Former Costco Site Gets Controversial Time Extension

The developers of the 44-acre Planned Development District (PDD) and Master Plan at Exit 56, where Costco once planned to build a warehouse, have one more year to submit site plans — maybe.

The Planning and Zoning (P&Z) Commission (pictured) voted 3-2 to grant a one-year extension, but Town Attorney Bill Aniskovich warned that the decision could be appealed.  Zoning regulations say a site plan must be submitted within 24 months of Master Plan approval, or the plans are null and void. However, the regulations do not address the possibility of extensions. The deadline was July 30.

“There is also nothing in your regulations that authorize you to grant that extension,” Aniskovich said at a special meeting Thursday held at Fire Headquarters.  “There is also nothing in your regulations that prohibits you from granting an extension.”

It was also revealed by the attorney requesting the extension that developer Charlie Weber Jr. has been talking with Costco about re-considering the Exit 56 location.  The warehouse store pulled its application after it became apparent that the Inland Wetlands Commission (IWC) would not approve the site plans.

In other business, the commission unanimously approved the Walsh Intermediate School expansion plans, with the addition of a right-turn only lane to provide better traffic flow.

The commission also voted not to support a proposal to use Melrose Avenue as an emergency road for firefighting equipment to access the proposed Parkside I redevelopment project. The fire marshal said that widening Sliney Road would be a better solution.

The Fate of Exit 56

The fate of Exit 56 development has been hotly debated by residents since public hearings on the PDD were held in 2015. The PDD and Master Plans were approved by the P&Z by a 3-2 vote July 2, 2015, and became effective July 30, 2015.

Plans called for a 158,070 square-foot Costco warehouse on about 22 acres owned by Wayne Cooke and the Cooke family. Six commercial buildings were slated for construction on 16.5 acres owned by Charles E. Weber Jr. and Al Secondino. One building was proposed on a 1.73 acre site owned trustee Peter G. Mandragouras. Other property owners are involved in the PDD.

Costco announced in February 2017 that it was no longer interested in Branford. That was about 10 months after Costco and the other developers withdrew their applications shortly before the IWC commission was scheduled to vote.

At Thursday’s special meeting, Attorney Kevin Curseaden (pictured), of Carroll, Curseaden & Moore LLC of Milford, who represents Weber and Secondino, requested a one-year extension on behalf of property owners in the PDD. “It is a complex project,” he said.

Curseaden said that two years was not enough time considering the scale of the PDD and the number of property owners.  He said there is case law that when a commission acts in a legislative capacity, there is discretion to grant an application if it is not specifically prohibited. He also mentioned that the zoning regulations allow one-year extensions for building the PDD project. “There is a little bit of inconsistency within your own regulations,” he told the commission.

Curseaden said Weber is still discussing the possibility of Costco returning to the PDD. “He’s had ongoing negotiations with Costco. He’s authorized me to say to you tonight that he’s still in talks with Costco. I’m not representing that Costco’s definitely interested in coming back, but according to Mr. Weber, they’re still having conversations.”

Legal Issues — “A Gray Area”

Town attorney Aniskovich and the town’s legal firm, Brenner, Saltzman & Wallman of New Haven, were asked prior to the meeting to review the legal issues regarding a time extension for Master Plans. Attorney Danielle M. Bercury submitted a memorandum of law regarding the issues, which was explained in more depth by Aniskovich during the meeting.

Aniskovich said there is a gray area of the law as to whether Branford’s P&Z commission has the authority to grant an extension of a PDD and Master Plan.

“Unlike other areas of your regulations that specifically authorize you to grant extensions, this section does not contain that language to grant an extension of the 24-month period,” Aniskovich said. “So while it may make common sense …the legal question is do you have the authority under the regulations to grant the extension. And frankly, the simple answer to that is no.”

However, he pointed out that the Master Plan regulations do not prohibit time extensions.

He further explained: “The commission can choose to do whatever it wants, subject to an appeal. I would not be doing my job if I didn’t tell you that granting an extension where there’s no express authority under your regulations or in a statute, opens the commission up to vulnerability.”

The Commission Weighs In on “Null and Void”

P&Z Chairman Chuck Andres (pictured), who is an attorney, said he had several concerns about a time extension.

“I would not have any problem, if we had the authority, granting an extension,” Andres said. “That said I do have a problem saying that we have the authority in the regulations because the regulations say site plans must be submitted within 24 months. The master plan shall become null and void if the site plans are not approved within that timeframe, period. It doesn’t say we have authorization to grant extensions.”

According to the town’s zoning regulations, the word “shall” is “mandatory and not discretionary.”

Andres said the ability to grant an extension probably should be in the regulations.

Commissioner Marci Palluzzi said the regulations should be amended. “We have a number of property owners who are working in concert, which is highly unusual. She said the multi-owner PDD is a new scenario.  “I question whether the time limits in this scenario were even appropriate given the complexity.”

Commissioner John Lust agreed with Andres. “I think it’s pretty clear we don’t have the authority.”

Commissioner Joe Chadwick said the commission has to look at the intent of the regulations, and consider that it doesn’t say extensions can’t be granted.
He said information regarding extensions is missing from the section on Master Plans and PDDs, but it is addressed in most other cases.

Commissioner Joe Vaiuso said there is a loophole in the regulations. “If we had thought of it, we would have had the opportunity to put into the regulations something about being able to extend.” He said it is reasonable to grant an extension of one year.

Andres and Lust voted against the extension; and Palluzzi, Chadwick and Vaiuso voted in favor. When the PDD was approved by a 3-2 vote two years ago, then chairman Ellsworth McGuigan, Andres and Palluzzi voted in favor; and Chadwick and Lust voted against the Exit 56 proposal.

Walsh School Clears Another Hurdle

The commissioners voted unanimously to approve plans to expand Walsh Intermediate School.  Chadwick and Palluzzi, a member of the Building Commission, recused themselves from voting on this project. Alternates Paul Higgins and Fred Russo voted instead.

The public hearing concluded Thursday after a presentation by traffic engineer Luke Mauro (pictured) of Langan Engineering in New Haven. Mauro said he requested traffic speed data from the DOT for Damascus Road but there was none since it’s not a state road. He said the speed on state roads near the school is about 35 m.p.h.

Mauro calculated sight distances from the school’s east and west driveways using the speed data from the state roads, and said the school’s west driveway had adequate sight distances. However, he said the east driveway was “a little shy” of DOT standards.

He suggested using special school zone signage and other traffic calming measures to slow down vehicles.

Andres asked about the feasibility of adding a right-turn only lane to the west driveway to encourage drivers to use that exit instead of the east one where there is limited sight distance. He said the turning lane should be added to increase safety. This was discussed at a previous hearing.

Town Planner Harry Smith said previous concerns listed in the staff report or voiced at hearings have been addressed. He said the right-turn only lane could be added as a condition of approval. He also suggested conducting a traffic speed study in front of the school to more accurately determine sight distance calculations.

Parkside Access Questioned

The commission reviewed two requests in regard to the proposed redevelopment of Parkside Village I, which houses low-income elderly and people with disabilities.

Plans to replace the aging Parkside Village I complex at 115 S. Montowese St. have been ongoing for several years. A proposal by Beacon Communities LLC of Boston last year was withdrawn from P&Z consideration shortly before the cut-off date to apply for federal funding in November. The plans are being revised.

Attorney Tim Hollister, a partner at Shipman & Goodwin in Hartford, represented Beacon Communities. He told the commissioners that the new designs will address some concerns expressed last year. He said the plans will be submitted to the P&Z soon, but that issues regarding property lines need to be addressed.

The commission unanimously agreed to issue a positive report on the first request to adjust the property lines between the Branford Housing Authority property and Sliney Fields. The Representative Town Meeting (RTM) will also have to vote on the issue.

However, there was considerable discussion about the feasibility of constructing an emergency access off Melrose Avenue.

Branford Fire Marshal Shaun Heffernan, who attended the meeting, said the Melrose access would be permissible, but widening Sliney Road would be the preferred emergency access.

The commission eventually voted 3-2 to give a negative referral to the RTM regarding the Melrose access proposal. Andres, Palluzzi and Russo voted for the negative referral; and Lust and Vaiuso voted against the negative referral. Chadwick, who recently resigned from the Housing Authority, did not vote on the issue.

Community House-Senior Center

As for additional parking for the Community House-Senior Center project, the P & Z hearing on this topic will be held in September. The Community House project was approved last year. The hearing for new parking spaces is for an area where a house purchased by the town will be torn down.

Meanwhile, the Building Commission recently authorized a bidding process for a construction manager for the project. Bids are due by August 23. Chair Peter Banca said he does not expect the cost of the project to exceed the $12.1 million approved and said that it may come in at a little less.
The Building Commission meets tonight at 7 p.m. at Fire Headquarters.

Groundbreaking is expected on Oct. 1 with construction completed within a year.

Sally E. Bahner contributed reporting for this story.

###