Conservation Commission/ Inland Wetlands
And Watercourses Agency Minutes
Regular Meeting- Tuesday May 2, 2006
Simsbury Town Offices- 7:30PM- Main Meeting Room
Chairman Miller called the meeting to order at 7:30pm in the Main Meeting room of the Simsbury Town Offices. The following Commissioners were present: Commissioner Winters, Commissioner Sharpless, Commissioner Nowak, and Commissioner Ursini. Also present was Conservation Officer Beach.
II. |
APPOINTMENT OF ALTERNATES |
Commissioner Sharpless was appointed to serve for Commissioner Bucknam.
III. |
PRESENTATION(s), DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE VOTE |
a. |
Application of Bill & Laurie Kelley, Applicants, for an Inland Wetlands Permit to construct an addition within the regulated area on property located at 12 John Peel Road. |
Mr. Jack Kemper, architect, and Mrs. Laurie Kelley were present for the application.
Mr. Kemper explained that the house was built when the regulated setback was 75 feet and built within those parameters. Where currently there is a deck at the back of the house the applicant is proposing adding an addition. There will be no additional square footage added to the house. The excavated soils will be trucked off site the same day, with some kept to backfill the foundation. There will be no tress coming down. A silt fence will be installed above drop off. The vegetation along the drop off is wild.
Mr. Kemper stated that the addition will be connected to the foundation drainage/corner drains of the house, and will discharge into Case Pond as it does currently. According to Mr. Kemper the soils on site are sandy. He explained that construction vehicles will enter the site by way of the driveway. Construction will begin beginning of the summer, and the shell of the addition will be done by fall. The landscaping/regrading around the area will remain as a lawn.
Mr. Kemper read the staff memo from Mr. Beach dated April 27th, 2006, and agreed with his statements.
Chairman Miller and Commissioner Sharpless expressed that the drains not go out any further that they are currently. Mr. Kemper agreed with this. Conservation Officer Beach expressed that when the pipe is installed it should have very little pitch to it.
A motion was made by Commissioner Sharpless that this is a regulated activity by reason of construction in the regulated area adjacent to a wetland.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Nowak, and carried unanimously.
A motion was made by Commissioner Sharpless that this is not a significant activity because there is very little change from the existing conditions and no significant increase in water flow.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Ursini, and carried unanimously.
A motion was made by Commissioner Sharpless to grant the application with the recommendations set forth in the staff report, and with the limitation that any curtain or corner foundation discharges be limited to the same distance as existing discharges.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Nowak, and carried unanimously.
b. |
Application of Douglas Beach, Owner, Dahlstrom & Sons, LLC, Applicant, for an Inland Wetlands Permit to construct an addition within the regulated area on property located at 138 Terry’s Plain Road. |
Mr. Dahlstrom, agent, was present to discuss the application. The application is to construct an attached two-car garage and convert the existing garage and breezeway space into living space. He stated that the map shows the existing access to the property coming the front of the house, but it actually bears left and around the side of the house to the existing garage. Construction will begin within 2 weeks and completed by the end of August.
In response to Commissioner Ursini’s questions, Mr. Dahlstorm responded that the area is mostly lawn and during the grading process, one dogwood tree will be removed. The topsoil will be stockpiled and as soon as grading is complete the soil will be used on site and the area reseeded.
Mr. Dahlstrom stated that construction vehicles will be on the existing paved driveway, adding they have designated an area above the curve as a turn around for the vehicles.
Mr. Beach explained that the area is fairly flat, and that some wetlands are uphill. Mr. Dahlstrom stated there will be no impact in terms of water flow, it will flow as it does currently.
Commissioner Nowak asked whether alternate areas were considered for the addition. Mr. Dahlstrom explained the area chosen impacts the elevations the least, and the area isn’t any closer to the wetlands line that any part of the existing house.
Commissioner Sharpless questioned whether construction vehicles would impact the probability of material flowing down the driveway. Mr. Dahlstrom explained their first intention is to excavate the area in front of the U garage. This area will be compacted with base and will catch any material coming down. He stated that if any material does come down the area will be silt fenced. He added that the excavator will be brought in and moved out.
Chairman Miller asked how deep the excavation is to be. Mr. Dahlstrom answered that 4-foot frost walls will be dug under the new garage. He also stated that the gutters currently drain out across the area where the driveway is currently, and will not change.
Commissioner Sharpless inquired about the septic tank. Mr. Dahlstrom answered that it does not have leaching fields, it has dry well.
Commissioner Nowak asked when the house was built. Mr. Dalhstrom answered that the dry well and new septic tank were installed in 1971, but admitted he did not know when the house was built.
Chairman Miller asked what distance the new addition is to the well. Mr. Dahlstrom answered that it is about 35-37 feet of the well. He added that during the excavation they might encounter the well line, and it might have to be relocated. A pump was recently installed to the well, but does no know how far down it goes.
Chairman Miller asked about the tree line. Mr. Dahlstrom expressed that there is only the one dogwood 25-30 feet below the well, and that there is no clearing in the area that needs to take place as the area is basically grass.
A motion was made by Commissioner Nowak that this is a regulated activity by reason of the soil disturbance and the construction of a permanent residence in the upland review area to a wetland.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Winters, and carried unanimously.
A motion was made by Commissioner Nowak that this is not a significant activity because the actual wetlands area is at an elevation above the location of the proposed addition.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Winters, and carried unanimously.
A motion was made by Commissioner Nowak to grant the application with the recommendations set forth in the staff report of April 27, 2006.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Winters, and was carried unanimously.
c. |
Application of Timothy J. Ruark, Applicant, for an Inland Wetlands Permit to pump water from pond within the regulated area on property located at 7 Hop Hollow. |
Mr. Ruark was present to discuss the application. He wishes to use the water from Hop Brook for general maintenance of the law and garden area. He pumps the water from the pond instead of his well so that his well does not dry up during the summer, as has occurred to some of his neighbors. He stated that he estimates he uses approximately 400 gallons of water per day during the warm periods during the summer. His lawn is approximately 7,000 square feet.
Commissioner Winters asked if any of his neighbors have been drawing any water. Mr. Ruark answered that none of the other 8 homes in Hop Hollow has been drawing water within the last few years.
Mr. Beach stated that both Apple Lane and Hop Hollow associations have decided the get a collective permit. Chairman Miller stated that maybe the Commission should wait until both associations come in.
Mr. Beach said that the main issue is to figure out how much the whole association is using because Hopmeadow Country Club has a diversion permit to draw 350,000 gallons per day. He stated that he needs to go back to DEP. He stated that diversion permits are regulated by the state, and the Commission does not have the authority to regulate Hopmeadow Country Club.
Commissioner Winters asked if the country club has a regulated diversion permit or a diversion permit. She stated that summer water use can be 5 times the amount of use seen in winter months. She also added that grass can take a certain amount of dormancy in the summer. She voiced concern that the resource is being used only for aesthetic use.
Chairman Miller asked if any other members of Hop Hollow would be coming in to discuss the issue. Mr. Ruark expressed that he is only one in Hop Hollow Association is interested in pumping water. He stated that some members of the Apple Lane Association are interested in pumping the water but were not ready to join him in his application.
Chairman Miller asked about the ponds themselves. It was answered that Hop Brook feeds into each of the individual man made ponds. Commissioner Winters stated that the fact the ponds are man made does not alter the way it is regulated.
Commissioner Winters expressed that part of the problem is Hopmeadow Country Club has a prior right to divert. She expressed concern that if Hopmeadow Country club is diverting the Brook’s maximum amount, then any other diversions should not be permitted.
Commissioner Ursini voiced concerns: Do they have the right to pump the water? The diversion is only for aesthetic reasons, and is not for the livelihood of the homeowners. As an alternative they could use the water from their well. He expressed that the use does not supercede the regulations, and expressed objections because the water is only to be used to maintain the lawn and garden.
Commissioner Winters agreed with Mr. Commissioner Ursini, stating that it does impact the resources downstream. Also, the water has already been allocated to Hopmeadow Country Club and there is the added issue of possible over allocation.
Mr. Beach explained that Hop Meadow keeps logs on how much water they use. He stated that that they have never withdrawn 350,000. During periods of dry weather, they probably draw 250,000-265,000 gallons.
Chairman Miller expressed that it is during the drought periods that people want to draw, the worst time to draw. He stated that for most of the year 400 gallons per day in not an issue, but the time of the year it is needed is the driest. He stated he would like to see both of the associations, Hop Hollow and Apple Lane come in as they are all using the same resource.
Mr. Beach stated that once the total is they can go back to DEP to see if it is over allocated.
Commissioner Sharpless asked about regulating the flow on critical days. Mr. Beach stated that the stream is being monitoring on a daily basis via the use of a weir.
The Commission discussed the ways of measuring flows.
Commissioner Nowak asked if the stated declares a drought can Hop Meadow withdraw its’ total allotment. Mr. Beach explained that yes DEP could cut back on what Hop Meadow’s allotted.
Mr. Beach explained that Hop Meadow does not pump from the stream, they withdraw from the pond, which feeds off of the stream, so if they over withdraw only the pond draws down, it does not effect the dam and stream. This is the same as occurs with the Hop Hollow ponds.
Chairman Miller expressed that it is difficult to evaluate this one Homeowner, when another Association is going to come in to ask for the same thing.
Commissioner Ursini and Commissioner Nowak again voiced their disapproval of the application given the fact that among others, the water is to be used for aesthetic purposes, and the applicant has other resources to use.
Some Commissioners asked to have a total amount of water being drawn, and if Mr. Ruark has the right to draw the water. Mr. Beach stated DEP said the activity is regulated and a permit is required, but nothing was mentioned regarding the fact he does not have the right.
Commissioners discussed and questioned how the 350,000 gallons per day amount was come to Hopmeadow. Chairman Miller said that Hop Meadow got the permit last year.
Mr. Ruark stated that the pond adjacent to his property holds approximately 100,000 gallons and is replenished by springs, with some of it being ground water recharge. Last year the pond was lower, but it does not dry up.
Commissioner Sharpless asked if it is possible to measure the flow of the dam. Mr. Ruark said that it could be. Commissioner Sharpless suggested a way to come up with a figure to determine how much water can be removed.
Chairman Miller asked if the application should be tabled until the next meeting to get DEP to come in. Mr. Beach said that he could contact DEP to give an estimate of how much water is flowing through.
Commissioner Nowak asked if Mr. Ruark’s property is upstream of the culvert that goes under West Street. Mr. Beach answered yes, and all of his water comes from Hop Brook.
Commissioner Sharpless expressed that there is the issue of notifying the homeowners when they can’t withdraw. Mr. Beach stated that is the benefit of issuing this permit; the town has record of who is withdrawing.
Chairman Miller said that members could drive by the area on their own to get a sense of the scale.
Mr. Ruark stated there is a dam repair going on that they will see. The dam was leaking, and some of the stonework was destroyed. There was a cease and desist order issued on this as the association was attempting to repair the dam.
A motion was made by Commissioner Nowak to table the application until the next meeting with a map supplied and how Hop Meadow County Club came to defer their 350,000 gallons per day.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sharpless, and carried unanimously.
IV. |
IV. CEASE AND DESIST ORDER – SHOW CAUSE HEARING |
a. |
Violation of Sections 6.1 and 6.2 of the Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Regulations of the Town of Simsbury, Violation of Chapter 440, Section 22a-42a of the Connecticut General Statutes, and Trespass and unauthorized alteration of Town of Simsbury Open Space on property located at 9 Woodhaven Drive. |
Mr. Demko was present to speak on the order.
Mr. Beach explained that a neighbor of Mr. Demko called up the town to report that someone was working in the stream behind Mr. Demko’s house. Mr. Beach spoke with Mr. Demko who assured him that he will cease the cleaning of the area.
Mr. Demko explained that he has been having a running dispute with this same neighbor who reported the issue to Mr. Beach. Mr. Demko declared that he has been falsely accused of building a dam, when instead he has only been cleaning up and maintaining the area, not working on it.
It was explained that the portion Mr. Demko was cleaning is not his property, it is instead town property.
Mr. Beach said that Mr. Demko agreed to not work on it, and if there is an issue of clogging in the area, Mr. Demko should call the town and public works will come and clean it up.
Mr. Demko questioned why the order says that he cannot do any activity within 100 feet of the wetland. Mr. Beach clarified that he would need a permit to do any regulated activity within 100 feet.
The cease and desist order will be released.
V. |
APPROVAL OF MINUTES of April 4, 2006 |
Commissioner Sharpless moved to approve the minutes of April 4, 2006.
Commissioner Ursini seconded with all in favor.
As stated in the Commission’s new regulations made official not too long ago, the Conservation Officer, after conferring with the Commission Chair, is permitted to issue permits for projects within the 100 foot buffer area that do not appear to impact the wetlands area. These two applications fall under this category.
All of the normal steps have been taken with these applications and the same fees collected. Both were issued permits.
a. |
Application of Kathleen Lucas, Applicant, for an Inland Wetlands Permit to construct a deck within the regulated area on property located at 107 West Mountain Road. |
Mr. Beach called Chairman Miller and explained that this project involves putting a deck on the side of the house and hand digging holes for the three to four 3 sonotubes. The wetlands are located behind the house. Both Mr. Beach and Chairman Miller decided the project is far enough away and will not disturb the wetland. Mr. Beach issued a permit for the application.
b. |
Application of Eric and Anne Davis, Applicants, for an Inland Wetlands Permit for renovation and expansion of kitchen and addition of a deck within the regulated area on property located at 20 Banbury Drive. |
This application is to build a kitchen addition onto the footprint of the existing deck. The excavation work will bring the construction area another two feet closer the wetland. They are building another deck on the back of that on four-five sonotubes. The deck is 50-60 feet to the streambed. Mr. Beach explained that the Banbury area is maze of wetlands and has wet areas that run down between the neighborhoods.
Commissioner Ursini asked why applications a. and b. under Item III did not fall under this category.
Mr. Beach explained that the applicants were unsure about some issues.
Commissioner Winters expressed her concern over the stream located on Old Farms Road, at Simsbury Farms. Gravel has been washing down into the stream, and two small culverts are also experiencing problems. She noted that it is town property and it does not bode well for the town.
Mr. Beach said he will speak with Mr. Gerry Toner, Director -Parks and Recreation.
The Powder Forest site walk was cancelled because the town and Mr. Beach wants more calculation information on flow. There have also been problems with bio-filters and detention filters and these will also be part of the site walk. Mr. Beach noted that the project is private, and that the only thing the town is taking ownership of is the sewer. Mr. Beach stated that residents would be moving in about 60 days.
A motion was made by Commissioner Nowak to schedule a site walk on Tuesday May 16, 2006 at 6:15pm. at the Powder Forest site.
Commissioner Ursini seconded, with all in favor.
VIII. |
CORRESPONDENCE/ANNOUNCEMENTS |
None
Commissioner Ursini made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:10pm.
Commissioner Winters seconded, with all in favor.
| 
