Apartment Proposal Timing Intrudes On FFH Planning Process

By Kendra Bobowick

Concerning a March 16 lease proposal for apartments at Cochran House, First Selectman Pat Llodra is “not going to allow this to drive our decisions” regarding housing at Fairfield Hills.

“Annoyed” that the recent official lease offer mentions a May 1 deadline, the first selectman said, “That’s not fair.”

As the town carries out its own review of the former state hospital campus’s plans for reuse, which may or may not include housing, she said this week, “We are not going to dance to another’s tune.” Stating that she is prepared to wait for a Fairfield Hills Master Plan Review Committee to complete its work, which should conclude in coming weeks, Mrs Llodra added, “We are not going to rush this process, and I need to push back hard. They are not going to ram this through; we’ll wait for the review process.”

An official lease offer by a New York firm for the four-story building facing Mile Hill South proposes a $27 million investment on the company’s behalf, and would pay an up-front cost of $225,000 to lease the building, with annual payments to follow.

When Mrs Llodra realized that the lease proposal states, “[Town, state and federal] Approvals will need to be completed by 1 May 2011,” she stressed, “that is the developer’s perspective; that is not my timeline.” The proposal by Merchant Equity Institutional Partners of New York also notes an “effective lease date” of “1 May 2011.”

The first selectman insisted, “We need to give [the review committee] time,” adding that she is “trying to stay neutral.” She explained that “as long as the review committee” is looking at reuses, which could include housing, “it would not be fair for the Board of Selectmen to give an opinion.”

Two issues are before the town: first is the question of housing as a reuse in general, and the other is the specific proposal for Cochran House. Since the town had learned months ago that one developer had an interest in the building, the first selectman had initially instructed the review committee, “Don’t let certain proposals drive your decisionmaking process.” The group would be best served “without putting extraordinary pressure” on them.

Also scheduled for early April is a Planning and Zoning Commission hearing regarding the addition of housing as an adaptive reuse for Fairfield Hills. Mrs Llodra had preferred that zoning Chairman Lilla Dean could wait, but understands that although the hearing will open, Ms Dean “will keep it open until the review committee is done, so decisions are not made ahead of the review committee.”

Master Plan Review Committee Chairman Michael Floros made “no comment” regarding the lease proposal, but explained that his committee “was moving along” with its review work. Regarding their final recommendations regarding the master plan, he said, “We will base our decisions on information that we have and what we hear in our public forums.”

Most recently the committee has planned community conversations to discuss Fairfield Hills reuse. He is trying to avoid interest in Cochran House from influencing his group’s work, he said.

An 18-person group initially met to discuss the future at Fairfield Hills, and led to a larger, communitywide forum and think group on March 16. A second communitywide meeting on March 23 was scheduled to help inform a survey that the review committee will circulate.

“We need to give them the time and space for the process,” Mrs Llodra said.

Fairfield Hills Authority Chairman John Reed also notes that the apartment proposal raises the months-old question regarding housing.

“Everyone’s been anticipating something,” remarked Mr Reed Thursday, March 17, a day after sole real estate broker J. Michael Struna presented the authority with the developer’s lease proposal. He confirmed that the developer is interested in negotiating a 99-year lease arrangement to convert the building into apartments.

Mr Reed anticipated “two things,” beginning with, “What’s next?” He said, “As far as negotiations, speaking for myself, I would look for some collaboration or direction from elected bodies in town.” Seeking guidance in the lease negotiation process, he does not think the authority should “do this by ourselves.” He recognizes bodies such as the Board of Selectmen, and members of other boards including the Economic Development Commission, Planning and Zoning Commission, and Master Plan Review Committee, which is currently reassessing the campus’s master plan for reuse. All have raised the topic of a “residential component” regarding Fairfield Hills during recent meetings.

Regarding the authority, Mr Reed said, “We’re only appointed.” As an advisory committee that reports to the selectmen, he said, “If the Board of Selectmen wants us to undertake more discussion [regarding the lease proposal], we’ll prepare, but not without the request from the elected officials.”

He has discussed with Mrs Llodra possible public venues so that residents and various boards “can hear directly from the developer.” Mr Struna had indicated that the development team would not be ready for a presentation for several weeks.