Connecticut Development News

[StamfordCT]

STAMFORD -- Four-hundred-foot-high twin towers would soar above the Atlantic Street post office if the city approves an application filed Friday to build a Ritz-Carlton hotel and condominiums.

Developers Thomas Rich and Louis Cappelli have proposed building the two 39-story towers on 4.4 acres owned separately by the U.S. Postal Service and the St. John Urban Development Corp. The land includes two low-income apartment towers, which would remain.



Advertisement


Including the post office and a vacant retail complex that would be demolished, the new development would take up about 3 acres. The buildings would be 105 feet taller than the 295-foot high Landmark Tower.

Rich and Cappelli, who also have proposed the 34-story Trump Parc condominium tower at Washington Boulevard and Broad Street, said in June that they had an agreement with Ritz-Carlton to build in Stamford, but would not disclose the site.

It was clear to most observers that the post office site -- where Rich has previously proposed office buildings and a Marriott Residence Inn, and where Houston-based Hines Interests also had proposed an office building -- was the location.

Under the development plan, one of the two towers would occupy the northeastern corner of the site, near the corner of Atlantic Street and Tresser Boulevard and be separated from the post office building by a landscaped plaza and main entrance.

The other tower would face Federal Street, west of the post office and north of the UBS complex.

The two buildings would include 198 hotel rooms and 289 condominiums, with a new post office facing Tresser Boulevard, and 64,000 square feet of retail and restaurant space. Thirty of the hotel rooms might be operated as hotel-condominiums,

The historic 1916 post office building, which included letter boxes built by Yale & Towne and bronze work by Tiffany & Co., would be restored and turned into a space for special events, but its 1939 addition would be razed to make way for a second plaza entrance on Federal Street.

The Zoning Board has approved tall buildings on the site -- and plans that included demolition of the 1939 post office addition -- before. The Hines office tower would have risen to 350 feet, and Rich's second office tower proposal -- floated to attract the Royal Bank of Scotland as a tenant -- would have reached 375.

Preservationists fought unsuccessfully to preserve the 1939 addition at the time, arguing that at least the facade should remain.

The board can't stop demolition of the Renaissance Revival post office and the addition, which are on the National Register of Historic Places, but it can decide whether to grant a historic preservation bonus that the developers are seeking to add square footage.

If the Zoning Board rejects the extra height, as it did on Trump Parc, the application includes alternate plans to build the towers 50 feet shorter.

The developers have proposed donating to the Mill River Park greenbelt project in exchange for the extra height. An idea first proposed along with the Trump Parc application, the extra 50 feet would result in a $695,000 donation to the greenbelt.

When Rich and Cappelli proposed Trump Parc, it would have risen 400 feet from the sidewalk, 70 feet higher than regulations allowed.

The board rejected the extra height on the half-acre development parcel next to Target but said it welcomed tall buildings elsewhere in the city, relaxing parking restrictions for large residential buildings and raising the downtown height limit from 330 feet to 350 feet.

Rich didn't provide a construction schedule for the two towers but said he and Cappelli would need nine months to complete the design and get financing after the board makes a decision.

The development plan is similar to one announced by Ritz-Carlton and Cappelli in downtown White Plains, N.Y., where Cappelli is building another hotel-condominium combination as part of his Renaissance Square development.

[Xusein]

400ft? Great!

This thread was dead...I gotta go look for some more news, I've been lazy lately...

[StamfordCT]

Downtown Development Plan Comes Into Focus



STAMFORD -- Plans filed Friday provided more details of a proposal to replace a church parking lot and 120 low-income apartments with three residential towers at a downtown crossroads.

The plan, by Lowe Enterprises Real Estate Group of California, would put a massive complex of retail and residential buildings at the northeast corner of Tresser and Washington boulevards.






ALLALAKAZARCACOCTDEDCFLGAHIIDILINIAKSKYLAMEMDMAMIMNMSMOMTNENVNHNJNMNYNCNDOHOKORPARISCSDTNTXUTVTVAWAWVWIWY



Advertisement


The three towers would each rise at least 30 stories, containing a combined 834 condominiums and apartments atop a grocery store, parking structure, and ground floor retail shops and restaurants, according to the plans.

The 32,000-square-foot grocery store at Bell Street and Washington Boulevard -- an amenity city leaders and planning experts consider essential to attracting more residents to downtown -- would join a 28,000-square-foot health club and other retail space along three existing streets and a planned pedestrian plaza near the church and the Rich Forum theater.

Together with a planned Ritz-Carlton hotel and condominium building across Tresser Boulevard, and a pedestrian-friendly addition to the nearby Stamford Town Center, the proposed development could provide sought-after street-level activity along Tresser Boulevard, which has been assailed as a canyon full of offices but devoid of people.

The development also would eliminate 120 low-cost apartments in the cylindrical north tower of the existing housing complex, called St. John Towers.

Lowe plans to pay $23 million for the north tower to St. John Urban Development Corp. The group operates the apartment buildings under a 40-year agreement with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to keep the rents affordable to people who make less than 80 percent of the area median income.

That agreement expires in 2010, but officials have said the revenue from the development deal will allow them to extend it for the remaining two towers.

St. John Urban Development Corp. administrators have said they cannot maintain the remaining two buildings, on the south side of Tresser Boulevard, without the proceeds from selling the northern tower and the land under it. That land would be combined with the church parking lot to create a 4.5-acre development parcel for the Lowe project.

In an unrelated agreement, the nonprofit agency also would receive lease payments from Rich-Cappelli Associates, the developers of the proposed Ritz-Carlton, for land it owns that the developers need for that project.

Similarly, officials at St. John the Evangelist Church, which owns the parking lot, have said the deal will provide money to preserve the 19th century Gothic church on Atlantic Street and its rectory next door, as well as fund the church's charitable work.

Since St. John Urban Development Corp.'s agreement with HUD expires in 2010, it could demolish and sell all three towers. Officials at the nonprofit agency have said the city's ordinance requiring replacement of every unit of government-subsidized housing does not apply to St. John Towers.

The city is not demanding one-for-one replacement of the 120 units in the north tower, though it has told St. John officials they must provide a relocation plan for every resident in the building and keep the remaining 240 apartments in the other two buildings affordable.

The agency is pursuing an agreement with HUD and the city to renovate the two southern towers and guarantee low rents there for 30 more years.

The relocation plan could involve a combination of strategies, including moving some tenants to the southern towers as units there are vacated, providing home ownership assistance, and providing as many as 20 below-market rental apartments in the new development, said Richard Redniss, a land-use consultant working for Lowe.

Officials from Lowe, the church and St. John Towers have been meeting with residents about the relocation plan, Redniss said.

In 2004, Lowe and the church announced plans for a 15-story office tower on the parking lot site.

The three towers currently planned would all exceed the height of any building in the city now. They would range in height from 305 feet to 350 feet for the tallest building, at Tresser and Washington boulevards. That building would contain condominiums, while a 323-foot building on Bell Street would have apartments.

The three buildings would include a total of 834 condominiums and rental apartments, comprised of 46 studios, 487 one-bedrooms, 264 two-bedrooms, and 37 three-bedrooms.

The third building, on Tresser Boulevard on the site's southwest corner, could be built in a later phase as apartments, condominiums or offices if the market changes, Redniss said.

Under the city's inclusionary housing ordinance, Lowe must reserve 50 units at below-market rates for sale or rent to people who make less than half the area median income. That equals less than $58,000 for a family of four.

Lowe is proposing to pay a $7.3 million affordable housing fee instead of building the units on site.

The development site would include 1,123 parking spaces. Lowe has proposed leasing the Bell Street garage from the city and operating it in some form of public-private partnership, as well as using the garage for shared parking, according to the application.

Cars would enter the parking garage from Bell Street and Tresser Boulevard. The landscaped pedestrian plaza would also include a pickup and drop-off area off Bell Street.

Sorry guys i have no renderings, they didn't give any renderings.

[StamfordCT]

Downtown Development Plan Comes Into Focus



STAMFORD -- Plans filed Friday provided more details of a proposal to replace a church parking lot and 120 low-income apartments with three residential towers at a downtown crossroads.

The plan, by Lowe Enterprises Real Estate Group of California, would put a massive complex of retail and residential buildings at the northeast corner of Tresser and Washington boulevards.









Advertisement


The three towers would each rise at least 30 stories, containing a combined 834 condominiums and apartments atop a grocery store, parking structure, and ground floor retail shops and restaurants, according to the plans.

The 32,000-square-foot grocery store at Bell Street and Washington Boulevard -- an amenity city leaders and planning experts consider essential to attracting more residents to downtown -- would join a 28,000-square-foot health club and other retail space along three existing streets and a planned pedestrian plaza near the church and the Rich Forum theater.

Together with a planned Ritz-Carlton hotel and condominium building across Tresser Boulevard, and a pedestrian-friendly addition to the nearby Stamford Town Center, the proposed development could provide sought-after street-level activity along Tresser Boulevard, which has been assailed as a canyon full of offices but devoid of people.

The development also would eliminate 120 low-cost apartments in the cylindrical north tower of the existing housing complex, called St. John Towers.

Lowe plans to pay $23 million for the north tower to St. John Urban Development Corp. The group operates the apartment buildings under a 40-year agreement with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to keep the rents affordable to people who make less than 80 percent of the area median income.

That agreement expires in 2010, but officials have said the revenue from the development deal will allow them to extend it for the remaining two towers.

St. John Urban Development Corp. administrators have said they cannot maintain the remaining two buildings, on the south side of Tresser Boulevard, without the proceeds from selling the northern tower and the land under it. That land would be combined with the church parking lot to create a 4.5-acre development parcel for the Lowe project.

In an unrelated agreement, the nonprofit agency also would receive lease payments from Rich-Cappelli Associates, the developers of the proposed Ritz-Carlton, for land it owns that the developers need for that project.

Similarly, officials at St. John the Evangelist Church, which owns the parking lot, have said the deal will provide money to preserve the 19th century Gothic church on Atlantic Street and its rectory next door, as well as fund the church's charitable work.

Since St. John Urban Development Corp.'s agreement with HUD expires in 2010, it could demolish and sell all three towers. Officials at the nonprofit agency have said the city's ordinance requiring replacement of every unit of government-subsidized housing does not apply to St. John Towers.

The city is not demanding one-for-one replacement of the 120 units in the north tower, though it has told St. John officials they must provide a relocation plan for every resident in the building and keep the remaining 240 apartments in the other two buildings affordable.

The agency is pursuing an agreement with HUD and the city to renovate the two southern towers and guarantee low rents there for 30 more years.

The relocation plan could involve a combination of strategies, including moving some tenants to the southern towers as units there are vacated, providing home ownership assistance, and providing as many as 20 below-market rental apartments in the new development, said Richard Redniss, a land-use consultant working for Lowe.

Officials from Lowe, the church and St. John Towers have been meeting with residents about the relocation plan, Redniss said.

In 2004, Lowe and the church announced plans for a 15-story office tower on the parking lot site.

The three towers currently planned would all exceed the height of any building in the city now. They would range in height from 305 feet to 350 feet for the tallest building, at Tresser and Washington boulevards. That building would contain condominiums, while a 323-foot building on Bell Street would have apartments.

The three buildings would include a total of 834 condominiums and rental apartments, comprised of 46 studios, 487 one-bedrooms, 264 two-bedrooms, and 37 three-bedrooms.

The third building, on Tresser Boulevard on the site's southwest corner, could be built in a later phase as apartments, condominiums or offices if the market changes, Redniss said.

Under the city's inclusionary housing ordinance, Lowe must reserve 50 units at below-market rates for sale or rent to people who make less than half the area median income. That equals less than $58,000 for a family of four.

Lowe is proposing to pay a $7.3 million affordable housing fee instead of building the units on site.

The development site would include 1,123 parking spaces. Lowe has proposed leasing the Bell Street garage from the city and operating it in some form of public-private partnership, as well as using the garage for shared parking, according to the application.

Cars would enter the parking garage from Bell Street and Tresser Boulevard. The landscaped pedestrian plaza would also include a pickup and drop-off area off Bell Street.

Sorry guys i have no renderings, they didn't give any renderings.

[Xusein]

New Haven may see some more development via Yale...to think once they tried to stop it...

Yale's Plans Greeted Warmly
City Once Resisted Campus Expansion

NEW HAVEN -- More than thirty years ago, Yale tried to build new student dorms in the heart of downtown but the mayor at the time nixed the idea, afraid that further expansion would come at the city's expense by taking more land off the tax rolls.

Now, Yale is moving to build something big - possibly more dorms - behind Grove Street Cemetery, and this time the city is all for it. Taking a break from the campaign trail this week, Mayor John DeStefano Jr. uttered words that would have once been unthinkable: "I generally think the growth of the campus is a very good thing."

The area Yale is eyeing for development is a sleepy set of streets on the western edge of campus, bordered by a historic cemetery, a bike trail and an ice rink. Just beyond lies the impoverished Dixwell neighborhood, which in recent years has seen sparks of revitalization. Earlier this year, Yale opened a campus police station and community center on the grounds of an old industrial laundry and is set to build a new health center next door. The Farmington Canal bike trail was extended into downtown and a glass engineering tower now shines over the trail.

The land Yale is eyeing for redevelopment sits within view of these additions, in a neglected corridor connecting main campus with the Victorian mansions and research labs on Science Hill. Yale says it hasn't settled on a use for the small triangle of land, home to several academic buildings. But a map buried in a 6-year-old planning document clearly tags the area for "academic housing."

Until now, the main obstacle to redevelopment was three dead-end streets whose rights of way are controlled by the city. All told, the streets add up to half an acre. Yale wanted the land badly enough that it recently agreed to give New Haven $10 million for public improvements in return for closing the streets. The agreement cleared the board of aldermen's finance committee last month and is expected to pass the full board when it meets on Monday. .

A few residents have objected. Ben Northrup, a Yale-educated architect who lives nearby, says he wants to see the university grow but in a way that preserves the dynamic interplay between campus buildings and public streets.

The Urban Design League, an advocacy group that has clashed with Yale in the past over parking garages and the demolition of the historic Maple Cottage, also has complaints. One member, a retired IRS agent, thinks New Haven could get more money for the streets and use it to lower taxes. Others say Yale should announce its intentions first.

"I'm not against expanding the density in that zone," said Anstress Farwell, a Yale graduate who heads the group. "But you need to have a plan before you close streets."

Supporters say Yale needs the flexibility to develop the site as it sees fit. They have faith that whatever Yale builds - be it classrooms, research labs or housing - will be a masterpiece. "Whatever Yale decides to do there will enhance the neighborhood and benefit the city," said Dr. David Leffell, a skin cancer specialist at Yale-New Haven Hospital who lives nearby.

Earlier this year, the hospital traded $5 million in community benefits for permission to build the Yale Cancer Center. In the dead-end street agreement, Dixwell residents get $250,000 to refurbish Scantlebury Park next to the police station. The city gets $10 million to fix streets, lights and bridges. Environmentalists get the bike trail extended to Orange Street.

"Yale at one time in the not-too-far-past had invisible walls to the community, but I think that's changed since Rick Levin became president," said Jerry Tureck, a semi-retired businessman who lives nearby. "They've discovered it's easier to work with a happy community than an unhappy one."

Residents can now see their fate and Yale's entwined. "Everyone has realized that as the university grows, especially if it's done in a systematic and collaborative way, jobs are created that stimulate the economy locally and our tax base improves," said Jorge Perez, a banker and city alderman.

The mayor says he would like to see residence halls go up. The more bodies downtown, the better off businesses are. "We like residential in the city," said DeStefano. "It contributes disproportionately to the economic well-being of the city."

Yale alumni are also supportive because it improves the odds their kids will get in, says Jonathan Dach, a Yale student journalist who spoke to several alumni for his cover story in The New Journal, a campus magazine. This year, Yale set a record, taking in less than 9 percent of the 21,000 students who applied.

Town-gown relations have improved since the early 1970s when Mayor Bartholomew Guida reportedly greeted Yale's plan to build dorms on the site of an old bowling alley at the corner of Whitney and Grove streets with a two-word obscenity. In the last decade, Yale, the city's largest employer, has donated $25 million to the city to make up for the taxes it doesn't pay as a nonprofit. It has also invested heavily in downtown.

It may be a testament to the good will Yale has created that the proposed street closures have not sparked the outcry that closing Wall and High streets in 1990 did. Back then, the cash-strapped city agreed to close the streets for 20 years in exchange for voluntary tax payments.

For years, Yale has been faced with a design challenge. How to integrate the main campus with the research labs and mansions on Science Hill? A map in Yale's 2000 "framework" plan hints at how that might be done: build dorms behind the cemetery. Dach cites the map and the new construction nearby as possible evidence of Yale's intentions.

"The administration is still skittish from the embarrassment of going public with the Whitney/Grove colleges before everything was nailed down," Dach said. "That's a sympathetic position but not the right one."

[Xusein]

Bradley will get it's first international flight to Amsterdam, courtesy of Northwest...in July 2007...

Anyone else want to check out some of their coffee shops...

Northwest To Announce Trans-Atlantic Flights From Bradley
After years of trying, Bradley International Airport will finally be able to offer a direct route to Europe.

Northwest Airlines plans to launch nonstop daily flights between Bradley and Amsterdam, the first trans-Atlantic flights in the airport's history, officials announced today.

The once-daily departures and arrivals from Amsterdam's Schiphol airport are expected to start by July 1 of next year, officials said. Fares have not yet been determined.

State officials have tried for years to bring a truly international flight to Bradley. The airport currently offers flights to Canada and charters to other points in North America.

"There has been a push for as long as anyone can remember," said James Abromaitis, commissioner of the Connecticut Department of Economic and Community Development.

The new flight should be welcomed by Connecticut business people who currently must travel to Boston or New York City to fly to Europe, Abromaitis said.

Earlier this year, Delta Air Lines started offering four daily flights from Bradley to New York City, where travelers can connect with flights to 67 destinations around the globe.

Bradley, which handles about 390 takeoffs and landings each day, is New England's second busiest airport behind Logan International Airport in Boston.

An Associated Press report is included in this story.

[Xusein]

Link: http://www.courant.com/news/local/hr...,2495091.story

Front Street's New Hope
Compromise On Project's Scope Leads To Deal

October 6, 2006
By JEFFREY B. COHEN, Courant Staff Writer After years of planning, numerous prospective builders, several extended deadlines and seemingly endless negotiations, the state and a developer announced Thursday they have an agreement to bring revelers and residents to Front Street by 2008.

And they say shovels will be in the ground by Halloween.

The state's deal with Greenwich developer Bradley Nitkin would mean that apartments, restaurants and entertainment venues - maybe a comedy club, maybe an ESPN "interactive experience" - would begin to bridge the gap between the year-old convention center and the rest of the city at the heart of its downtown revitalization effort.

"We have absolutely first-class, first-class tenants who are restaurants and entertainment venues who have committed to us," Nitkin said, declining to name the tenants. "I think it's a fabulous site, I think it's a fabulous location, and I think the time is right."

On Thursday, Nitkin and the state confirmed a deal to build 115 apartments and 60,000 square feet of commercial space on roughly half of the now vacant, 6-acre plot across Columbus Boulevard from the Connecticut Convention Center.

The $55 million project will be built with $22 million in state funds, more than $7 million in grants and loans, a tax agreement with the city, and the remainder from Nitkin. The construction will be on the part of the plot closest to the Connecticut Convention Center.

The state's original vision called for a bigger project. Its first deal with Nitkin called for a smaller one. Pressure from the city led them to meet in the middle, officials said. Now, they say, they've got the right mix.

"What we're building is the right scope for this site," Nitkin said.

Mayor Eddie A. Perez agreed.

"We held on for a bigger and better project, and this is a bigger and better project," Perez said. "If you're talking about the market, I think there's more appetite. ... Nitkin was a smart developer, he held out for the least-risky project, and he knows this project can grow."

There are still obstacles. Nitkin and the state must now flesh out the tedious details of a lengthy development agreement, the state must do some site preparation work, the city has to reapply to the federal government for the $7 million in funding, which technically expired in September, and, perhaps most important, Nitkin has to lease the commercial and residential space.

And experience shows that deals alone do not build buildings.

Before Nitkin there was Richard Cohen, a developer who failed to begin building after he signed a 2002 agreement with the state. Cohen is suing the state in state court.

After the Cohen deal fell apart in 2004, the state thought a pack of developers would jump at the public subsidies attached to Front Street and it plunged into a fast-forward process to pick a replacement for Cohen's Capital Properties. The jump never happened, and although the state received four development proposals, none was to its liking.

Finally, the state selected Nitkin from yet another pack of developers, and they have been negotiating since April 2005. In February of this year, they signed an agreement that allowed for a phased development of the project.

But the city didn't like the scope of that deal - a first phase with 60 residential units and 43,000 square feet of retail - and told him that if he wanted all of the money he was asking for from the city, he'd have to do the whole project - 200 residential units and 100,000 square feet of retail.

Eventually, everyone compromised - Nitkin committed to a larger project, while the state and the city each put in more front-end money - and, on Sept. 28, the state and Nitkin initialed an agreement on all of the major funding issues.

Gov. M. Jodi Rell issued a press release on the announcement Thursday but wouldn't grant an interview. Her spokesman Judd Everhart said that she finds the project's scope "not only adequate, but reasonable and realistic."

Everhart went on to say that Rell was pleased that the deal had been consummated.

"There's an element of not only delight that the thing is done, but relief that they were able to finally make this happen," he said.

The state's talks with Nitkin also suggest a second phase of development to build on the remaining acreage that borders Prospect Street. Although Nitkin says he hopes to start building Phase Two as Phase One wraps up, the specifics of a deal for that phase are still up in the air, officials said.

More certain, however, is a bit of nomenclature. Nitkin said the development will most likely keep the name that Cohen gave it.

"For all of the investigation we've done in names," he said, "the name that keeps sticking is Front Street."

Contact Jeffrey B. Cohen at jcohen@courant.com.

A discussion of this story with Courant City Editor Andrew Julien is scheduled to be shown on New England Cable News each hour today between 9 a.m. and noon.

[Xusein]

If anyone lives in Hartford or the area...you know that boarded up building on Main Street, right next to I-84...ugly right? It's going to be demolished!

Link: http://www.courant.com/news/local/hr...,3354129.story

Eyesore Easing Toward Oblivion
Land Deal Expected To Spur Work At Site

October 27, 2006
By JEFFREY B. COHEN, Courant Staff Writer

A run-down, boarded-up building off I-84 that the city has called a "butt ugly" eyesore appears closer to demolition, clearing the way for construction of upscale condominiums on the site.

The city is now prepared to sell the condo developer a small strip of adjacent land that is essential to the project, and the sale would move the plan forward.

When added to the demolition site, the small strip - about 10,000 square feet - would give Joseph Citino enough land for the condominiums.

"It completes the piece, so to speak," said John F. Palmieri, the city's director of development services, who thinks that while building condos is noble, erasing the Butt Ugly Building from the city's landscape is even nobler.

"It's a terrible blight, it's very visible," Palmieri said. "The image of the city is hurt by this arrested and deteriorated structure on the city's edge. ... I believe if we were to take the property down as a precursor to development, we will have done a tremendous service to the city and the region."

City officials say Citino has an agreement to buy the building at 1161 Main St. from its current owner, Robert Danial. And he wants an agreement to buy the essential city parcel.

Although the sale of the city property to Citino at fair market value is contingent upon his demolition of the neighboring structure, it does not mandate the construction of something in its place. That would come later, as the city and Citino agree to work together toward a residential project that could result in between 60 and 220 condos being built, in part, with financial help from the city.

But Citino has agreed to buy and demolish the building, then clear the site, a process Palmieri says could cost $1.2 million.

Citino has said the condos could be "ultra luxury." When the talks were made public in February, his Plan A called for the bare minimum - six or seven stories with retail at ground level and 70 units ranging from 1,500 to 2,000 square feet above. Plan B was more ambitious - 21 to 24 stories with more than 200 units.

A city council committee will now hear the matter of selling city property to Citino. Council President John Bazzano said he likes the idea.

"If he can knock that building down, he's gone a lot further than people have in the past," Bazzano said. "They don't call it the Butt Ugly Building for nothing."

Contact Jeffrey B. Cohen at jcohen@courant.com.

[Xusein]

Link: http://www.courant.com/news/local/hr...,2101966.story

A link of map that shows the Hartford Business District (PDF)
Link: http://www.courant.com/media/acrobat...0/26078157.pdf

District Plan Gets Green Light
Taxpayers Willing, For Now, To Pay For Increased Services

October 25, 2006
By JEFFREY B. COHEN, Courant Staff Writer

Downtown Hartford property owners overwhelmingly approved a plan to raise their taxes and make for cleaner and safer streets Tuesday, but the work of delivering on the plan's promise may well be harder than selling the promise itself.

"We still have to prove that there's real value to paying" higher taxes, said R. Nelson "Oz" Griebel, head of the MetroHartford Alliance and a proponent of the plan. "The real hard work is before us."

The balloting that ended Tuesday asked the owners of 251 properties in the downtown and part of Asylum Hill to pay more money for enhanced services - including street cleaning, hospitality guides, and public relations. Many cities use "business improvement districts" to improve services in downtown areas.

Lawrence R. Gottesdiener - owner of a new, 36-story apartment tower, downtown's largest landowner, and a longtime supporter of the idea - said that while the plan has risks, they are worth it for a city betting on a resurgence.

"It costs money, and it costs money in an already high-cost jurisdiction," Gottesdiener said. "But when they've been done properly in other cities, they have been very effective. ... We're putting our money where our mouth is."

The district is not unique in Connecticut. Similar initiatives have been launched in Bridgeport, Stamford, New Britain and elsewhere.

In order to pass, the voting needed to hit two benchmarks. First, a majority of the owners of the 251 properties had to vote in favor of the plan; 70 percent did. Second, owners of half of the district's $805 million in assessed property value had to vote in favor; owners of properties that made up 78 percent of that value did.

The voting was the result of more than a year-and-a-half of lobbying major property owners toward the cause. Some investor-owners had to be convinced that higher operating costs made sense; some national corporations had to be convinced that their local neighborhood was worth improving; and most property owners had to be assured that the district would be held accountable for its results.

That's why there is a clause built into the ordinance that has it go away after three years. The members of the district can also move to dissolve the district at any time if they lose confidence, officials said.

But, for now, there is support.

M. Ronald Morneault, head of Business for Downtown Hartford, lobbied hard for the district and said the cost of the plan to the average downtown business owner - either one who owns the building where the business is or who rents and has the cost of the increased tax passed down - is a steal.

"If my landlord passed along $280 to me and said you were going to see nine new patrolling security and hospitality people and nine new street cleaners and that there was going to be marketing money, all for $280 bucks, I'd say you've got to be kidding me," he said.

By ordinance, the district can raise no more than 1 mill's worth of taxes from its property owners. That would translate into roughly $805,000 a year to run the district.

Using that figure, the average annual payment to the district by the top five property owners would be $70,880; the average annual payment to the district by the bottom 50 property owners would be $232.

Next, the district will hold a meeting of property owners to elect a board of commissioners that will then decide which services to provide and how much to pay for them.

Several developers were cautious and optimistic.

Developer Martin J. Kenny, who owns the Trumbull on the Park apartment complex, wouldn't say how he voted. Conceptually it makes sense, he said. "I'm just worried that it supports a whole myriad of bureaucracies," he said. "From what I've been told, it's going to be streamlined, and that's great."

Michael Grunberg, who owns buildings known as the Bank of America building and the nearby Prudential building, said he voted for the district and that the benefit justifies the cost. He added that the district will also give property owners the ability to speak with one voice when it comes to dealing with the city.

Marc Levine - owner of properties including the Sage-Allen apartment and retail project; the neighboring Richardson building, which is home to a Marriott Residence Inn; and Artspace Hartford at 555 Asylum - said he voted for the district.

"Everything they're talking about is beneficial to us," he said. "We just have to wrestle with the budgetary questions."

Griebel said he anticipated the good result Tuesday and added that skepticism from property owners is healthy.

"There is a leap of faith that everybody has to take, that if we're right, their property value would be enhanced," Griebel said. "If we're wrong, [property owners] are out of pocket for one mill for up to three years."

"But it's not like we're the first ones to do this and we're jumping off into the great abyss," he said.

Contact Jeffrey B. Cohen at jcohen@courant.com.

[Xusein]

Connecticut isn't only about Hartford, here's a editorial on the development going on in Bridgeport, the largest city (not metro) in the state...

Bridgeport, if they let it, would be booming...it has the cheapest housing prices in the Tri-State Area...

It's a little long...

Link: http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/...tility-opinion

Turning The Corner In Bridgeport
October 22, 2006


If I told you that a Connecticut downtown had some cool new housing under construction, major new restaurants, an art cinema coming, a new transportation center and in general a positive buzz, would you in a million years think I was talking about Bridgeport?

Do I mean our Bridgeport, the state's largest city and leading punch line, the throwback to Chicago in the 1930s, the pyrite patch along the Gold Coast?

I do. Bridgeport has endured decades of corruption, bad luck and inept management. Everything you ever heard about it was largely true. But the cosmic pendulum is swinging back. Things appear to be turning around.

The revival effort is led by a mayor making a personal comeback, Democrat John M. Fabrizi. Fabrizi admitted earlier this year that he used cocaine in his first year in office. But Fabrizi cleaned up, and to prove it allowed the Connecticut Post to supervise his drug test. He's found an economic development strategy that's gaining traction. He is working relentlessly to resurrect the city and, it would follow, himself.

As a reporter, I had many occasions to visit in Bridgeport in the 1970s and early 1980s, and it was on the skids. The great manufactories of the past - Remington, Singer, GE and others - were downsizing and leaving. Some joked that it was called "The Park City" because the cops could be counted on to fix parking tickets. Mobsters such as Francis "Fat Frannie" Curcio plied their trade with minimal interruption.

I stopped in federal court one day when tax rebel Irwin Schiff was selling copies of his book during his trial for income tax evasion. Schiff insisted he had discounted the price, calling it a "trial offer." In Bridgeport, that was downtown entertainment.

P.T. Barnum was mayor of Bridgeport in 1875. Most of the mayors over the past three decades more resembled Barnum's midgets. There was serious talk of bankruptcy. Mayor Joe Ganim grubbed his way into a nine-year stretch in the federal snoozer, and former state Sen. Ernest E. Newton II is doing five slow ones for taking bribes.

Ganim was replaced in 2003 by city council president Fabrizi. When Fabrizi tearfully admitted having abused cocaine and alcohol, it looked like more of the same, more disappointment and lost time, for Bridgeport.

But not so fast. Some positive things were happening. Gov. Lowell Weicker's insistence in the early 1990s that Housatonic Community College locate in downtown Bridgeport was paying off; it is one of the fastest-growing community colleges in the country (with a remarkable art gallery, go figure).

Also, some of Ganim's projects, however accomplished, were helpful. The downtown minor league baseball stadium and adjoining basketball/hockey arena brought suburbanites into Bridgeport who otherwise wouldn't have come. "They didn't get mugged, their cars weren't stolen and they had fun. They began to think differently about Bridgeport," said Paul S. Timpanelli, head of the Bridgeport Regional Business Council.

Also, say people who know him, Fabrizi was working hard all along, regardless of how he relieved tension. The city remade parks (Olmsted-designed Seaside Park is stunning), rebuilt sidewalks and installed new lighting.

Bridgeport was always surrounded by money; the challenge was drawing it in. Fabrizi may have hit a daily double.

For years the city had been trying to bring back manufacturing and land Class A office tenants, with little success. This strategy was a loser, but it turned out there were other opportunities. Some large corporations were looking for sites for back office operations. When the city opened the door, Royal Bank of Scotland and Pitney Bowes moved hundreds of jobs in.

The other opportunity was housing.

The price of housing in surrounding towns is obscene. There aren't many housing options for teachers, cops, bus drivers or even mid-level corporate types in Fairfield County. It occurred to Fabrizi and others that Bridgeport could be the bedroom town for the tonier stops on Metro North.

Fabrizi went for it. He adopted a take-no-prisoners attitude with blighted property and unpaid taxes: fix up, pay up or I'm taking it. He blew up the housing authority and appointed a new one. He brought in former DOT deputy commissioner Nancy Hadley, a top-notch administrator, to run planning and economic development. They've got rehab completed or underway in downtown buildings that have been closed for decades. Part of the appeal is that these buildings are all within short walking distance of bus, rail and ferry service, and thus are alternatives to the rush-hour sludge on I-95.

The prospect of transit-oriented redevelopment attracted New York developer Eric Anderson to Bridgeport. He's turning the Art Deco City Trust Bank and the former Arcade Hotel (a good use of eminent domain here), and several others into downtown housing and retail. He's a very bright young man, a devotee of urbanist Jane Jacobs who likes to "get people out of their cars." He said he saw downtown Bridgeport and asked: "Where do I sign up?"

Another bright and committed developer, Bridgeport resident Phil Kuchma, is rehabbing a block that contains the Bijou, the oldest movie house in the country built as a movie theater and still a movie theater. It will show art films when the renovation is completed. Downtown has the bones of a very nifty neighborhood.

The years of corrupt and inept leadership have left Bridgeport lagging behind the state's other large cities in many areas. To get many of these development projects started, the city had to fight itself. Officials brought in a team from the Urban Land Institute headed by former Indianapolis Mayor William Hudnut in 2005. Hudnut discerned that the city's land-use policies didn't reflect either the market or the city's goals. For example, waterfront areas that cry out for mixed-use development are zoned industrial. Outdoor dining, which would work downtown and along the waterfront, is prohibited.

The city never went much for plans, preferring the big-bang deal (a tendency not unknown in Hartford). There is no plan of conservation and development, though it is required by state law. But now there will be, as officials madly work to create or update plans and zoning regulations.

I drove around the city with Fabrizi. I hadn't seen him in about a year, and he is noticeably thinner. "I haven't had a drink in more than a year, that may be part of it," he said, a little ruefully. He's a city native and former schoolteacher, a straightforward, hands-on, what-you-see-is-what-you-get guy. People like him. He's not trying to be governor.

He's made at least one step to confront the city's recent history. Prospective developers get a business card in the economic development office with the phone numbers of the U.S. attorney and the state's attorney on the back and the statement: "Nobody pays to play in Bridgeport!" Yet the old days fade slowly; the Connecticut Post recently reported that most of the Democratic town committee members worked for or were connected to city government.

Fabrizi is on the streets all the time; someone said he'd attend the opening of a fire hydrant. People waved to him in the East Side and in the tough Marina Village housing project. He seems focused; he senses that his housing strategy is working and he's trying to make it happen tomorrow. He knows there's much to do. Taxes are still too high and the schools need work. His city was late getting into the magnet and charter school movement, but seven new schools are in the works.

City residents have given him a chance. He's trying to make the most of it. The business community is behind him. Unlikely things do happen. The Red Sox won the World Series in our lifetime. Despite everything, it may be Bridgeport's time.

Tom Condon is the editor of Place. He can be reached at tcondon@courant.com.

[StamfordCT]

At least he is in the streets and sees whats going on. Thats good BPT is turning around. Hopefully they won't kick everyone out, like they are doing in Stamford. In stamford they're attracting big businesses, BUT the workers can't afford to live here, because of the prices. I understand money flowing into a city is one thing, BUT tohave a place so expensive that most people can't afford it, is stupid to me, and they got that BS plan of ONLY havin 10% affordable housing when they build a new condominium or housing.

And Stamford is attracting businesses, it needs to liven up Downtown, because Stamford is a very boring place to live. THey talk about downtown is alive.....which is a lie. Stamford is my hometown, but i wish there was more to do around, they need to do something, because stamford isn't really happening. Hartford has a live downtown?? right?

[Xusein]

I think Stamford has to start thinking big, but it is stuck under the shadow of NY. It has the potential and the income to surpass Hartford in developments. But there are more NIMBYs there, with people moving to Stamford to escape the city lifestyle, instead of Hartford that basically is "desperate" enough to approve anything.

Hartford's downtown is getting better, but it still has a long way to go. But downtown still feels dead on weekend afternoons. But...it is better than before, no doubt. Downtown could feel ultra-busy on weekdays though.

Bridgeport has a great chance to become a great city. It is much cheaper than the rest of Fairfield Co. to rent an apartment in...and, you could still commute down to NYC (trains, not traffic-filled I-95). If they fixed their issues with government/crime, I would move down there. It has a lot of good things going for it...

[StamfordCT]

Yea bridgeport has potential. But what are NIMBY's please explain that to me, because i dont kno what that is. Stamford is thinking big, but at the expense of its people who aren't earning millions...it needs to seriously help those who aren't making millions, those who work hard to get what they got.

and downtown needs some life for real, because it really doesnt buzz a whole lot. Downtown stamford is only like 2 blocks ( where everything is)...they need to expand downtown a bit and bring some live music, and i would LOVE to see a building surpass landmark square as tallest in stamford, stamford really is boring it needs some tuning up for real.

[Xusein]

NIMBYs...how can I explain...

Not in my backyard types. People or groups that protest a development, like a high-rise, or a highway, because it "will ruin the small town character" or "will make sprawl grow".

Some are good, like the protesting of a toxic waste dump, but in general...it just stops or delays developments to take longer and more expensive than it would be originally. Connecticut has too much NIMBYs, and it shows, look how slow-growing the state is...

BTW: I haven't been to Stamford (in the city, not I-95) in years. All I remember going there was Stamford City Center, which was a nice mall. Does Stamford have much nightlife?

[StamfordCT]

ok i understand what nimby's are now. Yea CT has too many of them. It seems like everytime a building gets proposed to be taller or near height of landmark square, they shoot it down. To me it seems they want a 295 foot building to remain the tallest building in the city.. we need something 300+.

Stamford City Center? You mean the Stamford Town Center. lol. Nice mall...eh
its BORING. You can walk the whole mall in like 5 minutes and leave. I try to avoid going there, i go to trumbull mall or connecticut post mall. The problem with our mall is the location and appearance. It would be better if the mall was more open and not enclosed, and more appearance friendly. but there is nothing there though, its boring and small. Just two shopping levels which you can walk in 45 seconds, HORRIBLE food court ( even though they trying to do something different now). Our mall is terrible, i've worked there, and its DEAD most of the time compared to other malls man. i wish north stamford had a mall, i believe if a mall was up there it would be wayyyyy more better.

[StamfordCT]

Stamford is building alot of high rise apartments, i guess in the 200-250 foot range. but the city itself is running our of room to build, all they can do is go up, because there is no space anywhere really.

One thing i do hate though, is that they turning EVERYTHING into condo's, even if its 1/2 acre, they stick like 20 condo's in there and sell em EXPENSIVE. But its about time stamford's skyline was re-shaped it, we need it.

[StamfordCT]

^See the city part of stamford is getting cramped and we running out of room.




our skyline needs a major facelift. the buildings on the right are out of place with landmark square building. The two buildings all the way to the right, i hate them, they need to go for real, they look ugly. i hate that stamfords tall buildings ALL line up along I-95....i hate it. For one the buildings are ugly, and two from far away it just looks terrible.

[Xusein]

From what I see, there is plenty of land, the downtown and development could go up north, and south...but I don't think the NIMBYs would like that...Stamford has a lot more room than Hartford does.

Yeah, that condo thing is an annoyance. The same thing was going on here in Hartford. But, the fact that the condo market here is going sour, made some developer make apartments instead.

[Xusein]

Some commentary on Commuter rail...

Link: http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/...nes-commentary

Why Not Get Trains Built Now?
October 29, 2006

By JAMES P. REPASS What with crime stories and campaign news, a Hartford press conference on Oct.18 was largely overlooked. It shouldn't have been; it was crucial to the economic future of Connecticut and New England.

State Senate President Don Williams, with transportation committee co-chairman Sen. Biagio "Billy" Ciotto, asked the Connecticut Department of Transportation to consider buying some double-decker rail cars that are being manufactured for New Jersey Transit.

Why is that so important?

Because if we do it, Connecticut taxpayers will save millions of dollars and get better rail service sooner.

The DOT is revitalizing the rail line between New Haven, Hartford and Springfield to serve commuters who otherwise must take the highway, or the infrequent, expensive Amtrak trains. The track work is getting underway and will be largely completed in two to three years.

In the normal course of events, the state will then wait until a pot of money can be identified, hire a consultant, write a specification, go to bid, accept and evaluate bids and pick a winner. Then, years later, the trainsets themselves will begin to arrive. In the six to eight years it will take to do all of this, Connecticut will have lost yet more employers and manufacturers, whose employees can't get to work in a reasonable time because the highways we've built are full yet again - and can't be widened without thoroughly wrecking what's left of this beautiful state.

We don't have to do it that way.

Instead, let's do this: New Jersey is buying hundreds of ultramodern locomotives and double-decker rail cars. These are similar to the commuter rail cars now in service by the thousands in Germany, a country with one of the best rail systems in the world. They are being built right now in New York. The manufacturer, Bombardier, has offered Connecticut these same world-class trainsets (one locomotive and five cars per set), at the same price, $15 million, that New Jersey Transit is paying.

Depending on the number of trainsets Connecticut someday orders - and remember, we are looking at expanding commuter rail service not just on the Inland Route but along the shore and on several branch lines - there will be a savings of $2 million to $3 million each. It should be no surprise that trains, like doughnuts, are cheaper by the dozen. Why not save the money and get the trainsets years earlier?

Gov. M. Jodi Rell recently signed, at a Windsor train station ceremony, Executive Order 15, "Connecticut Green and Growing." The governor's proposal to make Connecticut a smart growth state has caught the attention of Connecticut's transportation and environmental advocates, many of whom were frankly surprised to hear how heartfelt Mrs. Rell sounded on that day.

Governor, if you meant what you said about future generations when you signed that order with a literal and rhetorical flourish on that balmy day in Windsor, here is an opportunity to put substance to your words - in a way that will save the taxpayers a bundle, and get them better rail service sooner.

James RePass is president of the National Corridors Initiative, a transportation advocacy group that negotiated funding for the high-speed rail project that links Boston and New York. A former journalist, he is a contributor to this and other newspapers.

[StamfordCT]

They are gonna put 4,000 units of housing in the south end and retail stores. but the NIMBY'S are afraid that the south end development will "draw away" business from downtown. Man people need somewhere else to go because there isn't anything downtown really, i want them to extend downtown northward more shops, restaraunts etc. But the thing about building north is this: 1) You would have to demolish all the single family houses and replace them with apartments. 2) Demolish single family homes and replace with restaraunts and shops. 3) If your building toward north stamford...you know the rich people aint gonna let it happen.

Only other part where theres stores and shops is on high ridge road. Up on high ridge road is more like a second downtown, because thats where there is a whole strip of stores, and stuff up there. I wish in stamford they'd do 3 things:1) Re-Do the WHOLE MALL. 2) Put more restaraunts and stores downtown. 3) extend the downtown area because its cramped and only limited to within 3-4 blocks. 4) See a couple of new skyscrapers. 5) Make housing Affordable ( no not just 10% of the total units you build, but more like 25-30%). 6) More live music in stamford ( norwalks washington streets clubs have music. when you walk down the street the music is playing, giving the street a vibrant sound and feel during summer)