The hopeful developer of the Roger Sherman Inn site has a strong track record as a builder, the chairman of the New Canaan Planning & Zoning Commission said last week, and turning down his application to create six new homes on the highly visible 1.8-acre property could open up the town to an even denser re-development.
Yet New Canaan already is slated to see smaller dwellings—for example, for seniors seeking manageable “in-town” quarters—through mixed-use developments and the Merritt Village apartment-and-condo complex, according to P&Z Chairman John Goodwin.
“I am a little worried about do we continue to allow non-single family housing to push its way outward?” Goodwin said at the Feb. 28 P&Z meeting, held in Town Hall. “And I am worried that it potentially could set a precedent that other developers could use.”
He referred to proposed additions to a section of the New Canaan Zoning Regulations under which developer Andrew Glazer of Rowayton-based Glazer Group has applied to create six dwellings where the old inn and restaurant now stand (including converting the oldest part of the Roger Sherman into one of those units, though physically moving it closer to Oenoke Ridge Road).
As it stands, section 7.1.A.2 of the regulations (see page 155 here) says: “No nonconforming use may be changed except to a conforming use or, with the approval of a Special Permit by the [P&Z] Commission, to another nonconforming use of a less objectionable character.”
Glazer in 2009 used that section of the zoning regulations to get approval for the redevelopment of the Maples Inn to a “cluster housing” complex, though the final three words in it—‘less objectionable character’—appear to give P&Z overly wide latitude in making its decision, according to the town attorney, and open up New Canaan to an appeal in court should the commission deny an application based on the provision.
Though most commissioners agreed at the meeting that, under the regulations, changing the use of a property in the residential zone from commercial (the inn) to residential (the six proposed dwellings) conceptually is “less objectionable,” they disagreed on whether Glazer’s plan itself was the right one for the Roger Sherman site at 190 Oenoke Ridge Road.
Ultimately, because it was difficult to tell which way P&Z was leaning—in part because several members were absent—Goodwin asked Town Planner Steve Palmer to create for the commission’s March 28 meeting a set of conditions for approval as well as for denial.
Commissioner Claire Tiscornia said she had concerns about the proposal to create six dwellings on a property that, as-of-right, could see just one home built on it.
Trying to compare the adverse impacts of the Roger Sherman to the proposed six units “to me is really like comparing apples and oranges,” Tiscornia said.
“Yes, a commercial use is busy, people are in and out. But if there are six homes? I can tell you what the neighbors would like. The neighbors would like one home, maybe two. And that is the direction I’m going. I think six houses on 1.8 acres is way too dense, much too intense a use for that location in town. You are not going to get seniors walking. There’s no transit.”
Yet commissioner Laszlo Papp said he favored approving Glazer’s application. The residential use is a “less objectionable” than a commercial one, as per the zoning regulations, Papp said, and so the real question facing P&Z is “whether the density of this proposal would be defensible or not defensible.”
Because the proposed six units, taken together, would create the same footprint as the Roger Sherman does currently (though the re-development, in terms of total living space, would be about half-again as large as the inn), and because the new units conform to the regulations in terms of setbacks and building height, the application has earned approval.
“If you have come to the conclusion that this plan is not acceptable because it is too dense, you expose yourself to something that may be even more dense,” Papp said. “So when you reach a decision you have to think of unintended consequences.”
He referred to Town Attorney Ira Bloom’s concern that denying the application on the basis of regulation 7.1 (an earlier plan to create a new “overlay zone” for the has been scrapped) would open up New Canaan to an appeal of that decision in court. Specifically, Bloom has cited the state Appellate Court’s decision in 2013 in the so-called ‘MacKenzie’ case. In that case, which involved a McDonald’s in Monroe, the court ruled that zoning regulations that permit a zoning commission to apply flexible setback and landscaping requirements in approving development applications are invalid.
Bloom during the meeting urged P&Z to focus not on whether the proposal was right or wrong for the site, but whether it was “less objectionable” than the existing commercial use.
“That really has to sort of frame your opinions on this,” Bloom said. “Either less or more objectionable. That is what we are left with right now, to approve or disapprove.”
He added: “Your criterion you would use is the ‘less objectionable’ standard because that is really the only one you have, with modification. It essentially revolves around that.”
Glazer as part of his application has proposed text amendments to section 7.1.A.2 of the zoning regulations, eliminating the phrasing “of a less objectionable character” and substituting it with a series of more definite characteristics—for example, that it eliminates a commercial use in a residential zone, reduces traffic, reduces light and noise and is more consistent with the uses of the surrounding neighborhood. (Goodwin noted during the meeting that not all P&Z commissioners support those changes.)
Commissioner Kent Turner said he agreed with Papp that density is the key factor in Glazer’s application, but added that he struggled with the proposed “cluster housing” development in its context on Oenoke Ridge—specifically, located next to the seven-unit Maples Inn property.
“It is a two parcel property that would contain more than 13 houses and regardless of what you do on one property, I think you really have to look at that entire area as a development because it is similar in character, it is multiple residences, it is a lot of density on that area,” Turner said.
The Roger Sherman has been under wide speculation since it hit the market at $6 million two years ago.
It’s owned by a limited liability company whose principal is Joseph Jaffre of Heritage Hill Road and whose agent is Nesreen Jaffre of Ridgefield, according to tax records and records on file with the Connecticut Secretary of the State. They bought it for $3,415,000 eight years ago, records show.
The Jaffres in social media postings had said it would close Jan. 2, then extended that date twice. It’s still open.
A contract purchaser (though not the owner) of the property, Glazer first filed his plan for re-development in September—at the time, for eight units, which came down following public hearings to seven and then six.
Commissioner Dick Ward noted that Glazer must carve a minimum number of units out of the Roger Sherman property in order to make his plan financially viable, “otherwise it would not be of interest to him or any other neighbor.”
Saying he liked the look of the Maples and that Glazer has proven himself as a good developer, Ward voiced support for the application. He also noted that some of the inn’s direct neighbors had spoken in favor of the project.
“So I think that the neighbors, their voice should be listened to,” Ward said. “I am less influenced by people who live on the other side of town and like to go to the Roger Sherman Inn—they could care less about noise or cars or lights because they don’t live there.”
P&Z Secretary Jean Grzelecki said she was concerned about other developers coming forward with nonconforming development applications for parts of town where a commercial use exists in a residential zone, fearing it would set a bad precedent.
She also said it was unfair to those neighbors of the Roger Sherman who have voiced opposition to Glazer’s plan to spring a multi-unit residential development on them.
“I really think if you have a 1-acre lot with a house on it and you have houses on either side of you, you should be secure in your concern you should not have to worry about something other than a single-family house coming next door,” she said.
Commissioner John Kriz praised Glazer’s design though he added that “it seems like a lot of product in a small space.”
“It’s still a very intensive use of a prominent parcel in town, on a main highway,” Kriz said. “An entry to the town. And it just seems too dense frankly, to my mind.”