New Haven Independent

posted by: pinkbicycle on November 30, 2006  3:46pm

This is where elected officals have the power to make a difference and they don’t.  They dropped the ball. You absolutely could build some type of mixed income housing at the very least.  However downtown is sacred and is seen as a cash cow—potentially. Ask the elected officials to define affordable housing, I daresay they would be hard pressed to do so.  What the city is essentially saying to its poor citizens is essentially there is no room for you or your kind.  Just keep them on the fringes of town where the affluent can’t see them, hear them or God forbid live near them.  You know like 40-50 years ago when public housing developments were built on property that was less desirable at the time.  Fast-forward 40 years and all that undesirable property is now desirable property and LOOK Ma we can build mixed income housing! And where Santa did all the poor go?...hhmm this is not a good time to be poor and in need of housing.  Wow this sounds like a familiar story…and it came on a midnight clear.

posted by: nfjanette on November 30, 2006  8:33pm

They agreed with Landino that access to the train station from downtown was key. East Rock Alderman Ed Mattison suggested using downtown trolleys for that purpose. The committee concluded: If people could get from the train station to downtown quickly and safely, then “the notion we could become a suburb of Stamford isn’t too far off.—?

I could less about being a suburb of Stamford, but improving access, safety and appearance of the route to the train station should be a primary goal for the city.  Step one: raze the slum across the street and create a beautiful wide boulevard on South Church street linking the train station and downtown.  Walking out of the beautiful train station into urban decaying hell doesn’t leave a very good impression for most people.

posted by: Steve on December 1, 2006  12:26am

I completely agree with the first comments and am so saddened to read the second NFJANNETTE’s comments (but never surprised to hear this common solution to any urban issue).

How do you talk about demolishing an entire community’s homes; their apartments with such disdain and lack of even acknowledging that human beings, families, people like you and me live there?  I feel sorry for you.

posted by: charlie on December 1, 2006  9:32am

Landino is ABSOLUTELY correct that the city needs to let the market build a critical mass of luxury units first (i.e., probably over the next 10 years), and then begin to start talking about how to get affordable units in there.  If you start talking about a problem when very little has even been built yet, you are not a very smart cookie.

posted by: charlie on December 1, 2006  9:34am

Everyone should write to Whole Foods right now and lobby them to put a store on the first floor here. The 50000sf of proposed retail space could easily support one.

posted by: Bruce on December 1, 2006  9:38am

I certainly see the need to maintain affordable housing in a city like ours and I do think that our city officials have some degree of responsibility for keeping an eye on this issue.  What I don’t understand is why folks are so eager to have this affordable housing right smack in the middle of downtown.  This is prime real estate.  If people are willing to pay a million to live downtown, why would on earth would we force a developer to sell them for less?  As a homeowner and taxpayer, I want these developers to sell the most expensive and luxurious properties that people will buy so they will share more of our ridiculously high tax burden.

posted by: pinkbicycle on December 1, 2006  10:19am

So tell me Bruce, if a developer decided to build in your neighborhood, luxury town houses, condo’s whatever and they need your property to do so, or your neighbors property.  Or how about if a developer bought your neighbors property and tore down the existing home and wanted to build larger McMansions, because I am sur eyour neighborhood is desirable.  What would you say.  You make those comments becasue you are not directly affected by this.  And although you have a tax burden that you may or may not be happy about, however, are you willing to let a developer build based on what they think they can get for this type of housing.  And waht is our responisble to the City as its whole.  Can we not as talented and just people find a way to create a harmonious existence.  Why does it have to be all or nothing?

posted by: Josh Erlanger on December 1, 2006  3:54pm

Bruce I with you man. I think your comment is right on the money.

pinkbicycle whats best for a city on the whole is getting a larger tax base and getting people to spend money at local shops. juguding by your comments you dont live downtown so why are you so against this project.

posted by: Esbe on December 1, 2006  5:27pm

Pinkbicycle—

I can’t respond for Bruce, but I wonder why you bring up ideas like the city taking your property or someone building a less desirable building next door to you.  Neither of those scenarios has anything to do with this development.  This is a purely private development, with no subsidy, and the developer bought the properties from willing owners (although the old owners’ tenants are unhappy.) 

The lot is currently an ugly and underused site.  The only zoning variance that I know of, to build out to the sidewalk, puts the building in line with New Urbanist principles and was opposed by no one in the neigborhood because it makes the project fit the urban landscape better.

posted by: pinkbicycle on December 1, 2006  5:58pm

There are long standing businesse there that have been supportive of this City—who are not included in this plan.  They pay their taxes and have built up quite a clientel over the years. My point is this, that there is a need for affordable housing and mixed use development.  Why is downtown off limits to that. I will tell you why, because luxury has become code for affluent white. That to see anything else would be a deterrent to those who want to live above it all. So we are willing to let anybody with a plan for downtown build it because they think—-not know there is a market.  And according to the developers if they can’t sell those high end condos—then they will take a another look at subsidized housing/affordable housing.  The Aldermanic Committee that hosted the meeting , I beleive is the Committee designed to address affordable housing needs.  So either they need to change the name or they are full of shit.  Either way—I guess the stance is to do whatever it takes to bring money to the City—by any means necessary.  And one more thing—affordable housing means different things to different people.  We have Teachers and Police Officer who work here and can’t afford to live here.  Wouldn’t it be great to have mixed communities where all income levels could enjoy the same downtown vibe.  Hell if is was about taxes soley, then the community college and long Wharf theatre shouldn’t come downtown—that prime space for development to shore up the grandlist.  But there is some value in creating a culture of arts in this City. New urbanist my ass, this city has seen what new urbanist can do—every so many years somebody has a new urbanist idea.  I am sure somebody thought the coliseum woulf fit into the urban landscape.  Whatever,

posted by: Bruce on December 4, 2006  11:06am

I would love to live in a waterfront house with a dock and a private beach, but I don’t expect the City of Branford to force a property owner to sell me a $1 million home for a $200k just because.  Why should New Haven force these folks to do the same?  What if they start enforcing affordable automobile policies to auto dealers?  Maybe you don’t agree with our capitalist system, but that is what we have and it works very well when it is not hampered and constrained.  Have you ever heard of the rent control disasters in NYC?  This is basically the same thing.

It is not unreasonable or even inconvenient to commute downtown from Westville, Fair Haven, East Rock or many other parts of the city.  Again I ask—why is it so important to have these affordable units downtown? 

You are suggesting that these developers want to sell luxury condos because they are trying to keep minorities out of downtown.  My theory, and it’s just a hunch, is that they selling them because they want to maximize profits.

To answer your question, Pinkbicycle, I would adamantly oppose the city taking anyone’s property for commercial development.  However, the businesses in question rent from a landlord who owns the building and he has the right to sell to whomever he wants.

posted by: Ted on December 4, 2006  12:19pm

Dear Melissa,

Why did you choose to use the word “Gentrifier” in the title of this article? By so naming Mr. Landino, you imply controversy, i.e. racial discrimination, that need not be read into the plans to build a market-rate residential building.

On a historical note, did they call Dick Lee, or even JFK, “gentrifiers” when the City demolished Oak Street? This is not a political or racial issue. This is an economic one.

posted by: Craig on December 10, 2006  5:41pm

For god sakes, does everything have to be about race? I truly can’t believe some of the things I’ve read over the course of this debate. Let the free market take its course. If there is a demand for expensive residental units it’s plain smart for a developer to fulfill this need. You want to see local business downtown truly succeed? Dense residential buildings with occupants who will actually support business is a start. Aside from Stamford, most CT cities have dearth of ‘luxury’ living simply because most people that can afford them choose to live in the suburbs for a variety of reasons. New Haven is one of the few bright spots in the urban landscape of CT. Let’s embrace anyone, rich, poor, black, white, yellow, red, whatever, that wants to move here! Also, these local businesses that would move rent from a landlord! It’s perfectly legal for a landlord to sell his own property. Why can’t people realize that this plan is real progress for the city and could potentially be a tremendous asset for the downtown community! It’s progress!