Subcommittee weighs site options, parking costs and financing as it pursues 8-30g moratorium targets
Loading...
Summary
Members reviewed candidate sites (including Richmond Hill, Morse Court and the lumberyard), discussed how site combinations translate to 'hue' points toward an 8-30g moratorium target, and raised parking and financing concerns that will be addressed in FAQs and later finance notes.
The New Canaan Affordable Housing Subcommittee spent significant time reviewing candidate sites and how they contribute toward the town's target for what members referred to as "hue" points needed to qualify for moratorium relief under 8-30g.
Krista (Chair) explained the public meeting will be high-level and will not resolve site-specific applications currently before planning and zoning, but staff noted the committee has identified three candidate sites and described how combined contributions from sites could move the town toward the 150-point threshold the group cited. "I think the max is a 125 viewpoints, so that wouldn't get you to a moratorium, those two together," Krista said when discussing Richmond Hill paired with Morse Court; another member restated, "So that would give us a 125, and we need a 150." The committee framed that math as illustrative and emphasized the numbers were rough estimates for planning purposes.
Members also discussed site-specific trade-offs. The lumberyard was described as an option that could be phased and potentially jump-start a longer master-plan effort; other members urged caution because development at Locust could trigger additional issues such as traffic, emergency access and coordination with fire and EMS planning. "If we were to put this development... into Locust, next thing we'd find a problem and say traffic is a problem," one member said, raising the need to address emergency services and circulation in any site evaluation.
Financing questions and parking costs were raised as practical constraints. The group said it cannot yet provide exact costs but discussed rough illustrative figures for the public to understand trade-offs: one reference in the meeting cited about $30,000 per parking space in some scenarios and up to $45,000 for structured parking in other examples. The committee agreed to include a high-level financing note in FAQs and to ask Chris or finance staff to prepare further details for the public meeting and subsequent reporting.
The subcommittee emphasized its advisory role and that elected officials will make final choices on master plans and site approvals after public input, surveys and the committee's report.
