SALISBURY — A Superior Court judge has struck down legal challenges to a proposed affordable housing development on town-owned property at 11 Holley Street in the Lakeville section of Salisbury, known as the Holley Block.
A 19-page Memorandum of Decision, filed by Judge Andrew Roraback on Friday, Feb. 17, paves the way for the construction of 12 rental units for individuals or families at or below 80 percent of the median income level for Litchfield County.
“This is a clear win. We are overjoyed and we look forward to being able to put up 12 affordable housing units in that location,” said Peter Halle, co-president of the Salisbury Housing Committee, Inc. (SHC).
SHC was a named defendant in the lawsuit filed 18 months ago, along with the Salisbury Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z).
SHC’s application for the housing project was approved by the P&Z on May 17, 2021, with numerous conditions and after three lengthy sessions of a public hearing. On June 8, 2021, opponents of the proposal filed a lawsuit to halt the process.
The three plaintiffs in the lawsuit included two abutting property owners, 12 Millerton Road, LLC and RJSHolding, LLC, and an individual, William Muecke, who was an intervenor in the process.
The plaintiff’s attorney, Daniel Casagrande of Cramer and Anderson, wrote in a Tuesday, Feb. 21 email:
“While my clients respect the decision of the court they are obviously disappointed. We are weighing options to appeal.”
The plaintiffs challenged the commission’s actions in approving the application and claimed that it “failed to conduct an inquiry…as to whether there existed a ‘feasible and prudent alternative’ ” to SHC’s proposal.
In his decision Judge Roraback ruled in favor of the defendants.
“The plaintiff’s verified complaint…contains a litany of alleged shortcomings challenging the substance of SHC’s special permit application and alleged abuses of discretion on the part of the commission in reaching its decision to approve that application,” said Roraback.
P&Z chair Michael Klemens said the judge’s decision to dismiss the lawsuits is “affirmation that P&Z conducted a fair, open and inclusive process.”
Klemens said he was pleased that the judge “recognized that P&Z actually listened to the intervenors and imposed conditions that reflected their testimony.”
While pleased with the ruling, Klemens cautioned that it may be just the beginning of a multi-step legal process.
“What it means is that we’ve prevailed in this go-around, but of course the plaintiffs have the opportunity to appeal. I’m not even thinking that this is the end of it.”
He said the process has already been an expensive one for the town.
“It’s cost the taxpayers quite a bit of money, and that’s money that we cannot recover. It was an expense, but it was needed. We had to defend our decision to the best of our ability.”
The process has also delayed the project for the past a year and a half, noted Halle. “Every month that goes by without these 12 units is another 12 families that don’t have a place to live.”
‘Feasible and prudent’ alternatives sought
The Memorandum of Decision notes that the Holley Street property was given to the town in 1967 by the Belcher family. The gift was conditioned on the town agreeing to demolish a large and aging building known as “The Holley Block” that dated at least from the 1880s.
The Belchers provided that if new buildings were constructed on the site, they should have “exterior design in keeping with the Federal or early Eighteenth-Century image of our villages,” according to the legal decision. If no buildings were constructed, the Belchers directed the property be “cleared, graded and landscaped for a town park or attractively landscaped for a parking area.”
At the public hearing, there was extensive testimony and documentary evidence relating to the historical importance of the vacant .31-acre site on which SHC seeks to construct a building containing affordable housing, wrote Roraback.
In his decision, the judge noted that “…the court upholds the commission’s determination that the intervenors did not adduce evidence that was sufficient to require the commission to consider feasible and prudent alternatives.”
The court also ruled favorably to the commission’s interpretation of the regulations as they apply to the permissible front yard setbacks for SHC’s proposed building in the subject overlay zone, and that such interpretation was the result of “honest judgment that was reasonably and fairly exercised.”
In conclusion, Roraback ruled that the decision of the Salisbury Planning and Zoning Commission is upheld and dismissed the appeal.
In 2017, the Salisbury Affordable Housing Commission hosted a series of community forums to seek resident input on housing goals and locations. The Holley Block was voted the most popular site for new affordable housing at these forums. The site once contained an apartment building on it that was demolished decades ago.
The town provided an option to lease the property to the SHC, which has been awarded pre-development funding for the affordable housing project from the state Department of Housing to explore the viability of affordable housing on that site.
On Feb. 6, the Salisbury Board of Selectmen voted unanimously to extend the lease on the Holley Block property to SHC until July 31, 2025.
Halle credited the town’s Planning and Zoning commission, its chairman and town attorneys for making a solid case for the proposed affordable housing project, to be named “Holley Place,” which he said he expects will move forward once state financing comes through.
“P&Z did a thorough job when they ruled for us back in May of 2021, and that is really what carried the day. This is an important win for us. We needed this.”
