Groton Open Space Association

Groton Zoning Unit Tables Active Senior Housing Measure

GROTON–The Zoning Commission unanimously voted at a meeting Dec. 1, 2004, to defer any action on a proposal to create a new zoning class in the town, “Active Senior Housing.”

The commission voted after Chairman Stephen J. Hudecek concluded that the proposal in its current form could allow extremely high housing density under certain circumstances. He offered a theoretical example of 20 units of housing allowable under the proposed regulation on two acres of land. The proposal technically is an amendment to the zoning regulations but in fact is an addition because no Active Senior Housing currently exists in Groton.

Using chalk and a board behind his chair at the Town Hall Annex, Mr. Hudecek drew a rectangle representing 10 acres of land in an area zoned for half-acre housing. He noted that under the proposal, developers would be entitled to put 20 units on the 10-acre property. If only 2 of the acres were buildable [because the rest of the area was wetland, for example], then all 20 units theoretically could be constructed on those 2 buildable acres.

Michael J. Murphy, director of planning and development, agreed that the proposal would permit this result but contended that other regulations, for example, Inland Wetlands Agency rules, would preclude such a situation. Despite this statement, the commission voted to put off any decision on the proposal that Mr. Murphy had drafted for their action.

The commission did, however, approve a series of technical changes to zoning regulations governing “residential life care communities,” an umbrella term used to describe various kinds of housing for the elderly.

Earlier, in the public hearing segment of the meeting, the Groton Open Space Association had urged the town, among other things, to come up with a definition of “buildable land” before dealing with Active Senior Housing because this definition would be crucial to deciding how many units could be built on a given tract. Mr. Murphy’s Office of Planning and Development Services (OPDS) is scheduled to produce a buildable land definition in 2005 for use in many regulations besides those dealing with zoning. Speaking against the Active Senior Housing measure were GOSA directors Jim Furlong and Joan Smith, GOSA Treasurer Genevieve Cerf and GOSA President Priscilla Pratt, as well as Richard Dixon, an attorney representing GOSA. Wendy MacFarland, a Bel-Aire resident appearing as an individual, told the board that the “public feels disenfranchised” as the rate of residential building goes “out of control.”

The Active Senior Housing amendment would allow construction of clustered single family, duplex, townhouse and multi-family housing in many districts where it is not currently permitted. Such housing would have an age restriction–80% of the households would have to include at least one person aged 55. These buildings could be as close together as 20 feet. They would be capable of being upgraded where necessary with such amenities for the aged as grab bars in toilets and showers, but the proposed rules are far looser than in residential life care communities.

Among the town areas where Active Senior Housing would be allowed under the amendment are the 75-acre Merritt property and the 159-acre Watrous property, according to a map prepared by Mr. Murphy and shown during the hearing. GOSA has a contract to buy the Merritt property and preserve it as open space, though a developer is challenging GOSA’s contract. Another developer has proposed to build a residential life care community on 105 acres of the Watrous property, but GOSA is opposing the plan in court, contending that the project doesn’t amount to a residential life care community.

Appearing at the hearing in support of Active Senior Housing, Clinton Brown, principal of DiCesare-Bentley Engineers Inc., of Groton, suggested that the commission loosen a provision that would restrict Active Senior Housing to locations accessible by collector or arterial roads.

The next scheduled meeting of the Zoning Commission is Jan. 5, 2005. Though Active Senior Housing appeared to be headed for the Jan. 5 agenda, it was uncertain as the meeting ended whether any further action would be taken on the proposal. Commission Secretary Robert O’Neill noted that the commission didn’t need to act beyond approving changes to the residential life care community rules, and that had been done.