Developers Chris and Margaret Stefanoni — long known for doing battle with Darien over their proposed multifamily developments — are pitching a new approach to affordable housing in town: a floating zone.
In an Aug. 4 filing with the , the couple proposes an amendment to the town's regulations that would give "every property owner in the Town of Darien the right and opportunity to develop their property with affordable housing."
If enacted, the plan would create a special zone that any landowner in Darien could apply to their property. The owner would then be allowed to develop affordable housing consistent with Connecticut General Statute 8-30g, which requires that at least 30 percent of the units be priced below market rate.
"This floating zone will not only permit new development or redevelopment with significantly higher density, but would also allow many of the illegal 'in-law' apartments to automatically become conforming under the zoning regulations [provided the units comply with town and state requirements]," the proposal states.
"The intent of this Affordable Housing Floating Zone is to facilitate private development of affordable housing with a density that has already been found to be acceptable by the Town of Darien," it adds.
The proposal goes on to describe various setback and density guidelines for the zone. Developments would be limited to three stories and a density of 35 units per acre.
Between 1.5 and 2.0 parking spaces per unit would be required, depending on whether the units were designated for seniors.
In a written statement, Chris Stefanoni said that the proposal "is especially for the little guy, because there are too many lawyers, liars, and bullies at the top."
"Many people have approached me on how they can develop affordable housing on their own property, and this is exactly the vehicle they need," Stefanoni said. "The Town will never build affordable housing on its own, so this amendment gives power to every property owner and allows them to rise up, fight back, and accomplish what the local government is unwilling to do despite clear housing mandates by the state and federal government."
As written, the proposal would potentially allow developers to do an end-run around the 8-30g moratorium .
Normally 8-30g provides a favorable appeals process to affordable housing developers as a means of encouraging construction. But on the basis of affordable units added over the past two decades, the Department of Economic and Community Development granted the town a four-year reprieve in the fall.
Earlier this year, the Stefanonis' on that moratorium decision — a possible precursor to a lawsuit.
But their request was rejected, partly on the grounds that the couple had no active affordable housing proposals before the P&Z commission and therefore lacked standing. (The Stefanonis in May.)
The couple's floating zone proposal may improve their standing for future legal challenges, however, as the text specifically references the Stefanonis' 149 Nearwater Ln. address as a possible location for affordable housing.
According to P&Z Director Jeremy Ginsberg, the couple's plan would not be the first floating zone in Darien. The town already has a Municipal Use Zone on the books, which Ginsberg said has been used for the and headquarters.
A public hearing for the plan will likely be scheduled for October or November, Ginsberg said.
I find it simply amazing (yes AMAZING) that everything you post you get wrong. The 3rd least affordable housing? How can you just say such baloney? Rise up and make a difference? What are you talking about? You are welcome to deed your house now as affordable housing. And sell to someone who needs that lift that you pretend to want to offer. Do it. The Stefanonis and you are so clever--"with a density that has already been found to be acceptable by the Town of Darien," Oh really? Wow!!! If it's already acceptable, then why not do it? You dont need a new law, that already is a law. My god. People who twist and turn and then call people "liars and bullies" ---its all so disgusting. This guy actually think he is so clever that no one is smart enough to figure his manure. And James--seriously--is there anything you can get right?
Zoning restrictions are in place, to protect homeowners against changing the situation around their home. You buy stocks , when you know the rules are enforced by the SEC against insider trading. All investments are predicated on the basis of understanding what variables are permissable to change. If you buy a house in a residential area with restrictions, the cost is XXX . If you buy a house in a zone that has potential for commercial proprty development, it costs XXX-minus YYY . Stefanoni and his ridiculous angle of pretending to know all about real estate and development, and then making proposals such as this, that make it seem as though the deck is stacked by some King. The rules are in place, as a result of not protecting those in town hall, but those who own the homes. His logic is simply backwards.
Darien is the 3rd least affordable town to live in. (median house price vs median income) Not the town with the 3rd least affordable housing.
Garden Homes won. The town is pushing for more units in Allen O'Neill. Avalon is bordered by 95 and the train tracks. They won, because, they had a case. Not because they had deep pockets. Stefanoni is totally different. He proposes these obviously unbuildable projects -I dont remember the number of units on Hoyt Street, but lets say its 30 on 3/4 of an acre in the middle of single family homes. If Stefanoni, truly wanted to win-and get affordable housing, he would choose, similar to Avalon, to find land in a place that wont markedly diminish the value of the neighbors land around him. Im not sure if his game is simple greenmail, or if it's to antagonize people, but clearly there are options in Darien, for him to house seniors at affordable rates , if he so chooses. He has simply decided to be a thorn in everyone's side. What that accomplishes escapes me--but it does not look as though housing people is actually his goal. Avalon's objective is and was to build and fit into a community. There is a huge difference. As they have said in the P and Z meetings "what have you built Mr and Mrs Stefanoni? " Nothing. But he has made more money in real estate than anyone in the last 5 years. He doesnt want to build. P and Z has granted him approval on a limited basis. He didnt build. Why? Because that's not his game.
Its Apples and Oranges (no pun intended). Avalon is rejected in these towns, not on the basis of protecting homeowners. It is rejected on the notion that having multiple units built for families. The fear to the towns, is that the number of schoolchildren and costs to the education, including special ed, outpace the amount of taxes that are brought in. Avalon was fought. It makes sense to try to keep them out on the basis of cost only. ( I hope no one decides that they can pin some offensive label here--because it's simply about expenses vs revenues). The Stefanoni issue is about protecting homeowner value--not so much about costs to the town. Im not fooled. I think you are simply cynical. The objections to the Stefanoni project are founded in saftey, traffic etc. It makes sense to me that they would consider a smaller project acceptable. Turn it around Libby---do you really think that 30 units on Hoyt Street would not cause any traffic or safety issues? Do you really think the rejection is simply an automatic --based on some bigotry or anti-affordable housing stance? If you do, then could you explain to me why they are trying to add affordable housing at Allen Oneill and that they approved garden homes? If im not smart--then explain how they approve some projects that are densely populated but on the Post road, yet not on a single lane road in a non-commercial zone? Are they indeed anti -AH? Or simply capable of making smart decisions?
You say that they are fine to add affordable housing at Allen Oneill "because its already affordable housing." Ok. true. But if the town were against affordable housing, then it makes no sense to be adding, whether or not the location already has affordable housing. If the town were against affordable housing --then it wouldnt be granting approval to garden homes. Ceteris paribus, you can't say they are against affordable housing, while they endeavor to add many units in various parts of town. Now, if your argument is that they want affordable housng in appropriate locations, and are against affordable housing in inappropriate locations, then I agree. But, I would argue that that is their responsibility as Planning and Zoning. Its not complex. You say the facts back up your contentions, but Im thinking that you look at facts, and rationalize why your opinion about what is what, is right. The pure facts are, without coloring them, is that Darien has added affordable housing in the past 2 years, and has sought , through the Darien Housing Authority, and the State of Connecticut to add even more. Those actually are the facts--unencumbered by cynicism or rationalizing.
I think there are roughly 200 units of affordable housing in Darien. Not including Garden homes. The vast majority were done without any prompting from 830g. Do I think that Garden Homes was approved because of 830g? Probably. But if that is the only impetus Libby, why wasnt Stefanoni's projects approved? OakCrest? Im thinking that, as I said in my prvious post that in the past affordable housing was granted when the town felt it was appropriate. I think they approve it today when it's appropriate, and reject it, when it is not. If 830g provides a catalyst, so be it--but it does not mean that every project is approved or rejected. The same process that existed thoughout the history of Darien , seems to still exist. If anything, the rate has slowed since Stefanoni came to town. You can apply your sense of cynicism, and skepticism, but the fact still remains that affordable housing existed before 830g--and gets approved and rejected with 830g. People who think that 830g has demonstrably changed the landscape, are not wrong--but they also are not right. Im sure Fred Conze rues the day it was enacted--yet his job has just become tougher--not that his methodology has necessarily changed.
You are fixated on visuals in terms of why things are approved. Fine. Is the Stefanoni project visually unappealing? If you dont know, then it would blow your theory. I think that West Avenue and the Post Road are significantly different. I would expect a more highly dense approval on the Post Road vs West Ave. Do you think that they should be the same? By the way, if I run 4 miles a day since 1997 and tommorow they say its good for preventing lung cancer-will just give me an added reason. Not the only reason. Moratorium pts add to the reason for approval. Not the only reason.