Will Bridgeport finally get high-speed ferry service? The city is investing in that possibility.

Brian Lockhart

BRIDGEPORT — If someone compiled a list of dream projects for this city, a casino and high speed ferry service to New York City would be in competition for the top slot.

Both economic development projects have been proposed here at different times over the last few decades, but ground was never broken — until last October at 330 Water St. along the harbor.

That was when the Bridgeport Port Authority, with no fanfare, began construction of a new dock city officials say is aimed at attracting a private company interested in providing regular commuters as well as tourists high-speed ferry service between Connecticut's largest municipality and New York City.

Dan Onofrio, president of the Bridgeport Regional Business Council, said he only learned about the construction last month.

"We're like, 'Wait, so this is definitely happening?'" Onofrio said. "I heard about it but didn't know they were affirmatively doing it."

Tom Gill, Bridgeport's economic development chief, confirmed in an interview, "We're going to build the facility and put out an RFP (request for proposal) for an operator."

He said the operator would lease the terminal.

The effort, according to Mayor Joe Ganim's office, is being paid for with nearly $8 million in federal aid awarded years ago and administered through the state's transportation department, $2.5 million out of the city's share of the American Rescue Plan that federal lawmakers passed in 2021 to help bolster the national economy during the global coronavirus pandemic and $700,000 from the Bridgeport Port Authority.

That $11.2 million total is funding installation of "a docking system for passengers," ticket booth, lighting and security cameras at the end of Water Street near where the Bridgeport/Port Jefferson Steamboat Company currently operates its regular-speed ferries to Long Island.

"It is being built in a fashion that would allow a ferry terminal building to be constructed in the future," according to Ganim's office. 

The RFP is supposed to be issued in May, with the dock infrastructure completed "in the last quarter" of the year.

City Council President Aidee Nieves said she was never apprised about the high-speed dock project or that it was using up $2.5 million in American Rescue Plan aid. She said those funds might be better invested in other needed municipal infrastructure.

"Only a few people know about this and there hasn't been a briefing," Nieves said. "I understand (it is) to make us more competitive as far as transportation. (But) we're going to invest money into something (hoping) 'if we build it, they will come?' ... Where are the numbers to say this project is the right one to do at this time versus other projects?"

A similar $17 million high-speed ferry terminal in Glen Cove has remained empty for over six years, the Long Island Herald newspaper reported in late November. 

According to a project description from the Bridgeport website, "in the mid-2000s" the port authority studied the matter and "research and market analysis found that providing a high-speed ferry option as an alternative transportation method between Bridgeport, Stamford and New York would be viable, cost competitive and have a comparable travel time of commuting ... by car or rail." 

"There's some level of confidence that getting this high-speed ferry infrastructure in place will lead to a good result when they release the RFP," Tom Gaudett, a top Ganim aide, said. He noted, for example, that in 2021 the Bridgeport Boatworks' facility on the other side of the harbor announced a new tenant, Hornblower Group, which is using that Seaview Avenue address to maintain its fleet of cruise ships, sightseeing boats and ferries servicing New York City and other ports stretching from Boston to Norfolk, Va.

"The port authority and office of planning and economic development together are really tying to work on it, they're really pushing it forward," Gaudett said. "It happened a little late for everyone's taste, but it's happening at a time where something good might result."

But then there is the fact that, although the move has been delayed, the Bridgeport/Port Jefferson ferry for the last several years has been planning to relocate its terminal from the same area where a high-speed ferry would also operate, across the harbor to vacant land on Seaview Avenue. That decision was made in part because the site change will provide a far better route for the ferries to and from Long Island.

"It's a question of what kind of wake (waves) does a particular vessel make," Fred Hall, the Bridgeport-Port Jefferson operation's general manager, said. "Vessels which can make a large wake need to slow down substantially farther out (from shore)."

This eats up fuel and time. Hall said the future Seaview Avenue terminal will eliminate that problem for his boats because it is "closer to the mouth of the harbor."

"The design of a high-speed ferry may have a much lower 'wake profile,'" Hall added. "I can't speak to that because I don't have one."

Also, while past high-speed proposals for Bridgeport have included Stamford and Stamford Mayor Caroline Simmons' administration last summer was circulating a survey to gauge the need among local businesses, no additional action has since been announced in that city to the south.

Bridgeport's latest high-speed ferry effort is getting a mixed review from other local leaders.

"My gut reaction? It's a good thing," Onofrio said. "Providing people with alternative modes of travel to get them off the highways is a good thing for Bridgeport. ... We're at the nexus of Route 8, Interstate 95, the Merritt Parkway."

Councilman Scott Burns as a co-chairman of that local legislative body's budget committee initially was involved in coming up with ideas for spending down the $110 million Bridgeport received from the American Rescue Plan. A lot of that money has been invested in helping small businesses, nonprofits and on balancing the city's budget. But there was some left over, including $8 million that had been previously announced by Ganim for a since-abandoned effort to increase broadband infrastructure.

Burns said he was notified by the Ganim administration last year about its desire to finally push the ferry project forward using $2.5 million in ARP dollars and he is skeptical. He questioned how much of the effort is based on old data.

"I kind of let them know I was not pleased, but they went ahead and did it anyhow," he said.

Burns believes the port authority only moved forward because it faced losing the old $8 million federal grant, which is being administered by the state Department of Transportation.

"My understanding is the DOT said, 'If you don't do something with that money we're gonna ask for it back,'" Burns said. 

The DOT referred questions on Bridgeport's high-speed ferry initiative to the city.

Over three years ago, in late 2019, Gov. Ned Lamont released a transportation plan for the state that included high-speed ferry service to New York City from Bridgeport and Stamford.

"The state did get involved and said, 'You guys really need to get this infrastructure going,'" Gaudett said, adding it might have happened earlier were it not for the disruptions caused by the pandemic.

"COVID was not helpful and stopped a lot of things like this. Coming out of COVID, this was a priority," Gaudett said.

Jim Cameron, a longtime commuter and transportation advocate in the state, in 2019 panned a Fairfield County to New York City high-speed ferry as a "nonsensical idea."

"Such ferry service wouldn’t take cars off of Interstate 95. Those drivers aren’t going where the ferry does. And if they haven’t already opted for the train, why would they ever take a ferry?" Cameron wrote at the time in a column published by Hearst Connecticut Media.

Cameron this week said, "The only thing that has changed is maybe that the Metro-North trains are running slower and maybe that might increase demand. But I’m still of a mind that the demand is not there."

And, Cameron added, a high-speed ferry service would likely require more expensive fares than the train, be unable to compete with Metro-North's frequency, and also have to find space to dock somewhere in New York City.

But state Rep. Antonio Felipe, who represents the Water Street neighborhood, and City Councilman Ernie Newton, who co-chairs the budget committee with Burns and was also involved in ARP oversight, said it is worth the $11.2 million try.

"We've got a port," Newton said. "If we're serious about our port, we've got to put some dollars in it to make it work."

"I think anything that opens up access to the region is good, especially with the amenities we've built recently," Felipe said, referring to harborfront attractions like the new amphitheater and the Steelpointe redevelopment site with its marina, seafood restaurant and Bass Pro Shops store.

"The ARP funds were supposed to be this one time influx of money," Felipe said. "To use them for these kinds of one-time projects is exactly what it should be used for. ... My hope, as everybody in Bridgeport should hope, is that they get this done and across the finish line and get a win on this one."

Once envisioned for commercial development, Fort Trumbull is now filling up with housing

Johana Vazquez

New London ― Two decades ago the single- and multi-family houses that once populated the Fort Trumbull peninsula were demolished to make way for commercial development that never came.

But now with the city approving an agreement to sell the last three properties in Fort Trumbull, the state has increased the number of residential units allowed there to 604.

Development on the peninsula, until recently, has long been hindered by restrictions the state’s Department of Energy and Environmental Protection has placed on the number of residential units.

In 2000, the state and city established a municipal development plan with a flood management certificate approved by DEEP that limited the number of residential units to 84. The certificate was modified in 2011 to allow 104 units.

Mayor Michael Passero on Friday said the city negotiated with DEEP in December and the state modified the certificate to allow a total of 604 multi-family housing units on the peninsula.

Last year the city approved a site plan by Optimus Construction Management to build a 100-unit apartment complex and 100-unit extended stay hotel inside the peninsula.

In January, three properties totaling 6.28 acres were sold to RJ Development + Advisors LLC for $500,001. The company is the same developer building 203 apartments on Howard Street called “The Beam.”

What the development company proposes to build on the land remains to be seen.

The sale agreement states the projects on the property will primarily consist of, but will not be limited to, “the construction of residential units to be offered for market rate sale or rent/lease,” with the associated parking and other improvements.

The sale to RJ Development completes a 20+ year municipal development plan by the city’s development arm, the Renaissance City Development Association, to sell and develop all properties in the area. RCDA, the not-for-profit community development corporation, started buying land on the peninsula in 2000.

Peter Davis, executive director of RCDA, said by email this week that many factors played into choosing RJ Development, the main factor being the positive experience RCDA has had working with the firm on its delivery of The Beam apartments.

According to a development agreement between RCDA and RJ Development, parcels labeled 1A and 3C were sold for $500,000 and parcel 4A was sold for $1.

Davis said the value of all three parcels were established through negotiation, and the driving force of negotiations was the cost of remediating the remaining contamination of soil and groundwater.

In the instance of Parcel 4A, Davis said the remediation costs potentially exceed the land value by a significant amount. He said Parcel 1A has lingering groundwater contamination issues that have yet to be quantified with the state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection. The value of Parcel 3C is based on a per acre cost comparable to the sale of other parcels on the peninsula.

Jason Rudnick, principal of the RJ Development, on Thursday said his company is a big supporter and believer in New London and this is part of its continued efforts in the city, commencing with its apartments on Howard Street.

Davis said the RCDA received confirmation from the city’s utility department that the current road, sewer, storm water drainage and water systems have the capacity to support the proposed and future level of development on the peninsula.

Since the RCDA has functioned primarily to redevelop the Fort Trumbull district, the question remains about what will become of the city’s development arm in the future.

Passero said the city has used RCDA’s expertise on projects outside of Fort Trumbull and he anticipates RCDA will have an ongoing role with the city. He said RCDA will be in a transitional period for the next years as it finishes its business in the Fort Trumbull area and moves on to other functions within the development of the city.

School Construction Costs Leap to by $21 Million in Cromwell

Emilia Otte

CROMWELL — A project to build a new middle school is estimated to cost as much as $21 million more than the amount approved by the town in referendum last June. 

The project, which was approved for $58.6 million in the referendum, is now estimated to cost nearly $80 million. $17.3 million is in additional construction costs, and $3.8 million is in soft costs.

The committee first discovered the potential cost increases at a meeting on January 18, when Glynn said there were some inconsistencies found in the educational specifications, and that the preliminary estimates they had received for the project were “not favorable.”  

Rosanna Glynn, chair of the building committee, said at a committee meeting last week that the district was dealing with different project managers when the original estimates were made in April 2022, prior to the referendum. Since then, she said, construction costs had increased substantially. 

“I don’t think anyone could have imagined a war breaking out in the Ukraine last year or all the supply chain issues we’re having,” said Glynn. “This project is not immune from all that.” 

The construction increases include an increase in cost per gross square footage, escalation costs and “trade costs” — steel, HVAC, electrical, windows, roofing and other equipment. 

The increase also includes $1 million for an enlarged 500-seat auditorium that was left out of the building plans that the committee had been reviewing.

“The concept estimate also unfortunately did not include the cost of the expansion, even though we were led to believe repeatedly — repeatedly — that it was,” said Glynn. She added that she was not sure how this error had happened, since they had previously been working with different project managers. 

If the State of Connecticut approves the project, the town of Cromwell would be responsible for 60 percent of the increase — the state would cover 40 percent would come from the State of Connecticut in the form of a construction reimbursement grant. 

Joe Culotta, project architect for the architectural firm Perkins Eastman also identified an additional $4 million in potential cost savings, including site changes, electric HVAC and value engineering of the building, which, if accepted by the committee, could bring the cost down to a total of $73.7 million.

Committee members discussed whether to take the additional estimate to the town for referendum, or to wait until July, when the committee will receive official bids for the project. 

John Butkus, a program director for the project management company Arcadis, said that this was the fifth project they had seen that was having similar problems with the construction market. 

They also discussed how much could be cut from the building. Glynn said that, to her, the building specifications already looked very lean. She said it would be “short-sighted” to build a building that was too small. 

“I can very confidently say that nobody on this committee is trying to gold plate anything,” said Glynn. “But we are trying to build a building that is going to last 40, 50, 60 years and is going to meet the academic requirements for our middle school students.”  

The Town Council is holding a special meeting on Wednesday evening at 5:30 p.m. to discuss next steps for the project.

Plan for Timex site pulled in Middlebury

 STEVE BIGHAM 

MIDDLEBURY – An applicant has withdrawn its request to change the town’s zoning regulations as part of an overall plan to convert the current Timex world headquarters site into a large “Amazon-like” distribution facility.

However, while JSD Partners of Waterbury did not offer an explanation for the pull out, local residents say they expect the applicant will refile once it takes care of “procedural” matters.

Town officials were notified of the applicant’s withdrawal Wednesday morning, according to Middlebury First Selectman Ed St. John.

JSD Partners of Waterbury has been looking to build the 750,000 square-foot distribution center on the Timex campus off Christian and Southford roads, complete with 66 loading bays to accommodate as many as 106 tractor-trailers at a time.

The property is currently up for sale

The applicant’s attorney, Edward G. Fitzpatrick, did not immediately return phone calls Thursday, and town officials said they did not want to speculate as to whether the plan has been scrapped or just put on hold.

But members of the newly-formed Middlebury Small Town Alliance put out a statement Wednesday saying the applicant has “procedural issues that were identified. We believe they will refile.”

The group points as evidence to the fact that JSD Partners has not withdrawn its wetlands and watercourse application currently before the town’s Inland Wetlands Commission.

A hearing of the Planning and Zoning Commission was canceled Thursday night as a result of the withdrawal.

Last month, before the withdrawal, residents turned out in force at a P&Z hearing to express their concerns over the sheer size of the buildings being proposed for the site.

Residents also expressed concerns about the amount of traffic that would come to a distribution center.

Residents say distribution centers, unlike a typical warehouse, are visited throughout the day by trucks that arrive on site, are quickly unloaded or loaded, and then leave.

They envision the facility to be similar to those seen along stretches of Interstate 95 in New Jersey that seem to go on for miles and have dozens of truck bays.

The 100-acre Timex property is currently zoned for “light industrial,” which according to town officials, does not specifically identify a “distribution center” as a permitted use, although “warehouses” are an allowable use.

JSD Partners was seeking to have the regulations amended to allow for “a specialized warehouse that serves as a hub to store finished goods, facilitate the picking, packing and sorting process and ship goods out to another location or final destination.”

The applicant, which currently has an option to purchase the campus pending land-use approvals, was also looking to change the regulations to raise the cap on the permitted height of buildings from 35 feet to 55 feet.

This week, red signs began appearing around town in opposition to the proposed distribution center. The “No distribution centers in Middlebury” signs were put up by members of the new alliance group, which says it’s mission is to protect and promote the semirural, small town character of Middlebury.

Jennifer Mahr of 68 Abbott Road said a distribution center to facilitate large-scale interstate transportation of finished goods is the opposite of what it means to be semirural and is not consistent with the town’s Plan of Conservation and Development.

Mahr suggested the board put a moratorium on any kind of distribution center until it can better define what uses it wants and what kind of traffic the town is willing to allow. She said the town needs to update its regulations to deal with the realities of e-commerce.

But, according to Middlebury Zoning Enforcement Officer Curt Bosco, the applicant could seek almost the exact same size distribution center, “with almost the same intensity,” under the current regulations, even without any text amendments.

“They allow warehousing in the current regulations in Middlebury. Warehousing is almost the exact definition of a distribution center. Stuff goes in, they store it, and stuff goes out. That’s what warehousing is,” Bosco said.

Mahr disagrees, pointing out that Middlebury’s “light industrial” zone prohibits trucking terminals, except for the transportation of goods manufactured on the premises.

“The LI-200 Zone is all about the creation of new goods and is not a transportation zone,” she said. “E-commerce is light years ahead of zoning regulations and developers are taking advantage of regulatory gaps to build whatever they want, wherever they want.”

Mahr said small and semirural communities are bearing the brunt of it.

For now, at least, any distribution plans are off the books.