Once estimated at $93 million, CT pier project could exceed $300 million

Jordan Nathaniel Fenster

The state Port Authority is planning to request an additional $30 million in bonding to complete the state pier project, pushing the total cost to $300 million.

The goal of the state pier project is to upgrade the facility to accommodate a wind power hub servicing offshore wind farms that would bring power to Connecticut and the region. 

The project was originally supposed to cost $93 million, but costs had already ballooned to $255.5 million before the state Port Authority voted Tuesday to ask the state for an additional $30 million.

Of that $255.5 million, $77.5 million has been borne by Eversource and Ørsted, the power companies that will run the windfarms and pier once they are built. That $77.5 million contribution will increase by $23.75 million, a bit more than half of the additional $47 million cost of the project. 

The Port Authority will request the other half, $23.5 million, plus a $6 million contingency from the state. 

“Of the additional $47 million, Ørsted and Eversource have agreed to contribute $23.75 million and we will be seeking the other half of $23.5 million from the state plus an additional 6.5 million for an owner's contingency,” Port Authority Executive Director Ulysses Hammond told the Port Authority Board Tuesday.

That would bring the total cost of the state pier north of $300 million.

“No one has been able to explain to my satisfaction or the rest of the delegation’s satisfaction, how a $93 million project became almost a $300 million contract, nearly tripling in cost,” Rep. Holly Cheeseman, R-East Lyme, said Tuesday.

There is hope of recouping some of that cost, as Port Authority Executive Director David Kooris explained during an interview. NEO, which owns the offshore areas in which the wind farms will be built, will pay the state $2 million a year, and Gateway, which manages the state pier on behalf of the Port Authority, will pay back a portion of its revenue once the operation is up and running. 

“In addition to that, it is our expectation that there will be times when Ørsted does not have an active wind project utilizing the facility,” Kooris said. “In those situations, they will seek out other wind developers to use the facility. If that does happen, we expect that there would be significant revenue from that and so there's a mechanism whereby we share that revenue with NEO.”

The first wind project, which had been expected to be operational this year, will consist of 12 turbines supplying energy to 70,000 homes on Long Island’s south fork. Two years later, another 65 turbines are expected to provide energy to 350,000 homes in Connecticut and Rhode Island. Another 84 turbines should go operational that year, providing energy to 600,000 homes in New York state. The state pier would act as a staging ground for all those projects during both construction and operation.

Cheeseman said that during a Tuesday morning call between the Port Authority and a bipartisan group of lawmakers that “there were some general comments about difficulties, things that were unanticipated.”

Hammond said Tuesday that the cost increases were intended to cover work on a foundation wall, the pier’s heavy-lift platform, “and all of this work is scheduled to be completed by October, leaving only dredging in late fall.”

Eversource announced last week its intention to sell its share of the three offshore wind farms to Ørsted, but Kooris said “it has no bearing on us or our partnership.”

“We certainly view it as positive given Ørsted’s history in the industry and see no downsides associated with it whatsoever,” he told the board. 

Seabury Maritime, a contractor on the project, was recently fined $10,000 by the Office of State Ethics for undisclosed lobbying before the Connecticut Port Authority. It’s the second such fine imposed on Seabury in two years. 

Seabury and the Port Authority are also reportedly the subject of a federal investigation into its 2018 selection of Gateway as manager of the pier on behalf of the Port Authority. 

Seabury Capital, which owns Seabury Maritime, was paid $700,000, including a $523,000 “success” fee for choosing Gateway, three months after Henry Juan III of Greenwich, a managing director at Seabury, had resigned from the Port Authority board.

When asked earlier this year if he was concerned about the investigation, Hammond said, “We're concerned but not constrained.”

UPDATED: State Pier costs rise by more than $53 million

Greg Smith

The Connecticut Port Authority will ask the state for an additional $30 million to cover a portion of the $53.7 million more needed to complete the transformation of State Pier in New London into an offshore wind hub.

Increases in construction costs and contingency are raising the total cost of the project from $255.5 million to more than $309 million. The project to modernize the port and add heavy lift capacity to accommodate offshore wind turbine components was once estimated to cost $93 million.

The partnership of Ørsted and Eversource has agreed to provide $23.75 million to cover more than half of the $47.2 million increase in construction costs, according to an amendment of the Harbor Development Agreement approved Tuesday by the port authority’s board of directors. The authority, in exchange, has agreed to provide Ørsted and Eversource with the the majority of the initial revenues from the sublease of the property.

Ulysses Hammond, the authority’s interim executive director, said the authority is asking the state for $23.5 million along with $6.5 million in contingency funds to cover any unknown future expenses. The new price tag for the project was the result of months of negotiations with State Pier construction manager Kiewit and costs of changes in the scope of work, additional materials and obstructions in construction which led to delays.

State Sen. Heather Somers, R-Groton, was among other legislators on a call Tuesday morning with port authority officials for the announcement.

“I think the entire delegation made it very clear we’re tired of the port authority coming back and asking for more funding. They promised they would not be coming back and here we are once again,” Somers said.

Somers said she was frustrated not only by the entire request from the state, but what she said was pitched as a request for a “small contingency” of $6.5 million.

“That’s $6.5 million we have to go out and borrow and our taxpayers have to pay back,” she said.

State Sen. Martha Marx, D-New London, said the request from the port authority comes at a time when legislators are negotiating a budget. The $30 million, she said, certainly could be used in other areas.

“It’s unfortunate we have this cost overrun. It’s extremely painful. That being said, at least (Ørsted and Eversource) are paying for half of it. In the end, I still think it’s a good project for New London. For 40 years we’ve talked about this asset being underutilized,” Marx said.

Marx said she was “never a fan” of quasi-public agencies, agrees with continued scrutiny of the port authority and supports a bill passed in the House that places further restriction on quasi-public agencies.

Connecticut Port Authority Chairman David Kooris said Tuesday he hoped the $30 million request would go to the state Bond Commission by July. The port authority cannot enter into a contract with Kiewit on certain items without first obtaining approval for the additional funding.

While Ørsted recently announced its plan to buy Eversource’s stake in the State Pier project, Kooris said the purchase has not yet been finalized.

Ørsted and Eversource, as part of a Harbor Development Agreement, are leasing State Pier for 10 years with an option to extend that agreement, and are paying the port authority $2 million per year to lease the facility.

Separately, the City of New London is receiving a minimum of $750,000 per year in accordance with a host community agreement with Ørsted and Eversource.

Kooris said during lulls in Ørsted’s offshore wind projects, State Pier would be an attractive facility for other offshore wind companies. Under terms of the new agreement, Ørsted would take 90% of the revenues from any sublease until it recoups its $23.75 million. The agreement is over once Ørsted’s lease is up. Kooris said Ørsted and Eversource have taken a risk in not knowing if they will recoup their additional investment. He said Ørsted and Eversource have already contributed more than $77 million toward the project.

Of the cost increase, Kooris said unlike previous estimates, the numbers announced on Tuesday represent an agreement for a “guaranteed maximum price” on the vast majority of the work to be completed.

Kooris agreed there were “clearly missteps in public pronouncements” on the estimated costs in 2018. He said the $93 million cost estimate being widely used at the time was based on a preliminary design that has changed. A later cost estimate of $157 million came before the project elements were put out to bid.

At Tuesday’s meeting, Marlin Peterson, construction manager for AECOM, the engineering firm overseeing the State Pier project, explained the complexity of driving piles in the seabed that need to be seated at a certain depth and on dense rock material into order to maintain the structural capacity to accommodate a heavy lift capacity berth.

Gov. Ned Lamont, through a spokesman, continued to tout the benefits of an upgraded State Pier.

“The State Pier Project will transform the New London region and all of Connecticut, supporting quality jobs and clean energy goals,” Adam Joseph, director of communications for Lamont, said. “The administration is thankful that our partners Ørsted and Eversource are making a significant investment to help complete this project. We anticipate placing any needed state contribution on the Bond Commission agenda in the near future.”

Eversource and Ørsted, in a statement, said the partnership remained committed to the State Pier redevelopment project “and its successful, uninterrupted completion.”

“Today, as part of our commitment to the state, we have agreed to provide nearly $24 million in additional funding to realize this critical infrastructure project that will transform this state asset into a state-of-the-art, heavy-lift marine terminal able to serve Connecticut with a broad range of industries, cargo types, and vessels including offshore wind turbine staging and assembly,” the statement reads in part.

State Pier is slated to be a staging and assembly hub for three of Ørsted and Eversource’s offshore wind projects ― South Fork Wind, Revolution Wind and Sunrise Wind. Construction work at State Pier is expected to continue through the summer even as it hosts vessels associated with South Fork Wind.

New Hartford site emerges as potential location for new, $335M federal courthouse

KENNETH R. GOSSELIN

A new site for a federal courthouse in Hartford emerged Tuesday outside of downtown that would be among the three under consideration to replace the 60-year-old Abraham A. Ribicoff Federal Building and Courthouse on Main Street.

A state office building on 10 acres at 61 Woodland St. in the city’s Asylum Hill neighborhood is now among the sites being considered for the planned $335 million new federal courthouse.

The new site was disclosed with little fanfare by the U.S. General Services Administration, which oversees the development of public buildings. The site, at the corner of Woodland and Asylum streets, was included in an announcement Tuesday in advance of a public meeting on June 6 to present the three options and inform the public on how comments can be submitted to the federal government.

Paul Hughes, a GSA spokesman, said the federal agency approached the state about any properties that state owned in Hartford, as part of its market research for finding a location for the new courthouse.

“We learned the state is in the process of consolidating certain real estate assets as part of its long range portfolio planning,” Hughes said in an email. “The parties agreed that while the state continues to analyze which of its properties to consolidate, the Woodland site is worthy of further analysis by GSA as a potential site for the courthouse.”

The Woodland Street property replaces an earlier option of the parking lot at 10 Ford St., the site of the former Parkview Hilton hotel, demolished in 1990. The parking lot is directly across from Bushnell Park and is owned by Hartford-based Chase Enterprises.

“We are looking to do a bigger project on the property,” Cheryl A. Chase, general counsel at Chase Enterprises, said Tuesday, in an email. “The courthouse would have eliminated other co-development possibilities.”

Chase declined further comment Tuesday.

The Woodland Street site now joins two others: A parking lot on Allyn Street, just west of XL Center and a parking lot at the corner of Capitol and Hudson streets. The latter is part of “Bushnell South,” an expanse of parking lots slated for mixed-use redevelopment.

An announcement of the initial three sites last fall immediately drew concern from local officials because they were all prime locations for mixed-use residential development.

Mayor Luke Bronin agreed that a new federal courthouse was needed. But he said it had to be in the right location and not where the city was working to pursue taxable residential development. The federal courthouse would be tax-exempt.

Bronin did not immediately have a comment Tuesday. State officials couldn’t immediately comment.

In 2022,  the GSA received authorization for $335 million to purchase a site, design and building a new, 281,000 square-foot federal courthouse. So far, $273.5 million has been appropriated by the U.S. Congress.

A new federal courthouse in Hartford has been discussed for years, and in 2020, the courthouse was listed as the top one needing replacement across the country.

A groundbreaking could still be several years away.

Connecticut’s Congressional delegation has been a strong advocate for the new courthouse. U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal three years ago said the existing courthouse, part of the Ribicoff complex, had outlived its “sell-by” date. A new facility would bring judicial civil and criminal operations into the 21st century, Blumenthal said.

But both Blumenthal and U.S. Rep. John Larson said the right location had to be found to be “consistent with the city’s economic development needs.”

Construction of a new courthouse is seen as needed to tackle significant, ongoing security, space and building condition problems, a spokesman for the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, has said.

Prisoner movement is through public corridors and through public entrances of each courtroom because the layout of the building does not allow for separation of public, prisoner, judge and staff movement.

The sally port where prisoners are transported to and from the court isn’t big enough. The location of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement offices in the building are also a problem, the office said.

The existing courthouse now has eight courtrooms and 11 chambers, many of which do not meet modern size standards. A new courthouse would have 11 courtrooms and 18 chambers for 18 judges.

It is likely the Ribicoff building, built in 1963 and named in 1980 after a former governor and U.S. senator, would still be used for a consolidation of federal offices if a new courthouse is built.

The June 6 meeting will held at the Park Street library branch at 603 Park St., Hartford, from 5:30 to 7:30 p.m.

Danbury's Immaculate High to begin $3M campus repairs, replace track and turf field: 'way overdue'

Dan Nowak

DANBURY – A long-awaited groundbreaking ceremony will signal the start of a facelift at Immaculate High School, with the focus on a new turf field and track along with upgrades in the building and parking lot.

“This is way overdue,” Immaculate's Athletic Director Nelson Mingachos said. “These upgrades and renovations signal an exciting time at Immaculate for students, alumni and staff, to finally get this done."

The groundbreaking is set for 12:30 p.m. June 6 on the field at Immaculate, which serves students from 28 communities in Connecticut and New York. 

“Turf fields typically are replaced every 10 years, and our turf is 13 or 14 years old," he said. "Another possibility is we are also thinking of getting new lights for the fields.”

The upgrades are part of a $4 million capital campaign marking the 60th anniversary of the private Catholic high school that includes $3 million in construction improvements. The date of the groundbreaking was chosen to coincide with the 90th birthday of Robert E. Gerwien Sr., a former Immaculate principal.

The $4 million in phase 1 of the plan will focus on three areas, according to the school website.

A total of $2 million will be used for campus capital improvements, which will include updating and replacing windows throughout the facility; repairing the parking lots and access areas; and improving the school building and grounds.

Another $1 million will be used for the Robert E. Gerwien Sr. Scholarship Endowment Fund. The scholarship fund supports prospective students who need financial assistance to attend Immaculate. 

The final $1 million will be used for athletic fields enhancements, upgrading the track and grounds.

Phase 2 upgrades, which are in the planning stage, will include a state-of-the-art Performing Arts Center at Immaculate.

The turf company will start installing the new turf June 15, Mingachos said. The project is expected to be completed in two months — in time for the fall sports season.

“Immaculate athletics has always been an essential part of the makeup of our community,” Lisa Cianflone, board chair of the Mustangs All Sports Club, said in a statement. “We always strive to showcase our scholar-athletes both on and off the field.

“The MASC board has dedicated its efforts to help athletics strive at Immaculate and the groundbreaking will help enhance the new scoreboard and improve our fields.”

The Mustangs All Sports Club, an organization of parents of student-athletes, operates the concession stands and holds fundraising events to financially support the school’s sports equipment and training.

“For the past 60 years, our field and track area known as Mustang Valley has been home to our athletes and has hosted countless sporting events,” Mingachos said. “It’s the heart of Immaculate athletics and has witnessed hard work and determination, victories and humbling defeats, and true sportsmanship and camaraderie.

”But the life of our facility is coming to an end. The Mustang Valley turf and track must be replaced. Thanks to all the donors who stepped forward to help make this possible."

Middletown 414-unit apartment complex could generate $1.5 billion for local economy

Andrea Valluzzo

MIDDLETOWN — Springside Middletown will be one of the largest apartment complexes in Middlesex County when construction is finished, but that’s not why this project is being deemed “historic.”

Following the May 16 groundbreaking on the planned 414-unit apartment complex off Newfield Street near the Cromwell line, Bob Dale, a principal of the real estate development firm PB Development, said the project is unique for several reasons.

“This is one of the first projects I have been involved with that has so many community groups that were involved with the planning and will continue to be involved, so I think that is unique and exciting,” he said. “Many of those groups were represented at the groundbreaking and we have regular communication with them.”

The developer’s active partnership with the city and its community groups also led to a notable tax abatement negotiation with the city, where the developer committed $1 million of the project costs as a set-aside, earmarked for minority contractors to bid work on the project.  

A project liaison for the city, Alan Marshall, said this is a historic moment for the city because “never in the history of Middletown has there been a set-aside from a private developer funded by private money,” he said.

Marshall said the project is estimated to create $1.5 billion in total economic impact. “The one thing that I keep saying over and over again is this is a huge win for Middletown — it’s a cash- positive deal.”

Explaining that these set-asides are more common in public development projects than in the private sector, Marshall said he was able to help design a set-aside to benefit socially and economically disadvantaged (and minority-owned) businesses. He also said that $1 million was the "floor," not the "ceiling."

“I really believe it’s going to shape the way that tax abatements are done in Middletown going forward,” he said. 

The developers are also committed to purchasing $100,000 worth of gift cards from local businesses to gift to their future residents. The gift cards are part of a “discover Middletown” project to let Springside Middletown residents get to know local businesses and "welcome them to a very vibrant downtown,” Dale said.

Marshall said this project is about much more than just filling a need for more housing. 

“First of all, the apartments are going to be phenomenal. That’s the first thing that’s exciting, but, even more than that, I am excited about the opportunity for minority contractors to get chances to work on a development this large,” he said, noting that three workshops for potential contractors were offered and over 40 participated. 

About 80 percent of them are local, from Middletown or the greater Middlesex County area.

Construction is already in full swing, and has been going on for about a month. Both the first and second phases are estimated to take about 27 months to complete. 

The complex will also include a club building with co-working spaces, common room and  coffee bar, while a recreation building will house a fitness center, yoga and spin studios,  climbing wall and golf simulator room. The grounds will also have a pool with outdoor kitchen, grill stations and cabanas, bocce court, pickleball courts, dog park, playground, and walking trails.

Phase I will include 240 apartment homes in three distinct building types, including townhomes, garden-style, and one elevator-served four-story building. The development is on an over 48-acre parcel of land between Newfield Street / Route 3 and the Coginchaug River, about 1.5 miles north of downtown. 

After years of planning, Dale was excited to see construction begin. “It’s always a good day when we break ground. We are very excited and think there will be plenty of demand," he said. “There is a lot of work ahead of us, but I think we are off to a good start … it will be even more exciting once we welcome our first residents.”

Torrington mining operation gets permit renewal, with conditions to address neighbors' complaints

Emily M. Olson

TORRINGTON — Haynes and O&G were granted another two-year mining permit by the Planning & Zoning Commission, but with conditions aimed to address complaints from neighbors about noise and idling vehicles. 

The Haynes materials quarry, a mining operation partnership with O&G Industries, has been running for more than 20 years, with trucks and machinery running from 7 a.m. to 3 p.m.  on weekdays. The companies use the materials mined from the property for a variety of construction projects, such as roads, buildings and foundations. Every two years, the companies apply for a renewal of their permit to continue that work. 

A group of residents living near the property attended an April public hearing on the permit and wanted the commission to further investigate the impact of the mining operation on the environment. They also complained about tremors from blasting at the site, as well as dust, and said trucks arriving to pick up material from the quarry were lined up outside the gate before 7 a.m., bringing noise and exhaust with them.

In its permit renewal approval, the commission required the quarry owners to prohibit trucks from queuing outside the property gate before 7 a.m., and to adhere to the quarry hours that are included in the permit, on weekdays as well as Saturdays. While no blasting or transporting is done on Saturdays, materials such as gravel and stone are sold from the property.

O&G representatives said they would post signs reminding truck drivers not to line up in the morning before the quarry opens. 

Regarding the complaints about dust and blasting, the commission and City Planner Jeremy Leifert ruled that Haynes and O&G's permits were in order for those activities, and that the companies were complying with them.

According to O&G representative Richard Warren, notices of blasting times are sent to residents with a phone call, and that information is available from the quarry office. He encouraged people to contact the companies at any time with their concerns. 

"If we get complaints, we will investigate them," said Leifert, whose memo accompanied the commission's ruling May 24. 

Regarding any environmental impacts of the quarry, the commission said it was not within its purview to conduct any such studies. "No professional testimony has been heard regarding any environmental requirements, so these are not required or needed," Leifert wrote. 

Some residents wanted the commission to request an environmental impact study and have federal agencies such as the Occupational Safety and Health Administration investigate the operation to make sure it's safe. But because it is an allowed use under Torrington's zoning regulations, an environmental impact study isn't required, Leifert said. 

During the public hearing in May, Leifert said the commission was limited on what it could enforce.

"We have a lane that we have to stay in, as a municipality, and there are certain procedures we have to follow," he said at the time. "We don't have the authority to get information on those tests, things like that; we have a set of regulations to follow on a local level, and if there's a different agency that monitors what comes out of that mine, it's not our purview, it's theirs."