Politics & Government

Decision Made On Apartments, Retail Project Pitched For Downtown Milford

The Board of Aldermen weighed in on the project at its meeting last week.

MILFORD, CT — The Board of Aldermen rejected a proposal tied to a mixed-use redevelopment of a downtown property.

The board weighed in at its Monday night regarding a temporary parking easement disruption connected to the 40 Broad St. proposal.

The request sought Board of Aldermen approval for a Planning and Zoning Board referral allowing construction within a city easement area behind Colony Grill.

Find out what's happening in Milfordfor free with the latest updates from Patch.

The property owner plans to demolish the existing structure and construct a mixed-use building with retail space on the first floor and apartments above.

Attorney Thomas Lynch, representing property owner Stuart Walls, told aldermen the current building contains about 2,000 square feet and would be replaced with a roughly 10,000-square-foot structure featuring three commercial spaces and 10 apartments.

Find out what's happening in Milfordfor free with the latest updates from Patch.

Lynch said the site is subject to a municipal easement that provides the city with seven parking spaces adjacent to the building. He said the request before aldermen was for a temporary disruption during construction.

“There’s not going to be any request for a release or relinquishment of the existing easement,” Lynch said. “It’s going to be a temporary disruption of the easement.”

According to Lynch, construction would take about six months. He said the parking spaces would ultimately remain and become covered parking beneath part of the new building.

Several aldermen questioned how parking would function during and after construction. Aldermen questioned the scale of the project and the impact on parking downtown.

Lynch said contractors would park off-site during construction and future residential tenants would be prohibited from parking in the easement area.

Lynch also emphasized that the project would comply with zoning regulations and said no city parking spaces would be permanently lost.

However, the board ultimately rejected the proposal by a 10 to 5 vote, citing parking and density concerns.

View the full meeting by clicking here.

Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.