Pine Crest Estates—

P&Z Rejects Zone Change For 56-Unit Condo Complex

By Andrew Gorosko

Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) members have unanimously rejected a developer’s requested change of zone from R-2 (Residential) to EH-10 (Elderly Housing), that was sought as a preliminary step toward constructing a 56-unit age-restricted condominium complex on Alberts Hill Road in Sandy Hook.

Citing issues including hazardous roads in the area, and the lack of both public sanitary sewers and a public water supply at the site, P&Z members in a 4-to-0 vote on January 19 turned down New Canaan developer Jack Dweck’s rezoning request for the 20-acre property at 32 Alberts Hill Road. Voting against a change of zone were P&Z Chairman William O’Neil, Lilla Dean, Jane Brymer, and Robert Mulholland.

The site formerly held The Cornerstone of Eagle Hill, a private drug and alcohol rehabilitation hospital, which closed several years ago. In 2003, Mr Dweck bought the property from Lutheran General Behavioral Health Corporation of Oak Brook, Ill., for $1.375 million at a foreclosure sale. P.W. Scott Engineering & Architecture of Brewster, N.Y., represents the applicant.

The rezoning request from Mr Dweck, doing business as Pine Crest Estates, Inc, had drawn heavy opposition from nearby residents at December and November P&Z public hearings. Opponents had charged that constructing such a high-density project there would be unwise.

Project opponents listed a variety of complaints about the condo construction proposal, including additional traffic on hazardous roads in the area, environmental concerns, damaged property values, the prospect of depleted underground water supplies, and an adverse effect on the area’s character, among others.

The site’s current R-2 zoning is intended for single-family houses on building lots of at least two acres. EH-10 zoning is intended for high-density, multifamily housing for people over age 55. The site lies on the northern side of Alberts Hill Road, about one-quarter mile from that road’s intersection with Walnut Tree Hill Road.

Mr Dweck’s proposal for a 56-unit condo complex involved converting some existing buildings on the site into 18 condos, as well as constructing 38 new condos.

In a discussion before the January 19 P&Z vote, Ms Dean said the site is “too far out” from the town center to expect a municipal sanitary sewer system or public water supply to be extended to it.

Age-restricted housing complexes that have received P&Z approvals have all had access to public sewers and a public water supply, she noted.

Mr O’Neil observed that if the P&Z were to drop its requirement that age-restricted housing complexes have access to public sewers and a public water supply, it would effectively open up many areas in town to such high-density development.

Mr Mulholland stressed that the Alberts Hill Road site does not lend itself to an increase in construction density, which EH-10 zoning would allow.

He added that nearby hazardous roadways make the area “an impossible place to drive around.” Mr Mulholland said he drove through the area under snowy conditions recently to estimate the difficulty of wintertime driving there. It would be unwise to increase the traffic volume in that area, he said.

Development Alternative

Mr Mulholland urged that instead of pursuing high-density multifamily construction on the site, the developer instead construct an “open space subdivision.” Open space subdivisions, also known as cluster housing, group together dwellings on a site in order to preserve relatively large contiguous open space areas nearby. Local land use regulations would allow the same number of dwellings to be built at an open space subdivision as would be allowed at a conventional large-lot residential subdivision on the same site.

On a 20-acre site such 32 Alberts Hill Road, an open space subdivision might contain up to ten acres of open space, instead of the three acres of open space that would be required in a conventional subdivision.

“That’s one of the most beautiful pieces of property,” said Ms Brymer, adding that she would support having an open space subdivision built there.

At a December public hearing, a representative of Mr Dweck said an open space subdivision is not a viable alternative for the site.

On January 19, Mr O’Neil noted that nearby property owners had raised many issues in opposition to a 56-unit condo complex.

The P&Z chairman pointed out that if a conventional residential subdivision were proposed for the site, it would probably be approved for construction by the P&Z, noting that property owners have certain rights to develop their property.

Ms Dean said that the owner of 32 Alberts Hill Road retains a town-granted approval to operate a drug/alcohol rehabilitation hospital on the site.

Mr O’Neil added, though, that such a facility would need to be operated under the terms of an existing P&Z special permit.

Following the P&Z’s vote to reject the zone change, Mr O’Neil said that although nearby residents seem to oppose any redevelopment of the site, redevelopment may occur there.

Mr O’Neil advised that concerned residents should unite if they are interested in shaping future growth in that area. Seeking “upzoning,” or some other zoning approach for the site, might be a course for them to pursue, he said.

Upzoning increases minimum building-lot sizes, with the effect of decreasing an area’s overall potential construction density.

In 2001, as an environmental protection measure, the P&Z upzoned extensive areas lying within the town’s Aquifer Protection District (APD), which is situated above the Pootatuck Aquifer.

On January 20, resident Morgen McLaughlin of 14 Alberts Hill Road, who had opposed the zone change at the Alberts Hill Road site, said that the applicant was seeking the maximum amount of development possible for the site in proposing 56 age-restricted condominiums.

Constructing an open space subdivision on the site would be the best way to develop the property, if the site is to be developed, she said.

Ms McLaughlin said P&Z members were wise in stating that their rationale for rejecting the zone change is that the site does not have access to public sewers or a public water supply.   

At a December public hearing, attorney Peter Scalzo, representing the developer, told P&Z members that if the proposed condo complex does not materialize, the site could be used again as a hospital, or could hold nine or ten single-family houses, or could hold an “affordable housing” complex.

Some estimates of the site’s potential for single-family house construction have placed the number of potential houses as low as seven.