CONSERVATION REPORT

The Easton Courier – February 21, 2008

Running Brook Farms LLC appeals head to judge
by Maggie Caldwell, Editor

EASTON - Though more than a year has passed since the town rejected two applications to build cluster housing on South Park Avenue, the developer’s challenges to the rulings have loomed large over Easton. Next month, those appeals are set to go before a judge.

Last February, the Conservation Commission unanimously rejected an application by Philip DiGennaro, of Running Brook Farm LLC, to develop a 72-unit prefabricated cluster housing that includes affordable units on a 29.6-acre parcel adjacent to the Mill River.

The application would have taken advantage of a state statute stipulating that communities must amend zoning regulations to accommodate affordable housing developments, unless the town proves such development would pose serious public safety or health threats.

In December 2005, the Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously rejected a proposal from Running Brook Farm for an age-restricted 44-unit housing development on the same site. Mr. DiGennaro appealed both rulings and now the final briefs are due before a judge who specializes in affordable housing cases on March 17. The judge is set to hear the appeal of the Conservation Commission’s decision; however, there is a stay of appeal of the Planning and Zoning Commission’s earlier ruling, meaning it will not be heard immediately.

Plaintiff’s appeal

In the brief filed by Matthew Ranelli, attorney for Running Brook Farm, he said the Conservation Commission based its denial of the 72-unit proposal mainly on concerns regarding the design and efficacy of a proposed sewage treatment system that was approved by the state Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). In 2001, Easton’s Conservation Commission approved a prior 74-unit development application that would be served by the same sewage treatment system in the exact same location as the present appeal, Mr. Ranelli said.

Mr. Ranelli included in the Running Brook brief a statement from DEP Commissioner Gina McCarthy in defense of her department’s approval of the sewage treatment system.

“The department would not have recommended issuance of the permit if the environmental conditions, the proposed technology, or its proposed operation and maintenance in compliance with the discharge permit were not adequate to protect the water quality within the Mill River watershed,” Ms. McCarthy wrote.

“The DEP concluded that the ... technology was ‘time-tested and proven’ and that the risk of catastrophic failure was ‘highly unlikely,’” Mr. Ranelli wrote.

He also said the commission’s consultant, Vollmer Associates LLP, reviewed and recommended a sewage treatment and storm water plan for the 44-unit age-restricted proposal that would be almost identical to the one in the most recent affordable housing proposal, “except the detention basins in the current plan are slightly larger to provide more retention and infiltration and less discharge.”

Not satisfied with Vollmer’s conclusion, the commission hired a second consultant to review the proposed system who “predictably, reached the opposite conclusion,” Mr. Ranelli wrote.

Ira Bloom, attorney for the town, asserts that is untrue.

The commission had no consultants assisting it in 2001 or in 2004, he said, explaining that the Vollmer reports were addressed to the town’s Planning and Zoning Commission chairman and the town’s land use director and were in response to reports from Running Brook’s own consultants.

“These misstatements by Running Brook cannot be dismissed as harmless mistakes,” Mr. Bloom wrote in the Conservation Commission’s brief. “They are part of their attempt to create a story which ignores the critical reports in the record by suggesting improper motives by the commission.”

According to Running Brook, the commission also based its denial on the “potential for a catastrophic explosion from the gas transmission line which crosses the site on its way from New York City to Boston” and the site accessibility for emergency vehicles.

Ed Nagy, town engineer, and the Easton police department reviewed the proposal and approved the plan after the developer made some alterations based on their assessments, and received approval of the plan from Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co., the owner of the gas line, according to the brief.

“Each reason is without merit,” Mr. Ranelli wrote.

Burden of proof

Unlike typical land use cases, the burden of proof is shifted to the town when an appeal involves affordable housing. The Conservation Commission must show that the reasons for denying the application clearly outweigh the need for affordable housing in town. The commission must also show that there are no reasonable changes to the application that can be made to satisfy the commission’s concerns.

Only 0.44%, or 11 homes out of 2,511, qualify as affordable housing, and Easton ranks 161st out of 169 towns in Connecticut in terms of the number of affordable units, according to 2005 statistics.

The affordable housing statutes are available to any developer until a town has 10% of its housing stock deed-restricted as affordable housing.

In a summary sheet of the town’s work on the cases supplied to The Courier by First Selectman Tom Herrmann, it is acknowledged that town commissions that have denied affordable housing applications historically have lost about 70% of the appeals throughout the state, effectively reversing those commissions’ rulings.

In the briefs to the court on both the Conservation and the Planning and Zoning appeals, the town emphasized the deficiencies in the construction and reliability of the community septic system, based on the findings of town consultant Stearns and Wheeler LLC, hired in 2005.

The Conservation Commission brief also highlights the differences between both the two earlier proposals for age-restricted housing and the latest application for 72 prefabricated units.

“The simple truth is that this application presented great dangers to the wetlands and watercourses,” it said in the Conservation Commission’s brief, filed by Mr. Bloom. The latest proposal was “significantly different from an earlier age-restricted application filed by a different developer,” the brief states, referring to the 2001 proposal.

The Conservation Commission’s denial of the latest proposal contained a “critical report” from Stearns and Wheeler that raised concerns regarding the wastewater system.

Mr. Bloom stated that Running Brook Farm’s brief places “great weight” in the earlier decision by the DEP on the wastewater treatment system, which the DEP issued “without the benefit of the Commission’s consultant’s report.”

During the application proceedings for the 2004 age-restricted housing proposal, a prior attorney for Running Brook Farms opened his presentation before the Planning and Zoning Commission with a “threat” to file an affordable housing application if the commissioners denied the application, the brief asserts.

“Running Brook kept this promise, filing this quickly prepared and, frankly, highly unattractive affordable housing project,” Mr. Bloom wrote.

Settlement possibilities

Town officials have been involved in pre-trial conferences with a judge to explore various settlement possibilities with the developer. Typical negotiations include anything from reduced building amounts to outright purchase of the land or a combination of the two, though First Selectman Tom Herrmann wouldn’t give specifics of any of the settlement proposals.

“I can’t comment on the proposals because it might prejudice the process,” he said last Friday.

The town is still discussing possible settlements and is awaiting response from the developer on the latest proposal; however, Mr. Herrmann said he is “frustrated that the developer has not been more responsive to our proposals.”

Besides Mr. DiGennaro, the other partners in Running Brook Farm LLC have not been publicly identified.

“I would like to respect their privacy,” Mr. Herrmann said. “I will merely say that the partnership includes a prominent Fairfield physician with a number of real estate and medical facility investments, two contractors who are brothers and live in Easton, a resident of Easton Woods, and two lawyers in addition to Phil DiGennaro, who is a commercial real estate developer from Trumbull.”

Calls for comment to Mr. DiGennaro on Monday and Tuesday were unreturned. Running Brook’s attorney, Mr. Ranelli, provided some background information off the record, but would not speak to The Courier on the record without approval from his clients. He said on Tuesday he was unable to reach them.

Connecticut Post – Wednesday, February 08, 2006

Easton rejects proposal for affordable housing
By Vin Moran vmoran@ctpost.com

EAST0N - The Conservation Commission rejected a plan to build an affordable housing complex on a tract off South Park Avenue, with one member calling the project "catastrophic" to the nearby Mill River.
In a 6-0 vote, the commission denied the application of Running Brook Farm LLC to develop 72 units of affordable .housing on the 29.6-acre tract bordering the river.
"I just don't see how anybody sitting in our seats could have confidence in approving this application," Commissioner Robert Falkenhagen said.
Running Brook owner Philip DiGennaro originally applied for a Permit to develop 44 units of age-restricted condominiums, but the Planning and Zoning Commission denied the 1 application in December 2004.
In the wake of the zoning commission's decision, DiGennaro made good on his threat to refile the plan as affordable I housing. State statutes make affordable housing proposals more difficult to reject because the burden of proof shifts to the municipality, which must then prove how the development is harmful.
Easton residents have decried DiGennaro's switch to affordable housing as greedy and called the application a punitive response to their rejection of the original proposal.
"DiGennaro did not file this application to be altruistic," said resident Jim Riling at a public hearing Monday night. The sole purpose of the application, he said, was to punish Easton.
Although the Department of Environmental Protection approved DiGennaro's latest plans, the Conservation' Commission raised questions about the impact of the project on the river.
Their rejection of the plan was motivated partly by concerns over chloride and nitrogen levels caused by bacteria from wastewater runoff. .
As evidence, Running Brook's engineers from the firm of Malone and MacBroom provided the commission with the results of soil samples that they said showed the soil was dense enough to filter out pollutants.
But of the 14 samples taken in 2001, only four were usable as evidence, the engineers said.
"Just the results of the tests raises concerns," said Commissioner Adam Dunsly.
Because the Running Brook property abuts the Mill River, commissioners said a poorly planned septic system, combined with the human traffic, construction and the effects of wastewater and storm water runoff, were not only potentially hazardous but possibly even catastrophic to the waterway.

Winter '05-'06 Conservation Report

by Mike Piquette, Nutmeg Conservation Chairman

Since we who live in Fairfield County are so dependent on stocked trout, many of us are not aware that we’re in the middle of brown and brook trout spawning season as this is being written in mid-November. Trout spawn much like salmon - in late fall they scoop out depressions in gravelly areas in tails of pools. The female deposits eggs, which are immediately fertilized by an attending male. The female then scoops out another depression immediately upstream of the just completed one (that’s right – the women do most of the work!). The current sweeps the disturbed gravel over the original depression, covering it. The eggs lay in the gravel, under the streambed, gradually developing all winter.
The eggs fully hatch in the spring, and the newly hatched "fry" wiggle their way up out of the gravel and into the stream. Trout eggs require highly oxygenated water as they develop. Water must percolate through the gravel from egg laying in fall through hatching in spring. If silt enters the stream, the fine silt particles will settle around the larger gravel, effectively sealing the bottom. Water does not percolate through the gravel, oxygen is depleted and the eggs die. Water quality must remain excellent from mid-October until mid-April for successful reproduction. Water quality is also vital for trout survival - and for survival of the plants and animals that trout depend on - at all other times of the year, especially summer, when water levels become low and water temperatures high.
As I write this report, trout are spawning in the Mill River Wild Trout Management Area (WTMA) in Easton, and directly downstream in the Mill River in Fairfield. The Mill is one of only 10 “Class 1” wild trout fisheries designated by DEP in the state. I observed wild brook trout, which are part of a DEP restoration effort, spawning in the WTMA in the same spot for the past three years. During the DEP sampling of the river this summer, successful brook trout reproduction was documented by the presence of several fry, just hatched this spring. Brown trout are reproducing as well. Don’t forget that this is the area that was nearly wiped out by a chlorine spill just 2 ½ years ago, and is still recovering.
Amidst this good news, there’s been a very disturbing development. A massive “affordable” housing development has been proposed for the former horse farm on South Park Ave. that covers most of the west bank of the WTMA. The proposal is for 74 units on only 29 acres! The property is zoned for one unit per 3 acres, meaning that only about 9 homes can be built under current regulations. If a development is considered “affordable” (meaning a percentage of units are priced lower than others), the state can override local zoning, even if Easton’s P&Z Commission rejects the development. If the project will cause harm to the environment, however, it can be stopped. The research is clear: dense developments and the way they disturb the landscape, are death to wild trout, and in particular to wild brook trout. Just when the stream is recovering from the devastating effects of the chlorine spill, and brook trout, Connecticut’s only native trout, are become re-established, their demise is right around the corner.
The housing development was introduced at a P&Z hearing in November. A large crowd was there, and every person who spoke (except the developer’s consultants) was in opposition. Nutmeg TU was well represented. The battle will continue at another P&Z hearing on December 12th at 7:00 p.m. at the Helen Keller School on Route 59 in Easton, about 2 miles north of the Merritt Parkway. In addition, the Easton Conservation Commission will hold its first hearing on the development the following night, December 13th (place to be determined). We need a big turnout - not only from Easton residents, but from concerned anglers and conservationists as well.
The hatchery trucks aren’t headed for the Mill in Easton – nor should they be. The river is home to wild brown trout and a rare population of native wild brook trout, perhaps the most sensitive fish species in the state.
In heavily urbanized/suburbanized Fairfield County, where most of the wild trout populations are long gone – the Mill stands out as a jewel with its clear, cold water and wild trout. We can’t allow it to disappear on our watch. For more info, contact me at 203-261-1868, or e-mail me.

P.S. The spot where I’ve watched wild, native brook trout spawn for the past three years is right next to the leaching field for the in-ground sewage treatment plant (and its experimental technology) that must be constructed to handle the 20,000+ gallons per day of sewage that this development will create.

7/10/05 Conservation Report - GREAT NEWS!

Dear Trout Unlimited Nutmeg Members and Friends,

Several weeks ago, I sent out an appeal for you to write, call, or email your state legislators to pass CT Senate Bill [SB] 1294.

This bill called for Connecticut to establish new minimum streamflow standards. With badly outdated standards, entities [water companies, golf courses, municipalities, etc.] could withhold or take water from streams without much regard for how much water the streams themselves need to remain vital and healthy habitat for the living things that depend on them.

Well, I'm happy to report that the bill was just signed by Gov. Rell.

Connecticut will now write the law that will provide this protection.

This can be a long story, but I will keep it short. This legislation now marks Connecticut as one of the leading states in the United States in taking such water policy measures. [A nice distinction, but sad indictment on other states inasmuch as our state's existing streamflow standards were far from what US Fish and Wildlife service has as guidelines.]

The success in getting this legislation passed is due in no small way to the massive email, letter writing, and phone call campaign that we, TU in Connecticut, mounted. In short: it worked.

To all those that wrote, pat yourself on the back.
Job well done!

Bill [Blaufuss, Nutmeg TU President]

[And a special "Thank You" to Kirt Mayland and Jan Allardt from this webmaster.]

________________________________________________________________________________

Introducing Kirt Mayland, TU's Eastern Water Project Director!

February 2005 - Kirt is Trout Unlimited's first full time staff in Connecticut. The Eastern Water Project is a TU program focused on improving water diversion and in-stream flow policy in the eastern states. Funding for Mr. Mayland's position is the happy result of a grant TU recently received for this purpose.

Mr. Mayland previously worked for an environmental law firm in Connecticut. He also worked as a corporate attorney in New York City. A Dartmouth graduate, he was a Fulbright scholar in Monterrey, Mexico, where he received a Master in Finance, followed by a JD from the University of Connecticut, then by a Masters in Environmental Law from Vernon Law School.

He has already been very effective in navigating the landscape of issues and legislators - tasks with which Trout Unlimited Volunteers previously struggled. We look forward to having a visit from him soon!

1/7/05 Conservation Report

The recent denial of rate increases for Aquarion has put the opening of streams on former Aquarion lands on hold. The state-purchased lands are managed by a team comprised of the DEP, Nature Conservancy and Aquarion. The state Health Dept. has final say on activities proposed for these watershed lands. The DEP Fisheries Division continues to work on opening the streams to public fishing (with catch-and-release regulations.) There’s a possibility that some stream sections will open sometime in 2005. Former club-leased stream sections such as the Mill River just below the Easton Reservoir and a section above the reservoir, as well as a section of the Saugatuck River just above the Saugatuck Reservoir are likely candidates for 2005.

Report continues: please see under "Mill River."

________________________________________________________________________________

Brook Trout

11/16/04 - TU Releases a Report which Profiles the Threats to the New England Brook Trout

Trout Unlimited (TU) released a report examining the combined effects of acid rain, sprawl, forest loss, mismanagement, dwindling clean water supplies and invasive species on New England’s wild brook trout. The report is available at www.tu.org.

“We set out to do a report on a fish, and wound up doing a report on a lot of what ails New England in general,” said Jeff Reardon, TU New England Conservation Director. “This means that if we keep brook trout in our waters, we’ll have done a good job of fixing the major threats to the New England landscape.”

The report, “The New England Brook Trout: Protecting a Fish, Restoring a Region,” also explores the ways that citizens can involve themselves in the brook trout restoration effort in each of the New England states.

“Brook trout are the ultimate indicators of the health of our lands and waters,” said Chris Wood, TU Vice President for Conservation. “Mercury and other airborne emissions are reflected in the growing number of fish consumption advisories on waters throughout New England. Water withdrawals and water quality degradation result in more streams with fewer trout. Urban sprawl and subdivisions into formerly forested areas deprive trout of the benefits of healthy streamside areas.”

The report recommends steps to address the concurrent threats to the brook trout and the New England landscape, including:

• strengthening air pollution laws
• independent certification of sustainable timbering practices
• expanding state and private land conservation purchases
• adopting wildlife management policies that promote wild and native species
• broadening public awareness of the threats posed by invasive species, such as the hemlock wooly adelgid, Japanese knotweed and Asian long-horned beetle

“New England is positioned to lead the country into a new era of conservation, where anglers and hunters, community leaders, outdoor recreationists and other local citizens combine their efforts to secure the health of the lands and waters that sustain us all,” said Wood.

“All of these challenges can be dealt with effectively,” said Reardon, “but doing so will require significant personal and public resolve.”

click here to read it (you must have Adobe Reader)

10/1/04 - Nutmeg TU Helps DEP Restore Brook Trout to the Upper Mill River

DEP, with help from Nutmeg volunteers, transferred 162 wild brook trout to the WTMA in Easton on October 1. According to DEP’s wild trout biologist Mike Humphreys:

“The brook trout transfer project went well last Friday. We collected 162 wild brookies from a small trib to the Naugatuck River on State Forest land in Thomaston. This small stream has a few barrier waterfalls and has no record of ever being stocked. This population may even have an uncontaminated native gene pool. We collected the target 50 breeding pairs of fish that appeared to be ripening for spawning this fall. Also 62 yearling and young-of-year fish that appeared immature. We left plenty of fish of all sizes in the section of the donor stream that was electrofished. Five or six volunteers from the Nutmeg Chapter met us at the Mill WTMA, and helped us spread the fish above the lower bridge. Sampling next summer should be interesting.”

TU's Mike Piquette saw trout redds (areas in the stream where trout scoop out gravel to lay their eggs) in this section of the river in late October and early November, including a brookie actively working a spawning site. We’re hoping that the brook trout will become established while wild brown trout numbers are down due to the April, 2003 fishkill. DEP found some wild brook trout in the Mill this summer. These fish were probably survivors of the September, 2002 transfer project, and their offspring.

________________________________________________________________________________

Housatonic River

11/28/04 - "Natural flow of river draws mixed reactions"

By: Robert Miller - News-Times [Danbury] (click here to read it on their web site - there are some nice pictures, too.)

Clambering across the nearly dry rock bed of the Great Falls that give Falls Village its name, Robert Gates talks about what things will be like next year, when there will be spumes and cascades across the channel, all day, every day. "It will be a beautiful sheet of water that will break up across those rocks,'' he said. "We could start it in early June or July.'' Gates is station manager of Northeast Generation Services, the subsidiary of Northeast Utilities that now owns and operates the five hydroelectric plants on the Housatonic River. Under orders issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in June, Northeast Generation must greatly alter the way it does business at its power plants at Falls Village and Bull's Bridge in New Milford. In turn, those changes will significantly alter the ecology of the Housatonic. Under the FERC order — which will be in effect for the next 40 years — Northeast Generation must let water run constantly through the two plants' turbines, creating a much more natural river environment along a 27-mile stretch of the river. It also must restore natural flows over the Falls Village falls and Bull's Bridge Gorge, releasing 80 cubic feet per second over the rocks at Falls Village and 200 cubic feet per second into Bulls Bridge — restoring at least some daily glory to what had been two of the river's most scenic spots. Gates said when Northeast Generating worked with FERC and the state Department of Environmental Protection to determine the best flow for the Great Falls, area families flocked to watch the water crash and tumble there again. It's now working on an environmental plan with the DEP that will establish the flow permanently. "I was astonished at the number of people who came to watch,'' he said. "They just came out of the woodwork.'' Not everyone is thrilled with the changes. The town of Falls Village has sued the DEP, claiming it did not hold a legally valid public hearing when it issued a key decision mandating the natural flow, which is called run-of-river. And canoeists and kayakers will probably see a prime stretch of whitewater on the Housatonic flatten out because Northeast Generating will no longer hold the water behind the two plants, then release it in a daily rush. It may also affect the businesses that cater to paddlers. "It's way too premature to tell,'' said Jenifer Clarke, who with her husband, Mark, owns Clarke Outdoors in Cornwall. "But we don't have high hopes.'' The company has its own rental armada of 50 canoes, 12 sit-on-top kayaks for beginners, 15 whitewater canoes, and rafts that seat 10. On busy summer days, nearly every boat will be on the Housatonic. But without the pond-and-release, Clarke said, it's not clear the Housatonic will have enough water in it in July and August to attract much business. "You may end up dragging the boats across the dry spots,'' she said. "People don't come back happy when they have to do that.'' The FERC decision mandating run-of-river was based on actions the DEP took in 2000 when it issued water quality standards — called a 410 permit — for the Housatonic. The DEP said Northeast Generation should establish natural flows. FERC, by law, had to follow suit. The debate in 2000 continues today. It often has been portrayed as a battle between anglers — who think run-of-river will create a better fishery on the Housatonic — versus the paddlers. Under so-called pond-and-release, Northeast Generating would basically halt the flow of the river for certain hours, then release water two or three times a day on a regular schedule. That way, it could generate a lot of electricity when there was a peak demand for it. Peak demands meant better prices for energy that has to be transmitted immediately after generation. But it also meant there would be periods each day when the sides of the river would be reduced to mud flats for long stretches Then the flood of released water would churn up the river sediment as it headed downstream, leaving the river water turbid. The DEP — in issuing the 410 — said such stop-and-start water flows did not benefit the river's ecology. A natural flow, it ruled, would mean better microbial and insect life in the river. That would mean more amphibian and reptile life, more fish and more birds. Ed Parker, chief of the DEP's Bureau of Natural Resources, said the DEP will study the river to see if these long-term changes occur. "We'll be able to look at pre-run-of-river and post-run-of-river and see the benefits,'' he said. Northeast Generation had asked FERC, instead, to allow the company to operate the two plants until 2040 as it had for much of the previous century. After FERC mandated run-of-river in June, the company agreed to switch to that mode by August. The change meant about 1,000 cubic feet per second — 7,480 gallons — was running through two turbines at the Falls Village plant in October. "In the spring and fall, we always run wide open, 24-7,'' said Tim Paviol, the plant's mechanic and operator. It was only in the summer months, when the river runs low, that Northeast Generation switched to pond-and-release. The Falls Village plant was built in 1918. It has three massive 5,000-horsepower turbines that are basically the plant's original machinery; the plant is now eligible for inclusion on the National registry of Historic Places, Gates said. Gates said it's clear Northeast Generating Services will not make as much money at the two plants as it did under pond-and-release. But it will still be profitable enough to keep open. "It generates 45,000 megawatts of power a year,'' he said of the Falls Village plant. "In the current market, electricity sells for $50 a megawatt hour.'' Gates said Northeast Generation also hopes to get the electricity included in the state's renewable energy program, allowing it to sell the power at a higher prices. While Northeast Generation Services has acceded to the FERC permit requirements, the town of Falls Village is challenging the DEP decision at the heart of run-of-river — the 410 water quality permit, by suing the state. First Selectman Louis Timolat said the issue at hand is one of principle — whether the DEP can make a major change in public policy without a formal hearing to let the public speak. Timolat said the 410 permit was in essence a regulatory decision, and by statute, such proceedings require full evidentiary hearings. "You can call it anything you want,'' Timolat said. "You can call it a rose. But it's still a regulation. What I would like is for the DEP to be part of the state's government, not a parallel government.'' However, Rick Jacobson, the DEP's assistant director of inland fisheries, said state law does not require the DEP to hold a hearing before issuing a water quality permit. The DEP nevertheless held a public meeting on the issue and received written comments. The agency considered both the testimony at the meeting and the written comments before making its decision, Jacobson said. Timolat also said that in making the decision, the DEP formed "an unholy alliance'' with fly fishermen who romanticize the Housatonic as a wilderness stream, rather than seeing it for what it is: a river that people have settled along and used for centuries, with a lot of different demands — power, recreational boating, and fishing among them. In issuing the 410, he said, the DEP ignored the other uses to placate the anglers. People on the other side point to the benefits of the DEP order. Mike Piquette is chairman of the Housatonic Coalition, which represents different angler groups that use the Housatonic. In recent weeks, when he has been to the river, he said, he has seen changes for the better. Places that used to be mud flats had water flowing over them, and the river's water was running clear. Fish that used to congregate at deep pools — which offered protection from the pond-and-release cycles — were now exploring the entire river. "There used to be areas of habitat that were worthless,'' he said. "Last week, the river looked nice.'' Likewise, Harold McMillan of Housatonic Outfitters — which caters to both anglers and boaters from locations in Cornwall and Great Barrington, Mass., — said he was able to sell 100 kayaks and canoes this year. Next year, he plans to expand his rental canoe fleet in Cornwall from eight to 12 boats. "People have more access to the river now,'' he said. "They don't have to worry about it being dry part of the day and they can have a nice, easy ride down the river. A lot of people don't want to paddle in white water.'' In contrast, he said, he probably lost a little angling business this year — the river was running too high for optimum fly-fishing. "But I opened this business knowing I'd be dependent on the river,'' he said. "That's what happens.'' And, he said, instead of mud flats, he's seeing a flowing river when he's out on it. "Pond-and-release put a lot of stress on everything,'' he said. "Now, the river is gorgeous.''

Contact Robert Miller at bmiller@newstimes.com or at (203) 731-3345.

NEWS FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE   Contact: Leon Szeptycki, TU Eastern Conservation Director, 434.984.4919; Michael Piquette, 203-321-2489

June 24, 2004

TROUT UNLIMITED APPLAUDS CONDITIONS OF FEDERAL RELICENSING OF DAMS ON THE HOUSATONIC RIVER

Washington -- The national conservation organization Trout Unlimited (TU) today hailed the issuance of a license for the Housatonic River hydroelectric projects by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The issuance of the license culminates more than five years of work.

The license issued to Northeast Generation Services covers the future operation of five dams on the Housatonic River – Falls Village, Bulls Bridge, Rocky River, Shepaug and Stevenson. The license includes a variety of provisions that will increase the health of the Housatonic below these projects. Most significantly, the license includes a requirement that the Falls Village and Bulls Bridge project be operated as “run-of-river.” These facilities historically have been operated as “peaking” facilities, where water was stored during low-demand times of day, and released when demand for electricity was highest. These operations produced daily fluctuations in river flows that impaired the health of the river.

As part of the renewal process, the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) required the license under section 401 of the Clean Water Act to include natural flows below these dams because of the negative effects of peaking generation.

“DEP’s water quality certification and now the new FERC license will bring natural flows to virtually all of the free-flowing Housatonic in Connecticut. Natural flows have the potential to dramatically improve the health of the Housatonic and its trout fishery,” said Mike Piquette of Trout Unlimited’s Connecticut Council, who also serves as chair of the Housatonic Coalition, a bloc of conservation groups that advocated for natural flows during the relicensing.

The water quality certification is one of the few issued by any state that requires the conversion of a hydroelectric dam from peaking flows to run-of-river flows. Under the Clean Water Act and the Federal Power Act, FERC is required to include the terms of such state certifications in the licenses they issue.

“We really appreciate DEP issuing the certification and then sticking to their guns, even though they received some criticism for it. They required run-of-river because it is the right thing for the ecological health of the Housatonic, and we hope that more states will follow Connecticut’s lead,” said Leon Szeptycki, TU’s Eastern Conservation Director.

The license also includes other provisions to enhance river health, including:

• minimum flows in the bypassed reaches of the river at the Falls Village and Bulls Bridge facilities;
• minimum flows downstream of the Shepaug development tailrace and the Stevenson development dam; and
• fish passage facilities for various species of fish and American eel.

The license will govern operation of these dams for the next 40 years.

Trout Unlimited is North America’s leading coldwater fisheries conservation organization, dedicated to the conservation, protection and restoration of trout and salmon fisheries and their watersheds. The organization has more than 127,000 members in 450 chapters in North America.

~~~~~

View the entire license at the following web address: (http://ferris.ferc.gov/idmws/nvcommon/NVViewer.asp?Doc=10174770:0), or download it by going to this address: http://ferris.ferc.gov/idmws/docket_search.asp, type in P-2576 in “Docket Number”, and 06/20/2004 to 06/24/2004 for “Filing Date Range”, then click “Submit”. When the page loads, scroll down to “Order issuing new license re Northeast Generating ….” and click on “File List”. The license will be available for downloading in either PDF or WORD format.

TO DO:

1. Please thank Senator Joe Lieberman (CT-D) for supporting DEP’s 401 and run-of-river flow for the Housatonic by e-mailing/calling/writing a short note to him. His contact info is on his letter.
2. Please tell the EPA to clean up PCB contamination in the Housatonic River, number 7 on the list of American Rivers' America's Most Endangered Rivers of 2004. [What are PCBs? Click here to find out.]

________________________________________________________________________________

Mill River

The upper Mill River (in Easton) is fragile and must be treasured. What makes it so unique is its population of wild (born and raised in the stream, not in a hatchery) brown and (a few) rainbow trout, and wild & native brook charr. In fact, it is the only stream in Connecticut where all three salmonids spawn. The State of Connecticut, recognizing its value, designed sections of the Mill River as one of its first "Class 1" Wild Trout Management Areas (WTMA.) WTMAs have special regulations designed to minimize the impact anglers have on wild trout (for example, all trout must be immediately returned unharmed to the stream.) Trout are like the canary in the coal mine. The presence of these wild coldwater fish indicates just how healthy the entire ecosystem is.

Although WTMAs protect trout, they do little to protect the clean, cold, unsilted, highly oxygenated water the trout themselves and the other animal and plant species need to survive. Perhaps the greatest threat to wild trout in Easton (and throughout Connecticut) is the incessant, seemingly unstoppable "development" of their watersheds. The Nutmeg Chapter of Trout Unlimited is monitoring the ongoing hearings in Easton and providing information to all the interested parties about how to lessen the inevitable impact of the proposed developments on the environment of this little gem.

-See the Nutmeg TU letter to the Easton Planning & Zoning Commission.

7/12/05 Conservation Report

I helped out with the sampling of the Mill River WTMA in Easton today. Looks like the river is coming back after the 2003 chlorine spill. Appeared to be good numbers of wild browns, including a few 13-16”. Decent numbers of wild brookies, too. The section near Buck Hill Road, closer to the reservoir, again had very low numbers of trout. Only one small brown there, but there were many tiny wild brookies in this section. The brookies had hatched this spring. There were many wild browns hatched this spring in all sections, and some just hatched brookies as well. There was even a wild tiger trout (sterile brook/brown hybrid). DEP biologist Mike Humphreys thought that there were enough wild brookies to create a sustaining population, if they can survive with the competition from the browns. No need for further transfers. Only 2 stocked fish (one brown, one brookie) were sampled. All the rest were wild. My guess would be about 4:1 or 5:1 browns:brookies. Attached are pics of two of the better fish from the sampling.

Mike

3/23/05 Conservation Report

A developer has applied for a wetlands permit to build 50 units of age-restricted housing on 30 acres of land bordering the west bank of the Mill River WTMA in Easton. The Easton Conservation Commission held a hearing in March to hear the proposal from the developer as well as comments from the public. As far as impacts to the river and its trout fishery, this proposal is very similar to the 2001 proposal for 74 units on the same property. The review and comments prepared by Don Mysling of DEP Fisheries and Penni Sharp (the consultant we hired) in 2001 are therefore very relevant to this development. We submitted those comments at the hearing and I spoke for Nutmeg TU. I emphasized the fragile nature of the fishery and the protections that it needs. I asked for an increased buffer zone along the river, less impervious surfaces (roads, driveways, roofs, etc.) and proper landscape management. Local residents hired a consultant who submitted a report asking for increased environmental protection.

A major issue is the disposition of the open space along the river. This open space is about 13 of the 30 acres. We requested that this land be given to the Aspetuck Land Trust. The ALT owns land up-and downstream of this area, and allows public access there. Due to the fragile nature of the river, we asked that no improvements (parking, trails, etc.) be made to the open space. Encouraging use of the property (which is very close to a university, a high school, an exit off a major highway and CT's largest city) will surely lead to overuse and abuse which would threaten the trout population. Protection from abuse is especially critical at this time as the river is recovering from last year's fishkill. The protection of the Mill's unique trout fishery was a theme that was raised several times in the hearing.

I have great apprehension about the future of the Mill River with a very dense development nearby. The previous development proposal received a wetlands permit, so it's very likely that a permit will be granted for this proposal. One positive aspect is that despite a decrease in impervious surfaces with this proposal, the same stormwater runoff treatment system from the original proposal will be kept. In other words, the stormwater runoff (which can significantly raise water temperatures and introduce silt and sand if not properly treated) will receive more treatment than what was previously permitted. The developer is also agreeable to our ideas on the open space.

It's important to note that because the Mill River is not stocked and supports wild trout, it needs, and will hopefully get more protection. Stocking fish to make up for environmental degradation is a relatively inexpensive trade-off that many developers would gladly make. Depending on stocked fish is a course that can lead to further loss of habitat and water quality, while managing for wild trout requires increased protection.

3/24/05 "'Easton-friendly' project proposed"

By: Larissa Lytwyn, Editor - Easton Courier

Easton resident Harold Rosnick presented plans for 17 single-family homes on a 72-acre parcel off Adirondack Trail to the Conservation Commission Tuesday night. His presentation followed the commission's regular meeting. The commission will take it up again at its next meeting on Tuesday, April 12. According to the project's engineer, Ronald Ochman of Ochman Associates, Easton, the 4,000- to 8,000-square-foot houses, which would be across from Mill River, would "minimally affect" a little less than one-tenth of an acre of wetland. "The main way to minimize damage in that sensitive one-tenth [acre] of wetland would be our plans to build two bridges over two of the property's major wetland crossings," Ochman explained. "For the third major wetland crossing, we will insert a culvert in the steam that would allow the water to flow through." Otherwise, he said, the development, titled Adirondack Estates, would inhibit water flow and incur flooding. The remaining wetlands that cover a good portion of the property would remain untouched, Ochman said. According to the proposal, Adirondack Estates would take about five years to build. Each lot would measure between 3.01 to 10.41 acres. Each home and driveway would have at least two to three underground retention chambers for water runoff from the roofs. Rosnick said each home, bearing brick, stucco or stone facades, would have a "European country" style. He did not mention prices for these homes. Landscape designs were not included either. Rosnick expressed confidence that Adirondack Estates will be in line with "what the people of Easton want." Princie Falkenhagen, who is a member of the watchdog group Citizens for Easton, agrees that Adirondack Estates would be a favorable development. "The plans are all in line with our current zoning regulations," she said. One aim of Citizens for Easton, she said, is to ensure that all proposed construction complies with zoning laws. "Our goal is to preserve the rural feeling of Easton," said Falkenhagen. She described the Adirondack Estates plan as "very different" from a proposal Trumbull developer Philip DiGennaro submitted for a 29-acre parcel across Mill River from Rosnick's land. The P&Z denied DiGennaro's proposal for a 44-unit complex for adults age 55 and older on a 29-acre parcel on South Park Avenue. The proposal had generated controversy in town and drew opposition from Citizens for Easton. "The [DiGennaro] property would have required the creation of a potentially harmful new zoning regulation, the Age Restricted Residential District [ARRD]," said Falkenhagen. The P&Z denied DiGennaro's application last December on grounds that the ARRD included a provision that would have allowed much higher density development on watershed land than current regulations permit. Since approximately 84 percent of Easton is comprised of watershed property, the P&Z declined to approve the provision. In addition, the P&Z disagreed with DiGennaro's contention that a senior housing development would favor Easton residents. Instead, P&Z members said that many elderly Easton residents had said they would not be able to afford to live in the complex. DiGennaro planned to sell the units for $700,000. While DiGennaro awaits a court appeal for his rejected P&Z application, he is moving forward with his alternative plan to build affordable housing on the property. In the meantime, town leaders are considering whether they should buy DiGennaro's land to preserve it as open space.

1/28/05 "Easton P&Z sued over South Park"

By: Bill Bittar, Associate Editor - Easton Courier

EASTON - The Board of Selectmen unanimously decided last Thursday to appoint attorney Ira Bloom to defend the town's Planning & Zoning Commission in a lawsuit to overturn the town's denial of a condominium plan for South Park Avenue. The developer, Running Brook Farm LLC is suing after a proposal for 44 detached units of age-restricted housing was denied on Dec. 20. Town leaders are also pursuing purchasing the 29.6 acre property by negotiating with the developer, or a move to take it by eminent domain. The Board of Selectmen voted for appraisal firms to bid the job of assessing the value of the vacant parcel farmland. Raymond Rizio, the attorney for the developer, was unavailable to comment by press time. Rizio had vowed to come back with a denser affordable housing proposal should the P&Z deny his client's application for the establishment of a new Age Restricted Residential District. The South Park plan was controversial, because many residents wanted to preserve Easton's traditional zoning, which only has one-and three-acre residential zones and no commercial zoning. The proposal also had its supporters - including all three selectmen - who believed the town could stave off an unwanted affordable housing development while gaining tax revenue to ease the burden on residential taxpayers. Running Brook Farm LLC is listed as the plaintiff and the P&Z, its chairman Robert Maquat and Town Clerk Derek Buckley were named as the defendants in the lawsuit filed at Bridgeport Superior Court on Dec. 30. The town has an answer date of Feb. 1. The lawsuit claims the commission acted "illegally, arbitrarily, and in abuse of its discretion" in its Dec. 20 denial because the application "complied with all standards set forth in Easton zoning regulations;" the decision was "inconsistent" with town zoning; "the reason for denial was unsupported by the record;" the commission "failed to abide by the time requirements set forth in the general statutes;" and that the decisions "are discriminatory, in violation of the Constitution and its amendments." The suit also claims that the commission made its decision based on information outside of the record and public hearing.

1/7/05 Conservation Report

The Easton Planning and Zoning Commission has denied the zone change required to build the proposed 44-unit age-restricted housing development on 29 acres along the Mill River WTMA. The developer now plans to submit an application for an “affordable” housing project, which would mean a much denser development. If the project meets state-defined ‘affordable” criteria, local zoning regulations (currently 3 acres/unit) do not apply. The developer feels that he can fit 75 units (double occupancy) on the property if an on-site sewage treatment plant is used, and - if he can hook up to Bridgeport’s sewer system - MANY more units. This, of course, could be a disaster for the fragile wild trout fishery in the Mill River. The good news is that the town of Easton is pursuing purchasing the property either by eminent domain or through negotiations with the developer. The Nutmeg chapter has generously pledged $20,000 for the purchase if the property remains unimproved. The Aspetuck Land Trust has pledged $100,000. This issue will be in the news for some time to come. See below for a sampling of recent newspaper articles.

"Affordable Housing Possible - Developer to follow Easton rejection with high-density plan"

By: Daniel Drew - CT Post

EASTON – The Trumbull developer whose four-part zoning application for a South Park Avenue site was denied this week now may apply for a higher-density affordable housing complex. “We’re developers,” said Philip DiGennaro, the managing partner of Running Brook, LLC. “Our job is to develop the property and create value.” He had sought to build a 44-unit age-restricted housing development on the property near the Fairfield border. Three-bedroom units there would have cost about $750,000. But the proposal was unanimously denied Monday by the Planning and Zoning Commission. DiGennaro says he will likely decide in early January on whether to file a new zoning application. He had threatened to apply for an affordable-housing project if his zoning application for the age-restricted project was denied. The firm now is considering an application to build an affordable-housing project with 76 two-bedroom units, 152 one-bedroom units, or a combination of the two, said Ray Rizio, the attorney representing Running Brook. Asked if the units would be for rent or sale, Rizio said Running Brook would choose its most financially beneficial option. Meanwhile, town officials have begun investigating the possibility of buying the property from DiGennaro – either by negotiating a sale price or by seizing it through eminent domain, said First Selectman William Kupinse. The Aspetuck Land Trust has pledged $100,000 to buy the property and an unnamed resident donated $10,000. The property was purchased for about $5 million. Neither DiGennaro, nor Rizio, would say what they believe is an appropriate price for the 29-acre parcel, but DiGennaro said he would consider an offer by the town “if the number was right.” The property’s fair market value depends on its zoning designation, he said. The site is now zoned for one singly-family home per three acres, meaning that between eight and ten homes could be built there. “I think the property is worth much more than eight to 10 three-acre lots,” DiGennaro said.” DiGennaro said he has a history of working with municipalities to preserve residents’ interests while protecting his business, he said. In this case, he said his proposal for 44 age-restricted units was in the best interests of all sides. “We felt we held up our end of the bargain and we didn’t get the same treatment from the town,” DiGennaro said. After the P&Z’s denial of the Running Brook application, one resident called the commission’s decision “the Lexington and Concord of the 21st Century,” likening any future zoning fight over the site with the opening salvos of the American Revolution. Commission members cited as reasons for the denial a potential danger to the Mill River, disruption of life for nearby residents and conflicts with the town’s comprehensive plan for conservation and development. “The town of Easton’s residents are not immune to the laws and statutes of the state of Connecticut,” Rizio said. “I think that will be abundantly clear in the future.” It is difficult for towns to stop affordable housing developments. Until a written offer is made, the firm will continue its plans to develop the land. “We’re committed to building,” Rizio said.

"Easton Pursues Options"

By: Daniel Drew - CT Post

EASTON – The Board of Finance on Tuesday unanimously approved a $15,000 appropriation for an appraisal and legal fees as the town considers buying a controversial parcel that could be slated for an affordable housing development. The Planning and Zoning Commission last month denied an age-restricted 44-unit development for the 29-acre tract. Running Brook LLC now wants to build a high-density affordable housing complex there. Finance members stressed that the money would be used for information gathering and did not constitute a commitment to seize the land through eminent domain. First Selectman William Kupinse estimated the appraisal would cost about $8,500; once lawyer fees are paid, the cost would likely be just under $15,000, he said. Kupinse said he is open to the possibility of seizing the South Park Avenue property through eminent domain, or negotiating a selling price with the parcel’s owner, Philip DiGennaro. DiGennaro has not named an asking price, but his attorney said they have turned down offers from other developers in excess of $8 million. The town could be going down a slippery slope if it buys the property because developers can continue to buy land and propose affordable housing developments, said member Andrew R. Kachele. “There’s no way we can buy them all,” he said. Kachele, who voted for the appropriation, would prefer to see the town negotiate a price with DiGennaro, or fight the development in the courts. “I would rather see us be prepared, instead, to call the developer’s bluff.” One resident at the meeting said the town should not purchase the property. The millions the parcel would cost could be used for education, he said. But Lea Sylvestro told finance members that investigating the purchase would be “in the town’s best interest.” Another man said eminent domain might not even apply to the South Park Avenue land. DiGennaro pledged to sue if the town tries to seize the property. He is preparing an application that could include 76 two-bedroom units, 152 one-bedroom units, or a combination of both. DiGennaro is also trying to get approval from Bridgeport to connect the development to the city’s sewer lines. Then he could increase the number of units on the lot because he would not be restricted by limitations on the waste disposal system already approved for the site. When Kachele questioned DiGennaro’s willingness, or financial ability to withstand a protracted court battle, Kupinse replied: “their pockets may be deeper than you think.”

Daniel Drew, who covers Monroe and Easton, can be reached at 330-6470 or by emailing ddrew@ctpost.com.

12/16/04 - "Easton not ready for zone change"

By: Derek DiFronzo, Staff Writer - Easton Courier

EASTON - There is every reason to expect the Planning and Zoning Commission will deny an age-restricted housing proposal when it meets next week. However, residents and officials must be prepared to deal with the consequences. Early on in the process, Raymond Rizio, the attorney for the developer, Running Brook Farm LLC, warned the town that if the plan were denied, the developer would return with an application for affordable housing. By the end of Monday's P&Z meeting, it was clear the commission members had made up their minds regarding the proposal to construct 44 units of age-restricted housing on 29.6 acres at 18 and 22 South Park Ave. The general consensus was that there was not enough need in town for the project to support changing the town's zoning regulations and potentially damaging the environment. Based on the results of the meeting, P&Z Chairman Robert Maquat said he, Land Use Director John Hayes, and town attorney Ira Bloom would be working on a resolution to deny the application at the next meeting on Monday, Dec. 20 at 6:30 p.m. in Town Hall. The majority of commission members have expressed their reluctance to approve a proposal that calls for an amendment to town zoning regulations to create a new floating zone titled Age Restricted Residential District (ARRD). The members believe that if the town desires to make any such changes in its zoning regulations, it should wait and incorporate the changes into the new Master Plan of Conservation and Development. Since the deadline to decide on the age-restricted housing proposal is Jan. 1, but the new master plan is not scheduled to be presented until early next year, P&Z members believe it would be premature to approve any zoning changes at this time. The P&Z might have seen the need to change the regulations if there were enough community support for it, and if the proposed housing would meet the needs of Easton's older residents, Maquat said. However, many seniors have pointed out that they would not be able to afford to live at the proposed housing complex considering that the units are expected to cost about $750,000 each. Selectmen Robert Lessler and Emmett Wallace have spoken out in support of the age-restricted housing, claiming that it could produce $450,000 to $500,000 in tax revenue each year to the town. Still, many residents believe the risks associated with changing the zoning regulations would be too great. Those opposed to the plan say a change in zoning could open the door to other, even less desirable developments. One of the residents leading the opposition to the proposal is Lea Sylvestro, president of Citizens for Easton and a member of the Conservation Commission. "To voluntarily change your zoning to meet a developer's need is a dangerous move," Sylvestro said. "It sends the wrong message." According to Maquat, in order for the proposal to be approved, four out of five P&Z members must vote in favor of it. Therefore, judging by the members' reactions on Monday, he said he did not see any way that the plan would go through. Sylvestro, who attended Monday's meeting, commended the P&Z for putting in such hard work on the application and considering all of the residents' views. She said she was pleased with the way the meeting ended and looks forward to the commission's decision on Dec. 20. However, she and many other residents and town officials are concerned about the developer following through with his threat to return with an application for 74 units of affordable housing. Whereas the age-restricted housing would prevent families with young children from coming to town, affordable housing would bring a large influx of children to fill up Easton's schools. Sylvestro said one of her concerns, as a Conservation Commission member, about development on South Park Avenue is its potential effect on the nearby Mill River. The concern about the health of river is even greater with affordable housing, she said, because many more people would be living there and going near the river. Under state statute, if the town were to deny a proposal for affordable housing, the developer could appeal the decision in court. The burden of proof would fall onto the town's shoulders. In other words, the town would have to provide valid reasons as to why the project should not go forward. "We'll see what the developer does, and we'll deal with it as it comes," said First Selectman William Kupinse, who has expressed his opposition to affordable housing. "There's always hope. Fighting an affordable housing project would be difficult, but if that's the way the developer decides to go, we would have no choice but to fight it." Kupinse said there still is a chance that the town could work out a deal with the developer and purchase the property. It all depends on what price the developer asks for, and whether the Board of Finance decides to support the venture, he said.

12/2/04 - "Easton's first condo development likely on its way"

By: Bill Bittar, Associate Editor - Fairfield Minuteman

EASTON - A late effort by several townspeople to preserve close to 30 acres of farmland on South Park Avenue as open space appears unlikely to succeed, according to two of Easton's selectmen. Meanwhile, the majority of Planning & Zoning Commission members seemed to favor an application to build 44 detached, age-restricted condominiums on the site. And although there has been an 11th-hour attempt to get the town to buy the property, it will likely fail, according to First Selectman William Kupinse. Kupinse said he put discussion of a potential town purchase of the South Park property on the Board of Selectmen's agenda for tonight because he felt he owed it to the townspeople who called him in support if it. "I'm not sure the developer wants to sell," he said, "and if he does want to sell, he would want more than the town is willing to pay. I don't think this is something that would go far." Nevertheless, Kupinse said he would be in favor of sending the proposal to the Board of Finance, which is the only town body that could appropriate funding. "It would probably have to be eminent domain and the cost would obviously be in excess of $5 million because the developer would want to make some money on it," said Selectman Emmet Wallace. Wallace added that he still supports the project which he believes would bring in a net positive in taxes because there would be no children to educate and the neighborhood association would maintain the roads. "I think the present proposal is good for Easton," Wallace said "I know quite a number of people have a different view and do not want the three-acre zoning broken, even though it's off watershed." P&Z favors plan P&Z Chairman Robert Maquat asked fellow commissioners during a work session Monday night to envision a scenario where they deny the application, only to have a judge approve a denser affordable housing plan down the road. "I guess at the end of the day ... we'll have a larger number of units at South Park," he said, "some affordable, some not. - more kids in our school system. Are we better off than having an age-restricted development? Play it out in your mind." Attorney Raymond Rizio has said his client, Philip DiGennaro of Running Brook Farm LLC, would apply for 74 units of affordable housing on the property at 18 and 22 South Park Ave. if the current application is denied. Affordable housing applications are difficult to deny because the burden of proof is on the town. Democratic selectmen Emmett Wallace and Robert Lessler have spoken in favor of the condo plan because they believe it would address a community need for senior housing, and raise needed tax revenue. Republican First Selectman William Kupinse said he supports it, not because he thinks it would be a good thing, but because he said it's better than the alternative - affordable housing. The P&Z will meet again Dec. 6 at 6 p.m., at a location yet to be announced. The Board of Selectmen will discuss the possibility of a town purchase of the property tonight at 7 p.m. in the Easton Senior Center. Four votes needed Maquat said four out of five commissioners would have to vote in support of the condo application, which includes a proposed zoning amendment establishing a new, age-restricted residential district. An AARD must have a minimum of 25 acres outside of a watershed, and be on a major road, according to the application. Easton only has three and one-acre residential zones, and no commercial zoning. If the South Park application is approved, commissioner Paul Dominiani said the P&Z, which is in the process of revising Easton's town plan of conservation and development, should not accept the developer's version of the amendment. The town's land use director, John Hayes, will re-write the proposed amendment in time for Monday's meeting. "John will revise the regulation," Commissioner Scott Centrella said, "and if it's voted down, it was extra work." Russell Leggett was the sole commissioner who mentioned the possibility of voting against the application. He warned of the "slippery slope" the town could go down if it bends to the developer's wishes. If the P&Z makes an exception for Running Brook Farm, he asked, what right would it have to bar others from breaking town zoning? "I'm deciding this on the value of the property," Leggett said. "If we have affordable housing, we have affordable housing. You're going to cry over spilled milk one way or another." If a judge ultimately forces the town to approve an affordable housing development, Leggett reasoned, at least town zoning will not have changed. But Maquat argued that the town would have little say over a court-approved development, adding it could have more control over what is built if it approves the South Park condo plan. Details, details Centrella said he believed the only question posed by the application is whether or not there is a town need for senior housing. The South Park plan would require at least one resident per dwelling to be age 55 or older with no school-age children allowed. Leggett said seniors who want to downsize and stay in town have told him the condos, projected to cost $750,000 a piece, were too pricey to move into. Centrella said he believed there is a need for the housing, but that there was a question over the cost, which all agreed would be dictated by the market. "I think that an age-restricted zoning district off watershed is good for seniors," Dominiani said. "I could support it regardless if an affordable housing application [is looming] or not." "I think it's part of the community need," said Wallace Williams, who quietly listened to fellow commissioners for most of the meeting. P&Z commissioners went over details including the proposed community septic system, an existing gas line on the property, and legal liability and enforcement of the age restriction. It was decided that a condo association and the zoning enforcement officers would monitor the ages of residents and that a trained professional would be in charge of maintenance of the state Department of Environmental Protection-approved community septic system, which would be able to handle 22,800 gallons of waste per day. Leggett expressed concern over the septic system because there is only a 10-year history of such systems and one failure could pollute the Mill River, which is a trout stream. While the South Park parcel is close the river, Hayes said it is not in a watershed. It used to be in a watershed when zoning was established 1941 because of its proximity to Samp Mortar Reservoir. But he said it lost its designation when the reservoir was abandoned after World War II.

________________________________________________________________________________

The Catskills

As Catskill Park celebrates its centennial, decisions are being made which will affect its future and its nature.

From the New York State Council of Trout Unlimited's web site: "Developers are attempting to build a huge casino in the vicinity of 7,000 acres of New York State land along the Neversink River. The Indian tribe involved is from Wisconsin, and is federally recognized, but is not recognized by New York State. If they buy the land, then New York State DEC will have absolutely no authority over its development or its impact on the Neversink. Contact the Governor's office and let him know how you feel about this issue."

According to an online statement of the Theodore Gordon Flyfishers, " The traffic and pollution associated with such a massive development so close to the water could ruin the Neversink trout fishery forever. The developer is preparing its EIS [Environmental Impact Statement] now but based upon the preliminary documents we have seen, cannot adequately protect the river at that site."

Those who love the Catskills' mountains, forests and rivers - and New Yorkers, who depend on them for clean water - also ought to be concerned about the proposed Belleayre Resort, a mountainside mega-development that would cover more than 500 acres. To learn more about this issue, visit the web pages of the Friends of Belleayre Mountain and of the Friends of Catskill Park.

________________________________________________________________________________

Saugatuck River

6/17/04 - You may have heard that Leon Hirsch, the property owner of the land on the far side of the TMA on Ford Road, has applied to subdivide the property into four building lots. Of concern to us were the effects of development on the river, thermal and chemical pollution, siltation from run-off and associated issues. Also, access to the river--heretofore, we were prohibited from setting foot on the island by Skerlick Rock, as well as from fishing the 'back stretch' of the river i.e. between the island and the land.

Last night, the application was heard by the Westport Conservation Commission. Nutmeg TU Chapter Board members Bob Knoebel and Dwight Patrick, and Bruce LePage of Aspetuck Land Trust all testified at the hearing. The Conservation Commission was proactive on all our concerns even prior to our testimony, including seeking a 100 foot Conservation Easement. Through negotiation and testimony, the following is the happy outcome:

• Conservation Easement on the two western lots of 15' from the wetland line
• effectively 40' from river's edge, and 100' on the two eastern lots (this being the right bank as facing downstream]. Conservation Easement to include ALL property on the left bank, i.e. the slivers of land between the river and Ford Road, including the area where we have located the Beach Bench.
• Conservation Easement precludes development and protects foliage, and it now also offers us access to all of the river, as well as the land on the right bank.
• Triple siltation fencing to be required during construction.

"North American freshwater ecosystems hold one-third of all freshwater mussels in the world, 40 percent of all stoneflies, 30 percent of all mayflies, two-thirds of all crayfish, and one-tenth of all freshwater fish. ... Freshwater biodiversity is diminishing as rapidly as that of some of the most stressed terrestrial ecosystems on the planet. While 123 species of North American freshwater mollusks, crayfishes, amphibians, and fishes have become extinct since 1900, the future bodes far grimmer." Dave Foreman, Rewilding North America (Island Press, 2004)
Connecticut's new 'Conserve Wildlife' commemorative license plate The plate was unveiled at a ceremony at Dinosaur State Park in Rocky Hill on June 23, 2004. Money raised from the sales and renewals of the wildlife license plates will fund research and management efforts, habitat restoration projects, and enhance public outreach. (Fish are included under the 'wildlife' umbrella for the purposes of this fund.)
Turn In Poachers __(800) 842 - HELP (24/7) Emergency Spill Reporting __(860) 424 - 3338 (24/7)   Keep informed - subscribe to Nutmeg Chapter of Trout Unlimited Email: Browse Archives at groups.google.com