Connect with us

Connecticut

CT landlords join calls for lawmakers to incentivize housing

Published

on

CT landlords join calls for lawmakers to incentivize housing


Another group on Wednesday added its voice to the cohort clamoring for lawmakers to take action to push towns to make it easier to build more apartments: landlords.

At a press conference in Newington, the Connecticut Apartment Association asked lawmakers to take steps to increase the number of multi-family units in the state, especially near public transit, make the permitting process easier for builders and enact measures to help developers more easily turn commercial properties into apartments.

This is the start of a more public push than in years’ past by landlords to put their political weight behind housing development. Landlord groups have typically gotten support from Republican lawmakers and pro-business legislators.

“We are here to engage the discussion now because there’s no easy fix and the old approaches must change. This is what we’ve been talking about with legislative leaders and will continue to do so leading up to the January legislative session,” said apartment association member and New Haven landlord Dondré Roberts. “Our message is simple and direct: Connecticut needs to make it easier to develop and build multi-family housing affordably now.”

Advertisement

Connecticut’s housing crisis has been a problem for legislators for years. According to the National Low Income Housing Coalition, Connecticut has a shortage of over 98,000 housing units that are affordable and available for low-income renters. 

State legislators have been pushing for housing reforms for the past couple of legislative sessions. Roberts said his group supports legislation like House Bill 5474, which passed last session and includes measures to provide incentives for middle housing development, require written notice of rent increases and develop ordinances for short-term rental properties, among other actions.

“Last year, H.B. 5474, which tackles the missing middle of duplexes, triplexes and housing that’s between single-family and multi-family communities like this one, is a great start and they need to keep going,” Roberts said.

Although members said they supported the bill, they did not testify publicly on it. The bill changed substantially between the public hearing and final votes, and members said Wednesday they’re working toward more support this session.

“It’s time,” Roberts said, of the need for more action. “Just as someone who lives in the state … it’s tough out there, especially when you are looking for housing that sometimes doesn’t exist for your budget.”

Advertisement

The landlords’ support may create tension within the coalition of people supporting zoning and land use changes. Typically, those in favor of zoning reform have aligned themselves with tenants’ rights groups.

But the apartment association has opposed bills pro-housing coalition members have supported and on Wednesday it called for lawmakers to stop focusing on landlord-tenant issues and get to what they called the root of the problem — the lack of housing.

“The legislature needs to turn away from the landlord-tenant battles like rent caps and forever leases that held us back last year,” Roberts said. “Those proposals were rejected. They took everyone’s eye off the ball, stalled progress, and they don’t add a single unit of housing.”

Lawmakers in past sessions have considered proposals to cap rent increases and to stop no-fault evictions, or evictions that occur when leases end. Neither proposal has gotten through the House or Senate.

Broadly, the apartment association members said they wanted to make it easier to build more housing of many types, including higher-density developments. They said lawmakers should explore methods such as tax incentives, among other solutions.

Advertisement

They pointed to data that shows the vast majority of Connecticut’s residential land is zoned for single-family housing and said that needs to change.

Landlords said they also wanted to see ways to make it easier to convert vacant commercial properties into apartments. The strategy has been used across the country in cities like Providence, where a shopping mall was transformed into apartments.

A major concern for the apartment association and other groups is the development process for housing around Connecticut. Kevin Santini, a principal at the family-owned property management and construction company Santini Homes, said developers struggle in Connecticut because of the extensive permitting process.

“If you go into a piece of land that isn’t zoned for multi-family, it’s very daunting and very unattractive to go in and try to go through the processes that you need to go through,” Santini said.

He emphasizes the need for predictability with infrastructure. 

Advertisement

“You can’t make the process take two to three years, especially if you’re rezoning a parcel by that time,” Santini said. “It’s years and it’s hundreds of thousands of dollars if not seven figures.”

Roberts said the group supports incentive-based solutions rather than mandates for towns. That issue is one of the biggest debates in the conversation about zoning reform and housing development in Connecticut.

Top lawmakers and housing experts have said leaving control in the hands of local government isn’t working. But Gov. Ned Lamont and many opponents of statewide zoning reform have argued for incentive-based, locally driven solutions.

Santini said the responsibility for building the housing will lie with developers.

“To make positive changes, politics can’t be involved,” Santini said. “And I know that’s crazy to say, and maybe even naive, but we have to do what’s best for the state of Connecticut, and we have to put our agendas aside. And right now, the state needs us. The state needs builders.”

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Connecticut

Person dead, 3 others hospitalized after fire in Bridgeport

Published

on

Person dead, 3 others hospitalized after fire in Bridgeport


A person has died and three others were taken to the hospital after a house fire in Bridgeport Monday evening.

City officials said they responded to a reported structure fire on Connecticut Avenue just before 5 p.m.

Fire officials said three people were taken to the hospital for evaluation. The extent of their injuries is unknown.

Advertisement

Authorities said one person died in the fire, but their identity has not yet been released.

The Red Cross is relocating four children and four adults. The Bridgeport Fire Marshal’s Office is working with Connecticut State Police Fire and Explosion investigators to determine the cause.

No additional information was immediately available.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Connecticut

Pedestrian struck on I-95 in Milford has serious injuries

Published

on

Pedestrian struck on I-95 in Milford has serious injuries


A pedestrian has serious injuries after being struck while on Interstate 95 in Milford over the weekend.

Dispatchers received a call about a pedestrian hit on I-95 South around 6:30 p.m. Sunday.

Fire officials said a car sideswiped the pedestrian’s car while he was attempting to put fuel in it.

The pedestrian suffered serious leg injuries in the collision and he was transported to Bridgeport Hospital for treatment.

Advertisement

The collision is under investigation. Anyone with information or anyone who may have witnessed the collision is asked to call State Police at (203) 696-2500.



Source link

Continue Reading

Connecticut

Connecticut’s time for energy investment is now – if state leaders get on board

Published

on

Connecticut’s time for energy investment is now – if state leaders get on board


As a 15-year veteran of the utility industry, I can tell you with certainty there’s nowhere like Connecticut. In other states, when utility companies receive downgrades in their credit rating, regulators and consumer advocates haul them into hearings, demanding to know their plans to rectify them.

Not so in Connecticut, where regulators themselves are named as the reason for the downgrades, and policymakers like the Office of Consumer Counsel and the Chairs of the legislature’s Energy and Technology Committee work overtime to provide political cover.

Meanwhile, the scope of these downgrades – from S&P and Moody’s, two of the most respected financial institutions in the world – extend statewide, from two Avangrid companies, Eversource and all its subsidiaries, to even a small water company.

Whatever the political rhetoric, the impacts are serious and the damage long-term. Building a grid for Connecticut’s future will require billions in new investment over the decades to come, and with the downgrades warning investors to be increasingly skeptical of Connecticut utilities, every single dollar just got more expensive.

Advertisement

The state has a long list of goals for its economy and clear objectives for its utilities: build a modern, sustainable, reliable, resilient, renewable, innovative electric grid capable of supporting massive capacity increases from electrification and data centers. Alienating the investment community does nothing to further those goals; it only makes them less attainable.

But until PURA and state policymakers abandon their anti-utility bias, they will continue to miss today’s golden opportunity to build the energy system of tomorrow –- an opportunity other states are rigorously pursuing. Instead, the excellent reliability that customers rely on, built through a long legacy of investment, will be whittled away even as costs continue to rise.

This, to a question that Sen. Norm Needleman and Rep. Jonathan Steinberg raise in their editorial, is why companies like ours “care” if our credit rating is downgraded. We are not so short-sighted as to shrug off the consequences of higher costs for our customers.

But even more significant are the consequences to long-term energy investment in Connecticut. Utilities are some of the most capital-intensive businesses in the country. We rely on selling bonds to finance safe, reliable, high-quality service through investments like new substations, battery storage, flood walls, microgrids and more.

Downgrades signal to investors they should pull their loans, leaving us with insufficient capital to advance these innovations. Instead, utilities are forced to put what limited capital we can raise (through higher premiums on our bonds) into the most basic, fundamental projects, like storm restoration efforts or pole replacements after traffic accidents.

Advertisement

Accepting – and even incentivizing – PURA to enable meager investments to support only the most basic service puts Connecticut out of step with our neighbors, as other northeastern states are doing the hard work of system planning for the future. It’s no coincidence that Eversource is putting forward 30-year investment plans in Massachusetts while pulling $500 million in investments from Connecticut. Nor should it be surprising that Avangrid company New York State Electric & Gas (NYSEG) is building two 1-megawatt battery energy storage systems that tap directly into New York substations, a major resiliency investment, while nothing of the sort is happening in Connecticut.

Regulators in Massachusetts and New York are far from easy or passive. They have high standards that utilities must work hard to meet, and they do not get everything they ask for, as Needleman and Steinberg baselessly claim is our demand.

What Massachusetts and New York do is set the rules of the road for utility companies. They set clear standards of performance they expect from utility companies – in everything from the level of detail in rate cases to their forward-looking investment plans – and they hold them accountable.

That is not the case in Connecticut. Legislators can obfuscate, downplay, or even offer fictitious conspiracy theories -– most incredibly, that we would pay credit rating agencies, which are independent referees under federal law, to downgrade our credit ratings when downgrades are good for no one.

But none of these political games change the fact that energy companies cannot invest in a state in which PURA puts politically expedient rate cuts over its stated objectives. Nor will they alleviate the underinvestment these policymakers are apparently willing to accept in favor of the fabrication that PURA is “simply holding utilities accountable.”

Advertisement

I fear Connecticut’s energy infrastructure, and the economy it’s built on, will be left behind as other states move forward with a clear vision. The golden opportunity for investment in the energy future is now, and we are at serious risk of missing it as our regulators and policymakers prioritize waging political war on the state’s utilities. The longer they dally, the more likely it is that PURA’s actions and inaction will leave us in the dark.

 Charlotte Ancel is the Vice President of Investor Relations at Avangrid, the parent company of United Illuminating, Connecticut Natural Gas, and Southern Connecticut Gas.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending