Coliseum Site Redo Design Approved

With misgivings that it’s not a monumental, breathtaking, Frank Gehry gateway building, and with lingering concerns about open space, the City Plan Commission approved the site plan for the first phase of the ​“mini-city” that is to rise on the former Coliseum site.

The unanimous vote came after hours of debate at a Zoomed special meeting Wednesday night of the City Plan Commission helmed by Chair Ed Mattison and hosted by City Plan staffer Stacey Davis.

It was the latest step in a long journey for Norwalk-based Spinnaker Real Estate Partners, led by vice president for development Frank Caico and local zoning lawyer Carolyn Kone, in its quest to design and win approval for a plan to rescue the effort to build a residential-commercial community on the George-State-MLK-Orange lot where the former concrete arena was demolished in 2009.

Spinnaker first came for approval before the commission two weeks ago, after a year of engagement with local critics on the number of affordable units and the making of a bike path on Orange Street.

It sought approval for the first phase of the project, a 200-unit apartment building at the George and Orange Street corner, a retail ​“laneway” to be shared by pedestrians, bicycles, and cars, and a public plaza.

After 11th hour testimony from members of both the Hill South and Downtown/Wooster Square community management teams, commissioners tabled the matter, that night. So they agreed to reconvene at Wednesday night’s special meeting.

“We took all the questions asked on Oct. 21,” Kone testified during the Zoom proceeding, ​“prepared a nine-page response” and distributed it to the heads of the management team, the commissioners and the alders. She grouped the concerns as ​“traffic impact,” the ​“safety of the retail laneway,” and issues concerning ​“future phases.”

Wednesday night’s meeting comprised a presentation with responses to those areas of concern.

Traffic engineer Ted DeSantos offered reassurances about the traffic on the laneway: In the short run of the road from Orange to State Street, there will be a ten-miles-an-hour posted speed limit, he said.

In addition there are two speed bumps, two striped crosswalks, and three types of surface material — cobblestone-like paver on the road, a different paver on the plaza (the laneway’s destination), and a broad sidewalk made of traditional concrete.

Those elements, along with vertical elements such as street trees, over-arching light poles, benches along the sidewalk, he said, will make for a safe shared roadway. He described an atmosphere where drivers’ and pedesterian eyes’ meet, and a configuration that fulfills and exceeds national and local standards for safe and shared streets.

DeSantos also responded to New Haven Urban Design League President Anstress Farwell’s contention that the traffic impact study doesn’t reflect consequences of the full build, which is years in the future.

It indeed does, DeSantos asserted. He also addressed Farwell’s objection about not having a developed travel management program — a plan to reduce single-occupancy vehicle use in the development and the area. He argued that that is hardly a flaw in the site plan, because such a program does not in the end relate to traffic safety.

Design, materials, and architecture — along with issues such as affordability for apartments and rents — are not the purview of the site plan review before the City Plan commissioners. Still, Mattison has historically allowed such discussions to be part of the public hearing.

Among the testifiers Wednesday evening were architects and developers including Joel Schiavone, Robert Orr, and Jay Brotman.

Directly from the chacun a son gout department, Brotman, an architect and neighbor to the project at Svigals + Partners in the Ninth Square, called the building ​“a very elegant solution to the site.”

Schiavone characterized the building as a big box without neighborhood character. (Click here to read a recent article in which he detailed his alternative visiion.)

Hill Alder Carmen Rodriguez, while reiterating that ​“we don’t want to stop this,” bemoaned that the building, which would be seen ​“from many angles of the city and should beautify the city is, alas, not a ​“crown jewel.” ​“This is a one-time shot to make this absolutely incredible,” she said.

Virgina Kozlowski, CEO of the Economic Development Corporation, local business owners, and others were also on hand to praise the project’s potential for reviving the Ninth Square.

“The developer is a great partner, and their design is taking into consideration a lot of the community input and we’d look to the developer to continue to do that,” Kozlowski said. ​“It’s been a long time coming, and we’re excited to support this project.”

In his summary and response to the testifiers, Spinnaker’s Caico said that 30,000 square feet of the site are set aside for open space. As 40,000 square feet is an acre, approximately a quarter of the the 4.4 acre-site is open space, he estimated.

Those facts did not settle one of the most contentious issues that Farwell and others had raised: Namely what counts as open space? Is a parking lot, for example, truly open space?

As for the next phases, Caico said the relatively blank slate for the future features of the project allows for ​“orderly and methodical development and allows for flexibility for future market conditions.”

That raised a red flag for Mattison: ​“I know we don’t have a crystal ball,” he said, ​“but we’re in a pandemic, and this project is going to add quite a bit of retail space. What makes you think you can fill all that space and do you have a contingency plan” if filling the retail space takes a fair amount of time?

“I don’t want to mislead that this is a home run. This is a work in progress,” Caico responded.

He went as far as to say that in Norwalk, where Spinnaker is headquartered, his office uses space in the Ironworks development, a mixed use development that Spinnaker built.

“It’s possible as a contingency, some of our offices might be here, that would be part of it,” he said.

In the end, Mattison and the other commissioners, having absorbed all this, agonized their way to a vote.

“I feel very torn about this project,” said Mattison. ​“If we had the opportunity both fiscally and in terms of design, I would have preferred something with a little more gravitas.

“But we do have to deal with reality … Certainly the builders have been diligent about talking to people…. I would have liked architecture somewhat more exciting than what we’re getting. … My own sense is I’ll vote for the project because realistically I’m not sure we can do better.”

City Plan Co-Chair Leslie Radcliffe put it more simply: ​“I live in the Hill neighborhood. I’m excited that there is going to be something on that deserted land. I don’t have a problem with how the building looks. I’ll defer to those willing to take the risk.”

Commissioner Ernest Pagan expressed concern that the bar for approval was set low: ​“I get the feeling we are settling. I’ll leave it at that.”

Aldermanic Rep Commissioner Adam Marchand brought the discussion back down to the hard reality of the ordinance, which limits the issues the commission was to consider in deciding whether or not to grant site approval. ​“I’m going to vote in favor because I’m convinced the applicant has met the criteria.”

He also itemized other ways he felt Spinnaker had included features that ​“recommend” the project. Those included lengthy engagement with the community that resulted in fulfillment of the requirements of the DLDA (development and land disposition agreement), such as the creation of open spaces; contracting with local organizations regarding jobs on the project, and increasing the affordability component beyond the scope of the DLDA.

“To your point, Ed, wouldn’t it be great to have a Frank Gehry designed museum there, that kind of monumental architecture at the gateway to our city? But that’s extremely expensive and not feasible for ordinary developers,” Marchand argues.

“Look, let’s not let the perfect be the enemy of the good.”

He called for ongoing involvement of the developer on the legitimate concerns of connectivity, of making people from all the surrounding neighborhoods feel welcome and safe. He said there will be ample opportunity in months ahead as well as in future phases for public airing of how, for example, such nuts-and-bolts issues as the hours of the public plaza can be discussed.

“But it does meet the criteria for the site plan and I urge my colleagues to vote Yes.”

They did, unanimously

Afterwards, Attorney Kone said, ​“Thank you and we will work very hard with the community on this phase and future phases.”