Costco project to face decisive vote before Plainfield zoning commission
Alison Cross
Plainfield — Tuesday night’s Planning and Zoning meeting
could make or break Costco’s controversial proposal for a massive
distribution center on the Plainfield-Canterbury town line.
The wholesale giant will appear before the commission at 7
p.m. to request a zone change that would transform more than 200 acres into an
I-2 Industrial District that would permit the construction of any warehousing
and distribution facility that passes a site plan review.
Costco is also requesting amendments to the town’s
Industrial-1 and Industrial-2 zoning regulations that would modify certain
setback requirements, eliminate building design standards, and erase a 20-foot
maximum height requirement for site lighting.
The scheduled public hearing and regular meeting in
Plainfield come just days after Costco's plan to construct two 1.1
million-square-foot depot facilities on 443 acres off Route 12 in Plainfield
and Butts Bridge Road in Canterbury cleared
a major hurdle.
After a heated public hearing, the Canterbury Planning and
Zoning Commission broke with the majority of public sentiment and approved
Costco’s request for industrial zone changes and regulation text amendments for
the Canterbury side of the project.
Before the vote, Commissioner Michael Lee said the
commission was “Not saying yes, and this (project) is going to pop from the
ground, … what we are saying is, ‘We’re not saying no yet.’” However, the
commission’s near-unanimous decision to rezone several parcels at the proposed
site from a rural to industrial has limited what projects the commission can
legally say “No” to.
Under Canterbury’s
zoning regulations, warehousing, storage, wholesaling and distribution
facilities are all permitted in industrial districts, in addition to trucking
terminals, rail terminals, manufacturing, processing, assembling, professional
offices and research offices.
The only constraints are that the proposed facility must
pass a site plan review and not “emit dust, ash, smoke, odors, gases, or fumes,
… transmit noise, vibration or heat beyond the boundaries of the subject lot,
or create dangers of radiation or hazardous waste in violation of accepted
State and Federal regulations and standards.”
So-called “Site Plan Review Uses” offer the Planning and
Zoning Commission little discretion to deny projects they oppose — according to
state statute, “A
site plan may be modified or denied only if it fails to comply with
requirements already set forth in the zoning or inland wetlands regulations.”
If the Plainfield Planning and Zoning Commission approves
Costco’s zone change, it would convert nearly 150 acres of residentially zoned
RA-30 land and 60 acres of I-1 Industrial land into an I-2 Industrial
classification. If Costco’s request is denied, it would limit the company’s
ability to move forward.
The proposed project is located at the site of a gravel pit.
The first phase calls for the construction of a 1.1 million-square-foot depot
facility in Canterbury. Once that is complete, the company intends to build
another 1.1 million-square-foot building on the Plainfield property. However,
Costco representatives have said when and whether that happens depends upon the
company's growth.
The distribution center is expected to create 250 jobs by
year five and add 1,287 to 2,844 tractor-trailer trips to local roads each day.
Employees would enter and exit in Canterbury next to 234
Butts Bridge Road. The truck entrance and exit for the depot facility would be
located in Plainfield at the site of the vacant Frank O’Connell Handcraft
Museum Annex Building next to Norwich Road Storage.
The north side of the property would abut the Tarbox Road,
Margaret Lane, Louis Lane and Douglas Drive neighborhood. The south side would
back up against the neighborhood on Topper Road, North Street and South Street
off Route 12.
On Thursday, Costco representatives estimated that the first
phase of the project would cost $117.2 million — including $962,200 in
development fees paid to Canterbury — and generate the equivalent of 129
full-time construction jobs.
They said the 1.1 million-square-foot warehouse proposed for
Phase 1 would likely generate $733,000 in real and personal property taxes for
Canterbury each year — roughly 7% of the town’s tax revenue.
Costco did not provide revenue estimates for Plainfield.
Offshore wind project to restart again off CT coast after Trump overruled in court
A federal judge on Monday restarted the Revolution
Wind offshore energy project, handing the Trump administration another
setback in its efforts to halt the wind farm under construction in waters off
Rhode Island.
“A federal judge has once again blocked Trump’s efforts to
tank Revolution Wind, finding yet again that his actions are likely arbitrary
and capricious and that our challenge is likely to succeed,” said Connecticut
Attorney General William Tong in a statement.
“This project is on the finish line to begin delivering
clean, affordable energy to Connecticut families,” Tong said. “With yet another
clear defeat, it is my hope that Donald Trump will drop his lawless and erratic
attacks for good. We’re prepared to keep fighting — and winning — for as long
as it takes to protect Connecticut ratepayers, workers and our
environment.”
The Trump Administration first issued a stop work order on
Aug. 22 and Connecticut and Rhode Island sued in response. The project
developer, Ørsted, sued separately and a federal district court issued an
injunction, allowing work on Revolution Wind to proceed. But on Dec. 22, the
U.S. Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management suspended
work for at least 90 days, citing undisclosed national security
concerns. Ørsted sought a preliminary injunction to block the latest stop
work order.
Trump has long opposed wind energy in general and has
specifically cited claims of national security risks and economic concerns in
his efforts to shut down Revolution Wind and similar wind farms around the
country. The president at times has claimed that sound from wind turbines can
cause cancer, a contention not supported by the mainstream scientific
community. As recently as Friday, Trump doubled down on his dislike for wind
power projects.
“I’ve told my people we will not approve windmills,” Trump
said. “Maybe we get forced to do something because some stupid person in the
Biden administration agreed to do something years ago. We will not approve any
windmills in this country.”
Located 15 nautical miles off the coast of Rhode Island,
Revolution Wind is a wind energy facility expected to deliver enough
electricity to the New England grid to power 350,000 homes, or 2.5% of the
region’s electricity supply. The project had been on track to begin delivering
power to the New England grid this month, supplying much needed power during
the challenging winter heating season. Connecticut was an earlier supporter of
the offshore wind.
Gov. Ned Lamont and Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-CT, were
among those applauding the preliminary injunction issued by the U.S
District Court in the District of Columbia.
“This project should have never been shut down the first
time or second time by the White House,” Lamont said. “Federal interference has
stood in the way of lower energy costs and good-paying jobs, but today’s ruling
puts Revolution Wind back on track. We look forward to seeing this project move
ahead without further disruption and begin powering more than 300,000 homes.”
Charles Rothenberger, director government relations at Save
the Sound, also praised the court decision.
“We are pleased that the Circuit Court recognized that
further delaying completion of the Revolution Wind project would cause
irreparable harm to the residents of Connecticut and Rhode Island,”
Rothenberger said in a statement. “Revolution Wind passed an exhaustive review
during the permitting process and has nearly completed its construction. Delay
would only unnecessarily prevent our region from enjoying the energy
reliability and cost saving benefits that the project will deliver.”
Revolution Wind is projected to save Connecticut and Rhode
Island ratepayers hundreds of millions of dollars over 20 years. The Revolution
Wind project supports over 2,500 jobs nationwide in the construction,
operations, shipbuilding and manufacturing sectors, including over 1,000 union
construction jobs. The project has been vetted and approved through a federal
and state regulatory process and is supported by binding contracts and legal
mandates, proponents said.
Large-scale CT solar project looks to drill under popular trail. Residents concerned with its impact
Broadleaf Solar,
a renewable energy supplier, is seeking to drill transmission lines under the
Farmington Canal Heritage Trail in East Granby as part of a large-scale solar
project on a former agriculture field.
The New York based solar company paid
nearly $10.2 million for the 600-acre Monrovia Nursery property in
Granby and East Granby in 2021, officials said. Its plan includes building a
100-megawatt solar facility on 322 acres of the former agricultural property.
As part of the plan, Broadleaf would use horizontal drilling
to install transmission lines to connect 100 megawatts of electrical power to
an Eversource 345 kilovolt transmission line near Route 20, according to the
company’s project proposal. The project site is at 35 Floydville Road and 90
Salmon Brook St.
The proposal calls for drilling under Salmon Brook River,
Route 20 and under the popular “Rails to Trails” bike and walkway.
Broadleaf had been waiting for Monrovia to phase down its
use of the property. Monrovia announced in 2023 that it will leave the
Connecticut nursery altogether by mid-2025 and has now ceased operations at the
site. The land is 60% in Granby and 40% in East Granby, according to officials.
Part of the land was used for decades as a growing field for tobacco.
The operation would be by DESRI, which operates
power-generating solar facilities from Hawaii to New England. DESRI, a
renewable energy company, develops, owns, and operates utility-scale solar,
wind, and battery storage projects.
“The Broadleaf Solar project remains in the development
phase; no construction has begun. From the outset, we have committed to
responsible, well-engineered development, informed by thorough studies that
guide permitting, engineering, and environmental safeguards,” Aaron Svedlow,
executive director for Broadleaf/DESRI, wrote in an op-ed
in the Granby Drummer.
“All necessary state permits and licenses will be secured
before any work commences by qualified contractors, and contingency plans will
be in place to address unforeseen conditions. To date, site activities have
been limited to standard survey work, including a recent geotechnical
investigation to assess subsurface conditions for advanced engineering,”
Svedlow wrote.
The project still needs to get permitted. According to town
officials, no permits have been filed yet with Granby and East Granby. The
Connecticut Siting Council, the entity that has legal jurisdiction over the
siting of power facilities and transmission lines, would need to give the final
approval. Under state law, Granby and East Granby do not have regulatory
authority over Broadleaf’s application but can provide input to the Siting
Council’s recommendation.
Broadleaf intends to file permits within the next 60 days
for the project.
An updated project schedule released in June pushed back the
projected construction timeline until the end of 2026. The site intends to be
fully operational in 2028 under the current projection. That timeline is
delayed from a previous
proposal in 2024 that showed an operational date for December 2026.
Broadleaf said the project will create 150 construction jobs
and contribute to economic development in the region. In addition, the project
will create enough energy to power approximately 24,000 homes annually and
remove approximately 127,000 metric tons of carbon per year, according
to the project site plan.
Some residents and town officials are concerned that the
project will have environmental impacts, including temporarily disrupting use
of the popular trail. Broadleaf Solar has proposed to drill the transmission
lines below Traprock Land Conservancy-owned land, the Salmon Brook River, Route
189 and under the Farmington Canal Heritage Trail and Route 20, according to
maps included with the project proposal.
“The Salmon Brook and Lower Farmington River is officially
registered in the United
States registry of rivers as national wild and scenic rivers,” said
longtime Granby resident Reinhard Maier. “Those rivers and streams are under
the National Park Service, so they are offered certain protections. The
drilling proposal goes under the Salmon Brook and zig zags under Route 20.”
Maier, who was out biking on the rail trail last July, said
he got more interested in the project when he saw heavy equipment drilling core
samples right near the popular bikeway. He said that he was told the drilling
was to get a sentiment sample to understand the feasibility of drilling
transmission lines under the trail. Broadleaf confirmed they conducted a
“geotechnical investigation” last summer.
The Granby resident said he is concerned about the proposed
use of horizontal drilling for the project and wrote
an op-ed detailing potential hazards. Horizontal drilling generally
reduces environmental impacts compared to traditional drilling by minimizing
surface disruption and avoiding sensitive areas like rivers and wetlands, but
one risk includes “inadvertent returns” where drilling fluids may leak,
potentially contaminating groundwater and surface water, he said.
Svedlow noted in his op-ed that protecting the Salmon Brook
and safeguarding the localized watershed and ecosystem is a high priority.
“The project will employ best-practice methods to avoid and
minimize impacts to surface water and other sensitive features. Electrical
connection to the existing grid will be made via underground collection lines
installed beneath Salmon Brook using Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) — a
proven method that avoids disturbing the surface and sensitive resources,” he
wrote.
“DESRI has successfully implemented HDD projects in
Connecticut and nationwide,” Svedlow added. “Other aquatic resources on-site
will be avoided during construction, with best management practices ensuring
site stabilization, appropriate spill and release response plans, runoff
reduction, and establishment of long-term vegetation.”
Broadleaf said it is anticipating some disruption to the
trail if the project moves ahead, but that it will most likely be brief and
temporary. No time period has been established yet for how long that disruption
may last if the project is given approval from the Connecticut Siting Council.