New Haven Independent

Posted by: REGS | February 13, 2008 8:30 AM

Yes, who needs a golf course, through road and revenue generating housing for our growing community when we can have a public works garage, a cemetery and a few empty ballfields. VISION for Branford needs glasses

Posted by: Tyrone Speaks | February 13, 2008 11:56 AM

REGS, Sounds like your a friend of the developer NEE. How do you figure affordable housing is revenue producing. Its common knowledge that the cost to put a child through the school system far exceeds the revenue generated by almost any housing development! EMPTY BALLFIELDS? Your kidding right? You must not have school age children. The Recreation Department has a shortage of playing fields ask any parent with kids involved in sports. As a taxpayer I would much rather see playing fields than affordable housing. Call me a tree hugger if you like but this is a good plan. Before you rebut this posting you should know that I am an unaffiliated taxpayer, I didn't vote for or support Unk, but make no mistake about it, I am not interested in seeing the town grow with affordable housing. I would guess that most people would not like to see this site developed either unless of course they are on the receiving end of the profits of such a development. As for public works, why not? its badly needed and the town owns the property, and quite frankly it does not need to be in public view. Credit where credit is due REGS, the golf course idea is a good one but only as long as it remains a public course to the residents of Branford, and not made into a private club that only the wealthy could afford to belong to like they tried to do with the Queach property. Tyrone Speaks T.E.

Posted by: JNG | February 13, 2008 12:37 PM

How many Copyright and Trademark violations did you commit in publishing the Master Plan?

Posted by: REGS | February 13, 2008 10:01 PM

Yeah Tyrone, NEE is in my pocket, give me part of that $20mil. Ha Ha. I did look at the famous BranfordTaborrecord.com website and the proposed plans from the trial record. Only a percentage of the homes were affordable. All the homes were 2 bedrooms. Demographics from this type of housing shows very few school age children come from such developments. The real estate and personal property from the cars would be tax positive. The golf course was supposedly a par 3 short course open to the public. The testimony pointed to similar courses in Milford and Stratford which are popular among seniors and lunch time crowds. This was no Pine Orchard exclusive course. Just something green, privately managed and open to the public. What's bad about that? Now if the Town couldn't assure it would be kept as such...that would be another story.

Posted by: Mojito, T.E. | February 14, 2008 10:44 PM

I hear what your saying Regs, but have to agree with Tyrone. Back in the late 70's this town heard similar statements about the condos being developed up on Brushy Plain Road, "hey, they are not meant for families... they are only two bedrooms... they will bring in young professionals...they will bring in more tax dollars, they attract DINKS (double-incomes no kids)... Well go up to Brushy Plains at 7:30am any weekday and watch the scores of school buses pulling out of each complex, keep in mind for each child taxpayers of Branford pay $10K per year and growing. Talk about Vision? History has a way of repeating itself, let's for once learn from past mistakes. We needed to build up schools, fire and police protection, and now have more traffic on our roads thanks to that Vision.

Oh and by the way, take a ride this Spring on any weeknight or Saturday down to Hammer Field, Sliney Field, Foote Park and see for yourself how much open field space Branford really doesn't have first hand.