Trump Parc arranges for affordable apartments

Trump Parc's developers are a step closer to fulfilling affordable housing requirements by purchasing a West Main Street building and converting some of its units into affordable condominiums.

[striper]

It about time builders are doing somethinggood in town,
Stamford is way behind in low income rents.I still believe
there should be a cap on all rents.

[Not fair to all]

Even out of college with college loan hanging over my head and being a life long Stamford resident I was not qualified for a NEW affordable housing unit. I dont think people should be given something they cant afford or show they cant afford. Some of these people getting these units drive more expensive cars than the people having to pay full price.

[Madmanmike]

They only use this affordable housing bull so they can build their huge structures, Stamford should return to the small town it used to be.

[Tuere W]

While I applaud that Trump Parc is trying to satisfy thier 10% without having to shell out 2.8 million dollars, I just wish it would have a more immediate impact.

Unforntunately in Stamford, what is considered "affordable" would be exorbitant almost anywhere else.

I mean how else would you describe a minimum salary of $42,000 a year to be considered for a 2 bedroom apartment?

I hope this changes soon or the landscape of this town will truly change. And I am sure it won't be for the better

[Dying In Stamford]

What a joke.
Nothing is affordable in Stamford unless you are making over $70,000.

[Wyn Achenbaum]

How many new affordable units does this "solution" add to Stamford's supply?

For whom is this a solution?

When are we going to do something that makes the major changes in our incentives that will cause the private sector to put to use the 32+ year old 4.3 acre "Hole in the Ground," and the other unused lots in our downtown, and the underused site with buildings that come from the 1940s?

Correct the incentives. Let's do what we have to see those sites well used. The best incentive revision I know of is Land Value Taxation: lower the millage rate on buildings and raise the millage rate on land value.

Watch our underused sites blossom with buildings that will meet human needs, like housing for working people, middle class people, retirees, right in the center of things.

All we need is the enabling legislation for divorcing the property tax millage rate on land from the rate on buildings.

Or we can enjoy that lovely hole in the ground for another 30+ years, and leave it to our children's generation to enjoy, too!

[Knottie]

My question is this, Exactly how many of those apartments are being made "affordable"; and how many Stamford residents, if any, have been afforded the opportunity to take advantage of these "affordable" units. Sounds to me like these "affordable" were a requirement/stipulation of the Contract, during the purchasing of the property.... What is my point? Maybe some of the good people of Stamford, might want to purchase one of those "affordable" units; I mean, if your risking your life, then you should enjoy in the benefits. I'm just saying...

Wyn Achenbaum wrote:

How many new affordable units does this "solution" add to Stamford's supply?
For whom is this a solution?
When are we going to do something that makes the major changes in our incentives that will cause the private sector to put to use the 32+ year old 4.3 acre "Hole in the Ground," and the other unused lots in our downtown, and the underused site with buildings that come from the 1940s?
Correct the incentives. Let's do what we have to see those sites well used. The best incentive revision I know of is Land Value Taxation: lower the millage rate on buildings and raise the millage rate on land value.
Watch our underused sites blossom with buildings that will meet human needs, like housing for working people, middle class people, retirees, right in the center of things.
All we need is the enabling legislation for divorcing the property tax millage rate on land from the rate on buildings.
Or we can enjoy that lovely hole in the ground for another 30+ years, and leave it to our children's generation to enjoy, too!

[What is up]

It is now over two years since the last post. How many apartments have sold in Trump Parc Stamford? It sure looks empty to me.

[Tiger Woulds]

i think about 40% looking at teh lights at night

[Harry Secombe]

selling now. much more activity going on..

[dead or alive]

apartments look nice. good location and great views. i also think that highgrove is complete now

[Frijoles]

dead or alive wrote:

apartments look nice. good location and great views. i also think that highgrove is complete now

Shoddy construction though and still ridiculously priced.

And still an eyesore from multiple vantage points. Including from the Sound.

[dead or alive]

why do you think the construction is shoddy? is this based on personal experience (as either an owner or a builder) or hearsay?

[Really]

If there is any question on the quality of the work, just ask the mystery inspector.

[dead or alive]

why let the truth get in the way of a good story..?

[Yale]

the Yale apartments look awesome. lots of character

[Anonymous]

What do you think of Stamford Advocate Staff writer Jeff Morganteen's work???

http://www.topix.com/forum/city/stamford-ct/T...

[jedward]

I think he is good. I like his work

[flo]

I am single and can barely afford a 1 bedroom apartment. They need to make affordable housing for single people...

[flo]

Stamford needs to have affordable housing for single people, in order to live comfortable in Stamford you need to make over 70,000 and most of us do not make that much.