[CTartist]

This article is a very good read about this subject. It does a better jobs of explaining affordable housing than I do and the current proposed bill.
https://greenwichfreepress.com/news/...-supply-155721

"CT Sweeping Zoning Legislation, SB 1024, Aims to Increase Overall Housing Supply

Main Street Zoning
A key part of DeSegregate CT’s proposal calls for “Main Street Zoning,” which would call for towns to fast track two- to four-family housing, making them “as of right.” There would be no minimum parking requirements, within a 1/4 mile of a “main street” in towns with over 7,500 people or with “concentrated development” as defined by the Census.

The proposed legislation would require towns designate 50% of an area within 1/4 mile of a main street for 2-4 unit housing, and require 10% of any development with more than 10 units be designated affordable."

I do agree with affordable housing but I am totally against the above. The towns should have control of where to put the affordable housing and what kind for each town. I also think 10% is too high.

[SteveM85]

Originally Posted by CTartist

This article is a very good read about this subject. It does a better jobs of explaining affordable housing than I do and the current proposed bill.
https://greenwichfreepress.com/news/...-supply-155721

"CT Sweeping Zoning Legislation, SB 1024, Aims to Increase Overall Housing Supply

Main Street Zoning
A key part of DeSegregate CT’s proposal calls for “Main Street Zoning,” which would call for towns to fast track two- to four-family housing, making them “as of right.” There would be no minimum parking requirements, within a 1/4 mile of a “main street” in towns with over 7,500 people or with “concentrated development” as defined by the Census.

The proposed legislation would require towns designate 50% of an area within 1/4 mile of a main street for 2-4 unit housing, and require 10% of any development with more than 10 units be designated affordable."

I do agree with affordable housing but I am totally against the above. The towns should have control of where to put the affordable housing and what kind for each town. I also think 10% is too high.

"It would make all housing “as of right,” and developers would not have to go through the pubic hearing process."

Says it all right there.
They have Sara on they're side and in their pockets. Deep pockets.

[pramre]

Originally Posted by SteveM85

"It would make all housing “as of right,” and developers would not have to go through the pubic hearing process."

Says it all right there.
They have Sara on they're side and in their pockets. Deep pockets.

How likely is this bill likely to pass both chambers in its current form and be signed into law? I am not familiar with CT politics and don't know how much of the Democratic majority aligns with this line of thinking.

We're considering purchasing a home within walking distance of Darien train station/main street and something like this would give us major pause. Would not be a fan of apartment buildings next to our single family home, with the added traffic & noise.

[Mike 75]

Originally Posted by CTartist

This article is a very good read about this subject. It does a better jobs of explaining affordable housing than I do and the current proposed bill.
https://greenwichfreepress.com/news/...-supply-155721

"CT Sweeping Zoning Legislation, SB 1024, Aims to Increase Overall Housing Supply

Main Street Zoning
A key part of DeSegregate CT’s proposal calls for “Main Street Zoning,” which would call for towns to fast track two- to four-family housing, making them “as of right.” There would be no minimum parking requirements, within a 1/4 mile of a “main street” in towns with over 7,500 people or with “concentrated development” as defined by the Census.

The proposed legislation would require towns designate 50% of an area within 1/4 mile of a main street for 2-4 unit housing, and require 10% of any development with more than 10 units be designated affordable."

I do agree with affordable housing but I am totally against the above. The towns should have control of where to put the affordable housing and what kind for each town. I also think 10% is too high.

So basically there will be a 1/2 mile wide corridor in each town and 50% of the corridor will be available to developers to build pretty much whatever they want without the town's input. Can't imagine that anything could go wrong.

[tbanks3]

Originally Posted by pramre

How likely is this bill likely to pass both chambers in its current form and be signed into law? I am not familiar with CT politics and don't know how much of the Democratic majority aligns with this line of thinking.

We're considering purchasing a home within walking distance of Darien train station/main street and something like this would give us major pause. Would not be a fan of apartment buildings next to our single family home, with the added traffic & noise.

I think the saying is, “you can’t have your cake and eat it too.”

Right now I believe zoning laws prevent these options from being built or considered. So ONLY single family homes are permitted. This would allow for other types of multi family housing or apartment complexes. Besides, single family homes near transit stations is poor land use. Transit oriented development is the future and should be embraced in my opinion.

[MikefromCT]

Originally Posted by tbanks3

I think the saying is, “you can’t have your cake and eat it too.”

Right now I believe zoning laws prevent these options from being built or considered. So ONLY single family homes are permitted. This would allow for other types of multi family housing or apartment complexes. Besides, single family homes near transit stations is poor land use. Transit oriented development is the future and should be embraced in my opinion.

This I agree with, and I would love to see more of this, but to do this without input from local residents is a VERY unwise decision. People within their communities deserve the right to voice their concerns, their opinions, their criticisms, their suggestions. And they deserve to be heard.

[CTartist]

Originally Posted by Mike 75

So basically there will be a 1/2 mile wide corridor in each town and 50% of the corridor will be available to developers to build pretty much whatever they want without the town's input. Can't imagine that anything could go wrong.

What they want is a terrible idea.

This is why I would get up in Trumbull's zoning meetings about apartments, affordable housing etc. and say
"I am originally from Stamford and please don't put all this type of housing in one area. Don't put up a blocks of affordable housing in one area. In people's minds that creates and area of town that is "bad. Please have different types of affordable housing in different parts of the town".

Apparently people on the Trumbull zoning boards listened to my pleas and others from Stamford. We have affordable housing in all the different parts of our town:

1) 1+ acre zoning we have accessory apartments.
2) NORTH of the Parkway on Main Street in the 1/2 acre zoning we have 2 and 3 family houses in the Historic Houses. The historic house** exterior can not be changed so you would never know they are 2 and 3 families for the most part.
3) North of the Parkway in two "Village Zones" near the 1) Town Hall and 2) we have mixed-use with apartments on top of businesses.
4) South of the Parkway we have apartment building zoning where 5% or 10% need to be affordable housing within the complex.

With all the different types of housing in all the different zones Trumbull has been able to get up to 5% affordable housing AND retain the character of 90% of our town north of the Parkway. With what this bill proposes towns will not have that control. Especially the ones that have little affordable housing. I am totally against that part of the bill. The towns need to have control over where they put the affordable housing as they deem fit to keep the characters of their town.

Why don't they just propose ways to ENFORCE the existing law of 10% affordable housing in the towns without ruining the towns.

** We passed a law in Trumbull that states all the historic homes (built before 1900) on the main roads can not be changed. That stopped the developers from buying the historic houses, tearing the down and doing anything they wanted. If this law would pass the character in our town would be lost forever.

[CTartist]

Originally Posted by pramre

How likely is this bill likely to pass both chambers in its current form and be signed into law? I am not familiar with CT politics and don't know how much of the Democratic majority aligns with this line of thinking.

We're considering purchasing a home within walking distance of Darien train station/main street and something like this would give us major pause. Would not be a fan of apartment buildings next to our single family home, with the added traffic & noise.

I am going to contact my representative in Trumbull who is totally against this and ask him (or his office) what the chances of this getting passed it. I will let you know. Here is my representative.
http://www.icontact-archive.com/arch...be278acb6913d0

The representative Tony Hwang is vocal about this too. I will keep an eye on what both of these representatives are saying. This would drastically change the character of the 1-95 Metro North corridor from Greenwich to New Haven. That is what these people want with this bill: control of the 1-95 Metro North corridor from Greenwich to New Haven. The people up in Hartford could care less because they are not here.

Lamont is from Greenwich so I can't see him signing this bill. I am 99.9% sure he would veto this bill.

[ProudFairfielder]

Originally Posted by CTartist

This article is a very good read about this subject. It does a better jobs of explaining affordable housing than I do and the current proposed bill.
https://greenwichfreepress.com/news/...-supply-155721

"CT Sweeping Zoning Legislation, SB 1024, Aims to Increase Overall Housing Supply

Main Street Zoning
A key part of DeSegregate CT’s proposal calls for “Main Street Zoning,” which would call for towns to fast track two- to four-family housing, making them “as of right.” There would be no minimum parking requirements, within a 1/4 mile of a “main street” in towns with over 7,500 people or with “concentrated development” as defined by the Census.

The proposed legislation would require towns designate 50% of an area within 1/4 mile of a main street for 2-4 unit housing, and require 10% of any development with more than 10 units be designated affordable."

I do agree with affordable housing but I am totally against the above. The towns should have control of where to put the affordable housing and what kind for each town. I also think 10% is too high.

I really couldn't imagine what that would do to Fairfield...

I'm assuming that they'll call US 1 "Main Street" and then say anything within that halfmile stretch is fair game. That's all of downtown, all of the Old Post Road historic area, touches Fairfield U at Barlow Road, a very significant portion of Southport Historic District...

Gee, might as well build a new town from scratch!

[pramre]

Originally Posted by tbanks3

I think the saying is, “you can’t have your cake and eat it too.”

Right now I believe zoning laws prevent these options from being built or considered. So ONLY single family homes are permitted. This would allow for other types of multi family housing or apartment complexes. Besides, single family homes near transit stations is poor land use. Transit oriented development is the future and should be embraced in my opinion.

I am sorry to be blunt. We are paying a premium to be near transit when we purchase a home. Why can’t these developments be built farther away from the train and be provided with a Jitney service ? If the towns had input on how to meet the quota of multi family housing, they would probably choose that option and pick vacant lots more suitable for massive development instead of central/historic downtowns. It is easy for someone who has no financial stake in the matter to propose arbitrary zoning regulations without the town’s input. I hope this bill doesn’t pass.