Affordable Housing No Square Deal from Depot Planners

 The Central Connecticut Regional Planning Agency's Housing Report
outlines the State of Connecticut's  recipe for economic growth;   "...should transit service improve radically, opportunities shall arise."    The report relates the development of both transportation infrastructure and adjacent housing options and addresses it's implied  effect on the region's economy.    The final pages in the CCRPA Housing report summarize in similarity to the Central CT Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy,  The State of CT Plan of Conservation and Development , The State of CT Consolidated Housing Plan  and Bristol's 2013-2014 Housing Action Plan.  All of these documents suggest housing and business development be concentrated along transit corridors.  The study suggests a lack of public transportation options places otherwise independent individuals in situations of fiscal distress and that lower transportation costs make housing more affordable.  The $340 million+ CTFastrak busway project which will require $9 million/year in subsidies is touted therein as a much necessary project which could spur such economic growth.

 Bristol, CT is specifically named in the report as a future Transit Oriented Development zone, with 1,000 future housing units having such a designation.

The CT DOT's current rail study is also mentioned regarding the possibility of extending the Waterbury Branch of recently plagued Metro North to Bristol's Depot Square.  The report also goes into detail regarding the Bristol's Housing Authority not meeting the needs of Section 8 applicants by HUD's standards.

Subsidies will undoubtedly be the avenue to pave the way for such progressive development endeavors as any private investment is reliant on such partnerships.   The Department of Transportation estimates public transportation subsidies at anywhere from $2.50 to $42 dollars per ride depending on the mode and length of travel.   Providing transportation subsidies to financially distressed individuals to make housing more affordable most obviously leaves no net gain to the equation.  Such keynesian economic strategies reliant on deficit spending and continual subsidies are simply not productive at stimulating economic growth as they burden residents with decades of interest payments on the debt that absorbs what would otherwise be free capital.   Perhaps those involved in the decision making process should be using unbiased resources, rather than the data provided by the Center for Neighborhood Technology's Housing and Transportation Affordability, when contemplating the economic benefits of such transformative projects.  A more comprehensive study, completed by the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco members, titled
Roads to Prosperity of Bridges to Nowhere? , Theory and Evidence on the Impact of Public Infrastructure Investment" thoroughly analyzes the macroeconomic data of such investments without focusing strictly on the socioeconomic aspects of low income residency.

  It is important for community leaders to make a balanced assessment of economic investments or municipalities can find themselves in the heart of a newly constructed center of urban decay.  As taxes and regulations have continually increased in the region since 2007, median income has been in decline.    Such deficit spending would inevitably push even more of the middle class below the poverty level.  In this regard, instead of providing options and opportunities, it will severely limit choices.  Future generation's quality of life will be diminished as more Americans will be added to the class of those who cannot afford  personal transportation or will find their American Dream a modular shell of a home, as recommended by the planners themselves in the report.