Fringe-developing (6 percent of population, 31
communities):
These communities are home to just a small fraction of the state’s residents.
But they are experiencing the most rapid population gains—more than twice the
rate of growth of the state as a whole. The speed and scale of growth in these
communities brings its own stresses—requiring major investments in roads,
sewers or schools that often strain even the hardiest tax bases. However, most
fringe-development places do not command such big tax bases—on average, they
have slightly below-average tax bases that are growing much more slowly than
average.
As
in the at-risk category, how these very low-density places manage their growth
has important implications for the long-term development of the state—although
they contained just 6 percent of the state’s population in 2000, 13 percent of
the land that urbanized during the 1980s and 1990s was in these places. They are
especially susceptible to the incentives in the tax system encouraging
competition for tax base and discouraging cooperative planning.
All types of communities are hurt by the way Connecticut is growing Nearly two-thirds of the state’s population—65 percent—lives in cities or suburbs struggling with social or fiscal stresses. Stressed suburbs have problems typically associated with large cities, including weak tax bases and significant and growing poverty in their schools. At-risk suburbs must cope with continuing population growth and increasing social needs with below average tax bases that are barely growing. Fringe-developing places have fewer social needs, but are facing growth-related costs with stagnant, below-average tax bases and modest household incomes.
Even middle-class, bedroom-developing suburbs struggle to provide needed schools and infrastructure with largely residential tax bases. Just a small share of the population lives in affluent suburbs with expensive housing and plentiful commercial development. But even these places are suffering from the loss of valued open space, growing traffic congestion resulting from inefficient development and the extra costs felt statewide as a result of highly concentrated poverty.
From CT Metropatterns, p. 3