Sherman considers leasing land to private developer for its first senior housing

The development would be managed privately.

“The only role the town really has in this is leasing the land to the developer in a favorable situation,” Sherman First Selectman Don Lowe said.

For the proposal to receive the green light, residents would approve the plan in a public vote because the town owns the land.

Hollander and several others who are involved with IVS are holding a public forum about the proposal at 10 a.m. April 9 at Charter Hall, the town’s volunteer fire department, 1 Route 39. The public will have the opportunity to ask questions.

Complex specifics

The complex would have a combination of 52 studio, one- and two-bedroom apartments that would be available for rent.

In addition, there is approximately 18,000-square-feet of space on a lower level. A portion of that space will be used for a common room, gym, and storage rooms for the tenants.

The proposed development would include solar panels, a balcony, individual HVAC units, and an in-unit washer/dryer.

“To maintain reasonable rental rates and not market driven rates, the lease will provide a cap of the profit a developer can make,” Hollander said.

The housing would not only be open to Sherman residents, but for anyone who is eligible.

Need for senior housing

About 1,950 of the town’s population of around 3,600 is age 55 and over, according to the 2020 U.S. Census.

In creating the town’s Plan of Conservation and Development, the need for senior housing was addressed.

“Some form of Senior Housing was deemed to be acceptable or desirable by residents… Within one year from the date of adoption of this current revision to the POCD, the Housing Commission will develop and submit to the Town a proposal for same, and will continue to explore any other options for Senior Housing,” the plan said.

With the idea of senior housing, there is the thought that seniors wouldn’t have to leave the town they live in once they retire or downsize.

Lynne Gomez, director of Sherman’s social services, said oftentimes, seniors like to remain in the town that they’ve lived in and loved.

“That is a real sentiment, and when the house is large and becomes burdensome, how do you stay in your neighborhood?,” she said

“There’s long been perceived a need for senior housing units in Sherman, and town surveys have proved the majority of people are favorable to it,” Lowe said.

He added, however, that unlike towns like Kent, which have “a whole downtown that you can walk to, Sherman doesn’t have those kinds of amenities.”

Additionally, the town also doesn’t have water or sewage “that help for putting together cluster type housing,” he said.

Sherman resident Elizabeth Beatty, who has lived in town for 85 years, is strongly against the IVS proposal, saying there is no need for it in a town like Sherman.

She said Sherman is a small, very rural town.

“We are not New Fairfield, New Milford, or Bethel, with their numerous multi-family apartments,” she said. “This is totally inappropriate for Sherman. We live in the most northern town in Fairfield County. Sherman is totally different from the rest of Fairfield County. Sherman really should have been made part of Litchfield County.”

Sherman resident John Cilio is also against the proposal. While he said he wouldn’t oppose the idea of senior housing, he said he doesn’t understand why a private developer would get the land essentially for free.

“Why should the town give land away that has no reason to be given to a commercial developer for profit?” he said, adding he doesn’t know why the developer couldn’t buy land in town.

Additionally, he said if the apartment complex development should fail, the town would be responsible for it.

Lowe said the town had formed a senior housing development plan in 2013, but it was voted down, with 67 percent against to 33 percent in favor.

“The thought then was that the town of Sherman would build this,” he said. “The only part of Sherman’s involvement this time would be leasing town land under favorable circumstances to a developer.”

He reiterated, though, that nothing would move forward without a town referendum vote “for people to weigh in on that.”