By Bill Slocum
Contributing Editor
Neighbors opposed to the construction of a 355-unit apartment complex in central Greenwich came out in force Monday night to urge rejection by the town Inland Wetland and Watercourses Agency.
Calling it “monstrously scaled,” the structural equivalent of “one-and-a-half Greenwich Hospitals” and “four Town Halls,” the uniformly negative outcry became heated at points, and directed as much against the agency as the applicant.
Some neighbors complained the wetlands agency was giving the applicant too much leeway, allowing critical information to be left wanting. Others questioned if the applicant was intentionally stalling to inconvenience opponents and run out the clock on the application’s review period.
“Why are you giving these people a pass?” asked attorney Edward O’Hanlan, representing the Greenwich Neighborhood Preservation Association, an organization of neighbors opposing the project. “There is a fatigue element in this.”
Agency members pushed back, noting that the public forum’s focus was supposed to be on wetlands impact, not the agency’s administration of the matter. But the criticism continued, and remained heated, especially after O’Hanlan claimed agency staff had been unhelpful to his group in recent days. Agency director Patricia Sesto vigorously denied this.
Agency Secretary Stephan Skoufalos objected to the issue of the incomplete application being continually raised. “It’s getting a little too much for me,” he said. “We have to focus on the wetlands issues. We understand the application is to date incomplete.”
Other opponents argued that part of the site along 345 West Putnam Avenue, occupied since 1927 by Post Road Iron Works, was found to have contaminants, and that no construction should be allowed without remediation first taking place.
“Lead, cadmium, and chromium 6 are among the chemicals used in metal processing,” Valerie Stauffer, a District 7 Representative Town Meeting member, told the agency. “After 90 years of Post Road Iron Works in operation, I would guess the soil in the five acres slated for development probably contains a majority of these bad-actor chemicals.”
A neighbor of the site, Mike Covney, brought a tape recorder so the agency could hear from “those who will be most affected by the development”—sounds of a vernal pool at night in which the croaking of tree frogs and other creatures was audible. The pool, while off-site, is part of an area around the property that opponents say would be impacted by blasting and soil removal.
The agency announced that they have hired a licensed environmental professional, AECOM out of Rocky Hill, Connecticut, to investigate contamination questions onsite. AECOM previously handled the Greenwich High School Music Instructional Space and Auditorium (MISA) remediation project for the town.
The agency also pushed back on a contention by attorney Steve Studer, representing the site developer, that a pipe extending from the Iron Works portion of the site predates the authority of the agency and hence would be “grandfathered” from their purview. The agency’s position has been that, while the pipe itself may have existed before the agency came into existence, anything running through that pipe today is something the agency can act on.
Agency members reminded Studer about other unanswered questions, such as the issue of contamination and whether blasting necessary for a two-story underground garage would impact surrounding bedrock. An extension was granted to mid-June to hear from the applicant, but with a warning.
“Eventually, the string runs out,” agency member Bill Galvin told Studer.
