Residents speak against proposed Bic Drive apartments

FI-news-MMAbout 60 people attended a Feb. 3 Planning and Zoning Board public hearing, with 16 of them speaking against a proposed 257-unit apartment building with an affordable housing component at 460 Bic Drive, at the corner of Naugatuck Avenue.

Garden Homes Residential of Stamford submitted the plan under the state’s affordable housing regulations, Connecticut General Statute 8-30g, which overrides local zoning regulations.

The hearing will continue on Tuesday, Feb. 17 at 7:30 p.m. at City Hall.

Joseph Coci, managing director of Mountain Development Corp, requested time for his staff to analyze the proposal and to prepare more detailed comments. The company owns the 625,000 square foot industrial complex at 500 Bic Drive.

The proposed apartment building — an H-shaped four-story building — will have 194 one-bedroom apartments and 63 studio apartments. The building would have 322 parking spaces, averaging 1.25 spaces per unit, and Garden Homes could add 42 more parking spaces if needed.

Check back later for more details on this week’s public hearing

About author

By participating in the comments section of this site you are agreeing to our Privacy Policy and User Agreement

  • FakeJoker

    Mountain Development has had a year to prepare their comments. Just another stalling tactic by Milford.

    Milford needs to realize this developer is playing hardball. Milford took grants for years intended to help the city develop affordable housing while blocking affordable housing development. Now a compliant has been filed with HUD. How do you think the current administration will react?

    Why do you think Milford’s grant guru retired right after the letter was sent to HUD?

  • Ramone Love

    Gee, let me guess, they whined and moaned about dust, traffic and noise, the Holy Trinity of NIMBY-ism everywhere. And out of a population of nearly 53,000 less than 1/100th of a percent showed up to oppose it? Yeah, that’s a real groundswell of opposition.

  • Rocco Frank Milford Independen

    Was going to speak against this project, regrettably I was tied up on personal commitments. However, and to throw in my personal opinion on this, I can’t agree more with the people of Milford for multiple reasons. The primary reason is that 8-30G threatens the very purpose of having an elected representative board in our town. Reason being that we as citizens elect our representatives to our bidding while the developers use their resources to hire skillful attorneys and lobbyists to pass our right to democratic rule to a law their attorneys use to circumvent the development will of many communities. Secondly, no one doubts the importance of affordable housing, especially where no affordable housing exists, thus far the only only chorus of individuals calling for affordable housing are Developers and those parties who stand to profit under such massive projects. Lastly, several people in Milford are trying to sell their homes at very affordable prices, new developments such as this one make their property more obscure given the ongoing stream of new housing that these developers pursue. What I believe needs to happen here is policy change at the Mayors office, the City and BOA need to propose an ordinance granting the city a First Right of Refusal on the purchase of the large lots (I.E. the 44 Acre lot on Wheeler’s Farms Rd) that get razed in the name of 8-30G. Given the fact that developers are at constant odds with the people of Milford, its time their government took the job of preserving our open space seriously, of which includes tax increases and funds earmarked for the purposes of purchasing open land. Purchases, unlike city employee pension fund bailouts, interest payments, contributions, etc.., that hardly benefit any of us who live and work in Milford.

    • FakeJoker

      An ordinance that requires property owners to give the city “right of first refusal” is an attack on private property rights.

      • Rocco Frank Milford Independen

        What you say is true, it is an imposition on property rights. However, you do realize we live in a Republic, and under the City Charter, and state and Federal Constitution our Republic clearly spells out that the Common Good along with others not infringing on the the peace and tranquility of their neighbors and community is a reasonable and just use of our laws. If what you say is absolute, then there is no reason why someone could not buy the 44 Acres on Wheelers Farms Rd, and put a Tiger and Bear sanctuary there, or perhaps even a 100 Story building or nuclear power plant. The laws exists to keep harmony and tranquility in the community, absolute property rights means that you have no control over your neighbors bad decisions. The same way you would not want your neighbors house to be used as a trash and recycling facility the people of Milford are more than within their rights to question any development that diminishes, mars, or possibly degrades the existing services we already pay for with additional congestion, health hazards and carrying costs. If these projects were taxed based on something other than the common mill rate they may be viewed more favorably. Thus far no one has made a compelling case that the people of Milford suffer from a lack of affordable housing. There are more cheap houses here than anyplace I have ever lived. If this project was slated for Greenwich, Darien or even Cos Cob I would be highly in favor of it because those towns have affordability issues. Its common knowledge that the only complainers on affordable housing in Milford is the developers who stand to reap lots of profits.

© HAN Network. All rights reserved. Milford Mirror, 1000 Bridgeport Avenue, Shelton, CT 06484

Designed by WPSHOWER

Powered by WordPress