The fatal flaw in the age-restricted housing regulation passed by the Planning and Zoning Commission last fall has been found in five other regulations approved during the past year.

Now the commission must rescind a total of six regulations, Joe Fiteni, chairman of the commission, said during a meeting at the town hall annex on June 26 at which the age-restricted regulation was to have been rescinded.

Instead, the commission will rescind all six of the flawed regulations during a meeting July 10 at Wilton Library, Fiteni said.

The meeting will begin at 6 p.m.

“Once they have been rescinded, we’ll have to have new public hearings for these regulations as time is available,” Fiteni said, explaining how the process of vetting each regulation with full public transparency must be repeated.

The flaw came to light in a lawsuit filed by a resident claiming that the age-restricted regulation was improperly publicized in legal advertising. The regulation took effect on the same day a legal ad announcing it appeared. There should have been a couple of weeks in between, according to Town Counsel Ira Bloom, who looked into case law and discovered the flaw means the regulation must be rescinded.

The other regulations that must be rescinded include:


  • Allowing hotels within DE-5 and DE-10 districts;

  • Establishing provisions for temporary and portable lighting used at outdoor events;

  • Modifying regulations to assisted-living developments and certain provision pertaining to affordable housing;

  • Parking requirements for medical and dental clinics;

  • Zone change from residential to general business for 2.5 acres at 586 Danbury Road.


The July 10 meeting at the library will be a big one. Also that night, attorney Chris Russo, representing resident Vicki Mavis, will present the case for banning the Age-Restricted Overlay District from Ridgefield Road. He was scheduled to make that presentation June 26 but asked for a postponement.

Other public hearings on the agenda that night include the zone change application for 183 Ridgefield Road, which is the case that incited the ire of neighbors; a special permit application for an accessory dwelling unit at 86 Old Belden Hill Road; an amendment of zoning regulations for assisted-living developments on behalf of Young’s Nurseries, Inc.; and an application for a 90-unit assisted living facility at 211 Danbury Road owned by Young’s Nurseries Inc.