Regional Residential Build-out Analysis 2013 – Part 3

Thomaston Town zoning regulations were used to calculate allowable building density for each parcel. When run, the CommunityViz software placed buildings on approp riate parcels, conforming to preset density and setback rules for each zoning design ation. The following settings were used with a minimum lot size of 15,000 ft 2: Land Use Designation Dwelling Units Per Acre Minimum Sep aration Distance (feet) Efficiency Factor RA-15 2.09 55 75% RA-80 .54 65 80% RA-80A .54 65 80% Dwelling Units The residential build-out projected that a total of 681 additional dwelling units will be placed at total build-out in Thomaston with curren t zoning regulations in place. Land Use Designation Total Residentially Zoned Acres Buildable Residentially Zoned Acres Potential Number of Future Building Units R-15 692 80 166 R-80 1,135 304 127 R-80A 3,300 935 388 TOTALS: 5,127 1,319 681 Population Using the current household size of 2.53 residents p er dwelling unit in Thomaston (Census 2010), the future population increase from the additio nal 681 dwelling units would be: New Dwelling Units Average Household Size Potential New Residents* Current Residents (Census 2010) Total Full Build- out Population* 681 X 2.53 = 1,723 + 7,887 = 9,610 *Assuming full occupancy of new units. The vacancy rate of existing housing units in Thomaston is 5.1% (Census 2010). Central Naugatuck 61 Common Impacts CommunityViz also calculated some potential impacts that the additional population could have on the Town of Thomaston. While these figures are based on national averages and may not ideally represent local conditions, they can help prepare for future growth. Common Impact Increase Units School Children 300 School Children Labor Force 1,006 Workers Annual Residential Energy Use 64,695 Million BTU Annual Residential Water Use 70,095,330 Gallons Daily Vehicle Trips 3,854 Daily Trips Annual CO Auto Emissions 301,927 Pounds Annual CO 2 Auto Emissions 5,918 Tons Annual Hydrocarbon Auto Emissions 34,603 Pounds Annual NO x Auto Emissions 22,264 Pounds Central Naugatuck 62 ! !!!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !! !! ! !! !!! ! ! !!!!!! !! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !!!!! !!!! !!! ! ! !! !! !!!! !! !!!!!!!!! !!!!! ! ! !!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!! !!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!! !! !! !! ! ! !!!!! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! !! !!!!! !! !! ! !! !!!! !! ! !! ! !! !! ! !! ! !! !!!!!! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! !! ! !!!! ! ! ! !! !! !!!!!! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö× Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö L it c h fi e ld H ar wi n ton P ly m out h W at e rb u ry Wa ter town A lt a i rA ve H ill R d M ai n St R e ynol dsB ridg e R d B r a n ch R d US H w y 6 Mino r Rd E Ma inS t H il lRd H i g h S t MainS t A t w o od H t s Wa te rto w n Rd H i c kory H il l Rd F en n R d SM a inSt S tr a w b e rry P a rk P i n e Hi ll R d A tw ood R d Moose h o r n Rd S t a t e Hw y 8 G rand St U SHw y 6 EM ainS t H ill R d I n n e s A v e L it c h fiel d St Exi t 38 W oo dr uf f A ve W a ln ut H il l R d G a sceo n Rd O l d B r anchR d C a r terRd S ta t e Hw y 254 C l a y St W arn erL n M a p le A ve Bla ke m a n Rd Eth e ri d g e C t La u r elD r J uliaL n N or th fie ld Rd US Hw y 6 E dw i n L n Willi a m s St P a rk in g Lot M ar i n e St Sa n d ers o n Ln AdaDr J u d so n S t W a te rto w n Rd E li z a b e t h A ve O a k St Kar e n D r M ooseho rnR d Vi ewD r M i c h e l l e L n S Mich ell e Ln N Lyn n ri c h D r W H ill to p Ave Le ig h Av e G illR d Gi l b e rt S t T re st le L n P errettD r Ho t c h ki s sA ve Exi t 4 0 Tw in Oak s D r W o o db ri d g e L n E xi t 3 9 B a b b it t R d WHillR d NMa in S t Wa t e r b ur y R d Cen t e rSt E dg ew o od A ve S t a te H wy 8 Hi g h Str e e t E x t C e n t e r S t Sm ith R d M ar th aWay NM a in S t NM ai n S t O ld No rt h f ie l dR d O l dNor thfi el d Rd L ynnr ichD r C ed ar M o u n tai n Rd J acks o nSt Tr ac ySt O l d Br a n ch Rd B ri s t o l S t Ple as an t St S t e v en s Blv d Riv e r St Pr ospe c t St Pro sp e ct St B aumDr DWel t o nW a y York R d PleasantV ie w Rd H owa rd L n Bayberr yD r Tw in P on dR d T u r n e r R d Va lley Vie w Rd ValleyVie w R d O l d W at e rb u r y Rd C ha p elSt ThomastonResidential BuildOutResults2013 I 012 0.5 Miles BuildOutResults ResidenceDistrictA151/4Acre ResidenceDistrictA802Acre ResidenceDistrictA80A2Acre × Ö NewDwellingUnit × Ö Sources: CT911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS ThomastonParcels:NEGEO Zoning:Thomaston Central Naugatuck 63 ! !!!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !! !! ! !! !!! ! ! !!!!!! !! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !!!!! !!!! !!! ! ! !! !! !!!! !! !!!!!!!!! !!!!! ! ! !!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!! !!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!! !! !! !! ! ! !!!!! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! !! !!!!! !! !! ! !! !!!! !! ! !! ! !! !! ! !! ! !! !!!!!! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! !! ! !!!! ! ! ! !! !! !!!!!! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! Lit c h fi e ld H ar wi n ton P ly m out h W at e rb u ry Wa ter town A lt a i rA ve H ill R d M ai n St R e ynol dsB ridg e R d Bra n c h Rd E l mS t U S H w y 6 Mino r Rd E Ma inS t H il lRd Ma inS t S ta teH w y 8 At w o od H t s Hil lRd Wa te rto w n Rd S t a teHw y 8 Hi c kory H il l Rd NMa inS t F en n R d SM a inSt St u m p f A ve S tr a w b e rry P a rk P i n e Hi ll R d E M ai n St A tw ood R d Moose h o r n Rd S t a t e Hw y 8 USHw y 6 H ill R d I n n e s A v e L it c h fiel d St Exi t 38 W oo dr uf f A v e W a ln ut H il l R d Gasc eo n Rd Ol dM orr isR d O l d B r anchR d C ar t e r R d S ta t e Hw y 254 N o r th f ie l d R d M a p le A ve Bla ke m a n Rd H i l l s i d e A ve Eth er id ge C t L a u r elD r J uliaL n N or th fie ld Rd Edw i n L n M ar i n e St Sa n d ers o n Ln AdaDr J u d so n S t W a te rto w n Rd Kar e n D r Ran dolp h A ve Moose h o rn R d G ra bh e rr R d V i ewD r M i c h e l l e L n S Sa n f o rd Av e M ich ell e Ln N Lyn n ri c h D r W Le ig h Av e G i l lR d Rid g e w o o d A c re s T re st le L n P errettD r Hot ch ki s sA ve Exi t 4 0 Tw in Oak s D r W o o db ri d g e L n K e nne d y Dr E xi t 3 9 B a b b it t R d WHillR d N Ma inS t Wa ter b ur y R d Cent e r St E dg ew o od A ve S ta t e Hw y 8 Ce nt e r S t Sm i t h R d Sm it h Rd M ar th aWay NM a in S t NM ai n S t O ld No rt h f ie l dR d O l dNor thfi el d Rd Lyn nrich D r C ed ar M o u n tai n Rd OldNor th fi e l d R d Ja ck so n St Humis t onCir T racy St O l d Br a n ch Rd Br i s to lS t P le as an t St S t e v en s Blv d Riv e r St Pr ospe c t St Pro sp e ct St B aumDr B lu e Tra il Dr DWel t o nW a y York R d PleasantV ie w Rd H ow ar d L n Bayberr yD r Tw in P on dR d T u r n e r R d Va lley Vie w Rd ValleyVie w R d O l d W at e rb u r y Rd C ha p elSt Thomaston2013LandUse ofResidentialBuildableLand I 012 0.5 Miles CurrentLandUse UndevelopedLand Agriculture RecreationalorUncommittedOpenSpace Sources: CT911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS ThomastonParcels:NEGEO LandUse:COGCNV Central Naugatuck 64 ! !!!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !! !! ! !! !!! ! ! !!!!!! !! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !!!!! !!!! !!! ! ! !! !! !!!! !! !!!!!!!!! !!!!! ! ! !!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!! !!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!! !! !! !! ! ! !!!!! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! !! !!!!! !! !! ! !! !!!! !! ! !! ! !! !! ! !! ! !! !!!!!! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! !! ! !!!! ! ! ! !! !! !!!!!! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! Lit c h fi e ld H ar wi n ton P ly m out h W at e rb u ry Wa ter town A lt a i rA ve H ill R d M ai n St R e ynol dsB ridg e R d Bra n c h Rd E l mS t U S H w y 6 Mino r Rd E Ma inS t H il lRd Ma inS t S ta teH w y 8 At w o od H t s Hil lRd Wa te rto w n Rd S t a teHw y 8 Hi c kory H il l Rd NMa inS t F en n R d SM a inSt St u m p f A ve S tr a w b e rry P a rk P i n e Hi ll R d E M ai n St A tw ood R d Moose h o r n Rd S t a t e Hw y 8 USHw y 6 H ill R d I n n e s A v e L it c h fiel d St Exi t 38 W oo dr uf f A v e W a ln ut H il l R d Gasc eo n Rd Ol dM orr isR d O l d B r anchR d C ar t e r R d S ta t e Hw y 254 N o r th f ie l d R d M a p le A ve Bla ke m a n Rd H i l l s i d e A ve Eth er id ge C t L a u r elD r J uliaL n N or th fie ld Rd Edw i n L n M ar i n e St Sa n d ers o n Ln AdaDr J u d so n S t W a te rto w n Rd Kar e n D r Ran dolp h A ve Moose h o rn R d G ra bh e rr R d V i ewD r M i c h e l l e L n S Sa n f o rd Av e M ich ell e Ln N Lyn n ri c h D r W Le ig h Av e G i l lR d Rid g e w o o d A c re s T re st le L n P errettD r Hot ch ki s sA ve Exi t 4 0 Tw in Oak s D r W o o db ri d g e L n K e nne d y Dr E xi t 3 9 B a b b it t R d WHillR d N Ma inS t Wa ter b ur y R d Cent e r St E dg ew o od A ve S ta t e Hw y 8 Ce nt e r S t Sm i t h R d Sm it h Rd M ar th aWay NM a in S t NM ai n S t O ld No rt h f ie l dR d O l dNor thfi el d Rd Lyn nrich D r C ed ar M o u n tai n Rd OldNor th fi e l d R d Ja ck so n St Humis t onCir T racy St O l d Br a n ch Rd Br i s to lS t P le as an t St S t e v en s Blv d Riv e r St Pr ospe c t St Pro sp e ct St B aumDr B lu e Tra il Dr DWel t o nW a y York R d PleasantV ie w Rd H ow ar d L n Bayberr yD r Tw in P on dR d T u r n e r R d Va lley Vie w Rd ValleyVie w R d O l d W at e rb u r y Rd C ha p elSt Thomaston2012AerialImagery ofResidentialBuildableLand I 012 0.5 Miles Sources: CT911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS ThomastonParcels:NEGEO 2012NAIPAerialImagery:CTDEEP Central Naugatuck 65 Central Naugatuck 66 Waterbury City zoning regulations were used to calculate allowable building density for each parcel. When run, the CommunityViz software placed buildings on appropriate parcels, conforming to preset density and setback rules for each zoning designati on. While no maximum allowable density for the CBD zone is set in the city’s zoning regulation s, this build-out assumed a similar de nsity to the RH zone. Assumptions were also made regarding the maximum allowable uni ts per building in CBD, CG and CN districts, mirroring similar residential districts. The followin g settings were used with a minimum lot size of 6,000ft 2: Land Use Designation Density (Dwelling Units/ Acre) Minimum Separation Distance (feet) Efficiency Factor Allowable Dwelling Units per Building RH 42 20 70% 72 RM 24 12 70% 12 RL 8 12 75% 1 RS 6 20 75% 1 RS-12 4 20 75% 1 RO 8 20 75% 6 CBD 42 0 70% 72 CG 24 30 70% 12 CN 8 20 75% 6 CO 24 20 70% 1 Dwelling Units The residential build-out projected that a total of 11,700 additional dwelling units in 8,199 residential or mixed buildings will be placed at total build-out in Waterbury with current zoning regulations in place. Land Use Designation Total Acres Buildable Acres Potential Future Residential Buildings Potential Future Dwelling Units RH 89 5 8 137 RM 1,899 215 427 3,504 RL 4,529 686 3,881 3,881 RS 2,482 289 1,245 1,245 RS-12 3,233 760 2,232 2,232 RO 72 3 18 18 CBD 226 2 5 44 CG 250 18 42 288 CN 46 3 4 14 CO 189 21 337 337 Totals: 13,015 2,002 8,199 11,700 Central Naugatuck 67 Population Using the current household size of 2.54 residents per dwelling unit in Waterbury (Census 2010), the future population increase from the additional 11,700 dwelling units would be: New Dwelling Units Average Household Size Potential New Residents* Current Residents (Census 2010) Total Full Build- out Population* 11,700 x 2.54 = 29,718 + 110,366 = 140,084 *Assuming full occupancy of new units. The vacancy rate of existing housing units in Waterbury is 10.9% (Census 2010). Common Impacts CommunityViz also calculated some potential impacts that the additional population could have on the City of Waterbury. While these figures are based on national averages and may not ideally represent local conditions, they can help prepare for future growth. Common Impact Increase Units School Children 5,171 School Children Labor Force 17,358 Workers Annual Residential Energy Use 1,111,500 Million BTU Annual Residential Water Use 1,204,281,000 Gallons Daily Vehicle Trips 66,222 Daily Trips Annual CO Auto Emissions 5,187,299 Pounds Annual CO 2 Auto Emissions 101,670 Tons Annual Hydrocarbon Auto Emissions 594,497 Pounds Annual NO x Auto Emissions 382,504 Pounds Central Naugatuck 68 !!! !! !! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !!!!!!! !! !! !!!!!!!!!!! ! !!!! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! !!!!!! !! ! ! !!!!!!!! !!!! ! !! !!! ! ! ! ! ! !! !!! ! !! !! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !! !!!! !!!!!! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!!!! !!!!!! ! ! !! ! !!!!! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! !!!! !! !!!!! ! !! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! !! !!! !! ! ! ! !!! ! ! !! ! !! !! !!! ! ! !! ! !! !!!!!! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!! !! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !!! !!!!! !! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! W at e rt ow n W o lc o tt C h esh i r e P ro s p e ct N au gatu c k Mid dl e bury P ly m o uth T h oma sto n WM a inS t R ivers id eSt Su nn y s i de A ve I84 C hase P k w y Sta te Hwy8 W a shi ngt onAve S ta teHw y73 NMainS t Au sti n R d A rv id a R d S L eo n a rd S t Lym an R d W i l l owS t J ack s o nS t U n io n St G ra n d St E a g le S t A rdsleyR d M er id en R d Ca p it o lA ve Captai n N ev ill e Dr Wo lco tt S t Sou thvi e wS t F re ig h t S t N Wa ln u tS t M ed ia A v e B ag le y Te r C o lon i a lA ve La k ew oo dRd P ar k R d Pear l L ake R d B o yd e nS t C h as e Av e Sc o vil l S t M o ntoeRd De lawa reAve P orter S t R id ge S t R eid vi lle D r P ro sp e c t Rd Tu r n p i keDr B r a d ley A ve S ta t e S t C em e te ry R d W ood ti ckRd C oun t r yC lubR d C hur c h S t P ie d m on t St S ha ron Rd C hi p m a n Str e et E x t Lon gH il l R d Wash i n gt onS t Nicho lsDr M i dva l eA v e F e rro Rd Pi n eS t Bi d w e l l S t G reen St We s l e y S t Deerf ie ld Av e C on gre ss Av e C lem at isAv e Ma y f i e ld Rd D w i g ht St N Elm St Munici pal Rd F ar r e l l R d S yl v a n A v e D a n P ar k e r D r C lo u g h R d D inata liDr M i l l e r S t B ry an S t Farm woodRd W ake le e R d N a th a n S t Spli tR ockDr Ch e s te r A ve Tu d o r S t Tro jD r Be a c o n St V en ic e A v e Jo s ep h St A v o n Av e D rahe r A ve W Gro ve S t Gra ss y Hi ll Rd F o x Run R d Ham il t o n P arkRd N Ha rk er A ve AlbertaS t M a t tatuckH ts M id f i e ldDr V il la R d Ken m o r eAve R ai l r o a d Hil l S t Cl ov er S t G ro ve St Mill S t Shef f ie ld St De vonwoodD r Rus sel l S t A ld er St G ed d es Te r R i d ge f i e l dA ve B o s se R d B i r c h St Dell w o o d Dr Gi le sSt P r o s pec t S t Er n e st A v e H orseshoeD r P al m aC ir Hamd enAv e K im b le A ve Woo st e rA v e W e lc h St K eef e S t Vivi a n Dr Pla ttSt V er no nS t H itchco ck R d Pe n ta S t Va il S t Laurie P l A cad e m y A ve L ava lS t K en dal lCi r H eweySt Coll i n s S t FernCir Dixi eAv e D ivis i o n St Ga te s A ve M il l c r a f t L n W acon aAv e D a n a D r Bucki n g ham St Nor to n St G r a n b y St Sh ir in g L n R o se St A rlin e Dr R a yS t J o n es D r N ei l S t H i l lvie wA ve H ansA ve F o rt H il l A ve P i ner idge Rd ClubDr Ma n sf ie ld A ve Av e n u eo fIn d us tr y T ansyDr J u d d S t L is aCt J u ni pe r RidgeDr M er il in e A ve Vale nt inoD r Cr e stwoo dA ve B e rg i n C ir L akes ide BlvdE A dd i s o n St Ge r tr u de A ve Tu bi n g S t Pinec re s t Dr L u ke S t Wayr id ge C ir G ar y A ve Gos sSt S antaMar iaD r R o sen g art e nDr TowerRd H a rt C ir K no ll S t F a i r la w n Av e FulkersonDr S out h w es t R d Benc h St C it i z ens Ave H an o ver S t Be e c h St C it y M ill s L n C ar o lin e S t Dr i g gs St W ilke nda A ve B r e n tw oo d A ve S to w e Rd Hil l hous eR d F o r e s t A ve M a tt oo n Rd C a p ew ell A ve Iv e s S t C r e s t S t R um f o r d S t Eng le w o od Av e EMounta i nR d Fairv i e wSt B ut le r S t H i g hl a n d Dr P e ar S t S ta te H wy2 6 2 D e lh urs tD r B ro w n P l Fi r s t A v e L a k e S t N e w fie ld A ve Te r ry Rd S lo cu m St Old ha m A ve E s s e x A v e T i m b er Ln A ll e n S t B ir c h fi e l d D r D ar li n g St J o d i e C i r W in t h r o p A ve Je w el r y St T he rou xAve G a r d e n H i l l C i r W D o ve r S t A nawa nA v e M ac a u l e y A ve W o o dsideA ve Te rr a c e A v e P o rte rM a n o rD r Y o rk t o w n R dg Ya te s A ve O le n a A ve L eaf A v e B la ke S t Alyc eTer H ighviewS t Mar kL n Mul loyRd L y d i aSt T o m pk i n s S t P ar tr id ge D r Le o n e S t Ju d ithLn T r a n si t S t M acA r th u rD r W a te rv il le G re en Rd War r e nSt Ay ersSt Ne w b u ry S t A sh l e y S t E x it 2 5 R i c h ar d Te r M un ic i p al D r R o be rt S t J il l so n Ci r E x it 3 6 C edarA ve M ad isonA ve F i el d wood Rd G il m a n S t R o ya l O a k D r Elmw o odAv e P o nhamS t Ex it25A E x it 1 7 F o x S t M a rt o n e S t W oo dmere Rd R oc kle dgeD r F er n S t Southwin dRd E lise Dr H ollyS t E a stfieldR d Taf t P t B rist o lS t P lankR d Ba l dwinS t M e a d o w St Nort hridgeDr B ankS t H i g hl andAv e HarpersF er ryRd E a s t o nAve C ha rl e s S t SM ai n S t C h er r y S t W aterv ille S t K araDr H un ting donAve Sti l l s o nR d Ham ilt onAve Kay nor Dr P ierpon tR d B y amRd F a rm in gt o n AveC o o k e S t Be thL n W i lson S t C hest nu tH ill A v e H il lS t Fann in g St P l att sMi llsRd Th o mast o n A ve Eas ter nA ve B eec h e r A v e F r os t Rd B ates w oodR d B uck s Hi l l Rd G ran dv iew Av e Jersey St B ish o pS t Garden C ir Ann aAve O a k St Cir cuitA ve Tracy Ave C el iaD r Ka r e n Ave P a rklawn Dr N a t ion al A ve B o uley A ve C li n to n St N e wH aven Ave P urdyRd L in colnSt SouthCir P each Orc ha r d Rd Stony b r o ok R d O ra n g e S t M a yb r o o k Rd B r o o ks i deR d Chippe rRd C h estn ut A v e W est p or t D r Riv e r St Pr oc t o r S t S p rin g L ak e R d N o rrisS t H illc re s t A ve A val onC ir W i ndyD r Ch ase R iv e r R d Hu bb e ll A v e I r e n e A ve Ci rcularAve Mi d d leSt Ha d dadRd R eid St St or e A ve Her i t ageD r S 5 th St Knoll woo dCi r C h ri s t ia n H il l R d La kesideBlvdW E dw in A ve J o yR d Enoc h St Prog res s Ln I n te rstateL n G ai l D r BristolS t Ca lv a ry Ce metery WaterburyResidential BuildOutResults2013 I 012 0.5 Miles Sources: 911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS Zoning:CityofWaterbury BuildOutResults ResidentiallyZonedBuildableLand ArterialCommercialDistrict CentralBusinessDistrict GeneralCommercialDistrict NeighborhoodShoppingDistrict CommercialOfficeDistrict ResidentialOfficeDistrict HighDensityResidentialDistrict MediumDensityResidentialDistrict LowDensityResidentialDistrict SingleFamilyResidentialDistrict LargeLotResidentialDistrict Central Naugatuck 69 Central Naugatuck 70 !!! !! !! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !!!!!!! !! !! !!!!!!!!!!! ! !!!! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! !!!!!! !! ! ! !!!!!!!! !!!! ! !! !!! ! ! ! ! ! !! !!! ! !! !! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !! !!!! !!!!!! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!!!! !!!!!! ! ! !! ! !!!!! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! !!!! !! !!!!! ! !! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! !! !!! !! ! ! ! !!! ! ! !! ! !! !! !!! ! ! !! ! !! !!!!!! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!! !! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !!! !!!!! !! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! W at e rt ow n W o lc o tt C h esh i r e P ro s p e ct N au gatu c k Mid dl e bury P ly m o uth T h oma sto n W Ma in S t EM ainSt S u nn y s i de A ve I 8 4 Ch as ePkw y StateH w y8 W a s hi ngt onA ve Field St EA u ro ra St S ta teHw y73 NMainS t C l o u gh R d S Le o nar d S t C o nist on A ve W a tert o w nA ve W il l o w St S abalDr J ack s o nS t G r a n d S tUn io n St E ag le S t A nd er s o n A ve A rd sl e yR d Me ride n R d C a p it o lA ve Cap tainN ev ille D r W o lc o tt St Sou thvi e wS t F re ig htSt N W alnu t S t C o lon i a lA ve H igh S t Lake w o o d Rd PlankRd P arkR d Pe arl La keR d Boyd e n St C h as e Av e Sco ttRd M onto eRd Delawa reAve P orter S t R id ge S t R eid vi lle D r Pro s p ec t Rd TurnpikeD r Whitewoo dRd S ta t e S t D al las A ve Woo d tickRd Ir vin gtonA ve B e rk e l e y Av e C oun t r yC lubR d Stil es St P ie d m ontS t HighlandHl S har onR d C hi p m a n Str e et E x t Lon gH il l R d Wash i n gt onS t Nicho lsDr P er k in s A ve F e rro R d Grille y town Rd Wa l l S t Deerf ie ld Av e P la i n f i e l d D r C on gre ss Av e H omer St R e v e re S t C lem at isAv e D w i g ht St N Elm St BentwoodD r Fe r ndaleAv e F a rr e llR d D a n P ar k e r D r D inata liDr We stwoodAve P arkingLot F a rmwoodRd P ip ing RockD r Spli tR ockDr Ch e s te r A ve ManorAve F l e e tS t Tu d o r S t Tro jD r Ha m ilt onAv e A rvi da R d Jo s ep h St A v o n Av e D ra her A v e G rassy Hil l R d H ol i d a y H l H am ilton P arkRd N H ark er A ve AlbertaS t M at tat u ckHt s M id f i e ldDr V il la R d Ken m o r eAve R a i lro ad HillS t Cl ov er S t G rove S t Mill S t Sh ef f i e ld S t A lbio nSt De vonwoodD r Yal eSt R us sel l S t A ld er St G e d d es T e r R i d ge f i e l dA ve E Fa r m St B i r c h St Dell w o o d Dr H orseshoeD r P al m aC ir Hamd enAv e F o re s t R id geRd Mid dlewayE Woo st e rA v e F aberAve B en e d ic t S t Vivia n Dr P la ttS t Jo hn St S o uthma ydR d H it c h c o ckRd V a il S t Silve rSt In d ustr yLn Laurie P l Lawn S t Lava lS t H eweySt FernCir D ecic c oRd Dix i eAve Cro w nSt G off S t B ucki n g ham St Nor to n St G r a n b y St R o se St A rl ineDr RayS t H a nsA v e W h i t e St R edco atRd O ak H il l A v e Club Dr Town s e n dA v e M er il in e A ve Cre st woodAve K els e y St L akes ide BlvdE PinecrestDr Ridg elan dDr L u ke S t Hause rSt Go ssS t Sa n ta M a r iaD r R osen gartenDr TowerRd M a p l er id geD r Kno ll S t Fa i r la w n Av e FulkersonDr L a w lo r St C it i z ens Ave Be e c h St Sch r afftsD r W il ke n da A ve S t oweR d H il l hous eR d F o r e s t A ve M attoonRd R o sett eSt L au re lSt Iv e s S t Lam on tSt C r e s t S t R um f o r d S t M o rto n Rd EMounta i nR d A r n o l d S t Fairvi e wSt H i g hl an d D r S ta te H wy2 6 2 N or m a n St N ew fie ldAv e Te r ry Rd O ld ha m A ve E sse x A v e Sta r let Ln E s th er A v e A ll e n S t C on c o r d S t Tr a v e rs e St F airf ie ld A ve L eaf A v e H igh viewS t MarkLn E ar l S t Mullo yRd Zu e lla D r E x it 2 1 T r a n si t St Mac A rth u r D r Ay ersS t Le sterDr E x it 2 5 E x it 3 6 Ced arA ve Ma disonA ve W ar d St F i el d wood Rd G ilm a n S t P o nhamS t Ex it 1 7 F o x S t M a rt o n e St W o odg le n Dr Joshu aTow nRd C om o A v e F er n S t E lise Dr H o l lyS t E a stfieldR d TaftP t S pri n g B r o ok R d B rist o lS t B ald win S t M e a d o w St R iv ers id e S t B an k S t Highl a n d Ave HarpersF er ryRd E as to nAv e C ha rl e s S t S M ain St C h e rr y S t W at e rvil l eS t K araDr H un ting donAve S ti llson Rd Kay nor Dr A us t in R d P ie rpon tR d By amRd F a rm in gt o n Ave Cooke S t B ethL n W i lson S t C hest nu tH ill A v e EastsideBlvd H i ll S t Fann in g St P latt sMillsRd T homast on A ve Eas ter nA ve Oronok eRd B eec h e r A v e F r o s t Rd Bat e s woo dR d Buck s Hi l l Rd G ran dview A ve Jer sey S t B ish o pS t G ar d e n C ir AnnaAve Cir cuitA ve Tracy Ave C eliaDr K ar e n Ave P a rklawn Dr Nati o n alAv e B o uley A ve Merril l S t P urdy R d L inco l nSt SouthCir P ea ch Orc h a rd R d Stonyb ro o k R d O ra n g e S t Maybro okRd Whi teBir c h Dr B r o ok sid eR d Chippe rRd C h estn ut A v e Bald w inAv e W est p or t D r Riv e r St P ro ctorSt Sp rin g L ake Rd N orr isS t H i ll c re st Av e W i ndyD r C h as e Ri v er Rd A tw oo d A ve H u bb ell Av e I r e n eAve C i r cularAve Mi d d leSt H ad dadRd R e id S t S to r e A v e Heri t ageD r Knoll woo dCi r Lakes ideBlv dW S h el l e y S t E dwi n A v e Joy Rd Enoc h St Progres s Ln I n te rstateL n G ail D r BristolS t Ca lv a ry Ce metery Waterbury2013LandUse ofResidentialBuildableLand I 012 0.5 Miles Sources: 911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS LandUse:COGCNV CurrentLandUse UndevelopedLand Agriculture RecreationalorUncommittedOpenSpace ResourceExtraction Central Naugatuck 71 !!! !! !! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !!!!!!! !! !! !!!!!!!!!!! ! !!!! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! !!!!!! !! ! ! !!!!!!!! !!!! ! !! !!! ! ! ! ! ! !! !!! ! !! !! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !! !!!! !!!!!! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!!!! !!!!!! ! ! !! ! !!!!! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! !!!! !! !!!!! ! !! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! !! !!! !! ! ! ! !!! ! ! !! ! !! !! !!! ! ! !! ! !! !!!!!! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!! !! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !!! !!!!! !! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! W at e rt ow n W o lc o tt C h esh i r e P ro s p e ct N au gatu c k Mid dl e bury P ly m o uth T h oma sto n EM a i nSt W Ma i n S t I84 Ch ase Pk w y St a t e H wy 8 W a shi ngt onAve H a rt l e y D r Sta teHw y73 Clou gh R d S L eo n a rd S t Lym an R d W a t erto w nAve J ack s o nS t U n io n St G ra n d St E a g le S t A rdsleyR d C a p it o lA ve Captai n N ev ill e Dr H a mi l t o n A ve Wo lco tt S t Sou thvi e wS t F re ig h t S t N Waln ut S t C o lon i a lA ve La k ew oo dRd Har ri s C ir P ar kR d Pe ar lLa keRd Wil s o nSt Bo ydenS t C h as e Av e Sc o vil l S t M ont o e Rd P orter S t Oakvi ll eA ve R id ge S t R eid vi lle D r Pro s pect Rd TurnpikeD r B r a d ley A ve S ta t e S t C em e te ry R d Ir v ington Av e F arm crestDr TorosA v e C hur c h S t S har onR d C hi p m a n Str e et E x t L ong H ill R d M i dva l eA v e F e rro Rd Pi n eS t Bi d w e l l S t G reen St W a ll St Wes l e y S t S o ci et y H ill Rd Deerf ie ld Av e C on gre ss Av e C lem at isAv e Ma y f i e ld Rd P le a s an t V ie w Av e NElm St Munici pal Rd F a rre l l Rd E l le n S t D inata liDr M il l e r S t B ry an S t P arkingLot Fa r m w oodR d W ake le e R d N a th a n S t G r a s s y Hi l l R d Cha r t e r A v e Ch e s te r A v e F l e e tSt Tu dor St T ro jD r C o rn w a l l A v e G r e e n A c re D r Ven ic e A ve J o s ep h St A v o n Av e D rahe r A v e W Gro ve S t Alber taS t M a t tatuckH ts M id f i e ldDr V il la R d C ar v e r S t Te rr e ll R d R ai l r o a d Hil l S t G ro ve St Mill S t R ue l S t D ev o nwoodDr Eas tS t R us sel l S t A ld er St H ar p er A ve B en it o S t M i d l a n d Rd Le d g es id e A ve R i d ge f i e l dA ve B o ss e R d S ie r raS t R odne yS t G ilesSt E ri c L n P r o s pec t S t Er n es t A v e H orseshoeD r P al m aC ir E la i n a C ir Hamd enAv e A n es a Ave W o os t erA v e L u c il l e S t r e e t E xt W e lc h St K eef e S t G en o a St Pla ttSt A lpi ne Ave V er no nS t Hit c h co c kR d Pe n ta S t Va il S t N in a Ct S ilv e r S t A c a d em y A ve Lav a lS t Kenda llC ir H eweySt Coll i n s S t C alo St Ar denRd D ecic c oRd D ixieAve B e ve r ly A ve D ivis i o n St Ga te s A ve M il l c r a f t L n C arn ati o n Ln N o er a Rd W acon aA ve Tw i n in g A ve G r a ce A ve D a n a D r Bucki n g ham St G ra n t S t Norto n S t G r a n b y St S ha g ba rk R d S h ir in g L n B u e ll S t R o se St A rlin e Dr Ni c o la St Fa ir w a y Ln G r e envi e w Dr Ra yS t J o n es D r N ei l S t H ansA ve W h it e St H e cl a S t Fo rt H il l A ve P i ner idge Rd ClubDr Av en u e o f I n d u s tr y Tan s yD r J u d d S t Ea stv i e w A v e M er i l in e A ve Vale nt inoD r Cr e stwoo dA ve B e rg i n C ir L akes ide BlvdE A ddi so n St Ge r tr ud e Av e Tubi ng S t W ol f f S t L u ke S t S h ort S t R e g en cy Hl Stonefiel dD r W ayr id ge C ir G ar y A ve L i nco lnd a le D r GossSt New po rtDr S antaMar iaD r TowerRd H a rt C ir K no ll S t F a ir la w n Ave FulkersonDr So ut h w e st R d C ozy Ln T h e n dara Dr C it i z ens Ave H an o ver S t C it y M ill s L n Ga yl o r d G l n F l o yd St Schr afftsD r C ar o lin e S t Dr i g gs St K al i n C t A rb orS t W ilke nda A ve B r e n tw oo d A ve W h it e R ose Ave S t o w e Rd Fo r e s t A ve M a tt oo n Rd A c o r n S t R o sett eSt C a p e w ell A ve L au re lSt Iv e s S t K o da k S t G ra n ad a Dr R um f o r d S t Eng le w o od Av e EMounta inR d F ai rviewS t B utl e r S t Pe ar S t S ta te H wy2 6 2 G r e e n le a f A v e P e ac h S t D e lh urs tD r B ro w n P l Fi r s t A v e G eo rg es Ct Te r ry Rd O ld ha m A ve E s se x A ve Sta r let Ln P em br o k e Ave M el od y L n T i m b er Ln A ll e n S t D ar li n g St Mid woodA ve J o d ie C i r T r a v e rs e St W in t h ro pA ve Je w el r y St G le n f o r dD r T he rou xAve M on mo uth A ve W D o ve r S t St on eSt M a tt e s o n S t Lu n d A v e M ac a u l e yA v e W elli n g t o n A ve T e rr a c e A v e P o rte rM a n o rD r Yo r k t o w n Rd g Ha rk er A ve Y a te s A ve O l e n a A v e L eaf A v e B l a k e S t Delf o rdR d Alyc eTer H ighviewS t MarkLn T h o m ps o n A v e S te e p H ill Rd MulloyRd F o r tu na St To m pk i n s S t P ar tr id ge D r Zu e lla D r Oak cre st C i r L e o n e S t B a rringt o n L n Ju d ithLn T r a n sit St M acA r th u rD r C leoneD r W a te rv il le G re en Rd Warr e n S t L ar ch m on tA v e Ay ersSt Gre en fi e ld A ve L e sterDr H i d den P on d Rd N e w b u ry S t V in e StA sh ley S t W h it ti e r A v e E x it 2 5 Cr oni n D r Mou nt ai n V ie w Dr M or e la n d Av e R ich ar dTer Mu n ic ip al D r J il l so n Ci r C ha rt e r O ak A v e D o w n es St Ex it 3 6 C edarA ve Sh e rm an Ave M ad isonA ve B la ckm an Rd Fi eld wood Rd Gi l m an St R oya l O ak D r Elmw o odAv e P o nhamS t Ex it 1 7 F o x S t M a rt o n e S t W oo dmer e Rd W oo dg le n Dr Jos hua To w n R d Fer n S t Southwin dRd E liseDr H ollyS t Taf tP t B rist o lS t P lankR d Bal dwinS t M e a d o w St R i ver si d eSt B ankS t H ig h l a nd A ve HarpersF er ryRd E as t o nAve C ha rl e s S t SM ai n S t C h e rr y S t W ater v i l l e St K araDr H un ting donAve Sti l l s o nR d Kay nor Dr A us t in R d P ierpon tR d B y amRd F a rm in gt o n AveC o o k e S t Be thL n C hest nu tH ill A v e H il lS t Fann in g St P l att sMi llsRd Th o mast o n A ve Easte rnAve B eec h e r A v e F r os t Rd B ates w oodRd Buc ksH il lR d Gran dview A ve Jer sey St B ish o pS t Gard e n C ir O a k St Cir cuitA ve Tracy Ave C el iaDr P ark law nDr Na t ion al A ve B o uley A ve C l i n to n S t Merr i l l S t P urdy R d L inco l nSt SouthCir P each Orc h ar d Rd O ra n g e S t Gay lordDr M a yb r o o k R d Vi llage Wood D r Br oo ks i deRd Chippe rRd C h estn ut A v e W e s tp o rt D r Rive r St Pro c t o r S t S p rin g L ak e R d N orrisS t H illc re s t A ve A val onC ir Windy D r M ounta in L a u r e l D r Ch ase R iv e r R d A t w oo d A ve H u bb e l l A ve I r en eA ve Mi d d leSt Ha d dadRd R eid St H i g h R o ck L n S to r e A ve He ri tageD r S u m a c St S 5t hSt Knol l woo dCir C h ri s t ia n H il l R d Lakes ideBlv dW Edw in A ve JoyRd Eno c h St Prog res s Ln I n te rstateL n G ai l D r BristolS t Ca lv a ry Ce metery Waterbury2012AerialImagery ofResidentialBuildableLand I 012 0.5 Miles Sources: 911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS 2012NAIPAerialImagery:CTDEEP Central Naugatuck 72 Watertown Town zoning regulations were used to calculate allowable building density for each parcel. When run, the CommunityViz software placed buildings on approp riate parcels, conforming to preset density and setback rules for each zoning design ation. The following settings were used with a minimum lot size of 7,500 ft 2: Zoning Designation Dwelling Units Per Acre Minimum Separa tion Distance (feet) Allowable Dwelling Units Per Building Efficiency Factor R-12.5 3.45 40 3 75% R-30 1.45 40 1 75% R-70 .62 50 1 80% R-90 .48 40 1 95% R-10F 4.36 20 3 75% R-20F 2.78 30 3 75% R-30F 1.45 24 1 75% R-G 5.81 60 3 75% R-GF 5.81 80 3 75% R-12.5-RT 8.00 50 2 75% R-12.5-PCD 3.20 30 3 75% R-30-ARHa 6.00 40 3 75% R-30-PCD 1.30 30 2 75% R-30-RT 8.00 50 2 75% R-70-ARHb 2.00 20 4 75% Dwelling Units The residential build-out projected that 2,692 residential buildings with a total of 3,135 additional dwelling units will be placed at total build-out in Watertown with current zoning regulations in place. Zoning Designation Total Residentially Zoned Acres Buildable Residentially Zoned Acres Potential Future Residential Buildings Potential Future Dwelling Units R-12.5 1,292 180 223 442 R-30 2,505 682 736 736 R-70 4,728 1,769 859 859 R-90 5,762 1,623 702 702 R-10F 435 23 30 67 R-20F 496 29 28 55 R-30F 1 1 1 1 R-G 239 15 29 58 R-GF 53 1 2 3 R-12.5-RT 8 1 2 4 R-12.5-PCD 25 0 0 0 R-30-ARHa 5 0 0 0 Central Naugatuck 73 R-30-PCD 149 17 8 16 R-30-RT 22 15 46 92 R-70-ARHb 100 67 26 100 TOTALS: 15,820 4,423 2,692 3,135 Population Using the current household size of 2.57 residents per dwelling unit in Watertown (Census 2010), the future population increase from the additio nal 3,135 dwelling units would be: New Dwelling Units Average Household Size Potential New Residents* Current Residents (Census 2010) Total Full Build- out Population* 3,135 X 2.57 = 8,057 + 22,514 = 30,571 *Assuming full occupancy of new units. The vacancy rate of existing housing units in Watertown is 4.7% (Census 2010). Common Impacts CommunityViz also calculated some potential impact s that the additional population could have on the Town of Watertown. While these figures are based on national averages and may not ideally represent local conditions, they can help prepare for future growth. Common Impact Increase Units School Children 1,402 School Children Labor Force 4,706 Workers Annual Residential Energy Use 297,825 Million BTU Annual Residential Water Use 322,685,550 Gallons Daily Vehicle Trips 17,744 Daily Trips Annual CO Auto Emissions 1,389,930 Pounds Annual CO 2 Auto Emissions 27,242 Tons Annual Hydrocarbon Auto Emissions 159,295 Pounds Annual NO x Auto Emissions 102,492 Pounds Central Naugatuck 74 !!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!!! !! ! ! !!! !! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! !! ! ! ! !! !!!! !!! !! !! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! !!! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !!! !! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!!! !!!!!!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !! !! !! !! !!!!! ! ! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!! !! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !! !!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!! 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 M i d d l e b ur y Thom as ton M or r i s Bet hlehe m W oo dbu r y Wa terbury W ood b u r y Rd B ass ettR d Co lon i a lS t Ya l e St T o wn L i n e H wy S Lake Winn em aug Rd C ut le rSt C ap e w e ll A ve N i l s en St F o x Rd Fal lsT e r H ol lowRd H ub b e ll A ve C e da rR dg Q uas sa p a u g R d Ham ilt onA ve L o v le y D r S trai ts T p k e B u n k e r H ill R d Po r te r St U S H w y 6 Ha m ilto nLn E ch oLa keR d E xi t 3 6 D e p otSt Fr ostBrid geR d Litc hfi e l d R d W a rre n W ay A u n tO l ive Rd F ran kl i n Ave W oodruf f A ve C h e rryAv e E ll e n K a y D r D efo r e s t S t S m it hPondR d Thom as to n R d Co bb S t Jud d Fa r m Rd H il l s i d eA ve BryantR d W in sl o w D r C i r c uitAv e No va Sco t ia H i llRd G re en wo o dS t B a rb ar a L n M an ila St W ar w i c k Rd A d a m s R d Dal t onS t B ot e l le S t H o ul t o n S t N o rw a y S t Sk i lt o n R d C ol o ni a l R d Sa ug us A ve W i ld er C t P a rk Ln J er ic h o Rd Led geR d Ea rl e Av e L e e S t W a ln ut S t R ip l e y S t O t is D r Ken tT e r P l a tt Rd St a t e Hw y 2 62 P ond S t H i g h S t C utl e r K n l N e w W oo d R d My stic L n D el wo od D r A rc ad i a A v e W e st G a te M arcD r FernH il l R d ShawF arm R d Sl a d e T e r Co m me rc i a l S t J a so n A ve Vail lRd M or in StJe n ks St Th e Gr e e n C ar s o n Ave I ceH o useR d B us h n el l A v e K illo rin Rd C o tt a g e P l Fr ansonRd M a p le T r e e D r R a s p ber ry L n B idwell HillRd B ran ch C t Go lf v i e w Dr Se e m a r R d B u rton St P ec c iD r P hil l i p s Dr B u ss e m e y Av e T a f t C ir Hi l lc re st A v e (1 ) FoxRu nR d Tro la n e R d OldF a rmsR d W ood sid e C t K nig ht S t Ha w le y St P axt o n St A c ad e m y Hl Far m d a le Rd M on ro e S t C e n tr a lA ve Pe pp e rid g eT r e eR d J oshu aTownR d C ar olaD r E us ti s S t M alv ern Hi l l R d Sa u nd ers A v e E d gew oo d A ve M o u nt a in ViewD r M ea d ow c rest L n Wh eele rFar m Rd Sa ndB a nkRd Fli n t loc kR d Je n taLn D un ro bi n Ln H i g h la n d Av e D e erf ie ld L n E x it 37 C o rnwa l lD r W es tv ie w Dr C all e n d er R d Hig hmead o wR d H o p k in s Rd HoneyHill Rd B arne s R d Black R ock Rd No rt h fi e l d R d S ta te Hw y 8 Charte rO akD r Pu ll e n A ve Li nk fi e l dR d B uc ki n gh amS t HardR ockR d Ri v e rs i d e St FallsAv e P a rkR d M e lr o se A ve C onco rdD r In v er a r y D r E ddy St W est R d Hil l t opRd F arv ie w C ir D IN u n zio R d Ba llFarmRd Ki m ber l y L n S teele Br o o k Rd MountF ai rDr N e i l lDr B each Av e H inma n Rd T a r b el l A ve S il l s D r O akDr EvelynSt Chi mneyRd P le as a n t V i e w Av e To w n L in e Hw y Bu tter n u tLn Sp err y R d RosaDr C h es tn ut G ro ve Rd Pl u n gi sR d Em i le Av e Hidd enP ond Dr To w n L in e H w y N C ha r l e s S t Da vi sSt r e et E xt A p ple Hil lD r Gilb er tRd WatertownResidential BuildOutResults2013 I 012 0.5 Miles Sources: 911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS Parcels:Tighe&Bond Zoning:Watertown BuildOutResults ResidentialBuildingType 8 7 SingleFamily 8 7 MultiFamily ZoningDesignation R10F R12.5 R12.5RT R20F R30 R30PCD R30RT R30F R70 R70ARHb R90 RG RGF × Ö × Ö Central Naugatuck 75 !!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!!! !! ! ! !!! !! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! !! ! ! ! !! !!!! !!! !! !! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! !!! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !!! !! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!!! !!!!!!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !! !! !! !! !!!!! ! ! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!! !! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !! !!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!! Mi d d l e b ur y Thom as ton M or r i s Bet hlehe m W oo dbu r y Wa terbury Da v is S t De fo rest St W oodb ury Rd D el h urs t D r B assett R d S unnys id e Av e M id dle b ur y Rd Fre n ch St L ake W in nem aug R d C ap e w e ll A ve M ai nSt( 2 ) F o x Rd S unse t A ve (2 ) M ai n S t( 1 ) Woo l s o nSt C eda rR dg Q uas sa p a u g R d Ham i lt o n Ave J o rd a n A ve S t r a its T pke B u n ke r H i ll R d Ar t il l ery R d U S H w y 6 L i s b o n S t N or t h St (1 ) H a m ilt o nL n E c hoL a keR d MohicanR d E xi t 3 6 F r ostBri dgeRd L itch f i e ld Rd W a rre n W ay A u ntO li v e R d F ran kl i n Ave Gu er n s e y to w n Rd W oo d ruf fA v e C h er r y A v e Sm ithPondR d Scot t A v e T hom ast onR d C obb S t J uddF arm Rd W i ld er S t Brya n tRd To w e r R d W e stg a teRd WinslowD r Ci rc u i tAve N o vaSco ti aHil l R d G re en wo o dS t A d am s Rd Lov leyD r M e rr im ac S t Dal t onS t N o rw a y S t Skil t on Rd A u gus ta S t V an O r m an St C o l onial R d Sa u gu s A ve J e richoRd Led geR d Le e S t C re s tv ie w D r W a lnut S t Or chardL n H ung er f or dAv e WoodparkD r Pla ttR d Phe l p s A ve S t a t e Hw y 2 62 C ontourCt Fai r v ie w A v e H i g h S t N ew Woo dRd B ir c h St M un so n Rd Av al on A v e Tu rno r Ave M arcD r Fe rnH i l l R d H ickor y Ln Com mer c ia l S t J a so n A ve V ai llRd No r t hwestD r M or in St O l dColon yDr Radn o r Ln Je n ks St Po rtl a n d S t C lermo nt S t To w n L in e H w y S IceH o useR d B us h n el l A v e K i l lor inRd F ra nso n Rd O ldBai rdRd B idwe l lH i llRd Bel d enS t B u rton St P e cc iD r Si lkS t T a f t C ir Ol dF ar msR d W hit e S t H a r t S t F ar m dal e R d M on ro e S t Cent r a lAv e P e p p e ri d g e T r e e Rd G ilber tLn Ca rolaD r P eckLn E us ti s S t M alv ern H il l R d Bowers S t Wheele rFar m Rd San d B an k Rd F li n t lo c k Rd H ig h l a n d A v e Deerfi e ldLn E x it 37 Le x in gt onD r C ornw al lDr W es tv i ewDr Merr ia m Ln Sto n y brookL n C al le n d er R d H ig hmead owR d Ho p k in s Rd HoneyHi l l Rd B ar nes R d C aru so D r Blac kRo ckRd N o rthfie ldR d Sta teHw y 8 Charte r O ak D r Osage Ci r P u ll e n Av e L in kfie ld R d Buc k in g ha mS t R iv e r s i d e S t FallsAve L il a c A v e CayugaD r Bree zyKnoll Dr P ar k R d M elr ose A ve C o n c o rd Dr I n ve r a ry D r Ed d y S t We st R d H il ltop Rd B ayv ie wCir F a rv i e wCir D INun z i oRd P a wneeR d BallFarmRd K imbe rl yLn Le d g ewood Rd MountFairD r LoopRd N e i l lDr D e erRun B eac h Ave H in m a n Rd O a k S t T a r b el l A ve SillsDr Oa kDr Ev elyn St Chi m ne y Rd Claxton Ave Ple a s a n t V ie w Av e T o w n L in e Hw y But te rnutL n S p err y Rd RosaDr Plu n g is R d Em i l e A v e N ort h S t( 2 ) E dwar d A ve B el laVis t aD r Hidden PondD r To w n L in e H w yN George town D r Maple Ave C har lesSt D avi s S t ree t E x t Wo lfHi ll Rd Ap ple Hil lD r Gr a n dviewAve M or risT o w nLi n e Hw y Cur t iss L n M cV eig hRd Gi l b er tRd Watertown2013LandUse ofResidentialBuildableLand I 012 0.5 Miles Sources: 911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS Parcels:Tighe&Bond LandUse:COGCNV CurrentLandUse UndevelopedLand Agriculture RecreationalorOpenSpace Central Naugatuck 76 !!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!!! !! ! ! !!! !! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! !! ! ! ! !! !!!! !!! !! !! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! !!! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !!! !! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!!! !!!!!!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !! !! !! !! !!!!! ! ! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!! !! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !! !!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!! Mi d d l e b ur y Thom as ton M or r i s Bet hlehe m W oo dbu r y Wa terbury W o odbu ry R d Ba sse tt R d S unnys id e Av e M id dle b ur y Rd F re n ch S t Ya l e St La k e W in n em au gR d C ap e w e ll A ve F o x Rd Su n se t A v e(2 ) Fal lsT e r Woo l s o nS t H ol lo w R d C um mi n gs Av e C e da rR dg Edge Rd Q u a s s a p a u g R d Ha m ilto n Ave J o rd a n Av e S um m i t R dg S t r a its T pke B u n k e r H ill R d A r t il l e ry R d Po rt erS t U S Hwy6 Ha m ilto nLn E ch oLa keR d M a in St N Mohi can Rd E xi t 3 6 D e p otSt Sk ip pe r A ve C o n n e c tin g R o ad Fr ostBrid geR d Litc hfi e l d R d W in sl o w D r W i ll i a m s Av e F i u m e S t A un tOli v eR d Gu er n se y to wn R d O ti s D r E l le n K ay D r Sm it h P on d R d Scot t A v e T hom ast onR d Co bb S t JuddFa rm Rd W i ld er S t Bryan tRd S a co S t S i o u x R d Ci rc u i tAve G re en wo o dS t R o ck d a le C t M an ila St W ar w i c k Rd A d a m s R d Lov leyD r Dal t onS t N o rw a y S t Z o ar A v e S k i lt o n R d Au gus ta S t C o lo ni a l R d Sa ug us A ve W o odg ateCi r Aub r e y Ct Je richoRd Led geR d Squ i r e C t Le e St D aw n C ir L ew is Dr S prin g St S ta nl e y A ve B ri e rw o od Dr C o un t r y Dr G l e n H o l l o w Rd W e d g ewo od D r S to n ele i g h Rd P l a t t Rd S t a t e Hw y 2 62 P ond S t H i g h S t Sh an n on Av e C utl e r K n l N e w W oo d R d B ir c h St My stic L n D el wo od D r S to n e h e n ge Pl C hu rc h es F a rm Ln M un so n Rd A v a lo n A ve W e st G a te T u rno r Ave M arcD r So u t h v ie w D r Fe rnH il l R d Hickor y Ln P in e St G r o ve Hil l R d Pe n nyLn Co m me rc i a l S t E as tH il lR d N o rthwes t D r M or in St E d i t h StRa dno r L n Je n ks St P or t la n d St C lermont S t R oc kl a n d A ve R o bert s Av e C ars o n Ave To w n L in e H w y S M ea d o w Ln H az e l S t I c eH o u se R d B us h n el l A v e Kil lo ri n Rd C ot t a g e P l Fra n s o n R d O ldBai rdRd R asp b er ryLn B idwell HillRd B ra n chC t Se e m a r R d B el d enSt B u rton St P ec ci Dr Bu ss e m e y Av e T a f t C ir Hi l lc re st A v e (1 ) F o x R un Rd F ie ld w ood Dr Me a d o w v iewCt T ro la n e R d M ‘F in ga l R d M o re h o us e Rd Woods id e C t Whit e St H e d g e ro w Dr P axt o n St O ld Ar m yR d A ca d em y Hl Sp ru ce w oo d R d Cent erS t F arm d al e Rd M on r o e S t C e n tr a lA ve Pe pp e rid g eT r e eR d G i l b e rt L n P eckLn E us tis S t Tr u m b ul lSt A t w o o d St B e lleme a d o w Dr S au n d er s A ve L a k eVie w Dr M o u nt a in ViewD r R e g en cy Hil l D r L on g vi ewAv e B ow er s S t B ro o kvi e wCir Wh eele rFa r m Rd San d B an k Rd F l i n t lo c k R d W est M eadows Rd D un ro bi n Ln O l d M e ad owLn H ig h l a n d Av e D e erf ie ld L n F re n ch M o u nt a i nR d E x it 37 C o rnwa l lD r W es tv ie w Dr Merr ia m Ln Sto n y brookL n H ig hmead owR d Ho p k in s Rd HoneyHi l l Rd B arne s R d Ca r u s oD r B lac kRo ckRd D e an n aC t N or th f ie l d R d St at eHw y8 C harte r O ak D r O s age C ir P u ll e n A ve L in kfie ld R d B u c ki n gham St Ha rd Ro ck Rd R iv e r s i d e S t FallsAve C ay u g a D r B ree zyKnoll Dr P ark Rd M e lr ose A ve C onco rdD r I n ve r a ry D r Ed d y S t Wes t R d H illt opR d B ayv ie wCir F arv ie w C ir D INu n zio R d Pa wneeRd BallFarmRd K imbe rl yLn L e dgewoodR d S te e le Bro okR d M ountFair D r LoopRd N e i l lDr D e erRun Beac h A ve H inma n Rd O a k S t Ta r b el l A ve S i ll sD r OakDr EvelynSt Chi m ne y Rd P le as a n t V i e w Av e To w n L in e H w y B ut ternu tL n S p err y Rd R os aD r C he s t n u tG ro v e R d Plun g i s Rd O ld C o lo nia lR d Em i le Av e N ort h S t ( 2 ) E dwar d A ve B el laVis t aDr W i n dy Ri d g e Ln Hidd enP ond Dr To w n L i n e H w y N Ph ea s a n t R i d g e D r Maple Ave C ha rl e s S t D avi s S tr ee t E xt W ol f H i l l R d Ap ple Hil lD r Gra n d v ie w A ve M or risT o w nLi n e Hw y Cur t iss L n M cV eig h R d Gi lb er tRd Watertown2012AerialImagery ofResidentialBuildableLand I 012 0.5 Miles Sources: 911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS Parcels:Tighe&Bond 2012NAIPAerialImagery:CTDEEP Central Naugatuck 77 Central Naugatuck 78 Wolcott Town zoning regulations were used to calculate allowable building density for each parcel. When run, the CommunityViz software placed buildings on approp riate parcels, conforming to preset density and setback rules for each zoning design ation. The following settings were used with a minimum lot size of 30,000 ft 2: Land Use Designation Dwelling Units Per Acre Minimum Sep aration Distance (feet) Efficiency Factor R-30 1.45 50 75% R-30/ARPRD 1.45 50 75% R-30/PRD 1.45 50 75% R-40 1.09 60 75% R-40/PRD 1.09 60 75% R-50 .87 60 80% R-130 .34 100 95% Dwelling Units The residential build-out projected that a total of 1,646 additional dwelling units will be placed at total build-out in Wolcott with current zoning regulations in place. Land Use Designation Total Residentially Zoned Acres Buildable Residentially Zoned Acres Potential Number of Future Building Units R-30 2,761 248 238 R-30/ARPRD 43 10 11 R-30/PRD 91 34 34 R-40 2,130 383 292 R-40/PRD 92 39 29 R-50 1,341 366 241 R-130 4,831 2,552 801 TOTALS: 11,289 3,632 1,646 Population Using the current household size of 2.75 residents per dwelling unit in Wolcott (Census 2010), the future population increase from the additional 1,646 dwelling units would be: New Dwelling Units Average Household Size Potential New Residents* Current Residents (Census 2010) Total Full Build- out Population* 1,646 X 2.75 = 4,526 + 16,680 = 21,206 *Assuming full occupancy of new units. The vacancy rate of existing housing units in Wolcott is 4.3% (Census 2010). Central Naugatuck 79 Common Impacts CommunityViz also calculated some potential impacts that the additional population could have on the Town of Wolcott. While these figures are based on national averages and may not ideally represent local conditions, they can help prepare for future growth. Common Impact Increase Units School Children 788 School Children Labor Force 2,644 Workers Annual Residential Energy Use 156,370 Million BTU Annual Residential Water Use 169,422,780 Gallons Daily Vehicle Trips 9,316 Daily Trips Annual CO Auto Emissions 729,769 Pounds Annual CO 2 Auto Emissions 14,303 Tons Annual Hydrocarbon Auto Emissions 83,636 Pounds Annual NO x Auto Emissions 53,812 Pounds Central Naugatuck 80 × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö ! ! ! ! !! ! !!!!!! ! !! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! !!!! ! ! ! !! !! ! !!!! !!! ! ! !! ! !!! !! !! !! !!! !!! !! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! !! !!!!!! !! ! !!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! !!! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!!!!! !!!! ! !! ! ! !!!!!! !!!!!!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !!! !!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!! ! ! !! !!!!!!! !!!!!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! !! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! W ate rb ur y P l y m o u t h B r is t o l S out hi ngto n Ch esh ire T ro jD r FerroRd Ni cho l sR d Bou nd Li n eR d Me r i d e nR d L edg eb ro o k Dr A n ita D r HampshireD r Wol c o t tR d U p so n Rd D I S anto Dr N u tm eg Vall e yRd Be achR d C oun ty R d B ag le y Te r C en tr a l A v e L y m a n R d W o lc o t t R d Eas t St R an so m H a ll R d K i l m ar t in Av e Hemp leDr C el ia D r To sun R d La keS t W i llia m s C t Co e Rd Ri cha rd Ave Ches tnutHil lRd Sun ri s e R d L an c e w o o d L n F a rmingb ur y Rd S ta te H w y 3 2 2 E dgemontL n Sh el to n Ave H il ls id e D r White Oa kLn Alc o tt R d N or t h St L inda Dr Fores tv ie w D r H ol m es Ln Tow n L in eR d Ca rr i a g e H il l D r Ma dR iver Rd P or t e r R d Wakel e e Rd Judy Ln H ei d iC t Ch es tn u t Dr S y lv an Ct S ee ry R d Kare n Av e E ll e n w o o d R d Lib ert y Ln C ate ringRd M a t ta tu ck A v e J un e S t M id ean a C t Lo ng Sw a mp R d C hu r c hD r Lore n zD r C h as se R d No rtonR d M ona rc hDr S t a t e Hw y 6 9 G le n A v e S imon Dr S an dy Ln L au r a Ln M ic h aelT e r B r e e zy Knol l A ve A nd re a A ve G eo r g e St E ve rs D r Bro ok d ale S t W es tlo ok Dr D a le Ave D ee pwo o dD r A ddis o n C t R o se St O a kS t Edg ew at e r R d O ld Col o ny C ir Chan d ler Dr M a p le L n Ro os evel t L n H il l c r e st D r La n t e r n C t E ll e n A ve E ricaL n Colo n ia l C t Tu nx is R d OldBound L i ne R d S w is s L n Pin er i d ge D r R a n s lo w D r K a lk o D r B r o okL n C la rk S t S a d dl e R d Bar c l a re L n Ja n e tAv e L y m a n Roa d Ex t H i llt o p D r Par kA v e J en ny Ln E xec ut ive Hil l R d M o ha w k D r W a g o n T rl R oge rs R d Fr is b i e C ir W oodl an dD r Vi ll a g e Dr Be ec h e rRd C r ysta lB r o okRd B ri a rw o o d R d Coe M d w Bl a n sfie l d L n Lo ngv ie w L n R o cc o D r B org h es i C t D ia m on d T e r M i nor Rd S un set L n D ean na L n H e n r y S t Sh er a t o n D rBr e n tw o o d D r ValC t Plea sa n t S t O l d Farm R d Su s an Ct S pr in g R d B ould e r D r E ve rgre e n Dr C re stw o o d D r De er R un Dr Ba rk er Te r L yn w o od Dr W ood gait eDr L ak evie w Dr I v y LnJ a sm i n e L n O r c h ar d Ln Boldu c Ct T a m eB uc kRd B e a co n H ill B l v d B e rge nLn M a r g ar e t T e r C oa chDr H u nt e rs R d g Cole Rd W i hbeyD r C a m b rid g e D r F i n c h Rd Gar thwaitRd T o d d H o llo w R d Kl a n Dr Co lman Dr Av ery l lAve He m ingwayAve C eda r A v e E as t S t East S t Wood ti c k Rd W oo dti c kR d Ar vidaRd W olfH i l l R d Wol fH il lRd B a yvi e w Ci r T o d d R d B eec h er R d SpindleH i l lR d And rewsRd Gar rig u s Ct M u nsonR d M u n so n R dB roo ksH i llR d Co l b y L n Wo o d t ic k R d Mid w oo d Ave Junip erD r A lm aAv e R id ge cre s tD r K rege r D r Potu ccosR in gR d NMou nt a i nV iew D r B ou n d L i n e Rd Tere saDr Far vie w A v e Pr at tLn Dellwo odRd AugustA v e L au re l L n Hicko r y L n C l i f f S t F o re s t L n Woo d cr e s t A v e L o ne Oa k A ve S i lve rPo ndR d H a rriso nD r Wint e rbr o okR d Ch icoryDr R e d Fo x R u n Lew i s Av e T o s unRd Idlewo odR d DiamondR ockRd C ed arL n L i n d s le y D r Pa u l S t WolcottResidential BuildOutResults2013 I 012 0.5 Miles BuildOutResults Residential BuildableLand R30 R30/ARPRD R30/PRD R40 R40/PRD R50 R130 × Ö NewDwellingUnit × Ö Sources: CT911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS WolcottParcels:NEGEO Zoning:Wolcott Central Naugatuck 81 !! ! ! !! ! !!!!!! ! !! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! !!!! ! ! ! !! !! ! !!!! !!! ! ! !! ! !!! !! !! !! !!! !!! !! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! !! !!!!!! !! ! !!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! !!! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!!!!! !!!! ! !! ! ! !!!!!! !!!!!!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !!! !!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!! ! ! !! !!!!!!! !!!!!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! !! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! W ate rb ur y P l y m o u t h B r is t o l S out hi ngto n Ch esh ire T ro jD r FerroRd V i ll a g e D r CedarPoi nt Rd N i c h o lsR d Me r i d e nR d W it c h es R o ck R d An ita D r G r ill e yR d Hampshir eD r Wol c o t tR d U p so n Rd D I S anto Dr N u tm eg Vall e yRd Beac hRd Co unty Rd C en tr a l A v e L y m a n R d W o lc o t t R d Eas t St R an so m H a ll R d K i l m a rti n A ve Hemp leDr C el ia D r To sun R d La keS t W i llia m s C t Co eR d Ri cha rd Ave H eritageCt Sun ri s e R d F a rmingb ur y Rd White Oa kLn N or t h St L ind a Dr Da l e Av e D e e r R u n D r H ol m es Ln Tow n L in eR d C ar r i a g e H ill D r Ma dR iverR d P or t e r R d Spl i t R o ck D r Wakel e e Rd P on d D r Judy Ln H ei d iC t Sy lv an Ct Se e ry R d Sa n fo rd S t Ell e n w o o d R d Pau l a D r Lib ert y Ln Ca teri n gR d St a n ley St M a t ta tu ck A v e J un e S t M id ean a C t J a m es P l L o n g S w am p R d C hu r c hD r Lore n zD r C h as se R d Pe tr ie Rd N or to n R d M ona rc hDr S t a t e Hw y 6 9 G le n A v e S imon Dr S an dy Ln W a rr e n R d Lau r a Ln B r e e zy Knol l A ve G eo r g e St E ve rs D r Bro ok d ale S t Pimli c oRd W es tlo ok Dr D a le Ave D ee pwo o dD r Sa mu el s o n Av e Ad di s o n Ct C obbl e fi e l d Ct Ro se St C op pe r B e ec h R d Oa kS t O ld Col o ny C ir M e ad o w L a k e Dr C han dler Dr M ap l e L n Ro os evel t L n H il l c r e st D r N or to n Ht s Woodbe r r y C t La n t e r n C t El le n A ve E ricaL n P ete rs onL n Col o n ia l C t Tu n xis R d OldBound L i ne R d S w is s L n Pin er i d ge D r R a n s lo w D r K a lk o D r B r o okL n M eri de n R d C la rk S t S a d dl e R d Bar c l a re L n B il b yD r Ja n e tAv e L ym an R oad E x t To t te n h am Ct H i llt o p D r Par kA v e J en ny Ln M o ha w k D r Th oma sS t W a g o n T rl R o ger s Rd F r is b i e C ir W oo dla n d D r Gia nn i D r Be e c h er R d E lraeD r Cr ysta lB r o okRd C oe M d w Bl a n sfie l d L n R o cc o D r B org h es i C t Jo sep hA ve B arb ar a D r Dia m ond T e r Mi norR d S un set L n B a d ger R d D ea nn a L n S h er a t o n D r O a ken ga te Rd B r e n two od D r Pl e a sa n t S t O ld Fa rm R d Su s an Ct S pr in g R d Boulde r Dr E ve rgre e n Dr C re stw o o d D r De er R u n Dr B a rk er Te r L yn w o od Dr W o o dgai t eD r Man o rL n L ak ev ie w D r Iv y LnJ a sm i n e L nKi n gs w o od Ln O r c h ar d Ln Fe nto n Av e Boldu c Ct Ta m eBu c kRd B e rge nLn M a r g ar e t T e r C oa chDr H u nt e rs R d g Ja cquel ine D r Cole Rd W i h b ey D r W i l s o n R d C a m b rid g e D r F i n c h Rd To d d H o llo w R d Kl a n Dr Co lman Dr B ee ch ers L n Av ery l lAve He m ingwayAve Sc ovill Rd Cedar A v e Ea s t S t East S t Wo odtic k Rd W oodti c k R d Ar vidaRd W o lfHil l Rd B a yvi e w Ci r T o d d R d B ee ch er R d S pi n dle H i l lR d A ndr ews R d G ar rig u s C t M u nso n R d Mun so nR d Bro oksHi l lR d Al le n tow nRd W o odw a rd Dr C o l b y L n W oodt ic k R d M i d w o odAve Jun ip erD r A lm aAv e R id ge cre s tD r K rege r D r Potu ccosR in gR d NMou nt a i nV i ew Dr B ou n d L i n e Rd S Colm anRd Tere saDr Far vie w A v e Pr attLn Dellwo odRd AugustA v e L au re l L n Hicko r y L n C l i f f S t ForestLn Woo d c re s t A v e L on e O a k Av e S i lve rPo ndR d Ha rriso nD r Pe m br o k eHi llR d Wint e rbr o okR d Ch icoryDr R e d Fo x R u n L ew i s Av e T o s unRd Idlewo odR d Ev a’s Te r D ia mo nd RockRd C ed arL n Li n d s le y D r Pa u l S t WonxSprin gRd Wolcott2013LandUse ofResidentialBuildableLand I 012 0.5 Miles CurrentLandUse UndevelopedLand Agriculture RecreationalorUncommittedOpenSpace Sources: CT911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS WolcottParcels:NEGEO LandUse:COGCNV Central Naugatuck 82 !! ! ! !! ! !!!!!! ! !! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! !!!! ! ! ! !! !! ! !!!! !!! ! ! !! ! !!! !! !! !! !!! !!! !! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! !! !!!!!! !! ! !!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! !!! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!!!!! !!!! ! !! ! ! !!!!!! !!!!!!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !!! !!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!! ! ! !! !!!!!!! !!!!!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! !! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! W ate rb ur y P l y m o u t h B r is t o l S out hi ngto n Ch esh ire T ro jD r FerroRd V i ll a g e D r CedarPoi nt Rd N i c h o lsR d Me r i d e nR d W it c h es R o ck R d An ita D r G r ill e yR d Hampshir eD r Wol c o t tR d U p so n Rd D I S anto Dr N u tm eg Vall e yRd Beac hRd Co unty Rd C en tr a l A v e L y m a n R d W o lc o t t R d Eas t St R an so m H a ll R d K i l m a rti n A ve Hemp leDr C el ia D r To sun R d La keS t W i llia m s C t Co eR d Ri cha rd Ave H eritageCt Sun ri s e R d F a rmingb ur y Rd White Oa kLn N or t h St L ind a Dr Da l e Av e D e e r R u n D r H ol m es Ln Tow n L in eR d C ar r i a g e H ill D r Ma dR iverR d P or t e r R d Spl i t R o ck D r Wakel e e Rd P on d D r Judy Ln H ei d iC t Sy lv an Ct Se e ry R d Sa n fo rd S t Ell e n w o o d R d Pau l a D r Lib ert y Ln Ca teri n gR d St a n ley St M a t ta tu ck A v e J un e S t M id ean a C t J a m es P l L o n g S w am p R d C hu r c hD r Lore n zD r C h as se R d Pe tr ie Rd N or to n R d M ona rc hDr S t a t e Hw y 6 9 G le n A v e S imon Dr S an dy Ln W a rr e n R d Lau r a Ln B r e e zy Knol l A ve G eo r g e St E ve rs D r Bro ok d ale S t Pimli c oRd W es tlo ok Dr D a le Ave D ee pwo o dD r Sa mu el s o n Av e Ad di s o n Ct C obbl e fi e l d Ct Ro se St C op pe r B e ec h R d Oa kS t O ld Col o ny C ir M e ad o w L a k e Dr C han dler Dr M ap l e L n Ro os evel t L n H il l c r e st D r N or to n Ht s Woodbe r r y C t La n t e r n C t El le n A ve E ricaL n P ete rs onL n Col o n ia l C t Tu n xis R d OldBound L i ne R d S w is s L n Pin er i d ge D r R a n s lo w D r K a lk o D r B r o okL n M eri de n R d C la rk S t S a d dl e R d Bar c l a re L n B il b yD r Ja n e tAv e L ym an R oad E x t To t te n h am Ct H i llt o p D r Par kA v e J en ny Ln M o ha w k D r Th oma sS t W a g o n T rl R o ger s Rd F r is b i e C ir W oo dla n d D r Gia nn i D r Be e c h er R d E lraeD r Cr ysta lB r o okRd C oe M d w Bl a n sfie l d L n R o cc o D r B org h es i C t Jo sep hA ve B arb ar a D r Dia m ond T e r Mi norR d S un set L n B a d ger R d D ea nn a L n S h er a t o n D r O a ken ga te Rd B r e n two od D r Pl e a sa n t S t O ld Fa rm R d Su s an Ct S pr in g R d Boulde r Dr E ve rgre e n Dr C re stw o o d D r De er R u n Dr B a rk er Te r L yn w o od Dr W o o dgai t eD r Man o rL n L ak ev ie w D r Iv y LnJ a sm i n e L nKi n gs w o od Ln O r c h ar d Ln Fe nto n Av e Boldu c Ct Ta m eBu c kRd B e rge nLn M a r g ar e t T e r C oa chDr H u nt e rs R d g Ja cquel ine D r Cole Rd W i h b ey D r W i l s o n R d C a m b rid g e D r F i n c h Rd To d d H o llo w R d Kl a n Dr Co lman Dr B ee ch ers L n Av ery l lAve He m ingwayAve Sc ovill Rd Cedar A v e Ea s t S t East S t Wo odtic k Rd W oodti c k R d Ar vidaRd W o lfHil l Rd B a yvi e w Ci r T o d d R d B ee ch er R d S pi n dle H i l lR d A ndr ews R d G ar rig u s C t M u nso n R d Mun so nR d Bro oksHi l lR d Al le n tow nRd W o odw a rd Dr C o l b y L n W oodt ic k R d M i d w o odAve Jun ip erD r A lm aAv e R id ge cre s tD r K rege r D r Potu ccosR in gR d NMou nt a i nV i ew Dr B ou n d L i n e Rd S Colm anRd Tere saDr Far vie w A v e Pr attLn Dellwo odRd AugustA v e L au re l L n Hicko r y L n C l i f f S t ForestLn Woo d c re s t A v e L on e O a k Av e S i lve rPo ndR d Ha rriso nD r Pe m br o k eHi llR d Wint e rbr o okR d Ch icoryDr R e d Fo x R u n L ew i s Av e T o s unRd Idlewo odR d Ev a’s Te r D ia mo nd RockRd C ed arL n Li n d s le y D r Pa u l S t WonxSprin gRd Wolcott2012AerialImagery ofResidentialBuildableLand I 012 0.5 Miles Sources: CT911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS WolcottParcels:NEGEO 2012NAIPAerialImagery:CTDEEP Central Naugatuck 83 Central Naugatuck 84 Woodbury Town zoning regulations were used to calculate allowable building density for each parcel. When run, the CommunityViz software placed buildings on approp riate parcels, conforming to preset density and setback rules for each zoning design ation. The following settings were used with a minimum lot size of 40,000 ft 2 (435,600 ft 2 for GA): Land Use Designation Dwelling Units Per Acre Minimum Separation Distance (feet) Efficiency Factor* GA 4.00 100 60% R-40 1.09 50 60% OS-60 1.00 60 60% OS-80 0.54 60 60% OS-100 0.43 80 60% *Reduced to coincide with POCD goals. Dwelling Units The residential build-out projected that a total of 2,367 additional dwelling units will be placed at total build-out in Woodbury with current zoning regulations in place. Land Use Designation Total Residentially Zoned Acres Buildable Residentially Zoned Acres Potential Number of Future Bui lding Units GA 70 1 0 R-40 634 57 34 OS-60 5,601 1,539 639 OS-80 4,134 1,478 489 OS-100 11,449 4,623 1,205 TOTALS: 21,818 7,697 2,367 Population Using the current household size of 2.36 residen ts per dwelling unit in Woodbury (Census 2010), the future population increase from the additio nal 2,367 dwelling units would be: New Dwelling Units Average Household Size Potential New Residents* Current Residents (Census 2010) Total Full Build- out Population* 2,367 X 2.36 = 5,586 + 9,975 = 15,561 *Assuming full occupancy of new units. The vacancy rate of existing housing units in Woodbury is 7.7% (Census 2010). Central Naugatuck 85 Common Impacts CommunityViz also calculated some potential impacts that the additional population could have on the Town of Woodbury. While these figures are based on national averages and may not ideally represent local conditions, they can help prepare for future growth. Common Impact Increase Units School Children 972 School Children Labor Force 3,263 Workers Annual Residential Energy Use 224,865 BTU Annual Residential Water Use 243,635,310 Gallons Daily Vehicle Trips 13,391 Daily Trips Annual CO Auto Emissions 1,049,430 Pounds Annual CO 2 Auto Emissions 20,569 Tons Annual Hydrocarbon Auto Emissions 120,271 Pounds Annual NO x Auto Emissions 77,384 Pounds Central Naugatuck 86 !! !! ! ! !! !!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !!! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! !! !!!! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! !! !! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! !!! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! !!!! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! !!!!! !! !! !!! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !!! !! ! !! ! !! !!!! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! !!! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !! !! ! !!!! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö B et h le h e m W ate rt ow n Mid dl e b u ry S outh bury R o xb ur y W ash in gto n R d G ra ssy Hi l l R d Rox b u r y R d M iddleR oadT p ke T r ans ylva nia Rd M a in StN C h u rc h H i l l Rd Or c h a rd A ve Sh er m a n H i l l R d C atSwa m pRd W L a ke Rd Q u a ss ap au g R d U S Hw y 6 S ageRd Be t h l e h em R d Ju d d H i l l R d Hol lo wR d Scupp oR d Westsid eR d M ai nS tN D e e rwoo d L n Tut t le Rd ParkRd H o opP ol eHi llRd O ldW oodb ur y Rd U S H w y 6 H il lt o p D r Sycam ore Ave S c ratc hv ill e Rd Flan d ers R d Go o dH il lR d W a s h in gto nRd N Fo rty R d H i l l v i e w Ln La k e R d Pet e rR d M ain S tN M i d d le Q u a r te r Rd H i l l St H o lm e s R d Bac o nPondRd Q ua ssu k R d O re n au g A ve P le a s a n t S t SM e a d o w s E dw a rd A ve M e adow Av e Cra n eR d Jo sh ua H illRd M i llR d Ess e x L n B e a v e r V ie w Ct Main St N C e d a r G r v O rton L n Fo res t R id ge Rd S p rin g St K i m b er ly L n S out h S t Rai lt re e H il l R d W oodburyPl L ighthou seR d D e e rH i l l C t Carr ia g eLn F a rv ie w Ln G re y F o x Tr l R i d ge w o od Rd Pa rk landDr R uffin Rd SaxonyLn K nol l R d M e a d ow br o ok Ln N o rt h Rd H e ss e k yM e adow R d Ru cuu mRoadExt A tw ood R d Ti m b er L n OldMead ow R d Sw am p R d Birchwoo d Ln Haze l WoodsD r S teep le V iew L n Har d Hi l l Rd Br u s h yH i llRd P a r kLn Wood l a ndL n G reat Hol lo w Rd Bear R un O wl Ri dg e Rd H i l lv ie w L n G r a s s y H il l R d W hi te D eerRo c kR d M a in St S Woo dlakeRd M in ort o w nRd S Pomp era u g Ave R i v e rV ie wL n W eek e ep eeme eRd A s h S w a m p R d W estw oo d R d San fordR d C o w le s R d W as h in gto n Av e Old To w nFar m R d Hazel Pl a in R d Whi t e O ak Rd R ow le yR d Po nd V al le y Rd Clubh ous eDr P il g ri m Trl T oml in so n R d A rr o w h ea d W a y P a p erM illR d Whit t le seyR d Fo x R d O ld F l a n d e r s Rd C a m A ve B il l y Goa t L n B a rb a ra L n H eritage Dr B arn hi l lR d WoodburyResidential BuildOutResults2013 I 012 0.5 Miles CT911Roads:TeleAtlas,CTDPS WoodburyParcels:NEGEO Zoning:Woodbury BuildOutResults × Ö PotentialNewDwellingUnit ResidentiallyZonedBuildableLand ResidentialDistrict40 OpenSpaceDistrict60 OpenSpaceDistrict80 OpenSpaceDistrict100 × Ö Central Naugatuck 87 !! !! ! ! !! !!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !!! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! !! !!!! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! !! !! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! !!! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! !!!! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! !!!!! !! !! !!! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !!! !! ! !! ! !! !!!! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! !!! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !! !! ! !!!! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! Bet h le h e m W ate rt ow n Mid dl e b u ry S outh bury R o xb ur y W ashingt o nR d G ra ssy H i l l R d R ox b u r y R d M id d l e R oa dT p ke Tr ans ylva nia Rd Ma in StN Chur c hH i l l R d O r cha r dAve Hil lv ie wLn S he rm an Hi ll R d Old S her ma n H ill R d Ca tSw am p Rd W L a ke Rd Q u as sap au gR d U S Hw y 6 Bet hle h em R d Ju d d H i l l R d Hol lo wR d Scu pp o R d Ir o n w o o d L n W es tsideRd L yn n s C o r n e rR d J ud dR d M ai nS tN C ur t is s R d D ee rw oo dLn P ainte rH illR d T u t tle R d ParkRd H oo p Po leH il l R d O ldW oodb ur y Rd H il lt o p D r Sycam ore Ave S cr a t c h v il le R d Flan d ers R d G ood Hi llR d Ja ck s B rid g e R d Scho o l S t E d g e h i l l C t W ashi n g to nRd Cho heesTrl N Fo r ty R d W al k e r R d La ke R d Pet e rR d M ain StN Up p e r Gras s y H ill R d C oac h L i g htDr M i d d le Q u a r te r Rd NorthgateRd W oo db ur y P l H i l l St Ho lm e s R d B ac o n Po ndR d Q ua ssu k R d O re n au g A ve S pra i n B ro ok R d P le a s a n t S t S M ead o ws E d w a rdA ve C r o ssB rookR d M e adow Av e In w o od Ln M o unta i n Rd Sa wP it H i l l Rd T r o ll e y B e d R d Cr a n e Rd Jo sh ua H illRd M illR d Ess e x L n R u cu u m R oa d Ex t S t ile s Rd Be a v er V ie w C t M a i n S t N C ed a r G r v O rton L n Fo res t R id ge Rd K i m b er ly L n S o uth St Rai lt re e H il l R d G re enC i r B lu e ber ry Ln L ighthou seR d D e e rH i l l C t M ack ey F a r m Rd T a m ar a c k L n G re y F ox Trl R id ge w o od Rd R uffin Rd K nol l R d M ea d ow b ro ok L n M ea d o w C re st D r Nor th Rd He sse kyMea d o w R d Ru cuumRoadExt A tw ood R d T im be r L n Falls Rd Sw am p R d B ir c h w oodLn H a z e lW oods D r H a rdH il l R d G a t e Pos tL n S te e p l e V ie wLn Q uass a paug R d S to n efi e l d Rd Hil ls ideRd Har d Hi l l Rd B r u shyH i ll R d Pa r kLn L au r e l W o o ds R d Woodla n dLn Beth woodLn Leavenw or th R d Q uailR un R d G re a t Ho llo wR d BearRun Carm elHi ll R d N onnewau gRd Quan opau gTrl H i l lv ie w L n G ra ss y H il l Rd G ras sy Hi llR d Wh iteD eerRockR d M a in St S N et tl e t on H ol l o w R d Woodlake Rd M a i n S t S S Pomp era u g Ave R i v e rV ie wL n Wee keep ee me eR d A s h S w a m p R d W estw oodRd Sanf ordRd C ow le s R d W as h in gto n Av e Mi n o rto wn R o ad Ext O ldTo w n F ar mRd Ha zel Pl a in R d W hi t e Oak R d H u r d s H ill R d Row le yR d Plumb B roo kRd P o nd V al le y Rd Clubh ous eDr P il g ri m Trl Ter rell Rd A rr o w h ea d W a y Pr in ce ss Pi ne W a y P a p erM illR d WoodburyHl W hittles ey R d Fo x R d O ld F la n d ers Rd C a m A ve B i l l y Goa t L n EHil lRd B a rb a ra L n Her itage Dr B arnhi l lR d Sta gec o ac h R d S toneP itRd Ar tille ry R d Tow n Lin e R d Woodbury2013LandUse ofResidentialBuildableLand I 012 0.5 Miles CT911Roads:TeleAtlas,CTDPS WoodburyParcels:NEGEO LandUse:COGCNV CurrentLandUse UndevelopedLand Agriculture RecreationalorUncommittedOpenSpace Central Naugatuck 88 !! !! ! ! !! !!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !!! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! !! !!!! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! !! !! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! !!! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! !!!! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! !!!!! !! !! !!! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !!! !! ! !! ! !! !!!! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! !!! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !! !! ! !!!! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! Bet h le h e m W ate rt ow n Mid dl e b u ry S outh bury R o xb ur y W ashingt o nR d G ra ssy H i l l R d R ox b u r y R d M id d l e R oa dT p ke Tr ans ylva nia Rd Ma in StN Chur c hH i l l R d O r cha r dAve Hil lv ie wLn S he rm an Hi ll R d Old S her ma n H ill R d Ca tSw am p Rd W L a ke Rd Q u as sap au gR d U S Hw y 6 Bet hle h em R d Ju d d H i l l R d Hol lo wR d Scu pp o R d Ir o n w o o d L n W es tsideRd L yn n s C o r n e rR d J ud dR d M ai nS tN C ur t is s R d D ee rw oo dLn P ainte rH illR d T u t tle R d ParkRd H oo p Po leH il l R d O ldW oodb ur y Rd H il lt o p D r Sycam ore Ave S cr a t c h v il le R d Flan d ers R d G ood Hi llR d Ja ck s B rid g e R d Scho o l S t E d g e h i l l C t W ashi n g to nRd Cho heesTrl N Fo r ty R d W al k e r R d La ke R d Pet e rR d M ain StN Up p e r Gras s y H ill R d C oac h L i g htDr M i d d le Q u a r te r Rd NorthgateRd W oo db ur y P l H i l l St Ho lm e s R d B ac o n Po ndR d Q ua ssu k R d O re n au g A ve S pra i n B ro ok R d P le a s a n t S t S M ead o ws E d w a rdA ve C r o ssB rookR d M e adow Av e In w o od Ln M o unta i n Rd Sa wP it H i l l Rd T r o ll e y B e d R d Cr a n e Rd Jo sh ua H illRd M illR d Ess e x L n R u cu u m R oa d Ex t S t ile s Rd Be a v er V ie w C t M a i n S t N C ed a r G r v O rton L n Fo res t R id ge Rd K i m b er ly L n S o uth St Rai lt re e H il l R d G re enC i r B lu e ber ry Ln L ighthou seR d D e e rH i l l C t M ack ey F a r m Rd T a m ar a c k L n G re y F ox Trl R id ge w o od Rd R uffin Rd K nol l R d M ea d ow b ro ok L n M ea d o w C re st D r Nor th Rd He sse kyMea d o w R d Ru cuumRoadExt A tw ood R d T im be r L n Falls Rd Sw am p R d B ir c h w oodLn H a z e lW oods D r H a rdH il l R d G a t e Pos tL n S te e p l e V ie wLn Q uass a paug R d S to n efi e l d Rd Hil ls ideRd Har d Hi l l Rd B r u shyH i ll R d Pa r kLn L au r e l W o o ds R d Woodla n dLn Beth woodLn Leavenw or th R d Q uailR un R d G re a t Ho llo wR d BearRun Carm elHi ll R d N onnewau gRd Quan opau gTrl H i l lv ie w L n G ra ss y H il l Rd G ras sy Hi llR d Wh iteD eerRockR d M a in St S N et tl e t on H ol l o w R d Woodlake Rd M a i n S t S S Pomp era u g Ave R i v e rV ie wL n Wee keep ee me eR d A s h S w a m p R d W estw oodRd Sanf ordRd C ow le s R d W as h in gto n Av e Mi n o rto wn R o ad Ext O ldTo w n F ar mRd Ha zel Pl a in R d W hi t e Oak R d H u r d s H ill R d Row le yR d Plumb B roo kRd P o nd V al le y Rd Clubh ous eDr P il g ri m Trl Ter rell Rd A rr o w h ea d W a y Pr in ce ss Pi ne W a y P a p erM illR d WoodburyHl W hittles ey R d Fo x R d O ld F la n d ers Rd C a m A ve B i l l y Goa t L n EHil lRd B a rb a ra L n Her itage Dr B arnhi l lR d Sta gec o ac h R d S toneP itRd Ar tille ry R d Tow n Lin e R d Woodbury2012AerialImagery ofResidentialBuildableLand I 012 0.5 Miles CT911Roads:TeleAtlas,CTDPS WoodburyParcels:NEGEO 2012NAIPAerialImagery:CTDEEP Central Naugatuck 89 

Regional Residential Build-out Analysis 2013 – Part 2

Middlebury Town zoning regulations were used to calculate allowable building density for each parcel. When run, the CommunityViz software placed buildings on approp riate parcels, conforming to the preset density and setback rules for each zoning designation. Benson Woods, Ridgewood, and Middlebury Land Associates/CT Land Development (MLA/CTLD, also known as The Ridge and The Estates) are planned developments which have had plans approved by the to wn, but have yet to be completed. For these properties, the remaining units to be built (the nu mber of built units subtracted from the total number of approved units) was entered as the potential build-out units for each property. The following settings were used with a minimum lot size of 40,000 ft 2: Land Use Designation Dwelling Units Minimum Separation Distance (feet) Efficiency Factor AR-1 6.54 DU/Acre 20 75% SR-1 6.54 DU/Acre 20 75% R-40 1.09 DU/Acre 50 75% R-40/LQPD 1.09 DU/Acre 50 75% R-40/PRD 1.09 DU/Acre 50 75% R-80 0.54 DU/Acre 80 80% R-80/LQPD 0.54 DU/Acre 80 80% R-80/LQPD-1 0.54 DU/Acre 80 80% MLA/CTLD 164 Units* N/A N/A Ridgewood 51 Units* N/A N/A Benson Woods 214 Units* N/A N/A * Town approved un-built dw elling units in planned developments. Dwelling Units The residential build-out projected that a total of 2,078 additional dwelling units will be placed at total build-out in Middlebury with curren t zoning regulations in place. Land Use Designation Total Residentially Zoned Acres Buildable Residentially Zoned Acres Potential Number of Future Dwelling Units AR-1 59 44 214 SR-1 24 14 66 R-40 3,837 793 596 R-40/LQPD 64 32 26 R-40/PRD 481 57 43 R-80 4,008 1,664 680 R-80/LQPD 284 81 31 R-80/LQPD-1 157 31 11 MLA/CTLD 392 254 146* Ridgewood 229 110 214* Benson Woods 95 37 51* Totals: 9,630 3,117 2,078 *Town approved planned additional units. Central Naugatuck 31 Population Using the current household size of 2.72 residents per dwelling unit in Middlebury (Census 2010), the future population increase from the additio nal 2,078 dwelling units would be: New Dwelling Units Average Household Size Potential New Residents* Current Residents (Census 2010) Total Full Build- out Population* 2,078 X 2.72 = 5,652 + 7,575 = 13,227 *Assuming full occupancy of new units. The vacancy rate of existing housing units in Middlebury is 5% (Census 2010). Common Impacts CommunityViz also calculated some potential impacts that the additional population could have on the Town of Middlebury. While these figures are bas ed on national averages and may not ideally represent local conditions, they can help prepare for future growth. Common Impact Increase Units School Children 983 School Children Labor Force 3,301 Workers Annual Residential Energy Use 197,410 Million BTU Annual Residential Water Use 213,888,540 Gallons Daily Vehicle Trips 11,761 Daily Trips Annual CO Auto Emissions 921,300 Pounds Annual CO 2 Auto Emissions 18,057 Tons Annual Hydrocarbon Auto Emissions 105,587 Pounds Annual NO x Auto Emissions 67,935 Pounds Central Naugatuck 32 !!!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !!!!!!!!!!! !!!!! ! !! ! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !!! !! !!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! !!!!!!! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! !!!! !! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !!! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!! × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö ×Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö Wat e rbur y O x f o r d Sout hbury Wo od bu ry W a t e rto w n N au ga tu ck D on o va n Rd Br is to lS t S trai t s Tp k e Hil lP kw y Mi d d le b u r y Rd Lon gM eado w Rd C h rist ianRd J u d d Hi l lRd Memo r ial D r Wh it te m o re Rd I8 4 S ou t hfo r dRd Sh add u ckRd A n a w a n A ve B e nso nR d C h ase Pk w y Pa rkR o a d E xt T u rnp ikeDr W a te rtow nR d Jo Anne D r H i llRd T y ler R d Char c o al A ve S an dy H ill R d W L a ke Dr B re a kneck HillRd R iv e r s id eD r D or o th y Dr P ark R d K e ll yR d C on n e cti n g R oa d O ld W at e rt o w n R d Tyl e rXin g B r o o k L n K en t w oo d C t EFarmsRd Ya leAv e P ar kDr Fos terS t L au re l R d S ta t e H w y 6 3 Presto n H il l R d G unnt o w n R d Dw ye rR d Nor th St Ravenw o odDr Stei n m an n A ve Lake S horeD r R os e C t K ro de lR d Fen nR d B ay b e r r y Te r Sp rin gR d Ju n i p e r R d A lg i nDr Fe r nda le A ve T o wn se n d St G off S t J o a n n e D r B io ski R d C av es o n C t LeonardRd L u bec Rd CampRd J o y Rd Han n a h D r La w s o n D r Je ric h o R d Se rv iceRd J en se n Dr Ge or g e S t N ar c i s su sR d M i d w ay Dr E xi t 1 7 U pl an dR d HemlockLn Fre ed o m Rd P lymout h Ln W i n th ru p Dr H ig hl a n d D r S o uth v iew Ave C em et eryR d Col onia l A v e A t wo od St P or te r H il l R d S ton e w all D r N ic h o lsR d W o od la ndR d Bris to lR d C ro ss Rd O l d Regan R d Ch a seR d Ja netDr N an tu ck etWa y C en tralRd E R id g e Dr M arne y D r WoodfieldRd Gos sRd G le nwo o dA ve Li br aryRd Ches h a m D r G reenHil l Rd N orthrid g e D r Co untry Clu bRd F a l c onC restRd K issawaugRd W o oste rRd A ll e r to n F a r msRd Steep le ch a se D r A r ti llery Rd S outhSt WL akeRd Wh eel e r R d T r a n qu i lit y R d R e g an R d Brook si d eDr W as h in g to n Dr T h re e Mile Hil l R d Tyle r C v Bu r rHall R d T o w e r R d Mi r eyD amRd Tria n gleBlvd N Be n so n R d Cur t i sRd C l e a r V i e w Knl S k yl i n e D r W indi n g T rl NFa rmsR d M e rid et hRd P ort e r Av e Highla ndRd Cre stRd C a rriageDr M u nso n R d Brooksi deD r A val o nD r Middlebury2013Residential BuildOutResults I 012 0.5 Miles Sources: 911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS Parcels:NEGEO Zoning:Middlebury BuildOutResults ResidentiallyZonedBuildableLand SeniorResidentialDistrict AssistedSeniorRes.District ResidentialDistrict40 ResidentialDistrict40/LQPD PlannedRes.Dev.District40 ResidentialDistrict80 ResidentialDistrict80/LQPD ResidentialDistrict80/LQPD1 MLA/CTLD Ridgewood BensonWoods × Ö PotentialNewDwellingUnit × Ö Central Naugatuck 33 !!!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !!!!!!!!!!! !!!!! ! !! ! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !!! !! !!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! !!!!!!! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! !!!! !! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !!! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!! Wate rbur y O x f o r d Sout hbury Wo od bu ry W a t e rto w n N au ga tu ck D on o va n Rd G u n nto w n R d Br is to lS t W hi t e D ee r Ro ckR d S trai t s Tp k e Ol dW oodbu ry R d Hil lP kw y Lo n gM eado w Rd Ju d d H il l R d Me morialDr I8 4 U pp er Whi tt emo reR d S ou t hfo r dRd S haddu ckR d A n a w a n A ve B en so n R d Nu tm e g Rd S o m e rs et D r C h ase Pk w y Par kR oadEx t Tu rnp ikeDr Tuck er H i ll R d W a te rtow nR d Jo Anne D r H i llRd T y lerR d K ingSt Char c o al A ve S an dy H ill R d W L a ke Dr B re a kneck HillRd V i l la g e G r n P ark R d Ke ll yR d O ld W at e rt o w n R d Tyl e rXin g B r o o k L n C on nec ti n g Roa d E FarmsRd Ya leAv e Pa rk D r Lak e vi e w D r FosterS t S a ndyB each Rd Whit tem ore R d Sta t e H w y 6 3 Presto n H il l R d Dwy erR d Nor th St Ravenw o odDr Lak e v i e w C t S t e inma n n Ave C hri s ti a n R d K ro de lR d R i c h a rd so n D r A v e l i n e A ve F en nR d B ay b e r r y Te r Sp rin gR d Ni ck R d Ju n i p e r R d A lg i nDr Fe r nda le A ve M id d le b u ry T e r G off S t E dw ar d Rd J o a n n e D r B io ski R d C av es o n C t L u bec Rd C ed ar R d J u l i ano D r Iv y Rd C am p Rd Jo y Rd L ar c h R d H a n n a h D r Lo c kh art D r La w s o n D r K im b e rw i c k C t Je ric h o R d Jen se n Dr E lf i n P l Ge o rg e St S t o n y B ro okR d N a r c i s s u s R d M i d w ay Dr E xi t 1 7 U pl an dR d Bi r c h w oo d T er HemlockLn F re ed o m Rd P lymout h Ln W i n th ru p Dr H ig hl a n d D r S o uth v iew Ave C e m e te ry R d Col onia l A v e B ro n s o n Dr A t w o od S t P or te r H il l R d S ton e w all D r N ic h o lsR d M a d is o n C t Sy cam o re Rd W o od la ndR d Bris to lR d C ro ss Rd O l d Regan R d Ch a seR d Ch ar coalRdg B a yb e r ry R d JanetDr N an tu ck etWa y Cen tr a lRd E R id g e Dr Gleneag leR d M arne y D r WoodfieldRd G oss Rd G le nwo o dA ve Li br aryRd Ches h a m D r G reenHil l Rd N orthri d g e D r Co untry Clu bRd F a l c onC restRd K issawaugRd W o ost e r R d A ll e r to n F a r msRd Steep le ch a se D r Arti l le ryR d SouthSt W h ite ha ll Ct S t e ve n s R d Wh eel e r R d W oo d s id e A v e Tra n quili t y R d St o re R d R eganR d Brooksi d eDr W a s h in gt o n D r Th re e M il e Hi l l R d Tyle r C v Bu rrH a l lRd H unt in g R i d g e R i v T o w e r R d Mi r eyD amRd B o naRd Tria n gleBlvd N Ben so n R d Cur t i sRd C le a r Vi ew Knl W h it e A v e S k yl i n e D r D e e r R un R d W i nd i n g T rl NF armsR d M e rid et hRd Port e r Ave High l andRd F ai r h av e n D r Cre stRd C a rriageDr M u nso n R d Brooksi deD r Aval o nDr Middlebury2013LandUse ofResidentialBuildableLand I 012 0.5 Miles Sources: 911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS Parcels:NEGEO LandUse:COGCNV CurrentLandUse UndevelopedLand Agriculture RecreationalorOpenSpace Central Naugatuck 34 !!!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !!!!!!!!!!! !!!!! ! !! ! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !!! !! !!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! !!!!!!! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! !!!! !! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !!! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!! Wate rbur y O x f o r d Sout hbury Wo od bu ry W a t e rto w n N au ga tu ck D on o va n Rd G u n nto w n R d Br is to lS t W hi t e D ee r Ro ckR d S trai t s Tp k e Ol dW oodbu ry R d Hil lP kw y Lo n gM eado w Rd Ju d d H il l R d Me morialDr I8 4 U pp er Whi tt emo reR d S ou t hfo r dRd S haddu ckR d A n a w a n A ve B en so n R d Nu tm e g Rd S o m e rs et D r C h ase Pk w y Par kR oadEx t Tu rnp ikeDr Tuck er H i ll R d W a te rtow nR d Jo Anne D r H i llRd T y lerR d K ingSt Char c o al A ve S an dy H ill R d W L a ke Dr B re a kneck HillRd V i l la g e G r n P ark R d Ke ll yR d O ld W at e rt o w n R d Tyl e rXin g B r o o k L n C on nec ti n g Roa d E FarmsRd Ya leAv e Pa rk D r Lak e vi e w D r FosterS t S a ndyB each Rd Whit tem ore R d Sta t e H w y 6 3 Presto n H il l R d Dwy erR d Nor th St Ravenw o odDr Lak e v i e w C t S t e inma n n Ave C hri s ti a n R d K ro de lR d R i c h a rd so n D r A v e l i n e A ve F en nR d B ay b e r r y Te r Sp rin gR d Ni ck R d Ju n i p e r R d A lg i nDr Fe r nda le A ve M id d le b u ry T e r G off S t E dw ar d Rd J o a n n e D r B io ski R d C av es o n C t L u bec Rd C ed ar R d J u l i ano D r Iv y Rd C am p Rd Jo y Rd L ar c h R d H a n n a h D r Lo c kh art D r La w s o n D r K im b e rw i c k C t Je ric h o R d Jen se n Dr E lf i n P l Ge o rg e St S t o n y B ro okR d N a r c i s s u s R d M i d w ay Dr E xi t 1 7 U pl an dR d Bi r c h w oo d T er HemlockLn F re ed o m Rd P lymout h Ln W i n th ru p Dr H ig hl a n d D r S o uth v iew Ave C e m e te ry R d Col onia l A v e B ro n s o n Dr A t w o od S t P or te r H il l R d S ton e w all D r N ic h o lsR d M a d is o n C t Sy cam o re Rd W o od la ndR d Bris to lR d C ro ss Rd O l d Regan R d Ch a seR d Ch ar coalRdg B a yb e r ry R d JanetDr N an tu ck etWa y Cen tr a lRd E R id g e Dr Gleneag leR d M arne y D r WoodfieldRd G oss Rd G le nwo o dA ve Li br aryRd Ches h a m D r G reenHil l Rd N orthri d g e D r Co untry Clu bRd F a l c onC restRd K issawaugRd W o ost e r R d A ll e r to n F a r msRd Steep le ch a se D r Arti l le ryR d SouthSt W h ite ha ll Ct S t e ve n s R d Wh eel e r R d W oo d s id e A v e Tra n quili t y R d St o re R d R eganR d Brooksi d eDr W a s h in gt o n D r Th re e M il e Hi l l R d Tyle r C v Bu rrH a l lRd H unt in g R i d g e R i v T o w e r R d Mi r eyD amRd B o naRd Tria n gleBlvd N Ben so n R d Cur t i sRd C le a r Vi ew Knl W h it e A v e S k yl i n e D r D e e r R un R d W i nd i n g T rl NF armsR d M e rid et hRd Port e r Ave High l andRd F ai r h av e n D r Cre stRd C a rriageDr M u nso n R d Brooksi deD r Aval o nDr Middlebury2012AerialImagery ofResidentialBuildableLand I 012 0.5 Miles Sources: 911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS Parcels:NEGEO 2012NAIPImagery:CTDEEP Central Naugatuck 35 Central Naugatuck 36 Naugatuck Town zoning regulations were used to calculate allowable building density for each parcel. When run, the CommunityViz software placed buildings on approp riate parcels, conforming to preset density and setback rules for each zoning design ation. Multi-family housing was favored by the build-out where allowed by zoning regulations, and is based on th e highest permitted dwelling unit allowable per building without requiring a special permit. The follow ing settings were used with a minimum lot size of 5,000 ft 2: Zoning Designation Dwelling Units Per Acre Minimum Separation Distance (feet) Allowable Dwelling Units Per Building Efficiency Factor R-65 .67 60 1 80% R-45 .97 60 1 80% R-30 1.45 40 1 75% R-15 2.90 40 1 75% R-8 5.45 20 1 75% RA-1 8.71 20 *2 75% RA-2 8.71 20 *2 75% RO-1 8.71 20 *2 75% B-4 1.45 60 *1 75% DD 2.90 60 *1 75% * Higher DU/Building al lowed by special permit. Dwelling Units The residential build-out projected that 2,485 residential buildings with a total of 2,603 additional dwelling units will be placed at total build-out in Naugatuck with current zoning regulations in place. Zoning Designation Total Residentially Zoned Acres Buildable Residentially Zoned Acres Potential Future Residential Buildings Potential Future Dwelling Units R-65 2,873 1,057 545 545 R-45 73 36 28 28 R-30 741 148 170 170 R-15 2,403 465 1,000 1,000 R-8 1,071 107 415 415 RA-1 717 40 142 240 RA-2 113 6 22 39 RO-1 3 1 4 7 B-4 11 8 9 9 DD 524 68 150 150 TOTALS: 8,529 1,936 2,485 2,603 Central Naugatuck 37 Population Using the current household size of 2.56 residents per dwelling unit in Naugatuck (Census 2010), the future population increase from the additio nal 2,603 dwelling units would be: New Dwelling Units Average Household Size Potential New Residents* Current Residents (Census 2010) Total Full Build- out Population* 2,603 X 2.56 = 6,664 + 31,862 = 38,526 *Assuming full occupancy of new units. The vacancy rate of existing housing units in Naugatuck is 5.5% (Census 2010). Common Impacts CommunityViz also calculated some potential impact s that the additional population could have on the Borough of Naugatuck. While these figures are based on national averages and may not ideally represent local conditions, they can help prepare for future growth. Common Impact Increase Units School Children 1,159 School Children Labor Force 3,892 Workers Annual Residential Energy Use 247,285 Million BTU Annual Residential Water Use 267,926,790 Gallons Daily Vehicle Trips 14,733 Daily Trips Annual CO Auto Emissions 1,154,063 Pounds Annual CO 2 Auto Emissions 22,619 Tons Annual Hydrocarbon Auto Emissions 132,263 Pounds Annual NO x Auto Emissions 85,099 Pounds Central Naugatuck 38 !!!! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! !!!! ! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !! ! !!!! !!! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!!!!! !! !!!!!! !!!!! ! ! ! ! !! !!!!! !!!!!! !!!! !! !!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! !!!! !!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! ! !!! !!!! !!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!! !! !!! ! ! !!! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !!!! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!!! !!!!!! ! !! !! ! ! !!!!! !!!! ! ! !!! ! !!!!! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!! !! ! ! !! !! !!!!!!!! !! ! ! ! ! ! 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 78 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 W ate rb u ry Pro s pe ct BeaconFalls B e th an y O x fo rd Middlebury W eb b Rd C ur ti s s Ct U ni o n S t A n d r e w A ve St a t e Hw y 63 S pr ing S t A l le r to n R d C li f f S t NChur c hSt H a cket t S t A de llaSt N Mai n S t Cross S t O a kS t Pl a t tsM il l R d Spenc erS t D on na L n B ri dg eS t Pi c tu r e L n S ch m i t z Av e Mill S t M ap l e Hi l l S c h o ol C o n radSt B re n na n S t D onov anRd F o x H i l l R d H az el A v e Ae tn a St M illv ille A ve C hur ch St May S t M ille r Dr C u lv e r S t A nders o n St M ea d o w St S co tt S t Sta te Hw y 6 8 H i ll R d Gu nnto w n Rd Wo oster St P a rkP l W ar m E art h Rd L y n n Cir E ag le S t Pi n e St C ha r le s C t H il l S t T his t le D o w n Ln P em b ro o k Rd A l i s o nA v e M e a d owb ro o k P l D am so n L n U n io n Ci t y R d In ga Ci r N e w H av en Rd S um mi t R d Pon dv ie w Dr M ap le H il l R d Du n ic an Av e NewS t A lb er t A ve Ter r a ce A ve Gal p in S t A nn St Pro sp e c t S t D unn A ve F a i r la w n St C aro lynCir K na rf C t E Wa t e r b u ryRd Lo ra n n D r Lant e rnP arkD r Mann er s Av e G or m a n St C and eeRd O liv e St M i ch el le L n Lo cus tS t Fr a n c is St M ul b e r r y S t Morn in gDo veRd V i n e St N ev il l e St C ar ria geD r Spr uc eD r Lin e s C t Sun b urst Rd A rb o rA v e M yrt le Av e Tan glewoodLn S um m erf i eldSt F o x R un R d M a ryD r Taw ny Th r ushRd S v ea A ve L e Cla ir C t Pat r ic i aL n Ti m o t h y R d Ju dd S t H o pki n s St D u nn Ln V id ic h Ln K i n g S t M ayAv e M e a d o w C t She rm an S t B i rc hL n In w oodDr R o u nd Hil l R d EastDr B os c o D r Adr ia ti c L n S unse tDr H e ri t a g e Dr G e o rg e St Al m aSt M a r cS t G a ilD r Hi c ko ry L n Ex it 2 5 Wal n u t T e r H a r lo w Ct F o re st S t B ird R d Ka re n D r C i t yBr o o k Rd P i l g ri m L n StoneFen ce Rd Q uin n St M elbour n eC t CrofutRd V ic to ria L n MarbemLn W o od si de Dr V in c en tP l R edM a p leCt G r ic kis L n P l e a san tV i e w St B in gh am S t H em lo c k Rd N au gatu ck Dr W i n d v ie w D r Fe rn St C rown S t E xi t 2 6 W eidD r G le n dal e C t La u r e l A ve W hit n ey P l C har le n e D r R ound Tre e Dr T o w e r L n L in co l n S t W ood l a w n Av e Visc o n t i D r Sie rr aR i d g e R d A m an d a L n N ixo n A v e R a m se y Ave N ichols Rd Cov e n t r y L n E xit27 F a ir w o od R d Mi chae lL n Be eb e St T rac e yA n nC t Woo dru ff A v e E xi t 28 O ldFire h o us eR d W a r re n A v e T rou t B roo kDr P e ro ck L n C ounse lo r Dr Cla rkHil l R d Hi ll t o p Rd Be acon V all e yRd K ingswo o d D r Stat eHw y 8 W ardSt C he rr y St E lmSt S Ma in St C i t yH ill S t B la ck Fo re st R d Sch oo lSt A l b ion S t M e lb o urneS t H or to n Hi l l R d Ar chS t H il l s id e Ave B owman D r Vill ageCi r HighS t H oad le y S t Graham RidgeRd G reatH i l l R d Jo hn s on S t M orni n gMis tRd Na n c yL n G old en Hi llS t S w i ft Ln B ri a rwo odR d Os bor nR d Co l d Spr in g C ir B ro o k s id e Ave Andr e w Mo un ta i n R d Pa rkin gLot Y o rk to wnL n W e st o ver D r NH oa d l e y St W H il l T er A ppl e w o od Ln B ea c o n M an o r C i r C ra i g Ci r H i l l S tr e et Ex t A l lert onFarm s Rd W a t e r S t Pa r k Ave W i l d C h er r y Dr M a rs h Hi l l R d H un ters M o un ta i n Rd Sal emSt M ea dow Lar k Rd R idgeRd T u d o r L n C h err y S t E xt L in d a Ct C restwoodDr WildwoodCir Coun t r yHi llR d R a d o D r Pi n e w oo d Xi n g N Eve n i n g Sta rD r Ko skoL n I r v in gSt Longv ie wTer JonesRd O l d H w y Gu sSt C e l a ntano Dr R u elaD r Margar e t Ci r P le as a n t A v e Field st on e T er D o rm an Dr Ph y lli s D r C oen St R ay tk w i c h R d Sh e rid a n D r A u bur n S t NaugatuckResidential BuildOutResults2013 I 00 .51 0.25 Miles Buildout Results Residentially ZonedBuildable Land R8 R15 R30 R45 R65 B4 DesignDistrict RA1 RA2 RO1 PotentialFuture Residential Building 8 7 SingleFamily 8 7 MultiFamily Sources: CT911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS Parcels:Naugatuck Zoning:Naugatuck × Ö × Ö Central Naugatuck 39 !!!! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! !!!! ! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !! ! !!!! !!! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!!!!! !! !!!!!! !!!!! ! ! ! ! !! !!!!! !!!!!! !!!! !! !!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! !!!! !!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! ! !!! !!!! !!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!! !! !!! ! ! !!! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !!!! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!!! !!!!!! ! !! !! ! ! !!!!! !!!! ! ! !!! ! !!!!! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!! !! ! ! !! !! !!!!!!!! !! ! ! ! ! ! Wate rb u ry Pro s pe ct BeaconFalls B e th an y O x fo rd Middlebury H o l ly S t W eb b Rd Le w i s St C ur ti s s Ct U ni o n S t M a i n St A n d r e w A ve I n ga C i r R u b b e r A ve St a t e Hw y 63 W a te rb u ry Rd Sp ri n g S t Lo ngwo od Dr Fl a n d e rs R d C li f f S t NC hurch S t H a cket t S t A de llaSt N Ma in S t O a kS t P l a t tsM il l R d JuneSt Don na L n P i c tu r e L n Jo li e Rd O li v ia L n Mill S t H ig hla n dAv e Co n r a d St D ono v an R d Be ec h e rS t R ai n D an ce Ci r H az el A v e Ae t na St C a r r o l l C t B a rn F in c h C t C hur ch St C alvinS t M ay S t Bucking hamSt M ille r Dr C u lv er S t G u nn to w n Rd M ea d o w St S co tt St Sta te Hw y 6 8 H i ll R d M i tc he ll S t W Mo unta in R d Ge nera lD al t o n D r W o oste rSt P o rte r A v e P a rkP l D a vid St Ly n n Cir E ag le S t Pi n e St A et na Pl C ha r le s C t H il l S t T h is t l e D ownLn H o m e stead Av e Ly n n R d S ha ro n A ve A l i s o nA v e M e ad o w bro o k P l D am so n L n U n io n Ci t y R d N ewH aven R d S um mi t R d Pon d v i ewDr V a n Av e M ap le Hi ll Rd N e wS t P ep p er m i ll C t Gal p in S t A nn St A ar o n A ve K ro d elR d Pro sp e c t S t W i l s o n S t C aro lynCir Joh n S t K na rf C t E Wa t e r b u ryRd W ood c r estD r Lo ra n n D r C h ri s ty Ln Man n er s Av e B a il e y R d G or m a n St N obl e Av e C and eeRd O liv e St M i ch el le L n Lo cus tS t S Ma i n S tr e et E x t F r a n c is St M ulberryS t M a l g a ri C t Morn ing DoveRd V i n e St N ev il l e St C ar riageD r Deepwo od Rd C o un t r y Ho l lo w Rd R o ll in g W oo d Dr R ound H ill C i r S un b urst Rd A rb o rA ve Tan glewoodLn S um m erf i eldSt M a ryD r Taw ny Th r ushRd S v ea A ve P a tr ici a Ln C oe n L n M cK in le y S t H o pki n s St D u nn Ln M ell i ssaC t Pon d V a lle y Dr V id i c h L n K i n g S t M ayAv e M ea d o w C t B r ittanyLn B i rc hL n S im sb erry R d Di a m on d St B urri t t P l R o u n d H i l l R d Eas tD r A dri ati c L n S unse tDr H e ri t a g eD r Re dR o b inRd A l maS t M a r cS t G a ilD r Hi c ko ry L n Ex it 2 5 W as h i n g to n S t W al n u t T e r H ar lo w Ct Sh i r l e y S t C ob bl e s to n e Ct F o re st S t K ar e n Dr StoneFenc eRd Do n ov an C t Q uin n St M elbour n eC t Sta n le y St C rof u t R d Vi c to ria Ln S t o neyb ro o k R d W o od sid e Dr P a rk m an P l Ti d m ou th Ct W o o d cr e st C i r N e a g l e S t R e d M a ple Ct G ri ck i s L n P l e a san tV i e w St G a briel D r B in gh am S t H em lo ck R d C la r k R d Naugat u c kDr W in d vie w Dr F e rn St C o tt o n Ho ll o w Rd S c h en c k Ln C row n S t E xi t 2 6 K en t S t W eidD r O ld e F armLn G le n dal e C t A pp le B l o s so mDr L o un s bury St La u r e l A ve M a rb e r n L n C har le n e D r B r ight onR d R o u n d T re e Dr D a v in D r To w erL n R id ge la n d D r Lin co l n S t W ood l a w n Av e Visc o n t i D r Ni col eDr A m an d a L n N ixo n A v e N ic h o ls Rd Hop k ins H il l R d C ov e n t r y L n E xit27 A shR d Exit 29 Ca dbu ryPl F a ir w o od R d Mi chae lL n Be eb e St T rac e yA n nC t W o od ru ff A ve T ylerHill R d W i n t e rg r e e n L n E xi t 28 O ldFire h o us eR d War renA ve Tr o ut B ro okD r Per o c k L n Ev e ly n D r Co u nsel o r D r C larkHi ll Rd Hi ll t o p Rd Be acon Vall e yRd K ingswo o d D r D’Arcangel o Dr Stat eHw y 8 W ar d St C he rr y St E lmSt S M ainS t C it y H il l S t B l a c k Fo re st R d S choo lS t Al b ion St Mi s ty w oodLn M e lb o urneS t H or to n Hi l l R d Ar chS t H il l s id e A ve Lin e s Hi l lS t Hi g hS t H oad le y S t Graham RidgeRd G reatH i l l R d Jo h n s o n S t Mo r n i n g M is t R d Rad no r A v e Na n c yL n G o ldenH il l S t Sw if t L n B ri a rwo odR d O sbo rn Rd Id le wo o d D r Co l d Spr in g C ir B ro o k s id e Av e A ndr e wMou n ta i nR d Pa rkin gLot Y o rk to wnL n Li t tl e Ri v erDr West o verDr NH oa d l e y St W H il l T er C u r tis s St Ap plew ood L n B ea c o n M an o r C i r C ra i g Ci r H i l l S tr e et Ex t B lu e b i r dD r Al lert onFarm s Rd W a t e r S t Pa r k Ave M a rs h Hi l l R d H un ters M o un ta i n Rd S a l e mS t M ea dow Lar k Rd R idgeRd T u d o r L n Ch e r r y S t Ext W is t e ri a Dr L in d a Ct C restwoodDr W i ld w ood C ir C o unt r y H il l R d Ra d o D r Pi ne w oo d Xi ng N Eve n i n g Sta rD r Ko skoL n I r v ingS t S choo l S tr e e t E x t L o n g vie w T er JonesRd S ilv er R i d g e L n O l d H w y GusSt C ela nt anoD r R u elaD r Marg are t Cir Ger a ld ineDr Ple as a nt Av e Field st on e T er D or m an Dr Phy lli s D r Coen St R ay tk w i c h R d Sh e rid a n D r A u bur n S t Naugatuck2013LandUse ofBuildableResidentialLand I 00 .51 0.25 Miles Sources: CT911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS Parcels:Naugatuck LandUse:COGCNV CurrentLandUse UndevelopedLand Agriculture RecreationalorUncommittedOpenSpace ResourceExtraction Central Naugatuck 40 !!!! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! !!!! ! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !! ! !!!! !!! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!!!!! !! !!!!!! !!!!! ! ! ! ! !! !!!!! !!!!!! !!!! !! !!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! !!!! !!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! ! !!! !!!! !!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!! !! !!! ! ! !!! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !!!! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!!! !!!!!! ! !! !! ! ! !!!!! !!!! ! ! !!! ! !!!!! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!! !! ! ! !! !! !!!!!!!! !! ! ! ! ! ! Wate rb u ry Pro s pe ct BeaconFalls B e th an y O x fo rd Middlebury H o l ly S t W eb b Rd Le w i s St C ur ti s s Ct U ni o n S t M a i n St A n d r e w A ve I n ga C i r R u b b e r A ve St a t e Hw y 63 W a te rb u ry Rd Sp ri n g S t Lo ngwo od Dr Fl a n d e rs R d C li f f S t NC hurch S t H a cket t S t A de llaSt N Ma in S t O a kS t P l a t tsM il l R d JuneSt Don na L n P i c tu r e L n Jo li e Rd O li v ia L n Mill S t H ig hla n dAv e Co n r a d St D ono v an R d Be ec h e rS t R ai n D an ce Ci r H az el A v e Ae t na St C a r r o l l C t B a rn F in c h C t C hur ch St C alvinS t M ay S t Bucking hamSt M ille r Dr C u lv er S t G u nn to w n Rd M ea d o w St S co tt St Sta te Hw y 6 8 H i ll R d M i tc he ll S t W Mo unta in R d Ge nera lD al t o n D r W o oste rSt P o rte r A v e P a rkP l D a vid St Ly n n Cir E ag le S t Pi n e St A et na Pl C ha r le s C t H il l S t T h is t l e D ownLn H o m e stead Av e Ly n n R d S ha ro n A ve A l i s o nA v e M e ad o w bro o k P l D am so n L n U n io n Ci t y R d N ewH aven R d S um mi t R d Pon d v i ewDr V a n Av e M ap le Hi ll Rd N e wS t P ep p er m i ll C t Gal p in S t A nn St A ar o n A ve K ro d elR d Pro sp e c t S t W i l s o n S t C aro lynCir Joh n S t K na rf C t E Wa t e r b u ryRd W ood c r estD r Lo ra n n D r C h ri s ty Ln Man n er s Av e B a il e y R d G or m a n St N obl e Av e C and eeRd O liv e St M i ch el le L n Lo cus tS t S Ma i n S tr e et E x t F r a n c is St M ulberryS t M a l g a ri C t Morn ing DoveRd V i n e St N ev il l e St C ar riageD r Deepwo od Rd C o un t r y Ho l lo w Rd R o ll in g W oo d Dr R ound H ill C i r S un b urst Rd A rb o rA ve Tan glewoodLn S um m erf i eldSt M a ryD r Taw ny Th r ushRd S v ea A ve P a tr ici a Ln C oe n L n M cK in le y S t H o pki n s St D u nn Ln M ell i ssaC t Pon d V a lle y Dr V id i c h L n K i n g S t M ayAv e M ea d o w C t B r ittanyLn B i rc hL n S im sb erry R d Di a m on d St B urri t t P l R o u n d H i l l R d Eas tD r A dri ati c L n S unse tDr H e ri t a g eD r Re dR o b inRd A l maS t M a r cS t G a ilD r Hi c ko ry L n Ex it 2 5 W as h i n g to n S t W al n u t T e r H ar lo w Ct Sh i r l e y S t C ob bl e s to n e Ct F o re st S t K ar e n Dr StoneFenc eRd Do n ov an C t Q uin n St M elbour n eC t Sta n le y St C rof u t R d Vi c to ria Ln S t o neyb ro o k R d W o od sid e Dr P a rk m an P l Ti d m ou th Ct W o o d cr e st C i r N e a g l e S t R e d M a ple Ct G ri ck i s L n P l e a san tV i e w St G a briel D r B in gh am S t H em lo ck R d C la r k R d Naugat u c kDr W in d vie w Dr F e rn St C o tt o n Ho ll o w Rd S c h en c k Ln C row n S t E xi t 2 6 K en t S t W eidD r O ld e F armLn G le n dal e C t A pp le B l o s so mDr L o un s bury St La u r e l A ve M a rb e r n L n C har le n e D r B r ight onR d R o u n d T re e Dr D a v in D r To w erL n R id ge la n d D r Lin co l n S t W ood l a w n Av e Visc o n t i D r Ni col eDr A m an d a L n N ixo n A v e N ic h o ls Rd Hop k ins H il l R d C ov e n t r y L n E xit27 A shR d Exit 29 Ca dbu ryPl F a ir w o od R d Mi chae lL n Be eb e St T rac e yA n nC t W o od ru ff A ve T ylerHill R d W i n t e rg r e e n L n E xi t 28 O ldFire h o us eR d War renA ve Tr o ut B ro okD r Per o c k L n Ev e ly n D r Co u nsel o r D r C larkHi ll Rd Hi ll t o p Rd Be acon Vall e yRd K ingswo o d D r D’Arcangel o Dr Stat eHw y 8 W ar d St C he rr y St E lmSt S M ainS t C it y H il l S t B l a c k Fo re st R d S choo lS t Al b ion St Mi s ty w oodLn M e lb o urneS t H or to n Hi l l R d Ar chS t H il l s id e A ve Lin e s Hi l lS t Hi g hS t H oad le y S t Graham RidgeRd G reatH i l l R d Jo h n s o n S t Mo r n i n g M is t R d Rad no r A v e Na n c yL n G o ldenH il l S t Sw if t L n B ri a rwo odR d O sbo rn Rd Id le wo o d D r Co l d Spr in g C ir B ro o k s id e Av e A ndr e wMou n ta i nR d Pa rkin gLot Y o rk to wnL n Li t tl e Ri v erDr West o verDr NH oa d l e y St W H il l T er C u r tis s St Ap plew ood L n B ea c o n M an o r C i r C ra i g Ci r H i l l S tr e et Ex t B lu e b i r dD r Al lert onFarm s Rd W a t e r S t Pa r k Ave M a rs h Hi l l R d H un ters M o un ta i n Rd S a l e mS t M ea dow Lar k Rd R idgeRd T u d o r L n Ch e r r y S t Ext W is t e ri a Dr L in d a Ct C restwoodDr W i ld w ood C ir C o unt r y H il l R d Ra d o D r Pi ne w oo d Xi ng N Eve n i n g Sta rD r Ko skoL n I r v ingS t S choo l S tr e e t E x t L o n g vie w T er JonesRd S ilv er R i d g e L n O l d H w y GusSt C ela nt anoD r R u elaD r Marg are t Cir Ger a ld ineDr Ple as a nt Av e Field st on e T er D or m an Dr Phy lli s D r Coen St R ay tk w i c h R d Sh e rid a n D r A u bur n S t Naugatuck2012AerialImagery ofBuildableResidentialLand I 00 .51 0.25 Miles Sources: CT911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS Parcels:Naugatuck 2012NAIPAerialImagery:CTDEEP Central Naugatuck 41 Central Naugatuck 42 Oxford Town zoning regulations were used to calculate allowable building density for each parcel. When run, the CommunityViz software placed buildings on approp riate parcels, conforming to preset density and setback rules for each zoning design ation. The following settings were used with a minimum lot size of 65,340 ft 2: Land Use Designation Dwelling Units Minimum Separation Distance (feet) Efficiency Factor R-A .50 Units/Acre 50 95% R-CGD 445 Units* NA 100% * 445 approved un-built dwelling unit s in R-GCD. Dwelling Units The residential build-out projected that a total of 2,053 additional dwelling units will be placed at total build-out in Oxford with current zoning regulations in place. Land Use Designation Total Residentially Zoned Acres Buildable Residentially Zoned Acres Potential Number of Future Building Units R-A 16,731 3,655 1,608 R-GCD 942 562 445* TOTALS: 17,673 4,217 2,053 *Approved additional units. Population Using the current household size of 2.81 residents per dwelling unit in Oxford (Census 2010), the future population increase from the additional 2,053 dwelling units would be: New Dwelling Units Average Household Size Potential New Residents* Current Residents (Census 2010) Total Full Build- out Population* 2,053 X 2.81 = 5,769 + 12,683 = 18,452 *Assuming full occupancy of new units. The vacancy rate of existing housing units in Oxford is 5.1% (Census 2010). Central Naugatuck 43 Common Impacts CommunityViz also calculated some potential impacts that the additional population could have on the Town of Oxford. While these figures are based on na tional averages and may not ideally represent local conditions, they can help prepare for future growth. Common Impact Increase Units School Children 786 School Children* Labor Force 3,370 Workers Annual Residential Energy Use 195,035 Million BTU Annual Residential Water Use 211,315,290 Gallons Daily Vehicle Trips 11,620 Daily Trips Annual CO Auto Emissions 910,216 Pounds Annual CO 2 Auto Emissions 17,840 Tons Annual Hydrocarbon Auto Emissions 104,316 Pounds Annual NO x Auto Emissions 67,118 Pounds *Calculation exclud es population from over 55 R-GCD zone. Central Naugatuck 44 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!! ! ! !!!!!!! !!!! !!!!!! ! ! ! !!! !! !!! !! ! !!!! ! !!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!! !!!! !! !!!!!!!! !!!!! !!! !!!! !! !!!! !!!!!! !!!!!! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! !! !!!!!! !!!!!! !!!!!! !! !! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!! ! !!!!! !! !!!!!!! !!!!! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! !! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!! !! !! !! !!!! !!!! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! !! !! !! !!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö Middl ebury N au g a tu ck B ea co n F al ls S e ym o ur Sh elton M onro e N ew to w n S outh bur y Meado wBr o okRd Oxf o r d Rd QuakerFa rm sR d R oo se v elt D r O ld Tow antic H il l R d Ho gsBa ckR d H ul l s H il l R d Hun ter sM ou nt a in R d SethDen Rd Pr e s to n H i ll R d W o o d sid e A v e G overn or sH illR d Ce m et e ry R d M a rt in D r To w ne r L n Map l e Tr e e H ill R d A c ad em y R d M ooseH il l R d Jacks Hil l R d Cond o n R d O xf o r d Rd L arke y Rd Ol dC hur c h R d G r eat H il l R d S t illR d G unnt ow nRd G e o r g es Hil l R d J u li ano D r Bar ryR d O xf o r d Ai rpo rt R d Pi s g a h R d M oha w k D r G un nt o w n R d Ha w le y Rd Kers kiD r Sc h i a vi Wa y Pe rk in s R d Lo rr a ineL n Edm ond s Rd N or th St DormanR d O ld C h u r ch H w y T ra mD r Dunn Dr P eac hF armRd Hun tersM ountainRd P roko pR d LisaDr O akw o odDr L itt l e Val ley Rd Tr ib iolo gy Ctr S ny d e r D r Nib l ic kL n Fox Dr P unku p R d S yca m o r e L n A ncientHwy B r o w n R d L ou n sbu ry Rd K irk wo od Dr J u n e D r D av is R d M ich ael C i r H ur l e y Rd BeeMtRd M an i t o okDr O ld S ta t e R d(1) Cov en tryLn P is gahRd Fid d le headRd T e t la k Ln But t e rn u tL n H o lb ro o k R d R ed B a r nR d Old Li tch f ield Tpk e C hr is t o p her C t Re ali t y Rd Ca r ria g e D r Ro b i n s o n L n W al t e r L n P inel ed ge Rd NM ar kDr Pine StR ed w oo dD r D e e rCre e k R d L o l lyL n N a p l e sL n WestS t A s p e tu c k L n O ak Gl e n H l EastS t D ee r H ol l o w Rd Fl o r a L n D e a n n a Dr M u lb er ry Ln C hrist in aD r H ol l is D r M ead ow D r Tr e a t L n H e at h e r L n W in es apD r Tr e fo il R d E cho Va lley Rd O ld St a te R d( 3 ) B lu eb err y L n Ha wk in s Rd N odHi l l R d G reat O akR d Co rtla n dP l B on n ie L n M a r ia n Ln S ilan o D r E Hi l l R d Eve rg re e n Ln R a n da ll D r WoodRd P al m er Ln Ch a rle s Rd Ha rtCt W i ld flo we r D r HemlockTr l Jo sep hD r Sh e ld o n R d Pope R d Rom e L n N ic h ol s R d Be e M t Rd New g at e Rd Dougl a s R d B a laRi dge R d W yc h w oo d Ln C o uncilD r Lis bonTer T h or s o n R d La b ordeRd L a k e D r Com m erc e Dr Pe rr y L n Free m a nR d O ne i lR d On e il R d Ju n ip er Ct C h ri s t ia n S t Wyc h w o odLn A n dre w M ou n ta i n R d C he s tn u t T re e H il l R d N Lark eyR d Towan ticH il lRd R i g gs St Middle f i e l d Rd O l d S ta t e R o a d 6 7 R eesD r Pu tti ngGr e enLn AutumnR idgeR d S io uxD r O ldSta t e R d( 2 ) Do n ov a n R d Lough linRd C hauncey Dr W hiteG a teR d Pl o c h R d C opper m in e R d S ilv a Ter M ac In tos hRd Ch arte rOakR d J a c ks o nCo v eRd G re e nb ria r R d Jul i a noD r La n te rn R i d g e C t W ille n b r ockR d AppleDr Old Count ryRd E dwar d s Dr B ower sHillR d Belin sk y Cir SomersLn R oseDr O l d F arm R d Nan c y L ynn L n Ro ll i n g H il ls Dr Perki n sR d W yant R d EdgewoodRd Tall Pi nesD r Jens enF armRd Highl andR d J enn yLn S ara hD r KyleC t A ur ora Dr To w e r L n Sco ttDr O w lRid geRd Sunri seDr J emWo o dsRd BishopRd Dee rwo o d Rd Oak cres tR d F o xHo llowRd OxfordResidential BuildOutResults 2013 I 012 0.5 Miles Sources: 911Roads: Teleatlas/ CT DPS Parcels: NEGEO Zoning: Oxford BuildOutResults ResidentiallyZonedBuildableLand ResidentialADistrict ResidentialGolfCommunityDistrict × Ö PotentialNewDwellingUnit × Ö Central Naugatuck 45 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!! ! ! !!!!!!! !!!! !!!!!! ! ! ! !!! !! !!! !! ! !!!! ! !!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!! !!!! !! !!!!!!!! !!!!! !!! !!!! !! !!!! !!!!!! !!!!!! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! !! !!!!!! !!!!!! !!!!!! !! !! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!! ! !!!!! !! !!!!!!! !!!!! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! !! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!! !! !! !! !!!! !!!! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! !! !! !! !!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! Middl ebury N au g a tu ck B ea co n F al ls S e ym o ur Sh elton M onro e N ew to w n S outh bur y Meado wBr o okRd O x fo rdR d Q uakerFa rms Rd Ro os e ve lt D r Chr is ti n aDr W i s te ri a Ln F ai r w ay D r ParkRd O ld T o w an ti cH il l R d H o gsBa ckR d Hunters M ou nt ain Rd Se thDen Rd Pr e s to n H i ll R d G overn or sH illR d In vern e ss C t C e m et e ry R d M a rt in D r LongMea d owR d To w ne r L n Ac ad em y R d M oo se Hi l l R d StakumCir Jac ks Hil l R d C ond o n R d O xf o r d Rd L arke y Rd Mo unta in R d Go o d H i llR d OldC hur c h R d G r eat H il l R d K n or r R d St illR d Dutt o n Rd G e o r g es Hil l R d J u li ano D r B uc k s kin L n B arry R d O xf o r d Ai rpo rt R d Pi s g a h R d Gunnto w n Rd M oha w k D r G un nt o w n R d H a w l e y R d Kers kiD r P in es B r id g e Rd S c h i a vi Wa y Pe rk in s R d H aw ks to ne T er M ohi c an Rd E dmon ds Rd N or th St DormanR d Fairw ay D r Bi ce Dr Tra mD r Pine s b r i dg eRd D unn Dr L in ks W a y PeachFa rmR d HuntersM ountainRd P roko pR d O akw o odDr L itt l e Val ley Rd Tr ib iolo gy Ctr CedarLn Sh ag b ar k D r P ondV i e w D r Fo x Dr P unku p R d S yca m o r e L n A ncientHwy L ou n sbu ry Rd Ki r k w o o d Dr P eck Ln J u neD r G off i n Ct D av is R d Jenny La ne 2 W edge Hil l D r Co u n t r y C lu b D r H u r l e y Rd BeeMtRd O ld S ta t e R d(1) Cov en tryLn P is g a h Rd F iddlehea dR d T e t la k Ln B ut te r n u t L n H o lb ro o k R d Hi g h R id g e Te r R ed B a r nR d Old Li tch f ield Tpk e C hr is t o p her C t Re ali t y Rd Ca r ria g e D r Ro b i n s o n L n W al t e r L n P i n el e d g e Rd NM ar kDr Pine StR ed w oo dD r D e erC re ek R d L o l lyL n WestS t A s p e tu c k L n O ak G le n Hl EastS t La k e v i e w T e r D ee r H ol l o w Rd F lo ra L n D e a n na D r M u lb er ry Ln C hr is ti n a D r H ol l is D r M ead ow D r C ro z ie r C t H ea t he rL n W in es apD r Blu e Rid ge T er Tr ef oi l R d Echo Va lley Rd TwinB ro o ks R d O ld C o ac h R d O ld St a te R d( 3 ) B lu eb err y L n Ha wk in s Rd St o neb rid g e Rd N odHi l l R d OldE ngli s hLn G r e atO a k R d C o rtla n dP l B onn i e Ln M a r ia n Ln S il an oDr E Hi l l R d Eve rg re e n Ln P alme r Ln Ch arl e s Rd H a rtCt S ky li n e D r W i ld flo we r D r Hemlock Trl R i verben dD r J o sephD r Sh e ld o n R d Pope R d Rom e L n To ppen fjel L n Til q u is t Rd Be e M t Rd Ne w ga t eR d D ougl a s R d B a laRi dge R d W yc h w oo d Ln C o uncilD r OldMoose H il lRd T h or s o n R d Labo rd e Rd L a ke D r Co ldSpringDr C om m erc e Dr Pe rr y L n Cap ta in W o o s t er Rd Free m a nR d O ne i lR d One il R d J u n ip er Ct C h ri s t ia n S t Tro o nC t Wy c h w o odLn A n dr e w M o u n ta i n Rd C he s tn u t T re e H il l R d N Lark eyR d B el i n s k y Ci r Towan ticH il lRd R i g g s St C rest R d O ldS tate R oad67 Re e sDr Pu tti ngGr e enLn Autumn Ridge Rd Ch ip Sh otLn S io uxD r Lar k e y R d O ldS ta teRd ( 2 ) Do n ov a n R d Lou ghlinR d C hauncey Dr W h ite Ga te Rd O l d GoodH i ll R d Pl o c h R d L au r a L n Tee S h ot D r C opper m in e R d S ilv a Ter M ac In tos hRd C ha rte r Oak Rd J a ck s o n Cov e R d G re e nb ria r R d Jul i a noD r La n te rn R i d g e C t W ille n b r ockR d App l eD r Old Count r yR d E dwar d s Dr B ower sHillR d B el ins ky Cir Somer sL n C o u ntryC l u b D r R oseDr O l d F arm R d Nan c y L ynn L n Ro ll i n g H il ls Dr Roll in gHill s D r Perki n sR d W yant Rd EdgewoodRd Tall Pi nesD r Jen sen F arm Rd Highl andR d JennyLn S a ra h D r KyleCt A ur ora Dr To werLn Sco ttDr O wl R id g e R d Svehlak Ln Mo rs e R d S unriseDr Je mW oo d s Rd BishopRd Dee rwo o d Rd Oak cres tR d Fo xH oll o w R d Oxford2013Land UseofBuildable ResidentialLand I 012 0.5 Miles Sources: 911Roads: Teleatlas/ CT DPS Parcels: NEGEO Land Use: COGCNV CurrentLandUse Agriculture RecreationalorOpenSpace UndevelopedLand Central Naugatuck 46 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!! ! ! !!!!!!! !!!! !!!!!! ! ! ! !!! !! !!! !! ! !!!! ! !!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!! !!!! !! !!!!!!!! !!!!! !!! !!!! !! !!!! !!!!!! !!!!!! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! !! !!!!!! !!!!!! !!!!!! !! !! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!! ! !!!!! !! !!!!!!! !!!!! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! !! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!! !! !! !! !!!! !!!! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! !! !! !! !!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! Middl ebury N au g a tu ck B ea co n F al ls S e ym o ur Sh elton M onro e N ew to w n S outh bur y Meado wBr o okRd O x fo rdR d Q uakerFa rms Rd Ro os e ve lt D r Chr is ti n aDr W i s te ri a Ln F ai r w ay D r ParkRd O ld T o w an ti cH il l R d H o gsBa ckR d Hunters M ou nt ain Rd Se thDen Rd Pr e s to n H i ll R d G overn or sH illR d In vern e ss C t C e m et e ry R d M a rt in D r LongMea d owR d To w ne r L n Ac ad em y R d M oo se Hi l l R d StakumCir Jac ks Hil l R d C ond o n R d O xf o r d Rd L arke y Rd Mo unta in R d Go o d H i llR d OldC hur c h R d G r eat H il l R d K n or r R d St illR d Dutt o n Rd G e o r g es Hil l R d J u li ano D r B uc k s kin L n B arry R d O xf o r d Ai rpo rt R d Pi s g a h R d Gunnto w n Rd M oha w k D r G un nt o w n R d H a w l e y R d Kers kiD r P in es B r id g e Rd S c h i a vi Wa y Pe rk in s R d H aw ks to ne T er M ohi c an Rd E dmon ds Rd N or th St DormanR d Fairw ay D r Bi ce Dr Tra mD r Pine s b r i dg eRd D unn Dr L in ks W a y PeachFa rmR d HuntersM ountainRd P roko pR d O akw o odDr L itt l e Val ley Rd Tr ib iolo gy Ctr CedarLn Sh ag b ar k D r P ondV i e w D r Fo x Dr P unku p R d S yca m o r e L n A ncientHwy L ou n sbu ry Rd Ki r k w o o d Dr P eck Ln J u neD r G off i n Ct D av is R d Jenny La ne 2 W edge Hil l D r Co u n t r y C lu b D r H u r l e y Rd BeeMtRd O ld S ta t e R d(1) Cov en tryLn P is g a h Rd F iddlehea dR d T e t la k Ln B ut te r n u t L n H o lb ro o k R d Hi g h R id g e Te r R ed B a r nR d Old Li tch f ield Tpk e C hr is t o p her C t Re ali t y Rd Ca r ria g e D r Ro b i n s o n L n W al t e r L n P i n el e d g e Rd NM ar kDr Pine StR ed w oo dD r D e erC re ek R d L o l lyL n WestS t A s p e tu c k L n O ak G le n Hl EastS t La k e v i e w T e r D ee r H ol l o w Rd F lo ra L n D e a n na D r M u lb er ry Ln C hr is ti n a D r H ol l is D r M ead ow D r C ro z ie r C t H ea t he rL n W in es apD r Blu e Rid ge T er Tr ef oi l R d Echo Va lley Rd TwinB ro o ks R d O ld C o ac h R d O ld St a te R d( 3 ) B lu eb err y L n Ha wk in s Rd St o neb rid g e Rd N odHi l l R d OldE ngli s hLn G r e atO a k R d C o rtla n dP l B onn i e Ln M a r ia n Ln S il an oDr E Hi l l R d Eve rg re e n Ln P alme r Ln Ch arl e s Rd H a rtCt S ky li n e D r W i ld flo we r D r Hemlock Trl R i verben dD r J o sephD r Sh e ld o n R d Pope R d Rom e L n To ppen fjel L n Til q u is t Rd Be e M t Rd Ne w ga t eR d D ougl a s R d B a laRi dge R d W yc h w oo d Ln C o uncilD r OldMoose H il lRd T h or s o n R d Labo rd e Rd L a ke D r Co ldSpringDr C om m erc e Dr Pe rr y L n Cap ta in W o o s t er Rd Free m a nR d O ne i lR d One il R d J u n ip er Ct C h ri s t ia n S t Tro o nC t Wy c h w o odLn A n dr e w M o u n ta i n Rd C he s tn u t T re e H il l R d N Lark eyR d B el i n s k y Ci r Towan ticH il lRd R i g g s St C rest R d O ldS tate R oad67 Re e sDr Pu tti ngGr e enLn Autumn Ridge Rd Ch ip Sh otLn S io uxD r Lar k e y R d O ldS ta teRd ( 2 ) Do n ov a n R d Lou ghlinR d C hauncey Dr W h ite Ga te Rd O l d GoodH i ll R d Pl o c h R d L au r a L n Tee S h ot D r C opper m in e R d S ilv a Ter M ac In tos hRd C ha rte r Oak Rd J a ck s o n Cov e R d G re e nb ria r R d Jul i a noD r La n te rn R i d g e C t W ille n b r ockR d App l eD r Old Count r yR d E dwar d s Dr B ower sHillR d B el ins ky Cir Somer sL n C o u ntryC l u b D r R oseDr O l d F arm R d Nan c y L ynn L n Ro ll i n g H il ls Dr Roll in gHill s D r Perki n sR d W yant Rd EdgewoodRd Tall Pi nesD r Jen sen F arm Rd Highl andR d JennyLn S a ra h D r KyleCt A ur ora Dr To werLn Sco ttDr O wl R id g e R d Svehlak Ln Mo rs e R d S unriseDr Je mW oo d s Rd BishopRd Dee rwo o d Rd Oak cres tR d Fo xH oll o w R d Oxford2012Aerial ImageryofBuildable ResidentialLand I 012 0.5 Miles Sources: 911Roads: Teleatlas/ CT DPS Parcels: NEGEO 2012 NAIP Aerial Imagery: CT DEEP Central Naugatuck 47 Central Naugatuck 48 Prospect Town zoning regulations were used to calculate allowable building density for each parcel. When run, the CommunityViz software placed buildings on approp riate parcels, conforming to preset density and setback rules for each zoning design ation. The following settings were used with a minimum lot size of 30,000 ft 2: Land Use Designation Dwelling Units Per Acre Minimum Sep aration Distance (feet) Efficiency Factor RA-1 1.09 50 75% RA-2 0.54 50 80% Dwelling Units The residential build-out projected that a total of 924 additional dwelling units will be placed at total build-out in Prospect with current zo ning regulations in place. Land Use Designation Total Residentially Zoned Acres Buildable Residentially Zoned Acres Potential Number of Future Building Units RA-1 6,011 1,047 807 RA-2 1,959 279 117 TOTALS: 7,970 1,326 924 Population Using the current household size of 2.76 residents per dwelling unit in Prospect (Census 2010), the future population increase from the additio nal 924 dwelling units would be: New Dwelling Units Average Household Size Potential New Residents* Current Residents (Census 2010) Total Full Build- out Population* 924 X 2.76 = 2,550 + 9,405 = 11,955 *Assuming full occupancy of new units. The vacancy rate of existing housing units in Prospect is 3.4% (Census 2010). Central Naugatuck 49 Common Impacts CommunityViz also calculated some potential impacts that the additional population could have on the Town of Prospect. While these figures are based on national averages and may not ideally represent local conditions, they can help prepare for future growth. Common Impact Increase Units School Children 444 School Children Labor Force 1,490 Workers Annual Residential Energy Use 87,780 BTU Annual Residential Water Use 95,107,320 Gallons Daily Vehicle Trips 5,230 Daily Trips Annual CO Auto Emissions 409,555 Pounds Annual CO 2 Auto Emissions 8,029 Tons Annual Hydrocarbon Auto Emissions 46,950 Pounds Annual NO x Auto Emissions 30,208 Pounds Central Naugatuck 50 !! !! ! !!!! ! !! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!!!! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! !!! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! !! ! !! !! !!! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! !!! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !! !! ! ! !! !!!! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 Waterbu r y C h es h i r e B e th an y N au g a tu ck Terry Rd U nion Ci t y R d C oac hl ig h tC i r W hit e Oak D r Stra it s v i l le Rd C am br i d g e Dr Pe ach Orch ar d R d WhiteO akD r C oac h li g h t C i r S il l sAv e Bro nso nR d B oyd D r Ch er ry Cir C l ar kR d He rit a g e D r C hesh ir eR d A usti n Rd Pl a nkR d Corn w a ll A v e Tamarac kCt C ha t f i e l d R d Su m m it R d B rook s hir eDr C o er R d Cl a rk H il l R d W a te r b ur yR d M or r isR d A us ti n Rd C hu r c h St C an de e R d Cl ar kH il l R d A de ll a St J o l ie Rd A n th on y R d M il l e r D r D ee rfi e l d D r Matthe wSt H ol leyL n B o ard m an S t Wi hb e y D r L on g w oo dD r Cen te r St N otc h R d St a t e H w y 42 F o rest R id g e Rd Da m as e S t V alle yLn Kar y l L n K y leJ o s ep hT e r C hr i s t in e D r O a k C t Ty l er D r L ee R d O ak L n M el is sa Ln K no ll w o odP l S alemR d L ak e w o o dDr D o gw o od Dr F arm wo o dD r S un ris e Dr Pi n ec re st Dr B ir c h w oo d Te r B a yber ryR d IvyTe r Giova n n i D r Che ry l L n S a d d l e C t B l u e T ra il D r M ur phy R d R ow la n d D r Cob b l e s t o ne C t Ho li da y H i l l R d P la n kR d P in e M ea d o w Ln G en est A v e H ugh es C t W ilk en s L nR ic h ar d L n Flo re n c e Dr P e te r G i l k ey Rd Sa u n d e rsLn Y an el P l J u g g ern au t R d G e o rg e St G re en w ood Dr O ve rl o ok C t Fie ld st o ne D r Ev erg re e n Ln O l d L og T o w n R d H i c k o ry D r YaleFar ms Ln R oy M ou nt a in R d O rc h ar d D r Sp rin g Rd B a rr y L n N i c h o la s Ct L ak ev i e w R d M e rri m a n L n W oo d l a n d T er S t o nef ie l dD r M ixv i lle R d H or i z o n Vw A m be r C t Po rt e r H i ll Rd Nic o leCt M i k ayl a L n A pp le H ill D r Wi ll iam s Dr Br o ok w o o d C t R a d io To w er R d M ar ia Ho tc h k is s R d R ozumCi r C ed ar H i l l D r K l u g e Rd W ag o n W he e l D r Robin daleDr Lau ra A ve O ld S ch oo lh ous e Rd R o ckri dgeT e r B r ig ht onRd L o m b ar d D r Ca rmelD r T ro t te rs W a y Kl e in D r P on d V ie w Dr R ekL n C han d le r D r B ea ch Dr N ancy Ma e Av e H yde l o r A ve Lu ke S t S c o t tRd C am bri dgeDr C ambri d g e D r Cook Rd C ook Rd C en t e r St N e w Ha ve n Rd H o ri z o nVw A li s o nCt S ta t e Hwy 69 Sp ru ce Dr Tre ssR d M a p le DrMaple D r C olo ni a l Dr MelissaLn B ould er B ro ok Ct C o u ntr y B ro o k Rd Robi nm ar kR d Heml o ckRd Stephe nC t Lil acLn T e r r y Ln E l ain eC t Tim b er H ill R d L au re l L n S herw oo dD r Corr ineDr C oac h l i g ht C ir A sh Ln Put tin g GreenLn P ut t in g G re e n L n B uc kle y L n G ram arA ve MeadowLn R a c h el A nn C t R oy al C r es tD r Sm o ker i se C i r Smo ke r iseCir Ar b o r M ead owD r R o ar in g Br o ok Rd R oarin gBro okRd I n du st r ia l R d So uthri d g e R d Skyl i n eD r P l a t t Dr H e rit a g e Dr Ro sem a r y Rd High l a n dD r Prospect2013LandUse ofResidentialBuildableLand I 00 .51 0.25 Miles BuildOutResults ResidentiallyZonedBuildableLand Residential1Acre(RA1) Residential2Acre(RA2) 8 7 PotentialNewDwellingUnit Sources: CT911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS ProspectParcels:AppGeo Zoning:Prospect × Ö Central Naugatuck 51 !! !! ! !!!! ! !! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!!!! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! !!! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! !! ! !! !! !!! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! !!! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !! !! ! ! !! !!!! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! Waterbu r y C h es h i r e B e th an y N au g a tu ck Terry Rd U nion Ci t y R d C oac hl ig h tC i r W hit e Oak D r Stra it s v i l le Rd C am br i d g e Dr Pe ach Orch ar d R d WhiteO akD r C oac h li g h t C i r S il l sAv e Bro nso nR d B oyd D r Ch er ry Cir C l ar kR d He rit a g e D r C hesh ir eR d A usti n Rd Pl a nkR d Corn w a ll A v e Tamarac kCt C ha t f i e l d R d Su m m it R d B rook s hir eDr C o er R d Cl a rk H il l R d W a te r b ur yR d M or r isR d A us ti n Rd C hu r c h St C an de e R d Cl ar kH il l R d A de ll a St J o l ie Rd A n th on y R d M il l e r D r D ee rfi e l d D r Matthe wSt H ol leyL n B o ard m an S t Wi hb e y D r L on g w oo dD r Cen te r St N otc h R d St a t e H w y 42 F o rest R id g e Rd Da m as e S t V alle yLn Kar y l L n K y leJ o s ep hT e r C hr i s t in e D r O a k C t Ty l er D r L ee R d O ak L n M el is sa Ln K no ll w o odP l S alemR d L ak e w o o dDr D o gw o od Dr F arm wo o dD r S un ris e Dr Pi n ec re st Dr B ir c h w oo d Te r B a yber ryR d IvyTe r Giova n n i D r Che ry l L n S a d d l e C t B l u e T ra il D r M ur phy R d R ow la n d D r Cob b l e s t o ne C t Ho li da y H i l l R d P la n kR d P in e M ea d o w Ln G en est A v e H ugh es C t W ilk en s L nR ic h ar d L n Flo re n c e Dr P e te r G i l k ey Rd Sa u n d e rsLn Y an el P l J u g g ern au t R d G e o rg e St G re en w ood Dr O ve rl o ok C t Fie ld st o ne D r Ev erg re e n Ln O l d L og T o w n R d H i c k o ry D r YaleFar ms Ln R oy M ou nt a in R d O rc h ar d D r Sp rin g Rd B a rr y L n N i c h o la s Ct L ak ev i e w R d M e rri m a n L n W oo d l a n d T er S t o nef ie l dD r M ixv i lle R d H or i z o n Vw A m be r C t Po rt e r H i ll Rd Nic o leCt M i k ayl a L n A pp le H ill D r Wi ll iam s Dr Br o ok w o o d C t R a d io To w er R d M ar ia Ho tc h k is s R d R ozumCi r C ed ar H i l l D r K l u g e Rd W ag o n W he e l D r Robin daleDr Lau ra A ve O ld S ch oo lh ous e Rd R o ckri dgeT e r B r ig ht onRd L o m b ar d D r Ca rmelD r T ro t te rs W a y Kl e in D r P on d V ie w Dr R ekL n C han d le r D r B ea ch Dr N ancy Ma e Av e H yde l o r A ve Lu ke S t S c o t tRd C am bri dgeDr C ambri d g e D r Cook Rd C ook Rd C en t e r St N e w Ha ve n Rd H o ri z o nVw A li s o nCt S ta t e Hwy 69 Sp ru ce Dr Tre ssR d M a p le DrMaple D r C olo ni a l Dr MelissaLn B ould er B ro ok Ct C o u ntr y B ro o k Rd Robi nm ar kR d Heml o ckRd Stephe nC t Lil acLn T e r r y Ln E l ain eC t Tim b er H ill R d L au re l L n S herw oo dD r Corr ineDr C oac h l i g ht C ir A sh Ln Put tin g GreenLn P ut t in g G re e n L n B uc kle y L n G ram arA ve MeadowLn R a c h el A nn C t R oy al C r es tD r Sm o ker i se C i r Smo ke r iseCir Ar b o r M ead owD r R o ar in g Br o ok Rd R oarin gBro okRd I n du st r ia l R d So uthri d g e R d Skyl i n eD r P l a t t Dr H e rit a g e Dr Ro sem a r y Rd High l a n dD r Prospect2013LandUse ofResidentialBuildableLand I 00 .51 0.25 Miles LandUse UndevelopedLand Agriculture RecreationalorUncommittedOpenSpace ResourceExtraction Sources: CT911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS ProspectParcels:AppGeo LandUse:COGCNV Central Naugatuck 52 !! !! ! !!!! ! !! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!!!! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! !!! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! !! ! !! !! !!! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! !!! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !! !! ! ! !! !!!! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! Waterbu r y C h es h i r e B e th an y N au g a tu ck Terry Rd U nion Ci t y R d C oac hl ig h tC i r W hit e Oak D r Stra it s v i l le Rd C am br i d g e Dr Pe ach Orch ar d R d WhiteO akD r C oac h li g h t C i r S il l sAv e Bro nso nR d B oyd D r Ch er ry Cir C l ar kR d He rit a g e D r C hesh ir eR d A usti n Rd Pl a nkR d Corn w a ll A v e Tamarac kCt C ha t f i e l d R d Su m m it R d B rook s hir eDr C o er R d Cl a rk H il l R d W a te r b ur yR d M or r isR d A us ti n Rd C hu r c h St C an de e R d Cl ar kH il l R d A de ll a St J o l ie Rd A n th on y R d M il l e r D r D ee rfi e l d D r Matthe wSt H ol leyL n B o ard m an S t Wi hb e y D r L on g w oo dD r Cen te r St N otc h R d St a t e H w y 42 F o rest R id g e Rd Da m as e S t V alle yLn Kar y l L n K y leJ o s ep hT e r C hr i s t in e D r O a k C t Ty l er D r L ee R d O ak L n M el is sa Ln K no ll w o odP l S alemR d L ak e w o o dDr D o gw o od Dr F arm wo o dD r S un ris e Dr Pi n ec re st Dr B ir c h w oo d Te r B a yber ryR d IvyTe r Giova n n i D r Che ry l L n S a d d l e C t B l u e T ra il D r M ur phy R d R ow la n d D r Cob b l e s t o ne C t Ho li da y H i l l R d P la n kR d P in e M ea d o w Ln G en est A v e H ugh es C t W ilk en s L nR ic h ar d L n Flo re n c e Dr P e te r G i l k ey Rd Sa u n d e rsLn Y an el P l J u g g ern au t R d G e o rg e St G re en w ood Dr O ve rl o ok C t Fie ld st o ne D r Ev erg re e n Ln O l d L og T o w n R d H i c k o ry D r YaleFar ms Ln R oy M ou nt a in R d O rc h ar d D r Sp rin g Rd B a rr y L n N i c h o la s Ct L ak ev i e w R d M e rri m a n L n W oo d l a n d T er S t o nef ie l dD r M ixv i lle R d H or i z o n Vw A m be r C t Po rt e r H i ll Rd Nic o leCt M i k ayl a L n A pp le H ill D r Wi ll iam s Dr Br o ok w o o d C t R a d io To w er R d M ar ia Ho tc h k is s R d R ozumCi r C ed ar H i l l D r K l u g e Rd W ag o n W he e l D r Robin daleDr Lau ra A ve O ld S ch oo lh ous e Rd R o ckri dgeT e r B r ig ht onRd L o m b ar d D r Ca rmelD r T ro t te rs W a y Kl e in D r P on d V ie w Dr R ekL n C han d le r D r B ea ch Dr N ancy Ma e Av e H yde l o r A ve Lu ke S t S c o t tRd C am bri dgeDr C ambri d g e D r Cook Rd C ook Rd C en t e r St N e w Ha ve n Rd H o ri z o nVw A li s o nCt S ta t e Hwy 69 Sp ru ce Dr Tre ssR d M a p le DrMaple D r C olo ni a l Dr MelissaLn B ould er B ro ok Ct C o u ntr y B ro o k Rd Robi nm ar kR d Heml o ckRd Stephe nC t Lil acLn T e r r y Ln E l ain eC t Tim b er H ill R d L au re l L n S herw oo dD r Corr ineDr C oac h l i g ht C ir A sh Ln Put tin g GreenLn P ut t in g G re e n L n B uc kle y L n G ram arA ve MeadowLn R a c h el A nn C t R oy al C r es tD r Sm o ker i se C i r Smo ke r iseCir Ar b o r M ead owD r R o ar in g Br o ok Rd R oarin gBro okRd I n du st r ia l R d So uthri d g e R d Skyl i n eD r P l a t t Dr H e rit a g e Dr Ro sem a r y Rd High l a n dD r Prospect2012AerialImagery ofResidentialBuildableLand I 00 .51 0.25 Miles Sources: CT911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS ProspectParcels:AppGeo 2012NAIPAerialImagery:CTDEEP Central Naugatuck 53 Central Naugatuck 54 Southbury Town zoning regulations were used to calculate allowable building density for each parcel. When run, the CommunityViz software placed buildings on approp riate parcels, conforming to preset density and setback rules for each zoning desi gnation. PDD-19 is a planned development which has had plans approved by the town, but has yet to be built. The property has been subdivided with one dwelling unit planned for each individual parcel. The following settings were used with a minimum lot size of 20,000ft 2: Land Use Designation Dwelling Units Minimum Separation Distance (feet) Efficiency Factor R-20 2.18 DU/Acre 30 75% R-30 1.45 DU/Acre 40 75% R-30A 1.45 DU/Acre 40 75% R-60 0.73 DU/Acre 60 80% R-80 0.54 DU/Acre 60 80% PDD-19 1.00 DU/Parcel* 20 100% * Town approved un-built dwelling units in planned development. Dwelling Units The residential build-out projected that a total of 2,189 additional dwelling units will be placed at total build-out in Southbury with current zoning regulations in place. Land Use Designation Total Residentially Zoned Acres Buildable Residentially Zoned Acres Potential Number of Future Dwelling Units R-20 641 62 94 R-30 835 107 106 R-30A 1,022 26 28 R-60 12,859 2,091 1156 R-80 6,702 1,836 787 PDD-19 40 26 18 Totals: 22,099 4,148 2,189 *Town approved planned additional units. Population Using the current household size of 2.33 residents p er dwelling unit in Southbury (Census 2010), the future population increase from the additio nal 2,189 dwelling units would be: New Dwelling Units Average Household Size Potential New Residents* Current Residents (Census 2010) Total Full Build- out Population* 2,189 X 2.33 = 5,100 + 19,904 = 25,004 *Assuming full occupancy of new units. The vacancy rate of existing housing units in Southbury is 9.7% (Census 2010). Central Naugatuck 55 Common Impacts CommunityViz also calculated some potential impacts that the additional population could have on the Town of Southbury. While these figures are based on national averages and may not ideally represent local conditions, they can help prepare for future growth. Common Impact Increase Units School Children 887 School Children Labor Force 2,979 Workers Annual Residential Energy Use 207,955 Million BTU Annual Residential Water Use 225,313,770 Gallons Daily Vehicle Trips 12,390 Daily Trips Annual CO Auto Emissions 970,513 Pounds Annual CO 2 Auto Emissions 19,022 Tons Annual Hydrocarbon Auto Emissions 111,227 Pounds Annual NO x Auto Emissions 71,564 Pounds Central Naugatuck 56 !!! !!!! !! ! ! !! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !! !! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! !! !!!! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! !!! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !!! !!! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!! !! !! !! !! !! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! !!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!! !!!! !!!! !!!!!! !! !! !! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!! !! !!!! !!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!! !! !!!! !!! !!! !!!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! !!!!!!!!! 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 87 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 78 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 78 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 8 7 R o x b u r y W o o d bury Middle b ury O x fo r d Newtown Bridgewate r W a ke l e y R d Ke tt le to w n Rd NDur keeH l NPondDr R iv e r R d Roxbu r yR d O ldW aterb u ry Rd W ood v ale D r H er itag e R d G arn e t R d R eser voi r R d Sou th fo rd Rd St a teH w y172 B uc k sH il l R d Ne w R d Spr u c e B r o ok Rd Ber k s h i reRd N els onR d Hu llsH i l lR d ElkDr H e ri ta g e V lg M an sio nHo u s e R d WatchH il l D r M id lan dTr l OldF ie l dR d In di a n T rl B eaco nHi l l D r Jaco b Rd E F l a t H i l l Rd P last er Ho use Rd Jeremy Sw a m p R d M unnR d W as h in gt o nC ir Fl a gS w am p Rd Coope rHillR d O ldPovertyRd T a m ia m iT rl NG e o rge sHil l R d S ta te H w y 18 8 P e p p e r T re e Ln A n d r e w Pl FloodBr id geRd Housato n i cT rl Pr e s t o nHi l l Rd L uth er D r C ur tSm i t h Rd Wh ee le r D r Fo re s t R d Cou nt r y L n P atrio tR d G ra c e M dw s BrennanRd Pi n e Hill R d Tim be r la n d W a y T o m sH ill Rd S t r o ng to wnR d BurrRd E Mea d ow R d H or s e s h o e D r O l dW oodb ury R d Rive rTrl D ub l in Rd O le s o n D r Uni o nS q O ak Ln C ar r i a g e D r As h L n C obbl erLn E x i t1 3 W i n t e rw o o d D r Ch ai n Trl B a te s R oc k R d Sanfor dR d Ol d O akw o o d Dr S han eD r L aur el A ve N au t ic Tr l R u ssi a n Vi l lag e Rd Mu rphyLn W i n m ar D r B r id le PathRd H il l d al e D r S te rl in g R d g Ta l l wo odRd G a te Post Ln E x it 15 S yl v an Cres t Dr WGi lbert R d G lenL n E xi t 1 6 H i c k oryL n F arVi ewC ommons H inm anL nW H i ll cre stDr S til ls o nRd L o re l e iC t F aw n R id ge Ct N od H il l R d Li t t leY orkR d Ced a rGr o veR d Ri d gev ie wR d Dub l inH i l lRd W oods Way Dr R ail s t o neDr P each O r ch ar d R d Hem l o ck R idgeRd K et t le to wnW o ods R d Britia n i R d Set t l e r s H i llR d E xi t1 4 Sleep y Hill Rd G ra ss la n dsRd O ldHw y Rd F la gg Swamp Rd Va lleyS t r e a mLn Gre yR oc k R d Pompera ugTrl HollowSw amp Rd Amo sWhiteRd VillageRd Q u ake r Fa rmsR d Ju dd R d I84 U p p e r G ra s s y H i ll R d Ma i nS t N W h aleD r SBr ita i n Rd Hillt opR d E SDu r k ee Hl Bulle tHill Rd P a rki ngLo t W in ship D r Pe rki n s R d Pe terRd M a in St S L ib r ar y R d Sco u tRd Lakevi ewD r LumL otRd Grove Po nd Ln S t ilesR d Tr a d it io ns B l v d P ov e r ty R d H il lPl a ceDr C assi d y R d H il lt opRdW Lun a T rlLeeFarmDr H oll y H ill Ln Purc h ase B r o o k R d FishR ockR d C hu rc hR d W hi te B i r c h Dr B ranchRd Lak esi de R d W V i e w R d S tonega te D r C ha rt e r O ak R d YankeeDr W olfPit D r De p o tH i l l Rd M an or R d W h iteOa kSt OakHillDr C o lonial D r O l d Ich ab o d R d T e p i D r C r o o k HornRd W hi t e B ir c h Ln Ba g le y Rd Pa lme r R d Skyvi e w Dr H u n te rs R id g e R d Pe p pe rT re e H i ll Ln Sc a t a coo kLn B ee ch e r D r P on d V ie w Dr W oo dl a n d Hi lls R d Co ugh li n D r Lau rel woodLn L i t tl eF o x L n Su nsetRdg Blu eberr y L n DeerHi ll R d I v y Hi ll s Rd T urrill B rook D r Sache mRd H eri t a g eVl g East H i ll Wo o ds Southbury2013LandUse ofResidentialBuildableLand I 012 0.5 Miles Sources: CT911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS SouthburyParcels:NEGEO Zoning:Southbury BuildOutResults ResidentiallyZonedBuildableLand PDD19 Residential20 Residential30 Residential30A Residential60 Residential80 8 7 PotentialNewDwellingUnit × Ö Central Naugatuck 57 !!! !!!! !! ! ! !! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !! !! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! !! !!!! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! !!! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !!! !!! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!! !! !! !! !! !! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! !!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!! !!!! !!!! !!!!!! !! !! !! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!! !! !!!! !!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!! !! !!!! !!! !!! !!!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! !!!!!!!!! R o x b u r y W o o d bury Middle b ury O x fo r d Newtown Bridgewate r Ox f or d A ir p o rt R d Ke tt le to w n Rd NDur keeH l NPondDr R i ver R d R oxbu r yR d H er itag e R d InwoodCir G arn e t R d R es ervoi rRd I c h a b o d R d C o n co r d Ct S t a teH w y172 S o uthf o rd Rd Buc k sH il l R d Ne w R d Sp r u c e B r o okR d N els onR d Hu llsH i l lR d ElkDr H e ri ta g e V lg S tat eH w y 67 R R oa d N O 2 BrownBro okRd M an si o n H o us e Rd Hom est eadRd WatchH il l D r OldF ie l dR d In di a n T rl G e o rges H ill R d B eaco nHi l l D r JacobR d E F l a t H i l l Rd P la ste r Hou se R d Fa ir w a yDr J e r e myS w am p Rd P ai n t e r Rd H aw k i ns R d M unnR d Fl a gS w am p Rd Coope rHillR d Ol d PovertyRd T a m ia m iT rl K en w o od D r NG eo rg es H illR d Sta te H w y 18 8 A n d r e w Pl O l d W oo d R d F lo odB rid geR d Rid g e R d Housa t o ni cT r l B o u ld e r W ay Lut h erD r C ur tSm i t h Rd Ru s se ll Rd Wh e ele r D r Bri s t o l- T ow n Rd F o re s t R d Cou nt r y L n P atrio tR d G r a c e M d w s B rennanR d Pi n e Hill R d Tim be r la n d W a y T o m sH ill Rd S tr o n gto wnRd Bu r rRd E Mea d ow R d Chest nut Tr eeH illRd O l dW oodb ury R d Com m uni ty Ho useR d Dub l in Rd S p rin g Trl T o ls to y Ln S ky lin e D r O ak Ln C ar r i a g e D r Vi s taView Dr Bur m aR d As h L n C ed ar T rl Ho rseF en ce Hi llRd C obbl erLn W in te r w o o d D r B a te s Roc kR d Sanfo r dR d Ol d O akw o o d Dr S han eD r Laur e lA ve N au t ic Tr l Mu r p hy L n G ay lor d M oun ta in R d W i n m ar D r B r id le PathRd W i l lo w C re ek E s ta t e s Dr T a l l wo odRd G a te Post Ln E x it 15 S yl v an Cres t Dr WGi lber t R d G lenL n E xi t 1 6 H en ness ey F ar m R d Su n bu r s t D r H i c k oryL n M is t le t o e D r SGeorges H illRd P l e as a n t D r H il lcr e stD r W illo w Cr e e kEst a te s C t He rit a g e Ci r S till s o nR d Ha rv e st L n L orel ei C t F aw n R id ge Ct N od H il l R d L ittl eY or kRd Ced a rG ro v e R d Ri d gev ie wR d D ub lin HillR d W oods Way Dr Hor izonHl S ou thwood T e r K i e vD r R ai l s t o ne D r Pea ch O r ch ar d R d Hem l o ck R idgeRd K et t le to wnW oods R d Britia n i R d Se tt le rs Hil l R d Exi t1 4 Sleep y Hill Rd G rassland s Rd O ldHw y Rd F la gg Swamp Rd V al l e yS t r e am Ln Gre yR oc k R d Pompera ugTrl HollowSw amp Rd G ilbe rtRd Amos W hit eR d VillageRd Q ua ker FarmsR d JuddR d I84 U p p e r G ra ss y H i l l R d M ai n S tN Wh al e D r SBrita i n Rd Hillt opR d E CedarCir SDu r k ee Hl Bulle tHill Rd P a rki ngLo t W in ship D r Pe rkin s R d Pe terRd M a in St S L ib r a ry R d S co u tRd FoxRu n D r Lakev i ewD r LumL otRd P as c o e D r Sti lesRd T r a d it io ns B l v d P ov e r ty R d Hil lPl a ceDr C assi d y R d H il lt opRdW Lun a T rlLeeFarmDr H ol lyHi l l L n P urc has e B ro ok R d Fis hR ockR d Lakeme r eDr C h urchR d W hi t e Bi r c h Dr B ranchRd Lak esi de R d W V i e w R d S to ne ga te D r Cha rt e r O ak R d Ya nkeeDr W olfPit D r De p o tH i l l Rd N Po v ertyRd Kuh neR d Ma n or R d W P urch as eR d Oa k H il l D r C olo ni a lD r O l d Ich ab o d R d T e p i Dr C o ach m an s D r C r o o k HornRd W hi te B ir c h Ln B ag le y R d Pa lme r R d H i g hRi d ge R d S to n y C o rn er s Ln Skyvi e w Dr SF lat Hill R d H un te rs R id g e Rd Pe p pe rT re e H i ll Ln Sc a t a coo kLn B ee ch e r D r W oo dl a n d Hi lls R d Cou gh l i n D r Lau rel woodLn L it t l e F oxLn Su nsetRdg Dee rHi ll R d I v y Hi ll s Rd T urrill B rook D r Sache mRd H eri t a g eVl g Ea st H i ll W o od s Southbury2013LandUse ofResidentialBuildableLand I 012 0.5 Miles Sources: CT911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS SouthburyParcels:NEGEO LandUse:COGCNV CurrentLandUse UndevelopedLand Agriculture RecreationalorUncommittedOpenSpace ResourceExtraction Central Naugatuck 58 !!! !!!! !! ! ! !! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !! !! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! !! !!!! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! !!! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !!! !!! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!! !! !! !! !! !! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!! !!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!! !!!! !!!! !!!!!! !! !! !! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!! !! !!!! !!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!! !! !!!! !!! !!! !!!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! !!!!!!!!! R o x b u r y W o o d bury Middle b ury O x fo r d Newtown Bridgewate r Ox f or d A ir p o rt R d Ke tt le to w n Rd NDur keeH l NPondDr R i ver R d R oxbu r yR d H er itag e R d InwoodCir G arn e t R d R es ervoi rRd I c h a b o d R d C o n co r d Ct S t a teH w y172 S o uthf o rd Rd Buc k sH il l R d Ne w R d Sp r u c e B r o okR d N els onR d Hu llsH i l lR d ElkDr H e ri ta g e V lg S tat eH w y 67 R R oa d N O 2 BrownBro okRd M an si o n H o us e Rd Hom est eadRd WatchH il l D r OldF ie l dR d In di a n T rl G e o rges H ill R d B eaco nHi l l D r JacobR d E F l a t H i l l Rd P la ste r Hou se R d Fa ir w a yDr J e r e myS w am p Rd P ai n t e r Rd H aw k i ns R d M unnR d Fl a gS w am p Rd Coope rHillR d Ol d PovertyRd T a m ia m iT rl K en w o od D r NG eo rg es H illR d Sta te H w y 18 8 A n d r e w Pl O l d W oo d R d F lo odB rid geR d Rid g e R d Housa t o ni cT r l B o u ld e r W ay Lut h erD r C ur tSm i t h Rd Ru s se ll Rd Wh e ele r D r Bri s t o l- T ow n Rd F o re s t R d Cou nt r y L n P atrio tR d G r a c e M d w s B rennanR d Pi n e Hill R d Tim be r la n d W a y T o m sH ill Rd S tr o n gto wnRd Bu r rRd E Mea d ow R d Chest nut Tr eeH illRd O l dW oodb ury R d Com m uni ty Ho useR d Dub l in Rd S p rin g Trl T o ls to y Ln S ky lin e D r O ak Ln C ar r i a g e D r Vi s taView Dr Bur m aR d As h L n C ed ar T rl Ho rseF en ce Hi llRd C obbl erLn W in te r w o o d D r B a te s Roc kR d Sanfo r dR d Ol d O akw o o d Dr S han eD r Laur e lA ve N au t ic Tr l Mu r p hy L n G ay lor d M oun ta in R d W i n m ar D r B r id le PathRd W i l lo w C re ek E s ta t e s Dr T a l l wo odRd G a te Post Ln E x it 15 S yl v an Cres t Dr WGi lber t R d G lenL n E xi t 1 6 H en ness ey F ar m R d Su n bu r s t D r H i c k oryL n M is t le t o e D r SGeorges H illRd P l e as a n t D r H il lcr e stD r W illo w Cr e e kEst a te s C t He rit a g e Ci r S till s o nR d Ha rv e st L n L orel ei C t F aw n R id ge Ct N od H il l R d L ittl eY or kRd Ced a rG ro v e R d Ri d gev ie wR d D ub lin HillR d W oods Way Dr Hor izonHl S ou thwood T e r K i e vD r R ai l s t o ne D r Pea ch O r ch ar d R d Hem l o ck R idgeRd K et t le to wnW oods R d Britia n i R d Se tt le rs Hil l R d Exi t1 4 Sleep y Hill Rd G rassland s Rd O ldHw y Rd F la gg Swamp Rd V al l e yS t r e am Ln Gre yR oc k R d Pompera ugTrl HollowSw amp Rd G ilbe rtRd Amos W hit eR d VillageRd Q ua ker FarmsR d JuddR d I84 U p p e r G ra ss y H i l l R d M ai n S tN Wh al e D r SBrita i n Rd Hillt opR d E CedarCir SDu r k ee Hl Bulle tHill Rd P a rki ngLo t W in ship D r Pe rkin s R d Pe terRd M a in St S L ib r a ry R d S co u tRd FoxRu n D r Lakev i ewD r LumL otRd P as c o e D r Sti lesRd T r a d it io ns B l v d P ov e r ty R d Hil lPl a ceDr C assi d y R d H il lt opRdW Lun a T rlLeeFarmDr H ol lyHi l l L n P urc has e B ro ok R d Fis hR ockR d Lakeme r eDr C h urchR d W hi t e Bi r c h Dr B ranchRd Lak esi de R d W V i e w R d S to ne ga te D r Cha rt e r O ak R d Ya nkeeDr W olfPit D r De p o tH i l l Rd N Po v ertyRd Kuh neR d Ma n or R d W P urch as eR d Oa k H il l D r C olo ni a lD r O l d Ich ab o d R d T e p i Dr C o ach m an s D r C r o o k HornRd W hi te B ir c h Ln B ag le y R d Pa lme r R d H i g hRi d ge R d S to n y C o rn er s Ln Skyvi e w Dr SF lat Hill R d H un te rs R id g e Rd Pe p pe rT re e H i ll Ln Sc a t a coo kLn B ee ch e r D r W oo dl a n d Hi lls R d Cou gh l i n D r Lau rel woodLn L it t l e F oxLn Su nsetRdg Dee rHi ll R d I v y Hi ll s Rd T urrill B rook D r Sache mRd H eri t a g eVl g Ea st H i ll W o od s Southbury2012AerialImagery ofResidentialBuildableLand I 012 0.5 Miles Sources: CT911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS SouthburyParcels:NEGEO 2012NAIPAerialImagery:CTDEEP Central Naugatuck 59 Central Naugatuck 60

Regional Residential Build-out Analysis 2013 – Part 1

November 2013 October 2013 Central Naugatuck Valley Region Residential Build-Out Analysis 2013 Beacon Falls · Bethlehem · Cheshire · Middlebury · Naugatuck · Oxford · Prospect · Southbury · Thomaston · Waterbury · W a t e r t o w n · Wolcott · Woodbury The material contained herein may be quoted or reproduced without special permission, although menon of the source is appreciated. The preparaon of the report was fin anced through grants from the U.S. Department of Transportaon, Federal Highway Administraon, and the Federal Transit Administr aon, a grant from the Conneccut Department of Transportaon, and by the contribuon s from member municipalies of the Central Naugatuck Valley Region. T:GeneralReportsBuildOut2013 TITLE: Central Naugatuck Valley Region R esidenal Build-Out Analysis 2013 AUTHOR: Council of Governments of the Central Naugatuck Valley SUBJECT: Future residenal development in the Central Naugatuck Valley Region PLANNING AGENCY: Council of Governments of the Central Naugatuck Valley CONTACT: Council of Governments of the Central Naugatuck Valley 49 Leavenworth Street, Suite 303 Waterbury, Conneccut 06702 SERIES NO.: N/A PAGES: 89 ABSTRACT: This report presents the methods and r esults of the 2013 Central Naugatuck Valley residenal build-out analyses, which were conducted for all 13 Central Naugatuck Valley region municipalies: Beacon Falls, Bethlehem, Cheshire, Middlebury, Naugatuck, Oxford, Prospec t, Southbury, Thomaston, Water- bury, Watertown, Wolco, and Woodbury. The build-out analyses esmate the amount of future residenal development for each municipality guided by local zoning regulaons, and taking into account all developmental con- straints. The results of this build-out analysis are esmates based on the most accurate infor-maon available. All data and maps incl uded within this report should be used for general planning purposes only. All future development is subject to municipa l regulaon and the review and approval of relevant municipal commissions and officials. DISCLAIMER TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………. 1 II. METHODS AND REGION RESULTS…………………………………. 3 Methods………………………………………………………………….. 4 Limitaons…………………………………………………………. 5 Region Totals…………………………………………………………… 6 Populaon and Buildable Land…………………………… 6 Current Land Use of Buildable Land…………………… 8 Allowable Zoning Density of Buildable Land………. 10 Common Impacts………………………………………………. 12 III. RESULTS BY MUNICIPALITY…………………………………………….. 13 Beacon Falls…………………………………………………………….. 15 Bethlehem……………………………………………………………….. 21 Cheshire………………………………………………………………….. 25 Middlebury……………………………………………………………… 31 Naugatuck………………………… …………………………………….. 37 Oxford…………………………………………………………………….. 43 Prospect………………………………………………………………….. 49 Southbury……………………………………………………………….. 55 Thomaston………………………………………………………………. 61 Waterbury……………………………………………………………….. 67 Watertown………………………………………………………………. 73 Wolco……………………………………………………………………. 79 Woodbury……………………………………………………………….. 85 Page I. INTRODUCTION 1 1 A residential build-out analysis estimates the potential number of residential dwelling units that can be built in a given area, taking into account all known constraints to development and current zoning regulations. Residential build-outs can be a powerful tool for municipalities to assess zoning rules and regulations and how they will impact future development. Build-out analyses can also help prepare municipalities for future population increases and may lead to a better understanding of future demands on government services. This residential build-out analysis for the Central Na ugatuck Valley Region in Connecticut was conducted on a municipality by munici pality basis using the Community Viz extension for ESRI ArcGIS 10.1 Geographic Information System (GIS ) software. The Build-Out Wizard, a module in the CommunityViz program, calculated the number of dwelling units that can be placed on each developable parcel, guided by specific information about zoning regulations an d constraints to development entered by the user. The number of dwelling units was then used to calcu late potential additional population that each municipality could ultimately expect to add if current regulations remained in place and all available land was developed. Build-out results are presented in this publication, fir st in aggregate totals, then in more detail by municipality. Central Naugatuck 2 II. METHODS AND REGION RESULTS Central Naugatuck 3 Methods Each build-out began with a municipality’s digital parcel data, a GIS layer representing the complete municipality split into assessor’s parcels. A zoning designation was given to each parcel using the municipality’s official zoning map. Parcels in mo re than one zone were split along zone boundaries. Areas that are already developed, have zoning that does not allow residential uses, or is committed open space were all removed. Areas with environmental constraints to development (steep slopes, wetlands, flood zones, and waterb odies) were also removed. The remaining residentially zoned deve lopable land falls into four categories. The first, and generally recognized as the most available to development, is agricu ltural land. This land is being actively farmed, and is usually privately owned. It is usually leve l and has already been cle ared, making it ideal for residential development. The second category of build able area is undeveloped land. This land is forested, often former agricultural land, which has re verted to woodland. It is usually privately owned, and available for development once cleared. The third buildable land type is uncommitted open space. This is land that may be currently used for recreationa l purposes or held as open space, but does not have a deed restriction or easement preventing futur e development. Examples of uncommitted open space include privately owned golf courses, schools, and class III water company held land. While less likely to be developed, there is no regulato ry prohibition preventing future development on uncommitted open space. The fourth and final category of buildable land is earth excavation areas. This land is currently being excavated for stone, sand, or other resources, but may be developed for residential purposes once ex cavation is concluded. The future development patterns and density on the buildable land listed above will be guided by zoning regulations in each town. Each municipality’s zoning specifications were used to guide the build-out. The Build-Out Wizard in CommunityViz requires the allowable density, separation distance, and efficiency factor for each zoning designation, as well as the minimum allowable lot size for the entire municipality, in order to place po tential dwellings. Municipal zoning regulations were studied to Constraint Data Layer Sources Committed Open Space COGCNV Open Space COGCNV Assessor Data Previously Developed COGCNV Land Use COGCNV Assessor Data 2012 and 2010 NAIP Imagery (USDA) 2012 Leaf-Off Orthophoto (CT DEEP) Non-Residentially Zoned Municipal Zoning Municipality 100 Year Flood Plain FEMA Flood Map FEMA Over 25% Slope Slope derived from DEM COGCNV UCONN CLEAR Wetland CT Wetland Soil CTDEEP Water Hydrography Polygon Hydrography Line (10ft. Buffer) CTDEEP Central Naugatuck 4 determine these figures (as Bethlehem does not currently have zoning regulations, state health regulations guiding residential deve lopment in areas without municipal sewers were substituted). The allowable density was derived using the minimum lot size per dwelling for each zone, usually expressed in square feet and converted to dwelling units (DU) per acre. Zoning overlay areas with distinct regulations were treated as separate zones. Sep aration distance represents the allowable distance between buildings, most often derived by doubling side yard requirements. The efficiency factor allows for the construction of roads and other infrastructure inherent in any new development. Efficiency factors vary based on density since a larger proportion of potential lots must be used for infrastructure in dense areas. The following efficiency factors we re used in this build-out analysis unless otherwise noted: Density (Dwelling Unit/Acre) Efficiency Rate 16.01 70% When run, the Build-out Wizard in CommunityViz calculated the number of dwelling units each buildable parcel can hold accord ing to the zoning restrictions entered, and placed building points accordingly. The results for each in dividual build-out are presented in the following chapters, first by regional totals, followed in more detail by municipality. Limitations While all efforts were made to produce the most accurate results possible, there are some inherent limitations to the build-out process. First, this type of build-out only takes development of undeveloped land into account. Re-development of industrial or commercial land for residential purposes is not included. Omitting this type of development is es pecially problematic in cities such as Waterbury, where there is an abundance of form er industrial land which may be re-developed for residential purposes, and where there will likely be this type of future growth. This build-out also cannot predict future zoning changes or conservation efforts. This analysis assumes that available land will be built to the highest allowable density, while some landowners or builders may desire larger lots and lower densities. Central Naugatuck 5 Regional Totals Population and Buildable Land The Regional Build-Out Analysis calculated that there will be an additional 34,328 dwelling units built on 42,676 acres of buildable land if the region was comp letely built out. Using current household size (Census 2010) for each municipality as a multiplier, an additional 87,991 residents can be expected at build-out, representing a 31% increase in population. In the region , Beacon Falls has the least acreage of residential buildable land with 1,178, while Wo odbury has the most with 7,697 acres. The largest number of additional building uni ts can be expected in Waterbury with 11,700 units, while Thomaston can expect the fewest with 681. By percent of population increase, Bethlehem can expect the largest population increase with 184%, while Cheshire will only experience a 14% increase. Town Buildable Residential Acres Potential Future Dwelling Units Potential New Residents Census 2010 Population Total Build- out Population Potential Percent Population Change Beacon Falls 1,178 736 1,884 6,049 7,933 31% Bethlehem 5,327 2,662 6,628 3,607 10,235 184% Cheshire 2,354 1,554 4,134 29,261 33,395 14% Middlebury 3,117 2,078 5,652 7,575 13,227 75% Naugatuck 1,936 2,603 6,664 31,862 38,526 21% Oxford 4,217 2,053 5,769 12,683 18,452 45% Prospect 1,326 924 2,550 9,405 11,955 27% Southbury 4,148 2,189 5,100 19,904 25,004 26% Thomaston 1,319 681 1,723 7,887 9,610 22% Waterbury 2,002 11,700 29,718 110,366 140,084 27% Watertown 4,423 3,135 8,057 22,514 30,571 36% Wolcott 3,632 1,646 4,526 16,680 21,206 27% Woodbury 7,697 2,367 5,586 9,975 15,561 56% COGCNV Totals: 42,676 34,328 87,991 287,768 375,759 31% Central Naugatuck 6 Central Naugatuck 7 Current Land Use of Buildable Land Of the 42,676 acres of buildable residential land in the region, 31,019 acres, or 72.7%, consists of undeveloped land. Woodbury h as the most undeveloped buildable residential land with 5,691 acres, while Beacon falls has the least with 985 acres. 19.5% or 8,336 acres of buildable land in the region is considered agricultural, concentra ted in Bethlehem (2,135 acres), Woodbury (1,762 acres), and Watertown (1,540 acres). Waterbury, on the other hand, has only 17 acres of buildable agricultural land. Recreational or uncommitted open space make s up 7.4% of buildable residential land with 3,142 acres, with the largest amount in Wolcott (670 acres) and the least in Waterbury (7 acres). The 179 acres of resource extraction land make up the smallest propo rtion of residential buildable land in the region, .4%, and is limited to Southbury (54 acres), Cheshire (45 acres), Woodbu ry (29 acres), Naugatuck (27 acres), Waterbury (19 acres) and Prospect (5 acres). Town Total Buildable Residential Land (Acres) Agricultural Land (Acres) Undeveloped Land (Acres) Recreational or Uncommitted Open Space (Acres) Resource Extraction (Acres) Beacon Falls 1,178 147 985 46 0 Bethlehem 5,327 2,135 2,940 252 0 Cheshire 2,354 602 1,670 37 45 Middlebury 3,117 376 2,254 487 0 Naugatuck 1,936 101 1,582 226 27 Oxford 4,217 437 3,194 586 0 Prospect 1,326 79 1,049 193 5 Southbury 4,148 922 3,149 23 54 Thomaston 1,319 123 1,094 102 0 Waterbury 2,002 17 1,959 7 19 Watertown 4,423 1,540 2,585 298 0 Wolcott 3,632 95 2,867 670 0 Woodbury 7,697 1,762 5,691 215 29 COGCNV Totals: 42,676 8,336 31,019 3,142 179 Percent of Total Buildable Land: 19.5% 72.7% 7.4% 0.4% Central Naugatuck 8 Oxford Southbury Cheshire Woodbury Waterbury Wolcott Watertown Bethlehem Prospect Middlebury Naugatuck Thomaston BeaconFalls Legend UndevelopedLand Agriculture RecreationalorOpenSpace ResourceExtraction CentralNaugatuckValleyRegion BuildableResidentialLand byCurrentLandUse I 0510 2.5 Miles Central Naugatuck 9 Allowable Zoning Density of Buildable Land There are over 80 distinct zoning designations in the region, representing 31 allowable densities. In order to more easily understand an d visualize the densities on a region al level, buildable land was classified into five residential density categories; Estate (less than .5 DU/acre), Suburban Low (.5 to .99 DU/acre), Suburban Medium (1 to 1.99 DU/acre), Urban Medium (2 to 8 DU/acre), and Urban High (over 8 DU/acre). The Results by Municipality section of this report provides further breakdown by individual zoning designations. Most buildab le residential land in the region is zoned with a Suburban Low density (52.9%, 22,590 acres), followed by Estate (20.6%, 8,799 acres), Suburban Medium (18.5%, 7,914 acres), Urban Medium (7.2%, 3,066 acres), an d Urban High (.7%, 307 acres). Areas of least dense future development in the region are concentrated in Wood bury, Wolcott and Watertown, while areas of the densest future development are locat ed in Waterbury and Naugatuck. Town Total Buildable Residential Land (Acres) Estate 8 DU/Acre (Acres) Beacon Falls 1,178 0 0 1,170 8 0 Bethlehem 5,327 0 5,327 0 0 0 Cheshire 2,354 0 1,120 1,092 142 0 Middlebury 3,117 0 1,776 1,283 58 0 Naugatuck 1,936 0 1,093 156 641 46 Oxford 4,217 0 4,217 0 0 0 Prospect 1,326 0 279 1,047 0 0 Southbury 4,148 0 3,927 159 62 0 Thomaston 1,319 0 1,239 0 80 0 Waterbury 2,002 0 0 0 1,741 261 Watertown 4,423 1,624 1,769 697 333 0 Wolcott 3,632 2,552 366 714 0 0 Woodbury 7,697 4,623 1,477 1,596 1 0 COGCNV Totals: 42,676 8,799 22,590 7,914 3,066 307 Percent of Total Buildable Land: 20.6 % 52.9 % 18.5 % 7.2 % .7% Central Naugatuck 10 Oxford Southbury Cheshire Woodbury Waterbury Wolcott Watertown Bethlehem Prospect Middlebury Naugatuck Thomaston BeaconFalls Legend BuildableResidentialLand AllowableDensity ResidentialEstate(8DU/Acre) CentralNaugatuckValleyRegion BuildableResidentialLand byZoningDensity I 0510 2.5 Miles Central Naugatuck 11 Common Impacts CommunityViz also calculated some potential impacts that the additional 87,991 residents could have on the region. While these are based on nati onal averages and may not ideally represent local conditions, they can help municipalities and the region prepare for future growth. Common Impact Increase Units School Children 15,092 Children Labor Force 51,369 Workers Annual Residential Energy Use 866 Million kWh Annual Residential Water Use 3.5 Billion Gallons Daily Vehicle Trips 194,290 Daily Trips Annual CO Auto Emissions 7,140 Tons Annual CO 2 Auto Emissions 285,554 Tons Annual Hydrocarbon Auto Emissions 872 Tons Annual NO x Auto Emissions 561 Tons Central Naugatuck 12 III. RESULTS BY MUNICIPALITY Central Naugatuck 13 Central Naugatuck 14 Beacon Falls Town zoning regulations were used to calculate allowable building density for each parcel. When run, the CommunityViz software placed buildings on approp riate parcels, conforming to preset density and setback rules for each zoning design ation. The following settings were used with a minimum lot size of 7,500 ft 2: Land Use Designation Dwelling Units per Acre Minimum Separation Distance (feet) Efficiency Factor* PARD-3 1.87 20 60% R1 1.00 40 60% R2 2.00 40 60% R3 5.81 30 60% *Reduced due to un even terrain and difficult access. Dwelling Units The residential build-out projected that a total of 736 additional dwelling units will be placed at total build-out in Beacon Falls with curr ent zoning regulations in place. Land Use Designation Total Residentially Zoned Acres Buildable Residentially Zoned Acres Potential Number of Future Building Units PARD-3 137 38 42 R1 3,756 1,131 665 R2 14 0 0 R3 130 9 29 TOTAL S: 4,036 1,178 736 Population Using the current household size of 2.56 residents per dwelling unit in Beacon Falls (Census 2010), the future population increase from the additio nal 736 dwelling units would be: New Dwelling Units Average Household Size Potential New Residents* Current Residents (Census 2010) Total Full Build- out Population* 736 X 2.56 = 1,884 + 6,049 = 7,933 *Assuming full occupancy of new units. The vacancy rate of existing housing units in Beacon Falls is 5.9% (Census 2010) Central Naugatuck 15 Common Impacts CommunityViz also calculated some potential impacts that the additional population could have on the Town of Beacon Falls. While these figures are based on national averages and may not ideally represent local conditions, they can help prepare for future growth. Common Impact Increase Units School Children 328 School Children Labor Force 1,101 Workers Annual Residential Energy Use 69,920 Million BTU Annual Residential Water Use 75,756,480 Gallons Daily Vehicle Trips 4,166 Daily Trips Annual CO Auto Emissions 326,312 Pounds Annual CO 2 Auto Emissions 6,396 Tons Annual Hydrocarbon Auto Emissions 37,397 Pounds Annual NO x Auto Emissions 24,062 Pounds Central Naugatuck 16 !!!! !!!!! !!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!! !! !!!!!! !!!!! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! !!! !! !!! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!!!!! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !!! !! !! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !!!! !! !! ! !! !! ! !! !! !! ! !! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !!!! !! ! ! !! !!! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!! !! ! !!!! ! !!!! !! ! !! !! ! ! ! !!!! !! !!!! !!!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! !! ! ! !!! ! !!!! !! ! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !!! !! !!! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! ! !!! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!! !!!!! × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö B et h a ny O x f o r d Naugatuck S ey m o ur S t a t e H w y 8 Bu r to n Rd Lo p us Rd Skoko r atRd R im m o n H ill R d C o o k L n B et han y Rd La sk y Rd S Ma in S t W est R d ColdSpringsRd Lan ca s te r Dr PentR d ChatfieldD r PinesBridgeR d BeaconValleyRd O a k D r Bla ck b e rryHill R d E xit 2 4 M u n so n R d BreaultRd Feld s parA v e N Mai n S t N o e P l Hi ll s id e Dr E x it 23 RailroadAve F ro nt a ge Rd O l d T ur n pi k e Rd H igh landAve Lorrain eDr A ndras koRd Te r e se R d Fa irfieldP l B on n a S t Br ia rw oo d D r Ka le as W ay F ie ld s to neL n W o lf e Av e A rl e n e Ct EllenD r R i c e L ane E x t A v e n ue C Cedar Ln LopusRoad E xt Doll yDr L a ur ie Ln Back R immonRd SharonD r CedarC ir D ian aLn C la rk Ln P o nd V i ewC i r ChurchSt Havila n dDr N ew St S t a t e H w y 4 2 Q u ar r y Rd G ru b e r R d Hu n te rs Mount a inRd D on na S t Sta rwoodLn Buckingham D r Hale yRidgeRd M ap l e Av e R ic e L n W and a Dr E xit 2 5 La u r e lR dg HockanumGlenDr F a w n H i ll R d P am an ata Md w s W i ls on Ct H ubb e ll Av e R ai lr o ad Av e nu e Ex t P atriciaTer O ld Sawmi l l D r A ve n ue D S ny der Dr E ss e x Ct La k e vie w Ri s e S i c k o la Dr TwinOakTrl H oc k a nu m C t Bay b er ryC t La nt e r n Ri d g e Rd E dge w o o d D r D ep ot St Stodd ardP l W h it e B ir c h Ln J a n e St T hir d S t W est v ie w Rd M o l l e u r V ie w Dr S ou th Cir C o nc o rd Ct Al lia nce C ir J o h nso n St C o lu m bin e Ln Q u ail Hollo w C tSpru ce Ln D um s ch ot t R d Be ac o n St Cot ton H ol l o w Rd S ta te H w y 8 S Mai n St S M a i n S t St a te H w y 4 2 BeaconFallsResidential BuildOutResults2013 I 00 .51 0.25 Miles Sources: CT911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS BeaconFallsParcels:NEGEO Zoning:BeaconFalls BuildOutResults ResidentiallyZonedBuildableLand PlannedAdaptiveReUseDistrict ResidentialDistrictR3 ResidentialDistrictR1 × Ö PotentialNewDwellingUnit × Ö Central Naugatuck 17 !!!! !!!!! !!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!! !! !!!!!! !!!!! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! !!! !! !!! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!!!!! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !!! !! !! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !!!! !! !! ! !! !! ! !! !! !! ! !! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !!!! !! ! ! !! !!! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!! !! ! !!!! ! !!!! !! ! !! !! ! ! ! !!!! !! !!!! !!!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! !! ! ! !!! ! !!!! !! ! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !!! !! !!! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! ! !!! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!! !!!!! Bet h a ny O x f o r d Naugatuck S ey m o ur S t a t e H w y 8 Bu r to n Rd Lo p us Rd Skoko r atRd R im m o n H ill R d C o o k L n B et han y Rd La sk y Rd S Ma in S t W est R d ColdSpringsRd Lan ca s te r Dr PentR d ChatfieldD r PinesBridgeR d BeaconValleyRd O a k D r Bla ck b e rryHill R d E xit 2 4 M u n so n R d BreaultRd Feld s parA v e N Mai n S t N o e P l Hi ll s id e Dr E x it 23 RailroadAve F ro nt a ge Rd O l d T ur n pi k e Rd H igh landAve Lorrain eDr A ndras koRd Te r e se R d Fa irfieldP l B on n a S t Br ia rw oo d D r Ka le as W ay F ie ld s to neL n W o lf e Av e A rl e n e Ct EllenD r R i c e L ane E x t A v e n ue C Cedar Ln LopusRoad E xt Doll yDr L a ur ie Ln Back R immonRd SharonD r CedarC ir D ian aLn C la rk Ln P o nd V i ewC i r ChurchSt Havila n dDr N ew St S t a t e H w y 4 2 Q u ar r y Rd G ru b e r R d Hu n te rs Mount a inRd D on na S t Sta rwoodLn Buckingham D r Hale yRidgeRd M ap l e Av e R ic e L n W and a Dr E xit 2 5 La u r e lR dg HockanumGlenDr F a w n H i ll R d P am an ata Md w s W i ls on Ct H ubb e ll Av e R ai lr o ad Av e nu e Ex t P atriciaTer O ld Sawmi l l D r A ve n ue D S ny der Dr E ss e x Ct La k e vie w Ri s e S i c k o la Dr TwinOakTrl H oc k a nu m C t Bay b er ryC t La nt e r n Ri d g e Rd E dge w o o d D r D ep ot St Stodd ardP l W h it e B ir c h Ln J a n e St T hir d S t W est v ie w Rd M o l l e u r V ie w Dr S ou th Cir C o nc o rd Ct Al lia nce C ir J o h nso n St C o lu m bin e Ln Q u ail Hollo w C tSpru ce Ln D um s ch ot t R d Be ac o n St Cot ton H ol l o w Rd S ta te H w y 8 S Mai n St S M a i n S t St a te H w y 4 2 BeaconFalls2013LandUse ofBuildableResidentialLand I 00 .51 0.25 Miles Sources: CT911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS BeaconFallsParcels:NEGEO LandUse:COGCNV CurrentLandUse UndevelopedLand Agriculture RecreationalorOpenSpace Central Naugatuck 18 !!!! !!!!! !!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!! !! !!!!!! !!!!! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! !!! !! !!! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!!!!! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !!! !! !! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !!!! !! !! ! !! !! ! !! !! !! ! !! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !!!! !! ! ! !! !!! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!! !! ! !!!! ! !!!! !! ! !! !! ! ! ! !!!! !! !!!! !!!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! !! ! ! !!! ! !!!! !! ! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !!! !! !!! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! ! !!! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!! !!!!! Bet h a ny O x f o r d Naugatuck S ey m o ur S t a t e H w y 8 Bu r to n Rd Lo p us Rd Skoko r atRd R im m o n H ill R d C o o k L n B et han y Rd La sk y Rd S Ma in S t W est R d ColdSpringsRd Lan ca s te r Dr PentR d ChatfieldD r PinesBridgeR d BeaconValleyRd O a k D r Bla ck b e rryHill R d E xit 2 4 M u n so n R d BreaultRd Feld s parA v e N Mai n S t N o e P l Hi ll s id e Dr E x it 23 RailroadAve F ro nt a ge Rd O l d T ur n pi k e Rd H igh landAve Lorrain eDr A ndras koRd Te r e se R d Fa irfieldP l B on n a S t Br ia rw oo d D r Ka le as W ay F ie ld s to neL n W o lf e Av e A rl e n e Ct EllenD r R i c e L ane E x t A v e n ue C Cedar Ln LopusRoad E xt Doll yDr L a ur ie Ln Back R immonRd SharonD r CedarC ir D ian aLn C la rk Ln P o nd V i ewC i r ChurchSt Havila n dDr N ew St S t a t e H w y 4 2 Q u ar r y Rd G ru b e r R d Hu n te rs Mount a inRd D on na S t Sta rwoodLn Buckingham D r Hale yRidgeRd M ap l e Av e R ic e L n W and a Dr E xit 2 5 La u r e lR dg HockanumGlenDr F a w n H i ll R d P am an ata Md w s W i ls on Ct H ubb e ll Av e R ai lr o ad Av e nu e Ex t P atriciaTer O ld Sawmi l l D r A ve n ue D S ny der Dr E ss e x Ct La k e vie w Ri s e S i c k o la Dr TwinOakTrl H oc k a nu m C t Bay b er ryC t La nt e r n Ri d g e Rd E dge w o o d D r D ep ot St Stodd ardP l W h it e B ir c h Ln J a n e St T hir d S t W est v ie w Rd M o l l e u r V ie w Dr S ou th Cir C o nc o rd Ct Al lia nce C ir J o h nso n St C o lu m bin e Ln Q u ail Hollo w C tSpru ce Ln D um s ch ot t R d Be ac o n St Cot ton H ol l o w Rd S ta te H w y 8 S Mai n St S M a i n S t St a te H w y 4 2 BeaconFalls2012AerialImagery ofResidentialBuildableLand I 00 .51 0.25 Miles Sources: CT911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS BeaconFallsParcels:NEGEO 2012NAIPAerialImagery:CTDEEP Central Naugatuck 19 Central Naugatuck 20 Bethlehem When run, the CommunityViz software placed buildings on appropriate parcels, conforming to preset density and setback rules. Since Bethlehem does not have zoning regulations, health code regulations requiring a 1.5 acre minimum lot size in areas not served by public sewer were used to calculate the maximum allowable building density with a mi nimum buildable lot size of 65,340 ft 2: Land Use Designation Dwelling Units Per Acre Minimum Separation Distance (feet) Efficiency Factor All (No Zoning) .67 100 80% Dwelling Units The residential build-out projected that a total of 2,662 additional dwelling units will be placed at total build-out in Bethlehem with current regulations in place. Land Use Designation Total Acres Buildable Acres Potential Number of Future Building Units All (No Zoning) 12,208 5,327 2,662 Population Using the current household size of 2.49 residents p er dwelling unit in Bethlehem (Census 2010), the future population increase from the additio nal 2,662 dwelling units would be: New Dwelling Units Average Household Size Potential New Residents* Current Residents (Census 2010) Total Full Build- out Population* 2,662 X 2.49 = 6,628 + 3,607 = 10,235 *Assuming full occupancy of new units. The vacancy rate of existing housing units in Bethlehem is 10.4% (Census 2010). Common Impacts CommunityViz also calculated some potential impacts that the additional population could have on the Town of Bethlehem. While these figures are based on national averages and m ay not ideally represent local conditions, they can help prepare for future growth. Common Impact Increase Units School Children 1,153 School Children Labor Force 3,872 Workers Annual Residential Energy Use 252,890 Million BTU Annual Residential Water Use 273,999,660 Gallons Daily Vehicle Trips 15,067 Daily Trips Annual CO Auto Emissions 1,180,221 Pounds Annual CO 2 Auto Emissions 23,132 Tons Annual Hydrocarbon Auto Emissions 135,261 Pounds Annual NO x Auto Emissions 87,028 Pounds Central Naugatuck 21 × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! !!! ! ! !! !! ! ! M un ger Ln O r c h ard Ave Dark Ent r yRd E a s t S t Ar ch Br id ge Rd M olzonLn Mag no lia Hi ll R d Gui l dsH o l lo w R d Ju d so n Ln C ra ne Hol l o wR d H icko ry Ln Bel l a m y L n Bur rit t H il l R d K a s son R d M i ll P on d R d La k evi e w D r Woo dCre ekR d Th om s o n R d C ar m el H ill R d N Gr e e nH illRd S ti ll H il l R d T ow n Li n e Rd Ne tt le t o nHoll o w Rd T h e G r e en J a c ks o n L n Falls Rd Tou s iRd Lo n g Me a d o w R d W Sho re Dr H i g h la n d Rd Mad doxRd R i d geR d B er gma n H i llRd Suns et R d H ayes Rd Dou bl e H il lR d P ad dy H oll o w Rd G ro s R d PorterHillRd R id g e d al e W ay Ro be r t Lea th er Rd De e rwo o dDr Smi t h Ln Te rr e ll F arm R d C abbag e L n W eeke e p eem ee R d T odd HillR d F lan d ers Rd H a rd H il l R dS Main S tS M ain S tN K ass o n Ave L ak eDr J udg e L n L ak e s Rd Ha rr i son L n C ar m e l H il l R d S To w n L in e H w y S Sanfo rd Ln W hi teBirchLn L ak esLn A rrowh ea d L n Cr an e L n W oodla ndR d S ky M ea do wR d LongH or iz o nRd S un n y R id g e Rd Hard Hi ll R d N Aunci e n t OakR d BethlehemResidentialBuildOutResults2013 I 012 0.5 Miles BuildOutResults DevelopableLand × Ö PotentialNewDwellingUnit × Ö Sources: 911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS Parcels:NEGEO M or r is W a te rto w n W oo db u ry W as h i n gt o n Central Naugatuck 22 !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! !!! ! ! !! !! ! ! C o w l e s R d M unge r Ln O r c h ard Ave D a rkE ntryR d N on n ew au g R d Ea s t S t A rchB r i d ge Rd Mo lz o n L n M agno l ia Hi l l R d G ui ld s Holl o w R d Ju d so n Ln C ra n e H ol lowRd H ic k o ryLn Bel l a m y L n K a s son R d M i ll P on d R d La k evi e w D r W o odC r e e k Rd Th om s o n R d C o n necti n gR o ad C arm elH ill R d N S ta teH w y13 2 G r e enH il lR d W ood s E d g e Rd St ill H i ll R d T ow n Li n e Rd Ne tt le t o nHoll o w Rd T h e Gr e en J a c ks o n L n Falls Rd To usiR d Lon g Me a d o w R d W Sho re Dr H i g h la n d Rd Mad doxRd R i d geR d B er gma n H i llRd W est Ln Sunset R d H ayes Rd Dou bl e H il lR d Pa d dyH ollo wRd G ro s R d PorterHillRd R id g e d al e W ay R o ber t L eat h e r R d De e rwo o dDr Smith Ln T e rr e ll F arm R d C abb ag e L n W eeke e p eem ee R d T o d d Hil l Rd F lan d e rs R d Hard Hi llR d S M ainSt S M ain S tN K ass o n Ave L ak eDr J u dge Ln L ak e s Rd Harri s o n L n C ar m e l Hi ll Rd S To w n L in e H w y S Sanf o rd Ln W hi teBirchLn L ak esLn A rrowh ea d L n Cra n e L n W ood la n d Rd S k y M ea d ow R d LongH or iz o nRd S un n y R id g e Rd H a rd Hi l l R dN Au nc i e nt OakR d BethlehemCurrentLandUseofResidentialBuildableLand2013 I 012 0.5 Miles LandUse UndevelopedLand Agriculture UncommittedOpenSpace Sources: 911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS Parcels:NEGEO LandUse:COGCNV M or r is W a te rto w n W oo db u ry W as h i n gt o n Central Naugatuck 23 !! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! !!!! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! Cow le s R d M ung er Ln O r c h ard Ave D ar kE n tryR d N on ne w a u g Rd E a s t S t A rchBr id ge Rd Mo lz o n L n M agno l ia Hi l l R d G uil d s Hol lo wR d Jud so n Ln C ra n e H ol l owRd H i c k o ryLn Bell a m y L n K asson Rd M i ll P on d R d Lakev i e w D r W oo dC r e ek R d Th om s o n R d C o n nec ti n gR o ad C arm elH ill R d N S ta t eH w y1 3 2 G re enH i l lR d W oods Edg e Rd S till H ill R d Tow n Li n e R d Nett le t o nHollo w Rd T h e Gr e en J a c ks o n L n Falls Rd T o usi R d Lon g M ea d o w R d W Sh o re Dr H i g h la n d Rd Mad doxRd R id geR d Be r g m an H il lRd W est Ln Sunse t R d H ayes Rd Do u b le H il lR d P a d dyH oll o wRd G ro s R d PorterHillRd R id ge d al e W ay R o b er t L eat h e r Rd De e rwo odDr Smith L n Te r re ll F arm R d C abb ag e Ln W eekeep e e m ee R d T o d d Hil l Rd F lan de rs R d Hard Hi llR d S M a inS t S M ain S tN K ass on Ave L ak eDr J u dge L n L ak e s Rd H arri s o n L n C ar m e l Hi ll Rd S T o w n Li n e H w y S S anf o rd L n W hi teBirchLn L a k esLn A r r owh ead Ln C ra n e L n W o o dl a n d Rd S k y M ea d ow R d LongH or iz o nRd S un n y R id g e Rd H a rd Hi l l R dN Au nc i e n t OakR d BethlehemAerialImageryofResidentialBuildableLand2012 I 012 0.5 Miles Sources: 911Roads:Teleatlas/CTDPS Parcels:NEGEO 2012NAIPImagery:CTDEEP M or r is W a te rto w n W oo db u ry W as h i n gt o n Central Naugatuck 24 Cheshire Town zoning regulations were used to calculate allowable building density for each parcel. When run, the CommunityViz software placed buildings on approp riate parcels, conforming to the preset density and setback rules for each zoning design ation. The following settings were used with a minimum lot size of 20,000 ft 2: Land Use Designation Dwelling Units Per Acre Minimum Separation Distance (feet) Efficiency Factor ARPRD 1.09 24 70% I-CSDD 1.09 24 70% R-20 2.18 24 75% R-40 1.09 60 75% R-80 0.54 80 80% Dwelling Units The residential build-out projected that a total of 1,554 additional dwelling units will be placed at total build-out in Cheshire with current zoning regulations in place. Land Use Designation Total Residentially Zoned Acres Buildable Residentially Zoned Acres Potential Number of Future Building Units ARPRD 114 34 25 I-CSDD 108 77 57 R-20 3,185 142 222 R-40 6,653 981 778 R-80 6,958 1,120 472 TOTALS: 17,018 2,354 1,554 Population Using the current household size of 2.66 residents p er dwelling unit in Cheshire (Census 2010), the future population increase from the additio nal 1,554 dwelling units would be: New Dwelling Units Average Household Size Potential New Residents* Current Residents (Census 2010) Total Full Build- out Population* 1,554 X 2.66 = 4,134 + 29,261 = 33,395 *Assuming full occupancy of new units. The vacancy rate of existing housing units in Cheshire is 3.7% (Census 2010). Central Naugatuck 25 Common Impacts CommunityViz also calculated some potential impacts that the additional population could have on the Town of Cheshire. While these figures are based on national averages and may not ideally represent local conditions, they can help prepare for future growth. Common Impact Increase Units School Children 719 School Children Labor Force 2,414 Workers Annual Residential Energy Use 147,630 Million BTU Annual Residential Water Use 159,953,220 Gallons Daily Vehicle Trips 8,796 Daily Trips Annual CO Auto Emissions 688,980 Pounds Annual CO 2 Auto Emissions 13,504 Tons Annual Hydrocarbon Auto Emissions 78,961 Pounds Annual NO x Auto Emissions 50,804 Pounds Central Naugatuck 26 ! !! !! ! !!! !! !!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! !!!!!! !! ! !! !!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !!!! !! !! !! !! ! !!! !! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!! !! ! !!! !! ! !! ! ! !!!!! !!!! !! !! !!!! !!!!!!!! !!!! !!! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! !! !! ! ! ! !!! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! !!!!! !! !!!!!! !!! !! !!!!!!!!!! !! !! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! !!!! ! !! ! !! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!! !! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! !!! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !!!! !! ! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö × Ö× Ö S outhi ngto n W al l i n g f o r d Me rid en H a m d e n P ro s p e ct W at er bur y W olc o tt B et hany I 691 S M e ri d e nR d Y al e sv i l l e R d NB r o oksvaleRd WM ai nS t A cad emy Rd S pr i n g S t I8 4 W a l lin gfo rd Rd H i g hla n d Av e I8 4 W o lf Hi l l R d S Main St H ig g i n s Rd H ig h la n d Av e Moun tai n cr estDr S an db an k Rd Coo kHil lR d C or n w a l l A ve Kno tte rDr E lmw o od Dr A lle n A v e D ia m on d H ill R d D ic k e r manRd EJo h n so n Ave I691 Gui n e ve reR dg Wa l n ut St No r to n Ln I691 H i g hl a n d Av e S c h oo lh o use Rd Ro se m a ry L n Summ itRd W J o hns onA ve ElmwoodCir J arv i s St A li s o n A ve O ld La n e Rd P ea chT re eC t By amR d O l dL aneRd S ta te H w y 68 P l a n k R d Alyss a D r H i c ko r yLn S tr at ton D r Lec le r c Ave R iv er Rd E M i t c h e ll A ve P lan k Rd H uc kin s R d Scot tRd T h is t le Ct C u rri e r P l S to n y H il lR d Bla cks R d B et h any Mounta inR d Che r ry S t Oa k Ri d ge D r K i n gRd Br o ad Sw am pR d Buc klandDr N ic h ol e C t P at to n D r P re s t ig e Dr Real t yD r DundeeDr A n d re w A v e S t o n eg at e Ci r Pi n e T e r Glen brookD r C ar riag e D r R eser vo ir R d M a ri b o u CtF os te r C t Sh ip to n Ct W es ti n C t Ce d a r C t C urr ie r P l Vist a T er P rinz C t S her id an Dr H ol ly R d Ro m u lu s Rd De a n ar o se P l S cenicCt Ives Ro w B a te s Ln C hat h am W o o ds C t Flo ra l L n Jes s e Ct E ve ly n Ct K el l y C t Si rWa lter D r B u r n tH o ll o w C t TimberLn A le x a n de r D r P eh r L n C ha n til C ir B a rn H il l R d B o ulde rR d R em us R d Q ue ll C t Br ia r C t No t chRd C o rtla n d Ci r E xi t 3 R ive rsideDr A m he rs t P l H il lt o p Rd U ps o n Pl R ab id e a u Cir W arr e n S t Bu r ra g eCt Shir e C t Sm it h Pl H ill s id e A ve B l ue fieldCt H ay le d g eC t Su d o lC t Te d sC t S p ru c e S t Re n e e C t Ex it 26 N u t m eg P l Wi l li amsburg D r Sy lv an Ln FawnD r Mo un ta i n V i e w Te r H e ath C t In ver ne s s C t Stacy Ct S ain t J o se p h S t M cK e e P l S EndR d Wo od bu ryCt Le e A ve C hu r c h D r H az e lD r Li l a cC t Hid d en P o nd C arlt o n D r Cl e a rbro okPl R o ge r A v e W es tm o re Rd Gra n dv ie w C t Spli t R o ckR d M oss L n Stoneh e n g e Pl Va ll e y Rd F o xw ood C t W y n d em er e C t Ba ry te s Dr R iv er V i e wCt O ldFar m s R d Wo rd en C ir H in m an St And reaC t M a rk s P l W in th ro p Dr H eri t a g e D r A m h ers t D r I n du st ri a lAv e L or a y C t B r ig a d o o n D r I v e s H i ll C t Ji ll L n F ern woodD r N ic o l e C t M i xvilleR d S i n d a ll R d G r o ve St MinnaCt B a rkled ge Ct S lo perL n H id denPl L au re l Ter Co mme rc e Ct W i llo wSt A u tu m nC t Exi t 28 C hambe rl a i n Ct B r it tanyC t M c C a u s l an d Ct W il li am s R d Whis p eri n gHo llo w Ct N Ti m b e rLn D eepw oo d Dr V an essaCt AshleyCt S uffi e ldCt ER id g e C t Pi n e B ro ok Ct Bi r d Ln CurveHillRd H a rris o n Rd O r c har d H il l R d O l d T o w n E R d P hils o nC t BrookL n H a lf Moo n R d Rei nha r d Rd Fi e ld s t oneCt M os sF a r m s Rd M ari o nRd Ma ri o nR d NPondR d Ch es h ir e S t S B ro o k sv al eR d Fi n ch A ve C li f f E d geC ir Pe ckLn C ountr y Club R d Co lem an Rd P o plarD r M o untai n Rd M ou nt a in Rd O l dWa t e r b u r y R d O akAve O ak Ave C ra n berr y L n Bi r c h Dr Main St Or egonR d Sor ghumM ill Dr Buddi n g R i d g e R d R o c kvi e wD r Chest nut S t W ieseRd Avo n B lv d Ta m ar a ck R d T a lm a d ge Rd ThornH o llo w Rd War d Ln C re sc en t C ir F en n Rd O t t D r BatesDr F a rHorizon Dr W ol f Hi ll C t L a n s d ow n e Ln WoodHil lR d Pat t o n D r Pa tt o n Dr G reen wood D r Mus so V ie w A v e Fo x H il l R d C o pp e r B eachD r Diana C t Pa y n e D r No bH il lR d A lle nC t L an yon Dr S pe rryR d W i ld Fl o w er P l TroutBro okRd G re en s L oop B r a emarD r S ha ro n D r SPondC i r Bat esDr L in co l nD r Lanc ast e r Way Be lri dg eRd L ak e P er c i v al W ay Ab be y C t Na tha n HaleCt S urr e y D r Te rre llF a rm Rd B ellamyRd F la g le r Av e P le asa n t Dr M ountainBrookDr Cheshire 2013 Residential Build-Out Results I 012 0.5 Miles Sources: CT 911 Roads: Teleatlas/CTDPS Cheshire Parcels: NEGEO Zoning: Cheshire BuildOutResults ResidentiallyZonedBuildableLand ARPRD ICSDD ResidentialR20District ResidentialR40District ResidentialR80District × Ö PotentialNewDwellingUnit × Ö Central Naugatuck 27 ! !! !! ! !!! !! !!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! !!!!!! !! ! !! !!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !!!! !! !! !! !! ! !!! !! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!! !! ! !!! !! ! !! ! ! !!!!! !!!! !! !! !!!! !!!!!!!! !!!! !!! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! !! !! ! ! ! !!! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! !!!!! !! !!!!!! !!! !! !!!!!!!!!! !! !! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! !!!! ! !! ! !! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!! !! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! !!! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !!!! !! ! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! S outhi ngto n W al l i n g f o r d Me rid en H a m d e n P ro s p e ct W at er bur y W olc o tt B et hany I 6 91 All e n Ave S Me rid e n R d Y al e sv i l l e R d NB r o oksvaleRd WM ai nS t A cad e myRd St a t e H w y 10 W ate rb u ry Rd S pr i n g S t I8 4 W a l lin gfo rd Rd H i g h la n d Av e I8 4 W o lf H i l l R d S Main St H i g hl a n d Av e Moun tai n cr estDr S an db an k Rd Coo kHil lR d C or n w a l l A ve Kno tte rDr Alle n A v e C re ame ryR d D ia m on d H ill R d D i c ke r manR d EJo h n so n Ave I691 Gui n e ve reR dg Wa l n ut St No r to n Ln I 6 91 Hi g hl a n d Av e S c h oo lh o use Rd Ro se m a ry L n P o pl a r D r W J o hns onA ve ElmwoodCir J arv i s St A li s o n A ve O ld La n e R d P ea ch Tr e eC t B yam Rd O l dL aneRd S ta te H w y 68 P l a n k R d H i c ko r yLn W hi te Ln L ec l e rc Ave R iv er Rd E M i t c h e ll A ve P l a nkR d H uc kin s R d S cottRd T h is t le Ct WeeksRd Redst o n e D r Sto n y H il lR d Bla cks R d C ar o l D r B et hanyMounta inRd C he r ry S t Blo omin gda leDr Park P l K i n gRd Br o ad Sw am pR d Buc klandDr N ic h ol e C t T u cke r R d P at to n D r Cu rrie r P l R i c h mon d G ln Cort landCir P re s t ig e Dr T h o r p e L n Real t yD r DundeeDr A n d re w A v e H olli s D r St o n eg at e Ci r Pi n e T e r W i n t e rg re e n L n GlenbrookD r R o b i nLn D eer R un Ci r C ar riag e Dr W es t m o re R d Reser vo ir R d M ou n tS a n fo r dR d M a ri b o u CtF os te r C t Sh ip to n Ct R e g e n tC t W es ti n C t Ce d a r C t B ra d fordDr V i s taT e r P r inz C t R o m u lu s Rd De a n ar o se P l S cenicCt Ives Ro w B a te s Ln C hat h am W o o ds C t Flo ra l L n K el l y C t Sir W alterD r C h est er w o od Ct T im berLn A le x a n d e r D r C ha n til C ir B a rn Hi l l R d B o ulde rR d R em us R d Q ue ll C t Br ia r C t C o rtla n d Ci r O x fo r d Ct E xi t 3 R ive rsideDr A m he rs t P l H il lt o p Rd U ps o n Pl R ab i d ea u C ir W arr e n S t Ed i t h P l B u rrag e C t Ex it 2 Shi r e C t W av erl y S t C a st l e G l e n n S m it h Pl B l ue fieldCt H a y le d g e C t Su d o lC t Teds C t Sp ru c e St R e n ee Ct E xi t 26 N u t m eg P l S y lv an Ln Fa w n D r M ou nt a i n V ie w Te r Hea t h C t C o lt o n Ln I n ver ne s s C t Stacy Ct B e a r P at h CtH em lo ck Rdg Ha rvestCt S ain t J o se p h St V ic t o r ia D r Bi t te r s w e et Ln M cK e e P l S EndR d Wo od bu ryCt C hu r c h D r C re s t w o od D r Haz e lD r Li l a cC t L ex in g to n C t Cl e a rbro ok P l R o ger Ave W es tm o re Rd G r a n d v ie w C t Spli t R o ckR d Ra ilr o a d A ve M oss L n Stoneh e n g e Pl Va ll e y Rd Fo xw oo d C t W y n d em er e C t Ba ry te s Dr Ri ve rV ie wCt O ldFar m s Rd W o rd en C ir H in m an St A n dre aCt M a rk s P l W in th ro p Dr H eri t a g e D r A m h er st D r I n du st ri a lAv e H i g hw oodM nr Loray C t W a t ch Hi l l R d Qua rr yV i lla geRd B r ig a d o o n D r I v e s H i ll C t Ji ll L n F ern woodD r O rl e t o n C t RobinCt N ic o l e C t Ex i t 2 6 M ix v ille Rd S i n d a ll R d C amb rid ge Dr G r o ve S t MinnaCt B a rk l e d geC t L y n w o o dDr iv e E x t S lo perL n H id denPl L au re l Ter Co mme rc e Ct H o tc hkiss R dg W i llo wSt A ut u m n Ct E xi t 28 Ch ip m a nDr Devo nw oodDr Cham b e rla inCt E x i t3 B r it ta n y C t M c C a u s l an d C t W il li am s R d W h is p e ri n gHol low C t N Ti m b e rLn V an essaCt Ash leyCt S u f fie ldC t ER id g e C t C h a rle s Dr P i n e B ro ok Ct Bi r d Ln CurveHillRd H arris o n Rd O r c har d H il l R d O l d T o w n E R d Perci v a lDr P hil s o nC t Broo kL n H al f Moon R d Rei nha r d Rd Fi e ld s t oneCt M os sF a r m s Rd M ari o nRd Ma ri o nR d NPondR d Ch es h ir e S t S B ro o k sv al eR d Fi n ch A ve C l if fE dgeC ir Pe ck Ln C ountr y Club Rd C olem anR d Po plarD r M o untai n Rd M ou nt a in Rd O l dWa t e r b u r yR d O akAve O ak Ave C ra n berr y L n Bi r c h Dr R ich m on d G l n Ma in St Or egonR d Sor ghumM ill Dr Buddin gR i d g eRd R o c kvi e wD r Ch estnut S t O ldTo wneRd W ieseRd W ie s e R d Avon B lv d Ta m ar a ck R d Ta lm a d ge Rd Woodpo ndRd ThornH o llo w Rd War d Ln C re sc en t C ir F en n Rd O t t D r BatesDr F a rHorizo n Dr La n s d ow n e Ln WoodHillR d P at t o n D r Pa tt o n Dr G reen wood D r W e stland Av e Mus so V ie w A v e Fo x H il l R d C o pp e r B eachD r Diana C t Pa y n e D r No bH il lR d Lan yon Dr S per r y R d W i ld Fl o w er P l TroutBro okRd Fa r v i e w D r G re en s L oop B r a emarD r S ha ro n D r S PondC ir Bat esDr W i l lo w W el l C t Ri t a Av e L in col nDr H allD r L anc ast e r Way ArgyleRd B e lri dg eRd L a ke Pe rc i va lW a y AbbeyC t Na tha nHa le Ct S urr e y D r Te r re ll F a rm R d B ellamyRd F la g le r Av e P le asa n t Dr M ountainBrookDr Cheshire 2013 Land Use of Residential Buildable Land I 012 0.5 Miles CurrentLandUse UndevelopedLand Agriculture RecreationalorOpenSpace ResourceExtraction Sources: CT 911 Roads: Teleatlas/CTDPS Cheshire Parcels: NEGEO Land Use: COGCNV Central Naugatuck 28 ! !! !! ! !!! !! !!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! !!!!!! !! ! !! !!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !!!! !! !! !! !! ! !!! !! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!! !! ! !!! !! ! !! ! ! !!!!! !!!! !! !! !!!! !!!!!!!! !!!! !!! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! !! !! ! ! ! !!! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! !!!!! !! !!!!!! !!! !! !!!!!!!!!! !! !! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! !!!! ! !! ! !! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!! !! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! !!! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !!!! !! ! !! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! S outhi ngto n W al l i n g f o r d Me rid en H a m d e n P ro s p e ct W at er bur y W olc o tt B et hany I 6 91 All e n Ave S Me rid e n R d Y al e sv i l l e R d NB r o oksvaleRd WM ai nS t A cad e myRd St a t e H w y 10 W ate rb u ry Rd S pr i n g S t I8 4 W a l lin gfo rd Rd H i g h la n d Av e I8 4 W o lf H i l l R d S Main St H i g hl a n d Av e Moun tai n cr estDr S an db an k Rd Coo kHil lR d C or n w a l l A ve Kno tte rDr Alle n A v e C re ame ryR d D ia m on d H ill R d D i c ke r manR d EJo h n so n Ave I691 Gui n e ve reR dg Wa l n ut St No r to n Ln I 6 91 Hi g hl a n d Av e S c h oo lh o use Rd Ro se m a ry L n P o pl a r D r W J o hns onA ve ElmwoodCir J arv i s St A li s o n A ve O ld La n e R d P ea ch Tr e eC t B yam Rd O l dL aneRd S ta te H w y 68 P l a n k R d H i c ko r yLn W hi te Ln L ec l e rc Ave R iv er Rd E M i t c h e ll A ve P l a nkR d H uc kin s R d S cottRd T h is t le Ct WeeksRd Redst o n e D r Sto n y H il lR d Bla cks R d C ar o l D r B et hanyMounta inRd C he r ry S t Blo omin gda leDr Park P l K i n gRd Br o ad Sw am pR d Buc klandDr N ic h ol e C t T u cke r R d P at to n D r Cu rrie r P l R i c h mon d G ln Cort landCir P re s t ig e Dr T h o r p e L n Real t yD r DundeeDr A n d re w A v e H olli s D r St o n eg at e Ci r Pi n e T e r W i n t e rg re e n L n GlenbrookD r R o b i nLn D eer R un Ci r C ar riag e Dr W es t m o re R d Reser vo ir R d M ou n tS a n fo r dR d M a ri b o u CtF os te r C t Sh ip to n Ct R e g e n tC t W es ti n C t Ce d a r C t B ra d fordDr V i s taT e r P r inz C t R o m u lu s Rd De a n ar o se P l S cenicCt Ives Ro w B a te s Ln C hat h am W o o ds C t Flo ra l L n K el l y C t Sir W alterD r C h est er w o od Ct T im berLn A le x a n d e r D r C ha n til C ir B a rn Hi l l R d B o ulde rR d R em us R d Q ue ll C t Br ia r C t C o rtla n d Ci r O x fo r d Ct E xi t 3 R ive rsideDr A m he rs t P l H il lt o p Rd U ps o n Pl R ab i d ea u C ir W arr e n S t Ed i t h P l B u rrag e C t Ex it 2 Shi r e C t W av erl y S t C a st l e G l e n n S m it h Pl B l ue fieldCt H a y le d g e C t Su d o lC t Teds C t Sp ru c e St R e n ee Ct E xi t 26 N u t m eg P l S y lv an Ln Fa w n D r M ou nt a i n V ie w Te r Hea t h C t C o lt o n Ln I n ver ne s s C t Stacy Ct B e a r P at h CtH em lo ck Rdg Ha rvestCt S ain t J o se p h St V ic t o r ia D r Bi t te r s w e et Ln M cK e e P l S EndR d Wo od bu ryCt C hu r c h D r C re s t w o od D r Haz e lD r Li l a cC t L ex in g to n C t Cl e a rbro ok P l R o ger Ave W es tm o re Rd G r a n d v ie w C t Spli t R o ckR d Ra ilr o a d A ve M oss L n Stoneh e n g e Pl Va ll e y Rd Fo xw oo d C t W y n d em er e C t Ba ry te s Dr Ri ve rV ie wCt O ldFar m s Rd W o rd en C ir H in m an St A n dre aCt M a rk s P l W in th ro p Dr H eri t a g e D r A m h er st D r I n du st ri a lAv e H i g hw oodM nr Loray C t W a t ch Hi l l R d Qua rr yV i lla geRd B r ig a d o o n D r I v e s H i ll C t Ji ll L n F ern woodD r O rl e t o n C t RobinCt N ic o l e C t Ex i t 2 6 M ix v ille Rd S i n d a ll R d C amb rid ge Dr G r o ve S t MinnaCt B a rk l e d geC t L y n w o o dDr iv e E x t S lo perL n H id denPl L au re l Ter Co mme rc e Ct H o tc hkiss R dg W i llo wSt A ut u m n Ct E xi t 28 Ch ip m a nDr Devo nw oodDr Cham b e rla inCt E x i t3 B r it ta n y C t M c C a u s l an d C t W il li am s R d W h is p e ri n gHol low C t N Ti m b e rLn V an essaCt Ash leyCt S u f fie ldC t ER id g e C t C h a rle s Dr P i n e B ro ok Ct Bi r d Ln CurveHillRd H arris o n Rd O r c har d H il l R d O l d T o w n E R d Perci v a lDr P hil s o nC t Broo kL n H al f Moon R d Rei nha r d Rd Fi e ld s t oneCt M os sF a r m s Rd M ari o nRd Ma ri o nR d NPondR d Ch es h ir e S t S B ro o k sv al eR d Fi n ch A ve C l if fE dgeC ir Pe ck Ln C ountr y Club Rd C olem anR d Po plarD r M o untai n Rd M ou nt a in Rd O l dWa t e r b u r yR d O akAve O ak Ave C ra n berr y L n Bi r c h Dr R ich m on d G l n Ma in St Or egonR d Sor ghumM ill Dr Buddin gR i d g eRd R o c kvi e wD r Ch estnut S t O ldTo wneRd W ieseRd W ie s e R d Avon B lv d Ta m ar a ck R d Ta lm a d ge Rd Woodpo ndRd ThornH o llo w Rd War d Ln C re sc en t C ir F en n Rd O t t D r BatesDr F a rHorizo n Dr La n s d ow n e Ln WoodHillR d P at t o n D r Pa tt o n Dr G reen wood D r W e stland Av e Mus so V ie w A v e Fo x H il l R d C o pp e r B eachD r Diana C t Pa y n e D r No bH il lR d Lan yon Dr S per r y R d W i ld Fl o w er P l TroutBro okRd Fa r v i e w D r G re en s L oop B r a emarD r S ha ro n D r S PondC ir Bat esDr W i l lo w W el l C t Ri t a Av e L in col nDr H allD r L anc ast e r Way ArgyleRd B e lri dg eRd L a ke Pe rc i va lW a y AbbeyC t Na tha nHa le Ct S urr e y D r Te r re ll F a rm R d B ellamyRd F la g le r Av e P le asa n t Dr M ountainBrookDr Cheshire 2012 Aerial Imagery of Residential Buildable Land I 012 0.5 Miles Sources: CT 911 Roads: Teleatlas/CTDPS Cheshire Parcels: NEGEO 2012 NAIP Aerial Imagery: CTDEEP Central Naugatuck 29 Central Naugatuck 30

Animal Shelter Feasibility Study

Council of Governments of the Central Naugatuck Valley (COGCNV) Regional Animal Control Facility Feasibility Study 49 Leavenworth Street, Suite 303 Waterbury, Connecticut S/P+A Project No. 13.014 Draft Report: November 14, 2013 Final Report: February 12, 2014 Prepared by: Silver Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. Architects / Engineers / Interior Designers 3190 Whitney Avenue Hamden, CT 06518 P: (203) 230-9007 F: (203) 230-8247   (COG) of the Central Naugatuck Valley 1 Regional Animal Control Facility Study Silver/Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. © Acknowledgements We wish to thank the Council of Governments of the Central Naugatuck Valley for the opportunity to serve the Central Naugatuck Valley Region in the conceptual planning of their future regional animal control facility. We w ould also like to thank the member s of the Regional Animal Shelter Study Committee for their enthusiasm, helpfulness and input, as their feedback and comments have been invaluable to the thorough ness of this report. It has been a privilege to be a part of this collaborative effort to provide a more efficient animal care syst em to better serve the public and animals of the region.   (COG) of the Central Naugatuck Valley TOC Regional Animal Control Facility Study Silver/Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. © TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 SECTION I INTRODUCTION 3 Report Overview & Purpose Report Services Data Collection, Meeting Minutes & Notes Code Standards Preliminary Code Review SECTION II PROGRAMMING 8 SECTION III SITE OBSERVATIONS AND SELECTION 9 Existing Pound Site Visits – Memorandum #1 Middlebury Zoning – Memorandum SECTION IV PREFERRED CONCEPTUAL PLANS & RENDERINGS 10 SECTION V SITE, BUILDING & SYSTEM NARRATIVES 11 Site Architectural Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing & Fire Protection Systems SECTION VI OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS 22 Construction Costs Operating Costs Conceptual Cost Analysis SECTION VII MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE OPTIONS 24 SECTION VIII APPENDIX A 25 Meeting Minutes and Notes Previously Presented Program & Plans SECTION IX APPENDIX B 26 Connecticut General Statutes Section 22-336 – Dog Pound Regulations SECTION X APPENDIX C 27 Alternative Program, Floor Plans, Site Plan & Estimate   (COG) of the Central Naugatuck Valley 1 Regional Animal Control Facility Study Silver/Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. © Executive Summary This report is the result of a study commissioned by the Council of Governments of the Central Naugatuck Valley (COGCNV) to evaluate site a nd management options for providing a regional animal care facility intended to serve eight (8) towns in the Central Naugatuck Valley Region (CNVR). Under Section 22-336 of th e Connecticut General Statutes (CGS), all towns are required to provide pounds or other suitab le facilities unless they are participating in a regional dog pound. The objective of utilizing the regional dog pound approach is to provide the region with humane, yet cost effective animal control methods that will reduce capital expenses and improve outcomes for animals. This report was prepared by Silver Petrucel li & Associates, Inc. (S/P+A) of Hamden, Connecticut, an architecture, engineering and interior design firm specializing in municipal town planning, historic restorati on, master planning and design. Civil and site planning and engineering solutions were prep ared by Donald W. Smith, Jr., P. E. of Seymour, Connecticut. This report was developed with the frequent and insightful input of the COGCNV, Regional Animal Shelter Study Committee (Committee) and animal control staff of the participating towns. Report Process & Findings The information contained in this report was ga thered by S/P+A and consultants through visual observations of the region’s exis ting animal control sites and facilities, analysis of existing construction drawings and historical impound st atistics, and meetings with COGCNV, the Committee and town staff. This data was organized and appears in sections of this report in the form of meeting minutes, program matrices, conceptual plans, renderings, cost estimates and narratives. All information bound in this report has been developed with, presented to and approved by the COGCNV and Study Committee. Per COGCNV and Committee directive, the Towns of Beacon Falls, Bethlehem, Middlebury, Naugatuck, Prospect, Southbury an d Woodbury are looking to establish a regional animal care facility that will provide primary care for all eligible animals, including but not limited to sheltering, medical treatment and adoptive service. The Town of Wolcott is also participating in this study but intends to continue caring for its animals at their recently refurbished pound. The Wolcott pound also houses dogs from the adjacent Town of Plymouth, which was arranged through an agreement between the two towns. Of the se ven (7) fully participating towns, only four (4) towns currently have local animal car e facilities. All four (4) of these facilities are 20-30 years of age or older and in need of re pairs and upgrades, which is not unc ommon due to the heavy traffic and daily abuse inherent to these types of facilities. After review of historical impound statistics dating back to 2007 and projection of future impounds for the participating towns, it wa s determined that none of the four (4) existing animal care (COG) of the Central Naugatuck Valley 2 Regional Animal Control Facility Study Silver/Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. © facilities are large eno ugh to accommodate the spatial require ments of a regional shelter. Furthermore, it was determined that only one (1) of the four (4) animal care sites, Middlebury, has a large enough parcel of land to accommodate a regional facility of a size necessary to meet the needs of all seven (7) participating towns. Conclusions and Recommendations It has been determined, in conjunction with COGCNV, the Study Committee and local officials and animal control officers, that a regional animal shelter of roughly 8,000 square feet in size is required to meet the needs of the seven (7) full y participating towns. This 8,000 square foot number accounts for a cattery and (44) interior dog runs (as determined from historical and projected impound data), provisi ons for public visitation and viewing of animals, and office/support space for staff. The preferred, conceptual plan, A5, meets the pr ogrammatic goals of this regional shelter through creative and economic planning; specifically by propos ing to construct a 6,500 square foot addition off of the existing 1,750 square f oot Middlebury pound. By maintain ing and re-using the current Middlebury facility, construction co sts can be lowered and existing infrastructure can be reused to significantly reduce project costs. Furthermore, the existing parking lot and building entry off of the Middlebury Public Works site can be maintained for animal shelter staff and deliveries, with a new public parking lot and public entrance constructed off Woodside Avenue. This separation of public and private parking/access has numerous benefits, with the most important being that it minimizes environmental, visual and audial im pact on the surrounding residences and restaurant on Woodside Avenue. The conceptual cost estimate for the preferred pl anning option indicates that construction for the new, regional animal shelter will cost roughly $300/square foot, or $2.52 million. Including soft costs, which traditionally account for 20-25% of total project costs, the total project cost is estimated at just under $2.9 million. Additionally, preliminary estimates based on 2014 fuel costs indicate that anticipated utility costs (electric and gas) fo r this facility will run $40,000 annually. Alternative management structures for this regional facility were researched and evaluated as part of this study, and it has been recommended that th e regional facility operate under the control of the host municipality (Middlebury) or one of the other participating municipalities. (COG) of the Central Naugatuck Valley 3 Regional Animal Control Facility Study Silver/Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. © Section I – Introduction Report Overview and Purpose Silver/Petrucelli + Associates, Inc. Architects / Engineers / Interior Designers (S/P+A) was retained by the Council of Governments of the Central Naugatuck Valley (COGCNV) to perform a feasibility study for a new, region al animal care facility serving eight (8) towns in the Central Naugatuck Valley Region (CNVR). With gui dance and oversight from COGCNV and the Regional Animal Shelter Study Committee (Committ ee), particular emphasis was placed on site evaluation and management options for this region al facility. Additionally, a space program, floor plan, site plan, conceptual rende rings and cost estimates were de veloped to address the region’s animal care needs. This report provides limited analysis of the regi on’s current animal care facilities and grounds with emphasis placed on existing building condition, build ing systems, available site utilities and potential for expansion. Analysis and recomme ndations have been included in this report to address projected regional impoundments, necessary building system upgrades, utility tie-ins and building and site circulation. Additionally, ma nagement options and operating costs for the proposed regional shelter have been examined, with recommendations and estimates included to assist the CNVR in establishing a cost efficien t operation while providing improved service to the public and animals of the region. Report Services The following services were provided by S/P+A and consultants as part of this study to evaluate alternative sites and management options for the pr oposed regional animal care facility serving the CNVR. 1. Attended a project kickoff meeting with COGCNV and the Committee to discuss the overall directive and goals of the study includi ng but not limited to current animal care management structures for each town, existing animal care protocol for each town and programmatic needs for the regional facility. The existing Middlebury animal care facility and site was also toured at this time. 2. Analyzed existing impound statistics for the (8 ) participating towns and projected future impound statistics for a regional shelter ba sed upon documented population projections and historical data. 3. Prepared a preliminary building program ou tlining public, staff and support spaces based on animal care facility standards, and ou tlined the recommended quantity and size of dog runs based on projected impound statistics a nd Connecticut General Statute (CGS) Section 22-336. 4. Visited the remaining (4) animal care faci lities located in Wolcott, Woodbury, Southbury and Naugatuck. Documented the existing size and condition of each facility, available utilities, current HVAC provisions and potential for building expansion. (COG) of the Central Naugatuck Valley 4 Regional Animal Control Facility Study Silver/Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. © 5. Reviewed existing construction documents , site plans, and planning and zoning information for the Middlebury site, as this was the only identified site capable of accommodating a regional animal care facility. 6. Developed three (3) preliminary floor plans and site plans, outlining alternative animal care facility layouts specific to the CNVR regional animal care facility. 7. Attended a progress meeting with COGCNV a nd the Committee to discuss findings to date, and to make necessary programming and plan layout decisions. 8. Refined the preliminary space program and floor/site plans to incorporate comments from the previous progress meeting. 9. Compiled a draft report of all information de veloped to date, including program, plans, building condition and system narratives, conceptual renderings, estimates and management options. Presented the findings and recommendations of the draft report to the COGCNV and Committee at a progress meeting. NOTE: All items following Item #9 have not been completed at this time, but are anticipated following the presentation of this draft report. 10. Edited and revised the draft report ba sed upon COGCNV and Committee feedback. 11. Prepared a final report incorporating all information, recommendations and comments to date. Presented the final report to the COGCNV and Committee. Data Collection, Meeting Minutes and Notes An integral part of any site evaluation or planning study for a regional facility is a thorough understanding of the current facilities that exist and will be affected by the implementation of a regional plan. It is equally or more importa nt to understand and develop a common mission that all participating towns can agree with and commit to. This process began by investigating the current animal care facilities of participati ng towns, through the use of site visits, site investigations, existing doc ument review, planning and zoning research, and interviews/discussions with local town officials and animal control officers. All meeting minutes generated during the course of this study can be found in Appendix A of this report, and are a compilation of the architect’s discussions and meetings with COGCNV and the Committee. The approved space program, narrati ves and conceptual planning options contained within the following sections of this report reflec t and build upon the invaluable input and directive that was received during these meetings. (COG) of the Central Naugatuck Valley 5 Regional Animal Control Facility Study Silver/Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. © Code Standards The following is a list of the current building codes which are applicable for the State of Connecticut. Please note that these codes have not been thoroughly reviewed for this space study, but a cursory code review was completed for ma jor codes with significant cost and life safety implications, and the results can be found on page 6 of this report. Current Building Codes State of Connecticut Effective December 31, 2005 2005 State of Connecticut Building Code 2009 Connecticut Building Code Supplements 2005 Connecticut Fire Safety Supplement 2003 International Building Code (IBC) 2003 International Fire Code 2005 National Electrical Code 2003 Life Safety Code (NFPA 101) 2003 International M echanical Code 2003 International Plumbing Code 2009 International Energy Conservation Code 2003 ICC/ANSI A117.1 Handicappe d Accessibility Code 1973 Uniform Federal Accessibi lity Standards (UFAS) Section 504, Rehabilitation Act of 1973 2009 Connecticut Public Health Code 1999 Connecticut O.S.H.A. Regulati ons – Title 29 Dept of Labor 1996 U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission – Playground Safety 2010 Americans with Disabilities Act ( ADA) Standards for Accessible Design – Title II State and Local Government Facilities, Services and Activities – Title III Public Accommodations and Commercial Facilities As the codes are updated, they will affect the pertin ence of the information contained in this report, and applicable changes may result in the need for revising this report and the associated cost estimates. Most importantly, the codes that are in effect at the time the building permit is applied for by the Contractor are the ultimate determinant c odes, so changes in the codes and their adoption dates should be closely m onitored and planned for. (COG) of the Central Naugatuck Valley 6 Regional Animal Control Facility Study Silver/Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. © Preliminary Code Review A cursory code review was completed during this conceptual phase to help identify current, significant code violations and fu ture code challenges that may arise due to the proposed expansion of the Middlebury animal control faci lity. Like the plans, this code review is conceptual in nature and will need to be revisited in greater depth during the design phase of this project. This review was conducted through the reference of the codes lis ted on the previous page, review of existing construction drawings provided by the Town of Middlebury and visual observations made by the design team during field visits. BUILDING OCCUPANCY & CONSTRUCTION TYPE At the time of construction, the existing Middlebur y animal control facility was designated as a type 2-C construction type (non- combustible) with a Business (B) occupancy. This designation was per BOCA, the recognized building code at that time. Since that time, a new building code has been adopted; the International Building Code (IBC). The correlating construction type of the new code would be II-B (non-combustible) with the occupancy type remaining as (B)usiness. The proposed building addition could easily be constructed as the same II-B construction, but would require that all building elements outlined in the IBC be non-combustible. A second option would be to use a different and less stringent co nstruction type – preferably IV-B, which would allow building elements to be constructed of an y combustible or non-combustible material. The benefit of this change would be the ability to use wood framing, which may be a more economical option for the roof trusses. This change of construction type woul d not have any negative impacts, as the proposed building would still be within th e allowable building area and height allowed for type IV-B buildings. FIXTURE COUNTS According to the preferred, concep tual plan (A5) and the occupancy counts as determined per the 2003 International Building Code (IBC) for type (B) occupancie s, the following fixture counts will be required for the new, manuf acturing laboratory addition. Water Closets ( Total Male + Female ) (3) Lavatories (2) Drinking Fountains (1) Service Sinks (1) The proposed layout meets these criteria, with (1) wa ter closet and lavatory at each of the three toilet rooms (male, female and staff). An area fo r a drinking fountain will be provided in or near the public waiting area and service sink(s) will be located in the support spaces near the dog runs for ease of cleaning. (COG) of the Central Naugatuck Valley 7 Regional Animal Control Facility Study Silver/Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. © MEANS OF EGRESS, TRAVEL DISTANCE AND ACCESSIBILITY The means of egress and travel distance for all ne w construction areas will meet code, and all new spaces will need to be fully acces sible. This includes the need for a ramp structure between the new and existing portions of the facility, which will likely need to be constructed with different finish floor elevations due to th e sloping topography of the site. A full code review of these and all other items will be conducted during the design phase of the project. BUILDING AREA & FIRE PROTECTION The existing Middlebury facility does not contai n an automatic sprinkler system, and it is recommended that a sprinkler system not be included in the future, re gional facility. While a fire suppression system such as auto matic sprinklers would provide an added level of safety for building occupants and property, they are not common in these types of facilities due to the small building size and high installation costs.   (COG) of the Central Naugatuck Valley 8 Regional Animal Control Facility Study Silver/Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. © Section II – Programming The following Space Program is a culmination of the site visits, meetings and presentations outlined in Section I of this report, and all info rmation contained herein has been reviewed and approved by COGCNV and the Committee. The pr ogram outlines all anticipated public, staff, animal and support space needs within the proposed regional animal control facility and was used as a guide in the development of the preferred c onceptual plan contained in Section IV of this report. 13.014 COGCNV Regional Shelter – Impound Statistics.xls Silver/Petrucelli + Associates, Inc. 23-Jul-13 Architects / Engineers / Interior Designers Council of Governments – Central Naugatuck Valley (COGCNV) Regional Animal Shelter Study – Impound Statistics YearPopulation of (8) Participating Towns Average Impounds (PER MONTH) Maximum Impounds (MONTH) Average Impounds (w/o WOLCOTT) Maximum Impounds (w/o WOLCOTT) 2000 97,849 n/an/a n/an/a 2007/08 103,514 4560 3955 2008/09 103,780 4255 3647 2009/10 104,218 4160 3651 2010/11 105,209 5062 4461 2011/12 104,827 4255 3749 2015 107,988* n/an/a n/an/a 2020 110,267* n/an/a n/an/a 2025 112,140* n/an/a n/an/a AVERAGE 2007-2012 104,310 4458.4 38.4 52.6 3190 Whitney Avenue Hamden, Ct 06518 (P) 203-230-9007 silverpetrucelli.com * Future population projections obtained from the UCONN Connecticut State Data Center Page 1 of 1 7/23/201310:35 AM 13.014 COGCNV Regional Shelter – FINAL Space Program.xls Silver/Petrucelli + Associates, Inc. 3-Feb-14 Architects / Engineers / Interior Designers 3190 Whitney Avenue Hamden, Ct 06518 (P) 203-230-9007 silverpetrucelli.com Council of Governments – Central Naugatuck Valley (COGCNV) Regional Animal Shelter Study – FINAL Program Summary – Option #5 Regional Animal Shelter Program Space PROPOSED SF ACTUAL SF Comments 1Vestibule (Air-Lock) 80 95 Front entrance 2Public Lobby/Waiting 120 129 Reception counter& waiting area 3Viewing Room 85 120 4 Shared Office 425 430 Desks for (5), including reception; room for conference table 5Staff Break / Kitchenette 120 123 Tables, sink, microwave, refrigerator 6Men’s Toilet Room 64 62 Shared w/ public. Handicapped accessible 7Women’s Toilet Room 64 62 Shared w/ public. Handicapped accessible 8Staff Toilet / Shower Room 90 92 Includes shower and locker area 9Indoor Dog Runs (40) 3200 3200 80 s.f. per run – Includes pen & solid separation per Regulations 22-336-13 10Isolation Runs (4) 320 320 80 s.f. per run – (1) Isolation run / (10) indoor runs per Regulations 22-336-13 11Cattery 220 214 (20-25) cats 12Cat Quarantine 100 96 13 Grooming/Laundry 120 144 14 Exam Room 120 144 15 Food Preparation/Storage 225 240 W asher / dryer, sink, and storage 16General Storage 400 470 Divided into multiple areas 17Mechanical/Electrical 300 318 Exterior Access Net Total Usable Area6053 6259 Circulation + Structure (35%) 2119 2154 Total Facility 8172 8413 Space Needs Page 1 of 1 2/12/20143:54 PM   (COG) of the Central Naugatuck Valley 9 Regional Animal Control Facility Study Silver/Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. © Section III – Site Obse rvations and Selection Chris Nardi (Silver/Petrucelli + Associates) an d Donald Smith, Jr. (consulting civil engineer) visited all five (5) of the existing animal control facilities serving the eight (8) towns participating in this study; Middlebury – 2 Service Road Wolcott – 775 Boundline Road Woodbury – 271 Main Street South Southbury – 66 Peter Road Naugatuck – 508 Cherry Street Extension The existing facilities were analyzed based upon multiple criteria including current building size and condition, utilities available, existing electrical service and mechanical systems, proximity to highways, centrality to the pa rticipating towns and most importantly, potential for expansion. Of all five (5) sites visited; only one, Middlebury, had enough developable land to support the size building required for a regional an imal control facility. Fortunately, the Middlebury site was more appealing than the others for additional reasons su ch as centrality to participating towns, highway access, and available utilities. With the four (4) sites in Wolcott, Woodbury, Southbury and Naugatuck being deemed not-viable due to the in ability for site expansion, only the Middlebury site was investigated and studied in further depth as part of this study. There were not any other town owned sites presented by the Committee or region for potential investigation. The following memorandums outline the findings at the four (4) non-viable sites and summarize discussions between D. Smith, Jr. and Mr. Ku rt Bosco, the Middlebury Zoning Enforcement Officer, pertaining to the zoning of the existing and adjacent Middlebury sites. COGCNV Regional Animal Shelter Study 13.014 July 22, 2013 1 SILVER / PETRUCELLI + ASSOCIATES Architects / Engineers / Interior Designers 3190 Whitney Avenue, Hamden, CT 06518-2340 Tel: 203 230 9007 Fax: 203 230 8247 silverpetrucelli.com MEMORANDUM #1 SITE VISIT NOTES PROJECT: Regional Animal Shelter Study CLIENT: Council of Governments of the Central Naugatuck Valley (COGCNV) MEETING PLACE: Wolcott Pound – 775 Boundline Road Woodbury Pound – 271 Main Street South Southbury Pound – 66 Peter Road Naugatuck Pound – 508 Cherry Street Extension DATES: July 11 – 17, 2013 Purpose: To perform visual inspectio n of existing pounds and pound sites for the towns involved in the Regional Animal Shelter Study. A) Wolcott Pound The Wolcott Pound, serving the Towns of Wolcott and Plymouth, is located on Boundline Road, directly adjacent to the Wolcott State Fire Training School. The pound, which was originally constructed in the early 1960’s, has seen renovations in the late 70’s and 2007 after being condemned in 2005. The structure consists of concrete masonry unit (cmu) walls, with a wood framed, shingled roof. The roof was replaced during the recent renovations, which also included repairs to the building structure. The windows vary in ag e and condition with the area of greatest concern being the single pane window s located about the dog runs. The pound has a small administrative office/en try/storage area in the front and (10) covered, exterior dog runs w/ indoor pens in the back. (1) Quarantine run is provided through a separation provided using plastic pane ls. At the time of the visit, five of the ten runs were occupied which would be considered average for this facility. The COGCNV Regional Animal Shelter Study 13.014 July 22, 2013 2 dogs that are housed here are a combination from the two towns served, typically at a 50/50 split per town. There are 4 +/- cat cages located in the front office area, all of which were empty at the time of visit. The building’s heating and hot water system s are fueled by an above ground propane tank located behind the facility, while air conditioning is provided through a window unit in the front office area. The building’s waste and water are served by septic and well. Toilet facilities do not exist within the buildi ng, however a portable toilet (recently donated) exists on site. The fac ility has an active security system serving the building and exterior runs, with motion sensor technology used to monitor the exterior runs after hours. The Town owns a portion of land behind the existing building, extending about 20- 25’ past the existing vegeta tion line. While this site could accommodate some growth due to this additional land (exact numbers unknown at this time), it is Wolcott’s proximity to the other participati ng towns which limits its ability to serve as a regional location. Additional site amenities include a new stor age shed, outdoor exercise area for the dogs and a small garden/seating area. COGCNV Regional Animal Shelter Study 13.014 July 22, 2013 3 B) Woodbury Pound The Woodbury Pound, serving the Towns of Woodbury and Bethlehem, is located off of Main Street South behind the W oodbury Police Department. Town records indicate the structure was built in 1986 a nd it appears that renovations and repairs have been minimal since that time. The st ructure consists of wood framed walls and roof over a cmu wall base. The windows are single pane and in fair to poor condition. The pound consists of one, large open area that includes a refrigerator, sink, washer/dryer, hot water heater and storag e. Animal provisions consist of (5) covered, exterior runs w/ indoor pens. A dedicated quarantine run is not provided, although if needed, a quarantine run is set up through the use of separation by plastic panels. At the time of the vi sit, four of the five runs were occupied which is above average, although at certain times all five runs will be occupied with overflow support needing to be provided by adjacent towns. (Southbury is currently housing some animals from Bethlehem that could not be accommodated by Woodbury). Provisions for cats are not provided at this facility, although the animal resource officer (ARO) will often try to make al ternate accommodations for the animal if needed. COGCNV Regional Animal Shelter Study 13.014 July 22, 2013 4 The building’s heating and hot water syst ems are fueled by above ground propane tanks located near the front entry door. Air conditioning is not currently provided at the facility although the ARO is looki ng into purchasing a window unit for the comfort of the dogs. The building’s waste and water are served by septic and well and toilet facilities do no t exist within the building. The site is very constricted and provides little to no room for growth, and therefore is not viable to house a regional shelter/pound. COGCNV Regional Animal Shelter Study 13.014 July 22, 2013 5 C) Southbury Pound The Southbury Pound is located off of Peter Road behind the Southbury To wn Highway Department. Although the construc tion date of the building is not known, it appears that the facility was likely cons tructed in the 70’s or early 80’s. The structure consists of cmu walls with a wood framed, asphalt shingle roof. The windows are single pane and in poor condition. The pound consists of an office/administrative/storage area at the entry with exterior dog runs and interior pens on either side. Currently, there are (10) runs available for holding dogs, and (2) runs av ailable for cats. The building was originally designed to hold 16-20 runs, but many of those have been decommissioned to allow for a toilet room and interior/exterior storage space. (2) Dedicated quarantine runs are provided, separated from the ot her runs by plastic panels. At least half of the runs were occupied at the time of the visit, which is about average as this pound will house anywhere from (1) to (12) animals on any given day. The building’s heating and hot water syst ems are fueled by above ground propane tanks located on the north side of the f acility with supplementary heat provided through infrared heaters. Air conditioning is provided through a window unit in the office area and a central exhaust system is installed throughout the entire facility. The building’s waste and water ar e served by septic and well. The site is bounded by moderate to thick ve getation on all sides, however, it appears that much of this wooded area is part of the town owned parcel. While expansion may be possible on this site, more inform ation on the site boundaries, ownership and overall ability to develop the wooded area would need to be examined. Perhaps more crucial to the viability of expanding this site would be the issues surrounding the septic system, which from early indi cations would need to be significantly upgraded to meet the CTDEEP regulations . These requirements, which go beyond the typical health code re gulations, would be necessary due to the pound being located on a shared, town campus parcel, wh ere all buildings are factored together in the determination of septic system size and the associated regulating body. The State Health code dictates that discharge of over 5,000 gallons per day (gpd) per parcel of land, including contiguous land under the same ownership, is regulated by DEEP. The current Southbury parcel is near the 5,000 gpd threshold now, so expansion of the facility would push them over the threshold and into the CTDEEP’s more stringent and costly requirements incl uding quarterly analysis of groundwater samples. COGCNV Regional Animal Shelter Study 13.014 July 22, 2013 6 COGCNV Regional Animal Shelter Study 13.014 July 22, 2013 7 D) Naugatuck Pound The Naugatuck Pound is located on the Cher ry Street Extension, directly adjacent to the Naugatuck water treatment plant. The pound, originally constructed in the early 90’s, has undergone recent renovations consisting of a new asphalt shingle roof and restructured roof over the exterior dog r uns. The remainder of the core structure consists of concrete masonry unit (cmu) wa lls, with a wood framed, shingled roof. The windows are in fair to good condition. The pound has a series of administrative a nd support spaces consisting of a main office/reception area, small storage area with sink, furnace room and toilet room. The facility also contains (20) dog runs, cons isting of (10) interior and (10) exterior, each with an indoor pen. At the time of the visit, eight of the exterior runs were occupied and none of th e interior runs were being use d. The use of exterior runs over interior is typical is typical at this facility in order to allow dogs access to the fresh air that they would not otherwis e receive. Although cats are not normally accepted at this facility, th ere is a dedicated room for them containing roughly (6) cages. At the time of visit, there was one cat at the facility. The building’s heating system is fueled by oil, with the tank located within a dedicated furnace room. Air conditioning is provided through a wall unit located within the main office area. Public sewe r and water are available at the site. While the facility is the largest and most m odern of the participating towns, the site has minimal space for expansion due to Ch erry Street bordering on the south, the water plant to the east, and an aggressive , rocky terrain to the north and west. Additional site amenities include an outdoor storage shed and freezer. COGCNV Regional Animal Shelter Study 13.014 July 22, 2013 8 Any corrections, additions, or comments should be made to Silver / Petrucelli + Associates within 14 days of the date of the meeting. Distribution: Animal Shelter Committ ee, Rachel Solveira, Donald Smith, Silver/Petrucelli Donald W. Smith, Jr., P.E. CONSULTING ENGINEER 56 Greenwood Circle Seymour, Connecticut 06483 (203) 888-4904 Fax: (203) 881-3434 Email: dwsjrpe@sbcglobal.net CIVIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION SEPTIC DESIGN SITE DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Chris Nardi, Silver Petrucelli & Associates FROM: Donald W. Smith, Jr., P.E. Consulting Engineer DATE: August 15, 2013 RE: Report of Meeting COG Regional Animal Control Facility On this date I met with the Middlebury Zoning Enforcement Officer, Mr. Kurt Bosco, to review the zoning of the site adjacent to the current animal control facility. The following was determined: The area is comprised of Assessor’s Map 4-06, parcel 358 (41 ac) and parcel 358B (0.9 ac). The DPW facility is on parcel 425 . Parcel 358 is zoned AR-1 (Assisted Senior Residential), parcel 358B and 425 are zoned R-40. A commercial kennel and a Town of Middlebury Municipal Building are allowed by Special Exception in the R-40 Zone. There are no permitted or prohibited uses listed in the Zoning Regulations for the AR-1 zone. The Front yard setback in the R-40 zone is 35’ There are no parking standards in the Zoning Regulations for a Commercial kennel. We need to research other Towns for recommended standard. Kurt suggested I speak to the Town Planner, Brian Miller to review the proposal and the Zoning issues. It would appear that a Zone Change from AR-1 to R-40 would be appropriate. I reviewed the deed for parcel 358 (v129/p1079), for which the Town paid $1.5 million dollars for, and there are no use restrictions listed on the deed. I reviewed the drawing file in the land use office and found the attached topographic plan, which also shows the limits of Inlands Wetlands on the site. Please feel free to contact me with any questions. End of Memorandum (COG) of the Central Naugatuck Valley 10 Regional Animal Control Facility Study Silver/Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. © Section IV – Preferred Conc eptual Plans & Renderings The following plans and renderings are a culmina tion of multiple planning options developed by the architects and presented to and reviewed with COGCNV and the Committee. The preferred conceptual site and floor plans described and illu strated in the following sections outline general building layouts and adjacencies, recommend viable options for major building systems and depict site planning solutions to meet the needs of the Central Naugatuck Valley and their future regional animal control facility. While many details have b een depicted in these plans, they are conceptual in nature and do not illustrate the fine level of detail found in typical construction drawings. It will be necessary that these plans be further deve loped and refined as this project moves into the schematic design phase.   (COG) of the Central Naugatuck Valley 11 Regional Animal Control Facility Study Silver/Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. © Section V – Site, Buildin g & Systems Narratives Site GENERAL Since the majority of the site is essentially vacant, extensive site improvements will be required in order to construct the proposed 6,000 – 6,600 + s.f. facility. There is an existing concrete sidewalk along the Woodside Avenue frontage of the property. The sidewalk expands into a kidney shaped sitting area with so me feature landscaping and a rock garden at the westerly end of the project area. There is an apparent rock outcropping on the parcel, approximately 35’ wide X 85’ long by 10’ high, centrally located within the project area. There are no current surveys of the project area, with the most recent survey plan we could find being dated 1984 and pre-dating the current animal control building. The Project Area is constrained by Regulated Inla nd Wetlands to the west and to the east. The westerly wetland area is a higher quality wetland that will need to be protected from the proposed development. The wetland area to the east is associated with a former watercourse that has been significantly impacted in the past when the watercourse was pip ed. In addition to a topographic survey of the projec t area, the limits of both wetland areas will need to be determined by a soil scientist during the design process. The following describes the site improvements that are proposed. DEMOLITION The current proposal includes the reuse of the existing building so other than some minor demolition of fencing etc. no other demolition will be required. The majority of the site is wooded however and approximately 0.75 acres of tree clearing will be required. The apparent rock outcropping will need to be blasted and rem oved (1,500 cubic yards) and as part of the Site preparation. Depending on the Site Alternativ e selected, the sitting area and feature landscape/rock garden may need to be relocated. ON-SITE TRAFFIC CIRCULATION & PARKING A new driveway entrance from Woodside Aven ue is proposed for the public access to the facility. A parking lot with eleven (11) regul ar and (1) handicap spaces is proposed to be provided. The existing driveway and parking area near the existing building will remain and will be used for staff parking and for shipping/receiving operations. The new driveway and parking area will be su rfaced with bituminous concrete pavement consisting of three (3) inches bituminous concre te on fifteen (15) inches of grave base. (COG) of the Central Naugatuck Valley 12 Regional Animal Control Facility Study Silver/Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. © SIDEWALKS, ACCESSIBILTY & CURBING Concrete sidewalks will be provi ded on-site in order to provide a pedestrian linkage between the existing sidewalk, the parking areas and the buildi ng. All of the exit doors from the building will have a flush condition with the adjacent side walk and a code-conforming handicap accessible routes will be provided from the park ing area into the proposed building. Cement Concrete curbs will be provided along all driveways and traffic islands. Although concrete curbing is more expensive initially, it holds up much better over time and it is not easily damaged by snow plows or heavy vehicles. LANDSCAPING & LIGHTING Site lighting and landscaping will be provided as part of the project. Generally, the new landscaping will include foundation plantings alo ng the building, landscaped traffic islands and seeded lawn areas. The new site lighting packag e will be designed to provide a minimum of one (1) foot-candle of illumination in the parking ar eas and higher levels closer to the building. Depending on the site alternative se lected, the existing feature landscape/ rock garden sitting area will either be maintained or relocated and incorporated into the final site design. STORM DRAINAGE DISCHARGE A new storm drainage system will be installed as part of the overall site development. The storm drainage system will include a series of catchbasins and new storm drainage piping. The storm drainage system will outlet into the existing on-sit e wetlands or storm drainage system. In order to mitigate the increase in peak stormwater runoff due to the proposed development a Stormwater Management Area (detention facility) will be constructed. A storm water quality structure will also be provided to improve the qu ality of the stormwater runoff prior to discharge into the Wetland area. Due to the limited site area, it is envisioned that the Stormwater Management Facility will be below-ground. The design criteria for the below grade systems will be confirmed during the design de velopment phase of the project. WATER SUPPLY AND WASTEWATER DISPOSAL The existing facility is served by a one (1) inch m unicipal water service. It is proposed to install a new two (2) inch domestic service to service the proposed building. The proposed facility will be served by the municipal sanitary sewer. (COG) of the Central Naugatuck Valley 13 Regional Animal Control Facility Study Silver/Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. © OTHER SITE IMPROVEMENTS Other notable Site Improvements that are proposed for the project include: A modular block retaining wall is proposed along the west edge of the project. This wall is required in order accommodate the required grade change without impacting the adjacent regulated Inland Wetland area. Modular block re taining walls will also be required along the south edge of the proposed building in order to accommodate the grade change between the building floors. A vehicle loading space will be provided adjacent to the existing building. This space will be used by vehicles delivering animal s and supplies to the facility. Since the facility is located at the Town’s transfer station, a scr eened dumpster enclosure will not be provided. (COG) of the Central Naugatuck Valley 14 Regional Animal Control Facility Study Silver/Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. © Architectural GENERAL The preferred Space Allocation Floor Plan – Opti on #5, was developed to meet the programmatic needs of a regional animal control facility while providing spatial layouts and amenities that will better serve the staff, animals and public of the Central Naugat uck Valley. This 8,400+ square foot building delivers all of the spaces outlined in the space program (see Section II), while creating comfortable and adequately equipped spaces that will not only provide staff the means to better care for the animals, but also pr ovide the public with a more inviting and engaging location to view and adopt animals. SITE LAYOUT, ACCESS & ORIENTATION The existing Middlebury pound is located at 2 Serv ice Road, on the fringe of the Town’s Public Works complex. The pound parcel is bordered by Service Road on the east and south, Woodside Avenue to the north and heavily wooded area to th e west. Woodside Avenue is the public side of the parcel, containing residences and a local restaurant with exterior dining areas. The existing dog pound, roughly 1,750 square feet in size, is located on the south end of the site and shielded from Woodside Avenue by heavy vegetation. All access and parking to the existing building is through the public works co mplex via Service Road. One of the main goals in establishing this region al shelter was to provide a facility that was more accessible and inviting to the public. This was accomplished in the proposed plans by placing the addition, of roughly 6,650 square feet, on the north side of the property, adjacent to Woodside Avenue. Additionally, all public parking and access to the building will come from Woodside Avenue eliminating the need for visitors to travel through the public works complex in order to gain access to the building. (COG) of the Central Naugatuck Valley 15 Regional Animal Control Facility Study Silver/Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. © The existing access point through Service Road is planned to remain, providing back of house access and parking for staff, animal control officers and deliveries. This separation of public and private is ideal to allow visitors to freely enter the building without having to encounter animals, sometimes unruly, being transported to or from the facility. The new addition, though fronting Woodside Avenue, is located 90 feet from the road in order to provide additional visual and audi al buffering from the adjacent residences and restaurant. This 90’ setback from the road also allows the incorpor ation of lawn and landscaped elements to soften the appearance of the building from the road. All of the exterior dog runs and play areas in the proposed facility are shown located on the south end of the site, shielded from Woodside Avenue by the new addition. This was designed intentionally to shield all dog activity at the regional shelter from public view. Additionally, by placing the exterior dog areas on the south, the animals will bene fit from the afternoon sunlight, especially in winter months as the temperatures drop. INTERIOR LAYOUT AND ADJACENCIES – ADDITION As described in the site layout na rrative, the public portion of the proposed facility is isolated to the northern, Woodside Avenue side of the shelter. The entry vestibule to the building has been located off axis on the northwest side of the building to provide minimal walking distance to the parking lot while maintaining maximum green space in front of the building. The remaining public portion of this facility includes a lobby/receptio n area with seating, men’s and women’s toilets, and a viewing room where poten tial adopters can meet the animals in a private, comfortable setting. Directly adjacent to the public area is the staff of fice; an open office setting for five (5) staff members including receptionist with a small confer ence table and printer/copier area. The open office is also connected to the kitchenette/staff break room which will contain tables and chairs, a small counter, refrigerator, microwave and sink. All of these public and staff spaces are located on the north side of the addition, and with excepti on of the toilet rooms, each is provided with exterior windows for day lighting. The remainder of the new addition consists of dog runs, a cattery, various support spaces and circulation. There are (28) dog runs in the new add ition, all of which are interior runs with interior pens pursuant to the Dog Pound Regulations outlined in the Connecticut General Statutes (Refer to Appendix C for full text). The choice of designi ng interior runs as opposed to exterior runs was to maintain maximum visual and audial privacy for the residences and restaurant on Woodside Avenue while maintaining an energy efficient desi gn. One of the biggest liabilities with exterior dog runs is the loss of energy, specifically heating and cooling, through the dog doors. The disadvantage of interior r uns is that the responsibility of taking dogs outside now falls on the staff members caring for the animals. However, throu gh the design of exterior dog areas located on the south side of the addition, the an imals can not only get outside for the fresh air and sunlight needed, but they will be provided with additional space to run and exerci se that would not otherwise be possible in an exterior dog run. (COG) of the Central Naugatuck Valley 16 Regional Animal Control Facility Study Silver/Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. © Despite the layout of all interior runs, daylight will still be provided to the dogs through the use of clerestory windows located above the dog runs. The other support spaces, including a staff toilet/lock er/shower area, are all located in the core of the building. This core space that runs east to west, dividing the dog runs on the north and south accomplishes a few goals. First, by placing support in the core, areas such as the food preparation room are more readily accessible from all parts of the facility. Since staff are accessing this room multiple times a day to fill dog bowls, it is ideal that this area be located centra lly to all dog runs. Second, by using the support spaces as a buffer betw een dog runs on either side, the dogs will not be permitted eye to eye contact, which is often a cause for disruption in shelters and pounds. Third, by fracturing the dog runs into different areas of th e building, it allows for staff to segregate dogs by personality, breed and/or size to further mitigate disruption between animals. The biggest challenge in designing this addition will likely be dealing with the existing topography of the site. The current dog pound sits on the low side of the site with a finish floor elevation of 407’. The terrain north of the current facility is rocky and slopes upwards towards Woodside Avenue. Due to this sloping terrai n, it is anticipated that the finish floor of the new addition will be around 410’. Although it is possible to drop the new addition to the same elevation as the existing building, it is not economical due to th e increase in rock blasting, soil excavation and retaining walls. Instead, it is pr oposed that the change in finish floor elevation be accomplished through an interior stair/ramp system, located between the existing and new sections of the facility. EXISTING DOG POUND – RENOVATIONS The existing Middlebury pound consists of a (16) exterior dogs run with adjacent indoor pens. The remainder of the facility consis ts of a small area for staff, support and public functions. The existing staff office is being utilized as a multi-purpose room that functions as an office, the cattery (cats are being held in cages within the office), and a public lobby, waiting and viewing area. Since all of these public, office and cattery functions will be improved and relocated to the proposed addition, the existing area within the current pound can be renovate d and reused as storage or mechanical areas. It is anticipated that the existing dog runs and pens will be maintained as is, with minimal renovations only as required. The reuse of these spaces and the reuse of the existing building in (COG) of the Central Naugatuck Valley 17 Regional Animal Control Facility Study Silver/Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. © general will have a significant impact in loweri ng construction costs. Additionally, the existing structure will serve a functional purpose. It is an ticipated that all deliveries and more importantly, transportation of animals, will be serviced th rough this existing structure. This will allow separation of these service functions from the public functions of the facility, but will also allow access of animal control officers into this existing portion of the structure at all hours of the day. Since the officers are often responding to calls outs ide of regular business hours, it is important that they have a place to drop animals at all time s. Furthermore, the existing and new portions of the building can be separated by lockable doors so that animal control officers only have access to the existing portion of the buildi ng, and when the regional shelte r opens the following morning, staff can collect the animals and move them to the new portion of the building, if desired. This setup may be critical to op erations, depending on the future management structure of the regional facility. BUILDING MATERIALS The intent of the design for the regional shelter is to use durable, low or no maintenance materials for both interior and exterior fini shes. The exterior building skin will be a combination of metal flatlok panels, phenolic resin panels and split face concrete masonry units (CMU), all of which require no maintenance and are extremely durable . The roof will likely be architectural asphalt shingles, with metal fascias and soffits. Metal fe ncing will be provided to enclose the exterior dog areas, and translucent panels will be used above the exterior dog areas to provide diffused light while protecting the animals from the pr ecipitation and the harsh summer sun. The images below are representa tions of the materials proposed and described above. These images are for material reference only and do not demonstrate the imagery or final appearance of the proposed regional shelter. Refer to Section IV of this report for conceptual renderings of the proposed CNV regional animal shelter. PHENOLIC PANELS SPLIT FACE CMU (COG) of the Central Naugatuck Valley 18 Regional Animal Control Facility Study Silver/Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. © METAL FLATLOK PANELS TRANSLUCENT ROOFING Interior materials will consist primarily of pain ted cmu walls at the dog run and support areas, with metal stud walls and painted gypsum board at the o ffice and public areas. Ceilings will be 2’ x 2’ acoustical ceiling tile in the public and office areas, with exposed structure or painted gypsum ceilings above the dog runs and support spaces. The roof will likely be framed from wood trusses, however metal trusses are also an option. Flooring will consist of carpeting in the public and office areas, porcelain tile at the lobby and toilet rooms, walk off mats at the entry/vestibule area, vinyl composition tile (VCT) in the st aff break room, and epoxy coatin gs at the dog runs and support spaces. The following images are from the Stratford Animal Shelter, designed by S/P+A and constructed in 2011. They represent the materials planned for the CNV regional shelter as outlined above. (COG) of the Central Naugatuck Valley 19 Regional Animal Control Facility Study Silver/Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. © Mechanical, Plumbing, Fire Prot ection & Electrical Systems GENERAL Systems will be designed to comply with the Stat e of Connecticut Building Code (including the International Mechanical Code), Connecticut Fire Safety Code (including the National Electrical Code), and the Internationa l Energy Conservation Code. Utility incentive programs and similar avenues w ill be considered during the design process with the intent of maximizing program benefits. MECHANICAL The building will be furnished with a central heating plant will consisting of two (2) high efficiency condensing hot water boilers with fully modulating burners. Each boiler will be sized for 75% of the total peak heating load. The boilers will be provided with combustion air and vent piping terminating through the roof. The hot water distribution system will consist of primary in-line pumps to maintain a constant flow through each boiler (when enabled), and secondary in line pumps with variable speed drives to circulate water to the heating equipment. Supply water temperature will be reset based on ambient temperature. The office adjacent area will be provided with a single zone, split system heating, ventilating and air conditioning system. The system will consist of an air handling unit located in the mechanical room and an air cooled condensing unit mounted on a concrete pad outside. The air handling unit will have double-wall construction a nd will consist of a supply fan, hot water coil, refrigerant coil and air filter. Multiple heating, ventilating and air conditioning systems will deliv er 100 % outside air to each kennel group. Each system will consist an air handling unit interconnected to an air cooled condensing unit and a separate relief fan. The ai r handling unit will be provided with be double wall with supply fan, hot water heating coil, refrig erant coil and air filter. In addition, radiant hydronic slab heating can be cons idered for the kennel areas. A separate heating, ventilating and air conditioning system will deliver 100 % outside air into the Cattery and Quarantine Cat areas. Each system will consist an air handling unit interconnected to an air cooled condensing unit and a separate relief fan. The air handling unit will be provided with be double wall with supply fan, hot water h eating coil, refrigerant coil and air filter. All distribution ductwork from th e air handling units will be low pressure rectangular or round and insulated and will be located in the attic. Supply air registers will be located in the ceiling and return air grille s will be located low near the floor. The building control system will be a complete direct digital control (DDC) system including (COG) of the Central Naugatuck Valley 20 Regional Animal Control Facility Study Silver/Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. © microcomputer workstation, application softwa re, control units, sensors, thermostats, temperature and pressure transmitters, gauges, valves, dampers, operators, relays, and other equipment and appurtenances, in cluding electrical wiring. The building will be provided with emergency alarm and warning in the event of power failure or ventilation equipment failure. The emergenc y alarm will be automatic telephone dialing system. PLUMBING The existing one inch cold water main will n eed to be replaced with a two inch main to accommodate the additional plumbing fixtures and wash-down system. Domestic water heating will be accomplished by two high efficiency, natural gas fired units. One will store water at a temperature of 140°F for sanitizing applications and the other will store 120°F water for general use. Each system will be provided with a recirculation loop utilizing a pump controlled by a time clock and temperature controller. Plumbing fixtures will include conventional vitr eous china water closets and lavatories along with specialty fixtures such as prep sinks, a grooming tub, a mop basin and a shower. An emergency eye wash/shower will also be provi ded along with a dishwasher and stackable washer/dryer. A chemical wash-down system will be installed to allow for sanitizing the kennels and trench drains will be utilized. FIRE PROTECTION This facility will not be provided with a sprinkle r system since that protection is not required by the Building Code or Fire Safety Code. ELECTRICAL The existing animal facility at the Middlebury site appears to have an electrical feed from another building on the site. We assume there ma y be a need to provide separate electrical metering for the new animal facility but the electrical needs of the expanded facility may dictate the need for a new electrical se rvice regardless. Preliminary calc ulations indicate that a 400 amp service will be required to meet the electrical need s of the facility. The need for and availability of 3-phase power will be investigated further during design. Electrical distribution eq uipment including a main disconnect switch and one or two panels, will all be installed in the proposed mechanical/elect rical room. The desire for generator back-up for this facility will be discusse d during design. Options would include a permanently installed generator or provisions for conne ction of a portable generator. The attached estimate includes a separate line item for a generator. (COG) of the Central Naugatuck Valley 21 Regional Animal Control Facility Study Silver/Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. © All lighting systems will be new and designed to maximize energy efficiency and to qualify for utility rebates. New fluorescent fixtures will utilize electronic ballasts and T-8 or T-5 fluorescent lamps. The lab and office spaces will utilize lens ed recessed fluorescent fixtures. Al interior and exterior runs are proposed to ut ilize wet location rated fixtures to allow for washdown of these spaces. For the lab and office areas, control of lighting will be provided by manual switches with occupancy sensors for auto-off control. Lighting controls for the runs will be discussed with the Owner to determine if manual or time cl ock control is desired for all or part of the lighting. We do not anticipate that automatic daylighting dimming controls would be effectively applied in this facility. We do not currently plan to provide dimm ing controls for lighting in any areas. All exterior lighting will be new, and will cons ist of a combination of cut-off style building mounted fixtures along with canopy mounted fixtures. The need for any site pole lights to serve walks or parking areas will be further evaluated during design. The light source for all exterior lights will be LED, and control will include both photocell and time clock inputs. All fixtures, will be classified as “full cut-off” as required to satisfy requirements of the International Energy Conservation Code, as modified by the State of Connecticut. Code does not mandate that a fire alarm system be installed in this facility. The desire for a fire alarm system will be discussed with the Owner during design but the cost for this system is not currently reflected in the attached estimate. We anticipate the need for small telephone and data network systems. Public address function, if needed, could be handled via the phone system. The need for video surveillance or building perimeter security systems will be discussed with the Owner during design but the cost for this equipment is not currently reflected in the attached estimate.   (COG) of the Central Naugatuck Valley 22 Regional Animal Control Facility Study Silver/Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. © Section VI – Opinion of Probable Costs Opinion of Probable Construction Cost The following opinion of probable construction cost outlines the anticipated costs associated with the preferred and recommended A5 floor plan and Alternate 12 site plan. Like the plans, these costs are conceptual in nature and best reflect the design teams understanding of the needs at the future Central Naugat uck Valley regional animal shelter. Customary design and construction contingencies have been added to the estimate to cover future unforeseen costs that cannot be anticipated at this time. These costs are based on comparative projects of similar scale and construction type, and they represent anticipated 2014 construction costs. These costs will need to be revisited, refined and updated throughout the course of the following design phases, with corrections made as necessary for inflation and changes in the construction market. SUMMARY OF COSTS TOTAL CONSTRUCTION $2,525,088 SOFT COSTS $319,261 __________________________________________________ ____ TOTAL PROJECT COST $2,844,349 Operating Costs Building energy consumption and the associated operating costs for specific buildings can be estimated with reasonable accuracy through the use of energy simulations. However, energy simulations are extremely time consuming and co stly, and therefore were not included in the scope of this report. An alternative, and often comparable method of estimate operating costs is the use of historical data for buildings of similar use, size and age. S/P+A has reviewed utility costs for similar animal shelters and is confident that the follo wing estimates represent reasonable, anticipated utility costs based upon current 2014 utility rates. Rates for years 2014 and beyond would need to be adjusted to account for the rise in u tility costs, which is unknown at this time. Annual Projected Electrical Costs – 2013 : $27,500 Annual Projected Fuel (Gas) Costs – 2013 : $12,500 TOTAL $40,000 COGCNV – REGIONAL ANIMAL CONTROL FACILITY 14-Nov-13 2 Service Road Revised 2-12-14 Mi ddl ebury, Connecti cut S/P+A Job No. 13.014 OPI NI ON OF PROBABLE CONS T RUCTION COST 8,413 APPROXIMATE TOTAL GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE 6,665 (NEW CONSTRUCTION) 1,748 (RENOVATION) SECTION MATERIAL & LABOR COST NUMBER W ORK CATEGORIES QTY. UNIT UNIT $ ALLOW ANCE TOTAL $ OTHER COSTS BONDS (1.5% of construction cost) 1 LS $31,564 INSURANCE (.5% of construction cost) 1 LS $10,521 OTHER COSTS SUB-TOTAL $42,085 DIVISION TWO SELECTIVE DEMOLITION AND TIE-INS 1 LS $20,000.00 $20,000 DUMPSTERS 6 EA $850.00 $5,100 DIVISION TWO SUB-TOTAL $25,100 DIVISION THREE FORMWORK (CONTINUOUS WALLS) 3,400 SF $5.00 $17,000 CONCRETE FOOTINGS 50 CY $475.00 $23,750 CONCRETE FOUNDATION W ALLS 64 CY $425.00 $27,200 CONCRETE SLAB ON GRADE (INCLUDING REINF./FINISHIN G 6,665 SF $5.00$33,325 REBAR 5 TON$1,850.00 $9,250 DIVISION THREE SUB-TOTAL $110,525 DIVISION FOUR CMU WALL BACKUP – EXTERIOR 4,500 SF$15.00$67,500 CMU WALL – INTERIOR 3,200 SF$15.00$48,000 DIVISION FOUR SUB-TOTAL $115,500 DIVISION FIVE STRUCTURAL STEEL 8 TON$3,500.00 $28,000 COLD FORMED METAL FRAMING – INTERIOR WALLS 2,000 SF$3.00$6,000 DIVISION FIVE SUB-TOTAL $34,000 DIVISION SIX BASE CABINETS 60 LF$250.00 $15,000 UPPER CABINETS 50 LF$200.00 $10,000 SOLID SURFACE COUNTERTOPS 60 LF$150.00 $9,000 DIVISION SIX SUB-TOTAL $34,000 DIVISION SEVEN DAMPPROOFING 1,700 SF$1.00$1,700 RIGID INSULATION – EXTERIOR W ALLS & FOUNDATION 1,400 SF $2.50$3,500 ACOUSTICAL INSULATION – INTERIOR WALLS 2,000 SF$1.25$2,500 BATT INSULATION 8,500 SF$1.50$12,750 WEATHER/VAPOR BARRI ER 4,500 SF $1.50$6,750 METAL SOFFITS & FASCIA 400 LF$30.00$12,000 ASPHALT SHINGLES 75 SQ$350.00 $26,250 ICE AND WATER SHIELD 75 SQ$75.00$5,625 RIDGE VENTS 140 LF$20.00$2,800 EPDM ROOFING 150 SF$12.00$1,800 METAL GUTTER 280 LF$12.00$3,360 METAL LEADER 80 LF$10.00 $800 COMPOSITE METAL PANELING – EXTERIOR 2,300 SF$25.00$57,500 FIRE & SMOKE PROTECTION 1 LS $2,000 SEALANTS 1 LS $1,500 DIVISION SEVEN SUB-TOTAL $140,835 DIVISION EIGHT 1″ INSULATED ALUMINUM STOREFRONT/CLERESTORY 680 SF $60.00$40,800 ALUMINUM ENTRANCE DOOR 2 EA$2,000.00 $4,000 HOLLOW METAL DOOR FRAME 24 EA$250.00 $6,000 HOLLOW METAL DOOR 22 EA$450.00 $9,900 STEEL DOOR – INSULATED 7 EA$250.00 $1,750 DOOR HARDWARE 31 EA$500.00 $15,500 INTERIOR VISION PANELS 25 SF$45.00$1,125 DIVISION EIGHT SUB-TOTAL $79,075 DIVISION NINE GYPSUM WALL BOARD/CEILING 10,000 SF$3.00$30,000 ACOUSTICAL CEILING TILE 1,750 SF$4.00$7,000 CARPETING 80 SY$38.00$3,040 PORCELAIN TILE FLOORING 300 SF$14.00$4,200 VCT FLOORING 600 SF$4.00$2,400 RESILIENT WALL BASE 150 LF$2.50$375 EPOXY FLOORING (INCLUDING BASE) 6,600 SF$12.00$79,200 PAINT GYPSUM WALLS/CEILINGS 10,000 SF$1.00$10,000 FILL/PAINT CMU WALLS 11,000 SF$1.25$13,750 PAINT DOOR FRAMES 24 EA$75.00$1,800 KENNELS/FENCING/RUNS 1 LS$175,000.00 $175,000 DIVISION NINE SUB-TOTAL $326,765 DIVISION TEN INTERIOR SIGNAGE 1 LS $6,000 FEASIBILITY STUDY DIVISION TEN SUB-TOTAL$6,000 DIVISION TWENTY-ONE DIVISION TWENTY-ONE SUB-TOTAL $0 DIVISION TWENTY-TWO MECHANICAL SYSTEMS AS DESCRIBED IN NARRATIVE 1 LS $425,000.00$425,000 DIVISION TWENTY-TWO SUB-TOTAL $425,000 DIVISION TWENTY-THREE PLUMBING SYSTEMS AS DESCRIBED IN NARRATIVE 1 LS$170,000.00 $170,000 DIVISION TWENTY-THREE SUB-TOTAL $170,000 DIVISION TWENTY-SIX ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS AS DESCRIBED IN NARRATIVE 1 LS$105,000.00 $118,940 DIVISION TWENTY-SIX SUB-TOTAL $118,940 DIVISION THIRTY-TWO SITE IMPROVEMENTS AS DESCRIBED IN NARRATIVE 1 LS $518,500 (See Attachment for Site Cost Breakdown) DIVISION THIRTY-TWO SUB-TOTAL$518,500 SUBTOTAL = (INCLUDE O&P) $2,104,240 CONSTRUCTION COST PER SQUARE FOOT = $300.14 GEN. CONDITIONS 10.00%$210,424.00 CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY 10.00%$210,424.00 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL = $2,525,088 SILVER/ PETRUCELLI + ASSOCIATES Architects / En gineers / Interior Desi gners SOFT COSTS/FF&E 3190 Whitney Avenue A/E DESIGN FEES (7%) $176,756 Hamden, CT 06518 PRINTING & LEGAL NOTICES $3,750 Phone: 203 230 9007 DESIGN CONTINGENCY (5%)$126,254 MISCELLANEOUS & REIMBURSABLES $7,500 BORINGS $5,000 SOFT COST/FF&E TOTAL = $319,261 TOTAL PROJECT COST $2,844,349 FF&E (Furniture, Furnishings & Equipment) FINANCING COSTS HAZARDOUS MATERIAL ABATEMENT OFF SITE DEVELOPMENT EXCLUSIONS COG REGIONAL ANIMAL CONTROL FACILITY SCHEMATIC DESIGN PHASE – ALTERNATE 12 OPINION OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST SECTION NUMBE R WORK CATEGORIESUNIT UNIT COST QTY. TOTAL $ DIVISION TWO SITE PREPARATION CLEARING AND GRUBBING Ac. $5,000.000.8 $4,000 REMOVE CONC. SIDEWALK S.Y.$5.00 550 $2,750 EROSION CONTROL (Silt Fence) 12 MONTHS L.F.$5.00 150 $750 HAYBALES L.F.$5.00 50 $250 ANTITRACK DEVICE 12 MONTHS Each $1,500.00 1 $1,500 RELOCATE BENCHES, ETC L.S. $1,500.00 1 $1,500 GENERAL EXCAVATION STRIP AND STOCKPILE TOPSOIL C.Y. $10.00 350 $3,500 CUT C.Y.$12.00 1000 $12,000 FILL (ON-SITE MATERIALS) C.Y.$5.00 $0 BORROW C.Y.25.00$ $0 ROCK EXCAVATION (ALLO WANCE)C.Y. $100.00 1500 $150,000 ROCK EXCAVATION – TRENCH (ALLOWANCE) C.Y. $175.00 250 $43,750 STORM & SANITARY SEWER CATCH BASIN Each $1,500.00 1 $1,500 TRENCH EXCAVATION L.F.$20.00 200 $4,000 STORM MANHOLE Each$2,000.00 2 $4,000 SAN MANHOLE Each$2,500.00 1 $2,500 6″ PVC SAN SEWER L.F.$50.00 50 $2,500 CLEANOUT -SAN SEWE R Each $100.00 1 $100 4″ PERF PVC STORM CURTAIN DRAIN L.F.$40.00 $0 6″ PVC STORM (R.L. CONNECT) L.F.$30.00 200 $6,000 8″ PVC STORM L.F.$35.00 $0 CLEANOUT -STO RM Each $100.00 $0 12″ HDPP STORM L.F.$45.00 $0 12″ RCP STORM L.F.$45.00 $0 15″ HDPP STORM L.F.$50.00 100 $5,000 15″ RCP STORM L.F.$50.00 $0 18″ HDPP STORM L.F.$60.00 $0 STORMWATER MGMT SYS. L.S. $15,000.00 1 $15,000 OUTLET STRUCTURE Each $5,000.00 1 $5,000 SUB-BASE GRAVEL BASE (15″) C.Y.$35.00 275 $9,625 FORMATION OF SUBGRADE S.Y.$2.25 625 $1,406 BIT. CONC. PAVEMENT -NEW 1.5″+1.5″ Ton $125.00 120 $15,000 CEMENT CONC. SIDEWALK S.F.$12.00 1650 $19,800 SIDEWALK RAMPS S.F.$15.00 60 $900 DETECTABLE WARNING S.F. $25.00 30 $750 CEMENT CONC. CURB L.F. $30.00 300 $9,000 CEMENT CONC. CURB _ INTEGRAL WITH SW L.F. $25.00 161 $4,025 ELEC/TEL/CATV SERVICE UTILITY CO CHARGES (ALLOWANCE) Lump sum $10,000.00 1 $10,000 UNDERGOUND SERVICE L.F. $20.00 150 $3,000 TRENCH EXCAVATION L.F.$10.00 150 $1,500 LANDSCAPING TOPSOIL S.Y.$10.00 1100 $11,000 RAKE, LIME FERTILIZE, SEED & MULCH S.Y.$2.25 1100 $2,475 LANDSCAPE PLANT MATERIALS (ALLOWANCE) LS $8,000.001 $8,000 TREES Each $700.00 10 $7,000 MISCELLANEOUS TRAFFIC CONTROL Man Day $500.00 4 $2,000 2″ DOMESTIC WATER SERVICE LF$75.00 125 $9,375 RETAINING WALL SF$40.00 825 $33,000 SITE AMENITIES (Benches, etc.) L.S. $7,500.00 1 $7,500 CONSTRUCTION STAKING Lump Sum $2,500.00 1 $2,500 SIGNS Each $250.00 4 $1,000 PVMT MARKINGS Lump Sum $2,000.00 1 $2,000 AS-BUILT Lump Sum $3,000.00 1 $3,000 MINOR ITEMS (5%) Lump Sum1 $21,473 ESTIMATE CONTINGENCY (15%) $67,639 subtotal $518,568.42 (COG) of the Central Naugatuck Valley 23 Regional Animal Control Facility Study Silver/Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. © Conceptual Cost Analysis The following cost analysis is an examination of the anticipated cost reductions and/or increases associated with the formation of a regional animal control plan. This spreadsheet analyzes the cost implications on a town by town basis fo r all towns participating in this study. The information contained in this document is based on current data obtained from each town on their current animal control facility, as well as projected data for the regional animal control facility based on estimates and historical data of comparable animal control facilities in Connecticut. The following summarizes the rationale and data behind this analysis;  Cost projections were analyzed over a tim e frame of 50 years, which is a typical, anticipated life span for major building elements in this type of facility. There will be other maintenance needs with associated costs during this 50 year time frame, but these would be comparable (or less) to the mainte nance needs of the current animal control facilities.  Town populations were used to determine each town’s contribution percentage to the overall construction and operating costs.  In the Upgrade Facility section, a cost of $100 per square foot was used for each of the current pounds in an attempt to estimate costs to bring the current facilities to a comparable level as the proposed regional f acility. However, it should be noted that even with significant renovations, the existing animal control facilities of the region will never fully compare, as the proposed facility will be more energy efficient, will contain additional program such as staff areas, pub lic areas, and cattery, and will have full AC/Heat/Ventilation to provide more suita ble and healthier environments for the employees and animals.  Operating and wage reductions displayed in this spreadsheet were generated with oversight by each of the participating towns. These numbers are estimates and the final cost reductions in these ar eas will depend on multiple fact ors, most importantly, each town’s decision on reductions to st aff or staff hours. In order for towns to see a true cost savings, they will need to not only reduce current operating costs, but also reduce current wages to help offset some of the new wages that will be incurred under the regional plan.  This analysis does not factor in any potential state or federal grant funding, which will be pursued by the Council of Governments. Any grant funding that is secured could have a significant impact on the findings in this cost analysis. TOWNAGE OF FACILITY (YEARS)BUILDING AREA (SQUARE FEET)# DOG RUNSUPGRADE FACILITY ($100/SF AVERAGE)DEMOLISH ($10/SF)DECOMMISSION OPERATING COSTSWAGESTOTAL ANNUAL  BUDGET OPERATING COSTSWAGESTOTAL  PROJECTED SAVINGS  BEACON FALLSN/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A$2,300 $7,716 $10,016 $1,200 $0 $1,200 BETHLEHEMN/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A$0 $2,147 $2,147 $0 $0 $0 MIDDLEBURY22 1748 16 $174,800 $17,480 $3,500 $4,200 $24,500 $28,700 $3,500 $10,000 $13,500 NAUGATUCK22 2460 20 $246,000 $24,600 $3,500 $45,000 $45,000 $90,000 $19,000 $12,500 $31,500 PROSPECTN/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A$6,900 $13,265 $20,165 $5,500 $5,000 $10,500 SOUTHBURY35 2500 10 $250,000 $25,000 $3,500 $12,400 $77,148 $89,548 $6,000 $32,148 $38,148 WOODBURY27 550 5 $55,000 $5,500 $3,500 $6,100 $18,149 $24,249 $5,000 $4,149 $9,149  OPERATING COSTSWAGES TOTAL REGIONAL FACILITYNEW 8413 44$2,844,349N/A N/A$40,000 $70,000 $110,000 COGCNV ‐ REGIONAL ANIMAL CONTROL FACILITY C.1 ‐ CURRENT & PROJECTED ANIMAL CONTROL BUDGETS  JANUARY 03, 1014 ‐ REVISED FEBRUARY 03, 2014 ‐ REVISED FEBRUARY 12, 2014          CURRENT ANNUAL BUDGET (2013) BUDGET REDUCTIONS *WOLCOTT WILL MAINTAIN THEIR CURRENT DOG POUND AND  THEREFORE HAVE BEEN EXCLUDED FROM ALL STATISTICS  PROJECTED ANNUAL BUDGET (2015) PROJECTED COST OPTIONS FOR PARITY w/ NEW FACILITY TOWN POPULATION % SHAREREGIONAL FACILITY  CONSTRUCTIONOPERATING  COSTS/WAGES OVER 50 YEARSDECOMMISSION (SEE MATRIX C.1)TOTALUPGRADES (SEE MATRIX C.1) BUDGET REDUCTIONS OVER 50 YEARS (SEE MATRIX C.1) TOTALCOSTS SAVINGS OVER 50 YEARSCOST SAVINGS PER YEAR BEACON FALLS6000 6.79% $193,055.36 $373,303 $0 $566,359 $0 $60,000 $60,000($506,359) ($10,127.17) BETHLEHEM3500 3.96% $112,615.63 $217,760 $0 $330,376 $0 $0 $0($330,376) ($6,607.52) MIDDLEBURY7500 8.48% $241,319.20 $466,629 $3,500 $711,448 $174,800 $675,000 $849,800 $138,352 $2,767.04 NAUGATUCK32000 36.20% $1,029,628.60 $1,990,950 $3,500 $3,024,079 $246,000 $1,575,000 $1,821,000($1,203,079) ($24,061.58) PROSPECT9600 10.86% $308,888.58 $597,285 $0 $906,174 $0 $525,000 $525,000($381,174) ($7,623.47) SOUTHBURY20000 22.62% $643,517.87 $1,244,344 $3,500 $1,891,362 $250,000 $1,907,400 $2,157,400 $266,038 $5,320.76 WOODBURY9800 11.09% $315,323.76 $609,729 $3,500 $928,552 $55,000 $457,450 $512,450($416,102) ($8,322.05) TOTALS 88400 100.00% $2,844,349 $5,500,000 $14,000 $8,358,349 $725,800 $5,199,850 $5,925,650($2,432,699) ($48,654)  OPERATING COSTSWAGESTOTAL  ANNUAL BUDGET REGIONAL FACILITYNEW 8413 44$2,844,349$40,000 $70,000 $110,000 COGCNV ‐ REGIONAL ANIMAL CONTROL FACILIT Y C.2 ‐ COST ANALYSIS ‐ PROJECTED OVER 50 YEARS                    JANUARY 03, 2014 ‐ REVISED FEBRUARY 3, 2014 ‐ REVISED FEBRUARY 12, 2014 PROJECTED ANNUAL BUDGET (2015) PROJECTED NEW EXPENSES (RELATED TO REGIONAL FACILITY ONLY) PROJECTED SAVINGS (SEE MATRIX C.1) SUMMARY OF COSTS (COG) of the Central Naugatuck Valley 24 Regional Animal Control Facility Study Silver/Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. © Section VII – Management Structure Options The following management and staffing narrative s were developed through close collaboration with Karen Lombardi, an animal control consultant that has held numerous positions within this field. The following is an outline of options th at will be available to the participating towns under a regional plan for both management and staffing structure and expenses. These documents were discussed in detail with the animal study Committee, with recommendations made by the design and animal control professional s of utilizing a host/participating municipality management structure. Management Structure Options Multiple Town Regional Animal Control Facility Animal Control is a governmental responsibility with local governments deciding how services will be provided. Local priorities and resources available will help determine if it will be more effective to provide management in-house through an existing municipal department, regional board or out sourced to the private sector. In multi town facilities, regardless of management options utilized a clearly defined structure that outlines accountability, responsibility, and authority for management within the organization is essential. Expert input on all policies and protocols related to maintenance of physical and behavioral animal health should ideally be developed by collaboration of seasoned animal control officers, animal professionals such as the Humane Society and a veterinarian with training or experience in shelter medicine as well as the particular population being serviced. In multiple town facilities, to ensure consistency in day to day operations a shelter manager well versed in Animal Control , management and significant people skills should be on site during all hours of operation. Regardless of management option employed, the managing authority should possess a fundamental knowledge of the unique needs of Animal Control, including, but not limited to, safety of the public, animals and Officers, proper equipment needs, the importance of enforcement of animal related laws and compassion stress that is inherent in Animal Control workers. Management Options •Host/Participating Municipality Animal Control is often administrated by the host municipality in the town where the facility is located. In multi town facilities there may also be an official or department from a participating town that is more knowledgeable or experienced in successful Animal Control Management that may be engaged by the Regional Facility to provide management services . •Pros Generally, the host municipality has the best ability to monitor the needs of shelter building maintenance, associated work ordered and budgeting. Host municipality management also generally provides easier access between shelter personnel and management due to proximity. Successful Animal Control facilities in Milford/Orange, CT, Branford, North Branford,CT and Woodbridge/Bethany/Derby, CT all report to the Town Hall. Milford and Branford to the First Selectman’s office in the host towns and Woodbridge/Bethany/Derby to the Town of Woodbridge Finance Department. It should be noted that Milford and Branford also have a Board that addresses certain needs that will be discussed later. Host/Participating Municipality management also provides a more cost effective approach to animal control management.•Cons Host or Participating Municipality may not have the resources, knowledge or desire to take on the added responsibility of managing a multi town facility. Animal Control duties include law enforcement of animal related State Statutes and certain Public Safety situations such as communicable diseases and infections that may also require working in concert with a Town Health Department or Town Police Department. Due to the unique nature of Animal Control the assignment of management to a separate Town Department such as a Town Health Department or Police Department, generally will put too much emphasis on the Animal Control duties most closely related to the managing Department with an absence of consideration to the total duties and responsibilities in Animal Control. •Regional Animal Control Board Many municipalities have attempted to utilized an Animal Control Board to provide management to local regional Animal Control facilities. In the case of multi town collaborations usually one or two board members are appointed from each participating Town and are charged with providing management and budgeting oversight to the Regional facility and personnel as well as monthly reporting the the Town that they represent. Most members serving on such boards have an interest in animals and their well being. Many board members include animal professionals, such as Veterinarians and members of Animal Rescue organizations, among others. •Pros Cost is the largest advantage to management being provided by a volunteer board. •Cons Although animals and good intentions are generally the common bond to Animal Control Board members, historically it has not been enough to provide a sustained cohesive managing body. Whether it is priority differences between the participating Towns, differences of opinion in management styles or differences in individual agendas and visions of Animal Control, an Animal Control Board does not appear to be able to provide successful management in multi Town facilities. It should be noted that several multi town shelters such as Milford/Orange and Branford/North Branford do utilize Animal Control Commissions (Boards) for different purposes. These commissions help with some oversight, investigating citizens complaints and or concerns, help with fundraising, and shelter support. Neither Commission has any control over personnel, management, policies, protocols or volunteers. •Private Contractors A private contractor would usually handle both management of the facility and Animal Control personnel and services as well. A Private Contractor may or may not be affiliated with a large Humane organization. Private Contractors are a more common practice in areas of large populations and extensive Animal Control needs, such as in New York City. There are currently no private contractors providing this service in the State of Connecticut. Outside or Private Contractors could include organizations such as The CT Humane Society located in Newington, Westport and Waterford and The Simon Foundation located in Bloomfield. These are large humane organizations that along with smaller rescue groups such as the now disbanded Animals For Life have had some involvement in shelter management, in the case of Animals For Life, as well as aiding in shelter adoptions as in the case of the CT Humane Society and The Simon Foundation. Based on recent research I do not believe that the current humane private organizations and 501c3 rescues are interested in nor have the resources to manage a Regional Animal Control facility. My research has revealed that these CT organizations are not viable options and that are somewhat overwhelmed with their own missions. It should be noted that even if a willing organization or rescue were interested in managing a facility the cost and/or agenda is usually prohibitive. While certain boarding facilities and Veterinary hospitals might contract to provide run space for a Town’s animal control needs, it is not a real “management” option for a multi town facility. In the case of the current proposed Region and customary practices in CT where each Town prefers to keep or hire their own Animal Control Officers, the use of a private contractor would not be indicated and prove extremely costly if pursued. •Volunteers Volunteers are a welcome and useful shelter resource. Volunteers provide added free personnel hours that help the shelter’s budget by providing services, such as cleaning, filing, and other non professional functions the Towns would other wise be paying for. Volunteers also provide added comfort and attention to impounded animals through companionship, grooming, exercise and in some instances training. Volunteers also do fund raising and foster good will toward the shelter in the community. While an active volunteer base is necessary to a successful shelter, volunteers should only be viewed as a valuable addition and not be depended upon to consistently provide necessary services. The main focus should be on options that would ensure success for the Towns, the animals and the facility. Further conversation and ideas from participating Towns will help to define available management resources and needs so that preferred options can be explored in greater depth to determine the most effective and cost efficient management style that will best serve this Region.   REGIONAL FACILITY STAFFING OPTIONS Staffing recommendations are based on the assumption that local Animal Control Officers will not be responsible for the day to day running of the shelter, such as, the cleaning and feeding of the animals, or dering supplies, overseeing kennel staff, providing access to the animals for potential adopters to view, managing the office, answering the phones, communicating with participating ACO’s with regard to the animals impounded at the Regional facility from their towns, etc. The primary goal of proper staffing is to provide adequate coverage for the facility to insure the safety of the animals housed there and to provide a professional atmosphere enhancing adoptions and public relati ons as economically as possible. Staffing recommendations also do not rely upon volunteers as this will be a new facility without an established and/or reliable volunteer base. 1. As was briefly mentioned at the November 14 th meeting in Middlebury, it is strongly suggested non-ACO Facility Manager be employed at the Regional Shelter to provide continuity of serv ice and oversight of the day to day functioning of a multi-town Regional facility. It would be necessary for the facility manager to be knowledgeabl e about shelter animals and possess strong people skills. Based on my research with existing multi town facilities that employ a full time office manage r, both Municipal and Private Sector, the average starting pay range would be between $19. and $21. per hour or $39520 and $43680 gross annually. With a single office manager the issues as to who fulfill the of fice manager’s responsibilities at the facility during hours of operation should the Facility Manager be out sick or take vacation time would have to be addressed. Would participating ACO’s fill in at no additional cost? 2. A second option would be to employ two part time Facility Managers to provide the coverage of one full time Manager. Responsibilities and necessary skills would be the same, however, you would now have two people that know the job and can provide coverage should one be out sick or take vacation time. Average starting pay range would be slightly higher, however, this would be balanced by the absence of the requirement to provide insurance. Average starting pay range would be between $21. and $22. per hour or $20540. and $22594. for each employee. Equalling $41080. to 45188. annually for two employees working 19 ¾ hours each per week. 3. The third option would require The host Town’s ACO’s providing management in addition to their ACO responsibilities, if . This is done at other multi town facilities with non host participating towns providing compensation through contracts with the host Town. Compensation is usually negotiated between host Town and other participating Towns. 4. Kennel Staff. A minimum of two part time employees would be necessary to adequately clean and sanitize, feed animals, etc. in a 44 run Facility. It is unknown how many total animals will actually be impounded at the same time and although unlikely, with a full kennel this estimate of two part time kennel workers may need to be amende d to three. Pay for all part time personnel is estimated at 19 ¾ hours. My research revealed a large range in kennel help pay rates. Towns with strong, reliable volunteer participation tended to pay lower wages for their ke nnel help. However, they also appeared to have a higher turnover with less reliability and productivity from their paid employees. Of those shelters po lled the low average starting pay for kennel help is $13. to $14. per hour or $13351 to $14378. annually per Kennel Helper. It should be noted that the adoption of animals from any town, regardless of where they are housed, is the responsibility of the Animal Control Officer from that Town. Neither the Facility Manager, Kennel He lp or any other non ACO personnel is authorized to adopt, place or give away an animal, per State of CT Statute. As more information and thoughts become available from the participating Towns regarding the needs and involvement or not of each towns ACO’s in the non ACO functions of the Regional Facility there may be a need to revisit these staffing options. (COG) of the Central Naugatuck Valley 25 Regional Animal Control Facility Study Silver/Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. © Section VIII – Appendix A Meeting Minutes and Notes Previously Presented Plans and Program   COGCNV Regional Animal Shelter Study 13.014 June 26, 2013 – Revised 1 SILVER / PETRUCELLI + ASSOCIATES Architects / Engineers / Interior Designers 3190 Whitney Avenue, Hamden, CT 06518-2340 Tel: 203 230 9007 Fax: 203 230 8247 silverpetrucelli.com MEETING MINUTES #1 PROJECT KICK OFF PROJECT: Regional Animal Shelter Study CLIENT: Council of Governments of the Central Naugatuck Valley (COGCNV) MEETING PLACE: Conference Room Mi ddlebury Town Hall and Middlebury Animal Shelter DATE AND TIME: June 26, 2013 @ 9:15 am ATTENDEES: Edward B. St. John First Selectman Middlebury Edward L. Stephens Wolcott Police Chief Pat Gallagher Regional Planner, COGCNV Peter Dorpalen Executive Director, COGCNV Richard Wildman Middlebur y Police Acting Chief Edward Edelson (at site) Southbury First Selectman & Study Committee Vice Chair Don Smith Civil Engineer Chris Nardi SPA Bill Silver SPA Purpose: Kick off of the project and program information gathering. A) First Selectman St. John described the Middleb ury animal shelter is used primarily as a canine facility and a small ca ttery has been developed in the last 2 years in the staff office. This pre-engineered building wa s constructed around 1990 and has significant utility services including gas, sanitary sewe r, canine pumps for discharge as well as adjacencies to the transfer st ation and public works faciliti es. The facility is managed by a tenant “Animals For Lif e” (AFL) and their part time staff as well as volunteers manage the AFL stock plus the animal s Middlebury is responsible for. COGCNV Regional Animal Shelter Study 13.014 June 26, 2013 – Revised 2  The Animals for Life staff will be ente ring into a new lease to maintain the building as part of their responsibili ties, but the police chief maintains the town’s administrative responsibilitie s under state statutes. Currently Middlebury has two part time animal control officers who make the field calls. It is likely that if regional animal shelters are developed under this plan, the animal wardens or control officers will remain under the management of each of their respective towns.  Wolcott has one full time dog warden and they currently have a mutual support service partnership with Plymouth. No fees are charged either way and Plymouth handles the weekend and night animal control officer duties while the Wolcott town facility with its 10 runs is the housing for both towns.  Southbury’s animal control shelter is vi rtually a shed with exterior runs. They have one full time animal control officer and their facility may house anywhere from 1 to 12 dogs at any one time. Southbury’s goal is to get more dogs adopted as soon as possible before they become “kennel crazy” with long duration stays in small quarters , coupled with a lack of exercise. First Selectman Edelson believes it is ideal that the animal control officer for each town remain in their resp ective fields while humane society organizations operate the pounds, colle ct donations for their shelter and manage the adoption process. Almost all towns create relationships with the local veterinarians for the medical care of these animals. B) Other town sites  Don Smith reviewed the site information he has collected for the other towns, which includes Woodbury (shared with Bethlehem), Wolcott, Naugatuck and Southbury. The attende es were not aware of any other facilities in any of th e other council towns.  D. Smith explained that an expanded facility in either Woodbury or Southbury would require a new septic system conforming to CTDEEP regulations rather than the health c ode due to the current septic system capacity. Accordingly, expansion of the existing Woodbury and Southbury sites are the least desirable sites for a re gional facility due to septic system issues. C) Tour of Middlebury facility  The team assembled at the canine facility on Service Road in Middlebury and toured the site. On this day, 5 pit-bull mixes were housed on the side that is leased to AFL, and approximate ly 6 cats were in the cattery. There were no animals under the town’s control in the facility. The adjacency of the site to the public works facility includes the benefit of connection to emergency generation. The expansi on potential of the property toward Woodside Avenue on town land, prefe rred public access to the building and other site planning issu es were discussed. Besides the restaurant and one rented house, there are no detrimental neighbor adjacencies, and the public works portion of the site is under camera surveillance, so the Middlebury police do investigate and make arrests for illegal animal COGCNV Regional Animal Shelter Study 13.014 June 26, 2013 – Revised 3 abandonments, which the chief describes as active as once a per week but settling down in various seasons. D) Next action – P Gallagher will forward the animal control statistical information to SP+A as soon as convenient. Per the study scop e, the architect’s will begin to develop a program baseline on the regional animal needs and the relative changes over time. The architect and engineers will also arrange with each of the animal shelter towns, to visit those shelters and document the existing conditions. The intent is to schedule the next meeting in the future where this baseline information can be shared with the COGCNV subcommittee. Any corrections, additions, or comments should be made to Silver / Petrucelli + Associates within 14 days of the date of the meeting. Distribution: All attendees, Rachel Solviera, Ken Sgorbati, Bob Banning COGCNV Regional Animal Shelter Study 13.014 September 17, 2013 1 SILVER / PETRUCELLI + ASSOCIATES Architects / Engineers / Interior Designers 3190 Whitney Avenue, Hamden, CT 06518-2340 Tel: 203 230 9007 Fax: 203 230 8247 silverpetrucelli.com MEETING MINUTES #2 PROJECT PROGRESS REVIEW PROJECT: Regional Animal Shelter Study CLIENT: Council of Governments of the Central Naugatuck Valley (COGCNV) MEETING PLACE: Conference Room Middlebury Town Hall and Middlebury Animal Shelter DATE AND TIME: September 17, 2013 @ 10:00 am ATTENDEES: Pat Gallagher Regional Planner, COGCNV Edward B. St. John First Selectman – Middlebury Carol Hubert Asst. to First Selectman – Southbury Todd Brouillette Police Captain – Naugatuck Gerald Smith (Call-in) First Selectman – Beacon Falls Robert Chatfield (Call-in) Mayor – Prospect Chris Nardi Project Architect – SP+A Bill Silver Project Manager – SP+A Purpose: Review data collection, prog ramming, planning and study development to date. A) Chris Nardi presented the study progress to date through use of Power Point images and graphic handouts. The pres entation material focused on previously completed data collection, programming and si te investigations as well as new material depicting building and site planning concepts for the new, regional shelter. Each topic is briefly outlined below, accompanied by all decisions made by the Committee for the further development of this report. COGCNV Regional Animal Shelter Study 13.014 September 17, 2013 2 Impound Statistics; Historical data (2007-2012) on impounds for the participating towns were analyzed and organized into a spread sheet to depict peak impound volumes over the past six (6) years. These stat istics were compared to corresponding town populations over the same time pe riod (2007-2012), as well as future population projections for the years 2015, 2020 and 2025.  Note: Following the meeting, it was confirmed by the COGCNV and the Committee that Wolcott will be maintaining their existing animal control facility.  Excluding Wolcott, the averag e monthly impoundments for the participating towns over the past si x (6) years have been 38.4 with an average maximum of 52.6. Based upon this data and an anticipated average animal length of less than one month, it was recommended by S/P+A that the future facility be designed to accommodate 40-50 dog runs.  It was noted that depending upon the future management structure of the regional facility, and more speci fically the decision to operate as a kill versus no kill facility, the overall number of dog runs may need to be adjusted.  It was agreed by the Committee to proceed with S/P+A’s recommendation of 40-50 dog runs, w ith the understanding that the design process will be flexible enough to allow for the addition of runs if needed. Preliminary Space Program; The preliminary space program was pr esented, depicting the necessary programmatic spaces for a regional animal control facility (as determined by S/P+A based upon previously designed an imal control facilities). In addition, supplementary programmatic spaces were outlined which are often, but not always, desi gned into modern animal control facilities.  The space program was approved by the Committee with the following adjustments; o A cattery and cat quarantine will be included o A viewing room will be included o A staff break room/kitchenette will be included o A training room, conference room and/or community room will not be included. COGCNV Regional Animal Shelter Study 13.014 September 17, 2013 3 Existing Pound Visits; C. Nardi briefly described the obser vations and finding documented during the site and facility visits of the five (5) existing animal control facilities located in Middlebury, Wolcott, Woodbury, Southbury and Naugatuck. Among other items, the findings focu sed around current quantity of dog runs, heating and cooling accommodations, potential for site expansion and overall condition of the ex isting facility/structure.  It was determined by S/P+A that Middlebury is the only existing animal control site with enough developable land to accommodate a future, regional animal control facility.  C. Nardi commented that even wi thout this information, Middlebury was determined as the most ideal location of the existing facilities, due to its centrality to the partic ipating towns, easy highway access and location on a town owned, public works complex.  C. Nardi asked the town representatives if there were alternative town owned sites that may be avai lable for development of a regional facility. No suggestions were made and all present Committee members agreed that Middlebury was the only and preferred site and to proceed with the study accordingly. Building Layouts; C. Nardi presented three (3) alternativ e planning options depicting different spatial arrangements for the proposed, regional animal control facility. Planning options 1 and 2 depicted new facilities with the existing animal control facility being demolished. Pla nning option 3 depicted a partial new facility built off of the existing Midd lebury animal control facility, which would be renovated and re-used as part of the new, regional facility.  Planning option 3 was the consensus among the present Committee members. It was determined that this option of re-using the existing building be further developed, incorporating the programmatic changes previously outlined.  Maintaining the existing facility was preferred due to construction cost savings, and the ability to use the existing building as a secure and discrete area for dog drop offs as well as location for overflow dog runs.  It was requested that S/P+A de velop two (2) alternative plans depicting the dog runs in two orientations; o Back to back dog runs allowing dogs eye to eye visual contact (Similar to Planning Option 1) o Dog runs separated by a storage/support buffer, not allowing any eye to eye visual contact between dogs. (Similar to Planning Option 2) COGCNV Regional Animal Shelter Study 13.014 September 17, 2013 4 Site Layouts; Site layout options (developed by D onald Smith, Jr., consulting civil engineer) were briefly presented and discussed.  The Committee preferred the site op tion that reduced paved parking area and maintained maximum green space along Woodside Avenue.  It was determined that 10-12 public parking spaces were ample for this site, with additional staff and animal control parking located on the public works side of the building (location of existing facility parking) B) Next action – C. Nardi will forward a .pdf of the power point presentation to Pat Gallagher for distribution to the Committ ee members. S/P+A will revise the conceptual building plans per the comme nts of today’s meeting. Building elevations, renderings and cost estima tes will be produced and bound into a Draft Report, to be presented at th e next Committee meeting. Management structures for a regional animal control facility will be analyzed and presented at the next Committee meeting. Any corrections, additions, or comments should be made to Silver / Petrucelli + Associates within 14 days of the date of the meeting. Distribution: All attendees 13.014 COGCNV Regional Shelter – Preliminary Space Program.xls Silver/Petrucelli + Associates, Inc. 19-Jul-13 Architects / Engineers / Interior Designers 3190 Whitney Avenue Hamden, Ct 06518 (P) 203-230-9007 silverpetrucelli.com Council of Governments – Central Naugatuck Valley (COGCNV) Regional Animal Shelter Study – Preliminary Program Summary Regional Animal Shelter Program Space SQFT Comments 1Vestibule (Air-Lock) 80 Front entrance 2Public Lobby/Waiting 120 Reception counter& waiting area 3Shared Office 300 Desks for (5), including reception 4Men’s Toilet Room 64 Shared w/ public. Handicapped accessible 5Women’s Toilet Room 64 Shared w/ public. Handicapped accessible 6Janitor’s Closet 25 7 Unisex Shower/Locker Area 64 W ater closet, lavatory, and shower 8Indoor Dog Runs (45) 4050 90 s.f. per run – Includes pen & solid separation per Regulations 22-336-13 9Isolation Runs (5) 500 100 s.f. per run – (1) Isolation run / (10) i ndoor runs per Regulations 22-336-13 10Grooming/Laundry 120 11 Exam Room 120 12 Food Preparation/Storage 200 W asher / dryer, sink, and storage 13General Storage 400 Divided into multiple areas 14Mechanical/Electrical 300 Exterior Access Net Total Usable Area6327 Circulation + Structure (25%) 1582 Varies dependent on kennel layout Total Facility 7909 Additional Program to Consider SQFT Comments 1Cattery 300 (25) cats 2Cat Quarantine 100 3 Viewing Room(s) 85 85 s.f. per viewing room 4 Training Room/Conference/Multi-Use 3000 Training room recommended by Naugatuck ACO; proximity to major airport may likely impair facility’s ability to host credited training events 5 Conference/Community Room 500 Square footage variable dependent on room use and occupancy 6Kitchenette/Pantry 100 Staff Use 7Sally Port 500 Interior or exterior Space Needs Page 1 of 1 7/24/20132:41 PM (COG) of the Central Naugatuck Valley 26 Regional Animal Control Facility Study Silver/Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. © Section IX – Appendix B Connecticut General Statutes Sec tion 22-336 – Dog Pound Regulations   DOG POUND REGULATIONS Section 22-336-13 Definitions As used in sections 22-336- 13 to 22-336-30, inclus ive: (a) “Dog Pound” means a building provided and maintained by a city or town which is us ed for the detention and care of impounded dogs or other facilities including licensed veterinary hospital or licensed commercial kennel which, through written agreement with a town, is used for the detention and care of impounded dogs. (b) “Impounded Dog” means a dog seized by the chief canine control officer, assistant chief animal canine cont rol officer, canine control officer, regional canine control officer or municipal anima l control officer for the purpose of detaining the dog, quarantining the dog, or holding a dog under a restraint or disposal order. (c) “Indoor Pen” means a completely enclosed area inside a dog pound building to be used for shelter by an impounded dog. (d) “Indoor Run” means an area inside a completely enclosed dog pound to be used for shelter and exercise by an impounded dog. (e) “Outdoor Run” means an incompletely enclosed area adjacent to a dog pound building to be used for ex ercise by an impounded dog. (f) “Renovate” means to change the size , construction or composition of pens, runs, fences, floors, heating system, water supply system, waste disposal system, o r any other physical component of dog pound building which are governed by these regulations. (g) “Sanitary” means that which pertains to health, with especial reference to cleanliness and freedom from infect ive and deleterious influences. Section 22-336-14 Impoundment Requirements No dog may be impounded at a dog pound wh ich does not meet the requirements of sections 22-336-13 to 22-336-29, inclusive, of these regulations, subject to the provisions of Se ction 22-336-30 of these regulations. Section 22-336-15 Compliance All dog pounds in which impounded dogs are kept must comply with sections 22- 336-13 to 22-336-29, inclusiv e, of these regulations, subject to the provisions of Section 22-336-30 of these regulations. Section 22-336-16 Physical Requirements (a) Any building to be used as a dog pound shall be constructed in complianc e with sections 22-336-13 to 22-336-30, inclusive, of these regulations and maintained in good repair. (b) The lower portion of interior and exte rior walls of a building to be used as a dog pound shall be c onstructed of concrete or cement block material up to a minimum height of four (4) feet. (c) All fencing shall be a maximum 1 ½ inch wire mesh by 11 minimum wire gauge to contain impounded dogs and of a design to prevent injury. (d) A copy of blueprints detailing the construction of the dog pound facility or renovation of an existing facility sha ll be sub mitted to the commissioner at least ninety (90) days prior to start of construction. Sections 22-336-7 Pens and Runs (a) Dog pounds shall provide either an indoor run, or an outdoor run and an adjacent indoor pen for each adult dog. (b) Indoor runs shall measure not le ss than forty (40) square feet with a minimum width of four (4) feet and a mi nimum height of six (6) feet. Solid partition div iders shall be provided between each run extending from the floor to a height of at least (4) f eet and shall extend the full length of the run. (c) Outdoor runs shall measure not less than four (4) feet wide, eight (8) feet long and six (6) feet hi gh with a gate at the end of each run. Solid partition dividers shall be provided between each run extending from the floor to a height of at least four (4 ) feet and shall extend the full length of the run. (d) Outdoor runs shall be covered by a permanent roof of suitable material to protect the runs from snow, rain and excess ive sunlight and a barrier shall be provided between the top of the runs and the roof structure to prevent the escape of impounded dogs. (e) Indoor pens shall be adjacent to each outdoor run and shall meas ure not less than for four (4) feet square and at least four (4) feet high. Any indoor run of less than six (6) feet in height must be covered with a maximum of 1 ½ inch wire mesh by 11 minimum wire gauge chain link fence and sha ll be kept clear of obstruction to provide air circulation. (f) Indoor pens shall be supplied with a so lid pa rtition divider extending from the floor to a height of at least four (4) feet. (g) Doorways between indoor pens and the outdoor runs shall be offset from center to provide adequate space fo r resting beds to be placed in the indoor pens. Section 22-336-18 Floors and base of runs (a) All dog pounds shall ha ve smooth concrete floors, runs and troughs with a minimum of one-quarter (1/4) inch pitch per foot. (b) Floors of outdoor runs shall be pi t ched away from the building in the direction of a trough installed at the end of the run, exterior to the run fencing. (c) Floors of indoor pens shall be pitched toward a trough installed at the end of the pen, exterior to the pen fencing. (d) Floors of indoors runs shall be pitched toward a trough which has been made inacc essible to dogs by either co vering or placement exterior to the run fencing. (e) All troughs shall be pitched toward covered drains at least six (6) in ches in diameter connected by pipe not less t han (6) inches in diameter to a disposal system appro ved by the official responsible for local sewage disposal. Section 22-336-19 Heat and Ventilation (a) Thermostatically controlled clean and sanitar y heat shall be provided to maintain a minimum temperature of fi fty five (55) degrees Fahrenheit at floor level. At no time shall the indoor temperature of the dog pound where dogs are housed exceed ni nety (90) degrees Fahrenheit. (b) The indoor portion of the dog pou nd where dogs are housed shall be mechanically ventilated in such a m anner as will provide fresh air to maintain health and comfort of i mpounded dogs. Section 22-336-20 Water Supply All dog pounds shall be supplied with a su fficient amount of hot running water for the purpose of maintaining proper sanitary conditions. The pound shall also provide a sufficient supply of potable water for impounded dogs. Section 22-336-21 Lighting Electrical lighting shall be provided in all dog pounds, capable of providing a minimum of 30 foot candles. Lighting s hall be provided for a minimum of eight (8) hours during each twenty- four (24) hour period. Section 22-336-22 Sanitation (a) The dog pound shall be kept sanitary and cleaned a minimum of once daily. (b) A disinfectant capable of eliminating canine viruses and bacteria shall be used in washing down runs, pens and in terior areas of the dog pound. (c) Such disinfectants shall be used in a manner not harmful to dogs. (d) Runs and pens shall be cleaned and disinfected before use by another dog. (e) Feces and other excreta shall be removed from pens, runs and troughs daily. (f) Equipment shall be available for t he proper storage or disposal of waste material to control vermin, insects and obnoxious odors . Section 22-336-23 Food and water containers Galvanized or stainless steel food and water containers shall be pr ovided and kept clean and sanitary at all times. Food and water containers shall be washed and disinfected daily and before use by another dog. Section 22-336-24 Storage of dog food Dog food in original packagi ng shall be stored at least twelve (12) inches abov e the floor on clean racks, dollies or other cl ean surfaces, in such a manner as to protect from splash and other contamination. Unsealed bags of dog food shall be stored in covered metal or covered heavy duty plastic containers at least twelve (12) inches above the floor on clean racks, dollies or other clean surfaces, in such a manner as to protect fr om splash and other contamination. Section 22-336-25 Removal of dead dogs Any dead dog shall be immediately remo ved from the dog pound area. A dead dog shall be preserved in a pr operly operating refrigerator at a temperature of not more than forty (40) degrees fahrenheit or freezer at a temperature of not more than thirty-two (32) degrees fahrenheit until such time as the dog is transferred for purposes of diagnostic testing or di sposed of by cremation or burial. Section 22-336-26 Isolation area At least one (1) isolation area shall be provided for each ten indoor runs or outdoor runs with adjacent indoor pens. An isolation area must consist of an indoor run or an outdoor run with an indoor pen. Such isolation areas shall be only used by dogs quarantined pursuant to Sections 22-358 or 22-359 C.G.S. Section 22-336-27 Quarantined Dogs Impounded dogs quarantined pursuant to Sections 22-358 or 22-359 C.G.S., must be kept in an isolation area. Only one (1) dog shall be kept in each isolation area. Section 22-336-28 Animal Care (a) Water shall be provided for dogs at all times. Adult dogs shall be fed at least once per day. D ogs under the age of six (6) months shall be fed at least two (2) times per day. (b) Dogs shall be fed the type and qu antity of food as directed by the manufacturers’ label. (c) Any dog which appears sick or injured shall be examined by a licensed veterinarian. (d) A water impervious removable resting bed shall be provided for each impounded dog. Not more than one adult dog shall be kept in each indoor run or outdoor run wit h adjacent indoor pen. Section 22-336-29 Transportation All dogs transported by municipal animal control officers shall be transported in an enclosed vehicle. Vehic les used to transport dogs shall be structurally sound and maintained in good repair to prev ent injury to dogs carried therein. Section 22-336-30 Grandfather Clause (a) The requirements of Sections 22-336-17(b), 22-336-17(c), 22-336-17(d) and 22-336-17(e) of these regulat ions concerning minimum measurements for the size of ru ns and pens, and the requirements of Section 22-336-18 of these regulati ons do not apply to dog pounds which are completely constructed prior to t he effective date of these regulations. All other requirements of Sections 22-336-13 to 22-336-29, inclusive, of these regulations including the prov isions of Sections 22-336-17(a), 22- 336-17(f) and 22-336-17(g) sha ll apply to such dog pounds. (b) Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 22-336-30(a) of these regulations , any renovations to the si ze, construction or composition of pens, runs, fences, floors, heating system, water supply system, waste disposal system, or any other physi cal component of dog pound buildings completely constructed prior to the e ffective date of these regulations must conform with the appropriate requirements of Sections 22-336-13 to 22- 336-29, inclusive, of these regulations. Section 2 Section 22-336-1 through 22-336-12, inclus iv e, of these Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies are repealed.   (COG) of the Central Naugatuck Valley 27 Regional Animal Control Facility Study Silver/Petrucelli & Associates, Inc. © Section X – Appendix C Alternative Program, Floor Plans, Site Plan and Estimate The following documents were created in an effort to determine the maximum building footprint, and associated dog run quantity, that could be accommodated by the preferred regional site located at 2 Service Road in Middlebury, CT. The program and floor plan for Option 6 are demonstrative of this maximum build and iden tify an animal control facility able to accommodate up to (105) dog runs. Due to the unlikelihood of this region requiring an animal control facility with (105) dog runs, an additional solution was investigated. This solution, Option 7, investigates the design of an (80) run facility including the floor plan, site plan and cost estimate to follow; 13.014 COGCNV Regional Shelter – FINAL Space Program – Option #6.xls Silver/Petrucelli + Associates, Inc. 3-Feb-13 Architects / Engineers / Interior Designers 3190 Whitney Avenue Hamden, Ct 06518 (P) 203-230-9007 silverpetrucelli.com Council of Governments – Central Naugatuck Valley (COGCNV) Regional Animal Shelter Study – FINAL Program Summary – Option #6 Regional Animal Shelter Program SpacePROPOSED SF ACTUAL SF Comments 1Vestibule (Air-Lock) 80 95 Front entrance 2Public Lobby/Waiting 120 129 Reception counter& waiting area 3Viewing Room 85 120 4Shared Office 425 430 Desks for (5), including reception; room for conference table 5Staff Break / Kitchenette 120 123 Tables, sink, microwave, refrigerator 6Men’s Toilet Room 64 62 Shared w/ public. Handicapped accessible 7Women’s Toilet Room 64 62 Shared w/ public. Handicapped accessible 8Staff Toilet / Shower Room 90 92 Includes shower and locker area 9Indoor Dog Runs (95) 7600 7600 80 s.f. per run – Includes pen & solid separation per Regulations 22-336-13 10Isolation Runs (10) 800 800 80 s.f. per run – (1) Isolation run / (10) indoor runs per Regulations 22-336-13 11Cattery 350 347 (35-40) cats 12Cat Quarantine 150 157 13Grooming/Laundry 150 184 14Exam Room 150 184 15Food Preparation/Storage 350 408 W asher / dryer, sink, and storage 16General Storage 500 480 Divided into multiple areas 17Mechanical/Electrical 600 738 Exterior Access Net Total Usable Area11698 12011 Circulation + Structure (25%) 2925 2619 Total Facility 14623 14630 Space Needs Page 1 of 1 2/6/20148:25 AM 13.014 COGCNV Regional Shelter – FINAL Space Program – Option #7.xls Silver/Petrucelli + Associates, Inc. 3-Feb-13 Architects / Engineers / Interior Designers 3190 Whitney Avenue Hamden, Ct 06518 (P) 203-230-9007 silverpetrucelli.com Council of Governments – Central Naugatuck Valley (COGCNV) Regional Animal Shelter Study – FINAL Program Summary – Option #7 Regional Animal Shelter Program SpacePROPOSED SF ACTUAL SF Comments 1Vestibule (Air-Lock) 80 95 Front entrance 2Public Lobby/Waiting 120 129 Reception counter& waiting area 3Viewing Room 85 120 4Shared Office 425 430 Desks for (5), including reception; room for conference table 5Staff Break / Kitchenette 120 123 Tables, sink, microwave, refrigerator 6Men’s Toilet Room 64 62 Shared w/ public. Handicapped accessible 7Women’s Toilet Room 64 62 Shared w/ public. Handicapped accessible 8Staff Toilet / Shower Room 90 86 Includes shower and locker area 9Indoor Dog Runs (69) 5520 5520 80 s.f. per run – Includes pen & solid separation per Regulations 22-336-13 10Isolation Runs (11) 880 880 80 s.f. per run – (1) Isolation run / (10) indoor runs per Regulations 22-336-13 11Cattery 300 315 (30-35) cats 12Cat Quarantine 125 133 13Grooming/Laundry 150 158 14Exam Room 150 184 15Food Preparation/Storage 350 375 W asher / dryer, sink, and storage 16General Storage 500 480 Divided into multiple areas 17Mechanical/Electrical 1000 944 Exterior Access Net Total Usable Area10023 10096 Circulation + Structure (30%) 3007 2955 Total Facility 13030 13051 Space Needs Page 1 of 1 2/12/20148:08 AM COGCNV – REGIONAL ANIMAL CONTROL FACILITY 12-Feb-14 2 Service Road Mi ddl ebury, Connecti cut S/P+A Job No. 13.014 OPI NI ON OF PROBABLE CONS TRUCTION COST – PLAN OPTION #7 13,051 APPROXIMATE TOTAL GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE 11,303 (NEW CONSTRUCTION) 1,748 (RENOVATION) SECTION MATERIAL & LABOR COST NUMBER W ORK CATEGORIES QTY. UNIT UNIT $ ALLOW ANCE TOTAL $ OTHER COSTS BONDS (1.5% of construction cost) 1 LS$44,644 INSURANCE (.5% of construction cost) 1 LS $14,881 OTHER COSTS SUB-TOTAL $59,525 DIVISION TWO SELECTIVE DEMOLITION AND TIE-INS 1 LS $20,000.00 $20,000 DUMPSTERS 8 EA $850.00 $6,800 DIVISION TWO SUB-TOTAL $26,800 DIVISION THREE FORMWORK (CONTINUOUS WALLS) 5,856 SF $5.00 $29,280 CONCRETE FOOTINGS 81 CY$475.00 $38,475 CONCRETE FOUNDATION W ALLS 108 CY$425.00 $45,900 CONCRETE SLAB ON GRADE (INCLUDING REINF./FINISHIN G 11,303 SF $5.00 $56,515 REBAR 10 TON $1,850.00 $18,500 DIVISION THREE SUB-TOTAL $188,670 DIVISION FOUR CMU WALL BACKUP – EXTERIOR 8,750 SF $15.00 $131,250 CMU WALL – INTERIOR 9,400 SF $15.00 $141,000 DIVISION FOUR SUB-TOTAL $272,250 DIVISION FIVE STRUCTURAL STEEL 2 TON $3,500.00 $7,000 COLD FORMED METAL FRAMING – INTERIOR WALLS 1,500 SF $3.00 $4,500 DIVISION FIVE SUB-TOTAL $11,500 DIVISION SIX BASE CABINETS 100 LF $250.00 $25,000 UPPER CABINETS 80 LF $200.00 $16,000 SOLID SURFACE COUNTERTOPS 100 LF $150.00 $15,000 DIVISION SIX SUB-TOTAL $56,000 DIVISION SEVEN DAMPPROOFING 2,950 SF $1.00 $2,950 RIGID INSULATION – EXTERIOR W ALLS & FOUNDATION 8,750 SF $2.50$21,875 ACOUSTICAL INSULATION – INTERIOR WALLS 2,000 SF $1.25 $2,500 BATT INSULATION 11,303 SF $1.50 $16,955 WEATHER/VAPOR BARRIER 8,750 SF $1.50 $13,125 METAL SOFFITS & FASCIA 732 LF $30.00 $21,960 ASPHALT SHINGLES 125 SQ $350.00 $43,750 ICE AND WATER SHIELD 125 SQ $75.00 $9,375 RIDGE VENTS 300 LF $20.00 $6,000 EPDM ROOFING 150 SF $12.00 $1,800 METAL GUTTER 500 LF $12.00 $6,000 METAL LEADER 120 LF $10.00 $1,200 COMPOSITE METAL PANELING – EXTERIOR 4,500 SF $25.00 $112,500 FIRE & SMOKE PROTECTION 1 LS$3,000 SEALANTS 1 LS$2,000 DIVISION SEVEN SUB-TOTAL $264,990 DIVISION EIGHT 1″ INSULATED ALUMINUM STOREFRONT/CLERESTORY 680 SF $60.00 $40,800 ALUMINUM ENTRANCE DOOR 2 EA $2,000.00 $4,000 HOLLOW METAL DOOR FRAME 27 EA $250.00 $6,750 HOLLOW METAL DOOR 27 EA $450.00 $12,150 STEEL DOOR – INSULATED 4 EA $250.00 $1,000 DOOR HARDWARE 31 EA $500.00 $15,500 INTERIOR VISION PANELS 25 SF $45.00 $1,125 DIVISION EIGHT SUB-TOTAL $81,325 DIVISION NINE GYPSUM WALL BOARD/CEILING 15,000 SF $3.00 $45,000 ACOUSTICAL CEILING TILE 2,000 SF $4.00 $8,000 CARPETING 80 SY $38.00 $3,040 PORCELAIN TILE FLOORING 300 SF $14.00 $4,200 VCT FLOORING 600 SF $4.00 $2,400 RESILIENT WALL BASE 200 LF $2.50 $500 EPOXY FLOORING (INCLUDING BASE) 11,000 SF $12.00 $132,000 PAINT GYPSUM WALLS/CEILINGS 15,000 SF $1.00 $15,000 FILL/PAINT CMU WALLS 18,000 SF $1.25 $22,500 PAINT DOOR FRAMES 27 EA $75.00 $2,025 KENNELS/FENCING/RUNS 1 LS$300,000.00 $300,000 DIVISION NINE SUB-TOTAL $534,665 DIVISION TEN INTERIOR SIGNAGE 1 LS$10,000 FEASIBILITY STUDY DIVISION TEN SUB-TOTAL $10,000 DIVISION TWENTY-TWO MECHANICAL SYSTEMS AS DESCRIBED IN NARRATIVE 1 LS $652,550.00 $652,550 DIVISION TWENTY-TWO SUB-TOTAL $652,550 DIVISION TWENTY-THREE PLUMBING SYSTEMS AS DESCRIBED IN NARRATIVE 1 LS $200,000.00 $200,000 DIVISION TWENTY-THREE SUB-TOTAL $200,000 DIVISION TWENTY-SIX ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS AS DESCRIBED IN NARRATIVE 1 LS $150,000.00 $150,000 DIVISION TWENTY-SIX SUB-TOTAL $150,000 DIVISION THIRTY-TWO SITE IMPROVEMENTS AS DESCRIBED IN NARRATIVE 1 LS$527,500 (See Attachment for Site Cost Breakdown) DIVISION THIRTY-TWO SUB-TOTAL $527,500 SUBTOTAL = (INCLUDE O&P) $2,976,250 CONSTRUCTION COST PER SQUARE FOOT = $273.66 GEN. CONDITIONS 10.00% $297,624.95 CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY 10.00%$297,624.95 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL = $3,571,499 SILVER/ PETRUCELLI + ASSOCIATES Architects / En gineers / Interior Desi gnersSOFT COSTS/FF&E 3190 Whitney Avenue A/E DESIGN FEES (7%) $250,005 Hamden, CT 06518 PRINTING & LEGAL NOTICES $3,750 Phone: 203 230 9007 DESIGN CONTINGENCY (5%) $178,575 MISCELLANEOUS & REIMBURSABLES $7,500 BORINGS $10,000 SOFT COST/FF&E TOTAL = $449,830 TOTAL PROJECT COST $4,021,329 FF&E (Furniture, Furnishings & Equipment) FINANCING COSTS HAZARDOUS MATERIAL ABATEMENT OFF SITE DEVELOPMENT EXCLUSIONS

CNVR Fiscal Impact Report 2000

Central Naugatuck Valley Region FISCAL IMPACT REGIONAL SUMMARY REPORT Council of Governments Central Naugatuck Valley The pictures on the cover were arranged in relation to each communities general location in the Cent ral Naugatuck Valley Region. Bethlehem A Farm Woodbury Antique Shop on Route 6 Watertown Civil War Monument Thomaston The Opera House Southbury Southbury Green Middlebury St. John of the Cross Church Waterbury City Hall Prospect Town Hall Cheshire Town Hall Oxford New Industrial Development Naugatuck Town Hall Wolcott Town Green Beacon Falls Matthies Park August 28, 2000 This report summarizes the fiscal impact of different land uses in each of the thirteen communities that comprise the Central Naugatuck Valley Region of Connecticut. The study was prepared by Planimetrics, LLP of Avon, Connecti- cut. The Region includes Waterbury, the Regional center, and the following twelve surrounding communities: • Beacon Falls • Bethlehem • Cheshire • Middlebury • Naugatuck • Oxford • Prospect • Southbury • Thomaston • Watertown • Wolcott • Woodbury This study, which grew out of a recommendation in the 1998 Regional Plan of Conservation & Development, is intended to: • Increase awareness of the public costs of different programs and ac- tivities, • Provide a better understanding of fiscal issues by comparing local ju- risdictions with each other and Regional averages, and • Help promote a reasonable long-term balance in every community by comparing fiscal issues with other issues. With this knowledge, the communities in the Region can continue to explore ways to work together to promote greater Regional cooperation. Sincerely, Alfio Candido Peter Dorpalen COGCNV Chairman COGCNV Executive Director TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Introduction 1 2 Executive Summary 3 3 Methodology 7 4 Basic Information 11 5 Summary of Uses 27 6 Balance of Payments 37 7 Case Studies 39 8 Conclusion 49 Communities in the Central Naugatuck Valley Region INTRODUCTION 1 Which land uses receive more in municipal services than they produce in municipal reve- nue? Which land uses produce more in municipal revenue than they receive in services? OVERVIEW Municipal fiscal impact analysis compares the local revenues generated by a particular land use with the local expenditures associated with that use. The comparison helps estimate whether a particular type of use pays more in taxes than it receives in services, or vice versa. WHY STUDY FISCAL IMPACT? The Council of Governments of the Central Naugatuck Valley (COGCNV) adopted a Regional Plan of Conservation & Development in 1998. The Plan looks at Regional patterns of development and makes recommendations to guide future growth in the Region. One of the Plan’s recommendations (page 28) is to evaluate the fiscal impacts of land use activities in the Region. The recommendation reflects a concern in the Region that the current property tax system in Connecticut produces some per- verse land use situations where a community may strive to: • Attract uses that are “fiscal positives” (provide more in tax revenue than they require in services), and • Avoid uses that are fiscal negatives (require more in services than they provide in tax revenue). As indicated in the Regional Plan, this type of situation can result in “fiscal inequality, unequal tax burdens, and lack of Regional cooperation in areas of common concern”. As a result, COGCNV commissioned this study of all 13 communities in the Region. The study was conducted in order to: • Increase awareness of the public costs of different programs and ac- tivities, • Provide a better understanding of fiscal issues by comparing local ju- risdictions with each other and Regional averages, • Help promote a reasonable long-term balance in every community by comparing fiscal issues with other issues, and • Implement a recommendation of the Regional Plan. 1 Since each community in the Region is different, individual reports were pre- pared for each of the 13 communities. Those reports are available from: Council of Governments of the Central Naugatuck Valley 20 East Main Street, Suite 303 Waterbury, CT 06702-2399 203/757-0535 LIMITATIONS Fiscal impact analysis, also called tax impact analysis, attempts to relate the public costs associated with a specific la nd use to the public revenues associated with that use. While there are many reasons why such an analysis might be performed, the best rationale might be that it can help promote a reasonable long term balance in a community by comparing fiscal impacts with other issues. On the other hand, it st be realized that every land use do es not fiscally benefit the town and uses with negative fiscal results may provide other intangible, but equally valuable, benefits. mu Fiscal issues are not the only crite- ria by which mu- nicipal land use policies should be based. Fiscal parameters are only one part of municipal ad- ministration. The overall form and function of the community and its physical, social, and economic health is more important. Fiscal concerns are not the only criteria by which local land use policies should be based. Every land use will not benefit a community fiscally and a less benefi- cial land use should not necessarily be excluded since it may provide other community benefits. While different land uses vary significantly in their poten- tial fiscal impact on a community, the overall form and function of the commu- nity and its physical, social, and econom ic health may be more important. In addition, it is important to recognize, as illustrated in this Regional summary report, that every community is differe nt. A use that may produce a fiscal sur- plus in one community may not in another community if the fiscal parameters are different. Findings for each community are averages based on long-term condi- tions and trends and such findings may not be directly transferable to other jurisdictions. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The preparation of this report was greatly facilitated by the cooperation of mu- nicipal officials including the chief elect ed official, the finance staff, the assess- ment staff, the school business office staff, and other municipal officials. Their contributions to this report are gratefully acknowledged. 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2 Residential uses typically receive more in services than they provide in tax revenue. This is not surpris- ing since munici- pal services are generally config- ured to benefit residents (voters) while revenue comes from a vari- ety of sources. Fiscal impact analysis reveals some simple truisms about the fiscal situations in most communities in Connecticut: • Most community services benefit residents, • Residential uses provide only a portion of local revenue, • As a result, residential uses can be characterized as having a negative fiscal impact on existing taxpayers in a community. Consider these charts summarizing revenues and expenditures in the Region: Sources of Local Revenue 35% 9% 8% 48% Intergovernmental Revenue Other Revenue Tax Revenue From Residential Uses Tax Revenue From Non-Residential Uses Uses Benefitting From Local Expenditures 84% 7% 9% Residential Uses Non-Residential Uses Tax-Exempt Uses Residential uses provide about 48 percen t of all local revenue in the Region (primarily through local taxes) yet benefit from about 84 percent of all local expenditures. 3 In other words, non-tax revenues (such as state aid, user fees, and investments) and tax revenues from non-residential uses all defray the cost to residential taxpayers of the services they receive. It is little wonder that, in communities th at understand this situation, taxpayers and communities are eager for additional state aid and more economic develop- ment. That strategy is designed to bring something positive into the community and is distinctly different from policies that may be designed to exclude certain uses. The fact that resi- dential uses typi- cally receive more in services than they provide in tax is perceived as a positive by new residents since they will also re- ceive more in ser- vices than they pay in taxes. However, it is perceived as a negative by exist- ing residents since it dilutes the bene- fits they currently enjoy. As shown in the following charts, even when non-tax revenue is deducted from local expenditures (to produce what is refe rred to in this report as “net expendi- tures), the same relationship holds true. Sources of Local Tax Revenue 78% 22% Residential Uses Non-Residential Uses Uses Benefitting From Local Net Expenditures 88% 8% 4% Residential Uses Non-Residential Uses Tax-Exempt Uses 4 The key determi- nant of whether a residential use will produce a fiscal surplus is whether it produces any public school pu- pils. Any residential unit that does not result in school enrollment will be a fiscal surplus to the community. The typical re- sponse of many communities is to try to limit devel- opment that does not “pay its way.” Residential Uses Thus, due to the tax revenue from non-residential development and the revenue from non-tax sources, 1-4 family residentia l uses in the Region generally receive more in services than they pay in taxes. For every $1.00 received in services, the amount of revenue generated by resi- dential uses varies from $0.55 in Southbury to $0.95 in Bethlehem. Southbury had the highest fiscal benefit to existing residents (and the largest fiscal im pact due to new residential development) due to the strong non-residential tax base, revenue received for the Southbury Trai ning School, and the net revenue re- ceived from Heritage Village (an age-r estricted condominium development). Bethlehem was at the other end of the spectrum due to the low amount of non- residential development. Condominiums generally pay more in taxes than they receive in services al- though high school enrollments from some projects do produce a fiscal deficit for a community. For example, it is estimated that the age restrictions at Heritage Village in Southbury produce a $3.5 million annual fiscal surplus for the Town of Southbury. Apartments generally receive more in services than they pay in taxes although low school enrollments from some proj ects do produce a fiscal surplus for a community. Mobile homes can be a fiscal surplus if they have result in low school enrollments. Non-Residential Uses Non-residential uses typically pay more in taxes than they receive in services. In fact, commercial, industrial, and public utility facilities in the Region are esti- mated to produce about $58.6 million in annual fiscal surplus to support other uses in the communities in the Region. Vacant Land (including Public Act 490 Land) Vacant land requires very few municipal services and, as a result, produces a fiscal surplus to a community. What is in teresting with regard to vacant land is its potential future use. For example, while undeveloped residential land or lots may produce a modest fiscal surplus for a community today, there is a strong possibility that the land could produce a fiscal shortfall once developed. Tax Exempt Uses Tax-exempt uses typically receive more in services than they pay in taxes. While some State facilities produce a fiscal surplu s (due to payments in lieu-of-taxes), other tax exempt uses are estimated to require about $12.6 million of expendi- tures annually within the Region. 5 Understanding the Results W p To maximize fiscal benefits to existing residents, most communities want to: r r New residential uses seeking the same fiscal bene- fits enjoyed by current residents dilute the existing benefits and this may result in per- verse land use decisions. • Attract new non-residential development, • Receive more state aid, and • Generate more revenue from non-tax sources. Some communities also seek to attract housing types that do not generate school enrollment. hat is characterized as a negative fiscal impact (receiving more in services than roviding in revenue) is not always a negative. Consider the following: • Churches and other tax-exempt facilities may not “pay their way” but enhance community character and quality of life • Land trusts pay no taxes but preserve open space in communities which enhances community character and quality of life Even for tax-paying uses, a negative fiscal impact may not always be a negative. Consider the following for 1-4 family dwellings that receive more in services than they pay in taxes: • For existing taxpayers, such new development would raise their taxes (to pay for the services required by the new development) • For residents of existing 1-4 family dwellings, such new develop- ment would dilute the fiscal benef its that they currently enjoy (be- cause they may also receive more in services than they pay in taxes) • However, for new 1-4 family dwellings, the fact that they receive more in services than they pay in taxes would be considered a “good deal” by them Overall, new non-residential developm ent, low school enrollment-producing residential uses, and additional non-tax re venue produce fiscal benefits for exist- ing residents. While such events also produce fiscal benefits for new residents, the new esidential development may dilute th e fiscal benefits enjoyed by existing esidents and be seen as a fiscal negative. Focusing solely on fiscal benefits to existing residents can skew local behavior. If all new residential development is halted in order to retain fiscal benefits for existing residents, community development may be adversely affected. In addi- tion, it does not halt the sale of existing residences to families with school-age children. Future Directions It is important to note that every community is fiscally balanced at a given point in time. In other words, each commun ity generates $1.00 in revenue for each $1.00 in services provided. Some communities are balanced differently than other communities and each community is uniquely affected by changing land use patterns. In the long run, managing the community responsibly to promote the best overall quality of life may be more important than investigating every land use without regard to how it fits into a bigger picture. 6 METHODOLOGY 3 OVERVIEW A fiscal impact analysis requires knowledge of a number of factors: • Budget information (revenues and e xpenditures) is required to de- termine where money comes from and goes to, • Tax base information is required to determine how tax revenue (the major source of revenue for most municipal general funds) is gener- ated from different land uses, and • Demographic information is re quired to understand the population and school enrollment that results from different land uses. Fiscal Impact Components As part of the study, budget, tax base, and demographic information was col- lected for all 13 communities in the Central Naugatuck Valley Region. While tax base and demographic information was available in a consistent format, the budgets for all communities had to be rearranged to provide for consistent report- ing and calculations in the study. 7 This fiscal impact study is based on the concept of “net expenditures.” Net expenditures reflect how much tax revenue needs to be raised to support local pro- grams. Net expenditures are determined by subtracting non- tax revenue (such as state aid) from total expenditures. PROCESS The study is based on the general fund of each of the 13 municipalities in the Region. The general fund supports almost all municipal expenditures and re- ceives almost all municipal revenue (especially tax revenue). The study looked at 1997 land uses and 1998-99 revenues and expenditures in each municipality. These dates were selected since 1998-99 was the most re- cently completed fiscal year at the time the analysis was done and that budget was based on the 1997 Grand List (a compilation of all real estate, motor vehicles and taxable personal property). The analysis of fiscal impact is based on the concept of net expenditures. Net expenditures reflect how much money needs to be generated by local tax revenue to fund each program area. When non-tax revenues (such as state aid, local user fees, interest on investments, and other sources) are deducted from the program expenditures they are associated with (s uch as state education aid being deducted from total education expenditures), the ne t expenditure in that program area can be estimated. Net expenditures can also be restated in terms of services to different components of the community: • services to pupils (educational programs), • services to residents (park/recreation, library, elderly, and other pro- grams or services that benefit residents), and • services to property (such as fire, police, public works, debt service, and similar expenses that benefit all property). Fiscal Impact Process 8 LAND USE CATEGORIES To facilitate the analysis, land use categories consistent with property assessment reporting requirements of Connecticut municipalities were used: Residential Uses • vacant residentially zoned land • vacant residential lots • 1-4 family residential uses • residential condominiums • apartments • mobile homes Commercial Uses • vacant commercially zoned land • commercial buildings • commercial condominiums Industrial Uses • vacant industrially zoned land • industrial building • industrial condominiums Public Act 490 Uses • private land assessed for farm, forest, or open space use Public Utility Uses • land and facilities used by public utility companies Tax Exempt Uses • federal, state, or local lands or public facilities (such as schools, hos- pitals, and garages) that are tax exempt • private lands or facilities (such as religious, educational, and hospi- tal) that are tax exempt 9 AVERAGE COSTS AND MARGINAL COSTS It is important to note that the analysis looks at the “average” cost of different land uses rather than the “marginal” cost of different land uses. In an average cost analysis, overall fiscal impact can be estimated after compar- ing the average costs and average revenues that result from a typical land use. A marginal cost analysis is much more difficult since it requires the determina- tion of how much more it will cost to maintain one more mile of street, provide police or fire service for one more house or business, or educate one additional student. Marginal costs are typically lower than average costs until the capacity or capa- bility of the current system is consumed. At that time, additional capacity needs to be created through the hiring of new staff, purchase of new equipment, or construction of new facilities — each of which can have expensive local implica- tions. Such an analysis involves dete rmination of “excess capacity” in various municipal delivery systems and identifying the “straw that breaks the camel’s back.” Since, over time, average costs and marginal costs will converge, average costs are most often used in town-wide fiscal studies. 10 BASIC INFORMATION 4 Basic information collected as part of the study is summarized on the following pages: Demographics • Regional Housing Composition • Regional Population Distribution By Housing Type • Regional Public School Enrollment By Housing Type Tax Base • Regional Tax Base Comparison Budget • Regional Expenditure Comparison • Regional Revenue Comparison • Net Expenditure Comparison 11 Housing Units Based on information from the assessor in each community and from the Con- necticut Department of Economic a nd Community Development (DECD), the number of housing units in each community was estimated as follows: Residential Housing composi- tion is important since fiscal impact can vary for dif- ferent types of residential land uses. 1-4 Family Building The number of dwelling units in single-family, two-family, three- family, and four-family buildi ngs was estimated from Census, DECD, and assessor data. Apartment The number of apartment units was estimated from assessor data. While assessed as a commercial property, an apartment building is considered to be a residential land use. Condominium The number of residential condom iniums was obtained from local assessor data. Mobile Home The number of mobile home units was obtained from assessor data. Commercial Nursing Homes, etc. The number of nursing home beds or other residential units in commercial facilities was not considered relevant to the analysis. Tax Exempt Public, Private The number of dwelling units in tax- exempt facilities (state facilities, church houses, private schools) wa s estimated based on the assess- ment type and assessed value of tax exempt facilities. As can be seen from the table on the faci ng fold-out page, there are some major differences in the housing mix in each of the thirteen COGCNV communities. 1 -4 Fa m ily Com pos ition 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Be a con F al ls Be t h leh em Chesh ire Middlebur y Na u gatuck OxfordPros pec t Southb ury Thomast on Waterbury Wa te rt o wn Wo l c o tt Wo odb ur y Regio n 12 Bethlehem and Oxford have the highest proportion of 1-4 family units. Waterbury has the highest proportion of apartments. Southbury has the highest proportion of condominiums. Prospect and Bea- con Falls have the highest proportion of mobile homes. Apartment Composition 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% B eaco n Fa lls B ethle h em C h eshire Mi dd le bu r y Na ug at u c k Oxford Prospec t S o ut h b ur y T homaston Wate rb ury Wa t e r tow n Wolcott Wo odbu ry Region Condom inium Com pos ition 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% Be a con F al ls Be t h leh em Chesh ire Middlebur y Na u gatuck OxfordPros pec t So u th bu r y Th o mas t o n W at e r b ury Watertown WolcottWoo d bu r y Reg ion Regional Housing Composition (flip page over) 13 P O Population was estimated for each residential use since fiscal impact analysis is not particularly sensi- tive to the number of residents . opulation verall 1998 population estimates for each community were obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau. The 1998 population estimates were allocated to different uses as indicated below. Since fiscal impact analysis is not particularly sensitive to the number of residents of a community (it is more sensitive to the number of public school pupils), occupancy was estimated for all uses. Residential 1-4 Family Occupancy was estimated after occupancy of all other land uses. Apartment Estimated based on the number of apartment units (typi- cally assumed at about 2.0 persons per unit and adjusted based on school enrollment). Condominium Estimated based on the num ber of condominium units (typically assumed at about 2.0 persons per unit and adjusted based on school enrollment). Mobile Home Estimated based on the number of mobile home units (typically assumed at about 2.0 persons per unit and adjusted based on school enrollment). Commercial Nursing Homes, etc. The number of residents living in nursing homes or other commercial facilities was estimated from Census data. Tax Exempt Public, Private The number of residents living in tax-exempt facilities (state facilities, church houses, private schools) was estimated based on local contacts and information from the Census. 14 Per unit occu- pancy is highest in Watertown, Pros- pect, and Oxford. Per unit occu- pancy is lowest in Waterbury, South- bury, and Wood- bury. Occupancy per unit is typically lower for apart- ments and condo- miniums. Persons Per Unit – 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 Bea con Fa ll s Bethlehem Cheshire Mid d le bu r y Na ugatu c k Ox ford P rospect Southbury Thoma s ton W ate rb ury Waterto wn Wolcott Woodbu r y R e gion Regional Population Distribution By Housing Type (flip page over) 15 Sc Fiscal impact analysis is very sensitive to the number of school children and care was taken to allo- cate school chil- dren to residential land uses. hool Enrollment Fiscal impact analysis is very sensitive to school enrollment due to the cost of education. As a result, care was taken to allocate the number of school children to different land uses. The following methodology was used: Residential 1-4 Family Public school enrollment was estimated after estimating enrollments from all other land uses. Apartment The addresses of local apartment complexes were obtained from the assessor. These addresses were submitted to the school department with a reque st for the number of school children that resided at each address. Condominium The addresses of local c ondominium complexes were obtained from the assessor. These addresses were submit- ted to the school department with a request for the number of school children that resided at each address. Mobile Home The addresses of local mobile homes complexes were obtained from the assessor. These addresses were submit- ted to the school department with a request for the number of school children that resided at each address. Commercial Nursing Homes, etc. No school enrollments are assumed to result from commer- cial facilities. Tax Exempt Public, Private The number of public school pup ils living in tax-exempt facilities (state facilities, church houses, private schools) was estimated. As can be seen from the fold-out table, public school enrollment per housing unit varies in the Region from about 0.34 pupils per unit in Waterbury to about 0.56 pupils per unit in Wolcott. Another way to look at school enrollment information is in terms of the school enrollment ratio. This ratio expresses the number of school pupils as a percent- age of the population. Clearly, a higher enrollment ratio would signify a larger school burden. 16 Most school en- rollments come from 1-4 family dwellings. Enrollments from apartments and condominiums are highest as a per- centage of total enrollment in Waterbury and Woodbury. School enrollment per 1-4 family dwelling is highest in Southbury and lowest in Waterbury. Enrollm ent Per 1-4 Fam ily Dwelling – 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 Beacon Falls BethlehemCheshireMiddleb ury N au gatu ck Oxfo r d Pros pect Southbury Tho ma sto n W a terbury Wa ter to w n Wo lco tt W o od bu ry R egion School Enrollment Ratio 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% B e acon Fall s Beth lehe m C he shire M iddlebury Na uga tu ck O xford Prospect So uthb u ry Th om aston Waterb ury W a tertown Wolc ott W o odb u ry R egio n Regional Public School Enrollment By Housing Type (flip page over) 17 Tax Base & Composition The tax base of each community in the Region was summarized. The results are ented on the following foldout page. pres m The Grand List supplement re- flects the assess- ment amount above and beyond the real estate assessment that results from motor vehicles, personal property, and any exemptions. The total assessment of each land use includes the real estate and what this study calls the Grand List supplement. The Grand List supplement reflects the assess- ent amount above and beyond the real estate assessment that results from motor vehicles and personal property minus any exemptions (such as for the elderly, veterans, or manufacturing equipment). Each community’s Grand List (the compilation of all listed property in a com- munity) contains two major components: • The taxable Grand List (a compila tion of all taxable property), and • The tax-exempt Grand List (a compilation of all tax-exempt prop- erty). In this analysis, the combination of bot h Grand Lists is called the consolidated Grand List. Grand List Supplement Within the Region, the median Grand Li st supplement for residential uses was about 14 percent. In other words, the assessed value of motor vehicles and personal property minus any assessment exem ptions added about 14 percent to the residential real estate value. Within the Region, the median Grand List supplement for commercial uses was about 30 percent and the median Grand List supplement for industrial uses was about 56 percent. In other words, th e assessed value of any motor vehicles and any taxable personal property (such as computers or machines) minus any ex- emptions added about 30 percent to the commercial real estate value and about 56 percent to the industrial real estate value. Tax Exempt Uses Within the Region, tax-exempt uses add about another 10 percent to the taxable Grand List. However, there are some significant differences between communi- ties in the Region in terms of the amount and type of tax-exempt property. For example, while tax-exempt properties in suburban communities might in- clude state parks or other open space, the list of tax-exempt properties in Waterbury includes low-income housing and other facilities that are likely to require services. 18 Residential uses comprise the smallest portion of the tax base in Waterbury, South- bury, and Nauga- tuck. Residential uses comprise the larg- est portion of the tax base in Bethle- hem, Prospect, Woodbury, Ox- ford, and Wolcott. The per capita Grand List is low- est in Waterbury and Naugatuck since they have not revalued in some time. The per capita Grand List is highest in Southbury, Wood- bury, Middlebury, and Bethlehem. Residential Component of Tax Base 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% B ea co n F al l s Bethlehe m C he sh ire Middlebury Naugatuck Oxford Prospect Southbu ry Tho ma st o n Wa terbu ry Wa tert ow n Wolcot t Woo db ury Reg i on Per Capita Grand List $- $10, 000 $20, 000 $30, 000 $40, 000 $50, 000 $60, 000 $70, 000 $80, 000 $90, 000 Beacon Falls Bet h l eh em Ch e shir e Mid dle bury Naug at u ck Oxf or d Prospect Southb ur y T ho maston Waterbu r y Watertow n Wo lc ott Wo od bur y Re g ion Regional Tax Base Composition (flip page over) 19 Expenditures One of the major parts of the study was comparing expenditures between com- munities. Each community uses a different budget format, and a detailed review was required to compare budgets in a meaningful way. As can be seen from the following chart: • Education expenditures are the largest component of all municipal budgets • Education expenses as a component of the overall budget are greatest in Prospect, Southbury, Bethlehem, Beacon Falls, and Woodbury • Education expenses as a component of the overall budget are smallest in Waterbury, Naugatuck, Middlebury, and Thomaston Regional Comparison of Per Capita Expenditures High $2,456 Average $2,182 Median $2,151 Low $1,716 Regional Comparison of Expenditure Composition Category % Education 59% Public Safety 12% Public Works 7% Capital /Debt 6% Other Services 16% TOTAL 100% Other services include recreation, land use, and other general government services. Expenditure Distribution 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Be a con Falls Bethle hem Che s hire Mid dle bury Naugatuck Oxford Pr o sp ect S outhbu ry T ho mast o n Wa ter bury Wa t e rt ow n Wol cott Woo db ury Region Education Public Safety Public Works Capital Expenses/Debt Service Other Services/Functions 20 Per capita spend- ing is highest in Middlebury and Cheshire. Per capita spend- ing is lowest in Prospect, Beacon Falls, Watertown, and Woodbury. Per pupil spending is highest in Ox- ford. Per pupil spending is lowest in Naugatuck, Wol- cott, Watertown, and Beacon Fa Per Capita Expenditures $0 $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000 B e aco n F al ls Bethleh e m Che shire Mi dd le bu ry Naugatuck Oxford Pro s p e ct Sou t hbur y Thomaston Waterbur y Water t o wn Wolcott Woo dbu ry Regio n Per Pupil Expenditures $- $2, 000 $4, 000 $6, 000 $8, 000 $10, 000 $12, 000 Be a con Fall s Bethleh e m C hes hi re Mi ddle bury N aug at u c k Oxf ord P rospect Southbury Thoma st o n Wa terb ur y Wa terto wn Wolcott Woodbury Regi on lls. Regional Expenditure Comparison (flip page over) 21 Revenues Municipal revenue comes from a variety of sources. While the largest category is current taxes on local property, revenue is also derived from: • Intergovernmental revenue (such as state or federal aid) • Fines or fees • Investments • Miscellaneous (such as taxes from prior years, use of the municipal surplus) As can be seen from the following chart, current taxes provide most municipal revenue. The percentage of all re venue derived from current taxes is: • Highest in Middlebury, Southbury, Woodbury, and Bethlehem • Lowest in Naugatuck and Waterbury Regional Comparison of Revenue Composition Category % Current Taxes 58% Intergov. Rev. 33% Fines, Fees, 4% Investments 1% Miscellaneous 4% TOTAL 100% Regional Comparison of Current Taxes Per Capita High $2,218 Average $1,276 Median $1,262 Low $1,035 Percent Revenue From Current Taxes 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Beac on Falls Bet hlehem Ches hire Middlebur y N augat uck Oxford Prospect South bury T homaston Waterbury Wat ert ow n Wolcot t Wo odbury Re gion As can be seen from the following chart, non-tax revenue (intergovernmental revenue, fines, fees, investments, and miscellaneous) as a percentage of local revenue sources is: • Highest in Naugatuck and Waterbury • Lowest in Middlebury, Southbury, and Woodbury Revenue From Non-Tax Sources 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Beacon Falls Bethlehem C hes hi re M iddle bur y Naugatuck Oxford Pros pect Southbury Thomaston Waterbury Wat ertown Wolcot t W oodbury Region 22 As can be seen from the following chart, current taxes per capita are: • Highest in Middlebury, Bethlehem, Cheshire, Southbury, and Woodbury • Lowest in Beacon Falls, Naugatuck, Prospect, Waterbury, and Wolcott Per Capita Current Taxes $0 $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 Be a con F a lls B ethle hem Cheshire Mi ddleb u ry N a ug a tu ck Oxfo r d Pro spect Southbu r y T ho m a sto n Wa ter b ury W aterto wn Wolcott Wo od b ur y R egio n Regional Revenue Comparison (flip page over) 23 Net Expenditures The term “net expenditures” is used to refer to the money that needs to be raised rough local tax revenues for a particular program area. Net expenditures are termined by subtracting non-tax program revenues (such as user fees and state aid) from program expenditures. th de Net expenditures refer to the money that needs to be raised through local tax revenue for a particular program area. Net expenditures are determined by subtracting non- tax program reve- nue (such as user fees and state aid) from program expenditures. Net expenditures can also be restated in terms of services provided to different components of the community: • services to pupils (educational programs) • services to residents (park/recreation, library, elderly, and other pro- grams or services that benefit residents) • services to property (such as fire, police, public works, debt service, and similar expenses that benefit all property) Net expenditures vary from municipality to municipality depending on the levels of local expenditures and the revenue sources used by each of the programs. In the fiscal impact analysis, net expend itures are reallocated to land uses based on the characteristics of each use. Net expenditures for services to pupils (educa- tion) are allocated on a per pupil basis. Net expenditures for services to residents are allocated on a per capita basis. Net expenditures for services to property are allocated on the basis of assessed value (ad valorem basis). As can be seen from the following chart, net expenditures per pupil for education are: • Highest in Middlebury, Southbury, and Woodbury • Lowest in Naugatuck, Wolcott, and Waterbury Net Expenditures – Services to Pupils $0 $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000 $7,000 $8,000 B eaco n F al ls Bet h le he m Che s hire Middleb ury N a ug atu ck Ox fo rd Prosp e ct S out hbury Th om asto n Wat e rbury Watertown Wolcott Woo db u ry Region 24 As can be seen from the following chart, net expenditures for services to people are: • Highest in Waterbury, Woodbury, Cheshire, and Middlebury • Lowest in Oxford, Wolcott, and Bethlehem Net Expenditures – Services to People – 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00 90.00 100.00 Be acon F all s Bethlehem CheshireMiddlebu r y Naugatuck O x for d Prospect Southbury Thoma ston Wate r bury Watertown Wolcott Woodbur y R eg ion As can be seen from the following chart, net expenditures for services to property are: • Highest in Naugatuck and Waterbury • Lowest in Southbury and Woodbury Net Expenditures – Services to Property – 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00 B eac on F all s Bethlehem CheshireMiddl ebur y Naugatuc k Oxford Pr ospec t Southbury Thomaston Waterbury Water town Wolcott Woodbur y R egion Net Expenditure Comparison (flip page over) 25 USE OF NET EXPENDITURES Since the number of pupils, number of residents, and assessed value can be estimated for most any land use, the net expenditure estimates provide t he basis for estimating the fiscal impact of different land uses in the Reg ion. The fiscal impact methodology allocates revenues and expenditures based on the consolidated Grand List (taxable and tax exempt properties). The use of the consolidated Grand List assumes that all properties (whether they pay taxes or not) benefit in some material way from the overall provision of municipal ser- vices. The following pages summarize the fiscal imp act of different uses in the Region. 26 SUMMARY OF RESULTS 5 Residential Uses Residential uses generally receive more in services than they provide in revenue. The key determi- nant of whether a residential use will produce a fiscal surplus is whether it produces any public school pu- pils. Any residential unit that does not result in school enrollment will be a fiscal surplus to the community. In the Central Naugatuck Valley Region, or elsewhere in Connecticut, residential uses typically receive more in value of services than they provide in tax revenue. Overall, the analysis found that residential uses in the Region received almost $51 million more in services than they paid in taxes in 1998-99. The main reason is that residential uses produce residents and school children. As a result, residential uses benefited from almost all of the $190 million in net educational expenses, almost all of th e $19 million of net per capita expenses, and about $118 million of other expenses. However, it is important to note that there are differences among the various residential classes (1-4 family dwelling, apartment, condominium, mobile home). In addition, there are differences with in each class depending on the characteris- tics of different uses. These differen ces are discussed on the following pages. 27 1-4 Family Buildings Chart Composition This chart, and the charts on the following pages, compare the tax revenue received as a multiple of the services provided. For example, in the chart on this page, 1-4 family dwell- ings in Bethlehem provide about $0.93 in tax revenue for every dollar in services received. In Southbury, 1-4 family dwellings provide about $0.55 for every $1.00 received in services. As a class, 1-4 family dwellings (including single-family, two-family, three- family, and four-family buildings) typically receive more in services than they provide in revenue because of school-age children. However, there are some differences among communities in the Region. As can be seen from the following chart: • 1-4 family dwellings pay the most for the services they receive in Bethlehem, Woodbury, and Wolcott, and • 1-4 family dwellings pay the least for the services they receive in Southbury. 1-4 Family Dwellings $0.00 $0.10 $0.20 $0.30 $0.40 $0.50 $0.60 $0.70 $0.80 $0.90 $1.00 B ea c o n Fall s B e th leh e m Che shire M i d dle bury Nau g atuck Oxf o rd Prospect Sout hbu ry T ho m a ston Waterb u ry Wa t ertown Wolco tt Wo odb ur y T pr rec p In communities with a large non- residential tax base, more of the revenue to support services to resi- dents is provided by other uses. As a result, new residential uses tend to be seen as a fiscal drain since they dilute benefits to existing resi- dents. here is an interesting explanation for this pattern. In communities with a large non-residential tax base, more of the revenue to support services to residents is ovided by other uses. In other words, residents pay less for the services they eive. In Southbury, where the non-residential tax base is among the highest in the region at 27 percent, residents pay only about $0.55 for every $1.00 of services they receive. On the other hand, Bethlehem residents pay about $0.93 for every $1.00 of services they receive since the non -residential tax base is the lowest in the region at 4 percent. In Southbury, new residential developments that produce school-age children will tend to be seen as a fiscal drain sin ce they increase costs more than they rovide revenues. Development which d ilutes the fiscal benefits enjoyed by existing residents can make it fiscally attractive for existing homeowners to encourage the purchase of land as open space rather than be developed fo r resi- dential homes. As more costs are “avoided”, the fiscal benefits to existing resi- dents are maintained or increase. Followed to its ultimate extreme, a community could reject some residential developments in order to avoid future ser vice costs. This is a classic example of how fiscal issues may be detrimental to the economic or social development of the community and the Region as a whole. 28 Apartments Apartments, as a class of residential uses, can either produce a fiscal surplus or a fiscal deficit depending on their occupancy characteristics of each. For example, age-restricted apartments produce a fiscal surplus because there are no school enrollments. As can be seen from the following chart: • apartments produce the greatest surp lus in Southbury since the Town as- sesses many assisted living and elderly care facilities as apartments and these produce no school enrollments, • apartments produce a fiscal surplus in Bethlehem, Oxford, and Woodbury due to low school enrollments, and • apartments produce a fiscal shortfall in the other municipalities due to the cost of educating school children. Apartments $0.00 $1.00 $2.00 $3.00 $4.00 $5.00 B eac on Fal l s B ethlehem Ches hir e Middlebur y Naug atuc k O x ford Prospec t Southbur y Thomaston Waterbury Watertow n Wolcott Woodbur y The very high fiscal ratio in Southbury is due to a local assessment practice where assisted living facilities are consider ed apartments rather than commercial facilities. It is important to note that fiscal relationships can change over time. This is especially apparent in com- munities with a small number of uses where a small change in occu- pancy can produce a large change in fiscal impact. The very low fiscal ratio in Prospect is due to a unique occurrence. While there are very few apartments in Prospect, the school enrollment is high from one unit. However, these enrollments are all at the high school and, as a result, the fiscal situation will change with graduation of students. This points out another reason for caution with fiscal analyses. The estimates reflect conditions at the time the study is done but these conditions can change over time as people age, pupils graduate, revenues change, expenditures change, and other changes occur. For example, a re view of apartments in Prospect at the present time may find them to produce a fiscal surplus. 29 Condominiums Like apartments, condominiums can either produce a fiscal surplus or a fiscal deficit depending on their occupancy characteristics. For example, age restricted condominiums (like Heritage Village in Southbury) produce a fiscal surplus because there are no school-age children. As can be seen from the following chart: • condominiums produce a fiscal surplus in seven of the ten communities that have such developments, • condominiums produce the greatest surplus in Southbury due to the age restrictions at Heritage Village, • condominiums produce a fiscal deficit in Naugatuck, Thomaston, and Wood- bury due to school-age children that result in costs exceeding what is paid in tax revenue. Residential Condominiums $0. 00 $1. 00 $2. 00 $3. 00 $4. 00 B eacon Falls Bethl ehem Ches hi re Mi ddl ebur y Naugatuc k O xfor d Pr os pec t S outhbur y T homaston Waterbur y Watertow n Wolco tt Woodbury Age restrictions cannot be imposed on a development by a municipality in order to produce a fiscal surplus. However, de velopers can establish age restrictions and zoning regulations could provide for more units per acre for age restricted developments (since the occupancy per unit or bedrooms per unit are typically lower). In fact, regulations based on bedrooms per acre rather than units per acre may be a more appropriate regulatory tool. 30 Mobile Homes Mobile homes can also produce a fiscal surplus or a fiscal deficit depending on the occupancy characteristics. Within the Region, mobile homes provide a fiscal surplus in four of the nine communities where they are located and a fiscal short- fall in the others. As the following chart indicates mobile homes produce: • a fiscal surplus in Beacon Falls, Oxford, Prospect, and Waterbury due to elderly occupancy or low school enrollments, and • a fiscal shortfall in Naugatuck, Southbury, Thomaston, Watertown, and Woodbury due to the cost of educating school children. Mobile Homes $0.00 $1.00 $2.00 $3.00 B eacon Fall s Beth l eh em C he s h i r e Middlebur y Naugatuck Oxfo r d Pr ospe c t Sou thbu ry T homasto n Waterbury Water town Wol cott Wo odbu ry 31 Generally speak- ing, any residen- tial unit that does not result in school enrollment will be a fiscal surplus to the community. Variations Within Residential Classes It is important to note that the preceding discussions are broad generalizations for classes of residential land uses. There are differences within each class, primar- ily due school enrollments. Generally speaking, any residential unit (1-4 family dwelling, apartment, condo- minium, or mobile home) that does not result in school enrollment will be a fiscal surplus to the community. Factors that can cause residential uses to have a lower fiscal impact include: • age limitations (resulting in fewer school age children), • reduced housing turnover (single-family home sales are often made to families with school age children), • extended length of residency (once school children graduate, a resi- dential use will have a positive fiscal impact), and • fewer bedrooms (typically resulti ng in lower occupancy and fewer school children). The fact that residential uses with school children produce a fiscal shortfall while residential uses with no school children produces a fiscal surplus puts municipali- ties in a dilemma. In most suburban communities, the development pattern most desired by existing residents has been single-family homes in residential subdivi- sions. Yet these uses typically produce a fiscal deficit for a community. Multi- family developments are typically seen as “out of character” and have been opposed by existing residents. However, these developments can produce a fiscal surplus for a community. It is not generally possible to influence the age composition of new residential subdivisions . While it may be possible to influence the age composition of new multi-family developments so that they produce a fiscal surplus, it begs the question of whether it is desirable to do so. Again, fiscal decisions are not the only basis on which land use decisions should be made. All residents of a community and the Region are entitled to housing choices. 32 It is also difficult to influence the bedroom composition of new residential subdi- visions. This is a function of the Health Code and could still occur through additions following approval. The bedroom composition of multi-family devel- opments can typically be influenced at the time of approval and may not be permitted later depending on the development form (such as condominium). In other words, a community can have more influence over the composition of apartment and condominium occupancy th rough design and approval than they can have over single-family subdivisions. It can be possible for a community to influence length of residency and housing turnover. Studies have found that hous ing occupancy (and school enrollment) following a house sale (whether a new or existing house) typically peak within about 8 to 12 years after the sale and then children move on with their lives. In other words, after a family has b een in occupancy in a house for about a decade, the likelihood that the unit w ill produce a fiscal surplus increases. Thus, it can be desirable for a community to encourage longer-term residency and discourage housing turnover. The best way to do this is by minimizing the costs of ownership for longer term residents. Options that are available to communities include elderly tax breaks. A case study of the potential impact of the sale of a house occupied by an elderly couple to a family with just one school-age child is presented in Chapter 6. 33 Commercial / Industrial / Public Utility Uses Based on the preceding discussion about residential uses, it should come as no surprise that commercial, industrial, and public utility uses produce a fiscal surplus for a municipality. S Non-Residential In the Region in FY 1998-99, non- residential uses supplied about $58.6 million of net tax revenue to support other uses. ince such uses do not directly result in local public school enrollments or local residents, they have no impact on education or service categories in the local budget that represent about 60 percent of local expenditures. Of course, such uses require workers who must live somewhere. However, employees typically live over a wider area and so a community can benefit fiscally from having local businesses. In addition, such uses are typically assessed at high market values and typically have personal property (machinery, equipment, computers) that can add a signifi- cant amount to the tax base. In 1998-99, commercial, industrial, a nd public utility uses in the Region pro- duced a fiscal surplus of about $58.6 million annually to support other uses in the Region. As can be seen from the following chart: • Commercial uses in the Region all produce a fiscal surplus to the municipal- ity where they are located (the amount of revenue received is in excess of the $1.00 in services provided) • Commercial uses produce the largest surplus in Woodbury and Southbury • Commercial uses produce the smallest surplus in Naugatuck, Waterbury, Thomaston, Watertown, and Wolcott Commercial Development $0. 00 $1. 00 $2. 00 $3. 00 $4. 00 $5. 00 $6. 00 $7. 00 Beacon Falls Bethl ehem Cheshire Middl ebur y Naugatuck Ox ford Prospec t S out hbur y Thoma ston Water bury Water town Wolc ott Woodbur y The pattern is similar for industrial uses although the magnitude of the fiscal surplus is different due to the amount of manufacturing equipment or other personal property associated with industrial uses. 34 Vacant Land (including PA-490 Land) Vacant Land In the Region in FY 1998-99, va- cant land (includ- ing PA-490 land) supplied about $6.0 million of net tax revenue to support other uses. However, the key issue is what hap- pens to that land once it is devel- oped. Vacant land requires very few municipal services and, as a result, produces a fiscal surplus to a community. What is interesting with regard to vacant land is its potential future use. For example, vacant commercial or industrial land produces a fiscal surplus today and will produce an even larger fiscal su rplus (in dollar terms) when developed in the future. In many respects, ther e is no negative fiscal outcome. The earlier that property is developed, the more tax re venue is available to offset residential services. Undeveloped residential land or lots ar e another matter. While they produce a fiscal surplus today, there is a strong possibility that the land could produce a fiscal shortfall once developed. It is this dilemma that can make the Public Act 490 program beneficial for communities. While PA-490 will reduce the taxes that an undeveloped residential property might pay today, it tends to defer the date that the property might be developed in the future. In a sense, it is a program th at can help a community defer or manage the time that a use will occur that requires more in services than it provides in revenue. As can be seen from the following chart, vacant lands and Public Act 490 lands produce a fiscal surplus to the municipality where they are located (the amount of revenue received is in excess of the $1.00 in services provided). Public Act 490 Public Act 490 allows land owned by a private party (or non-tax exempt organization) to be assessed as farm, forest, or open space land under the Public Act 490 program (Section 12-107 of the Connecticut General Stat- utes). The Public Act 490 program reduces the assessment of parcels that meet certain criteria so that an increasing tax burden would be less of a contributor to the sale and development of property. Any property that is sold within 10 years of its desig- nation pays a recapture provision. In this way, the program encourages long term ownership of property and helps moderate develop- ment. Vacant Land (including PA-490 Land) $0.00 $1.00 $2.00 $3.00 $4.00 $5.00 $6.00 $7.00 B ea con Fall s B ethle hem C h es h ire Mid dl eb u ry Nau g atuck Oxf ord Pro spe ct So u thb ury T ho mast o n Waterb u ry Wa t er t o w n Wolcott Woo d bur y 35 Tax Exempt Uses Tax-exempt uses include federal property, state property, local property (such as schools, town halls or city halls, public works, recreation, and library), and property owned by non-profit entities (such as land trusts, historical societies, ious institutions, cemeteries, and veteran’s organizations). relig Tax Exempt Uses Tax exempt uses in the Region were supported by about $10.7 mil- lion of net revenue from other uses in FY 1998-99. Since tax exempt uses pay no taxes yet receive some services, they typically produce a modest fiscal shortfall. One exception is due to payments in lie u of taxes (PILOT) from the State of Connecticut. PILOT payments can exceed the expenses attributed to State facili- ties and such uses can produce a fiscal surplu s. As shown in the following chart, there are differences between communiti es and whether State facilities produce a fiscal surplus. Most of this variation is related to higher payments in lieu of taxes for certain types of facilities (such as the Cheshire Correctional Institution, Southbury Training School, and Oxford Air port). Other variations result from local expenditures and tax base composition. State Facilities $0. 00 $1. 00 $2. 00 $3. 00 $4. 00 $5. 00 Beac on Fal ls B e thlehem Cheshi re Mid dl ebur y Naugatuc k Oxford Prospec t Southbu ry Thom aston Waterbury Watertow n Wol cott Woodb ury 36 BALANCE OF PAYMENTS 6 The balance of payments looks at: • which uses support other uses in the Re- gion, and • which uses are supported by other uses in the Region. Once the fiscal impact of different land uses is known in each municipality, the “balance of payments” between uses can be estimated. In essence, the balance of payments identifies: • which uses support other uses, and • which uses are supported by other uses. Overall, about $70 million dollars is tran sferred annually between different land uses in the Region in order to provide adequate tax revenue to meet the net expenditures in different program areas. Regional Fiscal Impact Summary (flip page over) 37 The largest amount of support (almost $51 million annually) is provided to 1-4 family dwellings. About $10 million is used to provide services to municipal facilities. Almost $8 million is provided to support residential apartments. Another $2 million is used to support c hurches and other religious facilities. The greatest support is provided by co mmercial developments (about $30 mil- lion) and industrial developments (a bout $27 million). While vacant land pro- vides almost $6 million worth of support to other uses at the present time, over 80 percent of this land is residentially zoned and subject to future residential development that may prove to be a fiscal negative. Within the Region, residen- tial condominiums produce a fiscal surplus of over $4 million annually to support other uses. Net support in the Region of almost $2 million is provided by State payments-in-lieu-of-taxes. Other fiscal studies have reported that private open space (such as land assessed as farm, forest, or open space as part of the Public Act 490 program in Connecti- cut) is a fiscal positive. However, those studies have also reported the results by comparing the revenue received in relation to the service provided. This analysis confirms those overall findings but also shows that the actual amount of fiscal surplus available to other uses is fairly modest (about $230,000 in the entire Region). Of course, since such programs help reduce the possibility that land will be developed and become a fiscal negative, the positive result overall is important to note. In the computation of the Balance of Payments, it is important to note that the use of the Consolidated Grand List assumes that all properties in the Region (whether they pay taxes or not) benefit in some material way from the overall provision of municipal services. In other words, it includes tax exempt uses as beneficiaries of municipal expenses such as road maintenance, police protection, fire protec- tion, and similar services. If expenses were only allocated on the basis of the Taxable Grand List, expenses would be allocated only among taxable uses and this would: • decrease their support of other uses, or • increase their negative net fiscal impact. 38 CASE STUDIES 7 While individual case studies can help to illustrate different findings, it must be remem- bered that the effect of one de- velopment or one fiscal policy may be dwarfed by overall economic changes or by small changes in other fiscal pa- rameters. The information in this study can be used to estimate the fiscal impact of differ- ent land uses or policies. The following sample case studies are presented: Existing Development • Existing Residential Development Wolcott • Existing Non-Residential Development Thomaston Proposed Development • Proposed Residential Development Woodbury • Proposed Non-Residential Development Prospect Other Case Studies • Tax Impact of Property Purchase With Cash Bethlehem • Tax Impact of House Sale Watertown • Median Sales Price Analysis Beacon Falls • Breakeven Assessment of a Residential Unit Oxford 39 Existing Residential Development Estimating Revenue For an existing residential development, add up all the real estate assessments, motor vehicle assessments, and personal property assessments. Deduct any tax exemptions (elderly, veterans, blind). This is the total net assessment for the development. Multiply by the mill rate to determine the tax revenue generated. Real Estate Assessment Case Study #1 Wolcott This case study is for a fictitious existing residential development in Wolcott. $1,428,000 Motor Vehicle Assessments $174,000 Personal Property Assessments $22,000 Exemptions ($5,000) Total Assessment $1,609,000 Times mill rate 27.98 mills Tax Revenue Generated $45,020 Estimating Net Expenditures Net expenditure amounts are discussed on pages 24-25. Count the number of school children and multiply by the net expenditure for services to pupils. Count the number of residents and multiply by the net expenditure for services to resi- dents. Take the total assessment for the development ($1,609,000) and multiply by the net expenditure for services to property. Add all of these estimates to- gether to get the total estimated annual net expenditures. 10 school children times $3,079 per pupil $30,790 35 residents times $44.47 per capita $1,556 Total assessment times $12.52 mills $20,145 Annual Net Expenditures $52,491 Estimating Annual Net Fiscal Benefit The annual net fiscal benefit is estimated by subtracting the estimated net expen- diture associated with the devel opment from the estimated revenue. Tax Revenue Generated $45,020 Annual Net Expenditures $52,491 Annual Net Fiscal Benefit ($7,471) Since the estimated annual net fiscal benefit is a negative number, it means that the fictitious development is presently resulting in a fiscal shortfall for the com- munity. 40 Existing Non-Residential Development Case Study #2 Thomaston This case study is for a fictitious existing non- residential devel- opment in Thomaston. Estimating Revenue For an existing non-residential development, add up all real estate assessments, motor vehicle assessments, and personal property assessments. Deduct any tax exemptions (manufacturing equipment). This is the total net assessment for the development. Assessed real estate value $560,000 Motor Vehicle Assessments $0 Personal Property Assessments $100,000 Exemptions $0 Total Assessment $660,000 Times mill rate 25.10 mills Tax Revenue Generated $16,566 Estimating Net Expenditures Multiply, take the total assessment for the development ($660,000) by the net expenditure for service to property (page 25) to estimate the total estimated annual net expenditures. 0 school children times $4,042 per pupil $0 0 residents times $66.36 per capita $0 Total assessment times $10.59 mills $6,989 Annual Net Expenditures $6,989 Estimating Annual Net Fiscal Benefit The annual net fiscal benefit is estimated by subtracting the estimated net expen- diture associated with the devel opment from the estimated revenue. Tax Revenue Generated $16,566 Annual Net Expenditures $6,989 Annual Net Fiscal Benefit $9,577 Since the estimated annual net fiscal benefit is a positive number, it means that the fictitious development is presently resulting in a fiscal surplus for the com- munity. 41 New Residential Development Case Study #3 Woodbury COGCNV Region A proposal has been submitted for a 12-unit subdivision in Woodbury. The houses are estimated to sell for $350,000 each. The development is expected to produce 10 school-age children and a total population of 32 new residents. What is the estimated annual fiscal benefit? Estimating Revenue Multiply the average selling price of a proposed house or unit times the number of units to get the total estimated market value of the development. Multiply that times the current residential assessment-sales ratio (obtained from the local assessor) to determine the total real estate assessment for the development. Add another 8.7% in Woodbury for the net effect of motor vehicle assessments, personal property assessments, and assessment exemptions. Multiply the total assessment by the current mill rate to determine the tax revenue generated. School Enrollment While the average school enrollment per unit in Woodbury was 0.42 students per unit, studies of school enrollment have found that the typical impact from new development is roughly double what the community- wide average is. In Woodbury, this would correlate to a new house multiplier of about 0.84 students per unit and a total enrollment of 10 students from the new development. 12 houses @ $350,000 = market value of $4,200,000 At the residential assessment-sales ra tio (57%) = assessed value of $2,394,000 Adjustment for vehicles, propert y, exemptions (plus 8.7%) $207,880 Total Assessment $2,601,880 Times mill rate 18.90 mills Tax Revenue Generated $49,182 Estimating Net Expenditures Estimate the number of school children and multiply by the per pupil net expen- diture for services to pupils (see pages 24-25). Estimate the number of residents and multiply by the per capita net expenditure for services to residents. Take the total assessment for the development ($2,601,880) and multiply by the net ex- penditure for services to property. Add all of these estimates together to get the total estimated annual net expenditures. 10 school children times $7,413 per pupil $74,126 32 residents times $77.84 per capita $2,2571 Total assessment times $3.22 mills $8,382 Annual Net Expenditures $84,765 Estimating Annual Net Fiscal Benefit The annual net fiscal benefit is estimated by subtracting the estimated net expen- diture associated with the devel opment from the estimated revenue. Tax Revenue Generated $49,182 Annual Net Expenditures $84,765 Annual Net Fiscal Benefit ($35,583) 42 In this scenario, the proposed de- velopment will require more in service costs than it provides in tax revenue. The mill rate will have to be raised to maintain service levels and that existing residents will have to pay higher taxes as a result of the new development. Tax Benefit Of A Proposed Use Or Activity The value of a one mill change in the tax rate is determined by dividing the Taxable Grand List by 1,000. Taxable Grand List $693,208,482 Divide by 1,000 1,000 Value of One Mill Change in the Tax Rate $693,208 When the Annual Net Fiscal Benefit is divided by the value of a one-mill change, it will result in the change in the tax rate (in mills) resulting from the proposed development. Annual Net Fiscal Benefit ($35,583) Divide by Value of One Mill Change in the Tax Rate $693,208 Tax Rate Decrease Due to Development (0.05133 mills) Since the estimated tax rate decrease is a negative number, it means that the proposed development is expected to increase the tax rate in the community. To determine the effect on a typical resi dential property owner, take the total residential assessment and divide by the number of housing units to determine the average assessment. Multiply by the change in the tax rate to determine the benefit to a typical residential property owner. Total residential assessment $621,437,544 divided by number of housing units 3,821 Average assessment per housing unit $162,637 times the change in the tax rate (0.05133) Annual Tax Benefit to a typical residential property owner ($8.35 ) Since the estimated tax benefit is a negative number, it means that the proposed development is expected to increase the tax bill for a typical housing unit. Regional Proposed Residential Development Summary (flip page over) 43 Proposed Non-Residential Development Case Study #4 Prospect Estimating Annual Net Fiscal Benefit Estimate the assessed value of the development. Add an allowance for the motor vehicles, personal property, and exemptions (55.9% for industrial development in Prospect). Multiply the total assessment by the current mill rate to determine the tax revenue generated by the development. Estimated assessed value of $1,000,000 Adjustment for vehicles, propert y, exemptions (plus 55.9%) $559,000 Total Assessment $1,559,000 Times mill rate 24.97 mills Tax Revenue Generated $38,928 Since it is a non-residential development, no expenses are anticipated for educa- tion or residents. Take the total assessment for the development ($1,559,000) and multiply by the net expenditure for services to property to estimate the expenditures generated. Estimating Assessed Value Assessed value of a non- residential development can be estimated in two ways. Ask the Assessor for the likely value on the Grand List. Alternatively, estimate the market value of the proposed development and multiply that by the current non- residential assessment-sales ratio (obtained from the Assessor). Total assessment times $6.87 mills $10,710 Annual Net Expenditures $10,710 The annual net fiscal benefit is estimated by subtracting the estimated net expen- diture associated with the devel opment from the estimated revenue. Tax Revenue Generated $38,928 Annual Net Expenditures $10,710 Annual Net Fiscal Benefit $28,218 Tax Benefit Of A Proposed Use Or Activity Assuming that the value of a one mill change in the tax rate in Prospect is $369,651, the change in the tax rate (in mills) resulting from the proposed devel- opment would be: Annual Net Fiscal Benefit $28,218 Divide by Value of One Mill Change in the Tax Rate $369,651 Tax Rate Decrease Due to Development 0.076337 mills Assuming that the average assessment of a residential property in Prospect is about $114,922, the tax benefit to a typical residential property owner would be: Average assessment per housing unit $114,922 times the change in the tax rate 0.076337 mills Annual Tax Benefit to a typical residential property owner $8.77 Since the estimated tax benefit is a positive number, it means that the proposed development is expected to reduce the tax bill for a typical housing unit. 44 “Payback” Of Property Purchase Case Study #5 Bethlehem Land uses that produce a negative annual fiscal benefit result in increased taxes to existing property owners. In some cases, it may be more cost-eff ective for a community to purchase the property since the cost of acquiring the property can be amortized over a period of time whereas an annual fiscal deficit could continue indefinitely. In other words, if new development is going to cost existing taxpayers more money whether the property is developed or purchased, it may make sense to purchase the property for municipal use or open space. Dividing the cost of purchase by the annual fiscal benefit from development will result in an estimate of how long it would take to “pay back” the purchase price. In general terms, a “payback period” of seven years or less would be considered a more prudent investment than one with a longer payback period. Estimate the market value of the property in its undeveloped state. Multiply by 1,000 and divide this by the Grand List. This is the change in the tax rate (in mills) to purchase the property with cash from current tax revenue. Market value of the property in its undeveloped state $250,000 Divide by Value of One Mill Change in the Tax Rate $242,761 Tax rate Increase to purchase th e property with cash 1.02982 mills Note from the foldout page on proposed residential development, that a new 12- lot subdivision development in Bethlehem could produce an annual fiscal deficit of $38,185 and increase taxes by about 0.15730 mills. Dividing the estimated purchase cost of the property by the annual fiscal benefit from development to estimate the number of years to “pay back” the property purchase. “Payback Period” of property purchase: Market value of the property in its undeveloped state $250,000 Divide by the Annual Net Fiscal Benefit ($38,185) Number of years to “pay back” the property purchase 6.55 years In Bethlehem, after 6.55 years, taxpayers would have paid the same amount whether the property was developed or the property was purchased by the com- munity. 45 Possible Tax Benefit of A House Sale Case Study #6 Watertown Suppose a house in Watertown, which is occupied by an elderly couple, is sold and occupied by a family with a school child and an infant. The total assessment of the property (including motor vehicles) is estimated to be $140,000. What is the fiscal benefit? Total Assessment $140,000 Times mill rate 20.79 mills Tax Revenue Generated $2,911 Estimating Annual Net Fiscal Benefit Before The Sale The estimated annual net expenditures before the sale are estimated to be: 0 school children at $3,996per pupil $0 2 residents at 52.10per capita $104 Total assessment at 8.49mills $1,189 Annual Net Expenditures $1,293 As a result, the annual net fiscal benefit is estimated to be: Tax Revenue Generated $2,911 Annual Net Expenditures $1,293 Annual Net Fiscal Benefit $1,618 Estimating Annual Net Fiscal Benefit After The Sale The total estimated annual net expenditures after the sale are estimated to be: 1 school children at $3,996per pupil $3,996 4 residents at 52.10per capita $208 Total assessment at 8.49mills $1,189 Annual Net Expenditures $5,393 As a result, the annual net fiscal benefit after the sale is estimated to be: Ta An The sale of a house occupied by two residents to a family with school age children will turn a fiscal sur- plus into a fiscal shortfall. Elderly tax relief may reduce the desire to sell a house can be a prudent fiscal policy by a com- munity if it extends occupancy. x Revenue Generated $2,911 nual Net Expenditures $5,393 Annual Net Fiscal Benefit ($2,482) The change in the net fiscal benefit is ($4,100) and the property went from pro- ducing a fiscal surplus to producing a fiscal shortfall. For this reason, elderly tax relief can be a prudent fiscal policy by a community if it reduces the desire to sell a house. 46 Median Sales Price Case Study #7 Beacon Falls COGCNV Region Case study #3 looked at the fiscal benefit of typical new residential development. This case study looks at the fiscal benefit of 12 typical houses in Beacon Falls. Estimating Annual Net Fiscal Benefit The calculations are similar to those discussed on pages 42-43 for estimating the tax revenue generated, the net expenditures, and the annual net fiscal benefit. Calculations follow: 12 houses at Median Sales Price @ $110,000 $1,320,000 At the residential assessment-sales ratio (55%) = assessed value of $726,000 Adjustment for vehicles, property, exemptions (plus 13.6%) $98,506 Total Assessment $824,506 Times mill rate 24.65 mills Tax Revenue Generated $20,321 7 school children times $3,847 per pupil $26,931 32 residents times $54.90 per capita $1,757 Total assessment times $7.48 mills $6,170 Annual Net Expenditures $34,858 The annual net fiscal benefit is estimated by subtracting the estimated net expen- diture associated with the devel opment from the estimated revenue. Tax Revenue Generated $20,321 Annual Net Expenditures $34,858 Annual Net Fiscal Benefit ($14,537) Regional Median Sales Price Summary (flip page over) 47 Breakeven Assessment of Residential Unit Case Study #8 Oxford What does a residential unit have to be assessed at (or sell at) to “cover its costs? Clearly, the answer to this question depends on the number of school age chil- dren in the unit. Assuming one school age child in a family of three people in Oxford, the calcula- tions would proceed as follows. Estimating Net Expenditures For Residents and Pupils Multiply the number of school children by the per pupil net expenditure. Multi- ply the number of residents by the per capita net expenditure. Add all of these estimates together to get the total estimat ed annual net expenditures. Notice that this has excluded the net expenditures for services to property. 1 school child times $6,581per pupil $6,581 3 residents times $42.94per capita $129 Annual Resident Net Expenditures $6,710 Estimating Revenue Required The real estate assessment and the estimated market value of the residence are estimated as follows: Tax Revenue Required for Annual Resident Net Expenditures $6,710 Divided by 40.48 mills (the sum of th e mill rate ( approx. 30.40 mills) and the mill rate for services to property rate ( approx. 10.08 mills)) 0.04048 Total Assessment $165,761 Divided by 1.127 (the adjustment for vehicles, property, exemptions) 1.127 Real Estate Assessment $147,082 Divide by the residential assessment-sales ratio 55%) Estimated Market Value of Residence $267,421 If there are two school age children and a family of four, the resident expendi- tures increase to $13,334 and the estimated market value would need to be about $531, 404. Overall, the residential market value needed to support one pupil in the Oxford schools is about $262,280. 48 CONCLUSION 8 Different land uses have different impacts (including fiscal impacts) in each community. Overall, it is im- portant to evaluate each use in light of all of its antici- pated benefits and costs on the com- munity and not simply tax costs and revenues alone. While this report has attempted to summarize some fiscal relationships in the Central Naugatuck Valley Region, it should be considered a starting point for further discussion rather than a final conclusion. A municipal fiscal impact analysis provi des insight into the fiscal impact of different land uses on the General Fund at a given point in time . As changes occur in the Grand List, local revenu es and expenditures, housing occupancy, and school enrollments, the overall fiscal impact of different land uses can be expected to change. Caution should be taken before applying these results to other time periods or jurisdictions since the results of this study represent the interaction of demographic and fiscal parameters that: • may be unique to the communities in the Region, and • are changing over time. It is important to stress that this study only looks at fiscal implications. It does not consider physical, social, or economic implications of different uses. For example In terms of policy implications of the info rmation in this report, it is important to stress that fiscal concerns should not be the only criteria for determining munici- pal policy, especially conservation and development decisions. In the final analysis, while different land uses vary in their potential fiscal impact in a community, the overall form and function of the community and its physical, social, and economic health should be the more important issue. As has been stated previously, it is important to note that each use should be studied in light of all of its anticipated impacts on the community and not simply tax costs and revenues alone. In the long run, managing the community responsibly to promote the best overall quality of life may be more important than investigating every land use without regard to how it fits into a bigger picture. 49 References Ad Hoc Associates, The Effects of Development and Land Conservation on Property Taxes in Connecticut Towns , New Haven, Connecticut, Trust For Public Land, 1995. Burchell and Listokin, The Fiscal Impact Handbook , New Brunswick, New Jersey, Center For Urban Policy Research, 1978. Burchell, Listokin, and Dolphin, The New Practitioners Guide to Fiscal Impact Analysis, New Brunswick, New Jersey, Center For Urban Policy Research, 1985. Burchell, Listokin, and Dolphin, Development Impact Assessment Handbook, Washington, DC, Urban Land Institute, 1994. Burchell et al, The Costs of Sprawl Revisited, Transit Cooperative Research Program Report #39, Washington, DC, National Academy Press, 1998. Holzheimer, Terry, AICP, Fiscal Impact Analysis in Local Comprehensive Planning, Planners’ Casebook #26, Washington, DC, Ameri can Planning Association, 1998. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Does Land Conservation Pay? The Fiscal Implications of Preserv- ing Open Land — Resource Manual , Cambridge Massachusetts, Lincoln Institute of Land Pol- icy, 1992. So et al, The Practice of Local Government Planning, International City Ma nagement Association, Washington, DC, 1979. Southern New England Forest C onsortium, Cost of Community Se rvices in Southern New Eng- land , Chepachet, Rhode Island, 1995. Urban Land Institute, Economic/Fiscal Impacts of Development – Selected References , ULI Information Service Infopacket #306, Washington, DC. 1990 Census of Population & Housing, Connecticut State Data Center, Office of Policy & Man- agement. 1996 Housing Unit Data, Connecticut Department of Economic and Community Development. 1997 Grand List Data, Local Assessors Offices. 1998 Population Estimates, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. 1998-99 Budget Data, Local Finance Offices. 1999-2000 School Enrollment Data, Local Boards of Education. 50 Acknowledgments Council of Governments of the Central Naugatuck Valley Municipality Member Alternate Beacon Falls Susan Cable, Fi rst Selectman Karen Wilson Bethlehem Jeffrey Nicholas, First Selectman Victor Allen Cheshire David Borowy, Council Chair Michael Milone Middlebury Edward St. John, Fi rst Selectman John Baumer Naugatuck Joan Taf, Mayor Executive Committee Kevin Knowles Oxford Paul Schreiber, First Sel ectman Vice Chairman Beverly Hanna Prospect Robert Chatfield, Mayor Executive Committee Southbury Alfio Candido, First Select man Secretary Donald Briggs Thomaston Clifford Brammer, First Selectman Executive Committee Sam Barto Waterbury Philip Giordano, Mayor Allyn DeMaida Watertown Sean Butterly, Council Chair Charles O’Connor Wolcott Michael DeNegris, Mayor Treasurer Richard Longo Woodbury Richard Crane, First Sel ectman Chairman Duncan Graham Regional Planning Commission Municipality Members Beacon Falls Jonathan Chew, Arthur Koeller Bethlehem Victor Allen, Jack Nelson Cheshire John Campbell, Sherwood Dawson Middlebury Thomas Gormley, Francis Ruccio Naugatuck Joseph McEvoy (Chairman) Oxford Isabel Kearns Prospect George Kritzman (Secretary), Gene McCarthy Southbury Harmon Andrews, John Fischer Thomaston Sam Barto Waterbury Thomas Diblasi, Allyn DeMaida Watertown Mary Barton Wolcott Joseph Paulo Woodbury Katherine Campbell (Vice- Chairman), Eugene Crawford COGCNV Staff Project Steering Committee Peter Dorpalen, Executive Director Virginia Mason, Senior Planner Susan Forster, Senior Planner Laurel Stegina, Regional Planner Kristi LeDuc, GIS Research Associate Glenda Prentice, GIS Assistant Peggy Stack, Office Manager Patricia Bauer, Financial Manager Sam Barto, Thomaston Mary Barton, Watertown Delores Curtis, Southbury Kay Campbell, Woodbury William Donovan, Prospect Richard Pfurr, Cheshire Glenn Chalder, AICP Arroll Borden Donald Poland

COGCNV Economic Development Strategic Plan 2000

Draft ReportMt. Auburn Associates, Inc. i E XECUTIVE S UMMARY The Central Naugatuck Valley region has slowly emerged from the adverse effects of the late 1980’s and early 1990’s recession. Although ther e is the public perception that the region’s economy continues to suffer, the reality is quite different. There is considerable good economic news: ! While there continues to be economic uncertainty, the region’s economy has recovered — by some measures stronger than the statewide economy. ! After experiencing tremendous growth during the 1980’s and suffering through a devastating period in the early 1990’s, the Central Naugatuck Valley’s industrial real estate market is performing well. ! The most visible sign of the renewal is the new mall that is currently being constructed in downtown Waterbury. ! The number of unemployed residents has been declining for a number of years. ! Most respondents to our business survey report plans to modernize and expand soon. ! Manufacturing has made a strong comeback and has added jobs to the regional economy — it is comprised of nearly 600 firms that have an extraordinarily diverse customer base. ! While wholesale trade is a somewhat small component of the economy, it has experienced high relative job growth in recent years. In addition to these changes, the region has benefitted from the work of a number of organizations and institutions. They have ma de significant contributions to the region’s businesses and business climate. Included are the Council of Governments of Central Naugatuck Valley, A Community Vision for Waterbury, the Gr eater Waterbury Chamber of Commerce, the Naugatuck Valley Project, the Naugatuck Valley Development Corporation, the Connecticut Small Business Outreach/Development Center, the Neighborhood Revitalization Zones, the Waterbury Downtown Initiative, and New Opportunities for Waterbury. With respect to training, there are many institutions that are playing a key role in educating the workforce. These include the manufacturing sub-committee of Visions, Draft ReportMt. Auburn Associates, Inc. ii Naugatuck Valley Community Technical College, the Waterbury Adult and Continuing Education program, Waterbury’s Technology Education Program, Kaynor Technology, the Naugatuck Valley Project, and the Industrial Mana gement and Training Institute. The State of Connecticut’s Department of Labor and the Institute for Industrial and Engineering Technology have been very active. While the region’s economic and organizationa l strengths are formidable, challenges do remain. Economic disparities continue between the towns and Waterbury. Low-income residents remain somewhat disenfranchised from the mainstream of the regional economy. The region’s workforce has been strong, but some employe rs feel that basic and higher level skills are lacking. Manufacturers find it difficult to attract highly-skilled production workers, and the existing public transportation system presents problems for residents who depend on it for getting access to training and jobs. Finally, bala ncing the need for redeveloping brownfields while making industrial land available for industry expansions will be a challe nge. STRATEGIES AND R ECOMMENDATIONS In order to help the region bu ild on and take advantage of its strengths, and to help it address its challenges, recommendations are offered in four strategic areas (a more detailed list of recommendations is provide in the text of the report). 1. Maximize the Region’s Core Economic Strength — Manufacturing ! Position the Central Naugatuck Valley as a center of manufacturing precision and vitality. ! Increase public support for manufacturing and careers in manufacturing for the region’s residents. ! Develop and expand state-of-the-art high skills training programs. ! Further promote manufacturing modernization. ! Create more interfirm alliances and collaboration. 2. Maximize Job and Business Growth Opportunities in the Construction and Retail Sectors: ! Bolster the informal labor network through hiring “community job brokers.” ! Exploit opportunities at the Brass Mill Center Mall and in retail. Draft ReportMt. Auburn Associates, Inc. iii ! Capitalize on the extraordinary amount of construction activity that will occur in the coming months and years — jobs for residents and business opportunities for local contractors. 3. Promote a New Regional Vision and Spirit of Cooperation ! The COGCNV should aggressively promot e the concept of regional cooperation within the valley, and with key leaders in the State of Connecticut. ! Create a regional “jobs network” composed of organizations representing the economic interests of low- and moderate-income residents in the region. ! Create a regional development agency to help in the development of cultural projects in Waterbury, redevelopment of brownfields, expansion of the Oxford Airport, and projects within the Neighborhood Revitalization Zones. 4. Develop a More Strategic Approach to Industrial Recruitment ! Create a volunteer, but first-rate, regional industrial marketing and response team to promote the region and to respond to inquiries. ! Go beyond the low-cost incentives proposed for the downtown information technology zone, when targeting the information technology sector. ! The region should actively develop marketing materials related to warehousing and distribution and develop specialized training and assistance programs oriented towards the industry. ! Promote the region’s reputation for precisi on manufacturing and develop a regional marketing strategy to attract European firm s that are interested in the Valley’s rich manufacturing base. 1-1 Final ReportMt. Auburn Associates, Inc. C HAPTER O NE : A N E CONOMIC D EVELOPMENT S TRATEGIC P LAN F OR T HE C ENTRAL N AUGATUCK V ALLEY 1.1 I NTRODUCTION 1.1.1 T HE C HANGING E CONOMY The Central Naugatuck Valley region is now at a critical juncture. Like many communities across New England, the region has been buffeted by international eco nomic changes that are affecting the types of jobs be ing created, the location of jobs, and the number of jobs being created. Some of the changes in the U.S. economy that have had an impact on the region include: ! the shift from manufacturing to service jobs with accompanying declines in the quality of jobs; ! the movement from assembly line to smaller flexible production technology requiring higher skills from production workers; ! the increased concentration of financial and non-financial corporate assets in fewer firms; and ! the decline in government defense expenditures. Responding to these forces, the region has experienced a long period of economic restructuring resulting in shifts in terms of the level and types of jobs, products and services, and capital available to local residents and businesses. A large number of companies that had previously defined the region — most notably those in the brass industry — have either closed or moved. They have left behind a legacy of “brownfields” — old industri al sites with environmental problems — and dislocated workers. This restructuring has had a serious impact on all residents of the region — from the low-inco me residents of Waterbury to the professionals living in Woodbury. For many city residents, the loss of blue collar jobs has meant the disappearance of the primary path out of poverty for those without a college education. The loss of jobs has also had an impact on those in the middle class. During the last recession, white collar professionals experienced the insecurity a nd dislocation that had previously been primarily 1-2 Final ReportMt. Auburn Associates, Inc. borne by the blue collar workers in the region. From the local bankers who lost their jobs when their banks were taken over, to the professionals laid off as a result of corporate downsizing, to the small business owners who saw their sales decline significantly as disposable income in the region declined, the impacts of the economic decline are being widely experienced. There are few, if any, residents of the entire Central Naugatuck Valley who have n ot seen their lives affected by the changing economy. 1.1.2 G LOBAL T RENDS A FFECTING C OMPANIES IN T HE C ENTRAL N AUGATUCK V ALLEY Five major trends highlight the significant changes that have radically altered the competitive industrial environment. They present challenges to Central Naugatuck Valley companies. The trends are: ! The growing segmentation, globalization, and volatility of markets. Mass national markets have been replaced by segmented international markets. The revolution in information processing, transportation, and telecommunication technologies, propelled by divergent consumer tastes, has produced an increasingly niche-oriented marketplace. This segmentation of market has been acco mpanied by an internationalization of the market. ! The change in existing products from standardized to tailor-made. Allowed by the introduction of flexible manufacturing technology, product lines have shifted from being mass produced, one size fits all, to being customized to the needs of individual buyers. The flip side of the changes in markets is changes in products. Standard products have given way rapidly to customized products. ! The development and diffusion of new, more productive, and more flexible manufacturing technologies. Advances in manufacturing technology have allowed the development of flexible, reprogrammable production machinery. The changes in the nature of product markets are driven by and have undergirded fundamental changes in manufacturing technology. The advantage in manufacturing has changed over the past several years from one type of basic skill, bei ng expert at a routine set of tasks, to two skills, being flexible and being able to change quickly. ! The rise of agile enterprises. Rapid changes in markets, products, and processes are driving enormous changes in the structure of enterprises and the relationships among them. Many firms are shrinking in size, shedding overhead, and stripping away embedded layers of management hierarchy. Businesses must react quickly to rapid demand shifts in volatile niche markets. They must respond promptly to innovation in 1-3 Final ReportMt. Auburn Associates, Inc. technology and to the demand for more specialized, higher-quality, and shorter-lived products. The need for speed and accuracy in that response is driving a general decentralization of organization. ! The information revolution. Rapid changes in telecommunications and information technologies are transforming the way people live and work. And, we are only at the initial stage of this revolution. For exampl e, the Internet — known primarily to academic scientists as recently as two years ago — is now a household word, with millions of Americans going on-line in a very short time period. The above trends and changes have led manufacturers and economic development organizations to embrace modernization as a guiding principle and practice for manufacturing competitivene ss. Modernization places major emphasis on learning and continuous improvement as the keys to manufacturing success. “Magic Bullet” solutions and quick-fix technologies will not sustain the region’s industrial base. 1.1.3 T HE G OOD N EWS The residents in the region have been reading about bad economic news for so long that they have, in effect, helped to perpetuate negative images in the region, even as the economy has begun to turn around and there are signs of positiv e changes. During the past couple of years, while most residents in the region have continued to think that the area is in a continued slide downward, there have been clear signs of economic renewal: ! While there continues to be economic uncertainty, the region’s economy has recovered; by some measures stronger than the statewide economy. The most recent employment statistics for the state of Connecticut show that the Waterbury Labor Market Area added 2,300 jobs between December of 1995 and December of 1996. The percentage growth in employment exceeds ev ery region of Connecticut except one — the statewide average for this time period was 1.5 percent as compared to 2.7 percent in the Waterbury region. Only the Stamford and New London regions exceeded Waterbury in terms of the number of jobs added. ! After experiencing tremendous growth du ring the 1980s and suffering through a devastating period in the early 1990s, the Ce ntral Naugatuck Valley’s industrial real estate market is performing well. Absorption rates have increased in recent years and the vacancy rate is well under 10 percent. Industrial parks in the region have been successful at attracting new tenants. Captain Neville Industrial Park, for instance, is near 100 percent occupancy. Additionally, many vacant and bank-owned industrial properties have been purchased in recent years. 1-4 Final ReportMt. Auburn Associates, Inc. ! The most visible sign of the renewal is the new mall that is currently being constructed in downtown Waterbury. The decision to develop this mall was based upon private market assessment of the enormous untapped market potential in the region. ! The number of unemployed residents has been declining for a number of years. Since 1992, the number of unemployed residents in th e region has been reduced by close to 40 percent. ! Most respondents to our business survey report plans to modernize and expand soon . Just over half of the respondent s (53 percent) have plans to modernize their facility over the next three years, and 52 percent of res pondents have plans to expand their facility in the near future. ! Manufacturing has made a comeback. After almost two decades of decline, the number of manufacturing jobs in the region has actually increased by 1,000 since 1993. In particular, the region’s fabricated metals industry has been adding jobs at rates exceeding that of the state and the U.S. since 1991. ! While wholesale trade is a relatively sm all component of the economy, it has experienced high relative growth in recent years. Employment in distribution-oriented activities in the Central Naugatuck Valley Region (CNVR) has been incr easing steadily. Thirteen hundred new wholesale jobs have been created in the region since 1985; 300 of these jobs were between 1994 and 1995. Ten years ago, the industry repr esented 3 percent of total regional employment. In 1995, that figure was up to 4.3 percent. ! The region has a strong core of small- to mid-sized, locally-owned manufacturing companies that have become more technology-based and provide state-of-th e-art components for the industries of the world. Approximately 60 companies in the region could be classified as technology-based. Th e largest concentration of technology-based firms are involved in the production of elect ronics and computer peripherals, electrical equipment and supplies, chemicals, su rgical and medical equipment, and telecommunication devices. In addition to these economic signs, the ins titutional capacity and leadership within the region have been significantly enhanced over the pa st few years. Both the city and the region as a whole have a large and sophisticated set of institutions involved in a wide range of issues related to the economic lives of the residents and businesses of the area. These include: ! The Council of Governments of the Central Naugatuck Valley (COGCNV) has been actively promoting regional economic development activity and adding to the knowledge 1-5 Final ReportMt. Auburn Associates, Inc. base in the region. It works with CERC’s site finder program, and the Council of Governments also has an inventory of industrial properties. As a result of a strategic planning process that was undertaken in 1993, the organization has created an Economic Development Steering Committee and has de veloped resource guides for the region. COGCNV’s Economic Development Steering Committee sponsored this strategic planning effort. ! A Community Vision for Waterbury is a grassroots effort initiated by hundreds of volunteers in 1993. The purpose of the group was to create an umbrella organization that could bring together a number of individuals and organizations seeking to improve the quality of life in the city of Waterbury. Vi sions is a forum for the diverse interest groups in the community. In recent years, Visions has been involved in a number of educational activities including: helping to create Partnership 2000 (see below); helping to cre ate the Screw Machine Training Program; establishing the “Initiatives for Downtown Waterbury” and hiring a Downtown Manager to work on revitalization activities; organizing a sales and marketing consortium comprised of six metal fabrication companies; and underwriting a feasibility study for a downtown civic center. ! Greater Waterbury Chamber of Commerce provides a range of traditional services to its business constituency. In addition to these more traditional chamber activities, the Waterbury Chamber has been a participant in the Waterbury Partnership 2000. Of most note, the Chamber has helped to publish and widely distribute a magazine and video that highlight the strengths of the Greater Waterbury region. ! Waterbury Partnership 2000 is a public/private organization designed to improve the coordination of economic development activities in the city of Waterbury. The Partnership consists of the Chamber of Commerce, the Visions group, the Naugatuck Valley Development Corporation, and the city of Waterbury. Since its establishment, the Partnership has successfully worked on a number of issues. ! The Naugatuck Valley Development Corporation (NVDC) is a nonprofit, public/private corporation created over three decades ago to promote the economy of the city of Waterbury. It is the primary vehicle for all economic development efforts by the city of Waterbury. Although it is seen as primarily oriented towards the city, in fact, the corporation has a broader mission and capabilities for working on issues throughout the greater region. In addition to land development efforts, NVDC administers several revolving loan funds for businesses, including a $3 million regional fund. 1-6 Final ReportMt. Auburn Associates, Inc. ! The Connecticut Small Business Outreach/Development Center is somewhat unique. Like many other SBDCs in New England and in the country, it provides a range of technical services for small and emerging businesses. The services include business planning, marketing, cash flow management, etc. Additionally, the SBDC in the Waterbury area directly assists businesses in loan packaging for equipment, machinery, mergers and acquisitions, and in developing a succession plan. Its ability to offer this higher level of assistance to businesses makes it a very important resource to the region. ! Neighborhood Revitalization Zones (NRZ). In 1995, the Connecticut State Legislature adopted an act to bring about the economic revitalization of neighborhoods where properties are “foreclosed, abandoned, blighted, substandard, or pose a pu blic safety hazard.” The Public Act 340 allows neighborhoods to waive and bypass rules and regulations that impede neighborhood improvements. Waterbury was the first city in the state to enact the Neighborhood Revitalizati on Zones allowed under the new state law. The zones are a way for residents, businesses, and government to team up for long-term planning regarding housing needs in individual neighborhoods, and will enable neighborhoods to move toward self-suffici ency. NRZ groups are meeting in the following Waterbury neighborhoods: Brooklyn, Crownbrook, Hillside, St. Margaret’s, the South End, and Walnut Orange Walsh (WOW). None of these groups, however, has become a full-fledged NRZ yet. They are still in the initial stages of drafting a plan for approval. The South End Neighborhood Revita lization Corporation has drafted a master plan for a significant revitalization, largely ba sed on the need for jobs in the area. The plan emphasizes local business ownership, partnerships with established businesses, on-the-job training, and selected obsolete buildi ng demolition. Its effort is, in large part, guided by that of the Walnut Orange Wa lsh neighborhood, an area with one of the highest levels of poverty in the city, which recently completed a similar initiative. ! The Naugatuck Valley Project (NVP) was founded in 1984 by churches, unions, and citizens’ groups concerned about the changing economy and its impact on residents. The Project organizes around “jobs” issues in the region, focusing on developing strategies around training, job creation, affordable housing, quality health care, preserving the environment, improving public education, nurturing youth, reducing crime, and revitalizing distressed neighborhoods. NVP has helped to create a worker-owned home health care company — Valley Care Coopera tive. More recently, NVP is leading an initiative to identify and redevelop brownfields in the region. ! The Waterbury Downtown Initiative (WDI) is an alliance of businesses and private citizens founded to create a new mission for downtown Waterbury. WDI’s major goals 1-7 Final ReportMt. Auburn Associates, Inc. are to “transform empty buildings into productive assets, create meaningful jobs, and enrich Waterbury’s quality of life.” Current and past initiatives include: reporting on recommendations to address downtown parking, initiating discussions and ideas about a downtown training center with Briarwood College, exploring development of an information technology zone to attract high tech investment, examining alternative uses for vacant and under-utilized properties, and establishing a downtown bu ying cooperative. ! New Opportunities for Waterbury (NOW) is a community action agency for Waterbury and its surrounding towns, administering over 50 social service programs. Among the issues addressed are early childhood education, job training and placement, housing, adult education and literacy, mentoring, and health. One of the newest programs, JOBSFirst, provides job development and placement and job search skills training to AFDC recipients. NOW is also actively seeking to expand its day care facilities and to operate an entrepreneurial training program. In addition to these resources, other towns in the region have economic development boards or committees working to promote or manage development activities in their communities. While a number (Beacon Falls, Woodbury, Thomaston, and Southbury) have volunteer based commissions, others (Cheshire, Naugatuck, and Oxford) have full-time staff working to promote economic development in their communities. 1.1.4 R EMAINING C HALLENGES While a lot of progress has been made over the past few years, both in building the region’s institutional infrastructure and in turning the economy around, many serious challenges remain. 1. Disparities remain between economic conditi ons in the city of Waterbury and the surrounding towns. Although economic conditions are improving in the region, the city of Waterbury remains less well off than the rest of the region: ! In the town of Waterbury, households are, in general, less well off than in the region as a whole. In 1989, over 15 percent of the town’s households has an income below $10,000, compared to 7 percent in the rest of th e region, while only 7.5 percent of the town’s households have an income over $75,000 compared to 21 percent of households in the rest of the region. 1-8 Final ReportMt. Auburn Associates, Inc. ! Waterbury has the lowest per capita income in the region ($14,209 in 1995). ! Waterbury’s median household income, at $30,533 in 1989, is slightly higher than the national figure of $30,056, and much lower than that of all other towns in the region. ! In the town of Waterbury, 10 percent of the households received Public Assistance Income in 1989, compared to 2.5 percent in the rest of the region. ! The unemployment rate in Waterbury in 1995, at 7.6 percent, was the highest in the region. Since 1984, the town has consistently had the highest unemployment rate in the region except in 1993 when it fell below Thomaston’s rate. 2. The region’s low-income residents face a wide range of barriers limiting their ability to more fully participate in the economy. Low-income residents in the CNVR face ma ny of the barriers to employment that are common in other areas of the na tion. These include barriers related to the capacity of the individuals (i.e., language barriers and insufficient basic skills) and ones related to failures of the public sector (lack of child care options and in adequate transportation). The following barriers to employment are particularly relevant to the low-income residents of the CNVR: ! Child Care: Many low-income residents have problems with the availability and cost of child care. The lack of sufficient affordab le child care prevents them from taking advantage of employment and educational opport unities. Lack of child care is especially a problem for women in their early 20s w ho had children while in their teens and are now unable to find a place to leave thei r children in order to find employment. Moreover, there is a dearth of 24-hour child care service. This type of service is especially important for families with parents working second or third manufacturing shifts, or in some service occupations with evening and weekend hours. Many of these issues are now being addressed in the region and the state. The Governor has recognized that child care is single greatest barrier fo r welfare recipients, and has doubled funding for child care. New Opportunities for Wa terbury provides services to children of low-income parents who are working or in school/training programs and is in the process of building space for an additional 400-slot program. ! Discrimination: Many people have cited widespread discrimination based on age and ethnicity. The Hispanic population, in particular, faces discrimination in the workplace. ! Language: The Hispanic community faces an additional barrier — language. Many of the jobs being created, most notably those in the retail sector, require workers with good English speaking skills. Training programs being developed also require good English 1-9 Final ReportMt. Auburn Associates, Inc. speaking skills. Individuals who do not yet speak English have very limited economic opportunities. ! Job Readiness and Post-placement Support: One problem noted by staff at the Department of Social Services is that pe ople tend to get either very specific training geared toward a certain position, or they receive very general training and are then sent on their way. Job follow-up and post placement support services are inadequate. 3. The region’s workforce is falling behind — many employers in the area feel that many people are deficient in basic skills. Results from the survey of businesses pr ovide evidence that employers are facing increasing challenges in finding and keeping qualified employees. Employers believe that the secondary schools do not adequately prepare students for local entry-level jobs. Only 5. 5 percent of respondents to the survey believe that the local schools prep are students for jobs very well and 31 percent indicated that they prepare students poorly. Furthe rmore, interviews with local companies also revealed that illiterac y, as well as communication skills, personal motivation, critical thinking skills, and basic math skills, are issues. 4. The region is also facing a shortage of highly-skilled workers.Compared to the state of Connecticut, the CNVR region has a smaller proportion of highly-educated residents. A lower percentage of the region’s population over the age of 25 has a bachelor’s degree or higher than in the state: 21.5 percent in CNVR compared to 27.2 percent in Connecticut. 10.5 percent of the region’s populati on has an educational level below that of 9th grade, similar to the nation’s figure of 10.4 percent but higher than the state’s 8.4 percent. Several companies need to go outside of the region to recruit highly technical worke rs. Historically, however, the region did have a very strong base of highly-skilled, blue collar workers. This core of skilled workers is aging and what has been a competitive strength of the region is now becoming a critical barrier. Respondents to the survey reported that skilled production workers are the most difficult workers to recruit. Interviews with manufacturers confirmed that many of the highly-skilled worker s are aging and retiring, or nearing retirement. They report that it is increasingly difficult to replace these workers. 5. There is a mismatch between job opportunities available and the interest s of residents . The labor force in the CNVR has a very negative view of the manufacturing sector, which remains one of the region’s strongest sector s. The widespread and misinformed belief that positions in manufacturing are not well paid and involve undesirable working conditions is nefarious both to job seekers who do not even consider the manufacturing sector, and to companies that have difficulty recruiting workers. 1-10 Final ReportMt. Auburn Associates, Inc. Partly due to the lack of proper information regarding the manufacturing sector, there is a discrepancy between what is perceived and what is true regarding the ava ilability of jobs. While manufacturing job opportunities do exist in the regi on, in many instances, residents are not aware of them, or have a negative perception of the job situation. Many people are still reluctant to see their children enter vocational/technical school instead of staying on the college path. Even gui dance counselors tend to focus on the need to go to college. This emphasis on continued higher education at the expense of vocational training results in people dropping out of college when they decide it is not right for them, or never going to college in the first place, and then not having the basic skills for the workplace. 6. The existing public transportation does not serve the needs of residents and employers . Transportation is one of the most cited barriers faced by residents to gain access to employment, education, training opportunities, and child care. While the transit routes serve most of the towns in the region, decentralization trends have made it more difficult to serve various destinations in the region effectively. Access to training and employment centers is increasingly limited as a result. Moreover, there has been an increase in second- and third-shift employment in recent years. Many of the workers are low-income and lack access to private automobiles. At the same time, bus se rvice throughout the region stops at 6:30 p.m. Consequently, second- and third-shift workers must rely on other means of transportation to work. Finally, the lack of transportation is al so a problem for residents who need to drop off their children at day care centers. Because of this, some children have had to drop out of programs. 7. There is continued fragmentation on economic development . Although the region’s economic development capacity has grown considerably, it remains fragmented. There is no one entity responsible for overseeing the economic development agenda of the region. While a lot of leadership has been mobilized through Visions and Partnership 2000, the focus of these entities re mains on the city of Waterbury. While the Economic Development Steering Committee of the COGCNV does operate regionally, the organization is primarily involved in planning activities, not service delivery. The Mayor of Waterbury, a key political figure in the region, has not become engaged in many of these activities. The result is that while there is considerable capacity, there is still no clear leadership overseeing regional economic development in the Central Naugatuck Valley region. 8. The region has been left w ith a large number of “brownfields” — older industrial sites and buildings with environmental problems. While there are many geographic limitations on industrial development in the Central Naugatuck Valley, redevelopment of many of the Waterbury region’s brownfields, typically pre-1960 industrial sites with low and medium levels of environmental contamination, represents an economic development challenge. Approximate ly 168 brownfield sites have been identified 1-11 Final ReportMt. Auburn Associates, Inc. in the Naugatuck Valley. Forty-five percent of these sites are clustered in the Central Valley, which includes Waterbury. The city has the majority of the region’s older industrial sites and a number of brownfields. There is limited land available for new industrial development in the city of Waterbury. The Naugatuck Valley Project is initiating an effort to promote the clean-up and redevelopment of the region’s brownfields and has targeted several of these sites for redevelopment, including the former Waterbury Bu tton Factory at 777 S. Main Street, the Sealy Mattress Factory in the Oakville section of Watertown, and the Plume & Atwood Mill Complex in Thomaston. There remains a perception, especially among many of the real estate developers and brokers in the region, that the cost of cleaning up old manufacturing sites is prohibitive. In recent years, several state and federal programs ha ve been established to assist communities with clean-up of these former manufacturing sites. In 1992, the State of Connecticut developed the Urban Sites Remedial Action Program to conduct environmental reviews and clean up sites for industrial redevelopment. A $25 million bond fund to support brownfield redevelopment was passed in 1993. Urban sites with “economic development potential” are eligible for state funding. 9. The restructuring of the financial market s has led to the loss of many locally-owned banks and loan officers with a long history and commitment to the region . As is true of most of the nation, consolidations and mergers in the banking industry have meant that decisions about commercial and industrial lending increasingly are being made by individuals who are no longer based in the Waterbury region. Long-standing relationships between companies and banks have been affecte d. In addition, the loss of locally-owned banks has left the region with a smaller pool of corporate leaders. The purchase of Centerbank by First Union Ba nk of North Carolina is the most recent example of this trend. Many individuals are c oncerned that this buyout may have an impact on the availability of loans to small firms in the re gion. First Union is the largest bank in the region with 13 offices and over $1 b illion in local deposits. The bank was also considered by development finance professionals to be one of the region’s most aggressive small business lenders. Under its new management, the bank is now undergoing significant personnel turnover at senior levels. There is growing concern that the changes may result in less active lending to local and small- and middle-market companies. 10. The region lacks capacity to provide very small loans to individuals int erested in self-employment and home-based business development. None of the region’s development finance or business assistance organizations are explicitly geared to this type of client. While NOW has developed a program to support entrepreneurship amongst its clientele, there is no comprehensive program available to provide financial support to residents interested in starting their own small-scale business enterprise. 1-12 Final ReportMt. Auburn Associates, Inc. 11. Downtown Waterbury continues to suffer from high retail and office vacancy rates, and the region as a whole lacks Class A office space. The Greater Waterbury region is a secondary office market. In 1995, the region’s overall office vacancy rate was just unde r 30 percent, according to the Greater Waterbury Real Estate Report. Class A office vacancies were much lower, around 7 percent. The majority of the region’s office space is classified as Class B or C. The lack of quality Class A office space is a constraint. Downtown Waterbury, for example, has only two Class A office buildings and there are only five Class A office buildings in the entire region. There is a significant amount of available Class B and C office space in downt own Waterbury. The perceived lack of quality surface parking f acilities, increased crime, absence of entertainment options, and other issues present barriers to downtown redevelopment and the absorption of vacant retail and office space. 12. With increasing absorption rates for availabl e industrial buildings and sites, the region will soon face constraints in readily accessible industrial properties. According to the Greater Waterbury Real Estate Report, the industrial market vacancy rate was between 8.4 percent and 8.8 percent in 1995. The vacancy rate was much lower for post-1960 buildings, at 4 percent. The region has a significant number of modern buildings that were constructed in the last 20 years. Many of these facilities are single story structures that are functional for modern manufacturing. Pre-1960 structures tend to have a vacancy rate in the 10 to 15 percent range. While sites exist for new industrial development, available parcels are limited, particularly in certain towns in the region. The topography (wetlands and mountains) in certain areas also limits the development of some regions that are zoned industrial. The major example is the Reidville Industrial Park in Waterbury where most available parcels are too rocky to develop. 1.1.5 B UILDING O N E XISTING STRENGTHS 1. A prime location and transportation infrastructure for serving the North east Market . The Waterbury Region is well situated in terms of serving the New England and Northeast Market. Interstate 84 is a major east- west route that provides ready access to both the Boston and New York metropolitan areas. Route 8 provides north-south access to I-95 and I-90. According to the respondents to the Mt. Auburn Survey, highway access was perceived as t he most positive factor affecting business conditions in the region. On a scale of 1 (positive) to 3 (negative), highway access scored a 1.37. 2. A core of skilled production workers . Although there is concern about the aging of the workforce and manufacturers are facing a growing challenge in filling skilled positions, the region still has a core o f highly productive and skilled manufacturing workers. It needs to build on this core strength by increasing the 1-13 Final ReportMt. Auburn Associates, Inc. number of individuals in the region with these skills and ensuring that there is a new generation entering the workforce with these skills. 3. Reputation for manufacturing excellence and resources for manufacturing . The Central Naugatuck Valley maintains a strong manufacturing base, with more than 600 firms located throughout the region. While the state’s manufacturing employment continues to decline, the region’s manufacturing job base has stabilized and actually expanded slightly in recent years. The CNVR has added roughly 1,000 manufacturing jobs since 1993. The largest job gains have occurred in the fabricated metals and machinery and electrical equipment industries. The region is generally perceived in ternationally as one of the centers of high quality precision manufacturing. The image of the region in terms of its manuf acturing strengths is further enhanced by the organizations that have been involved in stre ngthening the region’s industrial base. The number of institutions and organizations that provide training resources for the manufacturing community is impressive in scope and quality and they are briefly described here: ! The manufacturing sub-committee of Vision’s Economic Development Task Fo rce has been at the forefront of organizing manuf acturers and developing training programs in the greater Waterbury area. It has relied on the work of a few volunteers to accomplish a great deal in the last year. ! The Connecticut Business and Industry Association’s (CBIA) leadership throughout the state and its involvement regionally have b een helpful in framing the importance of a high-skilled workforce. The CBIA has acted on legislation that affects the manufacturing community throughout the state, it has a Manufacturers Council to advocate on behalf of industrial firms, it sponsors roundtables and seminars on key topics, and it is developing a council that focus on careers in manufacturing. ! The Connecticut Department of Labor has undertaken a major re-engineering of its role and its programs for helping manufacturers find and train skilled workers. Its Waterbury office has recently helped several manufacturers with workforce access, its Customized Job Training Program ($1.2 million statewide) offers financial support for companies that wish to tailor a training program for its wo rkforce, its Apprenticeship Training Program provides tax incentives for companies that enroll workers, and its Work Force Connection program is a computerized and streamlined service that helps companies and individuals make the right employment match. 1-14 Final ReportMt. Auburn Associates, Inc. ! The Connecticut Development Authority has a Job Training Finance Program that provides loans to manufacturers who cannot af ford to cover the costs of a workforce training program. ! Vision’s manufacturing sub-committee, the Na ugatuck Valley Project, the Institute of Industrial Engineering and Technology , the Department of Labor, CBIA, the Connecticut Skilled Trades Association, and the Waterbury Adult Continuing Education Department have all collaborated on an exciting initiative to train area residents (employed and unemployed) for work in the screw machine industry — and a similar program is just underway for the eyelet industry. ! Naugatuck Valley Community Technical College offers computer, engineering, production, and technology education through its credit and degree progr ams, its certificate programs, and the courses and cust omized training programs of the Center for Business and Industry and Continuing Education. The college works with both individual companies and clusters of companies like the plastics industry. ! Kaynor Vocational Technical School has a metalworking and machining program that graduates 12 to 14 students a year. Students get hands-on production training in the machine shop, as well as computer-based machining on the school CNC machine. Kaynor has an Adult Education Program that offers machine tool and machine technology evening courses during the September to June school year. Approximately 16 to 18 people go through the program each year. Kaynor also offers a state-approved apprenticeship training program. Over 100 pe ople are enrolled this year from eyelet, screw machine, plastics, instruments companies, and job shops. Finally, Kaynor occasionally provides customized training to i ndividual companies as it did recently for a group of engineers at Sikorsky Aircraft. ! The Institute for Industrial and Engineering Technology (IIET) provides a number of resources to manufacturers. The IIET cont ributed $10,000 to the training program for the screw machine industry. IIET also has a Technical Training Center that offers customized, flexible training in process t echnologies, CAD/CAM, geometric tolerancing, and other quality and engineering applications. ! The Industrial Management and Training Institute (IMTI) is a private institution that offers apprenticeship courses and training for licenses in HVAC, electrical, plumbing, electronics, and wastewater treatment. Short, specialized classes are also offered. IMTI is creating a manufacturing incubator at its Freight Street site. In addition to space, the 1-15 Final ReportMt. Auburn Associates, Inc. incubator will provide training and support to other small manufacturing firms in the region. ! The Naugatuck Valley Deployment Research Program (NVDRP) is a manufacturing support and training initiative sponsored by CONN/STEP and Connecticut I nnovations, Inc. The Program works with the E mmett O’Brien Vocational Technical School (EOCTS) and the Institute for Industria l Engineering and Technology (IIET). Its industrial focus is currently on the plastics industry, although the pro gram’s mission is also to work with metalworking and high technology manufacturers. The program has a strong training component that includes apprenticeship training, summer internships for teachers, curriculum development and hands-on machine training for high school students, a program to train welfare moth ers for careers in non-traditional jobs, and a comprehensive set of classes and credit programs through the Naugatuck Valley Community-Technical College. Additionally, NVDRP has support programs and services that are designed to raise awareness of the plastics industry i n the region and make the industry a globally competitive sector. ! The Connecticut Skilled Trades Coalition is a collaboration of several companies, manufacturing organizations, training institutions, and community organizations. While the Coalition itself does no training of its own, it marshals resources, applies political leverage, and raises public awareness about the need of Connecticut manufacturers for a highly-skilled workforce. The Coalition, for example, was one of the sponsors of the screw machine industry training program. 4. Availability of labor. Although accessing highly-skilled workers is a growing problem, the region is still perceived as having a relatively large pool of potential workers. Employers find that filling relatively low-skilled positions is not difficult. In fact, respondents to the Mt. Auburn business survey ranked the availability of labor as the third most positive factor related to doing business in the greater Waterbury region. 5. Current construction boom — the Brass Mill Center Mall and other constr uctionactivity. The Waterbury region, in particular the city, is in the midst of a construction boom. The most visible element of this boom is the construction of the new Brass Mill Center Mall. This $120 million project is generating short-term jobs during the construction phase as well as about 2,000 permanent jobs. In addition to the mall, public investments of between $100 million and 1-16 Final ReportMt. Auburn Associates, Inc. $172 million are being made in four other major public investment projects — a sewage treatment facility, state courthouse, state office building, and, potentially, the revitalization of the Palace Theater into a convention center with commercial spin-offs. This construction activity provides enormous opportunities for the region. Not only are construction jobs being created, but these projects should have a positive impact on downtown development. 6. Employment support services and education and training infrastructure.While gaps and challenges remain, the region has a strong education and training infrastructure that provides opportunities for lifelong learning. In addition, the region has nonprofit organizations that have been innovative in their approach to p roviding employment support services. This infrastructure will be criti cal to ensuring that the region has the workforce needed to compete in the next century. ! Cheshire, Naugatuck, Waterbury, and Thomaston offer fairly comprehensive adult education courses in the evenings at their middle and high schools. The courses offered include Adult Basic Education, GED preparation, English as a Sec ond Language (although none of the ESL programs are very job-oriented), workplace readiness skills, computer literacy, and math competency. The Waterbury Adult Education Center also offers classes in citizenship, CNA certification, phlebotomy certification, auto screw machine training, and family literacy. The Thomaston program includes food handlers’ certification. The Waterbury and Thomaston centers, serving a total of over 4,000 residents, are used especially by Latinos and African-Americans. ! New Opportunities for Waterbur y has received funds from DSS to be used to provide job development, job placement, job retention, and job search skills training services for recipients of AFDC. The program (JOBS First) recei ves weekly referrals of about 30 participants who receive orientation, intake/assessment, referral for job search skills training (conducted by Waterbury Opportunities Industrialization Center, Inc.), and are assisted with job search, day care, and transportation issues. ! Community Employment Incentive Program (CEIP) is a grant program for Connecticut municipalities that provides fu nding for employment placement projects for recipients of General Assistance. It includes job readiness assessment and training, job search training, job placement, skills training, education, and transportation assistance. ! Work Force Connection is a nonprofit organization that receives state an d federal funds to help individuals with employment and training needs. Under the JTPA, funds are allocated to provide classroom training programs in basic education, literacy, 1-17 Final ReportMt. Auburn Associates, Inc. occupational skill training, and on-the-job training apprenticeships. T he organization’s Summer Youth Employment Program for youth between the ages of 14 and 21 helps improve the employability skills of participants. ! Multi-skill Educational Training Center provides assistance with job development, including interview techniques, job search skills, resume and cover letter writing, and job referrals. METC operates under auspices of the Waterbury Board of Education and offers the following programs: basic skills (reading, math), business introduction, GED, medical secretary program, office occ upations, and computerized bookkeeping. ! The Waterbury Remediation for Employment Project provides financial assistance for the education of individuals with reme diation needs in the Waterbury LMA. This training can enhance the individual’s ability to find employment. Contributions made by businesses to the program fund the training. In turn, the donor receives corporate income tax credits. ! Both the Waterbury Public Schools an d the Cheshire Schools have developed innovative programs with local employers. The School to Career program run by Cheshire Public Schools has developed ma ny partnerships — about 300 per year, 250 of which are constant. Some just involve one person coming to speak in schools, others are all-out partnerships with large companies that hire students for internships. All elementary and middle schools have Career Days. There is also a senior internship program, 10 weeks, part-time in business relevant to interests. In Waterbury, there are 100 partnerships in three main areas: allied health/medical careers; technology/ manufacturing; and culinary arts. Middle sc hools all have career days, mentors, job shadowing, career counseling, and guest speakers. 7. Low costs relative to other sites in the Northeast — particularly in Fa irfield County and New York. Both residents and businesses in the Waterbur y region (as well as in most of Connecticut) tend to focus on the high costs of doing business in Connecticut. On a number of measures this is the case. However, when looking at the cost competitiveness of the Waterbury region it is important to consider who the competition is. It is true that when compared to many other states in the U.S. or other countries certain costs are hi gh in the region. If Waterbury is to compete for industrial expansions and relocations with Mississippi or South Carolina, it will clearly be unable to match many of the costs of doing busine ss in these states. However, for the high end precision machining industry, the major competitors are more likely to be in Ohio or California. For distribution-oriented companies that need to be in the Northeast or New England, the 1-18 Final ReportMt. Auburn Associates, Inc. competition is likely to come from Dutchess County, New York or Worcester, Massachusetts. And, for companies headquartered in Connecticut looking for expansion sites close to their headquarters, the competition can be from towns in Southern Fairfield County. In addition to thinking about who and where the competition is, it is critical to think about the overall needs of businesses in different industries. For precision manufacturers, the skills of the labor force are an investment decisi on factor that is probably at least as important as business taxes. Many companies have found that the high cost of labor can be justified on a cost basis if it leads to higher levels of productivity and reducing the costs associated with uneven quality in the products being produced. Thus, in thinking about the costs of doing business it is important to understand with whom you are comp eting as well as the entire needs of the companies in the sectors being targeted. In terms of business costs, when you compare the overall cost structure for businesses in the Waterbury region to many competing sites in the Northeast, th ere are actually cost advantages in the region. In addition to relativ ely low costs for industrial land and buildings, labor costs and other business costs are lower than in many other locations in New York and New England. In addition, the incentives provided through the State’s Enterprise Zone Program have further improved the cost competitiveness of many sites in the Waterbury region. 8. A strong infrastructure of industrial parks.The region has a tremendous industrial park infrastructure, with more than 20 parks located in the 13 towns. Overall, the CNVR’s industrial market contains over 19.5 million square feet of industrial space. Waterbury has the largest share of the region’s industrial space, with more than 7.1 million square feet. The greatest potential for further industrial development resides in Cheshire, Naugatuck, Watertown, and Middlebury. There are limited industrial vacancies in Beacon Falls and some towns have very limited industrial development activity, such as Southbury and Woodbury. Oxford currently has limited industrial development, but its location along I-84 and recent investments in water, sewer, gas, and telecommunications infrastructure, have enhanced the town’s industrial development potential. In addition, several towns in the region are planning expansions of thei r industrial parks. Most brokers in the region anticipate that an increasing number of build-to-suit facilities will be developed in the region, especially given high absorption rates in recen t years. Captain Neville Industrial Park in Waterbury, for instance, is near 100 percent occupancy. Older industrial sites represent tremendous potential for the Waterbury submarket, but local developers anticipate that it will take a number of years before redevelopment of brownfields takes hold in the region, largely due to perceptions about the external costs associated with these sites. 1-19 Final ReportMt. Auburn Associates, Inc. While some towns in the region have few prime sites available for new development, a number of towns have an abundant supply of i ndustrial land. IBM owns over 1,000 acres of land in Middlebury that the compa ny has recently started to mark et for industrial development. Timex recently purchased 60 acres of this land for its new corporate headquarters. Oxford has a 62-acre parcel adjacent to the airport and many smaller parcels that were recently put on the market. Additionally, there are many pre-1960 structures throughout the region that remain vacant. As absorption rates rise, there is greater potential for these sites to be redeveloped. 9. A relatively competitive banking environment that is more actively competing for the small business market. While there is concern about the loss of lo cal ownership and the implication on smaller businesses, the region still maintains a relativ ely competitive banking market. Nineteen banks have offices in the region, including large money center and regional banks, medium-sized statewide banks, and small locally-based banks. The region’s banking resources are broadly distributed among these banks — the largest bank holds only about 25 percent of the region’s deposit base. The large number of competitors in the marketplace gives businesses a range of choices in developing banking relationships. While the availability of financing remains a concern for some companies, only about one in six of the respondents to the Mt. Auburn business survey considered the availability of bank loans as a negative factor in the region’s business environment. 10. Political attention by state government. Governor Rowland, who comes from Waterbury, is often quoted as saying that Waterbury is the “Center of the Universe.” Hi s commitment to the community is clear and he has helped to leverage attention and target res ources to the area. It is important that the community use this leverage to support a long-term strategy ra ther than to become overly focused on individual projects. 1.1.6 P RINCIPLES IN STRATEGIC PLAN D ESIGN 1. A broad definition of economic development needs to be promoted that links three approaches used in efforts to improve the economic lives of individuals: ! Traditional economic development strategies focused on developing work opportunities through promoting business startup, e xpansion, retention, and attraction. Communities have used a wide variety of economic development “tools” to create or retain jobs. It is these tools, such as financing programs, tax incentives, large-scale real estate projects, infrastructure investments, marketing activities, small business incubators, and business assistance programs, that have often come to define economic 1-20 Final ReportMt. Auburn Associates, Inc. development activities in a community. These efforts are referred to as the “demand” side of the employment picture. ! Workforce support policies and programs aimed at ensuring that individuals are able to work, ready to work, qualified to work, and able to secure work. The “tools” used to support the workforce include education and training, as well as a range of activities focused on support services and employment brokering. These activities are referred to as the “supply” side of the employment picture. ! Community development policies and programs aimed at revitalizing a spec ific geographically defined community. The “tools” used in community development have included housing development, commercial revitalization, real estate development, and self-employment. Increasingly, community development efforts are also focusing on building the “social capital” in the community through community building activities. 2. Focus this strategic planning effort on the following goals: ! Strengthen the regional economy. The region as a whole has suffered job loss and economic decline in recent years that have resulted in fewer employment opportunities for residents in all socioeconomic groups and increased fiscal pressures on many of the region’s individual communities. In order to increase opportunities for the most economically disadvantaged residents, the regional economy as a whole must be strengthened and new businesses and jobs created. ! Ensure that economically disadvantaged residents share in economic opportunities. As evidenced by the boom of the mid-1980s , a strong regional economy alone does not translate into economic opportunities for the region’s most disadvantaged residents. Strategies must be implemented that overcome the barriers individuals face in getting and keeping decent jobs. ! Support the viability of downtown and inner-city neighborhoods. The view is widely held among regional economists that the economic health of central cities and their surrounding suburbs are closely related. Wit hout an economically healthy downtown and socially healthy inner-city residential neighborhoods, the region as a whole is unlikely to reach its full economic potential. Moreover, without these conditions, the quality of life for those who must or choose to remain in the city will remain substandard. Political divisions and fiscal inequities within the region tend to reinforce and deepen economic 1-21 Final ReportMt. Auburn Associates, Inc. disparities and social divisions. Therefore, efforts must also focus on achieving and maintaining healthy economic and social conditions within the central city. 3. Focus on employment opportunities that either provide a family wage or offer ladders that could lead to family wage jobs . While there are many actors in the state and in the region who are developing initiatives that focus on job creation, few of the efforts pay sufficient attention to the quality of jobs being created and the match between those jobs and the skill base of residents. Creating entry-level jobs for low-income residents with a limited skill base and limited job experience should be part of the region’s economic development agenda. However, it is also important to think beyond the entry-level jobs by addressing career ladders and skill upgrading. A strategic plan for the region should address job quality issues and not assume th at providing entry-level jobs will be sufficient to allow families to improve their economic conditions. While entry-level jobs are a critical component of the economy, there needs to be acknowledgment of upward paths and potential for skill upgrading. 4. Support and strengthen existing capacity before supporting new programs ororganizations. Economic development efforts already suffer from fragmentation and duplication. It is important to consider how existing activities can be extended or strengthe ned before establishing potentially duplicative efforts or investing in ne w or small efforts that will encounter difficulty achieving scale and having impact. Rather than creating new organizations or parallel strategies, this plan seeks to support and strengthen the efforts already underway a nd focus on a few areas of recommendations. In addition to the strategies developed in this plan, it is important that regional leadership acknowledge and support other ongoing efforts that are critical to the r egion’s economic future. These include (but are not limited to): ! the important work of the Downtown Initiative; ! the work of the Neighborhood Revitalization Zones; ! the brownfields redevelopment study being developed by the Naugatuck Valley Project; ! the education reform and school to work efforts going on throughout the region; ! charter reform activities; ! welfare to work initiatives being developed in the region; ! the Freight Street Industrial Incubator; and 1-22 Final ReportMt. Auburn Associates, Inc. ! the retail training and entrepreneurial support program being designed by Work Force Connection. These activities already have momentum and plans behind them. We believe they should receive the full support and attention of public and private sector leaders in the region and should be considered an integral component of any long-term economic development agenda in the Central Naugatuck Valley. 1-23 Final ReportMt. Auburn Associates, Inc. 5.Concentrate attention on a few strategic areas. Given the ongoing activities in the region, Mt. Auburn focused on areas wh ere we believed our research and experience could add value. This led us to four key strategic thrusts that are expanded on more fully in the remainder of this report: I. Maximize the region’s core economic strength — manufacturing. II. Build upon existing opportunities in retail and construction activity. III. Develop a more strategic approach to industrial recruitment. IV. Promote a new regional vision and spirit of cooperation. 2-1 Final ReportMt. Auburn Associates, Inc. C HAPTER T WO : M AXIMIZE THE R EGION ‘S C ORE E CONOMIC S TRENGTH — M ANUFACTURING 2.1 O VERVIEW O F STRATEGY The Waterbury region has already developed a comprehensive and effective network of resources to support its manufacturing base. These resources are unusual in their level of sophistication as well as their responsiveness to the needs of companies. The following recommendations seek to further strengthen this support infrastructure and fill remaining gaps. Most critically, the strategy is a means of focusi ng the attention of residents, political leaders, and educators on the importance of manufacturing to the region and reinforcing an image of the region as a international center of a t echnology-based precision manufacturing industry. 2.2 J USTIFICATION Manufacturing continues to be a cornerst one of the CNVR economy. Companies are growing and jobs are being added. Strengtheni ng this important component of the regional economy is critical to the region’s long-term economic viability. Among the reasons for focusing on manufacturing are the following: ! although manufacturing experienced a serious decline in employment from 1985 to 1993, it still represents 22.3 percent of the total employment base in the CNVR; ! almost 1,000 manufacturing jobs have been added since 1993, most of those in the fabricated metals and machinery industries; ! wages paid by manufacturing companies are higher than most other sectors in the regional economy. The manufacturing sector contributes more than $650 million in annual payroll earnings in the CNVR, outpacing every other sector. While manufacturing employs only 22 percent of workers, it contributes more than 28 percent of regional earnings. In contrast, the service sector employs roughly one-third of the workforce, but accounts for only 26 percent of regional earnings. In 1994, the average weekly wage in manufacturing was $694, higher than most other sectors, with the exception of wholesale trade; 2-2 Final ReportMt. Auburn Associates, Inc. ! the survey of manufacturing firms conducted by Mt. Auburn Associates indicates that fewer than 2 percent of the region’s firms ar e defense-dependent — an indication that the majority of firms have taken appropriate st eps to diversify their markets and customer base; ! the survey also shows that more than half of the firms have grown in the last three years, both in terms of sales revenues and employees — a strong indication that the manufacturing base is in a slow but gradual growth mode; ! firms that responded to the survey anticipate that they will be hiring anoth er 1,600 full-time workers by 1999 — when other firms in the region that did not complete the survey (approximately 400 companies) are taken into account, the figure of 1,600 jobs could be increased, conservatively by 50 percent; and ! finally, slightly more than 50 percent of the firms that responded to the survey noted that they will be modernizing and expanding their facilities in the next few years. Note: A detailed profile of the region’s manufacturing base is included in Appendix D. 2-3 Final ReportMt. Auburn Associates, Inc. 2.3 B ARRIERS Through interviews, data, and the business survey, it is clear that manufacturing firms face a number of obstacles to continued growth and job creation. These barriers a re as follows: ! The shortage of highly-skilled workers is m aking it difficult for firms to take advantage of new orders and markets — workforce difficulties, in effect, have the potential of stifling the growth that has recently occurred. ! While there have been efforts made to address the skilled wo rkforce shortage (the most notable is the training collaborative develope d for the screw machine industry), there is no comprehensive system in place to pr oduce a critical mass of new, younger, skilled workers. ! While many companies have adopted new production technologies and have d eveloped programs to train and upgrade workers, the marketplace is fiercely compe titive and these same companies will need to make continuous investments to stay on a “modernization” track. ! Because the region’s manufacturing base is essentially a subassembly economy, there will need to be more of an orientation among all companies in th e region on markets, quality, and inter-firm cooperation (the nut s and bolts of finding and keeping a diverse customer base) — this is something that small, locally-owned companies need help in. ! In spite of the gains in manufacturing em ployment, the high wages that are paid, and the improvements to the manufacturing envi ronment, the public perception continues that manufacturing is declining and the shop floor is a “dirty” place to work. ! As a result of the public perceptions an d attitudes about manufacturing, Kaynor Tech School sees annual enrollments in its mach ine and manufacturing program of only 12 to 14 students per year. ! While there are a number of very effective state, university, and college resources available to the region’s manufacturers, each of these resource organiza tions is working independently with co mpanies and there is no currently available capacity to coordinate the services of these resource organizations and maximize eff iciencies. ! The current approach to marketing manufacturing services misses many manufacturers that need assistance. The resource organizations that are designed to assist manufacturers market their services either through a wholesale approach (e.g., mass mailings, presentations at workshops and conferences, advertisements in selected 2-4 Final Report Mt. Auburn Associates, Inc. publications) or they take the word-of-mouth approach and try to reach as many individual companies as possible. Clearly these approaches have been successful to a degree because the resource organizations have a presence within the manufacturing community in the region. Nonetheless, thes e approaches also have limitations. The wholesale approach often misses the target because companies are not familiar with the resource organization or the marketing material does not find its way to the right person within the company. The more direct word-of-mouth approach is time consuming, costly, and limited because it does not reach a critical mass of companies. ! The current routes and schedule of the region’s public transportation system make it difficult for low-income people (particularly those without cars), to pursue employment with some of the region’s employers, partic ularly those that are running second and third shifts. 2.4 O PPORTUNITIES There are many jobs available among manufacturers in the region, and companies have demonstrated an ability to expand markets and to increase sales. Opportunities exist to capitalize on those strengths of the industrial base. They are: ! A number of manufacturing firms in the re gion have begun to take an active and aggressive leadership role in developing new training programs targeted to skilled workers. As noted, the screw machine industry has worked closely with the NVP, the Waterbury Adult Education Department, Visions, Partnership 2000, the State of Connecticut’s Department of Labor, and th e Institute for Industrial and Engineering Technology. A similar program is now being planned for the eyelet manufacturing sector. ! Overall, the training infrastructure appears to be in place for developing a more integrated system for preparing skilled workers. The elements of the infrastructure include Kaynor Tech (apprenticeship, adult education, and secondary education), the Naugatuck Valley Community-Technical College (certificate, non-certificate, customized, and credit programs), the Waterbury Adult Continuing Education Department, Visions, Partnership 2000, th e State DOL, and support from NVP, the Institute, and the Industrial Management and Training Institute. Also, the training program developed for the plastics industry by the Naugatuck Valley Research and Development Program could serve as a model. 2-5 Final Report Mt. Auburn Associates, Inc. ! Beyond training, several additional resources are in place that can help small- and medium-sized firms with finances, management help, and engineering and technology assistance. Each of these resource organizations has a track record with companies in the region. These organizations include the Connecticut SBDC, CONN/STEP, the Institute of Industrial and Engineering Technology, the Precision Manufacturing Center at UCONN, the CBIA, area chambers, and Teikyo Post University. The challenge here is to stimulate more demand for these resources. ! Manufacturers in the region have formed a ssociations and engaged in joint ventures — an indication that industrial firms are developing a culture of cooperative problem-solving. ! Support systems within many of the towns in the region and the city of Waterbury are also developing a strong and productive relationship with manufacturers. Towns have economic development coordinators, town managers who provide assistance, and the city has the Naugatuck Valley Development Cor poration — they help manufacturers with permits, expansion plans, relocations, and locating good manufacturing land and sites. ! The region is really blessed with a rich and diverse manufacturing base that is productive and quite sophisticated — helping the region’s citizens and elected officials develop a more informed appreciation for the wealth of this resource would mean a great deal to the image of the manufacturing base. 2.5 R ECOMMENDATIONS The level of activity and support for manufacturi ng in the region is very impressive. Few regions in New England are devoting as much attention and as many resources to strengthen the industrial base as the Central Naugatuck Valley — local, regional, and state organizat ions are all involved, from both the public and private sectors. In this context, Mt. Auburn Associates offers two key points that guide the recommendations. First, the recommendations essentially build upon and extend what is already occurring; the regi on is not starting from scratch — it has a solid foundation in place. Second the recommendations are intended to help the region take better advantage of the abundant, but uncoordinated, resources that are in evid ence there. 1. P OSITION THE C ENTRAL N AUGATUCK V ALLEY AS A CENTER OF MANUFACTURING PRECISION AND VITALITY . 2-6 Final Report Mt. Auburn Associates, Inc. In numerous discussions throughout this project with citizens, business leaders, educators, training professionals, and elected offi cials, there was a commonly defined need — the region needs an identity and a niche for its economic future. From all of the research undertaken in the last four to si x months, Mt. Auburn Associ ates feels strongly that the niche is quite clear. The Central Naugatuck Valley Region is an extremely rich and diverse manufacturing community. Indeed, many of the older and larger brass companies have closed their doors, but in their place has emerged a group of small- and medium-sized companies that are clean, sophisticated, and market-oriented. These firms are growing and will likely continue to grow. In fact, there are few regions in the Northeastern United States that can boast of an industrial base that is as vital as that found in Central Naugatuck Valley. The region’s residents need to be educated about this rich manufacturing resource and an all-out effort made to retain the base and help it to expand. Some very good support systems are already underway (see elsewhere in this report) and more can be developed. The following recommendations are intended to build upon what currently exists in the region to support manufacturing, but they also extend and broaden those efforts. Mt. Auburn would like to point out that while the recommendations that follow are directed toward the goal of positioning the re gion as a center of manufacturing, the region’s public and private sector leaders should use them as a springboard. The envelope should be pushed, so to speak. The region should also draw upon the intellectual and creative talents that exist there and effectively create one of the strongest and most competitive manufacturing foundations in the Northeast. ! Create an informal (to begin) Manufactu rers Leadership Group with representation from all manufacturing industrial sectors in the region. At the moment, firms in the region belong to numerous manufacturing-related organizations and associations — the Connec ticut Business and Industry Association, the Manufacturing Alliance of Connecticut, the Smalle r Manufacturers Association of Connecticut, the Connecticut Tooling and Machining Association, the Precision Metalfo rming Association, the Precision Machined Products Association, and ot hers that are regional, state, and national in scope. As important as these associations are, none of them creates a forum to address issues and opportunities that are of major importance to all manufacturers in the region. The proposed leadership group would conceivably address the issues and opportunities that confront firms in the region, and do it in a coordinated fashion. Th e issues would include, but not be limited to, the following: ! building upon and expanding the training initiative already underway wit h the screw machine and eyelet industries; ! planning and developing a more comprehensive and systemic training program that would start with entry-level skills and lead to an advanced, upgrading a nd continuous education program for existing workers; 2-7 Final Report Mt. Auburn Associates, Inc. ! articulating a vision and an image of the manufacturing community within the region — this message should communicate how vital the manufacturing base in the region is and how new computer-based production machinery and other improvements on the shop floor have created a new environment in the industrial workplace; and ! continuing to work with Kaynor Tech, Wa terbury’s Technology Education program, and other industrial arts teachers and guidance counselors in the region to upgrade the image of manufacturing and begin to rebuild the prestige once associated with the skil led trades. ! Create a position of industrial organizer/coordinator for the Central Naugatuck Valley Region. The organizer’s position is essential. It would bring much-needed capacity to the volunteer work that is now being undertaken, it would provide more outreach capability and, therefore, bring more manufacturers into the or ganizing efforts that are underway, and it would serve as a vehicle for coordinating and streamlining the multiplicity of resource organizations that are working with area ma nufacturers. The organizer would perform several different functions: ! serve as a support staff for the previously mentioned manufacturers’ leadership group. The leadership group will need someone to implement the program and project ideas that emerge from it; ! serve as a linkage and outreach support system to stimulate demand for the regional and state manufacturing resources. The industrial organizer can help quantify the role that manufacturing plays in the region (in part, by using information from this report) and then encourage local and regional officials to assist in the effort to str engthen the manufacturing base. The industrial organizer can help resource organizations overcome the marketing barriers noted. He/she can help stimulate demand for services by working with individual companies and clusters of comp anies, help to better target the resources to companies that need the services, and generally provide a high profile for t he resource organizations; ! work with existing chambers of commerce, local development organizations, and town managers and economic development coordinators to help the region’s elected officials recognize the critical importance of manufacturing to the region’s long-term economic viability; and ! finally, the industrial organizer can encourage and support initiatives among manufacturers to engage in strategic allian ces or cooperative marketing. One very good 2-8 Final Report Mt. Auburn Associates, Inc. example of a joint marketing effort is the Connecticut Metal Components, Inc. This is an initiative among six precision metalworking firms in the region to help them penetrate export markets. More initiatives like this could be developed. 2. I NCREASE PUBLIC SUPPORT FOR MANUFACTURING AND INTEREST IN MANUFACTURING CAREERS WITHIN THE REGION . As noted, there is a lack of appreciation of manufacturing in the region. In the past, the youth of the region saw manufacturing as a viable career option. Manufacturing was perceived as providing relatively high quality jobs and opportunities for advancement. As the sector declined regionally and nationally, the perception changed. Students in h igh school no long looked to manufacturing as a career of choice. The general perception now is that manufacturing jobs were “dirty” and that the future was in the service sector and technolo gy based companies. The change in the manufacturing sector – with its growing technological orientation has not been recognized. As a result, as the current skilled work force retires, there are few skilled workers to take their place. Jobs that offer good wa ges and benefits are going begging, while non-college bound youth are either moving or seeking lower paid jobs in the service sector. Unless the perceptions of manufacturing changes, it w ill be difficult to attract young people into the training programs that are being developed. The region needs to build a new “image” of manufacturing. We recommend: ! Produce a high quality, four-color profile of the region’s manufacturing base as a means of broadening and enhancing the image of manufacturing. The profile would be an important visual effort to change and improve the image that manufacturing has in the region. A printed high quality, four-color production of four to six pages would be much more effective than other promotional tools (like a video production) in reaching a critical mass of people in the region. A local eyelet manufacturer has produced a good example of what the profile could look like. The company’s profile has photographs of the plant, and some of the equipment in the facility, a description of the company’s services, products, and capability, and a brief description of the company’s markets. The profile presents the image of a clean, modern, and sophisticated manufacturing firm. The regional profile should include a similar format and design and focus on a range of companies. The content should include a na rrative description of the diversity of the manufacturing base, the range of products and se rvices offered by companies in the region, the kind of skills and occupations found in companies, careers paths, and examples of the extremely broad range of commercial and consumer markets that Central Naugatuck Valley companies serve. The CBIA has produced some materials that are designed to enhance the image of manufacturing across the state. CBIA should be looked upon as a resource. Copies of the profile should be distributed to local and regional officials, public school teachers and guidance counselors, banks, ne ighborhood and citizen groups, education and 2-9 Final Report Mt. Auburn Associates, Inc. training institutions, human and social service agencies, and parent teachers organizations. Again, the intent is to help improve the image of manufacturing in the region by educating key constituencies about the profound change that has taken place in the manufacturing environment. ! Build an institutional relationship between the region’s public schools and the manufacturing community. There are several visible and well-received school-to-work programs in the region — one in Waterbury and one in Cheshire. The purpose of these school-to-work or school-to-career initiatives is to engage employers in a gi ven region to help school-age young people better understand the world of work and the range of career choices that are available to them. Also, the Waterbury School System’s Technology Education program has arranged field trips to area manufacturing firms for small groups of students, and “externships” that give teachers and guidance counselors direct experience of the ma nufacturing environment are in the planning stages. These are very important initiatives that should be continued. The intent of this recommendation, however, goes beyond the issue of careers and career choices and attempts to build a more in stitutional relationship between the region’s manufacturing community and all of the public school s in the region. It is directed at giving manufacturing and manufacturers an ongoing and visible presence in the region among the education community and it also attempts to enhance the image of manufacturing. There are a number of different initiatives that could be undertaken by the manufacturing community that would lead to a strong and productive relationship with the region’s public schools. The following list is by no means exhaustive. Other projects and programs could be added. ! a mentoring program that links engineers, t oolmakers, and machinists in area plants with young adults interested in math and science; ! a summer internship program that would offer employment to teachers, guidance counselors, and students who are old enough to work; ! a “manufacturers’ open house” that is held in the fall and again in the spring of the school year, targeted to school children and young adults, parents, teachers, guidance counselors, and elected officials; ! a scholarship program sponsored by area manufacturers that would help defray tuition costs for students or adults who want to take advantage of some of the certificate, non-certificate, and credit courses offered in the region (some firms are already doing this, but it a very low-profile effort and confined to a few companies); 2-10 Final Report Mt. Auburn Associates, Inc. ! creation of a speakers group from the manufacturing community that would provide schools with a list of people who could address a range of topics that surface in science, industrial arts, math, and the region’s industrial history (the talents and skills of people who own and work in the region’s manufacturing plants are extraordinary and this initiative would highlight some of the unique c ontributions that these individuals can and have made to the region); and ! creation of a curriculum unit for schools that introduces all children to the region’s manufacturing base — the unit could include videos, interactive exhibits, and narratives that build upon the school programs offered by the Mattatuck Museum. ! Encourage the Waterbury Republican to cr eate an ongoing profile of the region’s manufacturers. The newspaper has published profiles of manufacturing firms, but not in a sustained or structured fashion. Mt. Auburn is recommending that the newspaper publish a weekly or bi-weekly column on the region’s manufacturing firms. The column would profile companies, the products they make for consumer and commercial markets, the computer-based machinery and equipment used in the production process, a nd the occupations and skills of the workforce. Some companies in the Central Naugatuck Valley have world-class operations and they have a global customer base. Relatively few people in the region are aware of the complexity and the sophistication of this industrial base — an ongoing feature in the newspa per could address this issue, and it could significantly enhance level of the region’s “manufacturing literacy.” ! Develop and promote exhibits of the products of the region’s manufacture rs. The number of products and parts that are manufactured in the Valley is extraordinary. Manufactured items from the Valley find their way into the aerospace, automotive, cosmetic, electronics, computer, and other consumer industries. Exhibiting and displaying this impressively diverse set of manufactured goods woul d help the region’s elected officials, parents, teachers, and business people appreciate the richness of the industrial base. An exhibit could be planned in cooperation with the Connecticut Store and the Mattatuck Muse um. The store already sells and displays goods that are manufactured in the state. The museum houses a number of permanent as well as temporary collections and it is now working on a more ambitious effort that is an outgrowth of its 20th Century Manufacturing Initiative. The new initiative would produce an interactive display on the success and diversity of the region’s manufacturing base, and it could serve as a welcome and information center for are companies, residents, and visitors to the area. A collaboration of the store and th e museum would be appropriate. ! Use the Council of Governments as a vehicle for keeping elected officials in the region focused on manufacturing. 2-11 Final Report Mt. Auburn Associates, Inc. The elected officials in the region can play a very important role in retaining and strengthening the regional manufacturing base. Towns and municipalities are involved in the development of industrial land, they coordinate the permitting process, they set tax rates, and many of them are aggressively reaching out to companies and brokering resources. Currently, however, there is no setting in which these efforts are coordinated, and the su pport for manufacturing, while strong, has not been articulated in a clear fashion. To address this issue, the COG could be the setting in which the region’s officials publicly acknowledge how vital manufacturing is to the regional economy. The COG can carry out this mission in several ways: invite manufacturers to periodic meetings for di scussions of common concern to companies; take appropriate sections of this report that quantify the role that manufacturing plays in the region, publish the material and circulate it among the cities and towns in the region; co-sponsor events and programs that acknowledge the contribution of the region’s industrial base (Cheshire could serve as a model with its Business Appreciation Day); use the Industrial Inventory section of this report to assess the region’s and the individual towns’ capacity to make affordable industrially-zoned land available; take decisive action on the transportation problems identified in this report. 3. D EVELOP AND EXPAND STATE -OF -THE -ART HIGH SKILLS TRAINING PROGRAMS . A workforce brief entitled “Employer and Employee Roles in Workplace-Based Career Development: The Challenge of Change in the Workplace” pinpoints the dramatic changes that have taken place on the shop floor and the challenges that businesses and workers face. The Brief notes that: “There is no longer any such thing as a stable, secure workplace. Technological change and the opening of ma rkets to worldwide competition make it impossible for businesses to survive very long doing the same work in the same way. Businesses’ efforts to compete have changed the nature of the labor market….. Factory production work, which used to require mostly low-skilled physical labor, has been changed so much by technology that employees often need Associate degree-level skills to operate production lines….. The challenge of w orkplace change may be unsettling to employers and employees. Workers who do not keep upgrading their skills will be left behind — either in low-wage, dead-end jobs, or unemployed. Businesses that do not provide support and encouragement for employee skill upgrading will be outclassed by their more enlightened competitors.” The Valley’s manufacturers and workers are not immune to these challenges. In order to continue to secure a strong industrial base, the region’s employers and workers will have to take the high road/high skills approach to competitiv eness, develop a long-term workforce strategy, create collaborations between ma nagement, unions, and workers, and put in place a top quality education and training delivery system. 2-12 Final Report Mt. Auburn Associates, Inc. Part of the challenge is being addressed. The training infrastructure in the region is quite strong and much has been done recently to help to build a skilled workforce. To furt her strengthen this infrastructure and address the other challenges of long- term workforce strategy, collaborations with employers and employees, and creating an integrated quality delivery training system, the following recommendations are proposed. ! Under the direction of the Manufacturers Leadership Group, and in collaboration with the existing network of training institutions, develop the Central Naugatuck Valley Blueprint for High Skills Training. This is not just an academic exercise. What emerges from this kind of critical undertaking should set the tone and a specific direction for maintaining a first-rate, skilled workforce for the region. Fortunately, many ma nufacturers already know how essential a skilled workforce is to the financial viability of a comp any. And, as noted previously, the partnerships that have been created between companies and training institutions demonstrates the commitment that is being made to building a qua lity workforce. What is missing, however, is a more comprehensive and articulated vision for the region’s companies and workers, a detailed and long-term plan for making that vision a reality, and the involvement of union and worker representation. The Blueprint should not be a lengthy document — rather, it should be concise and accessible and provide public and private leaders as well as residents of the region with a good grounding in how a high skills work force program will take shape. Elements could include a vision statement about the future of manufactur ing and the manufacturing workforce, goals and objectives related to the vision, the importance of developing a three-tiered training system (vocational, adult entry-level, and workforce upgrading and retraining) , a brief outline of the occupations and skills requirements for Valley manufacturing firms, current training programs, projections for future demand for workers, etc. The Blueprint will help manufacturers, workers and training institutions plan for the future, and it should help residents and elected officials in the region bett er understand where the manufacturing workforce of the next five to ten years is heading. ! Update and quantify the demand for skilled labor over the next two to three years. The current training program directed at th e screw machine industry was based, in part, upon a survey of 102 firms by the Connecticut Sk illed Trades Coalition (revised 9/21/95). The survey projected that 383 new positions and re placements for retirement would be needed by companies in the next several y ears. The survey was key in bringing together the state and local organizations noted above and for securing the funds to operate the program. Several of the firms and training institutions interviewed for this project feel that a more comprehensive survey that includes broad representation from all key manufacturing sectors in the region is needed. The new survey would give a higher degree of confidence to firms and training organizations about the breadth and depth of the demand for skilled workers and it will lay the foundation for the Blueprint. Federal and state funding sources would also be eager to see such a survey. 2-13 Final Report Mt. Auburn Associates, Inc. Industry leadership will be essential in convincing firms in the region of the value of the survey. Industry leadership will also be key to designing a simple but effective survey instrument. In addition to industry leadership, a small working group of the region’s and state’s principal training institutions should be invol ved in developing the survey and possibly conducting it. On the broadest level, the surv ey should provide information on any given firm’s existing occupational and skills breakdown, the number and nature of positions it hopes to fill within a one-to-three year timeframe, the training required for those positions, and the wage range for the positions. The challenge, of course, for a survey like this is maximizing the response rate. Key to getting the highest return will be advance publicity about the survey, industry leadership in promoting and publicizing the survey, and the manpower needed to follow up with firms, and then tabulate the results. The more organized vol unteers involved in the process, the smaller the costs of conducting the survey. ! While the survey and Blueprint are being wo rked on, take action in several different areas: ! rebuild the relationship that once existed between Kaynor Technology and the region’s manufacturing community and make the school a first-rate vocational technical institution — the bond between i ndustry and the school has suffered, but there is a very solid foundation to build upon; ! develop a strong marketing and outreach effort to publicize the state’s Customized Job Training and Apprenticeship programs — both programs are well-regarded by some companies within the region, but not enough firms know about them or the positive effects they have had on area companies; and ! make better use of the workforce upgrading a nd retraining capacity of institutions like the NVCTC and the IIET to keep existing workers skilled and ab reast of changes in shop floor technology. 4. F URTHER PROMOTE MANUFACTURING MODERNIZATION . The manufacturing environment throughout the world is changing at a very rapid pace. The competition for new and expanding markets is fierce and it means that firms that wish to compete in the marketplace have to continuously upgrade and improve their production, management, and workforce systems or they risk failure. The term “manufacturing modernization” is used frequently and somewhat loosely in the world of economic development. Mt. Auburn Associates and Brian Bosworth of RTS have developed a definition of what 2-14 Final Report Mt. Auburn Associates, Inc. modernization means from years of practical experience and from conducting an extensive review of literature on the subject. Our viewpoint on modernization is presented below: ! Modernization is a process of continually adopting and integrating advanced busine ss practices in all areas of business operations. Modernization is a complex and multi-dimensional process. It does not occur from the adoption of a computer-based machine alone, nor does it occur from quick-fix engineering and management solutions. It reaches out beyond manufacturing process technology to embrace all areas of business operations, including human resources, marketing, finance, and other important factors. Seven critical areas of business operation have been identifie d in which modernization impacts on business practices. These seven areas are: ! Process Technology. It has become increasingly true that competitiveness in quality, cost, and service is difficult without employing sophisticated manufacturing technologies. Such technologies allow custom ization of product, lower labor costs, and shorter response time. Proven, off-the-shelf technologies are readily available, adaptable, and have demonstrated their value. They include design and engineering (e.g., CAD/CAE); materials and requirements planning; fabrication, machining, and assembly (e.g., NC/CNC, robots); materials handling and inventory management systems (e.g., guided vehicles); inspection and testing equipment (e.g., lasers); electronic communications, and control systems (e.g., LANs and programmable controllers). ! Advanced Management Practices and Techniques. Managing the complexity of interrelated and often simultaneous change across all areas of business operations requires using advanced management practices and techniques. Successful firms have adapted long-range strategic planning, total quality management systems, continuous flow/just-in-time, and other such advanced management practices. ! Market Research and Marketing. In the face of global markets that are more demanding and volatile today, firms must develop new skills in market research, analysis, and planning. They must define their core skills and become proactive about marketing. Historically, many small firms have been reactive about marketing and do not know how to find prospects and customers. ! Skills Enhancement. Managers and workers in the modernizing firm often need new occupational, technical, and problem-solving skills to effectively deploy advanced technology and flexible work organizations. However, smaller manufacturers often do not invest well in the skills of their workers. Many education and training systems are good at working with large firms, but not with smaller firms. 2-15 Final Report Mt. Auburn Associates, Inc. ! Work Organization. High value production demands flexible enterprises that can respond quickly to customer requirements for quality, reliability, precision, and speed of delivery. Centralized and hierarchical work organizations are seen as r etarding achievement of these objectives. Many mode rnizing firms are shifting quickly toward flexible or “high performance” work organizations. Typical attributes of these reorganized work systems are severely flattened management structures, employee work teams with significant autonomy, job rotati on, and employee involvement in problem solving. ! Finance. Exploring new markets, acquiring new technologies, and investing in training requires money. The modernization process l eads frequently to greater demand for debt or equity capital. Successful firms must have strong capital and cash flow management systems in place and be able to respond to the changing financial environment in which underwriting criteria have become more restrictive . Additionally, a strong system of financial planning and review is important to long-term economic viability. Firms need to pay increasing attention to how capital is managed and allocated within the operation. ! Inter-firm Cooperation. Many modernized firms have discovered that modernization requires new skills and new mechanisms for managing their relationships with other companies, including customers, suppliers, competitors, and other firms tightly linked in marketing and production clusters. Moderni zation studies have shown that firms that have relationships with other firms (e.g., supplier-OEM, partnerships, alliances) are more likely to adopt modern technologies. These relationships help facilitate learning about technology options, differences, and methods . Collaboration among small firms can also help achieve economies of scale in human resources development, technology, market research, sales, distribution, and service. ! Firms must manage and integrate change in each of these areas simultaneously if they are to survive and grow in the intensely competitive world economy today. And they must continuously make improvements. Modernization does not reach an end, a poi nt at which a company can stop learning. Competitive firms continually seek to improve. Managing technology, workforce development, finance, and inter-firm cooperation requires concrete skills that firms need to have. Therefore, to be successful across these dimensions, the personnel involved, whether top management or production workers, need to be good learners. They need to know how to find information, how to rely on external resources (including other firms), and how to develop lessons from experience. The learning organization is one that consciously encourages its employees to learn and to pass on the results of that learning. It uses the results of that learning to assess its 2-16 Final Report Mt. Auburn Associates, Inc. objectives, values, and beliefs. And it seeks to learn how to effective ly encourage learning within the firm. ! It is not easy for many businesses, especially small businesses, to modernize. They must overcome a variety of barriers that impede them. Many firms simply lack information to help them choose technologies or the information they get may be biased and untrustworthy if it comes from an impartial source, such as an equipment vendor. The lack of financial resources is often an impediment. It costs money not only to purchase technology but to train employees in how to use it. Sometimes, owners are resistant to change for a variety of reasons including lifestyle choices or business strategy. It may not make economic sense for a firm to buy new technology if the return on investment does not show a payoff. Helping businesses become good learners and enhance their competitiveness is a long-term process. ! Finally, it is important to note that many small firms have more success learning in informal than formal settings. Small firms tend to communicate in informal and concrete ways. They often do not like complex, formal, explicit information. They tend to prefer informal face-to-face contacts as a form of discourse. Thus, formal lectures, cla sses, and seminars do not tend to work well with these types of firms, whereas informal conversations and one-on-one meetings between parties create an environment in which more give and take can occur that allows trust to develop between parties. Some of the larger manufacturing firms in the region have adopted modernization practices and principles, as have a number of sma ller firms. As the results of the business survey and interviews with manufacturers in the region indicate, these firms have purchased computer-based production technologies, are committed to high performance workplaces, have secured ISO 9000 certification, and are undertaking innovative strategies for gaining new markets and customers. Nonetheless, there are many small- and medium-sized firms that either cannot afford to make substantial improvements or lack the expertise to do so. These firms need help. The help, in large measure, is available. Connecticut has an impressive number of effective resources for manufacturing firms, a nd these resource organizations have provided assistance to firms in the Central Naugatuck Valley Region. They include the Naugatuck Va lley Community-Technical College, the Connecticut Small Business Development Center (CT SBDC) in Waterbury, the Connecticut State Technology Extension Program (CONN/STEP), the Advanced Technology Center for Precision Manufacturing at UCONN, the Connecticut Business and Industry Association (CBIA), the Naugatuck Valley Research Deployment Program, Connecticut Innovations, Inc., the Manufacturing Applications Center (at IIET), t he Flexible Manufacturing Networks Center (IIET), the Connecticut Procurement Technical Assistance Center (IIET), and the Technology Assistance Center (CONNTAC). 2-17 Final Report Mt. Auburn Associates, Inc. Each institution has targeted resources for strengthening the competitiveness of companies. The CT SBDC has conducted programs on the succession process for firms that are transferring ownership, it has helped a number of firms package and secure financing from private and public sources, and it offers a range of business-related and techn ical assistance services to area companies. The IIET helps companies through its Flexible Manufacturing Network Center, it provides engineering and technical assistance to firms through Manufacturing Applications Center, and its training program s enhance the skills of incumbent workers. CONN/STEP has a pool of 20 field engineers that provide problem-solving and engineering assistance to firms that includes a range of areas from plant layout to high-end technology issues. The challenge is to stimulate higher levels of demand for the services of these resource organizations, to create a culture of modernization and continuous improvement, and to assist a critical mass of companies in the Central Naugatuck Valley region. In this context, Mt. Auburn offers the following recommendation: ! Under the direction of the Manufacture rs Leaders Group (see above) and with the assistance of the resource organizations noted above, develop a program and support system for the region’s manufacturers in “modernization” and continuous improvement. The leadership has to come from the manuf acturing community. That is, the motivation has to come from within in order for this initia tive to be successful. Also, it will take time to create a culture of “modernization” (years ra ther than months) and the process should be undertaken slowly over time. The Manufacturing Leadership Group and the proposed industrial organizer should take principal responsibility for the initiative, with support from the region’s chambers of commerce. The resource organizations will also have a major role to play. To help the modernization process, several programmatic items are proposed: ! A CEO forum to give senior and upper-level managers an opportunity to problem-solve and simply talk about the process of embracing modernization and continuous improvement. CEOs that have already adopted the process in the region, in Connecticut, and in New England could be presenters at the forum. ! Formation of a group of mentors from firms in the region who have been successful in modernization to serve as resources to companies that need help understanding the modernization process or who need convincing of its value. The mentors can provide very short-term advice and technical assistance and then broker the services of the resource organizations. ! Roundtable sessions on topics that relate directly to modernization and are consistent with the needs and interests of a significant number of firms in the region. 2-18 Final Report Mt. Auburn Associates, Inc. ! Publication of a quarterly newsletter that will include: profiles of area companies and their successes in modernization, trends in manufacturing modernization, listings of “best manufacturing and modernization practices,” and a calendar of relevant workshops and seminars (this newsletter could also be expanded to include other features of interest to companies in the region: market opportunitie s, descriptions of new public and private sector finance programs directed to manuf acturers, succession opportunities, notices from firms that are interested in forming strategic alliances, etc. ! Production of an easily-accessible guide to resource organizations that could be published in print and electronically. The guide, however, needs to be carefully formatted and designed so that area companies can readily find the right resource. Brief examples of how each resource organization has successfully worked with a company could be included. Simple descriptions of each resource organization, without examples or an indication of how the organization can specifically help a company, would not be appropriate. 5. F URTHER PROMOTE INTER -FIRM ALLIANCES AND COLLABORATION . The emergence of manufacturing network and inter-firm alliances has gained substantially in the U.S. in the last three to fi ve years in scope and nature: supplier networks to OEMs, marketing collaborations, strategic alliances, cooperative purchasing net works, R&D collaborations, etc. Although these initiatives differ substantially in sop histication and effectiveness, they do share common goals. They attempt to: ! broaden the capacity of an individual firm, thereby enhancing the firm’s capacity; ! provide access to new markets and market niches; ! enhance the competitiveness of firms; ! generate new learning opportunities; and ! develop support for state and federal resources. 2-19 Final Report Mt. Auburn Associates, Inc. In the Central Naugatuck Valley Region, there has been interest in inter-firm alliances and collaboration, and several of these have proven modestly successful. For example, firms within the screw machine industry developed a partnership around training (noted elsewhere), eyelet companies are now beginning a similar pa rtnership, Connecticut Metals Components, Inc. is a collaboration among six metalworking companies in the Valley to develop markets abroad, the plastics industry is working cooperatively with the Naugatuck Valley Research Deployment Program on several different ventures, several firms are working with Visions to develop a higher profile for manufacturers among secondary school students, and the Flexible Manufacturing Networks Center at IIET has creat ed seven networks and several of them have companies from Waterbury that are involved. Other examples exist among the different manufacturing-related associations that have a presence in the Valley (e.g., the Small Manufacturers Association, the Manufacturing A lliance of Connecticut, and the Connecticut Business and Industry Association). All of these efforts point to a level of intere st and activity that is quite impressive. The culture exists, therefore, for inter-firm alliances and cooperation — companies in the Valley clearly see a value in collaboration. Discussions with manufacturers and other resource organizations indicate, however, that additional collaborative projects would be of value and support for these initiatives would make it possible for more firms in the Valley to participate. The opportunities for collaboration are extensive and they could provide Valley manufacturers with enhanced capacity, learning, and markets. They include: ! additional joint marketing ventures among a small group of firms similar to the one undertaken by the Connecticut Metals Components, Inc.; ! additional training programs that build upon the work of the screw machine initiative (several companies in the Torrington area have developed workforce upgrading and re-training programs); ! collaborative efforts among firms to attend trade shows that would be too expensive for one to two firms to attend on their own; ! joint R&D projects in which several firms approach a university to conduct research that would benefit the firms that participate (examples of this exist all over the country); ! participation in the FMNC’s product development and procurement networks; 2-20 Final Report Mt. Auburn Associates, Inc. ! cooperative quality training and certification that would help lower the costs of a program (an example of this effort is ISO 9000 certification); ! joint problem-solving initiatives in which firms with similar waste, environmental, or energy problems join together to work toward common solutions; ! supplier networks in which a group of subcontractors work together to sell products and/or services to an OEM or group of OEMs; and, ! cooperative ventures to develop web sites among clusters of firms. A principal source of assistance to Valley firm s interested in alliances and collaborative ventures is the FMNC at IIET. The Center ha s a track record and a history of putting networks together successfully over the last three to four years. As mentioned, the Center already has a number of networks established in Connecticut, and conversations with the Director of the Center indicate that there is interest in the Cent er to support cooperative efforts that emerge from the Valley. For collaborations that might be undert aken that fall outside of the Center’s mission, there are several obstacles that need to be addressed and a strategy to overcome them. The barriers are: ! the lack of time that CEOs from small- and medium-sized firms have to devote to building alliances; ! the costs associated with building some alliances; ! the lack of experience among many small- and medium-sized firms in taking on collaborative initiatives; and ! the slow process of building trust among participating firms. To address the barriers and to help Valley manufacturers capitalize on new opportunities, the following recommendation is proposed. ! Provide an environment and the support syst ems that encourage substantive inter-firm alliances and collaborations among Central Naugatuck Valley manufacturer s. In order for this effort to succeed, there are a number of things that come into play. ! Regardless of the form that any alliance or collaboration takes, the effort should be industry-driven. That is, industry’s needs and interests must define the nature and direction of an alliance or collaboration. 2-21 Final Report Mt. Auburn Associates, Inc. ! A “go-slow” approach is critical. Given the barriers noted above, the process for developing even a relatively modest alliance or collaboration is difficult and it should be done with deliberation not speed. It will be time-consuming to find the right opportunities, to find interested parties, to bring firms together and to build a level of trust. ! The most effective method of getting other firms in the Valley to collaborate will be one that comes directly from manufacturers th emselves. That is, other manufacturers that have had a successful experience in an allia nce, a network, or a collaboration will spark other executives and managers to act. Inter-firm learning will generate the best results. ! With regard to the organizing process (identifying opportunities, firms, and resources), Mt. Auburn proposes that the industrial organizer be used to test out and explore potential alliances and collaborations — he/she will be in the best position to know where and when an opportunity presents itself. Selected presentations by manufacturers and resource organizations involved in forming alliances and collaborations would then be appropriate. ! The development of some allia nces and collaborations will clearly require the assistance of state or university resources. Other, smaller scale collaborations, like a joint marketing initiative, could possibly be handled by the industrial organizer, with guidance from the principals of the Connecticut Metals Components, Inc. ! There are several instances in the region and in the state where collaborations have taken place and the lead organization has resources that can help the Valley effort. The Flexible Manufacturing Network Center of the IIET is a very good resource that has considerable experience and success in organizing a number of networks and alliances in the state. The Center is also intending on making the Greater Waterbury area a priority this coming year. Second, the Connecticut Metals Components, Inc., as noted, has formed a joint marketing initia tive — the experience of the principals would be important to understand. Third, the Naugatuck Valley Research Deployment Program has had direct experience organizing the plastics industry in the Naugatuck Valley — there have been a number of joint projects and programs th at could serve as useful models for the Valley.