Three key elements espoused by our POCD are about preserving residential zoning, maintaining the current single-family residential character, and monitoring proposed densities...to minimize congestion.
I want to focus on two topics that would help Ridgefield pursue these objectives moving forward.
One, our Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC) should define the Private Club Special Permit term. Most neighboring towns do, so why shouldn’t Ridgefield? When terms are left undefined it opens the door for unqualified applications resulting in significant loss financially and personally for both the applicant and the residents who are consequently forced to step forward (on their dime) to prove the unfitness of the project. Please do the right thing and protect Ridgefield homeowners AND applicants before the next large commercial, for-profit business submits an application and tears this town and its residents apart.
The second issue that I’d like to address is my concern that many of the current P&Z Commissioners tend to deliberate and vote from a pro-development perspective. I believe there is a misleading assertion regarding town growth that is shared by some members of this commission. Recently in The Ridgefield Press, Real Estate and Land Use Attorney, Bob Jewell, stated that population growth in Ridgefield has slowed.
It is true that over the first half of the last century, Ridgefield’s growth steadily increased each decade. Between 1960 and 1970 there was tremendous growth in Ridgefield from about 8,000 people to over 18,000. That’s a growth rate of nearly 125%. Growth of 125% each decade is clearly unsustainable, but it seems that less, according to Mr. Jewell, is slowed growth. Ridgefield is 35 square miles, and it will only ever be 35 square miles. This begs the question... What is the capacity of Ridgefield? The problem with Jewell’s accurate population facts, but misleading assertion, is most easily depicted by imagining a glass of water. When the glass is empty, there is plenty of room to add growth or water. As the glass fills, there is less room for growth until we hit capacity because just like a glass of water, our borders are finite.
We shouldn’t be changing zoning laws to allow for more housing because Mr. Jewell’s “facts” tell you that growth is slow and that there really isn’t that much growth (read new housing) happening around you. It’s his “literal” business to tell you we need more housing and development, but it isn’t the purview of this board to promote growth and development in Ridgefield to the detriment of its current residents and in violation of its own POCD. Mr. Jewell’s faulty thinking leads to zoning amendments that increase density. For example, the recently approved amendment allowing five houses on an accessway rather than three - which he had proposed for the benefit of an applicant.
To conclude, Ridgefield isn’t capable of becoming Fairfield, Stamford or Greenwich, nor should it be. And people don’t move to Ridgefield for those qualities. Our terrain and topography are not flat, but instead mountainous, forested and angled. We have lakes and wetlands instead of oceanfront. Our roads are winding and meandering, our Main Street locked within precise boundaries with few ways in, through, or out. We are not our neighbors, and our POCD is written with that in mind, observing both our limitations and our advantages.
Please abide by our POCD and let Ridgefield be Ridgefield.
Catherine Neligan
218 Old West Mountain Road