New Chair at Redevelopment

Tuesday night marked the first meeting of the Redevelopment Agency under new chairperson Shannon Brown. At the last meeting, Gerry Daley stepped down as chair after many years.

Tonight's meeting offered news of some progress for the North End Home Ownership project, and a split vote on a proposal for the Miller/Bridge Street neighborhood.

The meeting began with an update from Nehemiah Housing's Michael Taylor and Broad Park Development's David Berto. Their project to provide 17 home-ownership units in the Ferry/Green/Rapallo neighborhood has made slow progress over the past few years, but tonight we learned of a new funding source for the project. Michael and David were joined by Andrea Pereira from the Local Initiatives Support Corp. LISC was an early supporter of the project, with a loan to assist with acquisition and development. Now, as members of Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFI) they have helped secure a $425,000 "forgivable loan" for the project. That means that after five years, the loan is forgiven and essentially becomes a grant.

Nehemiah is still on the waiting list for funding from the Federal Home Loan Bank's Affordable Housing Program, but may be eligible for funding as early as next month. The all-important appraisal of what these homes might sell for is expected by the end of March, which has the potential to unlock both a construction loan from Liberty Bank and millions in HOME funds from the state's Department of Economic Development. If all those pieces fall into place, assembling the approximately $7 million necessary for the project, then Nehemiah could begin abatement and demolition of the properties in question as soon as this May. If that timeline holds, the proposed homes would be sold and occupied by Thanksgiving 2010. For more background on the North End Home Ownership Project, the Planning department has all the drawings on its excellent webpage.

In other business, Redevelopment heard a proposal from Planning Director Bill Warner to purchase and demolish a blighted building on Bridge Street. The proposal generated much debate, including that from yours truly who would rather see Middletown work a little harder to find alternate uses for historic houses -- this one was built in 1865. The proposal did pass, with five commissioners in favor, four against, and two abstensions for unknown reasons. Now the proposal moves to the Common Council for their consideration and funding.

The discussion on Miller and Bridge street made it clear that Middletown is no closer to solving the terrible access problem for this neighborhood. The City cannot afford to purchase and demolish all the homes, nor can it afford to connect the neighborhood with a new road to North Main Street. A bill has been proposed to the state by our legislators for $3 million to solve this problem. The much less costly and much quicker option of negotiating the opening of the Portland Street railroad crossing is apparently off the table. And so the residents of Miller and Bridge are not likely to see changes any time soon, except perhaps the removal of one vacant, historic house.

Report on Redevelopment

The Redevelopment Agency met last night -- that's the citizen committee, appointed by the mayor, which is in charge of the official redevelopment projects of the City.

There are two primary projects we are working on.

There's nothing new to report about the Miller & Bridge neighborhood, which I wrote about here and here. Relief for this neighborhood will have to wait until the City can convince the State (through our legislators) to supply the approx. $3 million to implement either Plan A or Plan B. And now you'll just have to click on my old posts to see what those options are.


The other issue is the North End home-ownership initiative. The developers are Nehemiah Housing of Middletown and Broad Park Development Corp of Hartford -- I'll call this partnership "N-BP". The plan is for N-BP to create 17 home-ownership condos on Ferry, Green & Rapallo by doing rehab on a few historic houses, and demolishing two others and building new construction. The condos would be sold to people who fit certain income categories, and not on the open market (2 of the units would be developed by Habitat for Humanity). The City appointed N-BP as the developer on this project, which is intended to compliment the 96 subsidized rental apartments which have already been constructed on Ferry Street by the Richman Group.

It's been a long time in coming, but it seems that N-BP is getting closer to completing their financing for the project. I'll bore you with the details.

There are 5 sources of income for the $7 million project (this project costs more than $400,000 per unit.)
-There's a proposed grant from the state's Department of Economic Development, for about $3 million in HOME funds. It is in the final stages of approval and is supposed to be implemented within 90 days or so.
-There are proposed Housing Tax Credits from the State for about $500,000. The N-BP application for these credits was denied last August. They will have another opportunity to apply next August.
-The City has already committed $720,000 to the project. Most of that was done through the purchase of 2 properties, which the City gave to N-BP, along with the relocation of those tenants and various other items. The last 10% of the City's committment will be transfered to N-BP through Community Development Block Funding at the November Common Council meeting. I should note that CDBG funds come from the Federal government through HUD, and they are awarded to Middletown and other cities based on the number of low-income residents.
-The Federal Home Loan Bank in Boston is listed as a source for about $400,000,and a decision on this funding is expected in November.

-The developer is anticipating that these condos, when complete, will sell for about 2.5 million. Since those funds won't be realized until the end of the project, N-BP has applied to Liberty Bank for a construction loan, which is awaiting an "after-rehab" appraisal of the likely selling prices of the future condos, which is expected within the next 3 months.

Of these five sources, the City's portion is the only fully committed source, but the others are moving closer to reality and the next 3 months are critical to the future of this project. For cash-flow purposes, N-BP has also taken out some loans so that they could get to this point with the project, and those loans will be paid back through some of the above sources. N-BP has noted that if one of their funding sources ultimately denies them, they will look for other sources. (Note: all this data comes from the reports by Michael Taylor of Nehemiah during the Redevelopment meeting, and if I've got it wrong, I hope someone will correct me!)

One unusual event at the meeting last night was the appearance of four of the landlords in this neighborhood (in spite of all the publicly-financed properties, there are still some independent homes and small rental properties on these streets.) These landlords, with Connie Piacenta as their spokesperson, were making the rounds of various city committees concerning planning, health, safety and anywhere they could find an ear. They wanted to express their concerns about how long it is taking for the N-BP project to move forward, and about the condition of these buildings in the meantime. They also had a long list of issues about parking, garbage and the condition of the small City playground which has been vandalized. And they voiced concerns about the maintenance of the new Wharfside Commons (the Richman Group apartments).

Although the Redevelopment Agency is not in charge of some of the issues that they raised, I was very glad that they came and expressed their opinions so that we can monitor the situation more closely. The squeaky wheel gets the grease, and their approach of appearing before multiple committees is already working - they noted that some clean-up had already begun. As a volunteer on the Redevelopment Agency, it is always helpful to hear from citizens -- not just from the professional developers, City officials and other "regulars".

If you are still reading, then you must have an unusual tolerance for City business! Consider offering your services to the Mayor the next time an opening occurs on Redevelopment, or just come down, on the 3rd Tuesday of every month (time TBA) to watch the proceedings.

A new direction for Miller & Bridge?

Last night was the gathering of the Redevelopment Agency and the Public Safety Commission on the topic of Miller & Bridge.  It should be noted that this was not an official meeting -- it was sort of a workshop, since addressing the topic separately led to a stalemate.  

First some facts, which were prepared by Michiel Wackers.  Since the 1999 adoption of the Redevelopment Plan, there have been 12 acquisitions by the City in this neighborhood, and those properties have been demolished.  There are 16 pieces of private property remaining, which include about 27 housing units and there are 40 cars registered at those addresses.  The only business -- Alfredo's Riverside -- is closed but could potentially be re-opened.  To finish the plan, it is projected that it would cost just under $3 million buy those properties, relocate the people, and demolish the buildings.

We also discussed the option of connecting Miller Street to North Main Street, and then closing off the Route 9 entrance and leaving Portland Street alone.  The challenge here is the cost -- which was estimated by the State DOT as just under $3 million (coincidentally the same cost as demolishing the whole place!)   Of course, that's just a first estimate and there was lots of debate on how adding 300 ft. of road could cost that much...but it does mean acquiring an easement from Providence and Worcester Rail, and getting state legislature approval for at-grade crossings on the tracks.

And finally, we discussed the option of opening Portland Street -- the police did a count and gave an estimate of 100 trips a day, primarily between 5 and 8 pm, but personally, I am entirely unclear about what that means -- whether that is one car making two trips (which could easily be residents) or whether there are a lot of people turning in there when traffic is bad, and then making a u-turn.  Also, the narrowness of Portland Street, the need to eliminate some of their on-street parking, and the potential disruption to their neighborhood were issues -- and eventually, that option took last place, only to be pursued if the other two options fail.

So, I believe the next step is to have a full, public review of this at both the Redevelopment and Public Safety meetings.  Each group will be considering whether they can endorse the following request to our state legislators:  For approximately $3 million in funding to pursue either option one (demolish the neighborhood) or option two (connect it to North Main).   Any members of the public who care about this issue will have their chance to speak at both of those meetings.

The feeling is that giving them both options makes it easier for the legislators to find a way to get this funding.  But of course, they may be unsuccessful.  I should note that both Representative Serra and Senator Doyle did meet with Redevelopment last year, and they agreed to champion this cause at the legislature last year, whether for approval to open Portland St. or funding for some other plan, but that first we needed to agree on what we wanted (including approval from the Council).

So now we have a long-term plan on the table, but no short-term relief for the people on Miller & Bridge.  If we can actually get funding within the next year, then this is a positive step.  If not, we have to go back to the Portland Street option.

The one thing everyone agreed on -- there are no easy solutions for this situation.

What to do about Miller & Bridge?

What to do for the neighborhood known as "Miller & Bridge"? That's the tiny section of town that has it's own entrance from Route 9, just north of Exit 16, where the former Alfredo's Riverside Restaurant did business until earlier this year.

View Larger Map

As a Redevelopment commissioner, I was part of the process in the late 1990's that designated this area as a "Redevelopment Zone", including a plan to purchase and demolish all the structures in the area, by eminent domain if necessary. At the time, I spoke against the plan to demolish and I remember Catherine Johnson speaking eloquently about the importance of the area as an "architectural billboard" for our town, as the historic, wood-frame, working class houses are the first glimpse of Middletown as you arrive from the North -- she felt they could be restored and the highway access might be a positive instead of a negative, if the right owners and uses could be found. But there was an assumption that as the state looked at eliminating Exit 16 and connecting directly to the Arrigoni Bridge to Portland (that should be the subject for another post), there would likely be a buy-out of this neighborhood by the State D.O.T. And we all agreed that the status-quo was not good -- because of the isolation of the neighborhood, it had become a source of blight and the easy highway access provided a sort of "drive-thru" for drug dealers from outside the neighborhood, making life miserable for residents. In addition to other problems, unprotected train tracks run right through the neighborhood and lead paint falling from the bridge had contaminated a number of properties. And so it became the official policy of the City to eliminate the neighborhood through Redevelopment.

Whether for good or for worse, the State D.O.T. never came up with money to purchase Miller & Bridge. Meanwhile, the City spent hundreds of thousands of federal grant dollars buying certain properties and demolishing them, before they ran out of money and decided instead to focus the City's resources to demolishing historic houses on Ferry Street to create the Richman/Wharfside Commons apartments.

So, it's 10 years later and the Miller & Bridge neighborhood is in limbo, as the Redevelopment plan is still in effect, yet action on that plan has ceased and there is no intention to move forward with funding it. Some properties were purchased and demolished, and the quality of life did improve somewhat, but the remaining residents continue to feel that they do not receive the same level of city services, and property values must be affected by the fact that -- officially -- the neighborhood has no future. The people who live there would like to see us either lift the Redevelopment designation, or find the funding to finish the job. Either way, they would like immediate improvements to the traffic safety problem (one resident suggested to the Police that they should be exempt from tickets when they are involved in accidents on Route 9, since they frequently have to take risks just to get in or out of their neighborhood.)

The North End Action Team (NEAT) and Lydia Brewster raised this issue in the first place and have kept it on the Redevelopment agenda all these years, with repeated meetings to try to push it forward. This year, a compromise solution was approved at Redevelopment: ask the State to open the rail crossing at Portland Street for a few years, and to close the Route 9 entrance. In the meantime, perhaps try to find State funding to build a proper connection for the neighborhood from Miller Street to North Main, across the land controlled by the Providence and Worcester Railroad.

This temporary solution of opening Portland Street is understood to be a complicated proposal for two reasons -- first, it requires a special act of the state legislature, since opening Portland Street will require Miller & Bridge residents to cross the railroad tracks (which of course they already do within their own neighborhood -- and without any safety signals.) And second, St. John's Church and Portland Street residents are concerned about the social and traffic problems which might result from connecting to Miller & Bridge.

When this motion from Redevelopment made the necessary stop at the Public Safety Commission before going on to the Common Council, it was denied -- Public Safety doesn't want to open Portland Street. And Miller & Bridge remains in limbo.

And so I come to the reason for today's post on this topic: Tomorrow (June 24th) at 5:30 pm in Room 208 at City Hall, there will be a joint meeting of the Redevelopment Agency and the Public Safety Commission. I don't actually know if there will be a public session, but it should be interesting to see if we can't find a solution that brings some justice to the people in this neighborhood -- and if we can't, why not?