New Canaan Housing Committee Assigns Report Sections for October Deadline

Other Committee · Meeting of September 14, 2026

New Canaan housing panel splits up drafting duties for a moratorium report due October 19. The Affordable Housing Committee, led by member Chris Wilson, assigned sections on 8-30g moratorium history, site evaluation and Riverwood conversion feasibility to individual members, with Hillary Ormond volunteering to assemble the full document. Maria Weingarten warned the town would need to convert Riverwood units well below 100 percent of area median income to reach roughly 152 units of housing credit, saying "I would be very afraid to rely on" private developments the town can't control.

The committee approved its August 10 minutes 4-0 with one abstention. Resident Deliana Mendez, during public comment, urged the committee to develop its post office-area site before the more complex lumberyard parcel "so that you can learn the process."

In the full story:

• Who Was There
• Organizations And Documents Referenced
• The complete report — 2,381 words

Source: the Other Committee meeting of September 14, 2026, reported from the official video recording and transcript.

The Full Article

Roll Call and Minutes

Committee member Chris Wilson opened the September 14 meeting with a roll call establishing a quorum: Krista Nielsen, Jane Williams, Bob Strong and Wilson were present; Bill Perrette and Mike Sweeney did not attend. Maria Weingarten and Jeff Williams joined after the roll call, Weingarten by phone. Jane Williams moved to approve the minutes of the committee's August 10 meeting; Hillary Ormond seconded. Nielsen, who had not attended the August meeting, asked whether abstaining would cause a quorum problem; Wilson told her it would not, since the committee needs only a majority of those in attendance. The motion carried with Nielsen abstaining and all other present members in favor.

Subcommittee Reports

The project subcommittee and finance subcommittee both reported no updates, as neither had met since the committee's prior meeting. This was a brief procedural item that consumed only a few minutes.

Report Outline and Drafting Assignments

The bulk of the meeting was devoted to item five on the agenda: dividing up work on a draft report the committee intends to send to the Board of Selectmen, recommending how New Canaan should pursue continued protection from appeals under the state's 8-30g affordable-housing statute. The question before the committee was not what the report should conclude, but who would draft each section so a complete document could be assembled before the group's next meeting.

Nielsen had circulated a proposed outline in advance. Wilson said the report's only sections already drafted were findings tied to the committee's public workshop and survey results, and suggested the executive summary be written last, once the rest of the document was assembled. He proposed that he and Strong share a printed copy of the outline during the discussion.

Wilson took on the report's first three sections: an explanation of 8-30g and moratorium methodology, a review of the town's current moratorium status and the history of affordable-housing development in New Canaan, and a section on the moratorium strategy the committee adopted, tied to a town council ordinance. He also took the "plan for 2028 and beyond" section, which lays out that the town has units largely in hand for a 2028 moratorium and addresses how to assemble sufficient credit for a subsequent 2032 moratorium. "Those were pieces of the presentation," Wilson said, noting the material builds on a prior committee presentation but still needs to be converted into prose. Jane Williams took the section on the committee's formation, structure, roles, timeline and experts consulted.

On alternatives considered, including scattered-site versus large-scale development, Ormond volunteered to assemble the full report from all contributed sections rather than draft an individual piece, and also agreed to help edit. Weingarten, once on the call, agreed to review sections as well. For the site-evaluation section, summarizing the project subcommittee's work on site-selection process, evaluation criteria and sites evaluated, Wilson first asked Jeff Williams, who said it "wasn't one that jumped out at me" and suggested Nielsen may have already produced similar material; Ormond ultimately took the section.

Findings sections generated the most discussion. Members agreed the community-engagement portion was already drafted but lengthy and could be trimmed; no one volunteered to cut it during the meeting. On preferred-site findings, Ormond offered to write a first draft, building on existing public-input material. Jeff Williams took the case for mixed-use development, saying he had "done a lot of work on that" already. Wilson took master planning and Riverwood conversion feasibility. Weingarten took the scenario-planning framework, describing it as material largely in her head from work she had shared with the project subcommittee in June, including a hue-point calculator she built into the committee's finance model. At one point, in reference to needing shorthand for two members sharing a surname, a member asked, "How many letters I have to write to differentiate" between Jeff and Jane; the group settled on "Je" and "Ja."

Substantive Content: Scenario Planning and the Riverwood Math

The question before the committee, in Weingarten's framing, was not to recommend one outcome but to lay out scenarios for elected officials: for instance, that a given mix of unit types at a given size could generate roughly 152 units of housing credit under the state's point system, without the committee prescribing a single path. She cautioned that two other pending private developments referenced in the discussion, described by members as "Weed and Elm" and a "Hill Street" or "Richmond Hill" project, are too speculative to build into the committee's recommendations, since a pulled building permit does not guarantee a completed project. "I think any reliance until you know those units are delivered is, you know, might leave us in a bad position," one member said, and Weingarten agreed, adding that the committee should note the possibility as a footnote rather than a plan.

Jeff Williams raised whether the committee should set a deadline after which it would stop counting on outside developments for housing credit. Other members said any such deadline would need to fall well before 2032, given how long development takes, and that even a pulled permit doesn't guarantee delivered units. Weingarten added a further concern: developers who have previously built 8-30g projects in town might delay obtaining a certificate of occupancy if doing so extended the town's exposure to housing appeals. "I would be very afraid to rely on that, because I could see where they might hold on to their CO if it meant us getting out of our moratorium," she said. [00:19:40]

That exchange pushed the conversation toward Riverwood as what Wilson called "a real option" because, unlike private development, it is "largely within our control." Weingarten said her rough math shows 83 units at Riverwood would remain unconverted after 2028, and that converting all of them at 80 percent of area median income would still fall short of 152 units, meaning the town would likely need to go deeper, to 60 percent of area median income, to hit that number, which raises financing costs through additional town debt. Jeff Williams said the report needs "a firm answer from Scott or whomever" — a reference to the town's affordable-housing consultant, Scott Hobbs — on the maximum share of Riverwood units that could be feasibly converted, since converting units below full occupancy value means the town absorbs the shortfall. Wilson cautioned against precision the committee doesn't have, saying costs should be presented in "order of magnitude" terms rather than exact figures, and warned against town officials treating Riverwood as a cost-free alternative to new construction: "There is a it is certainly going to be in dollars put in per unit materially more to convert Riverwood units," he said, adding it remains a "political decision" for the Board of Selectmen. Jane Williams asked directly whether a master plan for the lumberyard site could realistically be completed and something built there by 2032; Wilson said the process "needs to keep going" and that construction itself is an 18-month to two-year undertaking that remains achievable if the town moves "expeditiously," though he separately predicted "a real catfight" over what ultimately gets built there.

Master Planning, Scope and the Board of Selectmen's Role

Members spent time defining what the committee's report should and should not attempt to decide. Jane Williams and Hillary Ormond raised concerns about authorizing a "master planning process" for the lumberyard site before basic site issues, including groundwater and hydrology, are studied. Wilson agreed the report should avoid language like "authorized" and instead recommend that a to-be-formed master-planning committee, not this committee, take up those questions. He said he had spoken since the last meeting with Hobbs, planning consultant Todd LaViere and a person he identified only as Diana, and that the consensus was a separate body should lead master planning for the site. Wilson noted the town's prior design work on the lumberyard, done with an architecture firm heard on the recording as "Amanda Emma," was narrowly scoped to parking and affordable-housing layout and did not address the site's broader highest-and-best-use questions or off-site issues such as traffic. Members agreed the committee's job is limited to producing a report of findings and options, not authorizing land use decisions; as one member put it, "We're not authorized under the statute, under the ordinance" to do more than recommend.

Appendices, the Hartford Letter and 8-30g Limitations

A quick review of the report's appendices found most material already available, with one exception: an appendix on the town's mulch-pile site, which Wilson said he added but was unsure needed to remain, citing deed restrictions and availability as open questions he would look into further.

Members debated whether to recommend the town advocate for changes to 8-30g itself, and largely decided against it, agreeing the committee wants to avoid a "lobbying side" to the report. They agreed instead to attach as an exhibit a letter the committee previously sent to the state legislature, which Weingarten said addressed proposed legislation referenced as HB 5002 and highlighted the steps New Canaan has taken to comply with 8-30g. Weingarten said Connecticut's 8-30g accounting system effectively only credits towns for one category of state-financed housing, noting New Canaan's high housing costs and resident incomes exclude it from certain funding categories such as Chapter housing loans available to lower-cost communities. She said she has compiled Department of Housing data on every Connecticut town's affordable-housing percentage going back to 2002, when standardized reporting began, and suggested the report note that New Canaan is among the few towns that actively pursues moratorium status under the statute despite more limited access to state financing than other communities.

Report Timeline

The committee's next meeting is scheduled for October 19. Wilson said he wants a draft of the full report ready for that meeting so it can serve as a working session for review and final suggestions, meaning individual sections should be submitted roughly a week earlier. After confirming that October 12 falls on the Columbus Day/Indigenous Peoples' Day holiday, the group settled on October 13 as the internal deadline for section drafts. Members with outstanding pieces, including Jane Williams and Weingarten, said they expected to have their sections done that week.

Public Comment

Deliana Mendez, a New Canaan resident who lives at 180 Park Street, spoke during public comment, the meeting's only public input beyond committee members. She said she had completed the committee's public survey and wanted to understand what the committee has accomplished and what comes next. She asked specifically about the town's two most prominent sites under evaluation, the lumberyard and a site near the post office, and suggested the committee "start with the one next to the post office, so that you can learn the process, learn how it works and what doesn't work," given the lumberyard's prominence and complexity. She also asked how the town would approach architectural design given New Canaan's architectural history, and whether the town would select architects competitively or award the work to a single firm.

Wilson responded that the committee is advisory and will not develop anything itself; any project would go through a full Planning and Zoning process with detailed renderings and additional public comment beyond what the committee has presented. He said the town's housing authority would likely lead development, probably with a third-party developer, citing the Canaan Parish project, where a firm identified as Heritage Housing, led by Dave McCarthy, handled construction under the oversight of the nonprofit New Canaan Neighborhoods, which owned that site. Asked whether the lumberyard's housing component would be 100 percent affordable, Wilson said the housing portion would be fully affordable but the site could also include market-rate residential, office or retail space, with those decisions left to a future master-planning committee.

Procedural Outcome

No formal votes were taken on report content or assignments; those were handled by consensus during discussion. The meeting's only recorded votes were the approval of the August 10 minutes, 4-0 with one abstention, and a motion to adjourn, moved and seconded by Ormond, approved unanimously on a voice vote.

Implications and What Is Next

The committee is working toward a complete draft report by its October 19 meeting, with individual sections due around October 13, ahead of a planned submission to the Board of Selectmen this fall. The report's central open question, how much weight to place on converting Riverwood units versus advancing a lumberyard master plan, will shape what options the Board of Selectmen has for extending New Canaan's 8-30g moratorium protection past 2028 and toward 2032.

Krista Nielsen, Affordable Housing Committee member, present, circulated the report outline. Chris Wilson, Affordable Housing Committee member, present, led the meeting's discussion. Jane Williams, Affordable Housing Committee member, present from the start. Bob Strong, Affordable Housing Committee member, present. Hillary Ormond, Affordable Housing Committee member, present, volunteered to assemble and edit the report. Maria Weingarten, Affordable Housing Committee member, joined by phone after roll call. Jeff Williams, Affordable Housing Committee member, joined after roll call. Bill Perrette, Affordable Housing Committee member, absent. Mike Sweeney, Affordable Housing Committee member, absent. Deliana Mendez, New Canaan resident of 180 Park Street, spoke during public comment about site sequencing and architectural process.

Board of Selectmen — the elected body to which the committee's report and recommendations will be forwarded. Scott Hobbs — town affordable-housing consultant cited on conversion-cost and master-planning questions. Todd LaViere — consultant Wilson cited among those he spoke with on master-planning approach. Architecture firm heard as "Amanda Emma" — designed prior parking/affordable-housing concept drawings for the lumberyard site. Heritage Housing (Dave McCarthy) — third-party developer cited as having built the Canaan Parish affordable-housing project. New Canaan Neighborhoods — nonprofit cited as prior site owner overseeing the Canaan Parish development. Connecticut Department of Housing Appeals list — statewide dataset of town-by-town affordable-housing percentages since 2002, cited by Weingarten as source material for the report's comparative-town section. State legislation referenced as HB 5002 — cited as the subject of a letter the committee previously sent to Hartford, to be attached to the report as an exhibit. State statute referenced as 8-30g — the Connecticut affordable-housing appeals law underlying the committee's moratorium strategy, discussed throughout the meeting. August 10, 2026 committee minutes — approved during the meeting, with Nielsen abstaining.