Inland Wetland Commissioners Ask Tough Questions

Members of Branford’s Inland Wetland Commission (IW) are concerned that newly created wetlands won’t be wet enough to replace ones that would be disturbed for a possible commercial development project at 250 N. Main St.

“How are you going to support those wetlands?” asked Dr. Richard Orson, an environmental consultant and member of the IW commission. At a recent public hearing, Orson said he fears the project would limit the water available for the proposed 26,000 square feet of wetlands that would be created or enhanced. Orson is pictured at left.

“There’s no consideration of wet,” Orson said. ​“This is not a plan … that is feasible.”

Some commission members were also concerned about the size of the project. At a previous meeting, the commissioners said the impact on wetlands would be greater than other projects they have approved.

Engineer John Mancini of B L Companies in Meriden said the plans provide for wetland creation and continuance. He asked that the public hearing be kept open so that he could prepare additional documentation to show how the new wetlands would meet the commission’s requirements.

The property in question is a 13-acre site located between Route 1 and I‑95. It is adjacent to the W. S. Clancy Memorial Funeral Home on one side, and United Tire Inc. and Greystone Manor condominiums on the other side. The Shapiro family, who operate the Cedar Island Marina in Clinton, have owned the property since 1997.

Owner Jeff Shapiro (pictured in the red shirt), said that plans have already been downsized. Shapiro said that when Costco wanted to build there in 2003, it would have required several variances because of the size of the store. ​“They walked away. They said the site improvements were too expensive,” Shapiro said.

At a previous meeting, Mancini displayed a conceptual drawing that gave an example of what could be built there without any variances. Click here to read about an earlier presentation.

No Developer Chosen Yet

Mancini said the owners are not proposing any specific developer for the site, but they are seeking approval to excavate the property and prepare it for potential development. The site includes hilly topography, wetlands, a stream and a rocky outcropping.

John Schmitz, (pictured) project engineer for BL Companies, said the topography limits the amount of developable land to 10 acres, but that local zoning regulations further limit that amount to 6 acres. He also discussed stormwater flows, drainage issues and the impact on wetlands.

He said the project may necessitate a traffic signal on Route 1, and would definitely require that the road be widened so turning lanes could be added. He said plans call for the construction of retaining walls on both sides of the access road.

“We plan to excavate the northern portion of the site,” Schmitz said.

Blasting Required

Mancini said it’s anticipated that about 65,000 cubic yards of rock will be removed. He said the project will require blasting in the northern patr, but that all local and state regulations will be followed. ​“We are in full compliance,” he said.

Several commission members asked about the possibility of a smaller project with less impact. 

“Is there a better way to develop this land that wouldn’t be so extensive?” asked commission member Wesley Vietzke. He suggested that a smaller building would be more appropriate.

Schmitz said they have looked at various alternatives but that the land would still require excavation.

Mancini said the owners ​“need to develop it in a productive way,” and that the topography of the site is not easy to work with.

Impact on Wetlands Outlined

Kim Lesay, a wetland biologist with BL Companies, said the project will impact about 12,880 square feet of existing wetlands, and that they propose to create or enhance about 26,147 square feet of wetlands. She said invasive species such as Japanese knotweed and phragmites will be removed.

“We meet the 2:1 ratio,” she said, referring to the 2 to 1 replacement whenever an existing wetland is disturbed.

“I really feel this plan would be an improvement to what’s out there now,” Lesay said.

Only two people spoke during the public hearing. David Pandolfi, owner of United Tire, said the property in the 1980’s wasn’t wetlands, it was an ice skating rink. He said he favors the proposed project. ​“I’m for it. You got to do something with the land.”

Tim Reiss, a resident of the adjacent Greystone Manor Condominiums, said he was concerned because the site is close to his property.

The hearing will be continued at the next Inland Wetland meeting.
###