Bethel police station construction delayed until spring
BETHEL - Town officials had hoped to begin construction of a new police station this fall, but it now appears the project won’t begin until spring.
Police and members of the Public Site and Building Committee only recently finished schematic designs for the project and have not yet received a final cost estimate from the construction company.
Site committee chairman Jon Menti said the parties wanted to ensure that project costs did not increase because designs had to change after construction began.
“It seems like we haven’t done anything, but we have,” Menti said. “It’s been under review and discussion with the police department. They’re the end user and so we want it to be what they need within the footprint size.”
Voters rejected at $14.1 million proposal in 2014, but late last year okayed a revised $13.5 million budget.
The 23,000-square foot station will be nearly three times larger than the existing station, Chief Jeff Finch said. The two-story building will have patrol offices on the first floor and the detective bureau on the second, and also features a bigger lobby, a shooting range and a training and community meeting room.
Finch said the station will be a big improvement on the current one, which has a leaking roof and occasionally floods when water rises in the swamp nearby.
“This building is very old,” he said. “It’s designed more like an office complex rather than a police department. A police department needs to be a building that can withstand a storm.”
Sgt. Bob Durkin, a member of the site commitee, said he looks forward to working in a roomier station.
“We’re so overcrowded now,” he said. “Obviously we’re going to operate a little differently. It’ll take some adjusting and getting used to, having two different floors. You’re not going to see people as much as you do now — we’re right on top of each other — but we’ll adjust to it.”
Finch said the new building will be more welcoming to both officers and residents. CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE
Meriden officials expect former R-J building to be razed within six months
MERIDEN — The city is expected to go out to bid for demolition of the former Record-Journal building at 11 Crown St. this week, and the building will likely be razed in the next six months, city officials said Tuesday.
A mixed-use, mixed-income housing development is planned for the city-owned site. The developer, Michaels Organization, is in the process of applying to finance the $27 million project, hoping to get 70 percent of the cost covered by the Low Income Housing Tax Credit program.
The city purchased the building from the Record-Journal Publishing Co. in 2014 for $495,000, using a U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Sustainable Communities Challenge grant.
The project involves demolition of the 111-year-old building and construction of a complex with 81 apartments, 57 of which will be considered affordable housing. The development will also contain 15,000 square feet of commercial and retail space.
The City Council voted to amend the city’s Master Development Agreement with Michaels Organization at the last council meeting in an effort to strengthen the developer’s application for funding.
The developer can score more points on the competitive application by using donated land and having the city participate as a sponsor of the development.
If the application succeeds, the program could cover 70 percent of the cost of the project, Burdelski said, meaning Michaels Organization would have to find investors to cover the remaining $8 million. Under the Master Development Agreement with the city, Michaels Organization has until October 2017 to secure funding. CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE
New London – A Pennsylvania-based company has proposed a $12.5 million mixed-use development on long-vacant property at the corner of Bank and Howard streets.
A.R. Building Co., which is constructing a $14 million 104-unit apartment complex on Mansfield Road, has pitched the idea of a four-story, 90-unit complex with market-rate apartments and 9,450 square feet of retail space on property known locally as Parcel J.
Mayor Michael Passero said he was “ecstatic” upon hearing news of the proposal, which will be presented to the City Council at its meeting Monday.
Passero said the proposal is evidence of success for the city’s new partnership with the Renaissance City Development Association. The RCDA solicited and vetted the proposals for Parcel J, recommending A.R. Building to the Office of Development and Planning.
“It’s working the way it’s supposed to be working,” Passero said of the partnership. “The (RCDA) is working to facilitate the city’s vision of development in New London.”
The council will be asked Monday to approve A.R. Building Co. as the prime developer for the 3.23-acre property that has sat vacant since the now defunct New London Redevelopment Agency bought the land in the 1970s as part of the Shaw’s Cove portion of a citywide urban renewal project. It is the last major piece of undeveloped property there.
Conceptual plans for the development show a mix of efficiencies, 1- and 2-bedroom apartments, a rooftop deck for residents and a plaza at the corner of Bank Street with a mix of decorative landscaping and benches. A.R. Building intends to build, own and manage the property with its Westerly-based construction division handling the build.
A timeline for the project is unclear, but A.R. Building, in its proposal, states construction could begin as soon as approvals are in place. CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE
Ultimate Taxpayer Price Tag For Dunkin' Donuts Park Could Be Determined In Court
When Hartford Mayor Luke Bronin announced an agreement in principle for completion of the dormant Dunkin' Donuts Park project, he said he expected that no more taxpayer money would be used beyond the $4.4 million the city has on hand.
The agreement, still unsigned more than a week later, might not be the last word on the ultimate taxpayer burden, however. That price tag could well be determined in court.
As for litigation after the fact, the former developers' attorney said Arch will have company.
"It won't just be Arch. It will be us," Raymond Garcia, the developers' attorney, said Tuesday. "The lawsuit will morph into a claim against the city, Arch and anyone else we feel is responsible."
Garcia acknowledged that while Centerplan CEO Robert Landino has said he would pay Arch for costs he believes should be incurred by his company, he expects the city will eventually bear the financial brunt of what remains to be done. "The city is going to be on the hook for most of it," Garcia said. "The city is responsible for most of the damage." CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE
Thriving Oxford Prepares for 'Economic Boom'
As Connecticut struggles with slow economic growth, falling state revenue and annual tax battles in the legislature, the town of Oxford is finding its own way to prosperity.
Officials of the 218-year-old town that began as a farm community cite Oxford's assets: plentiful land prized for development and an absence of polluted industrial sites known as brownfields common in Connecticut's factory towns that require millions of dollars and years of effort to clean up.
A.R. Building Co., which is constructing a $14 million 104-unit apartment complex on Mansfield Road, has pitched the idea of a four-story, 90-unit complex with market-rate apartments and 9,450 square feet of retail space on property known locally as Parcel J.
Mayor Michael Passero said he was “ecstatic” upon hearing news of the proposal, which will be presented to the City Council at its meeting Monday.
Passero said the proposal is evidence of success for the city’s new partnership with the Renaissance City Development Association. The RCDA solicited and vetted the proposals for Parcel J, recommending A.R. Building to the Office of Development and Planning.
“It’s working the way it’s supposed to be working,” Passero said of the partnership. “The (RCDA) is working to facilitate the city’s vision of development in New London.”
The council will be asked Monday to approve A.R. Building Co. as the prime developer for the 3.23-acre property that has sat vacant since the now defunct New London Redevelopment Agency bought the land in the 1970s as part of the Shaw’s Cove portion of a citywide urban renewal project. It is the last major piece of undeveloped property there.
Conceptual plans for the development show a mix of efficiencies, 1- and 2-bedroom apartments, a rooftop deck for residents and a plaza at the corner of Bank Street with a mix of decorative landscaping and benches. A.R. Building intends to build, own and manage the property with its Westerly-based construction division handling the build.
A timeline for the project is unclear, but A.R. Building, in its proposal, states construction could begin as soon as approvals are in place. CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE
Ultimate Taxpayer Price Tag For Dunkin' Donuts Park Could Be Determined In Court
When Hartford Mayor Luke Bronin announced an agreement in principle for completion of the dormant Dunkin' Donuts Park project, he said he expected that no more taxpayer money would be used beyond the $4.4 million the city has on hand.
The agreement, still unsigned more than a week later, might not be the last word on the ultimate taxpayer burden, however. That price tag could well be determined in court.
Arch Insurance, the bonding surety guaranteeing completion of the minor league ballpark, is reserving its right to sue for reimbursement from the fired developers, from the city, or from both, depending on whom it determines is responsible for the construction shutdown, now in its fourth month.
The city claims the developers, Centerplan Construction Co. and DoNo Hartford, breached their contract with the city by missing a May 17 deadline to hand over the park to the Hartford Yard Goats. The developers claim that the city is at fault for making more than 100 change orders in the months leading up to the deadline and beyond. The developers are suing the city for wrongful termination and are seeking an injunction preventing the city from hiring someone else to finish the job. The two sides are in court-ordered mediation. As for litigation after the fact, the former developers' attorney said Arch will have company.
"It won't just be Arch. It will be us," Raymond Garcia, the developers' attorney, said Tuesday. "The lawsuit will morph into a claim against the city, Arch and anyone else we feel is responsible."
Garcia acknowledged that while Centerplan CEO Robert Landino has said he would pay Arch for costs he believes should be incurred by his company, he expects the city will eventually bear the financial brunt of what remains to be done. "The city is going to be on the hook for most of it," Garcia said. "The city is responsible for most of the damage." CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE
Thriving Oxford Prepares for 'Economic Boom'
As Connecticut struggles with slow economic growth, falling state revenue and annual tax battles in the legislature, the town of Oxford is finding its own way to prosperity.
Officials of the 218-year-old town that began as a farm community cite Oxford's assets: plentiful land prized for development and an absence of polluted industrial sites known as brownfields common in Connecticut's factory towns that require millions of dollars and years of effort to clean up.
"We don't have brownfields. We don't have the old abandoned factories," said First Selectman George R. Temple. "We have the land. We have the will."
In population, Oxford is among the smallest towns in the state, with nearly 13,000 residents in 2014, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. But its increase of more than 30 percent since 2000 makes it the fastest growing town in Connecticut. The state's population rose 5.5 percent in the same period.
By luck, design or both, Oxford, located in New Haven County between I-84 and Route 8, is thriving. It's putting to use its land to draw outsized developments while being in the enviable position of drawing in so much revenue it can afford to cut property taxes. Oxford is starting by closing a few community gaps, notably the absence of a downtown and a supermarket.
"The only thing we really had in Oxford was a gas station," said Andrew McGeever, the town's economic development director.
Backers of a $70 million project leveling a rock quarry to make way for a retail and housing site hope to change that. The 32-acre property, with a supermarket set to open this month, is touted as a new downtown for Oxford, with a road headed into the development called Main Street. It's expected to generate $1 million a year in local tax revenue, Temple said.
Latest battle over The Haven focuses on West Haven zoning regulations
WEST HAVEN >> Attorneys for the proposed The Haven upscale outlet mall and two sets of holdout property owners sparred before the Planning and Zoning Commission Tuesday night over a proposal by the holdouts to change the city’s zoning regulations to require a special permit before a regional shopping center can be built in the waterfront design zone.
The PZC took no action,continuing a public hearing on the change until its next regular meeting at 7 p.m. Sept. 27, The change was proposed by Robinson and Cole, which represents Robert McGinnity and members of his family, who own houses at 341 and 349 First Ave.; and SZS Enterprises LLC, owner of the Citgo station at Elm Street and First Avenue. It would restore the regulation to something closer to what it required before the PZC changed it in 2014 in advance of a formal application for The Haven, which has yet to be submitted. “Currently, a regional shopping center use is allowed as-of-right,” Robinson & Cole attorney Evan Seeman told the commission. “What we’re proposing is that it be allowed instead by special permit.”
Seeman, who was joined by planning consultant Frank Fish, a fellow of the American Institute of Certified Planners, said he was asking the PZC to consider the change “so the commission has greater authority in the review process.” With a special permit requirement, “If the commission does want to grant approval of the special permit, it can impose reasonable conditions,” Seeman said, pointing out that the state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection supports the proposal. “Our point ... is that a regional shopping center is such a high intensity use that it should require a special hearing. “We’re not opposed to development. We just want to ensure that development proceeds in the most logical ... manner,” Seeman said. Three representatives of developer The Haven Group — two lawyers and a civil engineer — who argued against the proposed change did not agree with Seeman’s characterization of his side’s motives. Attorney Ray Bershstein said the commission heard the applicants say “they are not opposed to development, but they are opposed to this development.”Bershstein said that over the past two years, the Haven Group “has purchased 46 properties” in the project area. CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE
"The only thing we really had in Oxford was a gas station," said Andrew McGeever, the town's economic development director.
Backers of a $70 million project leveling a rock quarry to make way for a retail and housing site hope to change that. The 32-acre property, with a supermarket set to open this month, is touted as a new downtown for Oxford, with a road headed into the development called Main Street. It's expected to generate $1 million a year in local tax revenue, Temple said.
Known as Quarry Walk, it includes plans for a liquor store, Starbucks and other businesses along with an already-open bank, 150 residences and a walking path. Kathy Ekstrom, development manager for Haynes Development that's building the project, called Oxford an "emerging market."
Opponents have targeted some land development with "Keep Oxford Green" road signs, the reminders of efforts against high-density housing. To Temple, however, housing for residents over age 55 are "golden" because residents pay taxes but have no children in schools at a cost of about $13,000 per student. CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUELatest battle over The Haven focuses on West Haven zoning regulations
WEST HAVEN >> Attorneys for the proposed The Haven upscale outlet mall and two sets of holdout property owners sparred before the Planning and Zoning Commission Tuesday night over a proposal by the holdouts to change the city’s zoning regulations to require a special permit before a regional shopping center can be built in the waterfront design zone.
The PZC took no action,continuing a public hearing on the change until its next regular meeting at 7 p.m. Sept. 27, The change was proposed by Robinson and Cole, which represents Robert McGinnity and members of his family, who own houses at 341 and 349 First Ave.; and SZS Enterprises LLC, owner of the Citgo station at Elm Street and First Avenue. It would restore the regulation to something closer to what it required before the PZC changed it in 2014 in advance of a formal application for The Haven, which has yet to be submitted. “Currently, a regional shopping center use is allowed as-of-right,” Robinson & Cole attorney Evan Seeman told the commission. “What we’re proposing is that it be allowed instead by special permit.”
Seeman, who was joined by planning consultant Frank Fish, a fellow of the American Institute of Certified Planners, said he was asking the PZC to consider the change “so the commission has greater authority in the review process.” With a special permit requirement, “If the commission does want to grant approval of the special permit, it can impose reasonable conditions,” Seeman said, pointing out that the state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection supports the proposal. “Our point ... is that a regional shopping center is such a high intensity use that it should require a special hearing. “We’re not opposed to development. We just want to ensure that development proceeds in the most logical ... manner,” Seeman said. Three representatives of developer The Haven Group — two lawyers and a civil engineer — who argued against the proposed change did not agree with Seeman’s characterization of his side’s motives. Attorney Ray Bershstein said the commission heard the applicants say “they are not opposed to development, but they are opposed to this development.”Bershstein said that over the past two years, the Haven Group “has purchased 46 properties” in the project area. CLICK TITLE TO CONTINUE