[Arnold Karp is managing principal of 751 Weed Street LLC.]
This week, shovels are going into the ground at 751 Weed Street and one of two projects are going to be built.
The 102 unit version has already been fully approved by the courts. It is legal, it will be permitted, and it is ready to be built.
But there is now a better choice.
This project has lived many lives. Earlier versions were larger, and included more units that raised concerns for many residents. Neighbors spoke out. And instead of digging in, a group of residents, town leaders, and the development team did something increasingly rare: they came together and worked toward a compromise.
That compromise is a 62-unit plan that meaningfully reduces density, lowers building height, incorporates underground parking, and better reflects the inputs from the community. The compromise plan reduces the amount of total units by almost one half, and provides a $3.2 million payment (as part of the compromise) from the developer to the town. This payment will be used to support housing solutions on the town’s own terms, the definition of local control.
It is, by any estimation, a better plan for New Canaan.
Six neighboring property owners agree. Local authorities have reviewed and accepted it. Good-faith negotiations and compromise have brought us to the brink of delivering a project that balances growth with community concerns.
But now, two or three neighbors are standing in the way.
By refusing to come to the table, these holdouts are not stopping development. That ship has sailed. What they are doing is jeopardizing the compromise that so many worked hard to achieve for their own personal gain. Because here’s the reality: if an agreement is not finalized, the 102- unit plan will move forward.
Without community involvement we wouldn’t have spent the time and resources revising plans, reducing scale, and working through difficult conversations to get to 62 units. We wouldn’t still be offering that compromise today. We believe the 62-unit plan is the right outcome for this site and for this town.
But we cannot deliver that plan unilaterally. It requires agreement. And right now, that agreement is being blocked by two or three individuals who have chosen not to engage. The neighbor intervenors are needed as the court requires unanimous agreement for any approved compromise. Rather than working with the community they are working to advantage themselves by demanding buyouts and will leave the community with a much larger development. There are seven neighbor intervenors who have accepted the outlined compromise and wish to move forward, while these three intervenor holdouts must think the town should have the larger project.
Construction begins now. And if a resolution is not reached by May 22nd, we will proceed with what has already been approved: 102 units.
That outcome will not reflect the will of the broader community. It will reflect the consequences of inaction. New Canaan came together to find a better path forward. The overwhelming majority of stakeholders have done the hard work of compromise.
Now it’s time for the remaining holdouts to do the same. Because the choice is no longer between development and no development. It’s between a project shaped by the community, or by a few neighbors putting their interests over the community.
Mr. Karp,
Will you please provide more information to the readers about this compromise? I’m sure many people, like me, are just learning about it for the first time.
Are the plans publicly available/accessible?
How many of the 62 units will be deeded for affordable housing?
How could you just be learning about this? Karp has been destroying New Canaan for years.
• 62 owner-occupied units (a 40% reduction)
• vs. 102 rental units
• 3-1/2 stories
• vs. 4 stories on top of parking
• Fully underground parking
• vs. partially buried parking level with half-story visible
• Reduced surfaced parking
• vs. additional surface parking area
• Increased green/open space and border plantings
• Upgraded exterior building materials
• Payment of $3.2 Million to the Town of New Canaan to finance affordable housing as determined by the Town
And the 62 units all would be market rate, as I understand the proposed agreement.
Indeed. In the end 8-30g creates generational wealth for the developers with very little affordable actually getting built. This is precisely why 8-30g is a complete and utter failure. 30% of the units built under 8-30g are supposed to be affordable: 15% at 60% of Area Median Income and 15% at 80% of area median income. If you develop an actual 8-30g project, the affordable units disappear in 40 years to market value, displacing those living in the affordable units.
Developers use 8-30g as a cudgel to build out of scale, out of place developments and the courts in Hartford, not locally have made it virtually impossible to win these cases and developer advocates gaslight municipalities like New Canaan that have been building affordable for decades when he private sector does not.
Let’s be crystal clear. New Canaan has an existing inclusionary policy that requires 15% affordable on any multifamily development project > 5 units for those areas that are currently zoned for density development.
Back of an envelope cost for developing affordable housing per the new draft P&Z regs presented at the 4/21 workshop runs around $623K/unit. See for Page 20 yourself: https://cms3.revize.com/revize/canaan/Departments/Land%20Use/Pending%20P&Z%20Commission%20Applications/Public%20Workshop%20Presentation%2004.21.26.pdf?t=202604290834440&t=202604290834440
So doing the math a $3.2 Million “fee in lieu” covers roughly 5 units based on the draft zoning regs. A 62-unit project in an area actually zoned for density development would require 9 units of affordable (62*15%) under the current New Canaan inclusionary policy.
Yes, Michael. Mr. Karp does not answer Mr. Howard’s question about how many units will be dedicated to affordable housing. Isn’t that the what this whole fiasco is about? Doesn’t this “new plan” have to go through the P&Z process? What on earth is going on here?
I might add that all day yesterday and now at 7:45 this morning we are listening to the deafening noise of trees being taken down and chipped at 751 Weed Street.
How many will be allocated to affordable housing, if any? Love that you’re trying to work with the community, despite this is the first I am hearing of this new plan, but if this were truly about 830g and building affordable housing, wouldnt you generously allocate units (beyond 830g terms) IN PERPETUITY rather than converting to market rate after X years (which were the previous terms)?
There’s something going on here. A plan
no one in the public has heard about.
And who are these people that worked
Out the plan? Fear or generosity by the developer to all of a sudden cut his profits
In half ? And throw the Town a gift of
$3.2 million. Did someone finally use
the words that would scare them.
Hope so.
But
Let’s have a public meeting to see what’s
Actually going on here.
And tell us why you need the approval
of two or three residents to make this
plan happen. When you hold all the cards.
And we don’t need your 3.2 million
if you haven’t heard we have so much
Money we don’t know what to do with it.
Town wants to build affordable housing
At the parking lot at the train station.
Who would the Town chose to build it?
Light on information; heavy on intimidation. There is nothing honorable about publicly bullying residents of this town to comply with your demands under the guise of “compromise and community.”
Although this plan may be better for the town. And would love to think that Mr Karp is listening to and considering what works for the community, where he once resided. But I suspect that it’s harder to sell 2 and 3 Million dollar condos when their neighbors are lower income. So, doubt this “compromise” is driven by his consideration and desire to work with his former neighbors but likely his desire to maximize profits.
What do you mean by neighbors “demanding buyouts”? And why does it bother you if they are? You demand to build dense housing that doesn’t fit on a property that should house one or two homes in order to enrich yourself. You do not care a lick about affordable housing and I’ve seen no evidence otherwise. I agree with the other commenter-when was there a hearing about this? What payment is being given to the town? For what? For what use?
I feel this op Ed is very threatening in nature as well.
Lower building height, fewer overall units and underground parking is an amazing solution for the town and the neighboring properties. Making the new plans publicly available seems like a reasonable request. Hopefully, the details will be shared at an upcoming town meeting.
Mr. Karp reveals himself here as a bullying individual (“that ship has sailed” is not a very friendly turn of phrase) who thinks nothing of burdening well-run towns with meddlesome projects that overwhelm careful long term planning. He says “New Canaan” has come together. He doesn’t even live here! In my opinion he’s just a typical aggressive out-of-town operator with little respect for the rights of ordinary people who thought they were living in a peaceful, well-settled neighborhood. (Affordable housing my foot!) And now he wants us to congratulate him after running roughshod all over New Canaan. Words fail.
This op-ed lacks any type of media training. Framing this as though you are doing the town a favor while simultaneously warning that a worse outcome will happen if people don’t comply is plain manipulation, not collaboration. As others mentions I hope there will be a town meeting about this proposed “compromise”…
I thought that you preferred to build affordable housing, of which this “compromise” has zero units. Positioning this as better for the town is disingenuous at best and disgusting at worst.
It would be useful if the press in town, including this newspaper, did some useful digging and reporting on what is behind this story. Get the facts, interview the participants and investigate the story in full.
Chris, the issue is that these negotiations happened out of the public eye, in executive session. The press is not privy to what happens there, we can only report that the executive session took place and surmise what they’re discussing, which we did report on in this story. I can’t help it if you or other readers missed it. I’m not sure what else to say about this proposal. Here’s a quick summary: The developer applied for 102 units at Weed and Elm under 8-30g, P&Z denied the application, the developer appealed that denial and won the right to build 102 units, then the developer and town got together to hammer out a smaller (which the town wants) market-rate (which the developer wants) project. As stated in this Op-Ed, the courts require the approval of intervenors in the case and those intervenors are neighbors who, according to the developer, are holding out. So this smaller market-rate project cannot go forward and the court-approved 102-unit plan is poised to go forward, according to the developer.
Michael, thank you for reporting on this. As someone who in proximity to the project and in communication with those directly impacted, this is the first I’m hearing of it. Appreciate you bringing this to light.
“It is legal.” The last self-defense and self-own (he knows it’s hugely wrong and opposed by all) of a man selling out the town.
Compromise is something we all need to do. Especially our federal government. Thank you Arnold karp.
Where you stand is based on where you sit.
So we went from 102 units with 8-30g to 62 units without 8-30g. The compromise is a reduction in units at the expense of affordable housing. A win for the rich and a loss for the poor!
To my knowledge this is a proposed agreement, not something that’s been formally signed by the town (which I’m pretty sure could only happen following a public vote). So while it appears to have been discussed somewhere, there’s been no town approval — the Planning & Zoning Commission, for example, did not vote coming out of its own executive session discussing this (and another) 8-30g project in New Canaan.
With all the material changes – underground parking, no affordable housing units, reduction in units, change in look and feel, does this have to go thru a public hearing at P&Z? Or is that something that is being handled in the background? I would think it would.
A new project like this—for a new Special Permit and site plan approval and text changes to the zoning regulations—would have to go through the public approval process, like anything else, in my mind (not a lawyer but I mean…).
This is a unique case, though, because the property owner has already been approved for something the town has rejected/denied/said it doesn’t want. So it makes sense that there’s a real estate negotiation held in executive session—maybe the terms were discussed and the applicant got a sense of where P&Z stood without the Commission taking a formal vote? I don’t know because those are not public meetings.
Also, I would note that this is not the first time the town has approved a Special Permit faced with the “threat” of an 8-30g project—it happened at The Vue and it happened years earlier at Jelliff Mill.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. So before there was “the bad View” there was the threat by Karp to build 4oo+ units, including loads of affordable housing…which in hindsight, probably would’ve saved the town from greedy developers like Karp…And now we have Karp again, “compromising” (bwahaha) for the sake of the town. And again no “affordable housing” developed. Yet there will be lots of more expensive units which will line his already full pockets. This isn’t a win-win for the town. It is Karp’s slight of hand…again. Don’t be fooled. If he builds the larger project…he loses! It is about time to call his bluff.
Exactly, Sasha!
This is why Merritt Village aka: The Vue was built with approximately 99 market-rate “luxury” units and no affordable ones.
Yes, you remember the days of the Vue Arnold Karp project.
So many insightful comments here. Wondering how our executive branch of government is managing Karp!
Mr . Karp has never, and will ever, care about “affordable” housing but will use the guise of 830-g to pretend he does in order to enrich himself. If he actually cared about affordable housing he would build these units at a price that a median income could afford, but that isn’t what he does. Mr. Karp is nothing more than your typical bully who likes to try and push towns and people around under the guise that he is some benevolent man, he isn’t. Anyone who knows Mr Karp knows how he operates, and it is always how it can benefit him and not the towns he bullies thru lawsuits and pretend benevolence.
This is the problem with 8-30 G and those that support it. 8-30G has been exploited by builders like Mr. Karp for their own benefits and to the detriment of the towns that are forced to comply with it.
The proponents of 8-30g could fix this issue by simply making it part of the law that all affordable housing has to be sold or rented for x amount based on median incomes of the state. Make the ratio of these affordable units an 80-20 split in favor of the lower rents and builders like Mr. Karp wouldn’t waste their time, or the towns he tries to bully, to build them. If affordability is really what these builders pretend to care about let’s see them put their money where their mouths are.
If it wasn’t Mr. Karp, it would be someone else. He didn’t create the game, he is just playing it. Our elected officials created the game. They, in turn, were chosen by the voters. The blame resides on the people who voted for politicians who are in favor of 8-30g.
My guess is that well over half of the people complaining about Mr. Karp voted for the politicians who approved 8-30-g and the related bills that have created this situation. That guess is informed by the dominate arugment being used by Karp’s opponents: that they want affordable housing, just not this particular form.
How about being honest. New Canaan is made worse by affordable housing laws. Why would you chose to move to an elite, exclusionary town, and then support its demise? There are plenty of towns that already have a huge supply of inexpensive housing.
Effectively then, this real estate operator has removed the affordable housing aspect entirely, using 8-30g litigation to convert a rental proposal into luxury condos completely overcoming our zoning plan and worsening our affordable housing shortage. And we are expected to admire all of this maneuvering while the operator saddles the town with more traffic and more school and public safety expense, not to mention the massive disruption of downtown caused by the construction.Propose something threatening. Work out an even more developer-friendly arrangement. Some deal. Thanks a lot to the CT legislature, bought and paid for by the real estate lobby, for arming developers with this weapon. I am very sorry for the innocent in-town residents who will bear the brunt of the direct and indirect costs of this latest Karp-led folly. Every time I pass it on Weed or Elm I will be reminded to count to ten while he counts his millions far away from our permanent loss at Weed and Elm. It used to be a nice corner but “that ship has sailed”.
This fiasco is a prime example of you get what you vote for. The eyes wide shut crowd keep voting for the real kings! Ned Lamont and his dictorial democratic majority that ram these regulations down our municipalities throats by voting in the middle of the night and attaching provisions to other legislation. In essence holding us hostage. These Dems despise Fairfield county, other than Bridgeport. This scenario is all part of their redistribution and redistricting plan to retain power. Think what you want but if we did not have a democrat super majority and a governor KING who cares nothing for New Canaanites we would not be in this predicament. The main sponsor of this legislation is Democrat carpetbagger Rojas.
You cannot blame Trump people. If you want to demonstrate against no kings pick the real power Hungary culprits – Ned Lamont and his supermajority democratic cronies. State elections have consequences on our town. Wake up!!!’
I wonder if the Town has explored buying the project from the developer and turning it into a park or a smaller, 100% affordable project?
The loss of home rule is tragic
to developers and distant legislator’s .New Canaan Village came about from generations of local hard work and thought forged in public meetings. Of the people. All the people. The results are something we and others love and admire. It is truly a place of beauty. It and its way of life are worth fighting and working for.
As for developers , Avolon was the same, that did much the same things over 20 years ago. They wanted to build a huge development at our historic train station. They seemed to have all the power. I have to say we still beat them. The group ‘Citizen’s For New Canaan’ started by myself, Dudley Philips, Victor Christ Janer and Lou Squiteri . We worked on this many hours a week for over 2 years. We figured out how to beat them and worked our plan. We put in our own treasure ( Jan will never know 🙄) besides our time. We started with 4 people and it grew. It grew because we were a source of truthful information. We all did our part….the outrage of a bully corporation and sham State laws and the desire to save our village life fueled us. Those now opposing groups must fight to win as we did and save home rule. I refuse to think there is not a way.
I’m sharing the below information to try to clear up some of the misunderstandings that exist about the status of the project at 751 Weed –
We are one of the ten original Intervenors in town’s legal battle with Arnold Karp over the development of 751 Weed. An Intervenor is a legal term under CT law that allows for a neighboring property owner to join a lawsuit and participate in any legal settlement that occurs between a town and a party seeking a zoning variance. I am also a board member and treasurer of Save New Canaan Inc, a CT non-stock not for profit corporation, which has raised and spent significant sums in litigation with the developer and assisting the town with its litigation with the developer, as per its mission to fight for appropriate development in New Canaan.
As I think most folks know, at this point the town and the neighbors have lost all the litigation (as well as related appeals) with the developer, who is now free to proceed with his 8-30g rental housing project.
The town and the developer have negotiated a compromise alternative condo project as described in Karp’s op-ed. While NONE of the 9 remaining Intervenors (one sold and moved) is exactly thrilled with the alternative project, the MAJORITY of the nine Intervenors acknowledge that the alternative 62 unit condo project is better for the neighborhood and the town than the 102 unit 8-30G rental project that includes a meaningful affordable component.
Unfortunately, under CT law, in order to settle a lawsuit outside of a court adjudicated result requires UNANIMITY on all the parties to the litigation- in this case the parties are the town, Karp Associates and 9 Intervenors. If these 11 parties cannot agree on a settlement such as the 62 unit condo alternative, then the judges order stands and Karp can build the 830 G project as he proposed.
And I believe he will do just that.
This ‘compromise’ completely defeats the purpose of the project. Keep the 102 units, including the critically needed affordable housing. The compromise would only provide luxury condos, not what our town needs. If our state is going to be economically competitive, we need workforce housing, to expand our tax base, and provide more customers for our local businesses. Plus, our schools are bleeding enrollment. We need to grow!
Well as a technical matter the compromise condo proposal provides 3+ million in funding to release a number of units from market rate in the town own Avalon development and move their rents down to affordable levels.