Why Is Greenwich Celebrating More High-Density Housing?
Local officials recently gathered on Benedict Place near St. Mary’s Church in central Greenwich to celebrate the groundbreaking of Benedict Court—a massive six-story, 120-unit residential development expected to open in summer 2028.
While leadership beamed for the ribbon-cutting photos, many residents are left asking: What exactly are we celebrating? Greenwich is rapidly transforming from a charming, historic town into a landscape of towering high-rises in the name of affordable housing.
The project's architect, a Greenwich resident, acknowledged the scale, stating, “We agree it's a bigger building for the neighborhood, but we've looked for ways to kind of mediate the scale through different brick textures and colors.”
Even First Selectman Fred Camillo admitted to the local pushback, stating, “In Greenwich, we don't like it, but we are doing it locally. We've been increasing our stock of affordable housing.”
Illusion of "Solving" Affordability
The Benedict Court project sets aside 40% of its units (48 apartments) for "moderate-income" families, capping rents around $2,000 for a one-bedroom and $2,500 for a two-bedroom. The remaining 60% will rent at full market rate.
Proponents point out that Greenwich has moved its affordable housing stock from 5.2% to 6% toward a state-mandated 10% goal. But even if we hit 10%, the reality is simple: there will never be enough below-market units to satisfy demand. Why? Because they are below market.
By creating a small pocket of artificially suppressed rents in one of the country's wealthiest towns, we aren't solving systemic housing costs—we are creating a lottery system. When you offer below-market rents to a select group, the waitlist will stretch out the door. More critically, it opens the floodgates to workarounds, shenanigans, and loophole exploitation to qualify for and keep those rare units.
Built-In Loopholes
The systemic flaws in Connecticut's CGS § 8-30g mandate go far beyond supply and demand. Because initial eligibility looks strictly at annual gross income rather than total assets or net worth, trust-fund beneficiaries, young adults backed by high-net-worth parents, or individuals with clever tax write-offs can easily qualify. Even worse, state rules allow private property managers to self-police annual tenant income verifications with little municipal auditing, turning these units into an unmonitored free-for-all.
Between the Lines: Giving up local zoning control and accepting dense high rises in exchange for a handful of difficult-to-enforce affordable units is a terrible trade-off. Stop the madness.