Appeal Press Release
Greenwich Homeowners in Conservation Zones

 

 

Read Bud Dealys Columns on Greenwich Issues and Real Estate

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:                                January 29, 2003

 

Homeowners Group Files Lawsuit Against Town Regarding New Floor Area Ratio Regulations

 

Greenwich homeowner and President of the grass roots organization known as the “Concerned Homeowners of Greenwich”, Alan Small, along with a group of homeowners, has filed a lawsuit against the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) of the Town of Greenwich responding to the recently enacted floor area ratio (“FAR”) regulations adopted by P&Z on January 7, 2003. The regulations are being challenged because they do not address any of the goals set for them, appear arbitrary, and are not rationally related to any of the purposes.   This appears to be an unconstitutional violation of individual property rights.  The actions of the Commission left homeowners with legal action to appeal the FAR decision as the only alternative available to protect their property rights. 

 

 

 

The Concerned Homeowners have successfully sued sued the P&Z on this issue before.  On In April 19,, 2002, the Stamford Superior Court, declared the FAR regulations passed by the P&Z in 1998 “null and void”.    

Since 1998, public Ddiscontent over the FAR regulations in the Town of Greenwich has been building.  Even though the FAR regulations were in practical effect from 1998 to 2002 the P&Z could not point to any information to demonstrate that they were working to meet any goals set for them.  Since April, 2002, iAt public hearings held by P&Z on FAR the majority of Greenwich homeowners speakers who took the podium spoke against the reenactment of the FAR amendments as did the Conservation Commission, an advisory commission to P&Z.  Members of the Members of the Representative Town Meeting (RTM) Land Use Committee asked the P&Z to consider alternative methods.  Finally, Greenwich’s legislative body, The the RTM, itself votedvoted  by a two to one margin to approve approving a resolution requesting P&Z rethink the regulations.   The resolution that specifically asked P&Z to define the problem that led to the passage of the 1998 FAR regulation and consider the concerns of Greenwich residents in developing an equitable regulation, through analysis of several alternatives, that protects the property values of all homeowners.   The Concerned Homeowners believe that the P&Z has not followed that RTM resolution or listened to speakers at its “hearings” and is working to an outdated agenda.  take a step back and define the problem and develop fair and equitable regulations that support the property values of every homeowner in town

 

The FAR regulations hurt Greenwich homeowners for many reasons, according to Small.  The regulations create many numerous inequities that frustrate and impede the legitimate growth needs of homeowners, and yet fail to address P&Z’s stated concern regarding streetscape..  Furthermore, he says, their unfair application to undersized lots and lots in conservation zones results in an undue penalty to the owners of such homes that may reduce their property value.  Finally, P&Z’s recent inclusion of attics and basements in the FAR substantially reduces allowable FAR for most homeowners, rather than providinge relief from FAR limitations, as was the stated intention of P&Z when it passed the amended definitions regarding attics and basements in April 2002.. 

 

Despite these concerns of Greenwich homeowners, the P&Z reenacted the FAR amendments and they became effective upon publication on January 14th, 2003.  From that date, there was a time limit of fifteen days to file an appeal and The Concerned Homeowners  filed their complaint on January 29, 2003, within the fifteen-day statutory time limit from date of publication, within the statutory time limit and will be heard by the Stamford Superior Court.  Taxpayers of the Town will again have to pay the legal defense of a Commission decision that appears to not meet statutory requirements.  A legal challenge is being used to determine whether the regulation is proper.  This would appear to be a misuse of the public trust and funds with unnecessary litigation as the outcome chosen by the P&Z rather than dealing with the legitimate concerns of its taxpayers. 

 

For more information and to review the text of the Appeal go to www.greenwichfar.com or call 622-1250

JANUARY 29, 2003

GREENWICH, CONNECTICUT