TOWN OF EAST WINDSOR
WATER POLLUTION CONTROL AUTHORITY
Minutes of Meeting of September 27, 2006
Members Present: Paul Anderson, Tom Davis, Mark Livings, Reggie Bancroft, Jim Barton (Alternate) and Ed Farrell (Alternate)
Members Absent: Dave Tyler
Others Present: WPCA Chief Operator Ed Alibozek, WPCA Attorney Vincent Purnhagen, and Recording Secretary Laura Michael
Time and Place
Paul Anderson, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. at the East Windsor WPCA Administration Building.
I. Designate Alternate to Sit for Absent Member
Jim Barton (Alternate) was designated to sit for absent member Dave Tyler.
II. Acceptance of Minutes of August 30, 2006
Motion: To accept the amended minutes of August 30, 2006.
Discussion: Mr. Anderson stated that the amount of the check from the State of CT for nitrogen credits should be in the minutes.
III. Payment of Bills
Motion: To authorize the payment of the September 27, 2006 bill sheet in the amount of $33,425.08.
Discussion: Mr. Alibozek went over the bill sheet outlining any unusual bills.
IV. Visitors – There were no visitors.
V. Receipt of Applications
Chris Lin, Chinese/Japanese Restaurant, 4 Prospect Hill Rd
Mr. Alibozek explained that the WPCA is still waiting for a site plan.
VI. Approval of Applications
SJK Properties, Quarry Meadow, Depot St
Attorney Thomas Fahey of Windsor Locks introduced himself to the board. He is representing the applicant. Attorney Fahey referenced the minutes of the August 30, 2006 WPCA meeting, stating that Mr. Leslie referred to the application of Quarry Meadow as being incomplete; Town Engineer Len Norton’s concerns were not addressed. Attorney Fahey presented two memo’s from Mr. Norton, the first dated September 8, 2005 with 8 items; these items were addressed on the revised plans; the second dated July 26, 2006 with 4 items, these items were addressed by Mr. Kement and Mr. Norton wrote, “that should the commission decide to vote favorably on this application, these items may be made conditions of the approval”. Attorney Fahey stated that it is their position that the application is complete.
Attorney Fahey reported that the applicant along with Attorney Tyler came to the WPCA on August 31, 2005 for a conceptual discussion; the issue of the project being in the sewer avoidance area was brought up. At that time, the WPCA reviewed applications from a technical standpoint and let Planning and Zoning approve or deny an application because of the sewer avoidance area. Based upon the August 31, 2005 meeting Mr. Kement went forward at his expense. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved this application without any conditions; approval was not contingent upon WPCA approval. Attorney Fahey reported that Town Planner Laurie Whitten wrote to Town Attorney Steve Penney asking if PZC has the authority to approve an application in the sewer avoidance area and would this affect future funding to the Town from the State? Attorney Penney replied that yes, PZC does have the authority to approve this application; as for affecting funding, present
and foreseeable availability of funds from the State is remote. Ms. Whitten reported to PZC that she called OPM; the Town is already in violation and in jeopardy of losing funding. Attorney Fahey stated that Mr. Kement had been present for several discussions with the WPCA and there was no suggestion that the project could not be sewered. Attorney Fahey stated that the applicant has done all that was asked of them. It is unfair/unjust to deny this application because the WPCA’s position has changed.
Attorney Purnhagen arrived at this time in the meeting and remained until adjournment.
Mr. Anderson presented a timeline of the SJK Properties for informational purposes. When the application was submitted in August of 2005, the Sewer Avoidance Area issue was brought up. At that time, PZC was using the Sewer Service/Avoidance Area Map as part of their criteria for approving/denying applications. At the September 27, 2005 PZC meeting the application of Letourneau Builders was denied primarily because it was in a Sewer Avoidance Area. PZC stopped using this map following an opinion of their attorney. When Mr. Hogan of the DEP spoke at the March 2006 WPCA meeting, he stated that it is the WPCA’s responsibility to look at the Sewer Service Area Map. Up until this point, the WPCA looked at applications from a technical standpoint. At the time that the application was submitted, it was not the
WPCA’s policy to address the Sewer Service/Avoidance Area issue because PZC did it. Planning & Zoning is now ignoring that policy and has stopped using the Sewer Service Area Map. At the August 30, 2006 WPCA meeting, an Amendment to Standard Guidelines for Sanitary Sewer Construction (Force Main) was approved. It contains a subsection – Sewer System Extensions: Area of Service: Extensions to the East Windsor Sewer System must be within the Sewer Service Area as defined on the latest Sewer Service Area Map for the Town of East Windsor.
Attorney Fahey stated that when the application was submitted in August of 2005, the WPCA was okay with it, the Sewer Service Area was not their issue; it was a PZC issue. It is unfair to go back and change the rules. The applicant was upfront with the WPCA and they have been caught in the crossfire.
Mr. Anderson stated that at the time of the application, the WPCA was not in a position to tell them no; we didn’t know our criteria. Mr. Anderson asked Attorney Purnhagen if you find out something that you haven’t been dealing with, how does it apply to the decision of the application on the table? Attorney Purnhagen could not give an opinion at this time.
Mr. Davis asked what are we waiting for? Mr. Anderson replied nothing; the application is on the table. The question is whether to apply the changes discussed retroactively or not. Mr. Davis felt that this was a grand fathered situation; the application came in before the policy changes were made. Mr. Anderson stated that from this point forward, an application outside of the Sewer Service Area will not get past the door.
Mr. Farrell arrived at this time and remained until adjournment.
It was questioned that if this application is approved, will it open up the area for even more sewers? Mr. Anderson replied that if approved, a pencil line adjustment could be made to the Sewer Service Area Map. Only this project would be in the Sewer Service Area and everything surrounding it would be excluded from the Sewer Service Area. Attorney Fahey responded that the Kements have vested rights, the sewer line will not be open to the public, it will service that parcel only.
Attorney Fahey explained that the applicant has a unique situation, different from others. Policy has changed since the time their application was submitted. The applicant has done everything they were asked. Mr. Fahey believes that the application should be approved.
Mr. Loos stated that he agrees with Mr. Anderson and disagrees with Mr. Fahey. The town should not put sewers in a Sewer Avoidance Area. Why can’t they put in septic systems? Attorney Fahey responded that sewers are more environmentally favorable, as this project is in or near an aquifer protection area.
Mr. Filipone explained that PZC denied the application of Letourneau Builders for more than one reason; the Sewer Service Area issue was only one of the reasons.
Motion: To approve the application of SJK Properties, Quarry Meadow, Depot St. Plan title Proposed Sanitary Sewer for Quarry Meadows off Depot St, East Windsor, CT, Assessor’s Map 27/Block 77/Lots 6&9 dated August 22, 2005, revised July 14, 2006.
Discussion: Mr. Barton expressed he is troubled with this project; it is so far outside the Sewer Service Area. He is also troubled that the WPCA didn’t say it was way out of the ballpark and sat through the presentation of force main vs. municipal pump station leading the applicant to believe it was okay with the WPCA. He can see their argument. Mr. Livings questioned how this is a public sewerage system if it is in the Sewer Avoidance Area and is a force main, yet other residents will not be able to connect?
In Favor: Davis/Barton/Bancroft
Motion Carried. Application Approved.
Attorney Fahey thanked the board for their patience and left the meeting at this time.
Delinquent Account #022013
Mr. Barton reported that he talked to the individual early in September, the individual had been confused, but finally seemed clear on the issue of fees owed. Mr. Barton has not heard from him since. Mr. Barton doesn’t think the individual will do anything, he has a defeatist attitude; he doesn’t think he’ll ever get out from under this bill. He was warned of the possibility of foreclosure because of the age of the debt. This item will be carried forward on the agenda.
Motion: To suspend the regular meeting for the purpose of holding the public hearing scheduled at 7:30 p.m.
VIII. Public Hearing Scheduled at 7:30 p.m.
Motion: To open the public hearing as published in the legal notice for South Prospect Hill Rd Properties, Taco Bell/KFC, 43 Prospect Hill Rd and Galazka, 36 Old Ellington Rd.
There was no one present for South Prospect Hill Rd Properties, Taco Bell/KFC, 43 Prospect Hill Rd. Mr. Alibozek stated that this is a new commercial building and none of the FCC has been paid.
There was no one present for Galazka, 36 Old Ellington Rd. Mr. Alibozek stated that this is a new single-family residence and all of the FCC has been paid.
Motion: To close the public hearing for South Prospect Hill Rd Properties, Taco Bell/KFC, 43 Prospect Hill Rd and Galazka, 36 Old Ellington Rd.
Motion: To resume the regular meeting.
IX. Action on Facility Connection Charges
Motion: To impose the Facility Connection Charges as published for South Prospect Hill Rd Properties, Taco Bell/KFC, 43 Prospect Hill Rd and Galazka, 36 Old Ellington Rd.
X. Unfinished Business
Newberry Rd Assessments – carry forward to next month’s agenda.
Prospect Hill Rd Assessments - carry forward to next month’s agenda.
Establishment of Sewer Service Area
Mr. Alibozek explained that Geo Systems is working on a digitized map; at the present the map shows the lots in town. Next the sewer lines will be drawn in, showing the size and location.
XI. New Business
Superintendent’s Report – no report this month.
Motion: To adjourn the meeting at 9:34 p.m.