BCRD: We Do Not Work For Costco

The attorney representing Branford Citizens for Responsible Development (BCRD) is disputing claims made in Costco’s recently revised plans to build a new superstore off Exit 56. And he is asking for a little respect.

Attorney Keith Ainsworth, who represents BCRD, also says in a recent filing that it is time for Costco to change its attitude toward intervenors — that if a group co-operates with Costco (as the Branford Land Trust has) it is collaborative and rational, and if doesn’t it is ​“discredited as not being a team player.” He said it is not his role to be a Costco team player and pointed out that the BCRD does not work for Costco. He asked that the group’s presentations ​“be evaluated objectively.”

The Inland Wetlands Commission (IWC) public hearing for the Costco commercial complex will resume Thursday at 7:30 p.m. at Fire Headquarters.

Ainsworth and the engineering consultant for the BCRD recently filed new information with the Inland Wetlands and Natural Resources Department, and the consultant for the Branford Land Trust also issued a statement. Both groups were granted intervenor status. They responded to revised plans that the Costco team filed late last month after agreeing that the Branford Land Trust’s engineering consultant had provided important information their own engineers had missed. After further testing, the Costco team said they found bedrock capable of infiltrating stormwater, thus reducing the amount of runoff.

A report is expected to be filed soon by Milone & MacBroom, of Cheshire, the consulting firm hired to conduct an independent peer review of the Costco complex applications. Prior to the public hearings, the IWC denied requests by Costco’s attorney who asked to meet in private with the peer review team, accompanied by town staff. The commission said the request was ​“inappropriate” and that all conversations ​“should be done in public hearings.” 

It is anticipated that the Costco team will present a rebuttal Thursday in regard to testimony from the intervenors last month and new information filed late last week. It will also respond at some point to the Milone & MacBroom review. 

At issue is whether the 44-acre commercial complex proposed for Exit 56 will have an adverse impact on wetlands and downstream properties. The complex would include Costco plus a gas station and liquor store; and seven other commercial buildings that have not been identified.

BCRD: Don’t Discredit Our Science

In a supplemental brief filed March 3, Ainsworth took umbrage at comments made by Costco’s attorney last month. At that time, attorney Thomas Cody, who represents Costco, said the BCRD’s consultant was ​“grabbing issues unrelated and frankly, it’s a lot of disconnected, misleading information.”

Cody was reacting to a presentation at last month’s hearing by the BCRD consultant, Steven D. Trinkaus, of Trinkaus Engineering LLC of Southbury.

In the newly filed brief, Ainsworth asked the Costco team to evaluate its presentations objectively. He addressed what he called a recurring theme — ​“that if one meets with Costco to help them with their development design, that party is a collaborative, rational person and if one does not meet with Costco to improve its flawed project (like Milone & MacBroom or BCRD) then that party is discredited as not being a team player. The BCRD states simply that it does not work for Costco and it is beholden to conscience and science and asks only that its presentations be evaluated objectively.”

In a recent interview with the Eagle, Joe Montesano, Costco’s real estate consultant, said he tried to get BCRD and Ainsworth to the table to discuss issues privately, but they refused. ​“Absolutely. It is the absolute truth,” Montesano said. ​“We have tried numerous times; they just won’t come to the table and it’s all about just trying to kill the project; it is not about trying to do what’s right for the township.”

In the new filing, BCRD questions the Costco team’s statements that the DEEP’s Stormwater Quality Manual and the Erosion and Sedimentation Manual are guidelines and not regulations. ​“The BCRD does not claim the SWQM by itself is a regulation. However, where the Town of Branford has incorporated the manual into its regulations, they are part of the regulations which must be followed,” Ainsworth stated.

At last month’s public hearing, attorney Cody said the Connecticut DEEP 2004 Stormwater Quality Manual is a guidance document and ​“was never intended to act like a regulation.”

Ainsworth, in the recent filing, said that Costco’s soil scientist Michael Klein testified in two separate hearings in other towns that proposed projects failed to ​“meet the requirements” of the DEEP manuals. Ainsworth included testimony from those hearings in the supplemental brief.

Ainsworth stated: ​“Many of Mr. Klein’s criticisms of the other projects precisely mirror Mr. Trinkaus’ critiques of the current stormwater volume and quality controls in the Costco applications.”

Infiltration? Will Stormwater Soak In or Run Off?

The BCRD also claims that the project will ​“still fail to re-infiltrate stormwater generated on-site,” and that the project will harm wetlands and watercourses.

In response to Costco’s recently revised plans, Ainsworth disputes new claims that infiltration problems can be solved because rock at the bottom of the basins can infiltrate stormwater. The BCRD claims that the design of the ​“wet bottom stormwater basins” will not work to remediate stormwater contaminants.

BCRD says the Costco team needs to provide more analysis and data to show how the stormwater basins will work.

In a letter to the IWC dated March 3, Trinkaus said he reviewed the latest Costco revisions about the ability to infiltrate stormwater and said ​“the water quality remediation function of the stormwater quality basins will not occur and infiltration into the bedrock will result in polluted groundwater.”

Trinkaus said, in his opinion, infiltration will not occur as the Costco team described and that greater stormwater volumes will occur and will cause downstream erosion. He described in technical detail how he believes the six wetlands could be adversely impacted.

LandTech Responds

The Branford Land Trust’s consultants at LandTech of Westport, responded on March 3 to Costco’s revised plans.

The letter from soil scientist Christopher P. Allan, and engineer Michael J. Bartos said if there is no increase in the volume of water being discharged downstream, then there should not be an adverse effect. They said three stormwater basins were redesigned ​“and can be reasonably expected to provide adequate water quality treatment if the facilities are maintained as outlined.” They further stated that those three basins may require deeper excavation and rock removal to allow for placement of an organic layer to help conduct water.

The LandTech consultants stated ​“If the maintenance plan is not carried out on schedule, the proper functioning of the stormwater management facilities cannot be assured. We recommend a bond to ensure that the inspections and maintenance are implemented.”

The consultants said the town should bond all erosion and sediment control measures and have an independent third party inspect and report on a weekly basis until the site is permanently stabilized.

The Branford Land Trust owns 22 properties that are downstream from the proposed development site, including the 104-acre Van Wie Woods and Van Wie Pond. The Land Trust has previously stated that it neither opposes nor supports the Costco complex, but that its objective is to ensure the development does not adversely affect the quality of water being discharged from the site. Their consultants have met privately with members of the Costco team to discuss issues and make recommendations.

###