At the last Planning & Zoning Commission meeting, a pre-application proposing to convert an empty office building in Greenwich Office Park on Valley Drive to condo units under a modified ZBR 6-110 got some pushback from the commission.
(Section 6-110 is a town regulation to incentivize moderate income housing, whereas 8-30g is a state affordable housing statute.)
Specifically, the proposal would be to convert the empty 1978 office building to residential and pay a fee to the housing authority, now called Greenwich Communities, instead of including below market rate units required under 6-110.
The commission chair, Margarita Alban, referred to having a “moral issue” since the intention of the regulation was to be inclusive, and have the below market rate units on site.
Attorney John Tesei for the applicant, John Fareri, said the property owner did not want the building to “lie fallow for any longer time,” as it had already been empty for three or four years, and that the advantage of his proposal was “instant cash” for the housing authority.
Payment in Lieu Vs Inclusion
Commission chair Margarita Alban said previously the Representative Town Meeting was on record as strongly opposing fee in lieu, though it was the exclusive authority of the commission whether to approve them, not the RTM.
She said she had her own reservations about payment in lieu arrangements.
“Us paying money for the the lower income people to go live somewhere else is harder to do than for us than to have inclusionary zoning,” Alban said, noting that the intention of 6-110 was to be inclusive.
Alban said she is often asked by housing advocates in Hartford whether Greenwich had inclusionary zoning.
“For me to say, ‘No, we have fee in lieu’ is harder,” she said. “I’d like to be able to say yes we have inclusionary zoning – we have 6-110. But if you do an office conversion with a much more prohibitive cost set, we could have different incentives for you.”
Commissioner Arn Welles asked if the units would be for rent or sale.
“Given the current cost of construction, most probably those units would be for sale,” Tesei said.
Ms Alban acknowledged that 6-110 was flawed and the commission planned to take another look at it.
In the meantime she noted that at the state level, conversations are underway about tax incentives for office conversions to residential, and the Western Connecticut Council of Governments (WESTCOG) had sample regulations Mr. Tesei could study.
Commissioner Mary Jenkins said her concern about payment in lieu was that 6-110 is intended to incentivize construction with additional FAR, not to incentivize funding for other construction.
“I’d like to see 6-110 used rather than avoided. 6-110 is intended to be an incentive in and of itself. I’m very troubled by the idea of payment in lieu as a general proposition,” Jenkins said.
She noted the commission had only in rare circumstances contemplated payment in lieu arrangements, and the one situation where it was being contemplated was because the location was not suitable for below market units.
Jenkins said the central Greenwich location on the West Putnam Avenue, close to bus stops, was entirely appropriate for below market housing.
“My preference would be that we incentivize construction when you are working on a building, not take money and try to find land and other things,” Jenkins said. “It seems to cut the ground out from 6-110.”
Greenwich Communities
“In general I am uncomfortable with being exclusionary in 6-110 and moving people elsewhere,” Alban said. “At the same time I would love to support Greenwich Communities.”
She said she would be more comfortable following the paths of nearby Connecticut towns that have regulations for the conversation of office to residential.
Sam Romeo, director of Greenwich Communities, said he liked the proposal.
He noted that Old Greenwich was the only part in town without housing authority units.
Mr. Romeo said that rather than go to the state for financing and seek tax credits, it would be quicker to use the funds from the payment in lieu to buy multi-family homes or build additions at existing properties.
Ms Alban said if the commission did approve a payment in lieu, the tricky challenge would be calculating the fee per unit.
Greenwich Office Park is an office building campus with multiple buildings, various driveways, parking lots and parking garages located between West Putnam Avenue, Weaver Street and Valley Drive. The Property is in the GBO commercial zone.
“Two affordable units would have to be offered at State Median Income,” she said. “How much money would compensate so that you can build two units or do a two-unit conversion?”
Mr. Romeo said today it costs between $500,000 and $600,000 per unit to build affordable housing, without the cost of land.
“That’s what it cost us to do the 18 units Armstrong Court,” Romeo said.
The proposal was a pre-application and the discussion was intended to be brief.
See also:
Vacant 1978 Building in Greenwich Office Park Could be Repurposed for Residential
Also from Sept 4 P&Z meeting:
P&Z Denies Belle Haven Application with “Tortured Lot Line”