 |
| Search |
|
|
|
|
Editorials
WhilemMany Lancaster town residents continue to fume and express anger and disbelief that a sanitary sewer line is being installed in a wetland, 10-feet away from Ellicott Creek, the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) has given the green light to RJF Development to commence construction of the sewer line to service their 264 single family subdivision.
Town Engineer Robert Harris informed the board at the work session that now that the cold weather has set, the DEC believes the developer has a soil stabilization program in place that will allow them to get the 1,100 feet of sewer line in before any rains come or snowmelt occurs.
Harris also elaborated on the stabilization programs they have in place to ensure the trenching walls would not collapse and that if a flooding event were likely, the developer has a matting product that would cover the trench and prevent water from entering the trench.
RJF commenced work this week to install the sanitary sewer line.
 |
| January 23, 2008 |
Residents speak out about the project
Stony Road resident Roy Schneggenburger, spokesperson for a number of Stony Road residents living near the project site and incurring increased flooding, addressed the board on the project and the resulting Ellicott Creek stormwater violations.
Schneggenburger began by stating again that no one is against site development. "There was no public controversy noted in the SEQR review process," he declared.
“Controversy was absent until the sanitary sewer line installation began right next to Ellicot Creek and the underhanded manner in which the permits were issues by the town and regulatory agencies were issued.”
Schneggenburger chastised Supervisor Robert Giza for never mentioning that the town permit issued in October for site soil disturbance of more than five acres was for the sewer installation.
“Ten feet away from Ellicott Creek, and actually, in the south branch of the creek during rains and snowmelt, and for ½ mile going east from the Stony Road Bridge,” stated Schneggenburger.
He then went on to give a chronology of the flooding events that took place, even after repairs and further mediation attempts were made by the developer, and the seven storm water violations that occurred between November 23, 2007 and as late as the week of January 6th - after said attempted mediations.
 |
| Flooding on 1-10-08 |
Schneggenburger then went on to say that wetland disturbance could have been avoided had the sanitary sewer line connection been made further east, across Pleasant View Drive and on to the Commerce Center; or south to the Walden Avenue branch.
“All vested parties (DEC, Town, developer, sewer district) point fingers at each other covering the fact that this project is a travesty”, he continued. “The developer blames the town saying, “this is were you told us to put it.” The town turns it around and says, “the regulatory agencies are okay with this.” The DEC dragged its feet on issuing another “stop work” order, waiting for the cold weather to set in and take them off the hook.”
As for the DEC, they had no choice but to issue a “stop work” order on Dec 3rd, but on December 13th rescinded the “stop work” order based solely on a design submitted by the developer that later failed in preventing flood waters from again inundating the disturbed area on several more occasions.
“If flooding occurs again and the project site is inundated with water and causing pollution, all parties will again here from us.
Lee Chowaniec then addressed the board. He reiterated the comments he heard at the work session where the DEC commented that now that the cold weather set in and the ground is freezing, work can commence at the site to install the 1,100 feet of sanitary sewer line, at least until another flooding event would place.
It is going to happen," he declared!
However, the wisdom of disturbing a wetland for the purpose of installing a sanitary sewer line will always be questioned. All parties involved in the determination of the sewer line location and permit issuances will be subjected to culpability and blame, for an unwarranted and senseless transgression and resulting erosion and sediment stormwater violations.
Close is not good enough
Although DEC Engineer Damianos Skaros has been commended by the Town Engineer and the public contacting him, the correspondence he sent to Mr. Schneggenburger on January 17, and then on to me, is unsettling. Especially considering a week earlier the DEC was considering issuing another “stop work” because the latest attempt by the developer to hold back creek flood waters failed.
The DEC correspondence reads:
Our original “Stop Work Order” (Dec. 3, 2007) was issued to allow for and to ensure that necessary additional erosion and sediment controls were installed, prior to the advancement of the project (i.e. the installation of the sanitary sewer line.) Once the updated control plan was implemented and certified by the design engineer, work could continue.
At that time, the applicant was instructed to monitor the site more closely and notify the Department prior to the continuation of any site work. It was determined that, if the newly implemented controls proved to be inefficient or in need of repair, improvements/repairs would need to be made before any site work could commence.
As you may be aware, repair to the silt fencing, hay bales, and check dams were needed and were undertaken over the course of the past few months. The repairs were carried out promptly. Once complete, the Department was notified so that our staff could visit the site and ensure that the repairs were conducted properly.
The ultimate goal has always been to prevent and minimize any adverse impact to the receiving body of water (Ellicott Creek). We will continue to monitor the site and take any action, if necessary, to control the erosion and sediment runoff into the Ellicott Creek.
Comments
1. DEC letter states: Once the updated control plan was implemented and certified by the design engineer, work could continue.
Control plan design was approved by the DEC on December 13, 2007. Despite several more modifications, flooding continued into the disturbed area and stormwater violations continued.
When exactly was the design certified?
RJF Development’s design engineer is Robert Labenski, former Town of Lancaster Engineer who also serves with Supervisor Giza on the Sewer District #4 board.
2. DEC letter states: It was determined that, if the newly implemented controls proved to be inefficient or in need of repair, improvements/repairs would need to be made before any site work could commence.
Controls and added modifications (repair to the silt fencing, hay bales, and check dams) failed to staunch Ellicott Creek floodwaters and erosion/sedimentation stormwater violations continued. DEC considered issuing second “Stop Work Order” and dragged its feet until the cold weather set in.
DEC and ACOE reps promised to visit the site with residents after controls were put into place. Residents claim such joint visits never happened.
3. DEC letter states: The ultimate goal has always been to prevent and minimize any adverse impact to the receiving body of water (Ellicott Creek).
Exactly what does “minimize” connote with this project?
Sounds like “close enough is good enough.” Everyone associated with the project is commending the DEC for their time, effort and cooperation to seeing a project through the rough times and to restrict operations until weather conditions were favorable to install the sanitary sewer line.
Others view this as joined effort in culpability and cover up should the developer and/or others in the process escape without fines or censure.
Close enough is not good enough when code violations occur that result in environmental contamination.
Regardless of circumstance (flooding), the regulatory agencies and the town issued permits to RJF to disturb wetland soils 10 feet away from the main branch of Ellicott Creek without an adequate stormwater prevention plan(s) in place initially and thereafter.
“I can’t control floods,” Elliot Laskey of RJF Development told the Town Board. Apparently not!
The public now wants the DEC to act appropriately in handing out fines for each violation. If not, why should the public practice what the DEC (environmental protectors) preaches to them for preserving our environment?
 |
| January 23, 2008 |
 |
| January 23, 2008 |
© Copyright 2008 by Speakupwny.com
Top of Page
|
|
|
Editorials
Latest Headlines
|
|
Buffalo NY Web hosting By OnLineMedia, Inc
www.olm1.com
Part of
www.onlinebuffalo.com
[where: 14206]
|