Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Underground Tank Restaurant Conversion topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission tables restaurant conversion at 36 Newtown Road after discovery of unknown underground tank
Summary
The Danbury Environmental Impact Commission tabled a proposal to convert 36 Newtown Road into a restaurant after staff and commissioners pressed for testing and proper abandonment of an old underground concrete tank; owner and engineer must coordinate sampling and a staff inspection before the Oct. 23 meeting.
The Danbury Environmental Impact Commission on Oct. 9 tabled a proposal to convert a former auto‑parts building at 36 Newtown Road into a restaurant after commissioners raised environmental concerns about an undisclosed underground concrete tank and septic connections.
Ron Wolf, a professional engineer representing the applicant and the owner Mario Lewis, told the commission the project would reuse the existing building footprint, add 18 parking spaces and connect roof leader drains to the existing stormwater system. Wolf said the team plans new catch‑basins, to remove an existing septic system in front of the building and to connect the property to the city sewer system.
Owner Mario Lewis acknowledged there is still an underground concrete tank at the rear of the property. Commissioners and staff said the tank’s purpose is unclear: it may be a former holding or waste tank, not a heating oil tank, and the building has a long history of prior uses including auto repair.
Larry, a city staff member, told the commission construction had already begun but that erosion controls were in place and that no environmental impacts had been observed so far. He recommended the commission require the contractor to pump and open the tank in the presence of staff, inspect for sheen or petroleum byproducts, and, if contamination is found, remove the tank and sample soils beneath it.
Commissioners pressed for additional precautions. One commissioner suggested performing dye testing from inside the building to see if interior drains lead to the tank; another urged that staff be present when any tank work occurs and that the contractor not crush or abandon the tank in place without prior inspection and sampling.
Because further information and testing are needed, the commission voted to table the application to the Oct. 23 meeting to allow the owner to arrange sampling and for staff to prepare a follow‑up report and onsite oversight.
Next steps: the applicant was asked to retain a qualified contractor or consultant to evaluate the tank contents, pump and open the tank with staff present, report results to city staff, and, if required by test results, remove the tank and perform soil testing before any change of use is approved.
