Greenwich First Selectman Fred Camillo and other Greenwich residents pushed back against several proposed housing bills that would reform state zoning laws on Monday, during a public hearing before the state House’s Planning & Development Committee.
The hearing focused on several bills. Camillo testified before the committee on SB-1024, “an act concerning zoning authority, certain design guidelines, qualifications of certain land use officials and certain sewage disposal systems.
Specifically, the bill would: “(1) Allow municipalities to require that land use applicants pay the costs of any technical review of applications, (2) make several changes to the Zoning Enabling Act, (3) establish requirements for zoning regulations concerning accessory apartments, mixed-use developments and multifamily housing, (4) convene a working group to develop model design guidelines for buildings and context-appropriate streets, (5) require certain qualifications of certain land use officials, and (6) address the jurisdiction and capacities of certain sewage disposal systems.”
The group Desegregate CT endorses the bill. According to their website, the group is a “coalition of neighbors and nonprofits who believes in creating abundant, diverse housing in service of equity, inclusive prosperity, and a cleaner environment.”
The group says SB-1024 will provide more affordable housing where it is needed, and that it will empower towns to: “Direct development to places with existing infrastructure & housing, instead of sprawl; generate significant tax revenues and support Main Street small businesses; adapt and adopt a ready-made, no-cost model code; and approve more housing, unhindered by outdated State sewerage & traffic standards.”
But opponents of the bill, like Camillo, say state mandates would take local control away from municipalities. Written and verbal testimony was submitted for Monday’s hours long hearing, which can be viewed here.
“I cannot state in strong enough terms that one size fits all, Hartford driven mandates that weaken local control of authority is both not needed and potentially very dangerous,” Camillo said. “Any legislative proposal that threatens the streetscape and architectural consistency of neighborhoods in every municipality in the State of Connecticut by taking away local decision making will devalue property, hurt tax revenues, clutter streets, and take away from the beauty of the local neighborhoods that we call home. I stand in opposition of SB 1024 and all other legislative proposals that do not address social equity nor promote affordable housing.”
Camillo added that the “worthy goals” of social equity and affordable housing can best be accomplished through local authorities.
“The Town of Greenwich continues to work with our Planning & Zoning Commission, Greenwich Housing Authority and other community advocates and volunteers to increase affordable housing units and opportunities. More than 27% of our population of 63,000 residents is non-white, with almost that same amount falling under the ALICE category,” Camillo said. “Over 38% of our student population is non-white. This diversity, which is evident in our ethnic, socio-economic, and political makeup, is a source of great strength and pride for Greenwich residents.”
Camillo noted that the Greenwich Housing Authority has spent more than $27 million over the past five years on affordable housing units, and the town’s Planning and Zoning commission is bringing a public-private initiative to the Board of Selectmen in the next few weeks which aims to help the town achieve the 10% affordable housing mandate.
“The Town of Greenwich has seen an increase in its non-white population of over 25% since 2000. Our continuous diversification has and is being done through local efforts,’ Camillo said.
SB-1024 promotes transit-oriented development. Towns would choose 50% of an area within a half mile of transit for 4-plus unit housing. Ten percent of 10-plus units must be affordable. Since Greenwich has four train stations, Camillo was asked by State Sen. Tony Hwang (R-28), the Ranking Committee Leader on the Planning and Development Committee, how the bill would affect commercial and residential properties.
“The main station in Greenwich, within a half mile there are some multi-homes there, so that wouldn’t be as impacted. But in Cos Cob and Old Greenwich and Riverside, it really would be impacted by that,” Camillo said.
Greenwich High School student, Caroline Yu, voiced support for SB-1024.
“Affordable housing opens the gate to the state mending inequities. Namely, SB 1024 moves the state of Connecticut away from its national legacy of using zoning to maintain status quos that are rooted in history’s racism and discrimination,” she wrote.
“I specifically support SB 1024’s proposals because they are multi-faceted, being simultaneously economically and environmentally advantageous alongside its initial aims. Transit-oriented development reduces the amount of cars on the road, and therefore pollution, and it is an antidote to urban sprawl. Similarly, housing can be strategically implemented to be near main streets, where new customers will support small businesses. SB 1024 does not seek to radicalize our institutions or irrevocably plummet property values, but is an incomparable and feasible method of desegregating the state.”
Old Greenwich resident, Peter Fusaro, voiced support for HB-6613, SB-1024 and HB-6107.
“These land use reforms will encourage production of all types to meet the needs of all Connecticut residents by making the permitting and approval process easier and more manageable for small businesses to navigate while allowing for gentle density in and around our main street corridors and transit hubs, all while allowing for local control,” he said.
Ted Walworth, President of the Northeast Greenwich Association, urged lawmakers to “pull the plug” on HB-6107 — an act concerning the reorganization of the Zoning Enabling Act and the promotion of municipal compliance — and SB-1027 — an act concerning accessory dwelling units and zoning regulations. He said that “local zoning matters.”
“We insist on local zoning control in Greenwich, Fairfield County and all of Connecticut’s 168 municipalities. I represent the Northeast Greenwich Association with over 2,800 households and you must protect our character, sense of place and overall property values in our diverse territory,” he said.
The Board of Selectmen discussed the proposed bills last week, and Planning and Zoning Chair Margarita Alban voiced her opposition to SB-1024.
“The bill doesn’t do anything with affordable housing. It doesn’t create affordable housing. The bottom line is, the goal is to increase housing supply and thus reduce overall housing prices in the state,” she said.
Selectperson Lauren Rabin said she doesn’t believe the bill’s “one-size-fits-all approach” works.
“Admittedly, the first time I lived in a single family home, I was 29 years old. I grew up in Greenwich on reduced [school] lunch. I understand some of the issues because I lived them,” Rabin said. “If I think about some of my favorite places where I lived, it wasn’t on a busy street next to I-95. It was a place where as a child I had a yard to play in. I think some of the conversation is not focused on what an actual resident would want in the housing choices that are presented to them. I don’t see that in some of the bills and some of the dialogue.”
Selectperson Jill Oberlander said last week during the Board of Selectmen meeting that she was not sure yet where she stood on the bills, and that she was concerned with affordable housing and access children have to education in town.
“I’m not sure where I stand on any of these proposals. I do agree with Lauren’s statement that one size fits all does not necessarily work for all of our communities. I also recognize sometimes in terms of legislation, it’s hard to get communities to move towards different goals. I‘m particularly sensitive to children, actually, and what access they have to great education.”
To view all the bills that were under review on Monday, click here.
