CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AND WATERCOURSES AGENCY
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING – MARCH 7, 2006
I. CALL TO ORDER
Vice Chairwoman Margery Winters called the regular meeting of the Simsbury Conservation Commission/Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Agency meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. in the Main Meeting Room of the Simsbury Town Offices. The following commission members were present John Yocom, Christopher Ursini, and Alternate Thomas Sharpless. Commissioner Ryan Mihalic arrived at 7:45 p.m. Also in attendance were Howard Beach, Conservation Officer, and other interested parties.
II. APPOINTMENT OF ALTERNATES
Chairwoman Winters appointed Commissioner Ursini to serve as Secretary for this meeting.
III. PRESENTATION(s), DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE VOTE
a. Application of David Burr, Arbor Holding LLC – Owner, for an Inland Wetlands Permit for clearing of parcel within the regulated area on property located at 123 West Street.
David Burr, owner of Arbor Holdings, spoke on behalf of this application. He said that Arbor Holdings is the entity that owns the land that houses his landscape company. Mr. Burr said that this application pertains to the eastern most third of the property. The area has a forest type situation with a lot of mature white pine trees and some wetland related species that have reached good size and age. He said that they want to utilize the last third of the property and would like to construct a permanent structure in the farthest corner to store supplies and other things pertaining to what is going to be a nursery type practice. There will be a smaller covered structure where equipment can be parked to be kept out of the weather and also three hoop houses. Hoop houses are not permanent structures. Mr. Burr said that they
are metal pieces of conduit turned into a curved shape that gets covered during the winter to protect whatever material is inside. The land, after it is cleared, will be turned into a growing type of situation with several different species of nursery stock. He showed on a map where the wetter areas are located and said that in that location they would plant wetland type plants that can be grown in that type of area and will like those conditions. This would also keep the ground stable. The upper areas would be for other in ground type plantings that do not require the same amount of moisture as the lower area. While they are in the construction process, silt fencing would be installed all around the area to prevent erosion form heavy rains. Mr. Burr said that they are proposing to create a dirt road in to access this building from the parking area around the existing building.
A commission member asked what Mr. Burr has on the property right now. Mr. Burr said that he has his own landscape company on site and several tenants of various trades. The commissioner asked if this is a nursery operation at this time and also if the entire operation is in the wetlands. Mr. Burr said at this time it is not a nursery operation and he also showed the commissioners on a map where the wetlands are located.
A Commission member asked if he is proposing to construct the buildings outside of the actual wetland and the plantings inside the wetland. Mr. Burr said that some plantings will be inside and some outside the wetlands. He said that they are looking to start a production type nursery situation. Chairwoman Winters asked how much clearing of the site is proposed. Mr. Burr said that he is proposing to clear the last third of the property, but is planning to put smaller plants back in where plants are located now. A Commission member asked if all the stumps would come out. Mr. Burr said the stumps would have to be removed in order for them to plant the new turf.
Mr. Beach said that in the regulations, the clearing of the wetlands for a nursery operation is allowed “as of right”. He said the buildings in the back are related directly to the nursery operation, even if they are outside of the wetland.
Chairwoman Winters asked how he would be stabilizing the soil between the plants. Mr. Burr said that between the plants they would probably be using some type of woodchip or mulch that would create a better growing condition and also keep it neater for walking on. Mr. Burr explained the use of the hoop houses as where they would be potting up the small materials early in the season, and getting them to the point where they would become nursery stock. He showed on the plan where the nursery stock would go between the road way and the perimeter of the property. Chairwoman Winters asked where the fertilizers are to be stored. Mr. Burr said that they will be in the front end structure. He said that for his current operations he has to store chemicals for lawn care, and by law they have to be stored separately in dry and
labeled areas.
A commission member asked Mr. Beach if a permit is needed. Mr. Beach said he thought it best that this application go before the Commission, and if the commissioners felt that the structures might not be directly related to the point that they qualify as a nursery, they could grant a permit for that. Mr. Burr also said that around the perimeter of this portion of the property is Ensign-Bickford owned property. This application is only for about three acres of the approximate nine acre parcel.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AND WATERCOURSES AGENCY MINUTES
MARCH 7, 2006
PAGE 2
Chairwoman Winters said that she does not feel a permit is necessary for this application, but thanked the applicant for coming in and showing them the application. Mr. Beach said that a motion should be made by the commission.
A commission member moved that a permit is not required for this application. The motion was seconded and passed with a 4-0 vote. Commissioner Mihalic abstained, as he was late and did not hear the complete presentation of the application.
b. Application of Ken Auman, Owner, Glen Sucnon, Landmark, Inc., Agent, for an Inland Wetlands Permit to construct an in-ground swimming pool within the regulated area on property located at 17 Whitman Pond Road.
John Williamson, Landmark Pools, spoke on behalf of this application. He said that in reading Mr. Beach’s memo regarding this application, it seems that the only question to the condition of approval of the pool is the compliance of the standards of discharging pool water on the ground. Mr. Beach said that one of the issues that comes up before the Commission is their concern over the discharge of pool water to the wetlands. There are also concerns on the actual construction, excavation and the silt fence.
A Commissioner explained to Mr. Williamson that the application is approximately within 80 feet of the wetland property so the application is within the upland review area. The applicant will have to install a silt fence between the wetlands and the pool excavation. A silt fence will have to be left in place for one full growing season, all excavated material will have to be stockpiled on the east side of the pool, opposite the wetlands and any soil that is not needed has to be trucked off of the site. The site has to be finish graded and seeded as soon as the construction is complete.
The commission members discussed the water treatment programs used for pools. A member asked what type of water treatment system would be used for this pool. Mr. Williamson said that they would use a salt generator to generate the chlorine to chlorinate the water. He explained that salt is sodium chloride. You put 500 to 600 pounds of salt in 30,000 gallons of water, and an electrolysis type of device separates out the chlorine and treats the water. The commission member asked if at the end of the season if the water will be trucked off site or if it will be discharged out to the land. Mr. Williamson said that only about 6 to 8 inches of water is taken off and will not be trucked off the site. The commission member asked where in relationship to the wetlands the water will run off. The Commissioners discussed various
ideas while looking at a topographic map, and expressed concern as there is a brook at the bottom of the property.
A commissioner asked about the dimensions of the pool. Mr. Williamson said the pool dimensions are 20 ft. x 44 ft. A commissioner asked if the pool is heated. Mr. Williamson said that the pool is heated.
A Commissioner made a motion that this is a regulated activity because it is within 80-feet of the wetland. The wetland being a brook on the south side of the property line. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously,
A Commissioner made a motion that this is not a significant activity because of the evidence presented at this meeting and the management conditions discussed by Mr. Beach that will minimize the impact of the pool upon the wetland. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously.
A Commissioner made a motion to approve the application conditioned upon the Conservation Officer’s mitigation measures in the staff report dated March 1, 2006, and also upon the condition that the pool water be discharged over grass and not be allowed to sheet towards the brook or sheet down the driveway. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously.
c. Application of Meehan Group, LLC, Applicant, for an Inland Wetlands Permit to construct a home within the regulated area on property located at 2 Ryan’s Circle.
Robert Rossetti spoke on behalf of this application. He said that they had been before this commission in July of 2005 and received approval at that time to construct a septic system in the regulated area at 2 Ryan Circle. He said that a corner of the home is also within the regulated area and requires a permit. Mr. Howard showed the commissioners on a plan the footprint that is actually going to be built on the property. A corner of the houses extends into the regulated area approximately 6-feet.
Chairwoman Winters asked if the septic system was in place. Mr. Rossetti said it is not in, but has been approved. A Commissioner asked what the wetland is at the bottom of the site. Mr. Beach said it is a swampy area like a wet meadow with shrubs and brush. Chairwoman Winters asked if there is any extension into the tree line. Mr. Rossetti said that there is no need to clear beyond the septic system. The construction would start within 45 to 60 days.
A Commissioner made a motion that this is a regulated activity because the corner of the proposed foundation encroaches upon the upland review area. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AND WATERCOURSES AGENCY MINUTES
MARCH 7, 2006
PAGE 3
A Commissioner made a motion that this is not a significant activity in light of the degree to which the proposed foundation and property line do encroach upon a regulated area, and in light of the conclusions reached by this Commission concerning the wetlands permit for the septic system which encroaches considerably further upon the upland review area. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously.
A Commissioner made a motion to approve the application subject to the conditions imposed by Howard Beach, Conservation Officer, in his staff report dated March 1, 2006. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously.
d. Application of Joel Pachter, Applicant, for an Inland Wetlands Permit for connecting sewer line within the regulated area on property located at 468 Bushy Hill Road.
Ms. Pachter, Owner, spoke on behalf of this application to connect to a sewer line. She said that this crosses just over the tip of the wetland. She has to connect on Climax Road as there is no connection near her on Bushy Hill Road. A commissioner asked how deep down would the pipe be placed. Ms. Pachter said she was told that the contractor would go 4 ½ feet deep and do everything with gravity flow. They would install a six inch sewer line in stone bedding to the house. Ms. Pachter said that there is a silt fence already in place, but they can add to it if needed. Mr. Beach showed on a plan where the work would be done and where the heavy machinery would be located.
A Commissioner made a motion that this is a regulated activity because it is in the upland review area and it is also in the wetlands. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously.
A Commissioner made a motion that this is not a significant activity because even though it involves the removal and deposition of wetlands material, it is not going to have a significant impact upon the regulated area or on the another part of the wetland or water system.
A Commissioner made a motion that this application be approved subject to the conditions imposed by Howard Beach, Conservation Officer, in his staff report dated March 1, 2006. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously.
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF February 21, 2006
Tabled until next meeting
V. DISCUSSION
Mr. Beach briefly discussed the proposed Ethel Walker School project. No application received.
Mr. Beach discussed the CEQ (Council of Environmental Quality) meeting that was held on February 22nd at the Simsbury Town Hall. He said that they had a good turnout with approximately 45 people attending.
Mr. Beach updated the Commissioners on issues occurring on Hallview Drive, Hedgehog Lane, Shingle Mill Road and The Powder Forest.
VI. CORRESPONDENCE/ANNOUNCEMENTS
None
VII. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m.
________________________________
Christopher Ursini, Acting Secretary
| 
