WPCA Minutes 01/08/2015
WATER POLLUTION CONTROL AUTHORITY
REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 8, 2015
“Subject to Vote of Approval”
1. CALL TO ORDER
Vice Chairman Paul Gilmore called the regular meeting of the Water Pollution Control Authority to order at 7:30 p.m. in the Simsbury Water Pollution Control Facility Conference Room, 36 Drake Hill Road, Simsbury. The following members were present: Michael Park, Thomas Hickey, Jay Sheehan and Ed Kelly. Also present were Tom Roy, Director of Public Works, Anthony Piazza, Superintendent, Richard Sawitzke, Engineer, as well as other interested parties.
2. SAFETY BRIEF – Mr. Gilmore gave a safety brief noting the exits in case of an emergency.
3. PUBLIC HEARING – 63-86 SEMINARY ROAD
LEGAL NOTICE
TOWN OF SIMSBURY
WATER POLLUTION CONTROL AUTHORITY
The Simsbury Water Pollution Control Authority will hold a public hearing on Thursday,January 8, 2015, at 7:30 pm in the Conference Room at the Simsbury Water Pollution Control, 36 Drake Hill Road, Simsbury, CT. The purpose of the hearing is to review a proposal, and possibly take action, for extending sanitary sewers to serve 63-86 Seminary Road, Simsbury, CT. All interested property owners shall have the opportunity to appear and be heard.
WATER POLLUTION CONTROL AUTHORITY
Philip Richardson, Chairman
Mr. Sheehan made a motion to open the public hearing. Mr. Hickey seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved.
Mr. Gilmore read the legal notice.
Mr. Sawitzke stated that the Water Pollution Control Authority is the decision making body for sewer extensions, the operations of the facility as well as for the sewer piping that is already installed. The WPCA operates under various State and Federal regulations and they are appointed by the Board of Selectmen. He stated that the Water Pollution Control is not part of the Town’s tax base; all costs need to be recovered through assessments and fees. The Authority is the sole decision maker for the installation of sewers; however, they do listen to resident’s concerns.
Mr. Sawitzke stated that there are three different methods for installing sewers: under orders from the State Health Department or DEEP; installed by developers; or by resident request. He stated that the extension for 63-86 Seminary Road was brought before the WPCA by resident request. The funding for this extension comes from a revolving assessment fund; the funds have already been authorized for Seminary Road if the extension is approved. Generally, the
assessments will be levied within a year of completion of the project. He stated that an assessment is essentially a lien on a property; this is pertinent if a homeowner is trying to refinance.
Mr. Sawitzke stated that many of the septic systems in this area are quite old, although the soils are sand and gravel, which are considered good soils. If the WPCA approves this project, they would then move forward with the survey and then the design and construction phases. Construction would probably begin in 2016. Residents would see their first assessment payment due in either December of 2016 or December of 2017.
Regarding design, Mr. Sawitzke stated that, if there are not any extraordinary issues, the pipe will be placed deep enough in the street so basements could be served. If this option is too expensive, they then try to serve the existing pipe where it would come out of the house. He stated that there are situations where, if a house is downhill, a pump would be needed, although he does not believe any of these houses on Seminary Road are downhill from the road. If during the design process they run into obstacles, like bedrock or groundwater, the design process would stop and residents would be informed of the issues.
Mr. Sawitzke stated that there are three costs associated with the extension: an assessment; a connection charge; as well as the annual use fee. The additional cost to the homeowner would be to connect their house to the main in the street. He stated that unless a septic system fails, a homeowner does not need to connect to the sewer until they are ready. The estimated assessment has been calculated to be $8,835.00; the facility connection charge, which does not need to be paid until the time of hookup is $4,095.00. The assessment, as well as the FCC, can be amortized over a ten year period. If the FCC is not amortized, it will need to be paid in full at the time of connection.
Mr. Sawitzke stated that back in 2013, the WPCA approved a sewer extension for 88-94 Seminary Road. Because of some failed septic systems on Seminary Road, the Authority decided to inquire, again, to see if residents were interested in an extension.
Mr. Kuhrt, 67 Seminary Road, stated his concerns regarding this extension. He questioned if the Town does the work. Mr. Gilmore stated that the project would be put out to bid. Mr. Sawitzke stated that an on-call surveyor will do the survey work; the design is usually done in-house; and the other work is competitively bid.
Susan McGraw, 75 Seminary Road, stated that she lives alone and feels that this is an extreme cost for any elderly person.
Mr. Dunn, 84 Seminary Road, questioned if the assessment is the same for everyone or if it is based on road frontage. Mr. Gilmore stated that all of the houses for this project have the same assessment. Mr. Sawitzke stated that the total cost of the project is divided by the number of houses in the project. Mrs. Dunn stated that she is also not in favor of this sewer extension. She has recently retired and cannot afford this added expense; she would like her property to be excluded from consideration.
Mr. Barrett stated that he owns 81 and 83 Seminary Road, which are two houses on one lot. He stated his concerns regarding that if these charges are based on each house, he would then have to pay double; there is only one connection to the street. Mr. Piazza stated that separate houses usually do not share laterals. This is something that would need to be reviewed by the WPCA.
Mr. Curtiss, 85 Seminary Road, stated that he has a brand new septic system. He does not want this sewer extension to go forward.
Mr. Eastham, 86 Seminary Road, stated that from an economic point of view, a new septic system would be less expensive or equal to connecting to the sewer. He would rather replace the septic and save his neighbors the expense of this sewer extension.
Mr. Naspo, 79 Seminary Road, stated that his house is currently for sale. He is not in favor of this sewer extension because his septic is working well and an approval would not help with the sale of the house. He questioned if there would be an additional hook up cost if this extension was approved. Mr. Sawitzke stated that this additional expense would be dependent on the property; most of the properties on this portion of Seminary Road are set back 25-30 feet. The average cost to hire a drainlayer would be approximately $25- $30 per linear foot, although different companies set their own rates.
Mr. Brittell, 69 Seminary Road, suggested not approving this plan tonight and moving ahead with extending the sewer only in the area where people want to connect, which is at the end of Seminary Road near Phelpscroft. He would consider connecting only if his neighbors are in favor.
Mr. Gerry, 74 Seminary Road, stated that his pipe goes under the footings. He questioned if he would need a pump in order to connect his home to the proposed sewer. Mr. Sawitzke stated that he is not certain if a pump would be needed at this time. Mr. Sheehan stated that the homeowner could have pipe hangers, going out through the foundation wall in the front in the basement to possibly alleviate the need for a pump.
Mr. Keene, 68 Seminary Road, stated that he is open to the idea of connecting to the sewer, even though this would be a big expense.
Mr. Piazza stated that he did receive a fax from Ms. Kowal, 82 Seminary Road, which he read into the record. Ms. Kowal is not in favor of this sewer extension.
Mr. Sheehan made a motion to close the public hearing. Mr. Hickey seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved.
Mr. Sawitzke stated that the areas of interest in the sewer extension are very scattered. He stated that the Town will continue with the design so, in the future, there continues to be an option of extending the sewer in this area of Seminary Road. He stated that a lot of the septic systems are old, although some have already been replaced.
Mr. Kelly stated that the only strong interest he heard was from 78 Seminary Road because of their failing septic system as well as soft interest from surrounding homes. He stated that unfortunately, 78 Seminary Road is right in the middle of the proposed extension.
Mr. Kelly made a motion to not move forward with the sewer extension for 63-86 Seminary Road. Mr. Sheehan seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved.
4. STATUS REPORT ON SEWER EXTENSION PROJECTS, ETC.
Mr. Sawitzke stated that the far west end of Seminary Road will go into final design; this project should go out to bid this summer.
There was a short discussion regarding amortizing assessments over a longer period of time. Mr. Sheehan stated that a breakdown of annual costs may help residents to better understand their portion of costs. Mr. Roy stated that it may also be beneficial for homeowners to review a report regarding the anticipated change in the value of their property once connected to public sewer.
Regarding Buttonwood Road, Mr. Sawitzke stated that there was a public hearing several months ago and the residents wanted more information. He stated that after receiving this additional information, they are not interested in pursuing the extension. Regarding Russell Lane, Mr. Sawitzke stated that this is in the process of being surveyed.
Mr. Sawitzke stated that there is some interest on West Mountain Road. This is an area that would need to be studied.
5. TREATMENT FACILITY REPORT
Mr. Piazza stated that all permit requirements were met for November. He stated that they have replaced the variable frequency drives at South Pump Station as well as for the Aerator 2A. Regarding capital projects, the mechanically cleaned bar screen has been installed and will be wired within the coming weeks. The screenings conditioner will be on site by the second week in January. The capital items for FY 16 are a second bar screen and screenings conditioner; a four or six inch dry-prime pump and portable generator costs shared with the Town; as well as a chemical phosphorous removal system planning by permit.
Regarding the Farmington River bank stabilization, Mr. Piazza stated that WMC Consulting Engineers has received permitting for the project. The project will be put out to bid for the summer construction season. Also, regarding the energy audit, the CL&P portion has been approved by the Board of Selectmen and the CNG portion will be brought before the Board this month.
Mr. Piazza stated, regarding the North Interceptor flow assessment, AECOM has provided a draft copy of the assessment. They are currently waiting on the final invoice from the contractor for the Tunxis Pump Station replacement. Schultz Construction started in August of 2013; punch list items continue to be worked on.
Mr. Piazza stated that Edward Schwentke has been hired as the new WPC truck driver. He started work on December 22, 2015.
Mr. Piazza stated that there is a summary of the FY 15/16 budget for the Authority’s review, which also shows actual and approved costs for FY 13/14 and FY 14/15 as well. He stated that this year’s proposed budget comes in approximately $200,000 under budget, which can be used to cover capital expenses from last year.
Mr. Piazza stated that over the past several years, the Sewer Use Fund has been slowly decreasing. The Authority should consider discussing current annual use charges.
6. CORRESPONDENCE - There was no correspondence.
7. DECEMBER 11, 2014 MEETING MINUTES – POSSIBLE APPROVAL
One edit was made to the December 11, 2014 minutes.
Mr. Hickey made a motion to approve the December 11, 2014 minutes as amended. Mr. Gilmore seconded the motion, which was approved. Dr. Park, Mr. Sheehan and Mr. Kelly abstained.
8. ADJOURN
Mr. Sheehan made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:15 p.m. Mr. Kelly seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved.
______________________
Paul Gilmore, Vice-Chairman