Loss Of Development Deals Slows Fairfield Hills Plans

By Kendra Bobowick

They had to pare down their plans.

Fairfield Hills Authority Chairman Bob Geckle began, “We’ve certainly had setbacks in leasing the properties. It puts us in a bind…” Was it misunderstanding, confusion, or political rhetoric? On Monday Mr Geckle tried to explain “why we are where we are” amid struggling plans to revamp the former Fairfield Hills state hospital and grounds.

Following election season, all but one of a handful of developers shied away from signing lease agreements. Totaling up the losses, Mr Geckle said, “That’s roughly $1.18 million in letters of intent that have either dissolved or are in abeyance.”

The problem? “We were relying on that income,” he said. The authority had plans to pay for infrastructure work with the lease funds. Still feeling the stones cast at reuse plans in late 2006 and leading directly to the 2007 municipal elections, Monday’s meeting found the board picking up pieces of its planned development.

Searching anew for ways to pay for upgrades, Mr Geckle asked, “So, how do we move forward with infrastructure requirements?” Since the town purchased the property after residents voted to appropriate $21 million for its acquisition and update, the scope of  the work to revamp the 1930s infrastructure have become evident. Occupants will expect to turn on the lights, connect to the Internet, or warm their rooms in the winter; per lease terms, the authority would provide all infrastructure requirements…including water, sewer, electric, gas, and communications.

Work has already begun to redo the infrastructure at Fairfield Hills and bring in fresh utilities to the buildings, especially those awaiting occupancy — Hawley Realty is the one developer that did not back out, and has entered a lease agreement to renovate space where Danbury Hospital will expand services, and private resident Peter D’Amico’s Newtown Youth Academy is underway. Bridgeport Hall renovations to house the municipal and education department offices are also in progress.

What now?

“We may need to go the temporary route rather than permanent, per funds available,” Mr Geckle said. Temporary propane tanks in particular may be one solution to getting fuel, at least, to the new construction at the youth academy and ongoing renovation work.

The same goes for the electricity, Mr Geckle said. Although all utilities are intended to be looped below ground, electricity may temporarily be carried to the buildings on poles. His message to developers is simple — it is a temporary approach.

Temporary parking arrangements are also a consideration until a permanent lot goes in.

Unable to endorse the secondary plans she heard that evening, member Amy Dent finds the short-term solutions daunting. “Once you get a temporary solution it’s hard to get to permanent ones,” she said. She also worries about what the campus will look like. “It means destroying the appearance of Fairfield Hills because of temporary solutions.”

‘Irresponsible People’

 Mr Geckle pointed to what he believed to be the problem.  “In 2007 we had letters of intent, but as a result of rhetoric in the [municipal] election process we were successful with only one [developer] and the others succumbed to nervousness.” Ms Dent was also critical of those who attacked the town’s Fairfield Hills development plans during the 2007 municipal race. “I think it’s a result of a few people in the last election,” she said. She said that by putting forth their perspectives as truth, “They cost [the project] a lot of money, were irresponsible in their charges, and somebody has to pay the piper.” She added, “They should apologize for what they did.”

In 2007 the authority members had several letters of intent from prospective leaseholders. The town also had a municipal election that led to a change in leadership. Soon after Joe Borst won the first selectman’s seat, businessmen on the brink of signing a lease became reluctant to enter a deal.

Was it because of the new first selectman’s comments that lessees were reluctant? “Yes,” Mr Geckle said Monday.

Immediately following elections Mr Borst had said he was committed to a full review of all activities at Fairfield Hills, and delivered a statement that developers heard clearly — he would honor his promise to scrutinize the status of a town office project to determine if it can be stopped or put on hold. He added that he was never happy with the idea of Bridgeport Hall housing town offices.

In late November 2007, Mr Geckle opened an authority meeting saying, “A couple of real estate negotiations, particularly on the duplexes and a restaurant, have concerns relative to the change in town leadership, just to let everybody know…”

Mr Geckle had also stated that developers had been counting on municipal and education board offices relocating to the campus and anchoring the overall redevelopment project. “It was an important piece of the plan. Developers wanted to see a commitment on the part of the town.” The doubts planted during election season still haunt Fairfield Hills plans.

Minutes away from handing out paperwork and fresh marketing proposals, Town Planner and Community Developer Liz Stocker would soon offer her ideas on a fresh approach to marketing the campus. (See related story.)

 

Another Perspective

Legislative Council member and Independent Party of Newtown (IPN) member Po Murray, who had questioned points of the Fairfield Hills plans throughout election season, attended Monday’s meeting and later disagreed with Ms Dent and Mr Geckle’s “shared sentiments” that criticisms of Fairfield Hills development during the election campaign in part prompted developers to put their money back in their pockets and walk away.

Once lawsuits and campaigns to stop the Fairfield Hills reuse plans failed prior to the election season, emerging Independent Party members and others continued to question spending, asking whether appropriated funds could be diverted from the town hall and used elsewhere.

In an e-mail sent to The Bee Wednesday, Ms Murray reassigns the blame for the current difficulties in funding infrastructure at Fairfield Hills. She wrote, “...temporary solutions....are due to Fairfield Hills Authority members, Herb Rosenthal’s and Paul Mangiafico’s insistence that the town continue to invest $10.7 million in a new town hall rather than funding the infrastructure…” Initially, arguments arose in 2007 insisting that the schools, not a new town hall, were a priority for the $21 million Fairfield Hills appropriation approved by voters in 2001.

Repeating an argument raised frequently in the election campaign, Ms Murray wrote, “There is funding available...to address the parking, demolition, and infrastructure needs...if we do not use those funds for...the construction of the proposed new town hall.”

Where will funds come from to finish a permanent infrastructure? “Are they prepared to ask the taxpayers?” she asked.

Authority members say they have long understood that the original $21 million could not finish the redevelopment. Sources for alternative funds, like the $2.2 million infrastructure bond the authority is currently seeking are part of the plans. (See related story.)

First Selectman Joe Borst also dismisses suggestions that his election, and his own words in particular, added to developers’ “nervousness.” as Mr Geckle had said.

Defending his election to office, the first selectman said, “I can’t do anything about that.” Gleaning the voters’ message last November, which saw Herb Rosenthal unseated after ten years in office, Mr Borst said, “The people were unhappy with the way things went and voiced their opinion at the polls.” Did he intend to throw a roadblock at Fairfield Hills reuse? “I never said anything about stopping the project.” He did intend to look closely at the plans, however. “I did due diligence by looking into the project.”

As far as implications that the elections tripped up progress, Mr Borst said plainly, “That’s their opinion. It’ unfortunate that they feel the elections put a wet blanket on it. I don’t know that that was it, as far as I am concerned.”

He has asked director of town planning and community development to become involved and lend her help to the redevelopment. Looking favorably upon the potential at Fairfield Hills, Mr Borst said, “It’s a beautiful campus and lends itself to commercial development,” and his office is behind the project.

“I would like to see sufficient development,” he said. Already Ms Stocker has been talking with a developer, Mr Borst explained. “We’re trying to do what we can.”