July 10, 2023

CT Construction Digest Monday July 10, 2023

Norwalk wants new SoNo elementary school to be 100 percent solar-powered 

Kalleen Rose Ozanic

NORWALK — The city hopes to power the proposed South Norwalk Elementary School entirely by solar energy, according to Adam Blank, attorney for the school district on the project. 

He said the city has been collaborating with South Norwalk Electric and Water to make plans.

“The city's been working diligently with SNEW to come up with a feasible approach for the installation of not just rooftop solar, but some ground-mounted solar at the rear of the site,” Blank said during July 5's Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. “We hope and think it will meet 100 percent of the electricity required for the site.”

In the meeting, members also discussed logistics of ground-mounted solar panels and how to enclose them on the school’s property to prevent vandalism.

During the meeting, the commission also discussed the existing site plans for the proposed $76 million school, which will be South Norwalk's first in over 40 years

Blank said the school, when construction is completed, can accommodate a maximum of 682 students, though the expected student population is closer to 85 percent, or 580 students.

The attorney said they expect 146 students enrolled in pre-kindergarten at the elementary school.

The 12-acre space, formerly home to the Hatch & Bailey Co., will contain the school, 127 parking spaces, an athletic field and a playground, according to the plans Blank discussed.

Blank said the city plans to reduce the impervious surfaces of the space from 60 percent to 30 percent and add vegetated swales, a rain garden, 140 new trees, 385 shrubs and additional ground cover plantings.

Impervious surfaces are hard surfaces that easily allow precipitation carrying pollutants to runoff into waterways or storm drains that connect to them.

The Planning and Zoning Commission is expected to discuss the school at future meetings. 


Two Greenwich school projects missed the CT reimbursement deadline. Could it cost taxpayers millions?

Jessica Simms

GREENWICH — Residents may be on the hook for millions of dollars in school construction work because officials missed the deadline to apply for state aid.

And while both the Central Middle School and Old Greenwich School projects will eventually be done, base costs are expected to skyrocket because of inflation, in one case swallowing up whatever fiscal advantage might be granted down the line.

If all things had gone according to a best-case-scenario timeline, the new CMS building project would have been approved in time to make the June 30 deadline for next year’s state budget with a 6 percent reimbursement rate on the more than $100 million project.

But the CMS building committee had problems with the size, scope and layout of the new building, so the group decided in May that it did not have enough details to move the project forward for reimbursement.

Board of Education Chair Joe Kelly said because the CMS committee did not apply for state reimbursement this year, the project could get delayed if the aid is necessary to complete the project. By waiting, the overall cost of the project is estimated to escalate by 6 percent, but he said, “the escalation arguably can cost the same as we can get in reimbursement.” 

“If we have to do an analysis on if we put a shovel in the ground today and put the 6 percent reimbursement at risk, then is that equal to or smarter than waiting a year so that way we can secure the reimbursement with the escalation possibly being equal to the reimbursement?" Kelly said. 

The financials of renovating Old Greenwich School — for an estimated $42 million — in the next state fiscal year were dependent on approvals by the town's Representative Town Meeting and Board of Estimate and Taxation. Despite getting a shut down from the BET during its budget Decision Day in April, that didn’t stop the committee from pushing for official OKes to draw up plans and talk about financing.

“There is a risk that the project would be delayed a year at a cost of $3 million because of the state reimbursement process, which is that June 30 deadline,” OGS Building Committee Chair James Waters told Greenwich Time. “So not only are we risking Greenwich taxpayers taking on the extra $3 million, but the BET is putting at risk the over $6 million of state reimbursement for the project. So literally the combination of that is that they’re putting at risk about $10 million of taxpayer funds for this project.” 

Now that both projects missed this year's state reimbursement deadline, the only way for financial approval to happen in next year's budget is by special legislation. State legislators can ask that either project be added to the 2024 Priority List, but that can only be done after it is submitted by the state's Department of Administrative Services.

For now, however, any proposed construction projects submitted to the state have a new deadline — June 30, 2024 — and reimbursement won’t be available until the 2025 fiscal year. And, officials cautioned the district, there is no guarantee that the reimbursement will be available since the money is dependent on how the legislature votes on the school priority list bill and whether the governor will sign the list bill into law.

In the meantime, CMS project Building Committee Chair Tony Turner said the committee is taking steps forward. A schematic design package from the architects, SLAM Collaborative, should soon be in the committee's hands. 

“This will allow us in the month of July to have both Turner Construction Company and the architects, SLAM, to work on getting us a new project cost estimate,” Turner said. “It will be far more accurate than the previous one that we received. And all of that is due at the end of July."

Then, Turner said, most likely in September, the committee will go to both the BET and RTM to ask for funding for the new middle school based on the new cost estimate number.

Turner added that at 7 p.m. July 12, the CMS committee will be hosting another community forum. The last forum was May 17.

“This will be, most likely, the final opportunity for the community to give us feedback, ask us questions about the final design that we voted on, about the site plan and so forth,” Turner said.

As of Old Greenwich School, Kelly said the reimbursement rate is around 15 to 16 percent so “we would be smart waiting for the June 30, 2024, submission.

“At that point the cost analysis is not worth making because it’s clear that’s a lot of money,” Kelly said.

While Waters said the BET’s decision against funding OGS in next year's budget was a bump in the road, the committee is in “execute mode,” by working to develop the renovation’s design, creating the documents for the contractors that will include designs and specifications they will need and working to get land use approvals.

“We’re committed to doing this by the book in accordance with the town charter, incorporating feedback,” Waters said. “We’ve gotten a lot of great feedback from the community so far. I think we continue to be excited to move this project forward and really at the end of the day, it’s going to depend on when the BET is willing to provide construction funding for the project, but that’s out of our control. We’ll do everything we can to get this done.” 


East Hartford mayor says he will 'not receive a penny' in his new 'job'

Joseph Villanova

EAST HARTFORD — Democrats plan to nominate a candidate for mayor later this month after Mayor Mike Walsh announced Monday that he would not run again this year. Meanwhile, Walsh insists he's not being paid for his new gig.

Walsh announced this week he will leave office in November, along with his $106,000 salary, to serve as the organizer and "champion" of Port Eastside, a plan to redevelop Founders Plaza alongside other projects in East Hartford.

"It is not a paid position, it's not a job I'm taking," Walsh said, adding that he would "not receive a penny" from any parties involved.

Democratic Town Chairwoman Moriah Moriarty said there is one Democrat that she knows is interested in being nominated to run and seems to be well received as a potential candidate.

Moriarty said it is unclear if anyone else will step forward before the Democratic Town Committee makes its nominations on July 20.

"Until July 20, I'm staying neutral and letting the process play out," Moriarty said.

Town Council Minority Leader John Morrison said the Republican Town Committee is currently vetting candidates for mayor, especially with the news of Walsh's departure.

"Not that we weren't looking for somebody, but now it seems like we really have to put someone out there," Morrison said, adding that the competition could help drive voter turnout.

Morrison said the RTC plans to make their nominations at a meeting later this month, and Republicans have until then to choose a candidate willing and able to serve.

Walsh planned to run for re-election earlier in the year, having hosted campaign events as recently as June 22. Walsh will have served as mayor for a single two-year term when he steps down on Nov. 13. He succeeded former Mayor Marcia Leclerc, who took office in January 2011 after then-Mayor Melody Currey resigned to take a position with the state.

Walsh said redevelopment of Founders Plaza is the one item left on his list for town priorities going into 2024, and it became apparent to him in the past two weeks that he would not be able to give the project his full focus while serving as mayor.

"Nine mayors, including me, over 50 years have had no success developing Founders Plaza," Walsh said.

Walsh said his new commitment will have him work with private developers and local, state, and federal agencies to bring vibrancy to the Founders Plaza area, with new housing, retail, and entertainment.

Comparing the region to Hartford's side of the Connecticut River, "it is not a mirror image," Walsh said.

Walsh said East Hartford has the advantage of direct highway access, but the area has nothing but the Riverfront Condominiums.

"We've got to connect the dots on Founders Plaza so East Hartford gets some of the luster it originally had," Walsh said.

The State Bond Commission approved $6.5 million in grants for demolition and abatement of buildings in the area, alongside reallocating nearly $7 million for construction of a new apartment complex at the former Showcase Cinemas site.

Walsh said the next step in development is to work on development and tax agreements, an involved and complicated process. He said the agreement between the town and the Showcase Cinemas apartment developer took a little over a year to finalize the plans after the town agreed to the project.

Walsh, who will be 60 in September, said he had initially planned to limit himself to two terms as mayor, but clarified that he is not retiring by choosing not to run again.

"I am antsy by nature," Walsh said. "I think my wife would kill me if this was a retirement."

Moriarty said Walsh's announcement came as a surprise to her and many others. She said Walsh has done a great job as mayor since November 2021, accomplishing many items on his "aggressive" agenda.

"I think I speak for a lot of people when I say I hope the next mayor keeps up that pace," Moriarty said.

Morrison said he was also surprised by the news, and that he and Walsh have mostly worked well together since November 2021.

"I would have hoped Mayor Mike would have gave me a heads up, but it's his prerogative and that's the way things are in town sometimes," Morrison said.

Morrison said Walsh has had a lot on his plate including a myriad of development projects, and he hopes a new mayor would be able to handle it all.

"Finding an individual that's going to step into that, how that's all going to work out, that's what's kind of bothering me," Morrison said.

U.S. Rep. John Larson, D-1st District, said a project like Founders Plaza needs someone with the ability to pull levers at the federal, state, municipal, and private sector levels.

"There's no person better equipped to make that vision, that for so long has eluded this great community," than Walsh, Larson said.


East Haven zoners approve Strong Street housing project, luxury apartment building

Austin Mirmina

EAST HAVEN — Two major housing projects have been approved by town zoning officials this week, including one that had been delayed for more than a decade. 

The Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously approved applications for a luxury apartment building on South Shore Drive and a housing project on Strong Street.

The Strong Street development will include 69 detached single-family homes on about 17 acres on Strong Street, project officials said. The units will not have an age restriction or affordable component.

Autumn View LLC, the project's developer, also received approval for a five-lot subdivision on Strong Street, bringing the total number of homes to 74.

Officials estimated the project would take about three years to complete, with construction on the homes expected to begin as soon as possible. Prices for the homes have not yet been determined.

Vicki Imperato, managing member of Autumn View LLC, said she was relieved the project finally could move forward after a 16-year holdup. "It was very difficult but I'm so happy that we finally reached a decision that the town is as happy with as we are," Imperato said.

Although she voted in favor of the application, PZC Chair Marlene Asid said she wished the project was "not happening." She clarified after the meeting that she believed the project was "too aggressive" and that it "doesn't conform with the area." But she noted during the meeting that the proposal was being approved "under the best possible conditions."

The board placed nine conditions on the Strong Street project as part of its approval, one of which stated the applicant must install measures to deter flooding on the property.

Much like the 55-plus housing complex approved on Sperry Lane before it, the Strong Street project has gone through several iterations and been the subject of intense scrutiny over the years. 

In 2007, the commission approved plans for 51 age-restricted units on 14 acres at the property. But five years later, Autumn View filed an application with the commission to rezone the project to be 17 acres with 105 units. The application removed the age restriction but included affordable housing units. Several denials and court appeals ensued. The end result was a stipulated agreement from a Superior Court judge that spelled out the current version of the project.

For the 71 South Shore Drive project, a four-story, 21,000-square-foot apartment building to be called Mariner's Point Apartments will be located on 3.4 acres on the private road in the southwest corner of the town's Momauguin section, plans show. It will contain 72 one- and two-bedroom, market-rate units, and also feature a fitness room, rooftop deck and other amenities, according to the plans. Project officials said the apartments will be geared toward housing young professionals.

PZC member Louis Fusco said he was "very impressed" with how project officials worked with residents to resolve some of the issues they raised about the apartments during previous meetings. "I think if all of the people who came before us acted that way, it'd be better off for all of us," Fusco said.

Several residents had complained about the proposed apartment building at an April meeting, arguing that it would disrupt the local beach community.

Following the meeting, project officials came to terms with two of the disapproving homeowners, the applicant's attorney, Leonard Fasano of Fasano, Ippolito, Lee and Florentine, said Wednesday. The residents, who both live on Catherine Street, must sign off on agreements before any work on the project can begin, according to Fasano.

The initial project plans did not include any affordable units. However, Fasano had said his client, Branford-based Vigliotti Construction Co., would be willing to designate some of the units as affordable.

The project site is bounded by Silver Sands Road to the north and west, Catherine Street to the east and the Cosey and Silver Sands beaches to the south, less than a half-mile away. South Shore Drive also is home to The Village at Mariner's Point, an assisted living facility.

With the town aiming to increase its affordable housing stock, the PZC recently approved a four-month ban on applications for multifamily and multi-unit developments. Officials said the moratorium would allow time to craft regulations requiring developers to include affordable units as part of future projects. 


New tower for Hartford-Brainard Airport proposed as officials study site's future

Liese Klein

A plan to build a new air-traffic control tower for Hartford-Brainard Airport is up for review under a federal environmental report posted for public comment last week.

The plan, drafted by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), proposes replacing Hartford-Brainard’s 1973-vintage tower with a more modern design including all-electric building systems, recycled steel and harmful-chemical-free materials.

Hartford-Brainard was named earlier this year as one of 31 small airports nationwide targeted for upgrades under a $25 billion airport package in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law passed by Congress in 2021.

In addition to Hartford-Brainard, other small airports in New England on the FAA list include West Lebanon, N.H. and Tisbury, Mass.

Hundreds of small airports across the country operate with outdated air traffic control towers that don’t meet current safety and efficiency standards, the FAA said in its report.

“These new air traffic control towers will mean that smaller airports can handle more flights, more sustainably and more affordably,” U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said in April.

The current FAA report, a broad environmental review of all of the tower replacements, outlined impacts of construction on air quality, noise wildlife, climate and farmland. 

Hartford-Brainard’s future is currently being evaluated by consultant  BFJ Planning ahead of a July 13 public meeting. The land occupied by the airport has long been eyed as part of redevelopment plans for the South Meadows district of Hartford.

Information on redevelopment proposals for the airport property can be found at the website Hartfordbrainardpropertystudy2023.com.


Study finds Tolland would benefit economically from increase in multifamily housing

Jamila Young

TOLLAND — A recent study found that building additional multifamily housing could have a significant, positive impact on the town economically.

Director of Planning and Development David Corcoran said that the Economic Development Commission hired urban economics consulting firm Strategy 5 LLC to conduct an analysis of the town to explore the economic and fiscal impacts of additional multifamily housing after two multifamily projects were approved in recent years, the 83-unit College View Village behind Merrow Road and the 240-unit Fieldstone Ridge behind Big Y.

Both developments are currently under construction.

The study found that Tolland businesses could expect to see between approximately $2.5 million and $5.8 million per year in expenditures from residents in new multifamily housing, with 15% of expenditure potential in the transportation sector and 50% in the food sector.  

It also found that the additional housing would make more construction jobs available, with wages between $47,000 to $62,000 per worker per year, based on the average construction wages in Connecticut from current data.

"The intent of this study is to be hypothetical," said Corcoran. "Part of the intent of this study was to get a feel for what the market demand might be to help inform the Planning and Zoning Commission as they make decisions on how to zone for multifamily."

The study focused on the possibility of 250 additional units in multifamily complexes in town. 

Currently, there are 630 units in town at Stone Pond, Crystal Springs, Tolland Meadows, Somerset Woods, and Ivy Woods Apartments, as well as College View Village and Fieldstone Ridge.

In the study, the additional homes could include dwellings at different price points, as well as duplexes, with a mix of one-, two- and three-bedroom units. Studios, live/work space, handicapped-accessible apartments, and other types of spaces could also be included. 

The study estimates residents with an income between $60,000 and $140,000 per year would be most likely to reside in the homes.

Economic Development Commission members reviewed the study at their meeting on Wednesday. 

Adam Grossman said that residents would be more concerned about how much the additional homes would cost than how the town would benefit economically. 

"The financial impact seems to be the concern when we talk about multifamily housing," Grossman said. 

Corcoran said that the report is still being finalized, with a joint meeting of the EDC and the PZC scheduled for July 24, adding that a completed draft will be available on the town's website about a week and a half before the meeting.


Stamford Democrats Question the Public Benefit of ‘Luxury’ Development

Angela Carella

STAMFORD – During a Board of Representatives meeting this week, Democratic city Rep. Megan Cottrell laid out a view of the development that has earned Stamford the moniker “fastest-growing city in Connecticut.”

“The goal, for many, is to turn Stamford into a luxury place,” Cottrell said. “We are attracting affluent people from New York and surrounding areas, and pushing people out of Stamford. It’s a massive giveaway to the real estate industry, and we have to recognize that.”

Development is at the core of a controversy that began last month, when Democratic Mayor Caroline Simmons, a former state representative, quietly launched a bill in Hartford to block Stamford from changing consequential zoning regulations in the city charter. 

Changes that would have gone to Stamford voters for approval are now moot. The bill has been signed into law so, from now on, Stamford and all other Connecticut towns governed by charters, about 110 of them, cannot revise significant zoning regulations in their charters. They have to ask the state legislature to do it.

Simmons’ move has angered fellow Democrats, who outnumber Republicans 36-4 on the board. During the meeting at which Cottrell spoke, city representatives passed a resolution urging Gov. Ned Lamont to call a special session of the legislature to repeal the law blocking charter revisions. But Lamont refused.

Simmons has said she took action against the charter revision proposals because they would discourage development, economic growth, job creation, and private investment, and shrink the housing stock.

Cottrell and other city representatives who supported the charter revisions, however, say the kind of development happening in Stamford needs the checks and balances proposed by the Charter Revision Commission.

“When you put up luxury building after luxury building, prices are going to go up and up. We keep being told to add more housing and prices will go down. But they have not gone down,” Cottrell said during the meeting. “In fact, it’s increasing rent prices at non-luxury buildings around it. Real estate (experts) have told us that wouldn’t happen, but guess what? It’s happening.”

She referenced a December report from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis that found that, between 2011 and 2021, rents in Connecticut dropped to levels nearer the national average in all metropolitan areas, except one.  

In the Stamford-Norwalk-Bridgeport area, rents increased from 56 percent above the national average to 57 percent, according to the report, which showed that nearly all of it was driven by Stamford. Rents in Stamford, for example, are more than double what they are in Bridgeport. 

Cottrell said the push for more affordable housing, which Simmons said would be harmed by the charter revision proposals, has a flaw – it excludes the city’s affluent areas.

“New housing is not being built … in all neighborhoods,” Cottrell said. “It’s specifically the working-class and middle-class neighborhoods that are being asked to give and give.”

When residents of those neighborhoods push back against development because they are already congested with multiple-unit housing, illegal apartments, and vehicles parked on lawns and bumper-to-bumper at curbs, they are labeled Not In My Back Yard, said Democratic city Rep. Jeff Stella, who also supported the charter changes.

“When I hear NIMBY, it’s so offensive to me, because anyone who opposes an affordable housing project is called NIMBY,” Stella said during the meeting. “You should call us EIMBY, Everything In Our Back Yard.”

In his West Side neighborhood, multi-family structures go up next door to single-family homes, along with all manner of commercial projects, Stella said.

“We’re tired of change that’s supposed to be better for our districts, when it’s not,” Stella said. “When we fight it, they say you guys are NIMBY, but it will never happen in their districts, it will never affect their quality of life. They will never have to worry that their house will be worth less when they sell it because somebody put a container store next door.”

Supporters of the charter revisions say they were proposed to allow people most affected by development more say in zoning matters.

The proposals would have allowed residents to appeal zoning decisions by gathering 300 signatures from anywhere in the city, rather than just in the immediate area of a development; allowed modification of planning and zoning regulations, such as increasing the number of public hearings; and required approval from a larger percentage of officials before the city could take private property by eminent domain or sell public land.

Cottrell said it’s a lot easier to gather signatures to appeal a zoning decision in single-family, owner-occupied neighborhoods. It’s a different story in neighborhoods where property owners are limited-liability companies or absentee landlords, she said.

“In areas where development is happening quite rapidly, it’s a lot harder to petition,” Cottrell said, so Simmons’ action “basically preserves the status quo (petition rights) of the single-family homeowner in certain affluent parts of Stamford.”

Charter Revision Commission members Frances Lane, Cynthia Bowser and Karen Camporeale have said during their meetings that they wanted to raise the vote threshold for condemning private property because officials nearly always take property in working- and middle-class neighborhoods where residents don’t have the means to fight the city in court.

Charter revisions were on the table in Stamford on June 7, the state legislature’s closing day, when the law advocated by Simmons passed, nearly unnoticed, as part of a major bonding package authorizing billions in spending for capital projects statewide. Laws passed in this way are known in Hartford as “rats.”

The controversy over the charter prohibitions will likely continue over the summer, as the Board of Representatives debates the rest of the Charter Revision Commission’s proposals. Meetings are set for 8 p.m. Monday and 6:30 p.m. Wednesday. See http://www.boardofreps.org/ for details.


Hartford’s development strategy hinges on tax-fixing agreements

 Greg Bordonaro, Michael Puffer, Hanna Snyder Gambini and Michelle Tuccitto Sullo

In an effort to jump-start development in three key areas in or near downtown Hartford, city officials want to establish various tax-fixing agreements they say will make it more attractive for developers to build mixed-use projects.

Mayor Luke Bronin and the city council are considering tax-fixing agreements for future developments that occur at: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute’s former Hartford campus; existing buildings and empty parking lots near the Bushnell Theater; and a vacant parking lot in the Parkville neighborhood.

Tax-fixing agreements are nothing new for the city of Hartford, which has one of the highest property tax rates in the state at 68.95 mills. That, and other factors, make it more expensive to build in the city compared to the rest of the state.

The cost to build in Connecticut, in general, is higher than most parts of the country.

Tax-fixing deals essentially give developers a temporary lower property-tax rate.

Here’s a look at the deals city officials are considering:

RPI campus

Bronin has proposed a 20-year tax-fixing agreement for any development that occurs at RPI’s former Hartford campus, at 275 Windsor St., which went up for sale earlier this year.

The 12.7-acre property features two existing buildings, including a nine-story, 148,881-square-foot commercial building, and a four-story, 179,744-square-foot parking garage.

The site has been vacant since 2020, and the city wants to attract a developer willing to either re-use the existing facility or support new construction, to transform the site into residential apartments and commercial space.

The property currently has an assessed value of $1.19 million, with an annual tax bill of $82,050.

Bronin’s proposal would fix the assessed value of the property so the annual tax bill remains at about $82,050 for five years. After that, the tax rate would be adjusted at five-year intervals, up to the 20-year mark, based on a percentage of gross revenues produced by any development.

Parkville

Bronin also wants a tax-fixing agreement for an underutilized parking lot at 17 Bartholomew Ave., in the city’s Parkville neighborhood.

The lot is owned by prominent developer Carlos Mouta, who is seeking to build a $16.72 million mixed-use residential development.

Mouta plans to subdivide the property into two parcels.

Parcel A would contain a new multi-story building with 57 apartments, 30% of which would be affordable, and first-floor commercial space.

That project would be partially financed by a $5.5 million state grant. Bronin is requesting a 15-year tax abatement.

The city would take ownership of parcel B and enter into a development agreement and long-term lease of the parking garage. Mouta and the city would evenly split parking revenues.

Bushnell South

The city is also considering a tax-fixing agreement program for redevelopment in the “Bushnell South District,” which includes 15 properties bounded by Elm, Trinity, Hudson, Buckingham and Washington streets in downtown Hartford.

The tax-fixing agreements would cover the construction period of any new development, and last up to 15 additional years.

An estimated $200 million in housing and mixed-use developments are currently targeting the roughly 20-acre area south of Hartford’s Bushnell Park.

Ultimately, the master plan calls for about $400 million of investment in a new neighborhood of approximately 1,800 residents in 1,200 households, and more than 63,000 square feet of retail, cultural and commercial space.

Within the district, Spinnaker Real Estate Partners has already launched a $67 million transformation of a former state office building at 55 Elm St., into 164 apartments.

Philadelphia-based Pennrose and The Cloud Co., of Hartford, are trying to finalize financing for an estimated $45.35 million conversion of former state office buildings at 18-20 and 30 Trinity St., into 108 apartments and a restaurant.

New Jersey-based The Michaels Organization has pitched a plan to redevelop a 2.8-acre parking lot south of Hartford’s Bushnell Park into a $100 million development containing 233 apartments and several townhomes.

CRDA Executive Director Michael Freimuth said the conditions outlined in the district mirror a tax-fixing agreement the city already granted to Spinnaker for the ongoing 55 Elm St. project. The agreement is intended to keep yearly taxes around $2,000 per apartment unit rather than the $3,000 to $4,000 developers might otherwise pay, he said.

This allows developers to dedicate more project income to larger mortgages, paving the way for bigger projects and less public subsidy, Freimuth said.