New Amazon warehouse plan proposed for Killingly after first try denied
KILLINGLY—Ryan Companies, which has built Amazon warehouses
around the country, has filed a new application to build a 1.3 million
square-foot warehouse in Killingly. It will be received Monday night (8/3) by
the same land use agency that scuttled it last month.
The previous application to build a $200 million,
robot-focused, "first mile" fulfillment center near Interstate 395
was denied by the town's inland, wetlands and watercourses commission by a 3-2
vote in early July.
The online retailer announced at an April Killingly Planning
and Zoning Commission meeting that it would be the tenant for the warehouse.
In its rejection of the application, which was met with
resistance from residents during the months-long meetings before the wetlands
commission and the simultaneous planning and zoning commission review for
site-plan approval, the commission based its decision on a regulation that
calls for a denial if an applicant fails to exhaust feasible and prudent
alternatives.
In Amazon's case, a majority of the commission determined
that the Ryan Companies failed to demonstrate that a feasible and prudent
alternative does not exist that would cause less or no environmental impact to
the wetlands on the 556-acre site.
In its decision, the commission proposed that the applicant
investigate and significantly reduce the building's footprint to avoid entirely
filling in four areas of wetlands on the site.
The commission also proposed that the applicant investigate
the feasibility of structured parking instead of surface parking for its
employees, which would condense the development area and significantly reduce
the impervious surface footprint.
Killingly planner and zoning enforcement officer Jonathan
Blake said in an email Monday that the new application does appear to include
additional information regarding alternatives and comparing it to another
developed site in Killingly.
Ryan Companies has also filed a new application with the
planning and zoning commission for a site plan review. The applicant withdrew
the previous one following the denial of the wetlands application.
Austin Stowe, a spokesman for Amazon said in an email Monday
that the company is committed to serving customers in Connecticut and New
England with faster delivery and the reliable service.
"Tonight we're filing a new application with the Inland
Wetlands and Watercourses Commission that reflects the extensive work we've
done to address the concerns raised throughout this process," Stowe said.
"We look forward to continuing our work with Killingly and sharing more
about the positive impact this project can have for the community."
The "unprejudiced" nature of the vote allowed for
the company to submit a new application with those issues addressed, but the
company had a limited amount of time to re-file because the town recently
adopted a temporary zoning moratorium on accepting applications for large
warehouses, distribution centers, fulfillment centers, e-commerce centers
and truck and freight terminals.
The moratorium took affect on July 20 and will be in place
until June 30, 2027 to give the planning and zoning commission an opportunity
to consider and implement revisions to its regulations concerning commercial
warehouses and distribution centers.
The new applications were filed July 16, according to town
officials.
FROM THE WINY RADIO NEWSROOM: (KILLINGLY) The Killingly
Wetlands and Watercourse Commission (IWWC) voted unanimously to accept a new
application submitted by Ryan Companies, US, Inc. to construct an Amazon
Warehouse on Westcott Road, at tonight’s meeting.
Attorney Evan Seeman of Robinson & Cole LLP,
representing Ryan Companies US, Inc., explained to the Commission that they
will be providing a full presentation at the September meeting showing the
proposed changes. He also requested a Public Hearing to be held.
As previously reported, Ryan companies US, Inc – Project
Husky, resubmitted an application to build a new, just under, 1.3 million
square foot warehouse on Wescott Road in the Town of Killingly after their last
submission on March 16th of this year, was denied without prejudice by the
Inland Wetlands Commission on July 6th of this year.
The project is now described as construction of a new
warehousing and distribution center totaling 1,288,220 +/- sq. ft. on a 556+/-
acre assemblage, consisting of 340+/- acres for development (Project Site) —
which includes a 76+/- acre conservation easement — and 216+/- acres proposed
to be deeded to the Town for conservation. The project includes associated
landscaping, stormwater drainage improvements, parking, loading spaces, wetland
crossings, 23,058+/- sq. ft. of wetland disturbance, upland review area
activity, and proposed mitigation measures including 44,369+/- sq. ft. of
wetland mitigation (creation, restoration & enhancement); located between
I-395, Westcott Road and Mashentuck Road, and includes several parcels. The
area is zoned as a Business Park District and Rural Development District.
Due to the Labor Day Holiday, the next IWWC meeting will be
held on September 14th.
Eastern CT town puts up website on how to oppose unwelcome trash plant. Petition also started.
With many Plainfield residents already feeling besieged by a
wave of mega-warehouses and jumbo distribution centers, the proposal to build
an 81-acre
regional trash “gasification” incinerator near the center of town has
set off a full-scale opposition campaign.
Residents and local officials in July debuted plainfieldtrashplant.org,
a website about Smart
Technologies’ proposal and strategies for fighting it. That comes less
than a year after townspeople at a referendum voted
nearly 10-1 against the project.
Neighbors of the site near the intersection of Route 12 and
Route 14 are worried about industrial noise, nasty smells, ground water
contamination and other pollution, and townwide there’s a concern about still
another set of large trucks rumbling through what has been a lightly developed,
mostly rural community.
“A plant that takes in more than 1,800 tons of waste a day
is fed almost entirely by heavy trucks, and heavy trucks are the
quality-of-life problem residents raise most,” according to the new website.
Doctor Answers Women's Health Questions
“Residents and both (political) town committees estimate
over 100 (more) garbage trucks a day, but no state traffic study has been
filed,” the website states. “So that figure is a resident estimate, not an
engineering number.”
Lawn signs against the project can be seen along local
roads, and an online petition against it has gotten more than 700 signatures.
Like much of eastern Connecticut, Plainfield has been
experiencing mild to moderate traffic congestion that was once unheard of.
It has hosted a 1.3-million-square-foot Lowe’s distribution
center for the past 20 years, and residents got used to the truck and employee
traffic long ago. But fresh development has picked up rapidly in the past two
years.
Bristol falls in first game of Little League Softball World
SeriesBristol falls in first game of Little League Softball World Series
Watch More
Amazon opened a 202,000-square-foot distribution center on
the site of a former greyhound race track, and Uline recently began hiring for
the 1.2-million-square-foot warehouse it plans to open next month. Costco has
been trying to get zoning permits for a 1.1-million order fulfillment center.
All of that has residents on edge about anything that would
add even more trucks to their streets.
Currently, Connecticut has
only five energy-producing incinerators, including the Greenleaf Power
operation in southwestern Plainfield that burns wood chips and shavings.
Smart Technologies, a partnership of O&G Industries and
Advanced Waste Technologies International, wants to build the sixth. The company bills
its project as a way to build energy independence for Connecticut,
steeply reduce the volume of trash being shipped out of state, boost recycling
and reduce landfill use.
It would help compensate for the loss of the massive
trash-to-energy in Hartford’s South Meadows that once burned a third of
Connecticut’s trash before being shut down in 2022, Smart Technologies said.
The facility would separate out 99% of metals and 98% of glass, and would have
anaerobic digestors to create natural gas from food waste, it said.
If the state Siting Council and the Department of Energy and
Environmental Protection give the go-ahead, Smart Technologies would construct
a plant capable of burning nearly 470,000 tons of trash a year, the company
said.
The performance of the existing five facilities is degrading
at about 1% a year, meaning Connecticut has to steadily increase the amount of
trash it sends out of state by truck or freight train.
“While still permitted, the state’s 16 active landfills are
no longer receiving municipal solid waste for disposal. As a result,
Connecticut is forced to export a large percentage out-of-state,” the company
said.
The company emphasizes that its technology is more modern
than what was available when the other, traditional incinerators were built.
The Plainfield facility would employ a chemical process with intense heat to
break down trash into a gas, but wouldn’t fully burn it.
The opposition’s new documents extensively outline the
likely timelines for DEEP and Siting Council review, but note that Smart
Technologies has made no Siting Council application.
The website emphasizes that there was no legal power behind
last year’s referendum, in which 1,148 residents said they oppose the plan
compared to just 125 supporting it. The vote demonstrated public opinion in
Plainfield, but state law puts the power of decision with DEEP and the Siting
Council, not the town.
“Contact the state directly. Submit a written comment to CT
DEEP during its 30-day comment period, help file a 25-signature petition to
request a hearing, and — once a Siting Council application is filed — request
party status,” it recommends.
In a recent interview on WINY radio, First Selectman Kevin
Cunningham encouraged residents to learn about the project so they’re prepared
when official reviews get under way. He said that overall, the town would
rather not host the plant.
Opponents get another chance to fight Brookfield compressor station expansion
Brian Gioiele
BROOKFIELD — Opponents of the controversial proposed expansion of the Brookfield Compressor Station —
located just 1,900 feet from Whisconier Middle School — have new
life.
Amid immense opposition from town leaders, residents and
the Sierra Club, the state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection
has reopened the permit application process for the project — nearly a
year after giving tentative approval for a proposed air permit to double the
size of the gas pipeline compressor station.
DEEP’s decision comes after receipt of an amended
application submitted by developers Berkshire Hathaway and TC Energy to
increase the amount of carbon monoxide (CO) emitted at the site, which sits
adjacent to the town’s middle school.
Reopening the process allows opponents to submit concerns
about the environmental impacts — and work to push for denial — of
the expansion, plans for which have been in the works for years.
“Very positive news,” said state Sen. Stephen Harding,
R-Brookfield, who joined with the town’s Board of Selectmen in opposing the
proposed project.
“It’s a testament to the hard work of people of all ages and
backgrounds throughout Brookfield who spoke out to demand changes,” Harding
added. “We joined together to cite the environmental risks for everyone in our
community, and we have been unified in demanding transparency.”
Since the project’s initial proposal, Brookfield residents
joined by the Sierra Club, the NO Pipeline Expansion (NOPE) Coalition and Save
the Sound have worked to stop any expansion of Brookfield’s natural gas
compressor station, which is on an 80-acre property at 78 Meadow Lane owned by
the Iroquois Gas Transmission System.
During the initial public hearing, more than 400 public
comments were received by DEEP, the majority of them opposing the expansion and
urging DEEP to protect local air quality, public health, safety and
climate.
First Selectman Stephen Dunn, at the DEEP public hearing in
January, called on the state to protect residents by requiring such
measures as electric compressors and ambient air testing.
“Not one ounce of the gas that flows through these pipes
benefits residents in Connecticut,” Dunn stated.
With the reopening of the permit process, people can submit
written comments to james.grillo@ct.gov no later than Aug. 24. The reopened
permit approval process will allow parties to request an adjudicatory hearing,
which DEEP spokesman Bill Flood says, assuming all requirements are met, should
be granted. It also requires continuous emissions monitoring at the
facility.
“Questions remain about the pollution that will impact the
community, the type of permit that’s been requested, alternatives, compliance
and enforcement,” said Samantha Dynowski, Sierra Club’s Connecticut state
director. “Brookfield residents deserve a thorough process that centers on the
well-being of the community, not the gas pipeline corporation.”
Flood said after the public comment period closed earlier
this year, Iroquois raised a new concern that the emission limit for CO was too
low for it to deliver natural gas in the quantities it desires. The company
formally requested a higher emissions limit for CO in the permits.
Even with the requested change in emissions limit, Flood
said the proposed upgrade is expected to reduce overall CO emissions from the
facility compared with its current operations. DEEP’s technical review projects
an approximately 69% reduction in overall emissions from current levels. The
original requested permit would have seen a 90% reduction.
“The request for this new and more permissive limit happened
after the public comment period ended,” Flood said. “To ensure the public has
an opportunity to review and weigh in on these new CO emission limits, DEEP
posted a new draft permit and is initiating a new public comment period. The
new (Notice of Tentative Determination) will give the public an additional
opportunity to comment on the permits and petition for a hearing.”
The expansion would involve two steel pipelines that enter and
exit the station: The Algonquin pipeline, built in 2008, comes in from the
southwest, and the Iroquois pipeline, built in 2009, comes down from the north.
Iroquois says the project “has been developed to minimize
community and environmental impacts,” according to its website.
Iroquois wants to more than double the capacity of the
compressor station to receive an additional 125 million cubic feet of natural
gas per day, according to an operating permit filed with DEEP.
The Iroquois natural gas pipeline, which runs from Canada
through New York and Connecticut and under Long Island Sound, began operation
in 1992. When Iroquois proposed a compressor station for the pipeline in 2006
for Brookfield, residents objected, saying it would be a risk to the health and
safety of neighbors and the staff and students at Whisconier.
Despite objections, the compressor station was built.
The proposed expansion now has residents concerned about
possible increases in nitrogen oxide in the air possibly very close to
acceptable limits. Flood said DEEP concluded that the enforceability of the
annual nitrogen oxide emission cap could be enhanced.
The new draft permits now require Continuous Emissions
Monitoring System technology. The new CEMS requirements would mean
the company has to monitor nitrogen oxide emissions from each turbine in
real time. Additionally, the company would be required to continuously
record and periodically report to DEEP emission data captured by the CEMS.
“The CEMS would be subject to robust state and federal
quality assurance standards, and the CEMS itself and the emission records
associated with the CEMS would be subject to routine inspection by DEEP,” Flood
added.