Recommendation to Committee

October 28, 2005

Members of the Continuing Legislative Committee on
State Planning and Development:

The Honorable Eric D. Coleman, Co-Chair
The Honorable Lewis J. Wallace, Jr., Co-Chair
The Honorable Joseph J. Crisco, Jr.
The Honorable Antonio (Tony) Guerrera
The Honorable Jonathan A. Harris
The Honorable Jack Malone
The Honorable Craig A. Miner
The Honorable Leonard A. Fasano
The Honorable Richard Roy
The Honorable Andrea L. Stillman

Dear Senators and Representatives:

In accordance with Section 16a-32(b) of the Connecticut General Statutes and Section 16a-24b-7 of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies, the Office of Policy and Management (OPM) hereby submits it recommendation on the application submitted by Vincent F. Susco, Public Utilities Administrator, Town of East Hampton, Water Pollution Control Authority, for an interim change to the Conservation and Development Policies Plan for Connecticut (C&D Plan).

This application requests a change in designation from “Rural Lands” to “Growth” to the C&D Plan’s Locational Guide Map for an area located to the north of Clark Hill Road and west of Lake Pocotopaug in East Hampton. A copy of the application package was previously submitted by OPM to the Continuing Committee on September 5, 2005.

In accordance with R.C.S.A. Section 16a-24b-8, the Continuing Committee has thirty (30) days from receipt of OPM’s recommendation to act on the proposed interim change application.

My staff and I are available to meet with you at your convenience during this period, if you should have any questions.

Sincerely,

W. David LeVasseur, Undersecretary
Intergovernmental Policy Division

Attachments

Cc: Vincent F. Susco, WPCA
Dennis Greci, DEP
Alan H. Bergren, Town Manager
David Dodes, Town Planner
James Carey, Planning & Zoning
Senator Eileen M. Daily, 33^rd Senate District
Representative Gail K. Hamm, 34^th House District
Geoffrey L. Colegrove, Executive Director, MRPA

Findings and Recommendations
Vincent F. Susco, Public Utilities Administrator, Town of East Hampton, Water Pollution Control Authority
Request for Interim Change to the Locational Guide Map
Conservation and Development Policies Plan for Connecticut, 2005 - 2010

In accordance with Section 16a-32(b) of the Connecticut General Statutes, Vincent F. Susco, Public Utilities Administrator, Town of East Hampton, Water Pollution Control Authority, requests an interim change to the Locational Guide Map of the State’s Conservation and Development Policies Plan (State Plan of C&D). The request is to change from “Rural” to “Growth” the designation for a 106.73 acre parcel of land proposed as “Skyline Estates”, located north of Clark Hill Road and west of Lake Pocotopaug in East Hampton.

The request for this change is prompted by the fact that the East Hampton Water Pollution Control Authority recently submitted a request to the Department of Environmental Protection to amend their draft Colchester/East Hampton Joint Facilities Plan to include the subject site as part of East Hampton’s potential future sewer service area. Pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes, Section 16a-31, inclusion of this area is inconsistent with state funding previously utilized in 2000/2001 for a process upgrade to the wastewater treatment plant and will also jeopardize future state funding because it is inconsistent with the State’s Conservation and Development Policies Plan. Specifically, the policy guidelines on page 76 and 77 of the recently adopted 2005 – 2010 State Plan of C&D, for areas designated as Rural, state that development should be of a form, density and location compatible with the carrying capacity of the natural environment, and that large scale infrastructure for water supply, waste disposal and transportation should be avoided. The policy guidelines go on to state that for areas designated as Rural, sewer avoidance programs should be vigorously pursued, and that development should be on a scale that ensures indefinite functioning of on-lot or small community water supply and waste disposal systems. Introduction of sewer extensions into areas designated as Rural are only supported to correct an identified pollution problem from failing septic systems.

Please note that the proposed development of this land for residential purposes is not at issue regarding this interim change request. Development at this site utilizing on-site septic wastewater treatment would not require a change to the State Plan of C&D.

OPM Recommendation:

OPM recommends no change to the current classification for this area that is designated as Rural Land. A review of local planning activities indicates that this issue, as well as land use planning for the whole of the municipality, have not received the local public discourse necessary for OPM to consider in analyzing this interim change request. Specifically, the Town of East Hampton is not in compliance with Section 8-23 of the Connecticut General Statutes, requiring each municipality to update the local plan of conservation and development on a ten year cycle. The last municipal plan of development that was adopted by East Hampton pursuant to Section 8-23 is dated May, 1989. This Plan designates the area in question as low density residential development. While this designation is not inconsistent with the State’s designation as Rural Lands, the Municipal Plan is now more than sixteen years old and does not accurately reflect any current discourse or consensus on the local level. While OPM understands the Town of East Hampton is in the process of updating the 1989 Plan, this updated Plan is in the draft stage, does not yet include future land-use designations and has not been publicly vetted or adopted pursuant to state law. In addition, the latest plan of development for the Midstate Regional Planning Agency is dated 1978.

In 1997, as part of the revision process for the 1998-2003 State Plan of C&D, OPM published a Draft Locational Guide Map for review and comment by municipalities, regions and the public. This draft map designated an area, including the site in question, to the west and north of Lake Pocotopaug as “Growth”. This was the first iteration of the Locational Guide Map to use digital data, and it reflected the future sewer service area from the 1970 East Hampton Facilities Plan as part of the “Growth” area. Based on comments made by the East Hampton Town Planner at the August 28, 1997 OPM public hearing held in Middletown (see attached hearing notes, as well as minutes from East Hampton P&Z Commission meeting, Item 12, dated Jan. 8, 1997), OPM removed the “Growth” designation for this area leaving it with the “Rural Lands” designation. The 1998-2003 State Plan was adopted by the Connecticut General Assembly with the “Rural Lands” designation for this area.

In 2002, as part of the revision process for the current 2005-2010 State Plan of C&D, OPM notified municipalities that the State Plan revision process was beginning, supplied municipalities with the 1998-2003 Locational Guide Maps, and asked for comment. No comments were received from the Town of East Hampton. In December of 2003, after considering comments received from municipalities, OPM published a draft Locational Guide Map and through public hearings held in January and February of 2004 gave municipalities additional opportunity to comment on the draft State Plan of C&D. The Town of East Hampton did not make comment. The 2005-2010 State Plan of C&D was adopted by the Connecticut General Assembly in June of 2005 with the area in question designated as “Rural Lands”.

At the October 19, 2005 joint public hearing for the application in question, with the exception of the applicant, no Town officials made oral remarks or submitted written testimony to OPM and the Continuing Legislative Committee on State Planning and Development.

In addition to the local planning issues as stated above, OPM has other concerns regarding this application. It is evident that there is a lack of consensus, even among the scientific community, as to the relative impacts of sewers verses septic waste disposal to Lake Pocotopaug and its watershed. The State Plan of C&D does recognize that intensification of development around lakes can increase nutrient laden runoff resulting in problematic weed and algae growth. State Plan of C&D policy does not support the introduction of infrastructure such as sewers that may lead to intensification of development in areas with sensitive environmental characteristics. While it is understood that the Skyline Estates proposal may go forward at the requested density with sewer or septic, it is not clear that the septic alternative will result in a density equal to the sewer proposal. Based on a site visit to the property, it did not appear that percolation testing had been done for each proposed lot. Depending on results for such testing, which is required as part of a septic subdivision application, the land may not support septic densities equal to the sewer alternative. In addition, although the developer has proposed conservation easements on sewered lots to limit the size of yards and tree removal, the history of the effectiveness of such easements is mixed in Connecticut.

Lastly, as indicated in the April 2005 Eastern Connecticut Environmental Review Team (ERT) Report on the Skyline Estates Subdivision, the potential long term effect of removing groundwater from this watershed basin via individual wells and diverting it away through sewers without compensating for groundwater discharge, will impact the net flow in the Lake Pocotopaug watershed basin. While it is unclear what the net effect of this will be on the lake, the ERT Report does point out that septic systems re-introduce 95% of the pumped home-use well water back into the ground, thereby reducing any major net loss to ground water and the watershed. For this reason, the report recommends that onsite septic be considered as an alternative to sewer.

At this point in time OPM does not wish to usurp, or get ahead of the local planning process. The importance of the local planning process and local plan can not be underestimated when OPM is considering the five year revision to the State Plan or interim change requests such as this. It is suggested that when the Town of East Hampton has adopted an updated Plan of Conservation and Development, if this particular site is still at issue, that the Town make application for interim change to the State Plan of C&D at that time.