Farnam Planners Told: ​“Think Like A Criminal”

Hopefully, we will secure the complex from crime by making sure that the design is good, not just the site plan. http://interactive.securedbydesign.com/residential/

A parking lot hidden behind housing projects? On the corner of Chatham and Ferry? That's a great idea; what could possibly go wrong? I think the so called 'planners' need to listen to Santiago and the locals on this one; we might actually know what we're talking about. This area is already a nightmare of crime and blight, and there's no hidden areas right now. Imagine how much worse it will become if the housing authority actually provides a hidden place for crime to occur. Lovely.

One of the reasons that area is "on fire" is probably because there is a giant abandoned factory in the area.

A parking lot "hidden from the street" is still going to have a ton of eyes of the residents living in those townhouses! It's not automatically going to be a hidden area where people can cause trouble, since you are basically going to be in back yards.

I'm not a huge fan of replacing former neighborhood employment centers with single-use residential because it tends to homogenize neighborhoods as large dormitories where residents are gone during the day - leaving neighborhoods deserted. Neighborhoods used to function as semi-autonomous entities of work places, homes, stores, civic institutions and recreational facilities. Most neighborhoods still function - to some capacity - in this way, but with projects like this in Fair Haven and the Star Supply Co. proposal, the old Lovell School conversion, and Lehman Bros. adaptive reuse in Goatville, which all turn former employment or civic centers into residential use, neighborhoods seem to be homogenizing rather than diversifying uses. I look at places like Erector Square and the former Marlin Factory as templates for appropriately re-purposing former neighborhood employment centers.
Having said that, if housing is to come to this site, why not look at the original plan for this area from 1868, which called for a residential streetcar subdivision with alley way access to carriage houses?
http://www.historicmapworks.com/Map/US/4234/Fair Haven Plan/
Some of the alley ways were eventually built, but many were not. The block in question - bounded by Rowe, Chatham, Ferry and Lombard Streets - was planned as a residential block with rear alley way access. I think a revival of this plan would be appropriate and effective. Just look to the block south of this one and see how it works. Since cost is a concern, a semi-detached or row house building typology could be used, like what is currently being proposed by HANH, except that the houses should have more traditional lots with private rear gardens and rear parking accessed from the alley way.

Existing Site:
http://tinyurl.com/d4abu6d
Proposed Site (traditional Chatham Square streetcar suburban subdivision typology):
http://tinyurl.com/bogd7tj

Farnam Courts built in originally built in 1941 contained 288 units of housing, consisting of 1,2 and 3 bedroom units. From 1941 to 1988 Farnam upkeep was primarily financed by annual operating budgets with little or no major extraordinary maintenance overhaul from HUD.

In 1988-1990 the state of Ct. provided the HANH with about $8M for Farnam to perform sorely needed internal maintenance deficiencies, ignored since its inception.

In 1993 the HANH with $30M of HUD funds, including relocation monies,undertook the first ever major revitalization of Farnam Courts, reducing the number of units from 288 to its present 244 units and now included 4 bedroom units. The project rebuild was completed on or about 1995 and received high praise around the country from HUD.

Since 1995 the HANH is claiming that the 8M previously provided by the state in 1988 and the 30M by HUD in 1993 has helped to make the project obsolete and run down.

Contrary to the HANH current reasoning is the fact of absolute poor everyday maintenance accountability and poor site management from the top of the administration to the site managers.
Hud in its evaluation of HANH's Choice funding request cited similar reasons for it's twice held denial of funding.

See the history here:

http://www.newhavenindependent.org/index.php/archives/entry/farnam_courts_rebuild_to_proceed_without_fed/

The BOA aldermen mentioned in this story seem more interested in the mere moving of a building back from the street, rather, than evaluating the financial history of Farnam, measured with the ability of New Haven citizens to support another major land holding tax free institution, second to Yale, by providing 8M in bond funds to support a project rejected by it's main benefactor, HUD.

webblog1,
I also remain unconvinced that Farnam Courts needs to be completely redeveloped. Its interesting to note that I-91 was not placed through Farnam Courts even though eminent domain wouldn't have been required since it is already publicly owned. At the time of the highway's construction, the housing complex was only 20 years old and was the highest quality housing stock in the area. The argument for redevelopment seems to rely on the fact that the housing is isolated by the train tracks and I-91, which severed the street connections to State Street. The central courtyards also create an issue of surveillance, which can aid in committing crimes and criminals looking to escape detention. Physically, though the complex is a pretty good shape. The 1990s renovation added pitched roofs which deal with a northeastern climate better than the original flat roofs, and units have a better sense of ownership and privacy with the rearranged entrances.

The proposed site plan doesn't look like much of an improvement - none of the units face the large green space, there is an enormous amount of asphalt, and there doesn't appear to be any improved connection to Jocelyn or Wooster Squares. Is a new large green space even necessary, when better connections to Jocelyn or Wooster Square could happen?