Park Street Hotel Hits Roadblock

A Pennsylvania-based developer’s plan to build a 150-room Marriott Residence Inn on Park Street hit a roadblock Wednesday night — as the City Plan Commission pushed off taking a final vote, and opted instead to hold a public hearing on the project, in response to parking and gentrification concerns raised by the neighborhood’s alder.

The commission was originally scheduled to review and vote on the site plan for the proposed hotel at its latest monthly online meeting Wednesday. 

But after the city received a same-day request from Dwight Alder Frank Douglass and a petition with resident signatures, the commissioners voted 3 – 2 to postpone a decision and instead solicit community feedback at a future public hearing.

The project is slated for five adjacent lots — 130 and 134 Park St., 370 and 374 Crown St., and 421 George St. — which currently contain a former laundromat, a vacant medical office building, and two surface parking lots. Plans submitted by the Penn Real Estate Group describe a six-story, 150-room Residence Inn by Marriott with a ground-floor restaurant and bar open to the public, meeting spaces, and a 31-space parking garage in the rear. The project would replace 60 existing surface lot spaces.

"Hotels Or Housing?"

Douglass, who represents the ward where the hotel would be built, has expressed concern that the hotel project prioritizes commercial growth over community needs. ​“I’m really not that pleased with them building a hotel over there. I’d prefer affordable housing,” he told the Independent earlier this month.

Douglass elaborated on those concerns in an email sent to the City Plan Department midday on Wednesday. In that email, he requested a public hearing on the grounds that there ​“has not been sufficient outreach by the project developers to residents in my and neighboring wards.”

He wrote that he and a team of volunteers canvassed the area, and found that most residents they contacted did not know about the project. He wrote that he heard concerns from neighbors that only 31 parking spaces for a 150-room hotel could lead to traffic congestion in the neighborhood, and that ​“residents would carry the burden of overflow parking.”

“Many residents are rightly concerned about increasing rents and the affordable housing crisis affecting our neighborhoods,” Douglass continued in his email to the city. ​“It is unclear how this hotel will affect gentrification in the area.”

The City Plan Department also received on Wednesday a copy of a petition that was signed by nearly 120 people, raised many of the same concerns as Douglass, and bore the title, ​“Hotels or Housing?” That petition was printed on the letterhead of New Haven Rising, a local labor advocacy group affiliated with the Yale UNITE HERE unions, a powerful local political player that also has a direct interest in hotel worker organizing.

The petition warns that ​“long-term residents could contend with more traffic and less parking on neighborhood streets” if the Residence Inn is built on Park as planned.

“Meanwhile, our city would lose valuable land in a gentrifying neighborhood that could provide housing,” the petition continues. It states that housing, especially thanks to New Haven’s inclusionary zoning ordinance, would help address the affordable housing crisis and would provide more off-street parking ​“to ensure Dwight remains livable.”

“We need responsible development that addresses the housing crisis and doesn’t clog streets with inadequate parking,” the petition concludes.

"Generate Taxes, Bring Energy To The Street"

During Wednesday’s City Plan Commission meeting, City Plan Director Laura Brown said that staff received a same-day public hearing request and petition citing concerns about outreach, parking, traffic, rising rents, and gentrification. She noted a hearing isn’t legally required, as the project complies with zoning and staff recommend approval.

“As New Haven continues to grow as a destination for healthcare, education, culture, and commerce, so too does the need for more hotel space, especially in and around downtown,” reads a draft staff report about the site plan application. ​“New Haven’s downtown is a vital cross section of institutional and economic uses. With that activity comes growing demand for short term accommodation. The addition of 150 new hotel rooms would help meet the needs of visitors to the city looking to make use of those services.”

Still, several commissioners Wednesday emphasized the scale and community impact of the proposal as reasons for allowing public input.

“This is a large project,” said City Plan Commission Chair Ernest Pagan. ​“We can never go into a public hearing thinking that we already have preconceived notions of what we’re going to hear. That’s the whole process of the public hearing.”

Commissioner Adam Marchand echoed that view, noting that while many of the concerns raised — including rising rents, gentrification, and lack of affordable housing — fall outside the commission’s zoning purview, public comment could still inform the commission’s perspective. ​“Even a site plan review can benefit from hearing from the community,” he said. ​“I take seriously the representational role of my colleagues on the Board of Alders.”

Other commissioners were more skeptical. Commissioner Leslie Radcliffe said she was not persuaded that the public had raised any specific circumstances that legally required a hearing. She emphasized that the commission must base its decisions on zoning rules, not on broader preferences such as affordable housing. ​“I think this is a great location for a hotel,” she said, citing its proximity to the hospital and university, and the developer’s inclusion of extended-stay options.

Attorney Carolyn Kone, representing the Penn Real Estate Group, argued forcefully against holding a hearing. She said the concerns raised in the petition — including gentrification, job quality, parking, and use of the site — were not legally valid grounds for the commission to deny a site plan, and therefore did not justify a delay.

“We met with the local management team. We met with Alder Douglass. We followed city guidance every step of the way,” Kone said. ​“There’s no zoning basis for denial here, and delaying this project is extremely unfair to the applicant.”

“It should be noted,” Kone added, ​“that the petition is on the letterhead of New Haven Rising.”

Kone said that the developer plans to operate the hotel long-term, expects to create 20 full-time and up to 20 part-time jobs, and believes the project will revitalize a currently inactive stretch of Park Street. ​“This is going to generate taxes, bring energy to the street, and provide amenities open to the public,” she said.

Donna Galvin, principal of the Penn Real Estate Group, also spoke briefly, saying, ​“We are owner-operators. We build with pride and operate with pride. We’re not looking to flip this — we stay with our projects and run them with care.”

Ultimately, the commission voted 3 – 2 in favor of holding a public hearing, with Commissioners Ernest Pagan, Adam Marchand, and Joy Gary voting yes, and Commissioners Leslie Radcliffe and Joshua Van Hoesen voting no.

Because the hearing must be publicly noticed under state law, no further action on the site plan can occur until a later date. City staff said they would coordinate with the developer to schedule the hearing and complete notification requirements.

In the meantime, the plan to transform a block of mostly vacant properties into a mid-priced hotel remains on hold.