Four local sites have made the shortlist of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), which plans to build a new training center in Middletown. While support seems to be coalescing behind one of the sites on the list—Cucia Park—the Army’s continued consideration of a property on Boardman Lane has done little to ease the concerns of many opposed residents and officials.

At a public meeting at Mercy High School on Sept. 17, David Dale, Deputy District Engineer for the Louisville District of the USACE, presented the Army’s four preferred sites, along with eleven proposed sites that failed to win its approval.

The four sites include the Bysiewicz industrial site, the former missile site on Mile Lane, city-owned Cucia Park, and a farm on Boardman Lane.

The first site, the Bysiewicz industrial area, met the Army’s four criteria: sufficient acreage, being located in Middletown, having a willing seller, and posing no significant environmental constraints. It is located on Middle Street, approximately four miles northwest of campus and across Interstate 91.

The second site, on Mile Lane, housed the former Middletown Reserve Center. Its 25 acres, located about 2.3 miles northwest of campus, are still owned by the federal government. Though the site’s military use dates to 1955—when it housed three Nike missile silos and a military barracks—the facility more recently served as an office, storage space, training center, and meeting place until it was closed in 2006.

The site is currently vacant, though a city redevelopment plan recently recommended using it for a state-funded fire training school, as well as a new fire station, 911-dispatch center, and regional animal shelter. Those plans, however, would need to be rethought if the Mile Lane property is put back into Army hands.

Cucia Park is the third of the Army’s short-listed locations. Located 3.6 miles northwest of campus, it is industrially zoned and is currently owned by the City of Middletown. It sits against a southerly stretch of Interstate 91, and is not adjacent to any residential areas. It is also located on a bus route, which may make public transportation an option for some of the roughly 850 citizen-soldiers who will train there on weekends.

The Army was pleased with the Cucia Park site, which the city explicitly submitted for consideration earlier this month.

“It looks like a very attractive site,” Dale said at the Sept. 17th meeting. “There’s a lot of very positive stuff.”

The Middletown Conservation Commission has also endorsed the Cucia Park site. Commission chairwoman Sheila Stoane supported the site on a blog set up by the Army Corps of Engineers to solicit community feedback, writing that it was the most acceptable site for the proposed Army base.

Some commenters on the Corps’ blog also enthusiastically supported the selection of Cucia Park for an Army training center, noting its current reputation as a place for clandestine sexual encounters and drug activity.

The final site on the Army’s shortlist is a parcel in the area of Boardman Lane, about 4.2 miles northwest of campus.

While the USACE claims that this site will lead to minimal impact on the community and environment, many residents and officials voiced strong opposition to the Boardman Lane site. Many are also angry that despite their vocal public opposition for the past few months, the Army has so far refused to drop Boardman Lane from consideration.

“It is amazing to me that the Boardman Lane site just keeps reappearing after there have been so many objections by residents, [and] city and state officials,” wrote resident Linda Manthay on the USACE’s blog. “So many problems and objections have been pointed out as to why it shouldn’t be there, but they all seem to be ignored.”

Indeed, opposition to the Boardman site runs deep. It was not in the list of four sites submitted by the Mayor’s Advisory Panel, a group of residents appointed by Middletown Mayor Sebastian Giuliano to investigate and recommend to the Army potential sites in the city .

Associate Professor of Biology Stephen Devoto, who is a Middletown resident and a member of the advisory panel, praised the Army and USACE Project Manager Diane McCartin, but also hopes that the Army’s promise of collaboration is more than just talk.

“I’d like the Army to show with their actions that they are listening and collaborating with the city,” he said.

Devoto, an opponent of the Boardman Lane site, pointed out that the advisory panel rejected two of the four sites that the Army is now investigating.

“I was extremely disappointed; the city made it very clear that anything around Boardman Lane was unacceptable…yet it’s still on the list,” Devoto said.

While residents may have rejected the Boardman Lane site, the Army made some rejections of its own. The 11 sites it discarded include properties on River Road, Aircraft Road, Middle Street, Country Club Road, Freeman Road, Saybrook Road, and Toll Gate Road. Reasons for rejecting the sites included insufficient space, suspected environmental contamination, an environmental constraint such as the presence of wetlands, and high site development costs.

The Army’s tight construction schedule means that future developments will happen swiftly. By Oct. 30, the Army plans to have a final list of viable sites approved and will move forward with its environmental reviews.

The public comment period for the four proposed sites is open until Sept. 29. Citizens are encouraged to provide their thoughts via email, blog comment, or phone.