Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVerbatim Minutes 96-31P Collins Crossing STATE OF CONNECTICUT} } ss. SOUTH WINDSOR COUNTY OF HARTFORD } September 10, 1996 I, Dawn M. Samsel, hereby certify that I typed an accurate transcript of the July 17, 1996 Inland Wetlands Agency/Conservation Commission meeting re: Application#96-31P, Collins Crossing. That a true copy of said transcript is attached hereto, and it is accurate to the best of my knowledge, ability and belief and further certify that I have this date filed said transcript in the office of the Inland Wetlands Agency/Conservation Commission. Dawn M. Samsel q Date STATE OF CONNECTICUT} } ss. SOUTH WINDSOR COUNTY OF HARTFORD } Personally appeared Q.W n I l �a 1�1 S , signer and sealer of the foregoing instrument and acknowledged the same to be her free act and deed, before me. Notary Public My Commission Expires I a-! 3 i cgp PEOPLE INVOLVED IN DISCUSSION OF APPLICATION #96-31P - IWA/CC MEETING OF JULY 17, 1996 Elizabeth Warren, Chairman IWA/CC Salvatore Bonanno, Commissioner Susan Smith, Commissioner John Phillips, Commissioner Carol Heffler, Commissioner Audrey Wasik, Commissioner Susanne Hannigan, Commissioner John O'Connell, Commissioner Jeffrey H. Folger, Zoning/Wetlands Enforcement Officer Peter DeMallie, Design Professionals, Inc. Robert Arsenault, Design Professionals, Inc. John Stewart, CR3 Landscape Architects Attorney Harold Cummings, representing the applicant Brian Edwards, B & M Enterprises, developer Jane Nichols, 60 Nevers Road - abutter John Callahan, 1212 Sullivan Avenue- abutter Hugh Patelli, 1135 Sullivan Avenue - abutter Dirk Barry, 1224 Sullivan Avenue - abutter George Donahue, 1118 Sullivan Avenue - abutter i APPLICATION 96-31P COLLINS CROSSING July 17, 1996 Okay,Application 96-31 Collins Crossing is also a continuation of the Public Hearing which began on the third of July 1996. (Papers shuffling) We're here to continue the hearing from your last meeting from the third of July. Uh,with me tonight, for the record Peter DeMallie,Design Professionals engineer, also with me is Illy another Design Professionals , and also three landscape architects for the John Stewart. And Hal Cummings, attorney for Collins Crossing LLC, and Brian Edward's. Just for a brief overview of why Collins Crossing is . . (question?) . . yeah,just a quick one. Uh,just for your education,I know we're going with the other items on the agenda we'll begetting into conservation claim,but just for quick overview. It's approximately 31 acres in size. It's south of the high school. West of Nevers Road Park, and southwest of the Community Center. East of Sullivan Avenue. South of Hillsdale Road and Mountain View uh Road. Excuse me. (Whispering) You can't see. (Laughter). Okay,thank you very much. I'm sorry. Uh, we're proposing one through street,which is the subject to this application which we'll be getting into in a minute. Uh,which requires a crossing a Plum Gully Brook?,but one through street,here's Nevers Road, and here's the community center and high school. One through street, which would go from Nevers Road across Plum Gully Brook,up and over the hill, down to Sullivan Avenue,just south of Hillsdale Road. Uh, now there are four small developments within this 31 acre overall tract. Excuse me Peter. Yes. a Didn't we do this two weeks ago? U2. AQ� I, was everyone here? I thought . . ,o I wasn't. But don't do it on account of me. Right. Yeah. The whole presentation again based on . .Okay,we'll skip over what Collins Crossing is. Overall. If Sal doesn't know by now,he's in big trouble. (Laughter) We definitely won't get into that. Thank you. We've got.18 acres or 7800 square feet of disturbance,uh and there's about one acre of wetlands on the property, about 150 foot per length. Now, getting into the additional 1u.i, information for which you held the public hearing open,this we furnished to Mr. Folger a copy of the approval letters, uh indicating that the US Army Corp. of Engineers has approved a crossing and also that the State Department of Environmental Protection of water quality certification which is first one we've seen like this,I think it is isn't it Bob? First one we've seen where they've actually worked together as two a Federal and State Agency working together to jointly review an application and actually come up with a joint approval letter. So,which is interesting process here within the fold. So that has been issued,that's dated July 2 and a copy's been furnished to you,through Mr. l Folger. At the last meeting, if I recall correctly,basically the hearing was continued to tonight,basically for two reasons. To receive the Town Engineers report,which was not received as of that date, and to allow Mr. Folger and Mr. Stewart, from ,to work on protective measures along with work which John can address in a minute. So that was the primary reason for that, also in /n conversations with Mr. Folger,uh it was evident that he thought it would be appropriate if we GHQ could get some reports from, as an outbirth? of that hearing, if we could get some reports from the two consultants that we indicate for as part of the consultants for the project,Dr. Don Dubay and also Dr. Clarence Welti, as to their opinions regarding the possibility of this old waste oil site at the top of the hill,right up to the small site where there is some contaminated soil as documented by Dr. Dubay. If we could get some preliminary reports, I'll just summarize those for you in a minute. If I may. The real issue that we're requested to address tonight was whether or not there was any contamination of Plum Gully Brook as a result of that contamination from the prior bus company operation, which is thought to be from the prior bus 3 company operation. Uh, so as we do have those reports and if I may just summarize those. Also, Mr. Stewart's made a letter which he can summarize for you what he's doing. And submit a letter that we submitted to you just indicating what he's proposing to do based on certain with Mr. Folger. If I could just go through those reports just briefly. Uh,Dr. Clarence Welti is an expertise in geotechnical engineering. We've attached his qualifications. He's a PHD PE and lots of other credentials. has transferred many decades. If you talk to people who are involved with what's below the surface and geohydrauligy and wells and that type of thing,they all know him and they've all worked with. But he did a report of geologic background soil characteristics of the site, and it's impacts of and looking what's below the surface, and especially it's effects of neighboring water courses and neighboring properties. If I can just summarize a few of the things that he came up with. The top of the ,that's a hard generally, generally parallels the surface topography. Soils, characteristics of the subject site do not vary significantly,Mr. Ursell?, is familiar with the testing that we did on the site, I'm sure Jeff's taken a look at it as well as the characteristics of the test holes which went down, what'd you go about twenty feet? About 22 feet in some cases. Basically it's all sand and gravel. Throughout the site that's, as you're going down that level Dr. Welti was addressing what primarily that plus what's below that. Uh, and based on the presence of bedrock with and the general presence of glacial merain?uh he said generally be within 25 feet at the high point of subject site,that's what he thought to be below what we were investigating. He said the merain soils are dense with very low permiabilities. And he discusses the geological characteristics of the site and some things he said, for example it rises a flood plain is about elevation 150 and then rises to a high point of about elevation 180 and about 900 feet. And then it drops of to the west about 600 feet to Sullivan Avenue to about elevation 115. Basically its westerly flow will alternately flow to the Podunk River and then eventually down to Plum Gully Brook. He indicates that there was prior storage of waste oil site from the prior school bus company. The barrels of waste oil were stored near the high point on site. It's basically lots seven and eight in the proposed subdivision which will be before you later this evening, for conservation plan approval. Some oil did get into the contaminate the soil. The oil's relatively heavy and tends to be absorbed in surficial soils,that's at the surface. Numerous studies for similar types of situations as he's indicated,they've done a minimal depths of waste oil penetration. 4 Based on a drop of nearly 60 feet toward Sullivan Avenue, and about thirty feet there's a vertical XaAa 'L drop toward Plum Gully Brook. And he mentioned based on a hard hand relationship the ground surface basically parallels the ground surface as he indicated. It's clear that any migration the oil to the ground water would ultimately move toward the west eventually to the Podunk River,that's from this waste oil site. Any movement toward Plum Gully Brook,which is about 750 feet distant from the soil on slope of about four percent,just to the east,with permeability about 40 feet per day, would have been evident within about two years after any oil entered the ground water stream. Since it contamination obviously occurred many years ago, it's lack of presence in Plum Gully Brook at this time would tend to obviate the possibility of oil movement to Plum Gully Brook, he says. Also, regarding the potential affect from the oil spillage on residences to the north,there's almost no inclination of ground water flow to the north,based on surficial topography and surficial geology. Regarding bedrock geology,the bedrock has a mantle of hardpan, it's right over it,with significant slope to divert any contaminate ground water toward this river receptors. So there is almost zero possibility for flow toward the milt? mark. He said. That would toward Hillsdale and Mountain View. Which is the most immediate sizable neighborhood. Regarding other effects from existing conditions,the areas largely agricultural, surface runoff and subsurface flow from infiltrating strong water with generally an insignificant effects on water quality to the streams or in the ground water stream. Regarding effects from future development,the possible areas of concerns are as follows: one is vehicle traffic and parking with potential oil droppings; the second was salt use on pavements with potential migration to the ground water stream and the third was possible use of fertilizers in excess,to cause excessive nitrates and phosphates in ground water stream. And,regarding the first item regarding the request for vehicle usage, such a effects could be excluded with any type of development. In general,the pavement drainage with presumably include a provision for oil separation and catch basin which Bob can address. Ultimately some of your oils may drain to the retention basin. The basin drains eventually to the Podunk River which receives drains from Sullivan Avenue with many times such contaminates. These are issues that you've addressed any development. Regarding salt use,the second item. The salt use will probably occur to a large extent go into the retention basin,the west side probably into Plum Gully Brook and the east side. Again,Plum Gully Brook is presently receiving so far off of Nevers Road and now the potential new sulfurs with existing salt would appear to be very small. Appears to be very small. 5 As to fertilizers, fertilizers have been far varies(papers shuffling) been most noteworthy ry � nn • factor, effecting bedrock wells to proximity to such areas, over fertilizing, causes the excess l� nutrients to flow into the ground water stream and the nitrates to the bedrock. This causes excess nitrates or phosphates in the ground water. This problem is obviously not unique to subject development or what seems to be a concern to subject development did not occur. In summary,the subject development does not appear to have a more significant effect on ground water/stream water quality than any developmental site and probably not much more than if the site was left as is,with agricultural uses environmental control. The existing or pre-existing contamination if any, will not effect the quality of Plum Gully Brook or the water supplies to the site. The last sentence summarizes it all, in his opinion,not going to have an effect to the north nor to Plum Gully Brook or at one site. We have a shorter report from Dr. Dubay, from Connecticut Environmental Engineering Services. He wants to do that small spillage area,north of the there's a demolished building on top of the hill, and he said it is in fact contaminated soil from the oil. The drums are stored there. He's done recent testing. Done it on the soil and indicate there are no traces of any volatile organic compounds in the soil, either the type expected in gasoline's and diesel fuel or in chlorinated cleaning compounds. Now, its clear that the stained soil must be removed or disposed of properly, which is what we indicated at our last meeting, and the soil should be removed to a clean depth sampling, announced use the soil at the edges and base of the excavated grave or required to confirm that the removal is to standards acceptable for the state and towns. So whenever you see this stuff removed,they make an excavation, and at the base of that,they take soil samples and have it tested, make sure its clean to remaining soil. There was evidence of an old-fashioned crank type oil dispenser, at that location,there's a picture of it in here, if you can see it,but it's a real old-fashion one, in that general area,I've seen it. The oil stains there are from the motor oil. The history of the property was from a bus company. It's compatible with use of motor oil in bulk. Motor oil is heavy. Was very soiled? soil. Especially when compared to liquids like water, gasoline,heating oil. A private well which is inline and downhill from the oil stained area has been tested. That's the Callahan property. With sophisticated analysis for the constituents characteristic of motor oils, and none has been found. The question was raised whether Plum Gully Brook is contaminated from the presence of the stain at the top of the hill. It is my professional opinion that this is considered extremely unlikely. The oil would travel to the east, and the direction of Plum Gully Brook,where he's initiated sampling,just confirmed that, so the facts would speak for themselves. 6 So those those two reports do address the potential from the contaminated area at the top of the /n hill to get down Plum Gully Brook, and I think to summarize in both cases they indicate that that 1� they have no expectation of any contaminate from getting into Plum Gully Brook. And they're even going to be doing some testing down there. We're prepared tonight to address to address reasons for this particular location for crossing . . . .that type of thing,but before I get into that, I think I'd like to have John Steward address what he's done with Jeff or what they've arrived at for his report. He's submitted a written report based on the onsite field that they did,Monday I guess it was? And then after that yeah, after that Bob Orso will be addressing the Town Engineers comments and the meeting that he had with Jeff Olger and what changes we've made. Sure. (Papers shuffling) Good evening. My name is John Stewart. I'm Landscape Architect for the firm CR3 in Simsbury, Connecticut. This is in reference to the walk that Mr. Folger and I had around the site on Monday,to discuss the wetlands considerations. Oops. Sorry. (Laughter) In the area that we were walking into,was right along here, and where Jeff has prior to the time that I was onsite to determine where the crossing would be. The first concern that Dick had was these areas are meanders within the stream, which are showing some signs of erosion, and what could be done to mitigate those areas in erosion. In addition,we discussed bank material solutions, of both these areas where the armoring of these meanders would be and in addition what would happen between where the road crosses the wetland at the culvert and on into wetland. What we decided to do, and what my letter addresses Mr. Folger is this. As far the meanders goes we would use a product which is called ByLog?, which is a rolled coconut fiber material rolled into a log. These would be put on the outside of these meanders,where the erosion occurs, with the purpose and they're staked in place and the idea is that they protect these areas from high water flows which would cause further disturbance to them. In addition,these logs would be inserted, excuse me, into the logs would be cuttings of various types of plant material, willows and dogwoods specifically,which would grow,take root in there, grow and maintain this wetland character. They act as both a root a root,their roots in growing in so doing, would stabilize these slopes,the plants provide cover as well as wildlife habitat, and then generally maintain and increase the wetland use of this area. The meander which is closed to the culvert on the south, and then on up through the small disturbed area,what we would do is is plant this area,with the variety of plants,by Burnham, Arrowoo excuse me,by Burnham, Clethrow?, which is a summer sweet,which is a wetland 7 plant, and also,Uwatamoss?(sp), and I think there was um, let's see what else was in there, Clethrow. . . what else was in there? Grape. pu—� Grape. Yeah. So. So. So. The purpose is is that as this paved area traverses over here,you can see that every attempt is made to minimize the disturbance within the wetland. This hatched area indicates the existing tree line,which is there with the stream running in it. And the idea is is that as this goes through here, and we take care to reinforce these areas,when we get to this area here, not only do we reinforce it,but we take the plant material, instead of isolating here, with all this plant material to be planted along the slope and grow up and cover and eventually,hopefully within five years or so,to cover this area so that this would traverse an area and as so you look down into it,you really would not see it. It would be it would be completely contiguous with the existing area. It should be noted too, that this entire area of woodlands(paper shuffling) . . . is not going to be disturbed, aside from this location here. And in addition on the north side,while it's very narrow between the edge of the culvert and the property line, which goes off the high school, that the same type of plantings indicated in green hatch here, would also reoccur here to again, make this area contiguous with the planted area . . . It should also be noted,too that the use of the bylogs . . a lot of the work would be done with hand labor,rather than bringing in a lot of large equipment. So,you really don't have I�CIL���t large equipment coming in and creating more of a disturbance than what you're trying to do . . so a lot of that work . . It's all done by hand. A person could literally time of year, and the stream flow is down to a minimum they could literally follow the stream carrying these logs with them. And insert them into the areas that are identified and walk out and you wouldn't have to have anything other than just a shovel. So, any disturbance to the wetland would be about as minimal as you can get. It would be nothing more than somebody walking through the area, probably be easily done with a two man crew. So,thanks . . So,that the purpose of that was to primarily to address the existing erosion in and the stream belt that goes through the property. And to correct those those areas of erosion while we're developing the project. Plus address the crossing as well as vegetation. . so that any . . . Okay,Bob's gonna address the jurors comments relative to the wetlands crossing. 8 Basically, since the last meeting we have received the Town Engineers' comments. There's two in particular. There are really only three comments regarding the cross and one had to do with the construction of the culvert itself. If you recall it's a(tape change) . . . Folger and Mr. to what we're gonna do is we're not gonna have any large riprap, exposed in the wingwall area itself, on the slopes we would definitely still have the riprap? as proposed on the bottom, what we'll do is take larger riprap, set it down a little bit lower than grade. So that you have a stabilization at the bottom of the channel. Then let nature take its course, let some of the natural soils fill in the the lower area here, so that you would have soils filling in the void between the large pieces of riprap. That would then really kill two birds with one stone. It would satisfy the DEP in that small frogs,that kind of thing, could still get through in holes. Could get through the culvert, and the natural setting, and it would also prevent or help in scouring capabilities of any water coming down. Because you would still have the large rocks at the bottom of the channels. It basically would kill two birds with one stone. That's what we're proposing here. The other comment from Mr. Iazzetta? concerned if we lowered the culvert or set the culvert so that we have six inches of natural material in the bottom of the culvert,the capacity of the culvert is then reduced by six inches. Because now we have soil in the bottom of the culvert. So you want to make sure that calculation's reflected that. So what I did is I reran the calculations and submitted it to him. It really doesn't effect very much,this quote was designed for 100 year storm. It effected the headwater elevation for 100 year storm I think by 1/2 or 3/4 of a foot. But we're still about 4-5 feet below the road elevation for 100 year storm. So,it's fairly insignificant, right to submit those calculations to Mr. Iazzetta. That basically was Jerry Iazzetta's report, and we feel that in meeting with him, with meeting with Jeff Warren, we feel that we've addressed his report. I'm not sure Jeff. . . I'm sure he's talked to Jerry. Okay. That concludes Bob's report. I'd just like to review with you just some reason why we selected this particular location and why there was no turn into the actual crossing of the Plum /M1 Gully Brook, if I may do that. I've flipped it around to show the overall, so that you see Sullivan Avenue,Nevers Road,the three street belt Collins Crossing. . . (Comment) Uh,Kathy. The first thing is the and we indicate this at the last meeting, is that this is the exact location of where there was a prior crossing. If you've seen there, get down and you've seen there's remnants of like a concrete culvert. There's a metal culvert. Uh,what else is there. (Interruption). Pardon? 9 Couple metal culverts. Couple metal culverts. Debris. Right. Soil erosion. You can see evidence that it clearly was a cartpath and a crossing there. Which was accessed primarily by cornfields. And had been used up until it got washed out, now and we're not sure how many years ago that was. So,that's one of the major reasons why we selected this particular location. Another one was the disturbed area, it had been disturbed previously for that purpose. S . . . . .? On Nevers Road along Nevers Road,that is the only location where we can put a road entrance,just to let you know. It has to be that particular location. ? . . . up on a we get to the preferred siteline here,before you headed to the south,that's out of the question, you can't have it there. We don't meet the accepted standards for siteline. For public safety purposes. Also, if we were headed, even though we can't move it to the south, we were headed to the south, it would bisect this property that we've proposed to go to the Town of South Windsor, there was a there's been open spaced task force, which my understanding is they recommended to the Town Council that this property be secured by the town,not identify exactly what it would be used for, and that the Town Council unanimously accept it their recommendation. That's my understanding. Anyone knows anymore,please clarify. Sal. But,I think that to summarize it,the Town Council has voted unanimously to accept the recommendation of(cough interruption) My guess is that'll end up kicking back to the open spaced task force for a final recommendation uh disposition of it. But still we didn't want ` to put a road through the middle of that,cause we don't know what the Town might want to use that for. Whether it's for an actual ?? or for to be left alone. For recreation. Whatever. That's one reason for that. Also,relative to the overall development and it's very linear long piece of property,it goes thousands of feet in length,there's a subdivision regulation which has a maximum cul-de-sac street length of 600 feet. That'd bring you right around in here, and bring you right around somewhere into here. Which would preclude development of the property and that's central section of property which could not be developed. 10 It was quite clear when we went to the public hearing process on the zone change,that the planning and zoning commission would prefer to have the property residential in character, if it were to be developed. And we had also gone through and exercised what would happen if we could only develop the ?frontage? . You certainly don't want to put general house lots right along the frontage now, so we you know we could have gone commercial. There's some commercial in that general area. We thought it would be undesirable to do that,but I think we uh the neighborhood that was present at the hearing, generally indicated that they'd prefer it not to be commercial as well. Not that that would be proposed,but that if we couldn't get into the property with a street that would go through,that that was one possibility. Also,having a through street against one alternate it's get an additional means of an egress and ingress for emergency vehicles as your trying to get in the property. If your somewhere in the property, for example hit, and for some reason it's cut off here,you always have a second means to get to that site for emergency vehicles if you went through uh Gloria?Hurricane Gloria, 1980's, I know it's in this building at that time, like in 300 locations, where the streets were severed from down electrical lines, down trees, limbs,you name it, it was in the road, and we're blocked off. Fortunately, we didn't get any serious medical emergencies at the time,but nevertheless that's some of the thinking in the Town of South Windsor based on that that experience. And as consequence you've got to have an outlet,you got to have a second means to get to people if you can possibly do it. Hence, we have a, . . . . street length. There is a incidentally there is no other possibility of getting to this property from the north, from Mountain View as quite clear after hearing part of the hearings through Planning and Zoning Commission, and with Town Staff. And that the residents and also the Town, does not want to have Mountain View extended. There are a number of reasons for that. And it's existing condition and characteristics. The high school property doesn't allow for access from the north. We don't know that there's any possibility of getting in from the south,but we don't have any rights to do that, if you look at the property,there's some pretty good slopes on it,that's a sliding hill to the south. Collins Hill. Uh, pretty good slopes. The prospects for getting a road through there to service this property are pretty slim, and it's in question, seriously in doubt. And we don't have any rights to do it anyways. Also,the through street access to Nevers Road if your in these developments here,there is some traffic, as you know it can get quite busy on Sullivan Avenue. It is an alternate access point during very busy period, along Sullivan Avenue, as you can well imagine. And, also gives access to these residents to the Community Center and a park across the street. So,those are the reasons why we selected that particular location and why we must have a street that goes through, and why we must have a brook crossing and why it's there. So, I'd like to summarize that for you. 11 With that I think that finishes in the do we have any or any in the catch basins, for oil? Yes. I addressed that time,but. . e Okay. we have that both discharges at the culvert itself,before we have a discharge we have a sedimentation catch basin and two chamber catch basin. And all of those we have a we have a bell track for oil separation as well. (h-&4ff,U& Just to let you know that. Okay. We were able to drop the percent of the smoke on the pipes running and in change the JA� sub strait on the pipes to to reduce the velocities. C&�U-1-9-J Yes. Thats another point . . . . . percentage . . . Yeah,the have and also Jeff had a concerning the velocities when it gets back to the rip rap or no rip rap in the channel, one of the things that you were concerned about when you size or have rip rap in the channel obviously, is the,not only the amount of work,but the velocity of the work. In this case we don't have very large volumes of water,f lows of water coming from those two culverts that connect to the windwalls,but the velocities were high. And one of the reasons for that is because one of the new receptive pipes is the ADS pipe,which is a corrugated plastic pipe with a smooth wall inside. The only problem with that pipe is that you have very high velocity because it is very smooth inside. It's a lot higher than concrete. So to get around that what we did was we we then specked, and changed the plans to reflect that the discharge pipes from the last structures to the windwalls would be at a flatter pitch,which also resist velocity. And we changed to a concrete pipe. So the velocities were decreased significantly, I think in that location we had a couple we had one of the velocities had about ten CFS and I think we dropped it down to about four or five. So, we have very low velocities and low flows now. In that location. So, we did change the type of pipe going through that. Which actually we did, I know it's not the subject of the hearing,but in all locations of the entire project where we had a discharge we looked at velocities and we changed them all to concrete and flatness . . . Jeff, did you have any, is that it on your presentation? That's it. Any questions you might have . . . 12 Did you have any further comments you wanted. . . UM' . . Any questions. Just the fact that um, apologize for for running you folks up with piles of papers,but between the fourth of July holidays, and the days off, and unfortunately I was out for three days, so there was difficulty in getting Design Professionals some timely comments on recomments on this. And also, going out to the site, as far as evaluating for the stream stabilization, stuff like that. Um, one of the things that we did want and we did receive,just wanted to make a note of it at 5:00 this afternoon,were the reports, or at least the initial reports on the ground water contamination issue. And, again the likelihood of any any material heading to the east, which would impact Plum Gully Brook. Which was written into the record. �u Right. UJJaJ0-RA'\-- And commission,yeah Susan. N The other outlet structure for the drainage, are you guys doing anything with plantings or anything else about the erosion there, it's not picked as one of the four spots, is it? Actually, it is. WTIL It is, okay. If you look . . I'm sorry,what? If you look where it's shaded up there,towards the right. That's right, it is. Okay. Yeah,that's where we cross back over. Q Yeah, unfortunately this plan here that adjuster for CR3 had does not show the continuation of QQry the channel all the way down,because that was something that we added. This is one of the older,this is an original plans,but the pipe is right here. That channel would be coming right down right in that area. 13 Wamvw Anyone else? We have received details of that channel work, has that been laid out the details, or the details of that channel. auk It's been sized on the plans as far as size of rip rap and that type. Matter of fact at the very end of the culvert end of the flared end before it gets into the channel, what we have is a plunge pool. Which is like a almost like a rip rap spoon. Which then the sediment can sit in it before it goes up to the into the channel itself. -toA),jU 41 Do you have indication of amounts of rip rap? I don't know do you do it in tons? Or Yards? Or however. Yards. `9-30JtA4 M How much fill? & Qjyl�Yeah we have that in the . . . AAO,c e, It's in that with the application. (Papers shuffling) _ttY4JUU4v Then wouldn't that amount have been changed cause . . . 44"k_ Yeah. . . . your initial proposal. 6A&,,,JCE Yeah. 0jj4MW_V_L4To give you an idea . . tt)A -- Went along with the Army Corps thing with no rip rap in the channel. (J j4p,Nc u Right. t�y&RAg-Ai So that would make quite a difference I would think. GUftOAAAWell, actually. . 41- . . in the area of the channel, (thanks-whispering) . . 14 In the area of the channel itself, it doesn't effect the area of disturbance. I mean this area will still be disturbed. But, in the area of the channel that's coming down through here, and the wetlands itself is that what your? I guess I just wanted a general idea of how much rip rap your putting in there. I mean your lineal feet . . . . . or expanding on . . All right. We actually reduced from what's in the application. Because the application reflected the entire channel being rip rap. Right. So,you take out about a quarter, it's about a quarter of what we had in there. And then you added some from the other outlet, right. Right. So, it gives it about, even out,I mean can you give us comment. It's probably actually still a little less. k,Qj.. k e ,Yeah,because most of that's outside of the wetlands area. Jt4W Yeah, 150 cubic yards of rip rap. Right. So we takeout about 35 yards of that about here, and probably add in about 20. 115 be about o 'u 130. We'd be built from 150 to about 135. Okay. I had a concern that have you addressed where you brought up in one your reports in there L tonight. Bedrock. I had a concern what happens if you get bedrock. Now, if I understand correctly the stream bottoms at 155? Pardon me? Are you talking across? 15 Yes. akAC4 We don't anticipate getting anything bedrock at the crossing. We've done . . Well I know but. . . 6A� Yeah. I'm going to be sure you're not going to. Because we're only going down about 1/2 a foot below the existing stream line. Well that's,yes. That's what I didn't understand is,the last meeting you said you'd be six inches below the current stream bed. (Qf Av"kLJ— Right. t6aUNA- If your elevations are correct on your maps,the way I read them,the current stream bed is at 155. Including the sanitary you'll be at 152. That's three feet. a" "W Sanitary sewer itself? Well,when you include well your crossing a utility. So you put your utilities in and include that as part of the . . &A,AA� Right. �Q Is that 152 elevation on the sanitary not correct? No,that's correct. It's 152, almost 153,roughly. At the crossing. (,vDi&4,1 Okay. And if the current level is 155? CUB Right, so we're three feet below the bed at that point. Right. So how come you just said last time you said six inches. Well,I'm talking about the culvert itself. I'm sorry. I misunderstood your question. I thought you were talking about the culvert. Okay. 16 The actual cut through there for the sewer,yeah it'd be about three feet below the brook. Okay,how can you be sure you're not going to hit bedrock? Because of the types of deposits that we found in the stream,basically. I mean you get a good indication,before you hid bedrock you'll always hit hardpan, in these types of soils. What we hit is stratified sand and gravel's. Before you hit bedrock you'll always hit an area of hardpan. We've done extensive soil testing through this area,we didn't do it in the wetlands,but we did it just outside. We didn't hit any any any hardpan at all. And in some of the areas we went down 22 feet. You don't have, in the area at a low point like this, of bedrock, or excuse me, of a brook, what you'll have actually is more sand and gravel deposits than you would up on the slopes because it has a tendency to settle into that area. So,I mean I really don't anticipate this on a ledge very close to the surface here. There's no evidence of it through either some of the soil testing we've done or in looking at the stream bed itself. Okay. Well, I guess I want to be able to read,because he does make a reference to bedrock in one of his reports. Right,well what he does is he says that bedrock is usually found below a hardpan layer,which is correct. Right. Usually in these types of soils we would stratified sand and gravel's, usually have six, seven feet of hardpan. It is harder, obviously to get close to them. We didn't hit any of that going down 22 feet. Well,yes but you didn't go down 22 feet anywhere near where you're going to cross. Um, no we did go down, well here's test pit 119,which is at elevation(papers shuffling) 154 and a half 1155. If you look at 119 . . You went down ten feet. on the plans went down ten feet and what did we have? Reddish brown sand and gravel. And no hardpan,right? Right. 17 Yeah, so you really not down into the ledge layer at that leverage. And that's at elevation 155 or so. tV_6AJLa41 Okay. Um, when you presented your reasons for this crossing, uh one of your arguments was a 600 foot limit on the cul-de-sac. Right. Do I understand the Planning and Zonings reg's which is not our concern but our concern being do you have an alternative? Um,the Planning reg's not say if you run a stub off one of the streets then your 600 foot limit goes away. 0 Uh,that's subject to interpretation. Uh, first of all we can't do any stubs to the north,there's no 9�- possibility anywhere on the north side. Um . �l�t'► Why not? 4kGt, LLL Pardon? Why not? &Jtu_� Why not? Because there's only one location. It's the high school property entire . . Oh. Okay. Right. Right. So we can't go anywhere there, and uh and then uh it's all developed here. Uh,Mountain View, fxat&�- we've been told, and especially their grade changes here . . . Grade wise you can't. &�� You can't get it to work. +_. You can't get there from here,kind of a thing. JUJAAX" Okay. You can't extend that through. So there's no possibility on the north. On the south side where /n you you as we indicated the steep slopes for the sledding hill,that area,the prospects are pretty d�k unlikely. There's a possibility might be we go through a little bit here,but they'd have to exceed the 600 foot length. We don't see that going through. If you recall well if you drive along Sand Hill Road you know you've got Mery Waldrons' house, which is the top of the hill, which is right here, and then down at the uh closer to the intersection you've got the Collins property, Catherine Collins . . /✓� Uh huh. 18 What've you got David,you've got David and then you've got Porter and Catherine Collins and then you've Porter and Catherine Collins. So Catherine Collins is down in here and then David &&&LLC, and Dorothy Collins here, and then you got the Waldrons. Likelihood of a road going there is next to none. Especially with the grades there, if you've seen it. So don't think there's any possibility of a road going through there. Where would we put one through? And we also have no rights to do that. So we have to be able to convince the Planning and Zoning Commission that uh that there's a good prospect of this road going through to for emergency vehicles get in and other things, school buses what have you. Although most of it's for senior residents development there are ten house lots. We have to be able to convince them that that's a strong likelihood. For them to allow much greater than 600 feet,which would probably end up being a permanent cul-de-sac. More like you know 1,500/2,000 feet or more. Uh huh- So, So that would, in fact all the way down to here its its getting up there distance wise. Probably a 402 C.{.C,t_ -couple thousand feet. C� Have you considered the possibility of a loop road? We don't have enough, it's a linear parcel, 31 acres but it's not that wide, um we'd have to you mean going something like this and in back? i, Uh huh. I don't think it's up to them. t� &- I Who are they? �( Planning and Zoning Commission. And it doesn't really give you another outlet. You couldn't do it geometrically. J And geometrically. . How does it not give you another outlet? Well . . tow", It goes in and comes back out,right. 19 Geometrically when you're looking at the road map,you'd look at horizontally and vertically, amL"�- obviously. Then there's Town standards,regarding both. Excuse me? I'm sorry. Um, if you look at that'd bring your road in here(coughing)we do have over 10 percent road through here,because there are some pretty steep grades coming down through here. We have significant cuts through this area. If you start looking at taking those grades and trying to stay with the Town standards of horizontal curves and bringing it around by the time you get down through here,you'd never catch grade. I'm not sure I know what that means. Okay, we have to look at both the vertical and horizontal geometry when we're laying out a road. And there's Town standards. Very strict Town standards for both. Maximum ten percent grades. There's maximum and minimum curvatures horizontally for the roadway. If you combine the two,you could never have a road coming in loop it around and connect it on itself, and meet those standards. There's no trying to say,you'd never be able . . . curve much of a curve . . . You'd have maximum grades,minimum curvatures,horizontally, and they would just never connect. You couldn't do it. It was it was this coming into this like this, is is difficult because of the fact that we have ten percent grades. The only reason we could do it is because of the fact that we have good soils through that area. To try and loop itself around like this,you'd never be able to. Looking at horizontal and vertical geometry together the Town standards,you'd never be able to do it. Uh huh. Just didn't wouldn't happen. h, We did look at that very early on in the process, because we'd like to avoid the tremendous r expense of the watercourse crossing. We looked at a lot of different scenarios. &J1hJJAc — And it didn't work engineering wise. 20 JjAgIOW-U It just doesn't work. &XAK So you did run that,Peter? Oh we absolutely did. And we couldn't get it to work. We even looked at this location as well as being up further this way, down this way, grade wise and horizontally,when you look at the geometry and the geometric standards you have to live with for the Town standards, which are not unreasonable, I mean they're standards that most towns use,this really is the only location that the road can be, and it really in order to work it has to go through. It cannot really loop on its own. It just doesn't work. I mean when you look at these two developments for instance, which is not the subject of this hearing,but when you see the layer for the conservation plan,these (papers shuffling)walls here and here,that's because of the grades through there. In order to (papers shuffling), development we've had to use retaining walls to hold back the sills?because of the grades. So you know trying to bring a roadway and looping it around,you'd never do it. tOAUU41 Uh huh. Otherwise we'd have steep, we'd also, although we can't do it internally into developments if you'd attempted to do it, we'd end up with much steeper grades internally and in development n n� _ � � _ and if you've seen Porter's Share or Wyndemere Court, and of those developments,you noticed �2 (�t.C.u-e that every efforts been made to minimize grades so that residents of there, were a minimum of age 55 and older, we want to make sure that the grades minimal there so that they don't,you know winter conditions you don't want to have icy conditions on a steep grade for driveway. You don't the sidewalk into the unit, for the steps that type of thing. So we keep it at as minimal a grade as possible for the convenience of the residents. And what is . . . Like even the sight,that this isn't really a suitable sight then for that kind of development is it. Which is not a wetlands issue. .(tape change) . . basic and the cuts that you're gonna have to do just to meet the Town standards admittedly, Y g J � Y are very heavy duty,yes? But then again that's issue. It works and it works very well. It works and it works very well. These sites are individually are terrific sites for what we're proposing. The grades are excellent internally in the nature of four sites. there are over proposed and there's ten lots in the top. There's attached to the twenty unit senior citizens development here and each of these individual ones,the grades work out beautifully, internally and Okay, well again,that isn't our issue. But although,the way you separated out your application, all we have is the crossing. So we have no development to base the need for the crossing on. 21 Because your asking simply for the crossing. You're not asking us to then say can we build this development,right? JW ,L&.j- We have not . . Under this application. We have not, under separate applications we've asked for conservation plan approval for the four other applications. Right. Right. But . . But. But,this application is simply the crossing. And the relevance of the development. Right. But we have outlined why we had proposed it here, and why it has to go in there. And why the alternatives we looked at. And why we don't have an alternative to that location. Okay. Okay. I guess that's all the questions I have. Anyone else? Is there anyone from the public that has comments or questions on this application? Yes. Yes. Number one you have to come forward. There's a sheet there. You have to sign your name and address. Okay. MY name is Jane Nichols and I live at 60 Nevers Road. Excuse me could you come up a little bit? Sure. Yep. 22 But I live east of this proposal that's going here tonight. I have a few questions,I don't know if you can answer them. But I think they need to be taken under consideration and wish to do so. I'd like to know if there was a survey done on the amount of traffic, and speed that is utilizing Nevers Road,now. We have to restrict ourselves to wetlands issue. That's a Planning and Zoning issue. Okay. All right? Thank you. Okay. Sorry. When you're certainly free to ask that. Okay. That's good. I want to know if they've considered the fact that there are things in across the street from where I live. I can't go on somebody else's property, so I don't know. Things like lady's slippers, honeysuckle's that grow there,trilliums. Things that are supposed to be protected by the State Laws. Frogs, eels,turtles, all those things. Are we going to disrupt all that? Because we need a place to go in and out. Yes,we need a place to go in and out. If this is going to be senior citizens and it's going to be on that particular end that's going to be senior citizens, and we need to go over that brook,that's fine and dandy,but the . . Excuse me, what was the question again? Was there any studies done? —fit �� Yes, was there any thing as far as disrupting that particular natural habitat? Betty. Should we have her go through her questions, or just go one at a time and see if we can get some answers on it. Why don't we go one at a time. Yeah,that's probably true. It'd probably be a little clearer if we addressed your questions one at a time as you go along. Is that okay with you? 23 Yeah. I just think it would be a little more, for me at least I understand it a little better. Okay. And actually the commission did not to my knowledge inquire to the diversity database. Whether there's any endangered species. We can only. . I checked that. It's routine. We have we're one of the few towns that does a threatened and endangered species maps in our town. So we have areas where identified areas as special concern. The likelihood of finding threatened or endangered species is high. And I routinely on every application check those maps, if fairly confidential information. We check them just to see if there's anyplace that overlaps. Just as an example we had an area of special concern north of the proposed golf course, which is actually in or actually approved golf course which is actually in East Windsor,but that did have an area. So we did bring that to the attention of the commission and developers at the time. Was this done here? Was that study done here. Did you look into . . . It was done town wide. So we have the information and it shows areas on the town map they have areas where you have to have you know there's a red light goes on basically if you have . . . So if there are trilliums there, or if there are lady's slippers there,those are protected? No. They're not endangered or threatened . . Okay. . . species. So. All right. Yeah,but it's it is going to the proposal will impact the habitat and so the species,to a certain degree. We'll do that you know we're trying to minimize the likelihood of that. Okay. This Dr. Welti and Dr. Gilbay I believe are the . . . Dubay. Dubay. 24 Dubay. Okay. You talk about sand and gravel and bedrock. Aren't they a good filter? And if the oil that was on top of that hill has filtered down so that they have to take that away and clean. Wasn't it PSB's tested for? Q They tested for. . . Which is a. .. let me summarize what they indicated . . Dr. Dubay. Let's see. They did a test a &tatb�- sophisticated test for any extra contaminates you might be concerned with. With which might go along with motor oils and things like that. And it came out negative for the test. I think my specific question is did they test for PSB's, which is a carcinogen? If that's a normal characteristic thing . It is. It would test for that. Then my answer is yes. But they did do a normal test for motor oils and 1 what might be normally associated with those,which might be considered hazardous. Do you have the level of report . . . As we explained at the last hearing, the issue of the test results for individual wells,matter of fact is part of this process clients have contacted with Dr. Dubay to do testing of individual wells in the area. Are they selective? They are done to my knowledge,they've done all in the immediate vicinity right there. He's in the process of doing that, and there was all, in fact as they're doing that they've got a positive result from someone not for these hazardous types of things,but for bacteria. And the lab immediately contacted Dr. Dubay and Dr. Dubay immediately contacted the resident. Immediately went back and took another sample and our clients expense. And had it tested again at our clients expense. And which confirmed bacteria levels and then he immediately notified that party that there are bacteria levels that are of concern. In their well water. So that's something that might come out of it,but the things that you might be concerned about with motor oils, he had a sophisticated test for that. Everything you might be concerned with, normally concerned as part of the routine environmental investigation for something like that, he had it tested for. It's very expensive analysis. The neighbors that are going to be around this particular area that the wells were tested,were they selected. 25 I (can't make out) The idea of this is, we hired Dr. Dubay, who's an independent expert, and p basically gave him a blank check to go do what he,his opinion as an expert, needed to do. What was filed with the commission tonight, is a preliminary report which was primarily focusing towards the east,towards Plum Gully Brook,because that was the concern for this evening. I know that some of the tests that he ran, cost five of six hundred dollars a piece to run. Which meant that the laboratory was performing multiple analyses per sample. Because you don't just plug it in and it gives you a readout of everything there. You have to run a specific procedure for each chemical. I do know that what their normal procedure is is to based on their field observation, for example for motor oil,they will then run a whole battery of tests that would be associated with what you might find based on that observation. We have not yet received the copy of the laboratory analyses and the actual raw data printout of every test that was run. They will be filed with Planning and Zoning and with the Town as soon as it's available to us. I think the report that you saw here this evening I just received today, or late yesterday or earlier today. All we can say is these concerns have been raised, we're bending over backwards to try to do it. As Peter pointed out, apparently one person did have some,you know a problem with his well cap,which is nothing to do with us, it was bacteria there,you know,that was immediately made known to the homeowner. So we're doing all this testing so we have a foundation,we will have a database, so there's no question about what's out there. Write it down, so there can't be any question what happens later. But at this point,as the reports indicate, nothing we've heard indicates anything other than perhaps some oil stains from many years ago, up at the top. And that's it. And also . . . We're trying to correct a situation that's been there for a long time. This was done due to a prior use,where we've inherited this entire prior use, we're trying to correct it through my clients actions, and through their consultants. They're trying to correct the situation. This problem has been there for a long time and we're now trying to correct it. Even a picture of that hand crank oil dispenser or whatever,that's evidence of something that's been around for a long time. So we're just trying to correct that situation now through this process. Okay. Now Mr. Dutton is it? Cummings. Hal Cummings. ` Cummings. I'm sorry. As you can tell I'm not very familiar with this sort of thing. Um,you said that the wells being tested the concern of the people already live on Plum Gully side,Plum Gully Brook, sorry. They've all been tested? No. I don't I think. 26 I understand Rose,we told Dr. Dubay in your professional opinion go out and test those wells, that in your opinion could in any way be affected or impacted by anything being done here. And so now your looking as Dr. Welti would say, radiance and hypology and underwater flow and whatever, and as I understand Dr. Dubay's report,there's virtually nothing that is likely to have gone east towards Nevers Road, even from the pass. So apparently he saw no reason whatsoever,to go out in that direction that the there was very little if any conceivable possibility of anything ever even having to passed that way I think . . . if it would have it would have it would have gone through Podunk and then back through Plum Gully, is that correct? It would have shown up many years ago by way of oil stains on the water or the gravel, none of which has been observed. So that there's no apparent evidence of any serious or significant motor oil contamination. What we apparently have is a staining of some soils around where that crank or where they used to store some oil barrels years ago befpeople were concerned about this sort of thing. But nothing that indicates any significant quantity or anything that would have gone. At least that's what the per? (Everyone talking at once) It's going to be cleaned up and it's going to be removed. I guess my question is is was it really was it selective as far as choosing who's wells were tested and who's weren't? (mutual talking) judgment. Okay. So east of Nevers Road I mean, Plum Gully Brook didn't matter? n No,there'd be really no reason for it because . . Okay. . . if if let's say . . . That's fine. Well hypothetically let me just explain why. Is if if let's say there were some contamination that came down through here, it would be caught at Plum Gully Brook. It wouldn't go through the brook and passed on to the other side of Nevers Road. So there's really no reason to do any testing on the east side of Nevers Road. a�f if just to confirm that,Dr. Dubay is going to be testing at the northerly part, let me point that out Bob. And also at the southerly property line along the brook. 27 01�U� Right. Over here. At the beginning and end of the property,the brook, which is like 700, 800 feet in length, when they tested it,the beginning and the end and see if there's anything in the water. All right but that has not been done as yet? Okay. No. But it's their opinion that anything that happened up in here, chances are very unlikely that it would get down to Plum Gully Brook. There are a number of reasons which . . There are many agencies and officials responsible for monitoring this. Copies of these reports are being furnished to the town. They've already been given to Mr. Folger. He's going to ut" distribute them to the fire chief and fire marshall, or who ever has a responsibility here. And also to the health department which is Mr. Deptula, Town Sanitarian. So both of them are getting these preliminary reports. They're also going to get the final reports. We've indicated at the last hearing and the beginning of this hearing,which was July 3, I believe it was,that the full reports are going to be presented to this commission. They're also going to be presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission on July 30. Okay. I guess that answered my question. When you're doing any excavation and your going to get ready to put in this this 74 foot crossing,I think it's 74 feet culvert? awws-tA Yes. Yeah. Okay. SkZjq " It's a 6 foot. . . And you were talking about,I hope I have this right, rip rap is stone? Yes. Large stone. And you're going to fill in that on the south side of the culvert? Correct? 28 Yes, at the discharge side, right. 'And you're looking at about 135 cubic yards? Yes. I don't know how to put this,but I guess my question is if you're going to take the soils and your going to move it around on the top of this hill and do whatever you have to do for tearing and get the water flow and the ground water flowing and all that good stuff,what are you going to do with all fill? Are you going to move it somewhere and then bring it back? No. Does this rip rap come from somewhere else to come here? I Yes. No,the rip rap there's no stone that would qualify as rip rap. For this kind of a use on site. It would be brought in. You're 135 cubic yards is not very much,it's a very small amount. Okay. There's not a lot of rip rap being. . . I thought it sounded like an awful lot. I don't know. Well, I can actually tell you. Length wise and that kind of thing, if you'd like to know. No. Becau$e it wouldn't matter. It just sounded like an awful lot tome. I'm trying to think, you're talking 74 feet across this road. And you have to do something to shore off this 10 foot piece of steel,or whatever it's made out, or corrugated metal that your put in and you can't put it just on dirt because it's going to sink. No. Well it's a concrete round 6 foot pipe. Oh it's concrete. But it's going to sink into whatever unless your hitting hardpan, correct? No. It's going to be sitting on gravel. Under the stone. Okay. So you're going to put that in first and then hope that the brook decides to go through it. ti No. Believe me the brook is going to go through it. But you are going to change the direction that the brook is flowing. 29 No. The pipe is going to be laid exactly where the brook is today. It's going to be in the stream channel. What we're doing is is this area is going to be dried out because, at the last meeting what we did is we explained that there's going to be a temporary 36 inch pipe installed just to the east of the proposed crossing. The brook would be temporarily diverted through it. While this is installed. Then when the six foot pipe is in, and stabilized,then the brook would be brought back to its original course, which is through the culvert. This is exactly where the brook is today. (Question?) This is exactly where the brook. . . Guys are waiting for the next one, right? (Laughter) We want to see too. But,this is exactly where the brook is today. This is laid exactly in the line of the existing brook. By the time that all the water comes from up up the top where you're building all these houses, right? Yeah. And the senior citizens complex and all that, and if I read this right there's a connect over there. Sure thing. This is going this is the road and this is going to crown like so? �{ Right. All right. And this is going to take water from here into there? Correct. J This is going to take water from here into here? Q,,( M,t,ka Right. And add to the brook? 30 Correct. 1V Not a thou amount large . There's not a lot of water . . . � `r It'd be ground water runoff, correct? au"AK"L Correct. Surface runoff, database. t047 Ground water is underground. Okay. If I just may add,the vast majority of the brook along here is going to be undisturbed including all the vegetation around it,that's the idea. In fact there are a couple of pockets that Mr. Stewart and Mr. Folger, identified on Monday, and feel that some erosion were addressing those and correcting the erosion. That's what the . . There's about there's about 700 acres of land that drains north of us. One of the things we looked at when we first looked at development, and I will be getting into this more with the conservation things,we'll be talking about the whole project and phasing and so forth. One of the things we looked at was normally when you do a project you look at stormwater detention, detention basin. Slow down. Runoff. Based on development. There's a few things that decide whether you're going to include detention. One of them is where you are in the water shed. If you're at the bottom of the water shed,the last thing you want to do is detain your water. Because if you detain your flows then you hit,then your peak discharge happens the same time everything from above happens. So when your at the bottom, near the bottom of watershed, what you want to do is get your flows through quickly. Get out of the way before majority of the flow,the flood waters let's say from above, come. Like a smoke off. Yeah. Exactly. (Couldn't make out) (1yQk.Yeah. You know if you look at a 700 acre watershed and it's off this wall. It's huge. So by the time the peak runoff comes through, which is 400 cubic feet per second, that's a lot of flow,that's why this is a six foot culvert. And that's why the one just to the north 31 6[UV � of it at the high school, if you're familiar with the high school driveway,that's a six foot culvert as well. It's exactly the same as what we're proposing here. Same stream bed. �"" � And just north of that though there's a pond up there. UwaZ� Yes. There's a detention area. . On the corner of Haynes and Nevers, correct. Yes. And it comes from across the street . . Correct. And it's come down and that's where they've got the rip rock in there,right. JU-M/ Yes. Yes. That's . . And that floods over the road. Yeah. For a hundred year storm I'm sure it does,yes. I don't know because I'm not that old. Yeah. (Laughter) in the road four years ago there was water over the road. And eight years ago there was water over the road. In that specific spot. Look at if you look at the flood studies that had been done before we looked at it,that is the fact. &M That some of the areas up above have flooding problems. Right. But that still comes into Plum Gully Brook. Correct. Correct. (�6_4,, Yes. Now,if that flooded two years ago . . 32 aw"UtERight. We've already had this hundred year flood. Because it already flooded over the road, and now we're proposing to put that water that's coming from the top of that hill . . gk"*"Ll Yes. �J. . into that brook again. To increase it even if it's . . But we're downstream. Right. You're downstream. So now you're going to cause the same problems down here as we already had up here. aww"ANo. If you look upstream from us. Okay. C4�There are some flooding problems upstream. `-�Right. a,,,aikAnd when we did the study. We did it. IL Not too far upstream, either. This is this is one copy of the study that was done. It's pretty. . `7'LJ��Impressive. Yeah. Well it was a long study. It took some time. If you look at the study there are some flooding problems upstream. The culvert that's exactly at the high school. Okay. If you look at flood studies that were done by the flood insurance people,FIIVIA, and you look at the one we did,that culvert is adequate for one hundred year storm. Right. This culvert is adequate, easily, for a hundred year storm. There will be no flooding of the road. Correct. So what we're concerned about, we're not concerned about, I can't be concerned about what happens upstream. I have no control over that. `'r�{, I understand. 33 If the road floods up here, nothing I can do about it. What I have to look at is what we're dwuj�-- proposing. We ought to make sure that what we propose doesn't mirror what happens here. And that's what I have to design to. Okay. 1 . . l This is designed to handle a hundred year storm. Which is actually in excess of what the standards are. I understand what you're saying about this is your concern to get this through this committee. Your not concerned with what happened up the street. We can't do anything about it. 6�M I )There's nothing I can do about it. Right. Okay. Y MJJ iO It's out of my control. There's 700 acres. I'm down the street from this, so needless to say you probably are not concerned as to what happens to me because I'm down the street from it. Because your only concern is this. � No. Quite the contrary. Quite the contrary. And that upsets me. Well, quite the contrary. I totally disagree. When you have a hundred year flows coming down through here,the last thing you want is for any additional flows from this development to occur at that time. When the flows from this site come through, it'll be way in advance of any flood flows from the north. It'll be out of there. Before . . The flows . (both talking together) It'll be a large surge from the 700 acres above. That's one of the reasons we have no detention proposed here. It would actually harm this. Based on this particular water shed. 34 Yeah. �cJ I guess that's it. Thank you. �C Thank you. Thank you. Um, do we want to take our nine o'clock break before we continue or do you want to finish this and then take a break? I think we should finish with the public. Okay. Is there anyone else from the public that would like to address this issue? Master grace person. John Callahan. J&�" Would you sign in? He brought up they tested my well 3/10. 1 have no idea what they're you know I mean it's got ' concerned. Well haven't they given you the results. There looking If I may say Mr. Dubay has indicated to you that he wasn't concerned. Based on the results. And his report will,to the Planning and Zoning Commission, is going to have those results in it. And you'll see just a matter of a little bit of time. We haven't received them yet ourselves. 0,-0 U Yeah,I . . What you see here tonight I got about five o'clock or late yesterday afternoon which was also &,/,..faxed over this afternoon to Mr. Callahan's lawyer,Attorney Alan Thomas of Manchester. Um, I know Mr. Dubay has gone back two or three times because of additional letters and reports coming in. Certain tests were done. Letter comes won't you test for this. You test for that. Well now I didn't. Why didn't you. I didn't think I had to. Well go do it, make them happy. So the end result is we fully expected the reports coming in. Other than that one finding of bacteria which was immediately made known to the homeowner, (someone talking-can't make out)we 35 ' are not aware of anything at this point. Not hiding anything. It will be turned over just as we receive it. When we receive it. That's all I can say. Yes. I must say that what this commission asked and was concerned about was the Plum Gully Brook. Possibility of contamination in the well issue is more appropriately addressed at Planning and Zoning. Although we do have some interest in it, clearly. 1kAjL(_ ,. . those reports to you. A4AJUiri-J So. Did you have any other questions,Mr. Callahan. No. Thank you. Yes, is there anyone else? % J Can I ask you a question? Yes. When you talked about building the wings onto that drainage tube,you said you're gonna put three on. And then later on put another one on? CQ Right. � ✓ Why not all four at once? There's a reason for that and one is when we're constructing constructing this,you don't want to install a pipe like this in a brook that has active, even normal flow. It just doesn't allow you to set the culvert correctly onto the gravel and stone, and so forth. So what you want to do is get the water away from the work site. So what we're proposing to do (tape change) may try to get it done as efficiently and quickly as possible. When you're looking at something like this. So our estimation is probably a week to two weeks tops. Anything anything that's gonna be riled up or stirred up or whatever there is not going to effect the vegetation and the wildlife or whatever downstream, right. No. One of the reasons that at the July third hearing what I explained is you see this oval? Right here with a whole bunch of dots in it. That is a stone b?? There's gonna be a large clean stone burm? Large stone, like four inch stones. A pile. 36 (Question) Per cost of work at that location. That's gonna to filter any sediment that comes down through this until it's stabilized. Once there's a stabilization then that's removed,then the brook is back where it was. Thank you. Your welcome. Is there anyone else? Okay. You want my name? -ttkIA J24t Yep. You bet. Joe Barry. 1135 Sullivan Avenue, South Windsor. Okay. Let me tell you what's happening now. You take Graham Road,you take Hillsdale Road,you take the High School and all that drainage is coming down onto my property. Okay, it's being channeled onto my property. You live on Sullivan you said. I live on 1135 Sullivan Avenue. (Question) (Question) Across the street. Across the street. Up here. Almost across the street from the project here. A hundred feet. Okay. Northwest. j AL6-- Is that where the antique business is? Yes. Yes. Okay. It's to the northwest of the site. The other side is . . 37 Hillsdale Road. Yeah. eLkA-T So naturally I'm concerned about adding drainage to what I already have. aWAAAA But you're upstream of us. We're downstream of you. We're downstream of you. Water won't flow up hill toward you. Yeah. The flow from our site is gonna be,you're up here,we're down here,we're going this way. We're going south. We're going the other direction. Eventually when you get around the hill though,you're going to have . . No. Water. . (everyone talking at once) No. This is . . . Well I'm not sure under what circumstance that we, I'm not sure what you want us to do. I mean Well I think that the Town of South Windsor is illegally dumping, maybe I shouldn't be using the work dumping,but discharging waters illegally on my property. (Female voice talking can't make out) Is there a culvert there,Peter? That's exactly what's . . . We haven't looked at upstream other than the elevated that's uphill from us. So we're not influencing that. We're only (Everyone talking at once) There's a drainage problem there. A_gt , -Existing drainage problem that has to be addressed to . . 44A)S� Right. Doesn't concern this application,but if there is a problem . . 38 But, come in and talk to us and you know. Right. Does the town have a drainage easement on your property? The town doesn't. The state does. �,O&WM Oh,the state does. Oh. The state's discharging on your property? No. What it's all coming from South Windsor, with the Town of South Windsor. /UJILR-- And you put a state on your property? That's right. CKa"4;& northeast end. (Group discussion) We'd probably be able to help you but we can't help do anything for you, it has nothing to do ( -e-with property. Can you assure me that you're not going to add to this? Yes. Tomy . . . You have to add . . (Too many people commenting at once) Thank you. You're welcome. Is there anyone else who would like to . . . Dirk Barry. 1224 Sullivan Avenue. Question for you,Bob. Relative to the elevation of the culvert and a need to try to keep the fill to a minimum, is this culvert going to create a hump, basically in the road. Or a very,very sharp grade change right there? 39 &aj"You mean like Sullivan Avenue. P"Ay No. Um, (Paper shuffling-can't make out) I can tell you the fill . . okay existing grade of the brook itself would be (papers shuffling) through the drop down from Nevers Road down to it's going to continue to drop down at a much lesser extent. There's going to be about a nine foot, it's a six foot culvert, and I've got to have enough fill over the top of it so I can get other utilities and so forth . . So it's about nine feet of fill at the culvert itself. Grade ends. Well . . 6wl Well it could be rocks in there, are we going to get one of these big humps? alk4 -.P, L Oh, at the culvert? 6MAT At the culvert itself, do we . . design that would . . . No we can't, downstairs won't let us do that for one thing. But,no just to give you an idea from the road from Nevers Road itself, is coming down at about a 1%grade. Opposed. Do you want to hold that up . . . au0AVA To a low point right(interference) )a � Right here. If you can see. Down from Nevers 1%to a low spot here, and then percent right along here. But as far as being a home, no we can't do that. I believe that Mr. Nally(?) addressed the issues of Clarence Welti bringing up the lack of salty activities but then you talk about ten percent pitches. The need to do additional salting due to elderly needs,keeping it salt free and ice free condition. It kind of contradicts what Clarence Welti was saying about Nevers Road(sneeze) Bless you. (sneeze)being what you seen . . salting use and that salt is going to be deposited at the at the crossing. You know so it goes into the conservation plan,by your pipe lines, I tried to crossing that. "(A� Yes. Yes. 40 &M-auoTen percent grade ten percent grades Okay. Yeah. that way. a(,J�P/ti Down through here . . to"" End of the conservation plain . . Excuse me. the road is one percent. Okay. Yeah. 4"--6WA The other side is ten percent. On the other side we have detention duties. (Question-can't hear papers shuffling) salting, it's a real concern, unfortunately it's inherited with any kind of project because of the public safety factor. As you wouldn't want to answer someone who just broke their hip,by saying we reduced the amount of salt because of that you did end along the top. So, we have to even with road sanding it's a big problem with sedimentation of the streams and everything like that. And we're trying to look as to how to minimize the impact on the streams but still maintain the same level of sanding and salting so that . . . Well,I think he had the design stages,I think you design roads that you know might not need quite as much,you know up front . . you know We've minimized the slope wherever we can on the roads,to meet the town's standards. And one of the things we looked at is what's called the sedimentation structure. (Question) Where we've been able to put those,we've had so things like road oils,road sand and soforth, get filtered out before they discharge to the brooks . . (Papers shuffling) 41 We're probably talking about you know salt and road sand and fertilizer for the other applications, at least I was going to. Is there anyone else who would like to address the stream crossing,this particular. . an I just ask a question,because this . . Could you identify yourself first. George Donahue. (long pause) Are they going to put sidewalks across this? Across? Stream crossing. For on Nevers Road. I,that's a Planning and Zoning issue,but I assume so. (Laughter) Gj(,",,A-�I'm sorry I didn't quite . . Sidewalks. Request a road crossing. South side,yeah. IXA-do�_- On the south side. &M.6-�ow do you propose getting the utilities in there. Through Sullivan Avenue or Nevers Road? Both side. There's going to be . . . ac-��Are you going to bury everything? Everything has to be underground. You have to bury . . . All utilities. y"Ab Uyou've got electrical, cable tv. . . aAA-e"�We'll be getting into that more . . . 42 How do you do that? What do you mean? Sanitary sewers will go under the culvert. With encased in concrete,water line, electrical, everything else will go above it. Goes above the culvert. The only thing that goes underneath the culvert will be sanitary and sanitary sewer be cased in concrete to protect it from the weight of the culvert. &_V �Is this bank on Sand Hill Road large enough now to take care of all this runoff? This little gully goes under Sand Hill. aue Correct. Um,I haven't analyzed the culvert on Sand Hill Road. you can't even see the brook. It's all grown over, it's true. 6_)11_�-1 was at the high school and you can't even see. C11,at"aLa No, I haven't analyzed the culvert on Sand Hill. Normally you do a project like this, what you do is you analyze it upstream down to the discharge point. You make sure you address that. But,what happens downstream at Sand Hill . fill it up with sediment,then to the left . . The culverts themselves? Even though you design to have a soil bottom . . . Normally what happens with a crossover like is is that under normal flow, daily flow, see a little bit of sediments there deposits. Soon as you get a storm and crossed over, sediment washes out. It washes away. you can actually see Plum Gully now high school road cross my . . . So,there basically several areas . you designed . . (Can't make out what is being said) Normally when you design a culvert like this you unless large tree or branch falls, honestly for normal flow what happened is as soon as you get a very small storm, very small, it's washes through . . . (some whispering-can't make out conversation) 43 All right,that's part. . . The other part of the project is �i� v►'� That's a zoning issue,I don't know, we don't. . . We already the zoning change. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved an eight point zone change for the westerly portion of the site along Sullivan Avenue. . �utisz— Yeah,Nevers Road. &0-4-e- That's correct. We didn't ask for one of Nevers Road. t.U-4-AA"7 Is there anyone else? Shall we take our break at this point? Okay. Five minute break. Is there anyone who would like to comment. Okay. Are there any other questions from the commission,I think I skipped over you Jeff. Did you have any other. . . Well,I know there's still some confusion about the effects on like the Sand Hill Road crossing. I've been to at the Sand Hill Road crossing April 16th, and I was pleasantly surprised that there was plenty of room there for the water to go through. But Bob, could you explain the concept of again. If you factor in,how was everything here going to effect the crossing of Sand Hill? Okay. . If you put detention there,how would it effect the crossing of Sand Hill, if you don't put Air detention how would it effect the crossing. If you put detention on this side of the water shed,which is about in the Sunrise Lane area. If you put detention what happens is detention is basically the word detained is a derivative of detention. So what happens is it detains your flow. Slows it down. Let's it out at a later date and time. So it collects the roll off and holds it,builds it up and let's it out at a slower rate. You're peak comes out at a later time. What happens is is that 700 acres from way at the , which you built above the ceiling at this scale, once that peak flow comes down, if you detain it,you're going to be allowing peak flows from this site to come through at the same time. You compound the problem. What you do is you add a peak flow to a peak flow. So what you want in a situation like this when you're down near the bottom of the water shed, is you want any flows from the site to do what they do now. Right now these water,the surface water from here, surface runoff,runs down to the brook,runs to the south. That's what you want to continue to happen. Because by doing that once this flow comes down, runs down to south, it gets through 44 the brook before the biggest part of the flood,the flow comes down through the north. That's &""act basically the idea of whether you put detention or don't put detention. And we compound the problem just down too, at Sand Hill crossing, if we were to detain and release it during the heavier flood water. . Now, our increase in flows are not very large,they're very minimal and there's a couple of reasons for that. One is these are some of these are old farm areas,they've been farmed in the past. They have some of the areas where they were farmed in,very little minimal crop areas, as discussed in the previous hearing. The soil that we have here, are very sand and gravely soils. They have an excellent percolation. . So by the time you factor in types of soils we have and types of ground cover um existing ground cover, which some are minimal in some areas, for instance down in this area here next to Nevers Road,there's nothing there, it's old. Remnants of corn crops. Corn stalks that king of thing. For the most part. And some just normal weeds and so forth. When you start introducing lawn, grasses,thick vegetation you actually hold back some of the root. So in this situation we are not really causes any great increase because of vegetation cover,because of the excellent soil types we have. We have very sandy,very permeable soil. So a lot of the runoff is going down into the soil. ✓ttj1I," But on the other hand by adding the structures and the pavement,you're decreasing the area that Permeate. we're permeating. Yes. (Laughter) One way to look at it is that we're increasing volume of runoff. To some extent. We are not increasing peak flow all that much. And in actuality we are still discharging the peaks well before the main body of the flow come down through that area. Plum Gully Brook. But, is the town standard normally zero increase in runoff. At peak. Well, not always. It depends on where you are in the watershed. It doesn't make sense to put detention here. Otherwise we would have done it,believe me. It doesn't make any sense at all. The only thing it would do is delay your peak to coincide with peak from the north coming down through the watershed. And you'd be just compounding the problem. The problem. Okay. Did we built in estates on Miller Road, for example is the bottom part of the Podunk River watershed. That does not have similar detention,there's an analysis done and the Town did not want drum water detention at that particular location, it wasn't done. 45 Okay. And then the same watershed we did the project just to the south of this,the library extension. There's another indicate . . as a matter of fact there you're talking about large amount of addition to the building, right outside here, new large parking lot, a lot of increase in previous coverage. But again, it didn't make any sense to put any storm or detention. That's the same watershed just down the stream of us, it's down again near the bottom of this old well watershed. At that point, it's about eight hundred acres, it's about seven hundred acres. You want to get your local flows through as quick as possible. - n Okay. Do we have, and again I think we've ripped it over into your next application basically, or one of the next applications,but do we have those studies based on the peak flows. Yes. I think the areas that were viewed were,to my knowledge,he does not question at. -(L,4jp,VU Oh. Okay. I don't believe that this commission received anything of that nature, did we? Um, we submitted it. Yes. But, (can't make out) with his reports, a few were handwritten, (interference) and they were Okay. Jerry and I both looked through these. That study that detention wouldn't be wise. py It does pose problems as far as sediment retention, everything like that. That's why we're trl looking for increased sediment chambers, deeper sumps on the catch basin, four foot sumps instead of two foot. Cat: Which we did. Um, for that reason. Is because there is no area to hold the sand back as far as an estimated structure. If you didn't have those impediments to it, and keeping the flows down,you're going to have a Felt Road all over again,where water is going to come through and just flush out the sumps and the catch basins as it goes down. Those are being concerned. Okay. 46 That was one of the reasons we changed slopes and types of materials, so all the pipe will stick. To lessen the velocities as much as possible. We've actually gotten the velocities down, a very manageable amount. It still does not preclude routine maintenance on keeping the sumps closed. Some of which will be on private roads. Right. That was one of my earlier comments is that we have a maintenance schedule from the private roads and the associations there, including us, so we're assured they're going to be clean. Uh huh. Yeah,we've added a once a year cleaning bill to the drainage structures. ('LCaJJrA-YLJ Okay. aw"-L� Onto the plains as far as . . Once it's private property it's going to be difficult to enforce the . . It's the same thing. The same thing. Same maintenance schedule that the Town has,they usually clean the catch basins about once a year. They drain them. Did you have anything else sir? Susan. Um,did everything in the June 24th memo has been changed, catch basin, has a sediment structure and catch basin and all those changes have been made. It's a type two. We'd talked about it and decided that a type one wouldn't be wise because it's untested and we've had mixed reviews on the effectiveness of that structure. �,L�� Okay. So they made,they made up the difference by flattening the slopes on the pipes and changes the <XII-i pipe material to slow the flow down. ox;& Okay. And um we uh just to make sure,I made a note about a drainage easement that we were looking for a condition for a drainage easement for the Town on this? haA,Q,i Well,that's . . . 47 Are you talking about it over in here? Yeah. Yeah. �QQa e �j If the Town accepts the property it will be a mute point. Right. Is that part of this application? Um, Yeah. Yeah. There's an existing, it's down to the south of this. comes out of this catch basin right here. Right. I have another map that shows a better means to be able to see pipe that comes out of here, we're proposing rip rap,because there's no rip rap. Right. Robin is that part of this application, or is part . . . j Well. We'll add it to the application,we're not doing anything with it. Right. It's just that the town shouldn't have done it. Hasn't been done, so. If this area,if the zone in this area is accepted by the Town then it's a mute point. Point. But. . ^�A^ Justin case . . If it's not yes,then they have agreed to give an easement to the town. Okay. �{ Based on staff comments they would be adding additional fill material to the voluntary. . in the c/� form of rip rap there to the conserve it. 48 #�A Right. And you guys were agreeable to having a staff approval before the removing of the temporary Yes. Oh. Absolutely"6h es. Yes, did you have another comment you wanted to make. Um,yes the land that they're talking about is over open spaced land? � J Ummmm, it's proposed to be open spaced,yes. If it's open spaced land and that runs along the Plum Gully Brook, can they build a sidewalk on /(L that side of the street? l� Yes. It'll be the sidewalk will be within the right-of-way,their land is owned by the town for that move. So,yes it can be . . . On the proposed road. Not on Nevers Road. &#_O_ Yeah. Just the proposed road. No, on Nevers Road is the one I'm concerned with. (jy&kA1✓Y► Um,that again is in Planning and Zoning. First of all . . . Can they do that to wetlands? Can they build a sidewalk on wetlands land if the wetlands . . The wetland I don't believe . . . Well it's not that close to the wetland. ytV 4Ak" Directly adjacent to Nevers Road. &,�It's not a wetland. AO--Le�.V ((�� It would be outside,Nevers Road is located outside the wetlands or the wetlands buffer area. Okay. Next property down gets pretty close as you go to the south. As you know there's that little quick bridge to get over to this area. But on this property . . this is Nevers Road right here. Right. 49 And the wetlands line's way up here. This is forty scale, so that's like three hundred feet. Is does go closer to the street as you go down,but it doesn't . . dIz, " And it drops down. Well it's only about thirty feet from the road in front of my house. I'm not sure where your house is. 60 Nevers Road. She says . . `&,J The last house on the street. Or the first house . . This lot right here. So,yeah yeah you can see where it comes down . . (Laughter) au,/,,�You can see where it comes back down. Okay. Cw"40-j This is your house here? `-nLj,td�,, Right. Yeah. Yeah,right here it comes down Plum Gully Brook starts to come down close to Nevers Road. -� All right if that land is open land and it's part of wetlands, right? That area would be a touchy area to locate a sidewalk on. Can they put in a sidewalk there? e're not proposing. . We're not proposing a sidewalk. And no one has asked us to build a sidewalk there. 50 A4n� If the Town wanted to they would have to come here and ask us to put a sidewalk in. lu11 Right. That'd be a Town proposal. That'd be a Town proposal. Even the Town if . . . The only sidewalk we're proposing is on the proposed roadway up here. On the crossing street? Yeah. Yeah. And then with a handicap ramp at Nevers Road to you know because there is a sidewalk on the other side. Yep. On your side. So we're proposing a handicap ramp that would lead to that sidewalk on that side. We're not proposing any sidewalk north/south. Most residents, in fact all the residents of this development are you know,based on our experience, all of the cars and generally travel by motor vehicle. 14� But they're all senior citizens on that end, correct? Correct. Just that one development on that end,that's correct. This is the only. . . ��Qo Okay. All right. They all have a garage, and they will all have a car to our knowledge. And they're all going to cross at the top of that hill if they want to go to senior center or if they want to go down the other sidewalk in order to get in. . If they want to walk to the senior center they would cross at that point,yes. Correct. 0"DCOCorrect. f W-OL 4--,Okay. 51 all"AA—MWhich if you're familiar with the area, or you are if you live there, we're right at the crest of the hill. Yeah. So, sideline that's the death spot for it,right there. You can see in each direction. Just south of that . . . That's for the cross walk. Just south of that, going down towards your property,that's where site line . . (Tape change) . . located it here. Because you have excellent . . . for getting sidewalks. Okay. (Laughter) 0W" We don't want sidewalks. Ct,MApj_' We don't want sidewalks proposed on Nevers Road. We can't even talk about sidewalks here until we have one in front of us. So. -,Y You need to talk about Planning and Zoning about that. tU4_AAvo Okay. Well at the moment we don't want a sidewalk. Any other questions from the commission or the public. Yes. This may have been discussed at the last meeting but if I'd appreciate it if you could explain to me why can't why does Collins Crossing have to be a through street? Why can't . . . There are a number of reasons why it has to be a through street. One is that . . I know it's probably a Planning and Zoning borderline issue. But. Why is now. . No. No. 52 Because it's a alternative. No. It's feasibility. We can't,number one we can not have access to north at all. So we can't move through to anywhere to the north. Um . . . What do you mean by that. It can't move anywhere to the north? 4M-iAk It can't go into the high school property. &A-Clu. You can't go development and then go to the north through the high school for example. You have a maximum of six hundred foot road. . AAAJ Right. But then the Town standard right now it's been different. It's been a thousand feet,it's been nine hundred feet. It's been six hundred feet. They've gone back and forth but for the last ten years or so, eight years, it's been about six hundred feet. That's a maximum length you can do which is probably about here. That would be that would be it. That's as far as you could go. Therefore you couldn't get into the rest of the site. So therefore it has to go through. And if you were to have for example if they let us go to this point, for example,because let's say they put a stub which is maybe they'll want that so they could maybe extend it a little bit. Um,you know with this development here, so if you're not going to be going through, if that would be a very risky thing for the town to do to allow something this long, without a street going through. Because what if this get cut off here and this never got built. Then you'd have a very long length of street that you want to avoid by any event of tree falling down over time. And we're proposing trees on the street. And we want to propose trees on the street. Electrical line falls,we all have electrical lines overhead,but a straight pole. Something falls across the road and blocks it and somebody has a medical emergency,you got to be able to get in there from the other side. And you won't be able to do it unless you have the road go through. Pretty much summarizes. And also we can't have it loop through because we mentioned for Town standards we can not meet,to achieve that. And we looked at that very early on. Basically bisects that part of the property, so we have no choice but to put the crossing. And the ideal spot to cross it is here for many reasons. One is site line, as I mentioned before. Because that's the best location for site line. And the other one is that there was a crossing there for the farmers,I'm assuming for the farmers some years ago,there's remnants of concrete pipe,metal pipe,that kind of thing, right at that location. As a matter of fact, I think the Town overall topple maps actually show a crossing there. They show a culvert someplace at that location. At least some of the maps. . . 53 So,to me Town standards are existing regulations in effect are existing law, and for public safety purposes, we need to do that? d �, �°-• Do you agree with that Jeff,that it has to be done that way? Doesn't have to be done that way. Well,what's your why, what's . . .? Well,I mean, like Peter said,a stub could be done going towards the what the Collins property. South. You mean to here? Yeah. mean, we already are at six hundred feet. But, doesn't that change when the stub is put in? What do you mean you already . . . No,because I mean when you look at stubs you have to look. . . You have to be able to convince everybody that's going to go through. Yeah. There has to be a reasonable has to be a reasonable . . . Planning and Zoning(Everybody talking at once) &ILOUJ�- That's what we're talking about. This is a kind of a cross purpose issue. One of those times where it would probably would have been a good idea to have Planning and Zoning and Wetlands get together as one commission to review this for that reason. To work out whether or not alternatives are both prudent and feasible. I mean there are alternatives but it's difficult to tell again,whether they are feasible or prudent. Without input from Planning on something like that. If you look at the house, Irv?Waldron's house, which is a big beautiful colonial up on the hill on Sand Hill Road, at the top of the hill,that's right here. And you know how it drops off right around there. And then you've got the house right next to it, and then the other one next to that. Chi) There's no road gonna come . . . 54 Where's the road, and then you got the steep grades going down here, where's the road going to go. It's not, in our,opinion, it's going to go. j It's not feasible. You're looking for prudent and feasible . . . Well,I don't think that's a certainty. I don't think you can say that with certainty. Without talking to those people. And those people might not necessarily always live there. I don't think it has anything to do with who lives there. I think what we're saying is, engineering awlk�wise,feasibility, it's not very feasible to assume that there's a road that's going to come down to Sand Hill Road, with those grades down through that area. And with the existing houses through there. Do we have anything from Planning and Zoning that says definitely nothing will be going through there? --&t4,(AZ44J No. It's a judgment call. Apz#� Who's judgment? Whoever's making the decisions. We looked at it. And we looked at the grades, and in our opinion we didn't believe a road was going to go through there. We've got too many steep slopes on that other property to the south. And knowing what these intersection down here at Sullivan Avenue and Sand Hill right down here, and the grades we have on Sand Hill Road in this area, and the houses over there,we though it was infeasible to do that. Are you saying it's a dropping off you're saying is that. . . Yeah. Because of the grades there and the existing homes are,I mean you're not going to go through that house. Right. And the only alternative would be come back towards Nevers,and then you're back doing the crossing. �I�JL�- Right. I mean because you know. . . /&Aaj t Yeah. We'll get back through across down . . �� We're talking you know we're talking.18 acres . . for wetlands. 55 I think the point from the amount of this point of view, let's just forget for a minute that we have this proposal in front of you, and let's say we were coming in with a six hundred foot road stub, and now we had to convince this agency and Planning and Zoning,that there was a reasonable probability, a likelihood,that a road would be extended through here. And that we had to convince the commission, especially Planning and Zoning,that that would happen to the point where they could approve it knowing that this would be a dead end road, and that nonetheless it would be within the reasonable future extended. I think the likelihood of that passing or going through is improbable,I mean that's why we came to this. We're talking the sledding hill. You know the grades there. The sledding hill, and at the top of &A_aL� the hill is this house. Yeah. Well the grades there are no greater than the grades on the Sullivan Avenue side of the site, anyway. &Ai A.P. — They're steeper in through here,yeah. 6"A_MJA They are . . . Susan. Yeah,I mean I think this is the same thing we always get into, having to go first. We go first, and then Planning and Zoning goes. rkalkk. - Required by law. Right. So, so . . It used to be we used to come to Planning and Zoning first, and then come to you. Often that would be the case. Based on the scheduling. Right. So,I mean whereas we might want to have asked and got an official opinion from Planning and Zoning and say we will not let you do"x". But it doesn't happen, so we have to make a judgment. The first thing I asked to Jeff,when I went down there,was could they get an exception to the six hundred foot cul-de-sac thing. And it's a sub-division thing, and you can't. It's not a zone thing . . . &/jkffJ;PA_,L There no way we're under current law. So, so then and since they can't loop, and they can't get in another way,then the stub thing is the only other thing. And so I think what we have to look at is just for ourselves, is that is there any possibility that Planning and Zoning would consider that a feasible thing. Is there any likelihood that they could convince someone that this man is going to decide to have a road come through 56 right next to his house. You know. And that they don't have any control of that property. So, I think I think we just need to make a judgment call on that because then you know, and they can't get Planning and Zoning,you know,to make that call before we act, I mean it's the same thing we always . . . We're required to come here first,when they changed the law, so. What happens if we deny it. What do you do then, do you redesign it, and go to Planning and Zoning? Or come back here with a new design? , kav` Redesign to show what? To show possibly the road going the other way. And then you can test the waters of Planning wand Zoning. 6""O A We have to we would then have to demonstrate the Planning and Zoning. . . They what it comes down to. My point is this, if this design here had the stub design, for example,and we said that's fine,because you are not going over the brook,then you go to 4111L'�`'"'� Planning and Zoning. And they might say to you, no that's not fine,because we don't foresee a road being extended in the near future, and there's no reasonable probability that would occur. Right. Then you come back here a second time,the second stage would be to come back with something more like this, and say hey guy's,you know,the first design didn't work, we have to cross the stream,now. Problem Peter,we talked to Town Staff, Town Planner, we . . . Yeah. When we talked to Town Staff,the only possibility is they may want to have us leave a stub here,just to access this. And that would require that they change their allow for longer than six hundred feet long. So that people on top of the hill they could maybe extend this cul-de-sac JQJ and have a few lots up here. That's about the only possibility that I see occurring. We talking about that with Town Staff, and they recognize you know you go down through here,the only real way of serving this property is, and you're talking about real steep grades right through here, is you go across the brook. Again. I mean just you know,to summarize again,we're talking.18 acres of disturbance here. We're talking an area that previously was crossed by a farmer and disturbed. We're talking something just south of the very identical disturbance,right around here, for the high school,we're also into a project where we did sit down with Town Staff, and it was a concern as far as extending this road over,it was a request and to keep the road going through for public health and safety reasons. I mean that was something everybody agreed was paramount and important. 57 And even before we submit an application,we submitted plans for this and asked them to address those issues. And to look at it,the public works director was involved. The town engineer was involved. Planning Department was involved. Traffic. A lot of different people were involved. I mean we asked them to take a look,view of concerns about the layout. What do you want us to do? Where do you think road's going to go in the future? All that stuff. And we addressed all those types of things. And I wouldn't be surprised that as a result of the final process going through the application process with the Planning and Zoning Commission,that we might end up with a allow for a continuation of this,which would, in my opinion, end up being a longer than allowed now, cul-de-sac. ( ve-tA Right. Because it wouldn't really go anywhere's other than if there was (QQ,A-A-L& - Just to serve from the few. . . digit It would just serve this area. It would never go through here,here, or here, without another cost . AAL&_q­ Take this and extend it out a little bit, and that would be the maximum that you could put. I think to put some balance in this that pointing out that there is a crossing in the area. And there was a historic crossing. I think to totally balance it,that we ought to point out that those pre- dated in the wetlands regulations. So,I'm not sure they're relevant. As far as this application is concerned. Only in our mind there,because in locating the crossing where we did, we were sensitive to those kinds of things. Rather than going to an area where it was totally untouched and(word?) I mean if you're talking bring a road down through here, and eliminating this crossing at an area where there was already a crossing,then the pass at some disturbance,you're not going to be going next to or through somebody's house and property through here,more practically you're going to be taking a right turn,and you're going to be coming down, or taking a left turn coming down back towards Nevers Road to go through, now you're down through crossing Plum Gully Brook again, and an area that hasn't . . . That wasn't my point at all,Bob. What I'm saying is that the other crossing's are not relevant to this because they pre-dated the regulations that we're working on. 6tU&QkU__E_0kay. Fine. f Okay. W That's all. Yes, Susan. 58 Now, I was just wondering whether maybe we can find out whether anyone else, anyone is looking for more information or whether the discussion we're in now is sort of whether to approve or not. And we can have that later in the meeting after we close, and get to the other business. Well,I have a caution about closing the public hearing. Because number one I haven't read the material that was given us tonight, and I want to review that. And once we close the public hearing,then I can't ask the applicant what does he mean by this, himself. So,you want to keep going. f Yes. And we also have a concern in that we have an August recess. So,we need an extension then. Or, an additional meeting. We have to act within thirty-five days of the commencement of the public hearing. You hold the hearing open forty-five days,total. Right. If the hearing is closed we have thirty-five days to make a decision. So when is the forty-five days on the hearing over? About mid-August. And the same with the decision. Come about August 22nd for our decision if it was closed tonight. The um if you recall at the last meeting it was concluded and correct me if I'm wrong,that if g �there were two reasons for keeping the hearing open. One was to Mr. Folger and representative from CR3 Landscape Architect to go out and look at the stream and see where there's existing erosion, and what we could do about it for vegetation and erosion control. And the only other item that was on there, was to get the Town Engineer's report and to respond to that. Which was done. Those were the reasons for continuing the hearing to tonight. And we've done it. And we went one step further we even got, oh and another matter that was addressed was whether or not the contamination issue was going to be directly effecting the wetlands crossing. And the answer was no. Well,not totally. You said that you were having the water tested, and you don't have that. Q No,I think it was normal . . . 59 4fkti They did have the water tested. nj_kkb-��Yeah,the answer was it was not(interruptions) '(ttA J« Did you not, are you not having them test the water in the stream? For contaminates. He's volunteered to do that. Yes. We're going to be doing it. No. No. No. It's not there. He has not given us the test results on those . . . No. I think in his expert opinion the test wasn't necessary. At my request he's doing it so that in the future, we will have a database to show the existing status of the water at this point, if anybody in the future wants to make a claim we've got a basis to go on. But,for the point of view of the report that was submitted tonight,there is nothing in the report that indicates any concern about Plum Gully Brook. Period. Okay. I don't see any harm in the commission having those water tests. If they're going to be done,then it's an added benefit. &AAVAx- We've indicated they've won't be to this commission. We indicated that last time. Okay. But,the full reports will have all the water tests in it. Okay. But if we close the public hearing we can't receive that. "v s an but it would be an existing condition. Excuse me? It would be an existing condition if there's contamination from that old oil up on top it'd be an existing condition, development would do nothing other than improve the situation by removing the curse of the contamination. Well that's fine,that's fine. I'm sorry I think we're getting into semantics here. I still maintain if the information was offered,then the commission should take it in. Any information we can have, I mean why why have it there. And then say well, no we're going to close the public hearing, so it doesn't matter anyway. I mean. . Excuse me. you know,I grant you yes,you are going to improve the situation as far as the contamination. 60 Witt- Okay. That you're required to do that. That's not,you know,you're doing us a big favor,here. You're required by law to correct it. Before you can do anything, is that not so? Before we can develop the property it will be cleaned up. Yes. But you're required by law to do so. &#4-du— Uh, I don't know if we're required at this time to do it, I don't know the answer to that. Uh, it would be my impression that yes,you are. But anyway, I think that, and I also have a �J concern that all the information you're saying then,that all the information that we receive tonight, is extraneous. Basically. I'm just saying what this commission what my reading of what was said last time was that you're continuing the hearing to receive the report of the(couldn't make out word),which was not forthcoming at that time,which has since been received and responded to, and the other issue was what we could do along the brook to correct the existing erosion problem. It wasn't,there was a pole going around the table of commissions that the contamination was not an issue with the crossing. Okay. CUU"AA We were not connected . . I don't believe, I don't recall taking a pole on that,buts that's all right. Um,my concern is that the information that has been submitted,the commission has not had an opportunity to review it. I don't think we need to limit ourselves,I mean there's no reason to limit ourselves to the two things that we discussed. I mean that's part of the public hearing process,this came forward, so why not make use of it. Betty if, I'm sorry. I think Susan was first. I just want to, so Sal you're looking to keep it open,Betty's looking to keep it open. And Carol you wanted more time too,yes? Depends on what we're looking for. I mean Well,I just want to absorb what we've got. 61 I'd like an opportunity to read the information more thoroughly. So do we want to try to schedule another meeting? Or. . . Well forty-five days, did the clock started ticking on the third? ( fit ern The third of July. All right. Forty five days, if I read Carol's calendar correctly, falls I think on the seventeenth of &rtr"�"' August, is a Saturday. Which I guess would kick it over to the next business being Monday,the nineteenth. -fij-AAAa4J I came up with the twenty-second for some reason,I have no idea why. Twenty-second would be if it was closed tonight,that would be the outside gate to render a decision. And then the decision would have to be rendered thirty-five days from that point,unless um . . . .�� Unless unless extensions were granted. For the public hearing until . . . You could have a meeting next week. r� Yeah,you could you could have any number of extensions not to exceed the original forty-five days. All right. So,I mean we need an extension or we need to have another meeting. I mean basically that's the way I see it. We have to one or the other. All right. Say that again,I'm sorry. We need either to get an extension. . ItO-e-AAA- ' Extension from the applicant. Or have another meeting. I understand that, correct. 62 So, we just need to decide which one then. Okay. Isn't the fact we close the chase application mean we have to have a meeting before . . Yes, probably does. If we take a vote on it. . That's right Jack,very good. Because we have the same time constraints they do. Public hearing opened the third on that also. Unless we act on chase. `k4JAi24'7 Unless we act tonight. Unless we act on chase tonight. Yeah unless we act on it tonight. I mean it seems like we have a long meeting. I think we should just schedule another meeting �. next week, and then we won't have to be here until one in the morning. I'm not objectionable to next week. Okay. Is that a general agreement. So, we will continue the public hearing until . . . Can it hold off for a second. I just the only suggestion I would have is if we schedule another meeting,we should I think take into account when's our next official meeting,right now, what's September. *1M September. Right,we backed up thirty-five or thirty-four days from that day to see, if we continue if we have other meeting for this if we hold this hearing open, for another meeting, we should have it far enough into I think the preceding day,the upcoming days so that we don't have to have an additional meeting before our first September meeting to add to this. tol"Ovy, I see what you're saying. Okay, so if we don't vote on it, if we have a special meeting, we don't vote on it, and we still got thirty-five days from the time we close the public hearing. 63 Correct. If there's thirty-seven days, we're going to need another special meeting. All right, if we closed it then, we would have forty-five days. No we don't we have thirty-five. Thirty-five. So, if we left it open we would have . . . Still thirty-five. Yes, from the time we can hold it open for forty-five days. And then once you close it you have thirty-five days to act, I believe. So what I'm saying is if awe're going to have another meeting, let's have it, so that its' within thirty-five days of our September, first September meeting. Within thirty-five days of our first meeting in September. Yeah. Can we ask. . (Everyone commenting) September forth is your first meeting in September. I'm not sure, well okay. What's thirty-five days . . . Well September forth is August thirty-fifth. -`✓ So that says anytime after the first of August. After we grant an extension. Okay. That's I think we should have our meeting after the first of August. Okay, so then you've got the seventh, fourteenth,twenty-first or twenty-eighth,those are the Wednesday's. . � Well, I'd just like to back up a little bit. We're doing this at the worst case scenario I guess. ALQ/c/to 7 Pardon me? 64 Well let's figure out what do we what we need so we know how long we need. You wanted to digest things, do you want other stuff. `Cause if we only want to digest things . . I want someone from Planning and Zoning at our meeting. Yeah. Okay, so you want someone from Planning and Zoning. I do too. What else does someone else want. Do we have any other things we want, I mean let's make sure we get this clear this time. We want Planning and Zoning and we want time to digest the materials,do we want anything, the well cross. Yeah,I would like to have the water tests that they're doing on Plum Gully Brook. Uh huh. Water test on Plum Gully Brook. You want wells? IWA I No. For this. . . You don't want Okay. So those three things. You're saying someone from Planning and Zoning, do you want somebody from the commission to be here, or did you want somebody from the Planning Department? Well let me, let me maybe I can answer that with if you answer one question,Betty. If we agree to continue the hearing, keep the hearing open, are we going to,we as a commission going to have any further discussion among ourselves with respect to things, I mean we may want to follow up on. And can we confirm that delay these people in a letter,that we need the following and so forth. Yeah, . . Assuming that Jeff thinks of something that we're not thinking about now, is like,you know listing things out that we can send a letter to either Mr. Cummings or everybody involved. ,AntkD-- Right. But can. . A,-. - So that we can get that answer too, and not leave other dangling issues. 65 1, You put caucus staff. . . My point is that we're going to have that discussion maybe we can decide,you know, who the best people to have or will maybe we should be get our Planning and Zoning input. No,that we can't do. We can talk to staff, we can each of us talk to Jeff, and say I'd like to have this. And Jeff can act on it. But we can't have discussions about this as a commission once we're not in the public hearing setting while the public hearing's still open. Okay. All right. Thanks. So, we'll have to get that out now. All I'm saying,I guess I misunderstood . . . All right. I As long as the public hearing is open,this commission can discuss . . Very well. Very well. 4L4JV(," And yes,we can go back and ask them for more information. 61-0-4� Well. As long as the . . I don't know the answer to you're question I don't know what do you suggest with ,,�•- respect to Planning and Zoning to have someone here. Should we have somebody from the commission is that the better alternative? I don't know what. . Pardon me? I think I would recommend you considered have the Planner, or somebody from Planning staff. There's some significant legal problems with having a Planning Commission member publicly speaking about details of a pending application,that could prejudice them as a city-board member, so I think you'd want to remind on town staff to give you the expert input that you're looking for. I agree. As town staff should be us that bottom section on the road through there,right. So basically that would be . . . 66 That's what I want then. Okay. Pardon me. What did you say? I want someone from Planning. Right. Because,I want to talk about bringing a road in from the bottom section. Yeah. Now, would we want, do we need somebody from Engineering to feasibility of a stub, and running a road across to Sand Hill. The grades and that kind of thing. Well,I assume that's something that Jeff can . . . I can get that information. From Engineering. Hopefully. cy If it's a question, I don't feel that they would, nothing would be gained by having you know, Jerry here. AArj--) Okay. I can get that information. Yes. So we're looking for,we're looking to have someone from the Planning Department. We're l looking to have the information from Engineering. And we're looking to get the water test on Plum Gully Brook, right? I think so,I think that. . That's it. Okay. 67 How long would you guys need to get the water tests on Plum Gully Brook, right that's the only thing that's really you? n + � The water test on Plum Gully Brook? Yeah. The target date is July thirtieth. W X That was the date we had told the deadline for having the report done. I would assume you'd have it done a day or two before that. 41 What does that do though? It makes it. . 4&AJ�LL What does that do. That's what I don't understand, that was discussed at. . .(Tape change) All right. Is that that's going to be information submitted along with that. I mean,I guess it doesn't make any difference under what application the information submitted in the sense of trying to you know, obviously submitting it is the request of the commission,you still have other applications pending for conservation plan approval. If there were conditions you wanted to attach,because of something that came up in a report, presumably you have more than enough opportunity down the round. That's the only reason I'm just bringing it up. Well,that's all well and good,but,um I believe within our reg's it's our right to raise this as an issue. Under this application. You have the right . . . And, excuse me. Oh,I'm sorry. 0 If I could finish. Uh, and it was the choice of the applicant to separate these all out. This way if you had come through with the whole thing,then we wouldn't have this problem with mixing apples and oranges. But under this application in the crossing,I believe you'll find that water testing is not out of the realm. Consideration. So. And since we're in the public hearing. . 68 Right. So. If you have a problem producing that, fine. I mean that's up to you, I guess. But, um, I find it relevant to this application, and as I say you it was the applicant's choice to break them away,to separate the crossing out from the others, so I'm not sure why,then at this point, we should have to,then say fine we'll wait although you're scheduled for presentation tonight on the others, and you're not prepared for present it tonight, on the others. So, what is the point then in saying,move it over to the conservation plan. 62 What are we not ready for. We're prepared to present the entire conservation plan application tonight. Not the soil test. The water test that you offered, and now apparently want to back off on. No,I don't want to back off on it,but I'm starting to get a little frustrated with the fact that we're bending over backwards, doing things that we have no legal need or necessity to do to try to C&W AIJ accommodate and what's happening is a little bit of a frustration that in an attempt to more than adequately assure, advise or submit any and all data to this commission, it's not getting turned back out. That's why I'm sounding a little frustrated. Well, no I'm not trying to turn it back on to you,I simply want the time to take in all the ./ huk" information that you've offered. And I believe our regulations clearly state that we can ask for a VL water test. Even if there weren't evidence of contamination on the site. If there were contamination in the watercourse, or there weren't contamination in the watercourse,I don't know that would effect what we're proposing to do. I'm not sure if there wouldn't, I mean do we want to further disturb a water course that say, worse case scenario, and I doubt, frankly this is all kind of silly to go on about because I doubt very seriously there's contamination in the water course,but I see no harm in having that test available to us. Okay. But, say worst case scenario there is contamination in the water course, I, for one,would not be encouraged to allow you to further disturb an area that has a problem to begin with. So let's figure out, let's address the problem, wherever it's coming from, and then move on. We submitted the two reports this evening,though, from the two experts,who in their opinion there is no contamination in the brook. I understand . . . The water testing is only above and beyond. Exactly. I agree,Bob,that it is above and beyond. It has been offered. And within our reg's, I think we have the right to ask for it. Yeah. Susan. Yeah, looking at our reg's, I am first,I mean I said I said last week and that I mean I don't think if there is contamination then that's would be a violation. And I think we could deal with it that 69 way, in that we don't mean to do that. But,you know,people consider that a really important thing. You know that also matters to me. In our reg's as far as what we ask for,the water course characteristics which would cover this sort of test, apply if a proposed activity may affect a water course. The report will describe any anticipated changes in the following. There's 9.61). So I don't think that we're talking about that we want the test, because we're anticipating a change in it. We're interested in finding out the present condition of where I think though, it would fall in is the beginning of 9.6 where additional information may be required,related to the proposed regulated activity needed to access the impact on the regulated area. This may include but not be limited to. Um,because I don't think it would come up directly under that regulation, because they're not talking about that we need that test,because of something they're doing with this application. Um, is it,Peter, can you explain to me,because I mean,you know, it's not to me I don't see the need,but other commissioners think it's important. Is this what kind of a problem is this for you in this project, uh you know, if you waited for this testing, what does that do to your time work? Well, our time length line is our time line is complete. So,what is your time length? Because,you see if we start backing up, we're trying to,you may or may not know it, it may not matter to you,but there's tremendous interest in this. The Porter Share Development is you know, completely sold out and there are a lot of people who want this type of housing in the community. They'd like us to be able to provide that. It's not offered for sale now. And we can't be up for sale. But there's tremendous in this community to try to provide this type of housing. We have to cut back into it from a construction for the winter. In order to provide the housing you have to start the construction early enough, so that you can finish up certain things. Like get the first course of pavement down by winter. If we don't get it started during the month of August, it's probably unlikely that that can occur. And so, it holds it over to spring. Okay, so you're looking to finish by the end of July. And one of the things that is very critical in this, obviously, is the crossing itself. We want to get n the crossing done in September. During, right. During low flow. All right, so I mean, obviously we need to take a vote on whether we need these materials. In the past that's what we've done. There's been a majority vote on whether we need additional materials that commissioners have asked for. Okay, well I thought our arrangement we needed to continue the public hearing anyway, �llir1 regardless of this water test. 70 Yes,but it's a question of whether we continue it to next week, or we continue in August, which sounds like makes a big difference to you guys. We will work with the commission to get you reports as fast as humanly possible. I'm sorry, could you identify yourself. I'm Brian Edwards. Okay. We will work to get them as fast as possible. If you on the other hand, will accommodate and work with us and what we're trying to accomplish. The comment that we heard before is let's have a meeting as late as possible. No. The comment was to have it late enough,but not too late, so that if we did not act on that on the application at that next meeting that we're going to be planning to schedule, we would not have to schedule an additional,because this new meeting is an additional meeting, a second additional,because we need to act on that application within thirty-five days of the closure of the public hearing. And, our next meeting is, our next scheduled meeting in September, I think it's the forth. Right. And,the calendar I guess, when looking at it,the time to set it is, is around right after the first, or so. You're not going to have that thirty-five days fall within,you know,within that next meeting. I mean,the likelihood is is that if everything is submitted, and nobody has any problems,then we will probably going to approve it at that next public hearing, and I don't have a problem with it. But, if there is a problem,personally for me because I volunteer my time, I'd rather not have an extra meeting,that I know that I don't have to have. So, if we have the reports and everything ready by, let's say, next week. Is that something that this commission would agree to look at. If we have the information to you early enough for you to consider and look at? I guess that's what I'm saying is we'll do what we can do. Yeah. Personally,I only wanted to read that report for, as Betty mentioned,because it was offered to us. I wanted to look at it. That is not the thrust of why I wanted to continue the meeting. Peter, had mentioned that it was a judgment call on bringing a, in going with a stub, or bringing the road in from another direction. I personally, want to here from Planning to see if they concur with that,because I have one judgment opinion to go based on and nothing else. That's my only reasoning for wanting to continue. 71 If we were to have Planning at the next meeting, is that what you're saying? Yes. And we will have Planning at the next meeting. They could. . It's not the water report. I mean I would like to see that water report,because it was offered. And we have many other reports, and I was curious to read it, along with all of the other material that we have. But,my main thrust is the judgment call. I guess what I'm saying is if we could get Planning staff here next week, is that, if we could arrange it. I don't have a problem with that. If we,the only reason for further than that, was the feasibility of having the water study available from the other side. Planning we can have here for a meeting next week. I would assume. Someone who's knowledgeable in speaking on this, and you can follow up on the engineering questions,I assume. Yeah, if we can get a warm body,we'll at least have a report. We'll certainly have a report or something to substantiate the judgment call, or say there are other alternatives available. -t(Ajtkf_w Okay, now I . . . fxaajL, Can they justify the wetlands crossing or not. That's what I'm looking for,Peter. I want to make I want to make sure in my mind that there isn't another way to come in. That's that is a probable alternative. Now, if there was a report,this is just hypothetical,but if there was a report, saying that yeah, t An,,L � this is a possible alternative to go to the south,but,however, from that point you would have to ( , ` go down to Nevers Road,because that's really the only available way to go, and you're then still crossing that culvert, or still crossing the brook. ALAII�-Itls a redundancy. That that. . . Is that something that you would then consider,that's . . . MAA-�-- No. I mean I mean if you're crossing there, or you're crossing there,you're still crossing. CL1_�t,�Right. That's what I'm saying. 72 But, can you come straight down. I'm saying come down then turn left, I guess, and then come down again,that's Sand Hill Road at the bottom? Sand Hill Road's down here. What's to the right of those houses there? Here? Yes. Um,that's all part of the sledding hill, as far as I know. That's that steep hill that. . Collins Hill,the sleds. It's extremely steep, it drops down significantly. � e Yeah. Right to the road. I just want assurance there's no other way, it's all I'm looking for. Yeah, Susan. Yeah. I think that you know, we should make an effort to get and the other things that we've had done this month, and if we need to continue it at that point, I think we should deal with it then. 140 So,I'm going to make a motion to have a meeting . . Extend the meeting. Laughter. Amij-- Yeah,I make a motion to extend the meeting,to construe the rest of the agenda items. 4A ,4 M Okay. Second. LV-d1t4'— Any discussion. All those in favor. WPA- Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. kv—� We're just extending the meeting. 73 We're extending the meeting. Oh. All right. Wait a minute. She's got her. . . It's ten thirty-five. Okay. No discussion. All those in favor. Aye. Okay,I would like to make a motion to schedule a meeting next Wednesday to consider those A - items that will still pending on our agenda. That's all. I'll second it. Does that include the public hearing? Yep. It's an extension. Okay, so that'll be, where are we here,the twenty-forth. The twenty-forth. Yep. An we're firm on what we're it's going to take place so that the will know. Planning's back,Engineering. And we know, and they have an answer. I think I'd like to point out,just in fairness that that I think the applicant's beginning to feel a little frustrated. But I think I'd like to point out that this application is less than a month old. So, it's not like we're dragging our feet on this kind of thing,I mean,you know,they started back in January and here it is July. 4 JLA-, Pardon me, we applied in early June. June forth. r But,the application was not complete. 74 $"LkZL But, we only started hearing it last week. ttIdht-C4'I-J Was not complete until just before the public hearing. The last meeting. This is only our second meeting on it. Well,I understand, and what we'll do is we'll make a consorted effort to try to get those water J reports for next week. I can't promise right now,because I don't know just where they are. Point of view. But,they I know we'd scheduled the tests and the labs. Okay. Okay. Take's about a week to get them back and we've only taken the samples of the . . . We'll just do the best we can. Okay. Um, did we act on that? No. We just have a motion and a second. -tttdA,tA&7 Carol seconded. To schedule a meeting. Yeah. Um' . . Yes, Jeff. You are anticipating that this meeting will not only be the continuation . . t4K�akOh,yes I certainly am. But,that we will then go into a regular meeting and act on it, right then and there. The balance of the agenda. Yep. Well,then the other I imagine we will have some other things too. Sitting on this agenda that we won't have acted on that we can also deal with. 75 Because if we schedule it for then we are not within thirty-five days of our next scheduled -Q' meeting. So therefore,we would have to act on the application at that time. Or ask for an extension or schedule another meeting. I mean I think the point is let's just see what we can get in a week and you can recess at that time. But at least that gives us a chance of getting this thing finished up this month. Right. Okay. And even though we may not have had this before us for any continued length of time, still still I think all of us are interested in moving all applications within reason. Right. As quickly as possible for obvious reasons. Weather, ecetera, ecetera. So, I would agree that next week, and then we'll deal with it if we can't act on it. But it would be in their interest and our interest to try to get the information and act on it at that time. Right. And I agree that we want to move it along as quickly as possibly, and I think the fact that we're willing to have a special meeting is . . It indicates that. It indicates that. I'm a little troubled by doing anything other than the two public hearing's at the special meeting. I agree. s— I agree. Absolutely. Okay,that's fine. We normally would not meet in August, so why would we carry over any other items into August. Well, . . . Well, except for the Collins Crossing,though,they still need the approvals for their erosion and sedimentation stuff. But, don't we have a date on those nine six. 76 But, if they don't get approval,they can't build. . You mean, excuse me. When those were submitted for this meeting,they knew that we didn't meet in August. That's right. Okay,that's not our normal thing to meet in August. And also,they have not been to Planning ,jVAAA 1 and Zoning yet. So. When's Planning and Zoning meet,by the way. July thirtieth. So. But,I mean that is this is not our normal thing. I would suggest that you know, if you want us to act on it, let's say it's a condition,but I think, you know, if the chair feels that she wants that water tested,I'd just move these people. If you're going to bend over backwards,bend over. Let's do it. Then we'll have the answer and that won't be a question in the back of our minds. We will do what's humanly possible. All right. Well. Yeah. Well,that isn't my concern at this point, I mean if they have that that's great. You know,I'm Uj-� 4'-' not going to you know, go nuts if they don't. Laughter. But I would prefer it. But, my concern is limiting the meeting, are we limiting the meeting to the two public hearings. enu--X- a But,why say . . . We can't . . . . What's the second public hearing? t414AAa-t' Chase. 4AAI�� Didn't we close that? That's proof. &H141— If we meet. . 77 We already closed that. We still have to vote. Well then that would be . . . All right, Betty if we limit it to a public hearing,then we're not going into a regular meeting to be able to vote on it. So,what's the point? Yes. r�, What. I'm sorry,I didn't follow you. Remember we can't have or final discussions on motions in our approval during the public hearing. - At41-- Right. PL-4-1�ou've got to call a meeting for that duty. Right. Yes. So, if you limit this one on the fourteenth to a public hearing . . . Oh. No. No. I'm not saying that. I'm sorry. I'm saying we . . "-1411 Oh that the only agenda on it will be these two applications. �y Absolutely. That's yes. I'm sorry if I misstated it. Yes. Just those two . . �t That I would be willing to agree to. The overall Collins Crossing clean conservation plan and Chase Farms, is that what you're talking about? w4 t to '7 Excuse me. No. No. We're talking about the two items that were a public hearing. Chase Farms and Collins Crossing the stream crossing. 96.30P and 96.3 1 W. What about the conservation plans? What about them. 7s CVIK-al(A Presentation of what,how does that figure in, where are they . . . Well, when you put asked them to this meeting,you knew we didn't meet in August, so this was your one shot. If we vote on it tonight, well and good. If we don't. . Are you going to hear them tonight? �i That's up to the commission. How long they want to stay. Laughter. Yeah, let's I'll stay if we get another break, other than that I'm leaving. KLaughter. That would seem fair. We didn't even see them yet. tt4AA_"`' Oh,I understand that,I'm not arguing that. It's going to be mostly questions,because . . . No. I'm not arguing that. Yes. I'm not arguing whether you should put it on tonight or not. It makes no difference to me. If you want to, if the commission agrees, and you want to go ahead with that, fine. That's no problem. But, I'm just concerned that we call a special meeting, because of the time constraints of the public hearing,that we address only those issues. Yes. Because that was the intent of the special meeting. So. Because I think if we don't do that,then what is to prevent those who are on the other side from turning up and saying, oh hear me. We want to be heard. Just be really quick and good. Call the question. CUI � Yes. ,y Yes. 79 W dAA-8'r' Okay. to aji/t9,f' No other discussion. Jack. All those in favor. Aye. Opposed. Okay. t,(1`AAAA-t' So we have a meeting next Wednesday.