Promise: Rezoning Won’t Zone People Out

Promoting affordable housing is necessary and, hopefully, this effort will be productive for New Haven. However, Fair Housing laws prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, religion, national origin or gender.

I don't see how an "eye towards how the project would impact low-income, black and brown populations in particular" complies with Fair Housing. The very fact that LCI officials would direct professional studies towards one group or another shows a misunderstanding of Fair Housing.

We hope the good people of City government will find a way to support affordable housing for diverse neighborhoods without exposing the City to unnecessary legal issues.

Bad zoning can expose the City to a raft of legal challenges from property owners who claim their property value was diminished by the changes.

To bring services and housing into poorer neighborhoods, you can subsidize development with scarce tax dollars.

Or you can, for zero dollars, relax restrictive and outdated zoning laws. That seems like the better route.

Why must every project have affordable units? Why? What is wrong with charging rent and those who can and want to pay it can rent there?

"Affordable" as currently defined is an absolute joke.

At new projects like 360State Street or RMS' Parkside development, you have CT State subsidies going to yuppies, literally giving them $5,000/yr or more to live in luxury housing.

Where are our politicians on this matter? The benefits should be going to the elderly and needy families, -- not to people with decent incomes, and not towards luxury apartments.

THIS SYSTEM IS BROKEN!

OutofTown, restricting housing to a specific racial group is illegal. But I do not think that is what Kerry Ellington is seeking. Rather, she wants to know how the proposed changes affect black, brown, and low- income people.

Part of this analysis is straightforward. If a development goes up on property that is currently used for non-residential purposes, it will not cause direct displacement. You can determine the extent to which it would be affordable to current NH black, brown, and low-income residents using existing census data. Developments replacing existing housing in the corridors could result in direct displacement, although I suspect such developments would be uncommon. Again using census data, you could compare the demographics of the current residents to those of the people who could afford to rent the new units.

I believe Ms. Ellington is also concerned about indirect displacement. There, an impact analysis becomes much harder. I suspect the extent of such displacement would be very project-specific, affected by the rental vacancy rate in the area and rents for existing vs. new units.

CityYankee, the vast majority of units built in recent years or in the pipeline are market rate and unaffordable to most NH residents. This proposal would apply to a very small part of the city and would not apply to small developments. If you built a six-unit building there would be no affordability requirements. And under state law, the requirements would not affect developments that get building permits before the requirements go into effect.

So many issues...

If New Haven has a gentrification problem I don't see it. And I get out a lot. And talk to all sorts of people. In just about every neighborhood, you can still rent a 900sq ft 2 bedroom for 1200-1400. By all indicators, that's affordable.

Inclusionary zoning and mandatory affordable units will kill our only shot at avoiding bankruptcy; growing our grand list. Developers will stop looking at New Haven as soon as the numbers don't make sense. And that starts with the private sector subsidizing rents without having access to an offset via state loans or tax credits. These programs have shrunk 90 percent or more. There is no money for these developments by private developers.

New Haven has a huge share of the region's affordable housing. I think New Haven is at 30 percent affordable compared to many of our neighbors who aren't even in double digits. So why add to this? How about state legislation to make suburban towns carry their weight in this housing debate. Without state funds, it's not possible. But that's no reason to penalize New Haven developers.

As I see it (in the housing courts of CT it's really clear) the most vulnerable of society are the very low income people. They're on disability or are chronically jobless. They get bye with 7-800 per month plus assistance. There are a lot of these people. No one can house them effectively. This is an issue of poverty, substance abuse, trauma, education, etc. Not housing. Solving their housing issue does nothing to solve the other issues. They're still poor and uneducated with no prospects. And over time, they lose the drive to better themselves. It becomes a generational impairment.

This is as much a white problem as a brown or black problem. It's rural and cities. It's everywhere.

Let's not kill the progress we're making with a feel good token gesture at affordable housing.

Some version of this will pass. Sad. Because our politics is just that fubared.

There are lot of jobs such as medical receptionist which require no special education but pay about $15/hr, or $30K/year. A couple would therefore have a household income of $60K/year, so the idea that a household couldn't have an income of $58K is pretty absurd. It's not that hard. Moreover, at $60K/year, a rent of over $1,500/month would be affordable. There are scads of dwellings, both apartments and whole houses, renting for $1500/month. The joke of the subsidy of a place like 360 State is that the affordable rents are probably pretty close to the market rates for many apartments, such as those with a view of a parking garage instead of the harbor or Green.
Cityyankee: The problem with affordable rents is that many New Haveners have borne children before establishing themselves financially. They, and many local political and religious leaders, feel it's someone else's responsibility, not theirs, to provide for them and whatever number of children they decide to have.

"Indirect displacement" is a myth.

http://cityobservatory.org/another-housing-myth-debunked-neighborhood-price-effects-of-new-apartments/

As Ellington notes, housing instability is already very high, as it has always been among renters with moderate or low incomes. But displacement will be even higher if we restrict private developers from adding new housing to New Haven. As the article above notes, the "yuppies" who would have rented the new housing will simply come in and rent other privately-owned units instead.

Ben, some people are conflating housing unaffordability with gentrification. The former is a widespread problem in New Haven and across the country. It is not limited to low income households. You're correct that there are decent apartments available in town for $1,200. But you need a household income of $48,000 to afford such an apartment, using the 30% of income guideline. The median household income in New Haven is a bit more than $39,000 (2017 Census data). Substantially fewer than half of New Haven households can afford a $1,200 apartment.

A bunch of factors contribute to housing unaffordability, including income stagnation and the delay of 20- and 30-somethings in buying housing, which increases demand for rentals. In some places gentrification (the influx of well-to-do households in historically working class and poor neighborhoods) has been a major factor. But that has not really happened here. With few exceptions, the areas that had predominantly low and moderate income residents when I moved here 30 years ago still do. Over a generation, neighborhoods like Williamsburg have gone from working class to well-off; Dixwell and Fair Haven, not so much.

@averagetaxpayer

I'm the politician who collected & did the research on inclusive affordable housing. Its taken a year and a half of hard work advocating for this change. I used the US Census information to conduct a study on the racial & class earnings impacts.

My masters thesis is the crux of the proposal & adoption for this inclusive housing change along with non profits.

Soooooooo ... I wonder who the content experts are? Who took the initiative from economic development to expand a research study that they never finished? Who handed a proposal on inclusive housing & source materials to the affordable housing task force?

I find it very disturbing that the mayoral candidates in running against are touring the inclusive housing proposal success, without having done any of the work to develop it.

There's a nugget of truth for you.

Urn Pendragon

I think we can't have a reasonable discussion about mandating affordable units until there is a funding source to cover the gap that affordable units create. Its financially unworkable. If there was a loan bank, grants, or State money to cover the gap, i could support some form of inclusionary mandate. But I think this is a lot of good intentions with little thought about the ramifications. And the timing is terrible; during a building boom we should not kill our golden goose; we should let it lay some eggs.

Is there a common perception that New Haven is unaffordable or gentrifying? I dont see displacement of minorities anywhere in the City; in fact, Westville and the Cove look more diverse than ever. So does Dwight, and Science Park.

Anonymous, I had read that paper previously. While it is not wrong, it is not terribly persuasive with regard to New Haven. It is only looking at 11 cities, all of them much larger than New Haven. For methodologically sound reasons, it only analyzes the impact of geographically isolated developments. It does not analyze cases where there are multiple developments in the same or adjacent neighborhoods, something that is happening in New Haven now. And once you moved beyond 200 meters from the new development (about one block) rents for existing housing went up by about 10% following construction of the new developments.

Ben, we both know that the federal and state governments are not going to substantially increase affordable housing subsidies in the foreseeable future. One thing the city can do (and is proposing to do) is to provide zoning incentives for such housing. If a developer can put 10% more units on a lot, he or she can reduce rents, to a degree, and still make money.

posted by: anonymous on July 30, 2019 10:42am

"Indirect displacement" is a myth.

Who Benefits from Gentrification?

Peter Dreier

When affluent people compete with poor people for a scarce supply of housing, guess what happens? Home prices and rents go up, and the poor are pushed out. In a nutshell, that's the formula that fuels gentrification. Because American cities are highly segregated by income as well as race, gentrification also involves clashes of culture. In the typical process of gentrification, the gentry are white, and the displaced victims are people of color. In the first stages of gentrification, neighborhoods become more diverse regarding income and race. But over time, what had been a working class community comprised primarily of Black, Latino and Asian residents becomes an affluent area populated by white professionals, although in some cities, minority professionals are also part of the influx of better-educated and higher-income newcomers.Raising rents, converting apartments to condos, razing single-family homes and replacing them with McMansions, buying pools of mortgages and selling them to investors, and foreclosing on working class homeowners and reselling the properties to the highest bidders are part of their business model.n Los Angeles, the average rent for a 2-bedroom, 1-bathroom apartment is about $2,169 per month. A family needs to earn nearly $42 per hour — or $86,760 per year — to afford the average rent (meaning, not paying more than 30% of its income on rent). That is more than the typical income of even school teachers, nurses, electricians, mail carriers, insurance appraisers and firefighters. In the same city, the median-priced single-family home sold for approximately $669,000 last year. The monthly mortgage payment required to buy that home is $4,544 per month. A family would need to earn $165,247 per year to support this mortgage,

https://www.kcet.org/shows/city-rising/who-benefits-from-gentrification

posted by: Ben Trachten on July 30, 2019 4:04pm

Is there a common perception that New Haven is unaffordable or gentrifying? I dont see displacement of minorities anywhere in the City; in fact, Westville and the Cove look more diverse than ever. So does Dwight, and Science Park

The 5 Phases of Gentrification -- When can it be stopped?

New haven is in Phases 4.


Phase 4
The first wave of Pioneers gets priced out.
Banks and investors create more high priced apartments and condos.
Buildings bought for speculation in Phase 2 get put back on the market.

The push out and displacement will come in Phase.

Phase 5 – Post Peak
Vacancy rates increase as rents push above the limit.
Speculators take the money they made in Phase 4 and look for new opportunities in neighboring communities. Landlords are absentee, including large banks and institutional investors.
Property values stagnate or fall from their peaks.

New Haven be next year will be in Phase 5 – Post Peak

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10027271388

posted by: 1644 on July 30, 2019 7:21am

Cityyankee: The problem with affordable rents is that many New Haveners have borne children before establishing themselves financially.

If this is the Case.Then how come these people who are financially establish can not afford the rents?

Almost half of US families can't afford basics like rent and food

https://money.cnn.com/2018/05/17/news/economy/us-middle-class-basics-study/index.html

I secretly lived in my office for 500 days

Unable to pay rent in L.A., I slept behind my desk. But what began as a quick financial fix soon became a lifestyle

https://www.salon.com/2015/04/30/i_secretly_lived_in_my_office_for_500_days/

Working Class Americans Are Finding It Increasingly Difficult To Afford Housing

https://www.npr.org/2019/06/25/735930722/working-class-americans-are-finding-it-increasingly-difficult-to-afford-housing

3/5's: where do you see the vacancy rates increasing? Where are rents dropping? I see more units being built. What are the vacancy rates at places like 360 State that are more established? What about the Ninth Square? Where is the data on what is happening in New Haven?

We stand among the WORST places to rent in the country. Almost dead last (thanks, Bridgeport)

https://wallethub.com/edu/best-cities-for-renters/23010/

Anonymous and 3/5ths, indirect displacement happens, but is far from ubiquitous. A neighborhood can become "hot" for both rational and non-rational reasons. When this happens, better-off households bid up rents, making the neighborhood increasingly unaffordable to existing residents. If markets operated the way that Econ 101 texts say they operate, developers would build more housing and rents would go down. But the real world is more complicated. Zoning constraints and NIMBYism are real issues. And the housing that is being built is unaffordable to most New Haven residents.

But indirect displacement only happens in certain places. There is a limited number of well-off households that want to live in urban neighborhoods and a limited number of neighborhoods that they find attractive. Randy Salvatore is betting that lots of well-off people want to live close to the Med School, downtown, and Union Station. I don't see anyone making that argument about the Annex or West Rock (no slight to these neighborhoods).

New Haven has a real affordability problem. Building more market rate units will eventually help some moderate income folks, as well as helping to pay the city's bills. But it will do little to help low income households and is far from a panacea.

posted by: CityYankee on July 31, 2019 6:17am

3/5's: where do you see the vacancy rates increasing? Where are rents dropping? I see more units being built. What are the vacancy rates at places like 360 State that are more established? What about the Ninth Square? Where is the data on what is happening in New Haven?

As I said before New Haven is in Phase 4

The first wave of Pioneers gets priced out.
Banks and investors create more high priced apartments and condos.
Buildings bought for speculation in Phase 2 get put back on the market.

The push out and displacement will come in Phase 5.

Phase 5 – Post Peak
Vacancy rates increase as rents push above the limit.
Speculators take the money they made in Phase 4 and look for new opportunities in neighboring communities. Landlords are absentee, including large banks and institutional investors.
Property values stagnate or fall from their peaks.

New Haven be next year will be in Phase 5 –

What are the vacancy rates at places like 360 State that are more established? What about the Ninth Square?

As far as Ninth Square.I know people who live there and are now going to move out because the city will be charging from what they told me 85.00 a month to part there cars.They can not afford it.

You say I see more units being built.What is the rent for those units?In fact I know people who live downtown new haven due to the rents being so high.They have room mates.

Let's gentrify away! Maybe higher rents will drive some of the crime out of New Haven too.

3/5s: When affluent people compete with poor people for a scarce supply of housing, guess what happens?

Which is precisely why we should welcome and encourage new, high-end development on surface parking, conversion of office buildings, etc. so housing is not scarce, and more affluent people don't compete with poor people for the same housing, but have high-end offerings to move into.

Ben,

Many hardworking people in New Haven who have a variety of jobs are struggling with the increases in rents and are being pushed out of our city. Moreover, those who are struggling with addiction and those who don't have high levels of education deserve our respect and a safe and sanitary place to live. Certainly, we need to push the suburbs to do more, but making wild speculations about inclusive zoning and trashing people who would benefit from affordable housing isn't a productive contribution to the discussion here.

Dear BevHills: what makes neighborhoods of the poor dirty and dangerous? Do the suburbs drop off danger and dirt and drugs? Do the suburbanites come and wreck the housing units? All this talk of what people "deserve" seems to overlook that much of the pathologies we deplore seem to be part and parcel of these neighborhood residents. Who sez poor people have to be dirty and drug-addicted? Is it a rule or is it a lifestyle choice? If it is a choice; who are the other taxpayers to deny them their freedom to trash their homes and their lives? Sounds harsh but isn't this freedom?

CityYankee,

While I agree that there's a lamentable lack of emphasis on personal responsibility when it comes to sensitive social issues, a few rotten apples spoil the entire bunch. Let's not generalize the poor.

On the other hand, we need to stop blaming everything on white people or "institutionalized racism". We need to stop making everything a race issue. Let's be real: some people from certain communities make violent choices that cause fear and degradation of their own community, and the rest of the people have to suffer for it. Like second-hand smoking, but worse. We can blame cigarette companies, but what about the people who are doing the actual smoking in crowded areas?

We need hopeful solutions and bipartisan support, not divisive resentment politics that turn people away from pragmatic problem-solving and into a dark well of bitterness and discontent. Sowing hope and peace, watered by individual and community sacrifices, will go much further than loud, disruptive, anarchic, fruitless "community activism" who think they speak for community...but do they?

What bars New Haven from building those tiny apartments? They might be suitable for poor grad students or people needing permanent addresses to get their lives back in order.

Dwight&Howe;, the short answer is zoning and neighborhood opposition.

Someday I hope there will be less bashing of poor people in this comments section. CityYankee, you're out of touch. Go to New Haven's low-income neighborhoods and see the care that residents put into their houses and neighborhoods. Honestly, those commenting here could do us all a favor and just stop abusing large parts of our city.

Dear BevHills: Oh, I've been to the areas and the properties and I see the "care" you speak of. No thanks. The areas didn't trash themselves. While I could not say that all of the residents are responsible or that they are all dirty; I will say that there are enough of them to derail once-lovely areas of most cities. It is an unpleasant truth we have to face.

cityyankee: Vacancy rates are increasing in East Rock, and housing prices in Westville have fallen and are continuing to fall as more options are created downtown for people who would otherwise have limited themselves to those two neighborhoods. I expect the increasing affordability of Westville is a push/pull effect of its increasing diversity.

Poverty sucks but...

When we adopt an agenda as a city that is aimed at the least well off we neglect the "not poor" who matter just as much. These are the people that we should be looking to for our city's enduring stability. The vast middle. Working families. Of all colors.

Housing policy as an anti poverty solution is not thought through. There are so many other tools that could be used that don't have the baggage (real or perceived) of an inclusionary mandatory zoning ordinance. Let's focus on early intervention, education, job training, family planning and anti-violence. Or all of these. I think these will produce before any housing policy does.

Everyone deserves safe/sanitary housing. Not everyone can afford luxury housing. There will be housing that looks bad.

Some people choose to burden themselves with high rent just like some people buy cars they can't afford. I've evicted so many people from $700 apartments who walk out and step into a new BMW that has to cost $1000 per month. Ugh. It makes you scratch your head.

But really, if two adults can't figure out how to earn $50,000 per year, something is wrong. Our unemployment rate is so low. There is opportunity everywhere. Everyone has access to capital if you have a good idea. You can go to any number of local institutions of higher learning with almost no out of pocket money. The opportunities are there. I think many people are just conditioned to accept their circumstances and wait for someone to do something for them.

This is why capitalism works. If you want something, and you work for it, you will get it. When we take the socialist approach that everyone is going to be "ok" and there won't be winners and losers in society (or the gap between them will be pretty small) we de-incentivize self reliance and personal achievement. That's suffocating.

There will always be winners and losers in America but all the baggage of the past is not an impediment to success and attainment now. No way.

Ben,

MIT's living wage calculator estimates that a living wage in New Haven County is $17.64 per hour for a family of four with two working adults. Other estimates put a living wage at or over $20.00 per hour. Using the lower MIT figure, two full-time jobs would earn around $73,382 per year. Assumed housing costs in this calculation are $1,245 per month. In New Haven living wage jobs are scarce, and apartments for a family of four that rent for $1,245 are becoming more scarce. So affordable housing policies as well as polices that uplift wages are important for a large portion of families in New Haven.

Moreover the idea that housing policy shouldn't be used to address issues of economic stability for families in New Haven is absurd. For decades, in the United States and in Connecticut, housing policies including zoning laws were explicitly used to deprive wealth accumulation for residents in poor neighborhoods and particularly people of color. This injustice has never been rectified. Even now, banks discriminate against people of color who are trying to buy houses. There literally never has been a free market that treats everyone the same. The notion that capitalism creates just deserts is misguided on its own terms. But it is also a fantasy that people use to rationalize inequality that discriminatory corporate and government policies have produced.

The problem is poverty not housing. LCI and the city of New Haven is putting it's focus in the wrong direction. If the city focused on bringing industry to the city and creating jobs there would be no need to try to make developers invest their capital to correct the cities shortcomings. Developers are entrepreneurs not social workers. The average cost of development is 200.00 per square foot. So to build a 800 sqft unit at 200.00 per sqft it would cost a developer 160,000.00 per unit for an affordable rent of 12,000.00 annually. It would take 13.3 years before they would see a dime of profit on that unit alone. The numbers just don't add up. If they take care of where they currently live they would have luxury housing. There are plenty of Black and brown people that can afford market rate housing so what is the true meaning behind gentrification. What ever happened to trying to better one self and not asking/demanding a handout.

Common view point, the housing affordability problem is largely one of income, as you note. If a person is working full tine at a job that pays $15/hour (well above minimum wage) they can only afford a rent of $750/month (the average rent in New Haven is about $1,100). But the city's ability to affect residents' incomes is very limited, particularly since so many New Haveners work in the suburbs.

I don't see people of color struggling to get low rate mortgages on equal or better terms than everyone else. In fact, there are many programs available (DAP, HDF, CHFA, etc) that almost universally help low-middle income people of color (though they're available regardless of color). They don't redline areas. I'm always jealous when I do these closings; it's like instant wealth creation. I'm happy for the borrowers.

There is a wealth gap between rich and poor but it's much less a racial thing today then it's ever been. I see people of color doing well everywhere I go. It's the norm now. But if you want to see the lingering impacts of racism you can find them everywhere if that's the lens you choose to look through.

I start from the premise that everyone is equally talented and gifted and can figure out the world on their own. Not that certain people need a hand up again and again. We should incentivize success and provide that minimum cushion for a fall.

Affordable housing policies will not impact even a tiny fraction of New Haven families. If Washington DC can only manage to create a few hundred units after struggling with IZ for over a decade it's a bad idea. And they now have 217 million put aside to incentivize it. We have ZERO.


A quick search of a jobs website finds thousands of jobs in CT that pay above a living wage. Many with little education or experience requirement. So, jobs aren't the problem. Just go to indeed.com. You can apply from the website.