State Program Designed To Boost Affordable Housing

No one questions the need for zoning regulations, but those that discriminate on the basis of a minimum lot size or house size should by any stamdard be declared ilergal. Why should low wage working people be effectively barred from living in a community where they work? This is part racism and elitism at work here and we taxpayers now have to bribe town officials to take some of the poor working people. The other part, of course, is protecting the pocketbooks of those who live in these discriminatory communities. Obviously, big lot size and big houses mean plenty of property tax money, at a low rate. A statewide school tax would fix that but the moneybabs that control government won't have that. God, that's communism! Others would see it as respect for even the most lowly.

Good grief. Zoning regs make for attractive, safe, considerate communities. You're living in the 1920's, pal. Just make sure that you stay in the cities where that regressive mindset continues to fester.

Actually, I'd say there's an "exodus of young workers" because Connecticut is boring and given the choice between living in Seattle or Portland, Oregon vs. Hartford or New Haven or some dull CT suburban community where you have to drive everywhere, the choice is pretty obvious.

Maybe if we weren't taxed to death more young people would stay.

Developers need to look at putting affordable housing in areas that already have the infrastructure to handle the volume of homes discussed.

All these developers want to do is squeeze people into anyplace they can wedge new condos, then stick the poorest of poor people with a lifetime of condo common charges on top of their mortgages and taxes. That doesn't make for *affordable* housing once all the math is said and done.

Also, in Seymour Baker Residential is trying to put 360+ condos on a very narrow farm road that is already overtrafficked. The current speed limit is 25mph and people regulary are doing over 40mph - right past strollers and kids playing. The studies have been done years ago. There are no sidewalks or crosswalks; there is an elementary school on the road. The road is already used as a cut-through to Beacon Falls. Who is going to tell which homeowner(s)they will loose his/her front yard to expand the road for the 700+ cars that 360 condos would bring. Who's paying for the road improvements, who's paying for the policing to stop the speeders.

Why don't these developers go GREEN and repurpose some old downtown land that is on wider roadways!

Hmm. Yet another moronic idea to tax people more, to put up affordable housing, in a state that is currently unaffordable mostly due to taxes…

Beggers can't be chosey?

Those that can afford it should be able to live in somekind of a restictive neighborhood. There are those that don't want to live around all the crime.

"Affordable" housing projects? Haven't we learned our lesson yet? This idea has already been filed under "stupid human tricks".

yes affordable housing will keep some of our young workers in the state.McDonalds and Burger King will be eternally grateful that we are keeping this pool of low income talent available for their use.

Yet another UTOPIAN dream from the land of the lotus eaters,I think these politicians should be given a drug test.

FAV wrote:

No one questions the need for zoning regulations, but those that discriminate on the basis of a minimum lot size or house size should by any stamdard be declared ilergal. Why should low wage working people be effectively barred from living in a community where they work? This is part racism and elitism at work here and we taxpayers now have to bribe town officials to take some of the poor working people. The other part, of course, is protecting the pocketbooks of those who live in these discriminatory communities. Obviously, big lot size and big houses mean plenty of property tax money, at a low rate. A statewide school tax would fix that but the moneybabs that control government won't have that. God, that's communism! Others would see it as respect for even the most lowly.

Why do you consider this a "racist" practice? Are you assuming that "low wage working people" can't possibly be white?

And does the most "lowly" always include low wage working people, or could it also include lazy slackers?

Anytime the state tries to 'encourage affordable housing' it ends up attracting people to an area who can't afford to live in the area. If anyone can show me one instance of how programs like this have increased the tax base of the community, reduced crime, or served the general good of the community I would be willing to change my opinion on this matter. When you give something to someone it ultimately lessens it's value to the individual receiving it. A better approach would be to help people get a better education, learn good job skills, lean basic problem solving skills and learn the importance of civic responsibilities.

This would be a great Idea if it was done much like it was in this state 35 or 40 years ago with cookie cutter homes in areas that can sustain them and at a price people need to work for and aren't gifted. Mainly around larger metro areas, with home prices around $140,000. These things have a way of working out anyway like all the "elitist" peoples houses when it comes time to seel for retirement have no one to seel too just my 2 cents

Address the real problem wrote:

Anytime the state tries to 'encourage affordable housing' it ends up attracting people to an area who can't afford to live in the area.... When you give something to someone it ultimately lessens it's value to the individual receiving it.

The only being given anything through HOMEConnecticut is the developers and the towns. Towns get money from the state to plan for where in their communities want higher density development -- houses closer together, condos or apartments. The developers then get money to encourage them to build something that they otherwise wouldn't build -- smaller, reasonably priced homes in the $180K -$260K range. I don't know how old you are or how much you make, but I highly doubt that you made enough when you were in your 20's to afford a first house even at these prices. "Affordable housing" is not subsidized housing. Don't confuse the two. This is the kind of housing that will ensure that school teachers, volunteer fireman, plumbers, waitresses, hairdressers, etc. can afford to live the communities where they work. Otherwise the developers will continue building nothing but giant mcmansions and 55+ "active adult" developments. Connecticut desperately needs to get rid of the appeals law currently on the books. Developers use it like a gun to threaten towns and build god-awful developments in places where they don't belong.

TRUTH wrote:

<quoted text>
Why do you consider this a "racist" practice? Are you assuming that "low wage working people" can't possibly be white?
And does the most "lowly" always include low wage working people, or could it also include lazy slackers?

The reality is that most low wage earners are minorities. Since I said working people that should exclude lazy slackers.

There is a small error in this article. The author asserts that the Home Connecticut program is available to household with incomes of 65,000 which (she says) is 80% of the state median income. Not so. The 2007 state median income was 65,859 per CERC.com . 80% of that would be 52,687.

FAV types;
"The reality is that most low wage earners are minorities."

Wrong again. Whites make up the largest number of low wage earners.

Your attempt to hide the hypocrisy of your propaganda behind name calling isn't working.

This is the reason there is not affordable housing...because nimby's perception of affordable housing is section 8 and other government assisted housing, young professionals are pretty hard pressed to find affordable housing outside of the ghettos in the cities due to residents in well to do towns like west hartford,farmington, etc fight any attempt to put affordable housing anywhere in their town. Affordable does not = subsidized and doenst mean your town will be over run with welfare recepients.

Keep the riff raff outta the nice towns!