To: Mark Masinda, Chairman
Zoning Board of Appeals
40 Old Farms Road
Willington, CT 06279
From: Willington Conservation Commission
Re: ZBA2012-6 Application variance of Willington Zoning Regulations section 11.20.04.06 (location of septic system to wetlands) 3 Polster Road
(Map 46, Lots 16 & 17) Owner: Frank and Joseph Malack; Applicant: Love’s Travel Stops & Country Stores, Inc.
Date: 8/15/2012 (Letter approved at Conservation Commission meeting)
Based on the Conservation Commission’s review of the application variance, we have significant concerns that the proposed location of the high intensity use subsurface septic system may negatively impact the quality, value and function of Wetlands H, I and J as well as Roaring Brook.
When considering this application, the Commission kept in mind the following Natural Resource objective outlined in Willington’s Plan of Conservation and Development (Effective February 7, 2006):
“4.5 Objective B: Protect ground and surface water quality related to domestic use, recreation, fish and wildlife habitat from potentially polluting land uses and other possible contamination.”
As proposed, the applicant’s septic system will be located in a sand and gravel soil, 50 feet from wetlands I and J, and within 114 feet from Wetland H. Willington Zoning Regulation 11.20.04.06 clearly states that: “No portion of any subsurface septic system shall be located within one hundred fifty (150’) feet of any inland wetland or watercourse as described in Public Act 72-155, as amended, or within two hundred (200’) feet of any wetland or watercourse when the system is located in a sand and gravel soil.” We believe this regulation should be upheld, since it was designed to protect the wetlands and watercourses in Willington from negative impacts from high intensity uses.
The close proximity of the proposed septic system has the potential to pollute and irrevocably degrade the quality and function of Wetlands H, I and J, as well as Roaring Brook. We are concerned not only about fecal contamination, but also about contamination from other products that will be drained into the septic system and may not be broken down by mechanical or bacterial processes. Concerns include disinfectants, degreasers, commercial cleaners, and substances excreted in urine such as antibiotics, birth control and hormone replacement pills. These contaminants may degrade water and soil quality and cause harm to plants, mammals, birds, fish, amphibians, and other biological life forms that depend on the wetlands and Roaring Brook.
Fuss and O’Neill’s “Wetland Assessment Report”, submitted on 11/7/2011 as part of the W2011-51 application to the Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Commission, describes Wetlands H, I and J and their functions as follows:
“3.2.6 Wetland H – This wetland complex is formed by an intermittent stream and groundwater seeps. It discharges off-site to Roaring Brook. Portions of this intermittent stream/seep contains standing water and at points flowing water. Hydrology is attributed to groundwater discharge off the steep hill located to the east. The vegetation community would be classified as Red Maple/Skunk Cabbage Seasonally Flooded Forest.”
“3.2.7 Wetland I is a small groundwater seepage wetland. Groundwater seasonally and intermittently discharges to the surface and flows overland a short distance where it then infiltrates back into the ground. The vegetation community would be classified as a Red Maple/Skunk Cabbage Seasonally Flooded Forest.”
“3.2.8 Wetland J is located to the west of Polster Road. Hydrology is attributed to groundwater discharge off the steep hill located to the east, as well as a periodic stormwater discharge from Polster Road. A moderately sized wetland area collects groundwater and stormwater runoff and slowly discharges to the west through an intermittent stream or infiltrates into groundwater. The maximum standing water in the wetland is less than 12 inches. The vegetation community would be classified as a Red Maple/Skunk Cabbage Seasonally Flooded Forest.”
“3.4.1 Groundwater Recharge/ Discharge – This function considers the potential for a wetland to serve as groundwater recharge and/or discharge area. Recharge should relate to the potential for the wetland to contribute water to an aquifer. Discharge should relate to the potential for the wetland to serve as an area where groundwater can be discharged to the surface. All of the wetlands on site have some component of groundwater recharge and/or are hydrologically dependent upon groundwater discharge. Wetlands C, E, H, I, J and X are dependent on local, shallow, groundwater discharge.”
“ 3.4.2 Floodflow Alteration - This function is the ability to store inflowing water from storm or flooding events, resulting in detention and retention of water on the wetland surface… Wetland J is a level area that provides temporary retention of stormwater runoff from Polster Road.”
“ 3.4.4 Sediment/Toxicant/Pathogen Retention – This function reduces or prevents degradation of water quality. It relates to the effectiveness of the wetland as a trap for sediments, toxicants, or pathogens… Wetland J is a level area that provides temporary retention of sediment from Polster Road.”
“3.4.5 Nutrient Removal - This function relates to the effectiveness of the wetland to prevent adverse effects of excess nutrients entering aquifers or surface waters such as ponds, lakes, streams, rivers or estuaries… Wetland J is a level area that provides temporary retention of nutrients from Polster Road.”
“3.4.7 Wildlife Habitat – Wetlands D, F/G, and H provide a diverse habitat for wildlife. Numerous food sources exist throughout these wetlands given the high degree of diversity of vegetation. Evidence of wildlife usage (e.g., direct observation, tracks, scat, etc.) also provides a strong indication of usage of these wetland areas by wildlife. Wetlands I, J and X provide limited wildlife habitat. Some food sources exist throughout these wetlands given the moderate degree of diversity of vegetation. Evidence of wildlife usage (e.g., direct observation, tracks, scat, etc.) also provides an indication of usage of these wetland areas by wildlife.”
Fuss and O’Neill’s “Wetland Assessment Report “ documents that Wetlands H, I and J provide several functions including groundwater recharge and wildlife habitat. Hydrologically, these wetlands are dependent on local, shallow groundwater discharge. The proposed high intensity use septic system will be discharging an estimated 5000 gallons of effluent per day into the surrounding soils in close proximity to these wetlands. We are concerned there is insufficient separation distance between the proposed septic system and Wetlands H, I, and J, placing them at risk for contamination and diminishing their natural capacity to support plants and wildlife.
Additionally, there is clear connectivity noted in the applicant’s “Wetland Assessment Report” between Wetland H and Roaring Brook, which borders and flows through portions of the western part of the property. We are extremely concerned that Wetland H is directly downslope from the septic system and that any pollutants entering Wetland H could be discharged into Roaring Brook, causing contamination and impacting its function as a fishery, wildlife habitat and recreational resource.
Roaring Brook is a viable cold water fish habitat, supporting native brook trout and other aquatic species. It is classified as a Class 3 Wild Trout Management Area by the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP). Roaring Brook is also an important resource for recreational uses as well as for education and research. It is tributary to the Willimantic River and has state status as a Connecticut Greenway. In respect to the location of the owner’s property, the brook is accessible from downstream and upstream crossings (Lohse Road and Polster Road), as well as the adjacent Nipmuck State Forest to the north and west.
In summary, the Conservation Commission believes the applicant’s proposed location for their high intensity use subsurface septic system poses significant risks to Wetlands H, I and J as well as Roaring Brook, which could have an irrevocable impact on their quality, value and function. We recommend that the Zoning Board of Appeals give considerable thought related to the risks to these important natural resources before making a final decision regarding the application variance.
| 
