“What we try to do when we build these new housing communities is not build them in environmental injustice zones – not between loud train stations and loud highways with a large amount of air pollution.” – Kate LoBalbo, Cos Cob Continue Reading →
Transit Oriented Development
Recent Posts
RESTIERI: Why “Fair Share” Is Wrong for Greenwich
|
“Groups like the Regional Planning Association whose long list of donors are a “who’s who” of developers, construction contractors and real-estate investment trusts, fund groups like OCA and DeSegregateCT. Therein lies a real conflict of interest. It is these donors who will ultimately reap the profits of massive “Transit Oriented Development”, “Work Live Ride” and other proposals like HB6633 “Fair Share”, while towns like Greenwich will be guinea pigs for their central planning experiments.” – Tara Restieri Continue Reading →
Filed under: Letter to the Editor, CT169Strong, Fair Share, HB 6633, Tara Restieri, Transit Oriented Development, Work Live Ride
QUIGLEY: The Corporate Interests Behind Desegregate CT
|
“The idea that Desegregate CT is simply a coalition of underdogs working to establish more affordable housing options is very hard to reconcile considering the fact that its main financial and logistical sponsor, Regional Plan Association, is itself backed by many large corporate interests all of whom stand to profit from more development.” – Dan Quigley Continue Reading →
Filed under: Letter to the Editor, Cushman Wakefield, Dan Quigley, DeSegregate CT, Edison Properties, Greenwich, New Rochelle, Regional Plan Association
Dire Warnings Issued on Impact of “Transit Oriented Development” Bill 5429 in Fairfield County
|
“This is not a recipe for orderly or responsible development.” – Francis Pickering, Western Connecticut Council of Governments Continue Reading →
Filed under: Government, Real Estate, 8-30g, Bethel, Bill Galvin, Boston, Cambridge, commute
LETTER: Please read the state land use and zoning bills!
|
“As the owner of a .50 acre lot in the R-20 zone within one-half mile of the Riverside train station, if Riverside is designated as a primary transit station, this bill would give me the right to replace my existing single family dwelling with eight units of multifamily housing (16 units per acre meeting the density minimum), with on-street parking only, no affordability restrictions (less than 10 units) and no opportunity for a public hearing on my plan.” – Ken Rogozinski, Riverside Continue Reading →
Filed under: Letter to the Editor, Ken Rogozinski, multi-family housing, SB 1024, train station, transit district, Transit Oriented Development, zoning
Marathon Hearing Draws 340+ to Testify; Republicans Mostly Oppose, Dem’s Mostly Favor SB 1024 “The DeSegregate CT Bill”
|
These proposed bills not only ignore the economic reality of home pricing in high opportunity towns, but their adoption will suffocate efforts in affluent communities to create actual affordable units via private sector development.” – Danielle Dobin, Westport P&Z chair Continue Reading →
Filed under: Business, Government, Real Estate, 8-30g, accessory dwelling units, ADU, affordable housing, Danielle Dobin
Forum on Affordable Housing Focuses on Local Control, Property Rights and Unintended Consequences of Future State Legislation
|
The hosts and panelists said they feared the legislation would diminish the authority of local zoning boards and give the State of Connecticut significantly more control of local zoning. Continue Reading →
Filed under: Business, Government, 8-30g, affordable housing, DeSegregate CT, exclusionary zoning, Francis Pickering, Fred Camillo
Greenwich Residents Rail Against Port Chester Multi Story Apartment Building
|
“I worry about not just noise and air pollution, but lost travel time and public safety concerns for our EMT, Fire and Police vehicles that will have a hard time.” – Greenwich First Selectman Fred Camillo Continue Reading →
Filed under: Government, Real Estate, Al Shehadi, Anthony Gioffre, Brian Dempsey, Curt Lavalla, David Mann, Dennis Schack
Again, P&Z, Neighbors Balk at 143 Sound Beach Avenue Development Filed Under 8-30g
|
The last public hearing on the proposed development on Sound Beach Ave drew a standing room only crowd. Again. The building features just 47 parking spots for 60 units, in which 30% would be marketed as affordable under CT General Statute 8-30g. Continue Reading →