New Haven Independent

Frank D’Amore, a deputy director of the city’s Livable City Initiative, has been brainstorming how to dispose of about 550 sliver lots owned by the city. The lots, acquired mainly through tax foreclosure, are too small to build on or are otherwise unsuitable for development. They sit vacant, vulnerable to blight. (Click here for a back story.)

During a six-minute meeting of the Property Acquisition and Dispensation Committee (PAD) in City Hall Wednesday afternoon, D’Amore pitched a more concrete proposal for what to do with the land.

The PAD didn’t take a vote; D’Amore presented a draft proposal, which will be discussed further and voted on at the panel’s meeting next month.

Most of the sliver lots lie in residential areas, abutting people’s homes. Neighbors may be using the lots already for parking or gardens. In a difficult economy, the city has been having trouble getting people to buy the properties.

D’Amore proposes offering a price they can’t resist: free.

Technically, the city may have to charge one dollar; that question is still being tackled by City Hall attorneys, said Chrissy Bonanno, the city’s deputy director of economic development.

After the meeting, she and D’Amore elaborated on the proposal.

Bonanno said the city intends to encourage homeowners to use adjacent properties for a driveway or playground, not to entice out-of-town investors to snatch up the lots.

As under current city guidelines, whoever buys a sliver lot would get some help easing into the new tax bill. For the first 10 years, the buyer would pay no taxes; the taxes would then be phased in over the following five years.

The clearance sale would not last forever: D’Amore proposes offering the bargain basement prices for a period of 18 months.

“It’s a no-brainer for a property-owner,” D’Amore said.

The fire sale would not start for at least a couple months: First, the PAD will meet next month to approve the changes to its guidelines. The proposal will then go to the LCI board and the Board of Aldermen for approval, D’Amore said.

A Fast Lane For Condos

D’Amore (pictured) and Bonanno also pitched a second idea aimed at getting city properties back on the tax rolls.

The second proposal would speed up the process for turning over another type of property that has proved hard to sell: housing units developed by the city for the purpose of homeownership.

At the moment, the city only has one property matching that description: newly renovated Three Sistersdevelopment on the Hill’s Congress Avenue.

The development was designed as a way to strengthen the neighborhood with homeownership. After completing a painstaking, $3.2 million renovation in November, however, the city has not found anyone to buy any of the 12 condos.

All of the units remain empty, according to Bonanno. H. Pearce is marketing the property.

Amid an economic downturn that disadvantages the seller, the city came across another obstacle, Bonanno said: Families are reluctant to buy a condo because of the length of the city’s approval process.

Between the PAD, the LCI Board, City Plan and the Board of Aldermen, approvals for a land sale can take a four to six months, she said. By that time, a bank’s commitment to a mortgage rate would likely have expired.

To entice buyers to stick around, the city proposes creating a fast-track to home-ownership.

The new process would allow interested buyers to negotiate with a city-hired realtor on a sale price, then go directly to the Board of Aldermen for approval. That means compressing a four-step approval process into one single step.

Bonanno said if a potential buyer has a conflict of interest, such as being a city employee, then the expedited service would not be offered.

“We’re not trying to circumvent any system,” said Bonanno of the shortened approval process. “We’re trying to create one that helps people become homeowners.”

The new process would require aldermanic approval. LCI is currently only allowed to dispose of property in four ways, defined by the PAD Guidelines, which were adopted by the Board of Aldermen in 1997 and revised in 2006.

Hill Alderman Jorge Perez said he hadn’t read the proposal, but at first blush it sounded like a good direction to take. As a banker, he understands the difficulties of selling a house right now: “It’s not practical in the housing market that a [mortgage] commitment would be out there for more than 90 days,” he said.

If a house-hunter hasn’t closed on the home during that period, he or she would lose that commitment, risking a higher mortgage rate and a tarnished credit score.

“When it comes to homeownership,” Perez said, “it’s a good idea to consider other alternatives” to making a buyer wait through the standard city approval process.

Bonanno said she hopes the new tool will help bring a long-vacant building back to life.

“The city and the state made a big investment in the property,” she said, “and we want to be sure that the units are filled as soon as possible to protect that investment and strengthen the neighborhood.”