City Teams With Northland To Rebuild

????? am I the only one thinking WTF???? So this company scums the tax payers for MILLIONS of dollars in rent money on a property they let ROT to the ground. A property that they had the cities most vulnerable living in inhumane conditions. And we reward them with MILLIONS more??? That in any way shape or form is Fudged up!!

Looks like there is no accounting for common sense! I cannot believe that Southland is going to still be a factor in New Haven!

I understand why people are upset with Northland being involved in the redevelopment of the project. But they own the land. Unless the city takes the property by eminent domain (a very expensive option), Northland is going to be at the table.

This is disgusting. Northland has demonstrated that they are incompetent. The City of New Haven has demonstrated that they are incompetent at monitoring their progress and and holding them to their agreements. It's a match made in Church Street South. Makes me sick.

Wow! Talking about rewarding failure, corruption and deception. Northland should not be eligible to benefit from ANY public money from this property. I'd be interested if anyone can explain what the legal obstacles would be for the city or state to exercise eminent domain and/or other measures to take this property...or for the feds to take civil action to recover all of the HUD money...or criminal action for the fraud associated with mismanaging the property?

I have to agree with everyone here! We have seen how incompetent Southland is and HUD and LCI and the building department, so let's place our trust in them again! Makes perfect sense to me! I say TAKE the land by eminent domain- expensive or not expensive! We have certainly read MANY stories in the NHI recently that proves how the city wastes money with people they suspend and try to get rid of, then the aggrieved parties WIN and the city loses THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS of $$$$$$.

I say take the property by eminent domain and DON'T look back! SOMEONE in the city MUST have the POWER to stop this fiasco unless their are kickbacks coming! Then, that changes everything and the project will move forward no matter who says what!

Has there been any effort put into designating the nearly 50-year old Church Street South Housing complex as a National or State Historic Landmark/District, which would qualify the complex for significant rehabilitation tax credits?

Could the Choice Neighborhoods Grant, should it be awarded, potentially be used for surgical demolition and new construction on the site - rather than wholesale destruction?

1,000 units could be achieved through a combination of rehabilitation and new construction.

The buildings are being scapegoated as the issue, when really its poor management and maintenance - not poor design - which has been the primary problem.

"Not every structure in this area is sub-standard, but like cutting a rotten apple, so of the good has to be cut away too to save the whole." -New Haven Redevelopment Agency on the Oak Street area, 1955

"Efraín Soto […] was visiting his daughter, who still lives at Church Street South for now with her three kids; she had been there for 15 years. His daughter had no immediate plans to move out; her apartment was 'in good condition,' Soto said. This reporter expressed surprise, since so many of the apartments at Church Street South had been declared uninhabitable. 'That's what everybody says, but not my daughter,' Soto said. 'She's never had a problem.' However, all tenants will eventually have to leave, as officials have decided that the crumbling complex and its porous roofs and walls are beyond repair." -New Haven Independent, 2016

While HUD's recent inspection in 2015 yielded a score of 20/100 - the lowest score ever given in the City - an earlier inspection of select units in the complex in October 2014 yielded a score of 81/100. Clearly, there are some units in the complex that are quite livable - is it really necessary to cut them from the apple? Also keep in mind that unlike a rotted fruit, housing can be rehabilitated.

The "affordable housing" component of this project is a joke, as the subsidies will go to people making above average incomes for New Haven.

How is that possible?

Well, New Haven's median household income is $38,000/year.

But HUD uses New Haven-Meriden's "Area Median" household income for its computations, -- which is $84,000/year, because it includes New Haven's wealthy suburbs.

Therefore the "60% of area median household income" translates to more than 125% of New Haven's actual median income.

My feeling is that if the new definition of "affordable housing" is subsidies going to people with above average incomes, then we might as well not bother. There are so many needy families in New Haven, that is a complete travesty for scarce subsidies to be wasted on people who aren't in great need of governmental help.

Yeah, it sucks that the City it stuck with Northland, but they DO own the property. Just cause they've been terrible doesn't mean you can necessarily do anything. And at this point, it's basically either fight and try to get the money to redevelop the land with the current owners, or get into a lengthy and expensive legal battle that may not end in anything better. And who knows how long that'd take. Years, maybe?

Politics is all about compromise. Sometimes with people who don't deserve it. But you can't think like that. It isn't about punishing the wicked. It's about doing what's best for the city. And I think Harp is reasonable in her conclusion that working with Northland and trying to fight for HUD money to redevelop now is better for the city than a lengthy and difficult legal battle with uncertain ends.

Something smells here. As my Italian friends say," the fish rots from the head." Once again, the city takes the easy way out and the taxpayers both federal, state and city take it in the chops. There is zero accountability in government. Nobody in their right mind would spend their own money on a project like this unless they were a fool or corrupt. I do not think the folks in charge are fools or stupid, so I quess that leaves the latter reason as the driving force pushing this project forward. The voters need to shake up the current political folks in charge in New Haven. That will not happen, because enough money, perceived power and jobs are distributed to the folks downstream to keep everyone in line. Ain't politics great?

I think Bradley is being pragmatic about the situation.

The City needs to insist on the absolute highest possible design standards for anything that gets built here, but other than that aspect, another 10 year lawsuit just to obtain land from the private owner should be avoided if possible.

Separately from the land issue, this whole episode shows that Barack Obama, HUD, Governor Malloy, Mayor Harp and any other people who might be in a position to help the families that live here need to crack down much harder on landlords that are negligent and who exploit their tenants. It's not just a money issue -- people are dying as a direct result of their actions, and inactions.

Morgan, I'm not a lawyer, but staffed the legislature's Planning and Development Committee after Kelo v. New London. Unlike the property in that case, Church Street South is clearly blighted and there are a couple of statutes the city could use to condemn it. The issue is not the law, it is money. The city would have to pay Northland "just compensation" and it simply does not have the cash or any reasonable prospect of getting it in the forseeable future. Wendy and others may suggest taxing the wealthy and/or Yale to come up with the money. I have no problems with that but I am not going to hold my breathe waiting for it to happen. In the meantime the tenants, who have done nothing wrong, are suffering.

HUD could sue Northland to recover its section 8 payments. But it would have a hard time prevailing in light of the fact that the project consistently passed its HUD inspections.

I, too, find Northland's neglect of Church Street South to be reprehensible. But so long as Northland owns the property, it will have to be involved in its redevelopment.

I don't think there would be any legal obstacle for the city to exercise eminent domain to take the property for the public use of public housing. I suspect some of the parcels were taken by eminent domain, or the threat thereof, in the 1960's so the Jaycee's could built CSS. Of course, in the late 1960's, the land was worth a lot less, and owners would have been happy to sell land in a decaying neighborhood by a decaying railroad station owned by a bankrupt railroad. Today, rail has seen a great resurgence, and proximity to a rail station is once again a positive for real estate values. Moreover, as stated in another article, New Haven in general has seen a great increase in real estate values. The city government, however, is strapped for funds and already carries a heavy debt load. Does it want more debt to build low-income housing? For the right price, Northland would sell the land. But the city likely cannot afford that price, and if it low-balls an eminent domain action it will be in court for years and may face a huge judgment. If the city doesn't work with Northland, the buildings will be condemned and demolished, and the land converted to parking as with the area to the north. The city will lose housing and tax revenue. Yes, Northland has not been good at maintaining low-income housing, but neither has the city's Housing Authority, or the many failed cooperatives (e.g., Antillian, Trade Union Plaza).

Since Mayor Harp has never disavowed using Eminent Domain for development purposes, why doesn't the City just take the property via Eminent Domain and develop it as a mixed use, mixed income property. It's location opposite Union Station could be an unpolished gem waiting for a developer with imagination and savvy to create a destination along with housing.
Why do we repeatedly see the City acting as if there were no other options?

If we taught our young men and young women not to have so many babies until they had means to support their children, we would not have to spend such vast sums on public housing and social welfare programs. What are we doing to end the cycle of bad personal decisions which contribute to the cycle of poverty, and public expense?

The continued involvement of Northland amounts to rewarding them for bad behavior, it leaves a terrible taste in my mouth.

But, life is complicated and Bradley is right: they own the land and therefore hold many of the most important cards. I think the city is making the right call, however distasteful.

An even harder situation may arise if we don't get the HUD grant. Then, it will be very difficult to build a 30% "affordable" development.

"As long as they control the land and the property, they have to be reckoned with," Harp said. "I hate for them to benefit from these circumstances. However, I think it's important we rebuild as soon as possible" and get the affordable housing replaced "and they'll do that."

We'll see.

"Neal-Sanjurjo told the Independent Tuesday that the plan currently calls for building 1,000 apartments on the site. The 30 percent that will be either "affordable" or "subsidized" will therefore equal the number of apartments lost by the demolition of Church Street South, she said. She said former Church Street South families may indeed be able to return there if they wish."

Nonsense. They will be on average much smaller and by the definition of 'work-force' housing, less accessible.

So even presuming Northland would be making up the difference in cost to replace, depending on what "standard" they are held to, USD 30MM might only get you 55 units, not 300:
http://www.newhavenindependent.org/index.php/archives/entry/farnam_redevelopment_breaks_ground/

Taking Bets Northland will sell this land to the gentrification vampires who will in turn make market rent apartments.

Jonathan14: it's good you're anonymous because your remarks are ignorant and shameful.
Poverty is the result of a lost job, a sick relative, could be a child, a serious illiness without health benefits, addiction, post-traumatic stress disorder from a war or other trauma, and for people of color, centuries of racist policies that deliberately broke up and sold families, raped women and put the offspring to work in the fields, prevented them from getting an education, owning property, voting or getting into a union.
Today we can also look to the 1/2 of 1% that lobbies and pays for tax breaks and politicians to whom they pay protection in the form of campaign contributions. We can look to a Supreme Court that says money is speech and that political graft is indistinguishable from day to day political business. Or how about the people who exploit undocumented workers then complain about illegal immigration.? Or the sneaker maker or computer types who took jobs out of the US, employ low wage workers in unsafe conditions, pollute those countries because they lack an EPA, then sell their products here for a premium.
But you think you've narrowed it down to one cause and it's one that blames the poor.
That is one load of hate you are toting around.
Had I not been fortunate enough to work in the South Bronx, Bedford Stuvesant and Brownsville decades ago and watched heroic families working 2 & 3 jobs THEN! to keep their families afloat, I might not have known the truth of other peoples' existence.
But I saw it and I'll continue to bear witness to what I saw until people like you reclaim your compassion and understand it could be you one day.

Practicality should rule the day. The Mayor made the right decision under the circumstances. And Northland is not the first company to "profit" off of neglect and ineptitude. Indeed, many have made the argument that Yale has done that by leaving properties vacant to drive down housing prices as they obtain site control for projects. Moreover, the property was purchased for the intent of redevelopment and it was only because the Board of Alders were unreasonable that redevelopment did not occur sooner. What should have happened was a mix of 15-20% affordability, with the remaining 100 or so Section 8 vouchers sold off to a developer who would build family housing in New Haven. The problem would've been solved before Mayor Harp took office had the Board of Alders had any real business savvy or sense. Indeed, those same vouchers could've been used at Dwight Gardens, a then derelict property in need of renovation. The Board of Alders general inability to understand development can be seen by how many developers they nearly drive out of the City.

More importantly, while people may dislike Northland's treatment of property they had no intention of maintaining as affordable, the remainder of their portfolio speaks for itself: http://www.northland.com/properties/. The end result will look much better than the current property and most new city developments.

@AtticusShrugged: genuine question (just 'cause I am curious), where has Yale used the "vacant land to drive down housing values" strategy?

Let's be fair: Give some credit to the City / Harp Administration. They were able to dismantle this beast after years of blight and clearly being an obstacle to City growth. It took a full court press by the administration and Serena Neal Sanjurjo. She helped this forward. This is major and positive. This keeps New Haven on track to develop and grow.

Any new neighborhood developments here a positive. Gentrification will be tempered by the City/LCI being on the development team to ensure affordable units.

We don't need to love the land owner Northland, we as New Haven understand the city is a modern family, we will work through our growing pains as families due.

Put your politics aside for one minute:
We are seeing a huge change in our city. We are building for the future. Nobody is being left out. We are working together on Hill to Downton, CSS, and all across the City. The landscape of the City is being rebuilt for residents, businesses, and visitors. The neighborhoods are being rebuilt. People want to rent and own property here. We need to stay on this path!

posted by: Jonathan14 on May 17, 2016 1:18pm

If we taught our young men and young women not to have so many babies until they had means to support their children, we would not have to spend such vast sums on public housing and social welfare programs. What are we doing to end the cycle of bad personal decisions which contribute to the cycle of poverty, and public expense?

How about Corporate welfare.


A TIME investigation uncovers how hundreds of companies get on the dole--and why it costs every working American the equivalent of two weeks' pay every year

By Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele
TIME magazine
(TIME, Nov. 9) -- How would you like to pay only a quarter of the real estate taxes you owe on your home? And buy everything for the next 10 years without spending a single penny in sales tax? Keep a chunk of your paycheck free of income taxes? Have the city in which you live lend you money at rates cheaper than any bank charges? Then have the same city install free water and sewer lines to your house, offer you a perpetual discount on utility bills--and top it all off by landscaping your front yard at no charge?

Fat chance. You can't get any of that, of course. But if you live almost anywhere in America, all around you are taxpayers getting deals like this. These taxpayers are called corporations, and their deals are usually trumpeted as "economic development" or "public-private partnerships."

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/time/1998/11/02/corp.welfare.html

Check out how much money J P morgan makes on the EBT cards.


Report: JP Morgan Makes Over Half A Billion Dollars Off Food Stamps

A new report by the Government Accountability Institute finds that JP Morgan has made at least $560,492,596 since 2004 processing the Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) cards

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2012/10/01/report-jp-morgan-makes-over-half-a-billion-dollars-off-food-stamps/

You see this is how the rich make there money off of these program.

@ Bradley: Thanks for the clarification on eminent domain process.
@ Atticus: I wonder why Northland doesn't include Church St South in it's online portfolio or properties!

It looks like these people have the ability to build and manage decent-looking housing...and they chose to let CSS deteriorate -- probably knowing they'd get into trouble first and bailed out second. I still hope that the feds find a way to recover any HUD money that was paying for substandard apartments!

If it has to be Northland I just hope our city/state/federal agencies can team up and have a real plan for real accountability for the right kind of project. My preference (and that of a majority of readers) is a mixed-income development that will be diverse, clean, safe and attractive.

@Esbey, I stated that "many have made the argument that Yale . . . ." It is not my argument and I don't think any property owner has any obligation but to meet the bare minimal standard with its property. With that said, Yale or Yale affiliated now own/control much of Lake Place after years of it being distressed. I'm certain that the parcels weren't all picked up at the same time (2012 or 2013) and it's not been renovated into a gorgeous street. That's the prudent business move and I can't blame it. Similarly, 33 Dixwell has been vacant for years, though Yale owned it since 1983. Not exactly improving the land values.

@Morgan.... I'm going to assume that was rhetorical. However, an educated guess is that Northland only includes in its online portfolio sites it actually developed. It's acquisition of CSS was done in conjunction with the City, presumptively after an RFP was distributed, with promises of ability to rehabilitate the complex in a certain fashion. The alders blocked their proposal and the owner then sat on it because they could. Their intention wasn't to manage section 8 property but to redevelop land in a fashion consistent with their business plan. They weren't allowed to and bad things happened. It's probably a lesson the alders should learn as they continue to make it harder for developers to conduct business in New Haven. Just ask Randy Salvatore how hard it is to develop in New Haven when you're not asking the city for a dime. It's absolutely insane.

Now let me get this straight the same Dam Company that caused has caused problem and were slum lords are being rewarded by getting the contract to rebuild that shows how much the City really cares. Now you let a Home Owner have some code violations in the house they are renting they would fine that home owner and give them a deadline to have the repairs done. It quite funny how we havent heard the City say nothing about the Slum Company, the only time they say something is when HUD steps in.

Oh, this is priceless!!! You can't make this stuff up!! Northland, steals u blind, steals the Fed. Gov't blind, Alders, Local politicians and state and fed. politicians turn a blind eye for YEARS!!
Create a deadly situation "the Jungle", treat people like animals (and the city and Alders and State Reps. turn their backs STILL), Allow children to live in DEPLORABLE conditions and the solution is, "oh thats ok, boys will be boys, lets let bygones be bygones, we know you didn't mean it!!! Hey you're all a bunch of white guys so u must know better than we do!, Oh it's only money!!!"
What a bunch of yahoos! No wonder the Hill is the way it is! No wonder we are treated like dirt by City Hall, the MAYOR, UNIONS and especially the police led by an individual who couldn't care less about crime, wouldn't know proactive if it jumped up and slapped him and it SHOULD btw!
When someone shows you who they are, BELIEVE THEM THE 1ST TIME!!!! - Maya Angelou!!!!

The GRANT Neal is talking about has a deadline of the end of June. The only other community in the running for it is Meriden. This tendency to exaggerate is really annoying!
Since when has Northland worked with the city to relocate tenants??
Annndddd the proposed housing not here, not now and not at any time is AFFORDABLE HOUSING!!!!! When will these people get that this is LOW INCOME SECTION 8, IRRESPONSIBLE TENANTS, WHO TAKE NO PRIDE IN THEIR HOMES HOUSING!!!
AFFORDABLE housing is MIDDLE INCOME, you know for the kind for people who WORK!!!!!!!

THIS STATEMENT IS AN OUT RIGHT LIE!!!!! THIS AFFORDABLE HOUSING HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH CHURCH ST. SOUTH!!!!
THIS HOUSING IS FOR THE HILL TO DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT ONLY!!!!!!
"She also noted that the 30 percent of "affordable" housing envisioned for the new development at Church Street South is really "workforce housing" for people earning up to 60 percent of the area's average median income. Church Street South families often earn half or less than that amount, she noted."

HOW DARE SHE!!!!! Not to mention the housing was presented to the developer by ME !!! I think I ought to know don't you??!!

Adelaide-

You are right on point! Isn't politics disgusting! They talk about car salesmen being slimy and disgusting, but I think politicians have taken the number 1 spot in this category! People should be in JAIL for the blind eye they turned on "The Jungle" as it was called by many. It will NEVER happen because they are all in cahoots!