Diana Stricker Photo
One month after the owners of the former Bittersweet Farm presented development proposals to the Inland Wetlands Commission, they were back with a revised master plan which they claim will lessen the impact on the wetlands.
Some commissioners expressed skepticism about the revised proposal, while others said no decisions can be reached until a formal application is made. All in all the latest presentation elicited questions and concerns on both sides.
“We have made considerable concessions,” said project engineer John Mancini (pictured above) of BL Companies in Meriden. “This developer is interested in doing what is right.”
Plans call for the 135-acre complex to include a medical center, offices, single-family homes, apartments, small retail shops, and a wholesale retail club — widely acknowledged to be Costco. Mancini said the developers have eliminated 32 apartment units; four active-adult homes; 33,000 square feet of office space; and moved the wholesale retail club slightly.
“Our wetland impact has gone from… 2.4 acres to 1.6 acres,” Mancini said.
Daniel Shapiro, who chairs the commission, (pictured above) repeated a stance he voiced last month regarding the amount of wetlands that would be disturbed. “We’ve filled precious little wetlands in the past,” he said again Thursday.
“We’ve done a lot of research since out last meeting,” Mancini said. “It’s really important to understand the size and magnitude of this project.”
The site includes more than 80 acres at 777 – 779 East Main St. that were once Bittersweet Farm, and almost 50 acres at 21 Sycamore Way that were never developed. Owners include Michael Belfonti, president and CEO of Belfonti Associates in Hamden; and Alfred J. Secondino, whose family has operated A. Secondino & Sons Inc. general contracting company in Branford since 1929.
Both Belfonti and Secondino (pictured left to right) attended the meeting. Sometimes their expressions revealed their feelings.
“This is the only parcel of land this size that is privately owned by people who are trying to develop it,” Mancini said.
He said the site includes 35 acres of wetlands, with additional acreage that is sloped and in the upland review area, totaling about 65 percent of the total area. Mancini said the wetland perimeter is 5.2 miles.
Commissioner Robert Valley asked how size affects the project. “This is not a sympathy meeting. We have regulations to deal with,” he said.
In Branford, the IW Commission can regulate development within 100 feet of a wetland, which is known as an upland review area.
“Were not interested in economics. We might even find them offensive…we’re talking about wetlands,” said commissioner Wesley Vietzke. “The thing that’s impressive about this property is the size of the wetlands,” adding that larger wetlands are perhaps more important than smaller ones.
Shapiro later said that the Inland Wetland regulations do discuss striking a balance between preservation of resources and economic development.
“We should treat everyone with equanimity,” Shapiro said. “The (decisions) all fly on the merits of the application… and strike a balance between wetlands and development.”
Commissioner James Killelea asked several questions regarding the amount of wetlands.
“You’re looking for a hardship exemption? Is that what this is?” Killea challenged.
“I’m not here looking for a hardship,” Mancini said “I am here to say this parcel of land is unique. We’re consistent with the applications that were approved.”
Mancini said he would be irresponsible if he did not come to commission for an indication of how the plans would be received “before we spend hundreds of thousands of dollars” on a formal application.
He displayed a chart of projects approved by the Inland Wetlands Commission in the past three years. He said almost all the projects had activities in the upland review area. “None of those applications have had anywhere near the size of the lot here,” he said. “The size does matter,” Mancini reiterated, adding “This project could mean a lot to the economy.”
Shapiro said the commissioners can’t determine the merits of the plans until a formal application is made. “You can’t really prejudge it,” Shapiro said.
Following the meeting, the developers declined any additional response other than to say they have to take matters under consideration. They previously said it could be a couple months before a formal application is made.
However, timing may be a factor. Town officials have stated that Costco is looking at four sites near Exit 56, including the Bittersweet site.
The Bittersweet Farms property, which is on the State Register of Historic Places, was once a chicken farm. In the 1970’s it became an artist colony and craft village, featuring art studios and specialty shops.
In 2001, CuraGen Corp., a biotech pharmaceutical development firm, purchased the farm property for $2.3 million and evicted the artists. Although CuraGen received approvals to build a headquarters and research facility there, the project never materialized due to economic constraints.
###
re: "Were not interested in economics. We might even find them offensive…we're talking about wetlands," said commissioner Wesley Vietzke.
I am more than a little concerned about Dr. Vietzke's comment : "We might even find them offensive". I think some explanation is warranted, particularly if the public is to place its trust in the IWC.