Thomas Breen photo
More housing will likely soon be allowed in Woodbridge — with infrastructure, public-hearing, and commission-approval caveats — as suburban zoners lean towards incremental land-use change.
That was the outcome of the latest online special meeting of the Woodbridge Town Planning & Zoning Commission.
Monday night’s roughly three-hour virtual meeting marked the suburban commissioners’ penultimate opportunity to discuss and debate a two-pronged zoning proposal seeking to make it easier to build multi-family affordable housing in every residential district in the large-lot, single-family-home dominated leafy suburb.
The proposal, submitted by a team of civil rights attorneys and Yale law students last fall, has been subject to over six months of contentious public hearings and deliberations. It has also inspired the attention and participation of New Haveners interested in the regional roots of racism and segregation.
Following through on their commitment to amend the initial proposal rather than to vote it up or down in its entirety, the six Woodbridge land-use commissioners spent Monday night’s meeting going line by line through draft local land-use legislation that they will vote on during their next regular meeting on June 7.
WebEx image
Commission Chair Rob Klee.
Led by Commission Chair Rob Klee, who is the former head of the state’s Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP), a majority of the commissioners appeared to come to a consensus on at least two updates designed to increase the town’s stock of multi-family housing.
“To me, this is a strong step in the right direction,” Klee said during Monday’s meeting, towards “meeting what we heard from the public that we do have an issue [in Woodbridge] with not having sufficient opportunities for affordable housing and housing diversity, and also meeting the public who didn’t like what some called the extreme version Open Communities Alliance presented, and who wanted us to present an approach that came from us.”
These proposed updates would “strike that right balance” by taking ideas raised by OCA, hitting the “sweet spot” in terms of reasonable adjustments that the commission is legally allowed to make to a rezoning proposal, and “in doing so making progress towards improving affordability and housing opportunities in our town.”
The Woodbridge commission’s meeting took place on the same day that the state’s Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities (CHRO) released a 51-page report that details the connection among residential segregation, exclusionary zoning, and the disproportionate deadly impact that the Covid-19 pandemic has had on Black and Hispanic residents of the state.
ADUs & Multi-Family W/ Utility Access
The first proposed update that appeared to be backed by a majority of commissioners would allow accessory dwelling units (ADUs) — also known as “mother-in-law” apartments — as of right in every residential district in town.
Those ADUs would still have to comply with other existing town bulk regulations, including a 600 square-foot cap on the size of any ADU in Woodbridge, and a current prohibition on building accessory dwelling units in detached buildings, like garages. This update would therefore permit ADUs within the structure of an existing single-family home.
The second agreed-upon update would allow multi-family housing — defined as three or more residential units — to be built in any residential district in town with a few key caveats:
• The developer of the proposed multi-family housing must receive a special exception from the TPZ before they can build those new housing units. Special exceptions require site plan reviews and public hearings before the TPZ, meaning that anyone looking to build three or more units of housing in town would have to come to the local land-use commission for permission. Members of the public would also be able to weigh in on any such application.
• Multi-family housing by special exception would be allowed only in parts of town that have access to public water and sewer lines and that are not in the public supply watershed.
The civil rights attorneys and Yale law students behind the initial application pushed over the course of the past six months for commissioners to permit multi-family housing even where that public infrastructure is not built out, including in the public supply watershed.
They argued that private wells and septic tanks can handle more than just single-family burdens — and that there is a host of regional and state regulations already in place to protect the health of the public and the environment in the case of such developments.
Based on Monday night’s deliberations, a majority of the Woodbridge commissioners appear not to have bought that argument, and are leaning towards limiting multi-family developments to the few parts of town that already have public water and sewer and that are not in the public supply watershed.
Commissioner Yoni Zamir, whose day job is legal aid attorney in New Haven, was the one suburban zoner to criticize on Monday night the imposition of the public infrastructure- and watershed-related limits on multi-family housing in Woodbridge.
“I think there are enough protections in place in our current system and the state [Department of Public Health],” he said, to keep the watershed safe even with the development of multi-family housing.
He called the ADU and limited multi-family housing proposals apparently backed by a majority of his fellow commissioners Monday a “moderate, middle-of-the-road compromise” that he would nevertheless support come time to vote.
• Multi-family housing by special exception in those limited parts of town would also be subject to a maximum density requirement. Klee proposed on Monday that that density cap be 15 units per acre.
“To me, when there’s water and sewer that can handle that type of increased density, I’m OK with that.”
Commissioner Paul Schatz pushed back. “I think 15 is an awful lot on some of these lots in [Woodbridge’s A zone, which is currently limited to single-family housing on minimum lots of 65,000 square feet]”, he said. “Besides just the aesthetics of it, that’s an enormous change.”
Referring to a senior center that currently has 30 units of housing on two acres of land on Lucy Street, Schatz said, “I wouldn’t want it as dense as what’s on Lucy Street right now. That would be very dense for what’s a different setting.”
The commissioners did not come to a consensus Monday night as to what density cap they might ultimately support when they vote in June.
Two-Family Split
The commissioners also split on a third proposed zoning update that will ultimately be put to a vote next month.
That is, whether or not to allow two-family housing in every residential district in town, including in the watershed and in areas without public water and sewer.
Klee, Zamir, and fellow Commissioners Larry Greenberg all appeared to support such a proposal.
In particular, Klee proposed that Woodbridge’s zoning laws be updated to allow two-family housing as of right — that is, by zoning permit only, and with no required site plan review or public hearing — in every residential district in town except the public supply watershed.
In the watershed, he proposed, the town should require two-family housing proposals to get a special exception before construction can begin. That special exception requirement would trigger site plan review, a public hearing before the TPZ, and an automatic referral to the Regional Water Authority and to the state Department of Public Health for further reviews.
Under Klee’s proposal, two-family homes — inside and outside of the watershed — would be subject to the same bulk requirements, regarding size and setbacks and lot coverage, as currently apply to permitted single-family homes in those residential districts.
Klee’s proposal would also permit two-family homes in residential districts that would set aside one unit for tenants earning no more than 60 percent of the area median income (AMI).
“I think the applicant brought to our attention deficiencies in our zoning laws, and that we have a social obligation to address the housing needs of the area,” Commissioner Greenberg said in support of all of Klee’s proposed updates, including allowing for two-family homes across town.
Greenberg also pushed back on criticisms from more skeptical commissioners that a vote on an updated version of OCA’s proposal would not give the Woodbridge public adequate opportunity to weigh in on new zoning laws.
“I think the balanced approach that the chairman set forth is the right approach. I think there’s been plenty of discussion. I think everybody’s had an ample opportunity to express their views and that our function as a planning and zoning commission is to take the application that’s before us and do the best job we can to formulate new zoning ordinances that will address the issue that has been brought to our attention.”
Schatz and Commissioners Andrew Sklonick and Jeff Kennedy appeared to balk at allowing two-family homes by permit only in all residential districts in town except the watershed, and at allowing them in the watershed by special exception.
“I’m still not in favor of [the two-family proposal] without further guidance from the task force,” Skolnick said, referring to a newly convened Woodbridge town affordable housing task force.
“I’d rather have them all go through more scrutiny than less scrutiny,” Schatz said in apparent opposition to allowing two-family homes in residential districts outside of the watershed as of right.
See below for previous coverage of this Woodbridge rezoning proposal.
• Open-Housing Q: What About Water/Sewer?
• Suburban Zoners Seek Third Way
• Housing Debate Pivots Again Towards Race
• Suburb Housing Quest Enters New Phase
• Suburb Housing Pitch: Ditch Hearings
• Urban Lawyer/Suburban Zoner Seeks Right “Balance” In Housing Controversy
• Open-Housing Debate: Define Racism
• Open-Housing Quest Critics Champion Local Control
• Suburban Zoning Debate Gets Personal
• City, ‘Burb Clash On Open-Housing Quest
• Urban Housing Lauded; Suburbs Challenged