By Brandon T. Bisceglia
Orange-based United Illuminating wants to replace its aging towers that carry transmission lines running through Milford. But the replacement work requires the utility company to get a series of easements along the route so that it can erect the new structures.
The Milford Board of Aldermen wasn’t convinced at the April 7 meeting that the board should give UI the permissions it’s seeking.
The board was asked to approve three easements on River Street, Old Gate Lane and Prospect Street. Decisions about all three were postponed in a narrow vote, with those in favor saying they needed more time to gather information about the plan.
The utility has for several years been replacing its transmission towers throughout its territory in southern Connecticut with new monopoles that in general are taller than the previous towers. This project spans about 9.5 miles from the Milvon substation in Milford to the West River substation in New Haven.
The towers in Milford mostly run alongside the railroad tracks on land that is either already owned by the state Department of Transportation or by UI.
However, UI needs a series of temporary easements in order to access the towers and conduct the construction work. They also need some permanent easements in the locations where the new towers will be built to allow the overhead lines to sway and to trim trees as needed.
The shortest monopoles will be 70 feet. The tallest monopoles planned in Milford will be between 125 and 145 feet between the Milford Train Station and the Milford Cemetery, according to plans approved by the Connecticut Siting Council in 2022. The infrastructure is expected to have a 40-year lifespan.
Attorney Jodie Driscoll of Harris Beach Murtha, who is representing UI in the project, said that New Haven, West Haven and Orange had already approved easements for its sections of the replacement.
“The city of New Haven granted an easement that allowed UI to install a pole on one of their parcels,” Driscoll said. “There are no poles being asked for on any of the city of Milford parcels. All of the easements that we’re asking for tonight are to be able to access lines, or to have the overhead lines be able to sway over onto city property.”
Because the siting council had already approved the project and its decisions supersede those of the Board of Aldermen, UI could technically exercise eminent domain to acquire the easements.
Alderman Ray Vitali pointed out that the board really has not power to say no.
“You really don’t need our permission to do it,” he said.
“We would really like your permission,” Driscoll said.
“Absolutely, you would like the idea of us all being on board with the issue. But if this board votes it down, you’re going to do it anyway,” he replied.
But several aldermen also noted that there has been a protracted legal battle in Fairfield over the same type of monopole replacement.
In that case, the siting council moved portions of UI’s project from the south side of the Metro-North train tracks to the north in response to community opposition. But the alteration put other properties in the path of the poles without giving them a chance to weigh in. Fairfield and Bridgeport sued over the change, and on April 24 a New Britain judge ruled in their favor.
The biggest stumbling block for the Milford board, though, was a simple lack of information.
“We’re talking and we’re learning about this now, and not having been able to see that in advance, I think it makes it a little hard for me to say yes to this tonight,” said alderwoman Jennifer Federico.
“The project has been approved by the Connecticut Siting Council, and the city of Milford was invited over three years ago to be part of that process – and they were,” Driscoll said. “We weren’t anticipating you wanting to see where the areas were, what the types of rights were, how much we were paying for them, as the project design has already been approved and the city of Milford already has had input on that.”
“The intention is not to hold it up,” said alderwoman Ellen Russell Beatty, who is also a columnist for the Milford-Orange Times. “The intention is just to do due diligence.”
“I couldn’t tell from the materials we got if you were going to be building a structure, or what you were going to be doing,” alderman Win Smith said. “I would appreciate an opportunity until our next meeting to get a clearer picture of what’s going on here.”
Note: This article has been updated to clarify that the Connecticut Siting Council changed the route of UI’s monopole project in Fairfield.