State Senator Sujata Gadkar-Wilcox, who represents one of the most diverse districts in Connecticut covering Bridgeport, Trumbull and Monroe, explains on her Facebook page why she voted against a sizable housing bill .
At the end of a long debate last night, I cast my vote against House Bill 5002, An Act Concerning Housing and the Rights of Homeless Persons. I want to emphasize that Connecticut does have a housing crisis that needs to be fixed. We do need to increase our housing supply, find ways to make housing more affordable for everyone, and reduce homelessness. These are laudable goals, and I appreciate the efforts of the chairs of the Housing Committee to address them with this bill.
At the same time, I heard serious and valid concerns from so many constituents in my district, in Bridgeport, Trumbull, and Monroe. Members of the Bridgeport City Council were so concerned about the bill that they came to Hartford to discuss it with me and other members of the delegation. I heard from voters, First Selectmen, and former State Representatives. What I heard was that while action on housing is necessary, too many aspects of the bill took a one-size-fits-all approach – with too much discretion being given to developers and very few mechanisms for cities, towns – and even the state – to object even when the development is not designated for affordable housing.
Most of all, I heard the community’s concerns about the provision in the law that would prevent local planning and zoning boards from imposing minimum parking requirements. A lack of adequate parking for both residential and commercial developments has been a recurring problem throughout the 22nd district, one that I heard about while knocking on doors.
While it may make sense to reduce parking requirements for developments that have convenient public transportation, one size does not fit all. In many cases, allowing developers to build large apartment complexes with inadequate parking will burden the larger neighborhoods with more cars than the street parking can handle, producing traffic congestion and even raising safety concerns.
For these reasons, I voted against the bill and hope that these concerns—especially regarding parking—are taken seriously going forward.
