New Field of Dreams Becoming Reality; Drawing Attention to Historic District; and More

BRANFORD – The “Tank” is coming back home.

After seeing how upset residents were when a historic military vehicle was suddenly removed from the Branford Armory, The Connecticut Army National Guard has decided to return the Tank to town.

Used as an Armored Recon Vehicle in the Vietnam War, the M114-style APC was built in 1962. It had been located at the Branford Armory for more than 30 years up until Aug. 3, when the Guard hauled it away to refurbish it in preparation for plans to have it join a display of military vehicles at Camp Niantic.

Those plans have been scrapped, and residents are looking forward to their beloved Tank’s return.
 
CHESHIRE – Goodbye, grass. Hello, turf.

With a small ceremony and a few scoops from silver shovels — followed by some heavy lifting done by earth-moving machines — work officially began Thursday on Cheshire High School’s new synthetic turf field.

The field, which is expected to be finished in October, will be home to the football team. A new track will also be built, thanks to a last-minute funding approval from the Town Council.
 
STRATFORD – If the Historic District Commission Chairman has his way, the town will allocate $1,500 to cover the cost of three signs to highlight Stratford’s historic district.

Commission chairman Tom Yemm believes the signage will help draw attention and appreciation to the homes and their place in the town’s history. The town used to have a sign, but it was taken down a few years ago after succumbing to wear and tear.

Yemm said he plans on submitting a formal request for the funds this week.
 
HAMDEN – The arrest of a father on charges of risk of injury to a minor has resulted in a reader debate on whether the arrest was even necessary.

Police arrested the 38-year-old man after receiving a call that two children, ages 3 and 6, were at a playground unattended. The father was approximately 500 yards away watching a soccer game, according to police.

Some readers say a warning would have sufficed, while others suggest the charges are warranted. What do you think?