Curious about the actual plans for the housing development
proposed for 16 Neck Road in Old Lyme? We have links to both plans below. Take a look, and share your insights.
1drv.ms/b/s!AsFtT2rPsiywzW3k4H82oT8dGKFs
1drv.ms/b/s!AsFtT2rPsiywzWzhuMy7MUab8LE_
6 hours ago
Southeastern CT Cultural Coalition- Culturesect
Cultural Coalition is one of nearly three dozen nonprofits affected, including arts & culture and health & human service orgs. "dozens of other nonprofits...were denied tax-exempt status by Ralston after she ruled they did not meet the criteria. Ralston said she scrutinized all nonprofit applications this year in an effort to boost the city's tax base."10 hours ago
DOT chief sees ‘economic death spiral’ with higher rail fares, cuts
ctpost.com
The state's transportation commission is warning of a "economic death spiral to our economy" if rail and bus fares are raised and service cut. James P. Redeker said the state Department of Transportation would have no choice but the raise the fares July 1 without action by the General Assembly to fi...1 day ago
with news of a proposed housing development at the northbound entrance to Old Lyme, very definitely worth a read...
Connecticut House weakens, then passes affordable housing bill
ctmirror.org
The House of Representatives voted 76-72 Tuesday to approve and send to the Senate an affordable-housing bill sought by Gov. Dannel P. Malloy to push two dozen Connecticut communities to end their prohibition on multi-family housing. The bill was stripped of financial penalties before passage.1 day ago
"The bill requires zoning regulations to provide for, rather than encourage, a variety of housing development opportunities to meet local and regional needs. It eliminates a requirement the regulations be made to consider the “character” of a district, an ambiguous phrase."
Is the housing for seniors?
Take a look at the traffic study filed in December for the proposed Hope Partnership housing development at 16 Neck Road in Old Lyme.
Note: that the study is for 41 units and 113 parking spaces
2 days ago
Food for thought....
Number-crunching density, gasoline taxes, and congestion pricing.
“Does higher density in big cities increase traffic congestion? Or does it actually reduce congestion by moving more people closer to where the jobs are, thus cutting down on commutes?”
3 days ago
Norwich, New London and Groton included in governor's Opportunity Zone plan
theday.com
Seven U.S. Census tracts from southeastern Connecticut — three each in New London and Norwich and one in Groton — will be4 days ago
Latest on the state budget, and competing budget plans...
5 days ago
Extra Buildings for the 16 Neck Road Development? ------------
On Tuesday night at 7 p.m. in Town Hall, the Old Lyme Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Commission is set to consider 8 structures on parcel one of the 16 Neck Road housing development. The maps filed on April 10 clearly show only 7 structures.
We are seeking clarification from Hope Partnership, and encourage interested residents to attend the Tuesday meeting.
6 days ago
From Hope Partnership: Lot 1 is 7 RESIDENTIAL buildings with a pump house to accommodate the water for the development. Lot 2 is 4 RESIDENTIAL buildings with a community building.
Water Co. That Serves Old Lyme Rejects Eversource Offer: Report
patch.com
Eversource seeks to acquire Connecticut Water Service, which serves Old Lyme and other New London County communities.6 days ago
A worthwhile op-ed from the Connecticut Mirror's sister site, from a pro-affordable housing point of view. We encourage you to take a look!
The facts about state’s affordable housing statute
ctviewpoints.org
As the legislature considers whether to override Gov. Malloy's veto of changes to the state's affordable housing law, it should be aware of the facts about the law and what it accomplishes.6 days ago
To quote the Twitter feed of the CT Commuter Rail Council yesterday, "At Council meeting last night, CDOT indicated that none of the 60 cars at one time earmarked for SLE are going there any longer."
Metro-North to get 60 new train cars, including 10 bar cars, starting in 2019
nhregister.com
At a press conference in the New Haven rail yard’s component change-out shop on Tuesday, Gov. Dannel P. Malloy announced the $308 million purchase, $200 million of which will be paid by state-issued bonds. The rest will be paid by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority of New York. Transportati...7 days ago
A correction: The Hartford Courant piece we posted yesterday announcing much the opposite news, was 2 years old.... not quite sure how that one slipped through the synapses. Sorry about that...
On a line that has serious overcrowding issues, having bar cars that fit fewer people is just a massive waste of money and space.
Yea for Bar cars!
So dispiriting
I want the electronic signs on the platforms to tell us what time the next train will appear instead of the date and "Good Service."
The latest on tolling...
yaledailynews.com
City | Toll bill clears committee Nicole Ahn Toll bill clears committee Nicole Ahn Staff Reporter Lucas Holter The Connecticut General Assembly Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee narrowly approved a bill mandating that the state investigate the issue of highway tolls, setting up what lawma...7 days ago
Any proposal to develop and reshape the primary entrance for Old Lyme, regardless of intentions, demands real scrutiny and public involvement...
For us, that starts with getting answers to the 10 questions below prior to the May 14 public hearing at Old Lyme Town Hall. Are there any you'd like to add?
........................... 10 QUESTIONS............................................
1. Location The 16 Neck Road parcel chosen for the Hope Partnership development in Old Lyme is situated in a visually-prominent location at the primary entrance to a historic art community, which provides meaningful context to the National Historic Landmark Florence Griswold House, and which serves as an important hub and gateway for tourist economy in southeastern Connecticut. Can you explain the process which led to this site selection, what criteria were considered, and what other sites were considered for a housing development? Was this site offered or suggested to Hope Partnership, and if so, when, and by who?
2. Buffering The heavily-wooded lot, while not undeveloped, provides a significant visual buffer for visitors arriving from the south, a significant sound buffer for nearby housing, and a potentially-significant sound buffer for the nearby National-Register historic district on Lyme street. What studies and steps are you taking to address year-round potential impacts both visual and aural to the surround community, tourist economy, and nearby National-Register district? How will the portion of wetlands fronting Neck Road constrain or allow for adequate or additional buffering?
3. Cumulative Impacts and Induced Growth We are deeply concerned that the 16 Neck Road development, as part of a faulty piecemeal planning process, may significantly underestimate potential cumulative impacts, as well as further impacts from induced growth. Has Hope Partnership considered or discussed the 16 Neck Road development in the context of ongoing, proposed and potential improvements and new development along Route 156, and Halls road; the combined potential impacts to traffic safety and congestion; as well as impacts to the need or extent of sewers and other significant new infrastructure in Old Lyme?
4. Additional Costs and Obligations Has Hope Partnership requested or received assurances regarding financial or other one-time or on-going obligations from the Town of Old Lyme, including maintenance, additional infrastructure, or mitigation? If so, please provide a list of this assurances with cost estimates. Will access within the property be on a public or private road?
5. Multi-parcel Plan At a February 13, 2017 Special Meeting of the Old Lyme Planning Commission, Joe Wren, of Indigo Land Design, presented a preliminary proposal for between 16 and 24 units on one of two lots, with no stated plans for the second lot. At the April 12 Open House, Hope Partnership presented a significantly larger proposal for 12 structures and 37 units on two lots. Can you explain why, for the purposes of proposing and planning this project, the development has been parceled in two? Can you explain how and when the planning process expanded to encompass both lots and 37 total units?
6. Affordability Has there been a final decision regarding the proportion, and varieties, of affordable and market-rate units? Please provide a breakdown of estimated rental costs of each variety. Apart from cost, how will market-rate units differ from affordable units? Currently, how many rentals are available in Old Lyme, and at what cost?
7. Accessibility Given a preexisting waiting list for affordable housing in the broader region, how will this affect the opportunity for current Old Lyme residents to find housing in the 16 Neck Road development? Will any preference be given to existing residents of Old Lyme, or to other populations?
8. Ethics and Code of Conduct What is Hope Partnership's code of conduct in terms of transparency, conflict of interest, and for the ethical conduct of its partner organizations, officials and developers? What does Hope Partnership require from its partners in terms of disclosure, and related financial or commercial interests and benefits derived from Hope Partnership’s projects? To the best of your knowledge has Hope Partnership, and its partners, met these obligations of ethics and conduct? Does Hope Partnership assume any ongoing responsibility for 16 Neck Road, for required infrastructure, vegetation or buffering, after construction has been completed?
9. Further Projects Is Hope Partnership planning or considering other housing developments in Old Lyme, or the surrounding region? Has Hope Partnership considered projects in the beach communities, where previous attempts at multi-family housing have failed to receive zoning approval? How would these previous projects compare in terms of affordability with the proposed Hope Partnership project? How are issues like green space, sprawl, and mixed-use development considered as part of the Partnership’s site-selection process?
10. Accessory Dwellings Old Lyme, like much of the semi-rural region, has a long tradition of off-the-book rented accessory dwellings. Although likely not a sufficient solution to the housing needs of southeastern Connecticut, such rentals do allow lower-income residents to enjoy the benefits of picturesque locations, and historic settings, while paying relatively modest rents. In many cases, however, these rentals are not entirely legal, or compliant with local zoning. Does Hope Partnership have a position or policy to promote, improve, and allow for such rentals, which may supplement more suburban-style developments like 16 Neck Road?
1 week ago
I'd like to know when the plans being presented are "final". For example, in the Wetlands meeting Mr Wren stated that this entire project was 100% affordable. This has changed as Hope stated that that was determined to be financially unfeasible. Unfortunately, the meeting minutes reflect a plan that has already changed its scope creating a different picture than originally presented. I was told that the plans presented at OLCC are not "final". When do we see the "final" project so we can make an educated decision about whether we agree or disagree with the project?
How much say do people have to help this pass/stop it? Is it decided by laws/guidlines or by the feelings of people in the community? How can we see the answers once you get them?
This would likely be an add-on to Question #9: With several notable properties in Old Lyme already in disrepair, disuse, or possible abandonment (cf Cherrystones, the eyesore on Shore Road at the top of Hartford Ave, and buildings in Soundview), why are we not looking into ways of repurposing existing properties for affordable housing, instead of building at 16 Neck Road?
I think the location right off 95 is the worst possible option!
Is anyone asking what the cost of buying a home will be? Per yesterday’s Valley Courier HOPE Partnership has plans for 17 apartments over the shops at Spencer’s Corner in Centerbrook. The article does lists the projected cost of those specific apartments.
Joshua Grenier
Excellent questions👍🏽👍🏽👍🏽👍🏽🌼
At the April 12 Hope Partnership open house, Old Lyme First Selectwoman Bonnie Reemsnyder pretty strongly endorsed the 16 Neck Road project as an effective means of heading off less-scrupulous developers from outside of the community from building basically whatever they want in the name of affordable housing. Hope Partnership is based in Old Saybrook, and 16 Neck Road developer is Graybill Properties based in Old Lyme. The underlying reasoning is that until Old Lyme meets a threshold of 10% affordable housing [currently the number is judged to be just over 1.5%], there is little a town can do to block a project without risking a lawsuit. So, our question is this: How far will the 16 Neck Road project go toward meeting the 10% threshold? Is there any clear plan to meet that threshold? And if not, still being shy of 10%, isn't Old Lyme just as vulnerable to another development, with or without the 16 Neck Road project?
SECoast, I thought of another great resource of data that helps to show the needs the community of Old Lyme has... in case you don’t know about ALICE... www.middlesexunitedway.org/ALICE. You can drill down to learn specifics about Old Lyme.
It's hard to underestimate how important this project is for the Northeast Corridor. We did quite a bit of fact finding on this project in the fall of 2016, and came away with several concerns... unfortunately, the state's approach may have made this inevitable. We'll have more on this in a few days...
Norwalkers challenge Redeker on Walk Bridge replacement plan
thehour.com
NORWALK - Amid dwindling dollars, Norwalk residents hit state Transportation Commissioner Jim Redeker hard Wednesday evening on why the state is moving forward with a $1 billion plan to replace the Walk Bridge. "We have called for a full valuation of all alternatives to the Walk Bridge project," sai...1 week ago
Please find below our letter, and 10 questions, to Hope Partnership regarding the 16 Neck Road affordable development in Old Lyme. (There is also a link to the pdf below).
If you value this sort of advocacy and work in the region, please consider a small donation to our spring fundraiser. It's tax-deductible, and will be used wisely. You can donate, and find out more about our work, here:
www.facebook.com/secoast.at.Old.Lyme/posts/1728452007193543
..................................................................................................
April 18, 2018
Hope Partnership
191 Main Street
Old Saybrook, CT
06475
Dear Ms. Ashe and Members of the Board:
First, let me say that it was a pleasure to meet with members of your board, and to attend the Hope Partnership Open House on April 12. As nonprofits with overlapping geographies, and similar goals of thoughtful, community-minded development, we look forward to working side by side in the future on further projects along the shoreline. As an organization, we embrace the value of diverse communities, and shared responsibilities, and the key role that quality affordable housing plays in achieving these goals.
Our organization, a wholly independent 501(c)3 nonprofit, was founded in 2016 in partnership with the Connecticut Trust for Historic Preservation as a grassroots response not just to bad planning on the state and federal level which would have rerouted new industrial-scale infrastructure through the historic shoreline communities of southern New England, but just as importantly, to a faulty planning process which made those decisions possible with little prior public knowledge or timely oversight.
Given the proximity of the proposed Hope Partnership housing development in Old Lyme in both time and space to these earlier plans—indeed the parcel sold at significant discount at a time of depressed real estate values along the proposed new railroad right of way—it is not at all surprising that a great many otherwise supportive Old Lyme residents are sincerely disappointed, even angered, at what they perceive as a familiar lack of inclusion, and timely information, regarding your organization’s plans. We share these concerns. And even in the case of good plans, the greater good, and the best of intentions, we remain fierce advocates of transparency, of inclusive decision-making, and for the preservation of the rich aesthetic, ecological, and cultural diversity within and between historic communities along shoreline Connecticut and Rhode Island.
At present, SECoast has not yet taken a stance either supporting or in opposition to the proposed Hope Partnership development in Old Lyme, but to that end, we have several questions and concerns which we hope you can answer prior to the public hearing on May 14. In particular,
1. Location The 16 Neck Road parcel chosen for the Hope Partnership development in Old Lyme is situated in a visually-prominent location at the primary entrance to a historic art community, which provides meaningful context to the National Historic Landmark Florence Griswold House, and which serves as an important hub and gateway for tourist economy in southeastern Connecticut. Can you explain the process which led to this site selection, what criteria were considered, and what other sites were considered for a housing development? Was this site offered or suggested to Hope Partnership, and if so, when, and by who?
2. Buffering The heavily-wooded lot, while not undeveloped, provides a significant visual buffer for visitors arriving from the south, a significant sound buffer for nearby housing, and a potentially-significant sound buffer for the nearby National-Register historic district on Lyme street. What studies and steps are you taking to address year-round potential impacts both visual and aural to the surround community, tourist economy, and nearby National-Register district? How will the portion of wetlands fronting Neck Road constrain or allow for adequate or additional buffering?
3. Cumulative Impacts and Induced Growth We are deeply concerned that the 16 Neck Road development, as part of a faulty piecemeal planning process, may significantly underestimate potential cumulative impacts, as well as further impacts from induced growth. Has Hope Partnership considered or discussed the 16 Neck Road development in the context of ongoing, proposed and potential improvements and new development along Route 156, and Halls road; the combined potential impacts to traffic safety and congestion; as well as impacts to the need or extent of sewers and other significant new infrastructure in Old Lyme?
4. Additional Costs and Obligations Has Hope Partnership requested or received assurances regarding financial or other one-time or on-going obligations from the Town of Old Lyme, including maintenance, additional infrastructure, or mitigation? If so, please provide a list of this assurances with cost estimates. Will access within the property be on a public or private road?
5. Multi-parcel Plan At a February 13, 2017 Special Meeting of the Old Lyme Planning Commission, Joe Wren, of Indigo Land Design, presented a preliminary proposal for between 16 and 24 units on one of two lots, with no stated plans for the second lot. At the April 12 Open House, Hope Partnership presented a significantly larger proposal for 12 structures and 37 units on two lots. Can you explain why, for the purposes of proposing and planning this project, the development has been parceled in two? Can you explain how and when the planning process expanded to encompass both lots and 37 total units?
6. Affordability Has there been a final decision regarding the proportion, and varieties, of affordable and market-rate units? Please provide a breakdown of estimated rental costs of each variety. Apart from cost, how will market-rate units differ from affordable units? Currently, how many rentals are available in Old Lyme, and at what cost?
7. Accessibility Given a preexisting waiting list for affordable housing in the broader region, how will this affect the opportunity for current Old Lyme residents to find housing in the 16 Neck Road development? Will any preference be given to existing residents of Old Lyme, or to other populations?
8. Ethics and Code of Conduct What is Hope Partnership's code of conduct in terms of transparency, conflict of interest, and for the ethical conduct of its partner organizations, officials and developers? What does Hope Partnership require from its partners in terms of disclosure, and related financial or commercial interests and benefits derived from Hope Partnership’s projects? To the best of your knowledge has Hope Partnership, and its partners, met these obligations of ethics and conduct? Does Hope Partnership assume any ongoing responsibility for 16 Neck Road, for required infrastructure, vegetation or buffering, after construction has been completed?
9. Further Projects Is Hope Partnership planning or considering other housing developments in Old Lyme, or the surrounding region? Has Hope Partnership considered projects in the beach communities, where previous attempts at multi-family housing have failed to receive zoning approval? How would these previous projects compare in terms of affordability with the proposed Hope Partnership project? How are issues like green space, sprawl, and mixed-use development considered as part of the Partnership’s site-selection process?
10. Accessory Dwellings Old Lyme, like much of the semi-rural region, has a long tradition of off-the-book rented accessory dwellings. Although likely not a sufficient solution to the housing needs of southeastern Connecticut, such rentals do allow lower-income residents to enjoy the benefits of picturesque locations, and historic settings, while paying relatively modest rents. In many cases, however, these rentals are not entirely legal, or compliant with local zoning. Does Hope Partnership have a position or policy to promote, improve, and allow for such rentals, which may supplement more suburban-style developments like 16 Neck Road?
Given this considerable number of questions, and concerns, and the relatively little time remaining before May 14, I would like to thank you in advance for your help and your timely reply. Our hope and expectation is for a positive result, which is beneficial for the region, residents, and for Old Lyme.
Sincerely,
Gregory Stroud
Executive Director
SECoast
(860) 772-4349
gregorystroud@secoast.org
................................................ FULL LETTER BELOW..............
www.dropbox.com/s/w9lozcrih2un12m/Hope%20Partnership%20-%20Open%20Letter%20Final%204-18-18.pdf?dl=0
1 week ago
Well said....
Very well written.
Very well written. Are they addressing the impact on school enrollment?
Thanks, Darlene! That's a great question, which probably is best answered by the First Selectwoman (who is strongly supportive of the plan). Although declining school enrollment is a real concern, it's not clear how many new students this development will bring into the system, or whether there has been a study to judge the impact of the development on the town.
At the April 12 Hope Partnership open house, Old Lyme First Selectwoman Bonnie Reemsnyder pretty strongly endorsed the 16 Neck Road project as an effective means of heading off less-scrupulous developers from outside of the community from building basically whatever they want in the name of affordable housing. Hope Partnership is based in Old Saybrook, and 16 Neck Road developer is Graybill Properties based in Old Lyme. The underlying reasoning is that until Old Lyme meets a threshold of 10% affordable housing [currently the number is judged to be just over 1.5%], there is little a town can do to block a project without risking a lawsuit. So, our question is this: How far will the 16 Neck Road project go toward meeting the 10% threshold? Is there any clear plan to meet that threshold? And if not, still being shy of 10%, isn't Old Lyme just as vulnerable to another development, with or without the 16 Neck Road project?
Opponents file suit on Norwalk's Walk Bridge
Enviro group calls new $ 1 billion Walk Bridge plan waste of taxpayers’ money
thehour.com
HARTFORD - A group opposed to a $1 billion plan to rebuild the movable Walk Bridge over the Norwalk River - an aging relic that frequently delays Metro-North trains when it fails - are pressing lawmakers and the state to start over. "We want [the state] to rethink the costly and disruptive plan to b...1 week ago
To quote:
"According to Boucher, DOT officials told lawmakers that The Courant’s reporting on this issue was inaccurate and not credible. Redeker and his staff have not requested that The Courant issue corrections on any of the stories written about the old Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority rail cars.
A DOT spokesman said earlier this week that Redeker was not available to be interviewed. DOT Deputy Commissioner Anna Barry, who was a high-ranking MBTA official until she joined the Connecticut DOT in 2012, declined an interview request."
...
Our view:
As the nearest Connecticut has to a paper of record, in our experience, the Courant has bent over backwards to present the Department of Transportation's side in numerous disputes over fact, and interpretation.That the two are now at odds speaks volumes about the need for new leadership at CTDOT.
Department Of Transportation Tells Lawmakers Leasing Of 30-Year-Old Rail Cars A Good Deal For State
courant.com
Connecticut $4.45 million lease of 30-year-old rail cars is a great deal for this state, DOT Commissioner Redeker tells skeptical lawmakers.1 week ago
FYI to all those who use Shore Line East.
On Tuesday, April 17th, representatives from the DOT will be at all Shore Line East stations during morning peak hours to discuss the upcoming Amtrak track work that will impact service through November and answer any questions.
This is unrelated to the DOT's proposed cuts to Shore Line East, but feel free to ask about that as well.
To read the DOT's press release, please click on the following link: www.ct.gov/dot/cwp/view.asp?A=1373&Q=601632
For the most up-to-date information, Shore Line East customers are urged to check the service website at www.ShoreLineEast.com or call 1-800-255-7433.
1 week ago
Even a revenue-neutral plan while likely require some sort of changes...I went back through the last 5 years worth of gasoline tax revenue data and produced this graph.
One reason that we are scrambling to boost funding to the CT Transportation fund is due to a 12.36% drop in gas tax revenue witnessed in 2017 that seemingly came out of nowhere.
With a net outgoing migration flow this problem can only get worse as these tax dollars are levied when you fill up at a gas station in CT. Less residents, less potential for revenue.
Another contributing factor is that cars are becoming more fuel efficient. Car needs less gas (or is electric) that means less revenue for the state for roads.
Another factor, considering that we are a small state and the level of traffic passing through (one of the busiest corridors in the region (Boston to NY)) is impacting our roads but we are likely only collecting a portion of the revenue from out of staters.
This is why the topics of tolls has gained traction and you might be seeing tolls in CT starting in 2019 or 2020.
2 weeks ago
Proposed tolling maps for Southwest CT. Whether you support or oppose tolling for Connecticut, we urge you to read our previous detailed look at this topic here:
www.facebook.com/secoast.at.Old.Lyme/posts/1724452127593531Here is a map of the proposed toll sites for the SW section of CT including I-95 and CT-15.
2 weeks ago
Yikes!
Do you suppose that a discount applies if your e-z pass indicates your ct residency?
Why leave the Merritt Pkwy system untolled?
How about I395?
Even if you move away... Malloy will hunt you down and grab your$$$
Are these all to be tolls or proposed locations for options - so only some of these options will actually be tolls?
SECT- why no info for ‘your’ peeps? The graphic which shows New Haven and east?
....and they will build guaranteed speed lanes..express...so you can get from point 1 to 5 to 10 etc without sitting in local traffic...right??? And reduce tolls for those car pooling of course?? Oh wait...this is CT..so noooooooo 🤬
Have those opposed read up on this?? In-staters will get lower rates + tolls will be electronic so it will not hold up traffic if you have an easy pass, convenient anyway. (My husband & I both have them already). I think I read between New Hampshire- DC we are the only main state (excluding RI) which doesn’t have tolls. ie CT is missing out. Our state is desperate for funds so WHY NOT capitalize on one of our assets, ie location betw Boston & NYC?
So, CT wants me to move !
Tolls are a nuisance. If this happens will use back roads more and more.
Does Dan Spicer support this? Need to know who not to vote for. Let’s legalize weed and let’s reap those benefits.
Oh, all those accidents........😞😞😞
EVERY PERSON ON THIS THREAD! SECoast just posted another related piece— MUCH longer, looks to take 15 m at least— but If you felt strongly enough to weigh in here, then presumably you might be willing to learn the essentials and BE PART OF THE CONVERSATION. The problem? With this year’s short session, there is no way to get the needed consensus, thus I hope it does not pass this session or— if it does— that it is then thoughtfully executed with transparency as a priority and much opportunity for public input.
Mike Haynes
leaving CT anyways. enjoy yet another assault on your income!
Who needs more infromation ? The state has continually spent every tax dollar and more ! Give a incompetent jackass more money he will spend it ! Then they will up the gas/cigarette/alchol/consumer tax again and then the income tax ! And btw rhode island is adding tolls also and already have the electronic rigging done !
Let Fairfield County pay its fair share
If I lived in Litchfield, I'd be pissed to have to pay to maintain I95 for the Wall Street Guys commute from Greenwich and Stamford.
Except for the highways in Northern VA, I've never driven on a highway with this density of tolls--come on..at least one in every town? The impact on transportation cost of food, etc. will be horrendous. Remember, transportation costs will be impacted by both tolls and lost time / delays due to tolls.
Just trucks and out of staters
Ugggggg whose brilliant idea? Let me guess...a person who doesn't have to get across a river to get to work in southern ct?
I believe it will be electronic just as in Massachusetts. No toll booths
Dang. I remember when they got rid of the tolls in my hometown, Greenwich.
Tolling maps proposed by CTDOT. Whether you support or oppose tolling, we strongly encourage you to take a look at our earlier discussion of this topic here:
www.facebook.com/secoast.at.Old.Lyme/posts/1724452127593531TOLL MAPS PART 2:
The CT DOT has proposed installing tolls along major routes throughout Connecticut, including I-84, I-95, I-91, and Routes 2, 8, 9, and 11. The toll locations would not only be along the borders of our state, but also heavily scattered throughout.
A follow up to my previous post regarding the toll locations in SW CT. Here is a CDM Smith (engineering consultants) map of the proposed tolls on I-84 West of Hartford.
To drive from Hartford to the NY border on I-84 it would cost $5.50 during peak travel hours under this proposal
2 weeks ago
Affordable-housing development proposed for Old Lyme
theday.com
Old Lyme — A new affordable-housing development is being proposed on 6.6 acres of land by the Interstate 952 weeks ago
All the latest news... please click below for more, and please share this with your friends!
mailchi.mp
Whether you support or oppose the tolling of major Connecticut roadways, one thing is clear: Tolling is no solution to short-term budget shortfalls for 2018 or even 2022. The radical cuts to Shore Line East, to commuter service to New Canaan and Waterbury, etc. are issues which must be dealt with .....2 weeks ago
Please, while you are spreading the word and asking questions, please make sure that everyone in Old Lyme understands the deceit behind the words “affordable housing”. It is not affordable to the average person. Look at Essex and Old Saybrook.
The project looks far too dense for the semi-rural character of the area.
Stay focused on this
Thank you for all that you are doing for Old Lyme. We appreciate your support.🙂
Thank you for all your info. Maybe someone can start an event page for the public hearing on May 14th at the town hall? Then we can invite residents and anybody that we think would be interested. ✌🏽
Dennis Kessler
Please take a look at our our 10 questions regarding the Hope Partnership housing development in Old Lyme, here: www.facebook.com/secoast.at.Old.Lyme/posts/1730386020333475
Here is a recording of Old Lyme First Selectwoman Bonnie Reemsnyder's remarks on the 16 Neck Rd housing development. Worth a listen.
Reemsnyder - Hope Partnership.m4a
dropbox.com
2 weeks ago
Whether you support or oppose the tolling of major Connecticut roadways, there is one thing clear: Tolling is not a solution to budget cuts, and shortfalls, for 2018 or even 2022. The radical cuts to Shore Line East, to commuter service to New Canaan and Waterbury, etc. are issues which must be dealt with today. Tolling, even if adopted, is years out from being implemented.
So, we are deeply concerned that this present budget urgency, has been repurposed by CTDOT not only as part of a turf war with the 14 Independent Transit Districts in Norwalk, New London, and elsewhere outside of Hartford and New Haven, but also to avoid an informed and deliberate discussion regarding tolling revenues, costs, control, and oversight.
To this end, we'd encourage you to take a moment to read Executive Director of RiverCog Sam Gold's March 14 testimony on the issue to the CGA Transportation Committee. Whatever side of the issue you are on, Gold's testimony offers an excellent series of baseline concerns.
You can find it here
1drv.ms/b/s!AsFtT2rPsiywkyXmy5TddpW2RaH-
It is our position, that leaving potentially hundreds of millions of out-of-state dollars on the table makes little sense, but before we are willing to sign on to supporting tolls...
We'd like a much better understanding of how CTDOT's revenue assumptions are calculated.
We'd also like to a better sense of how much overhead and and upfront expenses will be required to institute and operate a tolling system. If we are motivated in part by harvesting out-of-state dollars, to what extent are these dollars simply lost to overhead expenses? (See the Yankee Institute piece below)
We have significant concerns that the plans lack adequate public oversight, and participation on the proposed governing body.
We agree with comments made by RiverCog, that these plans may also improperly give over a significant portion of the fundamental power of the purse from the legislature to CTDOT and the governor.
We have deep concerns that toll revenues will continue to be diverted into the general revenue stream.
Without a better understanding of how these tolls would be structured, and where these gantries would be placed, we have significant concerns about the equity of these proposals for the diverse communities and populations which use the roads in Connecticut.
We have concerns that these proposals will significantly burden small businesses and communities, like Old Lyme, which would likely be subject to tolls as a matter of reaching it's nearby and primary shopping district.
We also believe that proposals for tolling must be debated as part of a larger conversation of offsetting cuts, to make sure that lower-income drivers, and small businesses, are not priced out of our transportation network.
If for most lower-income workers, working requires driving, how likely is it that for lower-income workers, these tolls would overtake other forms of taxation as their single largest contribution to the state's revenue stream, in the process nullifying work-friendly tax policies like Earned Income Tax Credits?
yankeeinstitute.org
Tolls would cost $430,000 per day in operating expenses, so who would run them? by Marc E. Fitch | Apr 12, 2018 | Transportation | 0 comments Facebook Twitter Google+ LinkedIn Tumblr The proposed electronic toll gantries on Connecticut’s highways won’t be free — someone will have to operate an...2 weeks ago
Malloy doesn't care...
We'd love to hear your feedback on plans for a 37-unit, 12-building affordable housing development (under Connecticut General Statute 8-30G) in Old Lyme.
The development has been proposed by Hope Partnership, with Graybill Properties LLC, for 16 Neck Road, immediately adjacent to the I-95 Northbound exit (to the right).
You can find filed plans for the project below:
www.dropbox.com/s/dhzzk0qftf9to6h/Affordable%20Development%20Old%20Lyme%20-%20Plan.pdf?dl=0
There is a public hearing on the proposal scheduled for May 14, 2018 at 7:30 PM in the Old Lyme Town Hall. We encourage you to attend.
2 weeks ago
I count forty units? Wow. According to the minutes they were talking 16-24 units and now they're at 40 (according to plans). That is quite an increase. www.oldlyme-ct.gov/Pages/OldLymeCT_PlanMin/I05916F8D?textPage=1.
Ask questions! We need to understand this project.
I love the idea of this! For years I've heard people say there's no way that Children could live here. This opens up an opportunity!
Its not low income housing, nor is it truly "affordable" The "affordable housing law" in CT only means a very small percentage of units builts need to be "affordable". It is a law passed by developers basically to force towns to allow them to buiild cluster housing anywhere they what. It is ruining many neighbors all over the state. Most complexes here in Stratford pushed through with this "law" are 2 bedroom units with only 1 or 1.5 parking spots per car and the overflow cars blocking streets not meant for such a thing. FIGHT it if you can!
It's already created steady traffic choking in Old Saybrook and town taxes are going UP to cover what the State did not/could not. It was built with a promise not to remove a lane of trees between the units and the North burial ground... that went right out the window. Those of us who live downtown are pissed.... trust me, don't let it happen to you!
In the United States, municipalities have a legal mandate to zone a certain amount of land within their borders for multifamily housing (See, Southern Burlington County N.A.A.C.P. v. Mount Laurel Township, 1975). Perhaps in response to this SCOTUS decision, and fallout from it in the years that followed, in 1990, the Connecticut legislature passed the Affordable Housing Appeals Act (the "Act"). Under the Act, if less than 10% of the housing in a town is “affordable housing,” then certain developers whose housing development plans have been rejected by the town have the right to sue the town. Once in court, the town must prove that its rejection of the proposed development was for legitimate reasons. This presents a question to townspeople, do you either (a) affirmatively zone for affordable housing, which usually takes the form of multi-family housing, and put the balls in the town's court by actually PLANNING for where that type of housing is going to go, or (b) sit back and wait for developer's to propose affordable housing, and be forced into approving it when they make compelling arguments to the town's decision-makers that if they don't approve the project, they will successfully sue the town for noncompliance with its mandate to zone for affordable housing per the Mt. Laurel decision and its manifestation in the Act. The proposed development we see in this site plan is simply trash. Multi-unit garden apartments, adjacent to a highway? This type of housing and urban design was antiquated a decade ago, let alone today. But this is what we get if we don't affirmatively plan for affordable housing! Instead of being reactionary, we could try for once to be proactive? Imagine the possibilities of how we could otherwise meet our affordable housing obligations - say, a beautiful four or five story apartment building on Halls Road, built closer to existing street lines, and including ground floor retail that adds interest and vitality to our little town... a building like that would contain the same number of units as this proposed travesty, on 1/10th the land, preserving our landscape and having less impact on the natural environment. So, in organizing opposition to this embarrassment of a project, we should make sure that we are forward thinking about how we are going to affirmatively meet our beloved towns' obligation to provide affordable, multi family housing. Don't just say "no." Say "no" with a "yes" to something better! Bring solutions to the core issue.
I think it’s a great idea
How unfortunate. Thought they bought this property to prevent this type of development!!
Why would anyone want to live practically on top of I95? I am sure there is a much better location for afforable housing in this town.
The state actually took part of that property for eminent domain-years ago to put in I 95 I think.
How do they expect to get cars in and out of that parcel of land? Already, drivers coming off the highway often do not yield to the traffic on Rt. 156, and cars on 156 often do not stay in the travel lane at the point of yield. There must be a safer and more appropriate location in town for cluster housing.
Taking a left is going to be a nightmare!
Would love to do the Structural drawings, who's the Architect?
Here is an illustration of the development proposed for Old Lyme. If you'd like to see a smaller version of the project, six years, and a couple of miles down the road, we encourage you to visit the Hope Partnership Development at 45 Ferry Road, Old Saybrook.
Here is a recording of Old Lyme First Selectwoman Bonnie Reemsnyder's remarks on the 16 Neck Rd development: " www.dropbox.com/s/td5j46lxe9sy99a/Reemsnyder%20-%20Hope%20Partnership.m4a?dl=0
Realistically you will never have all 37 units merging onto 156 at the same time. If it’s well planned and designed, as a 33 year resident of OL, I approve of this development.
I don’t think it’s a good idea to have young children being raised in an area where constant pollution and exhaust is dropping down from the sky from the highway. Just saying.
I don’t see anything wrong yet! With hwy there they need some kind of a sound Barrier there! I need more information! Any tax benefits to us in old Lyme?
If it’s like what they have in Essex and Saybrook, it’s not going to be a very nice entrance to our town
I understand that humans need a habitat, but this is an abysmal plan conceived to enrich its owner, at the expense of our lovely little town.
Great point Gregg
I’m fine with that as long as my taxes don’t have to go up again
Dave Plotkin
Kevin Lamarco
Guess it's a good thing they're not building that trained to go through there anymore. What they built they would have to destroy for the tracks for their original plan next to the highway.
State transportation experts weigh federal budget
yaledailynews.com
City | State transportation experts weigh federal budget Nicole Ahn State transportation experts weigh federal budget Nicole Ahn Staff Reporter In recent months, state legislators have bemoaned the lack of transportation funding in Connecticut. And even though the new federal budget may offer ...2 weeks ago
3 weeks ago
3 weeks ago
The Day's editorial on Murphy's recent transportation forum
Transportation will carry Connecticut's future
theday.com
The Romans built roads and spread an empire. President Dwight Eisenhower built the interstate highway system and made America greatly prosperous.3 weeks ago
Tolls are just another Tax on the already over-taxed citizens. More people are leaving this state then coming in due to the high cost of living and lack of employment. People leaving this state is only going to increase with the changes to the 2018 Fed Tax rules. CT doesn't have a revenue problem. It has a spending problem. It is time to reign in the spending and start looking at ways to make this state more attractive to business and with it, jobs. So far, CT is doing a horrible job at that. "Connecticut has a relatively small state-owned road system, 4,079 miles, but it spends three times as much money per mile ($478,000 per mile) than the average state. Per-mile expenditures for capital work, maintenance and administration are also high." - 2016 figures www.hartfordbusiness.com/article/20161017/PRINTEDITION/310149956/ct reason.org/policy_study/23rd-annual-highway-report/total-disbursements-per-mile/
Connecticut Fund for the Environment goes to court to "to uphold the Town of East Lyme Sewer Commission’s decision to allocate a limited amount of the town’s sewer capacity for development in the Oswegatchie Hills." According to CFE, "The proposed development would destroy much of this coastal forest and replace it with 36 acres of paved and hard surfaces."
Share this Oswegatchie Hills update!
secure.everyaction.com
Next Tuesday, Connecticut Fund for the Environment will argue in front of the Connecticut Appellate Court to uphold the Town of East Lyme Sewer Commission’s decision to allocate a limited amount of the town’s sewer capacity for development in the Oswegatchie Hills. The proposed development would...3 weeks ago
Delays electrifying sidings along Shore Line East leads to delays and 30-year-old cars on new Hartford Line?
MassDOT: 30-Year-Old Rail Cars Connecticut Is Leasing Not Worth Repairing
courant.com
The old rail cars Connecticut is leasing for the new Hartford Line were too run-down to be worth fixing in 2011, according to a Massachusetts state report.3 weeks ago
White House infrastructure adviser D.J. Gribbin calls it quits
3 weeks ago
Another one bites the dust...
3 weeks ago
Not to fond of sitting on the beach in RI watching them spin. Hopefully these will be father away
The “environmentalists” couldn’t care less about the between 140,000 and 328,000 birds A YEAR are killed by these monstrosities. Disgraceful. www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/how-many-birds-do-wind-turbines-really-kill-180948154/
3 weeks ago
All the latest news from Senator Murphy's meeting in New London... we have link to the audio, and quotes from the key passages below, raising the possibility of a revived Kenyon to Old Saybrook Bypass.
....
Here is Murphy starting out: "I believe we will wither on the vine if we don't speed up the transit times to those two economic centers, and the rail corridor is today the growing means by which people get to and from, which brings up the question of siting. The federal department of transportation came out with a very controversial plan that involved changing the route of the Northeast Rail Corridor as it moves through Connecticut. I understand people's hesitancy about new routes, siting is always difficult, but I will say without applying this to any specific plan, if we communicate to the federal government that we are not interested in any new routes for the Northeast Rail Corridor, they will take their money and spend it somewhere else, and we will be stuck with increasing transit times year after year after year. And so what are your recommendations for how we approach this question of siting, I'd love the Chamber's perspective on this too, because businesses are dependent on the transportation times increasing, my prejudice is that while we demand that the state of Connecticut ultimately have the ultimate sign-off on any new siting, that we understand the risks of saying that we won't accept any new pathways at all for the Northeast Rail Corridor because it would be too disruptive. If that's the case, we will get virtually no improvements in service."
SECCOG's Kate Rattan agreed, stating that while NEC Future lacked necessary detail and study, and that the Northeast Corridor is the "lifeblood" of the region; the current service is little better than car travel, is too expensive, too slow, and requires additional planning on "how we can optimize the right of way that we have, and the impacts and benefits of any other options."
To which Murphy responded, "I think this is a really important point that you made that I should have, which is that the plan that was so concerning to people, was a plan done before any permitting, before and local review process had moved forward, Connecticut ultimately, right, has say over any new track that gets built here, and it will be those local conversations that will dictate how and if any new track is built. I just am communicating that I hope we are open to that conversation, even if it does result in a little bit of dislocation, the long-term benefits to the region and to businesses, would be, could be, tremendous."
Rattan added that, "It's really important for this region to stay on the preferred alignment of the Northeast Corridor, that we don't become a backwater."
Murphy agreed, "That's right. That's the other risk here. That there were a number of options for the future of the Northeast Rail Corridor. One of them bypassed southeastern Connecticut. One of them would run the Northeast Rail Corridor through the center of the state, and up across. And if we can't solve the siting problems here, then others that are willing to solve the siting problems, those options will become much more interesting. So it's really important to understand that it is not inevitable that the Northeast Rail Corridor continues to run through New London, if we are unwilling to make tough choices, and it ends up going somewhere else."
3 weeks ago
I will let my local businesses know later today. Hodges Square New London.
Why don't you run a monorail system up over the existing 95 Highway. You can go up over Bridges and overpasses. You can use existing Park & Rides as stops along the Route. And you don't have to worry about destroying historic districts and wetlands.
I fail to see how the railroad is the life blood of the region. Passengers are going from New York to Boston. They are not stopping for lunch or shopping. They don’t need to get there any faster at the expense of the Connecticut shoreline.
I didn't know we had already legalized pot, since this dude is high on something
A great opportunity to speak with Rep. Carney, currently the ranking member on transportation.
Rep. Carney Holds Legislative Update, April 5; All Welcome
lymeline.com
State Representative Devin Carney will hold a Legislative Update at the Vicki Duffy Pavilion, 150 College Street, Old Saybrook on Thursday, April 5, from 8 to 9 a.m. This event is being hosted by the Old Saybrook Chamber of Commerce and all Lyme-Old Lyme Chamber of Commerce members are welcome to at...4 weeks ago
A good write-up of the latest on state and federal transportation funding, with the Congressional GOP facing a possible wave election, and with little leverage for little else, the new omnibus spending bill in Congress is awash in additional federal spending, including an extra $10 billion in transportation spending.
For Connecticut, the apparent revival of TIGER grants, and the additional $25 million in federal formula transportation funding is important.
4 weeks ago
Undue Burden?
By a quirk of history, roughly half of the Connecticut -- including New London, Norwich, Middletown, Old Saybrook, Norwalk and Westport -- is served by independent municipal transit, while the other half -- including Hartford, New Haven, Stamford, New Britain, and Wallingford -- is served by CTTransit.
And while there are undoubtedly pluses and minuses to each system, it would appear that independent municipal transit provides much the better service of the two, with lower overhead, greater community involvement, and a funding scheme which requires local budget dollars. State dollars fund 100% of CTTransit, while independent municipal transit districts require an additional 10% or so local buy-in.
So, you have to ask yourself, in the latest round of proposed service and budget cuts, why has the Connecticut Department of Transportation chosen to spare CTTransit (and the communities it serves) entirely from budget and service cuts, while slapping independent municipal transit (and the communities it serves) with 15% cuts for the coming year, and 50% cuts for the next?
It's hard not to conclude that the Connecticut Department of Transportation is playing favorites, preferring its own less-efficient service, and has crafted a set of budget cuts to meet these ends. In the short-term at least, that will mean either higher taxes or lesser service for less favored communities across southeastern Connecticut, as well as to Middletown, Norwich, Norwalk, and Westport.
And what is the end game here? Either the end of transit service as we know it across large portions of the state, or a takeover by the Connecticut Department of Transportation, with higher overhead, and less community buy-in?
We strongly urge you to contact Governor Dannel Malloy by email at dannel.malloy@ct.gov or by phone (860) 566-4840 . In either case, please be polite, and ask the governor to "share the burden of budget cuts between CTTransit and Independent Municipal Transit." It's not just a question of fairness, it's a question of good government.
Office of Governor Dannel P. Malloy
Official page of the Office of Governor Dannel P. Malloy of the State of Connecticut. Comments posted/messages received may be subject to public disclosure pursuant to the Connecticut Freedom of Information Act or archived at the State Library4 weeks ago
Southeastern Connecticut has long been shortchanged on transpotation. I had a chance to ask Sen Blumenthal about this on a publicity train ride to Norwich back in 2012 or 13, when they were talking about opening up that route for public transportation; which so far has not happened
For a while the Governor was spending a lot of time and effort here, must have realized this area votes Democratic regardless of what does or does not happen
Clearly this is in direct response to the opposition to the proposed high-speed rail. All the rail money will slowly start to flow into the route which connects NYC to Boston and those CT Stations in between.
in an era of limited state budgets, with plans for affordable housing along Route 156 in the works, Old Lyme First Selectwoman Bonnie Reemsnyder, proposes a makeover of Old Lyme...
Old Lyme officials explore ways to enhance Halls Road
theday.com
Old Lyme — A revitalized business center with mixed-use development. Enhanced lighting and sidewalks. A pedestrian bridge over the1 month ago
1 month ago
Prediction: not a damn penny will go to the roads. Just like the unbearable gas tax. CT voters only look for a D after the name.
1 month ago
More thoughts on infrastructure, this time from a conservative-libertarian perspective...
Buried liabilities haunt the infrastructure debate
washingtonexaminer.com
Last week, five cabinet secretaries testified before the Senate Commerce Committee in support of President Trump’s long-awaited and recently-announced infrastructure plan. Under the plan, $200 billion of federal spending would encourage $1.5 trillion of total infrastructure investment, driven by.....1 month ago
DOT to hold meeting on plans for Niantic River Bridge work
theday.com
A roughly $15 million project for the Niantic River Bridge that carries Route 156 over the Niantic River in East Lyme and Waterford, including1 month ago
Empire State Passengers Association
NEWS LINK - NYS Assembly to begin a new push for high-speed rail Assemblyman Ron Kim (D-Queens) the bill’s chief sponsor, sees high-speed rail, not casinos and "corporate giveways," as a way to revive the upstate economy. “We need to rethink our overall economic development vision for the entire state, and that starts with some version of high-speed rail," he said. Kim’s bill, which so far ...1 month ago
1 month ago
Yash Patel... Infosys to CT!!!
1 month ago
What a breath of fresh air... just inviting comments without agenda. Thank you.
Common sense legislation to help support small businesses like The Beer’d Brewing Co., in Stonington. We appreciate State Sen. Somers' support.
Small brewers seeking to raise the limit on retail sales
thewesterlysun.com
The Westerly Sun is a local print and digital daily newspaper covering all local news, sports and community events in the Southern Rhode Island and Southeastern Connecticut area1 month ago
We encourage you to attend, to ask good questions, and hear what the various candidates have to say.There is an important event today in Groton hosted by Nancy Mello Miller and Alyssa Siegel-Miles from Action Together Connecticut - New London County and We Stand Together - Southeast CT Resistance Actions and Info. I also look forward to seeing my friends from Rise Up Mystic, Stonington Democratic Town Committee, Groton CT Democrats, City of Groton Democrats, Plainfield Democratic Town Committee, Griswold Democratic Town Committee, Voluntown Democratic Town Committee Meeting, and folks from Preston and Sterling as well. I'll be there (mostly listening), but happy to chat with anyone interested in my race for the State Senate. Look forward to seeing you there.
2 months ago
A well worthwhile analysis of the new Hartford Line in a statewide context
Plan Flaws Mar New Train Line's Promise | New Haven Independent
newhavenindependent.org
(News analysis) The Hartford Line is undeniably a triumph for a state whose transportation policy has often vacillated between paralyzed and bankrupt. But before the $8 trains start rolling from...2 months ago
We'll be attending the Tuesday roundtable of "Rebooting New England" hosted by Toni Harp and Luke Bronin in New Haven.
Pop-up meetings aim to stir advocacy for high-speed passenger rail from Manhattan
berkshireeagle.com
GREAT BARRINGTON — Think of her as commander of the Western Massachusetts rail uprising. Karen Christensen and The Train Campaign are popping up around the Berkshires to alert residents to the …2 months ago
"But Amtrak’s incompetence is not really about wages or staffing ... the incompetence manifests itself first of all in poor coordination between the various users of the NEC. Given better coordination, Amtrak could shave a substantial portion of its New York-New Haven runtime, perhaps by 10-20 minutes without any bridge replacements, and reduce schedule padding elsewhere."
Why Northeast Corridor Privatization is Doomed to Failure
pedestrianobservations.com
Alex Armlovich asked me whether it’s possible to design a public-private partnership on the Northeast Corridor (NEC) to build high-speed rail. I took it to a Patreon poll, in which it prevail…2 months ago
The New Haven Preservation Trust
The New Haven Preservation Trust is excited to see the New Haven Clock Company project move forward! NHPT helped jumpstart the project by supporting applications for the CT Trust Making Places and DECD Brownfields Planning grant programs in 2014 and 2015 respectively. In the late 1990s and 2000s, the Preservation Trust also worked to list the complex on the State Register of Historic Places an...2 months ago
"While the proposal is conceptual and doesn't include detailed maps yet, for the eastern portion of I-95 the study proposes strategic widening between Exits 54 and 55 for $81 million and improving Exits 88, 89 and 90 for $70 million."
Study calls for 'strategic' widening of I-95
theday.com
Hartford — Rather than advocating for widening Interstate 95 in both directions from the New York border to the Rhode Island border,2 months ago
DUH, how many years has this been needed?
How about upgrading exit 92 southbound. What a nightmare!!!
Comment on Facebook