Committee backs sending sale of 17 and 21 Wells Street to full council with conditions

The Planning, Economic Development and Housing Committee on July 2 voted to forward a resolution to the full Hartford City Council recommending approval of the sale of 17 and 21 Wells Street to the developer that previously built at 525 Main Street, subject to a revised term sheet.

The sale would allow Spectra Construction/Window Works to build a mixed-use project behind the Cornerstone (Donahue) Building at 525 Main Street that includes parking on the first levels and four stories of residential units above. Daniel Kleinberg, a project representative, told the committee the development would total roughly $20.8 million and include about 129 residential units: 56 studios, 61 one‑bedroom units and 12 two‑bedroom units, plus 58 parking spaces. Funding sources described by project representatives include a CRDA loan and a senior construction loan.

The committee’s recommendation was made “subject to” a revised term sheet to be prepared before the council vote. Committee members pressed for explicit language placing the developer’s previously discussed 20% workforce housing requirement into the term sheet and asked staff to insert a good‑faith provision encouraging the developer to offer a reduced parking rate for tenants in the workforce‑affordable units.

Council members raised questions about parking pricing and allocation. Majority Leader Merlyn Rosetti asked whether parking fees were included in underwriting; Kleinberg said parking is an ancillary revenue line and currently set at about $150 per month. Rosetti and others said that fee could make on‑site parking inaccessible for lower‑income tenants; Kleinberg said the developer had not previously considered a discount but would be willing to consider it.

Council members also discussed the length of the proposed tax‑fixing agreement for the project. Committee members noted many recent Hartford tax agreements had been for 10 years; staff said state law now allows agreements up to 30 years and that, after underwriting and negotiations, this project required a 20‑year agreement to be financially viable. Staff said consultants and city negotiators had tried to limit the city’s concessions.

After discussion, Councilman John Gayle moved to send the item to the full council with a favorable recommendation, subject to a revised term sheet that explicitly incorporates the 20% workforce/affordable component and a good‑faith effort on parking for those tenants. The motion was seconded and approved by voice vote; the committee chair reported no abstentions or opposition.

The committee requested the revised term sheet be submitted to the town clerk and council office in time for the July 14 council meeting.