Inland Wetland and Watercourse Commission
40 Old Farms Road, Willington, CT 06279
August 31 12, 2010
Special Meeting Minutes
Members Present:
Ken Metzler – Co-Chairman
Dave Schreiber – Co-Chairman
Tess Gutowski
Evan Brand
Mark Drobney
Members Absent:
Greg Blessing – Alternate - excused
Also present:
Gary Jones – Planner/Zoning Agent
W2010-11 Application for construction of travel stop, including store, food service, fueling station and associated construction at 3 Polster Road (Owner: Frank & Joseph Malack etal Applicant: Loves Travel Stop and Country Store Inc. (Received April 12, 2010 Public Hearing May 10, 2010 continued to June 14, 2010 continued to July 12, 2010 P.H. closed 37 day extension granted for decision)
K. Metzler called the meeting to order at 7:20. He said the Public Hearing was closed on 7/12/2010 and they cannot accept any other comments. This special meeting was scheduled as a workshop.
K. Metzler said he had 2 concerns. The first is the biological assessment of the property. He said the property is a very high quality site and pretty unique. K. Metzler’s second concern is he does not think there were enough test borings done in the detention basins. He said it was requested at the Public Hearing but not available.
T. Gutowski said her concern was regarding the Spill Prevention Plan. She said the town engineer reviewed the plan and came back with recommendations to strengthen it.
D. Schreiber said his concern is on the lack of buffer space between the high quality site and the detentions basins.
K. Metzler said he does not believe there is any direct impact to the wetlands; it’s all within the regulated area but there is potential for impact if there was a catastrophic release of product.
E. Brand said he is concerned on the details of CE501 regarding the erosion and sedimentation control. He is concerned about the use of calcium chloride during the construction process and the fertilizer that will be applied during the initial seeding. It can be caught in the detention basins. E. Brand said he was also concerned about the proposed septic and the leech fields in regards to wetlands J and I.
K. Metzler recapped the areas of concern; reviewing the wetland activity, the biological assessment, review ground water boring data, the Spill Prevention Plan, pushing activity into the regulated area without a buffer, dust control chemicals and fertilizer and the town engineer’s review of the containment plan. He said there is no proposed wetland or watercourse alteration.
The commission reviewed the plans of activity and the distance from the wetlands. K. Metzler commented that the groundwater discharge wetland maintains the water temps and the vernal pools. A discussion was held on the vernal pools and the separation of wetland B. K. Metzler said there appears to be an old road between wetland F and G that seems to be acting as a dam.
K. Metzler said he felt the ecological assessment of the site was pretty brief. A discussion was held on the question raised at the Public Hearing in regards to the brief listing of vegetation. K. Metzler said he thinks there are different ways to evaluate wetland ecological integrity and said the ecological assessment does not take in the uniqueness of the wetland habitat. He said, based on his experience, the hemlock wetlands and groundwater discharge wetland should have raised a flag to the applicant. T. Gutowski asked about his concerns and K. Metzler said he has petroleum discharge worries, is concerned about slope failure during construction and concerns about wetland J, I and the southern portion of H. T. Gutowski asked how he saw the proposed activity affecting the wetlands. K. Metzler said he is
concerned about ground water discharge once the pavement is put in. A discussion was held.
K. Metzler commented on CG102 in which a pipe and second level spreader was added to the original plans during the Public Hearing based on comments. T. Gutowski said the changes are described in the Stormwater Management Memorandum dated June 28, 2010. T. Gutowski asked if K. Metzler was concerned about capacity/volume in the wetlands. K. Metzler said his main concern was for potential of species of concern that may or may not have been observed. A discussion was held on the test borings. K. Metzler commented on CG102 and the location of wetland J. He said all water is directed into the detention pond as well.
A discussion was held on Spill Prevention and Containments. T. Gutowski said the town engineer’s revisions to the design are in the listed exhibits. K. Metzler commented on the Stormwater Management Memorandum and referred to Ralph Tulis’s comments on detention basin #2 being too close to the wetland’s discharge point into Roaring Brook. A discussion was held
A discussion was held on the town engineer’s comments regarding the proposed design. T. Gutowski read the letter from Joe Polulech dated May 27th. The commission reviewed the recommendations from Mr. Polulech. A discussion was held on the booms. T. Gutowski said Fuss & O’Neil did look at what Mr. Polulech submitted but she did not see a response to the May 27th letter but said some of the changes were made. K. Metzler asked T. Gutowski to contact Mr. Polulech to see if all the recommended changes were made.
A discussion was held on the Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan. T. Gutowski said she requested information on spills and the information was provided from older locations rather than the newer sites requested. T. Gutowski said the Spill Prevention Plan needs to be more carefully reviewed and she believes it may be a template rather than the final version.
T. Gutowski said the commission raised issues and she believes the applicant answered them. K. Metzler said he thinks if a catastrophic spill happens it will lead into the detention basins and potentially into the wetlands. D. Schreiber said he recalls that the plan included someone recognizing this as a spill and having to cover the detention basins.
K. Metzler said the commission will help staff compose a letter to the town engineer Joe Polulech.
D. Schreiber said he is concerned the riprap discharge that is 50 feet from wetland D. He said he is also concerned about the second detention basin and level spreader proposed. The detention basin in 604 feet and he is concerned about wetland F & G with Wetland J just above. He said in a major storm, there might be more water than can be handled. He said they also do not know what the water table is since test holes were not dug. A discussion was held on the comments from Ralph Tulis. D. Schreiber said he does not feel there is a significant amount of space between wetland J and F.
E. Brand said he is concerned about the details on CE501 regarding erosion and sedimentation control. He said the notes listed procedures applying calcium chloride and he is concerned about the chemical input changing the factors in the wetlands. He said it could affect the function of the wetlands and life forms in the wetlands. E. Brand said he is also concerned about the fertilizer that will be used during the temporary seeding and it could run off. This could change the biology and the ecology of the wetlands. E. Brand’s last concern is the proposed septic and he is uncomfortable with the nitrogen dilution areas bordering two of the wetlands next to vernal pool I and wetland J.
K. Metzler reviewed the Criteria for Decision with the commission.
T. Gutowski read the key points from the letters of opposition submitted from the public. K. Metzler commented on the acceptance from the Economic Development Commission.
A discussion was held on the comments from the Conservation Commission. Staff will provide copies to the commission members if requested.
Attorney Eric Knapp asked if the commission would have him draft a motion in favor or opposition and K. Metzler said one of each. Atty. Knapp will email the drafts to the commission.
Meeting adjourned at 9:36.
Respectfully Submitted,
Michele Manas
Recording Clerk
| 
