Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

iCUman t1_itvyxpc wrote

Reply to comment by JJ4444_Jules in How can we incentivize real discussions around solutions to home affordability in CT? by otter_spud

I disagree. It's immaterial if your town is wealthy or not. The question is whether your community has varied housing stock that can accommodate its citizenry throughout their lifecycle. If young professionals or crusty old folks do not have a place in your town, if your cops and teachers and municipal maintenance workers are in-commuters, if you have a "quaint little downtown" and you simply cannot understand why there aren't more businesses in those vacant storefronts - the answer is (say it with me) affordable housing.

Literally no one who advocates for affordable housing sees "massive, unattractive affordable apartments" as the only answer. Low-density MFH, condos/townhomes, mixed use residential/commercial properties can all be leveraged to keep our communities vibrant and affordable instead of the unsustainable sprawl, traffic and expense that exclusionary SFH zoning dooms a municipality to suffer.

18

JJ4444_Jules t1_itw5h5b wrote

I actually agree with you, not saying it’s right at all…. But if you look at the last publicized ( and polarized) forums such as Woodbridge or Greenwich, the proposals are not usually amendable to the local architecture OR services. Let’s be honest, affordable housing needs access to public transportation and a lot with a walk score of 2 is really punishment for the people who manage to get an affordable apartment. I think working with towns in the mid-range of public access of services , who honestly won’t hire an entire team of lawyers like the last 2 townships to fight it is a great way to actually get it done- and sooner. Hamden, Southington, West Haven, Naugatuck, etc have more access to public services and transportation and have expressed interest in the past of allowing well built facilities. I’m not saying it’s right to not allow affordable housing in certain places, but for the 17 years you will fight to get ONE duplex in Greenwich you could have built 25 in other towns and helped that many more. Time is the issue, inflation is killing families they need these built NOW

7

iCUman t1_itwi57x wrote

This isn't an either or scenario though. Building more affordable housing in places like Naugatuck and Southington doesn't preclude places like Woodbridge and Greenwich from doing the same. And if you don't want developers choosing how that takes shape, the answer isn't to waste your citizen's tax dollars hiring a crack team of lawyers that will inevitably lose the 8-30g appeal. The answer is to seriously address housing affordability in your POCD, and get your numbers over 10% so developers can't file for relief under that statute.

5