MDC pivots $460M sewer separation plan to bypass clogged Hartford river infrastructure
Metropolitan District Commission, Connecticut · Meeting date: May 18, 2026 · Published: May 28, 2026
Facing persistent flooding and unmaintained municipal conduits, the Metropolitan District Commission is altering its state consent order to construct a new outfall for its Granby area sewer separation project.
Key points
- MDC is shifting its $460 million Granby area sewer separation strategy due to a lack of maintenance on the City of Hartford's 108-inch Granby Street conduit.
- The utility will delay two planned contracts and instead advance a new outfall project near Marcus Garvey Park to ensure separated stormwater can safely discharge.
- A joint drainage study revealed the city faces up to $200 million in long-term river restoration and flood control costs, independent of the utility's combined sewer overflow (CSO) mandates.
- The Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) has given verbal concurrence to the consent order modifications.
Full report
The Metropolitan District Commission (MDC) is overhauling the phasing of its $460 million Granby area sewer separation project in Hartford, Connecticut, after a comprehensive drainage study revealed that the city’s receiving infrastructure is too compromised to handle the utility's separated stormwater.
During a May 18 Bureau of Public Works meeting, consultants from CDM Smith detailed a major pivot in the utility’s consent order compliance strategy. MDC originally planned to discharge clean stormwater from its newly separated systems into the city-owned 108-inch Granby Street conduit. However, severe sediment buildup, vegetative growth, and structural blockages in the North Branch of the Park River have severely limited the conduit's hydraulic capacity.
To avoid backing up water into the newly separated communities, MDC will delay portions of its "Package A" separation work, specifically Contracts 8 and 9. Instead, the utility is modifying its consent order with the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP)—which has already provided verbal concurrence—to advance Contracts 4 and 11. Contract 11 involves constructing a brand-new outfall near Marcus Garvey Park and the Westbrook Village redevelopment, bypassing the city's compromised conduit entirely.
The decision highlights a massive infrastructure coordination challenge between municipal flood control and utility combined sewer overflow (CSO) mandates. The MDC’s sewer separation work is estimated to cost $460 million—approximately $200,000 per home for the 2,000 residences in the project area.
Meanwhile, the City of Hartford faces its own steep costs to restore the river's natural floodplain and clear blockages. CDM Smith project manager Nicole Durello outlined a three-phase plan for the city to address flooding that occurs independently of the MDC's sewer system. The river currently suffers from severe bank erosion, tree dams, and trash accumulation.
The city's recommended mitigation plan includes $250,000 to $1 million annually for immediate maintenance, $2 million to $4 million for mid-term planning and modeling, and $150 million to $200 million for long-term stabilization, property buyouts, and replacing the Asylum Avenue culvert with a clear span bridge.
MDC officials emphasized that the utility's CSO elimination efforts cannot succeed in a vacuum. While the utility will build its own outfall as an interim solution, the long-term success of the separation program relies on the city addressing the river's capacity. "The more we separate, the more clean water we generate," an MDC official noted during the meeting. "It has to get discharged to this North Branch of the Park River."
The utility and the city have already seen success through joint efforts; an existing memorandum of understanding for bi-weekly street sweeping by the city has significantly reduced catch basin clogs and mitigated street flooding during recent heavy rain events.
This summary was generated by AI based on the source document and may contain errors.
Source: Bureau of Public Works Meeting, Metropolitan District Commission