NOTE: THIS IS A DRAFT COMPONENT
OF THE 2008 REGIONAL PLAN UPDATE

--- 1. INTRODUCTION --- 2. MAP OF GROWTH --- 3. WATER SUPPLIES ---
--- 4. WASTEWATER --- 5. TRANSPORTATION --- 6. GLOBAL WARMING --- 7. HOUSING ---
--- 8. ECONOMY --- 9. OPEN SPACE --- 10. MIX LAND USE --- 11. TOD --- 12. PEDESTRIAN ---

3-1. EXISTING AND POTENTIAL
INTERMUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLIES
This section of the Regional Plan begins with the most serious of infrastructure issues: development of new water supplies to supplement existing sources.

This topic is by nature regional and thus very appropriate for a regional plan.

As the Plan should focus on regional aspects of water supply, the listing below includes only potential additional intertown water supplies, excluding new or expanded sources to be used entirely within the boundaries of, and developed by, a single municipality.

Not included on the list below are existing and long established intertown water supply arrangements, especially drainage by gravity westerly to the the New York City system and south to the Aquarion Water Company. These are catalogued in the town by town overview texts in section two below.

Note that both existing and potential supply sources are given equal weight for protection on the Future Growth Map, where both are shown as Conservation Areas.

The reasoning is that until a future supply area's final water supply status is determined, it must receive protection as if it were to definitely become such a supply, lest it be degraded beneath drinking water standards. Both state and regional plan maps use identical logic in this regard.

POTENTIAL ADDITIONAL
INTERTOWN WATER SUPPLIES

Inclusion of a concept in this section is not an endorsement of the water supply proposal by HVCEO or by its potential water receiving or water donating member municipality. Rather, the list defines the agenda for upcoming water supply studies and policy formulation.

WATER SUPPLY INTO BETHEL:
--- There is the potential for Danbury’s water supply to serve as an emergency backup source for central Bethel. Source: determined to be feasible by Section 2 of a 2006 water supply interconnections study by HVCEO.

--- There is the potential for Danbury’s water supply to serve as an emergency backup to augment existing supplies in northern Bethel. Source: determined to be feasible by Section 3 of a 2006 water supply interconnections study by HVCEO.

WATER SUPPLY OUT OF BETHEL:
--- In southern Bethel, the potential for runoff from Bethel’s Wolf Pit Brook Watershed to be pumped northwesterly to Danbury is limited, under today's conditions, by a low cost benefit ratio. Source: 2006 study by HVCEO. The source of designation as potential future water supply is the 2005 - 2010 Conservation and Development Policies Plan for Connecticut and its earlier versions dating back to 1974.

WATER SUPPLY OUT OF BRIDGEWATER:
--- A long term regional goal has been to preserve the potential for future runoff from the Shepaug River Watershed in eastern Bridgewater to be utilized as a supply source by a large water company capable of developing this source. Source of designation: 2005 - 2010 Conservation and Development Policies Plan for Connecticut and its earlier versions back to 1974.

WATER SUPPLY INTO BROOKFIELD:
--- There is the potential for Danbury’s water supply to be extended northeasterly to serve the Federal Road Corridor in southern Brookfield. Source: determined to be feasible by Section 4 of a 2006 interconnections study by HVCEO.

Detail from HVCEO's 2006 Water Supply
Interconnections report. See full size graphic.

WATER SUPPLY OUT OF BROOKFIELD:
--- The feasibility of transmitting water to Danbury from major aquifers in central Brookfield will be studied in 2008 by a consultant to the Danbury Water Department. Source: 2007 Danbury Water Supply Plan.

--- There is a long range potential for watershed runoff from Brookfield’s portion of the Candlewood Lake Watershed to be pumped up from the southern end of Candlewood Lake to nearby Margerie Reservoir in Danbury. The concept was put into operation temporarily during a Danbury water supply emergency in the late nineteen sixties.

The concept requires state water quality reclassification of Danbury Bay from B to AA. Source: 2007 Danbury Water Supply Plan and earlier versions of that Plan.

WATER SUPPLY INTO DANBURY:
--- The feasibility of transmitting water to Danbury from major aquifers in central Brookfield will be studied starting in 2008 by a consultant to the Danbury Water Department. Source: 2007 Danbury Water Supply Plan.

A reassessment of the potential for diversion of drinking water from Ball Pond Brook in New Fairfield to Margerie Reservoir in Danbury will be studied starting in 2008 by a consultant to the Danbury Water Department. The Brook would require a classification from B to AA. Source of diversion concept: 2007 Danbury Water Supply Plan.

--- The potential use of New Fairfield's Short Woods Brook Aquifer as a local water supply for the New Fairfield Town Center area may yield an excess of water that can be transmitted to nearby Margerie Reservoir to assist Danbury. Source: New Fairfield First Selectman.

--- Long range potential for watershed runoff from portions of the Candlewood Lake Watershed in other municipalities to be pumped up from the southern end of the Lake to nearby Margerie Reservoir in Danbury The concept was put into operation temporarily during a Danbury water supply emergency in the late nineteen sixties.

The concept requires state water quality reclassification of Danbury Bay from B to AA. Source: 2007 Danbury Water Supply Plan and earlier versions of that Plan.

The black line identifies the proposed water supply
pipeline route from Danbury Bay of Candlewood Lake
on the east up gradient to Margerie Reservoir on the west.
The concept was put into operation temporarily during a
Danbury water supply emergency in the late nineteen sixties.

WATER SUPPLY OUT OF DANBURY:
--- There is the potential for Danbury’s water supply to be extended to Bethel, Brookfield, New Fairfield, New Milford and Newtown as documented in a 2006 water supply interconnections study by HVCEO.

WATER SUPPLY INTO NEW FAIRFIELD:
--- There is the potential for Danbury’s water supply to be extended north to serve the Town Center area in New Fairfield. Source: determined to be feasible by Section 6 of a 2006 interconnections study by HVCEO.

WATER SUPPLY OUT OF NEW FAIRFIELD:
--- Preserve the potential for future runoff from the Ball Pond Brook Watershed in central New Fairfield to be utilized by a water company. Source: 2005 - 2010 Conservation and Development Policies Plan for Connecticut and earlier versions of that Plan.

Also, a reassessment of the potential for diversion from Ball Pond Brook in New Fairfield to nearby Margerie Reservoir in Danbury will be studied in 2008 by a consultant to the Danbury Water Department. Source: 2007 Danbury Water Supply Plan.

View of New Fairfield's Short Woods Brook Aquifer.
Photo courtesy of Rick Gottschalk

--- The potential use of the Short Woods Brook Aquifer as a local water supply for the New Fairfield Town Center area may yield an excess of water that can be transmitted to Danbury’s Margerie Reservoir. Source: New Fairfield First Selectman.

--- Long range potential for watershed runoff from New Fairfield’s portion of the Candlewood Lake Watershed to be pumped up from the southern end of the Lake to nearby Margerie Reservoir in Danbury The concept was put into operation temporarily during a Danbury water supply emergency in the late nineteen sixties.

The concept requires state water quality reclassification of Danbury Bay from B to AA. Source: 2007 Danbury Water Supply Plan.

WATER SUPPLY OUT OF NEW MILFORD:
--- There is a long term regional and state goal to preserve the potential for future runoff from the West Aspetuck River Watershed in central New Milford to be utilized by a water company. Source: 2005-2010 Conservation and Development Policies Plan for Connecticut and earlier versions back to 1974.

The pristine West Aspetuck River in New Milford,
classified in state plans as a possible future water supply
Photo courtesy of Rick Gottschalk

--- Preserve the potential for future runoff from the Shepaug River Watershed in eastern New Milford to be utilized by a water company. Source: 2005 - 2010 Conservation and Development Policies Plan for Connecticut and earlier versions back to 1974.

--- Long range potential for runoff from New Milford’s portion of the Candlewood Lake Watershed to be pumped up from the southern end of the Lake to nearby Margerie Reservoir in Danbury The concept was put into operation temporarily during a Danbury water supply emergency in the late nineteen sixties.

The concept requires state water quality reclassification of Danbury Bay from B to AA). Source: 2007 Danbury Water Supply Plan.

WATER SUPPLY INTO NEWTOWN:
--- There is the potential for Danbury’s water supply to be extended easterly along Route 6 in Bethel to connect with the United Water Company’s Newtown System. Source: determined to be feasible by Section 8 of a 2006 interconnection study by HVCEO.

WATER SUPPLY OUT OF REDDING:
--- Redding’s Upper Saugatuck Aquifer, as a potential small water supply but remote from urban areas in need, would have low cost benefit for development of a well field. Source of concept: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1982 Housatonic River Basin Urban Study.

WATER SUPPLY INTO OR OUT OF RIDGEFIELD:
--- no new intertown transfers proposed.

WATER SUPPLY OUT OF SHERMAN:
--- There is a long range potential for watershed runoff from Sherman’s portion of the Candlewood Lake Watershed to be pumped up from the southern end of Candlewood Lake to nearby Margerie Reservoir in Danbury The concept was put into operation temporarily during a Danbury water supply emergency in the late nineteen sixties. The concept requires state water quality reclassification of Danbury Bay from B to AA. Source: 2007 Danbury Water Supply Plan.

3-2. INVENTORY OF WATER SUPPLY SOURCES
Water supply source inventories and maps, for both watersheds and aquifers, on a town by town basis have been produced for municipal water supply source protection and planning. These municipal data bases should be used in each municipal plan update.

The municipal inventories are incorporated by reference into this Regional Plan and provide a comprehensive supply overview, beyond the intermunicipal aspects listed above:

1. WATER SUPPLY SOURCE INVENTORY FOR BETHEL
2. WATER SUPPLY SOURCE INVENTORY FOR BRIDGEWATER
3. WATER SUPPLY SOURCE INVENTORY FOR BROOKFIELD

4. WATER SUPPLY SOURCE INVENTORY FOR DANBURY
5. WATER SUPPLY SOURCE INVENTORY FOR NEW FAIRFIELD

6. WATER SUPPLY SOURCE INVENTORY FOR NEW MILFORD
7. WATER SUPPLY SOURCE INVENTORY FOR NEWTOWN

8. WATER SUPPLY SOURCE INVENTORY FOR REDDING
9. WATER SUPPLY SOURCE INVENTORY FOR RIDGEFIELD
10. WATER SUPPLY SOURCE INVENTORY FOR SHERMAN

3-3. PROTECTING WATER SUPPLY SOURCES
Introduction. The two sections above provide an overview of water supply sources. This section provides the strategy for their long term protection.

Connecticut state statute 8-23 requires that each municipal plan of conservation and development address water supply resource protection. The municipal plan of conservation and development "shall consider the need for protection of existing and potential public surface and ground drinking water supplies."

To assist local water supply planning, HVCEO has invested heavily in maintaining background data on existing and potential water supply sources, many of which cross municipal boundaries. This information is used in town plan updates and development regulations.

A watershed includes all streams that flow together
to then empty into a single downstream location.

Surface Drinking Water Supplies. As noted above a watershed is defined as a land area that drains to a common discharge point. The high points of the topography in the watershed are on the outer edges and all drainage waters eventually merge into one watercourse.

A key policy of this Regional Plan is that existing and potential watershed lands that drain to public water supply reservoirs are areas of special environmental concern.

Existing water supply watersheds in dark green
and potential water supply watersheds in light green

Details as to existing and potential surface
water supply watersheds in and near Danbury.
1. supply source for New York City, 2-4 supply for Danbury
residents, 5-6 potential future supply for Danbury residents,
7. supply for coastal Connecticut , 8. supply for Town of Bethel

Water quality is directly related to the extent of development in its watershed, such development involving land use type, degree of impervious surface, storm water and sediment controls, and the adequacy of storm water flow and sewer treatment infrastructure. This has been proven over and over again since this classic 1976 study undertaken nearby:

An interesting study of three adjacent watersheds in the town of Fairfield entitled "Detection of Non-Point Pollution of Small Streams in Southwest Connecticut" by S. Bongiorno et al, 1976, demonstrates the relationship of land development to water quality. All three areas have similar geology of crystalline bedrock devoid of any calcium carbonate deposits.

The easternmost basin, the watershed of the Rooster River on the Bridgeport-Fairfield line, is highly urbanized with a high density of dwellings in multiple family and much quarter-acre lot zoning.

The watershed of the adjacent Mill River is moderately urbanized and that of the Sasco River to the west of the Mill River is semi-rural. Ninety percent of the homes in the Rooster River basin are connected to sanitary sewer systems which carry waste materials to treatment plants. The other two watershed areas dispose of wastes in septic tanks.

The study showed that the water quality of the Rooster River in the most highly urbanized watershed was worse in almost all pollution parameters than that of the other two rivers despite the fact that the Rooster has had sanitary sewering. The river's water quality was downgraded by street and surface runoff which was flushed into storm sewers.

Such stormwater runoff can contain many chemicals such as lawn fertilizers, organic herbicides, pesticides, and metallic ions which can reach surface waters through storm sewers and significantly lower the quality of the water. Rooftops, paved areas, automobiles, and lawns in a watershed area each makes its contribution to the receiving waters.

From the regional view it is obvious that the adequacy of protection features in one municipality affects the quality of water in downstream municipalities in the same watershed.

Due to the increasing pressure of land development on existing and potential water supply watersheds, performance standards are needed to control land use and stormwater runoff in new developments in these sensitive recharge areas.

As examples, HVCEO assisted the City of Danbury by preparing the 1989 planning report that led to the Danbury Water Supply Protection Overlay Zone and also the 2006 report entitled Bethel Water Supply Overlay Protection Zone recently endorsed by the 2007 Bethel Plan of Conservation and Development.

Views of Danbury's West Lake Water Supply Reservoir
Photos courtesy of Rick Gottschalk

Below Ground Drinking Water Supplies. Drinking water is supplied to the Region through a network of 1) below ground gravel aquifers, 2) surface reservoirs catching stream flow, and 3) wells drilled into bedrock. These water resources are under the control of various entities including municipal and proprietary water utilities and local landowners.

Below ground water supplies are of three types: the till aquifer, stratified drift
aquifer (sand, silt, sand and gravel), and the crystalline bedrock aquifer. Most
small capacity wells are drilled into the bedrock aquifer. But in lowland areas,
stratified drift gravel areas often yield larger quantities suitable for public supply.

It is vital for local, regional and state plans to accurately plot the location of these resources as development proceeds. They are therefore fundamental features of this HVCEO regional plan. Our descendants will judge us harshly if we do not work together now to preserve their future sources of clean water.

Major stratified drift (sand and gravel) aquifers in the
Housatonic Region are found in the lowlands of river valleys

Underground stratified drift aquifers
(sand and gravel) in and near Danbury.
1. Sugar Hollow Aquifer, 2. Kenosia Aquifer, 3. Still River West
Aquifer, 4. Great Plain Aquifer, 5. Still River Middle Aquifer,
6. East Swamp Aquifer, 7. Sympaug Brook Aquifer

Some years ago HVCEO provided the initial aquifer protection regulations and mapping adopted in Brookfield, Newtown and Ridgefield. Upcoming DEP mandatory aquifer regulation will affect Bethel, Danbury, New Milford, Newtown and Ridgefield.

Of use to local planning are the following technical resources for aquifer protection:

1) A review of aquifer basics, with links to information about the CT DEP mandatory aquifer protection program.

2) Criteria for aquifer mapping used by first generation municipal aquifer regulations that are still in effect.

3) Overview of the hydrogeologic setting for stratified drift aquifers particular to the Housatonic Valley Region.

4) From the latest updates of the ten town plans, excerpts of their aquifer protection policies.

3-4. WATER SUPPLY
TRANSMISSION AND
SERVICE AREAS
Regulation of existing and future public water supply transmission in the Region is managed largely by the Connecticut Department of Public Health (CT DPH), in conjunction with the Department of Public Utility Control and individual public and private water utility companies.

The Housatonic Valley Planning Region (except for the Town of Redding) is divided by the CT DPH mandated Housatonic Water Utility Coordinating Committee's (HWUCC) 1988 Areawide Management Plan into “exclusive service areas.”

Each such exclusive area is the domain of a single water utility provider, who is responsible for existing and future water customers in that area. While this regulatory system provides a business monopoly, rates and returns are in turn publicly regulated.

The water provider in the exclusive service area is obligated to extend water service to any customer in the assigned area who requests it. This service extension can be accomplished either through tying the new customer in with existing water infrastructure or developing and managing thereafter a new stand alone well.

While the HWUCC is administratively inactive, the exclusive areas remain embodied in state law. State staff uses this tool to shape area water supply systems.

The CT DPH requires each water utility company to file supply plans with projections of future needs and a statement as to how they will serve their exclusive service area. These plans are of great interest to local planning and should be referenced when municipal plans of conservation and development are updated.

Also of value to town plan updates is HVCEO's 2006 report on Potential Water Supply Interconnections to Danbury. Contents include:

--- CONNECT DANBURY TO CENTRAL BETHEL
--- CONNECT DANBURY TO NORTHERN BETHEL

--- CONNECT DANBURY TO SOUTHERN BROOKFIELD
--- DANBURY'S INTERNAL WATER SUPPLY NEEDS

--- CONNECT DANBURY TO NEW FAIRFIELD
--- CONNECT DANBURY TO SOUTHERN NEW MILFORD

--- CONNECT DANBURY TO NEWTOWN
--- CONNECT DANBURY TO RIDGEFIELD

3-5. SHRINKING SUPPLIES
DUE TO GLOBAL WARMING
In their water supply planning, municipalities in the Housatonic Valley should now plan for the fact that upcoming global warming will reduce the expected safe yield of surface reservoir and groundwater aquifer water supplies.

According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, water managers throughout the New England region need to evaluate the adequacy of their surface water supplies and storage facilities in light of the projected increase in droughts due to global warming.

Global warming means reservoir safe
yields will be less than originally planned

“Overall, stream flow is projected to become more extreme, higher in winter and lower in summer, exacerbating drought.”

Of course many residents of the Housatonic Valley Region obtain their drinking water from individual residential wells drilled into bedrock, not from public sources. But again, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists, “depending on local hydrological and geological conditions, these groundwater users may be highly vulnerable to extended drought."

Of similar interest is a 2008 USDA funded study by the University of Massachusetts Department of Resource Conservation, projecting the impact of climate change upon the Connecticut River Watershed.

Computer models used to predict changes over the next 40 years showed a decrease in the annual amount of water running off the surface of the land to feed streams and rivers. Warmer temperatures were predicted to decrease runoff in the late summer months of July and August when demand is highest, resulting in lower flows that could threaten community water supplies.

Communities were advised by study researchers to plan for water stress months and implement water conservation practices throughout the year.

Planning and zoning strategies to combat global warming are described in the Curb Global Warming chapter of this Plan.

3-6. QUALITY GOALS FOR WATER BODIES
The Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (CT DEP) has developed water quality standards in conjunction with the principles of the federal Clean Water Act.

As a result, each stream or water body in the Region has two classifications, one for its existing use, and one for ultimate future use, written in an "existing/future" format such as "B/A" or "A/AA". The highest standards are reserved for existing and potential water supply watersheds, which are AA.

The DEP seeks to bring every water body in the State to a minimum classification of "B" or better. Class B is not suitable for consumption as water supply but could be suitable for recreational use, fish and wildlife habitat, agricultural and industrial supply.

There is a non-degradation policy in Connecticut such that a stream now AA or A cannot be reduced to B to allow new discharges from industries or treatment plants. The classification system is summarized below:

CLASS AA: Designated uses are existing or proposed drinking water supply, fish and wildlife habitat, some recreational use, agricultural and industrial supply. Discharges into this water are severely restricted.

CLASS A: Designated use is potential drinking water supply, fish and wildlife habitat, recreational uses, agricultural and industrial supply and other legitimate uses including navigation. Discharges into these waters are severely restricted. No reclassification of A or AA down to B allowed.

CLASS B: Designated uses are varied and include discharges from industrial and municipal wastewater treatment facilities, providing "best available treatment" and "best management practices" are applied. All Class C and D water bodies must eventually reach the minimum standards of the B classification. Enforcement orders are applied to achieve this. We are an industrialized nation, and some waters must be permanently reserved for receiving waste.

CLASSES C AND D: Indicates unacceptable quality. The goal is Class B or Class A and DEP will issue orders to require improvement.

BETHEL, CT STREAM QUALITY GOALS
1. Aspetuck Reservoir tributaries reaching north into Bethel from Redding and Newtown: AA/AA.
2. Bethel Reservoir Brook from west of Hudson Street north to the Danbury City Line: B/A.
3. Chestnut Ridge Reservoir and its tributaries: AA/AA.
4. Murphy Brook (a.k.a. Braunies Brook) from source in Danbury to pump station at Reservoir Street: AA/AA.
5. Saugatuck Reservoir tributaries reaching north into Bethel from Danbury and Redding: AA/AA.

6. Sympaug Brook from Sympaug Pond and the old Bethel Landfill flowing north to just north of railroad bridge: B/A. Sympaug Brook continuing, from just north of railroad bridge north to Danbury City Line: B/B.
7.Wolf Pit Brook and tributaries that are upstream of a point just north of the intersection of Route 58 with Hoyts Hill Road: A/AA.
8. All other streams in Bethel such as Chestnut Brook, Dibble’s Brook, East Swamp Brook, Limekiln Brook, etc: A/A.

BRIDGEWATER, CT STREAM QUALITY GOALS
1. Housatonic River forming western boundary of Bridgewater (as Lake Lillinonah): D/B. The severe D rating is due to PCB contaminated bottom sediments.
2. Shepaug River tributaries reaching westerly into Bridgewater such as Hop Brook, Second Hill Brook, etc: A/AA.
3. All other streams in Bridgewater such as Clapboard Oak Brook, Hitchcock Mill Brook, Wewaka Brook, etc: A/A.

BROOKFIELD, CT STREAM QUALITY GOALS
1. Candlewood Lake due to wastewater pumped up from the Housatonic River: B/B.
2. Housatonic River forming eastern boundary of Brookfield (as Lake Lillinonah): D/B. The severe D rating is due to PCB contaminated bottom sediments.
3. Still River from Danbury Line north to the New Milford Line: C/B.
4. All other streams in Brookfield such as Dingle Brook, Hop Brook, Merwin Brook, Limekiln Brook, etc: A/A.

DANBURY, CT STREAM QUALITY GOALS
1. Candlewood Lake due to wastewater pumped up from the Housatonic River: B/B.
2. Eureka Lake and tributaries: AA/AA.
3. Hudson River tributaries reaching into northwestern Danbury from New York State: AA/AA.
4. Kohanza Reservoir and upstream tributaries: AA/AA.
5. Kenosia Lake tributaries: AA/AA.
6. Limekiln Brook flowing from the Bethel Line northerly to the Still River: C/B. Also an unnamed tributary stream on the west side of old Danbury landfill flowing northerly to Limekiln Brook: B/B .
7. Margerie Reservoir and tributaries: AA/AA .

8. Padanaram Brook and tributaries north of Padanaram Reservoir: AA/AA. Then Padanaram Brook from Margerie Reservoir Brook south to Patch Street: B/A, and third Padanaram Brook from Patch Street south to the Still River: B/B.
9. Saugatuck Reservoir tributaries reaching north from Redding into Danbury: AA/AA.
10. Still River from Lake Kenosia easterly to Padanaram Brook: B/A. Then the Still River from Padanaram Brook easterly to Limekiln Brook: B/B. And next the Still River from Limekiln Brook (where Danbury Sewer Treatment Plant effluent enters) north to the Brookfield Line: C/B.

11. Sympaug Brook flowing from the Bethel Line north to the Still River: B/B.
12. West Lake Reservoir and tributaries: AA/AA.
13. Unnamed brook in Rogers Park flowing south into Bethel to join Reservoir Brook: B/A.
14. All other streams in Danbury such as Great Plain Brook, Miry Brook, Parks Pond Brook, etc: A/A.

NEW FAIRFIELD, CT STREAM QUALITY GOALS
1. Ball Pond Brook flowing from Ball Pond easterly to just past New Fairfield Center: B/AA. Ball Pond Brook continuing from just past New Fairfield Center easterly to Candlewood Lake: B/A.
2. Candlewood Lake due to wastewater pumped up from the Housatonic River: B/B.
3. East Lake Reservoir tributaries reaching north from Danbury into New Fairfield: AA/AA.
4. Hudson River tributaries reaching into New Fairfield from New York State, except Gerow Brook: AA/AA. Gerow Brook from its source at the old New Fairfield Landfill flowing northwesterly into New York State: B/AA.
5. Margerie Reservoir and tributaries: AA/AA.
6. All other streams in New Fairfield: A/A.

NEW MILFORD, CT STREAM QUALITY GOALS
1. Aspetuck River East Branch from the Washington Line south to the Housatonic River: B/A.
2. Aspetuck River West Branch and tributaries from the Kent Line to south of Wells Road: A/AA. Then the Aspetuck River West Branch from south of Wells Road south to the old brass mill: A/A. The Aspetuck River West Branch continuing from the old brass mill south to the Housatonic River: B/A.
3. Candlewood Lake due to wastewater pumped up from the Housatonic River: B/B.
4. Cross Brook from Cross Brook Road flowing west to Great Brook: B/A.
5. Great Brook from south of Park Lane East flowing south to the Housatonic River: B/A.

6. Housatonic River bisecting New Milford: D/B. The severe D rating is due to PCB contaminated bottom sediments.
7. Little Brook from near Sunny Valley Lane north and then east to Housatonic River: B/A.
8. Still River from Brookfield Line north to the Housatonic River (as Lake Lillinonah): C/B.
9. Unnamed stream from the old Waste Management Landfill west of Blue Bonnet Knoll easterly to the Still River: B/A.
10. All other streams in New Milford such as Bullymuck Brook, Morrissey Brook, Town Farm Brook, Womenshenuk Brook, etc: A/A.

NEWTOWN, CT STREAM QUALITY GOALS
1. Aspetuck Reservoir tributaries north of its confluence with an unnamed tributary flowing into the Aspetuck River from the north end of the old Redding Landfill: AA/AA. Then the Aspetuck River from the same unnamed tributary south to the Redding Line: B/AA.
2. Deep Brook from east of Route 25 at Park Lane flowing north then east around the old hospital campus to the Pootatuck River: B/A. Also, an unnamed tributary to Deep Brook near Grand Place flowing easterly to Deep Brook: B/A.
3. Housatonic River forming eastern boundary of Newtown (as Lake Lillinonah and then Lake Zoar): D/B. The severe D rating is due to PCB contaminated bottom sediments.

4. Pequonnock River tributary reaching north into Newtown from Monroe: AA/AA.
5. Pootatuck River from the Monroe Line north to Deep Brook just south of I-84: B/A. Also, Cold Spring Brook from west of the railroad tracks flowing northwesterly to join the Pootatuck River: B/A. Then the Pootatuck River from the confluence with Deep Brook flowing north to the Housatonic River as Lake Zoar: B/B.
6. Taunton Pond: B/A.
7. All other streams in Newtown such as Gelding Brook, Halfway River, Limekiln Brook, North Branch Pootatuck, Pond Brook, etc: A/A.

REDDING, CT STREAM QUALITY GOALS
1. Aspetuck River tributary that is unnamed and flowing from the north end of the old Redding Landfill entering Newtown easterly towards the Aspetuck River: B/AA. Then the main stem of the Aspetuck River from this point south to the Easton Line (including two small tributaries, from south the end of old Redding Landfill, and from the Newtown Line southwesterly to east of Valley Road #2): B/AA. Also, a tributary that joins the Aspetuck in Easton that cuts through easternmost Redding via Lyons Swamp north to the old Easton Landfill: B/AA.

2. Chestnut Ridge Reservoir tributary reaching south into Redding from Bethel: AA/AA.
3. Mill River tributary entering from Easton: AA/AA.
4. Norwalk River in the Georgetown Area, entering from Wilton and flowing south to again cross the Wilton Line: B/B.
5. Saugatuck River and tributaries: AA/AA.
6. Wolf Pit Brook and tributaries reaching south into Redding from Bethel: A/AA.
7. All other streams in Redding such as Gilbert Bennett Brook, West Branch Saugatuck River, etc: A/A.

RIDGEFIELD, CT STREAM QUALITY GOALS
1. Comstock Brook and tributaries reaching into Ridgefield from Wilton: AA/AA.
2. Hudson River (Croton) tributaries reaching into Ridgefield from New York State and including the Titicus River, Waccabuc River, Round Pond and their tributaries: AA/AA.
3. Kenosia Lake tributaries reaching into the northwest corner of Ridgefield from Danbury: AA/AA.
4. Mill River and tributaries reaching into Ridgefield from New York State: AA/AA.
5. Norwalk River flowing from east of the Ridgefield Sewer Treatment Plant near Downtown Ridgefield to Wilton Town Line: B/B.
6. Saugatuck Reservoir tributaries reaching into Ridgefield from Danbury and Redding: AA/AA.
7. Silvermine River and tributaries reaching into Ridgefield from Wilton and New York State: AA/AA.

SHERMAN, CT STREAM QUALITY GOALS
1. Candlewood Lake due to wastewater pumped up from the Housatonic River: B/B.
2. Housatonic River forming part of Sherman’s boundary with New Milford: C/D. The severe D rating is due to PCB contaminated bottom sediments.
3. Hudson River tributaries reaching into Sherman from New York State: AA/AA.
4. Ten Mile River from the New York State Line east to the Housatonic River: B/B.
5. All Other streams in Sherman such as Morrissey Brook, Sawmill Brook, Wimisink Brook, etc: A/A.

3-7. QUALITY GOALS FOR GROUNWATER
Connecticut DEP's groundwater classification system then follows a similar logic. Look for a G in the acronym of these notations.

An example from the DEP map of just west of central New Milford, showing how the surface water and groundwater classification systems work together, is shown below:

GROUNDWATER ABOVE: Groundwater in the four green GB areas is assumed to have significant quality limitations. Then groundwater in the buff areas is classified as a higher GA rating but still has some slight limitations.

All white land areas are classified as GA, meaning without known limitations. Then the light blue area at top center is classified GAA, a part of the West Aspetuck watershed reserved for potential water supply use.

SURFACE WATER ABOVE: The dominant west to east surface water is the Housatonic River, classified as orange D with an eventual goal of B. The smaller north to south brown/organ ge stream above is the East Aspetuck River, classified B but with a goal of A. Then the dark yellow at the bottom left is the northernmost arm of Candlewood Lake, a DEP Class B water body (butt not suitable for waste discharges).

Contact HVCEO for color copies of the DEP classification maps in your area.

The DEP groundwater quality mapping system above often displays the Region's "brownfields." These problematic areas are defined as real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant.

A goal of this Plan is to clean up and eliminate all brownfield sites in the Region.

3-8. STORMWATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT
Plan sections above describe the linkage of runoff from land surfaces possibly damaging the integrity of downstream water supply reservoirs. The topic of stormwater management is narrower, but broadens the application of runoff controls to all watersheds, not just the high priority watersheds reserved for water supply.

The federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates stormwater, which usually carries pollutants, as part of its National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitting program. This program is aimed at controlling discharges from all categories of industrial, commercial and public property.

EPA has extended this regulatory program to stormwater from municipal stormwater systems. Only recently implemented in Connecticut, the stormwater management regulations require each municipality to take steps to keep the stormwater entering its storm sewer systems clean before entering water bodies. Innovation in Connecticut on this topic is accessed from this Connecticut Nonpoint Education for Municipal Officials (NEMO) web page.

CT DEP has phased in regulations that require municipalities to obtain permits to discharge storm runoff from their stormwater drainage systems into streams. All municipalities in Connecticut with populations greater than 1000 must create a local stormwater management plan. See details at the DEP Stormwater Management web page.

Both municipalities and businesses tying into municipal sewer and stormwater systems are responsible for meeting the new water quality standards. The HVCEO GIS program can assist with the organization of reference point mapping and data management systems for these efforts.

Proper planning can also upgrade stormwater management's physical control features such that they become quite aesthetic. Creative environmental planning for stormwater management for new developments will jointly address stormwater management, open space and wetlands requirements, with each element reinforcing each other.

An important study in Connecticut recently proved that innovative stormwater management design features, when implemented in a residential subdivision, greatly improved the water quality of receiving waters when compared to a similar subdivision that did not implement the stormwater measures.

3-9. WETLANDS PRESERVATION
Wetlands in Connecticut are defined as land, including submerged land, which consists of any of the soil types designated as poorly drained, very poorly drained, alluvial, and floodplain by the National Cooperative Soil Survey. In Connecticut these lands may also include filled, graded, or excavated wetland sites that retain saturated soil moisture.

This Regional Plan strongly endorses wetlands preservation. These sensitive areas are included in the Plan's Conservation Category.

Looking at the details, wetland soils are composed of a mosaic of richly productive habitats including swamps, marshes, wet meadows and riverine communities. In most cases wetlands are linked to a main watercourse that drains through them.

Note carefully that the Connecticut definition of wetlands is broader than just wet land, including river and stream watercourses and their adjacent flood plains.

Wetlands serve as natural filters by trapping impurities. Nutrients, contaminants, and sediments are transported to a wetland by stormwater runoff where the sediment is deposited.

Such nutrients and contaminants are then held within the wetland vegetation, and there, to the great advantage of the environment, broken down or released slowly over time.

However, in some cases, such as the vernal pool illustrated below, the water body of a wetland is seasonal, that is, it disappears during dry periods or when stream flow is low.

Shown from left is the same vernal pool in winter,
late spring, and early autumn. Source: 2007
Bethel Plan of Conservation and Development

Other key wetland functions are flood storage, habitat, educational value and buffering of human activities.

The public often views wetlands as just swampy or soggy areas. And developers traditionally just filled them in. But wetlands are so critical for a healthy environment that their mandatory local regulation in Connecticut was put in place in 1973.

Complicating their regulation, wetlands are easily affected by upstream development. This is particularly true if erosion and sedimentation controls upstream are inadequate, perhaps even located out of regulatory range in another municipality.

A wetland's precious filtering capacity is delicate and can be exceeded or harmed. Development on the non-wetland areas immediately adjacent to a wetland, commonly termed buffer or upland review areas, may also cause impacts on water quality and wildlife habitat within the wetland itself.

Large wetland just east of Ridgefield Center

New activities in wetlands are regulated by state authority delegated to local wetland commissions. There is also the parallel authority of the US Army Corps of Engineers for any development on a wetland that exceeds one acre in size. Local floodplain commissions also have a say.

Specifically, Connecticut State Statutes 22a-39-1 – 22a-39-15 require that any new activities in regulated wetlands be permitted by the DEP or a local wetland agency delegated that authority from DEP.

In addition, the Federal Emergency Management Agency requires that any work in a floodplain (including floodways) be permitted by a local “floodplain agency”.

The Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) has mapped all wetland soils in the states, which are available digitally or as print copy from HVCEO. It is recommended that municipalities have a large scale version of this map on display in their land use office.

Excerpt from statewide CT DEP
map of wetland soils categories

Most municipalities use this map for “reference only” and require developers to undertake site specific wetland boundary delineation on properties where activities are planned.

3-10. WATER SUPPLY RECOMMENDATIONS
GOAL: Encourage efforts to provide adequate, high quality water supplies to the Region.

1. Strongly support the preservation thru land use regulations of existing and potential surface water supply watersheds and subsurface aquifers as vital reserves of future water supply.

2. Encourage efficient interconnections of existing water supply systems and inter-municipal cooperation on water supply.

3. Include in the Plan potential water supply improvements proposed by municipalities, HVCEO or state agencies. This listing is to set the regional planning agenda for upcoming water supply studies and policy formulation.

4. Encourage clean water supplies in developing areas through minimizing development impacts on groundwater recharge.

5. Encourage water conservation improvements such as flow meters, efficient fixtures and usage practices. Promote educational efforts that encourage water conservation.

6. Municipalities in the Housatonic Valley Region should now plan for the fact that upcoming global warming will reduce the expected safe yield of surface reservoir and groundwater aquifer water supplies. Recalculate safe yields using more conservative factors.

3-11. WATER RESOURCE RECOMMENDATIONS
GOAL: Protect the long term health of the region's water resources.

1. Support the state goal of B quality, appropriate for fishing and swimming, for the regions wastewater receiving streams and the goal of A or AA quality appropriate for all others.

2. Use the HVCEO GIS program to assist with mapping data for municipal stormwater management efforts. Review local zoning regulations to comply with the CT DEP Stormwater Management Plan and the CT DEP Stormwater Manual .

3. Clean up and eliminate all brownfield sites in the Region. These are defined as real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant.

4. Plan and manage natural resources on the basis of watershed boundaries.

5. Coordinate state and local efforts to improve water quality in the region.

6. Consider downstream water quality impacts when making local land use decisions.

7. Municipal wetland agencies should develop an overall set of policy guidelines that provide performance standards and limitations for all properties in their jurisdictions and that identify the scope of work that is acceptable in and around wetland areas.

The contributions of consultant Jack Kozuchowski to
this chapter of the Regional Plan are gratefully acknowledged.

--- 1. INTRODUCTION --- 2. MAP OF GROWTH --- 3. WATER SUPPLIES ---
--- 4. WASTEWATER --- 5. TRANSPORTATION --- 6. GLOBAL WARMING --- 7. HOUSING ---
--- 8. ECONOMY --- 9. OPEN SPACE --- 10. MIX LAND USE --- 11. TOD --- 12. PEDESTRIAN ---