This is a printer-friendly version of an article from Zip06.com.
03/12/2024 01:36 PMNORTH HAVEN
Approximately 125 people gathered at the North Haven Recreation Center on Feb. 28 for what was at times a clamorous third public hearing regarding the proposed waste reclamation center, AB Eco Park.
The North Haven Inland Wetlands Commission (IWC) heard from Bill Gambardella, the visionary behind the ambitious project, for a third time on an initial application for filling a “small isolated wetland identified as Wetland 16,” said Land Use Official Alan Fredericksen. “That will result in 2,134 square feet of direct impact,” or approximately 1/20 of one acre. This would be a stepping stone to making the property developable for the project that would be located near the Target at 250 Universal Drive.
Tim Myjak, an environmental specialist and associate of Gambardella, attempted to persuade the IWC on the necessity of filling in the wetlands that are considered a “brownfield,” which is an abandoned and underutilized land in a state of degradation as a result of long-use by industry. The applicants want to fill Wetland 16 and the other wetland areas of the location, which have tires, creosote rail ties, and other materials left over from industry. Cancer-causing PCBs have also been detected in the wetland areas, an ecological point of concern for the applicant that they wish to remediate.
Myjak estimated that it may cost up to $600 million to restore the wetlands to conditions that resemble being untouched by industry. He feels that construction of AB Eco Park would be a more feasible option for the property.
“The site will just remain as a uncontrolled environmental condition,” said Myjak. “Versus, we work within the regulations that we have from the state and federal government and municipalities, and we develop a remedial strategy that benefits the future industrial use of this site...bringing it into a condition that is protective of human health and the environment because it is far from being protective of human health and environment now.”
Following the presentation by the applicant and associates, there were testimonials from the public that mostly assumed a critical tone on the overall concept of AB Eco Park, not just the exact contents of the current application.
North Haven resident Nancy Alderman, an advisor on the Quinnipiac River Fund, returned as an intervener on the application. Alderman assailed the project as a “seriously bad proposal” amounting to an ecological disaster for the Quinnipiac River and Greater New Haven Area. She also accused Gambardella of posting “untruths, falsehoods, and innuendos” about the impact of AB Eco Park on the project’s website, which allegedly had information altered two days prior to the public hearing.
“According to their original website, Eco Park is a waste incinerator. Waste incineration poses a significant threat to public health and the environment,” said Alderman. “The major impact on health is the higher incidence of cancer and respiratory symptoms…If it were a good proposal, the applicants would not have to tell untruths, leave information out, and include innuendos to mislead the commissioners and the public.”
As of Feb. 28, the project’s website stated that, “AB Ecopark is not an incinerator. Instead, what we are proposing is a power plant with extremely low emissions.”
A raucous moment in the meeting came when a visibly irritated Gambarbella interrupted Alderman’s testimony, calling her a “liar,” among other names, and saying that her testimony had “nothing to do” with the proposal. Gambardella’s outburst was met with jeers and shouting from the audience of citizens before he was escorted out of the meeting space by an individual sitting beside him.
Additional public testimony saw more criticism about the project’s potential negative impacts to the surrounding environment and ecology. Opposition was also demonstrated in the form of signs from several people in the audience that read, “Stop the North Haven Incinerator,” as well as a petition that gathered more than 100 signatures, according to residents who led the petition effort.
Although minimal, there was some testimony that supported the project and aligned with Myjak’s view that AB Eco Park is a feasible and necessary development. One of those supporters was Gambardella’s son, Evan Gambardella, who spoke about the importance of the project as contributing to “the preservation of the environment, not against it.”
“You have an opportunity here to actually fix this problem. You can solve it in an ecological and ethical way,” said Evan Gambardella, addressing both the IWC and the audience.
Regarding the information on AB Eco Park’s website, Evan Gambardella, who helped his father design the website, also admitted to the IWC that he was “responsible for the incinerator misinformation” and that the project is actually a recycling plant that would prove beneficial to the community.
“I did think it was an incinerator when I wrote that on the website for the first time. Unfortunately, it is not an incinerator, and that's why the website was updated with changes,” he said. “So, I apologize for the misinformation that was out there because it's not an incinerator. It’s actually a recycling plant. It's a waste-to-energy plant.”
Considering the bevy of new information that the commission was given by the applicants, coupled with the time needed to conduct more research on that information and the need to consider the large amounts of public testimony submitted to the IWC, the commission opted to not deliberate the application at the meeting. This part of the process, and the decision to accept or reject the AB Eco Park application, will be seen through at the IWC’s next meeting that takes place on Wednesday, March 27.
“There are many things that we have to look at in this application,” IWC Chair Frank Bumstead said solemnly to the remaining audience of citizens. “Some of the things are in the past, some of these [are] in the future.”