Kent 80-unit housing development granted first of several town approvals

KENT – A proposal for an 80-unit housing development on a 12.5-acre parcel in downtown Kent cleared its first permitting hurdle on Thursday, April 9, as the Planning and Zoning Commission approved a zoning change allowing the project to move forward.

The approval, granted after the close of a two-session public hearing, allows for the creation of a Planned Development District, or PDD, on the parcel between Town Hall and Maple Street Extension. The PDD restricts use of the land to the project proposed by Kent Housing Development Associates, a group established by South Kent’s Jim Millstein for its development.

The plans call for a mixed-income neighborhood-style development with 14 townhouses and larger apartment buildings. Sixteen of the units would be designated as affordable, and five acres at the southern end of the property would be publicly-accessible open space.

During the initial hearing in late March, Millstein described the development as “a village-scale residential neighborhood that fits naturally in Kent while addressing the town’s documented housing needs.”

As Millstein clarified during Thursday night’s proceedings, the PDD approval is the first of several approvals his team must secure before construction can begin. “This is just an interim step,” Millstein said.

The project still requires approval from the Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Commission and the Architectural Review Board, and must return before P&Z with a fully engineered site plan for final zoning approval, which Millstein said he hopes will be ready in four or five months. The Sewer Commission has already signed off on the project, indicating the town can handle the proposed increase in wastewater.

As there is no public hearing for a site plan, Thursday night marked the final chance for input from residents in the format of a zoning hearing.

The first round of the hearing on March 30 saw the public react with cautious optimism to the proposal, with many advocating for a more diversified housing landscape in Kent, while others expressed hesitation about its size.

Those concerns were echoed on Thursday night, which featured far less public testimony than the previous session of the public hearing. Bonnie Bevans, a realtor who lives near the southern end of the PDD parcel, said she felt the proposal is “too big for the location.” Later in the meeting, she spoke up again, saying, “We don’t need clump housing where it turns Kent into a Boston.”

Denise Morocco questioned why the proposal does not specify the installation of renewable energy. “It’s 2026,” she said, arguing that any development of this size should account for clean and, she argued, cheaper energy sources.

Steve Pener, a realtor who was raised in Kent and now has a family in town, countered the position that the development will be too big. “80 units isn’t enough,” he said, saying the housing crunch has “impacted the fabric of our community.” He also pushed back against claims that the development will significantly impact traffic in town. “If anything,” he said, “putting housing in the center of our village means more people walking to the grocery store, not more cars on Route 7.”

Jim Millstein offered his perspective on the necessity of the project after the public had spoken. “The people who work here cannot afford to live here,” he said, “and that is because we’ve restricted the supply of housing.”

“Towns need population,” he added. “Population drives economic activity… we need people to live in town,” stressing the word “live.”

Responding to Morocco’s concerns, he said he has to plan the project with affordability in mind in order to maintain the affordable housing thresholds. “If solar is cheaper – definitely going that way,” he said.

P&Z responded favorably to the proposal. “This application isn’t landing before us by chance,” commissioner Darrell Cherniske said, referring to the 2017 establishment of the Village Incentive Overlay District, a zone intended to promote affordable housing opportunities. “I think we’re very fortunate to have a local developer who has genuine concern in the outcome here being the best for the town.”

Commissioner Donna Hayes agreed, saying during her time working in the Land Use office, she had seen three other proposals with even more units than this proposal, none of which “were able to do what Mr. Millstein has done so far.”

“I think that it would be a wonderful addition to the town, it would be a wonderful addition to the schools,” she said. “It would be a wonderful addition to all the vendors and property owners in the center of town.”

“This is probably the best use of that piece of property.”