April 18, 2023

CT Construction Digest Tuesday April 18, 2023

Heavy equipment training facility gets approval for former Meriden power plant site


Mary Ellen Godin

MERIDEN — The city Planning Commission conditionally approved plans for a heavy equipment training facility at 600 S. Mountain Road last week.

The International Union of Operating Engineers Local 478 asked the city for permission to use the 36-acre former power plant site for training programs in the operations and repair of heavy construction equipment and driver training. It currently operates a 13,000-square-foot facility on Cheshire Road in Meriden that will remain open. The Apprenticeship Training and Skill Improvement Center is a nonprofit organization that serves students throughout the state. 

“That’s going to be a nice opportunity for us,” said Gregg Strede, director of training for the Local 478. “This will give us the opportunity to do classes at the same time. We ran out of room at 240 Cheshire Road.”

City officials stated that current zoning supports the proposal, but is not a traditional industrial zone. It does not support screening or crushing of material, which could be disruptive to neighbors on Bailey Avenue. The plans must also be referred to the fire marshal for review of the equipment fueling area and the above ground fuel storage tank. They also called for more information about additional parking, and include a security or access gate where the site driveway meets the cul-de-sac on South Mountain Road. Plans must also indicate locations and types of site lighting, according to city records.

“Prior to start of activities on the site, the applicant will construct the berm or other erosion control measures approved by staff,” according to meeting minutes. “The plans shall be modified to demonstrate ADA compliance and receive staff approval. Any changes of newer equipment or change in the scope of activities shall be brought back to the Planning Commission for additional approval.”

Any outside activity shall be limited to the hours of Monday through Friday 7 a.m. to one hour after dusk, Saturday 7 a.m. to 3 p.m., and Sunday 8 a.m. to 2 p.m.

The former power plant site has been vacant since the plant, which never opened, was razed leaving a few foundations. The Local 478 Operating Engineers Apprenticeship Training and Skill Improvement fund purchased the property for $975,000 from Meriden Gas Turbines LLC in June 2019.

Current conditions at the site will provide new opportunities for training, as part of the curriculum includes developing construction sites, Strede said. 

“The site allows us to set up various conditions and teach our members the safe operation and maintenance of equipment of all types, Strede wrote to commissioners. “We intend to have a permanent tower crane on site. The crane cannot be seen from the surrounding areas. Given the type of surrounding tree cover, there should be minimal noise, light or dust leaving the site, if any.”

The training center is expected to operate six days a week, Monday through Friday 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. as needed and Saturday from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. Sundays will be used as test days. The site will be gated at the intersection of the city road, with access only granted to students and instructions.

There will be an on-site fueling area with protective berm, a classroom trailer, on site for teaching and breaks and temporary rest room facilities. There will be no processing of materials for sale. The center expects to run about 75-100 students plus faculty per various course cycles.

Strede expects the site to be ready within two months. 

City Economic Director Joseph Feest said the use of the former power plant site is welcome news, as the city owns the property below. Despite its nonprofit status, which exempts the center from paying taxes, the training center provides needed certification for construction and truck driving jobs currently in demand.

“It’s a good use for the piece because it’s an open, flat lot,” Feest said. “The rest of the city-owned property is not affected.”


CT lawmakers seek to restore Shore Line East, add train service to New Milford

John Moritz

Amid Gov. Ned Lamont’s multi-billion-dollar effort to improve commuter rail service along the New Haven and Hartford lines, a bipartisan group of lawmakers has begun pushing an even grander vision for rail travel in Connecticut. 

That vision includes a return to full, pre-pandemic service along eastern Connecticut’s Shore Line East route, which has been plagued by low-ridership figures, and a hefty state subsidy that Lamont has sought to cut. 

In the Naugatuck Valley, local lawmakers are fighting to add new trains and service to three additional stations along the Waterbury Branch line on top of the service upgrades that Lamont announced last year. And in the Northwest corner of the state, Republicans want to extend the Danbury Branch line to include service to New Milford — a distance of about 15 miles. 

Each of those projects has been folded into a single piece of rail legislation by leaders on the Transportation Committee, which voted unanimously last month to send the bill to the Senate floor.

Proponents of the bill argue that secondary routes in Connecticut have long been hampered by a lack of investment from the state and that better service will spur ridership and economic development. 

Shore Line East, for example, is only operating at two-thirds the level it did before the pandemic, while the more popular New Haven and Hartford lines have returned to full service. In his proposed budget for the next two fiscal years, Lamont has proposed cutting Shore Line East service even further to 44 percent of pre-pandemic levels. (The governor’s budget also proposed cutting New Haven line service to 86 percent of its pre-2020 level to reflect a slower-than-expected return of riders). 

“At one point in time, the Shore Line East was a thriving, vibrant rail line that did a very successful job linking commuters to their places of employment, as well as to destination places along the shoreline,” said Jim Gildea, chair of the Connecticut Commuter Rail Council. “Then COVID came, and unfortunately, as with all the lines, it lost service numbers.” 

Some rail advocates, however, described the push for new services as a misguided attempt to attract riders — who mostly live along well-established routes such as the New Haven Line. 

“Fix what you’ve got before you start telling DOT how to spend money it doesn’t have,” said Jim Cameron, the president of the Commuter Action Group, which advocates for mass transit.

Since taking office in 2019, Lamont has mostly focused his rail agenda on increasing speeds along the state’s two most popular lines, which link New Haven and Hartford with New York City, while also investing in service upgrades along some existing branch lines, such as those to Danbury and Waterbury. 

Last year, the governor and Metro-North touted new “super express” trains that quickened the trip between New Haven and Grand Central by 10 minutes. Lamont has promised to shave another 15 minutes off the trip by 2035, requiring an investment of up to $10 billion in infrastructure improvements. 

Lamont’s office on Thursday referred comment on the bill to his commissioner of transportation, Garrett Eucalitto, who has raised concerns about the cost of the projects and the need to conduct additional studies. 

“We appreciate the committee’s dedication to railroads in our state, and we would like to work with the committee on the best way to modernize our rail system, but additional studies will require funding,” beyond what was included in the governor’s budget, Eucalitto said in testimony submitted to lawmakers last month, adding that new studies “would divert staff time from executing on the major rail modernization program currently underway.”

Restoring service along the Shore Line East route alone would cost at least $25 million a year over Lamont’s proposed budget, according to a fiscal impact report prepared by legislative staff. In an attempt to trim costs, the bill would also allow the Department of Transportation to conduct a competitive bidding process to find a lower-cost operator for Shore Line East, an idea supported by Eucalitto. 

Currently, service along the line is operated by Amtrak, which also owns the rails east of New Haven. 

The report did not estimate costs associated with other projects in the bill, though it predicted that adding service to New Milford would require a “significant” investment from the state.

With the inclusion of projects that stretch from the shoreline to the Naugatuck River Valley and into Litchfield County, however, the legislation has drawn the support from a broad coalition of lawmakers from both parties. 

“As companies start up and grow across our state, we have to be mindful about developing a workforce and getting those employees to these places of business,” state Sen. Christine Cohen, D-Guilford, said in a text message on Friday. “That means prioritizing the expansion of rail lines, restoring full service on lines like (Shore Line East) and providing micro transit options to provide connectivity. While these things come with a price tag, they pay off in droves and are key to economic development.”

Cohen serves as co-chair of the Transportation Committee and represents a district with several stops along Shore Line East.

In addition to the projects included by lawmakers, the bill would also direct DOT to study the feasibility of future rail projects, such as establishing a connection between Hartford and Middletown and running hybrid diesel-electric trains on the Danbury Line.

Such a study would cost roughly $2 million, according to legislative staff, and come on the heels of a similar study ordered by lawmakers in 2021 to explore options for expanding rail service in Eastern Connecticut. 

preliminary report from that study, released in January, detailed significant challenges to expanding rail service beyond New London, including capacity limits caused by movable bridges and the need to spend between $350 and $400 million to retrofit the aging freight lines along the Thames River to accommodate passenger trains. 

Cameron, of the Commuter Action Group, noted that the Metropolitan Transit Authority — which operates the New Haven Line — has warned that it is facing a fiscal cliff as it deals with sluggish ridership and the end to federal pandemic-era financial assistance. 

Even with billions of dollars in transit funding made available from Congress and the Biden administration, Cameron said it’s unlikely Connecticut will have the funding available to make the necessary improvements along the New Haven and Hartford lines while also adding new services elsewhere. 

Cameron also criticized the proposed extension of the Danbury line to New Milford, saying it would offer little value to commuters in Litchfield County, who already have the option of driving to catch trains along New York’s Harlem Line, which already offers quicker commutes into Grand Central Terminal. 

One of the principal backers of the plan to expand the Danbury Line, state Rep. Billy Buckbee, R-New Milford, countered that the goal of the project would not necessarily be to serve commuters into New York City but rather those making shorter trips along the Route 7 corridor to cities in Fairfield County, as well as those making weekend trips to the Northwest corner. 

The historic station in downtown New Milford, Buckbee added, was once a part of the defunct Berkshire Line that ran up to Pittsfield, Mass. Rail advocates hope that with the success of an initial expansion, trains will once again make the complete trip from the Berkshire hills to the coast. 

“There’s a lot of opportunity to expand Western Connecticut for more people to be able to access,” Buckbee said. "Let's show that it works, and then we expand."


200-apartment project planned for downtown Danbury gets environmental green light

Rob Ryser

DANBURY — A plan to build a seven-story apartment building and convert a Main Street office building into downtown housing got the environmental green light from the city’s wetlands commission — on four conditions.

The approval by the city’s wetlands commission last week of the 208-apartment project for south Main Street sets up a public hearing on Wednesday before the city’s Planning Commission. At the meeting, consultants for the developer will answer questions about traffic and other neighborhood impacts.

Known as The Legacy on Main, the developer plans to retrofit the five-story office building at 30 Main St. into 48 apartments and to build a 160-unit apartment building in the parking lot, atop a three-level parking garage.

00:00 / 00:32

The urban housing project, which is the type of development encouraged in the city’s recently adopted master plan for the next decade, represents the largest residential investment proposal in a central business district that has lagged behind the city’s booming west side and busy commercial strips on the east end.

On the west side, for example, there are proposals for 400 apartments at The Summit office complex, and for 195 apartments at the former Crowne Plaza Hotel.

The first step for developers of The Legacy was to convince the city’s environmental commission that the redevelopment of the 2.4-acre site at 30 Main St. would not degrade the nearby wetlands.

The city’s health department determined last week in a three-page report that the project would not “substantially diminish the natural capacity of the wetland … to support desirable biological life, prevent flooding, supply water, assimilate waste, facilitate drainage, provide groundwater recharge and/or provide recreation, open space or significant wildlife habitat.”

The report recommends the wetland commission approve the project on four conditions, including that if application information submitted by the developer “is subsequently proved to be false, incomplete or misleading, this permit may be modified, suspended or revoked, and the permittee may be subject to any other remedies or penalties provided by law.”

“I have no issues with the report,” Ben Doto, an engineer representing the developer, said at a Environmental Impact Commission meeting April 12. “I’m here to answer any questions if anything were to come up with respect to it.”

“The staff has recommended a summary ruling with four conditions,” said Bernie Gallo, the commission chair. “Any remarks, any questions?

Before a unanimous vote to approve the project, a commission member asked whether anything else had changed.

“No,” responded Gallo.

Another condition of approval is that the developer is required to “maintain sediment and erosion controls at the site in such an operable condition as to prevent the pollution of wetlands and watercourses,” should the project get Planning Commission approval.

Elsewhere on Main Street, a 149-unit apartment complex is nearly complete at the site of the former News-Times headquarters, and there are two other residential proposals. One plan calls for 100 units of workforce housing as part of a larger redevelopment of the old Fairfield County Courthouse. The other plan calls for 79 affordable apartments atop a two-level garage behind the headquarters of the nonprofit Connecticut Institute for Communities.


Officials defend, question look of new Southington library design

Jesse Buchanan

SOUTHINGTON — Town planners’ criticism of the new library design prompted debate among Town Council members. Republicans defended the design and planning process, while Democrats questioned the aesthetics, safety and future expansion possibilities of the building.

While the town’s Planning and Zoning Commission approved the proposed library design last week, planners had harsh words for the building’s look. Several said it looked like a factory and found it out of character with other buildings on that stretch of Main Street.

Jim Morelli, a Town Council Republican and library building committee chairman, defended the design during a council meeting Monday.

“A lot of work went into that design,” he said in response to questions from Democrats. “The architect is a renowned library designer.”

Valerie DePaolo, a Democratic councilor, asked if the design should come back for review.

“Our Planning and Zoning Commission is clearly not happy with how the building looks,” she said. “Shouldn’t we be really trying to take a look at this?”

DRA Architects of South Windsor worked on the design. The company, which also has offices in Massachusetts, designed Windsor, Tolland and Westbrook libraries.

“They designed that knowing it’s a gateway into our town,” Morelli said.

Paul Chaplinsky, a Republican and council vice chairman, said the aesthetics are outside the planning commission’s purview. He’s a former planning commission member.

Chaplinsky also said that the renderings of the proposed $17 million library have been available to the public for months and that the time to bring up concerns was much earlier in the process.

Debate over library size, design

Republicans, who hold a majority on town boards and commissions, have clashed with Democrats over a new library. Voters approved $17 million for a library building last year and at the time town officials expected a 30,000 square-foot building for that amount.

As town officials determined the cost of construction, the plan was reduced to a 24,000 square-foot building to stay within the $17 million amount. Democrats suggested going back to voters to approve more money for the library.

Morelli said his committee has worked hard to stay within the $17 million budget and still get a library that meets the town’s needs. That affected the building’s design as well as placement and layout.

“We have constraints on the look and the feel based on masonry versus siding,” Morelli said, responding to a criticism that the new building wasn’t brick to match surrounding buildings. “We have a budget.”

Sidewalks andparking lots

Much of the planning commission’s discussion last week prior to its five to two vote in favor of approving the library centered on sidewalks and parking.

The new library will have parking in two lots with the library building in between. Planners and some Democratic councilors questioned why there wasn’t a sidewalk connecting the two lots, saying it could be hazardous to pedestrians.

Morelli and others said there is a sidewalk along the front of the building, just not along the road connecting the two lots. With a steep incline on the back of the property, adding a sidewalk to that road would add a major cost as it would require a higher retaining wall and more excavation.

“We don’t really have room for it and it would cost us a lot of money to squeeze it in there,” Morelli said. “We have a very tight site.”

Last week, Todd Ritchie, a civil engineer with SLR Consulting, said the proposed building was about all the site could fit. The possibility of adding to the library to meet future needs had been raised by Republican councilors during discussions about the library’s size.

DePaolo said that was the first time she’d heard the library wouldn’t be expanded.

“I think it’s going to be a nice library, but I think it’s going to be too small from the minute it goes up,” she said.

The library plans have 3,000 square-feet more than the current building. Supporters say it’s got more useable and flexible space that’s better laid out for modern uses.

Responding to DePaolo’s questions about additions during the council meeting, Morelli said that wasn’t part of the charge to the library building committee. He’s focused on building the best possible library for the amount approved at referendum.

“(Additions) were never in the purview of the building committee,” Morelli said.


Gales Ferry Neighbors Push for Buffers as Dredging Company Plans Expansion

Brendan Crowley

GALES FERRY — Neighbors of a 165-acre industrial site on the Thames River being developed by a Massachusetts dredging and marine services company say they don’t want to stop the project, but want the company to compromise by leaving more of a buffer for their neighborhood.

Quincy-based Cashman Dredging and Marine Contracting applied to the Ledyard Planning and Zoning Commission for approval of a 20,000 square foot repair facility for equipment the company uses in marine contracting and dredging throughout the northeast. 

Planned for the northern edge of the former Dow Chemical property between Route 12 and the Thames River, it’s the first and smallest piece of what Cashman has said are plans to develop a complex of industrial buildings on the property. Cashman has also proposed a processing facility for dredged materials, but said it is putting that project on hold while the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection works on new dredging regulations.

Neighbors on River Drive, a short street next to the north end of the Cashman property, said they want the company to maintain as much as they can of an existing 300-foot stretch of trees that buffers their neighborhood. 

The company is proposing to clear almost all of it to make room for the repair facility and a lay-down yard that Cashman Vice President Alan Perrault said during a public hearing Thursday night will be used to store aggregate that would be shipped out of the site by rail, and for offshore wind materials headed for the New London State Pier.

Stanley Lucas, a River Drive neighbor who said he bought and is making a considerable investment to renovate the 1793 building on the property immediately neighboring the northern edge of the industrial property, said he was concerned the development being so close to the neighborhood would hurt their property values.

“It’s an idyllic neighborhood. Every day of the year is special, regardless of the weather. We see so many animals there, it’s like a zoo, it’s really amazing,” Lucas said. “Anything these gentlemen [at Cashman] are doing, these corporations, these businesses — we understand their motivation in what they’re doing. But we have an obligation to protect our own neighborhood, our neighbors, our quality of life and our investments.”

Lucas said the existing buffer of trees, many of which are old and large, is what is going to block the neighborhood from the effects of the industrial complex. The tree buffer was also the main concern of Dave Harned, another neighbor who said he was speaking on behalf of a group of residents called Citizens Alliance for Land Use.

Harned said it seems “self-evident” that Cashman’s proposals for the site will have a negative impact on the neighborhood, but he said the group isn’t aiming to stop the project entirely. They want Cashman to succeed at the site, and they want the town to benefit from the tax revenue the development would generate, he said. 

But they also want to protect their neighborhood, he said, and noted that the building has the same impact on the tax base if it leaves more of a buffer for the neighborhood.

“We want to retain the entire landscape buffer, the company wants to remove virtually all of the landscape buffer — can we meet in the middle?” Harned asked. “That’s what compromise is all about. Maybe 150 feet would be reasonable, and most of those huge trees could be left behind.”

Harned said the group’s primary concern are a group of about 15 or 20 tall evergreens and other large deciduous trees that are about 75 feet inside Cashman’s property from the northern property line, and asked the company if it could shift its plans for the building to keep those intact.

Town Planner Juliet Hodge said she had also asked the company if they could try to adjust their plans to keep those large trees. Hodge said she agreed with Cashman’s attorney Harry Heller that the site is underutilized and that developing it is a great opportunity for the town to diversify its tax base. 

But she said it’s important for the commission to keep in mind the full scope of the planned development, beyond the repair facility. Some residents said they were concerned that Cashman was applying for just one small piece of their intended project, making it more difficult to see the full scope of the impact.

Cashman has applied to the Inland Wetland Commission to re-grade nearly 40 acres on the southern side of the property by blasting and clearing the hill to make room for several large industrial buildings the company has said it would lease out. The company outlined its full plans to build several large industrial buildings on the site in February, and said the process could take 10-15 years to fully complete.

Hodge said there are concerns that the site, while having a long industrial history, has not been used intensively in a while. Heller said the Dow plant was shuttered in 2011, and since then the site has been home only to Americas Styrenics, a joint venture of Dow and Chevron that manufactures Styrofoam on the property. Hodge said the committee can require a bigger buffer as a condition of the special permit.

“Fences make good neighbors, buffers make even better neighbors,” Hodge said.

Heller declined to respond to most of the neighbor comments on Thursday night, while the commission continued the public hearing — tentatively to its May 11 meeting, though Chair Tony Capon said it was possible they would hold a special meeting before then.


Major road in Beacon Falls will reopen later this year

ANDREAS YILMA 

BEACON FALLS – After more than two years of closure, Burton Road, a major town artery, is expected to finally reopen later this year.

The town on Dec. 24, 2020, closed the section of Burton Road from Wolfe Avenue to North Main Street to traffic due to structural issues and fears the road could fail.

The closed section of the road, which has a sidewalk on one side and a stone wall on the other, travels over a brook that runs behind the Beacon Mill Village apartments. The road previously shifted due to erosion of its foundation from the brook.

The state Department of Transportation has committed to give the town $2.9 million to fix the road through the Local Transportation Capital Improvement Program. The funds are administered by the Naugatuck Valley Council of Governments. The Board of Selectmen last year approved awarding the LOTCIP project to Dayton Construction of Watertown.

First Selectman Gerard Smith said the Burton Road project is coming along.

Eversource workers moved the vast majority of their telephone poles. Frontier workers went to the area to move their wires but said they couldn’t because Eversource didn’t move all of their wires.

“I can’t understand how Eversource can move their wires but Frontier can’t move them until Eversource moves them all because they want to do all their moves once,” Smith said. “They don’t want to come out twice.”

This won’t hinder Dayton Construction from coming back to work as they were out on the week of April 12th, said Smith.

“They’ve (Dayton Construction) been excellent,” Selectman Michael Krenesky said.

Smith said the next step is expected where workers will take out the wall that runs along the two homes on the corner of Wolfe Avenue and Maple Avenue. Workers will put in a wall that will mirror the wall that is down below on Burton Road.

“Once they do that, they’re going to start ripping out the road, grading, sidewalks because you have your structural concrete guys that come out and do the walls, then the flat concrete guys because all the sidewalks are going to be concrete,” Smith said. “So the sidewalks will get done from Main Street all the way up. Then they’ll rip the road out, grade the road. Then it’ll move right along pretty quickly.”

The official answer from Dayton Construction on when the road reconstruction will be finished is October, when the contract is up. Town officials expect it to be done sooner, Smith said.

“It (road) will be done before the end of 2023,” Smith said.

Krenesky said the mild winter helped workers move more quickly.

“Because they were able to work all winter, they’re totally ahead of everything,” Krenesky said.