Login  /  Register  | 3 premium articles left before you must register.
TheDay.com - People opposed to Kobyluck plan in Waterford raise concerns at public hearing | Southeastern Connecticut News, Sports, Weather and Video | The Day newspaper

People opposed to Kobyluck plan in Waterford raise concerns at public hearing

By Jeffrey A. Johnson

Publication: The Day

Published 01/27/2012 12:00 AM
Updated 01/27/2012 12:11 AM

Waterford - More than 50 people attended a Conservation Commission public hearing on Thursday night, and many continued to voice their objections to a rock-crushing plant proposed for a 37-acre site on Industrial Drive.

Kobyluck Brothers LLC first proposed the project to the town in July 2010. The gravel and sand company has since undergone an outside-consultant review and ground-water testing on its property at the request of the town.

An engineer and scientist from Norwich-based CLA Engineers on Thursday presented an altered proposal that aims to reduce the size of the plant and enclose it within a building that would lessen noise, said Ellen M. Bartlett, a CLA engineer. The new proposal would also move development farther from wetlands.

But before the public hearing, several residents raised concerns about the proposal.

Seventeen residents calling themselves Waterford Against Mining were granted intervenor status in Kobyluck's pending application. The group, which is made up of residents who live on Vauxhall Street Extension and Douglas Lane, is allowed copies of the Kobyluck plan and a greater role in commission proceedings.

Many residents expressed concerns about potential noise and the threat of pollution if the rock-crushing plant is approved on Industrial Dive across from Kobyluck's headquarters.

Residents who attended the public hearing waited for more than two hours as staff from CLA Engineers laid out the altered proposal.

Bartlett and Robert Russo, an environmental scientist, went over the specifics of the plan. Russo said in part of his presentation that the storm water management plan is one change in the new proposal. Bartlett also presented plans for a bridge that would span Jordan Brook.

Russo said that any industrial proposal on the property would require a bridge across the brook.

"Anything else you were going to put on this site, you would have to cross Jordan Brook," he said. "We don't really have an alternative to crossing Jordan Brook."

Evan Glass, president of Colchester-based Alta Environmental Corp., gave a presentation on the water in Jordan Brook and concluded the Kobyluck proposal would not adversely affect the water in the brook.

Prior to that presentation, the Conservation Commission also granted Thames Valley Trout Unlimited intervenor status at the meeting. Last month the group's president said that no matter what precautions are taken, the rock and gravel operations would impact the fish populations in Jordan Brook.

The public hearing came a few weeks after Kobyluck Brothers filed a lawsuit against the town's Planning and Zoning Commission.

The company argues in the lawsuit, which was filed Dec. 30, that the commission made several amendments to its Plan of Conservation and Development so that the company could not proceed with the construction of the gravel mine and rock-crushing plant. The lawsuit is ongoing.

Thursday's public hearing will be continued to another night, according to Conservation Commission Chairman Gary Johnson.

jeff.johnson@theday.com

Town News

Visit Zip06
Submit Your:  Submit Your News Submit Your Photos Submit Your Events

Transcript available for chat with CEO of the Mohegan Tribal Gaming Authority

The reader web chat with Mitchell Etess, Chief Executive Officer of the Mohegan Gaming Authority, was held on Thursday, May 24.

Most Recent Poll
Do you support Pres. Obama's plan for curbing rising tuition costs?
Yes
59%
No
41%
Number of votes: 54

Six words and a photo of mom

For Mother's Day, submit a photo of your mom and six words that best describe her to a.nunes@theday.com.

Most Recent Poll
Do you support Pres. Obama's plan for curbing rising tuition costs?
Yes
59%
No
41%
Number of votes: 54