Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Enforcement Notice topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Roxbury commission closes notice of violation after farm owner explains long‑standing pond irrigation system
Summary
Dr. Morgado explained his family's pond irrigation system and historical approvals; the commission accepted his account, noted pump test figures suggesting withdrawals below state thresholds, and voted to close the notice of violation without further action.
The Roxbury Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Commission voted to close a notice of violation against the owners of 247 South Street after the property owner described the history and operation of a near‑acre pond and its irrigation/circulation system.
Owner Dr. Morgado told the commission the pond and diversion system were part of a long‑running landscape and farm restoration plan dating to the 1990s. He described several attempts to supply the pond by wells and, after repeated maintenance issues with in‑stream pumps, said the current system uses a pump and pipe configuration that—based on his measurements and piping constraints—delivers roughly 20–22 gallons per minute under normal conditions, far below the 50,000‑gallon threshold that would trigger state (Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection) review for large withdrawals. He said the pumps are run seasonally and controlled by timers and rain sensors.
Commissioners acknowledged the owner's conservation and restoration work on the property but said they issued the notice after a neighbor complained about pump noise and because they could not find a clear permit authorization in the files. The owner produced operational details and historical context, including references to prior town review of a larger master plan for the farm. After discussion the commission voted to close the notice of violation based on the information provided and deferred any further action unless new evidence emerged.
The commission noted that withdrawals above state thresholds would fall under DEEP jurisdiction and that individual water‑taking rights remain subject to permitting rules; it directed staff to record the closure and to monitor if pumps or withdrawals change.
