Michael P. Mayko
DERBY-After more than three decades of meetings, suggestions and proposals it appears that development is finally coming to the downtown.
The city’s Planning and Zoning Commission cleared the way for a proposed four-phase development by Derby Downtown, LLC which would bring four-story buildings with a total of 400 apartments as well as first floor shops, restaurants and residential services to the nearly vacant Factory Street. The street once housed the long gone Housatonic Lumber.
“What makes this project different than any other proposal is the developers already own the property,” said Carmen DiCenso, the city’s economic development liaison and former aldermanic president. “We see this as the first domino falling in place.” Chris and Jena Barretta, of Milford, who operate Barretta Landscaping and Garden on the Factory Street site, have owned the nearly 5 acres comprising the former Housatonic Lumber site for 11 years. Now they have combined with Steve and Jim Lepore of Lepore and Sons, a design and construction firm in West Hartford to form Derby Downtown LLC. Earlier this week the commission unanimously approved making the south side of Main Street where Factory Street is,a planned development district. This is the same type of zoning change that adjacent Shelton has used nearly 100 times in building its economic base. Such a district gives the commission control over the size, height and setbacks of buildings, the type of businesses that populate it, landscaping and more. Should a developer later want to modify a site plan, those changes must be approved by the commission.
During Tuesday’s public hearing portion residents applauded the proposal and urged the commission to approve the zone change.
“This is promising. Personally I am happy to see improvements coming downtown,” said Steve Ponzillo, a frequent critic of Planning and Zoning commission actions. “Ever since the River Restaurant explosion (Dec. 6,1985) all we’ve seen is one business after another leaving.”
Ponzillo’s only concerns are the lack of parking and the cost of rents.
DiCenso said consideration is being given to building a two-story parking lot on the south side of Main Street. DiCenso, Mayor Richard Dziekan, Andrew Baklik, his chief of staff and Sal Coppola, the city’s finance director have been meeting with the developers on this proposal since Dec., 2017. DiCenso said recent meetings with the state Department of Transportation indicate that the remaining four buildings on the south side of Main Street will be demolished before the end of the year and work on widening Route 34/Main Street might begin by late spring.
“I believe this will jump start economic development throughout the central downtown district,” Baklik said. Steve Lepore and Karl Nilsen, his land use consultant, said they intend to present a site plan during the commission’s Nov. 18 meeting. “The land is open and level and ready to go,” said Robert Rowlson, the LLC’s economic consultant who previously served as West Hartford’s economic development director. “Generally you have to assemble and acquire parcels, then demolish and clean them...The bus and train station are a mere 500 yards away...There’s easy access to Route 8 and Route 34.” He cited other amenities for tenants as the River Walk which runs from downtown Shelton to Ansonia and a planned bike path which will come with the Route 34/Main Street and Derby-Shelton bridge renovations. As for rents, Rowlson said studios would cost about $1,200 a month, one bedrooms in the $1,450-$2,085 range and two bedrooms in the $1,900-$2,700 range. He said they are gearing the apartments to empty nesters and young professionals with annual salaries between $50,000 and $100,000. Proposed leasing agreements will include amenity packages with access to high-speed Wi-Fi, indoor golf simulator, health club, in-complex library, bike racks, dog-sitting-walking and grooming services, possibly a rooftop garden, and community spaces. “These are things millennials want,” Baklik said. “I lived in a similar apartment complex in South Carolina where you could go downstairs to work out, watch a movie—it was like a mini-community.”
Rowlson said phase two won’t start until 80 percent of the approximately 111 apartments in phase one are rented. The entire four phase project will take between four-to-six years and bring in supervisors, general contractors, supplies with many “coming from the community. After construction we will have a management and a marketing team in place and use local services like landscapers, electricians...”
Manafort Brothers Inc. nears 100th birthday
PLAINVILLE - Over the course of its 100-year history, Manafort Brothers Inc. has established itself as one of the biggest contractors in New England.
The company will be celebrating 100 years in business in November, and the history of the company goes back through four generations of the Manafort family.
“When my grandfather started the business in 1919, it was called New Britain House Wrecking Company,” Jon Manafort said of his grandfather, James Manafort.
Originally, the family-owned company focused on taking buildings apart and selling the materials. In the 1940s, brothers Anthony, Frank, John and Paul Manafort Sr. took over the company and started using more mechanical tools and vehicles like cranes. The brothers officially changed the name of the company to Manafort Brothers in 1946.
Another two decades passed until the third generation of the family took over - Jim Sr., Frank Jr. and Jon Manafort. Under the leadership of these three in the 1960s. Manafort Brothers continued to expand its focus to construction work including concrete, civil and utility, demolition, abatement and remediation, highway and bridge, nuclear decommissioning, rail and mass transit.
“We expanded to doing work all around New England,” Jon Manafort said.
Now, the fourth generation of Jim Jr., David, Jason and Justin Manafort has continued to expand the family’s company. Manafort Brothers employs about 1,000 people and is expanding its headquarters since it’s outgrown the space.
Manafort Brothers also has locations in Massachusetts and Rhode Island.
“We’ve become probably the largest multi-discipline contractor in New England,” Jon Manafort said.
Manafort Brothers has been involved in many projects in the area, including specialty contractor work on New Britain’s downtown CTfastrak station.
While the company is now just over the border from New Britain in Plainville, it remains involved in the city.
“We’ve always been in this area and we continue to participate in a lot of local things,” Jon Manafort said.
Jon Manafort, who calls himself “semi-retired” since he still helps around with the business, said he hopes the family’s legacy of good work in the area continues for decades to come.
“Hopefully, there are more generations coming and maybe we can do another 100 years,” Jon Manafort said.
Seize chance to lock up transportation funds
By The Day Editorial Board Day staff writer
Want to assure that state money set aside for fixing Connecticut’s woeful transportation infrastructure is spent for that purpose? If the answer is yes, then it is critical to vote in favor of Question 1 on the Nov. 6 ballot.
“When my grandfather started the business in 1919, it was called New Britain House Wrecking Company,” Jon Manafort said of his grandfather, James Manafort.
Originally, the family-owned company focused on taking buildings apart and selling the materials. In the 1940s, brothers Anthony, Frank, John and Paul Manafort Sr. took over the company and started using more mechanical tools and vehicles like cranes. The brothers officially changed the name of the company to Manafort Brothers in 1946.
Another two decades passed until the third generation of the family took over - Jim Sr., Frank Jr. and Jon Manafort. Under the leadership of these three in the 1960s. Manafort Brothers continued to expand its focus to construction work including concrete, civil and utility, demolition, abatement and remediation, highway and bridge, nuclear decommissioning, rail and mass transit.
“We expanded to doing work all around New England,” Jon Manafort said.
Now, the fourth generation of Jim Jr., David, Jason and Justin Manafort has continued to expand the family’s company. Manafort Brothers employs about 1,000 people and is expanding its headquarters since it’s outgrown the space.
Manafort Brothers also has locations in Massachusetts and Rhode Island.
“We’ve become probably the largest multi-discipline contractor in New England,” Jon Manafort said.
Manafort Brothers has been involved in many projects in the area, including specialty contractor work on New Britain’s downtown CTfastrak station.
While the company is now just over the border from New Britain in Plainville, it remains involved in the city.
“We’ve always been in this area and we continue to participate in a lot of local things,” Jon Manafort said.
Jon Manafort, who calls himself “semi-retired” since he still helps around with the business, said he hopes the family’s legacy of good work in the area continues for decades to come.
“Hopefully, there are more generations coming and maybe we can do another 100 years,” Jon Manafort said.
Seize chance to lock up transportation funds
By The Day Editorial Board Day staff writer
Want to assure that state money set aside for fixing Connecticut’s woeful transportation infrastructure is spent for that purpose? If the answer is yes, then it is critical to vote in favor of Question 1 on the Nov. 6 ballot.
It reads:
Shall the Constitution of the State be amended to ensure (1) that all moneys contained in the Special Transportation Fund be used solely for transportation purposes, including the payment of debts of the state incurred for transportation purposes, and (2) that sources of funds deposited in the Special Transportation Fund be deposited in said fund so long as such sources are authorized by statute to be received by the state?
That Connecticut needs to do a far better job when it comes to transportation is beyond argument.
A report released in November 2015 by TRIP, a nonprofit organization that researches, evaluates and distributes economic and technical data on transportation needs, took a hard look at Connecticut. It concluded the state’s inadequate transportation system costs motorists $5.1 billion annually due to additional vehicle operating costs, congestion-related delays and crashes.
Poor pavement accelerates vehicle depreciation and adds repair expense. Congestion causes lost work time and increased fuel costs. Inadequate safety features mean added and more serious accidents.
At that time, TRIP found one-third of Connecticut’s major roads and 25 percent of Connecticut’s local and rural roads had pavements in poor condition.
“A lack of sufficient funding at all levels — local, state and federal — will make it difficult to adequately maintain and improve the existing transportation systems,” states the TRIP report.
Little has changed since.
A CNBC study released this past summer concluded Connecticut has the fourth worst infrastructure in the United States. The website gave the state a D grade. According to the study's findings, Connecticut, at 73 percent, has the second highest percentage of roads considered poor or mediocre.
Just last month came another report from TRIP, which concluded that 7 percent of the state’s bridges — 308 out of 4,254 — were structurally deficient because of significant deterioration to the decks and supports and need replacement.
In addition, mass transit needs to be expanded and improved to make Connecticut’s cities more attractive.
Connecticut must have a serious debate about how best to meet and pay for its transportation needs. Both the Democratic candidate for governor, Ned Lamont, and independent candidate Oz Griebel, former chairman of the now defunct state Transportation Strategy Board, support constructing electronic tolling on state highways to raise needed revenue. (Though Lamont has backed off to support a more politically palatable trucks only tolling policy.)
Republican gubernatorial candidate Bob Stefanowski opposes tolls, as do most top GOP leaders. Republicans insist they can find the money elsewhere to maintain and improve transportation, but we don’t see how, especially given Stefanowski’s stated desire to rollback and eventually eliminate the income tax.
While The Day sees electronic tolling as the only way to raise the necessary revenues — and to begin collecting money from the millions of out-of-state drivers who pass through the state — that is not what the constitutional question is about. The amendment is meant to assure that money directed into the Special Transportation Fund is used for transportation, regardless of how that money is raised and where it comes from.
The amendment is not foolproof. It only locks up for transportation use money placed into the TSF. The legislature could still redirect gas tax or future toll revenues to other uses before they are locked up safe. But having the amendment in place would provide greater transparency and accountability. Moves to circumvent the intent of the lockbox would be obvious and those involved in the chicanery would pay a heavy political price.
It is certainly better than having no lockbox and continuing with the current system that allows for all types of fiscal sleight of hand. The group Securing Connecticut’s Future, which advocates in favor of Question 1, estimates that over the last 10 years $500 million has been taken out of the transportation fund.
Approval of the amendment should also lead to lower interest on transportation bond issues because it will provide better repayment security, the group’s Co-Chair Michael Cacace said in an interview with The Day.
Improving the Connecticut transportation system is also critical to economic growth. Forty-two percent of businesses surveyed by the Connecticut Business and Industry Association believe road congestion limits the territory of their market, while 15 percent have considered relocation.
The choice appears obvious. Vote “yes” on Question 1.
Shall the Constitution of the State be amended to ensure (1) that all moneys contained in the Special Transportation Fund be used solely for transportation purposes, including the payment of debts of the state incurred for transportation purposes, and (2) that sources of funds deposited in the Special Transportation Fund be deposited in said fund so long as such sources are authorized by statute to be received by the state?
That Connecticut needs to do a far better job when it comes to transportation is beyond argument.
A report released in November 2015 by TRIP, a nonprofit organization that researches, evaluates and distributes economic and technical data on transportation needs, took a hard look at Connecticut. It concluded the state’s inadequate transportation system costs motorists $5.1 billion annually due to additional vehicle operating costs, congestion-related delays and crashes.
Poor pavement accelerates vehicle depreciation and adds repair expense. Congestion causes lost work time and increased fuel costs. Inadequate safety features mean added and more serious accidents.
At that time, TRIP found one-third of Connecticut’s major roads and 25 percent of Connecticut’s local and rural roads had pavements in poor condition.
“A lack of sufficient funding at all levels — local, state and federal — will make it difficult to adequately maintain and improve the existing transportation systems,” states the TRIP report.
Little has changed since.
A CNBC study released this past summer concluded Connecticut has the fourth worst infrastructure in the United States. The website gave the state a D grade. According to the study's findings, Connecticut, at 73 percent, has the second highest percentage of roads considered poor or mediocre.
Just last month came another report from TRIP, which concluded that 7 percent of the state’s bridges — 308 out of 4,254 — were structurally deficient because of significant deterioration to the decks and supports and need replacement.
In addition, mass transit needs to be expanded and improved to make Connecticut’s cities more attractive.
Connecticut must have a serious debate about how best to meet and pay for its transportation needs. Both the Democratic candidate for governor, Ned Lamont, and independent candidate Oz Griebel, former chairman of the now defunct state Transportation Strategy Board, support constructing electronic tolling on state highways to raise needed revenue. (Though Lamont has backed off to support a more politically palatable trucks only tolling policy.)
Republican gubernatorial candidate Bob Stefanowski opposes tolls, as do most top GOP leaders. Republicans insist they can find the money elsewhere to maintain and improve transportation, but we don’t see how, especially given Stefanowski’s stated desire to rollback and eventually eliminate the income tax.
While The Day sees electronic tolling as the only way to raise the necessary revenues — and to begin collecting money from the millions of out-of-state drivers who pass through the state — that is not what the constitutional question is about. The amendment is meant to assure that money directed into the Special Transportation Fund is used for transportation, regardless of how that money is raised and where it comes from.
The amendment is not foolproof. It only locks up for transportation use money placed into the TSF. The legislature could still redirect gas tax or future toll revenues to other uses before they are locked up safe. But having the amendment in place would provide greater transparency and accountability. Moves to circumvent the intent of the lockbox would be obvious and those involved in the chicanery would pay a heavy political price.
It is certainly better than having no lockbox and continuing with the current system that allows for all types of fiscal sleight of hand. The group Securing Connecticut’s Future, which advocates in favor of Question 1, estimates that over the last 10 years $500 million has been taken out of the transportation fund.
Approval of the amendment should also lead to lower interest on transportation bond issues because it will provide better repayment security, the group’s Co-Chair Michael Cacace said in an interview with The Day.
Improving the Connecticut transportation system is also critical to economic growth. Forty-two percent of businesses surveyed by the Connecticut Business and Industry Association believe road congestion limits the territory of their market, while 15 percent have considered relocation.
The choice appears obvious. Vote “yes” on Question 1.