Danbury zoning panel unanimously approves text change to cluster-development rules

The Danbury Zoning Commission voted 7-0 on Dec. 10, 2024, to approve a text amendment to sections of the zoning regulations governing cluster developments in RA zones, a measure proponents said will clarify density calculations and give developers more flexibility while preserving open space.

The amendment, filed by Bridal Raven's Development LLC and presented by attorney Dave Daniels and representatives for the applicant, adjusts how density is calculated for "eligible" cluster developments (those not completed as of Dec. 10, 2024), reduces several yard minimums for eligible projects, and allows limited encroachments of non‑habitable features such as stairs and porches into the front setback. Planning Director Waleed Al Bakri said the draft reflects staff and Planning Commission recommendations and that the changes were "fine tuning" to align the ordinance with the City's Plan of Conservation and Development (POCD).

Why it matters: Supporters said the change will allow previously stalled or partially completed projects to finish with a housing mix that is smaller and (they said) more marketable, while keeping perimeter open‑space protections. Opponents and some commissioners pressed for clarity on livability issues — including vehicle access, noise, and implications for accessory dwelling units and building code constraints — questions staff said will be addressed during later site‑plan and engineering review.

What the amendments do: Attorney Daniels summarized four main elements: 1) density for eligible cluster subdivisions will be computed using the minimum lot size applicable to the district rather than the existing parent‑zone method; 2) setbacks for eligible cluster developments are reduced (for example, the front setback for some districts is reduced from 30 to 20 feet; side‑yard minimums in eligible subdivisions were described as 5 feet per lot in RA‑20 and RA‑40 and 15 feet in RA‑80); 3) limited encroachments into the front yard are allowed for stairs, porches and decks (up to one‑third of the minimum front yard and maximum height of 6 feet, architecturally integrated with the primary dwelling); and 4) private roads must connect to an arterial or collector, be dead‑end (no through private road), and require sidewalks on both sides where they abut dwelling frontages and connect into an arterial/collector sidewalk network. Daniels said the edits incorporate city planning recommendations and are intended to preserve open space while permitting a more compact layout for certain subdivisions.

Site example: The applicant’s representative described a partially completed development on Damien Drive (near Clapboard Ridge Road) that, under the new rules, would allow roughly eight additional smaller single‑family homes on land previously left undeveloped. The representative said the result would be additional 2,000‑square‑foot single‑family homes (rather than the larger homes originally planned) located in the previously disturbed footprint, and argued that the change would complete the neighborhood without expanding perimeter disturbance. "This regulation change would enable 12 homes to be built in that space," the applicant representative said on the record when describing the local manifestation of the amendment.

Public concerns and responses: Councilman Paul Rotello said he was "agnostic" about the petition but urged caution on reduced setbacks, calling 5 feet "a little stingy" and warning it could limit vehicle access to back yards and reduce privacy. Attorney Daniels and Steve Sullivan (TCA) clarified that the 5‑foot figure applies to each side of a lot line (i.e., 5 feet per side, producing ~10 feet between structures), and Daniels said ADUs were not part of the applicant's plan. Planning Director Al Bakri reiterated that many detailed design and engineering questions will be handled at site‑plan review and that the zoning amendment establishes the regulatory framework rather than final design.

Vote and next steps: Commissioner Botello moved to approve the amendment, citing alignment with POCD goals including expanding housing opportunities and modernizing regulations; the motion was seconded and approved by voice vote, recorded in the record as 7‑0 in favor. The commission concluded that the petition is consistent with the POCD and that the amendments apply to eligible cluster developments as defined in the text. The commission also set a public hearing for a separate petition to create a downtown transit‑oriented development (TOD) district for Jan. 28, 2025.

The file for the text amendment and related staff materials are available on the City of Danbury planning and zoning website and will be part of the record for future site‑plan reviews for any project using the new standards.