WestportNow Teardown of the Day: 67 Valley Road

4 thoughts on “WestportNow Teardown of the Day: 67 Valley Road”

1. John; i like the idea of buying existing houses as an alternative; although I think any workforce housing is a very difficult sell in a town where many residents need to commute 3+ hours a day to keep living here. If we decide to go ahead with workforce housing, why doesn’t the town buy rental properties in Bridgeport where: 1) prices are much lower; 2) an influx of more middle class residents would in theory help the local economy and schools; and 3) we wouldn’t create a possible conflict of interest in providing a housing subsidy to new potential voters.

   Reply

2. I am curious and would like to get people’s thoughts on a question I have.  Assuming that the Town of Westport want’s to provide housing for town employees.  (Yes, I know that there are many different opinions as to whether this is something the town should do, but for the sake of this question, please just assume that the town has decided to do it.)

   What are the pros and cons of each of the following 2 approaches:

   1. Build a large development of 1-2 bedroom condos on town owned land and rent them to town employees on a subsidized basis.

   2. Have the town purchase small, relatively inexpensive houses in neighborhoods and rent them on a subsidized basis to town employees.

   Any thoughts?

   John McCarthy
   RTM District 9

   Reply

3. Good idea in concept, but the actual value of the property is the land, not the house, which makes it more expensive.  For example, the Town might have to pay $500K for this bungalow, and rent it as if it cost $250K.  If the Town builds on land it already owns, it doesn’t lose the value of the investment (although it may not be maximizing the return for that land).

   Unfortunately, this argument is almost always true year after year, so it is very difficult for any town to buy properties for this purpose.  Perhaps it could find some foreclosures…?

   Reply

4. Lets assume the town doesn’t spend tax payer’s money on an unnecessary and wasteful liberal fantasy and just reduces the current taxes and leaves open space as the word defines it.

   But I do have a very simple question that I would like answered, what is the reason for workforce housing? Are we losing highly skilled professionals to other municipalities who do offer such give aways? No we are not. Is it to help eliminate their commute? Gee if that’s the reason, shouldn’t we first help those who live in Westport that must wake up at 4 am to catch the train and commute for at least 90 minutes into NYC?

   First of all Westport, like most of the surrounding towns, is very small. Anywhere else, west of the Hudson River or north, towns and counties are large and vast, making long commutes routine. This is not the case here, one could live in Norwalk, Bridgeport or Fairfield and be in Westport in 10 minutes. What if Westport was larger and encompassed Fairfield and Norwalk, would we be trying to get the town employees closer to downtown?

   My second point is, what about town employees living in Ridgefield, Darien, New Canaan or some other affluent town further then Bridgeport, Stratford or Norwalk are we going to offer them subsidized housing too? Or is just for people in towns you deem less desirable. To me this is just elitism and pure arrogance.

   I really do not understand the reasoning behind this proposal. I also resent the way the First Selectman and his administration is pushing this with his bogus Sampson Engineering study stating that Baron’s South is best suited for workforce housing and his follow up survey to town employees asking if they would like subsidized housing? Was anyone surprised at the results? I find the steps taken to achieve his vision insulting at best. Lets not entertain or indulge his fantasy any longer.

   I have a lot more to say on this subject, but it’s getting late and I have to drive to Philadelphia in the morning. Even so, I don’t think the good people of Philly owe me housing or even a cheese steak sandwich.

   Reply