This is a printer-friendly version of an article from Zip06.com.
03/11/2016 08:52 AMOn March 10, an expert for Costco Wholesale Corp. said recently modified site plan infrastructure details and practices, submitted to Branford Inland Wetlands office Feb. 24, exceed required standards. But Costco's attorney said Costco will respond, if possible, with even more conclusive details in April, to address questions in a March 9 peer review result submitted by a firm hired for the town, Milone & MacBroom.
While Milone & MacBroom's peer review suggests Costco's application could include more calculations and specifics, experts for the firm also told Branford Inland Wetlands Agency (IWA) on March 10 that Costco's application, as it stands, does have enough detail to allow the IWA to proceed with deciding on the application.
In another development on March 10, Costco attorney Tom Cody told the IWA Costco's numerous application modifications submitted Feb. 24 do not require Costco to start over with an entirely new application. The idea of a new application was suggested Feb. 11 by attorney Keith Ainsworth, representing intervenor Branford Citizens for Responsible Development (BCRD).
Rebuttals, questions and comments the March 10 portion of the public hearing are being prepared by Ainsworth and will be heard at the hearing's continuation in April.
All of these developments, and more, took place during another marathon segment of an on-going public hearing incorporating three separate applications for parcels making up Costco's two-phase planned development on a portion of 44 acres off I-95 at Exit 56. Phase 1 includes Costco's proposed 160,000 square foot wholesale store and a 16-pump gas station situated on land owned by Costco, at 573 East Main Street. Phase Two includes further development with seven additional buildings for commercial, retail and restaurant use.
Costco's master plan, approved by Branford's Planning and Zoning Commission in July 2015, spreads both phases of development over about 20 acres involving all three parcels. The two smaller contiguous parcels involved are 20 East Industrial Road (which connects East Industrial Road to East Main Street) and an individual parcel at 569 East Main St. Both are owned by other entities. All three parcel site plan applications have been linked for one public hearing process, to ensure a better overview of all of the moving parts.
On Feb. 24, Costco submitted application modifications to 573 East Main St. to respond to concerns expressed by another intervenor, Branford Land Trust (BLT), regarding the impact of wetlands and watercourses downstream.
On March 10, BLT president Amos Barnes told the IWA that BLT was satisfied with the Feb. 24 modifications to Costco's application, barring a "short list" of three "minor remaining matters" which he submitted in writing the IWA on March 10 for Costco to undertake. The list asked for some further responses for Costco's invasive species control plan, conservation area management plan and integrated pest management plans.
Barnes reiterated to the IWA that the Feb. 24 modifications made to the Costco application arrived following a "very successful" meeting between Costco, BLT and an engineering firm working on behalf of BLT, LandTech.
"While the Land Trust is not expressly endorsing these three applications, it is not opposing the applications, either," said Barnes. "It is fair to say the applicants have tackled the issues raised by LandTech and provided appropriate modifications to allay the vast majority of our concerns. We believe the substantial modifications made by the applicant leave the Land Trust with little concern to the proposed development's affects on our properties. The key to success however, will be in the regular, continued monitoring of the project as well as continued upkeep and regular maintenance. Given the work the applicant has put into this process it is fair to say, the applicant has, from our point of view, attempted in good faith to meet all of our concerns."
Also during the March 10 portion of the public hearing, in response to a question from the IWA, an attorney representing the 569 East Main Street application responded his client would not pay for a potential scientific/engineering review of pond downstream on BLT property off 56 Gould Lane.
The pond recently came into question after resident Bill Horne, acting as an interested citizen, advised IWA Enforcement Officer Diana Ross he felt increased runoff could possibly cause an erosion issue impacting the pond. At Ross's request, Horne submitted a letter and photos of the site to the town. As a result, the IWA will conduct a site walk of the pond in the coming weeks to help determine if there is a need to further investigate downstream impacts to the pond.
Also on March 10, the IWA heard from three residents. One commended the town's Inland Wetlands Office for putting related material online at the town's website. Another said she was returning to reiterate an issue she'd found the on 569 East Main St. plan, regarding mismatched boundary lines on the overall site plan vs. the wetlands mitigation plan. That issue could potentially impact of a pond that, according to one plan's boundary lines, would be fragmented off from the wetlands by development.
Another resident, John Warneka of Red Hill Road, returned to express his concerns about his bridge, which extends over Van Wie's Pond. Warneka had worries about increased water run-off from the development upstream over-topping his bridge.
"There's not much room for error with my bridge," said Wanerka, adding he'd discussed the situation with the applicant's engineer from BL Companies.
"I was told (there) really won't be any increase in water flow and it isn't very important. So if that theory is wrong, we're going to have some problems," he told the IWA.
Warneka also said if the estimated sediment infiltration, pegged at 80 percent by the applicant, is wrong, "...we have another big problem with the pond building up (so) if these estimates and theories are wrong, who will will foot the bill for a new bridge, maybe dredge another pond, and my driveway? I'm sure it doesn't want to be me; I'm sure it doesn't want to be the town. I just need some answers on these kind of things before we go forward."
Warneka said he was looking forward to continuing to work with the applicants. IWA chairman Dan Shapiro asked Warneka to return to inform the IWA of the results of those further discussions.
The public hearing continues at the next regular meeting of the IWA, set for Thurs. April 14 at 7:30 p.m. at Branford Fire Headquarters.