To the editor:
As you have reported, Roan Development Ventures has submitted an application for a permit to build a large (11-building) mixed-use, integrated site development named The Hamlet at Saugatuck.
It is a revised conceptual plan from what they circulated just over two years ago. I do not have the documentation to compare the plans then vs. the new plans now, but it appears the developers have been responsive to some of the comments, ideas and criticism that was received at the time. They should be commended for incorporating community input into their revisions.
But as Westport’s Planning and Zoning Commission considers the application in the coming months, I’d suggest that they consider the five topics noted below:
Need for a scale model
From the architectural plans and computer-generated renderings, it is hard to get a real sense of the massing and density created by the 10 buildings planned.
I cannot tell if the plans submitted are for a larger, smaller or same-sized project as was introduced in 2022. Therefore, it would be very useful for the P&Z, and all the people in Westport, to have Roan provide a scale model of the planned development, including the surrounding streets, Saugatuck River, Metro-North train station and I-95 bridge.
P&Z should consider other Saugatuck properties that could be built
My estimate is that 20-25 percent of the land and buildings that were re-zoned in 2022 are not included in the developer’s current plans.
I’m referring to the buildings at 30 and 36 Railroad Place (where Tarantino and Harvest restaurants are) and the buildings at the corner of Riverside Avenue and Railroad Place (that includes the old “Button Factory”). Plus, 21 Charles St., 40 Railroad Place and 611 Riverside Ave.
As I understand it, the developer does have options on those properties, but they are not part of this plan. One can assume that Roan would like to also develop those properties.
As the commission assesses the massing and density of this 11-building application, it is essential to also consider the potential impact of future development on the remaining re-zoned properties. To ensure balanced growth, the commission may want to explore measures that limit the scale of further development in the remaining 20 percent of the rezoned area.
Some might consider this “spot zoning.” But there are examples of spot zoning being used in Connecticut, so that city planners can limit building mass and over-development in areas where that is appropriate for long-term, good civic planning.
Take closing Riverside Avenue “off the table”
The Baseline Logistics Plan includes the idea of closing Riverside Avenue “at times” to facilitate construction. Roan needs to adapt/adjust their plans and take this off the table.
Closing Riverside Avenue would be a disaster for so many Westporters who use the train station, live on Saugatuck Shores or as part of their current life pattern, pass thru the zone in an automobile. I was glad to see that the Westport police, in a March 3 letter, had similar guidance, essentially … don’t close Riverside Avenue.
Impact on Westport’s Exit 17/Cribari Bridge traffic
With or without the Hamlet, the area where Roan is planning development is a THOROUGHFARE zone. That is because it includes:
- Exit 17 off I-95, the major interstate running through Connecticut.
- The Westport/Saugatuck Metro-North train station.
- Access to and from the Cribari Bridge, one of the two bridges over the Saugatuck River.
Traffic congestion in this area is already a significant quality-of-life issue for many Westport residents and businesses. The developer has submitted traffic studies claiming that the project will have “little to no adverse effect” on area traffic.
However, I strongly urge the Planning and Zoning Commission to conduct an independent review of these studies to ensure their accuracy and validity before accepting the developer’s conclusions and assurances.
It’s still a very big development
Some Westporters will learn about Roan’s development plan, see the renderings and wonder, how can they build so much, and make it so big and potentially imposing?
That is because in late 2022, Westport’s then Planning and Zoning Commission “up-zoned” the Saugatuck area by around 700 percnet. By most sensible measures, that was an unnecessarily large increase, and the P&Z could have insisted on a more reasonable 500 or 600 percent.
And it is important to remember that in 2022, the P&Z made a point of saying that they were only approving a zoning change, and that they were not approving any specific development. Now, in 2025, there is a specific plan.
I hope the current P&Z members take into account the questionable decisions of earlier P&Z leadership.
The Roan project includes a luxury hotel, high-end condominiums, retail stores, restaurants, cafés, an event space, underground parking and more. While certain elements may enhance the community, others may not succeed or could compete with existing local businesses.
In particular, existing businesses in Saugatuck will likely suffer during three years of construction.
What is certain is that this development will permanently alter Westport.
I hope Westport’s P&Z Commission takes these concerns into account as they deliberate on this important matter.
Rick Smilow
Westport
Thank you, Mr. Smilow, for an excellent opinion piece. Your comments and suggestions are clearly and comprehensively stated, with no antagonism. You speak for far more of us than you may realize.
I particularly LOVE your idea of having Roan build a scale model, including surrounding streets and buildings for perspective. That will help enormously in determining what is – and is not – feasible for our lovely town of Westport.
The 2022 PZC decision was a betrayal. To those who voted ‘yay,’ I would love to hear from you on the current state of play.
Unfortunately the developers’ mantra now is, “We’re complying with the regulations.” As long as there is compliance, is there standing to object? I hope so.
There should be no special permits, no forgiveness of regulations. I suspect parking will be the biggest lever the PZC could use to scale down this “too big to fail” development.
I am anxious to hear from the experts not affiliated with the development, including our elected leaders.
Unfortunately our State representatives, while certainly influential, are not going to be the first line of defense against the Hamlet. The project was promoted by the prior Westport P&Z Commission with First Selectwoman Tooker helping to seek special grants in support of the project. Its fate now largely rests in the hands of local officials. For those who are concerned about the Hamlet’s enormous size, density and potentially devastating impact on commuter rail access, NOW is the time to speak up.
The P&Z hearings started last Monday (see 3/10 link) and will continue on Monday March 24 via zoom (see 3/24 link).
Residents should write directly to the P&Z commissioners (pandz@westportct.gov). Materials related to the Hamlet application materials may be found on the P&Z website.
The developer’s statement that there would be little to no adverse impact on traffic should be all you need to convince you that you are not being told the truth. This is obviously going to be very financially beneficial to the developer and possibly to whoever got their palms greased but it will not benefit those of us who must go through that area on a regular basis. It is difficult to get through the light at the Minute Man and Tutti intersection now without getting blocked in the box for a few cycles during busy commuter times. There will have to be a new exit built off 95 to bypass the whole area or it will be a nightmare. The quaint name “The Hamlet” sounds inappropriate, more like “The Collosus”.
What will happen when all parking at the railroad station is needed for commuters again, bearing in mind it is not just westporters who use the station.
There’s an almost daily increase in uptake of parking heading back towards precovid levels.
As I remember precovid parking at the train station was under extreme pressure. Some residents had to take taxis because finding parking was so difficult.
The Train station parking contract is dictated by the DOT.
Are users of the train station who park to commute, not the main stakeholders here ?
Are enough permits being issued to people on the waitlist, or are they having to pay daily parking rates?
Something is not adding up. At $7 per day or $35 per week, it is hardly fair to not issue more permits to commuters.
Lot 7, for example must NOT( cannot) be made available for the Hamlet. It cannot be commandeered by this development just because they do not want to build adequate parking into their plans.
That is common sense. We surely must not allow parking lots to be leased by private developers.
Once this is built, there will be no time for regrets, and “we told you so’s”.
Imagine a scenario ( fast coming) where every spot at the station is needed by commuters. It is after all a transportation hub.
What will happen then ? Will commuters be disenfranchised in favor of the Hamlet ?
It certainly seems to be setting up that way.
What does the DOT have to say about this scenario. Surely there are rules, as part of the contract with the state?
Has anybody actually counted how many staff, and visitors( hotel guests, diners, shoppers, apt owners) this development will see on a daily basis. I suggest many many hundreds. Likely well exceeding 1000 ( no exaggeration)
What will happen when the hamlet’s valets park cars at the train station at night and commuters arrive to park and take the train the next morning at 6 am ?
Is the Saugatuck train station just going to become like a giant open air personal parking garage for this developments use, at the expense of railroad commuters, most of them Westport tax paying residents.
As it is the train station already generates more revenue than is required to maintain it annually. It does not need to generate more profit at commuters expense.
What about Franklin street ? If it becomes 2 directional, where will the home owners on that street park who now park curbside.
There are 70 curbside spots on Franklin.
Will they just be lost ?
I hope these factors are all under serious scrutiny.
Is it fair to spot zone ?
I’m sure there are landowners in the immediate area who also hope to piggyback on this coup ( zoning change) .
Surely it’s not fair to stop them from also cashing in ?
It’s as though nobody has paid any attention to the drastic consequences of this development.
They will probably put up a multi tiered parking garage at the station just to complete the mini metropolis look.
I do not think they will. They are too cheap. They will keep the guardians of railroad parking close.
This whole escapade exposes a deep philosophical question. Actually two questions. The first is .. who gets to decide … and then…who gets to design?
My opinion is that this is totally inappropriate for our town.
I also would say that the design put forth is kind of bland, no bold statement. The worst kind of design by committee. Take a stroll about Lieden for ideas.
Looks like westpo has lost its way, but there is still hope—if you decide on redevelopment, you really go to commit, with a town like Westport people expect architectural standards that are higher than Stamford or Norwalk.
Why is Westport settling for cut rate design and planning?
This is a p&z nightmare, to be honest, that is being hoisted upon us. What is the cultural statement westport needs to make? Not this. Culturally this is theft.
BTW, I used link to P and Z to comment on the Hamlet project. They did respond and asked for clarification as to what project I was talking about(?) This is alarming. Are there other monstrosity style plans in the offing? Everyone needs to contact P and Z. We should demand a townwide referendum vote before this is permitted.
Ha ! In my humble opinion , The only other “shade filled” projects with townie investors are the inn at Longshore. A contract which in no way shape or form followed correct processes.. no RFP..
they basically got ownership of the lease for 40 years, and damn near got away without putting in a handicapped elevator, to save a few dollars.
I’ll post the lease here.
It’s OUTRAGEOUS
https://www.westportct.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/70972/638118813552530000
Take note of lack of triple nets, the 7 year massively discounted rent ( aka- the investment) etc… dream lease of the decade,IF you are not a tax payer in Westport, couple that with the depreciation they will get to claim against taxes and profit…. they basically are not out a dime for their investment, but are taking credit for it in media.
So tax payer in Westport subsidizes the entire project in a roundabout way.
Yet investors own the property til almost 2060.
I still cannot imagine how few people were willing to speak up/against this travesty.
I’m sure the entire Longshore town plan is to suit these folks, noting the “need” for more event parking… yet those of us with unsubsidized downtown businesses we ploughed our savings into on Main Street get short shrift where parking is concerned.
It is comical if it wasn’t tragic.
Alarming is an understatement.
Enjoy the bed time reading of this “gem”
Yikes!
Yikes is right Sharon.. not about what you know but who you do.
A sad testament to politics around here..
I refer to my comment from yesterday regarding the marketing ploy by this developer to beguile, misrepresent and shield those with financial stakes in this venture from public discovery. This public relations dishonesty and lack of transparency is abhorrent, but not unexpected when maximizing return on investment is the primary objective. We at least deserve to know WHO stands to gain, and WHO is supporting this project via letters and testimony.
HOWEVER: Any discussion here must recognize the Sword of Demiclese hanging over Westport that forced the prior P&Z’s hand when casting aspersions.
8-30g possibilities in Saugatuck must be included in this conversation. Given its proximity to public transportation, Saugatuck is a sitting duck for affordable housing developers who, by statute, will render control from our regulatory bodies and their 8-30g “vision” might be a nightmare.
ClearlyI’m not advocating for this McHamlet Resort & Spa. It is a behemoth that will forever destroy the Saugatuck Southern New England charm ( which DOES need to be renovated).
The Roan developers DO need to have any project work financially. What defines “to work financially” is debatable, and perhaps potentially negotiable – but ultimately is not up to us.
But consideration of the potential alternatives must be understood. Clearly, the prior P&Z understood this unfortunate reality. This was a PRIMARY consideration during their deliberations and decisions. AND as I recall, there weren’t any other “non-8-40g” projects in the offing.
Perhaps the 8-30g development projects are more palatable?
I don’t have a definitive answer to this as there are no rendering alternatives to consider…only other Town/city projects to contemplate.
But I think that reality needs to at least be part of any realistic commentary.
What recourse do we have? Any lawyers out there who also object to this development who can mount a class action suit?
If anyone cares to scroll down on this link to December 2022 hamlet article,
You will find the “smaller” 3 riverfront illustration which caused such an uproar to begin with. December 6 2022.
https://06880danwoog.com/tag/hamlet-at-saugatuck/
The comparison is SHOCKING.
What had albeit some slight semblance of New England but in an over sized rendering, yet still enraged local residents, now looks like it is on steroids. Disney World, or a hotel in Cannes or Nice, ( sign included)
For reference the picture of 3 waterfront structures in the linked article( scroll down to 2022) is the same monstrous 3 structures the author of this piece attached
All the 2 year hiatus did was possibly raise more funds and far bigger ambition.