Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

johnsonutah t1_itw6xwm wrote

With every proposed large scale multi family / apartment / affordable housing etc development, have the developers discuss the anticipated headcount impact to the school system, anticipated roadway & traffic impact, and anticipated water / infrastructure impact.

Have the town run the same assessment. Then using both assessments calculate the property tax impact to existing residents, and inform said residents accordingly.

Biggest fear of new development is increasing property taxes by way of greater required services / infrastructure, followed by declining property values (which results in higher property taxes when measured by mil rate).

Lastly, I personally think the conversation should be shifted to focus on building up our cities more with a greater & denser variety of housing stock, coupled with significant infrastructure investments (faster trains, trolley systems, better roadway system eg bury the highway if needed) which would improve the livability & desirability of our metro areas and attract new residents and employers. I find that the conversation around housing is almost exclusively geared towards suburbs and rural areas. And to be clear, I also support building more density around train stations in Fairfield County (and Hartford County).

Regarding why cities should be focused on, just as a real world example: why aren’t there market rate apartments along with shopping, coffee spots and restaurants around the New Haven train station? It’s an important station for the north east corridor. Why hasn’t the street been redesigned so there aren’t shuttle busses blocking the crosswalk and exit, causing a potential hazard and congestion? Unacceptable for the city and state to not rapidly develop this area.

5

ertebolle t1_itw8kqf wrote

This. Very often people have hugely inflated notions of how many new students a new development is likely to bring - my understanding is that relative to the property taxes paid, apartments are often more profitable for towns than single-family homes.

9

johnsonutah t1_itw9vhq wrote

Yup - but on the other hand, if a school system is effectively maxed out as is, and multiple large developments result in a need for a new highschool, new building etc, then there will be a town wide tax increase.

This happened in my town, we needed a new high school and our prop taxes are higher than they were before. I personally don’t care but I can understand the concern when new developments are considered / popping up all over.

I also want to highlight that it’s not just school systems…roadway overhauls, water infrastructure etc matter and are never ever addressed by developers.

1

kayakyakr t1_itwetr0 wrote

Population will increase and someone's going to have to build a new HS. And your increased taxes have now improved your school system, improving services offered by your town. If you look at it that way, it's an upgrade and well worth the price.

But your town could probably also have anticipated the growth and started investing in a larger school or new HS much earlier. Growing up, my town readjusted our HS split before I made it to high school. They launched the new HS by having an all-district 9th grade campus for a few years that funneled into the main campus. As the district population grew, they realigned and made the 9th grade campus a full 4 year HS. This would have been forward thinking and would have had much less an impact than saying, "well, shit, I guess we need a new school now"

−2

johnsonutah t1_itwii9m wrote

Bigger school system doesn’t equal better school system

And forward thinking is kind of the point - if we change the paradigm and roll back zoning across the state, it’s pretty hard for towns to plan.

In fact I think we are arguing for the same thing - transparency by developers and the town regarding infrastructure impacts from new developments, alongside tax assessments of the impacts. If high density multi families results in an uptick in school aged population, requiring infra upgrades, requiring higher prop taxes, it seems reasonable for the residents to be informed of that. It’s also equally good to be informed if that won’t happen, because it means tax rates will potentially go down!

2

Time_Yam301 t1_itxnmeq wrote

New multi-family housing development increases property tax revenue - which is desperately needed by many if not most municipalities in the state - and never decreases it.

Regardless, no municipality should have the right to prohibit multi-family housing within a reasonable walking distance of a train station.

1