Danbury planning panel continues hearing on Mill Plain gas station proposal after technical, traffic and tank questions

The Danbury Planning Commission on Jan. 21 continued the public hearing for a special-exception site plan for a gasoline service station, service garage and convenience market at 85 Mill Plain Road to the commission's Feb. 4 meeting so the applicant can address outstanding technical comments, traffic analysis and questions about underground storage tanks.

Commission chair Arnold Finaldi opened the hearing and read the revised legal notice for Danbury Mill Plain Realty LLC’s application (special exception no. 805), citing proposed trip generation of more than 500 vehicle trips per day. Attorney Neil Marcus and counsel Josh Pedrera, representing the applicant, described the property's long history as a fueling and repair site and said the project aims to reduce the number of nonconforming aspects of the site while retaining retail fueling.

Why it matters: Commissioners and neighbors flagged traffic on Mill Plain Road and potential risks to the Kenosia Lake watershed as central concerns for the project’s environmental and public-safety review. The commission also sought clarity on whether the applicant plans to replace existing underground storage tanks and how contamination issues, if any, will be addressed.

Larry Webster of Alfred Benesh and Company, the project engineer, walked the commission through the proposed site layout. He said the new canopy and fuel dispensers will be sited near the storefront, the existing tanks would remain in place and the rear addition to the building would be removed to free space for code-compliant parking and a one-way circulation pattern. "The tanks are not moving. They're existing. We're going to strip all of the equipment off," Webster said, adding that most engineering comments had been addressed but that additional city comments arrived that morning.

Resident Paul Rotello, speaking for the 6th Ward, reserved most of his remarks for the continued hearing but told commissioners, “The two main concerns would be protection of the watershed ... and also the traffic.” Rotello also asked why the applicant planned to keep the existing tanks rather than replace them, saying tank replacement would seem to be the foremost remediation step.

Pedrera and Webster said they would incorporate Planning Department and engineering comments, finalize the traffic analysis in coordination with CTDOT and return at the next hearing with revised plans and reports. The commission voted to continue the matter to Feb. 4 by voice vote.

What comes next: The applicant is expected to submit revised site plans, responses to engineering comments and a finalized traffic report for the commission and CTDOT review before the Feb. 4 meeting, when commissioners said they will press the team on tank replacement, contamination safeguards and CTDOT traffic conditions.