The Planning & Zoning Commission last week elevated one member from alternate to full member and vice chair. During its February 18 meeting, the commission also continued a public hearing concerning an application by the Town of Newtown Land Use Agency for a text amendment to local zoning regulations.

P&Z Chairman Don Mitchell noted at the opening of Thursday night’s meeting that Jim Swift had resigned. Following that, Mitchell nominated P&Z alternate Roy Meadows to replace Swift on the commission.

There were no objections and no other nominations. Meadows was voted in unanimously by the group, who met again via Zoom due to the pandemic.

Later in the meeting, Mitchell asked the board to consider making Meadows the board’s vice chair. With no objections, the board again voted on the motion. As with the earlier vote, the motion passed unanimously.

For nearly an hour, the commission conducted a public hearing concerning Application 21.03. The application was for “a Text Amendment to §3.01.331-333 of the Town of Newtown Zoning Regulations, so as to (1) eliminate the seven year requirement for detached accessory apartments, (2) eliminate the lot size requirement for detached accessory apartments, (3) increase the detached accessory apartment maximum square footage from 800 to 1,000, and (4) convert detached accessory apartments from Special Exception Use to Accessory Use, as demonstrated on documents submitted to the Land Use Agency 1/26/21.”

Director of Planning George Benson opened the hearing by asking Mitchell to talk about the communication received from the Borough Zoning Commission (BZC), which related to the hearing. BZC on February 15 had requested P&Z’s feedback on proposed text amendments regarding accessory and detached apartments.

Benson told the commission that the town’s requested amendment would make the document “consistent with what the Borough already has” on Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU).

The commission — including Corinne Cox, Barbara Manville, Dennis Bloom, Andrew Marone, and David Rosen, in addition to Mitchell and Meadows — discussed the points of the application for nearly 45 minutes.

The first point discussed concerned the stipulation that a building with an ADU must be on the tax records for seven years.

In his research, said Benson, he could not find a reason for that number. There was “no good rationale,” he noted.

Mitchell added that all Connecticut towns and cities should be “increasing and diversifying” their housing stock.

The second change, concerning lot size, was requested because “septic systems are generally the limiting factor anyway,” Benson said.

The third proposed change, concerning floor area, was initially requesting an increase from 800 square feet to 1,000 square feet. Following discussion, Meadows noted that the Borough regulations were 900 square feet.

The commission agreed that for the sake of consistency, the amendment would be modified to 900 square feet.

Bloom felt more housing options should be available for residents who want to move a family member onto their property. Benson agreed, saying for most people, the original intent is just that.

The commission also discussed whether the number of bedrooms specifically or the general number of rooms should be defined.

“Are we being too restrictive there?” Meadows asked his fellow commissioners.

Attorney Robert Hall was also in attendance Thursday night. Representing client Nick Barzetti, Hall said his client had built an apartment over a three-bay garage that is greater than the currently allowed 800 square feet.

Hall asked about the definition of gross floor area (GFA), which is measured from exterior walls and which is different, he pointed out, from how the Building Department calculates GFA. The town, he said, and Benson agreed, excludes any area that is not “livable,” such as a sloping roof or areas over a garage.

Benson said he thought the GFA discrepancy could be solved by referring to “livable” square footage. He said he would consult with the Building Department to find their definition of the phrase, and report back to the commission. He said he would also look into the legal definition of “family” and report back on that.

“It’s a good start,” he said.

Mitchell then moved to continue the public hearing for Application 21.03 to the next regular P&Z meeting, scheduled for 7:30 pm Thursday, March 4. Cox seconded, and all were in favor. The meeting/hearing will again be done via Zoom.

The board approved the minutes from its February 4, 2020 meeting.

At 8 pm, it entered Executive Session to discuss pending litigation regarding “the 13 Old Hawleyville Road case,” Mitchell said in moving the meeting to that status.

The commissioners remained in Executive Session until just past 9 pm. Upon exiting, they adjourned for the evening.