CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS & WATERCOURES AGENCY
MINUTES – SPECIAL MEETING
OCTOBER 30, 2007
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman, Richard Miller, called the Special Meeting of the Conservation Commission/Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Agency to order at 7:35 PM in the Main Meeting Room of the Simsbury Town Offices. The following members were present: Commissioners Margaret Sexton, Margery Winters, Ryan Mihalic, Andrew Bucknam, and John Yocom. Also in attendance were Howard Beach, Conservation Officer, Alison Sturgeon, Commission Clerk and other interested parties.
II. APPOINTMENT OF ALTERNATES
There were no alternates needed.
III. PUBLIC HEARING(s)
a. Application of Hoffman Enterprises, Owner, Sam Pines, Applicant, for an Inland Wetlands Permit relating to the redevelopment work within the regulated area to a wetland on property located at Hoffman Auto Park, 36 Albany Turnpike and West Mountain Road.
Mr. Donohue, representing Hoffman Enterprises, stated that this application was before the Commission several weeks ago. There has now been an appropriate request by neighbors for a public hearing.
Mr. Tom Daley, Milone & MacBroom, stated that there are two small wetlands on either side of this site, generally fed by the same system. There is a large wetland across the street; a pipe comes underneath Route 44 and discharges at the toe of the slope. It then goes through an intermittent watercourse and enters a pipe and directs the water across this site. In the rear portion of the site, there is an old storm water management basin, which, as part of this application, they are reconfiguring. There is also a small wetland pocket due to the man-made excavations. He stated that these are the two wetlands that they are proposing amendments to.
Regarding the wetland by Route 44, Mr. Daley stated that the existing pavement is there today. They are proposing to mimic that same edge of pavement. He stated that as they evolve through the process with the Planning and Zoning Commissions, there was a need to better balance the site. They did not find rock when excavating; they found boulders. This changed the cut and fill analysis. Also, in other areas where they did not think they would hit topsoil, they actually hit significant depths of topsoil. Some of the characteristics that were on site were different than anticipated. As the project evolved, they adjusted the grades slightly and raised the Best Buy approximately 18”, although, as this was raised 18”, the applicant did not want to grade into the wetlands. This allowed for
a more balanced site. As part of this application, they are proposing to put a small wall along the existing edge of pavement. There will not be any fill in this area. The wall is a pre-cast block; there are no footings involved. The maximum wall height is 2’.
Regarding the other wetland in the rear portion of the property, Mr. Daley stated that as part of this application, they were proposing approximately 75’ of retaining wall and they were grading the slope down to the wetlands. They have now raised the parking lot in this area up 18”, and instead of having additional fill in the wetlands, they are now proposing an extension of the retaining wall. They would also like to pull that wall back. The toe of fill was approximately 5’ off of the wetland; the wall is currently proposed to be approximately 12’ off of the wetlands. By installing this retaining wall, the plantings would now be planted at the level of the wetlands, which will provide more constant plantings through this area.
Mr. Daley stated that the Fire Department has required the applicant to put in an emergency access drive in the rear of the property. The old access is currently overgrown. The Fire Marshall has requested a different path for this access than what is already there. The access will be gated. In addition to this, they previously thought they would only be
able to serve the Nissan Building with a sanitary sewer pump station, which is not the most desirable. By adjusting the grades on the site and with additional surveying, they are now proposing gravity sewer and tying into the existing sewer line. They have aligned the sewer with the emergency access drive as to not incur any additional disturbance in this area.
Chairman Miller questioned if the emergency access road would be paved. Mr. Daley was unsure if the drive would be paved or gravel, although he stated that the Fire Marshall is requiring a maintainable surface. Commissioner Bucknam questioned what the nearest point was from the access road to the wetland and if there was potential to have runoff from the road to the wetland.. Mr. Daley stated the nearest point was 25’. He did not feel that there would be any runoff; the soils on the site are very sandy. He stated that they have graded this area to be flat so it does not receive any water.
Commissioner Yocom stated that Best Buy would be raised 18’. He questioned if water would accumulate between the retaining wall and the building, and if so, where would it go. Mr. Daley stated that there is a large 36” pipe in that location; that pipe will remain.
Regarding the retaining wall, Commissioner Bucknam questioned if it would be constructed from a material so that water and dirt could not pass through them, or if the materials would be porous. Mr. Daley stated the walls will have an open joint so ground water can bleed through; no drainage will be needed. Commissioner Bucknam questioned what purpose these retaining walls would serve. Mr. Daley stated that the walls were to serve as a grade break between the pavement and the drop down to the wetlands.
Commissioner Mihalic stated that the Staff Report indicates that the improvements that are currently proposed regarding the two wetlands represent an improvement over the initial design. He asked Mr. Daley to discuss those improvements for each of the wetlands. Regarding the wetland in the vicinity of the Best Buy, Mr. Daley described this as a no net change. Mr. Donohue stated that there was a sense that not excavating and removing the 18” of soil was a benefit. Regarding the other wetland on the property, Mr. Daley stated that this Commission approved the toe of slope 5’ off of this wetland (Flag #4). Now that the wall is proposed, they will be able to create a larger buffer around this wetlands. There is now a net increase from 5’ to 12’ in terms of providing that buffer.
Also, he believes another benefit is that by having the grade break and maintaining the existing grade adjacent to the wetland, there will not be sediment in this area. This will allow the plantings to take some of the groundwater; the plantings will function better in this lower elevation, as opposed to up on the bank.
Chairman Miller questioned if the retaining walls were at grade from the parking lot. Mr. Daley stated that they were. Chairman Miller also questioned if they would be plowing snow over these retaining walls. Mr. Daley stated that they would be maintaining the chain-link fence on top of one retaining wall. This will keep debris out of this area and will also create a physical barrier to the wetlands. The retaining wall in the front of the site will not have this fence on it; it functions as a drainage ditch. Chairman Miller stated he would like to see a fence on the retaining wall, which is located on the side of the Best Buy. Mr. Daley stated that although there is not much traffic around this side of the building, except for employees and people getting car stereos installed, he would not have an
objection to putting a 4’ high fence on that retaining wall.
Chairman Miller stated that the original plans showed no net increase in the impervious coverage. Mr. Daley stated that when they first came before the Conservation Commission, they had more impervious coverage. They had more parking. As the process began with the Planning and Zoning Commissions, a significant portion of impervious coverage was eliminated. As part of the Zoning application, it was determined that the building and paved coverage could not exceed 60%; when this application was before this Commission last, they were in excess of the 60%.
Regarding the retention basin, Commissioner Sexton stated she believed there was going to be a great deal of restoration in this area. She questioned if that was completed. Mr. Daley stated that it is still in the plan; they are proposing several different types of wetland seed mixes. The primary function is water quality; there is no water quality there today. Chairman Miller stated that many trees have been taken down on the site. He stated his concerns regarding the emergency access and the direct view of the backs of the buildings and the lights to the neighbors. He questioned if there was a plan to do more landscaping in this area to provide more of a buffer. Mr. Daley stated that they have done some buffer plantings. Mr. Donohue stated that the dimensions of the emergency access road were
demanded by the Fire Marshal, and they will be doing something to mitigate this area, and they will also be talking to the neighbors in this area.
Chairman Miller opened the public hearing up for public comments and questions.
Mr. Harald Bender, 6 Maureen Drive, showed the Commission the four inlets of water that go into the retention basin, which were depicted on the applicant’s plan. He stated his concerns regarding that there is only one outlet. He also stated his concerns regarding that only two of the inlets are being filtered. None of the filters will filter out antifreeze. He stated that one of the Zoning stipulations was that the parking of the cars would be on a surface that would not allow fluids to go out or that the cars would need to be drained first. In response, Mr. Daley stated that the triple pipes would be abandoned in place; they will not have water discharged out of them anymore. There was a discharge, although they have now found an alternate route. Although he understands Mr. Bender’s
comments, he stated they are proposing a catch basin insert. The insert is a carbon filter insert, called an Ultra Urban Filter. They are proposing that all of the catch basins have that Filter, which has an oil containment area. Mr. Bender stated that antifreeze is not water-soluble and these filters would not catch it. Mr. Daley stated that it would go into the basin that has a vegetative bottom.
Chairman Miller questioned if the drains from the auto body area are piped around the building and go through the other forms of treatment. Mr. Daley stated that he was correct. Chairman Miller questioned what the enforcement for maintaining the filters was. Mr. Beach stated that, as a part of the conditions of approval, the Planning and Zoning Commissions required the submission of bills from a licensed contractor who cleaned them out. This would prove that they were physically cleaned out. If the applicant does not do this, they will be in violation of the conditions of their approval.
Nancy Miller, 5 Joyce Lane, questioned if the sediment that is taken out of the filter when it is being cleaned would be analyzed to see what is caught in the filter. She feels that it needs to be proved that there is no pollution in the filter on an on-going basis from an impervious surface draining down into that area, or to make sure there is no improper disposal of these chemicals. She questioned who would monitor this. Mr. Donohue stated that Hoffman Enterprises uses the best practices.
David Sherwood, stated that this Commission should make it a condition of approval that the filters are cleaned to the satisfaction of the Enforcement Officer. The fact that it is a condition of the Planning and Zoning Commissions does not mean that this Commission can’t require the Enforcement Officer to be satisfied.
Commissioner Mihalic stated that there needs to be a maintenance plan, which would require working with Town staff to determine what the best management practices are and how to maintain the filters. He stated that Town staff will have to determine what those best practices are for something like the Urban Filters, which have not been used in Simsbury before. Commissioner Winters stated that the primary filtration is through the plants. She questioned if there was a maintenance plan for the plants. Mr. Daley stated that the applicant’s plans include the standard plan for this.
John Swan, Maureen Drive, questioned if the bonding that was put in place by the Zoning Commission was still in effect. Mr. Beach stated that this is a private site, and that he was not aware of any bonding. Mr. Donohue stated that there were specifications for elements of bonding for maintenance. Before the Town will give the applicant a Certificate of Occupancy, they will have to post bonding for two areas.
Commissioner Bucknam motioned to close the public hearing. Commissioner Mihalic seconded the motion, which was unanimously passed.
Commissioner Mihalic motioned that this is a regulated activity because it involves improvements on three sites that are in proximity to a wetland and within the 100’ upland review area. Commissioner Bucknam seconded the motion, which was unanimously passed. Commissioner Mihalic motioned that this is not a significant activity because it involves three isolated modifications to an already issued wetlands permit by this Commission that the applicant has brought to our attention pursuant to 11.9 G of our Regulations. Commissioner Winters seconded the motion, which was unanimously passed. Commissioner Mihalic motioned to approve the requested amendment to the wetlands permit for the site for the three locations with the following conditions: that the applicant installs a 4’ fence on the
retaining wall to the west of the Best Buy facility; that they use the best management practices regarding the installation, use, monitoring and maintenance of the new Ultra Urban Filters; and the applicant takes all necessary steps to ensure that they have an up-to-date, in compliance Storm Water Management Plan for when construction is completed. Commissioner Winters seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved.
IV. PRESENTATION(s), DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE VOTE
a. Application of Brian J. Foley, Applicant, for an Inland Wetlands Permit relating to the expansion of an existing pond within the regulated area to a wetland on property located at 76 Hartford Road. (Tabled at meeting of 10/16/07)
Mr. Beach stated that neither the applicant nor his engineer are present tonight. They have not yet submitted their calculations as of yet.
Commissioner Mihalic motioned to table this application until the next meeting. Commissioner Bucknam seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved.
b. Application of Mark Drummey, Owner, for an Inland Wetlands Permit to construct an addition to an existing residential structure, removal and replacement of an existing pool, and work relating to the installation of a new septic system within the regulated area to a wetland on property located at 70 Notch Road.
Commissioner Mihalic recused himself from sitting on the Commission during this application because he works with a relative of Mr. Drummey.
Mark Drummey stated they were applying for permits for a new septic system, an addition to their house, for replacing the existing pool and the replacement of an existing out-building. Mrs. Drummey stated that the current septic system lies within the wetlands setback. They are proposing to move the new septic system outside of the wetlands setback.
Mr. Beach showed the location of the septic system relative to the wetlands on the map to the Commission. It is outside of the 100’ upland review area; it is 250’ from the wetlands. They will be abandoning the old system and he showed where the new location would be.
In response to a question by Commissioner Yocom regarding if the septic system would need to be pumped up hill, Mr. Drummey stated that part of the property is very level. The grade difference from the house to the proposed septic location is only approximately 6 feet.
Regarding the septic system, Mr. Drummey stated that the current tank will be removed, which is approximately 20’ from the wetlands, which is currently yard and an overgrown area. Mr. Beach stated that they would be using silt fence in this area when the tank is removed. Regarding the addition to the house, Mr. Drummey stated that the existing house had additions on either side. The footprint of the existing Colonial will remain, although, both additions will be removed. They will be excavating for a new foundation, and backfilling and grading around the house. The addition will be 15’ closer to the wetlands at the rear of the house. Commissioner Winters stated her concerns regarding how close to the wetlands this addition would be.
The Commissioner members reviewed the Staff comments and recommendations.
Commissioner Bucknam motioned that this is a regulated activity because proposed construction activity is in the 100’ wetland review area to the adjacent wetland. Commissioner Yocom seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved. Commissioner Bucknam motioned that this is not a significant activity because the construction activity will all take place in an area, which is currently disturbed. There will be silt fence protecting the edge of the wetland and preventing any siltation. There also is not a steep slope to the wetlands. Commissioner Yocom seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved. Commissioner Bucknam motioned to grant this permit following the recommendations in the Staff report including the planting of certain shrubbery along the edge of the wetland to help maintain the
border of that wetland. Commissioner Yocom seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved.
c. Application of Thomas A. Schneider, Director of Finance & Operations, The Ethel Walker School – Owner, for an Inland Wetlands Permit to construct a barn and access drive within the regulated area to a wetland on property located at the Ether Walker School, 229 Bushy Hill Road.
Tom Daley, from Milone & MacBroom, stated that this application was before this Commission at the last meeting seeking the Commission’s advice as to how to proceed with this application. He stated that they previously received approval for a large expansion to the equestrian facility; Phase I has been completed. Mr. Daley stated they are currently proposing to construct a 40’ x 100’ barn with a metal sheet roof, which is outside of the 100’ upland review area. He stated that there is currently a gravel access drive through this portion of the property; they will be placing gravel on this driveway, which is located within the upland review area. The barn will be tucked up into the slope; they will excavate out the slope. This excavated material will be placed into the existing
topography; they will not be taking any material off site. They are also proposing a storm drain system at the toe of the slope to handle any runoff that comes off of the slope. They will be connecting it to an already existing storm drain system. He stated that they are also proposing a swale at the top of the slope; they do not want water to run through the barn and down the slope. A manure dumpster pad is also being proposed, which is also outside of the upland review area. The pad will have 2 small walls on two sides; the grooms will dump the manure and shavings in this location. They are proposing a sealed dumpster, which will be water tight, which was a concern from this Commission at the last meeting. The manure is hauled away daily. Mr. Daley stated there is a drain in the middle of the pad. Under this drain, they will be putting in a drywell. A perforated pipe will be connected; this will be a type of leaching
system.
Commissioner Winters questioned if the drywell under the pad would be gravel or sand. Mr. Daley stated that the drywell would be concrete with an open floor drain.
Chairman Miller questioned if any work would be done on the outlet from the pond. Mr. Daley stated that there is a stone dam in this location. They will be constructing a flood storage compensation area and a wetland creation area. He believes that this will still be part of the plan when they come back before this Commission regarding the reconfigured barn.
Commissioner Mihalic thanked the applicant for addressing the concerns that this Commission pointed out during the informal application process.
Commissioner Bucknam motioned that this is a regulated activity because of the gravel deposit in the upland review area. Commissioner Yocom seconded the motion, which was unanimously passed. Commissioner Bucknam motioned that this is not a significant activity because of the deposit of gravel in the wetland review area being the only activity. Commissioner Yocom seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved. Commissioner Bucknam motioned that this permit be granted. Commissioner Yocom seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved.
V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of October 16, 2007
Commissioner Yocom motioned to approve the October 16, 2007, minutes as written. Commissioner Mihalic seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved.
VI. APPROVAL OF 2008 REGULAR MEETING SCHEDULE
Commissioner Bucknam motioned to accept the 2008 Regular Meeting Schedule as written. Commissioner Yocom seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved.
VII. STAFF REPORTS
a. Administrative issuance of an Inland Wetlands Permit on the application of John and Eileen Hawley, Owners, Dan Gringas, Connecticut Remodeling, Applicant, for construction of a deck within the 100-foot upland review area to a wetland on property located at 37 Ashton Circle (Powder Forest).
Mr. Beach stated that this homeowner wanted to extend their deck a few more feet than what was originally approved; they are approximately 90’ away from the wetlands in an established lawn area. The additional concrete piers would be dug by hand. He issued this homeowner an administrative permit.
b. Administrative issuance of an Inland Wetlands Permit on the application of Kim D. Jennings, Owner, for the construction of a new septic system within the 100-foot upland review area to a wetland on property located at 1 Hamilton Lane.
Mr. Beach stated that there was a septic failure at this property. He stated that this Commission has been talking about changing the Regulations because they do not allow for emergencies, when an applicant does not have time to submit an application at least 2 weeks prior to a meeting. He stated that since this activity was outside of the wetlands, he issued an administrative approval, which can be done in one day. They are now putting in a new system.
VIII. DISCUSSION
Regarding the Tarrifville Water Commission of the Tarrifville Fire District, Mr. Beach stated that their Diversion Permit that they have obtained for the wells has come up for renewal. DEP mandates that they send out notification to each Commission in Town that they can reapply to extend their diversion permit. Although the Commissions do not have any input regarding this issue, the DEP feels that everyone should be notified that they are doing this. He stated that Well #1 has collapsed; they have drilled a new well next to that. Well #2 and Well #3 are up for renewal.
Chairman Miller stated that he has received a letter from the First Selectman regarding the opportunity this Commission has in drafting a report for the Annual Report. He questioned if there were any highlights from the past year that anyone would like to see in the Report. The following were suggestions from the Commission members:
§ Comments on the PDD
§ Hoffman Project
§ Construction of River View
§ Emphasize the awareness of LID (Low Impact Development)
§ Cease and Desist Orders
§ How this Commission dealt with homeowners using water from Hopmeadow Brook to water their own lawns
§ Flood Damage on Red Stone
IX. CORRESPONDENCE/ANNOUNCEMENTS
There were none.
X. ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Winters motioned to adjourn the meeting at 9:55 PM.
Commissioner Mihalic seconded with all in favor.
Respectfully Submitted,
-------------------------
________________________________________
Commissioner Ryan Mihalic, Secretary
| 
