Apartment Complex Draws Opposition From Milford Residents

MILFORD, CT — Several residents expressed opposition to a developer's bid to construct a mixed-use building at 67 Prospect Street at a recent Planning and Zoning Board public hearing, according to recent meeting minutes.

Patrick Rose, Rose Tiso and Company are seeking approval for a mixed-use commercial building at 67 Prospect Street. Plans include 36 apartments and restoring the Baldwin House, which would be used for commercial space.

Attorney Thomas Lynch said plans include restoration of the historic house plus the addition of 36 residential units. He said there have been major changes made to the proposal including restoring the Baldwin House, which was originally slated to be demolished. Also the original plans sought 44 units and that has been reduced to 36 units.

He said the state archeologist studied the rear portion of the property with sonar, looking for bones or artifacts of Revolutionary War soldiers, but found no evidence to support anecdotal information on the burial of early settlers, according to meeting minutes

Lynch noted letters of support from the State Historic Preservation Office and William Silver of MHPC. He expressed confidence that concerns had been addressed. The public hearing was held open and no vote was taken.

Here is a summary of Milford residents who spoke concerning the application at the hearing, as referenced in official meeting minutes filed by the city of Milford:

Lily Flanagan, of Prospect St, said she is across street from the earlier condominium development on Prospect Street. She said the proposed multi-facade is less appealing than the condominium’s white clapboard. She noted that delivery trucks enter and exit driveway of current apartment complex and asked if there a truck turnaround capability in the proposed apartment complex. She
noted that trucks also get stuck under the railroad bridge near New Haven Avenue end of Prospect Street.

Max Case, of Plains Street, Secretary of the Milford Cemetery Association, thanked the board for voting to hold a public hearing. He noted the presence of Jim Beard and Robert Hiza, saying they should comment. He was also skeptical that no overflow of water from the proposed storage galleries would flood onto the cemetery. He referred to the liability that would result from water
damage to abutting properties and that if the project increases the flow of water onto adjacent property, there is an obligation to protect cemetery. He said he would rather see water being directed into catch basins.

Jim Beard, of Wheelers Farm Road, President of the Milford Cemetery Association, noted that Robert Hiza’s research raised concerns about water management. Mr. Beard said he was involved in the POCD’s downtown plan, and said Milford history has not been preserved. He also wanted Prospect Street removed from the MCDD zone.

John Kranz, of West Main Street, owner of J. Kranz Carpentry, member of MHPC, said he was relieved Baldwin House was spared, but he still disagrees with the overall project. He noted that he is a close neighbor of the property, having bought and restored the old parsonage for First Church. He was dismayed by the loss of historic houses being replaced with moneymaking apartment houses.

Steve Rathman, of Prospect Street, said the project was outsized to the lot. He noted that the other complex on Prospect Street sits on over 2 acres.

Ann Maher, of Prospect Street, said the expense to restore Baldwin House had been worsened because the applicant allowed the property to fall into disrepair. She said the remains of colonial settlers there were documented by Peter Prudden, that gravestones were not used by the religious sect they adhered to, and that an archeological investigation would be unlikely to detect anything
but coffin nails or other durable artifacts. She noted that since the pandemic began, there have been daily delivery of Amazon and Grubhub trucks along the street. She cited MZR section 7.1.3.8 regarding the safety, comfort, and convenience of neighborhoods.

She said the project was not in harmony with built form of surrounding areas and that scale should be compatible with existing buildings whereas Baldwin House will be dwarfed by proposed building.