New Haven Independent

Posted by: New Haven Tea Party | October 9, 2007 2:18 PM

Taxpayers' Retirement Village - a 300 story building on each parcel, linked by heated and cooled crosswalks. It will require a 100% subsidy from the City of New Haven Economic Development Office, and partially paid for by the Housing Authority. That's because none of us will be able to afford our homes anymore due to taxes, fees and other assessments the BOA rubber stampers and visionaires in the mayor's office impose year after year. We'll all be retired because we will have exhausted our tired, poor bodies holding down multiple jobs in a fruitless attempt to get ahead of these people and take care of our families. And of course, we'll be approved for HANH subsidies because we'll be poor as church mice. But like the new monuments to non-education we're building around the city, which will likely cost taxpayers an additional $66 - $100 million more than promised, we will have a nice auditorium with stadium seating for watching movies and having meetings; we'll have an indoor poor with racing lanes; a multi-story atrium with lots of glass, tall ceilings painted a lovely blue and shaped like dancing waves on an ocean. And we'll have a ribbon of dancing children like Beecher, and made out of stainless steel, dancing around the elevator lobbies.

Posted by: Pedro | October 9, 2007 2:29 PM

This is very exciting. "Infilling" the state street area is something I have personally thought would be a great idea for years. It would tie together Wooster square and downtown, and add some vibrancy to that section of town. Currently once you hit state street you get a black hole of highway until you reemerge on wooster square. It will also help tie 9th square with the train station area.

I'm a big fan of trying to bring more people to live in this area of town, so I would love to see more apartments, especially moderately priced ones rather than million dollar glitzy ones. More storefronts for the burgeoning restaurant scene would also be a plus.
I'm also sure that there could be more good office space to be added to these areas for the many law firms and small businesses currently there.

Posted by: king james v | October 9, 2007 9:36 PM

how something like a Macy's or other department store where new haveners won't have to burn carbon fuels to get to milford or the post road to buy clothes (the botiques on chapel that cater to size 5 & under for rich women & yuppie babies don't count)? Oh, right, we tried that. Well then, something we really need - another starbucks, overpriced asian restarant or expensive apartments should sound good to the puppets on the BZA.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | October 10, 2007 8:04 AM

I second Tea Party's Idea!!

Posted by: charlie | October 10, 2007 10:24 AM

What's wrong with expensive apartments? Is anyone here smart enough to understand that the only way for the city to thrive is for it to expand its tax base?

Posted by: New Haven Tea Party | October 10, 2007 10:47 AM

Have we had the property appraised yet?

Posted by: nfjanette | October 10, 2007 2:52 PM

What's wrong with expensive apartments? Is anyone here smart enough to understand that the only way for the city to thrive is for it to expand its tax base?

Increasing the tax base sounds good if the buildings are built and run with private funds without giving away tax money to fund them, either in the form of grants or tax abatements. The placement of large buildings should also be managed carefully in the context of how they fit best into the city.

Posted by: charlie | October 10, 2007 4:31 PM

True, however sometimes people need to be able to see the forest through the trees. Giving a tax abatement is a very good idea if the developer is, as a result of the tax abatement, agreeing to contribute hundreds of millions of dollars to the development of the city, including spending millions of dollars on projects that the city would otherwise have had to fund anyways. It's stupid to argue about giving someone a penny today if they are going to give you $100.00 tomorrow. Would you rather have $0.01 or $100?

Posted by: jt | October 10, 2007 5:08 PM

yes, New Haven is on a roll, and frankly, there is nothing wrong with expensive apartments. however, will the "roll" stop when there are no longer parking spaces in downtown for people to come to visit New Haven, or will the tenants of these apartments suddenly get sick and tired of trying to find parking and move to a new location?
Parking is an extremely necessary of a successful downtown. If you built it, they will come. (but only if there is a place to park)

Posted by: Chrissy Bonanno | October 10, 2007 6:06 PM

Pedro--Thanks for the great ideas. I think you are right on target--mixed use is the way to go in urban centers that want to activate streetscapes and provide quality places for people to live and work.

JT--parking is definitely an important consideration, too.

Thanks Paul for opening this up for what I hope will be a lively discussion about what people want to see in Downtown.

Posted by: New Haven Tea Party | October 10, 2007 9:28 PM

2nd question...has the property been appraised yet? And you're right..we're on a roll alright, and unfortunately, the taxpayers are being rolled. I hope these deals are put together better than Lot E; Shartenburg and Macy's.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | October 11, 2007 8:41 AM

Question to Chrissy Parking???? What will replace the commuter and customer parking that this is taken away?? Will a lot be being built somewhere close??? SNET old lot maybe?? Has anyone turned in ideas? As "TEA PARTY" what is the property appraised at??
I hope that restaurants and apt are our of the running (we do not need anymore of those). What did the old downtown have That is no longer there?? Downtown use to be a great place. What do people that do not drive that live downtown need maybe the key question once the Shartenburg is up.

Posted by: charlie | October 11, 2007 11:25 AM

So "we don't need any more apartments", CedarHill??? According to you? That's probably the silliest idea I have ever heard expressed on this site. New Haven needs MANY more downtown apartments. When more people move in, too, the amenities you are talking about will follow, not to mention higher tax reciepts to pay for our basic city services.

Posted by: i live downtown | October 11, 2007 3:12 PM

I know I'm probably living in a fantasy world, but here's what I'd love to have downtown. Some of these are places that I already make a drive out to the burbs for. I would frequently visit all of these places.

-Trader Joe's!!!
-Sephora!!!
-Johnny Rocket's!!!
-an upscale bowling alley with a martini bar
-a nice cheese shop
-a Dave & Buster's type of place (it's like an adult-oriented Chuck E. Cheese)
-a chocolate bar (cocoas, chocolates, that sort of thing)
-a fun little city garden-oriented store.. for those of us who'd like to cultivate "kitchen window" type gardens, or who have a little terrace for potted plants.. no point in driving out to a huge garden/landscape store for this
-a sports/fitness store (not a monstrosity like Dick's though)
-a home store (kitchen supplies, bed & bath, etc) maybe even one that focuses on apartment decorating, they could specialize in space-saving solutions
-a nice affordable clothing store (can't afford the boutiques around chapel and I find them intimidating anyway).. I love the Urban Outfitters & J. Crew, so something like this...
-a pet groomer

I only moved here over the summer, so if any of these places already exist downtown, please let me know!!

Posted by: on whalley | October 12, 2007 2:35 PM

With regards to this "roll" the city is apparently on, expensive apartments and condos downtown MIGHT bring a bunch of rich yuppies into New Haven but it will push out just as many if not more middle class residents. Are there any left? Sometimes I think I'm the only sucker who hasn't abandoned ship.

Guess who will be left? Come on, guess?

Rich downtown center surrounded (even more so) by crime ridden poverty. Poverty doesn't care one bit about mil rates, taxation, utilities, or anything else for that matter so it won't be moving away. If anything they will continue to gravitate toward the hospitals, clinics, shelters and of course package stores they build their communities around now. But that's nothing that nice zoning laws and eminent domain abuses can't hedge against.

I guess the gamble is whether or not the Richie Riches who can afford a 500,000 drywall box on top of an identical series of drywall boxes will increase in size greater than the dependents in the impoverished areas surrounding said downtown area.

Ideally, I suppose the wealthy yuppies can satisfy their narcissistic and self-righteous impulses by creating a cute little socialist empire within the city's boundaries where the poor get to live from the scraps of the oligarchs. You know, as long as you don't have to see or touch them. Maybe build a fence? Drop a few bridges? It will be Ivory Tower heaven.

No middle class complaining about their taxation and nothing but elite, liberal, chortling yuppies to talk about how best to force the poorest to live.

A model for every city.

Oh, and another generically foreign restaurant I won't eat at while not shopping for $120 pants I can't afford (and wouldn't want to) at a downtown boutique would be good too. Maybe that pasta place with $30 jars of sauce can open a sister store?

Posted by: Carole | October 12, 2007 3:55 PM

We do need to think about parking. BUT we also need to think, a lot, about making it easier for people to live downtown without a car -- or with one car per household instead of two or more. "I Live Downtown" mentions some essentials: a good-sized grocery store like Trader Joe's, someplace to buy home goods, affordable clothing stores are all reasons people need to drive to the burbs. Better bus service would help a lot. So would Zipcar, which can save a ton of money while still making a car available when you need it.

Posted by: dana b | October 12, 2007 4:37 PM

Carole,

I agree with all your points, but I wonder if underneath your argument for downtown living without cars is a Trojan horse -- that old leftist saw about getting people out of their cars and onto the sidewalks. Instead of dealing with how Americans are, anti-car activists keep trying to change how Americans think about themselves in cars. (That would be with a cupholder, cell-phone, and drive-thru meal!)

You know, a segment of the populace is anti-car and wants to make people ride public transit, walk, etc. and "enjoy the neighborhoods" -- all great ideals but NOT the way people think of using downtown New Haven.

What JT said is absolutely right -- people will stop coming into the downtown to use its services, restaurants, and clubs, if they have to pay a lot to park in lots and garages removed from the places they are going.

I just had dinner with an out-of-towner who had to park in the Temple garage, walk four blocks each way, and pay $6 for two hours of after-7 pm parking. She was disgruntled -- "I have to add $6 to the dinner price just to eat in New Haven? You got to be kidding!"

I thought then and I think now that the hassle and cost of parking will deter people from coming downtown. Anti-car folks may hate that mentality, but rather than try to change it, I think we should accomodate people with adequate, inexpensive, and convenient parking. New Haven doesn't have the star power of Manhattan or San Francisco. The experience of being downtown isn't big or fanatastic enough to warrant the extra outlay. If we don't accomodate drivers, a lot of them will vote with their wheels.

Posted by: Chrissy Bonanno | October 12, 2007 5:45 PM

Thanks readers! Parking is definitely something we keep in mind during negotiations. In addition to any parking that may be associated with any proposals on these three parcels, there is a lot in the way of parking going in this neck of the woods. The New Haven Parking Authority purchased land on the corner of State and Wall Streets for a new parking structure (the new site of the "mid-block" garage), Shartenberg will have more than 500 new spaces, and the Coliseum site will have up to 500 spaces on an interim lot. Whatever development that takes place on the Coliseum site will also have a parking element. In addition, the new Gateway College will "wrap" a structured parking lot on the former Macy's site. Cedar Hill and Tea Party--the City ordered appraisals and environmentals on all three lots before the RFP went out that will be ready before we select developers and begin negotiations. I Live Downtown and Carole--thanks for your insights. Historically, State Street was the site of all kinds of local stores that supported dwellers downtown and in surrounding neighborhoods. There were green grocers and cobblers and butchers lining both sides of State Street before redevelopment. Part of the Shartenberg deal was a guarentee to bring a high-quality, urban grocery store (something the caliber of Trader Joe's or Whole Foods) to the site. I think your suggestions of complimentary service-oriented street level uses sound great.

Posted by: New Haven Tea Party | October 13, 2007 11:39 AM

Yeah for the appraisal...thanks. My hope is these deals will be better for taxpayers in both the short and long runs as well as for the developers. There is no reason to do development in New Haven where we count on long term payoffs that create near term problems, or at least provide no or very little near term benefit. Good luck.

Posted by: robn | October 13, 2007 1:38 PM

danab

I agree with you that the US has a long history of car culture, and assuming that alternative sources for energy will be readily available in 30 years, that will probably continue. But I think its wrong to label people who don't want clogged, polluted downtown as car-haters that want to diminish your freedom. Everybody should be free to breath fresh air and to nopt have their tax dollars sucked up by expensive ugly garages.

Besides the noise and pollution caused by too many cars downtown, residents that own a car can see it as more of an expensive hassle than fun. Not everybody, but certainly some. A company called zipcar has responded to this market and they allow people to rent a car for a couple of hours. Yale has brought them in to serve students who seldom need cars and don't want to keep one downtown. Many would rather pay 8 bucks an hour instead of buying, maintaining, gassing-up, and storing their own cars. I think a lot of cars could be taken off of the roads in New Haven if people become more aware of alternatives.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | October 13, 2007 5:23 PM

Thank you Chrissy for responding. I wish more city rep's would take advantage of "The Independent" and its comment area to communicate with the more active and less active people of this city.

I am glad that the parking is being addressed for the reasons that "dana b" brought up.
But... I to have some of the concerns that "on whalley" has. While Developing the downtown area we do have to keep in mind, the surrounding community's. We must make sure that the cost of making the downtown area a revenue area does not make a sacrifice of the surrounding areas to neglect. We are the gateway into the city. We are just as or even more important to the success of the downtown area.

With that said I would love for you to keep us up dated on the bids.

and "charlie" I totally understand that the more that live in the downtown can be a good thing..but we NEED other things downtown before that can work. As stated above by other posters. Even Chrissy brought up State Street shops before the redevelopment era of the 50's and 60's and the decline of making the downtown a place to live. Without the start of those conveniences in place before building more housing we may end up with alot of empty spaces. But then again with proper management it can work. ;)

Posted by: Kevin | October 13, 2007 6:24 PM

Two comments and two questions.

"I live downtown'' will be pleased to learn that a (presumably nice) cheese shop is going in at the corner of Grove and Whitney (I spoke with the owner this morning-he will also have a beer and wine permit).

"On Whalley" believes that downtown is "surrounded by ... crime ridden poverty." Having lived in East Rock for 15 years and Wooster Square before that, I wonder whether the writer has spent any time in these neighborhoods that border downtown.

Question for Chrissy-is the city doing any market research on what the people who live downtown want in terms of stores and services?

Question for Paul B.-have you thought about having a separate page for downtown as a neighborhood?

Posted by: Edward_H | October 14, 2007 3:59 PM

Charlie
So "we don't need any more apartments", CedarHill??? According to you? That's probably the silliest idea I have ever heard expressed on this site.

Funny you should say that. Here is the silliest thing I ever read on this site.

and odds are that the driver would be going about 45 to 50 MPH, seriously injuring or killing whoever he hit, versus just 20-30MPH in New Haven (which means 1/100th the force of impact and a 1000% higher chance of survival). As fas as getting shot, the chance of that is almost 0% unless you are a drug dealer, so you're still dealing with the fact you're about 100X more likely to die in the 'burbs. But I'm glad it's closer to work for you.

http://www.newhavenindependent.org/archives/2007/10/mayor_overrule.php

"people who live in glass houses should not throw stones"

Posted by: on whalley | October 15, 2007 8:18 AM

Kevin, gee you got me there.

I can't afford to both live in East Rock or Wooster area and save for my exodus out of this crumbling rock called New Haven. Quarter million dollar condos and million dollar homes are slightly beyond my means.

I've lived off of Sherman, Dixwell, briefly off of Edwards and now just off of Whalley. Sure, when I was near Edwards it looked cleaner but that didn't keep things from being stolen, car windows from being smashed, liquor bottles and beer cans from littering the land and panhandlers from harassing us and it certainly didn't do anything for my tax burden.

If you have some unconditional love for life here thats great. I did for years as my family has lived here for generations but I can't do it anymore. You fight and fight and fight only to see the city turn it's back on you over and over again. I've seen too many homes collapse, too many business close, too many friends and family get assaulted and mugged, too many cops not care and way too many stupid decisions by DeStefano and company that in absolutely no feasible way contribute to better the quality of life of my economic and social class in this city. If anything current policies show the city's administration would rather not have us here so I'm on my way out. I've a couple years left to go but that isn't keeping me from X'ing the days off of the calendar. At this point it's more like a prison sentence than a place of residence with some sort of sick game attached to see if I actually survive without being shot or stabbed for my sneakers or bicycle.