CONNECTICUT RIVER VALLEY COUNCIL OF ELECTED OFFICIALS

C/O CRERPA, PO Box 778, Old Saybrook, CT 06475

crerpa@snet, net 860-388-3497

To: Acting OPM Secretary Brenda Sisco

From: Connecticut River Valley Council of Elected Officials (CRVCEO)

Date: June 1, 2010

MEMORANDUM: Meeting the criteria for redesignation of planning regions by the OPM Secretary (Connecticut General Statutes 16a-4c)

CGS Section 16a-4c requires the OPM Secretary to establish criteria for designating logical planning regions within the State of Connecticut. The criteria are intended to evaluate the impact of urban centers on neighboring towns.

Unlike many other areas of Connecticut, the seventeen towns of the Connecticut River Estuary and Midstate Planning Regions are not clearly associated with any of the three major urban centers around them, - New Haven, Hartford and New London – although the towns in the region do have ties of various kinds with their urban neighbors. The lower river valley area has a joint tourism promotion effort with the New London/Groton/Mystic area. The Shoreline East rail service connects the area with both New Haven and New London. Some of the northern towns have a relationship with Hartford in several functional areas. However, the influence of any single urban area is limited. The seventeen towns do not fit the common model of center city surrounded by concentric rings of decreasing density. Instead, the Valley-Shore area retains its own identity and issues. The true center of the area is its dominant natural resource – the Connecticut River and the adjacent waters of Long Island Sound. The region has its own nodes of activity at historic crossroads – Middletown, Old Saybrook, and numerous village centers in the primarily small towns of the region. This area has not yet been significantly overtaken by the inefficient sprawl pattern of the past half century. Smart Growth principles, which seek to prevent the spread of sprawl, require that distinct non-urban areas be treated differently than more densely developed urban centers.

Trends in economic development: The historical shape of economic development in this state continues to evolve, from market towns to urban city centers, “edge cities”, and suburban industrial parks, with increases in reverse commuting and no-commuting “work from home” employees. As industrial and service jobs relocate overseas, the latest emphasis is on sustainable communities and “thinking local”. This region is not dependent on any one industrial cluster or the health of any one urban area. It has many of the features sought in “sustainable” development”. Most of the area lacks major infrastructure for large- scale employment centers. Among its residents in general, there is a preference for new development that is in scale with the more modest character of the region, serving the needs of residents and visitors without seeking to spur intensive growth. This is consistent with the current State Conservation and Development Policies Plan. In the future, the region’s economy is expected to remain modest and diversified, with an increased emphasis on culture and natural resources as a basis for tourism.

Trends in the environment : The Valley/Shore area is recognized for its outstanding natural resources, which give the region much of its character. The Lower Connecticut River is designated as an American Heritage River, is the core of the federal Conte Wildlife Refuge, and designated as a Wetlands of International Significance and as a “Last Great Place” by the Nature Conservancy. The towns within the area retain a common small town character and scale. Despite the area’s location along the longest river in New England, in the center of the state’s coast, there are significant environmental limitations to intensive development throughout the area. Even Middletown, the largest urban center in the region, originally a busy sailing port, is now largely a residential city and college town. Towns within the region have made preservation of open space a priority, so that, along with state preservation and conservation lands, a significant part of the landscape remains undeveloped. As the central physical feature of the region, the Connecticut River is a strong unifying factor.

Towns on both sides of the river view themselves as a common community. Any proposal to redraw regional boundaries should respect this important cultural relationship.

Trends in housing patterns : In recent years, the standard recommendation for achieving more affordable housing within individual communities has been to allow increased density for new housing to reduce the cost per unit of construction. In an area with limited infrastructure, particularly public sewers, public water, and transportation access, densities great enough to affect the cost per unit may not be feasible. Towns in the region have offered numerous other approaches, including incentive zoning and town financial support for alternatives. One of the factors affecting the housing stock in shoreline towns is the conversion of seasonal dwellings to year round use, as the 2010 Census will show. The challenge to provide a diverse supply of housing in this region will not be well met by urban solutions. The region should be a model for alternative approaches more in keeping with the character and limitations of the area. Solving this challenge will be made more difficult if the region is aggregated with any of the adjacent urban areas.

Employment levels: Without new Census information, this criterion is difficult to access. It does seem, from anecdotal experience, that residents are increasingly working from home or at local businesses. Non-statistically based surveys done during the past decade as part of municipal conservation and development plan updates show a broad distribution of work destinations. Residents travel within the region and to the larger urban centers. This area is within commuting distance to the New Haven, Hartford, and New London/Groton areas, with some commuting to the greater New York City area.

Commuting patterns for common job classifications: At the present time, recent hard data is unavailable for this criterion. Please see the discussion of “employment levels” above.

Traffic patterns on major roadways: The region has two major transportation corridors. The Connecticut Turnpike (I-95), completed 1958, is the major east-west roadway running through the region. The Route 9 Expressway, completed in 1968, connects the region between Old Saybrook and Middletown. The AMTRAK Northeast Corridor with an AMTRAK stop in Old Saybrook, is also the location of the Shoreline East commuter rail line running between New Haven and New London. Much of the traffic on these corridors is passing through the region and has increased steadily as development has occurred on all sides. Within the region, however, the local road network remains largely a collection of roads first laid out to serve farms and small mills. While suitable for rural development, most roads were not designed to accommodate intensive development. The area also supports a small regional bus system. When the State’s Transportation Investment Areas were created, the Midstate/Estuary regions were assigned to both the I-91 TIA and the Southeastern Corridor TIA, being not clearly associated with either area alone.

Local perceptions of social and historical ties: Even before European settlement of the region, the lower Connecticut River and Long Island Sound served as unifying factors for the population of the area. As the location of one of the earliest settlements in Connecticut, the region relied on the area’s water resources for transportation and, later, water-powered industry along the swiftly moving streams. During the 1700s, Middletown was a thriving port, with small shipyards up and down the lower Connecticut River. The River was the equivalent of a major interstate highway. Over time, development occurred elsewhere in New England, aided by new roads and railroad lines, and the shifting sands at the Connecticut River mouth limited access for deep draft vessels. The early “bones” of the region remain in place in the form of roads which lead to the waterfronts throughout the region.

In combination, the Midstate and Estuary planning regions encompass an area that developed historically as a unified community with a shared character and culture. Subsequently, this area stayed lightly developed as a unified community while urban areas grew around it. This area is one of the “spaces” between the more densely developed “places” of Connecticut, much as is found in the northeast and northwest corners of the State. Responsible growth policies are best practiced by treating such areas as separate entities, rather than viewing them as an extension of any one particular urban area.

Minimum size for logical planning regions: There is no magic number for the best configuration of towns, in terms of population, geographic area, or number of towns included. The choice of regional boundaries should rest on the role that the regional entity is expected to play. A coherent region should include an area with common issues and solutions that are applicable to individual member towns. Much of the joint Midstate-Estuary region consists of small towns with historic village centers and large stretches of lightly developed green space. The more developed areas are generally of modest scale.

In summary, the joint Estuary-Midstate Region appears to meet the criteria established in CGS 16a-4c for designation as a single planning region. While each of the two regions functions well separately at present, any redrawing of the state’s planning regions should provide for the continuance of the seventeen- town area as a logical and coherent entity. If a reconfiguration of regional planning boundaries is proposed by OPM, the chief elected officials of the Midstate-Estuary region request that a new region be created by formalizing the present informal working relationship into a single new planning region.