Projects would bring nearly 200 apartments to city

Some question impact of zone change

NEW HAVEN — An adaptive reuse and a proposed high-rise could bring nearly 200 more apartments downtown, while a small complex has been approved in the Hill section by the city’s land use boards.

A total of 5 ground-floor apartments, topped by 5 duplexes, on city land have been approved for Columbus Avenue and Salem Street.

The complex is fully covered by sprinklers, but City Plan Commission members still questioned having only one exit for nine of the apartments.

The larger projects have received some necessary ancillary approvals, but still need fleshed-out plans and a site plan review.

PMC, owner of the Strouse Adler apartments at 78 Olive St., received approval this week from the City Plan Commission for a zone change from BA general business to BD-1, central business/residential, for the 2.5-acre property.

The BD-1 zone generally allows for greater height and density and favors a transit-oriented development.

Attorney Christopher McKeon said PMC, a Philadelphia firm with several developments in New Haven, said preliminary plans call for a new building on the site with 136 apartments fronting on Chapel Street.

He said they are talking about 12 units on floors 2-12 and four apartments on the 13th floor, where there also would be a fitness center. McKeon said they would all be one-bedroom apartments.

Strouse Adler’s Smoothie building, a longtime occupant already on the site and one of the first industrial conversions to housing in the city, has 142 apartments and 148 parking spaces.

PMC for years had a contentious relationship with its neighbors, filing multiple legal challenges to the proposed apartments along Olive Street that now are nearing completion and pose competition to the Smoothie units.

In a separate project, the owners of the Olympia Building at 142 Temple St. propose topping the office building with four floors of 15 apartments each for a total of 60 apartments, from studios to oneand two-bedroom units.

They would maintain the first floor for administrative uses, and the second and third floors for office space. The L-shaped building spans Temple Street to Crown Street, but does not include the corner parcel.

City Plan recommended that the Board of Zoning Appeals grant special exceptions to allow zero off-street parking where 27 spaces are required and zero off-street loading spaces where 2 are needed for the Temple Street plan.

Attorney Ben Trachten said the building owners have an agreement with the New Haven Parking Authority to satisfy the parking requirement.

The large PMC parcel is bound by Chapel, Olive and Court streets, as well as the railroad tracks behind the State Street Train Station.

Of the three recently considered developments by City Plan, the PMC site is generating the most scrutiny.

Westville Alder Adam Marchand, who is also a commissioner, pointed out that the BD-1 zone allows for much taller buildings and a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 6.0 for a denser project.

That is limited however to a FAR of 3.0 and a height of 70 feet when the property is immediately adjacent to a residential zone. The property across from the site on Olive Street is zoned residential (RM-2).

FAR 6.0 means that the floor area may be up to six times as large as the lot area.

Marchand supported the zone change as he currently understands it if the height and FAR limits are applicable to a development.

He wants to know how far into the zone the height limits extend for potential projects, such as the portion of the parcel immediately adjacent to the tracks, some 200 yards from Olive Street.

The question is whether the property, as currently configured, would allow a 13-story building, unless it was subdivided.

“What does this map change make possible? It is not 100 percent clear in my mind,” Marchand said. He said he reserved the right to reconsider his support in the zone vote by the alders, which is needed for final approval.

McKeon said if they don’t get it, they can’t build on the lot.

The zone change has to stand on its own merits without consideration for a particular plan. The 13-story structure may be submitted to the city for review by the end of January. McKeon said he is in discussions with the city on an affordable housing component.

At the recent Downtown Wooster Square Community Management team meeting, McKeon first discussed the zone change and the proposed building.

Tony Kosloski, a neighbor in attendance at the meeting on Zoom, questioned the height, pointing out it was almost twice as high as the developments along Olive Street.

“This is a significant change for our side of the railroad tracks and it seems to be pushing things a bit. Just want to make that point. There is a large spatial issue here,” Kosloski said.

“The new buildings being put up on Olive Street have turned everything into a canyon,” he said. “Anything that is twice as tall as any of those buildings, will make it even more so.”

The zone change is not unique as the city in 2014 approved the same change for 630 Chapel St., the former Comcast site, 673 Chapel St. and 87 Union St, where hundreds of apartments are under construction along Olive Street in Wooster Square in seven-story buildings.

The city eight years ago recommended that this PMC property be rezoned to join the other parcels connecting the Chapel Street corridor to Wooster Square. When the city had not yet done that, McKeon said PMC took the lead and applied for the change.

In the current vote, City Plan staff have joined in that recommendation as has the city’s economic development office.

Deputy Economic Development Director Steve Fontana said the zone is “broadly consistent with the planning and evolution of this neighborhood and ... enables the kind of positive development we wish to seek.”

He said it follows a 2016 study of Wooster Square that recommended focusing on denser, walkable and transit-oriented development there.

McKeon said the purpose of the change is to create a corridor from downtown through the Chapel Street section and make connectivity with Wooster Square.

McKeon said PMC is actively engaged in discussions with city staff and will meet with the development committee of the Downtown Wooster Square Community Management Team for input. Alder Eli Sabin, D-7, is arranging for a community meeting on the plan.

City attorney Michael Pinto said there are some four orphan parcels in the area that also need to be rezoned to BD-1 from BA, but that would have to be done in a separate meeting after proper notice is given.

As for the 232-235 Columbus Ave. housing, Commissioner Ed Mattison asked why they shouldn’t hold a public hearing on it as requested by some residents.

Commission President Leslie Radcliffe said there had been a hearing before the Board of Zoning Appeals on the density and it was deemed reasonable. There also is a land disposition agreement with the city on the plan and a community management team review.

Pinto said site plan review goes through a checklist of technical measures and is not a forum for testimony on whether a resident likes a project. The board ultimately decided not to have a public hearing.

Pinto, in answer to questions, said the city solicited proposals for housing on the parcel and Ralph Mauro was chosen for the work. James Pretti of Criscuolo Engineering made the presentation.

The longer discussion was on the limited egress and the inconvenient walk for tenants to the outside trash receptacle.

There are two exits for the one handicapped ground-floor apartment, although the other four could also have a second exit, if needed.

For the two-level townhouses on top, which feature two bedrooms, the only exit is a front staircase, which necessitated a sprinkler system in the building.

Pretti said originally the builder proposed six to eight apartments for the site, but the city wanted 10, which restricted some construction. The ground-floor units are approximately 800 square feet; the townhouses are about 1,500 square feet.

Commissioner Ernest Pagan said it was a long walk to the dumpster for people in the townhouses in particular. “They have to walk a block to empty the trash. Can we work on that?” he asked Pretti.

The engineer said he did not know how they could add another staircase given the size and shape of the property and the number of units. They already needed a variance for the lot size per unit.

“Architecturally you would probably have to redesign the whole building,” Pretti said.

Pretti said the plans have gone through the fire marshal’s office and the building department and is the reason for the sprinklers.

Marchand said he agreed with the quality-of-life questions by Pagan, but he was not sure that was within their purview. Pinto said “the imperfections of the design are not grounds to either table it or request additional information.”

The vote was 3 to 2 in favor with Pagan and Mattison voting against the proposal.