Groton Open Space Association

Planning Commission To Comment on GOSA Land Proposal April 24

GROTON — The Planning Commission is scheduled to vote Tuesday, April 24, 2007, on whether to recommend that the Zoning Commission pass or deny GOSA’s proposal for a buildable land definition and a temporary moratorium on Active Senior Housing.

Final decision on the zoning amendments proposed by GOSA rests with the Zoning Commission, but the Planning Commission makes an important recommendation. If the Planning Commission’s finding is negative for the proposal, the measure would need approval by a “supermajority” of the Zoning Commission in order to pass. Otherwise, a simple majority would be sufficient for passage.

The Zoning Commission has five members, so a simple majority would mean three votes, while a supermajority would demand four votes. The Zoning Commission begins hearings on the GOSA proposal May 2, 2007.

In the Planning Commission’s initial consideration on April 10, the staff of the Office of Planning and Development Services recommended against the measures. Matthew Davis, manager of Planning Services with the OPDS, presented a memo to the commission that called the moratorium unnecessary and termed the buildable land definitions inflexible, not well integrated into existing regulations, very broad and overly aggressive.

GOSA proposes that buildable land should exclude inland wetlands and watercourses, 100-year flood zones, slopes in excess of 15 per cent and areas having naturally occurring ledge or rock outcroppings exceeding 150 square feet in horizontal area. It proposes that in determining compliance with minimum lot and parcel sizes, the buildable area only should be counted. One of the most important impacts of the GOSA amendment, if adopted, would be to limit the size of Active Senior Housing developments, such as the 241-unit Mystic Woods community that a developer proposed last year on Fort Hill. The GOSA proposal is aimed at limiting density calculations, rather than prescribing physical limits on building.

The 2002 Groton Plan of Conservation and Development recommended adoption of a buildable land definition. The OPDS has been promising one for more than two years. Mr. Davis, who joined the OPDS six months ago, told the Planning Commission that the OPDS expects to begin work on overhauling zoning regulations in July. GOSA had urged adoption of a buildable land definition prior to enactment of the Active Senior Housing amendment Feb. 2, 2005. However, Michael Murphy, head of the OPDS, said a definition would have to wait for a more comprehensive forthcoming measure that would deal with other forms of housing as well.

In the background to the Planning Commission deliberations is a proposal by an Old Lyme developer to create a floating mixed commercial/residential zone that could land on various town locations — both on “nodes” as defined in the POCD and on certain other areas. The zoning would allow buildings up to six stories in height. The first proposed landing for the floating zone would be a 33-acre tract at the intersection of Routes 117 and 184.

Mr. Davis’s memo said a proper zoning revision would “promote a built environment that achieves adopted form, character and environmental objectives, while placing far less emphasis on conventional regulation via Euclidean metrics (i.e. ‘density’ and ‘lot size’), especially in areas served by or planned for, public water and sewers.”

He said the GOSA proposal does not take into consideration “high-priority objectives such as implementation of the ‘nodes’ concept.”

GOSA noted in the hearing that the POCD contemplates both buildable land definitions and nodes and said GOSA finds nothing contradictory in those goals.

Attorney Frank B. Cochran, appearing for GOSA, told the meeting that GOSA wants “active discussion” of buildable land, noting that many communities have such definitions and that these rules do not cause the “havoc” that Mr. Davis predicts in Groton if the GOSA proposal is adopted. Mr. Cochran said the basic purpose of the proposal is to “reduce overcrowding in developable areas.” In a memo to Mr. Davis, he said that “Most post-Euclidean zoning techniques have some size and/or density standards” in order to comply with state law.

Groton resident Susan Sutherland raised questions about whether Active Senior Housing really would offer the tax advantages that are claimed and urged further study of the tax aspects of senior housing. She said education costs entailed by ASH could be far higher in a new ASH community than proponents claim and could grow over time.

The Planning Commission was expected to consider detailed arguments on the GOSA proposal on April 24, 2007.

None of the Planning Commission members expressed final opinions in this first hearing. Planning Commission member Peter Roper said he feels that “the good land has been developed and we’re pushing the envelope on some development. We ought to have a way to keep things in bounds.” He noted the POCD recommendation for a buildable land definition is longstanding and said that if the OPDS does not like the GOSA proposal, it should come up with an alternative.

Member Ray Munn expressed skepticism about a moratorium but said he was more open to a buildable land definition. Member Hank Steinford asked whether the Zoning Commission could accept an altered GOSA plan and, if so, whether the Planning Commission would get another chance to comment on it.

Mr. Davis said, “I don’t think this proposal can be fixed.” Chairman James Sherrard said it appeared that the Planning Commission could be able to comment on any changes if the Zoning Commission hearings went past May 2, but would not be able to do so otherwise. Member Jeffrey Pritchard said he would like further information as to how engineers could measure the area of a three-dimensional rock outcropping. Member Richard Fitzgerald asked whether ASH moratorium proposals had occurred elsewhere in the state.