Downtown North Redevelopment is back on the agenda for tonight’s Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. This document has been prepared for the meeting:
Downtown North Redevelopment PZ 090914 V2 FINAL
Since City officials announced plans to build a stadium last June, more questions have been raised than answered. Among those questions:
- Do all parcels hold considerable market, retail, residential, and mixed-use development potential?
- Have all of these parcels been completely surveyed and do topographical maps exist for all parcels? How are developers able to do a proper feasibility study without designs overlaying the topo? Can that be done without site or land surveys?
- Did the City have a recent market appraisal done for all of the parcels?
- Are there environmental reports on all of these parcels? Are there any underground storage tanks/sewer lines at these parcels that will need to be moved? How much will it cost for asbestos remediation at 150 Windsor Street? What is the magnitude of these potential environmental issues? Who pays for environmental remediation costs?
- How much will it cost for the street realignment of Trumbull and Pleasant, along with the abandonment of Windsor? Who pays? How will this impact the flow of traffic with several nearby schools and colleges?
- Are there unpaid taxes on any of these properties? What is the City doing to collect?
- Is there a reason that the commercial developer is able to have these properties gifted? Isn’t the norm for the commercial developer to purchase the parcels they plan to develop? Is there a reason that the developers are not being asked to pay full fair market value for this land?
- Where are the feasibility reports showing that a stadium would not negatively impact a nearby grocery store? Hockey at the civic center was unable to retain retail or a grocery. What reports indicate that this would be different for baseball a few blocks away?
The City of Hartford Budget & Revenue Analysis, likely to be revised, raises more questions:
DoNo Municipal Cash Flow by realhartford
- What are any of these numbers actually based on? What studies are being used?
- Is the parking permit fee accurate? Does this include the loss of current parking permit fee revenue?
- How many full-time parkers are estimated and what studies are being used to show this is accurate?
- If there are changes to the tax structure (property tax, admissions tax), state legislative approval is needed. State reps have not offered wholesale support of the stadium endeavor. How will the City makes this happen, especially when it comes to convincing New Britain legislators?
If any elected or appointed officials have solid answers to these questions, you are invited to leave a comment here.
lobonick
the developers getting the parcels “gifted” to them is hard to believe.. the answer from the dealmakers will be that is the way things are always done.. however under that analysis, the dealmakers need to give an example of prior gifts such as these parcels in other deals.. just one minor point.. your analysis is superior as always…
Kerri Provost
Nick,
Thanks for your comment. It’s appreciated.
Tim
First time I recall seeing Heaven acknowledged as having a future as part of the Downtown North proposal.
Brendan
I’m happy that the sentence that mentions it talks about bringing people to family friendly events instead of bulldozing it. All Heaven events are family friendly!
Rick
I am fortunate to have seen the Planning and Zoning Commission on RealHartford.org, just a few hours before the meeting. It hasn’t appeared anywhere else. At this late hour, there isn’t sufficient time to adequately review and comment on the proposal.
If I was a member of the Planning and Zoning Commission, elected official, employee of or consultant to the City of Hartford, or even the developer (DoNo, LLC and its members), I would insist that the holding of hearings or taking any action on this proposal, be postponed until full and complete disclosure of the proposal is made to the public and the media. Accordingly, I would request that the meeting scheduled for this evening be postponed and allow sufficient time (two weeks), for this disclosure to occur. Other meetings will need to be postponed as well.
Much was made in the initial announcement of the stadium deal with the Rock Cats about the success of other stadium deals. What does the attendance look like at these locations a few years after they opened, especially in the Eastern League? What are the financial results of these stadium owners?
This proposal deviates materially from what has been disclosed by Mayor Segarra, Council President Wooden, Director of Development Heller and others. The “municipal cash flow “schedule is the first official analysis of the project. In my opinion, there is no support provided for most of the numbers provided. The naming rights, event parking revenue, parking permit fee, admissions tax, DoNo Parking Payment and DoNo Property Taxes all have unstated assumptions and sources. The analysis does not disclose any expenses that the City of Hartford would have such as maintenance or capital improvements. This includes the $ 8 million of infrastructure improvements that Mayor Segarra’s spokesperson disclosed yesterday. These are costs of implementing this plan as are the many millions in the costs of acquiring the parcels – already committed or spent by the City of Hartford.
This is a very complex series of transactions – one that the taxpayers of the City of Hartford has and will be making a very substantial commitment to for many years to come.
Financially, this includes through the acquisition and donation (and/or lease under unspecified terms) of around 15 acres of land worth many millions of dollars, with a buyback of the stadium at the end of the initial lease term (under unspecified terms). In fact, there is much unspecified in this revised proposal and no comparison to what the stadium would look like financially with a municipal bond issue.
The City of Hartford has substantial risk in these transactions. It is appropriate to “take a time out” to make sure that everyone is fully informed, to be sure risks are minimized and benefits maximized for the residents of the City of Hartford. It is the only responsible thing to do.
Meghan Freed
Thanks, Kerri.
Justin
How much are we spending on marketing firms? ‘DoNo’ = “Don’t Know” even if you love the plan… It’s just so bad. Would be so much better to get interested residents together and come up with a plan in house than pay these folks to come up with such awful branding. It’s like they aren’t evening revising or revisiting after they write something out. So sick of Downtown boosterism at any cost. Hartford’s desperation for something new and for a boost doensn’t justify a rushed process. Our downtown sucks right now, and it will suck even more if in 10 years we have an abandonded stadium and more empty storefronts because we rushed this process now to coincide with election cycles and particular folks’ retirement plans.
Justin
Meant to write that even if you love the stadium plan, “DoNo” is an awful acronym and doesn’t help the city whether there’s a ballpark there or other development or nothing at all.
Anne Goshdigian
Kerri, I don’t get it. Does the above resolution on P&Z stationery mean that the commission has already give it their stamp of approval?
Kerri Provost
The commission tabled it. Expect more discussion on 9/23 pending updated resolutions from City Council and a report prepared by Thom Deller.
Bruce rubenstein
The city proposal is a fairy tale with made up numbers and no credible backup to validate those numbers. Mayor Caviar and his henchmen has spent or will be spending in the deal,the following…
1. $450,000. Ina CIP account for land acquision
2. $ 1,000,000. For drawings,renderings and work for a new city municipal building.
3. $ 4,500,000. To purchase the Renseleer property
4. $ 12,000,00 For deeding over 19 parcels to the developer to do the deal.
This does not take into account other mandated costs and expenses during and after construction.
Adding up the above and the bill to the taxpayer is about $500. That you and i
Will be forking over to the city,one way or another. Tthe above totals almost 18million.It takes almost 3million in property taxes for a 1 point mill rate increase,therefore Mayor Caviar has already spent 6 mills of your money……so do the math from there…..6 x.76 equals a tad short of $500. That the City will be expecting you to pay
.