Nearly 8 months to the day after a mudslide below Charton Apartments on Newfield Street, the City received approval to dig a channel to re-route the river past the blockage in the Coginchaug River.
The Coginchaug River is frequently bounded by steep banks in its meandering last mile or so, as it passes through the raised land between Veterans Park and the river's confluence with the Mattabessett. One of those banks collapsed on March 30th, after several days of heavy rain, sending a wall of mud into the main channel of the River.
Ever since the mudslide, the City, State, and Federal Governments have been wrangling with each other and with Ted Charton, the owner of the apartments, over how to clear the channel, and whether the remaining river bank below the apartments should be stabilized to prevent further mudslides. The Federal Agencies refused to authorize or pay for clearing of the channel unless the riverbank was stabilized to their satisfaction. Preliminary estimates indicated that such a stabilization could cost as much as $750,000, which Charton's insurance agency refused to pay for, and Charton insisted was unnecessary.
After months of meetings, the State DEP told the City that if it produced an engineered plan for a new channel, it might be approved. At its August meeting, the Common Council authorized $15,000 to pay for such an engineered study, with the understanding that the clearing itself would be done by city workers.
The plan calls for the new channel to be dug through the flat land on the east side of the northward flowing river. The channel will be 670 feet long, 28 feet wide, and 5 foot deep.
The Army Corps of Engineers provided approval to this plan, but with numerous conditions. The most significant by far is that this channel can only serve as a temporary bypass channel. The letter of approval specificies that by September of 2012 the City "shall submit a plan for the permanent closure of the bypass channel and the remediation of the area subject to temporary disturbance. ... Filling of the bypass and the remediation of the temporary impact area shall commence no later than November 28, 2012 and be completed with 60 days of this date (January 27, 2013)." The full approval letter and a map of the plan are available here.
Bill Warner, City Planner, briefed the Inland Wetlands Agency on the Army's approval at the Agency's Wednesday meeting. Ron Borrelli asked a number of questions about who would bear the costs of clearing the channel, and how it would be done. Warner indicated that the wetlands protection requirements in the permit might require specialized equipment and skills that the City workers do not have. He said the city would be paying for the channel clearing because it was needed to protect Veterans Park and Palmer Field, "The City is looking at it as protecting our interests." When asked why the city was not pursuing compensation from Charton, Warner said that the Corps had cited Charton for some of the fill he had put on the slope after the landslide, "The Mayor's position is that the Corps should go after him."
Borrelli was astounded that the permit only allowed a channel for two years. He asked if the city would really have to fill it in, "Is this one of those things the Army will forget about in their vast paper work?"
Warner did not respond verbally.
2 comments:
Thank you for posting this, Steve. This mudslide/blockage is very damaging to the lower Coginchaug ecosystem. The downstream section of the river (below the blockage) has lost flow and has turned into a stagnant backwater, and upstream from the blockage the higher water level will kill trees if allowed to remain (if it's not too late already). This (the lower Coginchaug between Veterans Park and the Boggy Meadows) is an area of major concern to the Jonah Center. We have written to the Mayor of our concerns and will continue to monitor the situation.
Your tax dollars seem to support a culture of doing City business where even the laws of physics are open to shortcuts.
When the study was approved, I had asked for a complete review of all maps, P&Z approvals, permits, and other history of this property. Shouldn't there be some accountability to all parties that allowed code standards to be ignored?
I have not heard any response on my request for a formal review of the history of this property, not from City Hall, nor P&Z, nor from Inland
Wetlands. Not anyone wants to know what went wrong.
Could this happen again and will the City Taxpayer be the one to foot the bill again?
Post a Comment