THomas MacMillan Photo
LCI’s Erik Johnson (l) and Frank D’Amore (r).
Five years ago, the city paid nearly $200,000 to move a circa-1880s Prospect Hill home 75 feet. Since then it has sat vacant and crumbling. Now the city is looking for a buyer who can breathe new life into it.
The house, at 477 Prospect St., is known as the Winchester Observatory Caretaker’s Cottage. The city currently has an open Request For Proposals (RFP) seeking buyers for the 4,353 square-foot structure. City officials said they’d like to see it occupied by someone who can restore with historical sensitivity. Read the RFP here.
A recent site visit with Livable City Initiative (LCI) staffers revealed that the home will require a serious investment to revive it to its former grandeur.
The house was built in 1882 as a home for the caretaker of a Yale observatory, which no longer exists. The “Yale Observatory Officer” occupied the building for six years. Yale used it for other purposes for more than a century after that, until it was donated to the New Haven Board of Education in 2002.
Two years later, in 2004, the house was moved 75 feet south at a cost of nearly $200,000, to make room for the construction of the new Celentano school. At its new location at 477 Prospect St., the house sits on a new basement but without gas, water, or electricity. Whoever buys the house would also have to install a driveway, said LCI staff.
Time has not been kind to the old house, which has peeling paint and a sagging porch with a roof riddled with holes. A peek inside the ground floor windows reveals scattered furniture haunting dusty rooms.
The city isn’t trying to make money off the sale of the house, said Frank D’Amore, deputy director at LCI. “We’re not looking for a lot of money.” The buyer’s funds should go into restoring the house, he said.
“This is a unique house,” said LCI staffer Evan Trachten. “We don’t want to see it wrapped in vinyl.”
Trachten and LCI head Erik Johnson said they’d like to see the building occupied by a professional, such as a psychiatrist or architect, who could use it as a residence-cum-office.
The city hasn’t set a minimum bid. The sale will add a taxable property to the city’s grand list. “That’s what this is all about,” Trachten said. “This theoretically adds substantial value.”
Trachten acknowledged that the successful bidder will have his work cut out for him. “It’s a big-ticket rehab,” he said.
Johnson estimated it will take an investment of about $600,000 to renovate the house.
He said the selection committee will not go for bids that seek to split the building up into apartments. He said the committee will be looking for bids that offer a comprehensive restoration plan that emphasizes green building and historic preservation.
A pre-bid walk-through of the property drew about six interested parties, half of whom were serious developers, said Trachten. The RFP closes on Jan. 11. After an internal review, the winning bidder will be notified about 45 days after that, Johnson said. He said he hopes the sale will be completed by June 2011, and the house occupied by June 2012.
Once the sale goes through, the New Haven Preservation Trust is ready to assist the new owner with renovation planning, said John Herzan, a preservation services officer with the organization.
Herzan’s job is to advise people who are restoring historic structures. He helps with everything from selecting paint colors to choosing a contractor to cashing in on tax credits.
Herzan said 477 Prospect exemplifies the Queen Anne architectural style, which features design asymmetry and material and texture variety. The house features a subtle sunflower motif, which Herzan said was popular at the time of its construction.
“It’s the detailing that makes that house so wonderful architecturally,” he said. “It would be a crime to get rid of it.”
Herzan said he’d like to see the house restored according to Department of the Interior standards. Tax credit programs are available, he said.
“The Trust is ready to provide technical assistance to whoever acquires it,” Herzan said.
The rear of the building.
Why does it need a driveway? Can't the owner get an easement to use the neighboring school property for parking, or add a few spaces right there?
A driveway is pointless, expensive, adds more asphalt to an otherwise "green" neighborhood, and just adds more curb cuts to a street that is already a major challenge for elderly and youth to walk along.
Hope this is fixed up, but it would be easier if the city applied some creative thinking. We already have more than enough parking lots.