Wetlands Protection—

State, Federal Regulators Call  Industrial Park Plans Deficient

By Andrew Gorosko

State and federal environmental regulators have informed the town that the Economic Development Commission’s (EDC) plans for the proposed Newtown Technology Park off Commerce Road are deficient concerning wetlands/watercourses protection.

In response, town officials are planning to meet with those state and federal regulators to learn how the plans can be modified to gain approval for industrial development in the environmentally sensitive area, which lies near Deep Brook, a trout stream.

The town has received letters from the state Department of Energy & Environmental Protection (DEEP) and from the US Army Corps of Engineers (COE) explaining that the technical information submitted to those agencies on behalf of the town is insufficient to gain permits for the industrial park project.

Last February, the town Inland Wetlands Commission (IWC) initially rejected issuing a wetlands/watercourses protection permit for the project to the EDC. The EDC then sought to have the town pursue a court appeal against the IWC over that permit rejection. But in March, the IWC reversed its previous rejection and approved issuing a permit.

The EDC’s development proposal involves an approximately 41.7-acre site off Commerce Road where much land would be left undeveloped. The proposed six-building complex would contain an aggregate of approximately 100,000 square feet of enclosed floor space.

The project has been in the planning stages since 2004. The town acquired land along Commerce Road in 1995 to provide road frontage for access to the site, which was given to the town by the state for economic development. The EDC is pursuing the project to broaden the local property tax base.

DEEP

In a recent letter to the EDC, Denise Ruzicka, head of DEEP’s inland water resources unit, wrote, “The application is deficient for processing.”

Among the many plan deficiencies listed by Ms Ruzicka: a new wildlife study must be conducted; more detailed stormwater drainage maps for the project are required; additional drainage analysis is needed; some sections of one stream that is a tributary of Deep Brook appear to be traveling through drainage pipes before reaching Deep Brook; the drainage plans must be shown to be effective to prevent erosion, flooding, and other problems; and engineering calculations must show that the proposed drainage plans will be adequate for expected water volumes and water velocities.

Also, the EDC must explain the need for extensive regrading proposed for a wetland area, including its plans to regrade an area through which an existing stream flows. Also, the postdevelopment stormwater control plan is deficient, according to DEEP.

Ms Ruzicka adds that even if the EDC provides all the information requested by DEEP, “It is unlikely that the Inland Water Resources Division would recommend approval of the project as currently designed, as it does not provide adequate protection for wetlands and aquatic resources and is not consistent with Connecticut water quality standards.”

Ms Ruzicka urges that the town meet with DEEP officials before submitting any additional technical information on the industrial park proposal.

Corps of Engineers

In a recent letter to the town’s engineering consultant for the project, Robert DeSista, COE’s chief for permits and enforcement in New England, wrote, “Our review concludes that this project is ineligible for authorization under the federal permit known as the Connecticut General Permit because the total of the direct, secondary, and temporary impacts exceed the one-acre threshold.”

Based on COE calculations, it is expected that although the project would directly affect only about one-half acre, the project would have secondary impacts on at least six acres of nearby wetlands, Mr DeSista wrote.

Such secondary impacts may include increases in stormwater runoff erosion, litter, garbage, lighting, noise, invasive plants, urban wildlife and air pollution, as well as decreased water infiltration into the soil, he adds.

Also, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has reviewed the project and found that it could have negative effects on possible vernal pools in the area, as well as the fish that live in Deep Brook, Mr DeSista adds.

“Redesign or modification of your project may qualify it for [permit] authorization,” Mr DeSista wrote. Those changes might include reducing the size of the project, increasing the environmental buffer area near water resources, and providing water-permeable pavement for the roads and parking lots.

Mr DeSista recommends that the EDC consider creating an industrial park elsewhere in town where there would not be any development-related negative effects on wetlands and watercourses.

However, if the EDC wants to develop the proposed Commerce Road site, it must rework its plan to provide for better protection of wetlands and watercourses, according to Mr DeSista.

Increased impervious surfaces and increased stormwater discharges from the developed site could negatively affect Deep Brook, which is a native brook trout spawning habitat, according to the COE letter.

Mr DeSista commends the EDC for incorporating “low-impact design” features in the project, adding that the EDC should consider using even more such features to protect water quality.

Also, the COE is requiring that the EDC conduct a vernal pool study to learn about the possible presence and location of such temporary water features on the site where certain amphibians reproduce.

Mr DeSista suggests that the EDC contact the COE to discuss the application.

Elizabeth Stocker, town director of economic and community development, said this week of the DEEP’s and COE’s review of the project, “We need to regroup with our consultants to determine our best approach” toward gaining approval for the project at Commerce Road.

Town officials will be meeting with DEEP and COE to discuss the application, she said.

The EDC wants to formulate an application that would be approved by both DEEP and COE, she said.

When the IWC approved the industrial park project last March, it put many conditions on that approval due to environmental concerns.