Editor’s note: the below is an opinion from the Westport Commission on People with Disabilities.
As Westport considers updates to its housing policies and regulations, one question currently under review by the Planning and Zoning Commission deserves clear attention: how we define and support residents with disabilities.
Text Amendment #864, now before the Planning & Zoning Commission, offers an important opportunity to expand the definition of “developmental disability” for special needs housing. The current state definition framework—limited to individuals with an IQ below 70 and onset before age 18—excludes many residents who face real barriers to appropriate housing.
The Commission on People with Disabilities strongly supports aligning the definition of “Special Needs Individuals” with federal law (42 U.S.C. §15002) rather than the more restrictive Connecticut standard. The broader federal definition better reflects the range of disabilities that affect activities of daily living and would help close existing gaps in access to special needs housing.
We support allowing off-site affordable housing within the Inclusionary Housing Overlay District—with clear standards. We urge the Planning & Zoning Commission to allow off-site special needs housing only when it is clearly demonstrated to be superior to an on-site option—such as through better access to transportation, closer proximity to services, or design features like shared community spaces that more effectively support residents’ needs.
All proposals will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis to ensure they promote inclusion, community integration, and compliance with applicable regulations. Off-site, deed-restricted special needs housing can also deliver an increased number of smaller, efficiency-style units, creating opportunities for shared spaces and supportive services, and generating more moratorium points than comparable on-site options.
While on-site housing offers the benefits of integration, thoughtfully planned off-site housing can better meet the needs of individuals with disabilities by enabling more coordinated access to services, supports, and amenities.
Westport has an opportunity to take a thoughtful, balanced approach—expanding housing while maintaining strong zoning principles. The goal is not to work around the rules, but to make them work better for everyone.
Westport Commission on People with Disabilities
Jim Ross, Chairman
Joe Anastasi
Stacie Curran
Diane Johnson
Daniel Maya
Sharuna Mahesh
Doug Rivkin
copwd@westportct.gov
P&Z Commissioner John Bolton had a rebuttal to this very concept when developer Rick Redness repeatedly proposed such a change as part of his luxury housing development plans.
If I may paraphrase, the gist of Bolton’s argument is that this definition change would create even more demand for affordable housing, squeezing out those who need it most.
The idea to broaden the definition in land use regulations may not be as altruistic as you might think in the context of the town’s affordable housing goals.
When a developer (who is working every angle to gain more lenient offsite affordable housing rules) rounds up surrogates to speak on his behalf, ask yourself why.
Broad and systemic permission to loosen affordable housing requirements in Westport is a slippery slope toward our continued failure to provide more affordable housing. And it will create “the other side of the tracks” neighborhoods instead of integrated and diverse housing for our residents.
Ask if this surrogate Op Ed is another part of the shameless campaign by developers to get offsite affordable housing.
Real altruism would have them building affordable housing well above current requirements, and without the need for such text amendments.
#136 Riverside Ave should be a model P+Z replicates at EVERY opportunity. Text amendment #864 Invites more options, better planning, and zero loss of control. Anything else is just virtue signaling. The community that benefits from access to housing could care less if they’re next to market-rate units—they live in a reality that Westport P+Z hasn’t promoted enough units. This is the chance to make a change that costs nothing and invites projects that can support affordable. What is on the regulations isn’t working.