Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSubdiv - Conservation (12) L��O•�N SE,` 0-1 s ?d&U&Ot O � O 9 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074 SOR•co��4 AREA CODE 203/644-2511 November 24 , 1986 Joseph LaCava CERTIFIED MAIL �3 �5 '<< Y7-);E,1k`rd LaCava Construction Company 185 Silas Deane Highway : Wethersfield, Ct 06109 DEC ?. ?` RE: Beechwood Farms Subdivision - Section 1 Application #361v.i_ z Planni�Q & Zoning Commission Dear Mr . LaCava: At the November 17 , 1986 meeting , the South Windsor Inland Wetlands Agency/Conservation Commission approved with conditions the entire plan for the development of Beechwood Farms Subdivision , Section I with the exception of Lot# 11 , 12 and 28 , due to the concerns with the brook located on or adjacent to these lots . The following conditions must be adhered to for this permit to be valid : 1 . A modified plan must be submitted excluding lot# 11 , 12 and 28 as buildable lots. deeds 2 . Conservation conveyances must be on the d ds of all residential lots with wetland areas. 3 . Typical plot plan with erosion & sediment control measures must be added to the plan . 4 . The original bond of $25 ,000 must be maintained . 5 . The permit is valid for one year and shall expire on November 17 , 1987 . , Very truly yours , Joh M. oran , Jr . , Chairm n Inland Wetlands Agency/ Conservation Commission Town of South Windsor JMM: dlb CC : A . B. Davies , Deputy Town Engineer Richard Martel , Town Engineer Marcia Banach , Director of Planning Louise Evans , Chairman , Planning and Zoning Commission/ Michael Gantick , Director of Public Works Thomas D' Auria, Building Official John Shemo , Economic Development Coordinator Fuss & O' Neill II N 168,861.7p 0 S73°-O7'9 -25" ° 12 N 168' 968.21 20 6.2 --- M 13 N 168, 994.23 1)7'-25"W 4 °D 14 N 169,016. 11 tas.00 LN16 010.38 o. -- b 40' ,0 78.65 40' E 066.78 � f b vS 043.04 058.31, aCD ct 22200 a � �+ 176SEE N E A" 876.21 = 3 73*-07'_ 23" E= n N 73" o7-ss•o #pp � aT 4.-,�. �s � C00RDINATES BASED() CO1DRRNINNA E U O ERIEM "•'O Rs N ENT „ p + . �-N 730-OT'-2S" 'P 7 �o r! ' C 116.00' *0Z NOTE "A" W r u' S73°-07'-25'E -� LOTS II, 12 AND 28 ARE N( 4 N, ITo.55 ;, „ INLAND WETLAND COMMISS >w >ft ari G O° iz=� ri♦ 45 %2 M 2 z =i` <° �z s Y. SEE Wp N °+ _ NOTE "A" c 0 : 7 o . N O M O0 Q>I > <i I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT TH N M c c= Z PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE 00 u<ow - CLASSA_2SURVEYAS DEFINED M }, m 0 ; FOR STANDARDS OF ACCURAI ADOPTED DECEMBER 10 19' O a? iv `,`� CONNECTICUT ASSOCIATION SEE NOTE t0 " Q N �a 0 m I �' N N e 0 0 7o r. 120.79 z �— N 730-07 -25 W tide•°• N d 3„U OF CON FU%% tr 7 � tC IA L g « ; A p �,° MANCHEST �wN CLERK'S T: - � 136.63 S 730-OT 25"E 3 *��'r��. sts� PL `•" OT F nRAWERNO ° ' " BEECHWOO n N MAP No. ...... - Ip REVISIONS SECTI01 SEE SHEET NO. 3 a REVISED SEPT. I, 1980 QUARRY BROOK DR. 8 JUNE 8/ 6/ 6585 SOUTH WINDSOR, j I,j ._"� 14/2 /7/85 86 PROA NO' 7' SCALE FIELD 10/24/86 78-166-A 5-23-80 1"=40' 2171 r r °lam is 5 87 Environmental /Wetland Impact Statement Prepared for: LaCava Construction Company : By: Ernest A. Schaeppi, Environmental Lot 11 Beechwood Farms SUBD. II & Land Use Planning Consultant Quarrybrook Dr., S. Windsor, CT. 266 Conestoga Way, Glastonbury, CT. December, 1995 Lot 11 is proposed for house construction adjacent to and partially within a wetland fringe area. The lot fronts on an approved and constructed town road and it has already been subdivided as shown in the South Windsor Land Records. Presented here is a report which describes the field conditions, relevant scientific information and proposed activities for use by the South Windsor Inland Wetlands & Watercourses Agency in its deliberation about house construction upon this lot. This report is structured to address the appropriate requirements in sections 8.1 to 8.4 of the current Town of South Windsor Inland Wetlands/ Conservation Commission regulations. Section I. - Field Survey, Bedrock & Surficial Geology, Wetland & non-wetland soils, plant and wildlife habitat and hydrology. Section II. - List of functional characteristics of the wetland, Memo form Conn. DEP regarding Natural Resource Data Base information for the area. Section III. - Proposed activities Section IV. - Anticipated impacts and mitigation of impacts. Attached for reference : Lot 11 plot plan as drafted by Reino E. Hyppa & Associates, Civil Engineers & Land Surveyors, Glastonbury, Scale 1" =40', with wetland boundaries delineated by Maureen Fitzgerald, Certified Soil Scientist, Geotoxi Associates Inc., Glastonbury; photocopies of Manchester Topo Quad #38 and Surficial Geology map GQ - 433 depicting the study area. Location: ELL T / ' A HIV-A �� Y IN - u CF4 POO SAN f�. o;� i ♦w A- � ~ `gyp '�- •� ' _ OUgR � K POD E � ROOD t;<::.. {j'•� a�V. .. ;s•:? f U -+ BEECHWOOD J who a = SUBDIVISION . ..•BrooK /� MAP OF BEECHWOOD FARMS SUBDIVISION SECTIONS I & II SHOWING LOT 11, WHAPLES BROOK AND 9 ACRES OF OPEN SPACE WHICH INCLUDES WHAPLES BROOK AND ASSOCIATED WETLANDS 42 �� \ 43 1 44 1 `45 1 46 1 47 I 48 1 49 1 50 1 51 / 152 IT :111 16 ( _ BEECHWOOD I FA�MS I I SECTION I II 40 I 39 1 38 37 136 I 35_ I 34 1 33 32 O 14 I �. ACCESS TO I 1 15.51 ACRES\ 53 OPEN SPACE 1. I 62 ^ 54/ 30Do ' 1 / 59�) 56 f 58 / 57 o 209 © 211 212 213 PUMP I u 1 0 I ' STATION Z5 6 p IO I a i 210 �' • m 214 24 8T. 114VEM Cif a , u J F - 9 90 215 O Qc gFFy 1591 ACRES O 3 TUDOR HILL 218 © 4 �17 19 0 7 9P pp� 1 • gt O pR IC R Gt_ 4 218 p p . . O O . i c WE!APLES..BROOK,...ALSO..KNOWN..AS. S QUARRY..BROOK..ON..SOME..RESOURCE ....OPEN.-SPACE.... BEECHWOOD FARMS MAPS...................................................... I J coNST�UCTIQN �Ae� Foci � PLOT PLAN 1-0-1 11 THE LACA\IA CONsm)cfl0K1 Co. BEECNWOOD FrAYMS b020g oet\IF S CCSH WINDSpj�!, CONW. �% 6u 0 N N/F ' JOHN RAYM O N D t� K/F Cc. IO j- 0 ANO 0eA1,NAaE 0 _ EASEME. UJI ( ,t L40 N/F//ARC n. I ---- / Cie 1 Lo i .1 j j g' 1 l5. ' �TOTAI Q E�Y BOOK e„ CL01P CB -- E -- Lo- Z $ P f REINO E. HYYPPA' 9 ASSOCIATES EXISTING CONTOUR — — -- _— — —---74 CIVIL ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS FROPOSE-0 CONTOUR 124 HEBRON AVENUE WETLANCD LIMIT 6_.r0-_A-6_...,6_A - GLASTONBURY, CONN. ' 06033 7 - - (203) 833-5218 Clearing limit, ...x X-- X ON* construction fence, SCALE: I"= 40' DATE 8-1- 95 MAP No.51-95-11 hayba les & silt fence ■ I. FIELD CONDITIONS FOUND AT LOT 11, EAST SIDE OF QUARRYBROOK DRIVE (a) FIELD SURVEYS CONDUCTED ON NOV. 7 AND NOV. 25, 1995: Non-Wetland Area- The upland streamterrace located on the south side of the lot and the northwest corner of the lot contain fine sandy soils vegetated by maple, beech, birch and oak and some woody understory growth and covered with leaf and partially decomposed litter. Shrubgrowth and groundcover is sparse. There is a mound of decomposing logs and dumped leaves and grass clippings near the road at the lot's southwest corner. Slopes are gentle, ranging from 4% to 9%. Wetland Area - Saco soils, swampland and a tributary of Whaples Brook form two distinct features. First, the tributary which drains toward a 30" RCP (culvert) beneath QuarryBrook Drive is confined to a well-defined channel at the southeast corner of the lot. Here is an incised, 2 to 6 foot deep channel with stable sideslopes and a swamp wetland which widens as the tributary flows westerly, water depth ranges from 3 to 6". Second, the tributary channel lessens in depth (1-2') and increases in width (2-7) from the lot's midpoint to the QuarryBrook Road culvert. Here, there is a well-developed, stable swamp containing oak, maple, hemlock, ironwood, dogwood, birch and in the, more saturated area at the lot's northwest corner there is some tussock sedge, ferns, mosses and some woody shrubs. Water depth ranges from '/2" to 3". Most likely skunk cabbages and Jack-in-the-Pulpit grow here too. The roadfill area near the culvert and adjacent to wetlands is stable and has not adversely affected the wetland's viability. One area of special interest is a"lobe" of wetland measuring about 25 X 35 ft. which projects into the proposed building area. A careful look at this area shows that it is a departure from the otherwise linear wetland boundary which roughly parallels the tributary to its north. A slight elevational change within this "lobe" has resulted in wetland conditions and qualifies it as a wetland soil. On 11/7/95, the soil here was not saturated or even wet at surface. Vegetation at this fringe area includes hemlock, maple and beech saplings (a photograph is available). It does not appear as a swamp to the casual observer. It is this writer's opinion that it is actually a fringe area where wetland and non-wetland soils blend into each other, nevertheless, by formal definition it is a wetland. Vegetative variety and stream stability (it was flowing with no observable turbidity on 11/7/95) suggest that this stream and swamp are a thriving wetland which tolerates a fluctuating watertable very well. It is a typical forested New England wetland and it is among the most common and abundant in the region. Such wetland systems provide habitat for a wide variety of wildlife including songbirds, birds of prey(hawk), grey squirrel, small rodents, raccoon and opossum, spotted salamanders, wood frogs, spring peepers, snakes and abundant insect life. According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats and Conn. DEP Wetlands of Connecticut this is classified as a Palustrine Forested Wetland (swamp) which contains an alluvial watercourse. (b) BEDROCK & SURFICIAL GEOLOGY The attached topo/surficial geology map indicates that Triassic sandstone and shale underlies the site at a depth of at least 100 feet. Atop bedrock rests glacial deposits including glacial lake Hitchcock silt and clay with alternate layers of glacial lake sand deposits. The silt and clay layers are compact and contain low porosity and low permeability. Atop this strata is found stream terrace deposits of sand and fine sand, usually yellow-brown and ranging in thickness of approximately 10-15 feet. According to Mr. LaCava, excavation for house foundations elsewhere in the subdivision encountered nothing but fine sand, which is consistent with state geological map data. Indicated on the surficial geology map as Qst, this layer is the result of post-glacial stream- deposited material which forms the Whaples Brook channel and its flanking terraces. (c) WETLAND AND NON-WETLAND SOILS Wetland soils are twofold. First, the brook channel is classified as alluvial characterized by its bed of transported and sorted sand and silt. Flanking the brook channel is a soil which caps the stream terrace deposits known as Saco, (sb) which is a series of very-poorly drained fine sandy loam or silt loam soils which typically contain standing water for long periods in Winter and Spring according to the USDA/ SCS Soil Survey for Hartford County. Saco soils on the study site support swamp vegetation (trees, woody shrubs and particular groundcovers). Non-Wetland soils flanking the Wetland Saco soils are designated Elmwood according to the Hartford County Soil Survey although that type has been since combined with others to a new designation known as Elmridge. Elmwood sandy loam is divided into 2 groups EnA with 0-3% slopes and EnB with 3-8% slopes. The subject site probably contains a combination of both types. Elmwood characteristics include a fine sandy texture, some glacial silt and clay 24-28" below surface according to the Soil Survey but in this area that may be predominately sand; is moderately well-drained, has moderate to rapid permeability and typically has water saturation 15 to 20" below surface in early Spring. This soil type supports a variety of deciduous and coniferous trees, woody shrubs and groundcover. (d) PLANT AND WILDLIFE HABITAT The combination of brook, wooded swamp and woodland upland terrace creates a regional habitat considering the extent of this landform combination along Whaples Brook, the Mill Pond (known as Podunk Pond or Vintons Mill Pond) and the Podunk River. Everything from songbirds, gamebirds to birds of prey find either shelter, forage or prey here. Also typically found in this woodland habitat type are small rodents, squirrel, rabbit, opossum, raccoon and deer. The study site most likely contains in some capacity, sparrow, flycatchers, vireos, thrush, woodpecker, bluejay, chickadee, robin, grackle, crow and hawk but probably not many, if any, gamebirds such as grouse or waterfowl such as duck due to surrounding urbanization or lack of enough standing water. Opossum and raccoon probably frequent the site in search for forage or small prey and squirrel nest in the vicinity and forage the acorns, roots and berries. Deer may occasionally forage for sapling shoots as they travel the open space areas or the powerline clearing but existing development may keep them away. Also found in this habitat type are Spring Peepers, Wood frogs, spotted salamanders, snakes and a variety of insect life. Without conducting an exhaustive wildlife inventory, the above wildlife profile attests that the area is productive largely due to its combination of woodland and available water. Existing vegetation described in the Field survey section supports a variety of wildlife. Please refer to attached DEP memo regarding the Natural Diversity Data Base. DEP has no evidence of Endangered, Threatened or Special concern species at Beechwoods Farms Subdivision, nor was any evidence of same revealed in my field study. (e) HYDROLOGY The Whaples Brook tributary which traverses the subject site drains uplands and swampland located east of Quarry Brook Drive including adjacent houseyards and a swamp located between a nearby powerline clearing and QuarryBrook Drive. The low area occupied by the brook and swampland receives its water from surface runoff and from groundwater seepage. The swamp represents the result of a seasonally fluctuating water table which may or may not be perched above a deeper regional watertable. The subject site is part of a regional drainage system: subject tributary to Whaples Brook to Podunk Mill Pond to Podunk River to Connecticut River. The headwater swamplands serve as surface flow attenuation and filtering wetlands which in turn help maintain good water quality and erosion prevention downstream. TOPOGRAPHICAL AND GEOLOGY MAPS USGS TOPO QUADP.ANGLE — MANCHESTER QUAD DATED 1963, REVISED 1992 10 .y �c !1,� .�.ti»' o�•1 � ��-.�_�-��� � �,'��'`;\ ���f;,•. Fes; .. ,��• ? --��' •/• �G f l,f j. � � � � ..t' •,��. �; ;_.� ---fie ! VICINITY OF LOT.__11.__...... USGS SURFICIAL GEOLOGY OF MANCHESTER QUAD, MAP GQ-433, DATED 3.965 Qcde 10 ;%.d+cl) 22 te— 71 ' al e Qsd �� r \ mil. I � � /p •. Qst�o u �• \ vs d j �';��% � d Qs �1'� � O al OS ON _ o f y f_1 I Ir. II. FUNCTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS AND ANALYSIS OF SUBJECT WETLAND AT LOT 11 Lot I 1 wetlands (stream and swamp) occupy approximately 1/4 of an acre, most of which is flat- bottom swampland. It contains a wide variety of wetland and wetland fringe vegetation, contains a seasonally-fluctuating inflow of surface water and some groundwater seepage. The stream channels and the swamp are both a stable, productive condition. Using Conn. DEP wetland evaluation criteria is the following analysis: 1) Flood Control - flat bottom swamp provides about 1/4 acre of natural flood storage capacity, due to controlled outlet, it provides some flood storage during storm events. It is part of a larger swamp also. Flood control valuable. 2) Ecological Integrity - Wetland system of stream and swamp provides a variety of habitats for flora and fauna. Integrity is good, condition is stable and function is valuable. 3) Wildlife Habitat - Combination of upland, stream and swampland plus adjacent powerline clearing makes this site supportive of many habitats. Although it is only part of a 7/10 acre contiguous swamp, it supports a variety of wildlife but in small numbers. Value herein is moderate. 4) Nutrient Retention/ Sediment Trapping - Valuable for both especially due to outflow control by culvert. While wetland serves as flood control basin it retains nutrients for uptake by vegetation and it traps sediment. 5) Educational Value -Limited. Considering this as private property, educational value is limited due to lack of public access. Viewing a swamp from the roadway is a fraction as valuable as walking through it to observe plants and wildlife. 6) Visual/Esthetic Amenity - Offers some scenic view to the neighborhood and from the road. Swamp maples display brilliant reds and oranges in autumn. 7) Agricultural value - according to Scs, Saco soils have no agricultural value unless drastically altered and drained. 8) Forestry Potential - none, other than for the landowner's firewood use, commercial logging not worthwhile due to swampy conditions and lack of numerous hardwoods with straight boles which would yield commercial-grade timber. 9) Underlying Aquifer -Limited value, based on the,assumption that this wetland is groundwater seepage fed and surface water-fed. Moderate value based on the assumption that during dry periods, wetland water seeps into groundwater. 10) Noteworthiness - Moderate, although this is a common forested wetland, it does serve a variety of valuable functions among them offering a scenic view. STATE OF CONNECTICUT r� DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION i I NATURAL RESOURCES CENTER '"•�fi��„ 79 Elm Street, Store Level Hartford, CT 06106 Natural Diversity Data Base December 5, 1995 Ernest A. Schaeppi E&E Inc. 266 Conestoga Way Glastonbury, CT 06033 re:Beechwood Farms Subdivision(Section 2) Dear Mr. Schaeppi: I have reviewed Natural Diversity Data Base maps and files regarding the area delineated on the map you provided and listed above. According to our information, there are no known extant populations of Federal or State Endangered, Threatened or Special Concern Species that occur at the site in question. Natural Diversity Data Base information includes all information regarding critical biological resources available to us at the time of the request. This information is a compilation of data collected over the years by the Natural Resources Center's Geological and Natural History Survey and cooperating units of DEP,private conservation groups and the scientific community. This information is not necessarily the result of comprehensive or site- specific field investigations. Consultations with the Data Base should not be substitutes for on-site surveys required for environmental assessments. Current research projects and new contributors continue to identify additional populations of species and locations of habitats of concern,as well as,enhance existing data. Such new information is incorporated into the Data Base as it becomes available. Please contact me if you have further questions at 424-3592. Thank you for consulting the Natural Diversity Data Base. Also be advised that this is a preliminary review and not a final determination. A more detailed review may be conducted as part of any subsequent environmental permit applications submitted to DEP for the proposed site. Sincerely, Dawn M.McKay Biologist/Environmental Analyst (Printed on Recycled Paper) 79 Elm Street • Hartford, CT 06106-5127 An Equal Opportunity Employer III. PROPOSED HOUSE CONSTRUCTION UPON LOT 11 Please refer to lot I 1 plot plan, as shown the entire house is within both the 80-foot watercourse setback and the 40-foot wetland bufler area. Also, most of the house area falls within the existing 20-feet wetland buffer limits. Grading for foundation construction and the north side yard occurs on a 9% slope. Fine sandy Elmwood soils found here and silty Saco Wetland soils found here, according to Guidelines for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control by SWC/DEP are classified: Elmwood - Soil Class C, moderate to rapid permeability, having a K-factor (erosion factor) of 0.24. Saco Wetland soils - Soil Class D, moderate permeability, moderate runoff, having a K-factor of 0.49. (low 0.0 - 0.2, mod. 0.2 - 0.3, high 0.3 - 0.6). Erosion potential for excavated silty Saco soils warrants well-designed and installed erosion controls. The plot plan shows wetland boundary alteration at the previously-mentioned wetland "lobe". Proposed is removal of part of the wetland"lobe" plus a small area at the north sideyard, thus reducing total wetland area by about 800 (0.018 acre) sq. ft. This is about 7% of the total wetland area on lot 11 (800/11,000 sq. ft.= 7.3%) This is a"regulated activity". Fill within wetlands for foundation construction comprises about 250 sq. ft. at 1 ft. deep plus there is an additional sideyard and rear yard fill area of about 550 sq. ft. at about 1 ft. deep. Total fill of 800 sq. ft. equals approximately 29 cubic yards. Fill material would be clean sand. PROCEDURE - 1) Foundation and limit of clearing/fill limits surveyed, staked and bounded by a visible construction fence. 2) 'frees are removed to clear foundation, fill and immediate yard area. 3) Required erosion controls are installed. 4) Stumps are removed and disposed oil-site. 5) Topsoil is stripped and taken off site (to be returned for final restoration). 6) Foundation excavation and fill is done, bottom floor will be at 76.5 ft. This excavation/fill creates an approximately 75.5 ft. base to accommodate drains, crushed stone, footings and slab. 7) Foundation formed and poured, forms removed, asphalt coat applied, foundation backfilled, utility trenches dug, utilities installed, trenches backfilled, periphery graded, exposed soils stabilized during and after house construction. Concrete will be pumped into forms at the rear foundation wall and at the side foundation wall facing wetlands. This measure will avoid unnecessary soil disturbance by heavy concrete trucks. 8) Contractors alerted throughout foundation and house construction to keep debris away from wetlands. Alert includes no deposition of solvents and fluids on soils. 9) ASAP, exposed soils are final-graded, topsoiled, seeded and mulched. Erosion controls at Wetland boundary are reinforced/replaced. Stabilization monitored. NOTE -Proposed construction and grading occurs outside of an existing conservation and drainage easement. The discussed wetland "lobe" is not within the easement area. - Lot 11 "buildable area" as defined in the S.W. wetland regs. sections 2.Lc and 8.4, which excludes wetlands and the 20-40-80 foot setback areas, is nonexistent even though there is about 3500 s.f. non-wetland area suitable for house construction, front and rear yards and a driveway. IV. ANTICIPATED IMPACTS AND MITIGATION OF THOSE IMPACTS Impacts imposed upon a wetland by house construction can be divided into short term and long term. Both are greatly affected by the nature of proposed activities and by how skillfully they are accomplished thus, a poorly done, simple activity can have detrimental consequences while a skillfully done, complex activity can be done with minimal impact. a) LOSS OF WETLAND AREA- Approximately 800 sq. ft. of wetland fringe within the"lobe" area and a narrow band of wetland fringe located at the proposed north side yard, comprising about 7% of the total wetlands on lot #11 will be permanently lost. This long-term impact occurs at the wetland fringe, not at its core, thus the contiguous wetland is not compromised. Also, the lost, fringe area is not as biologically productive as the wetter, core area. Another mitigative factor is that this common forested wetland is very resilient and adaptive. The toe-of-slope for proposed fill would be within 10 to 15 feet from the watercourse, thus the current wetland buffer would be narrowed slightly. MITIGATION -Done skillfully, proposed grading and foundation construction would pose minimal short-term and long-term impact. Using methods to be discussed in proceeding text, the buffer area will be stabilized and enhanced so that it continues to protect and support the wetland and so that none of its functional characteristics are reduced. The reviewers are reminded that there is an existing conservation and drainage easement which includes most of wetlands on-site. This in itself is a mitigative measure, the boundary of which excludes the proposed construction area. It is clear this was done by design at the time of subdivision approval during which a building area was accommodated. The proceeding section will outline the measures to be taken to reduce wetlands impact to a minimum while providing for house construction activities. b) WETLAND FRINGE BOUNDARY ALTERATION BY FILL AND GRADING - The long term impact just discussed is loss of some wetland area. Another long-term impact is the narrowing of wetlands which buffer the watercourse, primarily by regrading the "lobe" area. Here an approximately 15 foot wide section of wetland is stripped and filled for foundation construction and rear yard grading. Along the north sideyard, fill and grading extends about 5 to 10 feet into wetlands. Proposed slopes around the house and rearyard are gentle while the proposed slope north of the driveway is a 2 foot drop in 5 feet (40%), a bit steep. Short-term impacts mostly relate to soil stabilization and erosion control. MITIGATION -to protect the wetland buffer and the wetland - • Grading and construction limit delineation - prior to clearing of trees and brush, a highly visible barrier should be erected such as a bright orange vinyl-net construction fence or snowfence, to clearly define the limit of any activity. • Erosion and Sedimentation controls -just after clearing and before removal of stumps and soil stripping, a durable erosion barrier should be installed along the ----X---- line shown on plans. A primary system and a back-up system is highly recommended such as a buried-toe fabric fence behind a row of staked hay bales, both installed as required in the State Erosion and Sediment Control manual. These controls should be monitored and repaired on a continual basis. *Seasonal Constraints - Since the Saco soils are saturated in winter and spring it would be sensible to insure that final grading and seeding is completed by Sept. 15th in order that enough of the growing season remains to establish grass cover. C) TOPSOIL,REMOVAL GRADING FILL AND HOUSE CONSTRUCTION-Following removal and disposal off-site of stumps, wetland soils to be removed would be graded and taken offsite with non-wetland topsoil for later buffer restoration use. Next, the foundation excavation requires a few feet of"cut" uphill from wetlands and a few feet of fill near and within a 1 Ox20 section of the wetland"lobe". This whole procedure can be done in a few days. Next the foundation footings are formed and poured, then the foundation walls are formed and poured. Usually this done within a week. After the foundation is completed an asphalt coating is applied and dried, foundation drains are installed, utility hookups are made, then foundation and its perimeter can be graded. Already installed erosion controls will keep graded soil away from wetlands. • Foundation Stability - from a non-engineers viewpoint, this geologist can say that the fine sandy terrace soils, which may contain some silt layers, are bedded, sorted and surface-parallel. Since the same unconsolidated sediment is found beneath the Saco wetland soil and the Elmwood terrace soil it stands to reason that the overall load-bearing capacity is even and stable. Furthermore, groundwater is constantly being drained by the 74 foot m.s.l. watercourse, 2.5 feet below the foundation floor level. • Soil Stabilization - graded wetland buffer areas should be seeded with wetland tolerant grasses listed in the State Erosion and Sediment control manual (types 5, 6 or 11): Reed canary with Bird's foot trefoil, Bird's foot with crown vetch and red fescue/bromegrass. Seeded areas should be protected with netting or straw mulch. • Graded slope north of driveway and house- This is an area of special concern since the slope shown on plans has a 2 foot drop in a 5 to 7 foot width, which translates to a 28 to 40% slope. The critical area is that steep slope formed north of the driveway which will receive storm runoff. A few alternatives exist: 1) a more level shoulder with a wall and drains, 2) a longer, more gentle slope which dissipates runoff, 3) curb the driveway and direct stormwater to the street. Number one is not desirable since walls tend to deteriorate over time and collapse, this would sediment the wetland. Number three is best in that it eliminates slopeside sheetwash. However, a fourth alternative was chosen and the plot plan was amended to move the driveway to the south side of the house. Thus the erosion and slope concerns have been mitigated. Driveway drainage will flow into the street. • Yard drainage -the side and rear yard slopes are gentle and small in area thus storm runoff towards wetlands here is not a problem provided the wetland buffer is vegetated with grass and dense groundcover. • Roof drainage - roof drains from the north side of the house are best directed into spreaders to reduce water concentration as it flows toward the wetland. r • Utility trenching - barricade stockpiled soil excavated during utility trenching. Do not direct trench water, if dewatering is necessary, into the wetland. d) PLANT AND WILDLIFE IMPACTS - Obviously some wetlands bordering trees and some wetland vegetation will be lost. It represents a small area and the wildlife impact is minimal. There are no identifiable unusual, threatened or endangered species of plants or wildlife found here. No critical habitat is being disturbed. Most of the species found in this forested wetland are hardy and adaptable. Even the wood frog and spotted salamander adapt to its fluctuating water regime and seasonal changes. Vernal ponds and wetlands needed by spotted salamanders found on this lot will not be disturbed. MITIGATION • Maintain the wetland and a wetland buffer located within and adjacent to the conservation easement area. • Conduct grading, house construction and final stabilization in a manner which does not disturb the realigned wetland buffer and the existing wetland buffer areas. • Wetland Enhancement - following the environmental philosophy: in some capacity - give back what you take, add wetland tolerant, wildlife supporting vegetation to the wetland boundary and within the wetland. Recommendations: 1) In sparse areas of the wetland, plant Elderberry, Winterberry, American Cranberry or Amur Honeysuckle for wildlife cover and berries(Section 6 of the State erosion and sediment control manual). Such enhancement shrubs should be tolerant with poorly to somewhat poorly drained soils and they should provide food for wildlife. About 6 shrubs are recommended for planting. 2) Plant a 75 foot long shrubrow along the watercourse/wetland buffer along the conservation easement boundary. Use low-growing shrubbery such as American Cranberry, a good hedge former, which will not obstruct the house and a pathway around the house nor interfere with the wetland. (Section 6 of the State manual). 3) Plant 2 or 3 hemlocks or cedars at the non-wetland area meeting the watercourse. • Wetland Expansion - Wetland creation is often used to mitigate wetland loss or infringement. It is not appropriate in this case due to presence of a stable watercourse and the viability of non- wetlands located north of the watercourse and also due to a spatial constraint. It would be best to limit disturbance to that shown on plans. e) GROUNDWATER AND THE AQUIFER Both public water supply and sanitary sewer service will service the lot. There will not be any on- site septic system nor a below ground heating oil tank. Therefore potential pollution from septic effluent or heating oil is not a potential impact on groundwater. f) OTHER MITIGATING FACTORS • Construction management - The developer does not sell his lots for construction by others. Rather he has his own subcontractors who do everything from clearing to house construction to final stabilization, while he oversees the entire process. Therefore it is his directive to make sure ` that all construction debris, solvents, paints, cleaners and other substances which may litter or pollute the wetland are properly disposed and taken off-site. His successful and careful construction of Beechwood Farms subdivision speaks for itself regarding such matters. • Conservation easement and open space dedication- The developer has dedicated 9 acres of wetland/watercourse property to the Town of South Windsor and he has also placed conservation easements over many wetland areas throughout the Beechwood Farms subdivision including the subject lot. g) ALTERNATIVES Within the"build" alternative is the construction of a smaller house thus reducing wetland infringement. From a wetland standpoint this is viable but from a practical viewpoint this would be inconsistent with the subdivision and from its real estate sense. The developer wishes to proceed with the submitted plot plan. Within the"no build" alternative is only one option and that is to convert the lot into open space. Someone would have to purchase it -the town or some preservation entity. The developer has already had the lot subdivided and encumbered with a conservation and drainage easement. He has been paying building lot rate property taxes on the lot for years. The developer does not wish to take this route. CONCLUSION - It is the writer's opinion that construction of a house within the reviewed parameters will not adversely affect the adjacent wetlands nor the watercourse. Both short-term and long-term impacts can be minimal by exercising good erosion control, good site engineering and management, and by providing wetland-enhancing and buffering vegetation. It is the writer's experience that LaCava Construction Company constructs its subdivisions and builds its houses with utmost care. The writer, acting as Glastonbury Environmental Planner/Wetland Officer from 1982-1987, followed many of this company's developments from design to completion. Their work, especially in environmentally sensitive areas like that proposed here, was always done in a timely and skillful manner. Therefore, it is my opinion that the proposed activities will not cause significant impact to the wetlands and that these activities only present very minimal impacts. Respectfully Submitted, a j6da6^7 I Ernest A. Schaeppi Environmental and Land Use Planning Consultant REAR: 30' tbU%LOAe)LE AQEA, C1� REqu�c no►as� - 1.1oNE 1MPe.2V10US Co�ERAU�- = 8.\% P�F��ssc�r� MAP PAVECIi L- r_3n.40 CONSTRUCTION PLOT PLAN LOT 11 BEECHWOOD FARMS QUARRY BROOK D R I V E SOUTH WI NDS0R , CONN. PREPARED FOR H E LACAVA CONSTRUCTION Co. REINO E. HYYPPA 8 ASSOCIATES CIVIL ENGINEERS 84 LAND SURVEYORS I?q IIFP000 01-'1111 GLASTONBURY, CONN. 06033 (203) 633- 5218 SCALE SHOWN DATE 11 - 16 - 95 MAP No. 51 - 95 T� E� ioo Yam•�c+s�o� —J '== =' ='o--"�'— —� 6 DO ut tU U.tE . � pv-o os'LZ �Sc (� 'c�v evurw¢Utr. CErlm F�e. sus I, TOP Pp� / N t.�a•�4�5 vd- Cy4.��ooe�� a w,14 l� 51Li Ct_f5:E Q / Q �5 'A` t CONSERV.4T/ON ORAINAGE EASEMENT Q �t LtM1` CM= WF..TWNC?S • � W�LAti1C�; AS � swPt?oVGG 'T.�GC�KPVNtC PLL.ti� 2C-,*40 S.F. loo YEAP NSF T=Lpnti LIMlT JOHN J. L AWREn,CE, Jr •6 ALTER, SHERWOOD & JANENDA, LLC ATTORNEYS AT LAW 701 HEBRON AVENUE DAVID F.SHERWOOD P.O.BOX 1420 MANCHESTER OFFICE JOEL E.JANENDA GLASTONBURY,CONNECTICUT 0(3033-(3620 249 EAST CENTER STREET PETER JAY ALTER TELEPHONE (860) 652-4020 MANCHESTER,CT 06040 MARIO Di LORETO" (860) 643-9579 TELECOPIER(8G0) 652-4022 *ALSO ADMITTED IN MA AND NY Please reply to Glastonbury March 14, 1996 Mr. Jeffrey Folger 7z 1 t Zoning and Wetland Enforcement Officer MAAR `` 40,916 Inland Wetlands Agency Town of South Windsor South Windsor INLAND WETLANDS ACtNCYJ 1540 Sullivan Avenue CONSERVATION CONNINIISSION South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 Reference: Lot 12, Beechwood Farms II, Subdivision Dear Jeff: Please be advised that this firm represents LaCava Construction Company, the owner of the above-referenced, subdivided, building lot within the Beechwood Farms, Section II Subdivision. I previously delivered to you a plot plan and environmental report prepared on behalf of the property owner with respect to Lot No. 12. Pursuant to section 8.4 of the Town of South Windsor Inland Wetlands Agency/Conservation Commission Regulations, please accept this letter as a request to the Commission for a waiver to the buildable area requirement as defined in Section 2.lc of the Regulations. Based on our discussion, I am hopeful that you can place this matter on the Commission's agenda for April 3, 1996. If you require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Your cooperation and suggestions are greatly appreciated. Yours very truly, ALTER, SHERWOOD & JANENDA, LLC /eterr rmg Enclosure Environmental/Wetland Impact Statement Prepared for: LaCava Construction Company : By: Ernest A. Schaeppi, Environmental Lot 12 Beechwood Farms SUBD. II & Land Use Planning Consultant Quarrybrook Dr., S. Windsor, CT. 266 Conestoga Way, Glastonbury, CT. December, 1995 Lot 12 is proposed for house construction adjacent to and partially within a wetland fringe area. The lot fronts on an approved and constructed town road and it has already been subdivided as shown in the South Windsor Land Records. Presented here is a report which describes the field conditions, relevant scientific information and proposed activities for use by the South Windsor Inland Wetlands & Watercourses Agency in its deliberation about house construction upon this lot. This report is structured to address the appropriate requirements in sections 8.1 to 8.4 of the current Town of South Windsor Inland Wetlands/Conservation Commission regulations. Section I. - Field Survey, Bedrock & Surficial Geology, Wetland & non-wetland soils, plant and wildlife habitat and hydrology. Section II. -List of functional characteristics of the wetland, Memo form Conn. DEP regarding Natural Resource Data Base information for the area. Section III. - Proposed activities Section IV. - Anticipated impacts and mitigation of impacts. Attached for reference : Lot 12 plot plan as drafted by Reino E. Hyppa& Associates, Civil Engineers & Land Surveyors, Glastonbury, Scale 1" = 40', with wetland boundaries delineated by Maureen Fitzgerald, Certified Soil Scientist, Geotoxi Associates Inc., Glastonbury; photocopies of Manchester Topo Quad #38 and Surficial Geology map GQ - 433 depicting the study area. Location: # ELL t NIL IN� L A � Y GFgsq p0 10)u �A i 4 POD K C CARRYB �� C-J �o ROq U t> E �. - BEECHWOOD u STREET � Wha�c = SUBDIVISION ,SroaK ,1 I k • MP.P OF BEECHWOOD FARMS SUBDIVISION SECTIONS I & II SHOWING LOT 12, WHAPLES BROOK AND 9 ACRES OF OPEN SPACE WHICH INCLUDES WHAPLES BROOK AND ASSOCIATED WETLANDS 42 / \\43 44 1 45 1 46 1 47 1 48 1 49 I 50 1 51 / 152 17 `•.'I8 ins co 41 BEECHWOOD I ( FARMS I 1 SECTION I II 40 1 39 1 38 1 37 1 36 1 35. I 34 1 33 1 32 14 1. ACCESS TO I 1 15.51 ACRES\ 53 f 54 / 13 ` V .OPEN SPACE 1, 62 55 ' c / 61 60 12 59 56. 28 s 58 l 57 >R II q I - 209 211 212 1 213 PUMP u A STATION 25 10 1 a / J \ 210 _ 214 24 dT H4yEN CIR. _ a 215 FFy 1591 ACRES 22 216 O ^ TUDOR HILL � 21 �.•L. 9 ti� O 0 217 19 5P p0 St, Q. R IG R LE 4 g9 218 0 u i i WIPLES..BROOK,...ALSO -KNOWN.-AS. g . QUARRY..BROOK...ON.•SOME..RESOURCE ;. BEECHWOOD FARMS" MAPS...................................................... . o ....OPEN..SPACE.... 1 CONST�UGT(ON ! PEEPAZED FCe PLOT PLAN LO-T \Z LAcAVA CON5TtzUCTION CO . 5EECNWOOD FALMS N Q L)AQi�!`r 5E00K D ENE• SOUTH W I MDS0ew CONN. \--TEL.LA N1 N/F 5 JOHN P-AYMO"D qejel `y- SL'2VAT%O �eAiN�G6 \ l�3 } 12 O AN Uz«t,T'r �EMGMT l l l ) N/F LACav,+ 4 w th - - -- Now Y � x w �� t _ t o0 77fona5 '10� i (p t < <l G� 9 p CS dt et sHN.PVG 5 1 o o r� S -- 4 -- IVE N I Pl'C.�.QL.P. �aTE2 ,_ W --- W _ y LOT EY15T1NG CCNnO02 - - ----- - -- ?4 REINO_ E. HYYPPA d ASSOCIATES F20P05E0 cowck)R CIVIL ENGINEERS a. LAND SURVEYORS. WETLAND LIMIT ��•�...L1..•�•��F 124 HEBRON AVENUE Clearing limit, construction GLASTONBURY) CONN. 06033 fence, haybales & silt fence X X (203) 633- 5218 SCALE: I"=40' DATE: 8-1-95 MAP Na.51 -95-f2 Possible e1;pansion of" • " Conservation and 're Drainage Easement I. FIELD CONDITIONS FOUND AT LOT 12, EAST SIDE OF QUARRYBROOK DRIVE (a) FIELD SURVEYS CONDUCTED ON NOV. 7 AND NOV. 25, 1995 Non-Wetland Area - The upland stream terrace located north of swampland on the lot contains a gentle slope of 4 to 6%. Soils are a find sand covered by leaf and partially decomposed litter. Trees found include a large shagbark hickory, oak, beech, maple, deciduous tree saplings and some white pine saplings. Shrubgrowth and groundcover is sparse. A second non-wetland area is also found at the southeast corner of the lot, here vegetation is mostly oak, maple and some saplings and slopes are gentle. Wetland Area - Saco soils, swampland and a tributary of Whaples Brook occupy a 70 to 100 foot wide midsection of the lot aligned on an east/west axis._ At the west edge of the swamp is a 30" RCP (culvert) and a stable slope composed of fill graded for construction of QuarryBrook Drive. It appears that other than loss of wetland area necessary for road construction, the wetland has not been adversely affected. At the east side, the tributary branches as the flanking wetland widens. This tributary is alluvial and channel depth ranges from 1/4 to 2 feet. Water depth ranges from 1 to 6". Its width varies from about 2 to 5 feet although its defined channel is obscured by ponded. water midpoint on the lot. Here, swamp water depth ranges from 1 to 3". The tributary is stable and was flowing on 11/7 and 11/25/95 with no observable turbidity. Vegetation found includes white oak, maple, ironwood, and birch trees and ground pine. Closer to, and within the ponded and saturated soil area, along the tributary is highbush blueberry, tussock sedge, mosses, ferns, sphagnum moss, and most likely skunk cabbage and Jack-in-the-Pulpit. Near the tributary branch there is a cluster of maples with trunks ranging in size from 10" -18" dbh. Also there is a twin oak with trunks of 18" and 24" dbh. Near wetland flag#10 is a broken twin oak and due south about 40 feet are some more large oaks of 12" and 18" dbh. Vegetative variety suggests that this swamp wetland is thriving and that it tolerates watertable fluctuation quite well. It is a typical New England forested wetland and it is among the most common and widespread wetlands found in the region. Such swamplands, provide habitat or foraging grounds for a wide variety of wildlife including songbirds, birds of prey (hawk), grey squirrel, small rodents, raccoon and opossum, spotted salamanders, wood frogs, spring peepers, even snakes and abundant insect life. According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats and Conn. DEP's Wetlands of Connecticut this is a Palustrine Forested Wetland (Swamp) which contains an alluvial watercourse. (b) BEDROCK & SURFICIAL GEOLOGY The attached topo/surficial geology map indicates that Triassic sandstone and shale underlies the site at a depth of at least 100 feet. Atop bedrock rests glacial deposits including glacial lake Hitchcock silt and clay with alternate layers of glacial lake sand deposits. The silt and clay layers are compact and contain low porosity and low permeability. Atop this strata is found stream terrace deposits of sand and fine sand, usually yellow-brown and ranging in thickness of approximately 10-15 feet. According to Joe LaCava, excavation for most of the house foundations elsewhere in the subdivision encountered nothing but fine sand, which is consistent with state geological map data. Indicated on the surficial geology map as Qst, this layer is the result of post- glacial stream-deposited material which forms the Whaples Brook channel and its flanking terraces. (c) WETLAND AND NON-WETLAND SOILS Wetland soils are twofold. First, the brook channel is classified as alluvial characterized by its bed f of transported and sorted sand and silt. Flanking the brook channel is a soil which caps the stream terrace deposits known as Saco, (sb) which is a series of very-poorly drained fine sandy loam or silt loam soils which typically contain standing water for long periods in Winter and Spring according to the USDA/ SCS Soil Survey for Hartford County. Saco soils on the study site support swamp vegetation (trees, woody shrubs and particular groundcovers). Non-Wetland soils flanking the Wetland Saco soils are designated Elmwood according to the Hartford County Soil Survey although that type has been since combined with others to a new designation known as Elmridge. Elmwood sandy loam is divided into 2 groups EnA with 0-3% slopes and EnB with 3-8% slopes. The subject site probably contains a combination of both types. Elmwood characteristics include a fine sandy texture, some glacial silt and clay 24-28" below surface according to the Soil Survey but in this area that may be predominately sand; is moderately well-drained, has moderate to rapid permeability and typically has water saturation 15 to 20" below surface in early Spring. This soil type supports a variety of deciduous and coniferous trees, woody shrubs and groundcover. (d) PLANT AND WILDLIFE HABITAT The combination of brook, wooded swamp and woodland upland terrace creates a regional habitat considering the extent of this landform combination along Whaples Brook, the Mill Pond (known as Podunk Pond or Vintons Mill Pond) and the Podunk River. Everything from songbirds, gamebirds to birds of prey find either shelter, forage or prey here. Also typically found in this woodland habitat type are small rodents, squirrel, rabbit, opossum, raccoon and deer. The study site most likely contains in some capacity, sparrow, flycatchers, vireos, thrush, woodpecker, bluejay, chickadee, robin, grackle, crow and hawk but probably not many, if any, gamebirds such as grouse or waterfowl such as duck due to surrounding urbanization or lack of enough standing water. Opossum and raccoon probably frequent the site in search for forage or small prey and squirrel nest in the vicinity and forage the acorns, roots and berries. Deer may occasionally forage for sapling shoots as they travel the open space areas or the powerline clearing but existing development may keep them away. Also found in this habitat type are Spring Peepers, Wood frogs, spotted salamanders, snakes and a variety of insect life. Without conducting an exhaustive wildlife inventory, the above wildlife profile attests that the area is productive largely due to its combination of woodland and available water. Existing vegetation described in the Field survey section supports a variety of wildlife. Please refer to attached DEP memo regarding the Natural Diversity Data Base. DEP has no evidence of Endangered, Threatened or Special concern species at Beechwoods Farms Subdivision, nor was any evidence of same found during my field study. (e) HYDROLOGY The Whaples Brook tributary which traverses the subject site drains uplands and swampland located east of Quarry Brook Drive including adjacent houseyards and a swamp located between a nearby powerline clearing and QuarryBrook Drive. The low area occupied by the brook and swampland receives its water from surface runoff and from groundwater seepage. The swamp represents the result of a seasonally fluctuating water table which may or may not be perched above a deeper regional watertable. It is possible that an underlying regional aquifer exists above or below a glacial lake silt/clay formation previously mentioned. Nevertheless, the subject site is part of a regional drainage system: subject tributary to Whaples Brook to Podunk Mill Pond to Podunk River to Connecticut River. The headwater swamplands serve as surface flow attenuation and filtering wetlands which in turn help maintain good water quality and erosion prevention downstream. TOPOGRAPHICAL AND GEOLOGY MAPS USGS TOPO QUADRANGLE — MANCHESTER QUAD DATED 1963, REVISED 1992 �� �.� '• • `;�.• '.• vim, � _ -_ C poY o - ' .mil\� \� �--;—y-••� -,. _ -_` l\��--:.i �- ..�� 10 VICINITY OF LOT 12 USGS SURFICIAL GEOLOGY OF MANCHESTER QUAD, MAP GQ-433, DATED 1965 Qcde 71. s[ 10 - j QI 6 ?(sd+cl) 22 gyp: o Qt 40 1 ,.p odzi k_ a r ` �f �- Tj s � p >s 'Qal cl x' Q 2 �� qa sa \� l Ft an �AAs � —Q ° Y 'i II. FUNCTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS AND ANALYSIS OF SUBJECT WETLAND AT LOT 12 Lot 12 wetlands (stream and swamp) occupy approximately 0.45 acre, most of which is flat-bottom swampland. It contains a wide variety of wetland and wetland fringe vegetation, contains a seasonally-fluctuating inflow of surface water and some groundwater seepage. The stream channels and the swamp are both a stable, productive condition. Using Conn. DEP wetland evaluation criteria is the following analysis: 1) Flood Control - flat bottom swamp provides about 0.45 acre of natural flood storage capacity, due to controlled outlet, it provides some flood storage during storm events. It is part of a larger swamp also. Flood control valuable. 2) Ecological Integrity- Wetland system of stream and swamp provides a variety of habitats for flora and fauna. Integrity is good, condition is stable and function is valuable. 3) Wildlife Habitat - Combination of upland, stream and swampland plus adjacent powerline clearing makes this site supportive of many habitats. Although it is only part of a 7/10 acre contiguous swamp, it supports a variety of wildlife but in small numbers. Value herein is moderate. 4) Nutrient Retention/ Sediment Trapping - Valuable for both especially due to outflow control by culvert. While wetland serves as flood control basin it retains nutrients for uptake by vegetation and it traps sediment. 5) Educational Value -Limited. Considering this as private property, educational value is limited due to lack of public access. Viewing a swamp from the roadway is a fraction as valuable as walking through it to observe plants and wildlife. 6) Visual/Esthetic Amenity - Offers some scenic view to the neighborhood and from the road. Swamp maples display brilliant reds and oranges in autumn. 7) Agricultural value according to Scs, Saco soils have no agricultural value unless drastically altered and drained. 8) Forestry Potential - none, other than for the landowner's firewood use, commercial logging not worthwhile due to swampy conditions and lack of numerous hardwoods with straight boles which would yield commercial-grade timber. 9) Underlying Aquifer - Limited value, based on the assumption that this wetland is groundwater seepage fed and surface water-fed. Moderate value based on the assumption that during dry periods, wetland water seeps into groundwater. 10) Noteworthiness -Moderate, although this is a common forested wetland, it does serve a variety of valuable functions among them offering a scenic view. STATE OF CONNECTICUT 4 DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION OW V,iV.I NATURAL RESOURCES CENTER 79 Elm Street, Store Level Hartford, CT 06106 Natural Diversity Data Base December 5, 1995 Ernest A. Schaeppi E&E Inc. 266 Conestoga Way Glastonbury,CT 06033 re:Beechwood Farms Subdivision(Section 2) Dear Mr. Schaeppi: I have reviewed Natural Diversity Data Base maps and files regarding the area delineated on the map you provided and listed above. According to our information, there are no known extant populations of Federal or State Endangered,Threatened or Special Concern Species that occur at the site in question. Natural Diversity Data Base information includes all information regarding critical biological resources available to us at the time of the request. This information is a compilation of data collected over the years by the Natural Resources Center's Geological and Natural History Survey and cooperating units of DEP,private conservation groups and the scientific community. This information is not necessarily the result of comprehensive or site- specific field investigations. Consultations with the Data Base should not be substitutes for on-site surveys required for environmental assessments. Current research projects and new contributors continue to identify additional populations of species and locations of habitats of concern,as well as,enhance existing data. Such new information is incorporated into the Data Base as it becomes available. Please contact me if you have further questions at 424-3592. Thank you for consulting the Natural Diversity Data Base. Also be advised that this is a preliminary review and not a final determination. A more detailed review may be conducted as part of any subsequent environmental permit applications submitted to DEP for the proposed site. Sincerely, Dawn M.McKay Biologist/Environmental Analyst (Printed on Recycled Paper) 79 Elm Street • Hartford, CT 06106-5127 An Equal Opportunily Employer 111. PROPOSED HOUSE CONSTRUCTION ON LOT 12 Please refer to lot 12 plot plan, as shown the entire house is within the 80-foot watercourse setback and the 40-foot wetland buffer area. Also, one-half of the house falls within the existing 20-foot wetland buffer area. Grading for foundation construction and the south sideyard occurs on a 8-9% slope. Fine sandy Elmwood soil and silty Saco wetland soils found here, according to Guidelines for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control by SWC/DEP, are classified: Elmwood - Soil Class C, moderate to rapid permeability, having a K-factor(erosion factor) of 0.24. Saco wetland soils - soil Class D, moderate permeability, moderate runoff, having a K-factor of 0.49 (low 0.0 - 0.2, mod. 0.2 - 0.3, high 0.3 - 0.6). Erosion potential for excavated silty Saco soils warrants well- designed and installed erosion controls. The plot plan shows wetland boundary alteration for foundation and sideyard grading. Accordingly, a 20' X 37.5' area (750 sq. ft.) of wetland is filled for foundation and perimeter grading with an approximate depth of I foot. Wetland area lost of the 0.40 acres of wetland on Lot 12 is about 4.5% (750/16,800 sq. ft. =4.5%). This is a "regulated activity". Fill within wetlands for foundation construction and sideyard grading area of 750 sq. ff. at an approximate depth of I foot amounts to about 750 cubic feet (28 cubic yards). Dill material used would be clean sand. PROCEDURE 1) Foundation and limit of clearing/fill limits surveyed, staked and bounded by construction fence. 2) Trees are removed to clear foundation, fill and immediate yard area. 3) Required erosion controls are installed. 4) Stumps are removed and disposed off=site. 5) Topsoil is stripped and taken off site(to be returned for final restoration). 6) Foundation excavation and fill is done, bottom floor will be at 76.5 ft. This excavation/fill creates an approximately 75.5 ft. base to accommodate drains, crushed stone, footings and slab. 7) Foundation formed and poured, forms removed, asphalt coat applied, foundation backfilled, utility trenches dug, utilities installed, trenches backfilled, periphery graded, exposed soils stabilized during and after house construction. Concrete will be pumped into forms at the rear foundation wall and at the side foundation wall facing wetlands. This measure will avoid unnecessary soil disturbance by heavy concrete trucks. 8) Contractors alerted throughout foundation and house construction to keep debris away from wetlands. Alert includes no deposition of solvents and fluids on soils. 9) ASAP, exposed soils are final-graded, topsoiled, seeded and mulched. Erosion controls at Wetland boundary are reinforced/replaced. Stabilization monitored. NOTE: Proposed construction and grading occurs outside of an existing conservation and drainage easement. Lot 12 "buildable area" as defined in the S.W. wetland reps. sections 2.Lc and 8.4, which excludes the 20-40-80 foot setback areas, measures about 170 sq. ft. . However, there is about 4600 sq. ft. of suitable area for a house, front and rear yards and a driveway. IV. ANTICIPATED IMPACTS AND MITIGATION OF THOSE IMPACTS Impacts imposed upon a wetland by house construction can be divided into short term and long term. Both are greatly affected by the nature of proposed activities and by how skillfully they are accomplished thus, a poorly done, simple activity can have detrimental consequences while a skillfully done, complex activity can be done with minimal impact. a) LOSS OF WETLAND AREA - Approximately 750 sq. ft. of wetland fringe located due South of the proposed house, comprising about 1.1% of the total wetland area on Lot 12, will be permanently lost. This long term impact occurs at the wetland fringe, not at its core, thus the contiguous wetland is not compromised. This fringe area is not as biologically productive as the wetter, core area. Another mitigating factor is that this common forested wetland is very resilient and adaptive. Fill for foundation construction extends 1 to 1 '/2 feet above existing ground contours at the wetland fringe area at a distance of about 40 to 50 feet from the watercourse. Currently the wetland boundary is about 55 to 60 feet away from the watercourse. MITIGATION - Done skillfully, proposed grading and foundation construction would pose minimal short-term and long-term impact. Using methods to be discussed in proceeding text, the buffer area will be stabilized and enhanced so that it continues to protect and support the wetland and so that none of its functional characteristics are reduced. The reviewers are reminded that there is an existing conservation and drainage easement which includes most of wetlands on-site. This in itself is a mitigative measure, the boundary of which excludes the proposed construction area. It is clear this was done by design at the time of subdivision approval during which a building area was accommodated. The proceeding section will outline the measures to be taken to reduce wetlands impact to a minimum while providing for house construction activities. b) WETLAND FRINGE BOUNDARY ALTERATION BY FILL AND GRADING- The long-term impact just discussed is loss of some wetland fringe area. Another impact is a narrowing of the wetland buffer flanking the north side of the watercourse by about 20 feet. As shown on plans, existing contours remain as is at the rear yard, contours on the south sideyard are altered by moving the 76-foot level out into the wetland fringe at a distance ranging from 15 to 20 feet south of the house. Also, grading creates a 2-foot drop in about a 5 foot width ( a 40% slope)just south of the driveway. This occurs in the wetland fringe for a distance of 10 linear feet. For this reason, original plans were amended to move the driveway to the other side of the house. Short-term impacts mostly relate to erosion control and soil stabilization. MITIGATION - to protect the wetland buffer and the wetland • Driveway Location - The driveway was moved on the plot plan to the north side of the house as an alternative which minimizes grading and creation of a steep slope along wetlands. • Grading and construction limit delineation - prior to clearing of trees and brush, a highly visible barrier should be erected such as a bright orange vinyl-net construction fence or snowfence, to clearly define the limit of any activity. • Erosion and Sedimentation controls -just after clearing and before removal of stumps and soil stripping, a durable erosion barrier should be installed along the ----X---- line shown on plans. A primary system and a back-up system is highly recommended such as a buried-toe fabric fence behind a row of staked hay bales, both installed as required in the State Erosion and Sediment Control manual. These controls should be monitored and repaired constantly. • Seasonal Constraints - Since the Saco soils are saturated in winter and spring it would be sensible to insure that final grading and seeding is completed by Sept. 15th in order that enough of the growing season remains to establish grass cover. c) TOPSOIL REMOVAL FILL GRADING AND HOUSE CONSTRUCTION - Following removal and disposal off-site of stumps, wetland soils to be removed would be graded and taken off site with non-wetland soils for later restoration use. The stockpile area shown on plans is level and thus i erosion potential is minimal. Next the foundation excavation requires about 4 feet of excavation at the point farthest away from wetlands and about 1 '/2 to 2 feet below existing contour at the wetland fringe area. This whole procedure can be done in a few days. Next the foundation footings are formed and poured, then the foundation walls are formed and poured. Usually this due within a week. After the foundation is completed an asphalt coating is applied and dried, foundation drains are installed, utility hookups are made, then foundation and its perimeter can be graded. Already installed erosion controls will keep graded soil away from wetlands. • Foundation Stability - from a non-engineers viewpoint, this geologist can say that the fine sandy terrace soils, which may contain some silt layers, are bedded, sorted and surface-parallel. Since the same unconsolidated sediment is found beneath the Saco wetland soil and the Elmwood terrace soil it stands to reason that the overall load-bearing capacity is even and stable. Furthermore, groundwater is constantly being drained by the 74 foot m.s.l. watercourse, 2.5 feet below the foundation floor level. • Soil Stabilization- graded wetland buffer areas should be seeded with wetland tolerant grasses listed in the State Erosion and Sediment control manual (types 5, 6 or 11): Reed canary with Bird's foot trefoil, Bird's foot with crown vetch and red fescue/bromegrass. Seeded areas should be protected with netting or straw mulch. • Graded Slope South of House and driveway- Gradual slopes south of the house are gentle but an area of special concern is the 2 foot vertical drop in a 5 foot width, creating a 40% slope. This slope, if it receives driveway runoff, may be erosion-prone. A few alternatives exist: 1) a more level shoulder with a wall and drains, 2) a longer, more gentle slope which dissipates runoff, 3) curb the driveway and direct stormwater to the street. Number one is not desirable since walls tend to deteriorate over time and collapse, this would sediment the wetland. Number three is best in that it eliminates slopeside sheetwash. However, a fourth alternative previously discussed, was chosen and the original plot plan was amended to move the driveway to the north side of the house. Thus, erosion and slope concerns have been mitigated. Driveway drainage will flow into the street. • Yard drainage - the side and rear yard slopes are gentle and small in area thus storm runoff towards wetlands here is not a problem provided the wetland buffer is vegetated with grass and dense groundcover. • Roof drainage - roof drains from the north side of the house are best directed into spreaders to reduce water concentration as it flows toward the wetland. • Utility trenching - barricade stockpiled soil excavated during utility trenching. Do not direct trench water, if dewatering is necessary, into the wetland. d) PLANT AND WILDLIFE IMPACTS - Obviously some wetlands bordering trees and some wetland vegetation will be lost. It represents a small area and the wildlife impact is minimal. There are no identifiable unusual, threatened or endangered species of plants or wildlife found here. No critical habitat is being disturbed. Most of the species found in this forested wetland are hardy and adaptable. Even the wood frog and spotted salamander adapt to its fluctuating water regime and seasonal changes. Vernal ponds and wetlands needed by spotted salamanders found on this lot will not be disturbed. MITIGATION • Maintain the wetland and a wetland buffer located within and adjacent to the conservation easement area. • Conduct grading, house construction and final stabilization in a manner which does not disturb the realigned wetland buffer and the existing wetland buffer areas. • Wetland Enhancement - following the environmental philosophy: in some capacity - give back what you take, add wetland tolerant, wildlife supporting vegetation to the wetland boundary and within the wetland. Recommendations: 1) In sparse areas of the wetland, plant Elderberry, Winterberry, American Cranberry or Amur Honeysuckle for wildlife cover and berries (Section 6 of the State erosion and sediment control manual). Such enhancement shrubs should be tolerant with poorly to somewhat poorly drained soils and they should provide food for wildlife. About 6 shrubs are recommended for planting. 2) Plant a shrubrow along the newly-graded 76 foot contour just south of the house. Use low- growing shrubbery such as American Cranberry, a good hedge former, which will not obstruct the house and a pathway around the house nor interfere with the wetland. (Section. 6 of the State manual). 3) Plant 2 hemlocks or cedars in the non-wetland area south of the watercourse. • Wetland Expansion - Wetland creation is often used to mitigate wetland loss or infringement. It is not appropriate in this case due to presence of a stable watercourse and the viability of non- wetlands located north of the watercourse and also due to a spatial constraint. It would be best to limit disturbance to that shown on plans. • Conservation and Drainage Easement Enlargement - It would be possible to extend the existing easement to the north as shown on the plot plan by a series of dots with an arrow over then "ce" is printed. This change would increase the wetland area protected by the easement. e) GROUNDWATER AND THE AQUIFER Both public water supply and sanitary sewer service will service the lot. There will not be any on- site septic system nor a below ground heating oil tank. Therefore potential pollution from septic effluent or heating oil is not a potential impact on groundwater. >� OTHER MITIGATING FACTORS • Construction management - The developer does not sell his lots for construction by others. Rather he has his own subcontractors who do everything from clearing to house construction to final stabilization, while he oversees the entire process. Therefore it is his directive to make sure that all construction debris, solvents, paints, cleaners and other substances which may litter or pollute the wetland are properly disposed and taken off-site. His successful and careful construction of Beechwood Farms subdivision speaks for itself regarding such matters. • Conservation easement and open space dedication - The developer has dedicated 9 acres of wetland/watercourse property to the Town of South Windsor and he has also placed conservation easements over many wetland areas throughout the Beechwood Farms subdivision including the subject lot. g) ALTERNATIVES Within the"build" alternative is the construction of a smaller house thus reducing wetland infringement. From a wetland standpoint this is viable but from a practical viewpoint this would be inconsistent with the subdivision and from its real estate sense. The developer wishes to proceed with the submitted plot plan. Within the"no build" alternative is only one option and that is to convert the lot into open space. Someone would have to purchase it -the town or some preservation entity. The developer has already had the lot subdivided and encumbered with a conservation and drainage easement. He has been paying building lot rate property taxes on the lot for years. The developer does not wish to take this route. CONCLUSION- It is the writer's opinion that construction of a house within the reviewed parameters will not adversely affect the adjacent wetlands nor the watercourse. Both short-term and long-term impacts can be minimal by exercising good erosion control, good site engineering and management, and by providing wetland-enhancing and buffering vegetation. It is the writer's experience that LaCava Construction Company constructs its subdivisions and builds its houses with utmost care. The writer, acting as Glastonbury Environmental Planner/Wetland Officer from 1982-1987, followed many of this company's developments from design to completion. Their work, especially in environmentally sensitive areas like that proposed here, was always done in a timely and skillful manner. Therefore, it is my opinion that the proposed activities will not cause significant impact to the wetlands and that these activities only present very minimal impacts. Respectfully Submitte4 a Ernest A. Schaeppi Environmental and Land Use Planning Consultant r 4 b Y"ARF k REQUIRED 5ET61�� FRONT : t t . SIDE : REAR: 30' l5u%l-VA,BL6- AREA— IMPERVIOUS CAVE.RAC-�E.� "1.-l"/o q�ES50Q� MAP i.�0. 25 PAiZGEL 3°1 CONSTRUCTION PLOT PLAN LOT 12 BEECHWOOD FARMS QUARRY BROOK D R I V E SOUTH WI NDS0R , CONN. PREPARED IFOR THE LACAVA CONSTRUCTION Co. REINO E. HYYPPA d ASSOCIATI CIVIL ENGINEERS 8 LAND SURVEYORS 124 HEBRON AVENUE GLASTONBURY, CONN. 06033 (203) 633- 5218 SCALE SHOWN DATE 11 - 16 -95 MAP No. 51 t 'J Q UA/c'k Y B/POOfd" DRIVE ` ca 14r— -na 11 6U\LOA5LE AREA 60 CON�TQUCTI yKn FENCE__ 1 oo�av µou3F. 41AH eAL_E5 r, ST FmIQL. 94A.5 I W T. Cam Q U 51LT FENCE. �1--- PVAX Sr4PwPS2o�j W '� v i (SCE. p-SCa.�TA1 Frj � -+S 80 JN ' rLEGbfZ \' LL 1 \ ! ` Fl-oo LIMIT LL U -T aG Aai;4MC;TLr 12 oo o c•�,a¢aPq,c Pv..as , o CGWSERVAT/ON, OMNAGE {tul irl< I EASEMENT \�,. I 0 20 o N 'NEjuuo,, As r-kar,(.c NAP vOHN 1 \\ W. I 1 \\ a �v Q �y A ALTER, SHERWOOD & JANENDA, LLC ATTORNEYS AT LAW 701 HEBRON AVENUE DAVID F.SHERWOOD P.O.BOX 1420 MANCHESTER OFFICE JOEL E.JANENDA GLASTONBURY,CONNECTICUT 06033-6620 249 EAST CENTER STREET PETER JAY ALTER TELEPHONE (860) 652-4020 MANCHESTER,CT 06040 MARIO Dt LORETO' (860) 643-9579 TELECOPIER(8G0) 652-4022 *ALSO ADMITTED IN MA AND NY Please reply to Glastonbury March 14, 1996 p Mr. Jeffrey FolgerAAR h c er Zoning and Wetland Enforcement Officer Inland Wetlands Agency South 41 kid--,r Town of South Windsor INLAND VVIETT_ANDS MJENCY/ 1540 Sullivan Avenue CONSERVATION CO:11tv9l��sc,N South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 Reference: Lot 28 Beeches Farms ood ar s II, Subdivision Dear Jeff: Please be advised that this firm represents LaCava Construction Company, the owner of the above-referenced, subdivided, building lot within the Beechwood Farms, Section II Subdivision. I previously delivered to you a plot plan and environmental report prepared on behalf of the property owner with respect to Lot No. 28. Pursuant to section 8.4 of the Town of South Windsor Inland Wetlands Agency/Conservation Commission Regulations, please accept this letter as a request to the Commission for a waiver to the buildable area requirement as defined in Section 2.lc of the Regulations. Based on our discussion, I am hopeful that you can place this matter on the Commission's agenda for April 3, 1996. If you require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Your cooperation and suggestions are greatly appreciated. Yours very truly, ALTER, SHERWOOD & JANENDA, LLC eV(Ot— Jlter rmg Enclosure Environmental/Wetland Impact Statement Prepared for: LaCava Construction Company : By: Ernest A. Schaeppi, Environmental Lot 28 Beechwood Farms SUBD. II & Land Use Planning Consultant -Quarrybrook Dr., S. Windsor, CT. 266 Conestoga Way, Glastonbury, CT. December, 1995 Lot 28 is proposed for house construction adjacent to a wetland fringe area. The lot fronts on an approved and constructed town road and it has already been subdivided as shown in the South Windsor Land Records. Presented here is a report which describes the field conditions, relevant scientific information and proposed activities for use by the South Windsor Inland Wetlands & Watercourses Agency in its deliberation about house construction upon this lot. This report is structured to address the appropriate requirements in sections 8.1 to 8.4 of the current Town of South Windsor Inland Wetlands/Conservation Commission regulations. Section I. - Field Survey, Bedrock& Surficial Geology, Wetland & non-wetland soils, plant and wildlife habitat and hydrology. Section II. - List of functional characteristics of the wetland, Memo form Conn. DEP regarding Natural Resource Data Base information for the area. Section III. - Proposed activities Section IV. - Anticipated impacts and mitigation of impacts. Attached for reference : Lot 28 plot plan as drafted by Reino E. Hyppa & Associates, Civil Engineers & Land Surveyors, Glastonbury, Scale V =40', with wetland boundaries delineated by Maureen Fitzgerald, Certified Soil Scientist, Geotoxi Associates Inc., Glastonbury; photocopies of Manchester Topo Quad #38 and Surficial Geology map GQ - 433 depicting the study area. Location: # ELLI T N /I IN CfAs9 1 POOU AL 4- 4 � POD K � �VAggye li�• 5 -� ✓✓ � q U Eclr c �\ Q,•c c -+� �:: I7 J BEECHWOOD Who u STREET = SUBDIVISION— �� MAP OF BEECHWOOD FARMS SUBDIVISION SECTIONS I & II SHOWING LOT 28, WHAPLES BROOK AND 9 ACRES OF OPEN SPACE WHICH INCLUDES WHAPLES BROOK AND ASSOCIATED WETLANDS 42 43 1 44 1 45 1 46 1 47 148 1 49 1 50.1 51 / 152 i___F_T_ ego -10 41 BEECHWOOD( FARMS 1 SECTION III I 15 I 40 1 39 1 38 37 1 36 I ! 35 I 34 1 33 32 14 ACCESS TO I I 15.51 ACRES 53 j 54 ll O 13 R OPEN SPACE 1, I 62 ^ \ `� 30 i .• 1r / sl /� ? ' 12 60 59 56 / 58 57 © 1.1 03 U � 209 211 212 213 PUMP 2 I -1 v I 9 5 ATIOH 25 210 to I tU a I .,_ 214 24 6T H4ve4 Q 1s. J u� � 0 09O,P 216 1; FFy 1591 ACRES O V/ 216 O AD TUDOR HILL • 9 O ti� 7 �I7 19 O 5P � •. 00 ��R R 4 216 � 1 W i ALSO..KNOWN..AS S. Y .4,<•:... WHAPLES..BROOK,... QUARRY..BROOK.-ON.-SOME..RESOURCE " BEECHWOOD FARMS" x MAPS.............................................. _ ....OPEN..SPACE.... J �ONSTRIK.'TION P�EPAeEP Potz THE LACAVA CdNST QUGT l0 N Co. PLOT PLAN Lam" Zg UAR .- B��CNWOOD ���MS Q 2'`! B�'OOI� tJ2IVE 500TI-4 wIND50j��� CONN . ,o J. DMID WIF J_ >i.pENNy L• NIF SCNNEEf� JAMES G. # MAZGA2ET J. BEAK.►ply w-Z1 FENCE '\ \ \ ��NS�e•iNAT�oN 1 '14 P4wu4RCsEG EA6EM�N7 u7►uiY N .� .� •o r / I29 1 910 I 1 N(f 4 1 AL.LA D ODSyEXT TA FRANCS S. Y \ I 1 \4G 1 G'r 1pf 30. — — _— - lCo• �a ESROOK LO 11 I La 122. 1 REINO E. HYYPPA A ASSOCIATES EXISTING, cot_rr0U2 P20F�SED CAI`c1Z7U� 1q CIVIL ENGINEERS Q LAND SURVEYORS 124 HEBRON AVENUE WETLAND LIMIT- p f\ GLASTONBURY, CONN. 06033 ClearinT limit, construction ...+... ..,,�..,x �� (203) 633- 5218 fence, haybales & silt fence'- SCALE: I"= 40' DATE: 8-1-95 MAP No.51-95-28 I. FIELD CONDITIONS FOUND AT LOT 28, WEST SIDE OF QUARRYBROOK DRIVE (a) FIELD SURVEYS CONDUCTED ON NOV. 7 AND NOV. 25, 1995: Non-Wetland Area - gently slopes at 6-12% toward the Whaples Brook tributary which traverses northeast corner of lot. The tributary also crosses part of adjacent lot 29 where a house is approximately 20 to 25 feet from brook escarpment (this buffer is a non- wetland area). The gently sloping terrace located south of the brook contains fine sandy soil covered by leaf and partially decomposed litter. Trees include maple, beech, oak and a cluster of 24 - 30" dbh Eastern Hemlocks which are each twin-trunked at about 15 feet above ground level. These Hemlocks have canopies at least 25 feet above ground level and are prone to wind damage. Also found are many tree saplings, ferns, clubmoss and a few woody shrubs. Wetland Area - Whaples Brook tributary traverses the northeast part of the lot with a channel width of 2 to 6 feet and a channel depth of 2 to 6 feet below the adjacent terrace level. A small floodplain flanks the brook, it measures 10-20 feet in width including the brook and it exhibits some swamp vegetation (maple, oak, ferns). In Spring, Skunk Cabbage most likely sprouts alongside the brook. According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats and Conn. DEP Wetlands of Connecticut, this wetland is classified as a Palustrine Forested Wetland (Swamp) which contains an alluvial watercourse. The entire brook channel and sideslopes are stable The brook is alluvial with a water depth of approximately 3 to 6" (11/7/95), on this date it was running with no noticeable turbidity. (b) BEDROCK & SURFICIAL GEOLOGY The attached topo/surficial geology map indicates that Triassic sandstone and shale underlies the site at a depth of at least 100 feet. Atop bedrock rests glacial deposits including glacial lake Hitchcock silt and clay with alternate layers of glacial lake sand deposits. The silt and clay layers are compact and contain low porosity and low permeability. Atop this strata is found stream terrace deposits of sand and fine sand, usually yellow-brown and ranging in thickness of approximately 10-15 feet. According to Joe LaCava, excavation for most of the house foundations elsewhere in the subdivision encountered nothing but fine sand, which is consistent with state geological map data. Indicated on the surficial geology map as Qst, this layer is the result of post- glacial stream-deposited material which forms the Whaples Brook channel and its flanking terraces. (c) WETLAND AND NON-WETLAND SOILS Wetland soils are twofold. First, the brook channel is classified as alluvial characterized by its bed of transported and sorted sand and silt. Flanking the brook channel is a soil which caps the stream terrace deposits known as Saco, (sb) which is a series of very- poorly drained fine sandy loam or silt loam soils which typically contain standing water for long periods in Winter and Spring according to the USDA/ SCS Soil Survey for Hartford County. Saco soils on the study site support swamp vegetation (trees, woody shrubs and particular groundcovers). Non-Wetland soils flanking the Wetland Saco soils are designated Elmwood according to the Hartford County Soil Survey although that type has been since combined with others to a new designation known as Elmridge. Elmwood sandy loam is divided into 2 groups EnA with 0-3% slopes and EnB with 3-8% slopes. The subject site appears to contain a combination of both types. Elmwood characteristics include a fine sandy texture, some glacial silt and clay 24-28" below surface according to the Soil Survey but in this area that may be predominately sand; is moderately well-drained, has moderate to rapid permeability and typically has water saturation 15 to 20" below surface in early Spring. This soil type supports a variety of deciduous and coniferous trees, woody shrubs and groundcover. (d) PLANT AND WILDLIFE HABITAT The combination of brook, wooded swamp and woodland upland terrace creates a regional habitat considering the extent of this landform combination along Whaples Brook, the Mill Pond (known as Podunk Pond or Vintons Mill Pond) and the Podunk River. Everything from songbirds, gamebirds to birds of prey find either shelter, forage or prey here. Also typically found in this woodland habitat type are small rodents, squirrel, rabbit, opossum, raccoon and deer. The study site most likely contains in some capacity, sparrow, flycatchers, vireos, thrush, woodpecker, bluejay, chickadee, robin, grackle, crow and hawk but probably not many, if any, gamebirds such as grouse or waterfowl such as duck due to surrounding urbanization or lack of enough standing water. Opossum and raccoon probably frequent the site in search for forage or small prey and squirrel nest in the vicinity and forage the acorns, roots and berries. Deer may occasionally forage for sapling shoots as they travel the open space areas or the powerline clearing but existing development may keep them away. Also found in this habitat type are Spring Peepers, Wood frogs, spotted salamanders, snakes and a variety of insect life. Without conducting an exhaustive wildlife inventory, the above wildlife profile attests that the area is productive largely due to its combination of woodland and available water. Existing vegetation described in the Field survey section supports a variety of wildlife. Please refer to attached DEP memo regarding the Natural Diversity Data Base. DEP has no evidence of Endangered, Threatened or Special concern species at Beechwoods Farms Subdivision and I did not discover any evidence of same during my field study. (e) HYDROLOGY The Whaples Brook tributary which traverses the subject site drains uplands and swampland located east of Quarry Brook Drive including adjacent houseyards and a swamp located between a nearby powerline clearing and QuarryBrook Drive. The low area occupied by the brook and swampland receives its water from surface runoff'and from groundwater seepage. The swamp represents the result of a seasonally fluctuating water table which may or may not be perched above a deeper regional watertable. The subject site is part of a regional drainage system: subject tributary to Whaples Brook to Podunk Mill Pond to Podunk River to Connecticut River. The headwater swamplands serve as surface flow attenuation and filtering wetlands which in turn help maintain good water quality and erosion prevention downstream. TOPOGRAPHICAL AND GEOLOGY MAPS USGS TOPO QUADRANGLE - MANCHESTER QUAD DATED 1963, REVISED 1992 � Imo► � ♦\ • .•. �oe:� `;;� 4 ��, �, a�C��, � ( _ Tu 44 1pl VICINITY OF LOT 28 USGS SURFICIAL GEOLOGY OF MANCHESTER QUAD, MAP GQ-433, DATED 1965 r st: 10 7(sd+cl) 22_ Ate- tu Tip >6 / QI / o o �T 1 Qsd o a I I 0 s ip•c al I1. FUNCTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS AND ANALYSIS OF SUBJECT WETLAND AT LOT 28 Lot 28 wetlands are limited in width and occupy a restricted drainage valley with a well-incised tributary flanked by a 10 to 20 foot wide band of swampland. Due to slope gradents, the upland-wetland boundary is abrupt. Using Conn. DEP Wetland Evaluation Criteria is the following analysis: l) Flood Control - Stream provides a critical drainageway but has minimal flood storage capacity due to gradient and width limitation.. 2) Ecological Integrity - stream/wetland is valuable in that it provides drainage for upgradient swampland and conducts waterflow to downstream wetlands which in turn maintains wetland habitats. 3) Wildlife Habitat - limited on-site due to small area. 4) Nutrient Retention/Sediment Trapping- minimal due to small area of actual swampland on-site. 5) Educational value - minimal, privately owned, not part of park or trail system, one amenity is its view from the road. 6) Visual/Esthetic Amenity- Offers some scenic value from the road and to the neighborhood. 7) Agricultural Potential -None 8) Forestry Potential -None 9) Underlying Aquifer - Provides some protection to aquifer, if any, by maintaining clean water that may seep into ground during periods of very low flow (when an otherwise seepage fed stream becomes a groundwater recharge watersource) 10) Noteworthiness - Minimal, does not possess any unusual features. In summary, the stream and wetlands at lot 28 offer some valuable wetland benefits. Disturbance or alteration of wetlands is avoided by this plan. The most valuable asset provided is drainage from upgradient swamp wetlands and road storm runoff. Any constriction or blockage of the stream channel may cause upstream flooding and downstream erosion. STATE OF CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION NATURAL RESOURCES CENTER ''•�����„ 79 Elm Street, Store Level Hartford,CT 06106 Natural Diversity Data Base December 5, 1995 Ernest A. Schaeppi .E&E Inc. 266 Conestoga Way Glastonbury,CT 06033 re:Beechwood Farms Subdivision(Section 2) Dear Mr. Schaeppi: I have reviewed Natural Diversity Data Base maps and files regarding the area delineated on the map you provided and listed above. According to our information, there are no known extant populations of Federal or State Endangered,Threatened or Special Concern Species that occur at the site in question. Natural Diversity Data Base information includes all information regarding critical biological resources available to us at the time of the request. This information is a compilation of data collected over the years by the Natural Resources Center's Geological and Natural History Survey and cooperating units of DEP, private conservation groups and the scientific community. This information is not necessarily the result of comprehensive or site- specific field investigations. Consultations with the Data Base should not be substitutes for on-site surveys required for environmental assessments. Current research projects and new contributors continue to identify additional populations of species and locations of habitats of concern,as well as,enhance existing data. Such new information is incorporated into the Data Base as it becomes available. Please contact me if you have further questions at 424-3592. Thank you for consulting the Natural Diversity Data Base. Also be advised that this is a preliminary review and not a final determination. A more detailed review may be conducted as part of any subsequent environmental permit applications submitted to DEP for the proposed site. Sincerely, �)-� M Dawn M.McKay Biologist/Environmental Analyst (Printed on Recycled Paper) 79 Elm Street • Hartford, CT 06106-5127 An Equal Opportunity Employer III. PROPOSED HOUSE CONSTRUCTION UPON LOT 28 Please refer to Lot 28 plot plan. As shown,a large portion of the proposed house is within the designated 80-foot watercourse buffer and the 40-foot wetland buffer. None of the house foundation nor adjacent grading falls within the 20-foot wetland buffer area. Grading for foundation construction and the north sideyard within the 40-80 foot buffer occurs on a 6% slope. Fine sandy Elmwood soils found here, according to Guidelines for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control by SWC/DEP are within Soil Class C, have moderate to rapid permeability and have a K-factor (erosion factor) of 0.24 (low 0-0.2, mod. .02-0.3, high 0.3-0.6). However, if silt/clay strata is encountered during foundation excavation, the K-factor increases. This does not present much problem because the hillside box cut for the foundation is flat-bottomed and shallow. PROCEDURE - No out of the ordinary site preparation and construction methods are necessary. 1) Foundation and limit of clearing/fill surveyed, staked & bounded by construction fence. 2) Trees are removed to clear foundation and immediate yard areas. 3) Required erosion controls are installed. 4) Stumps are removed and disposed off-site. 5) Topsoil is stripped and taken off site (to be returned for final restoration). 6) Foundation is excavated, bottom floor will be at 74 ft. this excavation only goes_ to about 73 feet, minimal change from existing contours. 7) Foundation formed and poured, forms removed, asphalt coat applied, foundation backfilled, utility trenches dug, utilities installed, trenches backfilled, periphery graded, exposed soil stabilized during and after-house construction. Concrete will be pumped into forms at the rear foundation wall and at the north side foundation wall adjacent to terrace slopes. This measure will avoid unnecessary soil disturbance by heavy concrete trucks. 8) Contractors alerted throughout foundations and house construction to keep debris away from wetland. Alert includes no deposition of solvents and fluids on soil. 9) ASAP, exposed soils are final-graded, topsoiled, seeded and mulched. Erosion controls shown on plans, near the 20-foot wetland setback are reinforced/replaced. Stabilization monitored. NOTE: Proposed construction and grading occurs outside of an existing conservation and drainage easement. Lot 28 "buildable area" as defined in the wetland reps, sections 2.Lc and 8.4, which excludes the 20-40-80 foot setbacks, measures about 280 sf. . However, there is about 8000 sf. of suitable area for a house, recir and front yards and a driveway. IV. ANTICIPATED IMPACTS AND MITIGATION OF THOSE IMPACTS Impacts imposed upon a wetland by nearby house construction can be divided into short term and long term. Both are greatly affected by the nature of proposed activities and by how skillfully they are accomplished thus, a poorly done, simple activity can have detrimental consequences while a skillfully done, complex activity can be done with minimal impact. a) 40-FOOT WETLAND BUFFER AND 80-FOOT WATERCOURSE BUFFER AREAS - Neither wetlands nor the watercourse are disturbed by proposed activities. Only about 1/5th of the house foundation"footprint" falls within the 40 foot wetland setback and concurrently about 3/4 is within the 80 foot watercourse setback. Slopes between the house and wetland/watercourse measure from 6 to 12%, which are fairly gentle. Accounting for the house plus a 15 foot perimeter of yardspace, the remaining wetland buffer would measure about 20-25' wide and the watercourse buffer would be 40 to 65'wide. MITIGATION -Done carefully, proposed grading for the foundation and sideyard area facing Wetlands would present minimal short term and long term impacts on wetlands and the watercourse. Using methods to be discussed in the proceeding text, the remaining buffer area will be protected from intrusion, erosion and sedimentation. The reviewers are reminded that there is an existing conservation and drainage easement over the north 1/3 of this lot. This in itself is a mitigative measure already in place. Its confines exclude all proposed activities. The proceeding section will outline potential impacts and mitigative measures necessary to wetland protection. • GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION LIMIT DELINEATION - prior to tree clearing, a highly visible barrier such as a bright orange vinyl net construction fence or snow-fence should be installed just a few feet downhill from erosion controls shown on plans. This barrier would clearly limit vehicular intrusion and during construction it serves as a windblown debris catch. • SEASONAL CONSTRAINTS - Although the erosion risk on this lot is minimal, it would be sensible to insure that final grading and seeding is completed by Sept. 15th in order that enough of the growing season remains to establish grass cover. • Erosion and Sedimentation Controls - to be installed after tree cutting and before stumping. Considering the fine sandy nature of Elmwood terrace soils, both topsoil and subsoil, a good precaution would be the installation of a buried-toe fabric silt fence at the alignment shown on plans. In addition it is advisable to install a staked hay bale erosion barrier between the northeast corner of the foundation and the fabric silt fence, parallel to contours, for a length of about 15 feet. Below this location is a 9 to 12 % slope towards wetlands. The silt fence and hay bales should be installed as required in the State Erosion and Sedimentation Control manual and they should be monitored and repaired as needed. b) TOPSOIL REMOVAL GRADING, EXCAVATION AND HOUSE CONSTRUCTION - Following tree clearing, removal and disposal of stumps off-site, upland topsoil for the foundation and its perimeter is removed and taken off site, to be returned for later restoration. The foundation bottom floor rests at 74 ft., below which about 2 feet are excavated for footings. Excavation on the wetland buffer side is only about 2 feet, on the opposite side near the 76 foot contour excavation is about 4 feet. The procedure from excavation to footing and foundation pouring, foundation sealing, utility hookups and backfilling is usually done within two weeks. MITIGATION • Exposed slopes between the foundation and the wetland buffer should be stabilized with netting or straw. • Reve etation- those slopes should be seeded with a perennial rye mix listed in the State Erosion and Sedimentation Control manual when the season permits, straw or netting should be reapplied thereafter. • Soil load bearing capacity_- sorted, terrace sands have good load bearing capacity. • Erosion and Sedimentation Controls - previously mentioned should be monitored and repaired as needed. • Driveway Drainage - slopes between the driveway and wetlands are gentle enough to permit sheet flow toward wetlands PROVIDED: the area between is stabilized with a grass buffer on washed stone. An alternative is to curb that side of the driveway and direct runoff to the street. At the suggestion of the writer, plans have been amended to move the driveway to the other side of the house further away from the wetland buffer and the driveway will be sloped to drain into the street. • Roof Drainage - should be dissipated by rough surface or crushed stone spreaders. • Utility Trenching- make sure excavated soil from trenches cannot erode toward wetland buffer. c) PLANT AND WILDLIFE IMPACTS Tree removal will take away a cluster of 24-30" hemlocks, each of which has a high canopy. These trees often provide nesting cover for birds and squirrels. It appears these trees are at maturity and may be prone to wind damage. Other trees to be lost include some maple, beech and oak, all of which are less than 12" diameter. Enough streambelt vegetation exists here to absorb the impact on wildlife from loss of a 60 x 80' plot of trees. Urban tolerant species of songbirds and squirrel usually find forage and nesting areas in residential yards. Other than these wildlife types it is not likely that other species are being displaced. MITIGATION • Augment the new treeline between the house and wetlands with shrubs and trees if the sparsity warrants so. Suggested types: Gray Dogwood, Winterberry, American Cranberry. •- Conservation easement already in place. d) GROUNDWATER AND THE AQUIFER- Both public water supply and sanitary sewer service will service the lot. There will not be any P on-site septic system nor a below ground heating oil tank. Therefore potential pollution from septic effluent or heating oil is not a potential impact on groundwater. e) OTHER MITIGATING FACTORS Construction management - The developer does not sell his lots for construction by others. Rather he has his own subcontractors who do everything from clearing to house construction to final stabilization, while he oversees the entire process. Therefore it is his directive to make sure that all construction debris, solvents, paints, cleaners and other substances which may litter or pollute the wetland are properly disposed and taken off-site. His successful and careful construction of Beechwood Farms subdivision speaks for itself regarding such matters. • Conservation easement and open space dedication-The developer has dedicated 9 acres of wetland/watercourse property to the Town of South Windsor and he has also placed conservation easements over many wetland areas throughout the Beechwood Farms subdivision including the subject lot. f) ALTERNATIVES - Other than converting the lot to open space, the only practical alternative is the"build" option. The lot has already been subdivided and encumbered with a conservation and drainage easement. Adjacent lot 29 has been developed with no obvious wetland or watercourse impact even though that house is far closer to the watercourse than the proposed house on lot 28. CONCLUSION It is the writer's opinion that construction of a house on lot 28 within the reviewed parameters will not adversely impact the wetlands, the watercourse nor the wetland buffer area. Both short- term and long-term impacts can very minimal by exercising good site engineering, appropriate erosion control and regular site management. It is the writer's experience that LaCava Construction Company constructs its subdivisions and builds its houses with utmost care. The writer, acting as Glastonbury Environmental Planner/Wetland Officer from 1982-1987, followed many of this company's developments from design to completion. Their work, especially in environmentally sensitive areas like that proposed here, was always done in a timely and skillful manner. Therefore, it is my opinion that the proposed activities will not cause significant impact to the wetlands and that these activities only present very minimal impacts. Respectfully Submitted, a 'id ,,24' Ernest A. Schaeppi Environmental and Land Use Planning Consultant t ALTER., SHERWOOD & JANENDA, LLC ATTORNEYS AT LAW 701 HEBRON AVENUE DAVID F.SHERWOOD P.O.BOX 1420 MANCHESTER OFFICE JOEL E.JANENDA GLASTONBURY,CONNECTICUT 06033-6620 249 EAST CENTER STREET PETER JAY ALTER TELEPHONE (860) 652-4020 MANCHESTER,CT 06040 MARIO Di LORETO* TELECOPIER(860) 652-4022 (860) 643-9579 *ALSO ADMITTED IN MA AND NY Please reply to Glastonbury March 14, 1996 D =nk k k f Mr. Jeffrey Folger NIAR eti Zoning and Wetland Enforcement Officer Inland Wetlands Agency South Vlinf sor Town of South Windsor INLAND `NE i LANCIS AGENCY[ 1540 Sullivan Avenue CONSERVATION COMMISSION South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 Reference: Lot 11, Beechwood Farms II, Subdivision Dear Jeff: Please be advised that this firm represents LaCava Construction Company, the owner of the above-referenced, subdivided, building lot within the Beechwood Farms, Section II Subdivision. I previously delivered to you a plot plan and environmental report prepared on behalf of the property owner with respect to Lot No. 11. Pursuant to section 8.4 of the Town of South Windsor Inland Wetlands Agency/Conservation Commission Regulations, please accept this letter as a request to the Commission for a waiver to the buildable area requirement as defined in Section 2.lc of the Regulations. Based on our discussion, I am hopeful that you can place this matter on the Commission's agenda for April 3, 1996. If you require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Your cooperation and suggestions are greatly appreciated. Yours very truly, ALTER, SHERWOOD & JANENDA, LLC eVJalter rmg Enclosure CONSTRUCTION PLOT PLAN LOT 28 6EECHWOOD FARMS Q .UAR R Y SR00K D R I V E SOUTH WI NDS0R , CONN. PREPARED FOR THE LACAVA CONSTRUCTION Co. REINO E. HYYPPA 6 ASSOCIATES CIVIL ENGINEERS 9 LAND SUm'=YL•RS 124 HEBRON AVENUE GL A S TO N BURY, CONN. 06033 (203) 633-5218 SCALE SHOWN DATE 11- 16-95 MAP No. 51- 95-1-.2 I �1J►.IybA`�4 �- _ SGHMEER M QUAtCET•H JS F 1, 5q �\ ���` � w•z� •. R AR.EqW-25\ C0�13ERVAt10�1 DeA1W14E.4 IJ 27 41—AY (�AIE -i S1 W-23 \ 29 Vxovoseo I+ou3� \ ZI Hest'Fteo1C. p \ Ll. ppQ�� I Ter Feu.. Eyl 0.0 ••JJ"" 7 LL J I 1 % bskt.v�ee-14.0 \ AVPR�X. IOU , I r \ i�i Itt fl+e2.16.0 \ FLOOD %MIT Rv \ D W-21 ` t \ y 19 I BOOK DR/�I \ 1 _ °tRU(MQA/ Cr/r AID Slim (4)•2 S�pelE ONF2TER fABQIC 0 APR South Windsor INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY/ CONSERVATION CL3W43SIC* a pell 1 . 19%- To the n i -s of the Wand Wedands Comini- ion. We are writing to express our concern wituh.id prepped building of homes on Lots 11,12 and 28 on Quart' Brook Drive. We are residents of Quarry Brook Drive of 1 and are very much aware of the environment encompassing and surrounding these lots. Firaly, we eve .serious questions about the brook running through the prop. Will it he diverW? ff so, how and to where? What are the in i ions of this to the water level on surrounding properties? We are also extretnely concerned about the fate of the wildlife we have observed in the area. These lots have been honie to various animals and it is vet disconcerting to witness our wetlands acreage being nstantly reduced in number. d Thank you for allowing us to voice our concerns. We are confident to C-mm4ss on will ad only after shaving tI.Rx- ouohly studies Ibis matter. Sineel ; Mare and Lori Glass 406 Quarry Brook Drive u'dl VAndsor, Connecticut ut 0r'IIf 185 SILAS DEANE HIGHWAY CQNSTRUCTION CC. WET ERSF ELD CONNECTICUT 06109 BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS TELEPHONE: (860) 563-3711 April 10, 1996 i. Peter Jay Alter, Esquire Alter, Sherwood & Janenda, LLC i P. U. Box 1420 Glastonbury, Connecticut 06033 Reference: Beechwood Farms South Windsor, Connecticut Dear Peter: You have requested that I provide you with information regarding Lots 11, 12 and 28 in the Beechwood Farms, Section II Subdivision in South Windsor. By way of background, in 1986, Beechwood Farms Subdivision was fully approved by the Planning & Zoning Commission, including }" Lots 11 12 and 28. on November 17 1986 the Inland Wetlands Agency/Conservation commission issued the necessary permits for i• � the subdivision with the exception of Lots 11, 12 and 28, for which no permits were issued. Since 1986, the Town of South �' ; :: Windsor has treated these three lots as fully approved, taxable ;',. building lots. Lacava construction Company has considered these lots as building lots and paid real estate taxes accordingly. 4 - A In 1986, at the time of approval, the Inland Wetlands Agency had particular concern about the brook crossing that was to be con- `f:%' ' ' structed in the area of these three lots. It is my recollection ' :. that the agency wanted to wait until that brook crossing was in- stalled and stabilized before it approved particular plans for developing these three lots. In anticipation of such development, LaCava Construction's engineers had identified building and driveway �t locations and LaCava Construction ranted private conservation easements in favor of the Town of South Windsor as requested by the Agency. As building lots upon which our company can build and then sell single-family homes, the lots have a very conservative fair market value of $75,000. 00 each. If the necessary permits are not granted, there is no other reasonable alternative use for these lots and they .'.� will have no value except as excess undevelopable land. F1%it THE SYMBOL OF HOME BUILDING EXCELLENCE ..... Peter Jay Alter, Esquire April 10, 1996 Page Two As has been our custom and practice in South Windsor and in all other towns we build in, our company will act reasonably and re- ;;< ' f sponsibly to protect significant environmental concerns. The inability to develop each of these lots will represent a signifi- cant economic loss. You have my authority to share this information with the Inland Wetlands Agency/Conservation Commission as part of the applications made on behalf of the company. Please feel free to contact me if you have further questions. Very truly yours, VA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY <F ; +•... o eph P. LaCava, President Duly Authorized Opp'.: GARDNER & PETERSON ASSOCIATES LAND SURVEYORS • PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS EVE178 HARTFORD TURNPIKE KEN ETT 0. PETERSOGARDNERN, RE.,L.S. TELEPHONE (860) 871-0808 KENNETH R.PETERSON,L.S. TOLLAND,CONNECTICUT 06084 HENRY R TORCELLINI,P.E. FAX (860) 875-2086 SUSAN E.JAMAITUS,L.S. DOUGLAS T.SANBORN,L.S. MARK A.PETERSON,C.E. April 11, 1996 Marcia Banach Town Planner Town of South Windsor 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 Re: Former WaWa Site Rt. 5 & Pleasant Valley Rd. Dear Marcia: Tony Pacheco would like to construct a 3000 SF retail building on the subject property. Approximately 1800 SF of this building would be used for a Dunkin Donut facility with a drive- thru window. A preliminary site plan that we prepared indicated that only 20 parking spaces can be provided. Section 13.4. 1 of the zoning regulations states that a reduction in the number of parking spaces can be allowed by the Planning & Zoning Commission. Therefore, we hereby ask that we be placed on your next available Planning & Zoning Commission agenda (hopefully May 14th) for an informal discussion in regard to the number of parking spaces necessary. Please notify me as to the date of the next available meeting. Thank you for your assistance. Yours truly, Kenneth R. Peterson KRP: jml cc: Tony Pacheco7-1 .�� 9373.Doc ���� APR 12 1996 APR 15 1996 South Windsor INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY/ April 12, 1996 CONSERVATION COMMISSION! Inland Wetlands Agency/Conservation Commission 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT. 06074 RE: Continued work per your request of April 5, 1995 Dear Commissioner's: I am informing the Commissioner's that work of tree cutting and brush clearing along Farm Brook, my 7 . 2 acre parcel will continue for several weeks. As you know my parcel of land as seen on accessory map 40, parcel 32, is continually being cleared to plant Christmas Trees. If I may be of any other help please do not hesitate to contact me at 644-4551. Thank you in advance. Sincerely, John F. Reichle 246 Graham Road South Windsor, CT. 06074 10 N Sf4 O r F' �� V/ S-0� V&UAlat c v s 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074 f�'OSOR•CON AREA CODE 860/644-2511 April 15, 1996 CERTIFIED MAIL Attorney Peter Jay Alter Alter, Sherwood & Janenda, LLC 701 Hebron Avenue P O Box 1420 Glastonbury, CT 06033-6620 Dear Attorney Alter: Re: Lot 11, Beechwood Farms Subdivision At the April 10, 1996 meeting of the South Windsor Inland Wetlands Agency/Conservation Commission, a motion to approve the request for the 90/ x 90/ buildable square waiver failed. The concerns expressed by the Agency were: - Proximity to the watercourse, - proximity to the wetland area, - long term water quality concerns, - and availability of usable lawn area. Very truly yours, INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY/ CONSERVATION COMMISSION cam" 'C� � Eliza A. Warren, Chairman EAW/pmm cc: Town Engineer Chief Building Official Director of Planning Planning & Zoning Commission Zoning Board of Appeals LaCava Construction Company 10 W N S'r ° - _ ���►11J1 L c v s 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074 �rtipSOR ooN�� AREA CODE 860/644-2511 April 15, 1996 CERTIFIED MAIL Attorney Peter Jay Alter Alter, Sherwood & Janenda, LLC 701 Hebron Avenue P O Box 1420 Glastonbury, CT 06033-6620 Dear Attorney Alter: Re: Lot 12, Beechwood Farms Subdivision At the April 10, 1996 meeting of the South Windsor Inland Wetlands Agency/Conservation Commission, a motion to approve the request for the 90/ x 90/ buildable square waiver failed. The concerns expressed by the Agency were: - Proximity to the wetlands, - proximity to the watercourse, - long term water quality concerns, - and availability of usable land area. Very truly yours, INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY/ CONSERVATION COMMISSION 4X�1 *a4UX--"� liz th A. Warren, Chairman EAW/pmm cc: Town Engineer Chief Building Official Director of Planning Planning & Zoning Commission Zoning Board of Appeals LaCava Construction Company � Town Ole SotdA d O C V y 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074 SOR•CO AREA CODE 860/644-2511 April 15, 1996 CERTIFIED MAIL Attorney Peter Jay Alter Alter, Sherwood & Janenda, LLC 701 Hebron Avenue P O Box 1420 Glastonbury, CT 06033-6620 Dear Attorney Alter: Re: Lot 28, Beechwood Farms Subdivision At the April 10, 1996 meeting of the South Windsor Inland Wetlands Agency/Conservation Commission, a motion to approve the request for the 90/ x 90/ buildable square waiver failed. The concerns expressed by the Agency were: - Proximity to the watercourse, - reduction of the existing corridor, - long term water quality impact concerns, - and availability of usable lawn area. Very truly yours, INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY/ CONSERVATION COMMISSION Eli th A. Warren, Chairman EAW/pmm cc: Town Engineer Chief Building Official Director of Planning Planning & Zoning Commission Zoning Board of Appeals LaCava Construction Company R. GEOTOXI n�� p Associates, Incorporated l� Environmental Scientists&Consultants August 11, 1995 Reino E. Hyyppa & Associates 124 Hebron Ave. Glastonbury, CT. 06033 Attn: Mr. Ken Smith RE: LaCava Property, Lots 11, 12 & 28 Quarry Brook Road, So. Windsor, CT AUG I 4 Delineation of Wetland Boundary Dear Ken, A field investigation to determine the presence of regulated wetlands on the referenced parcels was conducted on August 10, 1995 by Geotoxi Associates,.Inc. personnel. Parcels #11 and #12 consisted of wooded land between existing residential lots on the eastern side of Quarry Brook Road. Parcel #28 consisted of a wooded area across the roadway from Lot #11. Per you request, only the outermost wetland boundaries were delineated on each parcel for determination of buildable upland area. Regulated stream channels were observed on each of the parcels. A series of soil test pits using a hand auger were recorded on each parcel. Based on the soil data collected, a forested wetland bordering intermittent stream channels occurs on much of Lot #12 and Lot #11. Soils in this wetland area included poorly drained and very poorly drained fine sandy loam. The stream channels converged on Lot #12 at the toe of Quarry Brook Road at a 30 inch concrete culvert. Regulated wetlands and watercourses delineated on Lot#28 were associated with the stream channel along the northern and western parcel boundaries. Wetland boundaries were flagged with pink and blue survey ribbon. The northern wetland boundary delineated on Lot #12 was numbered W-1 through W-1 1 from the power line right- of-way to Quarry Brook Road and closely bordered the existing edge of lawn of the northern abutter. The southern wetland boundary on Lot#11 was flagged and numbered consecutively from W-12 through W-18 from Quarry Brook Road east to the power line right-of-way. The southern wetland boundary of the stream channel on Lot #28 was flagged and numbered consecutively from W-19 through W-29, beginning at the toe of Quarry Brook Road. 2377 Main Street,Glastonbury,Connecticut 06033 Tel. (203)633-7866 Approximate locations of the delineated boundaries are shown on the attached plan. Based on field observations, the lot lines shown- on this plan may not be accurate. If there are any questions regarding this field delineation, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Sincerely, Geotoxi Associates, Inca Maureen E. Fi Gerald Ecologist/Soil Scientist attachment: GE 0 T 0 X I 14 Qv or � � � N � /� • 2g _ �, - Approximate 1 -n D 29 \ C Wetland Boundary 0 8►•50 7 F. m T.F. 7§.50 > Xm _ — �� T F 7S-50 � f I� \�` u \ P'M DRIVE \ I BROOK QUARRY 6L 6 f m SO e 0 W-19 \ 76 CLDIP WATER 33 31 -•-d'D•a 76 5IqP >, w L , :ffp � C ` t - 76 - W-11' / <o 7 $ 9 -12 _ - Approximate - s c �1 Boundary o Wetland --•-- - �•- ��_"=` � ' 75 1 P T.F. 2.50 � �T41-11 1 - : . M / -- i Approximate el Wetland Boundary -� + ►; i J \ ,. LACAVA PARCELS W-18 ,\ ' \ QUARRY BROOK ROAD SO. WINDSOR, CT -'r-,,..�;:d.•s..r..-.,..=tee /: q' - ' _ Geotoxi Associates, Inc. \ 2377 Main Street Glastonbury, CT 06033 aj 0.86 Ac. c4 3 0 °sue O `��1 �� / _ 5 , , � —� ,- 62 5, -. 1.02 Ac. t,70 QC. s _ 66 is 1 .36 Ac. 0 ' x ROO 19 106 — � �G/) 60 55.3 el 4 10� M��vlRlc 08 1.50 Ac. 0.51 Ac. 2e� � z�o� � 0 9 s q SX �! �" 0.50 A R�A4,� «5 54.3 \ .`' D 65 50,4 Q ; IV)(70 / i 2 _ 2 - - - 'S �7 15 a --9.50'Ac: i �6 1 0.63 Ac. ' y f / �60 3.94Aco 0 1 p o 3.06 Ac. • �� 0. ,. _ 5 4y - , 54.5 — - -- - _ 53 5 C _ 55. E 552 Xb Q p0 e r 49 � 22.4s' ' --- `479.46� i' / 0.91 Ac. C. 19 a , L002) � f' a's 54 8j t o 0.24Ac. - ry 1996 - r o- o,°. SOUth Windsor 7 3.20 Ac. - Plannink & 3 toning :Commission 0.07Ac. o TANDAkD RIPRAP LES 0 D E D 4 T.F.75.50 y . .ASP ro rkATf C� ` dl sp A PR S PE L cti . Os �../ ,\ / a ME GUARD RCD \ 21 . 22 �O 6-1 � 24 R.CP / ME L GUARD ' O 00 —- I T.F. 79.001co / CE - i iW 0 \ 0 D E co IN I � ' v, SWAMP 1 t ir. �SA UD co tK IN, � / ice• •-- � 1_ � 'r' Jt II Y i Zi BO / •,, 63 5 EL. 5.6 4 B 4j c,�Q• / - JAY / O� -jib yy T EL.75:9 WATER ). � EL.76.3 App Is AtIfiS Cp D D E D 301 10014 , WATER ®' ul �• E L.76.9 f 7 cc OD - 4 LL: i W: i - � AD 30 Cp WATER EL.73.8 I 3� �. HAY BALES ' T FENCE �� rit f t `�•` Jy 1'. ftl t/ �:• v �1t' 'M /f t; ',y' :�;' . r r,,+{, � Ar 1 „sL 7. b�iv+,,..,;'' T I O N C 0. WATER EL.78.8 � O ' 77ell 40, -- $ SEE NOTE 'AI SHEET NO-4 ; i' OP `19 / \ cp,n / W T R EL.75.9 1 (P WATER'` ). ER / 1 _ EL.76.3 ~ ( . Opp fis cP 1 lc �' i0 0 D E D OD 301 / \\ WATER / O ac W ul o m a / � 3 N � / Nad 1 , to WATER _ C 30 Cp EL.73.8 P ell SA N HAY BALES SILT FENCE / _ CONSTRUCTION CO. - -HWOOD FARMS / ' %• ' 1 \ � SECTION a