Daggett Developers Hit Snag

Developers looking to put 80 apartments in a former Daggett Street factory have at least another month to figure out how to get along with their neighbor, Yale-New Haven Hospital, in their quest to win needed regulatory approval.

The City Plan Commission voted to table a decision on whether to grant developers Eyal Preis and his new partner, Isaac Koren, a special permit for the conversion of the former Seamless Rubber Co. complex into new apartments and a special permit to allow 47 parking spaces. Commissioners did that at their last monthly meeting of the year after a dispute over an easement erupted into the open during a public hearing at City Hall Wednesday.

At issue is a small triangle of land.

The developers operating as 69 – 76 Daggett Street LLC had obtained site plan approval for the project back in February 2017, and special exception for parking in October 2017. But they never got started building because of ​“unknowable circumstances,” according to attorney Miguel Almodovar.

Nothing has really changed about the plan for the former Daggett Street Square artists’ haven, which city officials shut down in 2015 for dangerous code violations a year and a half before a similar operation in Oakland erupted in flames and killed 36 people.

The plan still calls for a mix of 80 studio, one‑, two- and three-bedroom apartments aimed at attracting medical residents and other nearby hospital personnel who want to be close to work. But a lot has changed about the on-site parking and how it would be accessed by tenants.

Almodovar said the developers sought to refine their plans for how drivers would enter and exit a proposed parking garage. Under the previous plan that commissioners approved there would have been 55 parking spaces, some of which would be in a basement level of the building and some in the backyard. To leave the site cars would have had to circulate through the garage level and leave from the back and side of the building.

Architect Sam Gardner of Gregg, Wies & Gardner said that his firm worked with city traffic staff to devise a simpler strategy that has cars entering and exiting the garage on Daggett Street instead. There would no longer be parking in the backyard of the building for tenants, mainly because there’s no longer any need for that much parking. That space would become a courtyard area instead.

Gardner said zoning regulations have changed, requiring only 40 spaces. Prior to that, the developers had obtained a special exception to allow 55 spaces where 80 space were required.

“We now have an excess of seven spaces,” Gardner said. He also noted that the original plans had called for transforming a garage into an amenity space for the complex but that space has been moved inside the building and the garage will become apartment space.

“It is the best version of the use of this particular site,” Almodovar said.” We’re very excited. We’ll be reusing a very large building in the neighborhood that can really connect Downtown to Union Station and we think it will be a great asset for the neighborhood and a great asset for the city.”

But what they don’t have is an agreement with Yale-New Haven Hospital regarding an easement over a small triangle of land that separates the Daggett Street building and two abutting YNHH buildings and connects to another sliver that goes behind those buildings. The developers’ original plans called for utilizing that as an entrance and exit point for the building’s garage to get to Daggett Street.

Attorney Elliot Kaiman, representing the hospital, spoke in opposition Wednesday night of the proposed site plan review and the special permit regarding the state of that easement. City Plan staff had urged the two entities to work that out amongst themselves.

Kaiman told commissioners Wednesday that when the hospital learned in January 2018 that the developers intended to use an existing easement in that manner, repeated attempts were made to reach them. It took about three months to run down a former attorney for the project. Eventually City Plan staff that helped the hospital make contact with the developers in April.

At City Plan’s behest, Kaiman said, counsel for the developers and the hospital quickly worked out and signed a letter of intent. But when it came time to formalize the agreement further, the developers objected to one point that they had previously agreed to, regarding separating the fire and life safety in the building.

“We pointed out that they had agreed to that in the signed” letter of agreement, Kaiman said. ​“Subsequently, we reached out over the ensuing months and to our surprise found this matter back before this body at about 5 p.m.”

He said the developers had not talked to the hospital about how the problem could be resolved since July.

“You have known that this is an issue since January of last year,” City Plan staffer Ann Hartjen said told Almodovar. ​“We asked you in letter form to work it out. You did not mention once that this hadn’t been worked out, so I’m a little disappointed Miguel.”

“It hasn’t been worked out because we’re no longer …,” Almodovar said.

“It has been worked out,” Kaiman interjected.

“An MOU hasn’t been worked out,” Almodovar said.

“It’s signed,” Kaiman replied.

“We do not have a signed, settled agreement. You are confused about what you’re talking about.”

“This is not what we do,” Commission Chair Ed Mattison interjected. ​“I am uncomfortable with a discussion of the legal merits of the various explanations, and I am inclined to tell you all to go back and work it out.”

“We’d welcome that,” Kaiman said.

Seeing the project’s plans for site approval about to be derailed at least for another month, Koren stepped in to smooth things over.

“Quite frankly I think we addressed any issue with our neighbors by entirely changing the traffic pattern of our plan to where this issue became a non-issue,” he said. ​“It’s why we felt no need to address it further. We are no longer encroaching on their property at all in any manner substantially different from what has already been approved. We decided to cut into the building and change our traffic pattern for the safety of the building’s tenants, pedestrians and to the comfort of Yale.”

“And that’s probably true,” Kaiman said. ​“You just never told us.”

Mattison told both the developers and Kaiman that he expects them to resolve their issues and come to some sort of agreement before they return to the commission. The commissioners then voted unanimously to table the matter.

Acting Economic Development Administrator Michael Piscitelli warned commissioners not to expect that the parties would come to an agreement. Instead, expect staff to have a recommendation for a way forward, he advised.

“If this is still in dispute, we still may give a recommendation for approval or denial,” he said.

Staff had originally recommended approval of the special permit and the site plan with conditions that include conducting soil tests and providing revised plans with proper Americans with Disabilities Act-compliant parking spaces and signs to the Department of Traffic, Transportation, and Parking.

Piscitelli said commissioners probably should not assume cooperation among the parties given that they just got ​“a year’s worth of evidence that we may not get it.”