Abandoned 560 Newhall St. property ...
... will continue to look like this for foreseeable future.
After ten months of delaying a decision on whether to solidify a seven-year contract with a nonprofit affordable housing developer, Hamden’s Legislative Council has officially axed a plan to have a nonprofit turn an abandoned Newhall Street middle school into apartments.
The council voted 8 to 5 Monday night to allow a tentative agreement by the town to sell 560 Newhall St. to Mutual Housing Association of Southern Central Connecticut (also known as NeighborWorks New Horizons) to expire on April 30.
The vote marks the end of ongoing negotiations between the town and the developer concerning both sides’ commitment to an up-in-the-air site plan that involved building roughly 87 apartments, 80 percent of which would have been affordable and 20 percent market rate, on the grounds of the continuously deteriorating former middle school.
Hamden first enlisted Mutual Housing back in 2015 to convert the blighted area into homes. Complications with soil remediation, lapses in communication, and pandemic woes meant that no progress was made on the project for six years. Read more about that history here.
When the council and Mutual Housing reentered conversations last July concerning the status of the project — and presented an updated plan for the area — new council members and Southern Hamden residents expressed renewed opposition to the proposal. They argued that adding potential low-income housing in one of the most systematically under-resourced areas of town would only further racial and economic disparity in Hamden.
Since July, council members continued to make amendments to the date at which their contract with Mutual Housing was scheduled to end, with hopes that they could salvage the original deal and come up with a site plan that pleased everyone involved.
In July, the town extended the contract to October. On Oct. 18, the council extended the contract to January. On Jan. 10, the council extended the contract through to April.
In between those dates, council members like Justin Farmer — who represents the Fifth District, where the property is located — scheduled community conversations to obtain public feedback about the potential project.
On Monday, Farmer and fellow representatives cited those public discussions as reasons not to move forward with Mutual Housing.
“I believe agency is one of our key cornerstones to democracy,” Farmer stated during the meeting. “We heard from community members in Newhall, right, and we have to trust that people will vote for their own self interest and to empower them to make decisions about their communities. So, in doing that I will be supporting the thoughts and concerns from the last couple of months of community members.”
Neighboring Third District Rep. Abdul-Razak Osmanu agreed with Farmer.
“Ultimately, I see that the needs of the community have changed in relation to when we first began this in 2015,” he said — adding that those needs have altered “even when we stepped into this on the council in the fall of 2021.
“I have questions as to whether the project ever met the needs of the council in the first place … Time after time the community came forth with suggestions as well as certain displeasures with the project.”
“I truly can’t blame them in looking at the history of this site,” he asserted. “Southern Hamden as well as Newhallville truly deserve better. We tried to make it work, but we can’t accept the offer in its current state. It’s time to start anew.”
He added, “I don’t see this as in issue with or crusade against affordable housing,” stating that Hamden is in desperate need of homes for individuals of all income brackets. But, he argued, he did not believe Mutual Housing’s proposed project would succeed in meeting the needs of any potential residents involved.
Council President Dominique Baez also spoke out against moving forward with Mutual Housing.
“This has been a long road,” she said. “We’ve been having this conversation a lot. We have talked to our residents; we have gone door to door.”
The neighborhood’s disapproval of the project, she said, “has become clear.”
Though the majority of the council’s debate on Monday was held in executive session, Baez offered some additional clarification as to why Mutual Housing’s proposal was found to be underwhelming.
The town originally bought into the project believing that an old gym on site would be converted into a community center. Following years of deterioration, Mutual Housing said that that idea was no longer feasible: instead, they could either demolish the building and build a smaller center or the town could find funding for a larger space. Baez and other council members maintained that ample community meeting space was key to the project design, but wanted the cost and labor to fall on Mutual Housing.
Another common request by residents was to build lower density homes on the property. Baez mourned the fact that the developer could not compromise on a lower number of apartments.
In addition to the belabored history between Mutual Housing and the town, Baez, Farmer, and Osmanu all expressed concern about the agency’s ability to manage and maintain another town property, known as Highwood Square, located on Dixwell Avenue.
Aarron Hoffman, outlined in yellow, makes one last pitch to disinterested council members.
Aaron Hoffmann, Mutual Housing’s director of real estate development, did agree that there are “some cosmetic issues” with their Dixwell property, adding that “property management is working to address them.”
He noted the complexities of the middle-school site project, sharing his belief that Mutual Housing had originally planned to build 100 units on the site and lowered it to 87 apartments in response to public input received before the organization came back to the council in July. “We didn’t believe we could viably lower it any further,” he said.
“We’re disappointed in the council’s vote,” he told the Independent. “We still believe that affordable housing is the best use for the formal middle school site.”
“The town has been good partners,” he said. “We worked with the administration and the council, especially the city attorney Sue Gruen and outside counsel Ann Catino. We understand that there are pressures from constituents.”
“I don’t have hard feelings. I wish it had gone the other way,” he concluded.
Next steps in the process remain unclear to the public.
As the Economic Development Department and Legislative Council explore new possibilities to revamp 560 Newhall St., they may also face litigation from the dumped developer.
Though Hoffman declined to comment on whether or not they plan to sue the town, the nonprofit’s executive director, Tom Cruess, said at an October council meeting that if the contract were canceled, the organization would be looking to recoup costs spent on the project.
That includes a $300,000 redevelopment loan as well as consulting costs tied to updating and amending the changing site plan. Cruess estimated back in October that Mutual Housing had spent roughly $200,000 on top of the $300,000 loan.
Hamden needs Affordable Housing but the "nay sayers" seem to have an agenda. Press on Hamden. The need is there and the Legislative Council is in place to meet that need. See that need and meet and exceed it.