 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: Kevin McCann, Louise Evans, Marshall Montana, Tim Wentzell, Sue Larsen arrived at 8:15 p.m., Suzanne Choate, and Patrick Kennedy
ALTERNATES PRESENT: Gary Bazzano
STAFF PRESENT: Marcia Banach, Director of Planning
Jeff Doolittle, Town Engineer
PUBLIC HEARING
Chairman McCann called the meeting to order at 7:36 p.m. Commissioner Evans read the Legal Notice as published in the Journal Inquirer.
Appl 02-11P, 420 John Fitch Blvd, LLC, request for a Special Exception to Article 6.1.3.7 for a 27,216 square foot Materials Reduction Facility for property located on the easterly side of John Fitch Blvd and northerly of Chapel Road (420 John Fitch Blvd), I Zone (Continued from 3-26-02)
Commissioner Evans read two letters into the record. The first letter, from Kathleen Franklin and Mark Franklin addressed to the Town Manager, Matt Galligan, opposed the Materials Reduction Facility at 420 John Fitch Blvd and informed the Planning and Zoning Commission and citizens of a web site at www.southwindsorcitizens.org with information regarding
the impact they feel this facility would have on the future development of our town.
A second letter from Marjorie S. Anthony, Chairman of the Economic Development Commission (EDC), was submitted on behalf of the EDC urging the Planning & Zoning Commission to deny Appl 02-11P, 420 John Fitch Blvd. The reasons for opposition are listed:
Contrary to strategic economic development plan
Contrary to Plan of Conservation of Development
Negative impact to gateway area abutting I-291 Corridor
Town has previously granted a waiver for this purpose in this zone
Chairman McCann stated the procedures to be followed for the public hearing, indicating Commissioner questions would be addressed first since this hearing was continued from March 26, 2002, and the Commission has already heard from the applicant, town staff, and members of the public.
Chairman McCann brought forth the preliminary point of order that was raised at the beginning of the March 26, 2002, public hearing with respect to the question of Commissioner Wentzell recusing himself.
Tim Wentzell made a statement indicating the Town Attorney reviewed this issue and stated there is not a reason for him to recuse himself from this application.
Chairman McCann indicated that the Commission would not be replacing Commissioner Wentzell on this application. It would be the decision of Commissioner Wentzell whether to recuse himself.
The Commission had the following questions/concerns:
Commissioner Kennedy commented there is a criterion that needs to be met for Special Exception. What evidence is in the record to justify that negative impacts wouldn't be created on property values?
Attorney Scott Consoli of Brown, Rudnick, Berlack, and Israels, representing the applicant, 420 John Fitch Blvd, LLC, made a comment before answering the question of Commissioner Kennedy. Consoli wanted to state for the record they would like to move forward with the public hearing but reserve the right with respect to the issue of a predetermination by Commissioner Wentzell until an appropriate time to make a determination.
Consoli submitted a letter of appraisal by an expert appraiser indicating in his view this application would not have a negative impact on property values.
Attorney Kathryn Hale made an objection for the record to the submission of new information and felt it was inappropriate to be accepted.
Chairman McCann noted Attorney Hale's objection for the record.
Commissioner Kennedy asked if there has been a study done on real estates prices on residences that have been constructed next to a facility of this type?
Consoli commented that market data indicates the general trend in real estate has been upward. There is an existing facility in South Windsor in a residential area, Waste Management, and that facility has not reduced property values.
Commissioner Kennedy asked would people's perception impact property values?
Consoli stated we are not here to act on perceptions. It's an established Industrial area. We are here to rule on facts and remove perceptions. You cannot see the building from Route 5 or Chapel Road. Our job is to separate perception from fact.
Attorney Hale responded with an objection to any submission and understands Attorney Consoli argument, but perception influences value. Value is defined as a price that a buyer and seller would exchange for a given property, and is extremely impacted by perception.
Attorney Hale again indicated it is inappropriate for this to be submitted if further information and further comments from the public is not going to be allowed. The ruling should be consistently applied and the applicant should not be able to submit new information.
Chairman McCann stated the purpose of this hearing is to gather the facts and information concerning this proposal to make a decision on the basis of the record and our regulations. It is not the purpose of this hearing to reopen the discussion of all others in favor and opposed. This continuation is to gather new information and changes to the proposal.
Commissioner Kennedy continued asking why do you feel a balance has been shown between neighborhood acceptance and community needs?
Consoli commented on the definition of "neighborhood" - our neighborhood is industrial, our proposal will be an improvement to this area. We are proposing to pave the roads, bring in sewers and water into this area which will greatly enhance the industrial area. In the Plan of Conservation and Development (POCD) one of the criteria for future industrial development is the availability of water and sewer. This proposal would accomplish this and make it available for everyone on the street. Community goes beyond the town, it includes the region and state. The POCD speaks of the addition of Solid Waste Recycling Facilities both on a local and regional level. This project is a cutting edge project. The State is looking forward to this project, which is also
being embraced by regional environmental agencies. On balance this facility is a positive for the community. This facility will be the model for Connecticut and there is an urgent need for these facilities.
Commissioner Kennedy asked do you feel there is a lack of neighborhood acceptance?
Consoli responded the number of people here at the public hearing is not the number of people in nearby residences. This is the voice of the few, not the voice of the many. From a visual impact you will not even see our facility. From a noise and odor perspective those are regulated. Our facility is in full compliance with all regulations, so the impact will be minuscule/non-existent.
Commissioner Kennedy commented that the applicant defined "community" as beyond the town of South Windsor. Is it important that this facility be located in the town of South Windsor?
Consoli responded that South Windsor is uniquely situated in close proximity to the I-291 corridor and there is the possibility of a rail spur. This location is in a perfect geographic location for a facility of this type. In addition jobs will be created, taxes, and infrastructure to the town.
Commissioner Kennedy stated the EDC opposes this application and believes there are no economic development benefits. How would you respond to this?
Consoli responded that he did not have the opportunity to read the letter from the EDC and asked for a copy of the letter. This project will help the economic development in this part of town. Consoli handed out a memo to the Commissioners that highlights fifteen points by page reference regarding this application
Hale objected submission of the memorandum to the Commission and stated she would like to have the opportunity to review the memorandum and keep the public hearing open so she may respond.
Hale commented that the applicant
Chairman McCann stated that Attorney Hale should have the opportunity to respond to the memorandum submitted by Attorney Consoli.
Consoli continued that there are two facilities in South Windsor, one of which is Waste Systems Management. This facility is clean and has no DEP compliance issues. The second initial application for the clay pit north of the site was for a landfill and was approved. Responding to the note about private sewers on the revised plans, Consoli indicated that it was added at the request of the town so that the town would not be responsible for taking over the utilities. For the record, the applicant
Consoli stated the Attorney for the landowner was present to make a statement regarding the proposed roadway.
Chairman McCann asked why this was not submitted with the initial proposal?
Consoli stated that the property owner was reviewing the plans and revised plans were submitted previously. It was the hope of the applicant to walk the Commission through the plan changes.
Consoli stated that the Attorney Dan Kleinman, attorney for the property owner, would like to make comments regarding the easements and the changes that are on the plans.
Hale made an objection on the record having new information brought forth stating that the public should be able to speak to new information if the applicant is allowed to present new information.
Attorney Kleinman, representing the Eve Haller, LLC and owner of the property to the south and owner of the easement has drainage concerns, all of which were discussed with the applicant. For the record the applicant has agreed to extend water and sewer, pave the roadway at a 30-foot width and to maintain the road during their ownership of the property. The letter from Ozzi Torres, Torres Engineering, Inc., was read by Attorney Kleinman and submitted to the Commission. Kleinman commented that as the abutting property owner and owner of the easement the recommendation of their engineer be incorporated in any approval process.
Commissioner Wentzell asked if the applicant would define non-processable screenings?
Karl Stopper, TRC Engineering, responded they are C&D wastes that cannot be processed and need to be separated out. They are construction and demolition waste not municipal solid wastes.
Commissioner Wentzell raised the question regarding the Operation and Management Plan - Material Collection section where it states "when hauler attempts to deliver toxic and hazardous waste, the hauler and the waste will be turned away."
Stopper responded asbestos is handled at the source in a very regulated environmental manner. Asbestos has to be removed prior to obtaining a demolition permit. Facility personnel will have "asbestos awareness" training to recognize potential asbestos containing material. If identified at the scale, they would be turned away and a record kept for DEP. When material is dumped on the tipping floor, there is a second chance to identify suspected materials that may contain asbestos. If suspect, it will be reloaded and sent back, or suspect material will be segregated and removed from processing prior to going on the sorting line.
Roofing materials will not be processed in a manner that would make them become friable or airborne, just placed in a container and taken away.
Commissioner Wentzell inquired will there be acceptance of asbestos containing materials but care will be taken to not accept friable material?
Stopper responded operators would have the proper training to identify those types of materials.
Commissioner Wentzell asked what is the State standard for asbestos in a load that is acceptable?
Stopper answered zero. There is a complete process in place by the State to make sure no asbestos gets to a facility like this.
Commissioner Wentzell asked if there is a statute that lets residents dispose of one cubic foot of asbestos in regular garbage?
Stopper was not aware of this statue.
Consoli made a point of clarification that asbestos will not be accepted at this facility and if material comes in and appears to contain asbestos it will be handled accordingly.
Commissioner Wentzell stated his original question referred to roofing materials.
Stopper responded that roofing or other materials with asbestos are required to be removed prior to demolition permits being issued just like all other asbestos containing materials (ACM). Contractors are required to do testing to certify that all asbestos is removed prior to demolition.
Commissioner Wentzell asked if a radiation monitor would be installed at this facility?
Stopper indicated there would be one at the scale house.
Commissioner Choate inquired when considering traffic impact do you consider size of vehicles or just the numbers of vehicles?
Bruce Hillson, Traffic Engineering Solutions, P.C., noted that any time you add cars to the roadway you will impact the traffic. There will be about a one-percent increase of traffic through the intersection of John Fitch Blvd and Chapel Road. The analysis did include trucks.
Commissioner Choate asked if there is any spill protection at the catch basins and if it is needed?
Engineer Tim Coon, J.R. Russo Assoc., noted the catch basins will be equipped with oil separators in the event there is a spill.
Commissioner Choate asked how much volume of a spill could be contained in a catch basin.
Coon responded the Vortex stormwater treatment unit could handle a spill, but no liquids will be accepted, and personnel are trained to handle spills.
Commissioner Evans asked what might be in the ground from previous occupants. In test wells there were unacceptable levels of metal in early analysis; later analysis showed no pollutants in three wells, the forth well (most polluted) could not located. What happened to the pollutants? Where does the drainage water from the site go?
Stopper indicated there was no correlation between the soil contaminants and ground water impact; 80% of the surface water flows generally to the south to the retention pond and 20% of the site to the clay pit to the north.
Commissioner Evans stated there are concerns with a 10-micron filtering system when the doors are open.
Consoli stated expert testimony regarding the air handling system would be provided. There will be a series of nozzles around doorframes, atomized fogging spray pointing into facility, the mist will trap the dust. Similar fogging nozzles at the tipping floor will be installed to keep the dust surpressed.
Hale stated allowing expert testimony for the applicant is a denial of due process and strongly objected and would like it reflected in the minutes.
Consoli responded to Hale
Ralph Landano, representing Air Reactor, Inc., noted his firm provides air quality control in the northeast. They are proposing to install high pressure atomizing nozzles throughout the building in areas of dust generation creating a
Commission Evans inquired as to what type of roof will be on the facility?
Coon responded that at this time the design is not complete, so he didn't know.
Consoli added when they go forward to build the building, a building permit will need to be issued and all building codes will be met.
Chairman McCann requested a five minutes recess.
Chairman McCann asked Marge Anthony, Chairman, for the EDC to give all the Commissioner members a copy of the the EDC letter that was read into the record.
Commissioner Evans read another letter into the record from Mark and Kathleen Franklin.
Attorney Hale addressed the Commission inquiring when she would have the opportunity to respond to the new information presented by the applicant.
Chairman McCann said she will have an opportunity after the Commissioners finish with their questions and comments to the applicant.
Commissioner Montana asked if this facility is literally a prototype? Has all of the technology been tested and tried in other sites?
Consoli stated yes, but the type of equipment to be used is new in Connecticut (others in the Northeast have used the equipment, but not in Connecticut).
Commissioner Montana asked what happens to all of the moisture from the fogging?
Landano responded four gallons of water per minute being used is not a lot of water. The water will be atomized at a very high pressure that will create a humidity condition. There will be no water residue but a steady level of moisture in the building.
Commissioner Montana has concerns with the noise that this facility will generate.
Consoli responded the South Windsor Zoning Regulations have very significant noise requirements. The applicant intends to comply with noise regulations. It would be acceptable to have periodic testing to be sure the facility is in compliance regarding the noise. The building is situated with the back of the building facing the Chapel Hill Condos with the front of the building facing Route 5. All of the operations at the facility are inside the building.
Commissioner Montana inquired if there be audible noise at Veterans Memorial Park?
Consoli responded that the doors of the facility are facing west away from the park.
Commissioner Montana directed a question to Karl Stopper inquiring what are C&D materials.
Stopper responded a mixture of items of acceptable materials are listed in the Operation and Management Plan.
Commissioner Larsen asked who will be the actual operator of this faciltiy?
Consoli responded at this time the owner is 420 John Fitch Blvd, LLC. Upon approval and the construction of the facility an operator will be selected; that has not been done at this time.
Commissioner Larsen inquired about the beaver habitat north of the site and questioned if that ecosystem being so young could handle an accidental spill of some sort.
The applicant noted that the IWA/CC reviewed all these kinds of issues. There is no opportunity for anything that might be spilled to leave the building. All containers will be covered and stored under roofs.
Commissioner Larsen inquired as to what plans are in place to handle an accidental spill?
Stopper referred to the Operation and Management Plan and stated all facility staff will be required to complete training. Spill kits will be kept at the site and the operator is responsible to maintain an on-call emergency contractor to contain a spill and contact the appropriate individuals in case such an emergency should arise.
Commissioner Larsen asked if there is a requirement to let the neighborhood know if there is a spill that would impact the residents.
Stopper responded the authorities would decide at the time of a spill. The State regulations govern what requires notification to the neighbors. It is part of the DEP permit.
Commissioner Larsen asked for clarification of "quite a few" nozzles?
Laudano responded that the square feet of the building and the amount of material received will determine the number of nozzles, approximately 150-200.
Commissioner Bazzano inquired whether or not the State or Federal Government will monitor the facility and if a daily log will be kept and how detailed it will be?
Stopper responded the facility operator has to keep State standard compliance records, must provide proper training, adhere to reporting requirements to the State, and would allow local inspections if desired. A log is kept on-site showing who the hauler is, where they come from, information regarding the site where the material comes from, and records of unusual/suspect loads.
Commissioner Bazzano inquired if there is State or Federal limit to the number of tons that can be processed on a daily or weekly basis.
Stopper responded that the applicant is requesting a permit for 500 tons maximum waste per day that this facility will be able to accept.
Commissioner Bazzano inquired what kind of vehicles would be used and the number of days material could be stored. There has been mention of another building; which building are you speaking of?
Stopper responded vehicles carrying roll-off containers, not dump trucks, would be used. All waste goes off site in covered containers. Materials stored on-site cannot total more than 3 times the permitted capacity (or 3 times 500 tons/day) but this site will only store a maximum of 1000 tons in containers on site. The other building is a covered storage shed that will store processed materials containers.
Commissioner Bazzano commented that the break in the median on Route 5 could be used as a holding area for trucks trying merge into southbound traffic and also inquired if there had been any discussion with Propane Gas or GCR regarding a back up of vehicles on the access drive?
Hillson responded that the trucks leaving the site can see traffic in both directions and can wait for gaps in the traffic in both directions. Trucks will be longer than the median and can not sit in that area. Hillson stated there should be no more than one or two trucks on the site at any given time, so that shouldn't be an issue.
Chairman McCann questioned who will police the building on a day to day basis and how can we be assured all of the standards will be met consistently?
Consoli responded the State approval process is rigorous and there are periodic inspections by DEP to be sure there is compliance. Inspections are unannounced and on average are done on a quarterly basis. The applicant would agree to an independent consultant inspector to review quarterly at no cost to the town.
Chairman McCann inquired if the operator of the facility would be bonded to the Town?
Consoli stated there could be a bond and that could be incorporated into the approval process. The facility will only being taking non-hazardous materials. The eventuality of pollution happening is remote.
Chairman McCann asked the applicant what would be acceptable as a reasonable bond?
Consoli indicated the applicant would propose a bonding requirement.
Chairman McCann noted that the trucks could be carrying 60 tons. Will the facility have its own maximum truck weight limits?
Consoli responded it would be 10 tons and the maximum is 20 tons. There are legal load limits requirements that must be met and are required by DEP. This facility will adhere to DEP
Chairman McCann questioned the traffic study regarding the number of 9 trucks per hour being spaced out evenly. At times could there be several trucks arriving at the site simultaneously?
Hillson responded that 50 trucks per day divided by 10 hours per day is approximately 9 trucks per hour. Each construction site has a number of trucks that will load, unload at the facility, and return back to the construction site. Those same trucks will be returning to the facility during the same day. The capacity analysis increased the number of trucks in the survey (used 9 per hour vs the more likely 5 trucks per hour).
Chairman McCann asked how long will it take for a fully loaded truck to get from Route 5 across north bound lane into the facility? How long of a gap in the traffic would be needed?
Hillson didn
Chairman McCann commented his concerns regarding the storage lane being mistaken by drivers as the storage lane for Chapel Road. Hillson had no concerns of this happening.
Chairman McCann referred to earlier comments of the 1998 TRC report that the groundwater flow was in a westerly direction toward the Connecticut River and in a report of 1993 it states the groundwater flow is easterly. Is there a discrepancy there?
Stopper responded that the 1993 report did not do groundwater monitoring, it was estimated. The 1998 report did monitoring and was better able to ascertain groundwater flow direction (usually minimum of three wells is required to determine direction).
Chairman McCann asked if oil trap hood would work for spills of something heavier than water.
Stopper responded it would settle to the bottom of the catch basin sump and vortex unit.
Chairman McCann asked for clarification of the fog after it binds to the particles? What kind of air handling equipment will be used?
Landano responded that the fog dissipates. The dust particles drop on the floor and get picked up with the rest of the material. The material is continuously being moved from the floor with machinery and is then processed through the facility.
Landano stated there are several different options, exhaust fans on the ceiling placed throughout the facility. When there is an open building, an air filtering system and an atomization system are used.
Hale objected to the new information being presented without plans that could be reviewed. This information has been outstanding for months.
Chairman McCann noted Hale's objection.
Tim Toolen, Tir Dim Filter Corporation, described how the volume of air will be calculated and air filtered as required by the State.
Commissioner Wentzell asked if the entire catch basin is available for storage in the event of a spill?
Coon stated that just the catch basin sump would be available for storage.
Commissioner Evans asked how much of property is being developed? Is there a possibility of further development on the property?
Coon responded the entire parcel is 4.92 acres the entire site is being developed with exception of the area used by Propane Gas. Based on the current layout of the property there is very little room for future development.
Commissioner Evans commented that most of the lot was covered with trap-rock, representing impervious coverage.
Coon stated the actual impervious coverage when the site is finished being developed would be 45.7%, with no trap-rock.
Commissioner Evans inquired about the parking waiver, and it seems that all of the pavement will be used in maneuvering trucks, if we grant a parking waiver, could you put the 29 spaces on the site and still maneuver the trucks around. Are there adequate parking spaces for Propane Gas?
Coon responded it would be possible to place the parking spaces to the west of the shed. The spaces would only be needed if the use of the site should change. There are enough spaces for Propane Gas; their requirement is 10 spaces and there are 17 spaces existing.
Commissioner Evans asked under what conditions might a DEP air discharge permit be required?
Need for a permit is based on the potential to emit from the source, which is the actual processing operation. If you exceed threshhold requirements that the DEP has for emissions then you have to go through the DEP permit process. You have to demonstrate to DEP what controls will be used. Water misting wouldn
Commissioner Evans inquired if there is a dumpster for office materials and is it located on the plans.
Coon stated that a revised plan were submitted to Banach tonight that shows the location of the dumpster pad
Commissioner Evans asked what is the distance to the nearest homes?
Consoli responded the closest is the condos 1,000 feet away.
Commissioner Evans asked if the Operations and Management Plan is submitted to the DEP and inquired about the xxx's in the text.
Consoli responded that it is a draft plan and some revisions were made to the plan.
Commissioner Choate asked what route the trucks would take when arriving from the east?
Hillson responded major highways and major routes would be used.
Chairman McCann asked Consoli if he had anything further and Consoli submitted a letter from TRC regarding mold to the Commissioner.
Hale objected to the submission of new information.
Consoli discussed the general memorandum submitted to the Commission to act as a guide. Consoli requested keeping the Public Hearing open to allow a response to the new information and address any final questions from the Commission.
Chairman McCann agreed that the Public Hearing should stay open to give the opportunity for everyone to review the new material. The Public Hearing will continue to May 14, 2002.
Chairman McCann asked the public if there was anyone who could not attend next week's meeting who wanted to come forward and speak.
Louis Tamayo, is not concerned with developing the site but opposes this type of facility. There could be health concerns associated with this facility being developed so close to a residential area. Tamayo spent the day at a recycling facility of this type and the doors of the facility never closed.
Jack Lawton commented on the traffic and a major concern is the railroad line that Consoli mentioned.
Edith Starr, Old Main Street, inquired about the hours of operations. Chairman McCann stated that was discussed previously
Marge Anthony, Chairman of the Economic Development Commission, wanted to remind the Commission that this application does not meet the requirement under 6.1.3, 6.1.5.1, or 6.1.5, and strongly objects to this project.
Hale submitted more petition signatures, treated wood information, pictures of a demolition truck taken on the highway taken by Mr. Moreland on Route 84E and Hale
Motion to continue the Public Hearing until May 14, 2002, was made by Commissioner Wentzell, seconded by Commissioner Kennedy.
ITEM: Adjournment
Motion to adjourn the meeting at 11:40 p.m.was made by Commissioner Wentzell, seconded by Commissioner Choate. The motion carried and the vote was unanimous.
Respectfully Submitted,
________________________
Kelli Holmes Date Approved
Recording Secretary
| |
