Date: Fri 03-May-1996

By ANDY GOROSKO

Published: Aug 11, 1999 12:00 am

Publication: Bee

Author: ANDYG

Quick Words:

DOT-bypass-road

Full Text:

DOT To Host Informational Meeting On Bypass Road

B Y A NDREW G OROSKO

The state Department of Transportation (DOT) has scheduled a public

informational meeting on its plans to construct a bypass road across the

Fairfield Hills grounds.

The session is slated for Wednesday, May 22, at 7:30 pm at Newtown High School

on Route 34 in Sandy Hook.

The DOT considers the bypass project to be a combination of three road

building jobs: the construction of a roadway across the Fairfield Hills

campus; the reconstruction of the section of Mile Hill Road from Nunnawauk

Road to Interchange 11 of Interstate-84; and the construction of a new bridge

to carry Mile Hill Road across the Pootatuck River.

DOT employees will attend the session to explain the project and answer

questions from the public. Plans for the project will be available for public

review. Cost estimates on the project range upwards from $3.5 million.

Detailed information, including maps and drawings, as well as written opinions

on the project are available for public inspection by contacting Bradley J.

Smith, manager of state design, at 860-594-3272, Connecticut Department of

Transportation, 2800 Berlin Turnpike, Newington, CT, Mondays through Fridays

from 8:30 am to 4:30 pm.

The DOT has scheduled the start of construction on the oft-delayed Fairfield

Hills bypass road for the spring of 1997, but that goal will only be met if

all the pieces of the road planning process fall properly into place,

according to DOT's engineers.

The 1.3-mile bypass road, a connector road which is viewed as an integral link

in the town's east-west road network, is considered by town officials as a

means to improve traffic flow between Route 25, Interstate-84 and Route 34,

thus relieving heavy truck traffic through the town center.

The DOT must obtain required wetlands construction permits from the state

Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to build a road and bridge above

the environmentally-sensitive Pootatuck Aquifer, the town's designated sole

source aquifer.

If a public hearing on the wetlands permit is requested, it could add 6 to 12

months to the permitting process, pushing the start of construction that much

farther into the future, he said. Members of the Pootatuck Fish and Game Club

are expected to have much say over whether a DEP public hearing is held on

DOT's wetlands construction application. The club's land holdings are located

on the south side of Mile Hill Road, near the bridge crossing site.

A large elevated bridge is planned to replace the antiquated bridge on which

Mile Hill Road crosses the Pootatuck River.

Traffic flow will be maintained across the Fairfield Hills grounds while the

bypass road is under construction. That flow, however, will be one-way traffic

at times to allow construction to proceed.

The DOT plans to install contamination filters on the roadway above the

aquifer to protect the evironmentally-sensitive area. The filtration system is

designed to contain the "first flush" of runoff which carries the greatest

amount of pollutants during storms. The four filters will be cleaned out once

or twice yearly.

The bypass road project is environmentally significant in that it's unusual to

build a major connector road in a place containing an area's designated sole

source aquifer.

A 1991 agreement, which resolved a lawsuit filed by the town against the state

over the state's construction of Garner Correctional Institution, provided, in

part, that the state build a bypass road across the Fairfield Hills grounds to

alleviate traffic congestion in the town center.

But time and again, the construction schedule for the bypass road has been

revised, pushing the beginning of construction farther into the future.

As of last November, the tentative start of construction on the bypass road

had been slated for the late summer or early fall of 1996.

Next HRRA Household Hazardous Waste Drop-Off Event Scheduled In Newtown

Genealogy Club's Next Program To Dig Into 'Dissecting A Civil War Pension Record'

Choral Society Planning ‘Voices Of America’ Performance

Newtown Earth Day Festival Was A Success

Local Fourth Grader To Host ‘Gaming For Change’ On May 16

The editorial took no position on the budget going up or down so you're reading things into the editorial that simply aren't there. The turnout is tied to the lack of passage, in that people who came out to vote last time did not this time, indicating a lack of support on their part. Perhaps it wasn't spelled out clearly enough, but that's what the editorial was driving at, people showing lack of support by not casting a vote. The editorial did address likely concerns among voters that may have led to lack of support and lack of turnout. This lower turnout also follows increasing turnout over the past four referendums in three years (meaning it is an aberration from that), and increased turnout is something that I do push for regularly in editorials. Any disappointment you might be seeing is at the break in that trend, not at whether the budget passed or not. I'd rather see more people come out and vote "no" then not vote at all.

Lower Turnout Results In Two Budget Defeats

Clearly, property owners no longer want to bear the burden of expenses while the state does not meet it’s responsibilities. Rising costs must be addressed by actions that do not include yearly increases of property owners’ taxes. The state of CT must meet its share of the educational costs, and other costs.

Town And School Budgets Fail At Referendum

This feels like an oddly misleading headline and narrative, particularly coming from the Editorial Board. The headline "Lower Turnout Results in Two Budget Defeats" pushes a misleading narrative regarding voter turnout, and then seeks to tie the outcome of the referendum to that misleading narrative. Sure, voter turn out for this year's referendum, 18%, was lower than last year's. However, last year's turnout, 25.4%, represented the highest turnout in the most recent 10 budget referendums. If you take the time to examine turnout percentages between 2017 and 2026 (2017: 19.9, 2018: 15.7, 2019: 17, 2020: 0, 2021: 8.98, 2022: 7.7, 2023: 8.8, 2024: 15.1/17.49, 2025: 25.4, 2026: 18), this year's turnout was actually the third highest in the past 10 cycles. Perhaps the headline of this article should say "Lower Voter Turnout Than Last Year", which is more accurate, rather than creating an impression that this year's turnout is some type of aberration - a narrative that the turnout numbers, in all their binary glory, simply do not support. Further, the headline of this article appears to tie the "lower turnout" to the defeated budgets. Sure, that could be true. But, perhaps, its more likely that Newtown residents are feeling the squeeze of multiple economic influences. In Newtown, we've experienced property revaluations and increased municipal spending. Eversource continues to raise rates. The state legislature gives PURA the authority to impose Public Benefit charges that benefit a tiny percentage of the public (and subsequently burdening the rest of us). At the national level, inflation has run rampant for years and many of those costs remain high to this day. In short, the data tells a far less dramatic—and far more honest—story than the headline suggests. This wasn’t an electorate vanishing in apathy; it was a fairly typical turnout delivering an verdict that, perhaps, some at the Editorial Board didn't like. At some point, it’s worth considering that residents aren’t confused, disengaged, or misled by turnout; they’re simply doing math at their kitchen tables and concluding that “no” is the only responsible answer left.

Enjoyed the forum which only confirmed my support for Brandon Moore as the Democratic candidate to run for the state representative position. Brandon Moore did not waiver about his duty to all the people, if elected, when an issue presents itself that requires that he voice a difference of opinion for the wellbeing of Newtown residents. If Michelle Ku’s 16 years have led to her loyalty being to other elected officials, as she implied, then Newtown is going to continue to witness actions that do not protect its residents. She could not unseat republican, Mitch Bolinsky, during a Blue Wave, and once again, will not do it now. Winning that seat is critical for all. That explains why her previous campaign committee now campaigns for Brandon Moore. It explains all the endorsements he has received from local elected democratic officials. It’s why we need Brandon Moore to be the democratic candidate to run for state representative.

Second Newtown DTC, League Of Women Voters Candidates Event Planned

Appreciated the opportunity to hear from both candidates as we were present for the College Dems forum but only heard from Brandon Moore. It was an opportunity to see who can unseat the Republican incumbent and there is no doubt that Brandon Moore should be the Democratic candidate. One concerned parent posed a question about discrimination unaddressed by the school district and interestingly enough, Michelle Ku, who proudly speaks of her Board membership years, said little, while Brandon Moore passionately addressed the issue along with his experience as an Apache Helicopter Commander. This family is supporting Brandon Moore. We need change and someone who is not afraid to disagree, especially about the rising costs of living in Newtown.

Log In

Date: Fri 03-May-1996

Leave a Reply Cancel reply