2026-09-28 - IWWA & Planning and Zoning Commission

03:40Come on.

06:34All right, we're all set.

06:37>> All right.

06:39Good evening. The city of Bridgeport

06:41Inland and Wetlands Inland Wetlands and

06:43Water Course Agency will come to order.

06:45It is Monday, September 28th. It is 6:10

06:49p.m. Uh, the first order of business

06:52this evening is introduce the members

06:54seated tonight. To my far right is Ali

06:56Akbar, Caesar Gado, um

07:01Bob Morton, vice chair, myself, chair

07:04Mel Riley, um to my left is um Solidad

07:09Nunees, who will be um being secretary

07:13tonight, and Johanna Doran.

07:17And we can call the first order of

07:19business.

07:20[snorts]

07:23>> The first one, right?

07:25>> Continue.

07:28>> Okay.

07:31>> Wait.

07:32>> French town.

07:33>> Continue. There's only one.

07:34>> So this one call to order. Recipient of

07:37application.

07:38>> None. Just no. Just right there.

07:40>> Just over there. Okay.

07:42>> Okay. Public hearing continued IW number

07:4626-05-150

07:49Frenchtown Road of Mustafa Omar to con

07:54construct a new single family dwelling

08:00>> receipt date May 26 2026.

08:05>> Good evening members of the commission.

08:07Nick Sampiri uh wetlands clerk for the

08:09city of Bridgeport. Uh, I'm standing up

08:11here before you on behalf of Matt Pop,

08:13our wetlands consultant. Uh, I have an

08:15email correspondence from him requesting

08:17that the this item gets continued to

08:20next month's hearing in October. Thank

08:22you.

08:38>> Thanks,

08:44>> [snorts]

08:53>> So

09:03>> well else there's Neil

09:05>> Jeff's minutes, right?

09:09Oh yeah, we have to vote to continue.

09:10>> Yeah, to continue.

09:11>> So, do I have an do I have a um

09:14>> motion?

09:14>> Motion.

09:15>> So, move.

09:17>> Second.

09:18>> A second.

09:19>> All in favor?

09:20>> I.

09:20>> Anyone opposed? The motion will be

09:23continued.

09:28>> We may not.

09:47So this is non decision. Oh the decision

09:50for IW.

09:53>> Are we doing that?

09:57>> What do you Oh, no.

09:59>> No.

10:14So we move to minutes.

10:16>> Yep.

10:17>> So now we move to minutes. August 2026

10:20minutes.

10:21>> Motion to approve.

10:23>> Second.

10:24>> All in favor?

10:25>> I.

10:27>> Do we adjourn?

10:30>> Yep.

10:31>> Motion to adjurnn.

10:33I second.

10:36>> All in favor?

10:37>> I.

10:38>> Anyone opposed?

10:41>> Inland wetlands is adjourned.

10:45>> All right, we've got about four minutes,

10:483 minutes before we can start planning

10:50and zoning.

10:51>> So, when we start passing here, right?

10:54Right.

10:54>> All right.

10:59>> Let me know when to start.

11:02>> [clears throat]

11:16>> Can't believe summers is gone.

11:18>> Yeah.

11:19>> Boy, this rain has been something, huh?

11:21>> Yeah.

11:23>> This last one was okay, though.

11:25>> Oh, yeah. It's just

11:27>> Well, yeah,

11:28>> but it's I mean, but it's been steady

11:31though since Friday. [clears throat]

11:34>> I think we've made up all of them.

11:36>> Oh, yeah. We must have an overabundance

11:40of water right now.

11:53>> That one [laughter]

12:15Pardon me.

12:20>> No,

12:21>> just this year.

13:21I don't

13:33land and water resources.

13:50any work conducted

13:52requires prior.

13:56>> So we just need

14:06So this

14:14>> requested something.

14:26>> Yep. Yeah, they're not.

14:29>> All right.

14:35The City of Bridgeport Planning and

14:37Zoning Commission will come to order. It

14:39is Monday, October TW uh September 28th.

14:43It is 6:15 p.m. The first order of

14:46business this evening is to introduce

14:48the members seated tonight. To my

14:50extreme right is Ali Akbar, Caesar Cado,

14:54uh, vice chair Bob Morton, myself,

14:57chairman Mel Riley, um, acting secretary

15:01Solidad Nunees, and Johanna Doran. And

15:04we can call the first item.

15:08>> First item on the agenda is C-126-16,67

15:13and 73 Hollister Avenue. position of 73

15:17Hollister LLC seeking aid zone change

15:21approval for the two parcel from the

15:24next two neighborhood mix zone to the

15:28industrial zone.

15:31Members of the commission, good evening.

15:33Nick Sampiri, clerk for the zoning

15:35department. Um I received a letter from

15:38attorney Russo today uh as a request for

15:41withdrawal. So they'd like to withdraw

15:43this application 67 and 73 Hollister

15:46Avenue.

15:48>> So that's withdraw, not deferred or

15:58>> No, that's okay.

16:03>> All right. Thank you.

16:07>> Next item. Next item is D-126-2540

16:13Beach View Avenue. Petition of Jason

16:16Raymond seeking a coastal site plan

16:19review and a site plan review for the

16:22construction of a six-unit residential

16:25apartment building in the NX2 zone and

16:28coastal area.

16:41Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of

16:42the commission. My name is Pat Sullivan

16:45and I'm a partner at Conan Wolf just

16:48down the block here from Broad Street

16:51representing Jason Raymond and his

16:54father David Raymond who are the owners

16:56of 40 Beach View um in Bridgeport. Uh,

17:00the Raymonds have a long history on the

17:02avenue. This would be their third build.

17:05They did a duplex many years ago, the

17:08property neighboring this recently.

17:11And they also have a history of

17:13residency on the street. I will let them

17:16tell you a little bit about that in just

17:18a few minutes. Both Jason and David are

17:21here with us tonight along with our

17:23architectural team, George Wilds and

17:26Justin Negrron.

17:28We're here tonight for a coastal site

17:31plan review. While we've given you a lot

17:34of detail, as is required under your

17:37regulations about the proposed project,

17:40this application is for coastal site

17:42plan review under 11.80

17:46of your regulations. This project itself

17:49is zoning compliant.

17:52We met with the NRZ and incorporated the

17:55changes they requested. We had an

17:58extensive back and forth with the D.

18:02They sent Emily Herz to the property to

18:04do a site visit. We provided them with

18:07the additional information they uh

18:09requested, added the title line to the

18:12plans, provided historic evidence of the

18:15existence of the sitewall of the seaw

18:17wall. Um, and I have uh entered an email

18:21into the the exchange that I had with

18:24Sue Jacobson of D. Um, and we have

18:28answered all of their questions.

18:31A coastal site plan review is required

18:35for activities or projects within the

18:38coastal boundary. The property at 40

18:40Beach View is within the coastal

18:42boundary. The lot is currently vacant.

18:46It's 75 foot by 100 foot. Proposed use a

18:51sixunit small general building pursuant

18:54to the zoning regulations

18:56section 3.60.

18:58The units will be attractive two-bedroom

19:02units designed and intended to fill an

19:04existing need. The property is in the

19:08NX2 zone. The neighborhood is a mixture

19:11of multif family and single family

19:14buildings with a condominium

19:17complex at the beginning of the street.

19:20The proposed sixunit use is allowed

19:23within the zone as of right. The

19:26improvements are under the small general

19:28building regulations

19:30and again designed to be fully zoning

19:33compliant.

19:35CAM application

19:37is for a general coastal permit. It

19:39complies with Connecticut General

19:41Statute 22A-92A1

19:44by promoting economic growth without

19:48significantly disrupting the

19:49environment. It complies with

19:51Connecticut General Statute 22A92D2F

19:56by managing the coastal hazard by

19:58minimizing hazards to property and

20:01complies with 22A 92C2B

20:04by maintaining patterns of water

20:06circulation by the placement of drainage

20:09control structures. There is no adverse

20:13impact offsite. [clears throat] Storm

20:15water drainage is designed to ensure no

20:18adverse impacts to adjoining properties.

20:21Well, the site is not appropriate for

20:24water dependent uses due to its size,

20:28location, and zoning. It cannot support

20:32facilities as described in 22A

20:369316

20:38which require direct access to or

20:41location in marine or tidal waters such

20:45as marinas, commercial fishing, boating

20:49facilities,

20:51fish processing plants, shipyards or

20:55boat building facilities. So now that I

20:58have sort of summarized the project, we

21:00had a letter from the Harbor Commission

21:02which was forwarded to us. We filed a

21:05revised application addressing the water

21:08dependent use issue.

21:11Uh as I said, we met with the NRZ.

21:14That group unanimously approved what we

21:16had done. They had a number of very

21:18positive comments and we also adjusted

21:21our plans to reflect the um what they

21:25shared with us at the at the meeting. Um

21:30I just need to reiterate this is not a

21:32zoning hearing in the sense that it's

21:34about the zoning project. This is a

21:36coastal area management application.

21:38The proposed project complies with the

21:40zoning regulations.

21:45I um next thing I want to do is bring up

21:47the Raymonds so that they can tell you a

21:49little bit about themselves, their

21:51history, and their future on Beachview

21:54Avenue. After that, I'm going to have

21:56George Wilds come up and go through the

21:59um plans with you, and we're all here to

22:01answer whatever whatever questions you

22:03have. Thank you.

22:13Uh good evening.

22:15>> Uh thanks for uh hearing this

22:17application. I just wanted to tell you a

22:19little bit about my history on the

22:21street. It's uh it's a long history. My

22:25uh my brother owned the house, the three

22:28family house before I did. And so that's

22:32we have over a 50y year history on this

22:34street. uh very invested in this street

22:38and uh uh when he bought the house uh

22:42105 Beach View uh the house

22:45>> sir your name and address

22:47>> excuse me

22:47>> your name and address

22:48>> so oh I'm sorry David Raymond uh 66

22:53Robson Place Fairfield and uh that when

22:56he bought the house uh the the three

22:59family next door was abandoned it was

23:02nobody was living in it there was no

23:05condo condominium development across the

23:07street. The street was really in not in

23:10great shape and over the years I've

23:13worked towards making it a better street

23:16and other people on the street have

23:18fixed it up too. I built a duplex right

23:22next to me. uh 95 97 uh beach beach view

23:29and then uh I also built on 30 Beach

23:32View a a single family house uh which is

23:36right next to the property that we're

23:38talking about. And so, uh, I lived on

23:41the street for, uh, for many, many

23:45years. And, uh, and so I'm very invested

23:49in having this, uh, fit into the

23:52neighborhood and be the best thing for

23:55the street. And it, uh, this lot I've

23:58owned for about 40 years. I've been

24:01paying taxes on it for 40 years.

24:05So the uh and but the impact on the

24:09wetlands which is really what we're here

24:11for you know how is it going to impact

24:14Ash Creek and if if anything it has a

24:18positive effect because right now it's

24:21it's a grass yard and if you're familiar

24:25with what grass does is it is it it

24:28doesn't let the uh water soak into it

24:32very well. And so all of this runoff

24:34from the street because the street is up

24:36higher runs onto the lot and runs right

24:40into Ash Creek and it's eroding the

24:43waterfront there. And so by actually

24:46building this property, we're catching a

24:49lot of the water, almost all the water

24:52that is falling on the lot and we're

24:54catching that and and putting it into uh

24:57uh

24:59>> storm retention system.

25:00>> Yeah. A storm retention system. So

25:02that's getting so that's actually if

25:05anything you could say we're improving

25:08the uh impact on Ash Creek and I kayak

25:13there. I I'm I'm very invested in having

25:17a beautiful

25:18uh you know property that actually is

25:22enhances the street and uh

25:30>> oh and I'm sorry my son is moving is

25:34actually we're you know we're renovating

25:37uh 109 Beach View and so my son's going

25:40to live there and so uh you know, we're

25:44not we've been there for many years,

25:46many many years, and we're going to stay

25:48there, and we're and we're, you know,

25:51we're just trying to, you know, do what

25:54is best for the street and best for the

25:57Ash Creek. That's it.

26:00>> Thank you.

26:01>> Questions?

26:02>> No.

26:03>> All right. Thank you for listening.

26:06>> No, I have some questions.

26:08>> You have some questions?

26:09>> Oh, it's good, sir.

26:10>> I don't know.

26:12uh in reference to the uh deep um

26:16there's some some issues and I just want

26:18to ask if you've resolved them with

26:20them. It says the placement of a

26:21multi-unit residential building in this

26:23area raises concerns from a coastal

26:26hazard perspective.

26:28>> Uh that's not my department. I guess

26:39>> I did expect I did um

26:43submit my back and forth with Sue

26:45Jacobson who's with the regulatory

26:47agency. I think that the letter that you

26:48have from uh Fred Oliver is August and

26:52the emails in the exchange that I had

26:55with Sue Jacobs and I have copies if you

26:57would.

26:57>> Yes, please.

27:00Yeah, that the August letter uh we've

27:04addressed all of those issues and so

27:07that's really

27:12a longer

27:16>> plan.

27:39So the first

27:42revised application goes through the

27:45harbor commission had asked for us to um

27:47add the water dependent issue the

27:49response to the water dependent issue

27:51question which is um and so Washington

27:55Gabases who did the the um CAM

27:58application has revised that. You can

28:00see the blue lettering um to reflect the

28:05um that it's really not applicable as a

28:08water dependent use. The size of the

28:09prop of the property is is too small and

28:12it doesn't it doesn't lend itself to

28:15let's say you know a fish plant. Um so

28:18residential is really the the best use

28:20for that property. And then if you look

28:22at the exchange, the email exchange with

28:25Sue Jacobson, Mr. Oliver sent this

28:28project over to Miss Jacobson who's in

28:30the regulatory section. She asked us,

28:34you can see it's a multi- multi-page

28:36document. Um

28:39Fred Oliver asked me to reach out to

28:41her. That's August 25th. And as you may

28:43recall, we were on the agenda for last

28:45month's um um meeting and we um deferred

28:51in an effort to make sure that we got

28:53you this information. So if you look at

28:55the it's really

28:56>> if you could direct me to the area that

28:58addresses that specifically the

29:01>> right. So if you look at um

29:08the let's see I think it's page

29:13You go back to page nine. She's saying

29:16um I'm telling her that Fred Oliver said

29:19I should reach out to her. She says,

29:22"Okay, I need the title wetlands marked.

29:25I need clarification so that I know that

29:27whether or not we have jurisdiction."

29:29Then you get to the uh page seven. So

29:32this is sort of going backwards. Um

29:36no works proposed in the CJL while

29:38close. No work will be allowed.

29:40construction barriers will be set up.

29:44[clears throat]

29:45She then asks about the seaw wall and

29:48says, you know, um do you have evidence

29:51that that is um that that seaw wall is

29:54legal, which it would have to be present

29:57before 1995 in order to be legal? And so

30:01we sent her um

30:04uh the revised plans addressing bullet

30:07the bullet points. And then um if you

30:10look at page three, she says, "Hi Pat,

30:13thank you for providing the details that

30:15we needed. The concrete blocks will have

30:17to be removed. Um to retain the seaw

30:21wall, you need to document that it

30:22existed prior to 1995. If the wall has

30:25not been in existence since then, it

30:27cannot be maintained. Thank you, Sue."

30:29And then if you go to page um

30:32uh number one, I submit the photographs

30:35to her and she said, "Hi Pat, thank you

30:37for the photos. While the wall does not

30:39need to be removed, any future

30:40maintenance of the wall would need to be

30:42reviewed under a certificate of uh

30:45permission application by this office

30:47and thank you." I then sent an email to

30:50Mr. Oliver and asked him whether he

30:52needed anything in addition and um and

30:56he said no.

30:58>> Okay. Also the 31st letter refers to the

31:01site being in a known floodprone area

31:04with no opportunity to provide dry eress

31:07and constitutes a significant increased

31:09hazard to life and property and

31:12knowingly puts multiple people in harm's

31:14way. How did you address that? So, I I

31:17think that um George Wilds will will

31:20also address that, but that um the the

31:24property is is outside of the flood zone

31:26and the access is from the street side,

31:29which is out of that um out of that zone

31:33and you know, the plans the plans show

31:35that. So, um I don't think there's any

31:38um

31:40uh suggestion that we're that we're that

31:43we would be underwater. We're five five

31:45feet I think it is out of the um

31:47>> it says

31:49zone.

31:50>> So they can give you those details on

31:52the on the the project that's that's

31:54proposed

31:55>> and have you required authorization from

31:58LWRD?

32:00>> I'm sorry. Say that again.

32:02>> Have you required authorization from the

32:05land and water resources division?

32:08>> That's the last letter that we have from

32:09them. I don't think Nick did you get

32:11anything in addition from D from Nick

32:14from um

32:16>> yeah no from um from Fred Oliver the

32:20letter that he sent the letter

32:28>> right right so we don't we don't have an

32:30up you know an updated letter um from

32:33him but he has told us that he doesn't

32:34need any additional information

32:37>> and and it says finally ly uh with

32:40regard to FEMA considerations, the

32:43foundation level is labeled as a

32:45basement on the plans. Basements are

32:47defined by FEMA as enclosures that are

32:49below grade on all sides and are not

32:52permitted for residential buildings in

32:54flood zones.

32:55>> And I think Mr. WS will also address

32:58that, but this is not a basement for

33:00this is not a basement for habitation

33:02and it's not enclosed on all four sides.

33:04So George can can address that, but we

33:07have addressed it. Yes.

33:10>> Well, I need to please come up and

33:12address.

33:12>> Well,

33:14[clears throat]

33:28my name is George Wilds from Wilds

33:30Architects. Our office is located at uh

33:32257 Nogatuck Avenue, Milford,

33:35Connecticut. With me this evening is

33:37Justin Negrron from our office. Um, so

33:41I've been asked to describe the project

33:42a little bit and I'll just go over the

33:44architecture and then come back and

33:47address the uh the uh concerns and some

33:50of the technical issues in terms of uh

33:53the FEMA construction techniques and

33:56what we do when we're uh building within

33:59uh close to uh coastal areas. Uh

34:03generally the uh the building is um as

34:06as you all know is six units uh

34:09approximately uh a thousand square feet.

34:12I I might add we did go before the

34:14neighborhood uh land I believe it's

34:17called the neighborhood land use in

34:19Black Rockck. Uh we had a very positive

34:22uh feedback from them. As a matter of

34:24fact, one uh of the uh folks that was at

34:28the the meeting said that I wish we had

34:30more of this uh kind of stuff going on

34:33in in Bridgeport. uh to that we just uh

34:37are very happy that we have a a client

34:40of the level of the Raymonds because of

34:43the uh commitment they are they have to

34:46detail and the articulation of some of

34:49the uh architectural details that are

34:51required for uh this particular project

34:55to fit nicely into the neighborhood.

34:58What we did is we tried to uh undulate

35:00the the the [clears throat] front facade

35:02by uh introducing uh a back and forth

35:06recessing the uh the entryways and

35:09pronouncing some of the windows uh to

35:12give us that that residential scale. Uh

35:16the exterior materials we took from the

35:18vernacular of the neighborhood which is

35:21uh uh quite a mix of uh of sightings and

35:25we've picked up some of that with the

35:26board in Batton uh all which will be

35:30maintenance uh free materials cement

35:32board uh that uh will and all the trim

35:36will be PVC uh which is uh ASAC which we

35:40kind of know uh as as it is. Uh one of

35:44the things that uh we want to address is

35:47uh some of the FEMA techniques uh and

35:49construction techniques that we'll be

35:51using. Uh there was some uh talk and

35:53some of the comments about the basement,

35:56the uh the water side of the structure

36:00uh in the basement is completely open.

36:02Uh by open I mean is that all those

36:05walls are breakaway walls that will be

36:07equipped with uh flood vents. The

36:10purpose of the break breakaway walls and

36:11the flood vents is that in a flood

36:13occurrence as the water inundates and

36:16comes into the basement area and fills

36:19up equally on both sides of uh of the

36:22breakaway walls and then if the walls

36:23are hit by a wave action they break away

36:26and don't cause any structural damage to

36:28the uh to the structure above. So the

36:31entire uh uh structure would be

36:34supported on uh peers, cement peers that

36:37we we always use in this type of

36:39construction. Uh and uh from there we

36:43built up the frame construction uh which

36:46all the way up kind of address the I'm

36:48kind of bouncing around but I think

36:50it'll make sense to the commission.

36:51[clears throat] Uh some of the things

36:53that were mentioned by the fire marshall

36:56um we will have uh a an NFPA 13R

37:00sprinkler system so that all the units

37:02are protected with an automatic

37:04residential sprinkler system. Uh in

37:07addition to that all units will be

37:08separated by a 1-hour fire rated wall.

37:11The floor assembly will be 1 hour fire

37:14rated. Uh some of the walls that are

37:16adjacent to the property will also be uh

37:19fire rated. There will be advanced

37:21warning systems in all the apartments as

37:24as you have in your house. Smoke

37:25detectors, carbon monoxide detectors. So

37:28in terms of life safety, this is

37:30probably the will end up the safest

37:32building uh I would probably think uh on

37:35the street as compared to some of the

37:37older uh the older uh single family

37:40residents there. So in terms of fire, in

37:43terms of life safety, uh this is a

37:46extremely safe building uh for um the

37:51residents and the the occupants. Um I

37:54think there was um

37:57uh one other thing that I'd like to uh

38:00point out and that is uh the egress

38:03which you can see from this rendering uh

38:06the steps come down and the last step is

38:10uh above the uh the flood plane flood

38:14elevate design flood elevation. So that

38:17[clears throat] uh that is a a feature

38:19that we took into consideration in

38:22placing in placing the building. Um

38:26let's see uh there was one uh I think

38:28there was one feature that was uh uh

38:31mentioned about the seaw wall and the

38:34seaw wall was established by Jason was

38:36able to provide uh documentation that

38:39that seaw wall was there prior to uh the

38:42uh the year whatever it was I don't

38:44recall but that seaw wall will remain as

38:47is uh and what uh Susan is saying is if

38:50they want to expand that seaw wall or

38:52construct another seaw law, they will be

38:55prohibited, but they have no intention

38:56of doing uh any of that. Um

39:01let's see. Uh the last thing I want to

39:04uh uh address is that the basement is

39:08will be unoccupiable. There'll be no

39:11occupancy permitted in that basement.

39:13Nor will there be any mechanical,

39:15electrical or uh plumbing fixtures

39:18allowed in that basement area in

39:21accordance with The intent is for us to

39:25uh construct the structure with all the

39:27FEMA regulations, which we've done many

39:30times uh with coastal uh construction

39:34that are a lot closer to uh more serious

39:37flood elevations than uh flood zones uh

39:40than this one. It's a proven technique

39:42that's been used over and over again.

39:44It's it's safe. It's resilient. Uh and

39:48we're doing it all the time. the same

39:50construction techniques would apply uh

39:52to this building. So, we will comply

39:55with all of the FEMA construction.

40:00If there's any questions, I'll be more

40:02than happy to answer them. Uh and as um

40:06and I just want to point out to the

40:08commission that this is a CAM

40:09application, uh coastal area management

40:12uh and our description of the zoning was

40:15for the uh board's information. If any

40:19questions, I'll try to answer.

40:22>> My question is about the basement. If

40:24the basement is not going to be

40:25occupiable,

40:27what's the purpose of still having it?

40:30>> The the purpose of the basement is that

40:32uh we need to get the first occupiable

40:35level up uh the the grade slopes off. Uh

40:39if we were not to to do the basement,

40:41then we'd have to fill that whole thing

40:43with a lot of earth and it doesn't make

40:45sense. So, uh what we do is we have that

40:48basement uh open uh and create that that

40:52first floor occupiable level above the

40:55100 or the flood design elevation. Let

40:59let me try to maybe I can answer. I'm

41:01Jason 109 Beach Avenue. Um part of it is

41:06mostly we put walls on it to make it so

41:08that it looks more pleasant from the

41:11outside instead of just peers. Um, it's

41:15not really a space that's usable for

41:17anything,

41:18>> but if you have a tenant, I don't know

41:20if you plan to rent it or not, but if

41:24whoever occupies these units and they

41:26have access to this basement, they will

41:28use it.

41:28>> They don't have to.

41:30>> So, it's going to be closed off.

41:32>> It's got walls around it that are not

41:33>> no doors.

41:35>> And then you've got one door for

41:36emergency access, but it's not a

41:38>> So, if if there's nothing there, what

41:40would you have access to?

41:42>> I mean, that's a good point. There is no

41:44access from any of the tenants to the

41:47basement area. The basement can be used

41:49for storage that is allowed within that

41:52within that. So there will be no

41:54occupancy other than that.

41:57>> I mean it's it's mostly an architectural

42:00design so that you can

42:02>> you look at the houses that are next to

42:03it.

42:05Beach View, for example, the one that we

42:07built

42:07>> has the same details

42:10on the

42:13>> but it's not a it's not actually it's

42:15not living space.

42:19>> If you don't want us to put the walls

42:20there, we don't have to put the wall.

42:24>> And my next question, the fire marshall

42:26said about fire rated walls. You also

42:29going to be having fire rated doors.

42:33Each unit is going to have fire rated

42:34doors.

42:35>> Yes.

42:37>> Yeah. It's going to be more

42:38>> That's 90 minutes, correct? Each door

42:40will be a 90 minutes fire rated doors.

42:44>> Yeah. It'll be fire code.

42:46>> Okay.

42:47>> And it'll actually be more fire

42:49resistant than any of the other houses

42:51on

42:54them have sprinkles.

42:55>> Yeah, you're really pushing us though.

42:57But I think [laughter] for a 1hour wall

43:00uh it's a 45minut door.

43:02>> 45 minutes.

43:03>> 45 minutes.

43:04>> That's the code.

43:05>> In a 2hour wall there be a 90m minute

43:07door.

43:09>> In a 2 hour look.

43:17>> Anyone else?

43:20>> All right. Thank you.

43:21>> Okay. [laughter] Thank you very much.

43:22>> Do I read the opposition's letters?

43:25>> Um yeah. We'll just

43:27Okay.

43:28>> See if Miss Sullivan is

43:40>> Does that conclude your presentation

43:42this sol?

43:47>> All right. Thank you.

43:48>> Go through the plans. We're happy to do

43:49that, but you know, here at your

43:51disposal.

43:52>> Would anyone like to speak in favor of

43:54this application?

44:00Is anyone opposed to this application?

44:03Step forward and state your name,

44:06address, and your opposition.

44:14>> Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

44:18>> Ladies and gentlemen of the commission

44:19and staff, my name is Charles Willinger,

44:22the law firm of Willinger, Willinger and

44:24Buy. He's just going to say a prayer.

44:28>> Uh,

44:28>> I'm sorry. Can you start over? I'm I

44:31didn't hear you.

44:31>> Pardon me.

44:32>> I'm sorry. Can you start?

44:37>> Oh, we don't have Okay.

44:39>> All right. We'll have to take a five

44:40minute break till I'll leave back.

44:44>> Five minutes.

44:45>> Okay. I'm sorry. I didn't hear you.

44:46>> We need to take a five minute break to

44:48come here.

44:49>> Sorry.

44:50>> Five minute

44:53presentation.

44:55You'll be right back up here.

45:07>> I think so.

45:34So I mean this letter is one, two,

45:38three.

45:41There is

45:47>> longations.

45:56>> Yeah.

46:03>> But I'm not sure they have

46:08Oh,

46:12>> I don't think they answered the the

46:14harbor master.

46:18>> Is this your

46:28>> Oh, she she's

52:37Ali Abbar as we join the meeting.

52:45>> May I proceed?

52:46>> Yes.

52:47>> Okay. Let me start again. Uh Mr.

52:50chairman. Uh, ladies and gentlemen, the

52:52commission and staff, my name is Charles

52:55Willinger. Uh, the law firm I am a

52:58partner in is called Willinger,

53:00Willinger and Buucy. Uh, I represent

53:03several neighbors who are vehemently

53:06opposed this application and for

53:08excellent reasons which we'll be

53:10explaining uh during this presentation.

53:14Um I um

53:17two of the people I represented the uh

53:20Anthony Camarano who lives at 30 uh

53:25beach side beach Avenue which is on one

53:28side of that building that you saw on

53:31the screen and on the other side is the

53:34Gremp family 58 Beach View Avenue. So,

53:38two of my clients are on either side of

53:41this property directly adjacent to this

53:44property. Uh, now

53:47I want to start by saying we have

53:50absolutely no issues with George Wilds.

53:53He's one of my favorite architects. Uh,

53:56I consider him nearly a genius. He has

53:58great design

54:01uh, characteristics in all of his

54:03buildings. and he's been doing this

54:05almost as long as I have. Uh so his

54:09building isn't an issue. The problem uh

54:12ladies and gentlemen is commission

54:15uh is with the property.

54:18This building has absolutely

54:21no business being on this piece of

54:24property.

54:25Um it's a horrible idea. It's a

54:28dangerous idea. uh it has uh serious

54:32implications from a CAM coastal area

54:35management standpoint.

54:37Uh there are not only health and safety

54:40issues which we'll address in a minute

54:42quoting the DEP's report. Uh but uh I'm

54:47here to tell you that this project

54:49violates the policies and goals of the

54:52CAM Act and it will absolutely adversely

54:57impact coastal resources. The main

55:00coastal resource of course is Ash Creek

55:03and the waters of Long Island Sound.

55:05That's the coastal resources that are

55:07going to be affected.

55:09Now,

55:11as uh as you are aware, FEMA uh

55:16establishes and designates flood zones.

55:20Uh and uh you know, FEMA stands for the

55:23Federal Emergency Management Act. And

55:27that's aptly described because uh we all

55:30know about flood zones. We all know

55:32about how many emergencies uh take place

55:36uh on a monthly basis and uh in FEMA

55:39flood zones, how the federal government

55:41has spent millions of dollars, how

55:44there's insurance requirements and so on

55:46and so forth. It's a dangerous area. Uh

55:49the

55:5140 Beach View property is in is located

55:55in two of the mo of the worst most

55:58hazardous flood zones. A portion of it

56:01is in the number one in terms of

56:04hazardous flood zones of EE it's called

56:08and most of the property is in the

56:10second worst flood zone AE. So we're in

56:14two very very sensitive potentially very

56:18dangerous flood zones.

56:22U not only that but the problem you

56:24couldn't tell it on the picture. It was

56:26a by way is a very pretty picture, but

56:28what you couldn't tell is that the

56:31property slope is about 10%

56:34from Beach View Avenue down toward the

56:37water.

56:38And what that means is every time there

56:41is a significant or not even a

56:44significant any kind of a storm, the

56:47water that will be running off of Beach

56:50View A uh Avenue will run naturally

56:54through the property into Ash Creek. Uh

56:58now the applicant uh testified that

57:03right now it's grass and he said we're

57:06making it better. Well, that's nonsense.

57:08That's nonsense. We all know that grass

57:11is pvious. So, when it rains, the grass

57:14absorbs the rain uh the rainfall

57:17and uh will absorb uh a lot of that

57:20storm water runoff.

57:23What is impervious that causes the

57:26problem are buildings and they have

57:32proposed I was going to say something

57:34the goal to propose but look it's

57:36America they could propose whatever they

57:37want a six family building massive

57:42building as you saw on this property

57:45uh forget about the density issues

57:48forget about the neighborhood issues

57:49which you're going to hear about I'm

57:51just going to be focused

57:52on the CAM issues, the coastal

57:54management issues, because that's what

57:56that's what this really is ultimately

57:58all about. But you should know some of

58:00the issues in the neighborhood with the

58:02storms and the sanitary stews and so on

58:04and so forth. Uh and some of that was

58:07referenced by the way by the DEP.

58:10Uh in any event, when water when storm

58:13water flows downhill, which it will, uh

58:18the uh thing to do if you want to uh uh

58:22protect resources is to have a storm

58:25water retention system, which they

58:27proposed. Problem is theirs doesn't

58:30work. And we're going to show you. I

58:32have the leading coastal uh and storm

58:35water expert in the state of Connecticut

58:36and he's going to be telling you why in

58:38very technical hopefully not too

58:40technical uh terms so that you

58:43understand. In any event, the way it

58:45works, and I'm not an expert, so I'm

58:47just a lay person like you, but as I

58:49understand it, storm water flows

58:52downhill. And the idea would be it to

58:54flow into this storm water retention

58:57system that they have proposed. And what

59:00it's supposed to do is retain the storm

59:04water, the flow of the storm water

59:08runoff, I should say. it's retained so

59:11that no uh toxins, no pollution from the

59:15street, from the bu from the roof line,

59:17from the buildings, so none of that uh

59:21toxin gets into uh Ash Creek. That's how

59:25it's supposed to work. If it doesn't

59:27work, and this doesn't work, if it

59:29doesn't work, we got problems because

59:31then that flow is going into Ash Creek.

59:35It's going into the waters of Long

59:36Island Sound and it's polluting them.

59:39And we're going to show you about that

59:41in a few minutes.

59:43Um

59:45the

59:47we were watching every day to see if

59:49there's going to be new plans and we

59:51called Phil uh Nick, I'm sorry. We

59:54called Nick uh on a daily basis. Has

59:57anything been filed? Make sure that we

59:59saw plans and as of Friday afternoon,

1:00:01nothing had been filed. We do understand

1:00:04that late Friday something was filed and

1:00:08attorney Selvin has um uh m referenced

1:00:11it uh and they what they did is pulled

1:00:14the retention system back from uh the

1:00:18coastal jurisdiction line because they

1:00:21don't want the EP involved. If you're

1:00:23back water side of the uh um coastal

1:00:28jurisdiction line, then you're uh

1:00:31outside the jurisdiction of D. The

1:00:34problem with that though, and it's in

1:00:36that handout that she uh that she gave

1:00:38you, is that if there's excavation, and

1:00:41there's got to be excavation, that could

1:00:44uh affect this coastal line. And I

1:00:48believe, and our expert believes that it

1:00:50will. So, not only are you in the AV and

1:00:53the VE zones, you're going to be because

1:00:55of excavation of this system in the

1:00:57coastal jurisdiction line of of the DEP.

1:01:03Uh so,

1:01:05your review tonight and your ultimate

1:01:08decision

1:01:10uh on this application

1:01:13is really governed by the CAM Act, the

1:01:16Coastal Area Management Act. Uh and that

1:01:20act uh is part of your regulations.

1:01:24Uh it's governed uh in section 11.80 of

1:01:28your zoning regulations

1:01:30and your decision and the issues that

1:01:32you have to resolve are really easy.

1:01:34There's only two decisions and it's in

1:01:36your regulations and in the coastal uh

1:01:39act. One, will this proposal does I'm

1:01:43sorry, does this proposal comply with

1:01:46the policies and goals of the Coastal

1:01:49Area Management Act? It doesn't, and

1:01:52we're going to show you that. Number

1:01:54two, is there any adverse impact on

1:01:59coastal resources?

1:02:01The answer is yes, and we're going to

1:02:03show you that. But those are the only

1:02:05two questions. Are there adverse

1:02:06impacts?

1:02:08Are there potential adverse impacts and

1:02:11do they violate the the policies and

1:02:13goals of the CAM act?

1:02:15[cough and clears throat]

1:02:17Now, the city engineer

1:02:19before we go into the actual plans, as I

1:02:23understand it, on August 5, the city

1:02:25engineer sent a letter uh asking them to

1:02:29submit revised plans. The applicant uh

1:02:32he wanted various information for his

1:02:34footing drains. He wanted a new sewer

1:02:37sanitary lateral to be hooked up to the

1:02:39existing lateral. Uh and he wanted to

1:02:42resubmit those plans. To my knowledge,

1:02:44unless they came in and they not on the

1:02:47website, uh that hasn't been done. Uh

1:02:50it's uh highly unusual if it if I'm

1:02:54right and it hasn't been submitted those

1:02:56plans. We haven't seen them. It's highly

1:02:58unusual, I would say, for an applicant

1:03:00to ignore your city engineers request.

1:03:03But it is what it is.

1:03:07The Connecticut DP, that's a more

1:03:11telling uh issue in my opinion. They

1:03:14issued a coastal review. You should have

1:03:17it in your records. It's uh issued by

1:03:21[clears throat]

1:03:22Mr. Oliver,

1:03:24the environmental analyst of the land

1:03:26and water resources division. They're

1:03:30the division that has uh jurisdiction

1:03:32over all CAM uh applications,

1:03:36particularly if the application is on

1:03:39the water like this one is. And what he

1:03:42said, I think uh is more than telling.

1:03:46It's critical. He said, "The proposed

1:03:48placement of a multi-unit residential

1:03:52building in this area raises concerns

1:03:55from a coastal hazardous perspective.

1:03:59Under base flood conditions,

1:04:03water at the subject site is expected to

1:04:06rise to approximately five feet above

1:04:10ground level on the side of the building

1:04:13facing Ash Creek, which will make it

1:04:16difficult for residents to exit the

1:04:18building,

1:04:20threatens um the safety of the residents

1:04:23in the event of a flood.

1:04:26Uh it's going to be difficult for

1:04:28residents to evacuate the area in the

1:04:31event of a storm and for emergency

1:04:34personnel to provide assistance in the

1:04:37area. Why? Because Beach View Avenue is

1:04:41the only vehicular uh egress pathway.

1:04:44It's the only street accessing this

1:04:47property. [snorts] uh and it is also in

1:04:50the AE13 flood zone and is expected and

1:04:55is expected

1:04:57to be inundated under base flood

1:05:00conditions. Accordingly, the DEP is

1:05:04saying to you, the commission must

1:05:06determine whether increasing residential

1:05:09density six times over a single family

1:05:14home at this site in a known floodprone

1:05:18area. A known floodprone area and the

1:05:21resident speaking tonight will tell you

1:05:23about that. with no opportunity to

1:05:25provide dry egress constitutes a

1:05:29significant increased hazard to life and

1:05:33property. Now listen to what this letter

1:05:35is. They're the experts. An increased

1:05:38hazard to life and property and

1:05:40knowingly puts multiple people in harm's

1:05:43way. It's a it's an astound astounding

1:05:47letter in terms of of this application.

1:05:52That's the DEP. I now want to review for

1:05:57you and Rob, you could put it up on the

1:05:59screen their their report. Um there, you

1:06:04know, as every as part of every coastal

1:06:07application

1:06:09and and hand out, we have handouts, too.

1:06:11Uh the same thing that you see on the

1:06:13screen, but it'll be easier to read and

1:06:15Rob will hand that out as I speak.

1:06:18Uh, every coastal application includes

1:06:20their coastal report. It's prepared

1:06:24uh by an engineer and I believe this one

1:06:27was as well. Uh, and it has

1:06:31the information that you need to know

1:06:33about enrolling on a particular

1:06:37application.

1:06:40So, what we'd like you to do

1:06:43is

1:06:45uh turn first to pa the first page

1:06:48should be page four

1:06:52and right Rob that's page four. Let me

1:06:54see that copy.

1:06:56Page four. Thank you. Uh of the coastal

1:07:01permit lists the coastal resources and

1:07:05you need to know what they are. What?

1:07:06because how could it be adversely

1:07:08affected if you don't know what they

1:07:09are? Well, there are a number of them.

1:07:12There's a lot that are not applicable,

1:07:14but there are substantial number that

1:07:16are applicable. General coastal

1:07:18resources, coastal hazard areas, coastal

1:07:22waters,

1:07:24developed shoreline, and tidal wetlands.

1:07:28Those are five significant coastal

1:07:30resources. And I want you to take a look

1:07:33under developed shoreline on that page.

1:07:36Developed Shoreline has a policy

1:07:39and I believe what was done on Friday or

1:07:43maybe today was the applicant

1:07:46revised the uh plan by embellishing a

1:07:51little bit what that policy was all

1:07:53about. And uh they did that not

1:07:58voluntarily but they did it because your

1:08:01harbor commission wanted to know why

1:08:05they did not consider this use

1:08:07appropriate for the development of water

1:08:10dependent use.

1:08:12And the reason the the um

1:08:16um the Harbor Commission wanted to know

1:08:18about that is because this policy says

1:08:23that this particular policy that is

1:08:24quoted by their expert says that uh if

1:08:28an applicant designates developed

1:08:31shoreline that's what they have here

1:08:33developed shoreline as one of the

1:08:35coastal resources the goal is to promote

1:08:38water dependent uses.

1:08:41Now, you'll notice

1:08:44uh when Pat uh Sullivan, Attorney

1:08:46Sullivan read that uh and they revi they

1:08:49revised uh page seven of their report.

1:08:52Uh they basically had the same

1:08:55conclusion. Uh page seven number two

1:08:58says identify existing and or proposed

1:09:01water dependent uses. That's an

1:09:03important element. And they said it's

1:09:06not applicable as the development is

1:09:08residential only and not a water

1:09:11dependent use. Did I hit something

1:09:14again?

1:09:14>> Okay. And not a water dependent use. And

1:09:18then they have the policy. Pat was nice

1:09:20enough to put the policy on page seven

1:09:23for you. But she forgot the last section

1:09:25of the policy. Yes, water dependent

1:09:28means fishing boats, docks, shipyards,

1:09:31and so on and so forth. But if it's

1:09:34shoreline um if it's in a um shore

1:09:37developed shoreline resource, it also

1:09:41includes uses which provide general

1:09:44public access to marine or tidal waters.

1:09:48Now, that's why Pat, just like I do it,

1:09:52and a lot of times when we don't want to

1:09:54have a shipyard next to a house or

1:09:57whatever we're developing, the last one

1:09:59I did was the Porsche facility in

1:10:01Fairfield and we're uh on Mil River and

1:10:05we needed a coastal resource. So, you

1:10:07know what we did? Pat does it all the

1:10:08time. I do it all the time. We provide

1:10:11public access. Public access would mean

1:10:13a an easement, a small easement from the

1:10:16street down to the water allow and

1:10:19another easement along the rear of the

1:10:22water of the rear of the property at the

1:10:24water allowing the public to enjoy the

1:10:28vistas and views of Long Island Sound of

1:10:31Ash Creek. That's public use. Now, they

1:10:34keep saying and that's water dependent.

1:10:37They keep saying there's no water

1:10:38dependent use. Uh let me show you what I

1:10:42mean. On page

1:10:46six

1:10:48uh of the uh of that handout,

1:10:51[clears throat]

1:10:52uh they say on part 7a,

1:10:56identify potential adverse impacts.

1:10:59That's the other key word here tonight,

1:11:02ad potential adverse impacts on coastal

1:11:05resources. And if you notice on page

1:11:08six, nothing's applicable. No, not

1:11:11applicable at all. And uh I want to

1:11:15direct your attention to the penultimate

1:11:18one, the second to the last one that we

1:11:21highlighted in a a potential adverse

1:11:24impact is degrading water quality

1:11:28through the significant introduction of

1:11:30in coastal waters of toxics.

1:11:34So, if there's a potential in a storm

1:11:39runoff situation that that storm water

1:11:42retention system doesn't work, you're

1:11:45going to have potential of these toxins

1:11:48going into Ash Creek. And that is not

1:11:51only a potential adverse impact, in this

1:11:54case, it's real. And our expert will

1:11:56show you in a few minutes.

1:11:58Turning to page seven, it says,

1:12:01"Identify existing and/or proposed water

1:12:05dependent uses."

1:12:07Again, they say, and they're they're

1:12:09admitting it. It's not applicable as

1:12:11this is residential and not a water

1:12:13dependent use.

1:12:15Page eight.

1:12:19Um,

1:12:21page eight talks about mitigation

1:12:25of potential adverse uses. And the

1:12:28question is that they have to answer

1:12:30explain how all potential adverse

1:12:33impacts on coastal waters have been

1:12:36avoided. How did we avoid them? And

1:12:39again, they don't really answer it. What

1:12:41they say there's no adverse impacts.

1:12:43They talk primarily about the storm

1:12:46drainage system, but we're going to talk

1:12:47a lot more about it in a few minutes.

1:12:50And then on number nine, what are the

1:12:53remaining adverse impacts? No adverse

1:12:56impacts. So, they're convinced pretty

1:12:58much uh that there are no adverse

1:13:00impacts. And we're here to tell you that

1:13:02they're wrong. They're 100% wrong.

1:13:07Now

1:13:10talking about adverse impacts.

1:13:14Uh I would like to now

1:13:18tell you a little bit about Mr. Gregi

1:13:21because he's going to speak here in two

1:13:22minutes. Uh Greg is a certified

1:13:27flood plane manager. We have his CV that

1:13:31we're going to hand out to you in a

1:13:33minute. Why don't you hand it out first

1:13:35as I talk? There we go. He's a certified

1:13:37flood plane manager. He's had extensive

1:13:42coastal management training. He went

1:13:44down to Maryland and took special

1:13:46courses on uh CAMax and coastal flooding

1:13:50and coastal uh impacts.

1:13:53>> Thank you.

1:13:53>> Uh he's taken courses FEMA courses in

1:13:56Connecticut. He's taken courses with the

1:13:59Connecticut DEP.

1:14:02And since 2015, that's more than 10

1:14:05years, Greg is the chief city engineer

1:14:08of the city of Milford.

1:14:10Now, Milford, for your information, and

1:14:12I lived in Milford and I lived on water.

1:14:15I don't anymore. After the last

1:14:17hurricane, my wife said, "I can't take

1:14:18it anymore." So, we left. But, uh, in

1:14:21Milford that Milford has more coastline,

1:14:25more property on the water than any

1:14:28municipality in the state of

1:14:30Connecticut. I never knew that but uh I

1:14:33thought upstate like would have more but

1:14:35it's Milford

1:14:36in the year 2025 alone. I asked him to

1:14:40say to count for this year but he he

1:14:43didn't get me the count in time. But for

1:14:45last year 2025, Greg reviewed more than

1:14:49100 coastal site plans, coastal reports,

1:14:54coastal applications. And I'm telling

1:14:57you, I don't believe there's another uh

1:14:59municipal engineer in the state of

1:15:01Connecticut that has reviewed more

1:15:02coastal permits than this gentleman that

1:15:04I'm going about to re uh to uh

1:15:07introduce.

1:15:08But it's not only coastal. The biggest

1:15:12part of this application is that you put

1:15:15submit this is this is this little

1:15:19document that I'm handing out or that

1:15:21Rob will hand out.

1:15:24And this is the Connecticut storm water

1:15:27quality manual because that's the big

1:15:30issue here is the storm water quality.

1:15:33>> And I was going to submit the entire

1:15:36manual, but it was too big for me to

1:15:39carry. You'll see in the table of

1:15:41contents, this manual is over 556 pages.

1:15:45So, I didn't want uh you to have to read

1:15:48that. But I do want you to turn to the

1:15:51very last page if you would.

1:15:54because uh in this la on the last page

1:15:57the DEP

1:16:00uh acknowledges

1:16:02uh the work of among other people Greg

1:16:05Pilleski and they say here and I've

1:16:08highlighted it that the D extends our

1:16:11deepest gratitude to all of the team

1:16:13members who contributed their valuable

1:16:16expertise and time to the development of

1:16:19this manual.

1:16:20And they and they then say the working

1:16:22group members include and they have uh

1:16:26actually it was two pages but the only

1:16:28page I want you to see is the first page

1:16:31where it says Greg Pleski, city of

1:16:33Milford. Greg was a contributor to this

1:16:37manual. He knows storm water storm water

1:16:40runoff. He knows retention and detention

1:16:43systems. In any event,

1:16:46um

1:16:48I guess it's time that we really heard

1:16:51from the expert about the issues that

1:16:54were involved with uh on this

1:16:56application. I asked Greg to review the

1:17:00plans to review the permit to the rep uh

1:17:02the application to review the CAM report

1:17:06and to uh share with you his findings.

1:17:10So, Greg, uh, if you'd introduce

1:17:13yourself and do just that, it would be

1:17:14most appreciated.

1:17:23>> Let me just get out of your way. Great.

1:17:34>> Good evening, commissioners. My name is

1:17:36Gregory H. Pedleski. I'm a licensed

1:17:38professional engineer and land surveyor.

1:17:40I'm also a certified flood plane

1:17:41manager. Uh it's been quite a few years

1:17:44since I've had the pleasure of

1:17:45presenting before this board. Uh I see

1:17:49one or two familiar faces and a lot of

1:17:51new faces. Um and as attorney Willinger

1:17:57said, I was asked to review this plan.

1:18:01Um I primarily focused on the storm

1:18:05water component of the plan.

1:18:08Uh, I did go and make a

1:18:12um I did go do an overlay on the plan.

1:18:19Um, now to be fair, this is the

1:18:23originally submitted plan, the plan that

1:18:26is there now. There's some modifications

1:18:29um which I did not have time to address.

1:18:33Um,

1:18:34the

1:18:38Yeah, it's the the laser doesn't really

1:18:41show up. Um,

1:18:55>> yeah. Yeah.

1:18:58>> So, um, I had a few concerns about the

1:19:02storm water. First off, there's

1:19:06at least Three things that bring storm

1:19:09water into the conversation on this.

1:19:12First is the Coastal Area Management

1:19:14Act. It's I think in part two of the

1:19:17application.

1:19:19Did you address storm water mitigation?

1:19:22They did address storm water mitigation.

1:19:25They did do that. um deep in the storm

1:19:30water quality manual requires for the

1:19:33purposes of

1:19:36storm water treatment uh that's

1:19:38reduction of pollutants. They require

1:19:40that you address the 1.3 inch water

1:19:43quality volume which the calculations

1:19:46have been provided to show that.

1:19:49Thirdly, the Bridgeport storm water

1:19:52manual requires a 10% reduction of a

1:19:5525-year storm. Um, and

1:20:00just a quick look, see the report seems

1:20:03to indicate that they did that.

1:20:07The problem is where they located their

1:20:09storm water mitigation system. Um, the

1:20:13they revised it so that it it's not

1:20:16quite as extensive as you're seeing on

1:20:18this. It's up closer to the building.

1:20:21They did move it so that it is outside

1:20:23of the coastal jurisdiction line,

1:20:26although it's still pretty close. Uh,

1:20:29and it would take a lot of efforts to

1:20:31make sure that they don't disturb any l

1:20:33anything closer to the water than the

1:20:35coastal jurisdiction line. Otherwise,

1:20:37that would um that would trigger uh

1:20:40permits being necessary. Uh most likely

1:20:43structures dredging filling from deep.

1:20:47My bigger concern is I overlaid the 10

1:20:51the one year, the 10-year, and the

1:20:5350-year title flood elevation is

1:20:55established by the US Army Corps of

1:20:56Engineers.

1:20:58As you can see on that drawing, the uh

1:21:01line closest to the back is the one-year

1:21:03tidal flood elevation,

1:21:06which goes over their uh retention

1:21:10system, which means that in a one-year

1:21:12flood, in a one-year flood,

1:21:16the system's going to be full of water

1:21:17from Ash Creek.

1:21:20And this the

1:21:27diagram

1:21:30where it says one year.

1:21:32>> That's in a one-year flood. That's where

1:21:34the water is going to come up to.

1:21:36>> Okay.

1:21:40>> Correct. Now, the system on their on

1:21:43their plan is a little bit different

1:21:45than that. It's a little closer to the

1:21:46building, but a corner of that one-year

1:21:50flood is going to be there. Um, and

1:21:53again, so in a one-year flood, the

1:21:55system's going to be completely filled

1:21:57up with water from Ash Creek, which

1:21:59means it's not going to be able to

1:22:00mitigate any storm water runoff from the

1:22:02site. It's not going to be able to treat

1:22:04any storm water runoff from the site.

1:22:07And Bridgeport's own storm water quality

1:22:10manual requires a 10% reduction in a

1:22:1325-year storm. You'd see the 10-year

1:22:16tidal flood is going I'm going to say

1:22:20roughly a quarter of a way into the

1:22:22building. So the the 25-y year storm

1:22:25would be flood elevation would be

1:22:27somewhere between the 10 and the 50-year

1:22:30elevation. I don't have a a number

1:22:31established for that. That's why I

1:22:33didn't show that. Um,

1:22:36if you I have a further concern with all

1:22:41of these sidewalks and you were if you

1:22:44were paying attention on the rendering

1:22:46they had, the sidewalks are coming off

1:22:48straight off of Beach View Avenue. There

1:22:50are no curbs on Beachview Avenue there.

1:22:53So, if you put those sidewalks in as

1:22:56they're shown on here, they're g those

1:22:58four sidewalks are going to tend to

1:22:59intercept gutter flows coming down

1:23:02Beachview Avenue, direct them through

1:23:04the site where they're not going to be

1:23:07treated, and they're going to end up in

1:23:08Ash Creek. Um, and

1:23:12I just don't see that that's any way

1:23:15consistent

1:23:16um with the standards of um deep with

1:23:21the storm water quality manual deep with

1:23:23respect to the coastal area management

1:23:25act um or of the um or of your very own

1:23:32uh storm water quality your storm water

1:23:36uh manual

1:23:38if you have

1:23:39I mean, I have other concerns, but

1:23:41they're minor compared to these, so I

1:23:43didn't go into any detail on those.

1:23:50>> Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. I also

1:23:54>> Oh, wait.

1:23:56I also

1:23:58>> explain that for us.

1:23:59>> I did a cross-section

1:24:02through the um through the site that

1:24:06shows that the one the coastal

1:24:10jurisdiction line is virtually at the

1:24:13top of their uh retention basin. The

1:24:16one-year tidal flood line is higher than

1:24:19that. Uh then I have in the magenta

1:24:22there's their lower level elevation

1:24:26followed by uh again in blue the 10ear

1:24:29and the 50-year tidal flood elevations.

1:24:32Um then above that in the green there's

1:24:35the base flood elevation of of the AE

1:24:38zone. Um and then the VE zone. The VE

1:24:42zone is actually just for reference

1:24:44because no portion of the building is in

1:24:47the ve zone. So that's not directly

1:24:50applicable to the building, but that's

1:24:52the flood elevation

1:24:54um pretty much at the southernly

1:24:56boundary of the property. And then the

1:24:58first floor elevation is shown up there

1:25:01at elevation 33. Uh those are all city

1:25:04of Bridgeport Datam uh consistent with

1:25:06the drawings that were submitted by the

1:25:08applicant.

1:25:15commission

1:25:21>> based on your analysis. What um is this

1:25:24also considered that they will have a a

1:25:27lower level of basement? So

1:25:30>> based on your analysis,

1:25:31>> basement are specifically not allowed

1:25:34per FEMA.

1:25:36>> So okay, I I know that I know because

1:25:39I'm on a flood zone. I'm aware that

1:25:41there's no basement. There shouldn't be

1:25:42no basement. But do that they having a

1:25:45basement. They want to put a basement.

1:25:49>> Okay. Can you hear me now?

1:25:51>> Okay. Based on the analysis, they based

1:25:53on their um the joint they will have a

1:25:57they considered to having a basement.

1:25:59It's not going to be occupied, but based

1:26:01on this water analysis that you did,

1:26:04will water run into there?

1:26:06>> Yes. The basement will be

1:26:09>> where where in this

1:26:15>> the water

1:26:15>> five and a half five and a half almost

1:26:17six feet of water in a 100redyear storm

1:26:20>> six

1:26:21that's what I was thinking I wanted to

1:26:23make sure okay

1:26:31>> I want to make the record crystal clear

1:26:33is your professional

1:26:36that in a one-year storm, forget a

1:26:3910-year storm, forget a 50-year storm,

1:26:42forget a hundredyear storm that happens

1:26:44once a year anyway, but in a oneear in a

1:26:47one-year storm, a one-year storm. Is it

1:26:50your professional opinion that this

1:26:53storm water retention system will not be

1:26:56able to treat any of the storm runoff on

1:27:00this property?

1:27:01>> Yes. And is it also your opinion that

1:27:03based on that conclusion, this

1:27:06application does not comply with the

1:27:08policies and goals of the of the coastal

1:27:11area management management?

1:27:12>> It does not appear to do so to be.

1:27:14>> Okay. And is it also your opinion

1:27:18that based on your experience and

1:27:20regional engineering, reasonable

1:27:22engineering

1:27:24that if untreated storm water flows into

1:27:27Ash Creek, it will adversely impact

1:27:31adversely impact the Ash Creek and the

1:27:34waters of Long Island South. That

1:27:35>> that's by the definition of the Coastal

1:27:37Area Management Act.

1:27:38>> The answer is yes.

1:27:40>> Thank you. I have no further question.

1:27:44Okay, thank you.

1:27:51[clears throat]

1:27:55>> I want to have this record perfectly

1:27:57clear.

1:27:59Uh the next exhibit

1:28:02is really just for your convenience, but

1:28:05uh I don't want to leave any mistakes

1:28:08uh for a if if you are inclined to deny

1:28:11this for a potential appeal. And what

1:28:15I'm referring and your attorney, the

1:28:18August Raymond or is here

1:28:22>> uh of section 11.80.7 80.7

1:28:27is what you have to do to review and and

1:28:30make your decision. And it says that in

1:28:33re reviewing and making your decision on

1:28:35coastal site plans, you as the

1:28:38decision-making body must evaluate

1:28:42the compliance with the following

1:28:44criteria. And it's what I started this

1:28:46presentation with. Number one is the

1:28:49proposal consistent with the applicable

1:28:53policies and goals of the of the of of

1:28:56the CAM act. The answer in my opinion is

1:28:59no. They don't have any water dependent

1:29:02use which is in in fact the minor point

1:29:04actually. The biggest thing is uh how

1:29:08they designed the storm water retention

1:29:11system. Number two, um, is the are there

1:29:15any adverse impacts on coastal

1:29:17resources? Well, you heard our expert

1:29:20and he showed you in graphic detail on a

1:29:22one-year storm what'll happen. And then

1:29:25three, I'm skipping C. It's really not

1:29:27applicable, but uh, it is, but I mean,

1:29:29it's a minor point. And D is, were there

1:29:32any measures taken to mitigate the

1:29:34adverse impacts? And certainly not with

1:29:37that retention system were there. So

1:29:40that's what you have to decide. And then

1:29:43take a quick look at 1180.8. It says

1:29:46action and it says that by law you have

1:29:49to state in writing the findings and

1:29:52reasons for your action. So I wanted to

1:29:55make certain that you're aware of that.

1:29:57Uh and then uh I want to just submit one

1:30:00more my final exhibit I promise you.

1:30:05And

1:30:07as Rob passes it out,

1:30:15it happens to be it happens to be an

1:30:18article

1:30:19that was published last week, just last

1:30:22week before this latest storm, by the

1:30:24way, just last week in the Connecticut

1:30:26Post. And I want you to take a look

1:30:29first at the uh map on this in this

1:30:32article. It's hard to see, but you could

1:30:35see uh Long Island Sound, a little bit

1:30:39of Long Island, a lot of Connecticut.

1:30:41And they rate in the article, although

1:30:44it is difficult to see, but they rate

1:30:47the water quality. Uh and you'll notice

1:30:50that if you read the article and study

1:30:51this map, the best highest water quality

1:30:56a quality is in the eastern and central

1:30:59basins basically from the Husatonic

1:31:02River up to toward New London, northeast

1:31:05toward New London and certainly from the

1:31:07Connecticut River. They have the best

1:31:09quality water. Our

1:31:12uh our area is the western basin and

1:31:16you'll see Bridgeport there if you look

1:31:18closely

1:31:19>> and if you can't I'll give you my

1:31:20glasses. You'll see Bridgeport is there

1:31:22and we're doing good. We're doing much

1:31:25better than we were. But what this

1:31:27article says is that the most troubled

1:31:31section of Long Island Sound did not

1:31:34receive an F F for failing uh for the

1:31:37first time in nearly 20 decades.

1:31:41So this goes on to say that we're doing

1:31:44better. We're doing better about water

1:31:47quality. Uh it says that uh there's a

1:31:52market uh showing of improved long

1:31:55improved water quality over a long-term

1:31:58uh trend. Why? It goes on to say the

1:32:03results reflect years of investment in

1:32:06among other things storm water

1:32:09management.

1:32:10Storm water management has a tremendous

1:32:13effect on uh water quality. And it goes

1:32:17on to quote the save the sound officials

1:32:20that they say yes but in shallow coastal

1:32:24areas which this is they are more

1:32:27affected by local pollution sources and

1:32:31these sources include guess what storm

1:32:35water runoff.

1:32:37And so, ladies and gentlemen of this

1:32:39commission,

1:32:41you're in a pretty special

1:32:44uh and enviable position tonight.

1:32:47Uh you can really make a difference by

1:32:51your decision tonight.

1:32:54Are we going to continue this trend of

1:32:56making our waters in our Bridgeport uh

1:32:59section of Long Island sound better? Are

1:33:02we going or are we going to forget and

1:33:05try to go backwards so that we're back

1:33:08to that F? And I know I think I know

1:33:12that you're going to do the right thing

1:33:14and the right thing is to deny this

1:33:16application. Thank you very much. I

1:33:18appreciate it.

1:33:18>> Thank you, Mr.

1:33:21>> Anyone else opposed?

1:33:24Step forward, state your name and your

1:33:26opposition. And please try not to be

1:33:28redundant with

1:33:30>> Please try not to be redundant with what

1:33:32has been extended.

1:33:34>> Good evening. My name is Diane Volcano.

1:33:37I live at 65 Beach View Avenue and I've

1:33:41lived in my home for more than 23 years.

1:33:46And in your packet

1:33:49prior to the meeting that was cancelled

1:33:51last time, you should have a letter from

1:33:53me that um talks about safety.

1:33:58And I have an addendum to that letter. I

1:34:00don't want to read that letter because

1:34:02things have changed [clears throat]

1:34:03since I wrote that letter.

1:34:04>> What's the name?

1:34:05>> Which is about um Do you have it in

1:34:08there?

1:34:08>> What is your name again?

1:34:09>> Diane. Last name is Volcano.

1:34:14I think it's in the email and the top is

1:34:17fire access safety concern

1:34:20should have been in the packet.

1:34:23Are you did you submit that?

1:34:35>> Well, it was given to the folks in the

1:34:39planning and zoning office. This is your

1:34:41phone. Sorry.

1:34:44>> I know you have a lot of material. So, I

1:34:46can read the addendum because things

1:34:48have transpired since then.

1:34:52>> If you'd like me to do that,

1:34:53>> please.

1:34:53>> Yes.

1:34:54>> Okay. So, um, as an addendum to the

1:34:57letter I submitted to planning and

1:34:59zoning office regarding the 40 Beachview

1:35:02Avenue application, I would like to

1:35:05emphasize further my opposition to the

1:35:08developers application on 40 Beach View

1:35:10Avenue. Since my opposition letter was

1:35:13sent to you, Fire Marshal Joseph Carr

1:35:16has completed a fire department access

1:35:22review. I believe you have a copy of his

1:35:25assessment in your packet as well. This

1:35:28review clearly coincides with my belief

1:35:31that this application presents a safety

1:35:33and fire hazard to myself and my

1:35:36neighbors who live on Beachview Avenue.

1:35:38The fire marshall division clearly does

1:35:41not support approval for this

1:35:42application. In addition to the

1:35:45potential safety issues, if something

1:35:47were to happen, such as a fire or

1:35:49emergency and and a person or persons

1:35:52were injured because access would was

1:35:54difficult or impossible, the city would

1:35:57be liable. I am requesting that you deny

1:36:00the application based on the fire

1:36:02marshall's assessment and require the

1:36:04applicant to resubmit with a design that

1:36:07meets the safety requirements for the

1:36:09street. This, in my opinion, would be a

1:36:13one or two family house or duplex that

1:36:16would include on-site parking.

1:36:20Also in your packet, I'm a a member of

1:36:22the Ash Creek Conservation Association

1:36:26and I was also also a former board

1:36:29member. I also do water studies for Save

1:36:32the Sound. So, I'm constantly testing in

1:36:35water and giving data back to Save the

1:36:37Sound. and some of the um points that uh

1:36:41attorney will Will Willinger has made

1:36:43about water quality and how important

1:36:45that is and how Ash Creek has thrived

1:36:48and is coming back and it's really

1:36:51really important that it's protected.

1:36:54So, um my concerns first concern is

1:36:58really safety. There are a lot of

1:37:00elderly people on our street. Um, I

1:37:03think what the the fire marshall has

1:37:06said it is to me like I don't know how

1:37:09you argue that. I mean, if you read the

1:37:11letter, he clearly states that it it

1:37:13this should not happen the way it's set

1:37:15up to be. So, um,

1:37:19>> I hope you will really um, consider

1:37:21opposing this this this

1:37:24application in its current current form.

1:37:27>> Thank you.

1:37:28>> Thank you. Do you need a copy of my I do

1:37:31have

1:37:31>> No, thank you. Yeah.

1:37:32>> Okay.

1:37:32>> Anyone else?

1:37:36>> Step forward. Just let's queue up,

1:37:38please, so we don't waste a lot of time.

1:37:42>> Hi, can you hear me?

1:37:44>> Yes.

1:37:44>> Hi, my name is Liz Waxler. I live at 16

1:37:47Beach View Avenue, which is

1:37:51adjacent to um the last the other piece

1:37:54of property that this uh developer

1:37:57developed. And I want to talk for to two

1:38:00different things. Um, one is that I'm

1:38:03downstream from this development. If you

1:38:06go, if you ever get a chance, take a

1:38:08trip to Beach View Avenue because it's a

1:38:10really beautiful beachy street, but it's

1:38:14a funky street and it's curved and I am

1:38:17downhill. Like, you guys know from the

1:38:20rain that we've had what a depression

1:38:22does to rainwater. We don't have sewers,

1:38:26storm sewers on our street. So the water

1:38:29just ripples down and then goes right

1:38:33into the creek past my house. It didn't

1:38:35used to do that. It used to go before

1:38:37this developer had developed the house.

1:38:39It used to go into that title area where

1:38:42his this plan is. He raised up the land.

1:38:46He built high and that changed the

1:38:50course of the water. So now the way we

1:38:51manage our water is we literally have

1:38:54curbs and it runs down into the creek.

1:38:57And I'm extremely concerned with a

1:39:01anything of height being built that's

1:39:04going to then drive wastewater down into

1:39:07the houses that are downhill of it. And

1:39:09and I have experience with this because

1:39:13um after the house next to me was built,

1:39:16it was raised up in storm water. Even

1:39:18though they had a retention system or

1:39:20they say they had a retention system,

1:39:23was

1:39:24flowing [snorts] out like a geyser from

1:39:27their gutters because they were

1:39:29overwhelmed. And so that's right next to

1:39:32me. And the other property he wants to

1:39:34develop is right there. And I don't have

1:39:36the confidence that this is going to

1:39:37work. It's got to work for everybody on

1:39:39the street. And I'm deathly afraid of

1:39:42being flooded. And I'm sure you guys

1:39:44understand with all the rain we've had

1:39:45and how the effect that it has on

1:39:47people, it's a devastating experience.

1:39:49And it's a huge fear. And I just guess

1:39:53leave it to you guys to make the right

1:39:54decisions on, you know, protecting

1:39:57people. You have the, you know, the say.

1:40:00Thank you.

1:40:00>> Thank you. Next. Please, please step

1:40:04forward. Come up.

1:40:10Good evening. My name is Carter Gremp

1:40:14and uh I live next to this lot. Uh I

1:40:18oppose

1:40:19>> your address, please.

1:40:20>> Excuse me.

1:40:21>> The address

1:40:23>> 58 Beach View A.

1:40:25>> Thank you.

1:40:26>> Oppose the construction of the project

1:40:28as it's currently designed.

1:40:31um for all the reasons spoken about

1:40:33before. Um couple things in addition I

1:40:37wanted to point out. Um you received uh

1:40:41petitions in opposition to this. Um

1:40:44pretty much every neighbor on the street

1:40:46signed that. Uh you have over a hundred

1:40:50uh signatures in opposition to this. Uh

1:40:54not just from the people on the street,

1:40:56but uh the neighborhood as a whole. Mhm.

1:40:59>> Um

1:41:00>> right.

1:41:01>> One of the reasons I think is people are

1:41:05looking at the density on the street as

1:41:06it currently is. Um the street is

1:41:09slightly more narrow than um than a

1:41:14typical two-way street. And at the end

1:41:17of the street, there is no turnaround.

1:41:20So, uh, if you were to go down the

1:41:23street to the end of the street,

1:41:26um, the only way to turn a vehicle

1:41:28around is to back into one of the

1:41:31neighborhood, uh, neighbors driveways

1:41:34and then you can get your vehicle, you

1:41:36can do a two-point turn. You can get

1:41:38your vehicle turned and go and go out

1:41:41the street. um at night uh with cars

1:41:46parked on either side of the street, the

1:41:47street is completely full of cars. Uh

1:41:51and it's one of these Bridgeport streets

1:41:54where

1:41:55um you know, if somebody's coming from

1:41:58the opposite direction, you have to pull

1:41:59over and stop and wait for that person

1:42:01to pass and then, you know, continue on

1:42:04your way. So, um

1:42:08you're going to have a lot more vehicles

1:42:10on the street with the way the plan is

1:42:12currently proposed. Let's say you have

1:42:15uh two or three vehicles per um

1:42:19per apartment. That, you know, that

1:42:21would be, you know, 12 to possibly even

1:42:2420 additional vehicles on the street

1:42:26where you have no parking available for

1:42:28those vehicles. Now, um

1:42:32then at the end of the street, excuse

1:42:34me, at the beginning of the street, when

1:42:35you turn onto the street and go down the

1:42:37hill, uh you turn onto the street, you

1:42:41go, uh and the street goes down uh and

1:42:44that's where you have which is really

1:42:46the beginning of the street. That's

1:42:48where you have the flooding. That's

1:42:49where the flood zone exists, the AE13

1:42:52flood. Um during this most recent

1:42:55noraster where we had steady rains and

1:42:58and flooding of the water um you had

1:43:01some flooding there but a week ago we

1:43:04had a very intense rain uh for a short

1:43:08duration. Um and there was so much

1:43:11flooding there that a normal vehicle

1:43:14could not pass. Um there was I witnessed

1:43:17all the neighbors are saying well we

1:43:18should have gotten pictures but I

1:43:20personally witnessed a car stuck in that

1:43:23location. They could not move. Uh we had

1:43:26to wait for the driver to figure out

1:43:28what to do and then you know I drive an

1:43:30SUV. My wife drives an SUV and very

1:43:32slowly you can make it through there.

1:43:34But there's a lot of water there. Um, if

1:43:37I was in the position of the fire

1:43:39marshal and uh I was looking at this

1:43:42situation

1:43:43um

1:43:45where uh as he came down and took a

1:43:48look, you know, I would be thinking we

1:43:50have a situation at this key point in

1:43:53the street where you could have cars

1:43:55stranded, unable to be moved in a flood

1:43:58situation. Uh we have a very sharp turn

1:44:02uh where you have uh an abundance of

1:44:05parked vehicles on either side of the

1:44:07street. Um we've got to get our

1:44:09emergency vehicles through that

1:44:12situation. Um and then when we reach the

1:44:16when we reach the new structure, uh we

1:44:19have uh lowline um utility lines. Uh we

1:44:24have a large setback uh that we could

1:44:27not easily reach with uh with ladders

1:44:30from a from a truck and um it would be

1:44:34very difficult for us uh to service um

1:44:39that first responders to service that in

1:44:41an emergency.

1:44:44[sighs]

1:44:47That's why in the letter that uh he

1:44:50submitted to you um he said he didn't

1:44:53see how um an apartment building could

1:44:56be built in this location and that uh if

1:45:00um uh an apartment building uh plans for

1:45:04an apartment building would be submitted

1:45:08um

1:45:09he would want to see

1:45:12he would want to see a detailed plan a

1:45:14detailed emergency plan first. uh and in

1:45:17that plan he'd want to see how uh

1:45:19emergency vehicles were going to be able

1:45:21to get down there and service that. Um

1:45:24he was talking about the assets of the

1:45:26fire department primarily. He he spoke

1:45:28about emergency vehicles as a whole, but

1:45:30he was talking about the assets of the

1:45:32um fire department and how you were

1:45:35going to get a big hook and ladder truck

1:45:37uh down the street. So I I think both

1:45:40from deep and the fire marshall uh you

1:45:43know we have heard um

1:45:48uh serious questions about how um

1:45:58about how any additional density on that

1:46:02lot beyond the one family uh how how the

1:46:05lot could handle any additional density

1:46:07beyond a one family. Um but you know, I

1:46:12hope that um you know, if considering

1:46:15this application

1:46:19that should anything move forward on

1:46:21that lot, it be included with um an

1:46:23extensive deep um review and and a dis

1:46:28an extensive safety review um as was

1:46:31requested by the fire marshall.

1:46:35>> [clears throat]

1:46:36>> And and this is this is in this is the

1:46:38reason why you know you're you're

1:46:40getting so much opposition tonight.

1:46:43You'll you'll hear from other people as

1:46:45well about how people are just wondering

1:46:46how is something like this going to be

1:46:48added to this little street. We can't

1:46:50turn around the end of the street. You

1:46:52can't get a fire. You I I don't know how

1:46:54a fire truck will get in and out. Um

1:46:56I've seen an 18-wheeler go down the

1:46:58street once when someone was trying to

1:47:00park. It took them all day to back the

1:47:0218-wheeler out of the street, the driver

1:47:04to get that that truck out of the

1:47:05street, you know, after it went down

1:47:07there. So,

1:47:09>> I think you've made your point. Thank

1:47:10you.

1:47:11>> Thank you.

1:47:12>> Take a break.

1:47:13>> All right. Um, we're going to take a a

1:47:16five minute break.

1:47:21>> I'm back.

1:54:32Good evening. Thank you for listening.

1:54:34My name is Margaret McSherry and I live

1:54:37at 79 Beach View Avenue. Okay. And

1:54:41Beachview Avenue is not in fact an

1:54:44avenue. So, by Webster's definition of

1:54:47an avenue, that is a broad treelined

1:54:50boulevard or thoroughare

1:54:53open at both ends for travel.

1:54:57Beachview Avenue is not that. It's a

1:55:00tiny little deadend street nestled just

1:55:03south of the post road sitting on the

1:55:05edge of Ash Creek.

1:55:07There are no sidewalks to speak of and

1:55:11uh most of the structures on the street

1:55:15are overwhelmingly

1:55:17owner [clears throat] occupied single

1:55:18family homes with a few duplexes as

1:55:21well.

1:55:23Anyone who has ever set foot on Beach

1:55:26View Avenue knows the how inappropriate

1:55:30and out of character it is for this

1:55:32neighborhood to even suggest an

1:55:34apartment building. I mean to be located

1:55:38there, it is a complete non-starter.

1:55:41An apartment building of any size would

1:55:44effectively destroy our small

1:55:46neighborhood and set a dangerous and

1:55:49ruinous precedent for future

1:55:51development.

1:55:54The small undersized lot where Mr.

1:55:57Raymond wants to build an oversized

1:55:59apartment building won't support it.

1:56:02I've lived on Beach View for 21 years

1:56:05and I've watched the edges of Ash Creek

1:56:07erode and the street flood.

1:56:12Also, there is no way that the current

1:56:16street parking, as you've heard from

1:56:18others, can possibly absorb the 10, 12,

1:56:23or more additional vehicles that would

1:56:26realistically come with this

1:56:29development.

1:56:31How or why he does not see that or

1:56:34understand that is beyond me and it's

1:56:38incredibly disappointing and very

1:56:40regrettable.

1:56:45Although I believe personally

1:56:48that Beach View has been erroneously

1:56:53designated as NX2,

1:56:56the waterfront neighborhoods of Black

1:56:58Rockck have always been recognized as

1:57:01historic areas with some structures

1:57:04going back to the 1600s when it was

1:57:07founded and many from the whaling

1:57:09industry in the 1800s.

1:57:12These neighborhoods and streets should

1:57:14be treasured and preserved.

1:57:19This proposed development is dismissive

1:57:22of that history, even contemptuous.

1:57:26And this illconceived, misguided effort

1:57:29is driven purely by modernday greed.

1:57:35Please deny it.

1:57:37>> Thank you.

1:57:39>> Next.

1:57:43area management. [laughter]

1:57:46>> Hello. Uh my name is Marie Green and I

1:57:48live at 65 Beach View. And I'm going to

1:57:51be very brief. My one major concern is

1:57:54does the street have sewer capacity. Has

1:57:57this been tested yet to add six

1:58:00additional homes households on this

1:58:03street? It is a dead end. and building

1:58:07six apartment units at the end of a end

1:58:09of a deadend street and a sewer main

1:58:12without capacity testing is a major risk

1:58:15that will likely violate local codes.

1:58:19Um the end of the end of a sewer line is

1:58:22highly susceptible to lowflow issues or

1:58:25backups. Adding six households

1:58:28dramatically increases the wastewater

1:58:31volume and peak flows which can cause

1:58:34sewage backup to into the new units or

1:58:37neighboring area as well as Ash Creek.

1:58:40Thank you.

1:58:40>> Thank you.

1:58:42>> Marie Green 65.

1:58:44>> Yep.

1:58:47>> Anyone else?

1:58:53>> Hi, I am Wilma Smith. My son Cassidy and

1:58:57I have lived or I have lived on Beach

1:59:00View for 35 years. It's a

1:59:03>> Your address, please.

1:59:05>> 66 Beach View Avenue. Um

1:59:10I have a 93year-old husband and an

1:59:1389year-old girlfriend living with me at

1:59:16the time. At this time, ambulances and

1:59:21fire trucks have been almost a daily

1:59:25occurrence in this last year for me.

1:59:28They've had difficulty getting in and

1:59:30out of this little street. Now to put

1:59:34six more units with no parking,

1:59:38it's going I'm nervous that they won't

1:59:41be able to get to my husband or my

1:59:43friend who broke her hip and my husband

1:59:45who's been in and out of the hospital

1:59:47for the last two years. To put another

1:59:51six unit [clears throat]

1:59:53on that tiny piece of property just

1:59:56doesn't make sense to me. That's why I

1:59:59hope you turn it down because the street

2:00:01just can't support it and fire trucks

2:00:05and ambulances have a hard enough time

2:00:08getting in. They have to back out. Uh

2:00:10they're not too happy about it. So,

2:00:13please consider that as

2:00:16>> one of your thoughts. Thank you.

2:00:18>> Thank you. Anyone else?

2:00:25>> Good evening. I'm Councilman Galen

2:00:27Murray. I represent the 130th district

2:00:30with which this application is located.

2:00:33I live at 61 Prescott Street in uh in

2:00:36Bridgeport. Um obviously I am the

2:00:40representative of uh all that are

2:00:43opposed, but I want to point out I am

2:00:45also the representative of these

2:00:47applicants and I am not here to pick

2:00:49sides based on opinion or preference.

2:00:52I'm here to really represent the

2:00:53community as a whole. Uh, I'm also

2:00:56mindful that you all have been listening

2:00:57to a lot of information. Uh, and it's

2:01:00been a long night, so I will do my best

2:01:02to keep this as quick as possible. Did

2:01:05you receive the, uh, packet that I

2:01:07submitted to Miss Blackwell? Thank you.

2:01:10>> Great. So, um, I'm not going to belabor,

2:01:15uh, the point uh, from the fire

2:01:18marshall.

2:01:19>> Um, but the first thing I do want to

2:01:21know is the letter. I am liaison to the

2:01:24harbor commission and the letter that

2:01:26was sent um by the harbor commission

2:01:30chair. Uh noting that this uh this

2:01:34proposal was not brought to the harbor

2:01:37commission and it is my understanding it

2:01:38was not brought to inland waterways as

2:01:41well. And according to general state

2:01:43statutes section 22A113P,

2:01:48I believe the failure to bring that and

2:01:50to get a favorable recommendation from

2:01:52the governing commission means that this

2:01:55body would actually have to approve this

2:01:57application by a 23 majority vote. Um,

2:02:02beyond that, I I believe that there are

2:02:05a number of issues that relate to the

2:02:08zoning code itself that speak to the

2:02:10dissatisfaction you're hearing from

2:02:12members of the community. One of which

2:02:15is while this is in an NX2 zone. I'm no

2:02:19expert on this. Uh maybe I'm wrong, but

2:02:22I believe that there are no other

2:02:23buildings on this street, including the

2:02:26condos, that fit the small general uh

2:02:30use category. Right. I believe those are

2:02:32row houses. Uh which is to say that this

2:02:36is in uh runs contrary to let me find

2:02:42the the section I cited um to to both

2:02:46the uh section 2.20.2F 2F which outlines

2:02:50[snorts]

2:02:50NX2

2:02:52uh and um

2:02:55sorry uh section 3.10.1A

2:02:59which uh states that the intent of these

2:03:02zoning codes is to preserve the

2:03:05architectural integrity of the

2:03:07neighborhoods. I believe placing a

2:03:11building use that is not currently uh

2:03:14located on this small stretch actually

2:03:19does what a lot of I believe the

2:03:21opposition is inferring. It opens up the

2:03:24fact the the neighborhood to actual

2:03:26further purchasing uh from real estate

2:03:30speculators to uh to de demolish the

2:03:35single family homes, the duplex homes

2:03:38and to continue to really over develop

2:03:40this coastal area. Um, in addition to

2:03:45that, uh, it's been noted the parking,

2:03:49but we, it also needs to, we also need

2:03:51to talk about pedestrian access. We have

2:03:53an issue with this, uh, with Beach View

2:03:57Avenue. The condos that were put in are

2:03:59supposed to have by law coastal access,

2:04:03pedestrian access. that has been

2:04:05restricted and it's had a delotterious

2:04:08effect on the walkability of the

2:04:11neighborhood. Beachview Avenue is now

2:04:14cut off from the rest of Black Rockck

2:04:17because of that development.

2:04:19Furthermore, there are barely any

2:04:21sidewalks on uh this road. So given the

2:04:25fact that we're talking 10 to 12 new

2:04:27vehicles crowding an already crowded

2:04:30street that does not have sufficient

2:04:32emergency vehicle access, you're also

2:04:35talking about potentially seniors,

2:04:37potentially children, having to cross

2:04:39into this very narrow street to walk and

2:04:42get out then onto Fairfield Avenue,

2:04:45which is very crowded where we have a

2:04:47bunch of uh motor vehicle versus

2:04:50pedestrian accidents already. Uh so

2:04:54based on those issues, I think we have

2:04:58uh

2:04:59uh a number of reasons why this goes

2:05:02against really the intent of the zoning

2:05:05code. I also want to address something

2:05:07else. The uh this was brought to the

2:05:10neighborhood revitalization zone. Uh we

2:05:14have uh a new group at the NRZ. Neither

2:05:17myself nor Councilwoman Nelson were

2:05:19informed that the applicants were coming

2:05:22to the NRZ. Uh the NRZ did make a

2:05:25determination but based on limited

2:05:29context and a limited uh purview, right?

2:05:34Uh and um one of the issues that has not

2:05:38been raised here, NRZ was not happy with

2:05:42the lack of parking. they just didn't

2:05:43have any uh standing based on the code

2:05:47to say anything about it. Um but I think

2:05:50that NRZ

2:05:52decision uh was a bit fraught. The point

2:05:56of the NRZ is to focus on appropriate

2:05:59development and blight mitigation

2:06:03uh and to to promote the broader will of

2:06:06the neighborhood. that NRZ body was

2:06:09unaware of the petition by over a

2:06:12hundred applicants uh assigners from Ash

2:06:16Creek Association, conservation

2:06:19association. Uh lastly,

2:06:22we've had significant flooding lately in

2:06:24the city. You may have all read about

2:06:26the incident that's happened at the

2:06:28Cartwright uh building which is uh a

2:06:33really huge problem that is dominating

2:06:36the news, dominating the time of my

2:06:38legislative body. That building has 100%

2:06:42FEMA flood insurance. However, this

2:06:45administration,

2:06:47the federal administration is putting in

2:06:49steps to deny that assistance to that, I

2:06:54believe, 90 unit apartment building. We

2:06:57cannot continue to overdevelop these

2:07:00coastal areas and especially if we're

2:07:03relying on on FEMA as guidance, which

2:07:06we're not here, nobody's going to come

2:07:08to to our aid. And as somebody who sits

2:07:12here ev every other week and tries to

2:07:16advocate on behalf of moving the city

2:07:19forward, I'm really worried about

2:07:22approving developments that will

2:07:24compound the issues that we have and

2:07:27that as a city we cannot mitigate and as

2:07:30a state we are unresponsive to and

2:07:33clearly our federal agencies are as

2:07:36well. So it's been a long night. Thank

2:07:37you for your time.

2:07:38>> Thank you. Anyone else in opposition?

2:07:50>> My name is Orlando Valente Uraga. We

2:07:53live uh 35 Beach Avenue, right across

2:07:56the street from uh from the Lentil. So,

2:08:01we live there for five years so far and

2:08:04it's a beautiful neighborhood. Um nice

2:08:06tree, quiet. Uh we got kids, we got

2:08:08pets, and the streets now got no

2:08:12sidewalks where we can walk our pets or

2:08:14play with our kids. But uh

2:08:18uh I don't know where you guys live, but

2:08:20you guys you pretty good good idea where

2:08:23we live right now. So our street is like

2:08:26a dead end street like my neighbors

2:08:28states already about it and we cons my

2:08:32biggest concern from our neighbors is

2:08:34really the safety from everyone. So it's

2:08:38I I had camera right in front of my

2:08:40house and we watch uh the the garbage

2:08:43trucks uh UPS trucks. They really had

2:08:47hard time to get in, get out, pick out

2:08:50garbage and you know, thank God we don't

2:08:54have any um emergency like a fire truck

2:08:57or or ambulance or something. Um but

2:09:00just imagine have six units. I live

2:09:03cross right across the street and uh

2:09:06just imagine have six units there and

2:09:11all those cars they're going to be there

2:09:13and our from this the side our tree is

2:09:16not um constru it's been constructed

2:09:19uphill so we don't have garage we can

2:09:22put our cars so we had to park on the

2:09:24street so just put more cars in there is

2:09:28going to be just a cow uh when a snowtor

2:09:32snow storm comes. Uh last year,

2:09:36uh we saw that um the the snow plow was

2:09:39they have really hard time to uh getting

2:09:41that snow out.

2:09:43>> Uh we cleaned the street and the snow

2:09:47plow came back again and then they just

2:09:49bury our cars with snow again. So it's

2:09:52like and we had a lot of snow last year

2:09:55like three stones of leaves and that is

2:09:59really hard and I think this unit is

2:10:02going to affect our lives there and

2:10:04we're not against to have somebody

2:10:06living there but but the big massive

2:10:10thing they're going to put in there is

2:10:12really is going to be really hard for

2:10:13everybody.

2:10:14>> All right. Thank you.

2:10:15>> Thank you.

2:10:17>> Is that it in the opposition?

2:10:19>> No.

2:10:20Yes,

2:10:21>> Nick from zone department. I have emails

2:10:24here for emails of opposition.

2:10:27>> Right.

2:10:28>> All right. So, I don't know if those in

2:10:29the packet, but

2:10:30>> All right. Yes, we have

2:10:31>> read them into

2:10:32>> Well, we'll just read the um

2:10:34>> the name.

2:10:35>> So, I'll read the Okay, I'm going to

2:10:36read the name. So, the these are the

2:10:39oppositions that we got.

2:10:42>> Oh, these are the opposition that we

2:10:44have received by email um from Mary Dei.

2:10:48Deardi. Yes, Mary Demarti. The other

2:10:51person is Lisa Herden,

2:10:56Teresa K. Rossi,

2:10:58and the president from um Gail Robinson,

2:11:01the president of Ash Creek Ash Creek

2:11:04Conservation Association, Inc.

2:11:08>> All right, that's that's the opposition

2:11:11uh rebuttal.

2:11:12>> Oh, no. These are mine. This is what you

2:11:14gave.

2:11:23Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We've heard a

2:11:24lot of information tonight. We've gotten

2:11:26a lot of information from neighbors,

2:11:29from the opposition, and um we'd like an

2:11:32opportunity to continue this hearing to

2:11:34next month so that we can get responses

2:11:37to any of that information and also so

2:11:40that we can get um updated information

2:11:43from deep. So, that would be our

2:11:45preference. All right.

2:11:48Thank you.

2:11:52>> Okay. We will continue. Yes.

2:11:54>> Thank you very much.

2:11:57>> Right.

2:12:00>> This item will be continued to next

2:12:02month.

2:12:03>> Do we need to make a motion for that?

2:12:04>> All right. That's

2:12:07>> Yes, Mr. William.

2:12:22Well, I I will file everything with with

2:12:24the commission, but I I can't

2:12:26individually send to all these people.

2:12:29>> No. Well, I mean, you've submitted

2:12:31things today, Chuck, so you've known

2:12:34about this for a couple of months, so

2:12:35thank you.

2:12:36>> All right. Um,

2:12:39>> so this item will be continued until

2:12:42October.

2:12:44>> All right, that concludes the

2:12:47>> that

2:12:48>> Yeah, we have to make a motion of it.

2:12:50We'll do that. But this concludes the

2:12:52public portion of our meeting.

2:12:58>> Oh. Oh. Oh. I meant this evening. Not

2:13:01this item. This item is still open, but

2:13:04there's no more. We need to keep it open

2:13:06otherwise we can't give you anything.

2:13:08>> This will be open. This is open. I'm I'm

2:13:10just trying to say this.

2:13:12>> So what do we have? What

2:13:13>> there's no more items on the agenda for

2:13:15this evening.

2:13:16>> Correct.

2:13:18>> That's what I'm saying.

2:13:18>> Going to close the

2:13:20>> No. You can't close.

2:13:21>> No, we're not going to No, this this No,

2:13:24the the public hearing on this item is

2:13:26still open.

2:13:27>> Okay.

2:13:27>> And will be continued.

2:13:34Um,

2:13:36>> no, we have to go in now we go into the

2:13:38decision session.

2:13:40>> Okay.

2:13:41>> So, now we move to the decision making.

2:13:43>> Yes.

2:13:47>> Do we need to rearrange anything with

2:13:49just this one item? So, I don't think

2:13:51>> you have to make any motions on both

2:13:53applications

2:13:55>> on both.

2:13:57>> Okay. on the um withdrawal too.

2:14:01Okay, I I need a motion on C1.

2:14:06>> Motion to accept the withdrawal.

2:14:08>> Second. Oh.

2:14:10>> All in favor?

2:14:11>> I

2:14:12>> All right. That item is

2:14:15approved for withdrawal. All right. In

2:14:17D1

2:14:18>> motion to continue.

2:14:20>> Second.

2:14:21>> Second.

2:14:23>> All in favor?

2:14:25>> I

2:14:25>> I

2:14:26>> I Okay. The motion will be continued

2:14:29until our October meeting.

2:14:40>> Me

2:14:41neither.

2:14:44>> Minutes. We just got minutes.

2:14:47>> So now we do we do minutes.

2:14:50>> Minutes.

2:14:51>> Oh, or is there Wait, is there anything

2:14:53else that should probably become before

2:14:55this? Yeah, he has something.

2:15:01[snorts]

2:15:06>> Oh,

2:15:07>> yeah. Just real quick, um David,

2:15:13um last

2:15:16>> we discussed the self storage analysis.

2:15:20>> Yes.

2:15:20>> And uh just wanted to give you a

2:15:23[snorts]

2:15:24uh we consulted with uh metrics helped

2:15:27us draft the site code. Um they are

2:15:30helping us we had a meeting with them

2:15:34and essentially they are supportive

2:15:38basically our thought process. Um

2:15:40they're just going to help draft the

2:15:42language and then once that's done we'll

2:15:45submit a formal application.

2:15:46>> Okay.

2:15:47>> In this formal application we'll also

2:15:49have the zones and

2:15:52>> correct

2:15:52>> what basically what we discussed in last

2:15:54meeting.

2:15:54>> Exactly.

2:15:55>> Okay. So we can have a better view of

2:15:56what zone D's are.

2:15:58>> Make sure that the language is

2:15:59consistent.

2:16:01>> Right.

2:16:03>> Okay.

2:16:07>> I just wanted you guys to know where

2:16:11>> it

2:16:13all

2:16:15and

2:16:16>> the minutes. Uh do we have enough?

2:16:18>> Yeah, we have

2:16:20>> we got a You want me to make a motion? I

2:16:21>> believe we have six here. The only

2:16:23people are missing

2:16:25>> you guys are all here.

2:16:26>> Except in here. No, you're going to have

2:16:30to

2:16:31>> No, you need a full.

2:16:32>> So, we can't even do the minutes. No,

2:16:34>> I'm going have to make a motion to

2:16:36>> motion to adjourn.

2:16:37>> No, continue minutes

2:16:39>> cuz we don't have a motion to continue.

2:16:41>> I second.

2:16:42>> minutes. Okay. I need a second.

2:16:44>> A second.

2:16:44>> Okay. And then we can do the

2:16:46>> All in favor?

2:16:47>> I

2:16:47>> All right. The meeting the mo minutes

2:16:50will be

2:16:51>> I second.

2:16:51>> I got you. All in favor?

2:16:53>> I

2:16:56>> meeting adjourned.

2:16:57>> Let's go. We done.

2:16:59>> Thank you.

2:17:00>> Yeah. So that's good that you lift it

2:17:02open this