Following lengthy discussion at a September 3 Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) public hearing, P&Z members unanimously rejected proposed new zoning regulations on “elderly housing.”

Local builder/developer Kim Danziger had proposed regulations for elderly housing that would allow the construction of detached single-family houses on relatively small lots in a subdivision format, with each lot having its own water well and septic system. Mr Danziger of Danziger Homes, Inc, had presented his regulatory proposal at an August 20 public hearing.

Mr Danziger had told P&Z members that having such zoning rules in place would serve to improve the local housing stock. Elderly housing, also known as age-restricted housing, refers to dwellings designated for people at least 55 years old.

Current zoning rules on elderly housing, known as the EH-10 regulations, cover large-scale, high- density housing complexes, which contain condominiums or rental units that have public water supplies and sanitary sewers.

Mr Danziger said that although the EH-10 rules have proven successful, a need remains for single-family housing designated for the elderly. Zoning rules for that purpose would allow houses to contain up to three bedrooms, he said. Also, the minimum building lot size for such development would be 35,000 square feet, or about four-fifths of an acre. 

As people age, they often seek smaller quarters than they occupied in their younger years, he said.  

Whether his proposal to expand the elderly housing zoning regulations should be enacted is a decision for the P&Z to make, he said. Town Health Department approval would be needed for the proposed type of development, he added.

Single-family housing for elderly people would be beneficial for the town, Mr Danziger stressed.

P&Z Chairman Robert Mulholland noted that the EH-10 zoning regulations have worked well for the town.

Mr Mulholland pointed out that Mr Danziger’s proposal made no provision for designated open space areas at a development site. Also, areas with steep slopes and wetlands at a site must be excluded in calculating the usable acreage there, Mr Mulholland said.

In a conventional large-lot subdivision, at least 15 percent of the land must be designated as protected, undeveloped open space, he said. At development sites employing the “open space conservation subdivision” (OSCS) regulations, at least 50 percent of the land must be designated as open space, Mr Mulholland added.

Mr Danziger responded that he was not seeking to modify the town’s open space regulations, but to expand the zoning regulations on elderly housing. The EH-10 regulations do not require the designation of open space, he added.

George Benson, town director of planning, said that Mr Danziger’s zoning proposal amounts to “a subdivision without [building] lot lines.” 

“This is not doable, as far as I’m concerned,” Mr Benson said. The zoning proposal amounts to an OSCS development without the required minimum 50 percent open space designation, Mr Benson said.

OSCS development also is known as “cluster housing” because single-family houses on the site are clustered, resulting in the ability to designate at least 50 percent of the site as open space.

“I don’t think this [(zoning proposal] is workable,” Mr Benson said.

Public Comment

During the public comment section of the hearing, Jill Wolowitz of 16 Main Street, who is a realtor, said there is a great need for the type of housing proposed by Mr Danziger.

“It would keep a lot of people in town,” she said.

Ken Rubin of 22 Hi Barlow Road said there are housing options for elderly people who want to live in Newtown, such as housing complexes and existing small houses. Existing condominiums designated as elderly housing are on the real estate market, he said.

“There are options for people,” he said.

Mary Wilson of 12 Whippoorwill Hill Road said that the existing EH-10 zoning regulations work well.

Richard Reynolds of 36 Hi Barlow Road said he is very concerned about open space issues, adding that the type of development proposed by Mr Danziger would have a traffic impact.

One Hi Barlow Road resident said he fears that allowing development such as that proposed by Mr Danziger would amount to “overdevelopment.”

William Hammond of 35 Hi Barlow Road said there are many houses for sale in town. The proposed zoning regulations would result in tract housing, he said in urging the P&Z to reject the proposal.

At the August 20 public hearing on his zoning proposal, Mr Danziger had told P&Z members that he represents Martin and Felicity Sidwell, who own land on Hi Barlow Road, near Hattertown Green.

According to town land records the Sidwells own property at #7, #9, and #11 Hi Barlow Road, which totals more than 34 acres. That area has R-2 (Residential) zoning, which requires a minimum two-acre lot size for single-family house development.

Mr Danziger on August 20 had presented P&Z members with a map indicating how the proposed regulations could be used to create single-family elderly housing at Hi Barlow Road.

The map depicts #7 and #9 Hi Barlow Road, which comprise about 26 acres. The map indicates 25 individual houses. The smallest lot size at such a site would be 35,000 square feet, or about four-fifths of an acre. Mr Danziger also provided a map showing an alternate layout for such a 25-lot subdivision.

For the sake of comparison, he presented a map showing the same land as it would be divided in a  large-lot subdivision containing 11 lots.

At the September 3 hearing, Mr Sidwell told P&Z members he bought land on Hi Barlow Road more than 35 years ago. He asked P&Z members whether they support Mr Danziger’s zoning proposal. Mr Sidwell said he wants to know whether he should pursue creating a conventional residential subdivision for his land or seek to develop it under the terms of the Danziger proposal.

Mr Mulholland responded that the P&Z spent much time formulating the OSCS regulations, in seeking to have future single-family house development occur on relatively smaller lots with the preservation of extensive open space.

P&Z member Michael Porco, Sr, said approving the proposed zoning regulations without provisions for open space would have a negative effect on the town.  

P&Z member Jim Swift said of the of the Danziger zoning proposal, “I cannot support this proposal.”

“Open space is so critical,” he said.

P&Z member Frank Corigliano said there may be a need for the type of development proposed by Mr Danziger, suggesting that the P&Z might be able to revise the zoning proposal in cooperation with Mr Danziger.

When a P&Z vote was then taken on Mr Danziger’s elderly housing zoning proposal, P&Z members unanimously rejected it.