New Haven Independent

Posted by: TONY | November 8, 2007 10:23 AM

$45 million dollars? "Many have been itching to move back in ever since they heard about a new renovation project, said Lee." Why would you let the same people move back in? You say drugs over took it before. Why would this time be different? The city can't even put a small swing set and slide down the street on Clifton Street at the small park yet they build a $45 million project? I don't get it!

Posted by: charlie | November 8, 2007 10:46 AM

Building subsidized housing, particularly lower-density subsidized units like this project, is a big mistake in the long term. New Haven already has way more than its fair share when compared to any of the surrounding towns. A large portion of existing subsidized units should be demolished, and no more new ones should be built, except in cases of large urban projects like Shartenberg where a small handful of units may be set aside.

Also, by the way, the only way to build truly energy efficient units is to build them as part of high-density, mixed-use projects like Shartenberg. Detached homes like these cost a fortune to heat, and that is completely unsustainable over the next 10-20 years (by then, these sparkling new units will be abandoned).

By building an overwhelming number of subsidized units like these, it is going to be very difficult for New Haven to expand its tax base and lower taxes on the middle and working class homeowners who are critical to the city's success.

Can anyone explain the rationale for flooding our city with subsidized units?

Posted by: FH'er | November 8, 2007 5:39 PM

"Can anyone explain the rationale for flooding our city with subsidized units?"

I can at least try. These housing projects are big business ($45 million and this is a smaller project), so the first thing we have to ask is cui bono?

Well let's see we have Developers, Construction Companies, Construction Managers, Demolition and Waste management Companies, Architecture Firms, Property Management Companies, and various Investors (when not paid for with tax dollars).

They need a place to do it right? It's surely not going to be in their towns. What better place to do it then in a town that doesn't vote? These types of projects are even encouraged and actively pursued in this town. Coincidence? How many articles have we all read now about campaign contributions coming from the above mentioned companies going to our Leader? I mean it wasn't ALL about the $1.466 billion dollar school rebuilding project. I am sure there are more than a few overlaps between companies and public projects (school & housing). I will bet my bottom dollar you will see some of the same companies working both types of projects.

Now, who are the losers? That's right, the tax payers of the almost entirely non-voting populous of New Haven. As we lose more of our tax base (or don't fight to get it back), gain more non-voters, we just keep losing.

FH

Posted by: charlie | November 10, 2007 10:39 PM

That's very cynical -- but is that the actual explanation for why our city refuses to demolish affordable units in favor of uses that actually produce taxes? It seems that there should be more pressure from ordinary citizens to do things like rezone & relocate the subsidized housing across from Union Station, an area which could easily be redeveloped to a high-tax-producing use.