This is a printer-friendly version of an article from Zip06.com.

Branford PZC Debates Costco

With three of its five voting members appearing to be leaning toward approval of the Costco master plan, the Branford Planning & Zoning Commission (PZC) will continue a debate opened on May 21 on the merits and problems of the proposal.

The commissioners will discuss more at the next meeting, then likely will meet once again to vote the project up or down, said Commissioner Charles "Chuck" Andres on May 21.

The PZC's five voting members include Andres, Chairman Ellsworth McGuigan, and commissioners John Lust, Marcia Palluzzi and Joe Chadwick. At the May 21 PZC meeting, the commission took its first crack at discussing all that's transpired since Costco submitted its application for a Planned Development District (PDD) in February. Over the course of a four-part public hearing (April 2 through May 7) the PZC heard from Costco and took in plenty of public input from supporters and detractors.

Now, it's up to the PZC to decide if Costco's PDD meets zoning law requirements in order to grant a request for a special exception permit. Should the PZC approve the plan, Costco would begin the PDD's Phase One, including the construction of retail buildings totaling some 160,000 square feet for a Costco wholesale club and gas station facility, followed by a second phase of seven to-be-determined retail/commercial buildings. The PDD would develop 44 acres off East Industrial Road by connecting several parcels owned by different entities. The land is currently zoned for light industrial/small retail use.

Andres opened the PZC's discussion on May 21 saying he was "generally inclined" to be in favor of the type of project Costco is planning, although he felt there should be "some conditions and modifications" created by the PZC before approval.

"We've heard very much passionate testimony [and] everyone made very good points...I'm very impressed by both the applicant and the opposition," said Andres. "But none of these are home runs...it's not a 100 percent issue."

Lust said he was adamantly opposed to the PDD application for reasons including what he felt was an "incomplete" master plan with insufficient traffic study information provided by Costco, the need for "some kind of comment" from the Inland Wetlands Commission prior to PDD approval, the desire to align the project with the goals of the town's Plan of Conservation and Development (POCD), and the fact that the PZC needs to find that the PDD application shows sufficient need for the special exception.

"Honestly, I don't know how we, as a commission, can vote positively on this," said Lust. "If they had come forward informally, as we recommend as a commission, we might have been able to give them more information regarding what we need as commission to make a decision on this."

Lust said the scale of the PDD, as proposed, is "confusing the issue," saying a PDD of a "smaller nature" is needed. He also expressed his concern the PDD's approval by the PZC would begin a process that will snowball and could prevent careful planning by municipal and government agencies involved.

"Once we approve this, the cow's out of the barn and we're behind the eight ball, Inlands Wetlands is behind the eight ball, and the DOT is behind the eight ball, if they think the town's approved it," said Lust.

The Connecticut Department of Transportation (DOT) would be working with Costco to produce corridors and traffic flow systems feeding into the site off state roads and I-95 Exit 56.

Chadwick said he, too, was concerned about approving the PDD and noted he still did not have a satisfactory answer to his question put to Costco regarding quantifiable benefits.

"There are projections that have to be made [and] I don't think we've really been given that," said Chadwick. "We're being given Costco, and 'everybody loves Costco—they're a great company.' It's sort of this basket of puppies [like] on a winter catalogue cover...Everyone is focused on the issue of Costco [and] how great this is going to be, but now we're looking at the much bigger site that could be a Trojan horse."

Chadwick said Costco has "maxed out" the property with its PDD. Both Chadwick and Lust also noted the PZC needs to look far into the future when considering the benefits of approving a PDD such as the one Costco's proposing.

PZC Chair McGuigan said he felt the PDD application was appropriate and that sufficient "flexibility" exists in the master plan to allow oversight of proper planning and development.

"The establishment of this zone is based on the discount store—is it good or not. Even people who spoke against it had nothing against Costco. It seems overall intensity and density of project is bothering them; the unknowns are bothering them, and it's probably bothering you, too," McGuigan said, speaking to Lust. "In the master plan there is this flexibility; they've got these other properties [and] they're going to limit [their] size."

McGuigan also pointed to town regulations that list requirements the PZC should consider when determining appropriateness of proposed PDDs.

"I think this particular plan meets it all, as much as it can, in the master plan sense," said McGuigan.

Palluzzi said she felt the PDD created a good use for the site and added that plans for interior traffic circulation in the development will take pressure off the potential for other commercial developments springing up alongside exterior roads such as Route 1, avoiding a commercial corridor such as the one in Orange on Route 1.

"That roadway in a PDD would function [to] take pressure off [of] an Orange development feel," said Palluzzi. "I go into a site and I'm contained in that site. I feel it's the piece of the plan that's unique to this plan."