Connecticut needs zoning reform, not housing laws
There has been a lot of discussion about labor shortages: police, teachers, nurses, manufacturing have all been widely reported, but virtually every business and enterprise needs more help. With all the talk of inclusionary zoning, affordable housing, overpriced Mcmansions as well as the usual complaints about commercial development being denied in our state, maybe we need to ask if our strict zoning is the root of our problem, rather than government money and wages.
A lot of our zoning rules were done in the 1940s and 1950s, even though they have been updated in the meantime.
But the basic concept in most towns is single-family homes are right and nothing else is. I understand that for the new subdivisions of the post-war era, but is that really what is best now? Then we had crowded cities with tenements, often with cold water only, and families headed toward six people. Today the average family size is 2.1, and the average age is considerably higher. Many towns have more people over 65 than children in school. Yet housing units have not expanded for this changed demographic, never mind our population growth of the last 80 years.
While often panned, our 169 towns were historically self-sufficient, which contributes to the sense of place we all hold so dear. Yet, to be an Independent town, a church was required, but also some amount of commerce and supplies as well as industry for local self-sufficiency. Large towns/cities were a place to sell surplus production from those farms and industries. Yet our core cities had more population and vibrancy in the 1950s than they currently do. The outlying towns have no place for their children to establish themselves independently. New business is not welcome at too many proposed sites. We also see issues with seniors unable to maintain their property and also unable to afford to hire the maintenance out; yet they have nowhere to go that suits their needs.
Our state population has doubled since the ’50s, and we have not built to accommodate that growth, accounted for a much smaller family size or allowed businesses to grow and provide economic opportunity.
Connecticut needs choice in land use. It has been suggested that we need 89,000 units now for people already living in the state. We have built 4,500 homes per year over the last five years, so we will be working off the current need for 20 years. Currently, we demolish in excess of 500 units year, so we will be short another 10,000 units in 20 years.
We need smaller houses on smaller lots that are cheaper to build and cheaper to maintain. Remote work dictates that there needs to be the provision for more home-based businesses. Town center buildings need the income of multifloor apartment rentals over retail and commercial first floors to justify the expense of valuable land with roads, sewer, water and other utilities that allow the walkable lifestyle sought by our millennials and seniors.
We also need to allow businesses to grow and expand. We need assisted living where there are employees of residents, including food service. There are other building projects that do not fit between the lines of zoning as it is currently written in many places. Our residents want housing choices, which current zoning denies. Maybe that is why so few young people want to come to Connecticut compared to New York, Boston, Washington, or Chicago, places where the weather, taxes and quality of life are comparable.
I suggest that we do not need zoning for affordable housing. We need zoning reform that allows people the liberty to plan and build for their family and community needs, and not hold on to a remembrance of 80 years ago.