Becker Makes His Case To The Council

By Steve Bigham

Legislative Council members seemed satisfied with the answers Bruce Becker gave to their questions about his plan for the adaptive re-use of Fairfield Hills during a 90-minute question and answer session Tuesday night.

This week’s meeting with the council follows the firm’s August 7 audience with the Board of Selectmen. Following that meeting, First Selectman Herb Rosenthal admitted his disappointment with Mr Becker’s presentation because it lacked specifics and simply rehashed his original proposal. This time, however, Mr Becker skipped the slide show and went directly to the meat of the matter.

The meeting fell just one day before the council was slated to meet with the selectmen (in executive session) to discuss in detail the town’s strategy for Fairfield Hills.  

Becker and Becker has spent more than 18 months trying to sell its plan for the preservation and adaptive re-use of Fairfield Hills to the town, which is currently in negotiations with the state over the possible purchase of the property. Mr Becker, the firm’s president, believes he has the resources that make his plan work, and there are still many who believe his ideas have merit.

“It’s obvious he wants to work with the town,” noted council member Will Rodgers. “I still think if the town purchases this it needs to maintain control.”

Earlier in the evening, council member Tim Holian asked Mr Becker if he would be willing to entertain a closing in which the town would be able to put deed restrictions on the property. The answer was “yes.”

Council member Dan Rosenthal said he was also satisfied with Mr Becker’s answers, although he was reluctant to speak too much in favor of one developer over another. He noted the Board of Selectmen must still come to the council with a request before the council can act.

In short, Mr Becker is proposing a sort of partnership with the town wherein both the town and his firm take part in a joint closing with the state. It would be a simultaneous purchase so that both parties are assured of what happens to the site. It eliminates uncertainties, Mr Becker said.

At the closing, Mr Becker said the 185-acre campus would be conveyed to Becker and Becker, which would in turn convey 130 acres and some buildings to the town. Newtown stands to pick up Bridgeport, Woodbury, and Newtown Halls and the Yale Lab in the deal. The remainder of the buildings would fall under the ownership of Becker and Becker.

Mr Becker’s plan is contingent on his being able to get the property listed on the National Register of Historic Places. This will make him eligible to receive historic tax credits, which bring his costs for the preservation project way down.

“The project is not feasible without historic tax credits,” Mr Becker said.

 Becker and Becker does not plan to put up much of its own money – maybe 15-20 percent. The majority of the $160 million will come from investors, who include everyone from the YMCA and Newtown Savings Bank to the Fannie Mae Foundation and First Union Bank.

Council member Doug Brennan expressed concern over Becker and Becker’s resources to complete the project, especially if the economy turns sour. Mr Becker offered hard financial commitments from his investors and stated that the project would include a performance bond.

“We never started a project we haven’t finished,” Mr Becker said.

Mr Brennan credited Mr Becker for his efforts in Newtown, which occasionally has meant taking “a few lumps,” but “the balance between what we need to do and what you need to do concerns me,” Mr Brennan said.

“We’re taking a big risk as a town in your scheme, but I don’t see enough rewards to the town,” Mr Brennan said.

Mr Becker disagreed, saying he sees huge financial savings for the town. He pointed out that the project would generate as much as $2.5 million in taxes each year, while costing less that $1 million in services.

“If you buy the property directly you have real uncertain costs to the town. By going in with us, the vast majority of the costs are eliminated,” Mr Becker said, comparing the 150,000 square feet building space to be cleaned up by the town versus 1.2 million square feet space to be cleaned up without Becker and Becker’s involvement.

Council member Don Studley asked if Becker and Becker would still be interested in Fairfield Hills if the town elected to buy all the land and only sell the buildings. The answer was “yes.”

Council member John Kortze noted that having a YMCA, a restaurant, baseball fields, senior housing, and municipal buildings all on 185 acres seemed like an awful lot.

“That’s what attracted us,” noted Bill Dwyer of the YMCA.

“We think having a vibrant mix of uses will give it a sort of village character – the crown jewel of the town,” added Mr Becker. “This is an opportunity for the town to absorb its growth. Most towns are unable to do that.”

Council member Melissa Pilchard drew up a list of 39 questions covering a wide range of issues regarding Fairfield Hills. Among them, what protections does the town’s existing zoning cover? What would the impact of the Fairfield Hills development be on the aquifer? What is the traffic impact? Why is there so much housing?

Mr Becker said his plan would have a minimal impact on the aquifer and that United Water has already agreed to put Fairfield Hills on its system. The developer reminded residents that the town’s zoning regulations include an entire section of Fairfield Hills. They restrict the new construction of single-family homes and limit apartments to 100. In addition, he said, Becker and Becker would waive its right to challenge Newtown’s zoning laws in a higher court.

As for the traffic impact, Mr Becker said there would be a significant increase due to development at Fairfield Hills. However, because there are so many mixed uses, the traffic would peak at different periods of the day. Mr Becker said 45 percent of the buildings he plans to take over will be used for housing with most of that being age-restricted housing.

Longtime Newtown resident Bob Tynan warned the council to beware of entering into an agreement in which the town would lose control of the land. He referred to a mining operation in Botsford in which “illegal stuff” happened.

“In spite of all the legal work that was done, he owned the land and he did what he wanted to do with it,” Mr Tynan said. “If you own land in this town, you have the advantage.”