HomeMy WebLinkAboutPierce Road PW Street File �lc-► �.t i"�rQ �"c-�a
MEMORANDUM
TO: MICHAEL J. GANTICK, PE
FROM: MELVIN C. STEAD, JR. Irv,�
SUBJECT: WATER LEVEL IN PODUNK RIVER AT RAYMONDS
DATE: FEBRUARY 27, 2004
Attached is a memo to file concerning observations and some history of the
water elevations in the Podunk River, Raymond's Pond and Desmond's Pond.
There may be additional source material at Town Hall concerning water levels in
the Podunk River at each of the culverts at Strong Road and Pierce Road that
would give us water surface levels prior to 1990 when the beaver moved in. The
culvert was reconstructed on Strong Road and the water elevation may be
recorded in the project file.
The sewer plans show that the Raymond house surrounding ground surface is at
82 along the north side. This would mean that the top of the foundation would be
around 82.5. Allowing 10 feet for foundation wall and footing that would put the
bottom of the footing at 72.5. This puts the bottom of her house footing at
approximately the same elevation of Pierce Road over the outlet culvert from
Desmond's Pond and approximately 4 feet above the current elevation of
Raymond's Pond. Some of her lawn area south west of her driveway has been
known to get spongy in the past. The ground elevation here is around 71-72. It
is not uniformly graded with a slope and has some low spots.
The water leaving Desmond's Pond discharges into a channel that flows into the
Raymond Pond. Regardless of elevation of Desmond's Pond, the water
elevation in Raymond's Pond is dependent on what happens in the Podunk River
and not on the elevation of the water in Desmond's Pond.
The beaver activity on the Raymond, Collins and Myers properties have the
biggest impact. The smaller dam on the Mangino property has a lessor impact
and the dam further south may have a slight impact.
CC: Jeff Doolittle
Jeff Folger
Karl Reichle
MEMO
NOTE TO FILE PIERCE ROAD/STRONG ROAD
OBSERVATIONS 2/24/04
• Water level at Strong Road culvert over Podunk River.
• The water level here is higher than it was 20 years ago as evidence by the
wider spread of water both up stream and down stream of the culvert.
• The water level is lower here than it was in 1990 after the beavers moved
in. I got an elevation for the roof of the culvert here at 71.00 from some
source in 1998. 1 do not recall where so we should have Engineering run
from a bench to confirm.
• The following are measurements down from roof of culvert taken at this
location:
6/4/98 2'-2 '/2 (2.20)68.8
7/14/98 2-2 '/2 (2.20) 68.8
10/30/98 2-0 (2.0) 69.0
2/23/04 2-11 (2.92) 68.08
• Maps of record —
1986 Topo maps Quinn Associates Raymond Pond 66.1
Vertical Datum NGV 1929 Desmond Pond 71.6
1976 Sewer map Purcell Ass.
Datum not referenced. No water elevation noted. Contours indicate
Raymond Pond +- 64
Desmond Pond dam elevation 69.9
1964 MDC sheet USC&GS datum shows a low swamp area for
Raymond's Pond and for Desmond's Pond. A pond shows up further to
the east of Desmond's Pond.
The contour line around Raymond's swamp is 68. The contour line
around Desmond's swamp is 71.
• Historical
• I recall that in the 1960's there was a defined stream extending eastward
from the outlet structure on the East Side of Pierce Road where
Desmond's Pond is now.
• Sherman Collins recalls that in his childhood days block ice was cut from a
pond on this spot.
• Conclusions
• The water level in Desmond's Pond has varied in the past 70 years from
between a high of 72 (assumed) and a low of 69.9. It has always been
above the elevation of the Podunk River.
• The Podunk River has been up and down since 1990 when the first of
several beavers moved in.
• The river currently seems to be 2 feet higher than it was 20 years ago.
• Causes - The entire Podunk River from the Connecticut River to Strong
Road has a series of beaver dams. I have not been north of Strong Road
but I suspect there are additional beaver dams up stream.
• The dams that I have seen between Strong Road and the wooden bridge
at the power line off Pierce Road are leaking and in disrepair. This
probably means that the beavers are not currently in residence. But it
may also mean they just are not now active.
• High water is probably also aggravated by the high water table and to
some extent the frost. This probably only contributes a small amount of
height. Maybe 1 or 2 inches.
• All of the dams from 100 feet south east of the culvert on Pierce Road to
the culvert on Strong Road are on private property.
Mrs. Alfreda Raymond 1201 Strong Road
William & Karen Myers 1141 Strong Road
Francis Collins 1105 Strong Road
William & Jean Mangino 272 Pierce Road
• South of Pierce Road, beyond the small dam on the Mangino property, the
river traverses property owned by the South Windsor Land Conservation
Trust, Inc. and the Town of South Windsor.
• The wooden bridge elevation at the power lines is not impeding the flow of
water but the water elevation is nearly at the bridge deck level. The river
down stream is also higher and wider than 20 years ago. I suspect there
may be beaver activity between here and Ellington Road (Route 30) also.
The MDC map contour line indicates the elevation here on the gravel
roadway and bridge to be +- 64.00. It should not have an impact on the
water level in the Raymond Pond or Desmond Pond.
i
e s
1 �<r
S i• _ � jam,
Iqy� ;00 / YYY Atl YYY
a
1 NOW
bye
rH
Al
Vt
.i , � ia��,P�' .: va��"'�i�r ^a✓ �', v.. ,,,,�,� .._ ,a� err ij'-/ v'6_
:
1 7.7
n ,.
4�� ��. �\"� r" na . \�j�lAr�' _ � �� BPS �•' �,.
IS
�rJ+ 4,,-t�
l� 1 f,`l1�,� \},`'"", _
A.�
Mike"' tick Re Duck Pond Pierce Road ge 1
WPa
From: Melvin Stead
To: Jeff Folger; Mike Gantick
Date: 6/27/01 11:43AM
Subject: Re: Duck Pond- Pierce Road
The 1998 plan for the construction of the access deck shows a pond elevation of 71.7, and a road
elevation of approximately 72.5. (from contour lines). The road base here was designed to be 18 inches. I
am not sure if it was constructed that way.
A sanitary sewer was installed here in the west green area behind the curb. When under construction
sheet piling was installed and left below grade. I do not know how low below grade.
Ther is also a water line trench and a storm sewer trench in the road at this location.
I am concerned that raising the water level further will cause the water to run through the road base at a
faster rate and cause damage to the road.
I am also concerned that raising the water level will reduce the runoff storage area.
This is a unique are in that the road is only 15 iee from the pond and only about 14 Inches above the
water level. It seems t beg for an expertise beyond my knowledge.
Perhaps we should look at raising the road and controling infiltration into the base.
>>> Mike Gantick 06/25/01 10:41AM >>>
Sherman Collins called to talk about the water level of the pond. He believes the level should be
maintained 8 inches higher than it is presently. What are your thoughts?
Regards,
Michael J. Gantick, P.E.
Director of Public Works
Town of South Windsor, Ct.
IVfike Gantick-Re Duck Pond Pierce Road
Pa e 1
From: Jeff Folger
To: Gantick, Mike
Date: 6/25/01 11:31 AM
Subject: Re: Duck Pond- Pierce Road
I don't believe that the outflow structure is built to accomodate that level. Past efforts by Mr Collins to
increase the water level were done by the Rube Goldberg method. An 8" increase in watre level will not
give us 12"of free board either.
t5ll ke&4ck Re Duck Pond Pierce Road u,
Page 1
From: Melvin Stead
To: Jeff Folger; Mike Gantick
Date: 6/27/01 11:43AM
Subject: Re: Duck Pond-Pierce Road
The 1998 plan for the construction of the access deck shows a pond elevation of 71.7, and a road
elevation of approximately 72.5. (from contour lines).The road base here was designed to be 18 inches. I
am not sure if it was constructed that way.
A sanitary sewer was installed here in the west green area behind the curb.When under construction
sheet piling was installed and left below grade. I do not know how low below grade.
Ther is also a water line trench and a storm sewer trench in the road at this location.
I am concerned that raising the water level further will cause the water to run through the road base at a
faster rate and cause damage to the road.
I am also concerned that raising the water level will reduce the runoff storage area.
This is a unique are in that the road is only 15 feet from the pond and only about 14 Inches above the
water level. It seems t beg for an expertise beyond my knowledge.
Perhaps we should look at raising the road and controling infiltration into the base.
>>> Mike Gantick 06/25/01 10:41AM >>>
Sherman Collins called to talk about the water level of the pond. He believes the level should be
maintained 8 inches higher than it is presently. What are your thoughts?
Regards,
Michael J. Gantick, P.E.
Director of Public Works
Town of South Windsor, Ct.
ik Gantick Re:buck Pond- Pierce
From: Jeff Folger
To: Gantick, Mike
Date: 6/25/01 11:31 AM
Subject: Re: Duck Pond- Pierce Road
I don't believe that the outflow structure is built to accomodate that level. Past efforts by Mr Collins to
increase the water level were done by the Rube Goldberg method. An 8"increase in watre level will not
give us 12"of free board either.
t 6eV-Ct ad s� �� � �
MINUTES of Meeting held April 24, 1978. at 9:00 a.m.
PRESENT: Messrs. Morway and McKnight (Addison--Construction Co.) ;
Messrs. Gates, McKeon, and Baldino (James P. Purcell Assocs.) ;
and Messrs. Young, Page, and Stead (Town of South Windsor) .
The purpose of the meeting was to discuss a solution to the
problem of dewatering in the vicinity of Pierce and Strong
Roads right-of-way, and other items regarding the Central Area
sewers.
On April 18, 1978, representatives of Addison Construction Company
appeared before the Sewer Commission to discuss the engineering
solutions for the above-mentioned water problem; and the method
of payment. The Sewer Commission suggested a meeting between
the Contractor,- Purcell Associates, and Town staff to discuss
the engineering solutions. It is understood that the payment
question is the prerogative of. the Sewer Commission.
The meeting began with a discussion of the problem of sewer line
installation. it is apparent that the Contractor and the
Consultant do not agree, at this point, as to an acceptable
installation design. The design proposed by Purcell included
steel sheeting driven to specific elevations, use of well-points
for dewatering, and then removal of the steel sheeting.
The Contractor, on the other hand, contends that removing the
sheeting will create voids in the clay and produce !subsequent
failure of the pipe system. The Contractor wished to go on
record that he was not going to assume responsibility for the
project as proposed by Purcell; and that his opinion be recorded
in the Minutes of this meeting.
Background
The problem was first identified approximately Spring of 1977.
The Contractor evidently notified Purcell, in writing, of the
problem and asked for specific procedures to be followed for t
installing the sewer line. As a result of that request,
Purcell recommended that sheeting- be driven to control underground
water flow. This solution did not work. Purcell then recommended
that the Contractor either dril.7e the sheeting further or put in
well-points. It was apparent at the time that the well-points
were the more practical solution..
inutes--Meeting 4/24/78
Re: Central Area
Page 2
Purcell stressed the fact that these were, in thbir opinion, only
recommendations and that the Contractor must have final responsibility.
Present Condition
The Contractor has installed sheeting. The water under the trench,
according to the Contractor, has moved the sheeting substantially.
The Contractor stated that he felt all along the sheeting should
not be driven, and that well-points were required from the start.
He was, however, instructed not to use well-points, but to
utilize the sheeting procedure.
It was then agreed that this meeting was to determine an acceptable
procedure for installation of the pipe, and not to determine
ultimate responsibility.
After much discussion, the conversation again returned to
acceptable procedures. The Town then, asked the Consultant
for an engineering opinion and recommendations as to what
should be done.
Some items considered were:
1. Driving piling to bedrock and supporting the pipe with
cross-members.
2. Utilizing a concrete cradle for the protection of the pipe,
3. Well-points, with sheeting pulled.
4. Well-points with sheeting left in place.
5. The possibility of changing the grade via pump station.
It was the consensus of the group, and the final recommendation
by the Consultant, that the use of well-points, with sheeting
left in place, was the best way to proceed.
The Contractor indicated that he would proceed, based on the
Consultant 's recommendation, and projected a starting date of
may 3, 1978.
/" Re: Central Area
Page 3
The second item discussed at the meeting concerned the Change
Order for sheeting. The Change Order approved by the Consultant
was for approximately $15, 000. Further discussions revealed
that, to date, the Contractor has only incurred expenses of
approximately $4,000 for the sheeting, and boring costs of
approximately $1, 000. It was decided, at that point, that the
Change Order (as submitted to the Sewer Commission by the
Contractor and as approved by the Consultant) should be for
approximately $5,000 and not the original . $15, 000.
The third item discussed at the meeting concerned the inspection.
The Town made the point that inspection of this very critical
installation area must be extensive.
At this point in the meeting, Purcell Associates stated that
if the sheeting is left in place it shall be, in their opinion,
a "pay item. " The Town indicated this will have to be decided
by the Sewer Commission, based upon information submitted by
the Contractor, in writing, justifying such expenses.
The last item of discussion was with regard to the restoration
of street sewer trenches. The Town directed the Contractor to
sweep from the street all excess materials utilized. for trench
winter maintenance; and to restore the patch to an acceptable
condition. Also, since a storm sewer is proposed for installa-
tion on Foster Road, the Contractor was directed notlto pave.
The Contractor indicated his bid prices expire May 30, and that
any extension of paving beyond that date would require increased
paving costs; and he feels that an extra is warranted.
The Town requested this information, in writing, so that we may
discuss it with the Sewer Commission as far as funding, etc.
The Town also stated that the landfill close-out project is
scheduled for early Summer. Any damage to the road because
of this operation will be maintained by the Town prior to
overlay. The Contractor raised the question of reduction of
retainer due to the extension of the time for overlay. This
:ill be requested in the letter outlining the increased cost
referred to above.
(THE ABOVE IS A SYNOPSIS OF Tr= APRIL 24 MEETING. ANYONE WISHING
TO READ A MORE EXTENSIVE .RECG:" OF' THE MINUTES, MAY DO SO IN THE
OFFICES OF THE DIRECTOR OF PUS=,IC 11ORKS. )
• tOW N Sf�
t ro
1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074
SOR•CON� n� AREA CODE 203/644-2511
RICHARD J. SARTOR
Town Manager f=� f
r
April 10 , 1985
Mrs . Shirley Stewart
46 Pierce Road
South Windsor , Connecticut
Dear Mrs . Stewart :
Thank you for your letter of April 3 , 1985 , in which you brought to
my attention a long-standing commitment that apparently has not
been fulfilled by the Town .
In order that this matter be corrected expeditiously , and you
receive the survey showing the new property lines , I am requesting
that the Director of Public Works , Mr . Robert Arsenault , contact
you, immediately , and schedule the necessary survey work .
If this problem is not corrected to your satisfaction in the near
future , please contact me directly .
Very truly yours ,
own Man er
RJS : prb
cc : ✓Director of Public Works
46 Pierce Road
South Windsor, CT 06074
April 3, 1985
Mr. Richard Sartor
Town Manager
Town of South Windsor
1540 Sullivan Avenue
South Windsor, CT 06074
Dear Mr. Sartor:
During 1975 in connection with the widening of Pierce Road, my husband and I
signed an agreement with the Town of South Windsor for compensation for the
taking of approximately 2,200 square feet of our property at 46 Pierce Road
for the project. The agreement provided for payment of $600, the planting of
hemlock shrubs and a survey of the new property lines. Although we did
receive the payment and the shrubs were planted as agreed, we have never
received the survey.
Several times after the agreement was signed, I visited or called the Town
Nall and wrote to request the survey, but was told it would not be released
until the project was completed. The construction itself took quite some
time and was followed by the Installation of sewers on Pierce Road. When all
the work was completed, I noticed that the merestone marking they
corner of our property was missing. At that time I again wrote to the
Engineering Department to request the survey and the replacement of the
merestone. The response was that it would be done "in the spring".
Nothing further has been done since that time. I was reminded of these items
recently while going over property records in connection with the revaluation
and I am writing to you in the hope that even after this length of time, it
is not too late to take care of these items. We would appreciate your help
in resolving this matter.
Very truly yours,
Enclosure
�Jc'
'L
We, Shirley R. and Ronald C. Stewart, hereby accept the sum of
$600.00 (six hundred dollars) from the Town of South Windsor in
full satisfaction of all claims for damages resulting from the
taking of approximately 2 ,200 square feet of our property at
46 Pierce Road in said Town of South Windsor.
The Town of South Windsor hereby agrees to plant hemlock shrubs,
two to three feet in height, approximately three feet apart,
along the new front property line.
The Town further agrees to provide Mr. & Mrs. Stewart with a
survey of their property showing the new property line.
Dated at South Windsor, Connecticut , this 7,Vf, day of April, 1975.
Town =ofuthZin or
By
TEW RONALD C. STEWART
V.
Town Manager
/SOwN 3F7
° Y GO
Own- a/2 sati l
1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074
f I�soR.cor AREA CODE 203/644-2511
May 16 , 1985
William M. & Jeanne M. Mangino
272 Pierce Road
South Windsor, CT 06074
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Mangino:
On April 29 , 1985 , I sent you a letter concerning blacktop that
was dumped along Pierce Road. I have enclosed a copy for your
reference. Since that time , the pile has been added to.
It is important that this material not be buried but removed
from the site.
Very truly yours ,
i7 2-5
j T /s tJc 7—
A.
Bowen Davies '�_�Lj �,_s5'ro
Deputy Town Engineer
ABD:bmr = �v�' - i?/fy'-,�. c. << -7-�
j T� %y /L'C' "�_ /`,mac' ?� f j e'
cc: R. Arsenault, Director of Public Works
R. Martel, Town Engineer �_-
Inland Wetlands Agency
Central Paving Company
Enclosure
Certified Mail : #P382 ' 454 153
272 Pierce Road
South-- Windsor, Ct ..
M ay 28, 1985
Hartford Paving Company
230 Hartford Tpke
Vernon, Ct. 06066
Attention: Owner of Hartford Paving
During the week of April 22nd, a paving company dumped debris from
a job on our property at 272 Pierce Road in Sou.th. Windsor. There was
a-sign stating "Clean fill only at the time. This was. rot clean fill
that was. dumped, and we were notified by the town of South Windsor
to get it removed. On May 16, 1 personally, saw your truck dump another
huge load of blacktop, in large chunks, and the sign for cleann fill
only had already: been removed by us. I tried to catch the driver but
he left before I could get to the end of the road.
We have called your office severaL..times, leaving messages with an
answering service. Onewoman did call back, but rc�; wife was not at
home, but did return the call twice after that, and you have not
responded, The woman who talked to my daughter-was: made aware of
what we wanted
We have been-in touch with the town and they were to bet in touch with
you also.
We want your company to remove this blacktop fro:.n. our property at once,
and if it is not, we will.take steps to have our laTWyer handle the
situation.
Very truly yours,,
WA i.am and Jeanne ?� i�ro
CC: A. Bo:.,-en Davies, Deputy Town Engineer (3)
taw" SF+
F 7-0� o-P Soa& V&U&O't
C
wC) 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE - SOUTH WINDSOR. CONN. 06074
r'1oSOR-CO AREA CODE 203/644-2511
May 21 , 1985
Hartford Paving, Inc.
230 Hartford Turnpike
Vernon, CT 06066
Gentlemen:
Enclosed are copies of letters sent to the Mangino's on
Pierce Road concerning dumping of blacktop. They were
inadvertently sent to Central Paving based on the information
presented.
Since then, we have additional information on good authority
that your trucks dumped this material, and we would like you
to clean it up.
To avoid complications, your prompt attention to this matter
would be appreciated.
Very truly yours,
A. Bowen Davies
Deputy Town Engineer
ABD:bmr
Enclosures
cc: ✓R. Arsenault, Director of Public Works
R. Martel, Town Engineer
Central Paving Company
CERTIFIED MAIL: #P 042 890 544
'Qy1N Sf4
-Town 07/e Satz M ?d
wC, 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074
SOR•Co AREA CODE 203/644-2511
May 16 , 1985
William M. & Jeanne M. Mangino
272 Pierce Road
South Windsor, CT 06074
l I/t
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Mangino: \
On April 29 , 1985 , I sent you a letter concerning blacktop that
was dumped along Pierce Road. I have enclosed a copy for your
reference. Since that time, the pile has been added to.
It is important that this material not be buried but removed
from the site.
Very truly yours ,
A. Bowen Davies
Deputy Town Engineer
ABD:bmr
cc: /R. Arsenault, Director of Public Works
R. Martel, Town Engineer
Inland Wetlands Agency
Central Paving Company
Enclosure
Certified Mail : #P382 454 153