The Greenwich Planning & Zoning commission voted on May 14 to approve an application for a 6-story, 120-unit affordable housing development under the state’s affordable housing statute 8-30g.
The development is considered “Assisted Housing” since the Town’s affordable Housing Trust Board issued a conditional commitment letter providing financial assistance.
The applicant was Nimbus Realty. The developer is Philip Wharton.
Houses on Benedict Court would come down to make way for a six story 8-30g affordable housing development.
The development will replace multiple buildings: 3, 5, 7, 11, 13 and 15 Benedict Court and 7, 9, 15, 19, 21 and 23 Benedict Place in the Central Greenwich Business “CGB” and Central Greenwich Impact Overlay “CGIO” zones.
The application had numerous previous iterations over many years. Back in 2017 and 2018, Benedict Court Development Co LLC proposed text changes to the Central Greenwich Impact Overlay Zone. That CGIO zone exists on maps of downtown, but its regulations, created in 1982, were never fully fleshed out. The text amendment would have granted a developer additional building rights for height, bulk and uses in exchange for a public benefit such as affordable housing, a public park, public parking, and infrastructure improvements. That proposal was denied.
While one commissioner complained extensively about the 8-30g statute and declined to vote in favor of the application, it is notable the applicant agreed to deed restrict 40% of the total units (equal to 48 units) at 80% of Area Median Income for a period of 40 years.
This is a significantly higher percentage than most 8-30g developments.
For example at the Oak Ridge Street development that was approved at the same meeting, just 22% of the units – equal to 7 units – will be offered to people making up to 80% of Area Median Income for 40 years.
“The significant imposition on the Town of Greenwich does not justify the amount of affordable housing they provide,” Mr. Macri said after the motion to approve was made by Ms Alban, adding that many residents were frustrated that ‘a poorly written regulation does nothing to further its supposed purpose.’
He described the 40-year deed restriction as ‘a blink of an eye’ and referred to a mandate by ‘people from somewhere else.’
“If I’m perceived as wicked, so be it,” Macri said. “My vote is nay.”
P&Z commission chair Alban reminded Mr. Macri that the state law had been on the books for 35 years and that the P&Z commission owes its existence to the state.
“This is not an imposition of something from somewhere else. This is a state law that has been in place for 35 years,” she said. “Our job is to follow the laws.”
“We are empowered and created under state law. We exist under state law. Further, municipalities only have authority to act because it is granted to them by the state of Connecticut.”
“The state statutes nowhere state that our job is to protect our town. We take it to heart, and I think we all believe we are protecting our town, but our job as mandated is to follow the statutes and the regulations.”
“I know it’s frustrating,” Alban added. “It’s incredibly frustrating that we have to do this.”
The vote in favor were Ms Alban, Anne Noel Jones, Dennis Yeskey and Peter Lowe. Mr. Macri voted no. 
Details on the development:
The combined gross floor area of the underlying properties is 26,336 sq ft. The application is for 32,340 sq. ft. while the underlying zoning allows 15,392 sq ft.
The approved FAR is 1.48, whereas the FAR is .51 and .3 FAR is allowed. Building coverage is presently 26% whereas 71.8% is proposed and zoning would allow 30%.
The proposed structures are 6 stories or 77-ft and 9-inches high. Zoning allows 40 feet with a maximum of 3 stories.
The current uses on the sites include 13 buildings with commercial uses and include 6 residential units whereas. The 8-30g will be entirely residential.
The applicant is providing 180 parking spaces, including 6 ADA for a ratio of 1.45 spaces per unit.
Town zoning regulations for multi family developments would require 260 parking spaces.
The Commission has expressed concern that parking supply may be tight for the 251 bedrooms proposed, but noted the project is within .6 miles of the Greenwich train station which may reduce parking demand.
The applicant plans to remove 8 on street parking spaces. Parking Services has indicated openness to the concept on the basis the applicant provide on site capacity for all delivery vehicles as this would reduce street congestion associated with the development.
Parking Services also asked about the possibility of off-street accommodation for ambulances and service vehicles.
Parking Services also requested construction phasing plans geared to reducing the associated congestion in the neighborhood.
The applicant submitted a traffic report dated January 10, 2024. The report states that the proposal will not have a significant impact on traffic operating or parking conditions in the area.
In its analysis, the applicant’s consultant utilized a 17% trip credit for transit-oriented development and reduced vehicle ownership for below market units.
The Greenwich DPW approved a 34 feet distance between proposed curb cuts where 50 feet is the standard required. The same letter also enables four access driveways where the maximum is normally two.
The Town Tree Warden approved the proposed tree removal and associated landscape plan.
The Town Conservation Dept recommended the parking area be equipped with bike racks to encourage micro mobility and noted the creation of more than 20 parking spaces triggers an installation of EV charging stations.
The Commission requested the applicant appear before the ARC subsequent to a decision and take input on façade detailing and on lighting.
The Commission noted that according to the Dept of Housing, Affordable Housing, 2023 Appeals List, the Town has 5.7% of their housing units as affordable and is therefore not an exempt community.
In the motion to approve said, “The Commission further notes that Objective 2.1 of the Town’s 2019 Plan of Conservation and Development is to ‘create more affordable housing as currently defined under Section 8-30g of the Connecticut General Statutes.'”
Also the motion noted that the Commission public health and public safety needs related to the project’s design did not outweigh the need for affordable housing. The application was approved with the following conditions:
• Prior to issuance of any zoning permit the final affordability plan shall be reviewed and accepted by planning and zoning staff and recorded on the towns land records; the final affordability plan shall include the parking management plan; any proposed exterior mechanical equipment will need to meet the Town’s Noise Ordinance which is part of the Town’s Charter; and Full Fire Department review and sign off shall be obtained. ARC reviews prior to zoning permit. Changes to be reviewed administratively by P&Z staff.
• Sewer improvement completed prior to building connection to the Town system. • Applicant to revise proposed parking garage layout to increase ease of maneuvers and spaces.
• Parking Services approval be obtained for the removal of street spaces and Parking Services requested be accommodated.
• Bicycle racks and EV Chargers.
• CT DEEP requirements to be met.
• Rights of Way and any Easements to receive Law Department sign off. turning radii of vehicle movement in and out of Benedict Court to be revised to exhibit 3 as preferred by DPW.
• All other outstanding staff and department comments to be addressed.
See also: P&Z Watch: Oak Ridge 8-30g for 31-Unit Building Approved with Numerous Conditions
Previous Benedict applications:
Six-Story, 110 Unit Affordable Housing Development Would Be a Stone’s Throw from Greenwich Ave January 2022
Proposed Downtown Tranfo Development Gets a Grilling from P&Z Feb 1, 2018
P&Z: Proposed Text Amendment to CGIO Zone Could Signal Major Downtown Redevelopment Dec 4, 2017