After another public hearing that lasted more than two hours on April 18, the Guilford Planning & Zoning Commission (PZC) opted to postpone a decision on a pending U-Haul proposal. The commission decided to take the allotted 65 days to review the proposal, documents, and objections, knowing full well whatever decision it makes will likely face appeal.

Nearly a year after its first proposal, U-Haul returned to PZC on April 4 for the its first public hearing seeking approval for a special permit and site plan application to build a new storage and rental space on Boston Post Road.

The proposed facility would be located at 301 Boston Post Road, on the corner of Route 1 and Tanner Marsh Road on what was formerly the Mannix Motors site and where U-Haul currently operates. The U-Haul proposal includes renovating the existing structure on the site and building a second structure for storage.

If approved, the site would include more than 400 storage spaces within the two buildings, U-Haul trucks for rent including seven trucks parked within 30 feet of the front of the property, a new landscape buffer along the Post Road including a perimeter of trees, and a new sidewalk along the Boston Post Road.

The U-Haul proposal first came before PZC in spring 2017. At the time, concerns were raised about how far the new building would be set back from Route One and the fact that the application came before PZC without formal review from the Design Review Committee (DRC). Concerns delayed the application to a point where by regulation it had to be pulled and resubmitted.

Under the new application, submitted by the U-Haul Corporate Office on behalf of the current building owner, the structure doesn’t exceed the maximum height allowance of 40 feet, according to the town planner. U-Haul requested and received a variance to set the storage facility back further from the main road; the storage building can now be constructed 70 feet back from the Post Road rather than 50 feet. The proposal has also received Inland Wetlands Commission approval and a favorable review from DRC.

At the first public hearing there was focus on the appearance of the building, level of usage, lighting, and questions about if the building would fit with the character of the town (find previous coverage at Zip06.com). At the second public hearing, U-Haul addressed some remaining questions, but much of the focus was placed on the process U-Haul went through with DRC.

DRC member Shirley Girioni said U-Haul met with DRC 12 times over the course of two years. She said it is the longest relationship DRC has had with any applicant and that U-Haul was extremely cooperative.

DRC member Philippe Campus, an architect, reminded the audience that DRC can only make recommendations and that its purview is limited to the appearance of the building, not the use. While he said he personally would have liked to see the property used for something else, aesthetically DRC and U-Haul were able to work well together to come up with compromises on the building.

“I think that between the first application to this—it’s night and day,” he said. “I think as far as building design we pushed them much further from their corporate image U-Haul building than you will see anywhere else in Connecticut.”

Public Opinion

While public comment at the first public hearing was largely opposed to the project, comments at the second hearing reflected a balance. Some residents spoke in favor of the proposal and even some of those who spoke in opposition acknowledge that U-Haul had worked hard to try to change the building design to address resident’s concerns.

“I have had to drive by the site as it is now,” said resident Jeremy Clark who lives on Tanner Marsh Road. “I won’t say it is decrepit, but it’s in need for some TLC. It seems to me that U-Haul has done quite a fine job of coming up with a design that looks appropriate and certainly brightens this part of Guilford from where it is right now. I ask that you think favorably of the U-Haul plan.”

Economic Development Coordinator Brian McGlone said the town tried to bring other business to that site, like a boutique hotel or a chain restaurant like an Olive Garden, but nothing stuck. He said U-Haul has worked hard to make this proposal work and U-Haul will provide a service and a Grand List boost for residents.

“I think most people in Guilford associate our village feel with out green, our waterways, and our downtown area,” he said. “This is Route 1. It’s our commercial strip, so to expect a village feel there I think is a bit unrealistic. Right or wrong, Route 1 is commercial from Madison to Branford.”

A few more spoke in favor of the proposal, including a local resident who will be the general manger of the facility. Residents then spoke in opposition, with many saying the building just doesn’t fit with the surrounding area.

“I am still concerned about the height of the building…I am also concerned about light pollution,” said resident Susan Nichols. “I have lived in the neighborhood for 28 years and there are no street lights, so really it is very dark at night so this is a huge change…Once its there its there and you can’t change that so I ask you to think about that.”

Resident David Milano, who owns a self-storage facility in Madison and the undeveloped property across the street from the proposed U-Haul site, discussed various issues he has with the building and even submitted his own photos of a U-Haul facility in Groton. He said while U-Haul isn’t going to have signage on the front of the storage facility, the trucks U-Haul plans to place it the front section of the lot will be advertising.

“One thing that struck me that I think is a pretty good way to think about U-Hauls intentions is at the last meeting, they mentioned that they don’t need any signage at all on Route 1,” he said. “There is the signage on I-95, but no signage on Route 1, which at first glance seems kind of crazy, right? What kind of business doesn’t have a sign out on Route 1? The kind of business that doesn’t have a sign on Route 1 is the kind of business that intends to use their trucks for advertising and illuminated windows for advertising.”

PZC members asked Milano if he would like to address any of the comments made that he is only opposed to the project because of concerns regarding his own business.

“Sure we have a couple reasons to be interested,” he said. “We submit to you the most relevant reason we think you should consider our point of view is we own the nearest residential property.”

Milano’s residential property is located across the street and is currently undeveloped, but does have a large sign advertising his storage unit business. Milano’s lawyer spoke at length addressing everything from the special permit, to non-conforming use, to the use of trucks as advertising.

Milano’s lawyer and an attorney with U-Haul went back and forth over numerous points before PZC eventually closed the public hearing. Chairman Frank D’Andrea suggested the commission not make a decision that evening and take the time to review the information and speak with legal counsel.

Town counsel Chuck Andres suggested whatever decision made by the commission is likely to result in an appeal, so the commission will want to be as comfortable with its decision as possible. The commission has 65 days to make a decision.