Cities left with industrial shells
Ugly scars of past blight much of Connecticut
WATERBURY — One key to a better future for Connecticut’s cities could lie beneath the ugly scars from its industrial past, blighted and often toxic pockets that mar city landscapes statewide.
The state has made strides to develop programs that have managed to attract developers to former industrial sites in cities, spending $206 million over the past decade alone.
But the state’s system of measuring the gains made by pouring millions into cleaning its polluted sites is flawed — the state doesn’t track number of jobs created or taxes generated after cleanup.
It also doesn’t accurately track the acres cleaned and there’s no complete inventory of polluted sites.
These former industrial
sites where fears of pollution, known and unknown, frighten off developers and the crumbling bricks and broken windows bring down property values for blocks all around are known as brownfields.
Gov. Ned Lamont, facing deep state deficits, has proposed significant cuts in brownfield funding at a time cities need all they can get to foster economic development.
“We would love to be investing more in brownfield remediation, but with the realities of the budget I think the governor in his proposal wasn’t able to invest as much as he would like,” said Lt. Gov.
Susan Bysiewicz, during an April visit to Waterbury for the launch of a cleanup at a derelict 17 acre industrial site.
Waterbury holds a reputation of accomplishment in brownfield redevelopment. The city’s most recent target is the former Anamet manufacturing complex. The city is using $3 million from the state to demolish most of the buildings in the complex. The city hopes a clean site will attract a developer.
Anamet is a good example of the challenges of the state’s urban brownfields. It had once been a bustling employment center before closing in 2000. More recently, it has looked like a relic from a fallen civilization as trees and shrubs reclaimed paved lots and buildings crumbled. Graffiti is widespread, windows are broken and garbage is collected in heaps.
Olga Jimenez, who lives across the street from Anamet, has come to expect litter near her apartment. She won’t let her grandchildren play in her front yard because of the prostitutes and drug users who took advantage of the former factory’s dark spaces.
Demolish it all, Jimenez said. “If this is down they can’t go back up in there and shoot drugs and do what they want to do, because it’s going to be an open spot,” she said. “There’s a lot of dumb stuff that goes on in the street, but that could be dangerous. They’ve already set it on fire a couple of times.”
The blight has set the tone for the neighborhood, it speaks to what was lost, rather than what could be, said 20-year-old Emily Ramos. Her grandparents own a house across from the long-desolate and threatening Anamet site. She is happy to see heavy machines tearing down buildings.
“For years, these buildings have just been taking up space that were once places where people had jobs,” Ramos said. “No matter what it turns into, whether it’s a place that will offer more job opportunities or more housing complexes, I think it’s just going to benefit this community in general bringing more people in.”
The $3 million in state grants won’t be enough to completely clean the site. The city is seeking another $2 million to finish the job.
Experts and state officials agree that state funding is the most important key to cleaning abandoned and polluted industrial sites. Without state backing, it often doesn’t make economic sense for developers to spend millions of dollars for cleanup in depressed urban areas.
The state Department of Economic and Community
Development is able to track money spent through its official brownfield programs, at least for the past decade. But it can’t account for how much money has been spent on direct grants to pet project, such as Anamet.
The DECD is unable to provide a history of this type of brownfield funding stream. DECD spokesman Jim Watson said that’s because these grants are often for a mix of projects in addition to brownfields.
It’s also impossible to tell how many acres were cleaned through the state’s brownfield program. The state’s records mingle acreage cleaned with acreage of sites where studies of the extent of pollution have occurred, but where no cleanup work has been performed.
Lamont’s current budget proposal would halve the amount of funding heading into the state’s brownfield programs, from about $20 million annually to $10 million in each of the coming two years, according to the DECD.
The General Assembly’s Commerce Committee headed by Waterbury Democrat Sen. Joan V. Hartley, whose 15th District includes parts of Waterbury, Middlebury and Naugatuck, has proposed spending $100 million on brownfield cleanups in the coming four years.
The General Assembly’s Finance, Revenue and
Bonding Committee forwarded a proposal that would pump $30 million into brownfields in fiscal 2020 and $10 million the following year.
Hartley expects a compromise.
“We never run out of projects, we always just run out of program allocation, so we know there is a very robust populace of need and requests,” Hartley said. “When we are talking about the economy of the state of Connecticut, I cannot foresee any administration walking away from the brownfield program.”
State legislative leaders announced a budget compromise Thursday. As of Friday, Hartley’s office and the DECD were unable to say how brownfield funding fares under the compromise.
In Hartley’s district, Middlebury doesn’t have any sites on the state’s list of brownfields. Taken together, Naugatuck and Waterbury have 37.
Advocates for brownfield cleanups are keenly aware of Lamont’s proposed cuts.
Arthur Bogen, president of the nonprofit Connecticut Brownfield Land Bank Inc., said state money is the key to making polluted sites feasible for investors.
Bogen’s group acts as consultants for municipalities, able to head brownfield redevelopment on their behalf.
“Without the marketplace backing them, nothing will happen,” Bogen said. “They are blighted. They have environmental issues and they sap much of the tax bases of cities that need to improve those tax bases.”
Bill Coleman, deputy director of Bridgeport’s Office of Planning and Economic Development, said state assistance has enticed companies to invest on polluted sites in his city.
Bridgeport received $16.7 million from state brownfield programs between July 1, 2009, and Dec. 1, 2018. That prompted $257.8 million in investment in Bridgeport brownfields from federal and local governments, as well as private business sources, according to DECD.
Developers, nonprofits and municipalities have received more than $206 million from the state’s brownfield programs over the past decade. That’s drawn another $3.2 billion from “other sources” to redevelop brownfields, according to DECD. The Cities Project, a collaboration between CT Mirror, Connecticut Public Radio, Hearst Connecticut Media, The Hartford Courant , Republican-American of Waterbury, Hartford Business Journal and Purple States, will publish periodic articles exploring challenges and solutions related to revitalizing Connecticut’s cities. Send comments or suggestions to ehamilton@ctmirror.org.