Cases
Rep Matters: Synthetic Turf Field Permits Obtained
Ann M. Catino, Chair of the Environmental
L
Use Practice Group, secured a special permit issued by the Town of Hamden Planning
Zoning Commission for the conversion of a natural grass baseball field to a multi-purpose synthetic turf crumb rubber field, which will serve baseball, soccer, lacrosse
field hockey. The new field was approved after several days of public hearings
amidst staunch opposition groups who decried the proposal to install a crumb rubber field. Ann worked closely with the design engineers
ultimately involved one of the foremost toxicologists in the country to present testimony
evidence on whether the studies
evidence indicate crumb rubber fields pose environmental or health risks to the athletes
public. Placing the issue squarely in the context of science, the 29 peer-reviewed studies conducted by states, universities
foreign governments
with uniformly consistent conclusions, Ann
the team was able to navigate the emotionally charged outcries presented by well-organized opposition groups. When the groups only presented raw data regarding the presence of constituents in crumb rubber, the applicant team presented evidence not only as to the methodological flaws associated with the data generation, but also that the data (even if accurate) reported constituents that exist in synthetic turf at levels below background soils or applicable st
ards. In the end, the evidence in favor of a multi-purpose crumb rubber field was obviously compelling. Against the backdrop of proposed new studies to be conducted by the EPA, the intense media scrutiny associated with these fields,
legislative initiatives calling for a moratorium on such fields, the Town spent considerable time carefully evaluating
considering the merits of all claims. During the deliberations, it was acknowledged that there was no peer-reviewed study supporting the arguments presented by the opponents. In the end, the science prevailed
was underscored by a unanimous vote of the Commission. Several weeks prior, Ann also successfully lead the permitting team to obtain a wetl
s permit for the field. Again, countering opposition
an intervention under the Connecticut Environmental Protection Act, the commission granted the permit.
Large Regional Bank Represented in Loan Facilities to CT Property Manager/Developer
Halloran & Sage represented a large regional bank in the negotiation, documentation
closing of mortgage
construction loan facilities to a Connecticut property manager
developer. The Firm, led by real estate partner James Maher, environmental partner Ann Catino
attorney Casey O'Connell, assisted the lender in navigating through the resolution of environmental issues with respect to the subject property
to promptly close
fund the loan within a strict year-end timeframe.
H & S Obtains Favorable Result in Environmental Matter
Ann Catino, a partner in the Environmental
L
Use Group,
Joseph Fortner, Jr., a partner in the Business
Commercial Litigation Group, of Halloran & Sage recently secured a ruling from the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut, disposing of virtually all claims asserted against its municipal client in an environmental class action. This decision is a substantial victory for municipalities
for clients who undertake investigation
remedial responsibilities pursuant to a Consent Order with an administrative agency.
In Collins, et al. v. Olin Corp., et al., 3:03CV945 (CFD), the Town of Hamden was sued by some of its residents, who claimed that their homes had been built on locations used as dumps in the late 19th
early 20th centuries. The plaintiffs sued the Town,
the successor of the company which allegedly generated
disposed of industrial waste. Their claims included certain common law
statutory claims for damages
injunctive relief, including claims for negligence, abnormally dangerous activity, recklessness, nuisance
other specific claims arising various state
federal environmental laws. The plaintiffs filed their action immediately after a Consent Order was entered by the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection between the Town, the company co-defendant,
certain other parties DEP alleged to be responsible for the environmental conditions existing at a middle school, public parks
approximately 300 homes. The Consent Order allocated responsibility among the parties
provided that the Town was to investigate
remediate only the public parks
Olin was to investigate
remediate the residential neighborhood. The residents, proposing class status, requested the Court to essentially undue the allocation of responsibility set forth in the Consent Order
requested the Town to undertake investigation
remediation of the very conditions that were covered in the DEP administrative proceeding. Halloran & Sage moved to dismiss all claims ordering the Town to undertake such actions,
, while the motion to dismiss was pending, also moved for partial summary judgment precluding any assessment of damages against the town under the doctrine of governmental immunity.
In his decision dated February 28, 2006, the Hon. Christopher Droney, U.S.D.J., ruled in favor of the Town on both motions. First, the court dismissed the claims for injunctive relief under the doctrine of primary jurisdiction. The Court readily acknowledged that the lawsuit would largely undue the allocation of responsibility set forth in the Consent Order
that the decisions required for proper remediation of the properties are more properly within the environmental agency's field of expertise
discretion.
The court next granted summary disposition of the claims alleging negligence, gross negligence, negligence per se,
negligent infliction of emotional distress, on the grounds that the doctrine of governmental immunity barred those claims
any claims for damages. While the plaintiffs had been given an opportunity to search for any evidence reflecting that the Town engaged in a proprietary function in allegedly permitting the filling of waste materials in the low-lying areas, the court concluded that the historical Town records indisputably show that any filling activities or control of filling by the Town occurred to redress
control mosquito breeding places
the spread of mosquito-borne illnesses. Further, the plaintiffs could not demonstrate that the Town received any proprietary benefit from the development of homes, parks
a school other than the general benefits arising from the normal growth
development of a residential community. Fees from building permits, certificates of occupancy or even an enhanced tax base were not considered by the Court to represent proprietary acts. Similarly, despite plaintiffs' best efforts to create a factual dispute about the Town's recklessness, in allowing such filling
future development, the court noted that the Town needed to control l
filling
garbage collection
disposal activities primarily to address issues of health
safety present at the time
that there was no evidence at the relevant time that this l
fill material posed a health or safety threat to later developers. Thus, with the exception of a single claim under CERCLA (regarding which a motion has yet to be filed), all substantive claims against the Town have been effectively dismissed.
The significance of the decision lies in (1) the court's discussion of the application of governmental immunity
whether a municipality can be sued for disposal
filling activities that happens within the municipality when any such activity allegedly permitted or conducted by the Town is for the benefit of its citizens at the time
(2) that a party to a Consent Order cannot be required to perform a clean up independent of or separate from any agreements (eg., a Consent Order) that party has with DEP.
Ann Catino Obtain Favorable Decision From Westport Planning
Zoning Commission
Ann Catino recently obtained a favorable decision from the Westport Planning
Zoning Commission, which voted to approve construction of a new 102,000 square foot Westport Weston Family Y on a 32 acre parcel adjacent to the Merritt Parkway
bordered by the Saugatuck River. Eric Bernheim also assisted in this matter.
This final decision followed approvals from various town bodies
the Connecticut DEP, as well as many hours of hearings
deliberations by the Planning
Zoning Commission. This was the longest application in the history the Commission.
H & S Obtains Approval for an On-Site Wastewater Treatment System
Ann Catino recently obtained a favorable ruling from the Department of Environmental Protection ( DEP ) for an on-site wastewater treatment system. The decision recommended approval of an application for an engineered sub-surface system with a design capacity of 34,000 gallons per day to support a proposed 102,000 square foot new YMCA facility serving the Towns of Westport
Weston, CT.
A tentative determination regarding the application was originally issued in May, 2006, but upon receipt of a petition,extensive, contested public hearings were held. After considering the testimony
information offered at the hearings
evaluating the merits of the project, the DEP hearing officer concluded that the discharge that would result if the installation were to receive a permit would adequately protect the waters of the state. A complete copy of the ruling can be accessed here .
Uniroyal Chemical Company v. Town of Middlebury, 2006 WL 962210 (2d Cir. 2006)
In a major Superfund clean-up case, the court upheld the allocation of interest on clean-up costs on a pro-rate basis, consistent with the allocation of the underlying costs.
H & S Obtains a Summary Disposition of Claims Against Municipal Client
Ann Catino, a partner in the Environmental
L
Use Group,
Joseph Fortner, Jr., a partner in the Business
Commercial Litigation Group, of Halloran & Sage recently secured a ruling from the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut, disposing of virtually all claims asserted against its municipal client in an environmental class action. This decision is a substantial victory for municipalities
for clients who undertake investigation
remedial responsibilities pursuant to a Consent Order with an administrative agency.
In Collins, et al. v. Olin Corp., et al., 3:03CV945 (CFD), the Town of Hamden was sued by some of its residents, who claimed that their homes had been built on locations used as dumps in the late 19th
early 20th centuries. The plaintiffs sued the Town,
the successor of the company which allegedly generated
disposed of industrial waste. Their claims included certain common law
statutory claims for damages
injunctive relief, including claims for negligence, abnormally dangerous activity, recklessness, nuisance
other specific claims arising various state
federal environmental laws. The plaintiffs filed their action immediately after a Consent Order was entered by the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection between the Town, the company co-defendant,
certain other parties DEP alleged to be responsible for the environmental conditions existing at a middle school, public parks
approximately 300 homes. The Consent Order allocated responsibility among the parties
provided that the Town was to investigate
remediate only the public parks
Olin was to investigate
remediate the residential neighborhood. The residents, proposing class status, requested the Court to essentially undue the allocation of responsibility set forth in the Consent Order
requested the Town to undertake investigation
remediation of the very conditions that were covered in the DEP administrative proceeding. Halloran & Sage moved to dismiss all claims ordering the Town to undertake such actions,
, while the motion to dismiss was pending, also moved for partial summary judgment precluding any assessment of damages against the town under the doctrine of governmental immunity.
In his decision dated February 28, 2006, the Hon. Christopher Droney, U.S.D.J., ruled in favor of the Town on both motions. First, the court dismissed the claims for injunctive relief under the doctrine of primary jurisdiction. The Court readily acknowledged that the lawsuit would largely undue the allocation of responsibility set forth in the Consent Order
that the decisions required for proper remediation of the properties are more properly within the environmental agency's field of expertise
discretion.
The court next granted summary disposition of the claims alleging negligence, gross negligence, negligence per se,
negligent infliction of emotional distress, on the grounds that the doctrine of governmental immunity barred those claims
any claims for damages. While the plaintiffs had been given an opportunity to search for any evidence reflecting that the Town engaged in a proprietary function in allegedly permitting the filling of waste materials in the low-lying areas, the court concluded that the historical Town records indisputably show that any filling activities or control of filling by the Town occurred to redress
control mosquito breeding places
the spread of mosquito-borne illnesses. Further, the plaintiffs could not demonstrate that the Town received any proprietary benefit from the development of homes, parks
a school other than the general benefits arising from the normal growth
development of a residential community. Fees from building permits, certificates of occupancy or even an enhanced tax base were not considered by the Court to represent proprietary acts. Similarly, despite plaintiffs' best efforts to create a factual dispute about the Town's recklessness, in allowing such filling
future development, the court noted that the Town needed to control l
filling
garbage collection
disposal activities primarily to address issues of health
safety present at the time
that there was no evidence at the relevant time that this l
fill material posed a health or safety threat to later developers. Thus, with the exception of a single claim under CERCLA (regarding which a motion has yet to be filed), all substantive claims against the Town have been effectively dismissed.
The significance of the decision lies in (1) the court's discussion of the application of governmental immunity
whether a municipality can be sued for disposal
filling activities that happens within the municipality when any such activity allegedly permitted or conducted by the Town is for the benefit of its citizens at the time
(2) that a party to a Consent Order cannot be required to perform a clean up independent of or separate from any agreements (eg., a Consent Order) that party has with DEP.
Counsel for Construction of a Transmission Cable
Halloran & Sage secured the permitting for the construction of a 300 MW HVDC transmission cable running under Long Isl
Sound from New Haven to Shoreham, New York. This project included obtaining approvals from the Connecticut Siting Council, the DEP, Coast Guard, the Army Corps of Engineers, National Marine Fisheries
negotiating settlement agreements with certain affected interests including the Soundkeeper
the Department of Agriculture. In addition, the development of this project,
its associated substation, AC interconnect
tower has involved attorneys from all areas of our Firm: energy, environmental
l
use, real estate, finance,
our appellate group. Our attorneys prepared the necessary documents for acquiring the fee
easements to the real estate, securing advanced financing,
obtaining the approvals from the Department of Public Utility Control.
Counsel for Superfund Litigation
Halloran & Sage attorneys served as lead joint defense counsel for the general waste stream defendants
co-defense counsel for the municipal defendants in the private cost recovery trial of the two most notorious Superfund sites in the state, the Beacon Heights
Laurel Park l
fills. During the course of the trial
in further proceedings before the Federal District Court, we became lead counsel for all 20+ municipalities involved in this litigation. The trial, which spanned six months, involved presenting novel cost-allocation models for the apportionment of the clean-up costs among all parties. Our representation included numerous appeals to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals
relitigating certain unique issues upon rem
, such as the calculation of pre-judgment
post-judgment interest under CERCLA
the effect of deposits made to the federal court registry on the calculation of interest. Our involvement in this case gave us unparalleled experience in municipal commercial
industrial liability issues arising under federal
state law relating to municipal solid waste, l
fill operation
closure
Superfund liability.
Counsel for the Development of a Major Entertainment Venue
The development of the Meadows Music Theatre involved transforming an old urban l
fill into a state of the art 30,000 person outdoor concert facility. Working with DEP
the state, urban site Brownfield funding was obtained
the site remediated primarily through the installation of a complex cap
redeveloped into one of the premier concert facilities in the state. State permits were obtained
local approvals from the City of Hartford
Hartford Redevelopment Authority were received in order to develop this one-of-a-kind facility. This was the first project of its scale to be permitted through the state's urban site remediation program
is a proud accomplishment not only for the developers but for the state.
