Property Owners Anticipate Lawsuit Against Upzoning Measure

By Andrew Gorosko

Anticipating that the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) will soon approve its controversial “upzoning” proposal, which would increase minimum zoning requirements in extensive residential sections of town, the Newtown Property Owners Association is making plans to mount a legal challenge to that action.

The group is collecting funds to hire a lawyer to file a lawsuit seeking to overturn the anticipated measure.

About 30 people attended an association meeting April 24 at Newtown High School to exchange ideas on their opposition to the upzoning proposal.

Association director Barry Piesner said he had hoped that association members could have met that night with representatives from town land use agencies so that association members could pose questions to them about upzoning. It is difficult to have such a question-and-answer session with town land use officials if they are not present, he said.

Mr Piesner told association members of a recent meeting at which several association representatives met with the first selectman to express their opposition to upzoning.

The P&Z has proposed upzoning to prevent groundwater contamination problems from worsening in the several communities situated along Lake Zoar, and to safeguard water quality in the Pootatuck Aquifer in south central Newtown.

But association members oppose the upzoning approach, saying that sewer installation is the solution. The upzoning proposal is an aspect of the town’s “sewer avoidance” program, a policy which association members challenge.

Sewers were needed in the Riverside section 30 years, ago and they are still needed there today, said Mr Piesner, a Riverside resident who lives on Alpine Drive.

Using diagrams, association president Richard Haight of Church Hill Road explained how upzoning would affect residential properties in terms of stricter requirements for development.

Erwin Potter of Washington Avenue said upzoning would require property owners to obtain zoning variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) to make certain improvements to their properties.

Obtaining zoning variances from the ZBA can become expensive for people who can least afford the variance application process, he said. Upzoning will effectively reduce the local stock of affordable housing when making physical changes to upzoned properties falls under the ZBA’s review, he said.

“You spend all this money to get a [ZBA] approval, which you might not get,” Mr Potter said. Applying to the ZBA can require the services of a lawyer and, sometimes, an engineer, he said, asserting that an application might cost thousands of dollars.

“Obviously, we’re going to have to move quickly if the [P&Z] vote is yes” on upzoning, Mr Piesner said.

Mr Piesner said he expects that upzoning will be approved by the P&Z, adding that the association has to raise money to mount a legal challenge. He pointed out to association members that if the association files a lawsuit to challenge upzoning, association members would directly bear the costs of their own lawyer, as well as indirectly cover the costs of the town’s defense lawyer through local property taxation.

Some association members said property taxation should cover costs of an association lawsuit. But association legal adviser Stacey Daves-Ohlin of Beacon Drive explained that such private lawsuits are not financed with public funding.

She urged that people who are not able to donate money to the association’s legal fund should instead help the group raise money for its legal expenses. Association members said they expect they will have to raise about $5,000 to hire a lawyer to get a lawsuit underway.

Ms Daves-Ohlin said there is not much land left to develop in the lakeside communities proposed for upzoning, in questioning the measure’s supposed effectiveness. Upzoning would prevent modest homes in those areas from being expanded, she said.

Ms Daves-Ohlin warned that P&Z members who vote for upzoning might not be reelected to office.

Other Side

In a past statement, P&Z Chairman Daniel Fogliano has said, “The proposed zone changes will not prevent owners from building new residences on existing lots, and the changes will not prevent owners from upgrading their properties, including constructing additions.”

The P&Z chairman has urged residents to contact the town land use office in Canaan House at Fairfield Hills or the community development office in Edmond Town Hall with any questions on the topic.

The P&Z’s upzoning proposal drew opposition from residents at P&Z public hearings in February and December. Affected residents say they are unconvinced that upzoning is necessary, adding they fear that increasing minimum residential zoning standards would damage their properties’ development potential, and thus reduce the value of their real estate.

P&Z’s underlying goal in upzoning is protecting groundwater quality, both in the town’s Aquifer Protection District (APD), which lies atop the Pootatuck Aquifer in south-central Newtown, and also in the several lakeside communities in Sandy Hook lying on the eastern edge of town along Lake Zoar, including Shady Rest, Pootatuck Park, Riverside, Cedarhurst, and Great Quarter. The comprehensive rezoning proposal covers an aggregate area greater than 2,500 acres. It affects approximately 2,315 properties, almost 2,000 of which have dwellings on them.

Under the proposal, some residential properties with current ½-acre zoning would have zoning designations increased to either 1 acre or 2 acres, depending upon their location. Other properties with current 1-acre residential zoning would be increased to 2 acres. Such upzoning is intended to at least maintain, or potentially decrease, existing construction densities, and hence decrease threats to groundwater quality.