Lumberyard emerges as public favorite in New Canaan housing discussion; traffic and school impacts flagged

The New Canaan Affordable Housing Committee’s project development subcommittee said public feedback favored the town’s Lumberyard site but underscored major concerns about traffic, school impacts and deed restrictions.

At the May 28 subcommittee meeting, members summarized table discussions from a recent public meeting. Jeff Williams told the subcommittee that the table recorder had polled attendees and that “five of the people said, ‘Absolutely. The Lumberyard is the place we need to go,’” while noting attendees also warned about existing congestion and the strain of adding resident traffic during morning and evening peaks.

Why it matters: the choice of a preferred site will shape project costs, needed infrastructure upgrades and which school district would serve future residents. Committee members said they will list ranked options and highlight each site’s pros and cons rather than present a single prescriptive recommendation to elected officials.

Members emphasized specific infrastructure questions the subcommittee needs to answer before advancing a preferred alternative: where sewer and water service currently reach, the exact deed restrictions on parkland parcels (including the mulch pile parcel discussed at the meeting), and the likely scale of traffic impacts during rush hours. Hillary Orond and others asked staff to confirm whether utility extensions would be required and how costly such extensions might be.

Chris Wilson, who joined the meeting partway through, said the subcommittee’s planning work has assumed a timetable aimed at a moratorium in 2032 and that the committee would present options reflecting that schedule. “Our report will be a 2032 project,” Wilson told the group, while noting conversion of existing Riverwood units could be costlier than building new units and that a partial conversion could create market distortions unless the town converted Riverwood fully.

Committee members reported that some public tables favored smaller, phased projects rather than a single large development; others explicitly supported a master plan for the Lumberyard lot that could combine multiple phases. Members also recalled prior controversies—such as a previously debated hockey-rink proposal and concern over the town’s mulch pile—that could become politically sensitive and will require factual follow-up.

What’s next: the subcommittee said consultants under contract (Amenta Emma) will be asked to refine site-level analyses, including traffic studies and utility capacity checks, and that the subcommittee’s report will present ranked options and estimated net costs for each approach. The committee emphasized it would present the findings to the board of selectmen, who would make final decisions.