Fairfield's new homes too big

FAIRFIELD -- Local architect Peter Cummings is proud of the three-story house he designed on Colonial Drive in the town's beach neighborhood.

The 5,300-square-foot house, described by Cummings as "reminiscent of an old English manor," is replacing a 1-story Cape Cod-style house on just over a quarter- acre.

The house is now under construction and will feature five steeply-pitched roofs and a front entrance through a three-story, stone chimney facade. It will include five bedrooms, 5 bathrooms and three fireplaces, with a pool and pool house as potential extras.

The house, without the pool and pool house, is priced at $2.4 million -- far more than the $750,000 that local builder Paul Fournier, Cummings' partner, paid in March to buy the Cape that he demolished.

But Cummings sees value in the new house beyond its size. He sees value in its architecture.

"Look at the creativity," Cummings said as tradesmen worked on building the house last week. "Fairfield's zoning regulations are the best of any town I work in because they allow the creativity to happen."

"I can't build a house like this in Darien. I only have a maximum of 35 feet in Darien and in Greenwich."

But Keith Harison, who lives on Buena Vista Road, is one of hundreds of residents who is tired of seeing large homes on small lots, a trend that seems particularly intense in neighborhoods south of the Post Road.

Those newly-built homes, derided by some as "McMansions," are too big and tall for their lots, block sunlight from reaching adjacent homes and are transforming Fairfield into a city like Brooklyn, N.Y., Harison said.

"If we continue on this path, has anybody considered what the density factor in Fairfield will be, the density and the traffic?" Harison said. "This is a New England town. I want it to stay with some New England flavor, where you have trees and grass and some breathing space. I want some breathing space."

The town's public schools are crowded enough without adding a lot of homes that have four and five bedrooms, Harison added.

The years-long debate over whether the town should allow the large new homes to be built may reach a conclusion Tuesday night.

The Town Plan and Zoning Commission is scheduled to vote on amendments to town zoning regulations that would further restrict the height and mass of new homes at 7:30 p.m. Tuesday in McKinley School.

Cummings contends the proposed amendments will eliminate architects' creativity and force them to build "one dimensional houses."

"You make us one-dimensional, do you know what you're going to end up with? Contemporary houses with flat roofs," Cummings said. "Architecturally, we're going to be extremely limited in what we can do."

Fournier contends property values could decline by a third because the house that could be built on a lot, after the existing house is demolished, will have to have three bedrooms instead of four to comply with square-footage reductions.

Assistant Town Planner James Wendt chuckled when he heard Fournier's statement about property values.

"Obviously a four-bedroom house is worth more than a three-bedroom house, but I don't think that's going to be the result of these proposals," Wendt said. "If you're going to take 350 square feet out of a house, I don't think you're going to cut out the most valuable part of a house."

Wendt also took exception to Cummings' belief that the proposed amendments would cause flat-roofed houses.

Wendt said the TPZ in January 2005 reduced the maximum permitted height of homes in the A, B and C zones from 40 feet to 32 feet.

The TPZ defines height as the midpoint between the main eave line and ridge, or highest part of a house.

"That reduction certainly did not result in a proliferation of flat-roofed structures," Wendt said. "It's almost akin to the bedroom argument. They're not going to create something they themselves consider ugly and unmarketable just in spite of the regulations."