Protect the Partrick Wetlands
and our Community
|
By Don Casciato dcasciato@bcnnew.com Printed in the Westport News |
|
First Selectwoman Diane Goss Farrell and Selectman Carl Leaman, both Democrats, supported the proposal while the Republican member of the board, John Izzo, voted against it. The board was acting in its role as the town's Water Pollution Control Authority (WPCA).
Although the board only spent a couple of minutes discussing the proposal before acting, the selectmen had spent close to six hours on it at two previous meetings.
Controversy flared at the last meeting of the board Feb. 11 when Farrell decided to read the Conservation Commission record dealing with the plan by ARS Partners to build at the bucolic site located on Newtown Turnpike and Partrick Road. It is close to Exit 41 of the Merritt Parkway.
"I was glad I did read it," said Farrell, Wednesday, during the meeting. "I know John [Izzo] wasn't all that pleased."
Farrell explained that she read environmental reports and the decision on the application by the Conservation Commission.
Asked if she had read the transcripts of the commission decision, Farrell said yesterday morning that she had not.
The measure now goes before the Planning and Zoning Commission.
The Opposition
"It's a farce that the Water Pollution Control Authority does not have jurisdiction over water pollution," said Matthew Mandell, a leader of a group against construction of the homes on the F.D. Rich site, after the decision.
Most of the area residents have joined together in a group called Partrick Wetland Preservation Fund.
"That being said, tonight's decision, while difficult to comprehend, in no way should be considered an endorsement of the sewer or the development of the Partrick Wetlands," Mandell continued.
"All that was decided tonight was whether the proposed sewer extension would harm Westport's sewer system and treatment plant. That's obvious since all the excrement is going to Norwalk.
"Why the selectmen decided to hide behind poorly written regulations and not tackle the relevant issues is a quandary and something you'll have to ask Mr. Leaman and Ms. Farrell.
"The real questions concerning well water contamination, public health, sprawl and loss of open space went unanswered and sloughed off to Planning and Zoning. It is there where the citizens of Westport will finally find justice in an elected commission whose regulations are clear and broad."
Farrell said yesterday that besides Mandell's comment, there hadn't been much reaction so far to the decision.
During the brief discussion by board members Wednesday night during a work session before voting, the first selectwoman said: "My concern is ground water quality.
I'm sufficiently satisfied adequate provisions have been put into place."
In addition, she said that soil quality was a concern.
The first selectwoman also emphasized that she was concerned about the rights of the property owners in the area and noted that the Planning and Zoning Commission "would be the final authority."
Leaman, in the previous meetings on the sewer request, had made a point of conscientiously following the WPCA regulations and did so again Wednesday.
"I have to go along with the regulations," he said. "The project meets minimum standards for better or worse and whether I like it or not."
Izzo, who earlier had announced his intention to vote against the sewer, said: "Mandell's group [Partrick Wetland Preservation Fund] has convinced me. Jurisdiction will be tested in court. I wish there was a way to acquire the property for the town."
Before the meeting started, a paragraph was added to the legal notice and agenda.
It reads: "further recommends that the Westport Planning & Zoning Commission impose a water well-monitoring plan working with the Westport Weston Health District whereby incorporating a requirement that the cost of any public water hookup for properties impacted will be at the developer's expense."