I am not necessarily thrilled by this proposed development. But I will say this: the hyperbole and exaggeration being trotted out by the opponents of this plan are very off-putting. They are hurting themselves with the exaggerated trip and pollution claims.
State your objection and let the Commission decide based on the criteria they are permitted to consider. Don’t fabricate data to embellish your point.
The electrical engineer should not have been allowed to waste the commission’s and the public’s time with his presentation. Being learned in one discipline does not confer wisdom in unrelated areas. Hopefully the commission accords his “testimony” the weight it deserves: zero.
The property is already taxed as a commercial property. Specifically, the owners are paying $231,089.42 a year in taxes. Take a second for that to set in, 200k in taxes each year. They purchased this property before 2011 (which means they have paid ATLEAST $2.5 million in property taxes). The town specifically put sewers in that area to attract projects like this. No need for sewers for the coveted "open space" everyone wants to make it. I can't believe people are delusional enough to think that a few protests can steer what is the owner's legal right to use the property for the purpose it is zoned for. Yes, the town can make requirements for rainwater, the appearance of the building, or even when the lights are turned on and off. It can not tell a property owner they need to pay millions on taxes just to have the property stay unused. In short, here comes a truck depot.
Two things to keep in mind.
One, what do we want to see done with this property. The current owners are entitled to profit from ownership of the land. I don't think it is suitable for single family houses.
Two, Remember what traffic is like when I 84 is at a standstill (traffic accident or construction) these trucks will havbe to run up and down Rt. 6 and Rt 25 when the highway is backed up.
It is balancing these competing interests that our Boards have to keep in mind.