HARTFORD — The Hartford area is close to securing $16
million from the federal government that would boost — and potentially
accelerate — the development of a comprehensive plan for solving the area’s
transportation woes, possibly burying highways and reconnecting Hartford with
its riverfront.
The plan is expected to examine options for the aging I-84
viaduct and I-91 interchange in Hartford — both notorious for congestion — and
the jumble of on- and off-ramps along the Connecticut River in East Hartford. East
Hartford officials has long argued the land, nearly the size of downtown
Hartford, could be better used for economic development.
The plan, however, also is expected to place emphasis on
alternative modes of transportation such as bus, rail and bicycle — and how
they could work together with the highway system. The plan would tackle the
thorny but crucial issues of emissions and climate change, and how to encourage
more pedestrian access.
On Wednesday, U.S. Rep. John B. Larson, D-1st, held a news
conference highlighting the $16 million on Hartford’s Mortensen Riverfront
Plaza. With the Connecticut River as the backdrop, traffic roared by on I-91
below the plaza, the noise so loud at points that it nearly drown out speakers.
Larson said the $16 million has been approved by the U.S.
House of Representatives as part of the $715 billion INVEST in America Act, a
five-year plan to upgrade the surface transportation. Larson said he expects
the $16 million win passage in the U.S. Senate.
“This isn’t going to be a study that sits on the shelf and
collects dust,” Larson said. “We are going to get this done.”
The $16 million would give a significant boost to the
“Greater Hartford Mobility Study,” formally launched earlier this year. The
study is expected to come up with a regional transportation plan possibly by
the end of 2022.
It isn’t yet known how much it would cost to rebuild the
area’s transportation system. Two years ago, replacing the I-84 viaduct with a
lowered highway alone was pegged at $5 billion or more.
A timetable for construction also is uncertain. One early
estimate placed the start of construction in late 2020. But a comprehensive
plan could allow the state to seek funding for individual pieces, knowing how
they will eventually fit with the larger vision that has been mapped out.
Larson has long pushed the idea of burying or capping I-91
as it runs along the riverfront in Hartford to reconnect it with the city. He
also supported a similar idea for the I-84 viaduct as an option for stitching
back together Hartford neighborhood torn apart by highway construction in the
late 1960s and 1970s.
In 2019, the state Department of Transportation was close to
recommending lowering the viaduct to reconnect neighborhoods, after six years
of study. But Larson argued that the future of the viaduct should be part of a
larger comprehensive plan for the Hartford area, and he won the support of the
state transportation department.
Elements of Larson’s vision and iQuilt’s “Hartford 400″
study could become part of the final plan.
“We have the opportunity to reshape how people move, where
and why,” Joseph Giuletti, the state’s transportation commissioner, said at
Wednesday’s news conference. “For this generation and the next, connectivity
will be key. It’s what every one of the millennials and the younger people
coming up today look for as places where you can live and work.”
The $16 million could also help fund preliminary designs,
but not the actual construction. The study would become a blueprint to seek
federal funding, possibly from the $1.2 trillion infrastructure package sought
by President Joe Biden.
Hartford Mayor Luke Bronin, at the news conference, pointed
out that Biden’s infrastructure package included a “specific focus” on
reconnecting communities that were cut in half by highway projects.
“That’s true in Hartford,” Bronin said. “And this project helps
heal that wound.”
AGC to Biden administration: Stop 'paying people not to work'
Several key factors are slowing commercial construction in
the U.S. and one of the industry's largest trade groups is looking to
Washington, D.C., for solutions.
Nonresidential construction activity dropped in May as firms
struggled with supply chain disruptions, rising materials prices and labor
shortages, according to the Associated General Contractors of America.
Officials with the association called on President Joe Biden's administration
last week to remove tariffs on key construction materials, allow unemployment
supplements that are keeping people out of the workforce to expire and take
steps to address supply chain backups.
"Many construction firms would likely be even busier if
only they could find materials for their projects and workers for their
teams," said Stephen E. Sandherr, the association's chief executive
officer in a statement. "Ending a program that is basically paying people
not to work will help, especially if the administration also removes tariffs
that are driving prices up on key construction materials."
Dozens of states have already
cut off weekly $300 federal pandemic unemployment benefits in the
hopes that their unemployed residents will head back to work. AGC
officials noted that firms in states that have ended the unemployment
supplements have experienced an increase in the number of workers looking for
employment. They added that firms in other parts of the country are still
struggling to find qualified workers to hire. The federal benefit is scheduled
to expire on September 6.
Nevertheless, in two states that have pulled back on
benefits — Maryland and Indiana — judges have recently issued rulings requiring
them to continue paying pandemic unemployment aid, according
to CNET. Jobless residents in Texas have also filed a lawsuit seeking to
bring back the aid that was cut off on June 26, though no decision has been
made, CNET reported.
President Joe Biden indicated last month that he supports
allowing the enhanced unemployment benefits to expire in early September, Business
Insider reported.
"A temporary boost in unemployment benefits that we
enacted helped people who lost their jobs through no fault of their own, and
who still may be in the process of getting vaccinated," he said.
"But it's going to expire in 90 days — it makes sense it expires in 90
days."
In addition to labor challenges, supply
chain backups and rising materials prices are also hurting the industry. Nonresidential
construction input prices increased
nearly 24% in May compared to the previous year, according to an
Associated Builders and Contractors analysis of U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
data. In addition, the prices of petroleum, natural gas and lumber all
skyrocketed over the past year.
The elevated prices will not decrease anytime soon, ABC
chief economist Anirban Basu told
Construction Dive. "While global supply chains should become more
orderly over time as the pandemic fades into memory, global demand for inputs
will be overwhelming as the global economy comes back to life."
In response, the AGC released the third edition of its Construction
Inflation Alert to inform project owners and government officials
about the threat to project completion dates and contractors' financial health.
"Being able to find workers is important, but
contractors also need materials delivered on time and at a reasonable cost, to
be successful," Sandherr said.
While residential construction has seen gains since last
year, nonresidential construction spending has lagged, according to an AGC
analysis of federal
construction spending data. Among the other large private
nonresidential project types, commercial construction—comprising retail,
warehouse and farm structures — retreated 2.6% year-over-year and
0.7% for the month. Manufacturing construction fell 3.2% from a year
earlier and 2.7% from April. Office construction decreased
8.3% year-over-year but remained flat from April.
Public construction spending plunged 8.7% year-over-year and 0.2% for the month. Among the largest segments, highway and street construction declined 4.3% from a year earlier, although spending rose 1.4% for the month. Public educational construction decreased 14.2% year-over-year and 1.9% in May. Spending on transportation facilities fell 10.4% over 12 months and 1.9% in May.
Details emerge of new 43-year deal for Tweed-New Haven Airport
The runway lengthens, a new terminal and garage get built,
and the name “New Haven” remains under newly released terms of a proposed
43-year lease between the city and Tweed’s airport authority.
The deal includes lifting of a weight limit on local
aircraft — and the teeing up of a long-term sub-lease with a deep-pocketed
private investor.
Those terms, and many more, were revealed Tuesday in a new
proposed amended and restated lease and operating agreement between the city
and the Tweed New Haven Airport Authority and a proposed ordinance amendment.
City officials submitted the proposed lease extension to the
Board of Alders at Tuesday night’s monthly meeting.
They also submitted a related proposed ordinance amendment
that would repeal a city law that prohibits airplanes that weigh more than
160,000 pounds from using Tweed.
Both proposals now advance to an aldermanic committee for a
public hearing before returning to the full board for a final vote, likely in
the early fall.
The proposal lease renewal and aircraft weight-limit repeal
come two months to the day after local, state and federal officials held a
celebratory press conference at the East Shore airport to announce that Tweed’s
current private management company, the Goldman Sachs-owned Avports, has promised
to invest $70 million to upgrade and expand the current airport —and
to bring in new airlines along the way.
The proposed 43-year lease extension between the city and
the airport authority is an intermediate, necessary step before the airport
authority can finalize a separate long-term sub-lease with Avports.
City Economic Development Administrator Michael Piscitelli
described in a cover letter addressed to the Board of Alders on this matter
“our shared goals for economic growth in a manner that is responsible to the
surrounding community and the environment. The above-referenced communication
represents a significant step towards implementation of these goals in light of
the recent progress on an update to theAirport
Master Plan together with new air service development and a proposed
public/private partnership with the Airport’s management contractor.”
Morris Cove neighbors critical of the Tweed expansion,
meanwhile, have formed
a new group called 10,000 Hawks, and have promised to watch with a close
eye every step of airport’s major new moves.
Click here, here, here,
and here to
read in full the new lease and related documents submitted by the city.
Longer Runway; “New Haven”
The 29-page proposed lease agreement between the city and
the airport authority, as well as the half-dozen supporting documents submitted
by the city to the Board of Alders, flesh out many of the details already
brought up by city, state, federal and airport officials over the past two
months.
Some of the key provisions of the new lease include:
The extension of the airport authority’s $1-per-year lease
of the city-owned airport land through June 30, 2064.
The extension of the airport’s main runway from 5,600 feet
to 6,635 feet long.
The construction of a new four-to-six-gate passenger
terminal and a new parking garage on the East Haven side of the airport
property.
“New Haven” will remain in the airport name, with any future
airport naming rights requiring city approval.
The phasing out of the city’s annual operating subsidy of
Tweed. This fiscal year will see the operating subsidy stay at $325,000. Next
year, it will drop to $162,500. The year after that, and going forward, the
city will not pay any operating subsidy to the airport authority.
The signing of a new sub-lease between the airport authority
and Avports, which has managed the airport since 1998.
The new sub-lease would allow Avports to not only operate
and manage the airport, but also to “implement the updated Master Plan through
a combination of on-airport revenue, new private equity and federal grants,”
per Piscitelli’s cover letter.
That is, Avports will be responsible for finding the
financing for and building the new terminal, garage, and longer runway—and will
be able to take home the additional profits that result from that expansion.
What About Avports?
While this proposed lease agreement is between the city and
the airport authority, it nevertheless does include a wealth of details about
what Avports plans to do based on its separate sub-lease with the authority.
Many of those promises are laid out in the proposed lease’s
Exhibit D, dubbed “Performance Standards.”
Some of those planned Avports-led improvements include:
The renovation
of the current passenger terminal on the New Haven side of the airport
property to accommodate new air service. Avelo Airlines has already announced
that it plans to set up in New Haven as its new East Coast base, where it plans
to station three 737 aircraft by the end of 2021 and hire over 100 crewmembers.
The investment of $1.5 million in traffic calming and
wayfinding in areas around the airport.
The investment of $1.5 million for “noise attenuation” in
the surrounding neighborhood, and an additional $250,000 to address specific
concerns about noise related to general aviation traffic.
The creation of a new stormwater management plan for the
airport and surrounding neighborhood.
The operation, maintenance, and upgrading of the Morris
Creek tide gates.
The employment of carbon neutral and LEED principles in the
design of the East Haven terminal.
The creation of an Environmental Stewardship Advisory
Committee consisting of three New Haven residents, two East Haven residents and
staffed by the city’s engineering department.
The development of a permanent job pipeline in partnership
with New Haven Works.
“Avports, on behalf of the Authority, will manage and
operate the airfield facilities (runways, taxiways),” the FAQ reads. “Avports
will lease the landside facilities (terminal, roadways and parking) from the
Authority, and will then enter into arrangements with airlines, rental car
companies, concessionaires, etc., to use the terminal facilities. Avports will
have the right to collect the revenue from the Airport operations, will pay its
operating and capital expenses, and will pay rent to the Authority as well as a
share of revenues above certain thresholds.”
Avports will also be responsible for securing funding for
the runway extension, the existing terminal renovations, the new eastside
terminal, and other improvements, the FAQ states.
Biden seeks to strengthen options for workers with new order
JOSH BOAK, Associated Press
President Joe Biden plans to sign an executive order that
will reduce the ability of employers to prevent workers from going to rival
firms and remove some of the state occupational licensing requirements that
make it harder to land a job.
The order is designed to improve workers' opportunities in
the economy, increase their chances of employment and generate more competition
among U.S. employers, White House press secretary Jen Psaki said Wednesday.
“This affects construction workers, hotel workers, many blue
collar jobs, not just high level executives,” Psaki told reporters aboard Air
Force One, adding that Biden “believes that if someone offers you a better job,
you should be able to take it.”
The order would be a key test as to whether empowering
workers will lead to pay hikes and smooth the way for them to move to parts of
the country where their skills are most in demand. It also enables Biden to
show in the 2022 congressional elections how Democratic policies are focused on
workers, a key argument as Republicans have increasingly tried to frame their
party as backing the working class.
The forthcoming order will direct the Federal Trade
Commission to restrict and potentially bar so-called noncompete agreements,
which have stopped workers in industries including fast food and Big Tech from
going to other employers for higher pay. A 2019 analysis by the liberal
Economic Policy Institute estimated that 36 million to 60 million workers could
be subject to noncompete agreements.
The order also seeks to ban “unnecessary" occupational
licensing that can hurt the earning power of military spouses, skilled
immigrants and former prisoners. The requirements can limit the ability of
teachers or hair stylists to move across state lines, while also making some
spend money at for-profit schools to affirm skills they already have. Roughly
30% of U.S. jobs require a license, according to a 2018 FTC report.
This effort builds on work begun in 2015 by the Obama
administration to get states to reduce the burdens from their licensing
requirements.
The order will also toughen guidance to the FTC and the
Justice Department to prevent employers from sharing wage and benefits data
with each other so they can suppress worker incomes. The New York Times first
reported Wednesday all the worker-focused elements of the order.
It was unclear when the order would be signed.
West Haven rejects Route 1 housing proposal; hoping for something 'that's a better fit'
WEST HAVEN — A plan to add housing to Route 1 has been
rejected, with officials deciding that a major commercial district in the city
should remain exclusive to businesses.
The Planning and Zoning Commission voted unanimously against
establishing an overlay that would enable a developer to create 150 apartments
at the current site of Universal Hotel Liquidators, with commissioners arguing
that doing so would directly conflict with the city’s adopted Plan of
Conservation and Development.
An overlay would allow the developer flexibility in site
design when it conflicts with the established zoning regulations for that area
of the city. The site, 855 Boston Post Road, is in an area of the city zoned
exclusively for business and not housing.
“West Haven doesn’t have a big commercial corridor, and to
sell it out would defeat the purpose,” said commission Chairwoman Kathy
Hendricks.
Landscape architect, site planner and Codespoti and
Associates President Jeffrey Gordon represented site owner Orange Avenue LLC
before the commission to request an overlay to the Regional Business District
where the site resides, to develop a project under the rules of an Incentive
Housing Zone. The ultimate goal for the site, he said, is to develop 150
apartments, 20,000 square feet of retail space and 100,000 square feet of
self-storage space.
Gordon argued that adding housing density to the Boston Post
Road would be to the economic benefit of the city.
“Apartment demographics are driving young people to New
Haven and Milford,” he said. “West Haven needs to compete with the business
draw of New Haven and Milford.”
The Boston Post Road, he said, “is not as economically
successful as it once was years ago,” so adding housing diversity would bring
about more opportunities to attract business by creating a demand.
Gordon said the project, as planned, would create an
estimated $1.1 million in annual tax revenue for the city.
But the proposed change was met with criticism and
skepticism from roughly a dozen neighbors, who urged the commission not to
allow housing at the site. Several said they felt it was absurd to add housing
to a section of the city reserved for business.
“You don’t see housing on the strip of Route 1 in Milford,”
said Katherine Tucker.
Robbin Watt Hamilton, city councilwoman for the 5th
District, said she supports the development of housing — but not “just sitting
in the middle of our community.” How would the development “link” to the surrounding
neighborhood, she wondered.
“I don’t want to be an experiment just because it’s
Allingtown,” she said.
Resident Sandra Burns said she feels like development often
is proposed for the city’s Allingtown section that would not be to the benefit
of the longtime residents of that district.
“We need something viable. This is not viable. Having
storage units over there? For what? For whom?” she said. “If you can’t come up
with a viable plan, leave us alone.”
The community opposition was not unanimous: Ken Carney,
chairman of the city’s Building Oversight Committee, wrote in a letter
submitted to the commission that the proposed development is a
“once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for West Haven.”
Gordon defended the plan before the commission, saying
apartments always are unpopular propositions with community members until they
become useful after being built. He said the building could not reasonably
contain a development like a supermarket that some community members expressed
a desire to see.
He responded to a question from Commissioner Gene Sullivan
by agreeing that the apartments — 64 studios, 52 one-bedrooms and 34
two-bedrooms — would be ideal for local hospital workers who need temporary
lodging throughout the week, as well as a college-age population.
Gregory Milano, an alternate member of the commission, said
he did not understand how the application for an Incentive Housing Zone would
benefit the application other than to add housing density. Hendricks said that,
because 13 percent of the city’s housing is affordable — three points ahead of
the 10 percent requirement — affordable housing is “not a carrot” that can be
dangled before the commission.
Milano said the city has other areas of the city already
approved for mixed-use development, and the developers’ presentation did not
adequately explain why adding housing to a business district would fit within
the city’s development plan.
Commission Vice Chairman John Biancur challenged the
assertion that apartments are bringing in young renters with disposable income
in New Haven and Milford, as the housing developments in those municipalities
is being done in walkable downtown areas.
“You’re talking about taking our prime commercial spot,”
said Hendricks, noting that it’s the deepest lot on the road. Further, she
said, the city’s development plan calls for placing storefronts toward the
front of the lot with parking in the back — something the plan presented to the
commission did not reflect. Gordon said the developer would create an appealing
plaza area for the city.
When the commission deliberated, commissioners said they
were happy to see interest in the property, but they were willing to hold out
for something more appropriate.
“Some opportunities come that may not come back,” said
Commissioner Steven R. Mullins. “I feel like an opportunity will come to this
location that’s a better fit.”
Hendricks mourned several opportunities that she believes
passed the city by — such as the popular Ferraro’s meat market relocating from
its longtime location in New Haven to North Haven — and said she hopes city
officials can find an exciting opportunity for the parcel.
“It simply is against our regulations,” said Biancur, adding
that he hopes the developer would return with a more appropriate proposal for
the location after hearing the commission’s feedback.
Following the vote, Burns said she believes Allingtown
residents constantly are fighting to keep development out of their
neighborhood.
“West Haven itself has never treated us like a meaningful
part of this town,” she said. “We’re going to pray and believe something great
is going to come.”