Date: Fri 23-Apr-1999

Publication: Bee

Author: ANDYG

Quick Words:

Volpe-Conservation-lawsuit

Full Text:

Volpe Sues Over Wetlands Permit Rejection

BY ANDREW GOROSKO

In a lawsuit filed in Danbury Superior Court, a local businesswoman seeks to

have a judge overturn the Conservation Commission's rejection of a wetlands

construction permit she requested to commercially develop 224 South Main

Street.

In the lawsuit, Judith B. Volpe of Southbury, the proprietor of Avance

Esthetiques, a day spa at Sand Hill Plaza, asks a judge to order the

Conservation Commission to approve the wetlands construction permit. Mrs Volpe

wants to build a 9,000-square-foot retail building and related facilities on

the 1.7-acre site to relocate the spa. The land is in a B-1 business zone at

the intersection of South Main Street and Brian's Lane, just north of Sand

Hill Plaza.

Citing a host of environmental concerns, the Conservation Commission in March

turned down Mrs Volpe's second request for a permit to develop the land along

the Pootatuck River, near United Water's public water supply wellhead.

Commission members had turned an initial wetlands permit request from Mrs

Volpe in January 1998 on environmental grounds.

According to the lawsuit, Mrs Volpe told commission members construction would

be protected by sedimentation and erosion control measures. She also provided

several alternative development plans to demonstrate that the application

represented the most feasible and prudent construction proposal, according to

the lawsuit. The proposed retail building and related site improvements would

not have any adverse effects on nearby wetlands and watercourses, according to

the suit.

Mrs Volpe has spent substantial money attempting to develop the property and

cannot make a meaningful use of the commercially-zoned land without getting a

wetlands permit for it, according to the lawsuit.

The lawsuit contends the commission illegally denied the permit request

because the development application did not directly affect wetlands in an

adverse manner, and the proposed developmental intrusion into a wetlands

buffer area was minimal and caused no adverse environmental effects.

The Volpe suit claims the Conservation Commission relied on the concerns of

United Water regarding the proposed development's alleged adverse effect on

the Pootatuck River and public water supply wells, and that there was no

evidence to substantiate the water company's concerns.

In rejecting the application, Conservation Commission members decided that the

development plan poses hazards to the public water supply.

Commission members decided the proposed construction would require earth

moving which would have a major adverse effect on the nearby Pootatuck River.

Commission members decided the development would substantially reduce the

ability of the river to sustain aquatic life, plus pose hazards concerning

flooding, water supply and drainage. The development site lies within the

town's Aquifer Protection District (APD).

"This is a very fragile site and development to the level of intensity as

submitted will still put the environmental conditions of the area at risk of

pollution," commission members decided.

In rejecting the proposal, commission members noted that United Water, which

has its public water supply wellhead within 200 feet of the site, is concerned

the proposed development would pose pollution dangers to its wellhead and the

stability of the Pootatuck River. The water company had requested that the

commission deny the application.

Also, commission members decided the development application doesn't meet the

conservation official's recommended setback requirements to protect the

Pootatuck River and Pootatuck Aquifer.

The Conservation Commission is required to respond to the lawsuit May 25.