MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
Thursday, August 18, 2011 at 7:30 p.m.
1st Floor Conference Room
Town Hall, 302 Main Street
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman, Paul Smith, called the regular meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
II. ROLL CALL
Members Present
Paul Smith, Chairman
Charles Sohl, Vice Chairman
William Pollock, Secretary
Robert McIntyre
Charles Wehrly
Kimberley Gallagher
Members Absent
Brendan McKeown
Staff Present
Sandy Prisloe, Inland Wetlands Enforcement Officer
Kathleen Noyes, Recording Clerk
III. OLD BUSINESS
Staff Report – Public Act 11-5- Chapter 4
S. Prisloe explained that under Public Act 11-5-Chapter 4, all permits issued prior to July 1, 2011 are automatically extended for nine years. Any permit issued prior to July 1, 2011 has an additional five-year extension at the request of the permit holder. Therefore, permits issued prior to July 1, 2011, are essentially 14-year permits. Legislation allows no discretion on the part of the Wetlands Commissions. Any permit issued now does not have a nine-year life; it goes back to a 5 year with the possibility of extension.
A. 11-009 Steve Hilger
Proposal is for subdivision of land only - no proposed work or improvements at this time.
63 Obed Heights Road, (Map 58/Lot 43) Residence AA-1 District
Joe Wren, PE, presented for the applicant, Steve Hilger, who was present.
J. Wren explained that the plan presented at last month’s meeting has not changed since last month. Commissioners asked at last month’s meeting for permission to walk the property, and according to J. Wren, no one called the applicant to ask. P. Smith confirmed that no commissioners have walked the property.
P. Smith stated that the southwest most corner of the lot has a very small piece of wetland on it. Approximately 50 % is within the upland review area. None of the proposed improvements are in the upland review area. The only consideration tonight is whether or not to create lot #2 as separate from lot #1. The remainder of the land will be combined and given to the adjacent property owner, Labriola. That parcel is almost 100% wetland or upland review area.
MOTION to approve application #11-009 Steve Hilger, Proposal for subdivision of land only-no proposed work or improvements at this time; 63 Obed Heights Road, (Map 58/ Lot 43) Residence AA-1 District; MADE by R. McIntyre; SECONDED by W. Pollock; VOTED IN FAVOR: P. Smith, R. McIntyre, C. Wehrly, W. Pollock; OPPOSED: none; ABSTAINED: K. Gallagher, C. Sohl.; APPROVED: 4-0-2.
W. Pollock recused himself from voting on the next application, B. 11-010 Jon Grossman due to a conflict of interest. He left the room until the end of the deliberations.
B. 11-010 Jon Grossman
Construct a 50’ x 70’ addition, construct a new access drive.
295 Middlesex Turnpike, (Map 52/Lot 63-1) Gateway Business B-4 District
D. Annino, Surveyor, presented for the applicant. He provided Commissioners with an updated plan presented 6/30/11 with revisions dated 7/29/11. He noted that per the IWWC’s request, the dumpster enclosure has now been relocated beyond the upland review area. Also, because there will be grading, a silt fence is proposed between the graded area and the wetlands.
Prior to the revisions, a single island was proposed, now two islands are proposed. Also proposed is an oil separator and new holding tank. The tank will be replaced not reused.
D. Annino explained that there are planters to the north of the oil separator. The air conditioning unit will be relocated. The planters and the air conditioning units will be located on the proposed islands, and the islands will be landscaped. The plants will be replaced. The air conditioning units are being relocated not replaced.
C. Wehrly asked about runoff. He also asked if there is an edge of pavement or if it is curbed. D. Annino said its edge of pavement. No other catch basins are proposed. D. Annino explained that there is sheet flow runoff onto grasses. There is natural vegetation on the western side, and it is maintained, mowed grass which then goes into a wooded area.
P. Smith asked D. Annino to redo the contours in the rear on the plan. P. Smith noted that the 54 contour is misplaced, and the 53 contour needs to be more down slope, especially on the west side. He also requested that the plan show correct grading in that area. P. Smith said he felt that with those changes, all of those modifications can be accomplished in the area controlled by silt fence, and that there would be no further encroachment into the wetland.
MOTION to approve application #11-010 Jon Grossman, Construct a 50’ x 70’ addition, and construct a new access drive; 295 Middlesex Turnpike, (Map 52/ Lot 63-1) Gateway B-4 District with the stipulation that the contours be changed as directed by the chairman; MADE by R. McIntyre; SECONDED by K. Gallagher; VOTED IN FAVOR: P. Smith, R. McIntyre, K. Gallagher, C. Wehrly, C. Sohl; OPPOSED: none; ABSTAINED: none; APPROVED: 5-0-0.
IV. NEW BUSINESS
W. Pollock re-entered the meeting.
A. 11-012 Classic Carriage Auto Wash, Inc.
Proposal is for conversion of an existing building to an oil change facility.
351 Boston Post Road, (Map 42/Lot 10-1) Gateway Business B-4 District
Frank Maitland, licensed civil engineer and licensed environmental professional, presented for the applicant.
F. Maitland explained that the DEEP informed the applicant that they could no longer discharge the water from Classic Carriage Auto Wash into the ground. Classic Car Wash has 2 facilities that wash cars. A water handling system is currently being constructed in the bigger unit on the eastern portion of the site. They will stop water discharge from the smaller unit as well.
F. Maitland said the applicant would like to put in a lube facility in the smaller building on the western portion of the site. He explained that the mechanic would slide under the car into a 2’ deep pit to service it. The facility will have a storage place for oil. Everything will happen inside the building. Nothing will change outside the building. All of the oil will be stored above ground. The pit is leak proof. The only facility underground is a 4” conduit into which 2 hydraulic hoses go. The hoses go into the pits. The hoses suck the oil out. There’s very little chance of leak. Nothing else is underground.
P. Smith asked about the existing oil water separator on the southwest side of the existing building. F. Maitland said it would be removed. It is within 100ft of the regulated area.
P. Smith asked what parking spaces will remain and what parking spaces will not remain because the parking spaces shown encroach on the upland review area, and some spaces are striped and some are not. There are concerns about water and oil washing into the wetlands from cars and trucks parked in the parking spaces. It appears 6 of the 9 spaces will be lost. P. Smith asked that the applicant ask their engineers, MacDonald, Sharpe & Associates to correct the plan labeled 8/3/11 revision plot plan, and that F. Maitland clarify this for the next meeting.
P. Smith asked about proposed protection for the work to be done. Based on the history of this property, he said a silt fence needs to be erected along the western side of property in the area where the pavement ends. P. Smith would like the applicant to stipulate that there will be no stockpiling of materials.
C. Sohl asked about the floors. F. Maitland said the floors are cement concrete floors; and said that the floors need to be re-graded.
P. Smith referred to the drawing labeled A-1 floor plan, and asked about proposed modifications to the building which include from west to east a storage area (18’ wide by 28’ deep) a 9’ wide waiting room and 2 bays 28’9” long. In the tank room adjacent to the waiting room, there are vertical tanks on feet which are proposed to hold fresh oil and used oil. Transmission fluid will not be stored in there. P. Smith asked that this be corrected on the plan for the next meeting.
Page 2 of “Pit Kit” shows a cross section of the process. The A4 drawing shows that the oil goes into a drain pan high up in the pit which holds 10 gallons of oil. There is a valve on the bottom of the drain pan. A hydraulic quick fit is connected to a hydraulic hose which goes underground in a 4” conduit. The unit is all one piece. The oil then goes into the manifold to the vacuum pump. P. Smith said the routing needs to be clearly shown. It’s suctioned into tanks 4 & 3. There’s a 4” PVC pipe with 2 hydraulic lines. P. Smith noted these are not clear on drawing, and it needs to be labeled and the Commissioners need to know where it’s terminating. P. Smith wants Commissioners to be able to follow the path of
the oil.
P. Smith asked about Drawing A1. F. Maitland said there is an inbay reel located between 2 bays on the northern side of the building. There is a flexible retractable hose, and 8 circles and 8 rectangles are shown in the oil dispense console. P. Smith said this needs to be fixed and clarified.
In addition to the semi-automated system, there will be 330-gallon double wall oil tanks. C.Sohl asked F. Maitland how they would know if there was a leak. He said that they check in between the 2 walls, and that the plan shows an access on the drawing which is a 1” opening between the 2 walls.
F. Maitland said there are 2” openings used to pump new oil in. There is a high-level alarm shown on the oil tanks that lets the oil delivery person know the oil level is full.
A suction pump will be used to pump used oil out of the building. If there is more used oil in the tank than is needed to heat the building, the oil can be pumped out and sold as used oil.
P. Smith said that IWWC Commissioners need to know what areas will be the highest risk for potential spills. He asked if delivery trucks would be sitting in the parking area within the upland review area. He wanted to be sure there would be no spills, and no oil in the wetlands.
F. Maitland explained that the first building on the western rear of the property would become the zip lube area, and the second building on the eastern portion of the property nearest the Boston Post Road would remain the car wash. P. Smith asked F. Maitland why the applicant chose to locate the zip lube area where they did, and why they didn’t convert the eastern car wash building into the 2 bay oil change facility. He explained that the 2 zip lanes will be located in the western building because of financial reasons.
Patty Pytlik, owner, spoke. She explained that because the DEEP required them to put in a water recycling system, they’ve begun construction. If the oil changing facility had been located in the eastern building, then two water reclamation systems would have been required , one for each of the two car wash buildings.
C. Sohl asked how the empty oil cans and used oil filters are handled. F. Maitland said they are put into a dumpster inside the building, and a company will come and take them away. P. Smith asked that it be shown on the A1 floor plan, and that the applicant identify the company or companies who are licensed to do this.
C. Sohl asked if the floor will be level, and he asked about the 1” lip, which will be concrete. He also asked how the floor gets cleaned every day. F. Maitland said they will most likely use speedy dry. P. Smith said he needs to know specifically the processes that will occur.
P. Smith said a number of things have been identified as needing clarification and explanation before next month’s meeting. C. Sohl requested that the plan be sealed by an engineer as well.
K. Gallagher asked whether anyone has been out to flag the wetlands since 5/17/07 when R. Snarski certified his prior flagging of the wetlands. In the past, there have been issues with ill-advised fill and the wetlands border may have shifted around. Commissioners requested clarification on that. Commissioners requested something from R. Snarski, or another licensed soil scientist, to verify that the current plans have been reviewed and the wetlands flags are correct.
P. Smith asked whether the shed in the south rear corner of the property and the propane tanks are still there. He was told the current plan does reflect current conditions today.
W. Pollock asked if cars would be placed on lifts. F. Maitland said no that the mechanics would service the cars from a 2’ deep pit. There is however, a lift proposed to raise the tires 3” off the ground to rotate tires.
Commissioners asked about storage, specifically what will be stored. They wanted to confirm that there would be no chemical storage. P. Smith stated that if anything that contained petroleum products would be stored there, it would need to be clarified, and the IWWC would need to know.
MOTION to accept application #11-012 Classic Carriage Auto Wash, Inc., Proposal is for conversion of an existing building to an oil change facility; 351 Boston Post Road, (Map 42/ Lot 10-1) Gateway Business B-4 District; MADE by R. McIntyre; SECONDED by W. Pollock; VOTED IN FAVOR: P. Smith, R. McIntyre, K. Gallagher, C. Sohl, R. McIntyre W. Pollock; OPPOSED: none; ABSTAINED: none.; APPROVED: 6-0-0.
MOTION to deem application #11-012 Classic Carriage Auto Wash, Inc. as not being significant, Proposal is for conversion of an existing building to an oil change facility; 351 Boston Post Road, (Map 42/ Lot 10-1) Gateway Business B-4 District; MADE by R. McIntyre; SECONDED by W. Pollock; VOTED IN FAVOR: P. Smith, R. McIntyre, C. Sohl, K. Gallagher, C. Wehrly, W. Pollock; OPPOSED: none; ABSTAINED: none.; APPROVED: 6-0-0.
MOTION to deem that Ordinance 71 fees need not be collected with the understanding that wetland flagging will be confirmed for application #11-012 Classic Carriage Auto Wash, Inc., Proposal is for conversion of an existing building to an oil change facility; 351 Boston Post Road, (Map 42/ Lot 10-1) Gateway Business B-4 District; MADE by R. McIntyre; SECONDED by P. Smith; VOTED IN FAVOR: P. Smith, R. McIntyre, K. Gallagher, C. Sohl, W. Pollock, C. Wehrly; OPPOSED: none; ABSTAINED: none.; APPROVED: 6-0-0.
P. Smith advised F. Maitland that the application will be discussed and deliberated at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the IWWC, Thursday, September 15, 2011, 7:30 p.m., Town Hall, 1st Floor Conference Room. He asked that the applicant please submit revised drawings no later than Thursday, September 8, 2011.
B. John Giannini
Permit transfer request #P05-024
16 Vista Terrace, (Map 25/Lot 11)
John Giannini explained to Commissioners that he would like to get the permit transferred in his name because he now owns the property and would like to build a home here. The permit was issued on 4/20/06, and it expires on 4/20/15.
P. Smith asked what the original permit was for. J. Giannini said it was to construct a single family home on the property.
Because the IWWC had nothing in writing from the original permittee, Tony Pelullo, P. Smith asked J. Giannini to testify as to whether he was the owner of the property, and Mr. Giannini said that he was.
J. Giannini said when he does build; he would like to change the driveway. P. Smith said that when the time comes to build, J. Giannini would need to check with the Health Department and the various departments at the Town Hall, as well as requesting the IWWC to consider any changes to the permitted construction.
Commissioners asked S. Prisloe about the process of a permit transfer request because Commission members had never had a request for a permit transfer before. S. Prisloe explained that the permit does not run with the land, but rather with the person the permit is issued to. The permit is issued to the applicant not the property owner.
MOTION to grant permit transfer request 05-024 to John Giannini., Permit transfer request; 16 Vista Terrace, (Map 25/ Lot 11); MADE by R. McIntyre; SECONDED by W. Pollock; VOTED IN FAVOR: P. Smith, R. McIntyre, K. Gallagher, C. Wehrly, R. McIntyre W. Pollock; OPPOSED: none; ABSTAINED: none.; APPROVED: 6-0-0.
V. REGULAR BUSINESS
J. Giannini came into see S. Prisloe because he was concerned that the permit was going to expire. He will be coming back to the IWWC at some point in the future to request modifications to the permit. According to the DEEP, the Old Saybrook regulations authorize the transfer of a permit with the written permission of the IWWC. It cannot however, be done administratively. The reason this needs to be done is because the permit owner and the property owner are not necessarily one in the same.
S. Prisloe recently did some inspecting at Classic Carriage Auto Wash. There is Japanese knotwood, and because it is an invasive species, it should be removed. An administrative permit is being issued for stockpiling of excavated material related to the water tanks used in the recycling of the water. S. Prisloe noted that there is excavated material that needs to be stored. The area in question is on the edge of, but within, the upland review area at the western side of property.
S. Prisloe has been out recently inspecting theColvest property. The silt fencing has been installed in the northwest corner of the property. It was supposed to be located behind the level spreader, but for this phase of the construction, it will go on the uphill side of the level spreader. When it is time for the next phase of construction, the silt fence will be moved.
S. Prisloe reported that the DEEP is spraying the phragmites on municipal properties in town.
B. Representative & Subcommittee Reports
K. Gallagher reported that the Conservation Commission is creating a Wiki.
In their packets, Commissioner received a copy of a letter from S. Prisloe to Atty David Royston dated 8/3/11 regarding permits P05-012 and P06-026 for Max’s Place.
P. Smith talked about the newsletter received from the CT Federation of Lakes.
A letter from C. Costa, Acting IWWC Enforcement Officer to Mrs. Barbara Rutigliano dated 8/17/11 re: permit #11-050 re: phragmites and a request for additional plantings was discussed.
P. Smith talked about notification to town inland wetland agencies for aquatic pesticide permit applications. There is an issue with water lily control on Amos Pond, off of Schoolhouse Road. CT Pond Services is permitted by the DEEP to use an herbicide to control the water lilies. P. Smith will contact DEEP, and will report to the IWWC next months.
D. Approval of Minutes – July 21, 2011
MOTION to approve the minutes of July 21, 2011 as presented; MADE by R. McIntyre; SECONDED by C. Sohl; VOTED IN FAVOR: P. Smith, R. McIntyre, K. Gallagher, C. Sohl, C. Wehrly, W. Pollock; OPPOSED: none; ABSTAINED: none.; APPROVED: 6-0-0.
VI. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION to adjourn the meeting at 9:35 p.m. until the next Regularly Scheduled Meeting of the Inland Wetlands & Watercourses Commission scheduled for, Thursday, September 15, 2011, 7:30 p.m., in the 1st Floor Conference Room, Town Hall, 302 Main Street.; MADE by R. McIntyre; SECONDED by K. Gallagher; VOTED IN FAVOR: P. Smith, R. McIntyre, C. Wehrly, K. Gallagher, C. Sohl, W. Pollock; OPPOSED: none; ABSTAINED: none.; APPROVED: 6-0-0.
Respectfully Submitted,
Kathleen Noyes
| 
