NORWALK, Conn. – Leaving POKO Partners in the dust might mean “years and years of inactivity” on Wall Street, said Mayor Harry Rilling, even if some Norwalk residents are fed up and appalled to see a request to extend the deadline for the completion of POKO’s Wall Street Place project to 2022.
Both Rilling and POKO developer Ken Olson jumped last week into an email discussion begun by a Norwalker who said it would be “a real understatement” to say that he’s “not pleased with the track that the Wall Street project is running on.”
POKO’s request for an extension is on the agenda for the Norwalk Redevelopment Agency’s Tuesday meeting. Olson recently got the Competitive Housing Assistance for MultiFamily (CHAMP) funding and the tax credits he has been looking for to begin Phase I of Wall Street Place, a mixed use development. The Land Disposition Agreement signed in November 2007 outlined conditions that now mean the deadline for completion of Phase I is September 2014, which Olson obviously cannot meet. He’s asking for a new completion deadline – just for Phase I – of June 30, 2016.
The deadline for the entire development was November 2017. Olson is asking to move that to Nov. 14, 2022.
Last week, James Cahn wrote to Council President Doug Hempstead (R-At Large) and copied everyone on the Norwalk Center Google Group.
“We bought our house on Union Avenue in 2003,” Cahn wrote. “At the time, one of the things that attracted us to our house and our neighborhood was the potential that we saw in the old central Norwalk district. Then, there was some buzz that started to generate around a ‘revitalization.’… Although even at the time, I thought that it was overly optimistic, comparisons were being made to areas like downtown Westport and the revitalization that happened in Fairfield.”
The request for a 2022 expiration date is “patently absurd,” Cahn wrote.
“At what point do we say that it’s absolutely not acceptable for a project like this to take 20 years? Is the intent to let Wall Street continue to look like a war-zone for the next decade as it has for the last? Has anyone associated with this project been to the area just south of the Stamford train station and in the vicinity of the old Yale property lately? Those projects were mostly started AFTER we began engaging POKO and has been mostly finished SINCE,” Cahn wrote. “… I’d like to explore the options available to us to sever our relationship with Ken Olson and POKO.”
The email drew these responses:
• “All good points. We have been much ignored down here by the powers that be. It takes two to tango and now would be a good time to demand some accountability with our elected officials — it’s the only leverage we have. I don’t think we would be in this position in the first place had the City not required that outlandish automated parking garage. The solution is simple — fast track a redesign with or without POKO. Either way it’s going to be faster than 8 years!” — Michael McGuire, Wall Street Task Force member
• “I fully agree, we can not let this go on, it is a blot on Norwalk that does not seem to go away. Let our ‘officials’ step up to the plate and get rid of this developer once and for all. I would be willing to sit on any committee to help fast track this.” — Carol Frank
• “I completely agree that POKO has been given too much slack. I was on the Wall Street plan committee 10 years ago and we all worked hard to come up with a plan that would revitalize the area. It was based on leveraging the city-owned parking lots to create lots of new residential units, which were supposed to drive business on Wall Street and the surrounding area. But – no new residents = no new business.” — Tod Bryant, Wall Street Task Force member
• “Agreed. 2022? 10 minutes up the pike in Stamford shovels have been in the ground and progress has been made in the development of the downtown. Why not in Norwalk?” — BWG
Then Rilling chimed in:
“I certainly agree with the concerns posted under this e-mail chain. As such, I have had several meetings with Ken Olson regarding the POKO project. Attending were my Redevelopment Director, Zoning Dept. Personnel, and members of the Common Council to include Mr. Hempstead as well as my Corporation Council.
“During those meetings, we set some very appropriate and realistic time frames for Mr. Olsen to begin demolition and to “get shovels in the ground.” All of which he agreed to. The recent letter from Mr. Olsen in which he asked for an extension did not include a chronological list of those requirements — much to our concern. We are in the process of correcting that.
“We are continuing to meet with POKO to push this project forward once and for all. None of us are pleased with this delay that spans at least 8 years. However, pulling the development rights from POKO might not result in the outcomes desired and mentioned here. POKO owns the property involved and pulling those development rights might result in more years and years of inactivity. Rest assured we are pushing forward with a view towards movement as soon as June of this year. When the tough decisions need to be made, they will be but only after careful deliberation with city staff to ensure we act in the best interest of the city.”
McGuire was apparently typing at the same time, posting the following five minutes after the mayor:
“I think Norwalk’s process is very different from Stamford’s. I’ve been in the commercial real estate business for 30 years, the last 16 in Norwalk. Even with this background the Norwalk system is challenging to understand. The best I can figure out is the City and POKO are in an ego-based standoff. POKO won’t ask for this project to be revised to meet the market fearing the City Council will pull the plug on him for any changes to the LDA (Land Disposition Agreement created pre 2007). Plus the cost and time to go through another round of planning with Norwalk is daunting given the gummed up nature of Norwalk’s approval process.
“The City won’t approach POKO about changing the project to meet the current market because apparently either they A) still think this plan is viable and the terms of the LDA are reasonable, or B) they are waiting for POKO to default on the terms of the LDA. This would alleviate concerns about the possibility of law suits by the developer should the City pull the plug prior to the developer defaulting on the LDA agreement. I’m not sure which one.
“So we are stuck with this impasse – a project that is not feasible, controlled by a developer not willing to ask for changes needed to make is feasible, and a recalcitrant City waiting for the developer to perform to the letter of the LDA which of course is not feasible, or default. Hmmmm….
“How about the both sides agree to work through this problem, revise the plan on a fast track format, minimize the changes to removing the automated parking garage with a simple deck over the current Isaac street lot, and use the Yankee Doodle garage for the extra needed parking. A Win-Win all around. In fact the fast track process could be used as the new model for how to run development in the City.
“The alternative is to wait for POKO to default then bring in another developer who will revise the entire project (a 5 to 7 year prospect at best). In the interim Norwalk suffers needlessly. I could be wrong in my analysis of what’s going on. If so I would hope the City leaders would set me straight for we, as taxpayers, have a right to know what going on, what’s the holdup, and what our leaders are doing about it.”
Cahn responded to Rilling’s remarks with skepticism.
“With all respect due to the mayor and his office, that reads an awful lot like, “We agree that POKO is probably incompetent but we’re basically at their mercy since they own the buildings and believe us, we all continue to try to convince POKO and Ken Olson to start work really soon but there’s nothing we can really do to force his hand. Don’t worry about it everything is under control. Just be patient.”
“Are we really hedging this by saying that if we pulled the plug and started again that we’d just delay the project? I’d be willing to bet money that if you put this job out to bid with the stipulation that all that needed to happen was for a GC to get the original agreed upon project done before 2022, you’d be fighting off bids with a stick.
“What I want to see is some specific accountability. What’s going to be done? When will it be done? What is the bonus structure for completing it early? What is the structure for ascertained damages when it isn’t completed by deadline?
“Let’s define parameters, here. When is your next meeting with POKO and what items are on the agenda?”
No response yet from Rilling, but Olson came out of the woodwork:
“It is good to see people engaged about what they care about. Certainly that helps create a healthy community. The problem with this electronic discourse as with so many of these kinds of discussion is all parties are not in the “room.” So let’s have a conversation. I believe that there is a lot more going on here with the development than is being considered in this discourse. I have always been willing to talk to the community and discuss this project as I am now. So I am willing to organize a public meeting that POKO will host in the community and invite all who care to come. I can then explain to you all where we are, what our schedule is going forward and if you want to discuss how we got here, we can talk about that as well.”
He got positive responses from three people, but nothing definite has been set up yet.
Leave a Reply
You must Register or Login to post a comment.