Property owner files appeal over site plan for factory complex amid questions about timing

Dec. 30, 2024 update: Attorneys from the town of Canton and Collinsville Redevelopment Company have filed a joint motion to dismiss this case. Read supporting paperwork here.

By John Fitts

Staff Writer

CANTON – The owner of a property on Spring Street in Collinsville has filed paperwork appealing the Planning and Zoning Commission’s Oct. 16 approval of a site plan for the historic axe factory complex in the village. However, some questions on the timing of that appeal have been raised.

The Oct. 16 site plan and soil and erosion plan approvals relate to the planned renovation of the 19.3-acre complex, which is currently the site of nearly 50 businesses and from 1826 to 1966, was home to world renowned edge tool manufacturer, The Collins Co.

Lisa and Merritt Tilney, principals at Collinsville Redevelopment Company and daughters of complex owner “Rusty” Tilney, are looking to remediate the site, update its infrastructure, raze some dilapidated structures, renovate some 20 buildings, and construct three new structures in a mixed-use plan that includes uses such as light industrial, retail, office and as many as 290 housing units.

The site plan did include building footprints but not elevations – as CRC is working with the state historic preservation office on details related to rehabilitation. Additionally plans for new construction have not yet been finalized, according to the company.

While the company would have to come back for those details, the approval was a key step for the company as it moves forward to secure funding – and additional permits – to first remove contaminated soils, update utilities, add parking, improve infrastructure and repairing the site’s waterways and, eventually, renovate and build new structures. The company is seeking both public and private financing for the project.

“Redevelopment of the site is a complex, expensive and time intense task,” the application narrative states. “Collinsville Redevelopment Company, LLC (CRC) obtained a purchase option with the intent of renovating many of the buildings on site and the construction of three new structures, producing a mixed-use retail, office, light industrial and residential project, envisioned by the IH-1 (Industrial Heritage) regulations. Due to the complexity of renovating historic industrial waterways (waterworks) as well as buildings on the Historic Register, installing entirely new utility systems, remediating contaminated soil, and building materials, creating new roads, drives, parking, site lighting, stormwater control systems, the project development is expected to take a number of years. Project finance, pollution remediation, foundational waterworks stabilization, utility infrastructure and road installation have priority. Adding to the complexity is the desire to retain existing tenants, while the grounds and buildings are being renovated.”

Tyler J. Nye of Scranton, Pennsylvania and owner of record for 15-17 Spring St., in Collinsville, recently filed a “verified complaint and appeal” of the commission’s Oct. 16 decision, contending it “was illegal, arbitrary, and/or capricious, and an abuse of the discretion vested in it.”

The appeal contends the decision was not based on the evidence before the commission, was arbitrary, did not consider “the historic nature and character of the IH-1 District,” constitutes spot zoning, was done for the financial interests of a developer and more.

It names the commission, Collinsville Redevelopment Company and At Collinsville LLC, the current complex ownership group.

The first question on the action, however, seems to be timing.

Appeals must be “commenced. …. within 15 days from the date that notice of the decision was published as required by the general statutes,” according to state law, which also list several parameters under which it must be done. One includes how a “proper officer,” in this case the Canton Town Clerk, must be served notice of an appeal.

The town filed a legal notice of the decision on Oct. 17 and that, according to the appeal was published Oct. 18, making the 15-day period through Nov. 2.

While the summons for the action was signed by an assistant clerk of the court on Nov. 4, the town did not receive the paperwork until Nov. 12 at 4:40 p.m., according to a timestamp from the Town Clerk’s office and town officials.

“It was immediately forwarded to the town attorney for review,” Neil Pade, Canton’s Director of Planning and Community Development, said of the paperwork.

Representatives for Collinsville Redevelopment Company and At Collinsville LLC were also served on Nov. 12, according to a court statement from state marshal Lucia O'Toole. That document also states the Town Clerk's office was served on Nov. 14. Duplicates were given to the Town Clerk on that day, as the Nov. 12 filing was given to the assistant town clerk, town officials said.

On Nov. 14, the commission’s attorney Kenneth R. Slater Jr. of Halloran Sage said he was still looking into the matter.

“I’m seeking confirmation not only of when, but how. … There’s a state statute that describes how individuals have to get served and how towns get served and how commissions get served, so I am investigating both timeliness and whether the service was appropriate.”

While the Nov. 4 date would almost certainly not be an issue in 15-day period due to the fact that Nov. 2 fell on a weekend and Canton Town Hall is closed on Fridays, Slater contends that the statute dictates the town should have been actually been served within that 15-day period.

“What matters is the date it was served, so that’s what I am checking into,” he said.

Slater confirmed that a state Superior Court judge would ultimately decide if the appeal moved forward and said a motion to dismiss would likely come next, based on the initial information he’s received, but added that the process could take a couple months.

Nye was also the plaintiff in a September 2021 appeal of changes made to the text and implementation of the IH-1 zoning itself. Those changes were made at the request of Sheldon Stein and New York-based Ranger Properties. Stein later dropped out of the project, reportedly for health reasons, and never filed a site plan. Nye eventually lost that appeal but the decision was not rendered until February of 2024.

Some of the language in the current appeal paperwork is repeated from the 2021 appeal, but the current paperwork does not list many specific examples of how the commission allegedly erred.

While the 2021 appeal was filed by an attorney, this one comes directly from Nye.

At the public hearing on Oct. 16, many residents spoke to the commission, while others submitted testimony. Several submissions and comments were positive but many who live near the parcel raised concerns of impacts, particularly traffic.

A traffic report included with the site plan estimates that, based on currently anticipated uses, a fully developed site – which would be years away - would generate an estimated 5,719 daily trips during the week.

A chart with the report estimates that 300 units in the facility would generate 2,022 vehicle trips per day. Residents in the Spring Street area interpreted that as the number of vehicles that would use the now closed, overgrown entrance on Spring Street but the development team contended that was not an accurate assessment and that those some of those vehicles would use the main site access.

Those who live in that area were even more concerned when the development team modified the plan. It had originally proposed to use the Spring Street access as a gated one for residents only, but prior to the hearing was modified to take out the residents only proposal due to a concern with the zoning language.

On the day of the Oct. 16 hearing, Nye wrote to the commission, a submission that was too late to be included in the original meeting packet, according to town emails.

In his email, Nye wrote, “Allowing unrestricted access to and from Spring Street may significantly increase traffic volume, raising safety concerns for both residents and pedestrians in the area. Spring Street, as a primarily residential street, may not be equipped to handle the increased traffic load that an unrestricted driveway access could bring, leading to potential congestion and hazards. This is a public safety issue - for pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists.”

The commission’s ultimate approval included the stipulation that the Spring Street entrance be for residential use only, an idea that the development team supported, noting that they had only made the modification due to a concern about the zoning language. However, that commission condition defers to the state, as the Office of the State Traffic Commission would ultimately decide whether such a restriction can remain in place.

In his Oct. 16 email, Nye also expressed concerns with “Preservation of Neighborhood Character,” “Site Disturbance and Environmental Impact,” and issues the proposal was “Inconsistent with the Original Plan” – going into some detail on each point. In comments to the commission at the public hearing he raised several concerns, including the financial viability of the project, long-term ownership and traffic.

“I would also implore the committee to not vote tonight and talk a walk down Spring Street. That narrow lane cannot handle this much traffic,” he said, later adding, “the decisions tonight have far-reaching implications for people beyond this room.”

Other owners on Spring Street and surrounding areas also requested the commission keep the hearing open but its members did decide to vote that evening.

In a brief Nov. 13 conversation with the Valley Press, Nye defended the timing of the appeal and while he declined being recorded for comment, indicated he would email comments.

As of 10:30 a.m. on Nov. 15 those had not been received.

Lisa Tilney of Collinsville Redevelopment Co. acknowledged receipt of the appeal paperwork.

“We received notice of the appeal yesterday,” she wrote to the Valley Press on Nov. 13. “Merritt and I will continue to work on moving this exciting project forward while the appeal makes its way through the legal system.”

At the Oct. 16th meeting, Tilney asserted that the goal of the project is to enhance the site and community.

“Collinsville is already completely amazing,” Lisa Tilney said that evening. “There’s this idiosyncratic, kind of organic growth over 140 years – the factory - and you can’t build that from scratch. So, I think Merritt and I feel that one of our primary goals is to preserve and enhance what’s already extraordinary on site.”

For much more about the plan and commission approval, see our previous story here.