Connecticut’s housing crisis has brought urgent attention to bold reform efforts. The latest is a sweeping housing omnibus bill, passed by the state legislature and now awaiting Governor Ned Lamont’s signature. Supporters claim it will break down barriers to housing development, but critics from across the political spectrum warn it may undermine local decision-making, disrupt commercial areas, and pressure towns with unrealistic affordable housing mandates. As the deadline for the governor’s decision approaches, towns and planners are raising serious concerns.
Read: Michigan Moves to Let Tenants Withhold Rent Over Repairs
Wide-Ranging Bill Combines Over 20 Proposals
The housing omnibus bill on Lamont’s desk includes more than 20 individual measures. Among them are mobile showers for unhoused residents, changes to parking requirements, the “work-live-ride” initiative to promote transit-centered development, and streamlined zoning procedures. The legislation’s sponsors argue that these changes would address the housing shortfall by easing statewide development hurdles. However, the bill’s broad reach has triggered pushback from local officials, planners, and even some state Democrats.
Also read: NYC Tenants Stunned as Rents Spike 15% After Broker Fee Ban
Commercial-to-Housing Conversions Raise Red Flags
The bill permits commercial properties to be converted into housing with two to nine units as-of-right, skipping public hearings and zoning board approvals. While some towns already support such conversions, critics warn that the policy could alter the character of commercial districts. Margarita Alban of Greenwich said replacing stores with housing could erode local economies. Others cautioned that such a broad rule could apply even to unique or historic sites, like diners or waterfront areas.
Also read: NYC Mayor Adams Breaks Ground on Final 420 Affordable Homes in Bronx
Parking Reforms Stir Local Concerns
The legislation eliminates off-street parking requirements for residential developments with fewer than 24 units and limits the local authority to enforce parking mandates. While some experts agree that excessive parking rules can hinder housing, towns like Guilford worry about the practical impacts. First Selectman Matt Hoey noted his town already struggles with limited parking, and the reform could make things worse. Planners also pointed out that many Connecticut streets were not built to handle additional street parking safely.
Also read: NYC Tenants Still Hit With $4.2K ‘Mystery Fees’ Despite FARE Act
Fair Share Housing Targets Spark Alarm
Another highly controversial part of the bill is the “Fair Share” mandate, which sets affordable housing targets for each town based on projections by the firm ECOnorthwest. Greenwich would need to add 745 units, Guilford 918, and Bridgeport over 6,800. Although the bill allows towns to propose their own plans within six months, many say this timeline is unrealistic. Francis Pickering warned that creating workable local housing plans in that timeframe would be nearly impossible.
Also read: Mamdani vs. Cuomo: NYC Mayoral Race Centers on Rent Freeze Fight
Enforcement Without Clarity Raises Challenges
Old Lyme’s land use coordinator, Eric Knapp, raised concerns about vague language in the bill. He said key terms are undefined, leaving towns unclear about how to enforce new requirements. While he acknowledged that basic building and safety codes would still apply, the bill appears to remove zoning commission oversight for many projects. This raises questions about consistency and accountability in housing approvals.
Also read: Minnesota Tenant Locked Out After Fire; Court Calls Landlord’s Action Illegal
Small Towns Struggle With Implementation
Unlike larger cities, many Connecticut towns rely on volunteer commissions rather than professional planning staff. Samuel Gold of the Lower Connecticut River Valley Council of Governments said this creates capacity issues. Towns are being asked to take on complex planning tasks with limited resources. He also warned that shifting authority from public boards to individual staff could open the door to political interference.
Also read: Florida Condo Owners Win Relief as DeSantis Signs HB 913 to Ease HOA Costs
Even Supporters See Need for Revisions
Some officials sympathetic to the bill’s goals believe it needs adjustments. Francis Pickering said that while turning vacant commercial buildings into housing makes sense, the bill uses a one-size-fits-all approach. Without clear distinctions, it could threaten vital town centers. He added that the assumption that streamlined processes will be more permissive is flawed, since towns can be restrictive regardless of the process used.
Also read: Gov. Tony Evers Announces $2.5M to Support Workforce Housing in Wisconsin
Veto or Revision? Decision Awaits
With criticism mounting, some have suggested that Governor Lamont sign the bill but call a special session to address its flaws. Others, including the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities, are calling for a full veto. Lawmakers like Rep. Tony Scott and Rep. Hector Arzeno say the opposition cuts across party lines. Arzeno pointed out that the community response to the Fair Share numbers was one of shock and disbelief. As Lamont returns from his trip, the housing debate is far from over. What happens next could reshape development policy across the state.
