New Haven Independent

Posted by: sandstorm | March 5, 2007 3:31 PM

Perhaps they need travel only as far as Stamford who has been made aware of this article!
Bureau lauds plan for Metro Green project
By Doug Dalena
Staff Writer

Published March 5 2007

STAMFORD - The city Land Use Bureau praised a plan to build 48 units of affordable housing next to the Stamford train station in what would become the state's largest "green" mixed-use development.

In a written assessment of the Metro Green development plan by W&M Properties and housing developer Jonathan Rose Companies, Land Use Bureau Chief said it is unique because it combines several features the city should want - transit-oriented development, on-site affordable housing at nearly double the amount required, consistency with the city's Master Plan and environmentally sensitive design.

The development, on 5 acres of a onetime industrial site immediately south of the train station, "will substantially mitigate traffic and energy concerns while providing a mixture of uses with a substantial amount of affordable housing," Stein wrote, recommending the Zoning Board accept the application for review. W&M - owner of the adjacent Metro Center office building and First Stamford Place off Greenwich Avenue - submitted it last week.

If built, Metro Green, originally named Metro Center II, would include a 17-story, 325,000-square-foot office tower between the train station and Metro Center and 220 units of housing in three buildings.

In a twist for downtown construction projects, the affordable housing component will be included on site and built before the office tower and market-rate housing.

Anthony Malkin, part of the family team that owns W&M, said two factors determined the decision to build the housing.

First, his company and Jonathan Rose Cos., which specializes in affordable housing, wanted the affordable component, a five-story apartment building with stoops and small lawns facing Henry Street, to be the first impression of the development.

"It was important to us that we lead with the below-market rate first," Malkin said.

Second, the developers had to meet a looming deadline to apply for the tax credits from the Connecticut Housing Finance Authority that will finance most of the affordable building, forcing them to compress the planning and design work.

The affordable apartments, most with one or two bedrooms, would be reserved for renters who earn less than 60 percent of the area median income - about $70,000. Rents, determined by individual household income, would range from $545 for a single person earning about $21,800 to more than $1,800 for a family of four with household income of about $70,000.

The 48 below-market rate apartments would constitute 23 percent of the housing in the development, nearly double the 12 percent required under city zoning rules for the area around the train station.

Design and planning for the office building and two market-rate residential buildings, though "very, very far along" in the design process, will take longer to complete, Malkin said.

Metro Green stands to become one of the first developments in Connecticut, and the largest, to meet the "green" design standards of the United States Green Building Council.

The standards, called LEED, for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, award points for features that save energy and water, limit construction waste, maintain high indoor air quality and reduce car traffic. Developers must register their projects, hire a LEED specialist to oversee the process, and have the finished projects inspected to get LEED certified.

The Green Building Council lists 26 projects in Connecticut in various stages of construction that have registered for LEED certification. Four that are complete have been certified.

Metro Center's office tower alone would be the largest, and is planned to meet at least the LEED Gold certification, the second-highest rating.

"We will have more employees and residents using mass transit than any development in Stamford," Malkin said.

Developers of several other projects in Stamford have said they will pursue some form of LEED certification, along with the city, which plans to make future city-owned buildings and schools meet LEED Silver, the third-highest rating.

Posted by: Leslie | March 5, 2007 5:58 PM

Geez- My 115 year old house in the Hill seems to be in better shape than these brand new homes. While this revitalized community does look lovely, what good is it if the houses are falling apart? The good people who chose to put down roots might get fed up and go somewhere else. What has happened to quality craftmanship? Is it really a thing of the past? If the people at City Hall want to say they care about quality housing, they must support these folks and facilitate a thorough investigation. They must take the necessary steps to halt shoddy building projects in our city.

Posted by: nothing was overseen | March 5, 2007 7:06 PM

I inspected all these houses prior to them being sold, for reasons I can't discuss. However, and I spent 20 years building, I noticed immediately that the workmanship was very poor. A simple thing to indicate this is the seams in the siding. They are not staggered and the siding will allow water penetration. Also the Tyvek house wrap was not even close to being applied correctly. The interiors, were cracking with pooor finishes prior to any settlement Mr. Rizzo may refer to. In fact, had the foundation been dome correctly the house would not settle. In addition modular houses of any quality use glue and screws for drywall and generally don't show cracking within a year. The workers were completely unsupervised and the crews I met had very limited experience. Thisis another example of the city claiming it is doing great things, but everything is half-hearted. I specifically stated back then that when these houses began to show the signs of poor quality, the owners, who would have the money would be stuck in a no win situation. But it looked good for Johnny to say they were done prior to the vote. Nobody could have stopped the project under his rule becuase of poor quality. The city had no dedicated person overseeing the construction. The building department flat out said they were understaffed and had no time for the little houses. Plus Eaton Row was the last in a long line of companies to get claim to this project. In fact there was a question as to whether the funds shuld have been available to them, but the city pushed that under the rug. Check contract compliance at the controllers office.

Posted by: nfjanette | March 5, 2007 11:07 PM

Over tiles stuck on two-by-fours with tissues in the absnece of a sub-floor

That's a classic indication of a poor quality builder that is too cheap to put down a proper cement board sub floor and to use proper mortar to affix the tiles.

Here's a good description of how to do it well from a do-it-yourself tips web site:

Chip board, cushioned vinyl flooring, particle boards of any type, luan plywood, OSB (Oriented Strand Board), tongue & groove planking, and hardwood floors are unsuitable substrates to directly install ceramic tile over.

Although it can be done successfully, many experts believe that ceramic tile installed directly to plywood surfaces should be avoided whenever possible. Plywood has a smooth surface and tends to swell, warp, and delaminate when it is exposed to moisture. Install at your own risk.

Posted by: TSN | March 6, 2007 8:21 AM

Question, where were the building inspectors? Are they not responsible to make sure that the minimial standards are met in construction, from the pour of cement, plumbing, electricial, and finally a certificate of occupancy?

Something smells fishy. If there was government help in this development, the FBI needs to investigate.

Look closely at these developments in the city, talk to some of the locals who are involved, odds are one will discover shenigans. Shenigans, corruption, that lead our officials to say, "There are always two sides to the story. The truth is always somewhere in between." It is in the inbetween that these vermon thrive, with a wink to the developers/contractors from the city officials, and shrug of the shoulders to residents.

Corruption prosecuted in Bridgeport and Waterbury. Hopefully now New Haven can get a closer look. Investigate these developments and follow the trail to the dealmakers in this city.

Posted by: ER | March 6, 2007 12:23 PM

Jonathan Rose Companies, through its affiliate Eaton Row LLC, has worked tirelessly during the construction and since the construction of the homes at Francis Hunter Drive to ensure that any reasonable construction-related issues of concern to the homeowners are addressed. We have spent over a year and a half working to complete any work identified in construction repair logs that were developed as part of a walk through with each individual homeowner and signed by every homeowner. In addition, Eaton Row LLC has gone above and beyond contractual or legal requirements to assist the homeowners in feeling happy with their homes. To date, Eaton Row LLC has spent over $500,000 including over a thousand of hours of staff time trying to assist the homeowners with their complaints.

While this article highlights the concerns of a few, several homeowners have accepted Eaton Row’s offer to resolve their problems and have had their work completed. Several other homeowners have not found it worth their time to respond at all. Where the discussion currently stands is here: in November 2006 and again in January of this year, Eaton Row LLC offered any homeowner who has outstanding repairs indicate what those items were so that they could be addressed.

As stated above, while several homeowners have opted to finalize any outstanding work with us, many others have chosen not to respond to our offer to assist them. While we recognize homeowners’ prerogative to waive this offer, we view it as bad faith to accuse us of being unwilling to address problems when we have not been provided with a list of outstanding issues. While we recognize the homeowners’ frustration, we cannot do any more than provide the offer that was made several months ago.

These homes are well designed, structurally sound and fundamentally well constructed. We still hope to have the opportunity to address any reasonable issues that we receive from homeowners. The work of any on-going coordination for the property is being handled out of the New Haven office of the company which has been open since 2005.

Posted by: CindyS | March 6, 2007 2:04 PM

I found this article while looking for relevant news to post on the website of hadd.com, a nonprofit org I volunteer for, which deals in shoddy construction and breach of warranty issues. It is absolutely disgusting that builders can get away with building DISPOSABLE houses.