U.S.  ARMY  CORPS  OF  ENGINEERS



A S    W E    S A Y   B E L O W   -   S O M E    T H I N G S    N E V E R    C H A N G E

 

LEADER OF STUDY-REPORT

 

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

...Who should apply for a permit?

Any person, firm, or agency (including Federal, state, and local government agencies) planning to work in navigable waters of the United States, or discharge (dump, place, deposit) dredged or fill material in waters of the United States, including wetlands, must first obtain a permit from the Corps of Engineers. Permits, licenses, variances, or similar authorization may also be required by other Federal, state and local statutes...from the FAQ page.

• LATEST from the Army Corps;
  
• 2012 plus update;
• Previously;
• Construction picture;
• Tennis courts flooding, drainage and lights coming?
• And lighted fields.
  

• Flooding;
• Lighted fields.
• Don't forget lighthouses (along Long Island Sound)
  
• E.P.A. news...
  

• Our notes on Second Quarterly "Lights Committee" meeting at Town Hall;  intention to have a "special" in later August 2015.
  
• "Lights Committee" holds meetings and onsite visits - our notes;  Dec. 11, 2014 FORUM story, from link in e-mail notice here:  http://www.thewestonforum.com/23691/weston-high-school-ball-field-puts-lights-to-the-test/?utm_source=Weston+Forum&utm_campaign=a06da7e386-FO_IN_THIS_WEEKS&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_848b12f59d-a06da7e386-193260349
  
• Weston, and how it discovered how to shorten those dark winter days when the tree have lost their leaves, for some residents.
  
• And another matter that usually comes around from time to time (Note:  Weston fields not this kind, we think) - for your information:  http://ctbythenumbers.info/2015/10/27/safety-of-fields-with-crumbs-from-rubber-tires-face-renewed-questions-ct-study-proclaims-theyre-ok/
  
• Elsewhere, 

SCHOOLS
The Board of Education
First to be called upon, the "B.O.E." made their pitch.  Financial figures were supplied by the Director of Finance of the B.O.E. regarding ten year regular budget costs looking "forward" ten years.  Construction cost was presented by the Chair. and the Board Member who had sat on the Select Team.  Bottom line: $65 million NET.

The School Building Committee
Following the Board of Education came the School Building Committee; the Chair. of this official Committee specifically called out gross (we think) numbers for other construction:
HIGH SCHOOL - $36,793,480
NEW 3-4-5 - $27,978,275
MIDDLE SCHOOL - $3,279,562
EAST&SOUTH HOUSES - $10,246,795
SCHOOL ROAD (to reconfigure) - approx. $1,500,000
_______________________________
TOTAL - $79,798,112 GROSS  (NET total $3.2 million higher than Board of Education number)

The Select Team
The Co-Chair. of this Ad Hoc Committee reported on their supporting activities, including the "Impact of Town Operating Budget and School Expansion Debt Service Costs" document (dated August 15, 2001).  This group is intending to develop informational tools regarding the items that will ultimately go to Referendum.

SEPTIC SYSTEMS

The Select Committee on the Impact of Sewage Treatment on the Character of Weston was not present.  Information was given by the First Selectman that the consultant had submitted a report stating that $2.4 million to $2.6 million was the cost of completely redoing (including recycling and tertiary treatment) - although the Department of Environmental Protection had not approved the final details of the full construction of systems and other treatment structures in the program yet.  The higher figure represents recycling of water at the new building (we think).

PARKS & RECREATION
"About Town" had had enough by this time (@10:30pm);  the Parks and Recreation Commission spoke of the shifting use of fields - and how many would be lost during construction.  Plans for Bisceglie and Morehouse Farm Park (Minerva Heady's land) and school campus total $10.5 million. Of this larger total,s as a subtotal amount, are plans for...2 little league fields, 3 multi-use fields, 2 tennis courts (is that enough?) and concession stand, lighting of 2 athletic fields, playground, nature trails and board walks, overlook (great view), water supply--and a SKATE PARK come to...$4.2 million (subtotal).  And some more items.  Breaking down these numbers further, according to written material available at the door, fields at Bisceglie for school and adult use (softball and baseball) might come to $400,000.  The big loser in all the plans is tennis (six courts lost on School Road)...does this make sense to you?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The bottom line?  "About Town" counted maybe $93 million gross to do it all.  But what do I know?

Next step is for the Board of Selectmen to recommend a number (and the projects to be included, we presume)...

Weston High School ball field puts lights to the test
Story in FORUM here:  http://www.thewestonforum.com/23691/weston-high-school-ball-field-puts-lights-to-the-test/?utm_source=Weston+Forum&utm_campaign=a06da7e386-FO_IN_THIS_WEEKS&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_848b12f59d-a06da7e386-193260349

...“When we were walking behind the field, we couldn’t hear Sal talking,” Mr. Muller said. “We could hear the music, though.”

He said decibel readings were about 61 to 62 decibels at the property line. “We’re now trying to get an idea of what does that mean.”

For one of the neighbors, Sandy Block of Parade Ground Court, it likely means it’s too loud.

Mr. Block, whose property does not abut the playing field but is nearby, said he would like the decibel level capped at about 50. That’s the level that was agreed upon in a court case that involved Fairfield University and its neighbors as the maximum sound level at the property line. “We could use that as a benchmark,” Mr. Block said...

At first meeting of Lights Committee - what happened:

STAMFORD -- The Parks and Recreation Commission last night turned down a request to light the Federal Little League field at West Beach.

Members Jo-Anne Hand, Thomas Lombardo and Vincent Martino voted against the project during the commission's monthly meeting, saying they are sympathetic to neighbors who oppose the project. The commission's fourth member, Julian Sayer, was absent.

"People said the lights would shine in their bedroom windows, their children wouldn't be able to sleep -- they'd lose their privacy," Hand said in an interview after the meeting at Government Center.

Martino said he received phone calls from neighbors asking him to vote against the proposal.

Federal Little League officials wrote to the city in August, seeking approval to purchase six 60-foot-tall light poles at their own expense.

Federal Little League President Joe Russo did not attend last night's meeting, but in a telephone interview afterward said he was surprised and disappointed by the commission's decision.

"We thought we had a very good chance of getting the lights because the purchase and installation would have all been funded by us," Russo said. "I'm very disappointed with the outcome of the vote and what we're going to do is explore any other avenues to appeal."

Park neighbor Peter Weissman, vice president of the Marina Bay condominum board, applauded the commisson's decision....

August 15, 2004
By MARYELLEN FILLO, Hartford Courant Staff Writer

Judy Emmick and Ron Rodd joke that they could sell hot dogs from the comfortable deck of their home to fans sitting in the Wethersfield High School bleachers just 30 feet away.

"If I want to know the score of the game I just look out the window," Emmick said, as she and her husband look beyond the bleachers to the massive renovation underway at the school's Cottone Field in Wethersfield.

Twenty miles away in a another residential neighborhood in Simsbury, Adam Sharaf stands in the middle of his manicured yard looking over a clutch of birch and evergreen trees to the Simsbury High School bleachers that offer fans a bird's-eye view of his home.

"That's where the band sits for home games," he said, pointing to the top rows that rise above the tree line. "I can wave to them during home games."

These are residents who have lived next to public high school athletic fields for years. They have tolerated the seasonal cacophony of over-exuberant fans and bands; noisy, street-clogging traffic; and the assorted other intrusions that come with living close to such a venue.

But at least, they say, it was limited to the daytime.

Now, as advocates push for the installation of lights to allow nighttime play, the residents have drawn the line on neighborly goodwill.

"There is nothing good about the installation of lights," said Emmick, who with her husband and others in the Wethersfield neighborhood are fighting a plan to install lights on the renovated field.

"There are larger consequences here," said Rodd, who contends that the project has been "rammed through" by a faction of local politicians. "We are not anti-sports, or anti-kids or selfish," he continued. "But this is a flawed process that is turning a desirable neighborhood into an undesirable one. We are trying to protect our homes."

The controversy in the two towns is a repeat of standoffs that have taken place over the years in thousands of towns across the state and the country. For many years, families living near schools in residential areas learned to co-exist with the associated activities, including a few football, baseball or soccer games.

But as lifestyles changed, and the number, types and participation in interscholastic sports increased, schools began seeking ways to extend the use of their fields, raise money and attendance and accommodate the growing number of working parents who can't get to daytime games.

Lighting has been the answer....

The move on Thursday came just two days before a critical vote before the commission and was made so that the developers can relocate two holes away from a sensitive trout stream. The commission will now have to consider the proposal in hearings expected to extend into the fall.
 
New York developer Roland W. Betts has spent three years trying to persuade local, state and federal agencies to approve his plans for an 18-hole course on the grounds of a 780-acre estate in Norfolk and North Canaan, in the face of growing local opposition to the project. But a court reversal of a local wetlands permit, objections by the federal Environmental Protection Agency and well-financed opposition by a neighbors' group, the Canaan Conservation Coalition, have so far stymied his plans.

The EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers, the final permitting authority for the project, have been especially concerned about holes 11 and 12. Even after one redesign, those two holes closely followed the steep contours of Hollow Brook, which federal officials have classified as a "Class A" stream with intermittent populations of trout.

Betts has insisted that he needs the challenging terrain around the brook to create a championship course that would attract members willing to pay $100,000 or more in membership fees, and he castigated experts provided by the opposition who said the course could be redesigned away from the brook.

But the Yale Farm development group was forced to reconsider after federal officials asked it to explore moving the holes in an area several hundred yards north of the brook...story in full at Hartford Courant.

NORTH CANAAN -- Catherine Gevers is a former artistic director of Carnegie Hall in New York and now a classical music consultant who, 11 years ago, followed her dreams and moved full time into a gracious, 18th century house on a hilly, rural lane in this remote northwest corner of the state.

On evenings when the weather was good, Gevers enjoyed nothing more than rounding up her basset hounds, climbing the long, white-graveled drive up on neighboring Yale Farm, and taking in the spectacular views of Canaan Valley and the Berkshires to the north. The land is so named because the farm was formed about a century ago from lands that had been part of a grant from Yale University.

While up on Yale Farm, Gevers often visited with her friends Robin and Henny Mead, the proprietors of the estate's immaculately preserved 780 acres and large manor house on the top of the hill.

But Catherine Gevers doesn't walk her dogs on Yale Farm anymore.

Two years ago, after Robin and Henny Mead died suddenly, their three sons transferred control of Yale Farm to New York uber-developer and presidential friend Roland W. Betts, who wants to turn the property into a championship golf course. The proposed Yale Farm Golf Club has been mired in controversy since then, and this spring, Gevers and a group of abutting neighbors filed four lawsuits against Betts and local land-use commissions over the Yale Farm development...

On July 6, the Waterbury Republican published an article quoting Stephen D. DiLorenzo, the senior project manager who is reviewing the Yale Farm Golf Club file for the Army Corps.

"Based on our meetings with the applicant and the revisions he has submitted, EPA and Fish and Wildlife have all along been telling him he needs to change the design and they haven't backed down yet," DiLorenzo said. Both agencies, DiLorenzo indicated in the article, were "leaning toward a denial" of permits for the project...story in full at Hartford Courant.

                 Corps issues Cross Sound permit to place underground cable in Long Island Sound

                 CONCORD, Mass. – The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has made a determination to
                 issue a Section 10/404 permit to Cross Sound Cable Company to place a cable system
                 in the Long Island Sound, a portion of which will be located in the Federal navigation
                 channel in New Haven Harbor, New Haven, Conn.

                 Cross Sound Cable Company, LLC of Westborough, Mass., applied for a Corps permit in
                 July 2000 to install and maintain an approximately 24-linear mile, high voltage direct
                 current (HVDC) and fiber optic cable system within the seabed of New Haven Harbor and
                 Long Island Sound using the jet plow and directional drill method.

                 The District Engineer signed the permit on March 19. "After careful review by the Army
                 Corps of Engineers and other state and federal agencies, we have determined that this
                 activity is permittable under our jurisdiction of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act
                 and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act," said Col. Brian Osterndorf, District Engineer of
                 the New England District. "Through review by Corps engineers and biologists in
                 consultation with other Federal, State and local agency representatives, we have
                 concluded that the proposed project will not impact the operation and maintenance of the
                 federal navigation channel in New Haven Harbor, and have minimal impact on the marine
                 environment. The permit is issued with 23 special conditions that must be closely
                 adhered to by the applicant. We thoroughly investigated navigation, environmental,
                 economic and other issues and impacts of the project in our evaluation."

                 The route of the cable will be from the New Haven Harbor Station, New Haven, Conn.,to
                 the decommissioned Shoreham Nuclear Power Plant at Brookhaven, N.Y.

                 The cable must be installed no less than six feet below the seabed or to an elevation of
                 minus 48 feet mean lower low water, whichever is greater, within the boundaries of the
                 Federal Navigation Channel in New Haven Harbor and to a minimum of four feet below
                 the seabed of Long Island Sound outside of the New Haven Navigation Channel.

                 "Placing the cable under the Long Island Sound has been found to meet Federal
                 permitting standards," Osterndorf said. "As part of the permit authorization we are
                 requiring the proponent to place the cables at a minimum depth of 48 feet. This will be 13
                 feet under the authorized depth of the existing Federal channel. This will ensure that the
                 cables do not impede navigation in the channel, nor will they impede any needed
                 maintenance dredging to keep the channel open to navigation. We are requiring a depth
                 that will include enough room for a possible future deepening of the channel if that were
                 to be authorized and funded."

                 The project purpose is to interconnect the electric system power market control areas
                 presently managed by the independent systems operators of both New England and New
                 York. This will enhance the existing power grids of the electric systems serving both
                 states by adding a new bi-directional path for bulk power sales and transfers in and out of
                 Connecticut and New York. The cable will be located mainly within the Federal navigation
                 channel in New Haven Harbor. The landfall at the Shoreham is made through an existing
                 intake canal.

                 The cable will be buried using the jet plow method and/or directional drill method as
                 determined by the contractor. The applicant applied for a Corps permit in July 2000. The
                 Corps issued a public notice for this project on June 24, 2001, with an expiration date
                 Aug. 23, 2001.

                 "We extended the public notice comment period in response to a request from National
                 Marine Fisheries Service," said Christine Godfrey, the Corps’ New England District
                 Regulatory Division chief. "We also held a public information meeting in New Haven to
                 fully understand local concerns and issues. The first proposal was to run the cable about
                 100 feet east of the channel. But due to potential impacts to shellfish beds the
                 Connecticut Siting Council denied the request."

                 The federal channel was suggested so as to minimize any impact to marine life.

                 "There are 23 special conditions that are part of the Corps permit," said Project Manager
                 Diane Ray, of the Corps’ New England District Regulatory Division.

                 "If future operations by the United States require the removal, relocation, or other
                 alteration, of the structures or work authorized, or if, in the opinion of the Secretary of the
                 Army or his authorized representative, the structures or work could cause unreasonable
                 obstruction to the free navigation of the navigable waters, the permittee will be required to
                 remove, relocate, or alter the structural work or obstructions," Ray said.

                 Cable installation is restricted to occur only between Oct. 1 and Jan. 15 or between April
                 1 and May 31 to protect winter flounder and summer flounder as well as shellfish
                 resources. Directional drilling operations as well as dredging of the Intake Canal at
                 Shoreham, N.Y. are not subject to this condition.

                 "The permittee must revisit the cable route on three occasions, at six-month intervals,
                 beginning approximately six months following the installation of the cable to conduct a
                 reverification of the burial depth of the cable," Ray said. Each survey will be recorded and
                 the results submitted to the Corps and Connecticut Department of Environmental
                 Protection (CT DEP). The permittee must contact CT DEP Marine Fisheries Division
                 (MFD) concerning the locations and date of MFD sampling programs and for a list of
                 potentially affected fishermen. The permittee must notify the affected parties of the time
                 and location of cable installation.

                 The permittee must undertake three benthic-monitoring inspections of shellfish bed
                 L-593, the first beginning no later than six months after installation of the cable, with the
                 second and third at six-month intervals thereafter. "The intent of the monitoring will be to
                 determine the rate of sediment reconsolidation and biological recolonization of the
                 disturbed substrate," Ray said. Prior to installation and no later than six months following
                 the charging of the cable, the permittee must conduct monitoring to measure electric and
                 magnetic fields, temperature and habitat disturbance within four, 1,000-foot long reaches
                 of the cable.

                 Also, the permittee or his agents may not formally pursue additional cable installations in
                 this area for a five-year period pending evaluation of the cable monitoring and verification
                 of the modeling of benthic recovery rates upon which this permit decision is based.

                 "The permittee must develop a response plan that will address any emergencies that
                 might arise during the installation of the cable," Ray said.

                 Also, there is a special condition to protect navigation interests. "No person, firm, or
                 corporation will be held liable for damage to the cable system caused by the person, firm
                 or corporation unless the damage is caused by gross negligence or willful or intentional
                 actions," Ray said.

                 The permittee will place no restrictions on commercial aquaculture and/or shellfishing
                 operations in the area of the cable system other than during the cable installation and
                 maintenance operations. And the permittee must post a bond for $1 million for
                 emergency repairs or removal of the cable as determined necessary by the Corps of
                 Engineers.

                 More information on the 23 special conditions are listed in the final permit. The application
                 for the federal permit was filed with the Corps of Engineers in compliance with Section 10
                 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 which provides for the federal regulation of any
                 work in or affecting navigable waters of the United States, and Section 404 of the Clean
                 Water Act which regulates the discharge of dredged or fill material in U.S. waters,
                 including wetlands.

                 "The Corps regulates activities in waterways and wetlands under the authority of several
                 laws," Godfrey said. "The permit program is designed to ensure that our nation’s water
                 resources are safeguarded, that the nation’s water resources are used in the best
                 interest of the public and that environmental, social and economic concerns of the public
                 are considered."

                 "The decision to issue a permit was based on an evaluation of the probable impacts of
                 the proposed activity in the public interest," Godfrey said. "That decision reflects the
                 national concern for both protection and use of important resources. All factors relevant
                 to the proposal were considered. Placing the cable in the federal channel does not set a
                 precedent. We look at each permit application on a case-by-case basis. In this case, it
                 was found to meet the Federal permitting standards. It will have minimal impact to the
                 marine environment and no significant impact on navigation or channel maintenance or
                 future channel deepening."

                                                                                       -- 30 --