MONROE, CT — Kelley Hangos-Carrano has a hand-dug well that’s 12 feet deep providing water at her home on Scholz Road in the Stevenson section of town, and she takes precautions to keep the water flowing throughout the year.
“Mine goes dry every year,” she said. “I have rain barrels. We all do.”
“I have three rain barrels and two metal watering troughs in my garden,” said Michele Soltiesiak, who lives on nearby Cottage Street. “I did not use my sprinkler once this year.”
“I can’t do more than one load of laundry a day,” Hangos-Carrano added. “Any more is a no, no. When it rains, we get excited because we may get to do more than one load.”
The two women shared concerns over their wells with friend and neighbor, Kate Johnston of Scholz Road, while seated around a table outside the Dunkin’ Donuts on Roosevelt Drive one recent Wednesday evening.
Johnston lives with her husband and their two dogs.
“I don’t know what we’d do if our well goes dry,” she said. “I have so many water bottles in our garage.”
The women and their neighbors strongly oppose Sun Valley Glen, an eight lot cluster housing subdivision proposed for 1536 and 1564 Monroe Turnpike, across from Z-Topia.
In addition to environmental concerns, they worry about the impact upon their wells.
The Monroe Planning and Zoning Commission cited concerns over wells in the Stevenson area as a reason for its denial of Sun Valley Glen last May, finding the applicant did not provide sufficient hydrogeological evidence or data to show wells for the new dwelling units would not negatively impact existing water sources.
Now the neighbors are furious over the commission’s unanimous decision on Sept. 4 to allow the developer to resubmit the plan again without changes.
Commissioners agreed that a well analysis done by a hydrogeologist hired by the applicant makes the proposal “substantially different” enough, not to require a brand new application.
Other than the well analysis, Christopher Russo, the attorney for the applicant, said the latest application is essentially the same as the last one.
“It’s the reason that’s stated for the denial,” he said. “We stuck with what was put as the reason for denial — the wells.”
Commissioners expressed a curiosity to hear the analysis before unanimously agreeing to accept a resubmission of the application for a new hearing.
This Thursday, the commission will decide whether or not to schedule a hearing on the cluster housing application for Oct. 2.
Meanwhile, there is a pending lawsuit filed by the applicant, Jans Land Development LLC, appealing last May’s denial. The legal action was filed at the Superior Court in Bridgeport on May 21, 2025.
The lawsuit contends, in part, that “the denial of the P&Z Applications was not supported by substantial evidence in the record or applicable law, but was based upon, and improperly relied upon, speculation, interference and other information and considerations outside its scope.”
The plaintiff is asking for a judgement overturning the denial and approving the application without conditions, and for an order awarding costs incurred in the court proceedings, and any further relief the court may deem just and proper.
‘Minimal to no effect’
During the meeting on Sept. 4, the developer’s expert, Karen DeStefanis, vice president of WSP, an engineering firm in Shelton, gave a limited presentation on the aquifer and the wells to the commission. A more detailed version will be shared at the hearing.
DeStefanis is a hydrogeologist and a certified professional geologist with over 35 years of experience in her field.
She said she conducted a site visit, did a virtual tour of neighboring properties, reviewed published documents and reports — including geological maps and information provided by MetroCOG online, spoke to the Monroe Health Department, reviewed water logs and data on precipitation and drought conditions, then performed a water budget analysis.
“I was able to determine there is sufficient water to the site to sustain the subdivision,” DeStefanis told the commission. “I can say the site will have minimal to no effect on the neighboring wells.”
The cluster housing would have individual wells for each dwelling unit, with each home built on one-and-a-half-acre lots.
Neighbors who spoke to The Sun do not believe a well analysis makes the application substantially different.
“The hydrogeologist is the only difference,” Johnston said. “They didn’t bring anything different to the table. If we are going to discuss substantial differences, there are none.”
Soltiesiak said the soil in the area doesn’t hold water well, so the developer would have to frack, going into the bedrock for new wells.
She and her neighbors contend the applicant’s data is incomplete, point out how the plan also includes a fire pond, and wonder, if they end up having to dig new wells, who will pay for it.
In 2000, four houses were proposed on the property, but the commission only allowed two homes with a shared driveway. The developer did not pursue that approval.
Hangos-Carrano wonders why the commission is now entertaining an application for eight homes on the same site.
All respectful comments with the commenter’s first and last name are welcome.
Just ask Jans to put up a bond to cover the cost of well modifications (if needed) in the area.
Very insightful, Bill. Thank you for publishing.
I think I might insert myself in this fight. I stand with residents of cottage street. These are the people of my childhood. I understand their concerns and grievances which are completely legitimate.
But first, I want to be clear about something. DeStefanis may be a hydrogeologist and a certified professional geologist with over 35 years of experience in the field, but that title and level of experience is not required to perform
a site visit, “virtual tour “of neighboring properties, a review of published documents and reports online. Anyone with a smart phone can do this. Any resident of the town can walk into the Monroe Health Department and ask to speak with someone. I’m looking at water logs and data on precipitation and drought conditions for that area right now on one screen to the left of me while playing solitaire on the screen to my right. In maybe 6 minutes I’ll have a water budget analysis completed and downloaded.
And now, I can say the site has the potential to effect or negatively impact neighboring wells.
When is the next meeting? I will fight for the residents of Cottage Street. I’ll do it because I can.
Best,
Bryant Abbott
Bryant, WE NEED HELP! The next meeting is October 16th!
The conditional approval by Monroe‘s inland wetlands commission in the year 2000, approved two homes instead of four homes on 1536 Monroe Turnpike. The current application is for eight homes on the combined lots of 1536 and 1564 Monroe Turnpike..
Bryant, thank you for your post and insight. Your presence and participation at the next hearing on the 16th will be very helpful. We’ve been swimming upstream since the beginning of the 1536/1564 proceedings. Thank you for adding your voice to ours!