.

Touring the Proposed Branford DPW Location

The Department of Public Works hopes to settle in at the property on Tabor Drive.

The future home of the , temporarily on 137 N. Branford Road, has been to the 77-acre property on Tabor Drive.

The town-owned land isn't ideal - and it isn't - but a tour from Art Baker, director of Branford Public Works, demonstrates what .

The site is part of a tract of land that the town seized by eminent domain in 2004 because of concerns over potential contamination from the town landfill, which is adjacent to the Tabor Drive tract.

The seizure followed plans by a developer called New England Estates for use of the land for residential purposes, rather than the light industrial standards to which a DPW facility must conform. That seizure prompted a number of lawsuits, one of which--litigation with the Marcus Law Firm, which served the town as outside legal case at one phase during the eminent domain case--continues.  

The building is still in the conceptual phase. A public hearing regarding the plans and it costs is scheduled for Wednesday, Feb. 1 at 6 p.m. at the  at .

Nancy Barnes contributed to this report.

Wayne Cooke January 27, 2012 at 11:16 AM
Contrary to your article, the Town did not seize the Tabor property because the land was polluted. In fact, in over twenty years of monitoring, no pollution has ever been detected on the 77 acres. The Town seized the property because--being close to the landfill--the parcel was deemed POTENTIALLY dangerous to residents of proposed affordable housing. Which of course leads to the question of why is it now considered perfectly safe for public works and playing fields? Once again, Patch is providing only part of the story and doing a disservice to your readers.
susan Barnes January 27, 2012 at 12:12 PM
"Contrary to your article, the Town did not seize the Tabor property because the land was polluted." THE ARTICLE STATES: ".......the town seized by eminent domain in 2004 because of concerns over potential contamination from the ( adjacent) town landfill,........" THIS POST STATES: "The Town seized the property because--being close to the landfill--the parcel was deemed POTENTIALLY dangerous......" Contrary?
Wayne Cooke January 27, 2012 at 12:36 PM
CAPTION UNDER PHOTO: "This sensor looks for contamination, and while the town originally seized the land saying the site was polluted, Baker says there are only traces of leachate from the nearby dump and asphalt."
Wayne Cooke January 27, 2012 at 12:40 PM
CAPTION UNDER PHOTO: "This sensor looks for contamination, and while the town originally seized the land saying the site was polluted, Baker says there are only traces of leachate from the nearby dump and asphalt."

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