Dixwell Rezoning Debate: 7 Stories Or 4?

The latest passionate neighborhood wrangling over the city’s planned rezoning of its three major commercial corridors — Whalley, Grand, and Dixwell avenues — focused on whether to limit new buildings to four stories rather than the proposed seven-story 75-foot height limit.

Thirty Dixwell homeowners, small business owners, and nonprofit officials gathered in the community room of the Florence Virtue Houses Thursday night for the session. Their mission: to dig deeper into some of the controversial aspects of the city’s Commercial Gateways District project that were aired at last month’s City Plan Commission (CPC) meeting. It was the latest of numerous such meetings around town to discuss the proposal, aimed at helping local and small-scale investors building businesses and denser, lower-rent housing in struggling commercial districts with outdated single-use, car-oriented zoning.

City Plan Director Aicha Woods and Deputy Director for Zoning Jenna Montesano were on hand taking notes and passing out cards for participants to formally put their two cents, and more, into the record. (Click here to view a 21-page presentation Woods and Montesano made at the meeting.)

This Wednesday night, the City Plan Commissioners are slated to receive the plan from Woods and her staff, including changes that might result from public input, and then to take a vote.

That proposed new zoning district classification seeks to use parking maximums, building height increases, and affordability and sustainability incentives to encourage denser commercial and residential development along the avenues connecting downtown with the city’s neighborhoods.

Thursday night’s gathering featured three hours of spirited debate. As was the case at last month’s CPC gathering, some speakers, while acknowledging a profound need for improvements in Dixwell, criticized the the rezoning initiative. Some suggested that allowing seven-story developments would lure out-of-town builders not committed to affordable housing, projects that could theoretically displace residents. The plan, so the critique continued, could distort neighborhood character in a way that might compromise or lose Dixwell’s culture and history, and continue a century-long trend of projects imposed without adequate community engagement.

“From what I understand,” said New Haven Legal Assistance Association (NHLAA) community organizer Kerry Ellington, taller buildings promote more market-rate housing.

“Nobody in my neighborhood can afford market rates,” Ellington added.

Others at the gathering, such as local landlord Jayuan Carter, objected. ​“Higher is okay if it’s [also] affordable,” he said. Policymakers have generally seen denser projects are more likely to promote affordable housing, because the builders can more easily afford to keep rents lower if they have more units.

Also, Woods and Montesano were at pains to point out, the commerical corridors don’t even have height limits right now, meaning developers can build higher as of right. They noted that the proposal’s language has built-in incentives for affordable housing..

There was more agreement at the meeting that a 75-foot limit would be fine for one portion of the Dixwell corridor where new owners have plans to build: Dixwell Plaza.

The plaza’s properties have been purchased by ConnCORP, a for-profit community development sussidiary of the nonprofit Connecticut Center for Arts and Technology (ConnCAT). (Read more about that here.)

CEO Erik Clemons, who was on hand with his development lieutenant, banker Paul McCraven, revealed that his group plans to put job-training, business-incubating, arts, day care, and other enterprises profoundly needed by the community.

To support those largely nonprofit activities below at the street level, a rental apartment building must rise above, and, to make the finances work, it must rise above four stories, he said.

That also is the case with development planned for the northern end of the proposed corridor, at a proposed 100 percent affordable-housing project planned on a vacant lot by the nonprofit Beulah Land Development Corporation.

“We’ve heard tonight for the first time about Beulah Heights and ConnCAT,” said Ellington. ​“Can’t we specifically rezone for those two, and then allow the rest of the community to participate in rezoning the rest of the corridor?”

“We can’t rezone just for them,” Montesano replied. ​“It’s called ​‘spot zoning’ and it’s illegal.”

Some participants in the discussion suggested that officials peel Dixwell away from the three-neighborhood rezoning plan.

That didn’t sit well with Livable City Initiative (LCI) Executive Director Serena Neal-Sanjuro.

“The challenge is when does Dixwell move if we take it off? Whalley and Grand will move forward. I’m afraid [there’s a risk] Dixwell will stagnate,” she cautioned.

Woods said that it is indeed possible to propose to the commissioners on Wednesday to vote [only on] Whalley and Grand. However, Montesano added: ​“It can’t just be tabled.” The process, which has already consumed years, would begin all over again for Dixwell.