Date: Fri 17-May-1996

Publication: Bee

Author: ANDYG

Quick Words:

growth-development-forum

Full Text:

with photo: Forum On Development Raises Concern And Hope For Newtown

B Y A NDREW G OROSKO

A forum on residential development attracted close to 250 people to the high

school auditorium Tuesday night. It drew calls for changes in local zoning

regulations, a suggestion for a moratorium on residential growth in Newtown,

and a reminder that construction work fuels the local economy.

Jack McGarvey of Fleetwood Drive, a founder of the Rocky Glen Area

Association, told forum panel members "It seems to me to be out of control

residential development in this town... I'm worried about a potential tax

squeeze."

Mr McGarvey said he fears Newtown will become similar to heavily developed

towns to the south. He asked if the town wants to leave future generations

with a legacy of overdevelopment.

Mr McGarvey asked that residential developers strive to preserve Newtown as a

special place.

"My greatest fear is that Newtown will have a major crisis in water

(supplies)," he said.

Forum panelist Lyndon Thomas, chairman of the town's Economic Development

Commission, said "Newtown is a beautiful place as we're all well aware." He

added that the town has been promoted for the past 35 years as an attractive

place to live for people coming from southwestern Connecticut.

Mr Thomas pointed to the Walnut Tree Village condominiums on Walnut Tree Hill

Road as an alternative form of housing for the elderly which won't put strains

on the public school system.

"We have to be able to provide alternatives for people to build and live in

Newtown," he said.

Resident Bart Smith of Rock Ridge Road asked what the town can do to motivate

private property owners to keep their land as it exists and leave it

undeveloped.

Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) Chairman Stephen Adams, a forum panel

member, said property owners could sell the development rights of their

holdings to the town. Such an arrangement, though, needs study, he added.

Town Attorney David Grogins, a forum panel member, said although the state has

had a program for purchasing development rights, little state funding is now

available for it. Land trusts can aid in preserving property, he said.

"What all of you want is that no land be developed," he said to residents in

the audience. But he noted that existing programs won't satisfy a public

desire to halt development.

"Everyone wants to be the last person (moving into) town," said Selectman

James Mooney. Mr Mooney asked why the town can't require minimum 10-acre

residential zoning and minimum 6,000-square foot house sizes to limit future

growth.

Mr Adams, a lawyer, responded that such high minimum standards would be thrown

out by a judge in court. "There has to be a rational reason for 'upzoning,'"

he said. Upzoning is a land use approach in which minimum residential lot

sizes are increased for valid, not arbitrary, reasons.

There must be a legitimate regulatory reason to increase minimum lot sizes,

said Mr Grogins. If lot sizes are increased to make local zoning

"exclusionary," it isn't fair to property owners, he said.

Forum panel member Elizabeth Stocker, the town's community development

director, said property owners can enter into private agreements with

developers regarding minimum lot sizes and minimum house sizes, if they

choose.

Pierre Rochman, a member of the Legislative Council, suggested that land use

officials consider using "impact assessments" to have new property owners bear

a direct share of the costs for the increased demands for public services that

new residents bring.

"Connecticut does not allow that," Mr Adams said.

Resident Lisa Schwartz of Poverty Hollow Road asked if the town can levy a

special tax on developers for school expansion projects.

Mr Adams pointed out that such a tax would be considered an "impact

assessment."

Mr Grogins suggested that residents consult with their state legislators on

passing laws to allow such taxes to be levied.

Developer and builder Kim Danziger, a forum panel member, said developers pay

taxes on the properties they own and customarily donate 10 percent of a

subdivision to the town as open space land.

"Developers are not adversarial. It's strictly a business. We have to make

money," he said.

Impact assessments typically apply to developments in states farther to the

west where hundreds of homes are built at the same time, he said.

Bob Tendler, a local real estate agent, said the people who met for the forum

could meet weekly for the next five years to discuss residential development.

"I don't think we'll be able to stop development," he said.

Mr Tendler urged that the town seek having corporate headquarters locate here.

Resident Mary Burnham of Walnut Tree Hill Road said she hasn't had positive

experiences with the P&Z and Conservation Commission. Ms Burnham lives next

door to the Walnut Tree Village condominium complex where the construction of

80 units has been approved.

Ms Burnham said an additional 200 condominiums could be built on land adjacent

to Walnut Tree Village. Sandy Hook would become the most congested part of

town, she said.

"I don't understand this (town) plan of development. Something is not right,"

she said.

Ms Burnham said she was surprised to find the number of homes which have been

built in Sandy Hook in recent years. Why can't the P&Z and Conservation

Commission protect residents from overdevelopment?, she asked.

Her comments were followed by sustained applause from the audience.

Mr Adams noted that only 80, not 280, condominium units have been approved by

the town for the EH-10 Zone along Walnut Tree Hill Road.

Ms Burnham suggested that the town place a moratorium on local residential

development.

Mr Grogins said moratoriums in Connecticut must be limited in scope and used

only in certain limited circumstances.

One resident said some development sites in town look like strip mines, adding

that the 4-acre or 5-acre minimum lot sizes should be put in place now. He

urged that the P&Z require that a minimum 20 percent of subdivisions be set

aside as open space land. A proposed scenic roads ordinance should be passed

and animal habitats should be protected, he said.

"We need to start to stem the flow (of development) before it gets out of

control in Newtown," he said.

Mr Grogins responded the town has an excellent land use staff which reviews

development proposals. "I'm not sure we need more regulations," he said.

"We need help... We need a lot of help,' voices in the audience responded.

Again, Mr Adams stressed, the courts have ruled that a 10 percent grant of

open space to the town in subdivisions is a "reasonable" amount.

Hoping To Hear "Can Do"

Eric Roundy, vice president of the Rocky Glen Area Association, said "I was

hoping to hear 'Can do.'"

"I was hoping for a pro-active situation. I'm hearing a reactive situation,"

he said.

Mr Roundy suggested a four-month construction moratorium so that residents can

reevaluate the town's land use regulations and then propose new ones. Such new

proposals would seek to preserve the local quality of life, he said.

P&Z members are considering open space subdivisions and cluster housing zones,

Mr Adams said. The P&Z can consider the merits of a moratorium when it meets,

he said.

"It's very frustrating to stand up and not get direct answers from anybody on

anything," Mr Roundy said.

Particular land use issues should be pursued with the town agency which

handles that issue, Mr Thomas said.

Resident Judy Holmes of Hundred Acres Road said the basic issues facing the

town concern public education, property taxation, and local aesthetics. She

suggested that public schools will be crowded again in five years due to

residential growth. She held up Redding and Bridgewater as model towns where

the rate of residential growth has been limited. Ms Holmes asked why Newtown

should allow back lot residential development.

Mr Danziger, the developer, said the town should continue residential

development in the most aesthetic way possible. "We want to develop the town

as nicely as you want to see the town develop," he said.

Mr Grogins cautioned that cluster housing is not a cure-all for developmental

woes. Although cluster development would protect more open space, there would

be as many people in cluster developments as in conventional ones, he said.

Cluster development is a "good tool" but it doesn't solve all development

problems, he said.

Resident Mae Schmidle of Echo Valley Road recommended that the selectmen and

Legislative Council organize an ad hoc committee to study developmental issues

and suggest solutions. "We need to protect our fragile environment," she said.

Getting Involved

Mr Adams said a more effective way to help deal with developmental issues is

having concerned citizens become members of land use agencies when vacancies

occur.

Resident Susan Gillis of Jeremiah Road said "I've lived here for five years

and haven't taken responsibility." Ms Gillis said she will make a commitment

to help the town deal with its developmental issues.

First Selectman Robert Cascella, a forum panel member, said "This is a

participatory form of government. Please get involved."

Mr Cascella said he's willing to listen to public comments on improving the

town plan of development, but added the Tuesday night session wasn't organized

to be a forum to unfairly criticize builders and real estate agents.

Property owners have the right to develop their property as they like,

provided that it's done within the context of the town's land use regulations,

he said.

Brian Hennessey of Eden Hill Road urged that an ad hoc committee on

developmental issues be formed.

Mr Cascella said perhaps such a committee is needed, but asked whether such a

panel would get anything accomplished. "An ad hoc committee can be helpful or

an ad hoc committee can be a large dustball going nowhere," he said.

Mr Cascella suggested that residents participate at P&Z meetings and if such

participation isn't fruitful, then an ad hoc committee might be formed on

revising the town plan of development.

Roo Simonds of Riverside Road said "I think the town needs time to digest and

think about the issues," adding that a moratorium on residential development

is needed. He suggested that the town create a World Wide Web home page on the

Internet so residents can electronically trade ideas on local development.

Developer Gerry Cavaliere said if a residential moratorium had been put into

effect in the past, perhaps some of the residents at the forum wouldn't be

attending it.

Construction fuels the local economy in many ways, he said.

"Let's be fair to both sides. We're abiding by the laws. We're not asking for

anything," he said.