.
Feedback

Town to Hold Public Hearing on Proposed Ban of Motorized Vessels in Farmington River

First Selectman says some tweaks possible, other river issues to be noted.

Wednesday evening the Board of Selectmen will host a public hearing on a proposed town ordinance that would prohibit "motorized vessels" on the Farmington River. 

As drafted the proposal would eliminate non-emergency use of motorized craft. At a previous meeting said the proposed ordinance was largely a response to concerns raised during a recent study of recreational opportunities in and near the river in Collinsville, especially the "upper Mill Pond" portion above the dam under Route 179 to Town Bridge Road. While current depths and state regulations limit much of any motorized activity, some selectmen previously said the large number of canoeists, kayaks or Stand Up Paddle Board users raises concerns about the potential use of jet skis or other motorized craft.  

On Monday, however, first selectmen Richard Barlow said he has received some feedback from those who use small trolling motors, in some cases electric, for activities like fishing. 

Barlow said while he still feels craft such as jet skis would not fit in the current usage patterns, he at least, would consider some changes to allow for some non-intrusive activities. 

"I think there's some potential we might want to modify it," Barlow said. 

Barlow said he is interested to hear more input at the hearing, which is set for 7 p.m. Wednesday July 25 at the community center. 

While there is the potential selectmen will vote on the measure Wednesday, Barlow said the town will also consult with its attorney to see if any potential changes, should the entire board move in that direction, would warrant another hearing or if minor ones could be made that night. 

Barlow said he will also discuss at least two other river issues Wednesday. One is public access. 

Monday, Jon Warner, owner of , confirmed the business is now prohibiting private access to the Collinsville boat ramp, from which parking and access are from property owned and/or leased by its landlord, Waterfront Preservation and Management Corporation. 

While the canoe business had been allowing those with their own boats to sign a waiver, Warner said there's been too many problems. One has been vandalism, such as a recent case in which someone cut the ropes on a floating dock that was nearly lost over the dam. In addition, some boaters have refused to wear life jackets and/or have brought alcohol on to the river, Warner said. 

"At this point it's not a public ramp," Warner said. "A few bad fish are ruining it for everyone." 

Barlow said the issue does make the town's efforts to provide public access more urgent. 

Town officials hope to provide a launch at the Town Garage site but have said the permitting process and related professional services for that and the ramp itself could result in costs upwards of $75,000. 

Barlow has said there may be grant opportunities and service clubs willing to help with the effort. 

"In my mind this necessitates that we have to move sooner than later," he said. 

Warner said he feels town-provided access and restrooms are what's needed on the river. 

Barlow also plans to raise the concern about youth jumping into the river. While the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection recently cut some railroad spikes and a makeshift ladder from the old bridge abutments in the "mill pond," making it harder for kids to climb and jump off them, many have been jumping from Town Bridge and the Farmington River Trail Bridge near the Burlington Town Line, raising concerns of safety and liability. 

The activity is nothing new but Barlow said there does seem to be an increase.

"It seems like this summer it's elevated to a new level," he said. 

While the access and safety issues are not on the board's agenda for Wednesday Barlow said he plans to bring them up during the selectmen's remarks portion of the meeting. 

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Canton Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Larry Litton May 22, 2013 at 10:49 am
Well said Mr. Franks! A new town garage is needed, but not at that price tag. The town leadershipRead More needs to offer a far better option to the voters than this. I am also voting NO...
Wyatt May 22, 2013 at 05:13 pm
@Larry. Thanks for the reply. I don't know the details of these sites or why they weren't chosen butRead More I do have a few initial thoughts. First, one of the concerns of opponents of the Commerce Drive location is that the garage is a danger to nearby residents, children, bikers and seniors. Those concerns would still exist and would likely be worse in any of the 3 locations you mentioned. In other words, the same problems as the opponents raise now would remain. Second, River Road and Lawton Road are already designated for youth sports. Given the lack of flat land and the shortage of fields in Canton, I don't see how these fields would be replaced. Fields can be built at the River Rd and Lawton Road locations but not on Commerced River. As for the state-owned parcel, I think the state owns that as open space - not land for a town garage. Third, if the people on Lawton Road got so upset about the CVS, I could only imagine the uproar if the town garage is built there! Some don't even want the park! Fourth, I think there is some builout problems with lawton road regarding utilities which makes the site difficult to work with. (or so I read/was told) However, thank you again for the reply. the only real option besides commerce drive is River Road, but as I mentioned above, the opponent's concerns regarding safety would still exist and likely be even worse - right by the bike trail, kids in the area, near a major road, near homes. I don't think that site would satisfy them.
Larry Litton May 22, 2013 at 04:46 pm
You should know better than anyone Steve, but I'll be happy to list the sites for Wyatt. I know thatRead More you will dispute everything I am about to say Steve, but I don't believe as you apparently do that different opinions mean that one or the other has to be "garbage". 51 River Road is the obvious choice. I know there are concerns about the elimination of the softball field there, but it could easily be relocated to allow for using this location. The site is clear, level, centrally located, and already has all the needed utilities. It was also listed as the #1 potential location by Weston and Sampson in their 2009 study done for the town. 55 Lawton Road is also already owned by the town. I haven't seen any published numbers for site work at this location, but the land is flat and wouldn't need all the build up, fill dirt, and retaining walls that will be required on Commerce. Like River Road there are no wetland issues at this property, and the useable acreage at 55 Lawton far exceeds that of any of the other properties that were looked at. This would certainly insure more than enough room for future growth if needed. I know there has been much talk about using this site for additional athletic fields, but at an estimated cost of $1.1 million dollars how likely is it that this will ever happen? And even if the money did someday become available, there is plenty of land there to do both if the layout is done well. There is also another parcel on Lawton Road Road that is I believe state owned, but I haven't heard any discussion regarding it. I certainly believe this property merits consideration as well.
Steve Roberto May 22, 2013 at 03:06 pm
Hey Larry, Wyatt asked you for the other 3 sites. Lets hear your answer and why exactly you feelRead More they will work. The EDA has been saying garbage like that for over a year. The Board of Selectman asked them three times to share their data. Of course they delivered nothing yet continue to say there is a better way. They have had plenty of times to show a better plan.
Wayne Jekot May 22, 2013 at 01:31 pm
The real reason people are opposing this plan is a "not in my backyard" attitude--it hasRead More nothing to do with cost. If so many people in town were so concerned about wasteful expenditures, we would have heard them complain about $3.6 million for a track and field! When the "dumb" location argument failed to make headway, the opponents to the "dumb" garage plan, acting purely out of self-interest and not for the common good, switched to a financial argument. You can't fool me: I voted yes.
Wyatt May 22, 2013 at 10:52 am
@Steve. Kudos! Nice to see some common sense and decency. The actions of "Citizens for aRead More Better Canton" have been shameful to say the least - attacking critics, distributing misleading information and attacking the good people who volunteer their time to make Canton a better place to live.
Steve Roberto May 21, 2013 at 04:05 pm
It makes me chuckle when someone spends weeks mudslinging, finger pointing, and pot shotting untilRead More the targets of their harassments speak up and then they decide the game is over, well sorry, I have only just begun. I was sickened by the behavior of certain people at the town meeting scheduled to discuss this garage project. Most of them where given a script to read using lies and incorrect numbers to attack members of town boards and commission. They attacked the intelligence, ethics, and integrity of members of the Board of Selectmen, Board of Finance, Permanent Municipal Building Committee and project consultants. You have even managed to involve our neighbors from Barkhamsted in your May 15 Patch submission, referring to them as “Hairshirt wearing radicals who don’t wash their cars”, again full of incorrect numbers and misinformation. I am attending a Board of Ethics Meeting tonight to defend myself from mud slung on me by those finger pointers trying to distract from the facts at hand. These very same people told this town that they wanted a football field and they wanted a pool. They said that the folks in Canton deserved these things. They understood that these things came with a price tag and they were ready to pay it. Funny how the song has changed now that we have changed our focus to a much less glamorous project. Perhaps if we were proposing a hockey rink or an equestrian team $5.4 million wouldn’t be so much.
Wayne Jekot May 22, 2013 at 01:31 pm
The real reason people are opposing this plan is a "not in my backyard" attitude--it hasRead More nothing to do with cost. If so many people in town were so concerned about wasteful expenditures, we would have heard them complain about $3.6 million for a track and field! When the "dumb" location argument failed to make headway, the opponents to the "dumb" garage plan, acting purely out of self-interest and not for the common good, switched to a financial argument. You can't fool me: I voted yes.
Wayne Jekot May 22, 2013 at 01:32 pm
The real reason people are opposing this plan is a "not in my backyard" attitude--it hasRead More nothing to do with cost. If so many people in town were so concerned about wasteful expenditures, we would have heard them complain about $3.6 million for a track and field! When the "dumb" location argument failed to make headway, the opponents to the "dumb" garage plan, acting purely out of self-interest and not for the common good, switched to a financial argument. You can't fool me: I voted yes.
Solinsky EyeCare May 21, 2013 at 02:45 pm
We are located at 1013 Farmington Avenue in West Hartford. See you there!
Nancy May 20, 2013 at 09:32 am
Where are you located, Solinsky Eyecare?