.

No Wetlands Approval for a New Shopping Center on Main

The Monroe Inland Wetlands Commission denied a wetlands modification needed for Cross Roads Center, which would be built across the street from Clock Tower Square.

A developer's plan to build Cross Roads Center, a 13,540 square-foot shopping center on 2.25 acres at 462, 464, 466 and 470 Main Street, suffered a blow on Wednesday night, when the Inland Wetlands Commission denied the application for a wetlands modification.

Rather than resolving a past violation by restoring existing wetlands that had previously been filled in, Jay Keillor, the engineer for the applicant, presented a plan to create an improved wetlands area elsewhere on the site. That proved to be the "sticking point" that sunk the application.

The creation of a new wetlands area was meant to allow the applicant, JV464 Main Street, LLC, to have a portion of the new shopping center be on the existing wetlands.

"We're disappointed," Keillor said after the meeting. "We thought it was a good plan. We thought our proposal would create a very viable wetland over a wetland that always had lesser value."

But he added, "We respect the commission."

The motion to approve the application with conditions was defeated 5 to 1 with John Bath the only commissioner voting in favor of it.

'A Huge Sticking Point'

During deliberations, Commissioner Cathy Kohut said, "We're losing an entire wetland. I'm not sure creating a drainage basin and calling it a wetland qualifies as remediation. I have some issues with that and the fact that there were no alternatives considered to allow for what we once ordered, which was remediation — so it's a huge sticking point."

In order to approve the application, Commission Chairman Jeremy Hayden noted that the town's regulations say if there's a possibility of a substantial impact to a wetland, the commission would have to make a finding that no other reasonable and prudent alternatives exist.

"Isn't the bottom line that it wasn't offered?" Kohut asked, noting that the developer offered no alternatives that entailed restoring the existing wetland.

Commissioner Lois Spence said alternatives the applicant could have explored include changing the orientation of the building or building on a smaller footprint. That way the existing wetlands would not be built upon and could be restored.

Before voting against the application, Hayden said, "I struggle with it. It's a great use of the site. It's something I'd like to see, but we have to comply with the regulations."

If the commission approved it, Kohut said it would be setting a precedent by not strictly following the regulations, adding this is not an issue that can be decided on a case-by-case basis.

But Bath contended that each application should be viewed on an individual basis.

Peg February 28, 2013 at 08:57 PM
I applaud our Wetland Commission for carefully considering and making a decision based on the protections we have in place as a town. I have noticed that some developers work very hard to disprove and circumvent regulations that stand in their way. I am not in favor of another service station in the already over congested area on RT111 and the distruction of the wetlands on which it will sit.
uc14 February 28, 2013 at 09:41 PM
i don't understand the logic for this decision. 1. it was a previously developed site, 2. its right next to a gas station and 2 garages, and 3. can someone actually point out where this wetland is? http://www.bing.com/maps/#JnE9LjQ3MCUyYm1haW4lMmJzdHJlZXQlMjUyYyUyYm1vbnJvZSUyNTJjJTJiY3QlN2Vzc3QuMCU3ZXBnLjEmYmI9NTcuNTQyMjM5NTk2OTk5NSU3ZS0yNy42MDEwNTg5NTklN2UyMS4wMDczODExMjI2NDc2JTdlLTExNi44OTc5MzM5NTk= there's a link to a satellite image of the property. maybe at one time it was wetlands, but not anymore. basically what the wetlands commission is saying is that once land has become disused it has to remain that way. awesome. so now stepney will have a huge plot of vacant land just sitting un-used and un-taxable. im not saying we should pave over all the wetlands in town, but i think everyone can agree that we don't want monroe to start resembling detroit with random patches of undeveloped lots dotting the roadside. as if main street doesn't have enough of those.
QWERTY February 28, 2013 at 11:08 PM
If this decision was made in the interest of protecting the town's eco-system, then great. If this was made because of preferential treatment, then shame-shame.
Big Boy March 01, 2013 at 11:17 AM
Maybe it was made in the interest of protecting the image we project at the "gateway to Monroe" remark made when discussing the use of, yet another vacant lot, that used to be Stevenson Lumber.
Franklin March 06, 2013 at 05:46 PM
How unfortunate for Monroe. Looks like more new tax revenue will be going to business friendly Trumbull or Shelton.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »