Date: Fri 12-Feb-1999

Publication: Bee

Author: ANDYG

Quick Words:

aquifer-protection-regulations

Full Text:

Developers See Proposed Aquifer Rules As Too Restrictive

BY ANDREW GOROSKO

Strengthened aquifer protection regulations proposed to better safeguard the

quality of existing and potential underground drinking water supplies drew

both criticism and support at a February 4 Planning and Zoning Commission

(P&Z) public hearing.

The hearing aired the proposed rule revisions which would greatly expand and

more explicitly state the rules P&Z uses to protect groundwater quality in the

town's Aquifer Protection District (APD).

The proposal calls for a cooperative relationship between the Conservation

Commission and P&Z under which both agencies would review development proposed

for the aquifer district. The town adopted the APD in 1981.

The APD, which varies in width depending upon soil conditions, generally

follows the course of the Pootatuck River from its headwaters in the vicinity

of the Monroe border northward to Sandy Hook Center. The aquifer district

contains the Pootatuck Aquifer, the town's designated sole source aquifer.

P&Z members received a letter from state Department of Environmental

Protection (DEP) officials commending them for developing the revised aquifer

regulations.

P&Z member Heidi Winslow, however, expressed concern about the P&Z conducting

a public hearing on the proposed regulations February 4. "I'm unhappy that

this is on for a public hearing before the commission has discussed this"

draft of the proposal, she said, adding that she has problems with some of the

content. She said the proposal is poorly written and unclear.

Conservation Commission Chairman Sandra Michaud spoke in support of the

aquifer regulations, adding she is glad the Conservation Commission and P&Z

are working together in seeking to protect underground water supplies. The

proposed regulations represent a collaboration of many people concerned about

aquifer protection, she said.

Criticism

But Robert Volpe of Southbury, an owner of real estate at 224 South Main

Street, questioned the expertise which went into developing the proposed

regulations. He said new regulations would reduce the rights of property

owners, like himself, in the APD. Mr Volpe questioned why certain activities

would be prohibited under the rules.

The proposed aquifer rules would prohibit sand and gravel mining in the APD.

Excavating sand and gravel from 224 South Main Street would be a main element

of developing the site as currently proposed by Mr Volpe. The land lies across

South Main Street from United Water's wellhead for its public water supply

system.

In June 1997, Mr Volpe and his wife, Judith, received a zone change from the

P&Z for 224 South Main Street, converting the property's zoning designation

from residential to business. The Volpes then applied to the Conservation

Commission for a wetlands construction permit for their business, Avance

Esthetiques, a day spa. The permit was rejected in January 1998 because it

involved an excessive amount of sand and gravel excavation.

The Volpes now have a revised, less intensive development proposal for the

property pending before the Conservation Commission. "These changes, if

adopted, would stop us cold. This proposal seems to be overkill," Mr Volpe

said.

The proposed aquifer regulations prohibit beauty and nail salons in the

aquifer protection district.

Curtis Packaging Objects

Don Droppo, the president of Curtis Packaging Corp of Sandy Hook, said the

manufacturing firm has spent much money to protect the environment.

"We, as a company, need to be able to continue to grow to remain

competitive... We want to stay in town. We want to expand in town," he said.

Mr Droppo said Curtis Packaging representatives will be meeting with P&Z

officials concerning the firm's industrial expansion proposal. The company

also is seeking approval for a residential subdivision near its Berkshire Road

factory.

The aquifer protection proposal would restrict or prohibit the firm's

expansion on its site due to sand and gravel mining restrictions, according to

Mr Droppo. Being prohibited from expanding would damage the company's

competitive prospects, Mr Droppo said.

In July 1997, P&Z granted Curtis Packaging a zone change from residential to

manufacturing for land adjacent to its plant. That land would be used to build

a 40,000-square-foot warehouse and distribution center.

Attorney Robert Hall, representing Curtis Packaging, said that as part of the

firm's operations, it prints packaging. "When you prohibit printing

establishments [in the aquifer protection district], you're really going too

far," he told P&Z members.

Gary Cluen, a hydrogeologist from GZA Geoenvironmental of Vernon, representing

Curtis Packaging, said much sand and gravel exists in the APD. Excavating sand

and gravel would not damage aquifer water quality or reduce water quantity, he

said. Excavation should be regulated, but not prohibited, Mr Cluen said.

Speaking on behalf of James Maguire, his client, Mr Hall said, "I am totally

mystified as to why a doctor's office should be prohibited."

Mr Hall also asked why the aquifer regulations would prohibit parking a

commercial vehicle in a garage.

The proposed rules run counter to the town's Plan of Development encouraging

new business to locate here, Mr Hall said.

Mr Maguire of JP Maguire Associates said the proposed regulations appear

overly restrictive. "We do need regulation, absolutely, but not prohibition,"

he said. He urged P&Z members to consider the economic health of the town's

tax base in considering aquifer regulations.

Mr Hall urged P&Z members to review the list of proposed prohibitions in the

APD with an eye toward regulating those activities rather than prohibiting

them.

Sand From Sand Hill

Mr Hall, representing another client, Sand Hill Plaza, said the plaza has much

excess sand and gravel on its site which it might like to remove in the

future, an activity which would be prohibited by the proposed regulations.

Mr Hall also represented M&E Land Group, a local residential development

company, at the public hearing.

Mr Hall said his various clients favor aquifer protection, but it should be

done in a "rational" way.

A representative of Newtown Sand and Gravel, a Toddy Hill Road surface mining

firm, said if the proposed aquifer regulations are approved, it would prevent

the company from mining.

Developer and builder Kim Danziger of 5 Stonewall Ridge Road said it's

important that aquifer protection be addressed, but, he added, the proposed

rules pose some problems.

"We face a lot of potential for litigation," he said. He urged P&Z members to

very carefully review their proposal before acting on it. Mr Danziger said he

hopes aquifer protection rules aren't being proposed for some ulterior

motives.

"We don't want to see bad regulations enacted," Mr Danziger said, adding P&Z

has approved bad regulations in the past.

Support From Residents

Jack Bestor of 24 Walnut Tree Hill Road spoke in favor of the aquifer

regulations. "It's a good feeling [P&Z] is being proactive" in seeking to

protect the aquifer, he said. "If we don't protect the aquifer, no one else

will. It must be protected." He urged P&Z members to approve the revised

regulations.

Wendy Beres of 15 Turkey Hill Road voiced support for the proposed

regulations.

Bob Beres, Mrs Beres' husband, said residents in his neighborhood had to have

a public water supply extended to them due to groundwater contamination. In

light of that, the aquifer protection proposal is a good idea, he said.

Penny Meek of 40 Butterfield Road said of the proposal: "It's sensible

planning for the future. It's moral planning." Such regulations would serve

future generations well, she said.

An Explanation

P&Z member Michael Osborne explained the proposed strengthened aquifer

protection regulations come in response to local groundwater pollution

problems.

The deposit of industrial waste at the former Charles Batchelder Company on

Swamp Road caused groundwater pollution there, he said. The town's former

Ethan Allen Road landfill lies within 1,000 feet of United Water's South Main

Street wellhead, he said. There are groundwater pollution problems in the

Turkey Hill Road neighborhood near the town garage, he added.

There are questions about groundwater pollution at sites near Garner

Correctional Institution, near Exit 11 of Interstate 84, and at Newtown High

School, he said.

"There have been problems. We are dealing with an unknown," he said.

"Newtown has to be proactive. This is an issue that will not go away. This is

an issue that's tied directly to the growth of the town, the future of the

town," he said.

P&Z Chairman Daniel Fogliano said P&Z will resume the public hearing on the

proposed aquifer regulations on February 25 at 8 pm at Newtown Middle School

for additional comments.