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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-15-2021, 05:37 PM
 
Location: Fairfield County CT
3,138 posts, read 1,712,385 times
Reputation: 1676

Advertisements

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.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-15-2021, 06:14 PM
 
Location: On the Sound
2,240 posts, read 734,246 times
Reputation: 914
Quote:
Originally Posted by CTartist View Post
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.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-15-2021, 09:46 PM
 
62 posts, read 30,222 times
Reputation: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveM85 View Post
"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.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2021, 03:29 AM
 
3,215 posts, read 3,121,296 times
Reputation: 1559
Quote:
Originally Posted by CTartist View Post
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.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2021, 06:07 AM
 
Location: Windsor, CT
113 posts, read 35,057 times
Reputation: 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by pramre View Post
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.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2021, 07:24 AM
 
Location: W Hartford, CT
2,071 posts, read 3,927,648 times
Reputation: 1749
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbanks3 View Post
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.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2021, 08:09 AM
 
Location: Fairfield County CT
3,138 posts, read 1,712,385 times
Reputation: 1676
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike 75 View Post
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.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2021, 08:31 AM
 
Location: Fairfield County CT
3,138 posts, read 1,712,385 times
Reputation: 1676
Quote:
Originally Posted by pramre View Post
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.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2021, 08:42 AM
 
Location: Fairfield
673 posts, read 256,507 times
Reputation: 331
Quote:
Originally Posted by CTartist View Post
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!
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2021, 08:55 AM
 
62 posts, read 30,222 times
Reputation: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbanks3 View Post
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.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

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.

© 2005-2021, 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