Council To FHA: Learn More About Developer’s Proposal

By Kendra Bobowick

Wednesday’s snowfall did not impede communications between Legislative Council Chairman Jeff Capeci and Fairfield Hills Authority Chair John Reed.

Via e-mail, Mr Capeci followed up on a recent council meeting with a resolution stating that the council “supports reviewing and vetting all projects that may bring economic stability to the Fairfield Hills campus, and encourages the Authority to invite parties to present their offer at a public meeting where residents can learn all facts prior to discounting a potential municipal revenue source.”

The council’s resolution supports public understanding of a proposal to redevelop Cochran House.

In past days, council Vice Chair Mary Ann Jacob was concerned that local officials held a potential multimillion-dollar reuse project at arm’s length out of respect for an ongoing master plan review. She had asked the full council to request that the authority pursue the proposal’s specifics for public review. The fill council favored her request for a resolution with what Mr Reed called a narrow majority vote of 7-5.

In past months, the Fairfield Hills campus’s sole real estate broker Michael Struna informed the authority that a prominent developer had a “real interest” in the Cochran House as an apartment complex. The resolution recognizes “a broker has offered a proposal for a possible residential development of Cochran House … the merits of said proposal remain unknown to the Fairfield Hills Authority and to the people of Newtown.” The resolutions states, “A full understanding of said proposal is needed prior to making a decision … unwillingness to consider said proposal is analogous to its rejection.”

The council’s resolution recognizes that housing is not currently permitted under the master plan, and also understands that the master plan is currently under review.

Lastly, the document states, “The resolution should not be interpreted as an offering of support for the development proposal. Members supporting the resolution are hopeful that the authority will find a mechanism for the residents of Newtown to learn the details.”

A day before receiving the resolution in writing, Mr Reed discussed the council’s vote from January 19 to support the resolution. He first made it clear that neither the authority nor the town has received a formal development proposal.

He confirmed that the authority has had “dialogue” with Mr Struna regarding a developer, but no offers have come in “because it was not an approved use.” In the past, authority members had been opposed to “fleshing out details” for that reason, he explained. Some authority members “did not feel it was a good idea, but if the council wants us to revisit, we’re happy to do so.”

Anticipating a discussion with the full authority at its next meeting, he said, “I don’t know if members will change their minds; we’ll have to wait and see.”

Mr Struna confirmed that “at this point, there is still interest” from the developer, but the “hard part” of his job is “keeping them together long enough,” referring to the lessor and lessee in any real estate deal.

He said the developer is a “substantial organization. We have kept them engaged.” Mr Struna hopes that in the near future various parties can have a more formal dialogue with the developer. “He has been successful in public/private partnerships and is sensitive to the process,” Mr Struna said. He suspects the developer would have submitted a proposal “long ago,” but is waiting to see what people want.

Fairfield Hills Master Plan Review Committee Chairman Michael Floros does not believe that the council’s resolution changes his committee’s charge. The process might produce more information for his group, which is assessing the current master plan for campus reuse. “It is at least more information for us to make a more balanced choice,” he said.