Connecticut DOT to conduct road work in East Hampton
Press Staff
EAST HAMPTON — The Connecticut Department of Transportation is announcing the scheduled closure and detour of Route 66 (East High Street) for a replacement of the existing box culvert carrying Pocotopaug Creek that crosses Route 66 in front of the American Distillery building.
Work will also occur between the Subway building and Classic Auto on the south side, according to a press release.
Traffic on Route 66 will be detoured beginning on July 23 for approximately two weeks.
The project consists of removing the old concrete box culvert structure and concrete endwalls and replacing them with a new reinforced concrete box culvert, which is seven feet high and 11 feet wide, including new endwalls and wingwalls, the news release said.
Utilities have been temporarily relocated, and will be returned to their original location once the new structure is in place. The existing pavement will be replaced between the project limits of roughly the Belltown Smoke Shop and Classic Auto properties, according to the town.
DOT Project No. 0041-0118 was awarded to Mizzy Construction of Plainville, with an estimated cost of $2.4 million, Feb. 9, and is scheduled for completion Oct. 9.
A well-signed detour will be in place to guide motorists around the construction. A truck route is included with the detour to ease local congestion.
Prior to, and after, the Route 66 closure, motorists can expect alternating one-way traffic on Route 66 on a periodic basis to minimize the duration of the road closure to maximum extent possible, the release said. Uniformed traffic persons, municipal police, and signing patterns will be used to direct traffic through the work zone during these times and while the contractor is actively working
Motorists are advised to remain alert and to use caution when driving through work zones.

Natural gas is the past. Natural gas is also the future.
 On Sunday, Virginia-based utility Dominion Energy Inc announced plans to sell almost all of its natural gas pipeline and storage assets to Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Inc for $4 billion. At the same time, the Virginia-based utility said that it's killing the Atlantic Coast gas pipeline despite a Supreme Court ruling that would grant it passage underneath the Appalachian Trail.
There's a lot going on here, and not just for the second-biggest U.S. power company by market value and the Oracle of Omaha. Natural gas, the "bridge fuel" to decarbonize the U.S. electricity system, is under pressure. But it's not yet a bridge to nowhere.
There are a number of factors motivating Dominion's strategy. The first is that permitting for gas infrastructure is "increasingly litigious, uncertain, and costly," Chief Executive Officer Thomas Farrell said during a call with analysts to discuss its plans. The second factor is that the economics of operating a midstream pipeline-even one that has had no trouble attracting customers-aren't great, Farrell admitted.
That doesn't mean the company is getting out of gas entirely. It still burns gas in power plants and will for some time. It also still owns distribution networks, which deliver gas to customers. That's the infrastructure Dominion sees carrying it into the future.
The whole thing is part of a strategy to generate more of its earnings from assets with a return on equity that's determined by state regulators. That may sound unexciting, but that's part of the point. It's predictable, and it gives Dominion a clear story to tell capital markets: for every dollar we invest in regulated assets, we'll receive X amount back, guaranteed.
There's a slide in Dominion's analyst presentation that illustrates this idea. It shows the company's past acquisitions of mostly-regulated companies such as gas distributor Questar and electric and gas utility Scana leading directly to Dominion's decision to sell its midstream gas interests and other assets. The result, it hopes, is that 90% of its operating earnings will come from state-regulated operations.
There's a financial strategy at work here too, one that I've written about before. It has three parts, the first of which is that returns on equity-both what utilities ask regulators for and what they're awarded-have been falling for decades. Not only that, the spread between asked and awarded is also fairly tight, and definitely tighter than it was in the mid-2000s and in the mid-1990s. That's good for messaging: it means you can say that what you want is pretty close to what regulators think you deserve.The second part of this strategy comes from the long-term decline in the risk-free rate of return on investments, as represented by the U.S. 10-year Treasury yield. We can think of 10-year Treasurys as a utility's opportunity cost for not investing in regulated businesses; the spread between a utility's awarded ROE and the 10-year note is effectively the risk-adjusted return on equity for regulated utilities. That spread is at a near-record high, north of 800 basis points, and it's more than double the risk-adjusted return of 25 years ago.
The third part of this strategy is that Dominion can match a clear growth path to this return on equity. Virginia's power sector aims to be 100% clean energy by 2045, which requires building at least 16 gigawatts of wind and solar generation assets. Dominion is allowed, by Virginia law, to own up to 65% of those assets. Those it owns will become part of the utility rate base, the assets on which it earns its ROE. It's not quite risk-free, but it's not far off.
The same is happening all over the country, meaning that gas networks on the other coast face pressure, too. In California a number of municipalities have mandated all-electric new construction-that is, gas won't be connected even for cooking purposes.
In the past three weeks, two of the state's big utilities, Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison, have written to the California Energy Commission in support of a statewide all-electric buildings mandate. SCE's letter says it wants the Commission to move "as quickly as possible" so that utilities might "avoid costly spending on natural gas infrastructure that may become stranded before 2045." Implicit in that statement: not every gas infrastructure operator can count on Warren Buffett or his successors to buy their assets when the time comes.

East Lyme Board of Finance postpones police building decision to July 20
Mary Biekert
East Lyme — The Board of Finance has postponed until July 20 its decision on whether to approve a request to bond an additional $2.17 million to complete plans to renovate and remodel the town’s future public safety building.
The board originally was set to hear and consider a presentation from the appointed vision committee tasked with planning renovations Wednesday, as well as decide on whether to approve the money needed to complete the project.
Now that the decision has been postponed, town registrars also have postponed a potential referendum date for voters to weigh in on the decision from July 23 to July 30.
Chairwoman Camille Alberti said by phone, as well as to the board, Wednesday she postponed the presentation and decision so the public safety building would be the only item on the board’s agenda at a special meeting July 20 instead of balancing both regular business and the decision at its regular meeting Wednesday. “The public safety building is important enough to warrant its own special meeting,” she said by phone. “That will be the sole focus of the (July) 20th meeting.”
Alberti told The Day she also is collecting information from Finance Director Anna Johnson about the full spectrum of costs associated with the building she believes have been left from public attention. She said an example of an unconsidered "project cost" is how much the town is spending on electricity for the unoccupied building, as well as the amount of interest the town has paid for its short-term loans to purchase the $2.77 million building last May. Alberti also has said she is trying to better understand the amount of interest the town will pay in the future on the bonds to purchase and renovate the building, among several other factors, such as the cost of an eventual roof replacement and air handling unit, which architects have estimated will cost more than $300,000 at some point.
Alberti said she plans to discuss and review those costs in detail with the board at its July 20 meeting after hearing a detailed presentation of the proposed remodeling from the Public Safety Building Vision Committee, which has been planning the building’s renovations with contracted architects Silver/Petrucelli + Associates since last summer.
The Board of Finance, as well as voters at a referendum in early 2019, approved bonding up to $5 million to purchase and fully renovate the former Honeywell building at 277 West Main St. to consolidate the town’s police force, dispatch center and fire marshal’s office after the Board of Selectmen had requested $6 million to complete the project.
But after the vision committee, which was appointed in early 2019 and is made up of police Chief Mike Finkelstein, selectmen, former members from the Board of Finance and members of the public, determined in May an additional $2.17 million would be needed to fully complete the building, the finance board now must approve the request before voters are given final say on the matter.
The estimated $7,178,566 renovation plan, as presented to the Board of Selectmen last month, includes the following: the cost of purchasing the more than 30,000-square-foot structure; three holding cells and a sally port area; an elevator cab; up to $500,000 in information technology infrastructure; an estimated $40,000 to eventually hook up to public water; more than $100,000 in architect fees; $50,000 for a clerk of the works; about $308,000 for contingency costs, as well as other miscellaneous items. Plans are limited to just the ground floor of the building, with the second floor left vacant to possibly be occupied in the future by other town departments.
The Board of Selectmen unanimously approved the additional $2.17 million request at a meeting in June, during which they hailed the proposed renovation plan as urgent and necessary, as well as the best deal for the town, after they described decades of placing the town's police force on "the back burner" to make way for pressing school projects.
Town police currently are housed in a small Main Street building, which the town rents from owner Dominion for $1 a year, that has significant flooding, mold and mildew issues and which First Selectman Mark Nickerson has argued is not an appropriate work environment. The town also leases holding cell and evidence collection space from Waterford for approximately $46,000 annually because it does not have such space in its current police building.
Should the Board of Finance deny the request, Alberti said the Board of Selectmen will have jurisdiction over whether to scale back project plans or possibly abandon the project. The same would be true if voters reject the vision committee’s request for more money at a referendum.
Registrars Mary Smith and Wendi Sims said by phone Thursday that they have been working closely with the town clerk in recent weeks to prepare for a possible referendum. Smith said the July 30 referendum, should it happen, will be in person, but she and the town clerk are planning a curbside voting option for those uncomfortable voting in person despite several safety measures that will be in place to protect poll workers and voters.

‘This doesn’t fit:' Enfield neighbors rush to mobilize against proposed distribution center
Jessica Lerner
 nly at the 11th hour did residents of the Misty Meadows and Maple Heights neighborhoods learned that Enfield's Planning and Zoning Commission would consider an application for a proposed 501,500-square-foot distribution center near their homes.
They had received no formal notice about the application from the town or from the applicant, Adam Winstanley, owner of Massachusetts-based real estate development company Winstanley Enterprises. So the neighbors scrambled to mobilize before the PZC made its decision on the proposed 43-foot-high distribution center at 113 N. Maple St. The decision was originally expected during the commission’s June 25 meeting.
It was quite an undertaking, according to organizer Dale Butrymowicz of 11 Winter Way. The neighbors, who had to rely on word of mouth, had mere hours to convince the PZC to hold a public hearing on the plan.
PZC Chairman Ken Nelson said Tuesday that the application didn’t require a public hearing. But the commission voted unanimously on June 25 to hold one at its next meeting, this Thursday, to give residents an opportunity to voice their concerns.
While Nelson wouldn’t comment on the matter further, another PZC member, who asked to not be identified, felt badly that the neighbors were getting the proposed distribution center “jammed” down their throats. The member said town Development Services Director Laurie Whitten should have called a public hearing from the start, even though the town’s zoning regulations don’t require one.
The member agreed with the residents that the hearing was rushed but said that two weeks is better than nothing.
While the commission member doesn’t believe the site plan review should be approved in just one meeting, the member said it will probably win the commission’s approval Thursday.
Continuance possible
Even securing a public hearing, though, was an uphill battle. While the commission members believed it would be in the public interest to hold a hearing, allowing residents to voice their opinions on a large project that will affect the surrounding residential area, there was pushback from Winstanley and Whitten.
Winstanley was worried that delaying the approval would affect construction, which is slated to start in August.
As a compromise, the PZC agreed to close the public hearing on the same night that it begins, this Thursday, then vote on the application. If the project is approved Thursday, Winstanley can start construction as scheduled.
While this was agreeable to the PZC and Winstanley, the neighbors take issue with the tight timeframe. They have met a few times over the past two weeks to coordinate their efforts.
The proposed distribution center has been designed to accommodate two tenants — Agri-Mark, a Massachusetts-based company that distributes a wide variety of dairy products throughout the United States, and a second yet-to-be-named company.
“Why is this so secret?” asked Thomas Grigely of 18 Deer Run. “Why is this being rushed through? How did this all happen? Why did it all happen so secretly? Why was it so silent? Why was it so quick? It begs the question, ‘Why?’”
Adam Winstanley wasn’t available to answer those questions. A representative of his said he was on vacation for the week.
Not a secret
While town staff members learned the specifics of the proposal only a few months ago, Bromson reminded residents that the property has been zoned for industrial use for more than 30 years.
So while the town manager understands the angst of residents, especially those whose properties abut the 71-acre parcel, he said there is nothing illegal about the proposal.
“When you’re a neighbor, you’d much rather look out and have a nice farmland than … a building, … but when it’s an existing legal use, if you apply for that purpose they have a right to use it for the purpose that it’s zoned,” Bromson said.
Still, many neighbors have concerns about the scope of the project and its impact on the neighborhood.
Increased traffic and congestion are a worry for many, as neighbors say there is already much truck traffic in the area. The proposed project, which would have three entrances, would generate additional car and truck traffic.
A traffic study performed by the Fuss & O’Neill engineering firm concluded that the proposed development wouldn’t have a significant impact to traffic operations in the area. But some residents question the validity of the study.
Pandemic affects traffic
For one, the study was performed during the COVID-19 pandemic, which the traffic study reports affected “ambient traffic volumes” due to Gov. Ned Lamont’s executive order restricting nonessential businesses. To compensate for this, the state Department of Transportation adjusted traffic counts to reflect previously observed levels. But some remain unconvinced by the methodology.
Another area of concern for many residents is noise.
Plans to minimize noise from the project include on-site traffic design intended to minimize trucks’ use of back-up alarms. In addition a 10-foot-high berm extending 1,100 feet is proposed, with 90 trees and shrubs planted in the area.
However, residents are unconvinced that the berm will do much good if the distribution center has refrigerator trucks — which can’t be turned off while parked for fear of spoiling perishable goods — coming and going at all hours of the day and night.
Agri-Mark plans to operate at the center from 5 a.m. to 5 p.m. throughout the week, but that could change. The hours of the other tenant remain unknown, potentially meaning the distribution center could operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week all year long.
The site plan review application says land records were reviewed for any environmental hazards, and none were identified. But the site plan doesn’t go into more detail about what methods were used as part of the applicant’s “due diligence.”
For some, including Butrymowicz, there’s a fear of contaminated soil on the former farmland. Several banned pesticides were found in 2006 on the athletic fields of the former Enrico Fermi High School, which is across North Maple Street from the Winstanley site.

Westport Board of Selectmen reject Hiawatha Lane sewer extension
DJ Simmons
WESTPORT — The Board of Selectmen acting as the Water Pollution Control Authority unanimously rejected a sewer extension request to increase housing density on Hiawatha Lane.
First Selectman Jim Marpe said he supported a denial of the 1,600-foot sewer extension proposed by Summit Saugatuck LLC because it was rejected by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
“Both the statute and our own WPAC policies would not allow us to approve it,” Marpe said.
The denial is the latest in Summit’s highly contested plan to bring a 187-unit housing complex to Hiawatha Lane.The Water Pollution Control Authority denied the sewer line extension proposal in 2003 and again in 2016 because the main pipe underneath the Saugatuck River and Pump Station 2 needed repairs.
When an agency issues denials, it is obligated to state all of its reasons, he said.
“It can’t issue one reason in year one, and then if that reason is later invalidated at some point in the process, reintroduce new or different reasons that could have been raised previously in the initial application,” he said.
Hollister said the Planning and Zoning Commission ignored administrative law by creating new reasons for denial not stated in the first denial.
“If this board chooses to deny this application based only on the 8-24 negative report....we will take that issue back to the court system,” Hollister said.
Peter Gelderman, the town’s attorney, said a similar issue has come up in prior litigation with the trial court not supporting the town’s position, but the appellate court stating it’s complex.
“We feel strongly that our interpretation of 8-24 is correct,” he said. “In fact, I don’t personally see another way to read it.”Gelderman said he believed the town would prevail in court if that was the next step.