LAKEVILLE – The public hearing considering the redesign of the Wake Robin Inn has been continued to Dec. 2, following another round of critical commentary from residents at its fourth iteration on Nov. 18.
The major revelation of Monday’s meeting is Angela and William Cruger, whose property sits directly across from the Wells Hill Road entrance to the Inn, will now hold intervenor status in the proceedings, and will be represented by attorney Perley Grimes. As intervenors, the Crugers and associated representatives now hold party status, alongside the applicant, Aradev LLC, and the Planning and Zoning Commission.
The intervention, which Planning and Zoning Chair Michael Klemens attested was filed on the morning of Nov. 18, is concerned with the ecological ramifications of the project. Specifically, the petition states that the project is “likely to have the effect of unreasonably impairing or destroying the public trust in the natural resources of the state” regarding groundwater quality at the site and in adjacent areas, and in threatening Connecticut-listed plant species that may be present in the affected terrain.
The intervenors were allotted a section of the meeting to present their arguments, but Grimes stated that consistently changing plans on the part of the developers had delayed the completion of comprehensive surveys of the land. He affirmed that a group of five experts will be prepared to present their findings at the Dec. 2 continuation of the public hearing.
Klemens asked that the experts’ reports be filed as soon as possible to ensure all parties have sufficient time to review them before the meeting. Grimes affirmed that the reports will be available promptly.
Attorney Josh Mackey, representing the applicant, criticized the intervenors’ petition “coming at the 11th hour,” claiming that there will be little time to respond to the findings of the experts.
“It’s unfair and its highly prejudicial,” he said.
Bill Cruger, speaking in the public comment section, said that the experts’ reports will be available with all due speed. “It’s not intended to be prejudicial, it’s meant to be informative,” he said.
For the applicant’s part, landscape architect Mark Arigoni of SLR Consulting gave a presentation highlighting recent efforts by the developers to respond to concerns from the public and P&Z. The report largely focused on an updated tree plan, informed by a survey conducted by Bartlett Tree Experts, who were contracted by Aradev LLC.
The survey assessed the health of approximately 800 trees, from which a map was developed that color-coded each tree in the affected area based on the survey’s findings. Arigoni stated that it is their intention to “eliminate the removal of as many trees as feasible,” and that they will continue to consult with the arborist through the construction process.
P&Z likewise focused on the tree plan in their commentary, with Klemens requesting that the plan be updated to include common species names alongside taxonomic designations so that the public may engage with the survey more easily. He also asked that an invasive species management program be added to the plans. Other commissioners expressed that they would like to see more specific numbers on how many trees will be removed throughout the construction process.
During the public comment section, residents expressed that their concerns and suggestions from prior meetings had not been met with the updated plan, which had few alterations in design from those presented at the Oct. 16 meeting.
Freya Block said that the community’s concerns, such as dangerous traffic patterns, environmental damage and noise pollution, had not been addressed by Arigoni’s presentation. She asked P&Z to consider “the enormity and incongruity of the scale of this project for this community.”
Thomas Muldoon also questioned how such a development would fit within the village dynamic of Lakeville, while also doubting the practical aspects of the project. The development would necessitate a large workforce to move to a region that is difficult to live in on low wages, he argued. “Where’s the affordable housing?”
“It’s not whether it’s a great idea, it’s whether it’s a legal idea,” Klemens responded to Muldoon’s concerns.
After the Dec. 2 meeting, the hearing will likely continue to Dec. 10. “We’re really going to have to close the hearing on the 10th,” Klemens said.
