Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Connecticut
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 09-29-2020, 08:20 PM
 
2,324 posts, read 2,148,992 times
Reputation: 1323

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wilton2ParkAve View Post
Is now really the time to be mandating more density? Completely ill timed.
May want to see how the virus is spreading in the rural areas of the country now. Density isn't the issue.

 
Old 09-30-2020, 05:51 AM
 
3,346 posts, read 4,134,723 times
Reputation: 1931
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beeker2211 View Post
May want to see how the virus is spreading in the rural areas of the country now. Density isn't the issue.
I think you’ve missed the point. Folks are thinking about the next pandemic (or second wave of COVID) and strongly desire space inside and out for when a lockdown arises. Follow the RE transactions (and also the rental markets for city dwellers that relocated). Also - the rural areas look nothing like NYC during their peak.
 
Old 09-30-2020, 09:20 AM
 
Location: Connecticut
34,700 posts, read 56,496,602 times
Reputation: 11162
Now a group of prominent New Haven attorneys are challenging the single family zoning laws in Woodbridge. This is a pretty biased article unfortunately. I remember when the town bought the golf course, it was to preserve open space, not to stop affordable housing. That may have been mentioned but it was not the reason. Seems very based to focus the article on that rather than being more objective. Will be interesting to see where this goes. Jay

https://ctmirror.org/2020/09/29/ct-c...-as-test-case/
 
Old 09-30-2020, 09:46 AM
 
3,432 posts, read 3,911,636 times
Reputation: 1758
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayCT View Post
Now a group of prominent New Haven attorneys are challenging the single family zoning laws in Woodbridge. This is a pretty biased article unfortunately. I remember when the town bought the golf course, it was to preserve open space, not to stop affordable housing. That may have been mentioned but it was not the reason. Seems very based to focus the article on that rather than being more objective. Will be interesting to see where this goes. Jay

https://ctmirror.org/2020/09/29/ct-c...-as-test-case/
I know where they are proposing this development, and its in a residential area that's on septic and well. Not a great strategy, IMO, as it brings in health and safety issues that wouldn't be present in a parcel on city water and sewers. And there are sections of Woodbridge that are on city water and sewers, so I'm a bit puzzled by this approach.
 
Old 09-30-2020, 10:31 AM
 
Location: Fairfield County CT
4,394 posts, read 3,281,890 times
Reputation: 2721
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayCT View Post
Now a group of prominent New Haven attorneys are challenging the single family zoning laws in Woodbridge. This is a pretty biased article unfortunately. I remember when the town bought the golf course, it was to preserve open space, not to stop affordable housing. That may have been mentioned but it was not the reason. Seems very based to focus the article on that rather than being more objective. Will be interesting to see where this goes. Jay

https://ctmirror.org/2020/09/29/ct-c...-as-test-case/
I keep telling everyone here that the towns bordering the cities are under pressure about building affordable housing just like Trumbull has been but I keep getting pooh-poohed on here. This is not going to stop. Watch what happens....they won't bother Bethany etc. because it's too far for the buses to take the low income residents in for their services in the cities.

The state doesn't bother Monroe, Newtown or even Easton/Shelton? (which is a head scratcher). Trumbull and Fairfield are getting pressured because our bordering areas have good bus service into the cities. I guess the bus service to Easton or Shelton is not that great but that can be remedied. Stratford is left alone because they have 6.39%.

It's a good thing Trumbull started taking matters into our own hand about 10 years ago. Trumbull only has one large style low income housing we have for the seniors. We have a big mix of different kinds of low income housing so you can't really notice where it is in the town.

For example:
*Deeded accessory apartments
*Deeded condos to buy with income restrictions
*Apartments building (many coming online soon) with a % of affordable apartments but over 90% are market rate.
*We now have mixed use with affordable apartments but there is not a big block of apartments, only a few.
*Many of the historic homes on Main Street are now 2 and 3 family houses and I believe many of those are affordable too. I helped get the law into Trumbull that you CAN'T change the exterior of a historic house in the Main Roads.
Trumbull is building it's affordable housing stock while keeping the town nice and desirable.

I think 5% is kind of the magic number where they leave you alone. In 2019 Trumbull had 4.68 and I bet with all the new apartments with the % of affordable housing we get to 5%. That is why we got the moratorium on affordable housing. As of 2019 Woodbridge is 1.24% and they border New Haven. They are going to keep going at Woodbridge like a freight train.
https://portal.ct.gov/-/media/DOH/20...for-online.pdf

West Haven 14.42%
Woodbridge 1.24%
Hamden 8.67%
East Haven 8.03%
Branford 3.36% (I included Branford because East Haven is so thin and western Branford is not far from New Haven)

After Woodbridge..... Branford will be next.

Woodbridge better start taking matters into their own hands NOW.
 
Old 09-30-2020, 11:17 AM
 
Location: USA
6,623 posts, read 3,576,208 times
Reputation: 3401
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayCT View Post
Now a group of prominent New Haven attorneys are challenging the single family zoning laws in Woodbridge. This is a pretty biased article unfortunately. I remember when the town bought the golf course, it was to preserve open space, not to stop affordable housing. That may have been mentioned but it was not the reason. Seems very based to focus the article on that rather than being more objective. Will be interesting to see where this goes. Jay

https://ctmirror.org/2020/09/29/ct-c...-as-test-case/
Great. Maybe a few Woodbridge teachers and police officers could afford digs in town now. I stand behind them 100%. They deserve it. Every penny of pention and every opportunity to have affordable housing. I'm not sure why some here have a problem with these hardworking honest folks.

The open space former golf course should remain as is. I'm all about preserving nature and having affordable housing for the hardworking honest personnel.
 
Old 09-30-2020, 11:43 AM
 
1,241 posts, read 889,663 times
Reputation: 1395
I don't think anyone on here has a problem with teachers or police officers living in Woodbridge or any other town.



Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveM85 View Post
Great. Maybe a few Woodbridge teachers and police officers could afford digs in town now. I stand behind them 100%. They deserve it. Every penny of pention and every opportunity to have affordable housing. I'm not sure why some here have a problem with these hardworking honest folks.

The open space former golf course should remain as is. I'm all about preserving nature and having affordable housing for the hardworking honest personnel.
 
Old 10-01-2020, 06:24 AM
 
Location: USA
6,623 posts, read 3,576,208 times
Reputation: 3401
Quote:
Originally Posted by JGBigGreen View Post
I don't think anyone on here has a problem with teachers or police officers living in Woodbridge or any other town.
Of course not. Everyone knows that.
Why they have a problem with providing them with some affordable housing in town is what i meant.

I'm talking strictly about these fine attorneys from NH. We all know the Desegregate saviors (a seperate org) with the fancy website have other ideas.
 
Old 12-16-2020, 09:35 AM
 
Location: Fairfield County CT
4,394 posts, read 3,281,890 times
Reputation: 2721
I can see this article (without paying $$) so I hope others can too.

My former First Selectman Tim Herbst is right in the middle of all of this. He is the lawyer AGAINST turning a single family house in Woodbridge into a multi-family house. He is the lawyer for the neighbors fighting against the zoning change to keep the house a single family home.

Does ‘snob zoning’ lead to segregated suburbs in CT? Woodbridge test case sets the stage for debate.
https://ctmirror.org/2020/12/07/does...kcSmG7yF-7B8Rs

"These same attorneys, who teamed up with a developer to purchase the property last spring, are calling on town officials to throw out the town’s prohibition on multi-family housing and to approve their application to tear down the 5-bedroom home and allow them to build a 4-unit dwelling.

While opposition to the application has been fierce – a dozen homeowners hired the conservative former gubernatorial candidate and land use attorney Tim Herbst to fight the zoning changes – other residents have stepped up to support the effort to dismantle the town’s zoning laws, which they say are restrictive."


Here is the irony in all of this about Tim Herbst. He helped get the zoning changes south of the parkway in Trumbull where all the apartments that are going in...... and thus more affordable housing in those very apartments.

Make no is mistake about it......Tim Herbst will be running for Governor again. Tim Herbst now lives up in the New Haven area. I can't remember which town he moved to.

Last edited by CTartist; 12-16-2020 at 09:57 AM..
 
Old 12-16-2020, 11:54 AM
 
7,912 posts, read 7,754,802 times
Reputation: 4147
Zoning is pretty much the only real local control out there. Having said that though the issue becomes more systemic. In many respects towns have local boards and committees that have a say on hiring. In order to be on them normally you have to be a resident to be on one. It can be argued that from that you end up having demographics recycled from residents. If the employees become more of the town it tends to ignore anyone in the private sector working in the area. If there's no rents or housing to get people in that becomes an equity issue. A better solution I would argue would be maybe at ward/district representation and allow for members of the private sector locally to be on boards and committees. That way in a big town the representation isn't the whole street and the private sector can have a tad of representation or at least outreach. Just because a business operates in a given community doesn't mean its employees (or owner) can afford to live there. Community land trusts might be a good idea or a housing co-op. Otherwise these can be confrontational. I've read new Havens recommendations years ago. It made sense but much of it I think was piecemeal.

Zoning even on a local level can have a big impact on housing. Euclidian zoning is a bit dated. Form based code would allow freedom to pretty much do anything as long as it doesn't changed the character of the building. Generally progressive areas are pressing for it and it can make a fair amount of sense. It would still have local control. If you want to actually change the look of an area that's different. So empty nesters can run a airbnb with less issue but tearing down a Victorian would require more requirements.

Mass has it at 10% under law 40B. Basically if you don't reach 10% for affordable then a 40B project can come in regardless of if the local government wants it. It's usually in more of the expensive areas of the state but for the most part it isn't that big of a deal.

authorizing adu's/in law apartments can be good but you still need the health code for water/sewer and electrical.

Other problems with housing is when overlaying policies frankly make no sense. Say you take New Haven. If someone gets a city job there (or hartford) they might have a residency requirement. But when they do that they don't exactly ensure that housing is actually there. Add in things like a height restriction (DC) and historical renovations and it can add up. If you don't have enough market rate housing options (houses or apartments) and a residency requirement rents can be high. If there's income restricted housing that doesn't always make sense. It's like we are trapping people to be poor. Systems can have poverty traps. that is to say that if you make more then more in benefits are cut and in order to pay for them out of pocket means you then have less than what you started with.

Mass already had public housing reform in 2015. LHA's can operate in towns and housing can be within the town but not outside it at least for the most part. Section 8 still has an administrator but actual public housing has been central state list for a few years now. The problem with the old local list is frankly generations of people would stay at the same place and could lock people into poverty. That and the state had a waiting list in one area and empty units in another. Public housing authorities aren't nearly as common in CT. Look at Mass Nahro and then CT Nahro. Having said this concentrating poverty is never a good idea. Worcester has had some great plans when they said they'd only let people in if they were working, volunteering or going to school 20 hours a week or more.

As for golf courses they are a magnet for housing since water lines are established, it's usually graded and it's been a dying sport for years. I don't see a problem with private development bringing in taxable revenue and jobs.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread




Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Connecticut

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top