Archive for the 'Development' Category
Reflecting on McMansions
Few words are spoken with as much disdain as ‘McMansion.’ I’ll admit to criticizing a property with the term on occasion, though I’m not one of those people who could wax poetic about the evils they represent.
In fact, I recently discovered that I had trouble even defining the term while I was talking with a local builder/developer about a project in which he may participate. After mentioning the main value drivers in the finished home, like location, quality, location, price point, and location, I suggested that he make sure to differentiate the property from a McMansion.
And that’s when I began to really think about the term. Wikipedia has an extensive page outlining all the characteristics (evils) of McMansions. It’s actually amusing that the tone of the entire piece is so negative, all the way down to the final sentence and its snarky footnote. Articles and photo galleries have also taken McMansions to task.
It seems to me that ‘McMansion’ is just another way to say ‘new construction.’ Properties that wear the scarlet ‘Mc’ are purchased by folks who are interested in homes that have modern features and amenities. The 1,700 square foot, 3 bedroom, 1.5 bath colonial just isn’t big enough for some people. And when choosing between 3,000 square foot homes, why not pick something brand new instead of something 100 years old if the prices are comparable?
A high percentage of new homes meet at least some criteria laid out in the various definitions of McMansions. Doesn’t that suggest that they are their own unique style?
Would the West End of Hartford have been considered McMansions during the early 1900’s if the term existed? It’s full of starter castles that were built in former farmland at the edge of town with few mature trees.
Perhaps we’re seeing another example of our collective preference for historical artistic styles over current artistic styles. Maybe one day there will be a judgment-neutral term describing this style of architecture and even associations celebrating the structures.
The good news for McMansion-haters is that there’s a good chance public sentiment (and their preferred architecture) is currently changing due to reflect the rising energy prices.
I’m very interested to hear what others think…
Bishops Corner Redevelopment Update
There have been rumors that portions of Bishops Corner will be redeveloped in the future, ala Blue Back Square.
Tonight the Bishops Corner Neighborhood Group held an informational meeting to talk about potential redevelopment of another parcel in the area, 2558 Albany Avenue, seen below.
Gregg Nanni, the General Manager of owner/developer Prospect Enterprises, gave a presentation about the proposed plan. As a little background, Prospect Enterprises also owns the adjacent property that houses Staples, Panera, McDonald’s, etc.
2558 Albany has been commercial space for approximately the last 30 years and is currently used as office space. The existing property poses some difficulties, as access to the parcel is limited by entrance and egress heading West only. Additionally, the building was originally a farmhouse and the redevelopment of the existing building wouldn’t be the highest and best use.
Prospect Enterprises is proposing razing the existing structure, regrading the property to reduce the grade to be more compatible with what currently exists in the area, and building a new structure on the existing site. Here’s a picture of an initial concept…
The footprint of the structure would be approximately 5,000 square feet, for a total of 10,000 square feet divided between two floors. The external style of the building would be a New England shingle style architecture, which would help it blend with the neighborhood, as it is in a transition zone near residences.
In the design, Prospect Enterprises is very concerned about the impact on residential neighbors. They are also looking into the possibility of LEED certification to formally recognize energy efficiency which would take into account building materials, using passive solar for energy, and a zero lumens border in order to reduce light pollution.
At this point, the proposed tenants for the building would be a bank on the first floor and medical offices on the second floor. Mr. Nanni indicated that there may be minor changes to the tenant proposal, but that economic demand for medical offices makes it a very viable possibility.
A few other interesting things of note that came out of the meeting…
1. This is all in the preliminary phases at this point. There have been informal meetings only. A formal application may be made later this spring or in the early summer.
2. The Historic District Commission has already been consulted and is willing to consider the removal of the existing building.
3. There will be a cross connection to the Staples parking lot in order to facilitate entrance and exit from the East on Albany Ave.
4. Mr. Nanni indicated that Edens & Avant have been tight lipped about their development project and he has no visibility into what they are planning on the opposite corner at Bishops Corner.
It was nice to see a developer that seemed genuinely concerned about his developments’ impact on the area residents.
I’ll keep an eye out for updates on this project and other happenings in the Bishops Corner area. Many West Hartford residents (and Town Council members) want to know what’s going on, but there is currently a lack of public information available.
Blue Back Part II? Redeveloping Bishops Corner
Just what is going on in the West Hartford neighborhood of Bishops Corner? First, Barnes and Noble closed and opened a new chapter at Blue Back Square. Then, Petco (Supplies & Fish) ran away. Finally, the Macaroni Grill said ciao after their lease wasn’t renewed. You don’t need to have a PhD in development to surmise that someone has plans for the area. Why else would you turn away a productive, paying tenant when you already had 2 vacant stores of substantial square footage? The landlord is still paying taxes on those properties, even as they sit vacant…
So, it was really no surprise when the Courant reported this morning that the developer, Edens & Avant, is expected to unveil major redevelopment plans as early as this spring. Apparently the firm is in preliminary talks with town officials and the project is leaning towards a walkable town center feel, with 1 or 2 large tenants, and the remainder of space being filled with smaller shops. Rumor has it that the project could cost as much as $100 million. Sounds kind of like Blue Back Square, eh?
Here are some thoughts from my end…
1. Kudos to Edens & Avant for working with town officials on the plan. I’m sure the town has a whole dumpster of “lessons learned” from the Blue Back development, so collaborating early will probably save both sides some work and contenscious discussions later on.
2. How will this development complement what has already been built at Blue Back Square? How much business will it cannibalize? What about West Farms and Elmwood?
3. Will this new development further hinder downtown Hartford’s efforts to attract buyers and renters, revitalizing housing and retail in the city center?
4. People in West Hartford are already rumbling about a difficult budget season. Will another substantial retail development help offset the tax burden on home owners in town?
5. And the question on everyone’s mind…who is going to pay for this? Will the town need to issue more bonds?
Hopefully when the plans are unveiled this spring, it will be an aesthetically pleasing, walkable development with stores that cater to a variety of income levels. We’ll keep a close eye on this one…