The Council had agreed on March 20 to continue the public hearing to April 29 at the request of Vessel Technologies, so that questions regarding fire and life safety issues could be addressed.

By Ronni Newton

Vessel Technologies will have another opportunity on Tuesday, April 29 to present plans – including any updates made since the previous installment of the public hearing that took place on March 20 – and the public will be permitted to comment before the West Hartford Town Council votes on the application to rezone the 2.33-acre parcel at 29 Highland Street and create a Special Development District overlay to allow for the redevelopment of what is now a proposal for 108 units of multifamily housing on the site of the former Hughes Health & Rehabilitation facility.

While the hearing, which begins at 6 p.m. at West Hartford Town Hall, is expected to be concluded on April 29, the Council is unlikely to vote that day.

Vessel’s construction process is one that has not previously been used in West Hartford for the construction of multifamily housing, and local officials have continued to request additional information and input as they conduct a thorough review.

Vessel, based in New York, is known for constructing their properties quickly and with minimal disruption, in six to eight months. The units are modular and prefabricated of materials – including the materials used for the walls and doors of the units – that Vessel states are non-combustible, then assembled onsite, with metal staircases, hallways, and common areas that are partially open to the air and exposed to the elements.

Town staff continues to express concern about the ability of Vessel to meet Connecticut’s fire safety and fire prevention codes due to the modular and prefabricated construction process that may limit design modifications, and had requested that the company submit construction level design plans to the town by April 11 to allow time for review prior to the April 29 hearing.

“Both the Town Council and town staff have identified significant fire safety concerns related to the proposed application. The applicant, along with other interested parties, will have the opportunity to respond to these issues at the continued public hearing,” West Hartford Corporation Counsel Dallas Dodge said in a statement. “A vote is not expected that evening, as the Town Council will likely need additional time to review and consider the information presented.”

Specific concerns include whether the entire building, including the corridors, will be sprinklered. The most recently reviewed plans indicate that the corridors will have an open-grate floor system and West Hartford Fire Chief Greg Priest and Assistant Chief and Fire Marshal Robert Grimaldi have expressed concern about smoke and fire traveling vertically from floor to floor as well as ventilation, the lack of compartmentalized stairwells, the possible build-up of water and ice on stairwells during a fire response situation, fire ratings of walls and doors, and limited ability for residents to self-evacuate.

The State Fire Marshal and State Building Official have also been made aware of concerns by officials in some of the towns where Vessel is pursuing projects – including Avon, Cheshire, Milford, New London, and Rocky Hill, as well as West Hartford – and on April 14 provided some guidelines related to some of the issues raised by West Hartford to building officials and fire marshals in all involved towns. “We understand that some of these projects are still in design, but others are in construction or even completed, so addressing these matters will present varying degrees of difficulty,” the letter from State Building Inspector Omarys Vasqyez and State Fire Marshal Lauri Volkert states. Vessel’s building in New London is completed and occupied.

While the company has not submitted the detailed construction plans to West Hartford, Vessel Executive Vice President Josh Levy said they are committed to meeting or exceeding all state codes, and said specifics will be addressed during the permitting process but that cannot take place unless and until the rezoning is approved. The company has submitted floor plans and elevations, as well as landscaping designs and other materials required for a planning and zoning review.

“No matter what we do, we’re going to have to apply for permits,” Levy told We-Ha.com in a phone interview on Friday, April 25. “We will work with the town, hand-in-hand, and are 100% committed to making any changes to comply with Connecticut code.”

“We’re producing a steel building that is Type IIB, considered non-combustible construction,” Levy said. Unlike the other projects under construction in West Hartford, they are not planning to build out of wood, he said.

“Our goal is to produce the safest building in the state,” Levy said, reiterating that the fire ratings of doors and other aspects of the project would be provided with the detailed construction plans. He said state code currently requires a 20-minute fire rating for doors, and that’s the rating of the doors they are currently planning to use.

Levy also said that Vessel will commit to fully sprinklering the building in West Hartford, utilizing a dry system for the unheated corridors to prevent freezing.

“We have to comply with Connecticut code. We will do anything needed to comply with Connecticut code,” noting that there may be updates to code before the plans are reviewed. “We will comply with every code requirement, or exceed the code,” Levy said.

The International Code Council (ICC) conducted a review of the plans for Vessel’s project in Cheshire, and the letter from the ICC, dated April 4, 2025, has been provided to We-Ha.com. The ICC said in that letter that based on their limited re-review of submitted documents, “deficiencies have largely been satisfied subject to the approval of the code official.” The referenced documents that were submitted to the ICC were not provided to We-Ha.com.

“There is absolutely nothing about our building that can’t be changed to comply with code,” said Levy. “No chance of not being able to satisfy the permit department.”

Vessel’s application indicates plans to replace the existing Hughes Health & Rehabilitation buildings on the site with multifamily housing and has been submitted under Connecticut General Statutes Section 8-30g, which requires that 30% of the units must be affordable – and at least 15% of those must be affordable for those with an income of 60% or less than the area median income (AMI). The most recent iteration of the plan designates 30 one-bedroom and three two-bedroom units as affordable. The proposal indicates that the affordable units will be spread out among the two buildings, which are mirror images on the exterior.

The 8-30g statute has been in place for several decades, but has rarely been used in West Hartford, Prior to the start of the public hearing process, Deputy Corporation Counsel Gina Varano explained the statute, which allows developers to override local zoning ordinances if the municipality does not already have 10% of its housing qualified as affordable, and if the project provides the requisite mix of affordable units. According to Town Manager Rick Ledwith, West Hartford’s affordable housing percentage is roughly 8%.

A zoning authority, in this case the Town Council, can only deny an 8-30g application if it’s “necessary to protect public interest in health and safety,” Varano said on Feb. 25, and if those reasons clearly outweigh the need for affordable housing and the public interest cannot be protected without meaningful amendments.

Nearly four hours of testimony was heard at the initial public hearing on Feb. 25, which included a presentation by Vessel as well as robust public comment by more a dozen members of the community. Many of the concerns raised related to traffic and the adequacy of parking.

The hearing was continued until 6:45 p.m. on March 11 “for the limited purpose of presenting an updated plan set to reflect reconfiguration of several units” – which included a reduction in the proposed number of units to 108 – after which the Council had intended to vote on the project. The earlier plans had been for 112 units but a request by the Council was made to add another affordable two-bedroom unit which required some reconfiguration of the plans that the Council said needed to be reviewed before the vote to rezone and establish a Special Development District.

At the March 11 hearing, the Council again moved to continue the discussion to March 20 because “this project presents a unique construction approach, something the Council has not seen before,” Mayor Shari Cantor stated on March 11.

“Given the distinct nature of the design, I believe it will be beneficial for our staff to have some additional time to thoroughly review and publicly comment on the project,” Cantor said on March 11. “This would also provide the applicant with the opportunity to address challenges and concerns related to this type of construction.”

When the decision was made on March 20 to again continue the hearing, it was to allow sufficient time to address fire safety and other safety concerns.

The hearing has remained fully open, and additional public testimony has been permitted in-person and via email. To date, there have been 28 emails submitted as part of public testimony – both for and against the project. Some of the individuals who have submitted comments in writing have also spoken at the hearings.

Most recently, on April 22, a letter from 50 residents of either Highland Street or Concord Street (which is behind the proposed Vessel buildings), was submitted via email asking the Town Council to reject the proposal, and  stating that not only will the project “negatively impact the character and quality of life in our community, but it will also adversely affect the health and safety of the homeowners and the children who attend Bristow Middle School,” which is located across the street on Highland Street.

“This is an experimental building technology with no long-term experience with respect to fire safety and possibly other structural safety issues. This would add to the significant health and safety risks that already exist in our volume-overloaded neighborhood with unregulated parking and traffic as well as the uncontrolled garbage that encourages rats,” was among the reasons mentioned for requesting denial stated in the April 22 letter. The letter is also critical of Vessel CEO Neil Rubler who they state has previously been rated one of New York City’s “worst landlords,” and expresses concerns about building a project of the proposed size and scale on a neighborhood street that is already impacted by traffic from the middle school.

“Though the path of least resistance would be for the Town Council to approve this project, for the above reasons we implore you to follow the example of neighboring towns such as Simsbury, who rejected Vessel’s initial proposal for an 80-unit building on a lot similar to the size of the Hughes lot (on a busy thoroughfare, NOT a side street), and eventually settled on a much smaller building of 48 units. You may be constrained by 8-30g, but you are NOT required to approve a large-scale project that maximizes profit for yet another out-of- state developer at the expense of further eroding the safety and quality of life for the tax-paying homeowners who have voted for you and entrusted you to protect our neighborhoods,” the April 22 letter states.

“This is a process, and we are very, very committed to the process,” Levy told We-Ha.com. “Any time you are doing something innovative or new it’s hard to wrap your arms around it,” he said.

Town staff has continued to press Vessel for any guidance, formal or informal, received from state building officials regarding similar Vessel projects. “As of today, my office has not received any response from the Applicant that I am aware of,” Dodge said in an April 15 email to Robin Pearson, the attorney representing Vessel. “If there is additional state guidance to the Applicant beyond what is included in the DAS communication [letter from the State Building Inspector and State Fire Marshal], we would appreciate your assistance in providing it. In particular, we are looking for information on what measures have been – or will be – implemented for both completed projects and projects that are in development to make them code compliant. This information is essential to our ongoing review of the West Hartford application.”

Levy, who was copied on the April 15 email from Dodge to Pearson, reiterated to We-Ha.com on Friday that there is “nothing out there that we would not do, or could not do, to comply with code.” Regarding the materials that will be used, he said, “I can unequivocally say they will be fire-rated according to code.”

Levy also agreed that if requested by the town, they would have a third-party expert conduct a code review, as they did with Cheshire.

He said he expects these types of questions since Vessel’s type of construction is not what officials are used to seeing.

Levy said Vessel plans on giving a presentation to the Town Council Tuesday night during the continued hearing, and will be prepared to respond to questions. “We view this as a collaborative process,” he said.

The Town Plan & Zoning Commission (TPZ) unanimously voted (5-0) to recommend the project at its Jan. 6, 2025 meeting. The approval letter stated that TPZ found the project consistent with the overall vision of the Plan of Conservation and Development (POCD), and specifically cited the Neighborhoods and Housing section goal to: “Enhance and maintain West Hartford’s existing neighborhoods and encourage diversity of housing types and costs to provide access and availability of housing options to current and future residents.”

The Design Review Advisory Committee (DRAC), which also officially reviewed the application as a referral from the Town Council following a series of study sessions that began in the summer of 2024, voted unanimously (5-0) at its Feb. 13 meeting against recommendation of the application. DRAC’s letter to the Town Council noted that the application was “inconsistent with our Committee’s Performance Criteria,” specifically noting that with respect to the relationship of the buildings and site to the area, the “overall mass and height of the combined buildings is large and out of context with the adjoining neighborhood.”

More information and history about the Vessel proposal can be found here.

Like what you see here? Click here to subscribe to We-Ha’s newsletter so you’ll always be in the know about what’s happening in West Hartford! Click the blue button below to become a supporter of We-Ha.com and our efforts to continue producing quality journalism.