The state is expected to take several months to review

The Borough Board of Burgesses Tuesday night approved a noise control ordinance which is less strict than the burgesses’ initial ordinance proposal, a measure which had drawn strong criticism at a public hearing last month.

However, it is unclear when the noise control ordinance will go into effect. Such local noise control laws are subject to review and possible modification by the state Department of Environmental Protection (DEP).

 Joe Pulaski, the DEP’s sole noise control specialist, was away this week and could not be reached for comment.

Attorney Don Mitchell, who represents the burgesses, said that for the noise control ordinance to take effect, it must be found to be consistent with state noise control standards.  It is unclear how long it would take DEP to review the Borough noise ordinance before approving it, rejecting it, or suggesting modifications to it, Mr Mitchell said.

If a Borough noise control ordinance eventually receives DEP approval, the ordinance would be published as a legal advertisement and would take effect 30 days after its publication.

 Senior Burgess James Gaston said the noise ordinance was modified to reflect public comments which were made at the December 12 public hearing about the earlier, stricter version of the ordinance.

That earlier version of the ordinance attracted pointed criticism, especially from a representative of Newtown Shopping Village, a shopping center on Queen Street owned by real estate developer Joseph Kasper. At the December session, attorney Daniel Shepro, representing Mr Kasper, said the ordinance was aimed directly at the shopping center and could economically damage the commercial complex.

Mr Gaston said he found Mr Shepro’s specific comments about him and about Borough Warden Joan Crick to be “troubling.”

At the Tuesday session, Mr Gaston read aloud several lengthy late December newspaper articles detailing a federal investigation into the activities of several Bridgeport-area firms, including Kasper Associates, Mr Kasper’s development firm.

 “We should take their comments with a grain of salt,” Mr Gaston said of the pointed criticisms which were leveled at the earlier version of the noise ordinance proposal by Mr Shepro.

“The allegation that the Board of Burgesses was trying to put them [Newtown Shopping Village] out of business was ridiculous,” Mr Gaston said.

At the December public hearing,  Mr Shepro had called for Mr Gaston and Mrs Crick to excuse themselves from voting on the noise ordinance, charging that they had both complained about noise emanating from Newtown Shopping Village. Mr Shepro also had pointed out that Mr Kasper and Mr Gaston have an agreement concerning property lying between the shopping center and Mr Gaston’s Main Street property.

Mr Gaston said he does not believe he has any conflict of interest in addressing the noise control ordinance as a burgess.

Mr Gaston, an attorney, told the burgesses, though, that he would excuse himself from voting on the revised noise ordinance, saying that his law partner may be involved in representing persons connected with the ongoing federal probe in Bridgeport. Mr Gaston, however, discussed the noise ordinance.

Mrs Crick noted that, as borough warden, she would vote only to break a tie. As it turned out, every burgess who voted on the ordinance voted in favor of it, so there was no need for Mrs Crick to vote on the matter.

 

Provisions

The revised ordinance reflects the constructive comments that were made at the hearing by Borough residents, according to Mr Gaston.

Mr Gaston expressed thanks to members of the public who had attended the December public hearing to express their views on noise control. About 40 people attended the December session, a large turnout for a burgesses’ meeting. Only a handful of residents attended the Tuesday night meeting.

In general, the revised ordinance reduces the time periods during which certain noise-generating activities would be prohibited in the Borough.

In the initial proposal, certain noisy activities would have been prohibited between 8 pm and 8 am the following day.

In the revised ordinance, controls are placed on those activities from either 8 pm to 6 am the following day, or from 8 pm to 6:30 am the following day, or between sunset and sunrise the following day.

Those noise prohibitions address complaints that the burgesses have received about nighttime noise in the Borough.

In light of a comment which was made at the public hearing about the ordinance possibly resulting in heavier truck traffic on borough streets in the morning when children are going to Newtown Middle School and Hawley School, Mr Gaston stressed that child safety outweighs noise concerns.

Consequently, the revised noise ordinance allows certain noise-generating activities to begin at 6 am, instead of the initially proposed 8 am. Allowing such activities, which involve truck traffic, to start at 6 am would ostensibly hold down truck traffic in the borough later in the morning when children are going to school, thus enhancing public safety.

Of the various complaints filed with the burgesses about noise problems, Borough Zoning Enforcement Officer Jean St Jean said, “I think everybody has to cooperate, and we won’t get the complaints.”

Budd Drive residents register many noise complaints, Ms St Jean noted. Budd Drive lies on the eastern edge of the Borough, near a rail line, Interstate-84, commercial and industrial areas.

The revised ordinance should not adversely affect the Big Y supermarket in Newtown Shopping Village, Mrs Crick said, noting that the store’s first deliveries of the day arrive at 6 am.

The noise ordinance exempts snow clearing activities from any time-of-day prohibitions, Mr Gaston said.

Of the revised ordinance, Mrs Crick said, “It’s reasonable.”

“It’s not unreasonable,” said Burgess Joseph Maher, III.

The noise ordinance is intended to control excessive noise within the Borough. The ordinance’s rationale is that excessive noise degrades the environment and is detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of borough residents.