Editor’s Note: The following was submitted to the Westport Planning Commission and all members of the Westport Representative Town Meeting by Dara Lamb on behalf of the Westport Alliance for Saugatuck.
By Dara Lamb
After reviewing the P&Z May 14, 2025 staff report and attending P&Z May 19 meeting on the Hamlet, we would like to thank town officials—including the Department of Public Works, Flood & Erosion Commission, Conservation Commission, and P&Z—for their diligence in ensuring the Hamlet application receives proper scrutiny. We especially thank Michele Perillie for her comprehensive and high-quality report, and the P&Z commissioners for the time and effort they devoted to formulate thoughtful, informed questions.
The Application Is Incomplete and Non-Compliant
The staff report and the May 19th meeting made one thing clear: this application is incomplete and does not comply with the text amendment or multiple town and state requirements. These deficiencies are significant, some are dependent on state responses, and cannot be resolved within the timeline to close the hearing on June 18.
Furthermore, the developer has changed plans so many times, it is impossible for the public to keep up with the mountain of constantly changing documentation which appears to be strategically submitted at the very last minute. To date, plans are still incomplete and without working designs for crucial mechanical and flood water mitigation systems. Commissioners from numerous committees have spent an inordinate amount of time on this application already and are set to spend much more with no end in sight.
At the May 19 meeting, the developer tried to lay the blame on the P&Z, stating they need more guidance. But they’ve already been given guidance, by the ARB, by the Flood and Erosion commission, by the public for some three years, and in the comments by commissioners.
It’s simply not fair for the developers to continually ignore recommendations with very clear guidance on what is required for this application to be complete and to comply with the needs of the town as written in the text amendment. In the meantime, other worthy applications sit and wait while the Hamlet gets prioritized and takes up the town calendar.
Many of the more than 1,100 signers of the Westport Alliance for Saugatuck petition built or renovated homes in Westport and were sent home to wait months to get back on the calendar when their application was missing required information or other approvals.
Rather than wasting more town resources, we respectfully request the applicant withdraw their application and return with an adjusted plan that meets the town’s needs, in full compliance and complete. The following is a summary of many, but not all defects in this application:
Architecture + Mass and Density not in Compliance with Text Amendment
Westport’s Architectural Review board unanimously rejected this application because it does not comply with the TEXT AMENDMENT’s requirement that its architecture be in keeping with the vernacular of a New England Coastal Village. We applaud the Planning and Zoning commission’s recognition of the ARB’s hard work and in particular, commissioner Wistreich’s statement that she would be troubled to go against their recommendation. After all, if the ARB is to be ignored, why have one at all?
Traffic & Parking: Outdated Data, Inadequate Solutions
The TEXT AMENDMENT requires the applicant not to make traffic worse than it already is. The applicant’s own traffic study by SLR indicates the Hamlet will negatively impact the key intersection of Charles/Park St at the entrance of commuter lot 1. Due to the Hamlet, this intersection will drop from LOS C to F on weekday afternoons, and LOS B to E during midday on Saturdays.
We understand a detail like this could get lost in a 70-page document. This underscores why having a peer reviewer is such good practice. However, the town’s peer reviewer, Sharat Kalluri, completely ignored this intersection in his review.
M.Paquette’s 4-26 letter to P&Z, forwarded and responded to by Mr. Kalluri, highlighted this once again. Once again, he ignored this. Why?
Below is a picture of current conditions at this intersection, taken at 4.18pm on May 18. As you can see, traffic is backed up all the way down Charles to Riverside Avenue.
What is not shown in this photo is this backup continuing all the way up the exit 17 off ramp.
How will Emergency Service Vehicles navigate this when minutes can make the difference between life and death or a debilitating permanent injury?
In addition, the applicant’s traffic study and proposed solutions are based on COVID-era data and do not reflect current or projected conditions. Mr. Kalluri, the peer reviewer, stated he could not adequately establish traffic patterns and loads from the site plan and had to rely on the developer’s data. We appreciate his transparency that he will soon be presenting another Saugatuck project to P&Z on behalf of another developer.
Updated traffic data is essential. We request an updated traffic study be done by a different peer reviewer who is not scheduled to have business before the town.
Common sense dictates the addition of 500 cars/hour, plus trucks and pedestrians unloading and loading will undoubtedly cause more backups. We appreciate commissioners Wistreich and Injeski’s probing questions on this.
Parking Concerns
Similarly, the parking plan fails to account for the true demand and relies on outdated data from 2024 before return-to-office rules were enforced. 5-day return to office rules are scheduled to go into effect this June for many if not most companies and will immediately spike demand for parking.
The applicant projected creating 640 jobs in their own brownfield remediation application. Most of these employees will arrive at the same time as commuters and may opt to park in commuter lots. Plus, to succeed, this development requires foot traffic of hundreds of daily visitors and event attendees. It is vastly under-parked.
There is no realistic way to prevent employees and patrons from occupying scarce commuter parking, especially during peak hours. Anyone from virtually anywhere can buy a Westport parking permit, and there is no practical way to police who parks where.
The proposal assumes availability that simply doesn’t exist.
The parking demand analysis REQUIRED BY THE TEXT AMENDMENT is missing. This is because a demand analysis would reveal this site plan is not in compliance with town regulations requiring sufficient on-site parking.
Below are pictures of Lots 1,2 and 3 taken at 6pm on May 8, 2025. As you can see, lots are full.
The text amendment gives P&Z latitude to determine how much parking is required for events. It also gives P&Z the right to require the development be scaled back to meet these requirements.
To determine parking for events, we suggest a good measure is to look at the severely deficient planned parking for the Black Duck: 2.7 parking spaces (see developers plan below, from their slide show presented at the P&Z public hearing). Whether this allocation complies with a badly written code or not, anyone visiting this icon of Westport sees many more than 2.7 cars for lunch, dinner and drinks patrons.
Where the commissioners do have latitude, we implore them to use their discretion for realistic instead of untenable parking demand assumptions.
Below is a photo of the slide developers presented at the P&Z public hearing.
Flooding, Contamination & Engineering Risks
Significant concerns remain regarding stormwater systems, contamination remediation, and long-term maintenance. Town engineers have raised red flags about drainage designs that don’t function. Secant piling systems, especially when exposed to contaminated soil and water can degrade over time and allow offsite contamination to migrate through. This is exactly the case in this development, since lots to be remediated abut unremediated, contaminated lots.
Venting and treatment plans appear speculative, estimated to continue for decades by the remediation contractor, with no clear long-term safeguards. Commonly occurring heavy winds and flood risks further complicate safe soil handling during the remediation.
An additional peer review was requested by P&Z but, to our knowledge, the developer has not yet funded it.
Maintenance and Oversight
This development proposes complex, interdependent systems (e.g., automated flood doors, tunnels, storm water treatment). Manufacturer’s specs for the flood doors have yet to be submitted so they can be thoroughly assessed by town engineers. Without proven plans for maintenance and failure protocols, the risks of systemwide failure are high.
No Basis for Conditional Approval
We understand that approvals must be based on regulatory grounds, not opinion. Fortunately, this application provides multiple fact-based reasons for denial, as outlined in the text amendment and highlighted by town staff. Approving this plan with conditions to be satisfied later shifts the burden unfairly onto the town with no assurance of timely or complete compliance, particularly given this developer’s track record with their special permit application.
Respect Town Time and Process
This application has consumed disproportionate time and attention, delaying other deserving projects. In addition, meetings and reviews have often occurred on Zoom, without appropriate public oversight. Constant document changes, often submitted at the last minute, make public review and informed feedback nearly impossible. Over 1,100 residents have documented their opposition to this project through our petition, many providing experience-based comments.
We urge the commission to ask the applicant to withdraw, revise, and return only when they have a complete, compliant proposal that respects Westport’s standards.
Sincerely,
In the circles I run in, thoughtfulness is a virtue that brings people together and prepares common ground for understanding. Such is thus, that is with this beautifully crafted letter. The time and care of presentation are to be congradulated, for this reads like prose, and yet, its meaning is unmistakably derived. Thank you for posting.
As a Westport resident and member of The Alliance, I commend the author for accurately and concisely laying out the facts. This has felt like a never-ending process, and the idea that ROAN should take some time to get their project in order is brilliant. They know precisely what is required and should bring the project into compliance. We all want to see Saugatuck turned into a beautiful hamlet, but let’s follow the rules and ensure it is done correctly.
I, too, want to thank the P&Z commissioners for their patience and commitment to our town. Thank you to the ARB, Flood & Erosion, and Conservation Boards for upholding the Town of Westport’s standards.
Wow, this letter says it all. Thank you Ms. Lamb for compiling this important info. I know you have 1,000 people strong contributing research and expertise to this effort.
There is so much to comprehend. You’ve helped us all.
It takes a village … Saugatuck Village.
100%!!! Not only should Roan withdraw this current proposal that seems ill prepared at best, but the text amendment should also go! In viewing the small development in East Norwalk, there are at least 30 contractor cars parked near the site. I can’t imagine the amount of contractor cars at this site for so many builds at once. This area cannot sustain the 6+ months remediation, 3 years of construction and whatever else. We are not a city, and never will be. This monstrosity doesn’t belong here.
This comment has been removed at the request of the commenter.
Elections are in November. Don’t forget that.
Whoever is going to “go for “ selectman needs to squarely agree that commuters take precedent over any hamlet parking no matter the day or time.
This is most important because I gave a queasy feeling in my stomach that someone is going to ignore that !
In fact what we do not want is somebody running so they can spend 4 years helping the hamlet !
There are already enough rtm helping the hamlet like their lives depended upon it..
the dishonesty associated with this application in my opinion is ghastly.
Running roughshod over regs, giving up regs as happened 2 years ago, it’s just bad.
Developers need to go back to the drawing board.
At least we all know that because the sites are so astronomically expensive 8-30g is never coming in Saugatuck.
Let’s make that point heard loud and clear.
In fact sorry I didn’t add this but very important.
In the upcoming select person race I suggest clear and black and white questions and answers about pertinent topics be hashed out so we can hold that persons feet to the fire.
“What is your interpretation of the railroad parking contract”?
Let’s get their answer to this.
Answer should be that of course commuters to metro north are the key stakeholders..
but I suggest we get that very question and answer on the record.
Several of us 2 years ago brought this grave concern of a developer stealing railroad parking and we were chastised, called liars.
The problem is we were not liars, and our very concern has been echoed by bernheim week in week out. That this development needs the use of railroad parking … but THEY CANNOT HAVE IT !!!!
This is the 400 million dollar question without which this “hamlet” does not work !
Yes. Thank you P & Z for all your conscientious hard work. All of Westport is relieved and grateful. And thank you to Ms Lamb and the Alliance for what you did to protect Westport. This is a beautiful and thoughtful letter.
Is this the same Alliance of misinformation that hired some Bridgeport lawyer to manipulated the chair of the P+ Z for an unauthorized slide show and “stacking” of public comment with naysayers for well over an hour, thus blocking locals opportunity to to speak in favor?
Why do you use maga tactics and misinformation?
Everything in this Opinion piece is skewed and bias. Please refer to P +Z archives on 11-21-22 at 1:05 time stamp to get the truth.
here’s the p+z link. play.champds.com/westportct/event/299
Because Robbie, where are their patrons for restaurants and shops and offices going to park ?
Where will staff park.? We are talking 2000-3000 people.
Forget weekends.
Monday to Friday 10am-6pm where will they park ?
The 277 spaces are spoken for with residents and hotel guests..
where will the patrons who will make this development a success and the staff who need to open the retail and restaurant spaces park ?
Where ?
What happened in 2022 is a travesty. This text amendment, written by the Hamlet attorney, should have never seen the light of day. It was so contentious, one member of PZC rang off the Zoom meeting and skipped the vote. Citizens to this day are still reeling from the debacle of 2022.
Dara Lamb’s letter provides a thorough and sophisticated assessment of the deficiencies in the developer’s current application, as it relates to the P&Z text amendment.
Beyond these points, there are qualitative and conceptual issues that should be considered.
One of them is that Roan has not presented information or studies that would support the idea that the project is even economically viable. The case is not strong that Westport will need another hotel, especially one with nightly room rates double what existing properties can garner.
And what case could be made that Saugatuck needs 20 to 30 new retail stores.? Oddly, the Hamlet project includes two small islands off the Norwalk coast to be used as amenities for the hotel guests.
Overall, this is not a project for the people of Westport. Nor does it bare any resemblance to a Hamlet…. it’s a small dense urban development in the center of Saugatuck.
As others have noted, I appreciate Dara’s thoughtful letter and want to extend my thanks to the P&Z members and the Westport Alliance for raising these important questions. Truly, how did common sense get so lost in the Hamlet program? How do you plan a development of this size and assume:
1. No parking spaces are necessary for the needs of 500+ employees.
2. Shipping services and delivery companies can and will adhere to the “only Sprinter Vans” mandate (because the loading areas are too small for regular trucks).
3. Uber and Lyft drivers will be aware of and compliant with dropping off passengers and food deliveries at one centralized location.
4. Large events with over 200 guests will be carefully planned and timed so that all guests’ cars are parked on stackers by valets without any car overflow into travel lanes.
5. Guests leaving large events will only use the crosswalk, where they will queue patiently, so as not to delay traffic.
6. Trucks can exit by backing out of the garage using the wrong-way lane, and it will not impact cars entering the garage.
7. The State of Connecticut will grant requisite approvals for changes to lights and roadways without exceptions and on time.
8. The number of cars in this area increasing by 500+ per hour can be accommodated without affecting traffic flow by adjusting the timing of traffic lights.
There are too many overly generous assumptions baked into this plan in an attempt to make it seem workable for commuters. Likewise, the three-year construction plan seems uninformed by reality. The risk to Westport is too great if our central transit center is subjected to increased traffic and a lack of parking. We should all urge P&Z members to request withdrawal of this application or to deny it. I appreciate the consistent efforts I’ve seen and heard at meetings and in conversations around town to challenge and think critically about these assumptions, so that we can avoid more unsustainable and hyperdense developments.
Bottom line 277 parking spaces is not enough for even 2 restaurants in this mixed use development..
so I SMH..
with 277 parking spaces, most for residents and hotel guests, oh and 2 for the entirety of the black duck. where will 2000 cars park.
Roan has been told the railroad is for commuters. They go into this eyes wide open and an increasing take up of permit parking for 5 days in office from June.. nobody gets to say they didn’t realise.
The next select person is going to need to commit their loyalty to commuters over developers..westport residents and voters who use the railroad parking to commute. They will not be sacrificial lambs here.
they will be asked and a commitment will be expected pre election. And safeguards implemented to insure valets do not empty their parking garages into railroad commuter parking pre morning rush hour. And stealing 277 parking spaces from commuters.
maybe Monday to Friday the hamlet should not be allowed to open any retail spot before 3pm ? Weekends won’t be as much of an issue..
Is that the answer.. ? Or none of the restaurants can open til 5pm…
bottom line it’s commuters vs hamlet patrons.
And anyone in charge of our town needs to recognize and acknowledge this very important pecking order.
The railroad is NOT A FREE FOR ALL !
ESP for greedy developers !
This is all on the record !
The HAMLET has 277 spaces.
That’s it !
It’s not a TOD.
So if they can make their development of 12 restaurants plus patio spaces, , 50 hotel rooms, 50 plus apts, an event space with food hall, and 28 retail spaces work, then show us how that works. Coupled with the 23 existing restaurants and numerous retail spaces, offices, and removal of 200 well used parking spots due to construction of the development..
It’s not a complicated question. Show us that you can work with a no use of commuters parking by the railroad and 277 spaces.
This is the elephant in the room !
PZ NEEDS TO EXPLAIN THAT TOO !
The only time FAR of 1000-1 or 1300-1 worked was during Covid.
No longer in Covid. But most of us knew that 2 years ago !
Back to massive uptake by commuters increasing every day.
So WHERE will they park outside of 277 parking spaces ?
This will be amongst the most important question and required commitment asked of the select person candidates this year.