The Westport Planning and Zoning Commission Thursday night rejected a proposal that would allow developers to trade off including affordable housing by submitting payment to a town fund.
The commission discussed and voted on the proposal following a discussion on the multi-family housing cap (See WestportNow May 3), and it was not the only discussion on affordable housing Thursday night.
Eleanor Lowenstein, commission co-chairwoman, said the way to control multi-family housing is through zoning and where those housing projects are allowed, and she had concerns about the proposal because it would affect a large area.
“If we create more multi-family zones, there will be more multi-family housing,” she said. “We don’t have a plan.”
Howard Lathrop, a commission member, said the number of multi-family housing projects has increased because of the housing prices.
Housing is too expensive, he said, so people are building the multi-family housing to address a need from people who want to move into Westport or stay here.
The commission also began discussions on an amendment to the town’s affordable housing regulations from Woodland Group that would be applied in the Indian Hill and Bradley Lane area. But the commission made no decisions nor gave the staff any direction on how it may vote.
Under the proposed changes, 20 percent of the units would have to be for those who make 80 percent of the state median income, and 10 percent would have to be those who earn 80 percent of the local median income.
The state median income is $81,000 for a family of four, and 80 percent of it would be $64,800. The median income of Westport is almost $159,000, and 80 percent of it would be about $127,000.
Helen Martin Block, a commission member, said there is a subcommittee analyzing affordable housing and the town plan upgrade is ongoing.
“We are making good progress in determining what direction we want to go,” she said.
Additionally, the regulation would be applied to a neighborhood that is not fitting for an affordable housing development, she said, because there is a lot of traffic and already a diversity in housing stock.
David Press, a commission member, said he had concerns with the proposal, but specifically how the changes would allow developments to abut I-95.
“There is no utilitarian use,” he said. “There is no advantage to have this along the highway.”
Tim Wetmore, a commission member, said he is not overly happy with the proposal, but there is little else to be done with the property.
“We need to look at this carefully,” he said.
Ron Corwin, commission co-chairman, said he is troubled with some of the requirements in the proposal, but he wants to know what else would be proposed if it’s not this particular regulation.
“If we want affordable and workforce housing, it needs to go somewhere,” he said.
