Derby Redevelopment To Take Place In Phases

Communities

Twitter

Commodore Hull - the original Valley bad a** http://t.co/OqcdHL3P

ValleyIndy - about 3 hours, 5 minutes ago.

Derby Dems say -- "Show the world the settlement." Read the letter. http://t.co/25zAnZwm

ValleyIndy - about 3 hours, 32 minutes ago.

The Derby Democratic Town Committee just delivered a letter to Mayor Anthony Staffieri saying the public should... http://t.co/4U7JMowq

We Read…

Government

Community

Fire Departments

School Districts

by Eugene Driscoll | Feb 8, 2012 5:40 pm

(12) Comments | Commenting has expired | Send link to a friend | E-mail the Author

Posted to: Derby

A redevelopment project for downtown Derby is expected to begin in the spring or summer, Derby officials said Wednesday.

California-based Eclipse Development has been talking about building about several stores totaling 180,000 square feet of commercial space in an area along the Housatonic River stretching roughly from the Derby-Shelton bridge to the former Lifetouch property on Derby’s Main Street.

Now the plan is to do the project in phases, starting first with a smaller chunk.

The first phase would start later this year with the construction of 30,000 square feet of commercial space. The project would expand down the road, with the hope that the economy improves.

“It’s great news, especially in economic times that are bad for the whole world,” Derby Mayor Anthony Staffieri said.

The troubled economy has hindered Eclipse Development from landing some mid-size or larger tenants that usually anchor shopping centers. The larger retailers have been flirting with Eclipse — but they simply are not committing to new locations at this time, officials said.

The idea now is to get the redevelopment project off the ground with a restaurant and three to five smaller retailers — businesses that are ready to go. The thought is that the larger tenants will sign on down the line.

Eclipse Development’s president, Douglas Gray, spoke Tuesday night at a meeting of the Derby Redevelopment Agency. Click here to read a story by the Valley Gazette’s Susan Hunter, who attended the meeting.

“The way he described it, he has tenants that are very interested that want to start right now,” said Ken Hughes, an Alderman and member of the Derby Redevelopment Agency. “And then he has larger tenants that are very interested, but they are saying ‘You know, let’s wait and see what the economy is like six to seven months from now.”

E-mails seeking comment were sent to Eclipse executives prior to and after the Redevelopment Agency meeting.

Derby officials said the first phase of the project would be about 30,000 square feet, to be built on land near Route 8 — including the former Lifetouch property at 90 Main St.

The first phase would include a restaurant accompanied by three to five retail shops. The retail shops would be between 5,000 and 6,500 square feet, according to Sheila O’Malley, Derby’s economic development director.

The tenants have not been named, but other Eclipse projects in the U.S. include Olive Garden restaurants, Quiznos sandwich shops and Starbucks coffee shops. Click here to visit the company’s website.

Eclipse Development is finalizing a deal that will see the company purchase the former Lifetouch property, O’Malley said.

Lifetouch has been called a key property in the Derby redevelopment zone. Eclipse has been trying to purchase the property for a long time — and the status of the deal was raised as a campaign issue during the last Derby election.

“Eclipse still has the financing and he still has the tenants, which is awesome,” Staffieri said. “It hasn’t moved as quickly as everyone would have liked because of the economy, but the important thing is that it is moving.”

The Derby redevelopment project has been dragging along for years — and becomes a political football every two years during the local election cycle. The issue has a ‘boy who cried wolf’ vibe to many residents.

“It has been a sore subject, and a subject of negativity,” said Joe Bomba, a former Alderman and current chairman of the Derby Redevelopment Agency. “But the important thing is that there are tenants interested and the developer wants to move forward with the project. That is a great thing for Derby.”

Comments

posted by: Stan Muzyk on February 8, 2012 9:12pm

Hopefully, some visual, physical movement showing the start of redevelopment will finally convince Derby citizens that this is no longer “a political-red-herring.”

posted by: Rob Hyder 641 on February 9, 2012 11:15am

This downtown redevelopment is starting to become a massive joke, to no one’s surprise either. During the last campaign, Tony Staffieri mailed out beautiful pictures of what downtown will look like. Now that the campaign is over, we’re going from a 180,000 square-foot project to a 3,000 square-foot project with the idea more businesses will eventually move in. Why didn’t you tell the voters the truth in November, Tony?

I also recall Staffieri sending out a mailing calling Dan Foley “Pinocchio.” Now isn’t that the pot calling the kettle black.

The lies are more than abundant. There was supposed to be a roundtable discussion prior to the 2009 election to allow public input, but that got cancelled shortly after the election. In November 2009, Ken Hughes said:

“To be honest with you, this past election was sort of a mini-referendum on our decisions with downtown redevelopment ... We are ready to go, full-steam ahead. We have developers interested in buying properties and building in Derby. You are going to see us move quickly now.”

Well, here we are in 2012 and we went from a 180,000 square foot project to 3,000, and that is still without any guarantees. When will the lies end?

posted by: Kate Kulenski on February 9, 2012 12:29pm

Rob, your literacy is astounding. The article says “30,000 square feet”, which is t-h-i-r-t-y thousand, not 3,000. Your math is lacking too, as it clearly states that several stores would be between f-i-v-e thousand and s-i-x thousand, which is already more than three thousand.

As the mayor said, the important thing is that it’s moving along, moving forward. I’m not sure where you think lying comes in. This town would be a lot better if its own residents were more positive about its future. Don’t pretend to care when all you do is pepper the Internet with your negative conspiracy theories. It’s ridiculous. Find something more constructive to do.

posted by: Rob Hyder 641 on February 9, 2012 12:54pm

Kate, thanks for picking up on my typo. I apologize for missing a “0” in my response. I promise to improve my literacy, and typing skills, going forward.

posted by: Rob Hyder 641 on February 9, 2012 12:58pm

Kate, one more thing. I forgot to wish you luck on your upcoming wedding to Paul Staffieri. Congratulations. I’m sure your future father-in-law is proud of you.

posted by: Kate Kulenski on February 9, 2012 2:00pm

Oh, another conspiracy! Shocking.

You wrote “3,000” in more than one instance so it seems you misread the article. Don’t blame me for looking foolish, you did that all by yourself.

I’ll remain positive about Derby’s future despite your steady stream of unproductive negativity. I have personal stake in it as much as anyone else who lives in the Valley. It must be nice to be a completely impersonal, impartial trumpet of truth. When you spend all your time complaining, you discredit your own self. Have a nice day

posted by: Fred Petrella on February 9, 2012 7:05pm

Contrary to what the article stated, Eclipse Development does not own the former LifeTouch building, nor do they have the property under contract. However, as marketing agents, we are in active discussions with two other potential buyers.

posted by: Eugene Driscoll on February 9, 2012 7:12pm

Hi Fred,

My article doesn’t state Eclipse owns the property—but the public official said what she said above, that a deal is very close (and that was her relaying her impression of what Eclipse said)

I’ll call you in the a.m. for another story.

posted by: Ken Hughes on February 9, 2012 9:42pm

Fred, I read on your website that the Lifetouch property is “next” to a proposed Derby redevelopment: “Retail development land located immediately off Exit 15 of RT 8 next to proposed downtown Derby proposed re-development.”

Are you aware the property is IN the Redvelopment Zone?, and if so, why wouldnt you include that in the property description on your website?

posted by: Bob Bomba 193 on February 9, 2012 9:58pm

@ Kate I agree with you..I am from Ansonia but follow this Derby Downtown Project somewhat I find it to be so sad how some people are just plain negative about this and seem not to take time to get the facts beforee they speak.

posted by: Mark Adams on February 10, 2012 1:08am

As the Derby’s official non-resident and politically unaffiliated citizen, I feel I must weigh in.

1) Continuous improvement of any kind is good. Who wouldn’t love to redevelop 180,000SF? However if the current market place can only necessitate 30,000 SF (I think I got that SF right.. hold on, let me check… yep, it’s right) of redevelopment with a vision of getting to the overall goal, well then God Bless.

Progress of any kind is good, and if it has to be done in baby steps, then so be it. Woulda, coulda, shoulda of what could’ve happened years ago, well, is years ago. Focus on what you can do know with what’s in your control, and not what has passed. The fact that anyone is willing to take a risk, and it is a risk, to develop right now when it is so extremely difficult to obtain financing is commendable. And the fact that they are interested in redeveloping Derby, well everyone in Derby and the Valley for that matter should feel blessed, even the most negative of us.

Being very familiar with developments, they are extremely difficult to get them off the ground in a great economy, much less when you are in a less than desirable economy. So I can not fault anyone for what they promised in a campaign, because the visions that are conveyed to them be prospective developers change as quickly as me moving onto the next bullet point…

2) The next bullet point… @ Mr Hyder.. I don’t know you nor Ms. Kulenski; however, your post about her engagement, by a lame reader such as myself, can be construed (when read with the other posts) as sarcastic. If you were being sincere and genuine, then I apologize for this comment. But if you were intending to be sarcastic, then this is not the forum to behave as such about someone and their engagement.

posted by: Stan Muzyk on February 10, 2012 11:28am

Rob Hyder 641: I agree with Mark Adams. Your shot at Kate Kulenski’s engagement was a very lowly outburst by you, and you should write a sincere apology to her, and Paul Staffieri—as their engagement has nothing to do with downtown renewal. You would have been a good writer for the former STAR NEWS, but I believe you should edit your “quick shots” in the Valley Independent Sentinel, before you submit them, even though you only admit to sending in “typo errors.”

Peace be with you, Rob Hyder!

Valley Independent Sentinel