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.
Dude, have you ever looked at your parents plot plan on file with the town? Have you ever looked at a subdivision plan for a new development? Obviously not, since you’d see that there would be a septic tank and primary leeching field on it as well as an area reserved for a secondary or future field. Older plans may not call the secondary field out but it certainly would be clear where it could should the primary field fail.
Also it is definitely not developers being cheap extending sewers to other parts of a town. Sanitary sewer systems are very expensive to build. It’s not just the pipe to the homes. It large trunk sewer lines design to carry the load an expansion would require. It’s adding capacity to pump stations on the line that’s needed when grades and sewer depths get to deep to reasonably construct and maintain. It also involves expanding existing treatment plants to accept more flow. You are literally talking about hundreds of millions of dollars that no one has. If they did the entire subject would be moot.
As for New Rochelle, have you been there? I don’t mean riding through on Metro North. I mean get off the train and walk around. It’s downright startling the contrast between old and new. Old building are one, two and maybe three stories set against new 30 story buildings that would be more suited for Manhattan rather than a suburb. I don’t care about ît being wealthy or not. That does not mean anything. It is about reasonable well defined community planning. That’s much more important. Jay
I'm not in the single-family home business, but I seriously doubt any municipality in the state would allow a subdivision to be built with septic systems. If they are illegal in Shelton, a town of largely right-wing tax refugees, I'm sure they are illegal in any of your beloved more desirable places.
Obviously, the 30-story building example is to an extent hyperbole. Although the success in Newark should serve as an example for Hartford.
And, while I do well, I do not make hundreds of millions. Few single projects generate that much profit in the state. You'd have to go to Manhattan for that.
I'm not in the single-family home business, but I seriously doubt any municipality in the state would allow a subdivision to be built with septic systems. If they are illegal in Shelton, a town of largely right-wing tax refugees, I'm sure they are illegal in any of your beloved more desirable places.
??? There are subdivisions all over my town that are on septics. The house I grew up in, in a subdivision, was/is on a septic. Septic is by far the most common type of waste removal in all the towns I've lived in, only the very centers of towns have had public sewer.
I'm not in the single-family home business, but I seriously doubt any municipality in the state would allow a subdivision to be built with septic systems. If they are illegal in Shelton, a town of largely right-wing tax refugees, I'm sure they are illegal in any of your beloved more desirable places.
Uh, what? My subdivision in Ridgefield was fully on septic. Almost all new subdivisions in more rural CT towns are on septic as well.
You are living in a state that has a lower apartment vacancy rate than Hawaii and the average rent is $1,600, requiring a minimum $80,000 salary, well above the household median.
It's unbelievable that people like you tolerate these kinds of oppressive laws that deprive not simply the poor and lower income people of a decent home without relying upon government assistance, but your own children.
You are literally eating your young, because why exactly? You don't like apartment buildings? You want to pay more taxes than would otherwise be necessary? You want your children to leave the state or live in crowded homes or with you?
This country did just fine before zoning laws, i.e. the deprivation of property rights of land owners for the supposed public good, were legalized by the Supreme Court. Since then, most places have hardly changed.
This state's land use pattern is exactly the same as it was in 1900, except farmland has been redeveloped with acre plus single-family homes. And this is a good thing, why?
Your state representative knows more about the impact of zoning laws than any bozo on a local zoning board. You may not like state control of zoning, but you obviously can stop it by voting for representatives who reflect your views. The problem is the districting is such you will be in a minority, and you know it.
You completely are misunderstanding what we are saying. I don’t think anyone has said they are against building affordable housing. We are against the way 8-30g allows developers to build what they want, where they want without any consideration of zoning or the character of where it is built. That’s VERY different from saying we are against affordable apartments.
You are also completely wrong about the state’s land use pattern being the same as it was in 1900. Back then there was no pattern because there was no control over land use so you could build a factory anywhere. That’s not possible today which is very good.
I’m also not sure why you think a state representative knows more than a zoning board member. You do realize that zoning board members have training. State representatives do not. It’s ludicrous to think they can or should make blanket local zoning decisions. I think that 8-30g proves that is completely wrong.
I think I said I'm a Fairfield Prep graduate, so I'm not exactly unfamiliar with the school or the town.
I did not say Fairfield was never wealthier than Stratford, but it is orders of magnitude so in a way that did not exist when I graduated from high school in 1996. But, facts are not something you really seem to care about. So, I'm not sure why I should bother writing much here.
What the hell does anything in the 1860s have to do with today?
I am talking facts. You seem to not know them though.
In 1996 most of Fairfield was as wealthy as it is today. All those big estates were there. Southport was there. Greenfield Hill was there. Brooklawn Park was there. All very wealthy while Stratford has nothing like them.
I went back to the 1860’s to show you why Fairfield is as wealthy and desirable as it is. It’s the reason the town has so much wealth. It’s the reason why public schools there are among the best in the state. It’s the base on which the town was built. That makes a difference. Jay
??? There are subdivisions all over my town that are on septics. The house I grew up in, in a subdivision, was/is on a septic. Septic is by far the most common type of waste removal in all the towns I've lived in, only the very centers of towns have had public sewer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidyankee764
Uh, what? My subdivision in Ridgefield was fully on septic. Almost all new subdivisions in more rural CT towns are on septic as well.
You both are right. There are MANY newer subdivisions around the state that are on septic systems. There’s even at least one in Shelton. Jay
No-one is arguing that Zoning that separates dangerous uses (industrial, hunting) from residential is is bad. What is being argued that the over preference of large lot SFHs to the point where that is the only type that can be built without much variance and the absolutist adherence to the Euclidian Separation of uses has gone too far, too long... especially in CT where that zoning form was not the norm until fairly recently. The PNZ boards decided to over preference large lot SFHs for bad reasons, and ignored basically every other aspect of well... zoning. You say that few are against moderate to low housing choices in more of the towns so then why haven't they been built? The housing starts in CT, and across the country, have been record low since I was in college. This isn't a good thing even if you happen to own property. Sure the potential sale price has increased but it's neigh impossible to get something that isn't also inflated. This is becoming a real problem where people want to cash out but aren't because replacement housing isn't available. This has been going on before the pandemic but that supply shock has really brought focus to the issue.
I know your concerns about height, but truth is that PNZ boards throughout the country have decided two is the max, even in areas where low rise is perfectly suited. They got lazy with "best practices" as if those practices were laid down by god herself... and want to talk about one-size-fits all that guide is the grand daddy of 'em. Many have also deputized themselves as defenders of the current, especially in CT, or at the very least incapable of handling community concerns. Inertia is the most powerful governmental force, after all.
Last thing, so we get rid of 8-30g... You think that boards will zone areas that'll allow more dense areas that more people could afford? That's honestly laughable.
I am talking facts. You seem to not know them though.
In 1996 most of Fairfield was as wealthy as it is today. All those big estates were there. Southport was there. Greenfield Hill was there. Brooklawn Park was there. All very wealthy while Stratford has nothing like them.
I went back to the 1860’s to show you why Fairfield is as wealthy and desirable as it is. It’s the reason the town has so much wealth. It’s the reason why public schools there are among the best in the state. It’s the base on which the town was built. That makes a difference. Jay
And formerly middle income areas have now become upper income areas with the number of teardowns. Beach is striking now. Used to be a great area, now it's... bleh. But good thing no Triplexes got built round there... too big.
Edit:: Also wanted to add... those micro-houses in Southport that are super cute. But if the whole area was razed tomorrow by raining sulfur or similar non-sensical biblical disaster and had to abide by the new zoning rules for the other parts of the Town Southport Center, Main Street, Center Street, and Church wouldn't be allowed to be built. It's silly. Would that be "preserving character"?
No-one is arguing that Zoning that separates dangerous uses (industrial, hunting) from residential is is bad. What is being argued that the over preference of large lot SFHs to the point where that is the only type that can be built without much variance and the absolutist adherence to the Euclidian Separation of uses has gone too far, too long... especially in CT where that zoning form was not the norm until fairly recently. The PNZ boards decided to over preference large lot SFHs for bad reasons, and ignored basically every other aspect of well... zoning. You say that few are against moderate to low housing choices in more of the towns so then why haven't they been built? The housing starts in CT, and across the country, have been record low since I was in college. This isn't a good thing even if you happen to own property. Sure the potential sale price has increased but it's neigh impossible to get something that isn't also inflated. This is becoming a real problem where people want to cash out but aren't because replacement housing isn't available. This has been going on before the pandemic but that supply shock has really brought focus to the issue.
I know your concerns about height, but truth is that PNZ boards throughout the country have decided two is the max, even in areas where low rise is perfectly suited. They got lazy with "best practices" as if those practices were laid down by god herself... and want to talk about one-size-fits all that guide is the grand daddy of 'em. Many have also deputized themselves as defenders of the current, especially in CT, or at the very least incapable of handling community concerns. Inertia is the most powerful governmental force, after all.
Last thing, so we get rid of 8-30g... You think that boards will zone areas that'll allow more dense areas that more people could afford? That's honestly laughable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beeker2211
And formerly middle income areas have now become upper income areas with the number of teardowns. Beach is striking now. Used to be a great area, now it's... bleh. But good thing no Triplexes got built round there... too big.
Edit:: Also wanted to add... those micro-houses in Southport that are super cute. But if the whole area was razed tomorrow by raining sulfur or similar non-sensical biblical disaster and had to abide by the new zoning rules for the other parts of the Town Southport Center, Main Street, Center Street, and Church wouldn't be allowed to be built. It's silly. Would that be "preserving character"?
And yet the areas being impacted by 8-30g are not Southport or the large lot zones. It’s not even the Beach area. It’s the moderate density middle class neighborhoods. The large lot zones are large lots for a reason. You need the land for a properly engineered septic system and if the home is on well. Environmentally if you want to properly recharge the water table, you need a minimum of two acres. See there are real reasons for that zoning. It’s not just made up.
What “micro-houses” are you talking about? I don’t know of any. The homes in Southport range from modest (the smallest I’ve seen are about 1,100 square feet) to mansions. I don’t think there are any you can call micro. There are small lots but they are mixed with mid sized and larger lots. That’s what makes the village so attractive. The zoning there prevents the larger lots from being subdivided further and thus preserving the character of the village.
I’ve given you what I believe should be done to provide affordable housing. I won’t repeat it again. Jay
And yet the areas being impacted by 8-30g are not Southport or the large lot zones. It’s not even the Beach area. It’s the moderate density middle class neighborhoods. The large lot zones are large lots for a reason. You need the land for a properly engineered septic system and if the home is on well. Environmentally if you want to properly recharge the water table, you need a minimum of two acres. See there are real reasons for that zoning. It’s not just made up.
What “micro-houses” are you talking about? I don’t know of any. The homes in Southport range from modest (the smallest I’ve seen are about 1,100 square feet) to mansions. I don’t think there are any you can call micro. There are small lots but they are mixed with mid sized and larger lots. That’s what makes the village so attractive. The zoning there prevents the larger lots from being subdivided further and thus preserving the character of the village.
I’ve given you what I believe should be done to provide affordable housing. I won’t repeat it again. Jay
Not for nothing but your trying to argue about micro houses in Southport (you know the ones about 12 feet across street view) instead of even considering the fact the zoning style you prefer would eliminate those adorable houses if Southport was a green field. That's my issue honestly. And the fact you lot don't want centers to grow at all because you endorse the current boards that prohibit any expansion makes that clear your generation just rants things the way they remember. My pops always said his generation was the brunt of the lead gasoline epidemic but I didn't believe him.
You keep on making excuses for poor planning with car centric mindset that seems stuck in a previous generation. Sure when resources were abundant and taxes paid for higher education that led to decent jobs it made sense. The world has changed. The new generation isn't about what you like clearly from general elections to the GA. it just seems to be a lot of whining.
I'm not even young and we want functional change. I'm so sorry it's different than what you figure is the prestige of the area but it's looking like the state will force towns to go back to the old style of development. Which is what made CTs charm... Not mcmansions that can be found anywhere.
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.
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.
