Date: Fri 14-Jun-1996

Publication: Bee

Author: ANDYG

Quick Words:

Tamarack-Woods-Adams

Full Text:

Environmental Study May Be Ordered For Tamarack Woods

B Y A NDREW G OROSKO

Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) Chairman Stephen Adams said this week he

will seek to have the applicants for the Tamarack Woods residential

subdivision hire an environmental consultant to address concerns raised by

nearby residents.

Tamarack Road area residents told P&Z members at a June 6 public hearing they

have environmental questions about M&E Land Group's proposal to build a 10-lot

residential subdivision known as Tamarack Woods within the 33-acre triangle of

land bounded by Tamarack, Sanford and Echo Valley roads.

Many residents who spoke at the hearing called for an environmental study to

gauge whether the construction would have negative effects on the rustic area.

"It's been alleged that there's going to be a negative environmental impact,"

so a study is in order, Mr Adams said June 10.

At the June 6 hearing, P&Z members granted the Tamarack Road area neighbors

"intervenor status" in the development application, meaning the neighbors will

function as a third party to the land use review process.

Hiring a consultant to do an environmental study of the land would lengthen

the P&Z's review of Tamarack Woods, Mr Adams said.

At the hearing, Larry Edwards of M&E Land Group, said although the developers

could put 15 lots on the 33-acre parcel, they are only applying for 10 lots.

M&E has spent much time discussing aspects of the proposed development with

people living in the area, he said. The developers have reached a road work

agreement with the selectmen and have gained approval from the Conservation

Commission for wetlands construction work, he said. Residents of the area

successfully opposed a proposal to do extensive road widening to accommodate

new traffic generated by the development.

The developers won't damage the rural charcater of Sanford and Tamarack roads,

Mr Edwards said. Both roads are dirt roads.

"We've tried to work with the neighbors," he said, adding the developers are

committed to spending $165,000 for road improvements in the area. The work

includes clearing road shoulders and blasting rock ledge that obstructs sight

lines.

The 33-acre parcel contains less than four acres of wetlands and will have

only one wetland crossing, he said. The houses planned for Sanford Road would

be set well back from the road, he added.

Mr Edwards then addressed the sensitive topic of how new home construction in

the area would affect exisitng well water water supplies in the area.

"There's been a lot of concern about wells," he said. "Wells fail for various

reasons" and not ncessarily because of what happens next door to them, he

said.

Mr Edwards said that based on his review of town health department water well

records, during the past 20 years there's never been a property within 500

feet of the development site where a new well had to be drilled.

Mr Edwards, an engineer and surveyor, said that new wells drilled for the

Tamarack Woods project won't adversely affect wells on adjoining properties.

Opposition

Following Mr Edwards' comments, a number of area residents discussed various

objections they have to the development proposal.

Mae Schmidle of Echo Valley Road said Indian artifacts might exist on the

development site. Mrs Schmidle claimed Conservation Commission members didn't

fully consider the environmental impact of the proposed development on the

Sanford Road area. She charged that some wetlands on the property are

inaccurately mapped.

"I feel that my family and my neighbors should have the benefit of an

independent consultant to determine adequate adherence to Newtown

environmental regulations as well as the possibility of Indian artifacts on

this particular site," she said.

"I would also ask P&Z to require the developer to control clear cutting on

this very environmentally sensitive piece of property... I strongly urge you

to require the developer to provide complete and adequate visual screening for

all abutting neighbors," she said.

Nicholas Bellantoni, the state archaeologist, will be inspecting the area for

Indian artifacts, according to Mrs Schmidle.

Mrs Schmidle asked exactly how much land lies in the proposed subdivision,

noting that there have been at least three versions of the subdivsion map

presented so far.

Protecting roads such as Tamarack Road was the genesis of her proposal to

create a town ordinance on protecting scenic roads, Mrs Schmidle said.

Lillian Strickler of Tamarack Road said that after the residential subdivision

in the area of Old Farm Hill Road was developed several years ago, her

domestic water well experienced problems. Old Farm Hill Road intersects with

Echo Valley Road.

Mrs Strickler said it cost her $7,000 to drill a new 500-foot-deep well. Mrs

Strickler said she is concerned about a new devlopment causing negative

environmental effects in her neighborhood.

Paul DeLuca of Echo Valley Road questioned Mr Edwards credibility in terms of

predicting that Tamarack Woods wouldn't have negative effcts on existing water

wells.

"We're listening to fantasies here... We're supposed to take this as gospel

truth," Mr DeLuca said.

Mr DeLuca criticized the way the Conservation Commission handled M&E Land

Group's application for wetlands construction work. He said the land proposed

for development is the home to unusual forms of vegetation and wildlife.

Mr DeLuca also objected to the number of driveways proposed for Sanford Road.

Of the effects of the proposed development, Mr DeLuca said "This is not going

to be the same. The whole area is going to be wrecked."

Cordalie Benoit Eliscu of Sanford Road said the development site contains the

unusual flower known as the lady slipper, an orchid that resembles a slipper.

"Development definitely is going to kill the lady slippers" and a huge oak

tree in the area, she said.

Ms Elsicu urged that all P&Z members inspect the property before voting on the

development proposal.

"We don't need any more houses in our neighborhood," she said. The propsoed

construction would amount to "an incredible impact... on an undisturbed piece

of land," she said.

People who move into the new houses will be upset when they learn that hunting

is allowed in Upper Paugussett State Forest which lies across Sanford Road

from the development site, she said.

Of the 33-acre site site, Ms Eliscu said "This is a very important piece of

land because of its age, because of its location next to a state forest."

"Walk on some of these ledges. Walk on some of these roads," she urged P&Z

members.

Jack McGarvey of Fleetwood Drive, the head of the Rocky Glen Area Association,

said the construction proposal must be reviewed carefully. He termed Sanford

Road "one of the most beautiful roads in town" and "an environemntally

delicate area."

Horticulturalist

Horticulturalist Sydney Eddison of Echo Valley Road said "This land is really

not very well suited to building. Really, no one knows how much water is

available... We should err on the side of less - doing less, building less."

It is everyone's responsibility to protect the environment, she said.

Mary Burnham of Walnut Tree Hill Road suggested that the developers'

application be resubmitted to the Conservation Commission for furtrher review,

contending that mistakes were made during its review process.

Mr Adams said, however, the P&Z doesn't have the authority to send the matter

back to the Conservation Commission.

One upset Tamarack Road resident said "If anyone of us had known the Taylor

property was for sale, we would own it and it wouldn't be developed."

The man said he moved to Newtown from Norwalk and bought as much land here as

he could afford, but apparently it wasn't enough land.

Rob Eckenrode of Wildcat Road asked "What gives a developer with a large piece

of property the right to come in and change the entire charcater of the

neighborhood?" He urged that P&Z members consider development issues

carefully.

Eric Roundy of Buttonball Drive, vice president of the Rocky Glen Area

Association, said of the P&Z "We really have a toothless dog here, a lap dog,

rather than a watch dog."

Mr DeLuca charged that the developers haven't provided enough information in

their report on the area's hydrogeology and questioned the quality of the

information that was presented.

Attorney Robert Hall, representing the developers said Mr Edwards' technical

report is based on good information. Mr Hall said the neighbors' calls for an

environemntal study of the development site "comes at the eleventh hour."

"We feel the application does meet the regulations and should be granted," he

said. State law allows people to apply to build subdivisions, he added.

Mr Hall told P&Z members that water can be found on any property in town by

drilling a well.

"All the people who are near developments fear it... Nobody likes to see

change," he said.

"We think (the land's) been evaluated sufficiently already," he said.

At that point, Mr Adams decided to keep the public hearing open so that P&Z

members could consider having the developers hire an environmental consultant

to review the development site.