News From The Compost Heap

The bigger issue here, which has been totally overlooked, is this: How many reporters report from a compost pile waving a yoga mat?? I must question Paul's street cred. If Paul Bass were a real environmentalist he would dump his nitrogen rich urine in his compost pile and in his garden, which also helps the environment with less use of water in the sewage system. https://blog.nationalgeographic.org/2013/04/10/human-pee-added-to-compost-boosts-crops/
So I must ask, what does Mr. Bass do with his urine?

Let's root for underdogs ;-)

I 'm still very upset because Ms Madelaine Fargeorge was treated with such disrespect and got unfair out come for all her efforts, she worked hard to do the right thing and tryin to have all in order for her project comes to reality, But forget that ! Politics playing favors wasn't in her business plan.
Paul it wasn't ONE politician making favor for other. There are three politicians dancing, shaking hands and smiling there.
I Still thinking City Hall needs to be involve NOW , I know some think, we don't want to politics gets in here ? really, so what's happening now then. They are going to wait until ends up in a law sue ?

I think we can do a lot better. We need the zoning code but should be carefully choosing qualified people to be in the commission and definitely should be review their performance when there personal interest. I know I am a dreamer.

Who settles lawsuits in New Haven? In towns, the Boards of Selectmen settle lawsuits, but I do not know New Haven's charter. Does Elicker have the authority on his own to reach a settlement with Fargeorge, or does it have to go to the Board of Aldermen?

Why mention the Historic District Commission in the same breath with the Zoning Board?????
We demand amnesty for the HDC!


[https://www.newhavenindependent.org/index.php/archives/entry/wooster_square_coffee_shop_1/

https://www.newhavenindependent.org/index.php/archives/entry/consiglio_historic_approval/ ]

I agree completely that free speech and protest are welcome and necessary in this country. That said, if you are protesting and holding a sign that says "Make Hair Salons Great Again", thus invoking the racist, violent, destructive rhetoric of Trump, well, then, I certainly reserve the right (and to me, a duty) to boycott and never go back to an otherwise fine establishment.

1 I am also still angry about the Fargeorge case

2 1644, of course Mayor Elicker could intervene. But will he threaten his relationship with the establishment?

Alex..you supported and canonized Harp. A 30 year career politician and the essence of the establishment. Like her, you too are establishment.

Dennis Serfilippi

1644: " Without a zoning code, we fall back on common law nuisance, which is do what you want with your land so long as you do not interfere with a neighbor's quiet enjoyment of his property. Unfortunately such an approach does not allow for density, or commercial and industrial uses in any efficient manner..."

I'm not so sure about this, since New Haven grew to be its most populous and probably highest density (in the neighborhoods that existed at the time and probably on the whole compared to today) a hundred years ago before zoning laws were in place. This paper I just skimmed is pretty interesting: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/5eef/c35af1e77ab66acc9dd049f4c4d5b43111cb.pdf

What is clear is that modern zoning has hurt pre-automobile cities like New Haven more than it's helped, especially when looking through the lense of this value-per-acre stuff:
https://youtu.be/HVD01WUm0oA

cove'd: I don't think your cite supports your comment. For example, the paper says that "Rather than apply- ing an abstract uniform standard, courts held that reasonableness depended not only on the nature of the use, but also on its location; homeowners in industrial districts were expected to endure higher degrees of discomfort from smoke and noise than were their counterparts in more residential areas." In other words, zoning and use segregation was done by courts, often after the fact, rather than by zoning boards officially declaring an area industrial or residential so that a buyer would know in advance what he could do there. There was also a lot of ad hoc legislation on set-backs, etc. The was not the laissez-faire scheme Paul advocates, or simple reliance on common law nuisance, although there was also that expensive remedy.
As for density being high value, that's not always true. Much of NYC and New Haven were high density and low value, such that owners often burned buildings for their insurance value (sometimes with people inside). LCI was conceived as a concession to people's preference for low-density. Most importantly, in land use it's more the ratio of services required vs. revenue generated that is important for planning. A public housing project may be very dense, but it generates a lot of demand for expensive services like education, social services etc. On teh other hand, a high-end home on an acre lot may have less value, but will generate taxes in excess of the services consumed, particularly if the residents use private rather than public schools. Also, low-density can make it easier to reverse middle and upper class flight. Look at values in DC or London, both of which have lower density than NYC. You don't need so many folks to turn around a row of town homes, so turn around (and displacement) is quicker. Thus Greenwich Village "gentrified" before the denser Alphabet City. Housing demand may yet change after the pandemic.

1644: the main point is that the current zoning regulations are, and have been, hurting the New Haven more than helping. Dirty industries have been long gone for decades. Overhauling the zoning regulations are long overdue. I'd even go as far to say that a scrapping the current regs and taking a laissez-faire approach is better than continuing to use the regs currently on the books. Your public housing example confounds the discussion - if anything, public housing was a more a product of mid-20th century zoning than not and public housing is an extreme example in terms of costs of services. I'm also not saying that we need Hong Kong density here, but things like allowing folks to as-of-right convert a single family home into a duplex or add an addition for a small retail business in a residential zone, etc. To further bring it back to my main point - modern zoning played a big part in bringing us things like suburban style development along Whalley Ave, and the 'light industrial zone' that is the Mill District which was originally more akin to/part of Wooster Square - were these really good things?

Cove'd: I don't disagree that New Haven's zoning regulations are woefully outdated. Sarah Bronin has eliminated parking requirements in Hartford, while New Haven still has car-centric parking requirements. The Alders, however, use the ridiculous zoning requirements to extract various concessions to politically influential people for allowing developments which should be as-of-right. As far as laissez-faire, would you be okay if you bought a single family home on a nice street and then the neighbors built a huge apartment building, such that your light and air was contracted, your quiet enjoyment interrupted, and your quiet street became a noisy parking lot? I still feel for the Trowbridges, who had a nice place on Hillhouse until Yale started building large right up to its lot lines and turning gardens into parking lots.

"As far as laissez-faire, would you be okay if you bought a single family home on a nice street and then the neighbors built a huge apartment building, such that your light and air was contracted, your quiet enjoyment interrupted, and your quiet street became a noisy parking lot?"

After giving this some thought, I'd personally be ok with this because I grew up in and adjacent to multi-family housing so its normal to me. Now this wasn't NYC density but nonetheless the level of density that supports walkable commercial/high-walkscore areas, places that were originally built in pre-automobile and I'd assume more laissez-faire times. How huge is huge is the question. In a free-market scenario, would a 100-unit apartment building get built on a currently all single family house street? IDK, looking back at history it probably depends on how close the street is to the city core. Examples from no-zoning places like Houston probably provides some more current insight. If a 20-unit apartment building got put on a street with currently all single-family houses, that's all good with me. Being that this is New Haven, the 2nd largest city in CT (which isn't say much), one should know better than to fear density here and should live/buy elsewhere if they do - there are plenty of surrounding towns with exclusionary zoning. So, perhaps the best way forward for New Haven is some combination of what Hartford did in removing parking requirements etc and what the Minneapolis 2040 plan has recently set out to do.