New Tech Park Plans ‘Extremely Encouraging’

By Kendra Bobowick

“Wow,” Conservation Commission member George Ferguson said to himself Tuesday evening after staring for several seconds at a new rendition of technology park plans unfolded on the table. Later that night he would note, “This is extremely encouraging. It looks like a homerun.”

On either side of him commission members leaned forward for a look. “Very interesting. Very,” said Chairman Joe Hovious. Moments earlier, Land Use Deputy Director Rob Sibley had unfurled several copies of a site map admitting, “I could almost do jumping jacks, I am so excited.” Placing his hands along the curved land use map, he flattened its edges to reveal two parcels off Commerce Road — 34 acres and 37 acres — set aside for open space and economic uses, respectively. Face up on the table awaiting the commission’s reactions was the Economic Development Commission’s (EDC) most recent rendition of how to use these pieces of property known as the Technology Park — a subject that over and over again in the past had arrived at a stalemate as the two commissions’ ideas clashed.

Tuesday may have been the start of a better story. Before the commissioners was a “commercial condo” concept that Mr Sibley believed they would find appealing.

“[The EDC] has taken to heart all of your recommendations,” Mr Sibley said. He told commissioners that “no activity” is on the open space area, unlike past concepts that saw a blending of the open space and development lots. Instead of a maximum buildout of as many as nine buildings of various sizes throughout the combined parcels, a road, and required parking, commissioners had before them something easier to look at.

“Access is no longer a road, it’s a driveway. It reduces the impact to wetlands and costs to the town,” Mr Sibley said, highlighting several features. The five-building commercial condos include structures from 28,000 square feet down to 16,000 and 8,000 square feet.

The potential build activity also is away from Deep Brook and a lower terrain that would remain a hay field, Mr Sibley said. He also mentioned the possibilities of alternative energy use, such as a solar field near the water treatment plant at the end of Commerce Road.

No plans are final, however. Commercial condos are only a concept so far.

“It’s a different approach, that’s a fact,” Director of Planning and Community Development Elizabeth Stocker said Wednesday. She admitted that the EDC is fishing for feedback before spending more time or money on engineering or design for the commercial condo concept. “We were putting it out there to see what they thought.” She and EDC Chair Rob Rau sat with a designer and the condo emerged. Land deeds and agricultural concerns in part gave shape to the new design. The town owns the 37-acre plot slated for development, but the state still holds the deed for the 34 acres. The state also is concerned about the loss of agricultural land, prompting the EDC and Ms Stocker to leave it alone.

Until she and the EDC hear more from conservation, for one, Ms Stocker said, “We’ll reserve further engineering until we get feedback.”

Tuesday, Mr Sibley explained, “If it’s positive feedback, they’ll put more money into it.” Understanding that the condo outline is “still conceptual,” Mr Hovious described the plans as “a fresh look, but it will take dollars to flesh it out and they’re looking for feedback before they spend the dollars.” Sensing the urgency, he instructed, “I suggest a subcommittee get together and think this through and react with time to think, not off the cuff.”

“[Mr Hovious] is right,” Mr Sibley stressed.

“We’ll need to ask questions,” Mr Hovious said.

“I highly recommend you get answers prior to the next meeting,” said Mr Sibley with his eye on the time until the EDC reconvenes. He feels delays would be a step backward.

A Look Back

Preserving open space, displaying a sensitivity toward agriculture, and thinking green with mention of a solar farm are dramatic changes from prior EDC plans that had the conservation members out of their seats in protest.

“This is a great day,” Mr Sibley said in a separate interview. The plans that he and Land Use Director George Benson saw last week were “amazing, I was stunned.”

Prior years’ drawings proposed a higher number of building lots, bridges, roads, and maximum development of the combined roughly 70 acres toward the end of Commerce Road. With conflicting interests for the land, the Economic Development Commission and Conservation Commission were at a standstill despite the first selectman’s intervention in late 2008 when he directed the groups to work together.

Gone are the proposed buildings, roads, multiple paved parking lots and overall disturbance that conservationists strongly rejected, replaced with a proposed commercial condominium that will satisfy economic growth. Moving away from prior $3.2 million or $2.7 million build estimates, the condo is an approximate $700,000 expense. “It’s not a subdivision,” Mr Sibley said with relief. Instead, he was looking at a potentially productive, tax-generating complex. “It’s what we have been saying all along.” Running through a list of pluses he summarized: “Everything is there; the difference between these and other plans in the past is tremendous.”

As the conservation members plan to respond to the EDC’s condo concept, Mr Sibley warned that any final plans would have to pass approval with various governing bodies, including the Inland Wetlands Commission and Planning & Zoning Commission.