Date: Fri 22-Nov-1996

Publication: Bee

Author: ANDYG

Quick Words:

P&Z-affordable-housing

Full Text:

Public Comments On Proposed Affordable Housing Rule Changes

B Y A NDREW G OROSKO

The Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) is reconsidering its regulations on

affordable housing complexes with the intention of changing the rules to

decrease the size and density of such developments.

P&Z members conducted a public hearing November 14 to field comments on their

proposals. The P&Z's proposals come amid a public outcry that the town is

being residentially overdeveloped.

The P&Z's proposed rule changes would: reduce the number of housing units

allowed per acre from six to four; cut the number of overall units allowed in

a development from 200 to 100; reduce the number of housing units allowed per

building from five to four; and cut the maximum length of buildings which

contain multiple housing units from 180 feet to 120 feet.

The proposed changes would reduce the "lot coverage" of affordable housing

developments by reducing the maximum allowable construction density.

The town's affordable housing regulations call for at least 20 percent of the

units in a development to be designated as "affordable." The state's rules,

however, call for at least 25 percent of the units to be "affordable."

The "density bonus" provided to developers in an affordable housing complex

involves the sale of the "market value housing" there to subsidize the

"affordable housing."

P&Z Chairman John DeFilippe said the P&Z's plans to make its affordable

housing regulations stricter doesn't apply to any particular affordable

housing development.

"This is purely the regulation change," he said. The P&Z didn't act on its

proposed regulation changes November 14.

Newtown Village

Two development groups are seeking Conservation Commission approval for

"Newtown Village." It involves the construction of 100 houses on 32 acres in

Sandy Hook, 25 houses of which would be "affordable housing."

Resident Judy Holmes of Hundred Acres Road, a member of the Newtown

Neighborhoods Coalition, told P&Z members the town's plan of development calls

for preservation of the local rural character. There is a local need need for

affordable housing, but it shouldn't be concentrated in large developments,

she said.

Ms Holmes proposed that the existing land use regulations on affordable

housing be eliminated and that a new approach be used. She proposed that all

subdivisions with at least five residences be required to contain at least 20

percent affordable housing. Under such a plan, a new 20-lot subdivision would

have at least four units of affordable housing.

Resident Mary Burnham of Walnut Tree Hill Road said it would take much courage

for the P&Z to drastically change its affordable housing regulations.

"I have 80 condos going in behind my house. I think that's too many," Ms

Burnham said of her property's location next to the Walnut Tree Village

condominium complex.

"Condominiums, when they're all shoved together, aren't rural. To me, it's

like having a little city next door," she said.

A 100-unit affordable housing complex is too large, she said, adding "you need

to get those numbers way down."

Building large housing complexes tends to urbanize the town, not preserve its

ruralness, she said.

Resident Jack Bestor of Walnut Tree Hill Road said the condominium complex

next to his house is very densely built. And only roughly 35 of the 80 planned

units have been constructed, he said.

The developers of Walnut Tree Village own additional land nearby, Mr Bestor

said, raising the possibility that the builders may seek development beyond

the 80-unit complex.

"Developers will come in here like piranha and have a feeding frenzy" if the

P&Z allows large affordable housing complexes, he said, adding he doesn't

want's Newtown to have the construction densities of Danbury or Bethel.

Developers will come to town, build large housing complexes, make profits and

then leave the town saddled with large community septic systems which may

fail, Mr Bestor said.

Mr Bestor said he's on the verge of moving out of Newtown because it is

becoming urbanized.

Resident Michael Gorski of Bishop Circle said a housing complex with 100 homes

is too dense a development, especially considering the lack of sewers and a

public water supply.

Mr Gorski asked P&Z members to mitigate the problems which are posed by living

next to a 100-house complex. Bishop Circle is just north of the site eyed for

Newtown Village.

Resident Jane Macomber of Parmalee Place said the coalition's proposal on how

to create affordable housing works to preserve local open space, and preserve

the concept of neighborhoods where residences are integrated and not

segregated.

Mr DeFilippe said that although the coalition's concept for providing

affordable housing is a good one, the November 14 public hearing was held to

consider the P&Z's proposal on rewriting its affordable housing regulations.

Developer Comments

John Horton, a manager for D&H Homes, LLC, the New Milford-based general

contractor that has applied for Newtown Village, attended the public hearing.

"At some point, the town decided affordable housing was required" and took the

time to write regulations allowing it as a land use, he said, noting those

regulations were adopted by the P&Z almost five years ago.

It seems odd that the P&Z is considering changing those regulations shortly

after Newtown Village has been proposed, he said. Mr Horton said he opposes

the changes proposed by the P&Z.

"The economics do have something to do with this regulation," he said.

In order to make the affordable housing concept work, the developer has to be

able to spread the cost of land across many houses instead of just a few

houses, he said.

"Arbitrarily changing those densities...is somewhat irresponsible," he told

the commission, adding that it has provided no rationale for its proposed

changes.

"I don't belive you've stated any reasons why you'd decrease the density," Mr

Horton said.

Mr DeFilippe later said the P&Z wants to cut the size and density of

affordable housing complexes to help protect underground drinking water

supplies, limit traffic flow, preserve the town's rural character, and prevent

an overburdening of the local infrastructure.

Resident Kurt Gillis, a neighborhoods coalition member from Jeremiah Road,

said the provision of affordable housng is truly a state issue, not a town

issue.

"I believe money is being made here," Mr Gillis said, noting that development

companies are in business to make a profit. The affordable housing regulations

give developers an incentive to develop land that might otherwise go

untouched, he said.

If lawsuits are inevitable when land is developed for affordable housing, the

town should stand behind a concept worth fighting for such as a requirenment

that subdivisions with at least five houses have at least 20 percent

affordable hosuing, Mr Gillis said.

Affordable housing should be built throughout town, not concentrated in

"pockets," he said.

"Let's protect what we have here and try not to be exclusionary at the same

time," Mr Gillis said.

Resident Bradley Tefft of Bishop Circle said he opposes local overdevelopment.

Affordable housing should be spread out throughout town, he said. Dense

development raises environmental questions about underground drinking water

supplies, he said. Failing community septic systems can pose health hazards to

people and animals, he said.

With the advent of affordable housing, there will be increased demands on the

public schools and increased local traffic, Mr Gillis said.

Ms Burnham proposed that the P&Z limit the number of units in a affordable

housing complex to 50 and that the housing density be limited to two units per

acre. After approving those regulations, the P&Z should then adopt the

coalition's proposal on affordable housing, she said.