STOPTHEPIT

The Pit Is Stopped!

2006-11-01T15:29:00.000-08:00

For immediate release:

ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP STOPS THE PIT

Hamden (Wed., 11/1/06): Facing a relentless barrage of legal, political, scientific, and general citizen opposition, Sunwood Development, a Wallingford-based housing developer, has withdrawn a controversial application to remove a quarter of a million cubic yards of gravel from a 40-acre residential parcel on Whitney Avenue in the Mt. Carmel section of Hamden.

“We had reports from environmental experts that proved what everyone already knew: this was a really bad idea in an ecologically sensitive location,” said Keith Ainsworth, the New Haven environmental lawyer who represented the Mt. Carmel Environmental Trust (MCET), a citizen group fighting the gravel pit proposal. “If the developer comes back with a condo development, we’ll send that idea to the trash bin, too,” continued Ainsworth, noting that the site is criss-crossed by wetlands and the Willow and Jepp Brooks, which feed Hamden’s public water supply.

“An industrial mining operation in a residential neighborhood is an insult to nature and to the neighbors. We had to fight it,” said Andrew Brand, a Hamden resident who lives near the site and is Chair of the MCET. Brand says he has been fighting proposals to mine gravel at the site for over 11 years. An even larger gravel mining proposal was defeated by the Hamden Planning and Zoning Commission in 1995.

“It just goes to show that neighbors who stand together can win,” said Gail Traester, a founding member of the MCET. But the fight may not be over. “Sunwood’s (the developer) President had threatened that if we didn’t allow them to mine gravel, they would come back to build lots of houses,” Traester noted. “I think he underestimates our resolve to protect the important drinking water and environmental resources on this land.”

The mining proposal was the subject of two evening-long hearings before Hamden’s Planning and Zoning Commission on October 10 and 25. More than 200 people attended each of the hearings, many speaking eloquently of the need to protect the quality of life and the natural setting in the northern end of Hamden, an area marked by scenic views of Sleeping Giant State Park, rock outcroppings, the Farmington Canal Rail-to-Trail, Brooksvale Park, and quiet neighborhoods.

No one spoke in favor of the proposal.

Every organization not paid by Sunwood that commented on the proposal raised serious questions about it and, in most cases, flatly opposed the project, including: the Connecticut Department of Public Health Drinking Water section, the Regional Water Authority, the King’s Mark Environmental Review Team, the Connecticut Fund for the Environment, Trout Unlimited, the Hamden Natural Resources and Open Space Commission, the Farmington Canal Rail-to-Trail Association, Hamden’s Farmington Canal Commission, Westwoods Neighborhood Association, the Hamden Historic Properties Commission, and the Mill River Watershed Association. Others speaking out against the project included Hamden Mayor Craig B. Henrici; State Representative Al Adinolfi (103rd district); Legislative Council President Al Gorman; Dr. Phil Brewer, Democratic candidate for state rep from the 103rd District, who spoke on behalf of members of the Cheshire Town Council; Bob Westervelt, Council rep for Hamden’s 9th district; John P. Wargo, a Yale Professor of Risk Analysis, Environmental Policy, and Political Science; and Dr. Steven Danzer, an environmental and wetlands expert.

“We are very serious about protecting this land,” Ainsworth stated. “If Sunwood comes back, they will see us again."

The Mt. Carmel Environmental Trust (MCET) was founded in 2006 to protect and preserve the quality of life in the Mt. Carmel section of Hamden, CT. MCET Board members include Andrew Brand, Chair; Michelle Brand, Vice-Chair; James Traester, Treasurer; Becky Bartlett, Secretary; Sarah Clark; and Gus Spohn.

Unprecedented eloquence

2006-10-28T20:05:00.000-07:00

At the first hearing on the 10th, when so many of us showed up and waited to speak, I was impressed by the patience and quiet dignity of the audience. It was a VERY long night, and all we heard was the presentation of the team of would-be pit mongers.

Last night, we got our chance to speak, and I was simply amazed at the intelligence and eloquence of our opposition movement. How many times have you seen people step up to the mike at a public hearing and then cringed at their inability to express themselves intelligently? But last night there was none of that, absolutely none at all. It was one speaker after another making excellent remarks and observations about all the aspects of the operation and aftermath of the proposed rape of the neighborhood. It is often said at long hearings, "everything has been said but not everyone has said it." Yet each of the dozens of speakers had a different take on the issue, and no two said the same thing.

Hats off to you all, band of eloquent pit bulls who will never let go, never allow this travesty to happen. We shall not be moved!

Dr. Phil, blogmeister

"A long line formed before the podium..."

2006-10-26T17:50:00.000-07:00

“When Planning & Zoning Commission Chair Joe McDonagh asked the packed Council Chambers (at the public hearing) last night if anyone wanted to speak in favor of a gravel-mining operation proposed for upper Whitney Avenue, no one budged. When he asked if anyone wanted to speak against the plan, which would excavate 254,000 cubic yards of sand and gravel over a two-year period, a sea of hands went up. And a long line formed before the podium.”*

The comments from the public last night were simply outstanding -- articulate; packed with information and thought; focused on the relevant issues; hitting all the issues, but not repetitious; respectful of the seriousness of the situation and of the task before the Commissioners, yet passionate. So many people during and after the hearing remarked on how impressed they were with the intelligence, clarity, and power of each and every statement. Thank you to everyone who spoke, and to everyone who has contributed so much time, thought, and effort to the many different aspects of this fight.

Next week: Attorney Keith Ainsworth presents the case against the Pit on behalf of the Mt. Carmel Environmental Trust. More comments from the developer. We look forward to seeing everyone there: Old Town Hall, 7 pm, Thursday, 11/2.

* from an article by Sharon Bass in the hamdendailynews.com. See full article, together with video footage from the hearing, at http://www.hamdendailynews.com

A message from Andy Brand of the Mt. Carmel Environmental Trust

2006-10-23T18:01:00.000-07:00

It's time for the public to speak, and for your concerns to be heard! On Wednesday, October 25th, at 7 pm in the Old Town Hall, the public hearing on the gravel pit proposal will reopen and now it's your turn. As chair and vice chair of the Mount Carmel Environmental Trust*, my wife and I would like to thank you for your interest in this issue, and for the hard work many of you have put into fighting the pits. From signing petitions to putting up signs (I think I counted 25 on Monday) to attending planning meetings to gathering information for your comments at the hearing, you have helped to strengthen the case against the pits.

It's important to stress how this mining operation would affect us all. Some of you may live near the site, as we do. Many of us make frequent use of the Farmington Canal trail (my wife is out there twice a day). Certainly we all drive on Whitney Avenue regularly! And, almost all of us use the public water supply. We should not have to worry about noise and dust in our backyards, dangerous trucks crowding our streets, possible contamination of our water, and definite destruction of our town's natural resources and wetland habitat. It's time to put a stop to this proposed operation once and for all!

Again, thank you for all your work so far. We look forward to seeing you on Wednesday evening and joining our voices in protest.

Sincerely,
Andy Brand

* The Mount Carmel Environmental Trust was recently formed to protect and preserve the quality of life in the Mt. Carmel section of Hamden, CT.

Citizens Speak Out against the Pit

2006-10-18T20:09:00.000-07:00

Here’s what citizens are saying about the gravel pit on the WTNH-Channel 8 blog:

Comment from: mick [Visitor]
From what I've seen, they're in a residential area. I don't care how many jobs it creates, you could put in a nuclear waste storage facility and it would create jobs. It doesn't fit with the character of the neighborhood. How much simpler can it be? Tell them to go dig somewhere else.
10/11/06 @ 18:30

Comment from: Jim [Visitor]
How can anyone say that they are going to return land to its natural state after they have stripped out some 250,000 cubic yards of it.
10/12/06 @ 09:10

Comment from: Michelle [Visitor]
There are so many problems with this application! The developer hasn't told or doesn't know where the trucks will go with the gravel, so he can't provide an accurate traffic study. He hasn't given specific information about test borings on the property, so no one really knows exactly how much sand is there--or when they'll hit bedrock!There are people living within just a few yards of where all the trucks will be refueling and idling, dumping diesel fumes all day long. And scariest of all, there are streams and wetlands throughout the property which lead right into our public water supply. How can we allow such drastic excavation work right in the middle of an aquifer? We can't!
10/12/06 @ 16:13

Comment from: Johnny [Visitor]
The owner of the property argues that he deserves "fair market value" in return for his investment. Since when is the public responsible for insuring private profit? But leaving that question aside, what would be fair market value? Say it's the value of building lots in the Mt. Carmel area, perhaps a total of three or four million dollars for his forty acres. Not the $30 to $40 million he hopes to make by turning those wooded acres into a devastated strip mine!
10/12/06 @ 19:36

Comment from: debbie [Visitor]
The gravel pit in Hamden is a VERY bad idea. Take a look at the area near SCSU where a similar gravel pit stood. The area surrounding this Mt Carmel/Cheshire/Wallingford corner is a residential area with restrictions to Sleeping Giant State park why should a gravel pit have any less restrictions? It is the last place anyone should be looking to set up a gravel pit. Leaving the area untouched is the ONLY solution. Once touched the land will never return to its natural state and either will the residents currently living in that area.
10/17/06 @ 13:33

Comment from: Ed Wilson [Visitor]
As a long-term resident, property owner, and voter in Mt. Carmel, I agree with most of our posters that this is highly inappropriate use of land so close to other residents and so far untouched by developers. 'Johnny' makes a point - 'fair market value' does not mean that the owner can squeeze every last cent of value out of the land at the expense of everyone else's quality of life. This greedy exploitation needs to be stopped now.10/17/06 @ 16:46

2006-10-17T02:12:00.000-07:00

My husband and I have lived in the Mt. Carmel section of Hamden for four years and in Spring Glen for three years before that. Hamden has been a wonderful community to be a part of, and we have enjoyed all it has to offer. I work at Quinnipiac University, hike Sleeping Giant, and, most often, walk the trail that runs by our house. Louis is a runner and is on the trail most mornings. We are horrified at the prospect of a gravel pit, with its concomitant dust, noise, traffic, and destruction of property so close to the trail.

We have spent years improving our property which sits on the corner of River Rd. and Whitney. This will have a direct impact on our quality of life on an already busy and noisy intersection. We have always felt fully compensated by our proximity to the trail and enjoyed walking with our friends and out-of-town guests while they told us how lucky we were. I have a feeling that if that walk will now include a gravel pit, the reaction will not be as positive.

In addition to our love of the trail, we have a strong appreciation of the warmth and commitment of our neighbors to this community. Those who live closer to the proposed pit may leave, strongly affecting the stability of the neighborhood and property values. Many of the families we know have young children, and we cannot understand how the pit developers truly believe that leaving unguarded standing ponds of water, some fairly deep, is safe for curious children. I only hope that these developers and the property owner plan to hold themselves accountable should any child be hurt.

We have tolerated tax increases, car accidents and tire marks across our lawn, picked up beer bottles and other litter thrown from passing cars, and mowed the greenway by the road which is only mowed by the town twice a year as far as we can tell. We have always felt that our stewardship of the area was part of the price one pays for living in a beautiful but busy community. The gravel pit, however, is just beyond our ability to forgive.

Please register our strenuous objection to this horrendous proposal.

Janice Swiatek-Kelley and Louis F. D. Kelley
475 River Rd.
Hamden, CT 06518

The Nuts and Bolts of Sand and Gravel

2006-10-13T07:25:00.000-07:00

I attended the Public Hearing on the 10th and was amazed at the exceptionally courteous behavior of fellow opponents of the Pit. Not that we aren't well behaved or civilized. But some of the items in the proposal and the analyses were so outrageous it was surprising that they did not cause more of an outcry (See the previous post for examples). Our discipline is our strength. Let's keep it up for the next session on the 25th.

Some of the details of a sand and gravel operation should be emphasized:

NOISE: From the moment operations begin in the morning until they end at night, one or more pieces of heavy machinery will crank up the diesel engines which will run all day long. This will create a constant drone and roar. In addition to this, a truck entering the property every six minutes will create its own diesel roar and at any given time there will be more than one truck on the site. The combination of trucks arriving, idling their engines, maneuvering, and leaving fully loaded will be added to the background din of the excavating equipment. Even this will be surpassed by the crash of gravel falling down onto the truck beds as they are loaded.

The fact that the developers requested the right to subject the neighborhood to this hellish roar from 7am to 5 pm six days a week and slightly fewer hours on Sundays shows their utter lack of regard for the living conditions of the surrounding community. The word "contempt" comes to mind. If they have no respect for us, can we trust anything they say or promise? Can we possibly believe in their Garden of Eden post-excavation artist's renditions when they are asking to drag us through hell to get there?

DIESEL, DIRT, & DUST: In addition to the particulate air pollution of several diesel engines running simultaneously can be added the constant cloud of dust kicked up by their tires as they move around the property. The developers like to talk about "clean, dust free sand."

Yeah, right. Just drive by the Tilcon facility on Route 17 in Durham and see the thick coat of dust on all of the surrounding vegetation if you need further convincing that the dustless gravel pit is a myth. But hey, green leaves are so pre-industrial, right?

AFTERMATH: After the developers take their $30 million and run, we will be left with four water filled pits with steep slopes not suitable for recreation and in fact outright dangerous. (Look closely at the angle of the banks of the gravel pit on the right. Do you want your small children playing around this?) Whether or not these "ponds" will be stagnant depends on their total volume versus the volume of inflowing water. Clearly there is not a large volume spring to replenish them and they will essentially become large breeding pools for mosquitoes, especially during the dry summer months. This means that for those who have not been driven out of the neighborhood by two years of noise and pollution the roar of diesel will be replaced by the buzz of unfriendly insects every time they step outside. (Unless you want to spray with insecticide all of the time.)

But we aren't going to let that happen! Our commitment, discipline, and passion will prevail. Be prepared for another long night on the 25th. Bring a friend. Bring popcorn! Let's make the next hearing a celebration our newfound neighborhood solidarity!

Phil Brewer, MD
Stopthepit Blogmeister

"So Many People Want to Speak on This Issue, the Town Will Continue Tonight's Meeting Oct. 25th"

2006-10-11T16:57:00.000-07:00

We’re grateful to the media -- print, online, tv, and radio – for their extensive, clear, and vivid coverage of last night’s hearing before the Planning & Zoning Commission. And we’re grateful to all the people who came and listened, who signed petitions, and who are otherwise supporting our efforts to stop the gravel pit project in northern Hamden. Among the 240 people who attended last night were neighbors, state and town officials, members of various civic associations and advocacy organizations, and others – and we’re looking forward to hearing all of them present their ideas, information, and questions to the Commission at the next hearing on Wednesday, October 25.

Here are links to, and extracts from, some of the coverage of last night’s hearing:

Hamden Daily News (online) http://www.hamdendailynews.com/

“About 200 people crammed into Council Chambers, most wearing little yellow buttons with the words ‘Stop the Pit.’ A few wore more than one. There were not enough chairs. Some had to stand in the back and in the rotunda. Babies cried. Young children…stood by their parents….Neighbors expect the operation to be noisy and ruin precious land. Many trees will be killed and just a fraction replaced at the end of the day. Residents cite traffic problems with trucks going in and out six days a week. They worry about air pollution from diesel fumes and contaminants getting into the town’s drinking supply. Jepp and Willow brooks run through the land and eventually drain into the Mill River, which pours into Lake Whitney. ‘We’re very concerned about drinking water quality,’ said Curt Johnson, a senior attorney with the Connecticut Fund for the Environment.”

New Haven Register (you may need to register online (it's free)and then search the site for the article) http://www.nhregister.com/

“About 240 people — many wearing ‘Stop the Pit’ buttons — crammed into the Memorial Town Hall auditorium to oppose a two-year sand and gravel mining operation at 4280 and 4246 rear Whitney Ave.…It's the vehicles that will infiltrate their neighborhood for two years that have people upset. The plan says that excavating work would take place weekdays and Saturdays for two years and that 250,000 cubic yards of gravel and sand will be removed in 64 round trips of truck traffic daily.…(The developer’s attorney) said there would be a ‘minimal increase in traffic,’ a comment that got a rise out of the disbelieving crowd.”

WFSB/Channel 3 http://www.wfsb.com/news/1005333/detail.html/

“Residents packed Town Hall in Hamden Tuesday evening....The area is home to a bike path, wildlife and hundreds of homes.…’It's just going to be total chaos. They want to put a mining operation in the middle of a residential neighborhood,’ said John Morrison of the Spring Glen Civic Association.”

WTNH/Channel 8 http://www.wtnh.com/global/story.asp?s=5523590&ClientType=Printable/

“So many people want to speak on this issue, the town will continue tonight's meeting Oct. 25th.”

"People packed Hamden Town Hall to voice their concerns..."

2006-10-10T21:44:00.000-07:00

More than two hundred people attended tonight's first installment of a public hearing on the proposed Whitney Avenue gravel pit. Sara Welch of WTNH-TV/Channel 8 was one of several television, radio, and print reporters who covered the hearing. Extracts from her report follow:

Heated debate over gravel pit plans in Hamden

"Stop the pit!" That's the battle cry from residents in one Hamden neighborhood
who are fighting a plan for a gravel pit....People packed Hamden Town Hall to
voice their concerns....The entrance along Route 10/Whitney Avenue is a major
concern. As many as 64-trucks a day would be coming and going from the site.
People also believe the project would forever alter the wetlands and ruin the
beauty of the Farmington canal green way that runs through the area....

"There are only three or four neighbors that are immediately impacted...," says Bob Wiedenmann, Sunwood Development....

The town's natural resources and open space commission (has) opposed the plan believing it will dramatically alter the environment and destroy wildlife in the area....

So many people want to speak on this issue, the town will continue tonight's meeting Oct. 25th.

The Issues at Hand:

2006-10-10T06:00:00.000-07:00

Protect our region’s health and safety!
Speak out against the gravel pit!
Help us pack the hearing room at tonight’s hearing!
Write a letter to the Hamden PZC!

Please plan to attend a public hearing before
Hamden’s Planning and Zoning Commission
Tonight, Tues., 10/10, at 7 p.m.
At Hamden’s old Town Hall (corner of Dixwell & Whitney)
regarding the proposed creation of a
GRAVEL PIT – MINING OPERATION
at 4246 (rear) and 4280 Whitney Avenue, Hamden
(between Whitney Court and Bittersweet Lane)

Applicant proposes to remove 250,000 cubic yards of sand and gravel over two years. Approximately 64 round-trip truck trips per day from the site. Access will be via Whitney Avenue, both northbound and southbound. Application materials indicate that approximately 8 truckloads of fill will be removed every hour, 8 am–5 pm, for a minimum of 255 days.

Among our concerns:
health (dust and fumes; impact on public water supply);
noise (from excavation and trucks);
safety (increased traffic, including heavy trucks);
impact on area’s water supply, wetlands, vegetation;
harmony and appropriateness of site use in relation to the general area and adjacent properties (a gravel pit in a residential zone that includes four parks: Farmington Canal, Brooksvale, Christian Rendeiro Park, and Sleeping Giant)
nature and intensity of use (disturbance of over 15 acres of land; two years of heavy-duty trucking; increased traffic on Whitney Avenue).

Please attend to ask questions and express your views!
For more information, please contact Sarah and Gus at 248-8181
or Gail and Jim at 288-6648.

Gravel Pit Is Completely at Odds with Town Plan of Conservation and Development

2006-10-09T19:21:00.000-07:00

Hamden’s zoning regulations state that, “in deciding whether or not to grant a Special Permit for the gravel pit, the Planning & Zoning Commission shall give consideration to, but not be limited by,” eight “threshold” points. The second of these points is how the gravel pit application complies with Hamden’s Plan of Conservation and Development. (See 9/24 posting below under “What Can I Do to Help?” for all 8 points.) Al Gorman highlights many inconsistencies between the gravel pit application and the Town Plan in his September 6 letter (see 9/28 posting below). Here are additional extracts from the Plan that underscore the inappropriateness of a large-scale, multi-year mining operation in northern Hamden:

From the HAMDEN PLAN OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT (adopted 7/6/04; effective 9/1/04)

p. 6: VISION STATEMENT. From its humble beginning as part of the New Haven Colony in 1638 and later incorporation as a town in 1786 with a population of some 1,400 “souls,” Hamden has grown to become home to nearly 57,000 residents. Over this span of some 365 years, one characteristic has endured: its neighborhoods….These neighborhood communities still characterize the town and attract residents from the surrounding New Haven metropolitan area. They offer residents a mixture of housing types as well as shops, open spaces, schools and a sense of history. The preservation and enhancement of these neighborhoods is vital to preserving the quality of life in Hamden….

p. 25: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS. The overall quality of life in a community is largely determined by the quality, quantity and distribution of its cultural and natural resources. The protection of Hamden’s natural resources is an important component to the Plan of Conservation and Development. This is because the protection of natural resources helps preserve the Town’s community character, preserves essential natural systems, and improves the quality of life for all of Hamden’s residents….

p. 124: AREA 6. North of the Mt. Carmel/West Woods/Whitney Avenue intersection becomes more rural with the eastern side of the corridor dominated by three major parcels – Sleeping Giant Park, Sleeping Giant Golf Course and the Regional Water Authority holdings around Clarke’s Pond….There are also several wetland areas as well as a west-to-east power line easement in the area. In general, this is a sensitive environmental area and should be treated as such.

p. 130: GOAL #6. From the West Woods Road/Whitney Avenue intersection to the Cheshire town line, protection of natural resources should be the paramount concern. OBJECTIVE: North of the West Woods Road/Whitney Avenue intersection, future land use should focus on low density development, NO EXTENSION OF NON-RESIDENTIAL USES (ed.'s emphasis), and natural resource protection.

p. 148: MAJOR PLAN GOALS. The overarching goals of this Plan of Conservation and Development are the preservation of the Town’s sound housing stock and stable neighborhoods; the regulation of in-fill development in keeping with the character and scale of surrounding neighborhoods and development; the preservation and enhancement of the Town’s open space and recreation areas,…and the support of quality of life improvements.

p. 150: Upper Whitney Conservation District. The policy for this area should be to prohibit non-residential development with a focus on continued natural resource protection as the northern gateway into Hamden.
• Land Uses should be compatible with the goal of beautifying Hamden and maintaining its natural beauty.
• Development proposals exceeding 100,000 square feet of commercial, industrial or retail use, should be subject to intensive analysis in terms of their economic, social, physical and environmental impact on the health, welfare and safety of the community.

p. 156: GOAL #1: Promote the conservation and preservation of natural resources as part of future development activity. Actions: Protect water quality through the protection of the Town’s watercourses wetlands and land within aquifer protection areas.

p. 159: GOAL #8: Provide a safe, attractive and well-maintained system of public roadways.

p. 160: GOAL #9: Support and foster programs that maintain the housing stock and enhance and preserve the fabric of existing neighborhoods.

p. 161: GOAL #10: Ensure that all residential areas and developments are attractive and well maintained places to live for Hamden’s residents.

p. 164: GOAL #19: … Highlight Hamden as a physically appealing place to do business.

p. 168: GOAL #25: From the West Woods Road/Whitney Avenue intersection to the Cheshire town line, protection of natural resources should be the paramount concern.

HEARING: A suggestion

2006-10-07T22:33:00.000-07:00

While canvassing the neighborhoods around the area of the proposed pit with Al Gorman today it was apparent that sentiment against the Pit is high and that turnout for the PZC hearing on tuesday will reflect the intensity of the opposition. I would like to suggest that everyone ask a neighbor to come with them. More than one senior expressed an interest but had no way to come because of not driving after dark, and people in this situation will need a ride. So, come to express your opinion, and bring someone with you!

The other thing that struck me was the number of people who just couldn't understand why the town can't just say no and be done with it. The fact is, the pro-pit forces are well financed, ably led, and under the law have a real chance of prevailing. Probably not at the hearing, but eventually in court if they lose again. That is why being very vocal and visible are so important. This will show both the owners and town officials that we mean business and will stick together for as long as it takes to prevail.

Remember, the request is for a special permit, not a routine one, and the default position for special permits is (or should be) denial. The burden of proof is on the developer to show why he should be granted an variance, and the more we organize and holler, the greater the burden that the opposition has to work with.

Dr. Phil Brewer

Representative Adinolfi Opposes the Pit

2006-10-04T19:12:00.000-07:00

Al Adinolfi, who represents the 103rd district (Cheshire, Hamden, and Wallingford) in the Connecticut House of Representatives, has boosted our efforts to oppose the pit by issuing this press release:

Adinolfi Opposes Proposed Gravel Pit

HARTFORD – State Representative Al Adinolfi (R-Cheshire) today expressed his opposition to a proposed sand and gravel pit near Route 10 in the northern section Hamden.

“The proposed gravel and sand operation by the Cheshire border in Hamden would have a serious impact on the area, and raises serious concerns,” said Adinolfi. “The impact to the environment, surrounding neighborhoods, and traffic would be quite detrimental to residents.”

The Sunwood Development Corporation has submitted a proposed special permit for sand and gravel mining at 4246 (rear) and 4280 Whitney Avenue. Under the proposal, the company would excavate 250,000 cubic yards of gravel and sand from the 40.4-acre site.

Late last month Hamden officials in conjunction with the Southwest Conservation District and the King’s Mark Resource Conservation and Development Council in developing an Environmental Review Team report on the project that gives details about the potential impact of the project. It can be viewed online at http://www.ctert.org/.

Adinolfi indicated that he had been in touch with the state Department of Transportation and the Department of Environmental Protection concerning the project and its potential negative impact.

“Area residents clearly don’t want a noisy mining operation taking place by their homes and in the neighborhood,” said Adinolfi. “I want to work to see that all of the potential concerns about this project are raised and made known, and I join with area officials who want to protect residents from this invasion into the peaceful surroundings of their community.”

Please support your Neighbors, Town and State Officials and come to the Public Hearing October 10th at 7pm, at the old Historic Hamden Town Hall Town Hall, 2372 Whitney Ave., Hamden, CT.
###

Rep. Adinolfi can be reached at 1-800-842-1423 (Capitol); 203-272-9701 (home).
Press Secretary Michael Downes: 1-860-240-0142

Hamden’s Natural Resources Commission Opposes Pit Project

2006-10-03T19:49:00.000-07:00

The Hamden commission charged with preserving the Town’s natural resources has written a Letter to the Editor stating their opposition to the gravel pit project and urging the Planning & Zoning Commission to deny the application “because of the negative impact the proposal shall have upon Hamden’s natural resources, open space, quality of wildlife habitat, as well as the well being of the public.” Here is their letter (boldface is blog editor’s):

September 28, 2006

Dear Editor:

The Natural Resources and Open Space Commission (NROSC) of the Town of Hamden, Connecticut is opposed to the proposed gravel mining operation proposed at 4246 Rear and 4280 Whitney Avenue, in the Town of Hamden. We urge the public to voice their opposition to the proposal at the Town’s Planning and Zoning Commission’s Public Hearing for the Special Permit, scheduled for October 10, 2006, 7:00 PM at Memorial Town Hall. We suggest the public confirm that the hearing will take place prior to attending with the Town’s Planning Office, or to submit written testimony to the Commission.

The proposed plan by the applicant calls for the removal of over 250,000 cubic yards of material. The site, in excess of 40 acres, contains numerous wetlands and is crossed by Jepp Brook and Willow Brook, tributaries for our public water supply. A highly successful open space and recreational resource of the Town, the Farmington Canal Rail Trail is immediately to the West of the project. Beyond the impact to the immediate area of the project site, including the natural habitat and private residences adjacent to the site, we believe the impact will extend beyond the borders of the immediate area, impacting the health, safety and welfare of the greater public.

The NROSC strongly urges the Planning and Zoning Commission to deny the application because of the negative impact the proposal shall have upon Hamden’s natural resources, open space, quality of wildlife habitat, as well as the well being of the public.

Sincerely,
Aris W. Stalis, Corresponding Secretary
Natural Resources and Open Space Commission, Town of Hamden, Connecticut
Hamden Government Center
2750 Dixwell Avenue Hamden, Connecticut 06518
Tel: (203)287-7100; Fax: (203)287-7101

A Candidate's Perspective on the Pit

2006-10-03T19:48:00.000-07:00

Phil Brewer, a medical doctor and Democrat from Cheshire who is running for State Representative from the 103rd district (Hamden, Cheshire, and Wallingford), has written a Letter to the Editor expressing his views on the gravel pit project. The letter currently appears in the online publication Hamden Daily News under the heading “Gravelly travesty” (http://www.hamdendailynews.com/letter_editor.html) and is also reproduced below.

To the Editor:

The age-old battle between profiteers who want to make money without regard for local consequences and tax paying members of the local community who want to preserve their quality of life beginning with a healthy environment has come to a neighborhood near you, West Woods in Hamden.

A developer hired by distant land owners is attempting to obtain approval to turn part of a lovely neighborhood into a commercial gravel pit and to subsequently leave behind 10 acres of stagnant pond water which will breed mosquitoes and, because of the sharp angle of the slope into the water, will be a constant drowning hazard.

If the Hamden Planning & Zoning Commission, under the threat of a further legal action that began after the first application was turned down, approves this project, the landowners will take their money and run, or more accurately have it sent to them, while the neighborhood pays the true price for this travesty.

We have seen in New London how public opinion reacts when private developers use local government to trample on the rights of long-standing residents of the community. Eminent domain laws are being rewritten around the country as a result. We encourage the Planning & Zoning Commission to once again stand up for the rights and expectations of long-standing members of a residential community and to once again turn down this proposal as being inappropriate. After all, it's the right thing to do. For more information go to: http://stopthepit.blogspot.com/

Sincerely,
Phil Brewer,
Candidate for State Representative, 103rd District
Dr. Phil Brewer for Connecticut State Rep (103rd District) Cheshire - Hamden - Wallingford drphilbrewer.com

The Pit and the Town Plan of Development

2006-09-28T17:40:00.000-07:00

In evaluating the gravel pit application during the public hearing on October 10, the Planning and Zoning Commission will be focusing on eight "threshold points" as required by section 826 of the Hamden zoning regulations. (All eight are listed in our 9/24 posting below.) The second threshold point is how the gravel pit relates to the Hamden Plan of Conservation and Development (PCD). Here is the relevant quote: “In deciding whether or not to grant a Special Permit, the Commission shall give consideration to, but not be limited by, the following:… 2.Compliance with the Plan of Development.”

You can see the entire PCD – more than 180 pages – online at http://www.hamden.com. (Go to Government/Town Depts N-Z/Planning/Regulations.) If you’d like to receive a document citing extracts from the Plan that are especially relevant to the Pit, contact Sarah Clark at 248-8181.

Several weeks ago, Al Gorman, Councilman-at-Large, president of the Hamden Legislative Council, and a resident of northern Hamden, submitted a letter to the PZC opposing the project. In that letter, he cited in particular several ways in which the developer's plan is inconsistent with the PCD. Here is the letter in its entirety; the highlights are mine (Sarah Clark’s).

September 6, 2006

Hamden Planning & Zoning Commission
Planning Office
Hamden Government Center
2750 Dixwell Avenue
Hamden, CT 06518

RE: Special Permit & Site Plan 06-1088/WS
4246 (rear) and 4280 Whitney Avenue R-2 zone

Dear Chairman and Commission members:

“Residential” according to Webster’s Dictionary is an adjective defined as “suitable for residences or homes: as, a residential neighborhood.” The Mount Carmel/West Woods area of northern Hamden, with no stretch of the imagination, is a residential neighborhood even with a state highway dissecting it and businesses dotting that artery. It is not a place for a mining operation or quarry excavation.

Hamden is committed to the goal of “promoting the conservation and preservation of natural resources as part of future development activity,” according to the community’s Plan of Conservation and Development, p. 32. The implication is to preserve what exists, not bulldoze and replant. In particular, the Plan cites in Goal #6, p. 130 “. . . protection of natural resources should be the paramount concern” for the area north of West Woods Road; the objective is to “focus on low density development, no extension of non-residential uses….”

The rationale to deny this special permit is clear. For this neighborhood in northern Hamden, this project is inappropriate and in discord. Traffic safety, noise, possible health issues, and environmental disturbances will impact residents’ lives for up to two years. Once begun, it could be burdensome to monitor this project and it will take decades to reclaim what now exists naturally. Often engineering can provide solutions to complicated situations, but it can not create a natural environment nor can it guarantee any enhancement of our neighborhood and Hamden’s quality of life.

Thank you for your consideration
Al Gorman, Councilman At-Large
270 Willow Street
Hamden, CT 06518

Thank you, Mr. Gorman, for your support.

(This version of Mr. Gorman’s letter was typed by Gus Spohn so it could be posted on the web. A copy of the original letter is on file in the town Planning and Zoning office in the Government Center.)

THE PIT MAKES THE MEDIA

2006-09-28T16:37:00.000-07:00

Today's Hamden Daily Journal features two letters to the editor opposing the proposed gravel pit. To see these effective statements, click here (http://www.hamdendailynews.com) and then click on "Letters to the Editor" at the top of the page.

You can also help to raise public awareness of our concerns by contacting local media, by asking the civic organizations with which you are affiliated to help publicize the Pit and the all-important public hearing on 10/10, even by wearing the STOP THE PIT button as you travel about town: it's visible, it invites people to ask questions (which inevitably lead to expressions of dismay and disbelief, and very often to offers of help), and it spreads the word. Publicity is key! Neighbors, visitors to our beautiful Trail and parks, shoppers, travelers, QU students: all need to know that their safety, landscape, health, and general welfare are at risk from this project so that they -- and we -- can be as effective as possible in stopping the Pit.

Taking action now...

2006-09-27T22:31:00.000-07:00

Neighbors opposed to the gravel pit have begun submitting letters to the Hamden Planning and Zoning Commission, even in advance of the October 10 public hearing. Scroll down to see an eloquent statement from John Mack Faragher, filed Wednesday. All citizens, no matter where they live, can submit testimony in advance -- and can speak at the hearing as well. If you plan to write a letter or submit other types of evidence (photographs, statistics, etc.) in advance, you'll want to be sure that your materials are in the mail (or email) no later than 10/5/06 to ensure that they are on file when the hearing begins.

Verbal testimony can be delivered at the hearing -- and is strongly encouraged -- but it's also recommended that you submit your comments in writing, either before or during the public session. It's also a good idea to cc your written testimony to other Town and State officials, as indicated on Mr. Faragher's letter. For more information on this effort, scroll down to our 9/24/06 posting where you'll see another letter, from Mr. Bartolini, as well as more recommendations on format.

And thank you in advance for your efforts: statements from the public, written and/or verbal, are crucial --

To: Hamden Planning and Zoning Commission, c/o Dan Kops, Assistant Town
Planner (dkops@hamden.com)
cc: Leslie A. Creane; Craig Henrici; Alfred Aldinofi; Martin M. Looney; Robert Westervelt; Joe Crisco; Philip Brewer
From: John Mack Faragher, 95 Brooksvale Ave, Hamden CT 06518
Re: Special Permit 06-1088, 4246 (rear) and 4280 Whitney Ave., R-2 Zone

My wife and I have been residents of the Mt. Carmel section of Hamden since 1988, and residents of New Haven County for thirty-five years. We are deeply concerned about the negative impact of the sand and gravel mining operation proposed for the site bordered by Whitney Ave. and the Farmington Canal Trail, which is near our home on Brooksvale Ave.

The operation will be dirty and dusty, noisy, and the fumes of the trucks will pose a public health hazard. It will result in massive environmental degradation to an area identified as a critical part of the region's watershed and located at the very center of the town's best open space and parkland. It will threaten the great recreational and significant historical resource of the Canal Trail. The so-called "ponds," left after the mining is completed, will pose a safety hazard to neighborhood children.

This proposed mining operation is completely contrary to the town's Plan of Development, which calls for low-impact development and open space for the northern portion of the town's Whitney Ave. corridor. It is obviously inappropriate to permit an industrial operation to exist in the midst of a quiet residential neighborhood. The dozens of heavy trucks that will enter
and exit the site every working day will play havoc with traffic on already-crowded Whitney Ave., and will pose a significant safety hazard.

Indeed, I will be interested to hear, at the public hearing scheduled for 10 October, whether the proponents can come up with a single positive feature--other than their own enrichment at the expense of the health, safety, and welfare of the Mt. Carmel neighborhood and the town of Hamden.

Many proposals for development are hard to decide, involving a careful balance of pros and cons. But this is an open and shut case. I urge the Hamden Planning and Zoning Commission to do the right and lawful thing: Deny this application for a special permit.

JMF

John Mack Faragher
Arthur Unobskey Professor of American History
Director, Howard R. Lamar Center for the Study of Frontiers and Borders
PO Box 208324
Yale University
New Haven CT 06520-8324

Hamden's Mayor Henrici Expresses Concerns about the Pit

2006-09-26T20:29:00.000-07:00

Important news today: Mayor Craig B. Henrici has issued a press release highlighting some of his concerns about the proposed gravel pit project. Here is the text of his release:

For Immediate Release September 26, 2006
Contact: Scott Jackson, 203-287-7100

Mayor Henrici Expresses Concerns About Gravel Pit

HAMDEN -- Mayor Craig B. Henrici today joined neighbors in expressing concerns relating to the proposed operation of a sand and gravel pit in Northern Hamden. The proposed operation would see the removal of more than 250,000 cubic yards of sand and gravel from a 40-acre site off of Whitney Avenue near the Cheshire town line.

The Town of Hamden has joined with the Southwest Conservation District and the King’s Mark Resource Conservation and Development Area Council to prepare an Environmental Review Team report on the proposed project, available online at http://www.ctert.org/, to help citizens better understand the potential impact of the project. Additionally, the Town has requested a hydrology study from the applicant to better understand the long-term viability of the four groundwater-fed ponds that will be left at the site following the completion of the excavation project.

“The potential impact of this operation on Jepp Brook, Willow Brook, and the Farmington Canal trail, not to mention the traffic implications of more than sixty daily dump truck trips, have generated huge concerns among residents,” said Henrici. “The real effects on wildlife and other environmental resources are likely to last a lot longer than the proposed two year operation of the gravel pit.”

************

Contact us!

2006-09-26T09:24:00.000-07:00

We have lawn posters, buttons, petitions, sample letters to the PZC, a sample Letter to the Editor -- lots of things that people can do and share to help get the word out about the Pit and the all-important Public Hearing on 10/10. Please feel free to call Sarah Clark and Gus Spohn at 248-8181 or Gail and Jim Traester at 288-6648 for more info and/or supplies.

STOP THE PIT

2006-09-24T08:44:00.000-07:00

Welcome to STOP THE PIT. This blog contains information about a gravel pit and mining operation proposed for Whitney Avenue in Hamden, Ct., and suggests specific steps you can take to effectively register your opposition to the project. Please feel free to contact Sarah Clark and Gus Spohn at 203-248-8181 or Gail and Jim Traester at 203-288-6648 with your ideas, comments, and questions.

OUR CONCERNS. A proposed gravel pit and mining operation, scheduled to go to public hearing before the Hamden Planning and Zoning Commission on Tuesday, Oct. 10, presents serious health and safety issues not only to neighbors who live near the project’s site on northern Whitney Avenue (Route 10), but also to citizens throughout Hamden, in Cheshire, and beyond. If approved, the project, which is slated to take two years, will create constant truck traffic up and down the already heavily traveled Route 10; spread dust, noxious fumes, and noise throughout the region; and leave behind an environmentally degraded site.

One of the primary concerns of the many people in Hamden, Cheshire, and other communities who are speaking out against the project is its potential impact on the region’s water supply: the entire 40-acre site lies within an Aquifer Protection Zone, is crossed by both Jepp and Willow Brooks (Willow brook is a tributary of the important Mill River), contains extensive wetlands, and is steps from Water Company property and wells. Part of the site also lies within a Special Flood Hazard Area.

STOP THE PIT is a grassroots organization of concerned citizens who want to protect the health and safety not only of those who live near the proposed gravel pit, but also of the entire region; preserve the quality of life for those who live in and near this residential zone; and protect the important environmental and recreational resources of the area. We are united in our determination to defeat this project.

WHAT DOES A GRAVEL PIT LOOK LIKE?

No man's land. Here are some pictures of gravel pits elsewhere. As you can see, a gravel pit quickly transforms watershed in habitat into an inhospitable no man's land. Is it any wonder that we oppose this project in our neighborhood? According to the developer's application, once the gravel and sand are removed from the site, the pits that remain will be filled with water . The end result: deep, stagnant ponds with steep slopes that could provide a breeding ground for mosquitoes and present a potential drowning hazard. (According to plans currently on file, one of the four pits will be located only 50 feet from the Farmington Canal Rail-to-Trail.)

TIMELINE OF THE PROJECT

1. Initial proposal called for trucks to enter and exit the site via Brooksvale Ave. Hamden's Planning and Zoning Commission rejected that proposal in 1995, citing traffic safety hazards.

2. Second proposal was submitted and was the subject of a special hearing before Hamden's Inland Wetland Commission in 2003. This proposal specified Whitney Ave. as the entrance to site. The Inland Wetlands Commission rejected the proposal, citing impact on wetlands.

3. The applicant appealed IWC's rejection, and in January 2006 a Superior Court Judge ruled in favor of the developer, indicating that the IWC's rejection was not supported by sufficient expert evidence.

4. In May 2006 the developer submitted a new proposal, which requires a Special Permit from the Hamden Planning and Zoning Commission and a Public Hearing. The Public Hearing was opened 9/12/06, but was immediately continued to the PZC meeting on Tuesday, Oct. 10. PUBLIC ATTENDANCE AT THE 10/10 MEETING WILL BE CRITICAL TO OUR CAUSE: WE NEED TO PACK THE HEARING ROOM. Anyone can attend the hearing, and you do not need to be a Hamden resident to speak.

WHAT DO THE EXPERTS SAY?

Here are extracts from an environmental impact report on this project:

Extracts from an Environmental Review Team Report prepared by the King’s Mark Environmental Review Team of the King’s Mark Resource Conservation and Development Area, Inc., for the Mayor and Planning and Zoning Commission, Hamden, Ct., Sept. 2006. Based on a field review conducted 7/12/06 together with other information.

Report 339 regarding Sunwood Development Corporation’s request for a
Special Permit (06-1088) for SAND AND GRAVEL MINING at 4246 (rear) and 4280 Whitney Ave. (north of Brooksvale Ave on Route 10 near the Cheshire Town Line).

The full report is available online at: http://www.ctert.org/default.htm (scroll down the page a bit till you see “SUNWOOD DEVELOPMENT”). Contact info is: Elaine Sych, ERT Coordinator, ertct@aol.com; phone is 860-345-3977

About King’s Mark: “The King’s Mark Environmental Review Team (ERT) is a group of environmental professionals drawn together from a variety of federal, state and regional agencies. Specialists on the Team include geologists, biologists, soil scientists, foresters, climatologists and landscape architects, recreational specialists, engineers and planners. The ERT operates with state funding under the aegis of the King’s Mark Resource Conservation and Development (RC&D) Area – an 83 town area serving Western Connecticut. As a public service activity, the Team is available to serve towns within the King’s Mark RC&D Area – free of charge.”

Following are extracts I’ve taken from the various sections of the report, which was received at the Hamden Planning and Zoning Dept. on 9/7/06. Emphasis throughout is mine (Sarah Clark, 248-8181).

1. From the section titled A WATERSHED PERSPECTIVE, pp. 10 ff

“The removal of over 250,000 cubic yards of sand and gravel over a two-year period from an area in excess of 15 acres will entail several temporary wetlands crossings….Given the site’s excellent surface and ground water quality, it is extremely important that precautions and Best Management Practices be taken to protect the stream and groundwater….

“This area lies within the Willow Brook floodplain….The water quality classification for both Willow Brook and Jepp Brook is Class AA. The Class AA designated uses are: existing and proposed water supplies; habitat for fish and other aquatic life and wildlife; recreation; and water supply for industry and agriculture.

“The ground water classification for the area is Class GAA. Designated uses for Class GAA are: existing or potential public water supply of water suitable for drinking without treatment….

“As a consequence of the surface and ground waters being of extreme high quality, any proposed development merits further consideration of available, practical measures which can be taken to ensure the protection of these resources from development-related impacts and nonpoint source pollution – a growing nationwide concern….

“The proposed method of excavation will create large bowls…that will result in steep sided slopes for the future ponds which may pose a safety risk not only to potential recreationists, but also slumping and erosion under submerged conditions….

“Once [the ponds are] filled, the quality of the groundwater discharging to the stream may be adversely affected by its exposure in the ponds to other factors affecting water quality such as thermal impacts and other sources of non-point source pollution, such as…geese.”

2. From the section titled TOPOGRAPHY AND GEOLOGY, pp. 13 ff

“This reviewer has some concerns about the data upon which the [developer’s] plan was drawn. The most serious deficiency in this reviewer’s opinion is the lack of subsurface data, such as the elevation of the water table and depth of bedrock. Both will have implications on how much material can be removed during the excavation….[If the watertable is higher than the developer’s plans indicate], he may then request to pump seepage-water out of the excavation pit so as to dig deeper….If the depth to bedrock is shallower than the planned excavation depth,…they will not be able to excavate as much material without enlarging the area of removal. That will translate into creating larger ponds but less buffer between newly created ponds and the established wetlands.”

3. From the section titled SOILS RESOURCES, pp. 19 ff

“[The ponds to be created at the end of the project] will range in size from 0.4 to 2.5 acres, and the depth of excavation to the pond bottoms will range from 35 to more than 45 feet below existing grade….It is likely that there will be considerable water level drop during the hotter and drier season, potentially affecting water levels in remaining wetlands and in both Jepp and Willow Brooks….Water table fluctuation can have substantial negative impact on wetland flora and fauna within the parcel and modify stream flow through the property and downstream.

“The stability of all proposed 2:1 side slopes [in the four proposed post-excavation ponds] also appears to be problematic, given the tendency of banks excavated into on-site soils to slump and collapse. [The soils specific to the site] also have very low water-holding capacity and are of inherently low fertility; long-term survival of tree and shrub species selected on soils with these physical and chemical properties is likely to be low….

“This reviewer is also skeptical that the planned addition of persistent open water and shallow marsh habitat, even if both are successfully established, will compensate for the removal of the great majority of upland wildlife habitat within the parcel.”

4. From the section titled WETLAND REVIEW, pp. 32 ff

“The site lies…about one half mile south of the Hamden/Cheshire border. Route 10 bounds the property to the east and the Farmington Canal Rail Trail borders it to the west….A buffer of 100 feet is proposed on the west side between the canal trail and the excavation.

“The greatest wetland impacts on the site will be at the watercourse crossings. These are areas of steep slopes and will be easily erodable once vegetation is removed. Large amounts of fill will be needed to bring the construction roads up to useable level….

“The proposed pond construction is a point of concern to various town commissions….It should be of note that [adjusting the proposed slope of the ponds makes them] inviting for resident Canada geese. Considering that each goose excretes one pound of waste per animal per day, these small newly created ponds may well have water quality issues no one will want to have to tackle in the future.”

5. From the section titled AQUATIC HABITATS AND RESOURCES, pp. 37 ff

“The Inland Fisheries Division has conducted fish surveys of Jepp Brook and Willow Brook on or near the site….The fish population was similar at both locations and was composed of the following species – blacknose dace, fallfish and redfin pickerel.... The fish population [of Willow Brook both upstream and downstream of the Jepp Brook confluence] was made up of the following species – brook trout, brown trout, blacknose dace, longnose dace, creek chub, fallfish, tessellated darter, redfin pickerel, white sucker, and American eel.

“The ponds will not have outlets….

“The proposed removal of sand and gravel from the site will significantly alter the existing topography of the area. It is conceivable that the removal of overburden as proposed may alter the local surface to groundwater hydrology. Of concern with the extraction to the depths proposed is the loss of soil types that have the ability to absorb a considerable percentage of precipitation falling on the site. Precipitation infiltrating the soil contributes to groundwater recharge, which is part of the local water table connected to wetlands and surface waters such as Jepp Brook and Willow Brook. The local water table provides seepage to the streams during dry periods and maintains a base flow essential to biological and habitat integrity. The amount of groundwater providing supply to the ponds will likely further diminish the amount contributed to the streams thereby exacerbating temporal or spatial impacts to surface flow. [i.e., less water for species]…

“The depth to which the soil extraction is proposed should be evaluated by an individual(s) with groundwater expertise to determine changes to precipitation infiltration rates or water storage capacity of the remaining soils. The depth of the proposed soil extraction should be modified should adverse impacts to groundwater be predicted.”

6. From the section titled STORMWATER REVIEW, pp. 41 ff

“The project is expected to disturb approximately 15 acres of land and ultimately create four…ponds. No permanent development of the land is proposed following the excavation….

“Mining operations are considered an industrial activity that requires registration under Connecticut’s General Permit for the Discharge of Stormwater Associated with Industrial Activity. …[Report goes on to list the ways in which the applicant’s plan must be modified or further elaborated to address erosion and sediment control issues.]”

7. From the section titled ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL REVIEW, p. 44

“The project boundaries appear of moderate to high sensitivity for prehistoric and historic archaeological resources. The State Historic Preservation Office and the Office of State Archaeology recommends that a reconnaissance survey be undertaken in order to provide the Hamden Planning and Zoning Commission with pertinent information regarding the identification and location of archaeologically sensitive areas.

“Of particular importance, all gravel mining activities must avoid physical impacts to the historic Farmington Canal, listed on the National Register of Historic Places, which is located in immediate proximity to the western border of the proposed project area.”

8. From the section titled TRANSPORTATION PLANNER COMMENTS, p. 45

“The vehicles leaving the site drive are expected to operate at poor to failing levels of service and may pose a safety risk due to their size, weight and operational characteristics.

“To alleviate these risks, proper signage and control of truck access should be utilized. Therefore, the Department concurs with the following recommendations:
-- The limiting of trucks to no more than eight, entering and leaving the site during an hour….
-- That trucks should be restricted from traveling to a destination south of the site during peak hours on Whitney Ave. and be allowed to travel in either direction during non-peak hours.”

WHAT HAVE WE DONE SO FAR?

We have been working to organize neighbors, have circulated a petition (over 400 people have signed to date), and we are working in other ways to increase awareness of the project and of the ways in which concerned citizens can voice their opinions. Note that ANYONE can speak at the upcoming public hearing and/or write a letter to the PZC: because the project impacts an entire region, you do NOT have to be a resident of Hamden to speak out.

In evaluating the applicant's request for a special permit, the PZC is required by Hamden's Zoning regulations to consider eight points in particular. These points are reproduced in next section below. It is critical that both spoken and written objections to the gravel pit address at least one of these points.

Once very important step anyone can take is to write a letter to the Hamden Planning and Zoning Commission, with copies to relevant public officials. Here is a sample letter:

September 20, 2006

Mr. Joseph McDonagh
Hamden Planning & Zoning Commission
Planning Office c/o Mr. Daniel W. Kops, Jr.
Hamden Government Center
2750 Dixwell Avenue
Hamden, CT 06518

Re: Special Permit & Site Plan 06-1088/WS
4246 (rear) and 4280 Whitney Avenue, R-2 zone

Dear Chairman and Commission Members:

This letter is in reference to the proposed special permit for a sand and gravel mining operation at 4246 (rear) and 4280 Whitney Avenue. As a Hamden resident for 32 years, I am absolutely against this proposal for the following reasons. (All page references are to the King’s Mark Environmental Review Team Report #339, September 2006.)

1. The area being considered is one of the last pristine wetland areas in the town of Hamden. Once altered and disturbed, it will never revert to its former natural state despite statements to the contrary.

2. The creation of four large bodies of water with steep sides, no outlets, and a potential depth of 35 feet to 45 feet will create a safety and liability risk to the children and adults in the town. (ERT p. 11)

3. The proposed ponds pose the real danger of contamination of fecal fouling by geese (ERT pp. 11, 36) and a breeding place for mosquitoes carrying the West Nile virus.

4. The gravel and mining operation will result in a dramatic drop in the level of wetland water during drier seasons. This will negatively impact the flora and fauna of the area and modify the flow of water in both Jepp and Willow Brooks. (ERT p. 19)

5. The King’s Mark Environmental Review Team Report stated that, “even if both [persistent open water and shallow marsh habitat] are successfully established these will not compensate for the removal of the great majority of upland wildlife habitat within the parcel.” (ERT p. 20) What was created by Nature will be destroyed by man.

6. This area now provides a rich habitat for native fish, geese, ducks, wild turkey, deer, coyote, raccoon, muskrat, fox, skunk, squirrel, various species of birds, rabbits, turtles, snakes, frogs, and other amphibians. (ERT pp. 20, 39) They do not have a voice to speak against this mining operation that will alter and destroy their habitat.

7. Water quality in the proposed area is now class AA and can be used for drinking. (ERT p. 37) Can anyone guarantee that excellent quality after the excavation is completed?

8. The removal of over 240,000 cubic yards of gravel and sand will create a situation whereby the remaining soil cannot absorb as much of the rainwater. (ERT p. 39) Can anyone foresee what will happen to this area and adjacent property when heavy rains come in the spring?

9. The noise, traffic problems (ERT p. 45), air pollution, and contamination of groundwater during the two years of excavation will adversely affect the lifestyle of all homeowners in the area and, indeed, all who travel Whitney Avenue. I have previous experience with the disruption caused by a sand and gravel mining operation in my neighborhood in the town of Bristol, Connecticut. For years the trucks loudly rumbled past our homes, eight hours each day. This caused dust to cover exposed surfaces. We were forced to keep our windows closed winter and summer. However, children and anyone outside was exposed to high levels of contamination. The chronically ill were particularly susceptible to the poor air quality.

10. With easy access from the Farmington Canal and Whitney Avenue this area will become an attractive area for off-road vehicles and their young riders. The four ponds with a combined surface area of approximately 4.8 acres and a depth of up to 35 feet (ERT p. 11) will be a natural attraction for life-threatening activity. Is the gravel and sand removal operation worth the life of even one young person?

The southern Hamden area has suffered for years by the hand of man who changed the environment. Is this the beginning of the change for northern Hamden?
I implore you to deny this special permit based upon the many serious problems, dangers and destruction of habitat this mining operation will create.

Sincerely,
Edward Bartolini
55 Huntington Circle
Hamden, CT 06518

Cc: Mayor Craig Henrici (chenrici@hamden.com); Mr. Al Gorman (goralbetsy@aol.com); Mr. Robert Westervelt (bbwestervelt@yahoo.com) ; Rep. Al Aldinolfi (alsquare3@cox.net); Sen. Martin Looney (Looney@senatedems.ct.gov); Rep. Brendan Sharkey (Brendan.Sharkey@cga.ct.gov); Dr. Phil Brewer (acepdoc@gmail.com); Sen. Joe Crisco
(Crisco@senatedems.ct.gov)

WHAT CAN I DO TO HELP?

(9/24/06 DRAFT: Stay tuned for more to come, including addition of relevant extracts from the Town Plan of Development. There are many other steps you can take to oppose the pit, including getting as many people to the hearing as possible (recommended by all the experts as one of the most important things you can do: numbers count!), getting many signatures on the petition (remember that Hamden residency is NOT a requirement), networking widely to get the word out, poster-making, and a long list of people and organizations to contact…)

Most effective things you can do to help stop the proposed Gravel Pit/Mining Operation on Whitney Ave. in Hamden, Ct.

Write a letter before 10/5/06 to the Hamden Planning and Zoning Commission, c/o Dan Kops, Assistant Town Planner, Planning Office, Hamden Government Center, 2750 Dixwell Ave., Hamden, CT 06518. Letter should reference Special Permit 06-1088, 4246 (rear) and 4280 Whitney Ave., R-2 Zone. Ideally the letter should highlight issues that are directly relevant to one or more of the eight points in the Zoning Regulations that the PZC must specifically consider as they evaluate the applicant’s proposal. Primary among those eight points is “the health, safety, and welfare of the public in general, and the immediate neighborhood, in particular.” As I understand it, “welfare” can encompass economic issues (including property values and quality-of-life issues). Here is the specific section of the Town of Hamden Zoning Regulations (section VIII-5, p. 172):

826 Special Permit Threshold Decision. In deciding whether or not to grant a Special Permit, the Commission shall give consideration to, but not be limited by, the following:
1. The health, safety, and welfare of the public in general, and the immediate neighborhood, in particular.
2. Compliance with the Plan of Development.
3. The location and size of the proposed use.
4. The nature and intensity of the proposed use and any operations involved in the use.
5. The safety and intensity of traffic circulation on the site and in adjacent streets.
6. The scale of the proposed site structure.
7. The harmony and appropriateness of the use and site design in relation to the general area and to adjacent properties.
8. Compliance with the zoning regulations and the site plan objectives set forth in Section 844. Any permit granted under this Section shall be subject to any and all conditions and safeguards imposed pursuant to Section 827.

827 Conditions and Safeguards. The Commission may, if it finds that a Special Permit is appropriate under Section 826, include reasonable conditions and safeguards related to the factors set forth in Section 826. Any such conditions or safeguards attached to the granting of a Special Permit shall remain with the property as long as the Special Permit use is still in operation, and shall continue in force regardless of any change in ownership of the property.

Also relevant: Section 840: Site Plan Review and Approval (since a site plan is required for a special permit)

844. Site Plan Objectives. In reviewing a Site Plan Application, the Zoning Section or the Commission shall take into consideration the health, safety and welfare of the public in general and the immediate neighborhood in particular, and may prescribe reasonable conditions and safeguards to insure the accomplishment of the following general objectives.

844.1 Town Plan. That the proposed site plan shall be in general conformance with the intent of the Town Plan, however, the Town Plan shall not take precedence over specific provisions of the Zoning Regulations.

844.2 Traffic and Pedestrian Access. That all proposed traffic and pedestrian access ways do not create traffic hazards and are:

844.8 Environmental Features. That the development of the site will preserve sensitive environmental land features such as steep slopes, wetlands, and large rock outcroppings and will attempt to preserve public scenic views or historically significant features.

844.9 Neighborhood Character. That the location and size of any proposed use, building or structure, as well as the nature and intensity of operations involved or conducted in connection therewith, will be in general harmony with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and will not be hazardous or otherwise detrimental to the appropriate and orderly development or use of any adjacent land, building, or structure as expressed in Section 650 – Performance Standards.

844.11 Soil Erosion and Sediment Control. The design of soil erosion and sediment control plans shall be such as to reduce the danger from storm water run-off, minimize non-point sediment pollution from land being developed and conserve and protect the land, water, air and other environmental resources of the Town.

Indicate on your letter that you are sending carbon copies to

Mayor Craig Henrici
Hamden Government Center
2750 Dixwell Ave.
Hamden, CT 06518
203-287-7100
chenrici@hamden.com

Representative Alfred Adinolfi
Home: 235 Sorghum Mill Drive
Cheshire, CT 06410
Home 203-272-9701 (it’s okay to call him at home)
Office: House Republic Office
L.O.B. Room 4200
Hartford, CT 06106
1-800-842-1423 office (toll-free)
Email: alsquare3@cox.net

Senator Martin M. Looney
Office: Legislative Office Building
Room 3300
Hartford, CT 06106-1591
1-800-842-1420 (toll-free)
Home: 132 Fort Hale Road
New Haven, CT 06512
Email: Looney@senatedems.ct.gov

Mr. Robert Westervelt
Council Member (9th district)
Town of Hamden Legislative Council
Government Center
2750 Dixwell Ave.
Hamden, CT 06518
Office: 203-675-0254
bbwestervelt@yahoo.com

Representative Brendan Sharkey
600 Mount Carmel AvenueHamden, CT 06518(203) 281-4647
Legislative Office Building, Room 5004
Hartford, CT 06106-1591(860) 240-85851-800-842-8267 Brendan.Sharkey@cga.ct.gov

Senator Joe Crisco
E-mail:
Crisco@senatedems.ct.gov
Phone:
860-240-0189, or toll-free1-800-842-1420
Address:
Legislative Office BuildingRoom 2800Hartford, CT 06106-1591

Phillip Brewer, M.D.
acepdoc@gmail.com
Democratic Candidate for State Representative from 103rd District
Campaign Headquarters
3 Dover Court
Cheshire, CT 06410
203-272-4434

Write a letter before October 5 if possible to the editors of one (or more) of the local papers. Try to include specific reference to the date, time, and location of the public hearing (10/10/06, 7 pm, Old Town Hall, Dixwell & Whitney) so people reading the letter will know where they can go to speak out. The info that follows was copied directly from the various publications’ websites.

Hamden Daily News (an online publication) The Hamden Daily News wants to hear from you. Letters to the editor are an integral part of a community newspaper. There are just three rules:1)You must include your first and last names.2) You must include your hometown.3) You must include a phone number for verification purposes (the number will not be printed).Click on Editor@hamdendailynews.com

New Haven Register
How to write a letter to the editor: To send a letter to the editor by e-mail, address your message to: letters@nhregister.com. To send a letter by regular post, address your message to: Letter to the Editor / New Haven Register / 40 Sargent Drive / New Haven, CT / 06511. Important: Include your full name, address and telephone number for verification purposes.

Hamden Chronicle Headquarters (best to call them for more explicit instructions):
349 New Haven Avenue P.O. Box 5339 Milford , CT 06460 Phone: (203) 876-6800 Fax: (203) 877-4772 hamdenchronicle@ctcentral.com
Hamden Journal (best to call them for more explicit instructions):
Hometown Publications, 1000 Bridgeport Ave.,Shelton, CT 06484
Email: Hamdenjournal@add-inc.com
(203) 926-2080 or 1-800-843-6791
Editorial Fax: (203) 926-2091

Cheshire Herald: Thank you for your interest in writing a letter to the editor. Letters should address an issue of concern to the Cheshire, CT readers. The Herald also prints guest editorials that are at lease 500 words but no more than 1000 in length. These editorials must include the author's name and hometown. Unsigned letters will not be considered for publication. Below is a form or you may e-mail your editorial to Dave Kenny at dkenny@cheshireherald.com. Addresses and Telephone numbers are for verification purposes only and will not be printed.

New York Times Letters to the editor should only be sent to The Times, and not to other publications. We do not publish open letters or third-party letters. Letters for publication should be no longer than 150 words, must refer to an article that has appeared within the last seven days, and must include the writer's address and phone numbers. No attachments, please. We regret we cannot return or acknowledge unpublished letters. Writers of those letters selected for publication will be notified within a week. Letters may be shortened for space requirements. To submit a letter to the Connecticut weekly section, please e-mail mailto:region@nytimes.com. Thomas Feyer, the letters editor, gives tips for getting your letter published. Click here for full article.

Meriden Record-Journal (covering Cheshire and Wallingford angles in particular).
Letters to the Editor Policy: Record-Journal readers are invited to send letters on topics of general interest (no more than once in a calendar month). We require that you include your address and daytime telephone number(s) where you may be reached for verification purposes. This information is kept confidential and is for our records only. Letters which exceed our maximum of 300 words will be edited accordingly. In election years, from September 15 until 4:00 p.m. on the Wednesday before Election Day, political letters [letters which mention any political party or candidate by name] are limited to 100 words maximum. We will not accept submissions that mention businesses by name. We reserve the right to edit all letters submitted to the Record-Journal. Letters may be submitted using any of the following four methods:
· email to: letters@record-journal.com
· U.S. mail to: Readers' Opinions, Record-Journal, 11 Crown St., Meriden, CT,06450
· fax to: (203) 639-0210

Hartford Courant (tk)

Waterbury Republican Editorial Page Editor Steve Macoy, ext. 1488. E-mail: smacoy Letters must be signed and include a phone number for confirmation. Mail: Letters to the Editor, Republican-American, 389 Meadow St., Waterbury 06722. Fax: (203) 596-9277. E-mail: opinion http://www.rep-am.com/contactus.php