Pushing for equity
Connecticut is separated into largely white suburbs and cities where more people of color live. Advocates want to rewrite local zoning rules to change that.
To many in Connecticut, racial inequity starts with housing. Restrictive zoning rules and other practices that control population density and protect the “character” of towns or neighborhoods have come under renewed fire this year. Advocates for change say these practices have created a state of wealthy, largely white, suburbs and cities where many people of color live.
In the wake of the George Floyd killing last year and renewed focus on structural racism, a number of measures were introduced in the General Assembly this year, sparking a contentious debate about how to remedy Connecticut’s history of housing segregation and expand affordable housing across the state.
Advocates of zoning reform and housing equity say that Connecticut must adopt comprehensive new polices to permit more versatile housing arrangements and ensure that all towns bear the responsibility of providing affordable housing. Critics of the various bills under consideration argue that many of the proposals would wrest land use decisions away from local
control and strip Connecticut towns of their distinctive qualities.
The proposals, contained in a number of different bills, would change the way critical land use decisions are made in Connecticut. The legislature’s planning and development committee is meeting Wednesday and could move several of these measures forward.
Key elements of the initiative follow.
Eliminate ‘character’ as an exclusionary tactic:
Senate Bill 1024, backed by the housing equity coalition Desegregate Connecticut, proposes stripping local towns of the ability to simply cite “character” as a reason to exclude certain types of development. It would, instead, require municipalities to draft zoning rules that rely on measurable qualities such as clear physical standards for structures or the architectural identity of a neighborhood. The effort would limit towns’ ability to defer to terms like “character,” which have historically been deployed to reinforce exclusionary housing practices.
Decentralize affordable housing:
Connecticut’s towns and cities would be required under the terms of
House Bill 6611 to develop a plan that would ensure they have an adequate stock of affordable housing. Towns with high rates of poverty would be excluded.
The legislation is modeled on the concept of “Fair Share Zoning,” which calls on every town in the state to host a portion of affordable housing, rather than concentrating affordable housing in a few municipalities. The bill would give municipalities leeway in terms of how to provide affordable housing, though municipalities would be required to create a specific number of affordable housing units and compliance would be strictly enforced.
Encourage accessory dwelling units:
Senate Bill 1024 would enable the construction of accessory dwelling units — separate living units located in the same plot as primary residences — across the state. Such units are allowed under some local zoning codes but prohibited by others.
“Currently, accessory dwelling units are permitted in many towns, but in many cases, towns require more costly processes for them to be approved and they also impose restrictions that might not make sense for the current day,” said attorney Sara Bronin, who leads Desegregate Connecticut. “For example, there are towns that say that only elderly people can live in accessory dwelling units.”
Bronin added that across the state, 73% of single-family districts already permit such units, but less than 8% of land in the state is zoned to allow the units “as of right,” meaning without expensive public hearings or long application requirements.
The bill would also reduce parking mandates — a tactic often used to control the number of people who can live in a given location. It would place a cap on the number of parking spaces towns require per housing unit, enabling more units to be built on individual lots.
Another measure, House Bill 6613, would require municipal zoning panels to adopt regulations allowing for accessory apartments and multifamily housing and penalize towns that do not do so by Oct. 1.
Link development to public transit:
Senate Bill 1024 would encourage transit-oriented development by permitting the construction of multifamily housing — of up to two to four units — within half a mile of a municipality’s primary transit station. Many towns do not currently allow such development. Thebill would affect all cities and towns with populations of at least 7,500.
“Our proposal is that towns take a look in their transit areas, decide where within the half-mile radius — which is about a 10 minute walk — they would like to permit two to four unit housing, and the bill encourages them to go through that process,” Bronin said.
The advantage of development near public transit hubs, according to the Desegregate CT website, is that it can encourage walkability and enhance diversity.
Fix the bureaucracy:
House Bill 6107 would revise existing municipal zoning rules to ensure they reflect the goals of the federal Fair Housing Act and provide an administrative remedy to enforce compliance.
The bill would also eliminate a requirement that zoning regulations be made with regard to a district’s “character,” and instead focus on a district’s “suitability for particular uses” and “with a view to conserving the value of buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of land” in a municipality.
House Bill 1026 would permit municipalities to require elected municipal planning and zoning commission members to undergo at least two hours of training on affordable housing per year.