Redevelopment Agency / North Walke Housing Corp
Regular MeetingNorwalk, CT · March 14, 2023
Agenda
3 Belden Avenue, Norwalk, CT 06850 • 203-854-7810 • norwalkredevelopment.org
TO: Members, Norwalk Redevelopment Agency
FROM: John Igneri, Chairman
DATE: March 13, 2023
RE: Regular Meeting Notice
************************************************************************
MARCH 14, 2023
5:30 P.M.
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
The next meeting of the Norwalk Redevelopment Agency Commissioners will be held on TUESDAY,
MARCH 14, 2023 at 5:30 p.m. The meeting will be held as a virtual meeting via the Zoom link provided
below. The meeting will also be broadcast on the Norwalk Redevelopment Agency YouTube channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHMiAZt32k6BnjaKdnUaIug?view_as=subscriber.
ZOOM Meeting Link:
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/87819590706?pwd=c2dMWnRGcEV2Q0h0Vm5USDdWRjNmQT09
I CALL TO ORDER
II ROLL CALL
III PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
IV ADMINISTRATION
a) Approval of Minutes
i) Approve the minutes of the January 10, 2023 Regular Meeting
b) Financials
i) Approve Norwalk Redevelopment Agency Statement of Revenues and Expenditures and
Balance Sheets for all funds for the Year-to-Date December 31, 2022.
ii) Approve Norwalk Redevelopment Agency Statement of Revenues and Expenditures for
Operating Fund 100 for Year-to-Date January 31, 2023.
V BUSINESS
a) Work Program Update
b) Design Review
i) Consider for approval proposed design work at 31-35 South Main Street.
3 Belden Avenue, Norwalk, CT 06850 • 203-854-7810 • norwalkredevelopment.org
c) Project RA2022-2 and Alternate 1 - 467 West Avenue Utility Infrastructure Upgrade and
Alternate 1
i) Authorize the Executive Director of the Norwalk Redevelopment Agency, Brian Bidolli, to
execute an Agreement in accordance with CHRO requirements with Grasso Companies, LLC
for Project RA2022-2 and Alternate 1 – 467 West Avenue Utility Infrastructure Upgrade.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF
NORWALK
(1) That the Norwalk Redevelopment Agency is approved as the implementing agency for
the aforementioned State financial assistance in an amount not to exceed Two Million
Dollars and 00/100 ($2,000,000).
(2) That the Agency’s Executive Director is directed to execute any and all agreements and
other documents necessary to pass-through the obligations of the Assistance
Agreement entered into by and between the Connecticut Department of Economic and
Community Development and the City of Norwalk on to the Norwalk Redevelopment
Agency, if such an agreement is offered to the City of Norwalk, and to execute any
amendments, decisions, and revisions thereto, and to act as the authorized
representative of City of Norwalk.
d) Fair Housing Advisory Commission Representative
i) Appoint Daisy Franklin as the Redevelopment Agency representative to the Fair Housing
Commission
e) Election of Officers
VI NEW BUSINESS
VII OLD BUSINESS
VIII ADJOURNMENT
CITY OF NORWALK
NORWALK REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 10, 2023
ATTENDANCE: David Westmoreland, Acting Chairman; Kelly Bloom, Lisa Cooper, Mary Peniston,
STAFF: Brian Bidolli, Redevelopment Agency Executive Director; Eugenia Lupinski, Director of
Finance; Katie O’Leary, Redevelopment Agency
I CALL TO ORDER
Acting Chairman Westmoreland called the meeting to order at 5:30 P.M. There was a quorum present.
II ROLL CALL
A roll call of those present was performed.
III PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
There were no members of the public who wished to speak at this time.
IV ADMINISTRATION
a) APPROVAL OF MINUTES
i) APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 13, 2022 REGULAR MEETING
** MS. BLOOM MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF DECEMBER 13, 2022 AS
SUBMITTED.
** MS. COOPER SECONDED THE MOTION.
** THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
b) FINANCIALS
APPROVE NORWALK REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES
FOROPERATING FUND 100 FOR YEAR-TO-DATE NOVEMBER 30, 2022.
Ms. Lupinski came forward to present this item. The operating Fund 100 had actual revenues of
$601,000 versus budgeted revenues of $595,000 for a favorable variance of $6,000. Total actual
expenditures of $695,000 versus budgeted expenditures of $719,000 resulted in a favorable variance of
$24,000. This is due to a favorable variance of $35,000 in personnel expenses offset by an unfavorable
$11,000 in administrative expenses. Legal fees of $38,000 were paid for 15-17 Chestnut Street, and
these legal fees will be reimbursed to the Agency after the LDA is signed. The actual operating deficit of
$94,000 versus a budgeted operating deficit of $124,000 resulted in a favorable variance of $30,000.
City of Norwalk
Norwalk Redevelopment Agency
Regular Meeting
January 10, 2023 Page 1 of 3
** MS. COOPER MOVED TO APPROVE NORWALK REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY STATEMENT OF
REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES FOR OPERATING FUND 100 FOR YEAR-TO-DATE NOVEMBER 30, 2022.
** MS. PENISTON SECONDED THE MOTION.
** THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
V BUSINESS
a) P3 ADVISORY SERVICES
i) AUTHORIZE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE ANY AND ALL AGREEMENTS
FOR P3ADVISORY SERVICES WITH INFRASTRUCTURE ADVISORS LLC RELATED TO WEBSTER
STREET LOT.
Mr. Bidolli came forward to discuss this item. A Request for Qualifications for P3 Advisory Services was
released and qualified firms were selected. A subsequent RFP was issued related to the Webster Street
Lot. This was driven by the questions being discussed during the developer selection process.
Mr. Bidolli stated they are looking for third party technical assistance due to the size of the project and
believes this will be of great value. There is a list of pre-qualified firms and they have received two
proposals back. Interviews have been conducted and an infrastructure advisor was selected by them and
the City to advance. They are still negotiating but Mr. Bidolli would like to have the approval in place as
negotiations with Quarterra are advancing. He noted the project is intended to be funded by City funds
and they are still working to figure out what source that will be. They are estimating around $150,000 in
total for the project. They are asking for authorization to negotiate the remaining scope item and then
sign any contracts.
** MS. COOPER MOVED TO AUTHORIZE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE ANY AND
ALL AGREEMENTS FOR P3 ADVISORY SERVICES WITH INFRASTRUCTURE ADVISORS LLC RELATED TO
WEBSTER STREET LOT.
** MS. PENISTON SECONDED THE MOTION.
** THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
b) CLIMATE ACTION PLAN
i. AUTHORIZE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE THE CONTRACT FOR
CLIMATE ACTION PLAN WITH SLR.
Mr. Bidolli came forward to discuss this item. The City has allocated resources to do a city-wide Climate
Action Plan. They are working with the City to advertise, bid, and procure a consultant for those
services. This is, effectively, a multi-faceted work program. The next meeting will be on January 11, 2023
and they desire to have internal authorization to execute the contract. They desire to pass it through
their committee to ensure all the scope items are being addressed. They are, effectively, trying to take
the work done in May 2022 in the Community Resilience Building Workshop to identify the most
pertinent risks, hazards, and infrastructure required to adapt to climate change and improve Norwalk’s
overall resilience.
City of Norwalk
Norwalk Redevelopment Agency
Regular Meeting
January 10, 2023 Page 2 of 3
They will be looking at the administrative environment in the city to figure out how best to improve and
integrate resilience across all departments. There will be an administrative/managerial component to
this. There will also be a technical/scientific component in terms of taking a look at flood projects and at
various vulnerabilities from a social, economic, and equity perspective. They have gone through an open
procurement process and identified SLR as the mutually agreed firm. They are still finalizing the scope of
the project. They do not expect to exceed $150,000 which will be coming from ARPA funding.
The question of whether this would fix the flooding issues on Water Street was raised. Mr. Bidolli said it
would be the first step towards that solution.
** MS. COOPER MOVED TO AUTHORIZE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE THE
CONTRACT FOR CLIMATE ACTION PLAN WITH SLR.
** MS. PENISTON SECONDED THE MOTION.
** THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
VI NEW BUSINESS
There was no New Business at this time.
VII OLD BUSINESS
There was no Old Business at this time.
VIII ADJOURNMENT
** MS. COOPER MOVED TO ADJOURN.
** MS. PENISTON SECONDED THE MOTION.
** THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
The meeting adjourned at 5:42 P.M.
Respectfully Submitted
Ian A. Soltes
Telesco Secretarial Services
City of Norwalk
Norwalk Redevelopment Agency
Regular Meeting
January 10, 2023 Page 3 of 3
MEMORANDUM
Via email
To: Bryan Baker, Principal Planner
Steven Kleppin, Director
Norwalk Department of Planning and Zoning
Jonathan Hopkins, Director of Program Development
Norwalk Redevelopment Agency
From: Frank Fish FAICP, Principal
Taylor Young, AICP, Associate
Subject: Peer Review of 31‐35 South Main Street
Date: January 6, 2023
As per your request, the following memorandum includes our review of the 31‐35 South Main Street application
received by the City of Norwalk Planning and Zoning Commission and the Norwalk Redevelopment Agency. We
have reviewed the application based off of its conformance with the South Norwalk TOD Redevelopment Plan
Design Guidelines.
The Applicant is proposing to construct an addition to the Marriott SoNo Residence Inn (“Marriott hotel”) on the
site of the existing Udelman Building at 31‐35 South Main Street in South Norwalk (see Figure 1). The proposed
addition would be eight stories tall, and would have 29,023 square feet of gross floor area. The hotel expansion
would have 48 rooms and 43 off‐street parking spaces in the rear of the site which would be accessed through
the driveway of the existing Marriott hotel.
The Applicant is proposing to construct the building facade with an industrial design similar to the façade of the
existing Marriott hotel. The first two floors are designed with gridded glass panes framed by five painted synthetic
lumber pilasters, and the five upper floors feature a brick façade with paned windows.
We reviewed the materials that were posted on the Norwalk Planning and Zoning website, and issued our
comments below. We have attached figures to this memorandum that show our comments on the applicant’s
drawings and on images from the site and neighboring buildings. The majority of our comments are on the design
of the proposed hotel expansion. However, in accordance with the Design Guidelines we have made limited
comments about how the proposed expansion and the existing Marriott hotel relate to each other and the
pedestrian environment.
Peer Review of 31‐35 South Main Street 1
BFJ Planning
MEMORANDUM
Architectural Guidelines
A. Building Massing, Façade Design, and Historic Structures
The design guidelines call for designing the building so it emphasizes the primary entrance, visually
reducing scale with variations in the façade, using human‐scaled façade features, prioritizing facades that
are located at intersections, and integrating historic elements from the neighborhood. The intersection
location and historic building elements are notable for this site; the proposed project would demolish the
Udelman building, which is located on the State Register of Historic Places, and is located at the end of a
T‐intersection with South Main Street and would be is located at the intersection of South Main Street
and Haviland Street.
1. RECESSED ENTRANCES
The proposed hotel addition is designed similarly to the existing Marriott hotel with a flat‐façade with the
entrance flush to the street wall. The Applicant should consider adjusting the entrance design to recess it
of the street and to add an awning (or similar pedestrian‐scale entrance treatment) to complement the
recessed entrances and awnings that are found on the Udelman building and neighboring buildings on
South Main Street. [Comment 1 – see Figure 6 and Photos 2, 5 and 6 on Figures 3 and 5]
2. GROUND FLOOR HEIGHT
The Applicant’s drawings show the proposed ground floor as being higher than the ground floor of the
existing Marriott hotel. We suggest the Applicant design the proposed ground floor so that it is lower than
the ground floor of the existing Marriott hotel so the building steps down to the even lower ground floor
at the northerly adjacent building (25 South Main Street). Lowering the architrave should be considered
brick between it and the windows above. Please show a detail of all design elements at the street level
including pilasters, architrave, store fronts, entrance doors, and any canopies on a revised drawing, and
show a portion of 25 South Main Street. [Comment 2 – see Figure 6]
3. COURTYARD BETWEEN EXISTING HOTEL AND PROPOSED BUILDING
We also suggest the Applicant revise the courtyard area between the existing Marriott hotel and the
proposed hotel addition if possible. The Applicant’s drawings show a courtyard around a proposed
transformer that is closed off by a decorative gate. We suggest the Applicant move the transformer to
another part of the site (if possible), and open the courtyard as a public space and outdoor amenity for
guests.
We suggest that the Applicant reduce the height of the gate to 7 feet tall and consider an arbor or other
element above the gate. The Applicant should present a detailed design of the gate. We also suggest the
Applicant move the gate back away from the street wall to create a recessed entrance design that is
Peer Review of 31‐35 South Main Street 2
BFJ Planning
MEMORANDUM
common on surrounding buildings. This would help break up the street wall and could create a small
pocket‐park in front of the gate that could have planters, seating, and/or bicycle parking. This is especially
important if the transformer cannot be moved to a different part of the site, and the courtyard must
remain closed. [Comment 3 – see Figure 7]
We also suggest the Applicant improve the courtyard by wrapping the brick façade around the building
into the courtyard. The façade in the courtyard could also improve the courtyard and/or pocket park with
a small window or side‐door entrance that would complement the side‐door entrance at the existing
Marriott Hotel (the side entrance should not be designed as a primary entrance, however).
[Comment 4 – see Figure 6]
4. FAÇADE DESIGN AND MATERIAL
The façade’s brick material and industrial design complements the existing Marriott Hotel and the
different window design helps to signify it as a separate building. We suggest the applicant use a different
type of brick and emphasize the fenestration and detailing differences between the buildings to further
signify the hotel addition as a separate building. This would help make the pedestrian environment more
varied and interesting.
The connection between the two buildings is shown as gray fiber cement panels. We suggest the applicant
use brick instead of the panels, or consider a metal finish similar to those found on historic industrial
building bridges. [Comment 5 – see Figure 8]
5. ENTRANCE AT EXISTING MARRIOTT HOTEL
The Applicant should also consider slight changes to the entrances at the existing Marriott hotel to
improve its connection to the pedestrian realm. We suggest the Applicant use the entrance on South Main
Street as a primary entrance along with the side entrance that opens up into the driveway. We reviewed
the existing ground‐floor plan and think this would work without making big changes to interior spaces.
[Comment 6 – see Figure 9]
The South Main Street entrance should be designed with an awning and pedestrian‐scale signage. The
Applicant should also consider reducing the scale of the driveway entrance to a more pedestrian‐scale
with a brick arch, or similar treatment. [Comment 7 – see Figure 4, Photos 3 and 4]
Peer Review of 31‐35 South Main Street 3
BFJ Planning
MEMORANDUM
B. Building Roof Forms
1. ROOF DESIGN
We suggest that the Applicant continue the design of the roof around the edge of the recessed connector
so the design appears to be building materials instead of simply pasted on the façade.
[Comment 8 – see Figure 10]
C. Building Lighting
1. LIGHTING PLAN
The Applicant did not submit a lighting plan for review. However, we support the Applicant’s pedestrian‐
scale lighting on the existing Marriott hotel, and suggest they design lighting fixtures with a different
design and a larger size than those on the existing Marriott hotel (the larger size reflects the wider spacing
of the proposed building). The lighting should be installed along the façade at a pedestrian scale. Please
show the lighting on the façade of the existing Marriott hotel on the elevations for review.
[Comment 9 – see Figure 10]
D. Energy Use
1. SUSTAINABLE DESIGN
The design guidelines state that new buildings should be designed with best practices for energy efficiency
and sustainable building design. The Applicant should present a brief narrative describing sustainable
design techniques that are being used in the proposed building. [Comment 10]
Signage Guidelines
1. SIGNAGE PLAN
The Applicant did not submit a signage plan for review. The Applicant should submit a plan and present
its conformance with the guidelines detailed in the South Norwalk TOD Redevelopment Plan.
[Comment 11]
Peer Review of 31‐35 South Main Street 4
BFJ Planning
MEMORANDUM
Site Improvement Guidelines
A. Site Composition and Mix of Uses
1. GROUND‐FLOOR USE
The proposed hotel addition has a ground‐floor space that could be used for retail (or a similar public‐
facing use) that would make the addition a mixed‐use building. The submitted plans do not show what
this space would be used for, and we question how it would be used since a stairwell exits into the space.
The applicant should confirm how the ground‐floor space would be used and how it would function as
part of the overall building circulation. [Comment 12 – see Figure 11]
B. Landscaping
1. LANDSCAPE PLAN
The Applicant did not submit a landscaping plan for review. The proposed building would have high lot
coverage, but meaningful landscaping could be added along the building’s façade and in the courtyard.
Landscaping could be potted planters on the ground or window boxes. [Comment 13]
2. SCREENING OF DUMPSTERS AND RECYCLING AREAS
The proposed building drawings do not show any new dumpsters, recycling areas, or staging areas on the
site. The Applicant should discuss how trash, recycling, and linens associated with the proposed hotel
rooms are stored on site. If they are stored outside, the Applicant should show how they are screened
from the pedestrian realm and views from upper‐floor hotel rooms. [Comment 14]
C. Pedestrian and Bicycle Connections
1. SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS AND STREET TREES
The Applicant’s drawings did not show any sidewalk improvements on the architectural drawings. The
sidewalk in front of the existing Marriott hotel was reconstructed and improved; the Applicant should
improve the sidewalk in front of the proposed building and present drawings for review. We note that
street trees exist in front of buildings south of the project site, but not in front of buildings north of the
project site, and we understand if the Applicant chooses not to plant street trees in front of the proposed
building. [Comment 15]
2. BICYCLE CIRCULATION AND CONNECTIONS
The Applicant’s drawings did not show any bicycle parking on the plans. We suggest the Applicant
designate a place for bicycle parking in the parking garage and along the sidewalk or in the courtyard if
possible. [Comment 16 – see Figure 12]
Peer Review of 31‐35 South Main Street 5
BFJ Planning
MEMORANDUM
D. Building Lot Coverage
1. EMPTY SPACE BETWEEN BUILDINGS
The Applicant’s drawings show an empty space on the ground floor between the proposed building and
the northerly adjacent building. The plans show a privacy fence between the two buildings, but don’t show
how this space would be restricted from guests. The Applicant should ensure this space is blocked from
the sidewalk, and should discuss how this space would be cleaned and maintained and confirm that it
would not be accessible to hotel guests through the ground‐floor parking lot. [Comment 17 – see Figure
12]
Appendices:
A. Figures
Peer Review of 31‐35 South Main Street 6
BFJ Planning
MEMORANDUM
Appendix A: Figures
Peer Review of 31‐35 South Main Street
BFJ Planning
31-35 South Main Street
31-35 South Main Street FIGURE 1: LOCATION MAP
Peer Review SOURCE: MAPBOX, URBAN FOOTPRINT, 2023
Proposed hotel expansion
Existing Marriott hotel
31-35 South Main Street FIGURE 2: PROPOSED SITE PLAN
Peer Review SOURCE: BEINFIELD ARCHITECTURE, SHEET C-6.0, 11/8/2022
Photo 1: View of existing building at 31-35 South Main Street looking southwest.
Recessed entrances.
Photo 2: View of existing building at 31-35 South Main Street looking northwest.
31-35 South Main Street FIGURE 3: EXISTING BUILDING PHOTOS
Peer Review SOURCE: GOOGLE MAPS
Reduce the driveway entrance height
with an arch or other treatment.
Photo 3: View of Marriott hotel at 45 South Main Street south of the project site.
Use this as a primary entrance to the hotel, and install
pedestrian-scale signage and entrance treatments.
Photo 4: View of unused street entrance to Marriott hotel.
31-35 South Main Street FIGURE 4: OFF-SITE PHOTOS
Peer Review SOURCE: GOOGLE MAPS
Pedestrian-scale awnings and recessed entrances.
Photo 5: View of building facade at 4 South Main Street.
Pedestrian-scale awning.
Photo 6: View of building facade at 40 South Main Street.
31-35 South Main Street FIGURE 5: OFF-SITE PHOTOS
Peer Review SOURCE: GOOGLE MAPS
Lower the facade so there is a
step down between the existing
Marriott hotel, this buidling, and
25 South Main Street.
Wrap facade column around
Consider moving the doors back off the street
the corner into the courtyard.
wall to create recessed entrances.
Consider a window or side
entrance.
31-35 South Main Street FIGURE 6: FACADE DESIGN AND COURTYARD
Peer Review SOURCE: BEINFIELD ARCHITECTURE, SHEET AA0.01, 11/17/2022
NEW COVERAGE
2,393 SF
90% MAX BUIDING COVERAGE = 27,020 SF
23,130 SF COVERAGE / 30,078 SF SITE AREA = 76.9% CO
COVERAGE
,403 SF
Move the gate back off the street
wall to create a pocket park.
Reduce height of gate to seven feet.
Can the transformer be moved to a
different part of the site to fully open
the courtyard? NEW ADDITION
EXISTING HOTEL
31-35 South Main Street FIGURE 7: COURTYARD
Peer Review SOURCE: BEINFIELD ARCHITECTURE, SHEET AA0.03, 11/17/2022
Suggest using brick or a GREY FIBER CEMENT PANEL FACADE PAINTED SYNTHETIC CORNICE
metal finish for an industrial
bridge look. Replace pilasters on top
floor with similar panels and
wrap both corners; provide PAINTED SYNTHETIC DECORATIVE COLUM
matching string course below
to tie the elements together
visually.
EXPRESSD BRICK FACADE TO
MATCH EXISTING HOTEL
Use a different facade brick
that complements the existing
hotel instead of matching.
BLACK METAL ACUSTIC WINDOWS
31-35 South Main Street FIGURE 8: FACADE MATERIALS
Peer Review SOURCE: BEINFIELD ARCHITECTURE, SHEET AA0.04, 11/17/2022
EXISTING HOTEL NEW ADDITION
1 BE-East-PSII - Materials PAINTED SYNTHETIC DECORATIVE COLUM
ADDITION NEW ADDITION
NG HOTEL EXISTING HOTEL
EXISTING COVERAGE
1,602 SF
Use this door as a
primary entrance to
the existing hotel
to improve the
pedestrian realm.
The interior flow
appears to work.
EXISTING COVERAGE
9,516 SF
EXISTING COVERAGE
4,140 SF
31-35 South Main Street FIGURE 9: ENTRANCE AT EXISTING MARRIOTT HOTEL
AA0.03 1" = 10'-0" 11/17/2022 SoNo Residence Inn - Pha
Peer Review SOURCE: BEINFIELD ARCHITECTURE, SHEET AA0.03, 11/17/2022
Extend the roof design around to the
side of the proposed buidling, and
wrap the side of the building with
brick.
Add pedestrian-scale lighting on facade. The
lighting should be different but complementary
to the facade lighting on the existing hotel.
31-35 South Main Street FIGURE 10: ROOF DESIGN AND LIGHTING COMMENTS
OVERALL AERIAL
1
Peer Review SOURCE: BEINFIELD ARCHITECTURE, SHEET AA0.01, 11/17/2022
What would this space be used for?
How would it work wtih the stairwell
exiting into it? Can it be programmed
as retail or other public-facing uses?
Area Schedule (COVERAGE)
Name Area
EXISTING 15,664 SF
COVERAGE
15,664 SF
NEW COVERAGE 7,796 SF
7,796 SF
23,460 SF
NEW COVERAGE
2,393 SF
90% MAX BUIDING COVERAGE = 27,02
23,130 SF COVERAGE / 30,078 SF SITE
NEW COVERAGE
5,403 SF
NEW ADDITIO
FIGURE 11: GROUND-FLOOR USE
31-35 South Main Street
SOURCE: BEINFIELD ARCHITECTURE, SHEET AA0.03, 11/17/2022
EXISTING HOTE
Peer Review
A
TELEPHONE COMP
ELDCO
GENERATOR
ERLY M Would this empty space be separated and
WEST DRILL HOLE
METAL
ALONG
POLE
SNET
3207 PRIVACY/SECURITY
FENCE ALONG PROPERTY EDGE.
restricted from the parking area? How would COVER
. 22 ON CORNER
PG
it be cleaned and maintained?
01
SEE LANDSCAPE DWGS.
VOL. 46
OVERHEAD
E
104.99 S 89°35'20" E E
WIRES
8' - 0" RAMP
NEW
22.0
EGRESS
STAIRS
GRAVEL/CRUSHED STONE is there space here or in the existing Marriott
ER LANDSCAPE/CIVIL DWGS.
hotel garage for bicycle parking?
METAL
10' - 0" COVER
21.9 HOTEL FUNCTION
SIGN
FLUSH CURB
NEW ADDITION 5' - 2"
1
BUILDING
VALET
SPACES 1,772 SF
191.17
LINE OF PARKING ABOVE
No. 31-35
BRICK
4
AA3.01
CONCRETE WALK
NEW PARKING
LEVEL
+21 SPACES
8' - 6"
19' - 0"
7' - 6"
WALL
16' - 6"
19' - 0"
19' - 0" 24' - 0"
21.4
20.8
DE
21.0
T 21.0 SC
20.8
20.6 5
CATCH
20.6 20.9
21.0
AA3.01
20.9 BASIN
20.9 20.3
6" PVC GG
21.0
21.2
6" PVC
DRIVE
20.6
FIGURE 12: BICYCLE PARKING AND EMPTY SPACE COMMENT 20.5
BRICK
20.5
31-35 South Main Street GATE UNDER
RAMP SOURCE: BEINFIELD ARCHITECTURE, SHEET AA1.01, 11/17/2022
Peer Review
UP 12" PVC
12" PVC
MH
TE
MEMORANDUM
Via email
To: Bryan Baker, Principal Planner
Steven Kleppin, Director
Norwalk Department of Planning and Zoning
Jonathan Hopkins, Director of Program Development
Norwalk Redevelopment Agency
From: Frank Fish FAICP, Principal
Taylor Young, AICP, Associate
Subject: Peer Review of 31‐35 South Main Street ‐ Second Review
Date: February 13, 2023
As per your request, the following memorandum includes our review of the revised 31‐35 South Main Street
application received by the City of Norwalk Planning and Zoning Commission and the Norwalk Redevelopment
Agency. The Applicant revised their submittal package after we issued the initial Peer Review Memo on January
6, 2023. The Applicant’s revised drawings are dated January 31, 2023.
We thank the Applicant for reviewing our memo and for addressing some of our comments. In general, we think
the Applicant should give more thoughtful consideration to the ground‐floor façade design and the use of the
building’s ground‐floor space. The Udelman Building is a contributing building in the South Main & Washington
Historic District (listed on the National Register), and it has a number of features that make South Main Street an
interesting walk for pedestrians. We think it is important that the proposed building follow this historic precedent.
The comments below focus on what we think are the most pressing issues with the proposed design.
Interaction with the Pedestrian Realm
A. Façade Design and Historic Structures
Our initial comments identified the historic precedent of recessed entrances and pedestrian‐scale entrance features of the
Udelman Building and many other buildings on South Main Street. The Udelman Building has a set of recessed double doors
on each storefront, and has a solid base on the bottom of the ground floor windows to break up the glass façade. The Udelman
Building and its neighboring historic buildings also have pedestrian‐scale signage on the windows and above the door. We
think the proposed building would benefit from a similar design (see Figure 1).
Second Peer Review of 31‐35 South Main Street 1
BFJ Planning
MEMORANDUM
The proposed ground‐floor façade has only a single entrance door on South Main Street that is flush with the façade, and
does not have a solid base that spans the width of the façade. The revised plans also an entrance and vestibule from the
parking garage to the event space, leading us to wonder if the garage would be the main entrance. In this scenario the door
on South Main Street is a secondary entrance or exit‐only doorway. The Applicant also stated there would be no signage on
the façade.
We encourage the Applicant to design the ground floor to complement the pedestrian character of the South Main &
Washington Historic District. This could include (as stated in the initial review memo), recessed entrances to break of up the
façade, pedestrian entrance treatments like awnings, and a solid base under the glass on the façade. The glass panes could
also be broken up with a vertical mullion or two (see Figure 2).
B. Use of Ground Floor Space
The Applicant’s revised submittal shows that the ground‐floor space on the proposed building would be used as “hotel
function” space that is available for corporate events, wedding receptions, and seminars, etc. It appears the space would not
be open to the public, and would mainly be used for events. This event space use may have some benefits, but we agree with
comments made by City staff that a retail use, café, or other public‐facing use would be much better for the pedestrian
environment on South Main Street.
The design of the interior space is somewhat confusing considering its proposed “hotel function” use. The room has a
vestibule, but no lobby or coat check space. Would the ‘front’ of the room be far enough away from the restrooms during a
wedding or corporate event?
We are happy to see the new egress stairs have a separate exit corridor, and are wondering how the hallway will be lit so it
won’t be overly dark. The exit door would be glass, but would there also be additional windows or special design in the
hallway so that it does not feel forlorn?
C. Design of Pocket Park and Transformer Space
We are pleased the Applicant designed a ‘pocket park’ space for use of event guests. We understand the design of the space
was partially determined by agreements between the Applicant and the utility, but we again wonder whether this space could
be redesigned so that is more open to the public. Could the transformer be pushed back away from the street, while still
providing enough access for the utility company? Could the gate be recessed to open up some space for planters, a bench,
or bicycle parking?
Appendices:
A. Figures
Second Peer Review of 31‐35 South Main Street 2
BFJ Planning
MEMORANDUM
Appendix A: Figures
Second Peer Review of 31‐35 South Main Street
BFJ Planning
Recessed entrances.
Pedestrian-scale signage
Solid base
Photo 1: View of existing building at 31-35 South Main Street looking southwest.
Pedestrian-scale awnings Recessed entrances
Solid base
Photo2: View of building facade at 4 South Main Street.
31-35 South Main Street FIGURE 1: EXISTING BUILDING PHOTOS
Peer Review SOURCE: GOOGLE MAPS
Potential pedestrian-scale signage and entrance treatments
Single entrance/exit to ground floor Exit stair
31-35 South Main Street FIGURE 2: PROPOSED FACADE DESIGN
Peer ReviewBE-East-PSII - Materials SOURCE: BEINFIELD ARCHITECTURE, SHEET AA0.04, 1/31/2023
1
1/8" = 1'-0"
Project Number : RA2022-2
Project Name : 467 WEST AVENUE UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE UPGRADE
Apparent Low Bidder Second Bidder Third Bidder Engineering's Estima
Items Description Quantity Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount
0201001A CLEARING AND GRUBBING 1 $80,000.00 $80,000.00 $37,278.00 $37,278.00 $0.00 $0.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00
0202452A TEST PIT 15 $1,500.00 $22,500.00 $1,334.00 $20,010.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,400.00 $21,000.00
0202529 CUT BITMUNOUS CONCRETE PAVEMENT 10,740 $1.85 $19,869.00 $7.00 $75,180.00 $0.00 $0.00 $3.00 $32,220.00
0203004 STRUCTURE EXCAVATION - EARTH 475 $35.00 $16,625.00 $39.00 $18,525.00 $0.00 $0.00 $35.00 $16,625.00
0203306 STRUCTURE EXCAVATION - ROCK 95 $250.00 $23,750.00 $173.00 $16,435.00 $0.00 $0.00 $200.00 $19,000.00
0205003A TRENCH EXCAVATION (0' - 10' DEEP) 3,225 $40.00 $129,000.00 $43.00 $138,675.00 $0.00 $0.00 $35.00 $112,875.00
0205004A ROCK IN TRENCH EXCAVATION (0' - 10' DEEP) 645 $265.00 $170,925.00 $145.00 $93,525.00 $0.00 $0.00 $200.00 $129,000.00
0219011A SEDIMENTATION CONTROL AT CATCH BASIN 10 $130.00 $1,300.00 $389.00 $3,890.00 $0.00 $0.00 $150.00 $1,500.00
0304002 PROCESSED AGGREGATE BASE 300 $70.00 $21,000.00 $50.00 $15,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $60.00 $18,000.00
0406004A 3" TEMPORARY PAVEMENT REPAIR 1,045 $40.00 $41,800.00 $84.00 $87,780.00 $0.00 $0.00 $45.00 $47,025.00
0406009A 5" TEMPORARY PAVEMENT REPAIR 1,065 $58.00 $61,770.00 $132.00 $140,580.00 $0.00 $0.00 $65.00 $69,225.00
0406201A ROAD ENCROACHMENT PERMANENT PAVEMENT 290 $185.00 $53,650.00 $262.00 $75,980.00 $0.00 $0.00 $150.00 $43,500.00
REPAIR (MAJOR ARTERIAL) MIN BID - SEE
SPECIAL NOTES
0406203A ROAD ENCROACHMENT PERMANENT PAVEMENT 890 $100.00 $89,000.00 $184.00 $163,760.00 $0.00 $0.00 $90.00 $80,100.00
REPAIR (COLLECTOR) MIN BID - SEE SPECIAL
NOTES
0406204A ROAD ENCROACHMENT PERMANENT PAVEMENT 865 $60.00 $51,900.00 $150.00 $129,750.00 $0.00 $0.00 $65.00 $56,225.00
REPAIR (LOCAL) MIN BID - SEE SPECIAL NOTES
0406999A ASPHALT ADJUSTMENT COST 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $30,000.00 $30,000.00
0507010 TYPE "C-L" CATCH BASIN TOP 1 $400.00 $400.00 $1,667.00 $1,667.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00
0507105A CONNECTION TO EXISTING MANHOLE, CATCH 1 $1,800.00 $1,800.00 $7,556.00 $7,556.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,300.00 $5,300.00
BASIN OR DRYWELL
0507449 TYPE "C-M" CATCH BASIN 10 $2,800.00 $28,000.00 $7,778.00 $77,780.00 $0.00 $0.00 $4,150.00 $41,500.00
0507493 MANHOLE - 48" DIAMETER 5 $3,600.00 $18,000.00 $5,556.00 $27,780.00 $0.00 $0.00 $3,500.00 $17,500.00
0507502 DOGHOUSE MANHOLE - 48" DIAMETER 1 $4,600.00 $4,600.00 $7,223.00 $7,223.00 $0.00 $0.00 $8,000.00 $8,000.00
0586775 REMOVE EXISTING CATCH BASIN OR MANHOLE 7 $900.00 $6,300.00 $3,334.00 $23,338.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,500.00 $10,500.00
0651012 15" RCP (CLASS IV) 16 $190.00 $3,040.00 $187.00 $2,992.00 $0.00 $0.00 $100.00 $1,600.00
0651656 12" CORRUGATED P.E. PIPE (SMOOTH 136 $85.00 $11,560.00 $69.00 $9,384.00 $0.00 $0.00 $90.00 $12,240.00
INTERIOR)
0651657 15" CORRUGATED P.E. PIPE (SMOOTH INTERIOR) 305 $135.00 $41,175.00 $73.00 $22,265.00 $0.00 $0.00 $95.00 $28,975.00
0651658 18" CORRUGATED P.E. PIPE (SMOOTH INTERIOR) 105 $170.00 $17,850.00 $80.00 $8,400.00 $0.00 $0.00 $105.00 $11,025.00
0651659 24" CORRUGATED PE PIPE (SMOOTH INTERIOR) 45 $200.00 $9,000.00 $89.00 $4,005.00 $0.00 $0.00 $120.00 $5,400.00
0901002 STEEL BOLLARD 13 $650.00 $8,450.00 $2,056.00 $26,728.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 $13,000.00
Page 1 of 2
Project Number : RA2022-2
Project Name : 467 WEST AVENUE UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE UPGRADE
Apparent Low Bidder Second Bidder Third Bidder Engineering's Estima
Items Description Quantity Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount
0921205 PERMEABLE PAVER CROSSWALK REPAIR 55 $185.00 $10,175.00 $195.00 $10,725.00 $0.00 $0.00 $35.00 $1,925.00
0922497 TEMPORARY BITUMINOUS CONCRETE 175 $35.00 $6,125.00 $139.00 $24,325.00 $0.00 $0.00 $35.00 $6,125.00
SIDEWALK/DRIVEWAY
0970006A TRAFFICPERSON (MUNICIPAL POLICE OFFICER) 1 $64,000.00 $64,000.00 $64,000.00 $64,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $64,000.00 $64,000.00
0970007A TRAFFICPERSON (UNIFORMED FLAGGER) 100 $55.00 $5,500.00 $65.00 $6,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $60.00 $6,000.00
0971001A MAINTENANCE AND PROTECTION OF TRAFFIC 1 $150,000.00 $150,000.00 $234,250.00 $234,250.00 $0.00 $0.00 $45,000.00 $45,000.00
0975004 MOBILIZATION AND PROJECT CLOSEOUT 1 $84,000.00 $84,000.00 $81,334.00 $81,334.00 $0.00 $0.00 $125,000.00 $125,000.00
0980002A PROJECT SURVEY AND STAKEOUT 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $158,000.00 $158,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $30,000.00 $30,000.00
1003890 REMOVE AND RELOCATE HISTORIC STREET 1 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 $5,178.00 $5,178.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,500.00 $5,500.00
LIGHT POLE AND LUMINAIRE
1004004A HISTORIC ROADWAY PEDESTRIAN LIGHT POLE - 16 $8,000.00 $128,000.00 $6,776.00 $108,416.00 $0.00 $0.00 $4,500.00 $72,000.00
WAYPOINTE
1004205A HISTORIC ROADWAY PEDESTRIAN LIGHT POLE 16 $2,550.00 $40,800.00 $2,042.00 $32,672.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,000.00 $32,000.00
LUMINAIRE - WAYPOINTE
1008210 CONCRETE ENCASEMENT 327 $350.00 $114,450.00 $567.00 $185,409.00 $0.00 $0.00 $250.00 $81,750.00
1010070 CABLEVISION 17"X30"X24" VAULT 3 $3,500.00 $10,500.00 $9,967.00 $29,901.00 $0.00 $0.00 $3,200.00 $9,600.00
1010912 ELECTRIC MANHOLE 1 $7,100.00 $7,100.00 $31,723.00 $31,723.00 $0.00 $0.00 $33,000.00 $33,000.00
1010920 CABLEVISION SPLIT MANHOLE 4 $7,000.00 $28,000.00 $13,289.00 $53,156.00 $0.00 $0.00 $10,500.00 $42,000.00
1015043 SWITCH GRAR VAULT 2 $8,000.00 $16,000.00 $41,139.00 $82,278.00 $0.00 $0.00 $33,000.00 $66,000.00
1113075 3 CONDUCTOR NO. 8 CABLE XHHW-2 PLUS 1 1,220 $10.00 $12,200.00 $8.00 $9,760.00 $0.00 $0.00 $9.00 $10,980.00
CONDUCTOR NO. 10 CABLE XHHW-2 INCLUDING
NYLON PULL LINES
1115001 3" POLYVINYL CHLORIDE CONDUIT 30 $10.00 $300.00 $25.00 $750.00 $0.00 $0.00 $13.00 $390.00
1115002 4" POLYVINYL CHLORIDE CONDUIT 6,000 $60.00 $360,000.00 $19.00 $114,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $15.00 $90,000.00
1115010 5" POLYVINYL CHLORIDE CONDUIT 16,990 $45.00 $764,550.00 $24.00 $407,760.00 $0.00 $0.00 $20.00 $339,800.00
1115204 2" POLYVINYL CHLORIDE CONDUIT 300 $10.00 $3,000.00 $8.00 $2,400.00 $0.00 $0.00 $12.00 $3,600.00
$2,801,964.00 $2,908,023.00 $0.00 $1,900,505.00
Apparent Low Bidder : THE GRASSO COMPANIES LLC
Second Bidder : A.M. RIZZO ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS INC.
Third Bidder :
Page 2 of 2
Project Number : RA2022-2 ALT 1
Project Name : 467 WEST AVENUE UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE UPGRADE - ALTERNATE 1
Apparent Low Bidder Second Bidder Third Bidder Engineering's Estima
Items Description Quantity Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount Unit Price Amount
1017044 UTILITY SERVICES - 4 QUINCY STREET 1 $9,000.00 $9,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $30,000.00 $30,000.00
(UNDERGROUND CABLE, ELECTRIC AND
TELEPHONE)
1017045 UTILITY SERVICES - 6 QUINCY STREET 1 $6,500.00 $6,500.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $30,000.00 $30,000.00
(UNDERGROUND CABLE, ELECTRIC AND
TELEPHONE)
$15,500.00 $30,000.00 $0.00 $60,000.00
Apparent Low Bidder : THE GRASSO COMPANIES LLC
Second Bidder : A.M. RIZZO ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS INC.
Third Bidder :
Thursday, November 3, 2022 Page 1 of 1
CITY OF NORWALK
Department of Public Works
P: 203-854-7891 / F: 203-857-0143
Norwalk City Hall
125 East Avenue, P.O. Box 5125
Norwalk, CT 06856-5125
BID SHEET
PROJECT: RA2022-2 and ALTERNATE 1
467 WEST AVENUE UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE UPGRADE
DATE: TUESDAY, MARCH 1, 2023 2:00 P.M.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
BIDDER BID AMOUNT BID BOND
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
A.M Rizzo Electrical Contractors, Inc. Base: $2,908,023.00 10% Travelers Casualty and
64 Triangle Street Alternate 1: $30,000.00 Surety Company of America
Danbury, CT 06810 Total: $2,938,023.00
Grasso Companies, LLC Base: $2,801,964.00 10% Argonaut Insurance
485 Pepper Street Alternate 1: $15,500.00 Company
Monroe, CT 06468 Total: $2,817,464.00
$ %
$ %
$ %