WPCA Minutes 09/08/2016
WATER POLLUTION CONTROL AUTHORITY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 8, 2016
“Subject to Vote of Approval”
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Paul Gilmore called the regular meeting of the Water Pollution Control Authority to order at 7:05 p.m. in the Simsbury Water Pollution Control Facility Conference Room, 36 Drake Hill Road, Simsbury. The following members were present: Lucian Dragulski, Ed Kelly, and Tom Hickey. Also present were Anthony Piazza, Superintendent; Tom Roy, Director of Public Works, as well as other interested parties.
2. SAFETY BRIEF – Mr. Gilmore gave a safety brief noting the exits in case of an emergency. He also stated that leaf blowing can be dangerous if your equipment is not properly maintained.
3. HENDRICKS COTTAGES (80 CLIMAX ROAD) – MANSOUR PRIME PROPERTIES
Mr. Roy stated that this is a development on Climax Road which is being submitted as an 8-30G application. Attorney Wise stated that this development will include affordable housing. Mr. Roy continued that the developer has requested that a sewer allocation be done for this property; they are allowed 1,836/gpd based on the 4.5 acres of R-40 zoned property. Under this application, it does allow for increased density for this type of housing, based on 3 bedrooms per unit, which would require 8,550/gpd. The developer will also be doing a sewer extension; they will be connection and flowing into Avon and back into Simsbury through the interceptor sewer. Avon has stated in a letter that they believe their Town’s sewer pipes have enough capacity for the flow in question. The developer was also told that in order to meet the Simsbury WPCA’s normal requirements, they would need to obtain sewer allocation from some other property that contributes flow to the south interceptor.
Attorney Wise stated that his client first applied for a 23 lot subdivision development last May and requested an allocation for this subdivision. They received a letter from Mr. Piazza explaining the deficit of allocation and would need to obtain allocation from another source and accepted by the WPCA. This application was withdrawn and they resubmitted a new application which calls for this 19 lot subdivision. This application is in its early stages and still needs to go before the land use commission. If there is a process for requesting an allocation study, he asked what that is because he feels this should have already been done. Mr. Piazza stated that there is a form to fill out requesting a flow allocation study along with the $150 fee, although this fee was waived for the 23 lot subdivision. He also stated that he has not yet updated his last letter regarding allocation for the 19 home development, although it remains the same. Mr. Gilmore stated that a formal application will need to be filed as soon as possible.
Attorney Wise stated that in 2010, the appellate court invalidated almost the exact same system from the Town of Newtown, CT. They had a zoning based allocation system that was based on their 1994 zoning map. A developer came in under 8-30G, although it could have been any application, and asked for an allocation in excess of what would have been allowed and it was denied by that Authority. He stated there was an appeal and the appellate court ruled that a WPCA has no authority to base allocations on zoning classifications because that usurps the power of the zoning commission to make those decisions. The only consideration for WPCAs is whether there is capacity in the system; allocation decisions cannot be based on yesterday’s zoning classification.
Attorney Wise stated that he and his client have asked repeatedly for WPC regulations that set forth the allocation system. They have been told that there is no such regulation; he stated that it is illegal to operate without regulations. Mr. Piazza stated that State statute does not require that a regulation be installed for determining sewer allocation, although there are Town policies in place, which Mr. Mansour was handed regarding the flow allocation study. Mr. Roy stated that the Town would require to build out the system so the sewage could be conveyed and to see whether or not the plant could handle it. The WPCA, historically, for every acre that has not been developed but can, has a right within the sewer shed to their appropriate capacity. He stated that if one is exceeded, it is potentially taking away from the other.
Ed Lally, Engineer, stated that in 1984, this WPCA must have had to vote in the minutes to adopt the allocation of the sewer according to the zoning. This should be sufficient to be a regulation or policy and satisfy one major concern of Attorney Wise. Also, approval of a special project under the affordable housing is not a zone change; it is the underlying zone of R-40. Lastly, the capacity deficit can be resolved by getting or buying capacity from another property, which has been done in the past and is an acceptable way to resolve this issue.
Mr. Piazza stated that the State has mandated that all potential development must go to the WPCA prior to other commissions in Town for approval to make sure there is sewer capacity.
Mr. Roy questioned what actions he and Mr. Piazza should take, possibly including some level of a subcommittee or continue working through the Town Attorney. Mr. Gilmore stated that a subcommittee would be a good idea as well as continuing to work with the Town Attorney. He stated that the WPCA needs to be very transparent and explore and consider things carefully and with an open mind and with the view that they are public servants. Mr. Gilmore, Lucian Dragulski and Tom Hickey volunteered to be on this subcommittee to look at the Town’s current and historical documentation so the WPCA can be best prepared to address the concerns regarding the proposed allocation. Mr. Roy stated that much of this can be done electronically; one of the goals is to make this process as transparent as possible.
4. STATUS REPORT ON SEWER EXTENSION PROJECTS, ETC.
Mr. Roy stated that they have received bids for Andrew Drive; the bid was award to local contractor, Red Door Construction for approximately $86,000. A contract with be executed and construction will start very quickly. He stated that Bushy Hill Road is currently in the process of being surveyed. They also continue to work with Maple Court and Old Mill Lane to establish easements; both condo associations needed to go to legal council to determine who has to sign off on the easements. Construction for this should begin in the spring.
Regarding 560-573B Hopmeadow Street, Mr. Roy stated that this is in the design phase, although there are some right-of-way issues that need to be resolved.
5. TREATMENT FACILITY REPORT
Mr. Piazza stated that all permit requirements were met for July and August. He stated that staff drained the secondary clarifier # 2 for annual maintenance.
Regarding the Farmington River bank stabilization, staff has obtained the ACOE permit and the project has been advertised for bidding; a closing date of Sept 20 for the bid opening was established. Construction is anticipated to start within a few weeks of awarding the bid. WPC staff continues to monitor the bank visually and electronically with no noticed changes.
Mr. Piazza stated that flow monitoring has been completed on the south drainage basins. Dave Prickett Consulting has started interpreting the data to establish flow capacity available it the basin. He stated that staff is working with the Town highway division for street paving operations as well as continuation with cleaning of the system.
Regarding personnel, operator, Joe Boruff, is out on sick leave due to surgery. His potential return day is the middle of October.
6. CORRESPONDENCE – There was none.
7. JUNE 16, 2016 AND JULY 12, 2016 MEETING MINUTES – POSSIBLE APPROVAL
Mr. Kelly made a motion to approve the June 16, 2016 minutes as written. Mr. Hickey seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved.
Mr. Kelly made a motion to approve the July 12, 2016 minutes as written. Mr. Hickey seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved.
8. ADJOURN
Mr. Hickey made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:15 p.m. Mr. Kelly seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved.
______________________
Paul Gilmore, Chairman