The most interesting thing about the Army Corps of Engineers meeting about the proposed Army Reserve Training Center Wednesday night was the speculation after the meeting as to why the Army still had Boardman Lane on their preferred site list.
After announcing their four preferred sites, in no particular order, Boardman Lane, with access through the Dooley property, the Bysiewicz industrial park, Mile Lane (former Nike site) and Cucia Park (which is the town's preferred site), the Corps was assaulted by those in Westfield who were appalled that Boardman Lane was still being considered. In addition, representatives from Rosa DeLauro's office, Chris Dodd's office, and State Senator Paul Doyle all criticized the Army for not taking Boardman Lane off of their list.
The most cynical among the audience speculated that the Army kept Boardman Lane on the list, knowing that they'd be criticized, but allowing them to focus attention on sites they actually preferred. Another theory was floated that Boardman Lane was kept on the list to prevent lawsuits by the current landowner.
In the end, the city, which offered four site selections (Cucia Park, Bysiewicz property, River Road and Manthay Property), felt that Cucia Park, adjacent to Smith Street and I-91 in the Southwest part of the city, was the most appropriate site.
Councilman Ron Klattenberg, who chaired a citizens' advisory committee on the site, presented the findings of the panel.
"The panel was unanimous in its rankings of the site, and two sites stood out, Cucia Park and River Road," he said.
For their part, the Army reviewed sixteen sites, rejecting the River Road site, along with 11 others including sites on Aircraft Rd, Middle St, Roscommon Office Park, Country Club Rd, Middle Street Delta Building, Atkins St – Krane Development, Freeman Road, Saybrook Rd, Tollgate Rd and Pratt and Whitney.
The Army will consider the city's recommendations and review its findings, and assess public comments which it will welcome until September 29. They hope to make a final selection by the end of October.
Members of the public who spoke out mostly addressed regrets that the Army had not eliminated Boardman Lane.
Westfield Residents Association representative Stephen Devoto said, "I don’t see how you can have this site on your list, after the Common Council resolution , and the work of the panel. It doesn’t show the spirit of collaboration."
One Smith Street resident, Sargent, explained that the development would increase traffic on her street. She also noted that Cucia Park is in a flood plain.
"A flood took the road right out during a storm," Sargent explained.
When asked if the city might put revenue from the sale of Cucia Park toward the purchase of property for open space, Mayor Sebastian Giuliano said, "We're at step one. That's about step 25, and I don't like to spend money we don't have yet."
3 comments:
Hair of the Dog
I do not see how the Advisory Panel, kept River Road on their list. Or how Mile Lane never was considered. Catherine Johnson observed that the pseudoscientific site "rating" numbers (Panel Points) present an interpretation of reality that reflects the desires of the Panel more than the actual reality. Does disappearing Cucia Park (9.4 PP) really "Enhance Middletown in a Meaninmgful Way" more than using the Bysiewicz Property (0 PP) as an Army facility instead of an Industrial Subdivision? They are a stone's throw apart... How about another category, like creates potential tax loss of 650,000 annually for city of Middletown? Mile Lane could really shine. Some of the best things in life are free. Is there no value in a Park? So much form and so little substance emerged from all this PP! This is the result of the cowardly collaborative response by our leaders to the demands of the Army to squeeze itself into our City. If this project is delayed, the Army says it will cut off its nose to spite its face by not constructing this facility at all. How foolish is that?
The process continues its painful bite.
Jasper Cane
Okay, Jasper, I now know you were at the meeting. Where were you sitting. Reveal youself, Cane! You'll be happy to know that Diane McCartin of the ACE, finds your comments, "interesting."
Ed,
I suspect that there is no one in town named Jasper Cane. More likely it is a nom de guerre of someone blessed with a superior insight and intelligence, but cursed by a suspicious and fearful outlook. I'd like to see Jasper go public with his identity. It’s time for this dog to learn new tricks. He would find out once and for all whether his adversaries, persons in positions of political and economic power, will accept constructive, even sarcastic, criticism without hurting him. I write this out of respect for Jasper and not just to throw him a bone.
Paul Torop
Post a Comment