Brighton Whole Foods meeting attracts hundreds. Here are the takeaways

Who knew a three-year avalanche of heated debate, activism and microscopic traffic analyses would be tipped off by the suggestion of a new grocery store.

It started in Brighton three years ago, when the Daniele family proposed a Whole Foods Market store and luxury retail options on about 10 acres in a Monroe Avenue plaza that formerly held Mario’s restaurant and Clover Lanes bowling alley.

May 2017: Whole Foods project: What the traffic model told us

But for neighbors and local businesses, the debate over the proposal's progress through the town development process is not about a Whole Foods location — most people opposed to the project say they wouldn’t mind the Amazon-owned, health-conscious food chain landing on the property.

But many have taken issue with the way the Danieles have gone about planning the project, even as the developers say they’ve done nearly everything possible to listen to complaints and make project changes.

Like the recent debate in Penfield on whether to buy the former Shadow Pines golf course, the Brighton debate shows democracy in action and a level of citizen participation that is higher than usual for a very local issue. Add in a well-known local family, the Danieles, and the interest of a popular Gates-based supermarket chain, Wegmans, and you have the makings of quite an argument.

A public hearing on the matter, held Wednesday evening at Council Rock Primary School, saw cars line surrounding neighborhood streets, bumper to bumper, for more than a mile out from the auditorium where the meeting took place.

Hundreds of people, including neighbors, lawyers and local business owners, formed a line extending several yards out of the school entrance.

"I got here late, I parked three blocks away, and when you walked up there was a big crowd outside and they were explaining that because the auditorium was already full, we would be directed to the overflow room," said Brighton resident Maranne McDade Clay. "They got people to stream (the meeting) from their phones as quickly as they could so they could hear the program."

McDade Clay and Tess McFarland-Porter were two of the last people in the overflow room waiting to be seated in the auditorium.

McFarland-Porter, who lives in the surrounding neighborhood, said that the turnout was indicative of the community's investment in the proposal.

"This was a beautiful night, and I did find a lot of neighbors here. I was surprised to find a lot of people who I didn’t recognize with the 'Vote Yes' signs, too," said McFarland-Porter. "I am with the arguments that the project is too big for the space. I sent an email about a year ago, and that was the gist, but I think my neighbors and the attorneys representing my neighbors are making compelling cases tonight."

She said her primary concern was traffic congestion. That was echoed by several others throughout the hearing.

"Traffic looks like it could be a real risk," said McFarland-Porter. "It presents a danger for bikers and pedestrians, as well."

Discussion began in 2015

So how did we get here?

“Just because a process is long and 'thorough' doesn’t mean it’s effective,” said Ben Werzinger, president of the Clover/Allens Creek Neighborhood Association, which arose in 2015 at the very beginning stages of the proposal.

Feb. 2015: Whole Foods proposed for Monroe Avenue

The original group comprised about 200 people living in the neighborhoods immediately surrounding the plaza property, and most of them were concerned with one issue: Would the plaza build-out necessitate exits onto Allens Creek Road and Clover Street and bring more traffic to their front doors?

The Danieles have vowed to keep that from happening, and their current plan doesn’t include exits. But they haven't legally guaranteed that point, said Werzinger. Also, the project is asking for zoning variances to build at a higher density through incentive zoning, which neighbors see as an end-around to building an oversized project. The developers say the requested variances allow them to plan a plaza that makes sense from a layout perspective.

Incentive zoning allows developers to waive certain zoning requirements in exchange for amenities offered to the town, such as parks, trails or community spaces.

These two items of contention pushed Werzinger to continue showing up at board meetings on this project for the last three years, advocating for neighbors. He said the town supervisor and the developers have not met specifically with neighborhood representatives to discuss their concerns.

He and other neighbors feel their complaints have remained largely unchanged and unmitigated. And that’s the problem.

“I think the biggest issue for me is that the Town Board has made it clear through their actions that they have no interest in considering the residents' concerns, which is very troubling,” said Elinor Freer, a Brighton resident who has been following the project. Her view of town leaders has been tarnished throughout this process, she said: “I truly expected better from our Brighton town leaders.”

Town Supervisor Bill Moehle said he is "very comfortable that we have conducted a thorough and thoughtful environmental review to date."

No special deals have been made between the town and the developer, and he has listened very intently to public comment, he said. The town has repeatedly asked the developers to go back to the drawing board when review documents didn't adequately address areas of concern, he said. Nothing has been decided.

The development review has been similar to that of other proposed projects in New York state, especially those that are somehow controversial with the community. The review process includes extensive site plans and studies from the developers, and a detailed procedure of town scrutiny and public comment.

Project's effect on traffic

The issue of incentive zoning continued to be one of significant discussion during the town meeting on Wednesday.

Jess Sudol, vice president with Passero Associates and a civil engineer representing the project, made the first, and longest, presentation of the meeting.

"Based on the accepted, reviewed and approved traffic study, during the worst case scenario, p.m. peak hour travel, as the result of the project as currently proposed, the increase in delay from Westfall Road all the way down to Clover Lane is 22 seconds. Twenty-two seconds is what everyone is upset about," said Sudol. "Twenty-two seconds in return for $1.7 million in pedestrian and public safety improvements, that, I remind everybody, would not otherwise be offered if not for the incentive zoning request.”

But residents, and the lawyers representing them, were quick to push back.

"This 22 seconds, nobody believes that. The town is supposed to obtain a significant benefit for the public, that is not what is happening here. No one has a right to incentive zoning, nor is the town required to follow this process. Incentive zoning is completely discretionary. What’s being proposed here are unfair to the other businesses up and down Monroe Avenue," said Aaron Saykin of Hodgson Russ LLP, the legal representation of Save Monroe Avenue. "You don’t have to push through a project that is too big for that area and do it through a process like incentive zoning. Send it through the regular zoning process."

Incentive zoning debated

Saykin continued on for approximately five minutes, frequently pointing back to the incentive zoning process.

Town Board member Christopher Werner said that he was troubled by the attack.

"Have you ever seen Meridian Center Park? That’s 100 percent incentive zoning, given to the town because we allowed that development out front, and what otherwise would have been a residential parcel," said Werner. "The Brickyard Trail, that only exists because of incentive zoning. It’s just ironic, the citizens complaining about incentive zoning, it’s always the developer complaining ..."

Kevin Saunders, an attorney speaking on behalf of the Clover/Allens Creek Neighborhood Association, echoed Saykin, and said that residents have made it clear that incentive zoning is not appropriate for the project.

“No one here is saying incentive zoning in and of itself is bad. (There is) overwhelming community opposition to the town allowing the proposal to be built at a size and intensity proposed,” said Saunders. “The closest I’ve felt to driving in Manhattan is right in this area. The community has overwhelmingly objected that you, Mr. Supervisor, have decided to give the developer this deal under incentive zoning.”

Moehle interjected: “I need to stop you. I have not voluntarily given anybody a deal, and I want to make that very clear.

"What we have done is considered an application, which is very different,” he said, firmly. “We have not made a deal on this project.”

Danieles talk about the backlash

The Danieles have been through this rodeo before, with a Royal Car Wash location on Monroe Avenue and Mario’s Restaurant itself, which is now shuttered as the developers make way for what they hope will be an eventual plaza revamp.

The three men — Mario Daniele and his two sons, Anthony and Danny — expected their project might stir up some displeasure among neighbors, especially about traffic on Monroe Avenue.

“We respect the neighbors,” said Anthony Daniele. “When a neighbor comes to me and says, ‘I don’t like your project,’ I may not agree with them, but I respect that. They live here like I do. I have to listen, and I would expect the town to listen to what they say.”

July 2013: Daniele family planning second Royal Car Wash

Based on studies they’ve done, there will be increased traffic volumes on Monroe Avenue, but no “significant negative impacts” from the proposal because of mitigation measures they’re hoping to add, such as an additional traffic light at one of the project’s two Monroe Avenue driveways, according to the developer’s most recent traffic study.

The developers met with neighbors in 2015 and tried to mitigate their concerns with the project’s early iterations, including removing the access points on the side roads, said Danny Daniele.

But the backlash on this project has been different as of late, they said, because of Save Monroe Avenue, a group of local businesses that has brought on lawyers and distributed marketing materials in opposition to the proposal. The group won’t reveal its members. The Danieles say they believe that Wegmans is behind that effort, although they have no proof of that connection.

Feb. 17: Brighton neighbors file lawsuit against town, developers of Whole Foods project

Dec. 2017: Joseph Morelle says he can't support current Whole Foods proposal in Brighton

“There are always going to be neighbors against (these projects),” said Danny Daniele. “But those neighbors got a shot of adrenaline from some unnamed corporate sponsor. Follow the money.”

Businesses of all sizes are members of Save Monroe Avenue, said Saykin. Business owners are mainly concerned about the effect increased traffic may have on their customers and bottom lines.

"People commonly say traffic is like water for the businesses," he said. "You need enough to survive, but too much of it, and you drown."

Wegmans has sent several letters to the town over the years, expressing concerns about traffic. The Pittsford Wegmans location is less than a mile from the proposed project.

The Danieles assert that, while they are asking for more density that is allowed under the zoning code on the property, other parcels on Monroe Avenue were built out to a larger scale than the zoning code allowed, according to a Monroe Avenue Corridor Density analysis study that the developers completed.

Auburn Trail lawsuit

The most recent chapter in the saga has come from the neighborhood association in the form of a lawsuit regarding the Auburn Trail, which winds through Brighton and Pittsford. A section runs through the rear of the Daniele's Monroe Avenue property.

The company owns the land on which the Auburn Trail runs, but the town of Brighton holds a recreational easement that gives the public the right to use the pathway, the legal papers say.

The suit alleges, among other things, that Daniele Family Cos. paved over a portion of the trail and blocked it with a padlocked gate. It accuses the developers of "misappropriating" the land in violation of the easement and accuses the town government of allowing that misappropriation to occur.

The developers have proposed redoing a two-mile stretch of the trail as one of the project’s incentive zoning amenities.

The easement doesn't run parallel to the path that's there, said Danny Daniele, which means the path as it is now is technically on company property and presents a liability concern. The gate is open now, but even when it's closed, it doesn't completely block pedestrian traffic, he said.

Throughout the process, the Danieles have stuck to the conviction that their plan will bring value to the community.

“Just like we’re proud of what we did at Mario’s, we’re proud of what we did at the car wash, and we’ll be proud of what we do there,” said Danny Daniele. “Every project our family has developed has turned out to be an asset to the community and enjoyed by the community.”

The public hearing on Wednesday night concluded several hours after it began, leaving the board with much to consider. The town will ultimately decide whether the current proposal's negative environmental effects should bar it from being developed on the site, but that process will likely take a month or more.



STADDEO@Gannett.com

LPEACE@Gannett.com