Zoning Official Floats Affordable Housing Idea For Fairfield Hills

By John Voket

Saying it is “up to town officials to educate the public about the difference between affordable and subsidized housing,” Fairfield Hills Authority (FHA) member John Reed threw his support behind exploring designating eight homes on the outskirts of the town-owned campus as affordable.

The FHA heard about the preliminary proposal from Planning & Zoning Commission Chair Lilla Dean during its June 17 meeting. Ms Dean said she first approached authority chairman Robert Geckle informally wondering if made sense to move forward applying for a state grant.

If delivered, the designated funding would help the town plan how to move forward preparing the cluster of modest colonials for individuals who otherwise might not be able to afford to purchase a home in Newtown.

Ms Dean preceded her presentation in full acknowledgement that the $50,000 grant funding may not come to fruition.

“But there are multiple reasons to try — and lots of pitfalls,” she said. One of the many positive aspects of the plan, if successful, would be to attract additional funding from private, state, or federal sources to help make the structures habitable.

The cluster of homes near the meadow at Wasserman Way and Mile Hill Road South served former Fairfield Hills Hospital personnel, and are across from a row of similar homes that were sold to underwrite improvements on the campus.

“This might be good PR,” Ms Dean said of her long-term goal to try and boost the stock of affordable housing in Newtown. She said the state calls for ten percent of housing in any community to be deemed affordable, and that today, less than one percent of Newtown’s total housing fits the designation.

“We’re in trouble. The town should take a more proactive view of affordable housing,” Ms Dean said, adding that some or all of the homes in question might also be considered for town employees.

During her talk with the authority, Ms Dean also suggested considering the cluster of homes as an artist community similar to one she saw in Hamden where qualifying tenants or buyers reside on the second floor, and have galleries or exhibit space on the ground level.

Authority treasurer Don Studley asked if the homes would be sold or rented, and if deemed affordable, what their price would be.

Ms Dean replied that general guideline stipulate affordable as 80 percent of the median household price, which would mean the homes would fetch, “in the low three-hundreds.”

Authority member Walter Motyka was adamant that the town not move towards putting residential tenants or buyers onto the Fairfield Hills campus.

“We’ve been approached by people wanting to take over the whole lot, and for years we’ve been telling people no housing,” Mr Motyka said.

Mr Geckle reminded Ms Dean that based on its latest revision, incorporating any type of housing into the Master Plan of Development for Fairfield Hills would require an amendment.

“I want to see if it will work,” Ms Dean said. “The state wants to see towns giving up public lands [for affordable housing], meeting developers halfway.”

Ms Dean said the town was currently embroiled in a lawsuit over an attempt to establish affordable housing elsewhere in the community, and by making an attempt to establish appropriate locations for such developments it would show the town was serious about the initiative.

“We’re in court now, and it would help to have something on our side,” she said, adding that she did not want to ask for the grant if she was going to face opposition to the plan from the authority.

Mr Reed said it is the authority’s charge to carry out the master plan, and after a housing component was removed from the latest revision, leaders in the previous administration indicated that housing could be put back in at some future point.

Mr Reed agreed adamantly that the town should do something sooner than later.

“At some point in the future a developer with enough resources is going to dig in his heels, and we’re going to get something much more controversial forced on us,” Mr Reed said. “It makes sense to have some housing to attract people who want to be here — who want to work in town.”

Mr Geckle said over a period of 18 months, during which he worked on proposed uses for Fairfield Hills early on in the process of obtaining the former state hospital for town use, most proponents of the acquisition opposed housing there.

“There was not a lot of public support,” he said. “[They agreed] we need it, but not there.” He added that since the land cannot be sold, any residential uses would have to be handled through leases.

Mr Motyka said the authority should not change the proposed site usage to address today’s crisis, but should look at an extreme long-term plan.

Mr Reed said that in the long term, if the houses were raised and the parcel saved for future use, it could certainly accommodate a new elementary school development at some point in the future.

Authority member Michael Holmes said he would be afraid of the precedent of creating residential use on the campus.

“I’ve heard since day one that housing was out,” he said. “Once housing is on the site, how will you keep developers away?”

First Selectman Joe Borst, who was on hand, said he liked the idea of having full-time residents on campus.

“Having people there will help with security. I suggest the authority explore the possibility,” Mr Borst said.

Mr Reed concluded that there was a need today, and he was loathe to consider the eventual alternative if the town squandered such an available opportunity to control its own affordable pilot program.

“We need to take control or a solution will be prescribed to us with no control by the town,” Mr Reed concluded.

In other business, the authority members on hand Tuesday said they were interested in handing over the financial reporting for all business related to its voluntary role to the Board of Selectman and the town’s finance director.

Mr Reed made a motion saying he did not understand why up to now, the finance director had not handled the financial reports for the authority, which is controlled by the Board of Selectmen.

Mr Geckle suggested that the financial reporting was left up to the authority up to now because its oversight extended beyond the agency’s own budget.

“It’s not a black and white situation. We have oversight of the [authority budget], lease and common area charges. It’s a little more complicated,” Mr Geckle said.

Mr Reed supported the move, saying the multiple layers of financial dealings between authority business and town projects going forward on the campus was becoming a problem and contributing to confusion over which financial statements provided the most current and definitive information.

Referring to the tracking of town bonding for Fairfield Hills projects, Mr Reed said: “People keep saying it’s our money, but it’s the town’s money.”

Mr Geckle committed to meeting with the Board of Selectmen and the finance director to propose the change in reporting, and said he would report back on the proposal at the next authority meeting.