Conservation Commission / IWWA Minutes 05/20/2014 ADOPTED
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS &
WATERCOURSES AGENCY MINUTES
MAY 20, 2014
REGULAR MEETING
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman, Rich Miller, called the Regular Meeting of the Conservation Commission to order at 7:30 p.m. in the Main Meeting Room at the Town Offices. Other members and alternates in attendance were Jim Morrison, Bertram Kaplan, Margaret Sexton, Margery Winters, and Donald Rieger. Also present were Howard Beach, Conservation Officer; Michael Glidden, Code Compliance Officer; Janis Prifti, Commission Clerk; and other interested parties.
II. APPOINTMENT OF ALTERNATES
Chairman Miller appointed Commissioner Morrison to serve as an alternate for Nick Zackeo. A quorum was present.
III. DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION
a. Application #14-05 of Jarrett Kravitz, Advantage Contracting, Owner, for approval of a proposed pool area in the Upland Review Area to a wetland on the property located at 5 Tower Run (Map I15, Block 19, Lot 0005B3). Zone R-80.
The Application was read into the record.
The Applicant provided the proposed revised layout for 5 Tower Run to the Commissioners which also showed what had been originally approved. The proposed change remains within the buildable lot and outside the wetland, but it is within the Upland Review Area. The closest point to the wetland is 90-100 feet; an existing row of vegetation shown on the map would remain. The front corner of the pool box was used as the pivot point to rotate it northwest to the 50-foot line, but not beyond. The grade was confirmed to be relatively flat; behind the pool area a 2-foot retaining wall was put in for a quick grade transition and to establish erosion controls. Town Staff indicated the isolated wetland is small with poor draining soils. When the proposed house is built in a couple of years, the fill generated would be used to establish the patio elevation and seeded with grass.
This would be a regulated activity within the Upland Review Area and the purchase of the property is contingent upon their ability to install the pool as shown; the closing is scheduled in a week. Town Staff will check further but believed that as long as the plan remains within the buildable square outside of setbacks, wetlands, or slopes over 20%, it may not have to go back to Planning. The Applicant indicated final grading and site plans would be generated at the time of permitting for construction; their first order of business would be establishing the road and erosion controls. Town Staff confirmed that the septic, reserve area, and house would be outside the regulated Upland Review Area. However, if the proposed drainage runs into the Upland Review Area, the Applicant would need to return to the Commission for a permit. Currently, the drainage pipe daylights about 80 feet away from the wetland, but within the 100-foot Upland Review Area. The 4-inch PVC french drain on the side of the house was described as a rock-filled trench with a pipe in it to pick up sub-surface and ground water to artificially drop the water table around the foundation and septic system; Town Staff confirmed that was approved by Planning. The Applicant indicated the pipe would not handle a significant amount of water, but would catch anything from the driveway and front yard migrating toward the wetland to quickly drop and defuse it; stones would be placed at the outflow with 6-8 feet of rip rap surround and covered with enough protection to keep leaves and debris from clogging; and the topography would slope slightly to the outflow. Soil would be stockpiled on the lot at 1 Tower Run where there are no wetlands and where nothing has been built. It was confirmed that where the silt fence would go is currently wooded, but it would be placed in the transition area for what would eventually be a grass yard at the filtration backstop.
Commissioner Rieger made a motion that this is a regulated activity because it involves construction in the Upland Review Area and it involves clear cutting in the Upland Review Area.
Commissioner Winters seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.
Commissioner Rieger made a motion that this is not a significant activity because of the precautions to be exercised in the construction, particularly the silt fence, the lack of stockpiling of soil and the like, will avoid any impact on the wetlands.
Commissioner Winters seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.
Commissioner Rieger made a motion that the Commission approve Application #14-05 for construction of the pool and clear cutting of trees as indicated on the drawing before the Commission, and that is the limit of this approval, up to the 50-foot line at the farthest point; all of this work, and the location and siting of the silt fence be done with the approval of Town Staff; and the timing of all these activities be approved by Town Staff in light of the season of the year.
Commissioner Winters seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.
b. Application #14-09 of Edwin Evonsion, Agent; Thomas Potter, Owner; for activities associated with the installation of a French drain and roof leader drains within the Upland Review Area to a wetland on the property located at 25 Sunset Hill Road (Map C18, Block 613, Lot064). Zone R-40.
The Application was read into the record.
The Applicant's representative indicated the owner is experiencing runoff uphill from neighboring lots and would like to dry up and improve the property. Currently, 4 downspout drains and the french drain run into the back wetlands area. There is an Orangeberg drain in the basement, but they do not know where it comes out and they will not tie into it. The proposed work would take place in the Upland Review Area, not the wetland. The front drains would go to a 6-inch pipe tied into the catch basin in front in the road. The best solution appears to be a french drain placed about 3-feet deep; the wetlands are about 30-40 feet from the house. The downspout leaders would be about 18 inches x 2 feet. Fill would be used to level off the irregular front yard; the back slopes gradually to the wet area. When the sewer lines were put in, the area was graded almost level and water remains; the swale that was put in causes the water to sit there and slowly migrate toward the house. They believe that the topsoil spread up from the wetlands will act to control the water and allow grass to grow. The wetlands are wooded but the small yard has very few trees, but there is adequate sun to grow grass. Silt fence would be installed as needed with the work taking place when the ground dries up around the end of June and seeding done before July 4th. The pipe from the front of the house to the catch basin could be done now.
Commissioner Sexton made a motion that this is a regulated activity because it will occur within the Upland Review Area.
Commissioner Kaplan seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.
Commissioner Sexton made a motion that this is not a significant activity because the activity will be outside of the wetlands and there will be precautions to keep out of the wetlands.
Commissioner Kaplan seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.
Commissioner Sexton made a motion to approve the permit based on the silt fence installed per Town Staff, no activity within the wetlands, and that it occur within the appropriate season to protect the area.
Commissioner Kaplan seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.
c. Application #14-11 of Pauline Salter of 121 West Street, LLC, Owner for clearing, grading, paving, filling, construction, and storm water drainage discharge within the Upland Review Area to a wetland on the property located at 121 West Street (Map F11, Map 103, Lot 015A). Zone I-2.
The Application was read into the record.
The Applicant's representative provided the Commissioners with the site plan for the rear lot located behind 119 West Street where school buses are stored. The overall layout with paved areas and north and south gravel areas was shown along with access points and property limits. Storm water runoff from the site is currently collected in the north and south drainage ditches which flow westerly to the eastern boundary line and both ditches outlet to a pond in the east near Landmark's apartments. The property has about 3,633 sq. ft. of wetlands on the property indicated in blue with the Upland Review Area limit shown by a green line extending into a neighboring property. They indicated runoff from the paved and gravel areas are mainly collected in the ditches with no treatment or pollutant removal to the detriment of the wetlands and pond. Their plan proposes: 1) addressing the water quality issue; 2) making improvements under the Storm water Pollution Prevention Plan; 3) obtaining a DEEP permit to bring the site into compliance; and 4) to allow Salters' business to continue operations on the property. They propose filling in a portion of the wetlands, as described, to capture the water runoff and treat it; an existing catch basin would be replaced and a second catch basin added. The gravel areas would be paved and tie into existing paved areas with storm water runoff captured in the two catch basins equipped with sumps and routed through a hydrodynamic separator and discharged to the wetlands. The hydrodynamic separator would remove 80% of system solids as well as fine particles and pollutants and designed in conformance with the Connecticut Water Quality Manual to handle water quality flow and for the Simsbury 25-year storm standards. Town Staff recommended combining the two riprap pads at the outlet location and they have agreed. The Applicant thanked the Town Conservation Officer and his staff for their help and cooperation in developing this plan.
A handout prepared by George Logan, Professional Wetland Scientist and Registered Soil Scientist, was provided to the Commissioners and a section was read into the record as follows: "Based on our review of the subject property and of the plans provided to us, we are of the opinion that the replacement of the existing drainage swales with a more formal storm water drainage system does not constitute a significant commitment of regulated resources or loss of wetland function. Conversely, the proposed mitigative measures will correct an existing problem and protect down gradient resources, including a pond." The wetlands that remain would be dredged of silt, sand and debris that have accumulated overtime to restore them to full function. They have incorporated into the plan the Soil Scientists recommended alternate seed planting and schedule with an appropriate plant mix to stabilize the wetlands, and provide pollutant removal and storm water attenuation. The reseeding area was indicated by hatch marks on the layout; a triangle indicated a drainage easement.
The project would be constructed in two phases because in its present condition with high ground water and poor grade of soils, the parking lot cannot be paved. In Phase 1 this year, a curtain drain in the south gravel parking lot would be installed and monitored to assure it is working; if necessary, additional fingers could be added or the curtain drain extended. The drain would cutoff sub-surface drainage from the property to the south and function in the gravel parking area to lower the water table to prepare the area for paving. Phase 1 would include all the storm and water quality structures. 2) Paving and curbing would take place next year in Phase 2. The Commissioners were also provided copies of an extensive Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan and an Operation and Maintenance Plan for the whole storm system. In the coming weeks, they will seek approval from both ZBA for an increase in impervious coverage and approval from the Zoning Commission for a site plan amendment. They summarized the project as a whole would address issues of environmental compliance, water quality, provided maintenance plans for effective operations, and preserving a business serving the community for 90 years.
It was explained this plan originated with the Applicant's new registration for a DEEP Storm water Discharge Permit for Industrial Activities which requires a Storm water Pollution Prevention Plan identifying potential exposures and engineering control measures. The Applicant has a general permit and put best management practices in place; a self-audit letter was prepared and submitted to DEEP; sampling was conducted on 4/7/2014 on the effluent side of the hay bales and silt fence at two drainage points which provided data that was non-detect with suspended solids at half benchmark requirements for storm water monitoring. They will ultimately get credit for drainage improvements, the separator, and eliminating runoff improving wetland quality under the companion Storm water Pollution Prevention Plan. While this is under a federal program, the State DEEP manages it for the EPA and sends out site inspectors. Salters hired a company to come in and wash the buses and contain the water used in holding tanks; all the maintenance is done inside. The proposed separator would be for the entire site. The Commissioners noted their concern that with many vehicles parked in the area that there is adequate storage in the event of any spill or release from those vehicles. As required by the Town, they have planned for a 25-year storm event and for a larger event, the system would be bypassed. Town Staff addressed the potential of taking the unit offline for a larger event, and the Town Engineer felt that due to the small watershed there was no value in doing so. The Applicant's representative noted the presence of a former tank farm on the southwest and catch basins and runoff from the street and across the street, but their test results were non-detect at less than 5 mg. per liter; if there had been anything, they would have collected further samples in other locations. Regarding whether there would be onsite remediation, something could come up when construction begins given the hydrological up gradient. Under the general permit, sampling is required every 6 months, but Salter's was not aware they needed the permit until recently and then acted to put best management practices in place. The Applicant's engineers believed the runoff from the gravel lots caused the sedimentation in the ditches with an old clogged curtain drain in the center of the lot.
The Commissioners asked about the necessity of filling in wetlands. The Applicant's engineers explained the long buses with tanks in back hang 10-12 feet off the backside and the only way they fit on the property is for them to hang over the drainage ditches, so if they contain the ditch, they keep the tight parking space for vehicles. Town Staff explained the two manmade wetlands are severely impacted, constantly wet, and have debris. The Commissioners were concerned about eliminating improvable wetlands to facilitate parking. The Applicant's engineers felt the primary wetlands are in adjacent areas with the eastern third of the north ditch restored and there is significant debris in the easement area that could be improved. If the discharge is meeting requirements, the Commissioners asked about the need for this plan. The Applicant's engineers said the problem is the suspended solids that will continue to fill in over time; silt fence, hay bales and petroleum booms have been put in to collect debris in the ditches. It was believed the neighbor up gradient had a significant past spill that was not cleaned up. Their longer-term plan would be to eliminate the hay bales and silt fence. Town Staff explained a sheen on the pond was detected in recent years and they do not know the source, so along with capturing suspended solids, the idea was to cap the parking lot and keep the oily product out of the water and then look at the up gradient property to determine the need for additional remediation. However, the first step would be for the Applicant to meet DEEP's requirements to trap material on their own site.
Regarding the amount of digging to take place, the Applicant's representative indicated about a foot of gravel in the area to be paved would be removed offsite and a new process aggregate base brought in for the pavement and its elevation, as well as for the catch basins, would be similar to now. They have found groundwater at about 2 1/2 feet and measures to pump out water will need to be put in place; the curtain drain goes from 3-7 feet deep and follows subsurface water. The catch basin de-watering would be handled under a DEEP permit with engineering controls put in place and any discharge reported; remediation wastewater could either be treated and discharged as verified by storage sampling, or discharged to a POTW. The Commissioners were concerned that after significant water believed to be clean has been discharged, that it is recognized sampling and filtration is needed. The Applicant's representative indicated test borings could be done for the up gradient source, e.g. for hydrocarbons work would stop. Salters would need to perform the drainage improvements when the school year is out and the water table is lowest.
Regarding management of the removed soil, their representative did not find any pollution issues in the locations tested. Town Staff explained the water coming from the up gradient Powder Forest side is clean, and the suspected source is coming from the west side where no samples were taken. The proposal to pave would improve the sites parking function and allow Salters to comply with the State's storm water discharge permit for continued operation of the business. They believed the wetlands function would be improved, including downstream with eventual cleanup of all the sites. The Commissioners summarized that the plan would restore the existing swales combined with concerns about the rest of the site and what is getting into the groundwater and the need for paving, so the hydrodynamic separator would be used. Regarding the amount of paving, their representative considered it preventative maintenance of suspended solids; the benchmark is 90, but their testing showed for the south ditch 13 and 54 on the north end. When the curtain drain is put in, the water diverted, and the parking area dried out, without paving the potential for vehicle pollution runoff would remain; Salter's will take a year before paving to see if it works. The engineers could not guarantee 80% total suspended solid removal under their guidelines without a hydrodynamic separator or something similar onsite.
The project history requirements for maintenance of the area requiring a paved surface and structure to remove suspended solids were reviewed. The sump maintenance schedule would typically be quarterly, but would be done as needed. The Town Engineer's recommendation was to combine the two pipes into one discharge so the flow from one does not undermine the other, but the two pipes would have independent outlets for monitoring. The steep slopes on the south and west sides would be vegetated and stabilized. The 2002 storm water State DEEP regulations are required to be verified on paper with a treatment train to remove 80% total suspended solids using catch basins with deep sumps on average removing 15%, and the storm water structure removing 80% of the remaining 85%. Their goal is to have no suspended solids and for Salters to contain the runoff on their site, but the current method with hay bales would be high maintenance long-term. Regarding the use of rain garden infiltration, the engineers explained the water table is very shallow and the site is always saturated.
The Commissioners were concerned about the sheen on the pond and discussed potential sources and where the plume could be coming from. The engineers did not know if there was a plume or the source of the sheen on the pond and the Application is to assure no impact from Salter's property. The Commissioners were concerned that the Applicant's activities not exacerbate the problem. To quell concerns, the Applicant suggested they could undertake test borings, or set some wells and see how groundwater is flowing to provide data. The Commissioners felt more information was needed and were concerned about the drainage coming across the property and what it picks up. Town Staff indicated there were two sources of water, including a wetland and the self-storage facility with a large amount of pavement that required a detention basin for surface drainage which was directed to the up gradient basin and the water bleeding out northerly onto Salters property, and on the east a wetland 10-feet up gradient of Salters and which works its way slowly through the soil recharging the site; both bodies of water are flowing south to north.
Regarding the southern part of the property being too wet for buses to park, the Applicant explained because of the high water table water runs across the area and requires constant sanding in winter. The engineers indicated they have found no evidence of a plume in their testing and the sub-surface water follows the ground contours; water from the south runs north and can run west as part of the ditch. The Commissioners requested more information on the hydrogeology of the area; if wells were installed and clean, that could address Commission concerns. The Applicant agreed to install 3 monitoring wells to see which way water is flowing and take borings for one round of water and soil sampling. Town Staff suggested bifurcating the permit in order to begin improving storm water quality with structures put in place, as paving would not be done for another year.
Commissioner Rieger made a motion the Commission find that this is a regulated activity as it involves filling of wetlands and construction in the Upland Review Area.
Commissioner Winters seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.
Commissioner Rieger made a motion the Commission find that this is a significant activity because it involves actual filling of some wetlands.
Commissioner Winters seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.
Commissioner Rieger made a motion that the Commission approve only part of Application #14-11; that it approve the filling of wetlands, acknowledging that there was no feasible and prudent alternative, the rehabilitation of part of the wetland, and the construction and installation of the new hydrodynamic separator and related storm water drainage system, but not the curtain drain system that had been proposed; the Commission may consider that proposed system later in a separate proceeding, but it is not approved because of concerns that it might have a detrimental effect on an adjacent water body. Otherwise, the permit as bifurcated, is granted with the usual conditions that Town Staff oversee whatever is needed to assure that a project of this magnitude and sensitivity is conducted at a time of year and in a manner that will minimize any adverse impact to wetlands and surrounding areas.
Commissioner Winters seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.
IV. ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS
Town Staff indicated that permits were discussed with the Town Engineer and issued administratively for the following 4 Applications.
a. Application #14-10 of R. McBride Home Repair & Improvement, Agent; Phil & Rebecca Smith, Owners; for the construction of a deck within the Upland Review Area to a wetland on the property located at 31 Fernwood Drive (Map B18, Block 506, Lot 054). Zone R-25.
b. Application #14-12 of Rosanne Poynton, Tower Generator, Agent; Nancy Onken, Owner; for the installation of a generator within the Upland Review Area to a wetland on the property located at 35 Lucy Way (Map H13, Block 109, Lot 023). Zone R-80.
c. Application #14-14 of Brendan Letson, Agent; Sean & Robin Ross, Owners; for the removal of the existing deck structure and construction of a new deck within the Upland Review Area to a wetland on the property located at 35 Long View Drive (Map C13, Block 302, Lot 041). Zone R-40.
d. Application #14-15 of Anthony and Jessica Marmile, Owners, for the modification of the existing concrete pool patio within the Upland Review Area to a wetland on the property located at 96 Great Pond Road (Map E07, Block 109, Lot 010). Zoned R-40.
V. RECEIPT OF NEW APPLICATIONS
Town Staff will schedule Public Hearings for 1) an Application for Saw Mill Road regarding dredging a pond filled with silt; 2) an inland wetlands map amendment for 292 Bushy Hill Road; and 3) a map amendment with wetlands application for 30 Blue Ridge Road.
VI. CORRESPONDENCE/ANNOUNCEMENTS
The Simsbury Storm water Module produced by Jim Ford won a 2014 New England Chapter of the Congress for the New Urbanism Award recognizing excellence in architectural landscape and urban designs built in harmony with their physical and social context as well as the policies, plans and codes that structure them. This was developed for the Storm water Management Plan developed for the center zone initially and applied to the rest of Town.
VII. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of May 6, 2014
On Line 73, the word "Kakiwick(?)" is corrected to the acronym "CACIWC".
On Lines 75 and 80, an apostrophe is added at the end of "Winters".
On Line 78, a period is added following "p.m".
On Line 90, the word "whether" is deleted, and inserted in its place are the words "new application language regarding"; and the words "would be involved" are deleted.
Commissioner Rieger made a motion to approve the May 6, 2014 minutes, as amended.
Commissioner Kaplan seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.
The Commissioners clarified that contacting the Farmington counterpart was to raise the issue whether there might be a federal issue so the Applicant focuses on that.
Mr. Beach announced his retirement at the end of June to the Commissioners and that Michael Glidden will be working with the Commission in the future. He appreciated the professionalism of the Commission and enjoyed very much working with the Commissioners and felt privileged to be part of the many good things that have been accomplished over 24 1/2 years. The Commissioners congratulated Mr. Beach and wished him well.
The Commissioners noted the June anniversary of the Apple Lane default and 1-year anniversary for the overdue planting plan. Town Staff noted that following issuance of a court order the dock was recently removed with no disturbance and the dock is stored on the property; the fine is to be tallied.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Winters made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:55 p.m.
Commissioner Sexton seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.
_____________________________
Donald Rieger, Secretary