A state lawmaker who is a leading proponent of closing and redeveloping Hartford-Brainard Airport said Wednesday he won’t push the issue in the legislature this year but vowed that he will not abandon his years-long fight.
“No, I have no bill for that,” State Sen. John W. Fonfara, D-Hartford, said, but added, “I’m not giving up.”
Fonfara’s comments came Wednesday after an informational meeting before the legislature’s Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee on the $1.5 million, state-funded Brainard Airport Property Study. The study examined future options for the 200-acre airfield in Hartford’s South End.
Any move to close Brainard would require approval of the General Assembly and subsequent backing of the Federal Aviation Administration. The state owns the airport, which is overseen by the Connecticut Airport Authority.
The study’s consultants outlined four options but recommended keeping the airport open and extending one of its runways. But this alternative also called for the closing of a lesser-used runway and redeveloping that area primarily for warehouse and industrial uses.
For almost a decade, Fonfara and former Hartford Mayor Luke Bronin have advocated for shutting down the airport and redeveloping it with a mix of housing, entertainment and recreational uses. Those would take advantage of the views of the Connecticut River and increase access to the riverfront, as many towns in the area are pursuing in their redevelopment plans, they have said.
Hartford Mayor Arunan Arulampalam is less enthusiastic, raising concerns about the viability of redevelopment at the airport.
During the meeting, Fonfara said the airport together with another neighboring 100 acres at the MIRA trash-to-energy plant, closed in 2022, represent an extraordinary opportunity for future redevelopment.
“We have 300-plus acres that I suspect that if anybody in this legislature had that in their districts they’d want to develop that, never mind the poorest city in the state of Connecticut, one of the poorest in the country,” Fonfara said.
Supporters of closing the airport, including State Rep. James Sanchez, D-Hartford, say the redevelopment would provide sorely-needed tax dollars for city coffers.
The consultant, BFJ Planning of New York, defended its recommendation saying a longer runway would increase the size of corporate jets that could be accommodated at Brainard. But it wouldn’t be such a dramatic change that large commercial airlines could fly in and out of Brainard.
“You are losing traffic right now because some aircraft operators cannot use your runway — it’s too short,” Frank Fish, founding principal of BFJ, said. “You get a better-utilized airport with the long runway extended that will accept corporate jets — Cigna, Travelers, other companies in the Greater Hartford area may be interested. It could increase the use of Brainard and, at the same time, provide for some economic development that is industrial.”
Fish said more modest industrial and warehouse redevelopment would be easier to fully lease.
The study acknowledged that the airport could be closed and used for industrial or mixed-use redevelopment. But it would cost millions to prepare the property — clean up contamination and knock down existing buildings — plus years to decommission it before fully reaping property tax and economic development potential.
But Fonfara said it is to be expected that redevelopment of a shutdown Brainard would take years. He noted that apartment redevelopment in downtown Hartford only slowly gained momentum over two decades.
The BFJ report said the recommended option would dovetail with the industrial nature of the area surrounding Brainard Airport, which includes a wastewater treatment plant. The alternative also could be achieved swiftly, potentially in one phase, the report said.
The proposed structures under the recommended option include a 100,000-square-foot building split equally between flex industrial and advanced manufacturing spaces; another 100,000-square-foot structure dedicated to industrial or manufacturing purposes, and a 20,000-square-foot retail area.
The three other options were:
♦ Keeping the airport open with limited development with a runway extension, new air traffic control tower, hangars and 94,000 square feet of aviation-related space.
♦Closing the airport and pursuing the addition of 2.6 million square feet of industrial space, 140,000 square feet of office space and 100,000 square feet of “accessory retail.”
♦Closing Brainard for a massive, mixed-use redevelopment that could have 2,700 units of rental housing, 105,000-square feet of retail, 262,000 square feet of industrial space and 255,000 square feet of indoor and outdoor recreation venues.
According to BFJ, total development costs range from $46 million for the recommended option to $1.4 billion for the mixed-use alternative. These numbers do not include the use of public subsidies in the calculations. Typically in the Hartford region, projects such as these receive subsidies of at least 20% of the total project cost in order to be financed due to market conditions and cost of construction, BFJ said.
Daniel O’Keefe, the newly-minted, state commissioner of economic and community development, said after the meeting that it understandable why that airport and the adjacent MIRA property just outside of the state’s Capital City on the riverfront are grabbing attention.
“And I think that’s ok,” O’Keefe said. “Every state asset should constantly be evaluated for its highest and best use. I come from a school of thought where the market determines the highest and best use.”
The study is “an informed contribution to the consideration of its highest and best use,” O’Keefe said.
The latest push to close and redevelop Brainard has spawned significant, organized opposition — giving rise to the Hartford Brainard Airport Association.
The association, whose members include pilots, Brainard tenants and others, have pushed back against airport being cast as a “playground for rich folks” with single- and twin-engine planes. The association also argues that Brainard is crucial for its pilot training schools and should be invested in as an asset to promote economic development in the region. The airport could be a center for developing new aviation and transportation technologies.
Kenneth R. Gosselin can be reached at [email protected].