Diana Stricker Photo
Bulldozers are at work at the Founders Village site in the heart of Branford where 117 senior apartments will be built.
Developer Alex Vigliotti was granted a building permit from Town Hall last week to begin work on the foundation of Building C, which is the uppermost of the three apartments that are slated to be built behind the Rose Hill Apartments, which he also owns.
In a related development, the state Department of Public Health confirmed there was no evidence of contamination on the 7‑acre wooded hillside north of the proposed complex and that further environmental testing was not required. Vigliotti deeded the wooded parcel to the town as part of a court settlement regarding the properties.
NEW SENIOR HOUSING
Diana Stricker Photo
The new complex, which will be built on 5.5 acres, will feature 75 one-bedroom apartments and 42 two-bedroom units. Building C will have 27 one-bedroom units and 14 two-bedroom units. The apartments are designated as age-restricted, which means at least one person in each rental unit must be age 55 or older.
Project architect John Cruet Jr. of Guilford designed the three-story buildings, which also include community rooms. In addition to parking lots, there will be a total of 122 parking spaces on the lower levels of the buildings. Access to the complex will be from Hillside Avenue, which the developer is widening to meet town standards. Vigliotti will also build a pump station to alleviate sewerage problems in the area.
The apartments will be within walking distance to the Town Green, churches and stores. An anticipated price range for the units has not been disclosed. One-bedroom units at the Rose Hill Apartments, which were built in 1985, rent for $875 a month, according to the rental Web site.
Marcia Chambers Photo
Bulldozers have been clearing the property for weeks in anticipation of construction. Laying the foundation for Founders Village was an endeavor that was more than 10 years in the making. Even after a court settlement paved the way for the project, and it was approved by Board of Selectman (BOS) and the Representative Town Meeting (RTM), a few people continued to question whether there were contaminants on the seven acres that the town now owns.
HISTORY OF FOUNDERS
It all started about a decade ago with an approximate 12-acre parcel bordered by Cedar Street, Rose Street and Hillside Avenue that is near the main town post office. Vigliotti’s original development plans were rejected several times by neighbors, and by the Inland Wetlands and Planning and Zoning commissions. Those plans called for blasting the top off the wooded hillside and developing housing on the entire parcel.
Years of legal battles were resolved by a court-stipulated settlement in 2009. Click here to read the story. At part of the settlement, Vigliotti agreed to give the town the seven wooded acres at the top of the hillside, and to build senior housing on the remaining acreage. The town’s regulatory commissions and governing bodies voted in agreement with the terms of the judicially approved settlement.
The BOS voted unanimously to accept the 7‑acre wooded parcel in January, 2012. It also agreed to grant the Branford Land Trust a conservation easement for the open space to ensure that it would remain a nature park and would never be developed. Click here to read about that vote and a history of the property.
The RTM voted on those some issues in near-unanimous agreement in March, but there were a few lingering questions from the Republican side of the aisle about whether more environmental testing was needed.
HEALTH DEPARTMENT AGREES WITH TOWN
In a three-page letter, Margaret L. Harvey, the state supervisor of the Site Assessment and Chemical Risk Unit, told Michael Pascucilla, the director of health at the East Shore District Health Department, that she agreed with town officials and with Pascucilla that a second environmental study was not needed.
Harvey noted that the seven-acre woodland park that Vigliotti deeded to the town has a grant of conservation “barring future development.” There have been several environmental reports over the years. One in 2009, Harvey noted, produced “no evidence” to substantial claims by nearby residents that there was “hazardous material dumping on the property.”
First Selectman Unk DaRos said of state report: “They agreed 100 percent. It is exactly what I said.”
Stan Konesky Jr., who lives on Ivy Street, was a key leader in the fight against Vigliotti’s earlier plans that would have seen housing placed to nearly the top of the hillside, plus three new roads into the housing complex. Now there is only one road. Konesky, one of several intervenors in what became a long court battle, praised the developer for arriving at a compromise a few years ago.
In an interview, Konesky said he wanted to include a conservation grant to insure no housing would ever be built on the seven-acre section of the land. He said he had investigated other towns before recommending that the land trust hold the conservation deed in perpetuity.
“I found when other towns needed money they sold the property years later. So to protect the citizens of Branford from any further development, I advocated that the Branford Land Trust serve as the conservator. This is important. The land trust is trustworthy, always honorable and always had the best interests of Branford at hand. This conservation document is always attached to the land deed when we are no longer here.”
He noted that the state’s recent environmental decision referred to the Branford Land Trust’s involvement. “Essentially the report from the state says you do not need a Phase 2 environmental report unless it (the land) is going to be developed. And it won’t be. So that was a very good move for us to do.”
In an interview, Pascucilla said his was the agency that asked the state Department of Public Health for an opinion on the site.
He said that Wayne Cooke, who has been engaged in a long-term public fight with Town Hall and DaRos over his farm taxes and other issues, had called him last spring about the Founders Village environmental issue. Pascucilla said he also received a letter from Cooke dated May 16, 2012, that said several Branford residents attended a RTM meeting “and in their opinion there was some misrepresentation about the environmental report.”
Pascucilla told the Eagle that he looked at the Phase 1 report and “the report looked good. We did not see anything there that would warrant a Phase 2 report. But the state of Connecticut Department of Public Health reviews these kinds of reports all the time throughout the state. They have a little more experience than we do. And so I asked them to take a look at it, to give us a hand because that is what they do. They concurred with us that a Phase 1 was a well-written document report and it is very factual and a Phase 2 would not be necessary.”
Konesky said he had spent nearly a decade of his life first fighting the enormous project and then working with DaRos and scores of neighbors to find a compromise, which all agreed to, he said. Cooke, he said, does not live near the Founders Village property and was not involved in the neighbor’s discussions that led to the agreement.
After both the RTM and BOS acted, Republicans, led by Minority Leader Frank Twohill, sought to have the engineer who wrote the Phase 1 report explain his findings to the RTM. That motion was defeated following a tie vote that was broken by RTM moderator Chris Sullivan. Click here to read the story. Twohill said concerns had been raised by neighbors.
The most vocal neighbors in recent years have been Chris and Michael Vergato, who live at 89 Cedar St. They have publicly claimed that sections of the land were contaminated, despite environmental tests showing no pollutants. There are large signs on their property expressing their views against DaRos. In 2007, they erected signs against then First Selectman Cheryl Morris, who promised them no housing, they said back then.
Konesky said Twohill was not speaking on behalf of the overwhelming majority of neighbors. “He may have meant the several residents on Cedar Street, but his statement is too general. The rest of the residents, and at some of our meetings we had sometimes 180 to 250 people, was not supportive of this (additional investigation).”
###
