BRIDGEPORT — Despite undergoing extensive makeovers in recent years, many ground-level retail spaces remain vacant in the downtown Arcade mall and a second building several blocks away known as 144 Golden Hill.
In the Arcade’s case, tenants have come and quickly gone. The building on the corner of Golden Hill and Main streets has not even seen that type of action.
“We were wildly optimistic,” said Eric Anderson, head of New York-based Urban Green, the developer chosen by the city in 2003 to take on the redevelopment of the buildings. “The appraisals were wildly optimistic. (But) there’s no market downtown. You need more housing.”
Now, those projects and another in the area known as Downtown North are the source of a power struggle between Anderson and New York-based Ginsburg Development Companies. The battle is playing out in two lawsuits filed by Ginsburg, which invested in the downtown projects, against Urban Green and Anderson.
In the lawsuits, filed in New York, Ginsburg accuses Anderson of fraud, mismanaging funds and other actions it says nearly caused the downtown Bridgeport projects to “implode.” Ginsburg wants Anderson to walk away from the projects, which Ginsburg, whose principal is New Yorker Martin Ginsburg, claims in the lawsuit are in danger of foreclosure.
Jonathan P. Vuotto, a partner at New Jersey-based Riker Danzig Scherer Hyland & Perretti, which represents Ginsburg, said the lawsuits speak for themselves.
“The point that we would like to emphasize is that, when the project was at very serious risk of failure as a result of Mr. Anderson’s actions, GDC took over as the managing member and is still in the process of turning it around — in the best interests of all parties, especially the city of Bridgeport,” he said in an email. “GDC was shocked to learn that many of the project’s cost issues were not as a result of Mr. Anderson’s mere mismanagement, but rather appear to be due to his fraudulent activities.”
The development companies first joined forces in 2005, two years after Anderson was chosen by the city to redevelop Citytrust, Arcade and 144 Golden Hill, three downtown buildings that had fallen into disuse. CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE
Bridge work closes portion of Route 150 in Wallingford
WALLINGFORD — Due to work on a railroad bridge in Yalesville, Route 150 is closed to traffic in the area and won’t reopen until next month.
The bridge underpass, just north of Old Colony Road (Route 71), closed Monday and is expected to reopen Nov. 10, according to the state Department of Transportation. Traffic is detoured to North Colony Road (Route 5) and Church Street (Route 68).
The bridge, built in the mid-1800s, has an underpass wide enough to accommodate only one-lane of traffic. A second set of tracks is being built atop the bridge as part of the New Haven-Hartford-Springfield commuter rail line. Expanded commuter rail service is expected to begin in January 2018.
Construction on the bridge includes installing and repairing supporting structures to allow for the additional track, said John Bernick, DOT assistant rail administrator
While the bridge underpass is expected to reopen during the daytime in November, it is expected to continue to be closed at night. Bernick did not have an estimate on how long the nighttime closure would last.DOT officials are scheduled to present plans to replace two bridges on Route 82 west of Route 11. Bridge 01140, built in 1924, is a 45-foot-long, two-span bridge crossing over the East Branch of the Eight Mile River. Bridge 05401, which is 200 feet to the east of Bridge 01140, is a 24-foot-long, single-span bridge built over Swamp Brook in 1924 and reconstructed in 1986.
Designs for the project are close to completion and call for the replacement of Bridge 01140 with a 56-foot single-span bridge and Bridge 05401 with a 32-foot single-span bridge. Both would be replaced by prefabricated units using a method called Accelerated Bridge Construction, which was also used recently in the bridge replacement project on Interstate 95 near Oil Mill Road in Waterford.
The project would also replace a twin pipe culvert east of Bridge 05401 and fix the profile of the road. Construction is slated to start in the spring of 2019 with the construction cost of $4.5 million coming from state and federal funds.
In order to reduce construction time, Route 82 would be closed for eight weeks while the prefabricated bridge units are put in place. Traffic will be detoured onto local roads through Salem, East Haddam and Lyme for 7.7 or 8.5 miles depending on whether they are traveling east or west on Route 82. Total construction would last three months.
Traffic evaluations showed a stage construction option that maintained one-way traffic during the replacement would take two years to complete.
Petition started to save Reid & Hughes building
NORWICH — The City Council is set to authorize a search for an engineering firm to prepare for the demolition of the Reid & Hughes building, and will take up the matter at its Monday meeting.
At the same time, supporters of efforts to keep the 1880 building on Main Street in the downtown have launched an online petition to try and save it.
The Norwich Heritage Trust has started an e-petition to the Connecticut Historic Preservation Council to stop the demolition of the building. It is petitioning the preservation council because the structure is listed on the national and state Registers of Historic Places as a contributing building to the Downtown Norwich Historic District.
"A very viable developer has come forward and is willing to take on the redevelopment of the building," member Susan Masse said. "We think the developer's project deserves further investigation by the city."
The petition had 176 signatures on Sunday, from places as far as Texas and Florida.
The Hartford-based Women's Institute for Housing and Economic Development, a nonprofit organization, recently introduced an informal proposal to renovate the building into a mix of first-floor commercial development and 20 units of affordable housing on the upper floors. The cost has been estimated at $5 million to $6 million, with roughly half that amount coming from historic preservation grants and credits.
Architect William Crosskey has said the building is able to be remodeled into a useful structure.
But the council voted 5-2 on Oct. 3 to approve an ordinance that would authorize the issuance of up to $800,000 in bonds for the city's share of taking down the building, which city Building Official James Troeger has said is not salvageable.
Todd Levine, the architectural historian for the state Historic Preservation Office, toured areas of the building with Troeger, Alderman H. Tucker Braddock and city Community Development Director Gary Evans on Oct. 13. CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE
With Casino Submissions Due Saturday, Developer Details Expanded East Hartford Plan
The partnership proposing a casino in East Hartford got a jump Friday on releasing details of its expanded gaming plans for the former Showcase Cinemas — a day before the deadline for submitting proposals to the operators of Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun.
Anthony W. Ravosa Jr., the partnership's managing member, said he is now proposing a gaming venue that could include both the vacant Showcase building and an addition that could be built to the rear of the existing building on what is now a parking lot.
The space could be as large as 300,000 square feet and accommodate as many as 2,000 slot machines and 150 game tables. A 2,500-space parking garage would be relocated just to the east of the abandoned Showcase building, in addition to a 1,200-space garage nearby.
"It's a rethinking and a new vision for the entire property," Ravosa said. The plan "allows us to accomplish this on the existing property that we have optioned."
Last month, the Mashantucket Pequots and Mohegans — the tribal operators of the state's two casinos — reopened the search for proposals for a Hartford-area gambling attraction to compete with a $950 million casino and entertainment complex under construction in nearby Springfield.
The Hartford-area casino is projected to cost between $200 million and $300 million.The decision caught many by surprise, coming after nearly a year of discussion over potential locations. The tribes — longtime, intense rivals — formed a joint venture to pursue what would be the state's first casino off tribal lands, after the legislature approved the search for a site.
The tribes eliminated a proposal from East Windsor, but East Hartford, Windsor Locks and Hartford were still in the running. The tribes said they needed to seek a second round of proposals because some of the initial submittals changed. For instance, Ravosa's proposal now also includes the potential for a "convention host" hotel at the Radisson in downtown Hartford.
And in Windsor Locks, prime sites at Bradley International Airport were withdrawn. CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE
Why spend $60 million on an ugly building
Sometimes a building is so banal its design cannot be defended – and, apparently the computer rendering by Direct Design Enterprises of Pawling, New York commissioned by the state Department of Transportation for a new parking garage at Union Station is indefensible. The design that spends up to $60 million to make a brick layer cake with a scalloped concrete eyebrow and rooflets all set to focus on a fire stair did not pass visual viability test and is being “revised.”
Whether the new design will be better depends on whether the DOT understands why this design was wrong for the use and context.The state government is ponying up $40-60 million for a 1,000-space, seven-level garage. There is an open space (a parking lot) to build it upon. With a good budget, benign site and east function to accommodate, how could this ham-handed design be offered up by the DOT.It’s clear there were basic miscalculations. Any building has the opportunity to be tone deaf to context (think the removed Veterans Memorial Coliseum)). Any design can ignore functional necessities (think the also departed Galleria Mall in what is now Omni Hotel complex). When a design has money (here, enough to allow for curves and brick), a simple clear function (dealing with cars, bikes and travelers) and has the potential to be a signature piece for a nice New England city (it could be part of a gateway experience for visitors to New Haven) and ends up being, well, just plain old ugly, there is reason enough to say “No.”
I am an architect. I am sure (I know) there are people who think some of my built product is ugly. Doing something new runs the risk of offending sensibilities. Bland is annoying, but ugly requires aggressive acts of visual imposition. As the jewel in its crown, this parking garage has a triumphal tower in the form of a fire stair offered up as the focal point of the entire construction. Harkness Tower it is not. As rendered it has all the charm of what it is: a fire stair.The stair was located for maximal visual impact at the farthest point from the station, meaning it would be used by no one - as the sequence is to drive in, park, and, since every parking space is closer to the station than this stair, everyone would use another way down to or back from the station. Besides the functional miscues, the computer rendering has the visual inspiration of a strip mall. Lest you think a parking garage is irretrievably dull, witness Paul Rudolph’s sculpted concrete version on Temple Street - architects love it, some observers hate it - but its not dull. Becker + Becker’s 360 State’s parking garage uses Kent Bloomer’s applied decoration to detox the garage’s potential blankness. 360 State also has glass-enclosed staircases - but used as visual bookends to a base from which its gridded tower launches. CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE
New Haven continues to argue for more retail, other changes for proposed garage at Union Station
NEW HAVEN >> The city is giving up on a bus depot at the proposed Union Station garage, but is continuing to argue for first-floor retail and other changes at the facility. City Economic Development Administrator Matthew Nemerson said they met with state Department of Transportation staff last week on the issue, one of several meetings on the topic.
New Haven residents and officials have strongly objected to the current design, which does not incorporate retail space on the lower level in an area that is expected to see extensive residential and other growth, although the timeframe is not immediate.Nemerson said the state is making changes to the “skin” of the proposed garage, which he favors, but discussions on the bigger issues have not been settled. Kevin Nursick, spokesman for the state Department of Transportation, said his understanding is that the state is “tweaking” the renderings of the garage with some input from the city. He said it is not a redesign, which would imply “something more drastic.”
Nemerson said discussions with the state led New Haven to drop its request for a bus depot at the garage. “They made a very convincing argument that getting all 15 bus lines onto Union Avenue underneath the State Street Route 34 bridge would be almost technically impossible,” Nemerson said Friday of its proposal to enhance the garage as a multi-modal center.The economic development director said that doesn’t mean the city isn’t giving up on putting a bus depot somewhere in the city where there would be bathrooms and users would be sheltered from the weather while they wait to transfer routes. The buses now all congregate at the Green around 6 p.m. as riders transfer from one line to another.The proposed garage, which would cost between $40 million and $60 million, would be constructed on the 260-space surface parking lot that accommodates only a portion of the overflow from the current garage. The new facility would add about 740 spaces for a total of 1,884 for rail riders between the two garages. The major unsettled topic remains allowing New Haven to continue long-term to manage the new garage through its Parking Authority, as it has done for 34 years for the current garage.“It is absolutely intrinsic to everything we do in the city,” Nemerson said of that role staying with the Parking Authority. CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE