Tweed Announces 2026 Construction Start
Tweed New Haven Airport’s operators announced this week that
construction should begin next year — and wrap up by 2028 — on a long-delayed
expansion project that has ballooned in cost to $250 million.
The top lawyer at a local environmental nonprofit and the
mayor of East Haven, meanwhile, expressed skepticism about that timeline — as
they voiced long-standing concerns around the project’s impact on the
surrounding environment and residential neighborhood.
In a Tuesday morning press release, the New York City-based
company STV — “a leading professional services firm that plans, designs and
manages infrastructure projects across North America” — announced that it had
been selected by Avports to
lead construction management for Tweed’s expansion.
At the center of that plan is the construction of a new
terminal on the East Haven side of the Morris Cove airport property as well as
the extension of the airport’s main runway by nearly 1,000 feet in order to
attract more commercial air service.
Tuesday’s announcement comes roughly a week after the
airport announced
the coming retirement of its executive director, and that the new East
Terminal’s design is now 70 percent complete.
It also comes a few days before the nonprofit Save the Sound
is set to appear in a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. on Friday
morning for oral arguments in a case that contests the
expansion’s potential environmental impact.
In a separate comment provided to the Independent on
Wednesday, East Haven Mayor Joseph Carfora said that Tweed’s newly announced
construction timeline is “premature” — as “this project remains subject to
local land use approvals, public safety review, and a complete understanding of
the impacts on East Haven residents.” (See more below.)
“We Are Ready To Turn This Vision Into Reality”
According to Tuesday’s press release, the airport expansion
project is now expected to cost $250 million. Back
when the project was first announced in 2021, the estimated price tag was $70
million.
The press release also states that construction is scheduled
to begin in 2026, and should be complete by 2028.
The press release does not identify a specific date in 2026
when construction should start, nor does it say exactly what the start of
construction should look like for the airport or surrounding area.
To quote directly from Tuesday’s press release, STV’s
Hartford-based team will oversee the development of the following parts of the
project:
A new 80,000-square-foot East Terminal designed to
improve operational efficiency and offer modern passenger amenities, including
expanded gate areas, upgraded concessions as well as comfortable waiting and
lounge spaces;
A runway extension from 5,600 feet to 6,575 feet, enabling
larger aircraft and expanded route options;
Parking facilities for up to 4,000 vehicles, improving
access and convenience for travelers;
Environmental enhancements, including restoring 28.5 acres
of tidal wetlands and creating more than three acres of new tidal salt marsh to
compensate for the nine acres of wetlands affected by the project.
“This is an exciting step forward for The New HVN,” Tweed
New Haven Airport Authority Chair Robert Reed is quoted as saying. “The
selection of STV marks real, tangible progress toward delivering an airport
that meets the growing demand for convenient air travel. We are encouraged by
the momentum behind this project and believe now is the time for local and
regional stakeholders to align with this progress. We look forward to watching
this next chapter take shape with the support and collaboration of our neighbors.”
“Tweed-New Haven Airport is a gateway for growth, and we’re
proud to help unlock its potential,” STV Vice President Mark DuPre is quoted as
saying.
“This partnership with STV demonstrates our commitment to
bringing home a newer, better airport for Southern Connecticut,” added The New
HVN CEO Michael Jones, whose private company runs the public airport’s
day-to-day operations. “STV understands that we are ready to turn this vision
into reality.”
Court Fight Heads To D.C.
Meanwhile, on Friday at 9:30 a.m., attorneys representing
Save the Sound and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) will square off in
oral arguments in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit.
They’ll be arguing the merits of Save
the Sound’s 2024 appeal of federal regulators’ 2023 approval of the airport’s
Environmental Assessment of the expansion project.
Save the Sound has argued that that review was “inadequate”
for a variety of reasons, including by not considering the actual number of
passengers this expansion would bring to Tweed. Avports and the airport
authority have argued that the FAA was right to determine that the expansion’s
“insignificant impacts to wetlands and floodplains can be adequately
mitigated.”
In a Wednesday afternoon phone interview, top Save the Sound
attorney Roger Reynolds dismissed the airport’s Tuesday’s press release as
“just another in the many they’ve made” in recent months. “To date they haven’t
chosen to seriously address the environmental issues” associated with this
expansion project, including that the new terminal will be constructed
“entirely in a flood plain” and around a residential neighborhood and
“sensitive wetlands.”
“Until they choose to seriously engage with the
environmental issues instead of simply trying to minimize and distract from
them, we don’t believe the project is going to be able to move forward,”
Reynolds said.
He confirmed that lawyers representing Save the Sound and
the FAA will engage in oral arguments on Friday at 9:30 a.m. in a D.C. federal
appeals court in regards to Save the Sound’s Environmental Assessment appeal.
Each side will have ten minutes to argue their case before a three-judge panel.
East Haven Mayor: This Timeline Is “Premature”
Carfora, the mayor of East Haven, told the Independent in an
email comment Wednesday that none of the airport’s public announcements or
construction timelines change the fact that the expansion project must also be
approved by local agencies in East Haven.
“Our position has been consistent,” Carfora wrote. “East
Haven must not be placed in a different category than any other community
affected by a major expansion of this kind. The applicant followed local zoning
and environmental processes in New Haven, and we expect the same respect for
East Haven’s jurisdiction. This includes meaningful engagement on issues such
as traffic circulation, stormwater and flood risk, emergency access, and the
ongoing burden placed on the neighborhoods that border the airport.”
He added that the town will “exercise every regulatory and
legal opportunity available to ensure that East Haven is protected. We will
continue to participate in state and federal agency proceedings and will
evaluate any new materials that Avports or STV submit. No press release can
substitute for the required review or diminish the concerns raised by our
residents, our public safety officials, and our engineering staff.
“Until that process is complete, any representation that the
project is ready to move forward is premature.”
State bond package steers $31M to Hartford development projects
State officials are preparing to direct more than $31
million toward economic development and community projects in Hartford under a
$3 billion bonding package slated for a Dec. 18 vote by the state Bond
Commission.
Hartford’s share includes about $17.5 million routed through
the Capital Region Development Authority.
The bond commission agenda, which covers statewide agency
operations, municipal grants and community-focused investments, is widely
expected to pass; items that reach the panel are almost always approved.
CRDA-directed funding for Hartford includes:
$5 million for repairs and maintenance at several downtown
public parking garages managed by the agency.
$4 million for a loan supporting a $13.64 million renovation
of the 96-room, 64-year-old Capitol Hotel at 440 Asylum St., where new
ownership plans to add nine rooms and upgrade common areas, the grounds and the
underground garage.
$2 million for a grant program to assist tenant buildouts
for new retailers and restaurants near the recently renovated PeoplesBank
Arena.
$3.5 million for a loan to developer Carlos Mouta’s
Parkville Management for a $4.6 million expansion adding 47 apartments to the
mixed-use building at 1429 Park St. The former factory already includes 96
residential units, office space and ground-floor retail, including Dead
Language Beer Project.
$3 million for environmental compliance work and retail
tenant fit-outs in the Front Street arts and entertainment district.
Another $3.8 million is slated for the next phase of a
five-year, $60 million project to repair and upgrade Pratt & Whitney Stadium at Rentschler Field in East
Hartford, also administered through CRDA.
ADVERTISEMENT
“We are pleased to be receiving these funds for important
projects in Hartford and East Hartford,” CRDA Executive Director David Steuber
said. “It reflects a number of important work streams we are engaged in at
CRDA.”
Steuber said the planned renovation of the Capitol Hotel
will advance ongoing efforts to strengthen hospitality options in Hartford’s
downtown business district. He added that the CRDA-focused investments on the
bond agenda are designed to reinforce one another and align with the agency’s
broader mission of boosting the region’s economic vitality.
Hartford is also positioned to receive $13.75 million in
community development funding recommended by the state’s Community Investment
Fund 2030 Board after its Sept. 30 meeting. Those allocations include:
$250,000 for Community
Renewal Team to plan a mixed-use affordable housing development on
Windsor Street.
$5 million to construct a new public library branch at 234
Barbour St.
$2 million to support restoration of Connecticut’s first
synagogue at 21 Charter Oak Ave.
$6.5 million for a North End project that will combine
affordable housing, daycare services and community-oriented retail, led by the
Mutual Housing Association of Greater Hartford Inc. and Citadel Community
Development Corp.
The bridge at Stamford's Wire Mill Road is complete, officials said
STAMFORD — Work on the Wire Mill Road bridge replacement in Stamford is
mostly complete following its May closure, officials said.
City Engineer Lou Casolo said the bridge reopened
Tuesday, finishing just before its end of the year deadline.
"I'm glad to be where we are at this point, and having
the traffic opened up before the holiday is also a nice gift back to the
city," he said.
Casolo said there are still a few things that need to be
completed, including relocating a gas line to the new bridge. He said some of
the other outstanding things that need to be done are weather dependent.
Cedar Heights Road and High Ridge Road were used as detours
while construction was ongoing. Casolo said the Cedar
Heights Road bridge was also replaced this year.
Casolo said the Cedar Heights and Wire Mill bridges are
dependent on one another because closing one allows traffic to flow over the
other and vice versa, thus allowing work to be completed swiftly with minimal
issues.
"When you have a complete closure, the project can
progress at a rate that's better, that's faster, versus closing and doing
things in stages," he said.
The Connecticut Department of Transportation previously said
the Cedar Heights bridge was in "serious" condition, citing major
defects and was described as "structurally deficient and functionally
obsolete."
Casolo said Cedar Heights Road bridge was closed and
construction began in April 2023. Despite facing multiple delays, it was
completed right before the Wire Mill Road bridge closed down.
"Cedar Heights is substantially complete," he
said. "There was a lot of overhead utility relocation there because
there's an Eversource substation located close to that bridge. So, the utility
companies are working to permanently relocate the utilities at Cedar Heights
Road, but the bridge is open... So there's no issue with with the flow of
traffic at either crossing."
He said the construction cost for the Wire Mill Road bridge
project was $2,173,243 and was 100% federally funded. He added that building
the Cedar Heights Road bridge project had cost $2,773,082 and was 80% federally
funded. Casolo said both projects received funds from the federal local bridge
program under the state Department of Transportation.
Congress looks to remove Coast Guard museum funding barrier
John Penny
New London — If the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act
passed by the House of Representatives this week gains final approval, it would
allow the U.S. Coast Guard for the first time to directly fund the $150 million
National Coast Guard Museum project being constructed on the city’s waterfront.
U.S. Rep. Joe Courtney, D-2nd District, said Thursday that
the $900
billion defense bill, which passed in the House on Wednesday in a 312-112
bipartisan vote but still needs Senate and presidential approval, would
essentially remove a decades-long funding barrier erected in the wake of a
landmark — and nationally lambasted — eminent domain decision.
The Fort Trumbull area in the late 1990s was cleared of
homes and businesses as part of a plan developed by the city and the New London
Development Corp. to help jump-start economic development in association with
the construction of Pfizer’s research headquarters.
That led to a bitter fight in which the refusal by a handful
of property owners — including lead plaintiff Susette Kelo — to sell their land
culminated in the 2005 U.S. Supreme Court case Kelo v. New London. The court
ruled in favor of New London and its use of eminent domain to seize the
properties for private development.
That case was unfolding as a location was being sought for a
new Coast Guard museum, Courtney said. He said some members of Congress,
unhappy with New London’s handling of the Fort Trumbull issue, enacted a
restriction that prevented the Coast Guard from making any appropriations to a
museum built inside the city.
“And since then, there’s been ongoing gymnastics on how to
resolve this statutory barrier,” Courtney said.
Courtney noted that a previous $50 million federal
appropriation for the museum project secured by U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy,
D-Conn., got around the funding blockade by earmarking the money for the
National Coast Guard Museum Association, not the Coast Guard.
Even with that federal aid and another $52 million in
donations, however, the association is roughly $48 million short. But the new
bill’s language creates a pathway to close that gap, Courtney said.
“It would allow the use of direct, existing funding by the
Coast Guard itself, which recently got billions for capital improvements
through a reconciliation bill, to support final museum construction work,”
Courtney said, referring to President Donald Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill
Act,” which commits $25 billion to the Coast Guard for various operational,
training and infrastructure upgrades.
Courtney cautioned that there have not yet been any funding
commitments from the Coast Guard, though its leaders did not oppose removing
the funding block.
The museum association’s president, Wes Pulver, said
Thursday that the group does not comment on pending legislation, but said he
and others “appreciated the continuing support of the Connecticut delegation
and the bipartisan effort toward building a world-class museum.”
Pulver previously said the association was exploring
entering into a construction loan and a future long-term lease agreement with
the U.S. Coast Guard to cover the funding shortfall. He said the association is
on track to turn the 89,000-square-foot,
six-story museum over to the Coast Guard next year with an anticipated 2027
opening.
A separate but related project calls for the construction of
a pedestrian
bridge connecting the museum and other downtown points with the Water
Street garage.
The State Bond Commission in 2018 earmarked $19.5 million
for construction of the bridge, and $500,000 in state funds were previously
approved for planning and design work. The work was initially estimated to take
about 16 months.
Pulver said in October that the sole bid for the 400-foot,
glass-enclosed span, from Manafort Brothers Inc., came in significantly higher
than expected.
A CT city is near to completing its ‘downtown revitalization.’ There’s a lot more to come.
It’s a full two decades after the launch of a highly
controversial plan to revive this Connecticut city’s downtown
Now, Bristol
is getting closer to selling the last of the Bristol Square Mall property that
it bought for $5.3 million in 2005.
The city this week announced it’s seeking developers to
build either apartments, condos or a mixed residential-and-commercial building
on 1.3 acres, the last part of the 17-acre site that it acquired
with dreams of a vast municipal facility.
Turning the decrepit and failing mall into a municipal
centerpiece was a
job that spanned the terms of six different mayors and a long series
of failed redevelopment proposals, with a contingent of voters complaining all
along that the city never should have gotten involved in the project.
But the property now has four of the city’s largest and most
modern buildings, with new restaurants opening and — city leaders hope — more
to come.
Carrier Construction is nearly done building 104 apartments
in two sleek, mid-rise buildings along North Main Street where the north end of
the mall stood and has already signed on to build another 30 on a smaller lot
to the south.
Monterrey, a Mexican restaurant, and the health-focused Pure
Foods this year both relocated to buildings on the property, which has taken on
the name Centre Square Village. Wheeler Health and Bristol Hospital have
already built substantial office and clinical buildings on the rest of the
land, leaving the 1.3-acre parcel as the final space available.
“While it may be the last parcel to be developed, I actually
think it is going to be the easiest since the rest of the downtown landscape
has been built with success and enthusiasm,” Mayor Ellen Zoppo-Sassu said
Wednesday.
“We are excited to see what the potential projects will be
to complement what we designed five years ago and have watched come to life,”
she said.
The city announced that through Jan. 26, 2026, it will
accept development proposals for the tract. Because the site is such a key part
of downtown, Bristol isn’t interested in selling it to a high bidder but
instead wants to compare detailed proposals from prospective buyers.
The city is looking for multifamily or mixed-use projects
for the site, and developers submitting qualified proposals will be invited to
interview with city officials, economic development director Justin Malley said
in an announcement.
The city’s frequently delayed downtown revitalization began
in the early 2000s during the administration of Mayor Gerard Couture, who
envisioned replacing the dying mall with a large municipal complex of community
buildings, open space, a fieldhouse, a Boys and Girls Club and more. His
administration hoped for substantial state aid from Gov. John Rowland, but
scandal drove Rowland from office and the hope for tens of millions in state
funding vanished.
Taxpayers turned on Couture, voting him out of office that
fall. The mall was subsequently demolished and what was left behind was a vast,
ugly vacant lot of broken concrete and gravel. A succession of mayors tried
various consultants, marketing firms and new development schemes, but there was
not solid progress until Bristol Hospital constructed a three-story,
60,000-square-foot office and medical lab complex on four acres there.
Wheeler Health built its 45,000-square-foot headquarters and
treatment center several years later, and Carrier has rapidly followed with two
four-story apartment buildings.
A Heated Split in Old Lyme Over Fees and Figures for Shoreline Sewers
OLD LYME — Members of the town’s Water and Pollution Control
Authority were locked in a heated dispute Tuesday over the numbers underlying a
shoreline sewer project just one week before residents vote on whether to
approve a doubling of the project budget.
Some WPCA members criticized chair Steve Cinami for what
they claimed was an attempt to make the figures appear more favorable, and a
workaround that may sidestep potential liability for town taxpayers.
The controversy came after Selectman Jim Lampos publicly
warned that the town could be left on the hook for millions of
dollars, even though officials had previously stated that only residents in the
affected area would pay. Cinami disputed Lampos’ calculations, claiming the
actual amount would be considerably lower.
The debate centers on state statute
7-249, which caps what property owners can be charged at no more than the
increase in their property values from sewer installation. Any excess amount
can be appealed by homeowners and may ultimately have to be divided among all
taxpayers in the town.
At Tuesday’s WPCA meeting, Cinami introduced a new approach
he said could reduce potential town liability.
Cinami proposed, and the WPCA approved in a split vote,
charging a $6,000 connection fee. This would not represent an additional
expense for residents but rather reclassify part of the project cost as a fee,
which Cinami argued should not count toward the assessment.
Cinami estimated $38,700 as the cost per EDU, the
theoretical unit calculation used to allocate project costs among properties.
By reducing the assessment by $6,000, this would bring cost down to about
$32,700.
Under these calculations, fewer properties would exceed the
legal limit, meaning Old Lyme taxpayers would face reduced liability. It would
also mean beach area residents would pay more for the project without being
able to challenge the assessment.
Mary Daley, a WPCA member and Sound View resident who
opposes the project, said she was initially “terribly confused” and questioned
the last-minute proposal.
“It sounds like you’re trying to make a public statement
that the EDU is less than what it is,” Daley said. “And really in the end, it’s
what the end user is going to have to pay for the system whether you call it an
assessment or EDU.”
Cinami’s argument shifted throughout the meeting. After
stating it wasn’t an additional payment because it was part of the project,
included in the cost per EDU, he then said it wasn’t a project cost but rather
an expense of inspections after connecting to the sewers, requiring a paid
inspector.
“The hookup fee is there for a reason. It’s to cover people
going out inspecting. It’s to do the paperwork,” Cinami said. “It’s not free to
put in, to put in a pipe in the ground.”
If accurate, it would mean connection paperwork would cost
15 percent of the cost per EDU.
By comparison, connection fees in New London and East Lyme
cost $2,600 and $1,240 per EDU, respectively. Those fees are not just
paperwork, but charge new users for investments that connected users have made
in the past to build the infrastructure.
Daley warned Cinami that WPCA attorneys had cautioned that
pushing costs into user fees or connection fees would face a legal challenge.
“This is going to be a court matter if you continue,” Daley
said.
“That’s why we put extra money in the budget for attorneys,
I guess,” Cinami replied.
The maneuver was defended by WPCA Vice Chair Corey Bullock,
who said it was possible that the owner of a vacant lot might decide to build
and connect in 20 years and that the fee should be paid then.
WPCA member Dimitri Tolchinski questioned the proposed
amount.
“It could be whatever we decide,” Cinami replied.
Tolchinski criticized how the matter had been raised and
said it was “a new surprise” to him.
“This is going to be a question mark for the future,”
Tolchinski said.
“It’s not a question mark in my book. I believe I have the
right to charge,” Cinami said. “They address hookup fees in the state statute.”
At Cinami’s request, WPCA board member Randy Nixon also read
the statute, supporting Cinami’s interpretation. He also backed the proposed
amount, arguing that was the figure that had always been discussed — something
both Daley and Lampos disputed .
Dennis Melluzzo, a WPCA member and project opponent,
questioned genesis of the idea.
“Has there been a subcommittee formed on this that I don’t
know about?” Melluzzo asked.
“Absolutely not,” Cinami responded.
“Pretty funny that two people that are talking have very
current knowledge of this and this is the first we’ve seen it was today,”
Melluzzo said.
“I certainly wouldn’t put something on the agenda, Dennis,
that I haven’t researched,” Cinami responded.
“I’m talking Corey [Bullock], I’m talking Randy [Nixon],”
Melluzzo said.
In a tense atmosphere, the WPCA approved allocating the
connection fee. Voting in favor were Bullock, Nixon, Andrea Lombard, Rob
McCarthy and Brad Yerks. Voting against were Daley, Tolchinski and Brian
Cornell.
Town meeting
Before the WPCA debate, there was a town meeting that was
adjourned to next Tuesday’s referendum.
Lampos was the first to speak, and responded to criticism by
Cinami of his cost estimates. Lampos said he had based his calculations on the
latest figures from the state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection
and had adopted a 6 percent contingency, considering the assumptions outlined
by the engineering firm Fuss and O’Neill.
expressed confidence in his numbers in August, the cost per
EDU he estimated then
was $1,900, and after adding all components and a review by an accountant hired
by the town, it rose to $3,121.
Lampos also responded to Cinami’s criticism that his
estimates included interest costs instead of considering only capital, saying
the Board of Selectmen had clearly labeled their assumptions about interest
charges.
“Chairman Cinami has argued we should instead present the
base price, as a sticker price on the car, that was argued as being true in the
case of the project,” Lampos said. “Personally I believe there’s a difference
between being a public servant and being a car salesperson.”
Resident Tom Grant questioned the cost increase from $9.5
million — the amount approved in the 2019 referendum — to more than $20.5
million.
“That’s not inflation. That’s robbery,” Grant said. “That’s
just unacceptable.”
Grant also questioned whether residents would be voting
without knowing what percentage of the total cost would fall on taxpayers.
“Something that we have no idea whether or not we’re going
to be affected by,” Grant said.
“There’s just a controversy as to how that’s calculated,”
Lampos replied.
Jack Gibson raised a similar concern, saying he did not live
in the area affected by the project and understood he would not be charged with
the sewer costs.
First Selectwoman Martha Shoemaker said they could not
guarantee that, as it would depend on property values in four years when the
next reassessment is conducted.
The chair’s numbers
Cinami, who arrived at the meeting after Lampos had spoken,
publicly challenged the figures presented by Lampos two weeks ago. He said the
Board of Selectmen had rounded-up to add about $140,000 to internal work costs.
He pointed out other cost discrepancies.
“Not much, but all this adds up and starts to make a
difference,” Cinami said. According to Cinami, his estimates were $860,000
lower than the budget presented by the Board of Selectmen for the referendum.
According to estimates Cinami shared with CT Examiner after
the meeting, the total project cost would be $34,871 per EDU, and adding the
New London and East Lyme connection fees brings it to $38,711. He proposed
deducting the internal connection fees discussed at the meeting from that
amount.
Cinami stated the cost could even be $2,000 lower since he
did not believe the contingency would be spent.
“All these numbers we’ve gone through before,” Cinami said.
“I’m confident that they’re accurate within probably 1% or 2% give or take.”
The sewer project, intended to resolve the high density of
houses and septic systems along the shoreline, has been pushed by the state
Department of Energy and Environmental Protection but is opposed by
many residents who say it is neither affordable nor necessary.
DEEP has offered to cover part of the cost through Clean
Water Funds. The latest offer includes a 25 percent grant toward the total
project and an additional $15 million in forgivable loans for shared
infrastructure.
The project would install sewers in Sound View and Area B —
two neighborhoods that are directly part of the town and where there are about
210 properties — and the three private beach associations: Old Lyme Shores, Old
Colony and Miami Beach.
On Dec. 16, voters will decide whether to approve expanding
the budget authorized in 2019 to more than double. All property owners in Old
Lyme — beach residents and non-beach residents alike — will be eligible to
vote.