Yale Farm plans still rolling - though quietly, for the moment

NORTH CANAAN — Five years ago, Yale Farm Golf Club was just becoming a familiar name in Norfolk and North Canaan. Two years ago, the would-be developers of an upscale golf course and country club on the 780-acreYale Farm withdrew an application for a permit to change wetlands.

In between, there were three years of public hearings for permits sought from planning and wetlands agencies in both towns. They were often conducted courtroom-style and produced reams of testimony.

Debate raged within those hearings and without. How would it affect the environment, traffic, local economy, property values, water supplies and the bucolic character of the two towns?

The same questions will likely be asked when the project is presented again, basically unchanged, in just a matter of months, according to the developer.

Project Manager and investor David Tewksbury told The Journal last week that since November the state Department of Environmental Protection has been reviewing  new data requested for a water diversion application.

“We’ve done probably the most exhaustive pump testing in the history of Connecticut permitting applications. We are cautiously optimistic that within the next two months, we will get our water diversion permit,� Tewksbury said from his office at Chelsea Piers in New York City.

He works there for the golf club’s principal investor, Roland Betts. Both men have long maintained weekend homes in North Canaan. Betts is an avid golfer who has stated the golf course here would be “world class.� The environmental team and professional course designers for the project have offered considerable evidence that it will preserve the rural nature and improve impacts offsite of what has dwindled to a small beef farm owned by the Mead family.

But an aggressively opposed group of adjoining residents hired its own experts to testify that the plan would have negative environmental impacts.

Watercourses on the hillside property include the headwaters that feed rivers and streams in Canaan valley, a string of hydrologists testified. Wells downstream of the property may also be impacted by what happens on the hillside.

Wells were dug and draw-down testing conducted. Both sides came back with opposing conclusions on the resulting data.

Applications, rejections, debate

Perhaps it was the local opposition that went as far as court appeals, or the conflicting testimony of the hydrologists, but it was clear the state environmental agency was not going to rush its decision.

In August 2005, the developer had permits in hand from the Norfolk Inland Wetlands Commission, and planning and zoning commissions there and in North Canaan.

The placement of a manmade drainage pond had brought a previous denial of a permit from the North Canaan wetlands commissioners. That month, the commission was once again poised to make a decision, when the application was withdrawn. The DEP had announced a pending decision to deny the water diversion permit.

Days later, Betts told The Journal the denial was a step forward. The reasons given for the denial would tell them exactly what they needed to do to tweak the application and win approval. It was not a matter of the project’s viability, but of the DEP wanting more involved testing that would answer new questions, he said.

He expressed his unflagging confidence and desire to complete the project, but also offered a warning.

“I can also tell you with absolute certainty that the property will be developed by someone,� Betts said at the time. “We haven’t sat down with the Meads and worked out Plan B, and the decision will be mostly theirs, but I can assure you financial return will be a factor. That’s not to say they don’t care about the land. Conservation is very important to them and that’s why they want to turn it into a golf course. But something will be built there.�

Opposition continues unabated

Wheaton Byers, a member of the Canaan Conservation Coalition formed to be a legal intervener in the proceedings, said his group will monitor future project developments and is prepared to resume the battle, if necessary. He remains convinced the project will be seriously detrimental to the property that has long been his family home and to nearby property owned by other North Canaan residents.

There is also the issue of the high-end homes planned there. The homes were not part of a revised golf course application. It was made clear that plan would have to be permitted separately. The developer stressed the golf course would be the priority and houses might never be built.

But the matter could not be ignored in discussions both in and out of official meetings. It clouded the issues, and, as with any project that even hints at a second phase, fostered mistrust.

With high-profile, highly vocal groups opposing the project, it has been difficult to count the proponents. Hearings brought public comments from residents who favored the project. Others have said they are reluctant to come forward in support. In the end, it will matter little in the face of scientific testing. Even with local approvals, the government will have the final word on the project. If it makes it past the DEP, the Army Corps of Engineers will have the final say.

Tewksbury said the investors are not worried.

“The project has already been fully reviewed by the Army Corps. We think we’ve done a great job and we are perfectly prepared to discuss the very sound science of the project.�

A representative of the DEP, which has recently undergone re-structuring of its departments, returned a call but said the department cannot comment on this issue at this time.