Housatonic Valley Regional Plan of Conservation and Development

Share Print Smaller Larger

 

7-1. OVERVIEW

The report of the 2006 Danbury Task Force on Homelessness recommended that HVCEO undertake a regional housing assessment study. The Danbury report saw the lack of affordable housing as a regional problem, where the needed policy direction could best be set by HVCEO as Danbury's regional planning agency.

HVCEO agreed to undertake this work, the result to also serve as background for the housing chapter for this Regional Plan of Conservation and Development.

Due to the length of the separate housing report, a stand alone document entitled Greater Danbury Housing Market Assessment is available on hvceo.org and is not reproduced here in its entirety. Components include:

--- DATA BASE FOR AREA HOUSING
--- POLICY COMPONENTS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING
--- MODIFICATIONS TO 8-30G ZONING OVERRIDE
--- HOUSING NEEDS QUANTIFIED
--- AFFORDABLE HOUSING MODELS

A highlight from this important research is the table below:

 

7-2. AFFORDABLE HOUSING RECOMMENDATIONS

GOAL: Expansion of housing opportunities and design choices to accommodate the region's variety of household types and needs.

1. Municipal planning should strive to balance economic growth with appropriate housing choices for the work force that is part of the local economic base in the municipality.

2. Both housing opportunities and design choices should be expanded in each municipality to accommodate a variety of household types and needs, especially newly forming households and senior citizens.

3. Connecticut’s affordable housing land use appeals statute, Chapter 126a, Section 8-30g forcefully overrides local zoning. Yet this law has turned out to be a sprawl inducer, and thus has a significant negative impact upon municipalities. HVCEO will continue to lobby for specific changes to this law as stated below:

 

REDUCE MASSIVE DENSITY INCREASE. At present the increase in density is unplanned, and can be any multiple of what current zoning laws allow. Chapter 126a, Section 8-30g should be amended to moderate this impact to more intelligently tie affordable housing proposals to the preexisting town planning and zoning.

This can be accomplished by limiting the density increases to fifty percent more units than the number that would be permitted by the existing zoning district in which the project is located.

BETTER MIXING OF MODERATE COST AND MARKET RATE UNITS. An amendment to this statute is needed to ensure that the affordable dwelling units and lots on which the dwelling units are to be constructed are of comparable size and quality to other dwelling units in the proposed development.

Such mixing was the intent of the original law, but is not followed in practice. Make it a requirement that building permits for the affordable dwelling units be issued in stages in proportion to building permits for the other dwelling units in the proposed development.

IMPROVE THE ACCURACY OF THE STATISTICAL FORMULA. The statistical formula for defining affordable housing In Chapter 126a, Section 8-30g determines which municipalities are exempt from the override of local zoning by affordable housing proposals. Unless 10% of a town’s housing is affordable, the town cannot deny a developer’s proposal for affordable housing without a very compelling reason.

The accounting system for determining the 10% needs to be made more accurate, as follows:

First, the formula has a major deficiency in quantifying the count of presently affordable housing, resulting in the undercounting of housing which qualifies as affordable by state definition. Simply, the current method inadvertently omits all units of low cost privately owned housing.

The State's definition of affordable housing, tied to “persons and families paying thirty percent or less of income, where such income is less than or equal to eighty percent of the median income,” should apply to all local units, public and private, as both really exist on the ground and should be part of any objective count.

A 1997 HVCEO 1997 planning study demonstrated that objective criteria from the U.S. Census is available to fairly add qualifying existing low cost private rental units to each town’s total. The actual stock of municipal housing can then more fairly be compared to the 10% goal.

And lastly, certain housing improvement grants assist homeowners in mobile home parks to improve their dwellings. Deed restrictions on sales price are then agreed to for periods for five years or other intervals. During such periods, these units are valid affordable housing and should be counted under the formula.

EXEMPT STATE DEFINED EXISTING AND
POTENTIAL WATER SUPPLY WATERSHEDS
Concerning the ability of 8-30g to induce increased density in the Housatonic Valley Region’s existing and potential water supply watersheds, CT DEP has long supported a maximum density of one dwelling unit per two acres in such areas to provide adequate protection of water quality.

The Conservation and Development Policies Plan for Connecticut also recommends a low density role for such sensitive watersheds. Just as a municipality’s industrially zoned land is exempt from 8-30g override, its state-defined water supply watershed land should also be exempted. For appeals filed within Connecticut's CT DEP recognized water supply watersheds, allows state courts to take into consideration for their rulings density recommendations for watersheds found in the Conservation and Development Policies Plan for Connecticut.

USE THIS LAW TO STIMULATE ACCESSORY APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT. Chapter 126a, Section 8-30g was modified during the 2002 session to allow a town to include “accessory apartments” as part of its 10% affordable housing count. However, under the amended act, accessory apartments must have a 10 year deed restriction committing the owner to rent the apartment at 30% or less of the tenant’s income, and to someone whose income is less than or equal to 80% of the area, or the state’s median income, whichever is less.

This onerous ten year provision greatly reduces the number of homeowners willing to have their accessory apartments used to help meet their towns’ affordable housing obligations. We need to allow homeowners to use the state formula certifying a unit’s affordability on a much more practical annual basis.

As now defined in 8-30g, accessory apartments that "count" must connect by an inside entrance to the main residence. But this automatically excludes from official recognition units in outbuildings like garages or renovated barns. This should be corrected.

In addition, HVCEO supports authorizing any municipality to offer initial and then continuing property tax credits to any residential property owner who certifies the creation of a new accessory apartment and maintains it thereafter, the unit to meet state standards for affordable rent and maximum tenant income.

4. Housatonic Valley Region Initiatives:

Maximize Regional Information Sharing for Affordable Housing Initiatives
HVCEO should work with the City of Danbury, Dream Homes, the Greater Danbury Continuum of Care, the suburban municipalities in the region and other key stakeholders to create a centralized database of all affordable housing resources available in the region. The existing HVCEO web page on this topic is a good beginning resource.

The 2009 Housing Market Assessment report should be widely disseminated to local groups that can make use of it. All databases included therein should be updated once 2010 Census data becomes available. In doing so, the number of 8-30g affordable housing units within each multi-family housing complex should be quantified.

Regional Coordination of Payments in Lieu of Affordable Units
The Towns of Bethel and New Milford adopted ordinances allowing developers the option of paying into a housing trust fund or associated organization in lieu of constructing affordable units within their development. If enough municipalities pass similar ordinances, then some trust fund resources could be pooled for joint affordable housing development if there is mutual advantage.

Transportation and Housing Linkages Must Be Strengthened
The economic burdens of the rising cost of energy; the loss of time in traffic congested commutes; and the negative impacts on the environment must be addressed moving into the future. The region has the advantage of the Danbury Line of Metro North providing the basis for a more rational transit based development form.

The efforts to extend regular passenger service north to New Milford should continue to be a key regional initiative. This initiative should be coordinated with Transit Oriented Development (TOD) in communities in the region within which passenger rail service is made available. The relationship between transit and development also should be supported by use of Housatonic Area Regional Transit (HART) for linkages.

Increased Use of Inclusionary Zoning Within the Region
The HVCEO Region communities have supported various legislative initiatives to amend Section 8-30g of the Connecticut Statutes in order to more effectively address affordable housing needs. Key issues of concern in the current legislation are the lack of local control as to the location and density of affordable housing proposals and the fact that affordable units found in the marketplace are not considered affordable unless government assisted or deed restricted.

The Blue Ribbon Commission Report in 2003 recommended fiscal incentives to encourage inclusionary zoning and mixed-income developments. Interestingly, some five years later, legislation was approved containing some of these elements.

The Incentive Housing Zone (IHZ) program provides for local control as to the location and density of housing through a process of local planning and adoption of a zone. The density issue is addressed by the provision that an IHZ must increase density by 25% over that currently allowed in the zone. The mixed-income aspect is addressed by the provision that only 20% of the units provided must be affordable.

The fiscal incentive is provided in that planning grants are available from the State Office of Policy and Management. A $2,000 payment will be made to the community for each unit permitted in the zone and $2,000 per multi-family unit or $5,000 per single-family unit for each building permit.

It is recommended that all communities in the region participate in the IHZ program.

5. Local Government Initiatives:

Make Use of Estimates of Housing Need by Municipality
Within policy documents and grant applications, make use of affordable housing need estimates as summarized above and detailed in the HVCEO's 2008 Housing Market Assessment.

Establish Local Strategies
Each community should establish strategies to pursue this report’s goals and objectives. While the goal is to address affordable housing issues on a regional basis, it must be recognized that the public policy most impacting housing is a community’s zoning and subdivision regulations.

As state enabling statutes are not likely to be modified to permit regional zoning in support of responsible growth principles, zoning initiatives must be implemented at the community level. While each individual community’s regulations must be examined and possibly modified by the appropriate local commission, there are several zoning and subdivision initiatives which would assist in meeting affordable housing goals.

The recommended initiatives are to be considered, customized and incorporated by each community as appropriate and as consistent with the community’s Plan of Conservation and Development. These initiatives are as follows:

Apply for Technical Assistance Grants from the
State of Connecticut’s Office of Policy and Management
A top priority for Housatonic Valley Region communities should be to apply for the available technical assistance grants from OPM as part of the Incentive Housing Zone program. With up to $50,000 available for each municipality, a number of issues that are eligible under the grant guidelines could be studied in detail, as well as potentially funding the actual activities necessary for developing and implementing IHZ regulations.

This funding affords the Housatonic Valley Region communities with the opportunity to not only study their individual affordable housing needs in greater detail, but to also develop a program to address these identified needs.

Utilize Conservation Subdivision Techniques to
Protect Open Space While Developing Affordable Units
Conservation subdivisions with an affordable housing component also could be a zoning option for the lower density communities in the region.

One possible way to utilize this tool would be to require that all new subdivisions over a certain number of housing units must utilize conservation subdivision principles and techniques and require that a certain percentage of housing units (say 10%-20%) be affordable. This strategy would almost certainly require some sort of density bonus or other form of incentive to be realistic.

Increase Accessory Apartments In The Region
An increase in the number of accessory apartments should be a primary technique for addressing housing needs for the following reasons:

--- Declining household sizes, including an increase in the number of one person households will increase the capacity of existing structures to accommodate a second unit.

--- As the Baby Boomer generation ages and the costs of maintaining a housing unit increase, particularly in terms of energy costs, homeowners will be looking for supplemental income.

--- In communities without a well-developed infrastructure, existing on-site water and sewer systems can accommodate additional households in an existing structure due to declining household sizes.

--- Many structures appropriate for accessory apartments are in older developed areas in proximity to rail stations. Accessory apartments in these areas have the potential to reduce traffic and sprawl.

Individual towns could create a program to identify and, if necessary, properly permit all existing accessory apartments and obtain deed restrictions to make them affordable so that they can be credited for affordable housing purposes.

In addition to the reasons stated in the bullet points above, the development of accessory apartments for singles and the elderly should be encouraged as a small but important component of the affordable housing supply.

Emphasize and Encourage Neighborhood
Center/Local Route Small-Scale Development
In the low density areas of the Housatonic Valley Region, affordable housing developments should be encouraged with specific criteria for design, density and location.

Towns should encourage small-scale affordable housing developments of 12 units or fewer units along local routes of note or in the “hamlet” type centers that can be found scattered along them. Strict design criteria should be implemented so that these developments fit within the scale and design of these more rural areas.

Utilize the Strategic Placement of Mixed Use
Developments to Develop Affordable Housing
In the primary transportation corridor areas (e.g., the Route 7/Route 202 corridor and the I-84 corridor), mixed use developments combining housing with an affordable component with retail, office or institutional uses along major transportation corridors should be encouraged.

The housing in these developments can range from single family attached units, condos, cluster housing to traditional multifamily units. Buildings themselves do not need to be mixed, but rather the whole parcel could be a mixed development.

Encourage Apartments Over Ground Floor
Retail/Office Space in More Urbanized Areas
These developments are envisioned as more of the “urban/suburban center” variety of mixed use development, consisting of multiple story buildings with ground floor commercial use and apartments on the floors above, again located along major transportation corridors.

Use Density Bonuses to Encourage Affordable Housing Development
Communities should provide a density bonus for affordable housing units in designated areas around existing developed areas and along transportation corridors. Five out of the ten communities in the region already utilize density bonuses; similar density bonuses should be encouraged for the other communities in the region as well.

Employ Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) as
a Means of Addressing Affordable Housing Needs
Encourage individual communities to create overlay zoning districts near transit nodes, in town centers and in areas with underutilized commercial or industrial sites that would permit higher densities of housing in combination with commercial uses and open space.

Create Unique Property Tax Credit
Programs to Encourage Deed Restrictions
A program that should be considered at the municipal level is one in which the annual local property tax on a property is forgiven in exchange for a deed restriction which requires that the property be sold at an affordable price upon the event of the next deed transfer. Such a program might be limited to senior citizens, such as the current “circuit breaker” elderly tax program.

Utilize Existing Home Ownership Programs and Financing
Options to Develop Affordable Units that are Counted under 8-30g
Home ownership programs include a wide variety of approaches such as downpayment assistance, FHA/CHFA mortgages, and Community Development Block Grant and HOME program initiatives in several communities in the region.

In the instances where a home ownership program is proposed in a suburban community, it means making home ownership for someone who commutes from Danbury to a retail/service job more of a reality by using the tools mentioned above as well as others to be developed.

Financial Resources For All Initiatives
A significant potential funding source for housing planning activities is the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program. Currently, the City of Danbury receives funds annually as an entitlement. The remaining communities in the region are eligible to apply annually for CDBG funds administered by the State of Connecticut Department of Economic and Community Development.

The communities could file a joint application and combine the funds with an allocation from the City of Danbury to support regional affordable housing programs and initiatives. The activities of such programs or initiatives would clearly be eligible and appropriate for the use of CDBG funds. There are also HOME funds available from HUD for Danbury as part of the State allocation.

In the same regard, the Greater Danbury Continuum of Care receives federal funds for special needs housing. These funds could be expanded by other towns in the region applying to the State DECD for federal “Balance of State” funds. There are also private funds, financial institution funds, the Federal Home Loan Bank Affordable Housing Program and foundation funds available.