2026-09-21 - Planning and Zoning Commission

00:00Yeah, Jonathan, it's hot enough in here

00:02and it's still hot.

00:19>> Okay, call to order, please. Roll call.

00:22>> Brian Card

00:23>> here.

00:23>> Norman Ferren,

00:25>> present.

00:25>> Michael Huo

00:26>> here.

00:27>> John Sarenopoulos

00:28>> here. Keith Thurlo

00:29>> here slamming

00:38>> present.

00:41Um there's no alternates to see. Hint

00:45hint if somebody wants to become a

00:47alternate.

00:49Uh agenda addendums. There's Jonathan.

00:53Do we have anything?

00:56Um, so one one thing that Keith and I

00:59quickly chatted about prior to the

01:01meeting, uh, recently we learned of the

01:03passing of, um, Dan Blanchett from, uh,

01:05J&D site and design or J&D Engineering.

01:08He passed away last week. Uh, and I

01:12wanted to see if the commission would

01:13entertain a moment of silence.

01:15>> Yeah, I was he was only 39 years old and

01:19so it's kind of sad to see. So, if we

01:22could entertain a moment of silence for

01:2430 seconds or

02:02All right. Thank you everybody for that.

02:06Citizens comments on items not subject

02:09to public hearing. Individual

02:10presentations not to exceed three

02:12minutes limited to an aggregate of 21

02:14minutes unless otherwise indicated by a

02:17majority vote of the commission. Public

02:18comments can be emailed to public

02:20comment.gov.

02:21or mail to the town of Kney, 172 Main

02:24Street, Kanley, Connecticut 06239. All

02:27public comment must be received prior to

02:292 p.m. the day of the meeting. Public

02:31comment received will be posted on the

02:33town's website, uh, kellyct.gov.

02:36As this is a hybrid meeting, citizens

02:39can participate in the citizens

02:40participation by WebEx or in person. I'm

02:43not going to read that. Meeting number

02:4628637264921.

02:50password capital P zc

02:552026

02:57and by phone 1 1415-655000000001

03:03okay the public's can speak at this time

03:06aggregate of 21 minutes preferably three

03:09minutes a piece if you lose more than

03:11that it's still 21 minutes so mute your

03:14conscience

03:17>> my name is Steve Krda I'm here on behalf

03:20of Matthew Kristo who lives at 89

03:22Katherine Avenue.

03:25Uh I'm trying to cover some new ground

03:28here that I haven't covered about Amazon

03:29before. Tonight I want to address

03:31Amazon's traffic record.

03:34Amazon's contract drivers and delivery

03:36vehicles have higher safety violation

03:39rates than the post office, FedEx, or

03:42UPS. Sometimes 89% higher over a

03:46three-year period. Why? They have the

03:50just in 30 minutes delivery promotion.

03:53They have tight delivery schedules. They

03:56have high stop counts. They have

03:58frequent returns to the distribution

04:01center. Uh they have a very heavy

04:04reliance on gig workers uh with

04:07inconsistent safety oversight. Uh

04:10sometimes they hire drivers with

04:12questionable qualifications.

04:15Many of the accidents involved drivers

04:18using cars, trucks, and cargo vans with

04:21no Amazon logo. A Penske truck rental

04:25weighing approximately 10,000 lbs

04:28rearended a passenger car and killed a

04:309-month-old girl in a car seat. Gig

04:34workers using smaller cargo vans and

04:37passenger vehicles are the workh horses

04:39of Amazon's delivery force. Drivers for

04:43Amazon report intense pressure to meet

04:46deadlines, sometimes skipping breaks or

04:49rushing, speeding.

04:52So even as Amazon insists it bears no

04:54legal responsibility for driver fatigue

04:57or stress or accidents, it maintains a

05:01tight grip on how the drivers do their

05:03job. through its Flex app and its mentor

05:07app. It directs the order of deliveries

05:11and a driver's progress. In fact, a

05:13dispatcher can call a driver if they

05:16fall behind schedule and based on work

05:19orders from contractors with drivers in

05:22eight states. Amazon requires 999 out of

05:26a thousand deliveries be on time. So,

05:30Amazon has operational control over

05:33roots and quotas and deadlines and tech

05:36tool tech tools. Uh, the Flex app is

05:39also known as the Rabbit app. That

05:41rabbit app has reliability problems and

05:44sometimes instructs um unsafe maneuvers.

05:48Um, Amazon employs realtime performance

05:52monitoring, but it evades culpability

05:55for crashes, injuries, and deaths. So

05:58bottom line, no matter if the warehouse

06:01is in the sticks here, thousands of

06:04third-party and flex drivers using their

06:07own vehicles will flood the region. They

06:10are not identifiable nor regulated by

06:12the feds. This is exactly what Amazon

06:16wants. Um some figures uh the uh

06:19Buzzfeed ProPublica between uh this came

06:22out two 2019 2020. Amazon contractors

06:26were involved in more than 60 crashes

06:30since 2015

06:32uh resulting uh also in serious injuries

06:35and 13 deaths.

06:36>> Three minutes.

06:37>> Wow. You know I don't like you anymore.

06:40Okay.

06:41>> I didn't know you ever did. [laughter]

06:53Michelle Murphy, break neckill road. I

06:55don't see the intervenor status on here.

06:57Is this the appropriate time? Is there a

06:59time later? Uh

07:01>> oh.

07:02>> I believe the intervenor status is going

07:04to be covered after the presentation. Um

07:07we'll be doing it at later in the

07:09meeting.

07:09>> Okay.

07:10>> Will there be a chance for the

07:11intervenor? Uh there's going to be a

07:13conversation by the town attorney and

07:15I'll leave that to the to the

07:16commission.

07:18>> I'm going to speak then in case I don't

07:20get a chance to speak.

07:22>> Uh on the objection, you're putting the

07:25horse before the cart. This is the

07:27allegation stage. Will we be bringing an

07:29expert witness to prove the allegations?

07:31Many of the points raised mention

07:33pollution and impaired w water quality.

07:35To answer the minimal requirement of how

07:38things will be affected, I've gone

07:39through point by point and inserted

07:40words from storm water runoff, soil

07:43erosion, says all the words I answered.

07:45I will be submitting expert testimony

07:47from engineer Steve Trinkos, which will

07:49prove that the proposed storm water

07:51management system is not in compliance

07:53with the pollutant load reductions

07:55required by the Connecticut Deep. The

07:57proposed storm water management system

07:59does not reduce the significant

08:00increases in runoff volume for all storm

08:02events. Also, our expert witness will uh

08:05documentation will also prove shortfalls

08:07in erosion control, storm water plan,

08:09and sewer plan. Uh purview

08:13before you guys ruled and you said uh on

08:16our other intervention status that they

08:18did have purview, planning and zoning

08:20has purview over storm water and erosion

08:22control. We ask that you do the same. Um

08:24that's all I need to say on that. Thank

08:26you. Oh, also our lawyer said uh I I

08:29submitted that for you that um the case

08:33they site Fort Trumbull versus Alves is

08:36actually a judicial proceeding and this

08:39is an administrating proceeding. It has

08:41a lower standard than your court

08:43proceeding

08:46Michelle.

08:47[applause]

08:49No, it's right now.

08:55>> Not talk about Husky. That that's

08:57intervenor

09:02Barlay, 26 Dark Lantern Hill Road,

09:04Danielson. I'm here as a resident of

09:06Killingly and also as um third district

09:09counselor.

09:10Um I'm sure that you'll hear the same

09:13spiel um um the planning and zoning

09:16commission reviews and approves um the

09:20site plan as for it approves the storm

09:23water um management plan and bond was

09:27only um the third party reviewer and is

09:29strictly an advisory report and not the

09:33um decision maker.

09:36Um, one of the earliest statements from

09:39Tim, um, Tom Cody of Robinson and Cole

09:42was that the application could not be

09:45denied because it is as of right and it

09:48could not be um, denied based on

09:51speculation and must be based on um,

09:54facts.

09:56However, nothing that is being presented

10:00is based on facts. It's all based on

10:03speculation.

10:04Um, looking at uh a couple of the um

10:09items for the uh

10:12uh lawsuit,

10:14Gustiffson further um explained that the

10:18proposed

10:19um

10:22proposed location for the proposed

10:24building avoids impacts to the highest

10:27functioning wetland uh resources and

10:30vernal pool habitats. I know this is

10:32about inland wetlands but it will

10:33pertain to planning and zoning also.

10:36There would be unavail unavoidable

10:38direct impact to some isolated wetlands

10:41but in Mr. Gustiffson's professional

10:44opinion

10:45these wetlands did not possess high

10:48functions of values.

10:51Gustoson stated that in his number 34

10:55stated that in his professional opinion

10:58the development would not significantly

11:00impact function um of values of the

11:03inland wetlands and water courses. So um

11:08Robinson and Cole and their um

11:11professionals are offering opinions

11:15and they're telling us that we need to

11:17have facts. nothing is um a fact. Uh I

11:22remember

11:25uh Keith Thurlo,

11:29I guess you could say he was called the

11:31liar when he said that he could hear

11:33sounds across the valley and the sound

11:37engineer said that um he was the

11:39professional and essentially Mr. Thurlo

11:42could not hear those sounds at his home.

11:46So that's all based on sound a sound

11:50engineers using calculations and

11:53theories to get numbers. None of it is

11:55fact. Please take this into account

11:57during your um deliberations. Thank you.

12:15Good evening. Uh my name's Alfred R.

12:17Dufrain, a Killingly resident. I'm

12:19speaking tonight about 90 Putnham Pike

12:22application 261368.

12:25>> That's that's at a public hearing, so

12:27>> just wait.

12:28>> Yeah, please.

12:28>> Okay, no problem. I don't want to I

12:29don't want to mess that up. Okay.

12:38Yeah, Ian McDonald, 548 Valley Road. Um,

12:42just wanted to uh follow up on some of

12:45Mr. Mr. Christa's comments uh regarding,

12:49you know, the traffic and obviously

12:52Amazon is is famous for for better or

12:55worse uh prioritizing,

12:58you know, the speed of of their delivery

13:00and uh that's where that's where the pea

13:02bottles come from. I mean that's that's

13:03that's why um you know and and I think I

13:08I don't know the exact percentage. I

13:09want to say it's somewhere between

13:13give or take 50%. It could be could be a

13:15little 10% less or more but it's it's

13:17around there in terms of who are sort of

13:19non Amazon drivers versus sort of the

13:22Amazon drivers that are generally going

13:25to these facilities. And as far as when

13:28I Googled, you know, the fastest way to

13:30get to Willamantic, which I think would

13:32probably be potentially a destination

13:34andor Hartford, it took me right down

13:37Main Street. Now, the assumption is no,

13:40we're we're going to send everybody,

13:42whether they're Amazon workers or not,

13:44down Knox to deal with that potentially

13:46to deal with that kind of nightmare of a

13:49of a uh merge up there. But if people

13:53are saving time and they're not even

13:55Amazon

13:56uh they're not, you know, company

13:59drivers, I don't know what is to keep

14:01anybody from saving a little bit of time

14:04and using a state road uh to, you know,

14:07to shave off a bit of time. And the

14:09amount of time we've spent in this town

14:11trying to kind of boost things up in

14:13Main Street and that we'd be adding a

14:16significant amount of truck truck

14:17traffic to the burrow is is is really

14:20disturbing to me. Uh the only other

14:22thing is that you know smog I think you

14:24guys know this but smog is a lot of

14:26times that phenomenon a lot of times is

14:28when you have a lot of pollution and it

14:30settles down in the valley and of course

14:32you know KMS and Main Street generally

14:35is in that valley. So, I I think it's

14:38it's really questionable to be putting

14:39all that truck traffic, that diesel

14:41fumes up on that hill um given, you

14:44know, given the kids down there and and

14:47as as well as, you know, the the bus

14:49situation around KMS can be a nightmare

14:50already. So, uh I'll leave it at that.

14:53Thank you.

14:56[applause]

15:08Good evening. Clet Rogers, 294 Putnham

15:12Pike, and I am here tonight to

15:17um

15:19one say thank you to the community of

15:22Republicans and Democrats that have come

15:24together as one as as a community. I've

15:29never thought I would be able to say

15:31that. I've been torn between my husband

15:35and my father for the last six years

15:37because of their political parties. And

15:39to have a group of community members

15:41come together um to fight for mother

15:45nature is my kind of people. I love you

15:49guys. Um,

15:51and I just want to put um

15:55I I think of the earth as my mother and

15:59all us little towns as her daughters.

16:02And I'll say that, you know, Mash and

16:06Tuck Mountain and 90 Putnham Pike are

16:09Dolly Parton's

16:11um breast. They are the biggest

16:15They are the biggest we got in this

16:17town. is 500 600 feet up on these two

16:22big breasts and in the valley is 395.

16:28In the valley is all our endangered

16:30species as all our wetlands is all the

16:33stuff. Everything comes from on top of

16:36those breasts. And you guys want to put

16:39two big piles of poop up there and think

16:43that it's not going to affect anything

16:45that the traffic going on 395 You're

16:48talking about 90

16:49>> 90 Putnham Pike and West Cot Road. I'm

16:52trying both of them.

16:54>> Try to focus on Amazon. You can speak

16:58later. Okay. So, Dolly's right boob just

17:02fell off.

17:03>> Now it's her left boob. We're talking

17:05just about the left boob right now. And

17:07this one's bigger than the right boob.

17:10Is 600 ft if you go on Berling Game

17:12Road. Berling Game Road. And it's kind

17:15of cut off like you can see the whole

17:17face of it on one side. And on the

17:20bottom of that is all the turtles.

17:22There's turtle signs all the way up Mash

17:24and Tuck Road. Turtle crossing. Turtle

17:26crossing. And those turtles are there.

17:27I've had a bus a get off to save a

17:30turtle because I'm not going to run it

17:32over. Um,

17:35okay. I've driven bus in this town for

17:3718 years. I've gone out from schools on

17:41all sides of the town and the teachers

17:45always get mad at me when I'm saying I'm

17:46taking Route 6.

17:49Nobody understands that 101 74 84 with a

17:55loaded bus does not go the speed limit.

17:59You're going 30 miles an hour up those

18:01hills and people behind you. My dad

18:04going to Yukon for 40 years. 30, no 29

18:08years to Yukon. Um was behind me one

18:11day. He's like, "What are you doing?"

18:14I'm like, "I taking the kids to the

18:16Hartford Science Museum."

18:19Um you have to go you they don't

18:22understand GPS, whatever. I go out to

18:25acupuncture in Scotland and now because

18:28we have the planefield Amazon,

18:31there's all kinds of unmarked vehicles,

18:34no license plate, this that and the

18:36other going out on 14 14A where you got

18:40all the Japanese notweed that's trying

18:42to do its job of filtering the soil from

18:45all the farms for all these years like

18:48um but we do not protect my mother, our

18:53mother, the birth the daughters. We need

18:56to we need to um partner with Amazon

19:01because we could be awesome. Like but

19:03the way it's going in right now, this is

19:06not a win-win for the town, for our

19:09future, for our kids. And I think any of

19:13you would want me to be defending your

19:16kids and your mothers

19:20and not these people who say they're the

19:23professionals. This town deserves

19:26better. Thank you.

19:30[applause]

19:40>> Hello. Uh Rebecca Rainville, 120 Lejo

19:43Road. Um

19:46so [clears throat]

19:48Amazon has designated the northeast

19:51corner, the quiet corner as a new Amazon

19:54mega warehouse industrial hub. I didn't

19:57live in this community um to live in um

20:03an area that's going to be

20:06destroyed. Um, you're talking hundred

20:09thousands of trees just taken down. Um,

20:12wetlands. I mean, people I've seen

20:15people at different the wetlands

20:16meetings wanting to build a house with

20:18just some square footage of wetlands and

20:21they can't do it. But they're going to

20:23come into

20:25our pristine area here and destroy over

20:2844,000 square feet of wetlands. That

20:32doesn't include the one in Norwich that

20:34they're also trying to build, which is a

20:362.1 million square foot. And then who's

20:39to say they're not going in Daveville up

20:41off of Route 12 and then maybe in

20:43Pomford and Putnham and Thompson. But I

20:45mean, is that what we really want for um

20:48our community?

20:50Our roads aren't designed to handle 4 to

20:54800 trucks, tractor trailer trucks 53

20:57feet long coming out onto Westcot Road

21:00under the underpass and then going on

21:03our rural roads of Knox and Gothier.

21:06There's homes there. Um,

21:10light sources for there are going to be

21:12247 running. Um the light from this mega

21:16warehouse will be running 24/7 which

21:19will affect um people that live in the

21:22neighborhood. It'll affect nocturnal

21:24animals. Um

21:27the reverberation from the tractor

21:30trailer trucks and the equipment going

21:32in and out of this warehouse will, you

21:35know, goes through um sheetrock and

21:39foundations and it's it's just a major

21:42health hazard. It's just not they're

21:44it's just not right for our community. I

21:47don't want to see the quiet corner

21:49become the industrial hub of Amazon. I

21:52mean, it's just we have our nursing home

21:55right there, which we've talked about.

21:57We have our school systems. We have um

22:0155 year old communities all surrounding

22:04where Amazon's going to go. I mean, it's

22:07a massive, massive facility. And I don't

22:09understand why they need it right here

22:11when they have one 18.2 miles away. They

22:14have another one that is 8.2 miles away

22:16in Planefield. Now they want to build

22:18another one in Norwich plus on top of

22:21this one. And who's to say what's going

22:23up the pike up 395.

22:27>> Yes. It's it's greed. And we shouldn't

22:31have to deal with them coming into our

22:34town. They're going to our taxes will go

22:37up. Um, our roads will be damaged. Our

22:40health and welfare of our citizens with

22:43tractor trailers that 4 to 800 every

22:47three minutes coming down our back roads

22:48and trying to merge on to 395. I brought

22:51this up before. You're trying to merge

22:54on to 395 as they're trying to get off

22:56to go six west. And as they're still

22:58trying to merge on, you have the traffic

23:01trying to get on to six east. I mean,

23:03we're just asking for trouble.

23:05>> Three minutes.

23:05>> We're just asking for trouble. And I ask

23:07you to deny with prejudice and make an

23:09example. And if they want them, they can

23:12put them in their own backyards and not

23:14in our town. [applause]

23:20>> Excuse me.

23:22>> Yes.

23:25>> Yes.

23:25>> Yes.

23:27>> Hi, my name is Jasmine Birdie. I am at

23:30125 Lake Road in Davo. Um, and we are

23:33only speaking of the Amazon, correct?

23:35until the um hearing opens up on Potnip

23:37Pike.

23:38>> Yes,

23:39it's a public hearing. The public

23:41comment, so it can be anything other

23:43than

23:44>> the public uh hearings that are going to

23:46be opening later.

23:49>> Okay. Um I said it once and I'll I'll

23:52say it again. Uh don't let you know

23:53these developer lawyers and fancy suits

23:55intimidate you and try to bullying you

23:57into approving these projects. Um we

24:00have a right to deny that. Uh you know,

24:02don't forget it. Um, correct me if I'm

24:04wrong, but didn't um this developer um

24:10for Amazon um with the Husky project,

24:13didn't they ignore the question of would

24:15Amazon drivers be delivering with their

24:17personal vehicles? I'm pretty sure the

24:20developers did not include that within

24:22their traffic study, if you want to call

24:24it that. Um, and by the way, these are

24:27um these drivers are contract contracted

24:30drivers. I see them all over town. um in

24:33their own personal vehicles delivering

24:36Amazon packages. Um these contract

24:38drivers

24:40um were not included in the traffic

24:42study. So it really isn't an accurate

24:44depiction of the amount of traffic um

24:46that this bogus project would bring in.

24:48Um I believe Amazon gets away with their

24:51shady behavior, making things appear not

24:53to be as bad as they are. Um but they

24:55call those drivers subcontracted drivers

24:58when it's really people in their own

24:59personal vehicles. So what's really the

25:01truth?

25:02Um,

25:04this is our home, you know. I mean,

25:06we're fighting for it. Republicans and

25:08Democrats, we're all coming together on

25:09this issue as it should be. And I

25:11absolutely love that for our home. Um,

25:14that alone should be a sign um for the

25:17shady developer. Um, that party lines

25:20are getting crossed here and we are all

25:22fighting for our home and we will not

25:26give up. Um, does the fact of how close

25:29this is to KMS matter at all? Does our

25:34children's safety not matter? Are you

25:37going to be responsible for medical

25:38bills and lawsuits that come against you

25:40if these Amazon drivers hint school

25:42buses from the insane increased traffic?

25:45Pretty sure that within um that within

25:48our laws, this project can be denied

25:50solely based on causing a tremendous

25:53negative impact to our quality of life.

25:55Let's also bring up the PAS issue going

25:57on in town which is seemingly never

25:58ending and continuing to emerge all

26:00across town which is affecting almost

26:03everybody. But let's build a mega

26:05warehouse. No. Are they getting their

26:08own sewer treatment plant? Will they be

26:10testing the discharge into the treatment

26:12system for PAS? What systems will they

26:15use to prevent PAS from getting into the

26:17sewer treatment? We already have a

26:18massive truck stop that is currently

26:20being built off the Ottawa and exit and

26:22looks like garbage. We don't need it and

26:25we don't need to add this warehousing to

26:26our town less than a mile from our

26:28children's schools.

26:31Thank you.

26:34[applause]

26:37>> This is already beyond, but go ahead

26:39because you're there.

26:40>> Okay, it'll be quick. Um, thank you

26:43everybody for all your efforts. There's

26:45a quote on this that says, "Never doubt

26:48that a small group of thoughtful,

26:50committed citizens can change the

26:52world." Indeed, it is the only thing

26:55that ever has. And that's by Margaret

26:57me. Anyway, I just wanted to ask um all

27:01the folks that'll be that have presented

27:04for Amazon. And um there's this mattress

27:09firm commercial that says, you know,

27:11they do these things like they stick

27:13their hands in the dip and you know, eat

27:16the eat it and then put their hands back

27:18in the dip and there's this and they do

27:20these crazy things and um the uh

27:24the somebody comes up to him and says,

27:27"How do you sleep at night?" And I guess

27:30that's my question. How do you sleep at

27:32night? You know, we have um I know on a

27:36mattress firm you sleep really well, but

27:40this is I don't think if you were had

27:42this in your own towns that were or

27:45right next door to you or like some of

27:47these people so close that they're

27:49they're really their properties are

27:51going to be ruined, their lives are

27:53going to be ruined the way they knew it

27:55and our beautiful town is going to be

27:56ruined. So,

28:00I know that you're all professional and

28:02you and you're, you know, serious about

28:04your work,

28:06but how do you sleep at night? Thank

28:09you.

28:11>> Okay. Um, [applause]

28:13any commission or staff report uh

28:15responses at all? No. All right. Uh,

28:20public hearings, public hearing comments

28:22can be emailed to public comment

28:24killing.gov of or mailed to the town of

28:26Kilanley, 172 Main Street, Kilanley,

28:29Connecticut 06239. All public comments

28:31must be received prior to 2 p.m. the day

28:33of the meeting. Public comment received

28:35will be posted on the town's website.

28:38Special print application 261368

28:41kill one LLC.

28:43Applicant Landover 90 Pike JIS map 89

28:47lot 22 54 acres general commercial. The

28:49project proposes two new distribution

28:51centers, 467,500

28:54square ft, gross floor area

28:58with associated loading bays, parking,

29:01etc., etc., etc. Continued from August

29:0317th.

29:08Introduce yourself for the record,

29:10please. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name

29:12is John Nuff. I'm an attorney with an

29:14office at 42 Cherry Street in Milford,

29:16Connecticut. on behalf of the

29:18applicants. Uh you as you mentioned, Mr.

29:20Chairman, we were last before you in

29:22August. Uh we made a lot of headway with

29:25regard to the uh very detailed comments

29:30from offered by Thai and Bond. Um we are

29:33most of the way through those. I think

29:35that uh we made incredible progress to

29:38date. There's the last few items that we

29:40need to resolve uh and we hope to do

29:43that um in the very near future. Um, so

29:46I've already emailed Jonathan with a

29:49request to continue the hearing until

29:51the October meeting. What we want to do

29:53this evening is Kevin Sol is here, a

29:55professional engineer, traffic engineer,

29:58certified soil um, sorry, erosion

30:01control specialist as well. And and Mark

30:04Wallace, our sound expert, is also here.

30:06So, we want to quickly review the

30:09changes that we have made in response to

30:11the tie-in bond review. uh update you on

30:14some things uh where Ty Bon had some

30:17initial questions and we can respond to

30:18the some of those tonight. Obviously,

30:20we'll put that in writing. Mark Wallace

30:22will give you a review of this his sound

30:24study both with regard to the operation

30:26of the facilities themselves as well as

30:29during construction and then we'll happy

30:31to answer any questions from the

30:33commission. So, that's the the plan for

30:35this evening. I know that you have lots

30:36of other things to uh attend to this

30:38evening, so we'll try to be concise. I

30:40don't know whether you want to hear from

30:42from Andrew White from Tai and Bine, but

30:44this obviously the commission's choice

30:46but um I think we're making a lot of

30:49good progress as we've been saying from

30:51the very beginning. Uh the project will

30:53benefit from the Tai and Bond review and

30:55I think that is uh has shown itself to

30:58be true as um as depicted in the uh

31:02response letters that we received from

31:03Tai Bond. So with that, I'll give you

31:05Kevin Seven Sully.

31:12>> Good evening, members of the commission.

31:14For the record, my name is Kevin

31:15Sullley. I'm a licensed professional

31:16engineer in the state of Connecticut

31:18with Soleie Engineering. Office is

31:20located at 501 Main Street in Monroe,

31:22Connecticut. Um, as

31:24>> we we need [clears throat] to hear you

31:25back here. You need to talk a little

31:27louder.

31:29>> That's me. I cannot hear you.

31:31>> My apologies. I'll move the mic so it's

31:33uh better heard.

31:37>> So, as attorney enough indicated, um we

31:40have been hard at work uh working with

31:42Ty and Bond and addressing all their

31:44comments. Um they submitted a revised

31:46comment letter and out of the 101 items

31:49that they had identified, we have

31:51successfully resolved 94 of them and the

31:54last seven remain really more detail-

31:56oriented things that we can continue to

31:58address and work with them and and and

31:59satisfy any and all concerns that

32:01they've raised. And again, as we've

32:03said, all of the comments that we've

32:05heard during during this uh process,

32:06both from the commission and from the

32:08public, we've been able to incorporate

32:10many many changes into our plans. And we

32:12do feel that what we have is is a far

32:14greater product from what we where we

32:16start and we always welcome that that

32:17proc that part of the process. Um so

32:21again just to orient everyone the site

32:23is located at 90 Putnham Pike. Um it's

32:25approximately 58 acres. Uh the site is

32:28zoned general commercial. The proposed

32:31use is permitted under special permit

32:32within that existing district. Um we

32:36have received local wetlands approval

32:38for our proposed activity

32:40and um uh we're here before you for

32:44planning and zoning. So our site plan

32:45package includes a lot of information

32:46including obviously this is a site

32:48survey and this is the current um and

32:51most recent uh proposed rendered site

32:53plan. So we have made a couple uh tweaks

32:57based on um the further correspondence

33:00with Tyen Bond on our overall site plan.

33:03We've add some additional signage um no

33:05engine brake signs to help in further

33:08reduce any potential um noise associated

33:11with the operations of the facility. Um,

33:14additionally, as as part of our recent

33:16submission, as Turnoff indicated, uh,

33:18Mark Wallace, our uh, acoustical

33:21engineer, has completed a comprehensive

33:23noise analysis. And as part of that, we

33:24did have a recommendation to add an 8

33:26foot high sound barrier fencing. Um,

33:29that has been incorporated onto the

33:30overall site plan and is highlighted on

33:32this plan up on the screen uh, now. And

33:35just to kind of show that on the the

33:37sheet 2.12,

33:39um, a little bit more highlighted there.

33:41Um and that again uh protects and

33:43captures attenuates any potential um

33:46noise associated with the project. Um at

33:49the last hearing there was some

33:50discussion and a request for a section

33:52to understand the relationship between

33:55um Putnham Pike and the proposed

33:58facility. Uh as we've indicated the site

34:00is uh somewhat topographically

34:03challenged. There's pretty uh steep

34:04grades as you um traverse

34:06[clears throat]

34:07uh west to east along the site. And this

34:09what this section shows is that there is

34:11an extensive existing vegetated buffer

34:14both on the um uh neighbors property to

34:19the west of our proposed center which is

34:20being maintained and obviously an

34:22additional um uh existing mature

34:25vegetated buffer which is being

34:26maintained. And you can see here um the

34:31the most of the proposed activity in

34:32closest proximity to Putnham Pike is a

34:35fill condition. You can see this dotted

34:37line here represents the existing grade.

34:39Um the proposed building is generally uh

34:42closer at existing grade um in its

34:44primary footprint and then there's some

34:46fill placed to accommodate uh some of

34:48the operations for the proposed

34:49warehouse facility. But what you can see

34:52here just to zoom in a little bit is we

34:53have over a 200 foot buff or

34:55approximately a 200 foot buffer um being

34:58maintained vegetated. We have a a

34:59proposed retaining wall, our noise

35:01fence, our additional noise acoustical

35:03barrier. And what it does also show is

35:05that the proposed building is over 400

35:07feet away from that existing um

35:09structure. Again, our site is zoned uh

35:12commercial, as is that property in front

35:14of us. We understand there's a residence

35:15there. Um but again, our proposed use is

35:18permitted via special permit in the uh

35:21in the proposed or the existing zone. Um

35:24>> could you uh could you show show more

35:26detail on where that wall is going to

35:29go?

35:29>> Sure. That that that wall is going

35:32directly on top of the retaining wall on

35:35the extent of um uh this portion of the

35:40uh Westerly uh smaller warehouse

35:43building. It's going to go along the top

35:45of that retaining wall and provide that

35:47additional acoustical screening and

35:48barrier.

35:49>> Can you go back to the other picture,

35:50please?

35:50>> Sure.

35:52>> S. So is that little black line that

35:55you're highlighting or identifying

35:58that's the wall that's the wall you're

36:00talking about putting in

36:01>> correct it's an 8ft tall 8 foot tall

36:04acoustical screen fence

36:06>> and that's going to be sufficient for

36:08the noise that might get carried across

36:10the valley.

36:11>> Yes. and our and actually that's a great

36:14segue and I can introduce Mark Wallace

36:16who is our acoustical engineer who can

36:18run you through his noise study which

36:20was completed and submitted to Tybin

36:22Bond as well.

36:27[clears throat]

36:41>> [clears throat]

36:43>> Uh good evening. My name is Mark

36:45Wallace. I'm with Tech Environmental. Um

36:49we're based out of Chumser,

36:51Massachusetts.

36:52And we were retained [clears throat] to

36:54do two sound studies. One for

36:57construction noise or related to

36:59crushing and construction activities

37:02um as well as from the warehouse

37:04operations. Um, so it's really going to

37:08be two separate presentations and then

37:10at the end of each one that I do for the

37:12sound study. Um, if you like I can open

37:14it up to questions for that before we

37:16get to the next one on the warehouse

37:18project. So my presentation is going to

37:20be on the methodologies and the results

37:23of that those studies and um and I'll

37:26walk through that with you. Um

37:30but before doing that I just wanted to

37:33talk a little bit what is sound and

37:34noise. You know obviously it's a very

37:36technical piece of information. Sound is

37:40everywhere but noise is unwanted sound

37:43and it's you know obviously subjective

37:45to um each individual's you know

37:47perception of of of noise. Um and sound

37:51is measured in decibb. Um, and what we

37:54typically hear is anything from zero dB

37:57up to 120 dB. But normal sort of

38:00everyday sounds are from about 30 dB to

38:0390 dB. And because it's on a logarithmic

38:07scale, if you were to be adding two like

38:09sound sources, 40 dB to 40 dB, it's not

38:1380 dB, but it's only 43 dB. But that

38:16three decel change in sound is

38:19considered just barely perceptible.

38:21whereas a five decel change is

38:23noticeable and a 10 decel change is

38:26considering a doubling of loudness. Now

38:28another um waiting scale is called the

38:32awaited scale. So when you see sounds

38:34that says dB or dba the awaited scale is

38:38for what people tend to perceive. It's

38:40basically waiting the sound levels in

38:41the mid-frequency octave bands and

38:44that's what people tend to hear. Um, so

38:47and that's what community noise uh

38:49studies and regulations are typically

38:51based on a DBA scale.

38:56So what were the applicable construction

38:59noise criteria? So we looked at uh the

39:02Connecticut deep regulations under

39:042286-69.

39:06They do have maximum permissible sound

39:08levels depending on the sound source and

39:10receiving property land use. Um, but it

39:14does exempt uh construction activities

39:18under the Killingly uh noise ordinance.

39:20Construction activities are exempt as

39:23long as those operations are occurring

39:25during the daytime hours. And those

39:27hours are 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Monday

39:29through Saturday and 9:00 a.m. to 9:00

39:31p.m. on Sundays.

39:33There are no construction noise

39:35standards, but there are guidance

39:37documents or guidelines. The Federal

39:39Highway Administration has construction

39:41guidance um and they have a daytime

39:44criterion of 75 dB and it's called an

39:48L10 metric. And what is the L10 metric?

39:50It's the sound level that is exceeded

39:5210% of the time. So if you were taking a

39:5560-minute measurement, it would be the

39:57loudest six minutes in that 1 hour

39:59period or it's 5 dB above baseline,

40:03whichever is greater.

40:07So for this particular uh study, we used

40:10the uh because the Killingly and the the

40:14Connecticut deep regulations exempt

40:16construction, we looked at the FHWA

40:19guidance and we applied that at six

40:21residential receptors that were closest

40:23to the property. Um

40:27and how do we do that? We do that based

40:29on doing an acoustic modeling analysis.

40:32It's a a model called CAD A. It's an

40:35international model that's used uh uh

40:39widely in the United States by acoustic

40:41engineers and it's based on uh ISO 9613.

40:46It's a standard that's used to to

40:48demonstrate how the sound propagate and

40:50attenuate. So it takes into account

40:52hemispheric divergence, how the sound

40:54spreads from a source, uh reflections,

40:58shielding by barriers and buildings and

41:00and topography.

41:02So we took into account the site grading

41:05material that was provided by solely

41:06engineering and then for off-site

41:08locations we took into account

41:10Connecticut deepar uh topographic data.

41:14So all that information is put into the

41:16model. Um and then what we did was we

41:19included a number of sound sources for

41:21the construction equipment.

41:25And what were those pieces of equipment?

41:27Uh they sort of fall into three buckets.

41:29Uh there's a rock crushing which

41:31includes the jock crusher and generator,

41:34jaw screen, stackers, conveyors, and

41:36additional screeners. You also have

41:38material handling. We had two front end

41:40loaders and two excavators. And for

41:42hauling the material out, we had two

41:44dump trucks. And what we were assuming

41:46is that all this all this equipment, all

41:48this sound energy is occurring

41:50simultaneously, which is obviously not

41:53the case in a construction uh site.

41:57So this is figure one from our report.

42:01Um this is an aerial view of the site

42:04and the uh six receptor locations on

42:06Putinham Pike.

42:09The a blowup of this is on figure two of

42:12our report. So the red hash marks

42:15represent each of the sound sources and

42:18the white circles represent stock piles.

42:22So again, all this information is put

42:23into the model and then it propagates

42:26that sound to predict the impacts at

42:30each of the receptor locations. So the

42:33daytime limit is 75 dB. The predicted

42:36sound levels range from

42:3945 to 66 dB. So they're all below the 75

42:43dBA criterion. So they all comply. The

42:46highest level is at the closest home at

42:48136 Putinham Pike.

42:53Um, this is going to just a summary of

42:55what I've just already said. Um, as you

42:58get further away, obviously the sound

43:00levels uh get less from beyond those six

43:04receptor locations.

43:07And this is a figure three in our

43:09report. Um, the blue line represents the

43:13contour. That's the 75 decel sound

43:15limit. So, it's not nowhere close to any

43:18of the homes. it stays relatively

43:20compact to the site area and stays on

43:22the property itself.

43:27So the conclusion is that you know we've

43:29done a a a detailed evaluation looking

43:31at construction and rock crushing

43:33activities at the closest homes um using

43:37a CAD a acoustic model which very

43:39conservative assumptions. They're all

43:41below the 75 dBA uh sound limit. Um so

43:46thus we're in compliance. Um, you know,

43:49again, as long as daytime operations are

43:51occurring and no nighttime conditions

43:53are occurring, you'll be in compliance

43:54with the Killingly uh noise ordinance.

43:57Um, and we don't expect to have any

43:59applicable uh exceedences uh of the

44:02daytime criterion.

44:04And so with that, that's my first

44:06presentation.

44:11>> Questions?

44:14Um so when you looked at your

44:16construction modeling did you look at

44:18the uh construction phasing that's

44:19proposed in the application because a

44:21lot of initial phasing occurs at that

44:23front entrance with some blasting and

44:25what's going to happen to that rock.

44:27>> Yeah. So we were provided with

44:29information from solely engineering

44:31which looked at that front area. That's

44:33where a lot of the activity was set up

44:36for and that's what we assumed in the

44:38model. So it's actually very

44:39conservative assuming that a lot of that

44:41activity is near the front of the site.

44:43most of your processing looks like it's

44:45inside to the center of the site.

44:46>> It's a little bit more in the center,

44:47but there's also work that's going to go

44:49in the in the back side of the site. So,

44:51um, again, we're assuming all this

44:54equipment is operating continuously at

44:56the same time, whereas that's not going

44:57to be the the case, you know, during

45:00normal construction activities,

45:01>> but during the initial phase of your

45:02construction, a lot of the activity will

45:04be up the front where those resonance

45:05and receptors are with that increase

45:07your noise sound. But

45:09um they they could be higher. But again,

45:11you can take into account some of the

45:13stockpiling that can be put together.

45:15You can use uh different kinds of

45:16burming material. Uh you can use

45:18different temp different different types

45:20of temporary barrier situations for some

45:22of the stationary equipment. Um, I've

45:25done we've I've worked on a lot of

45:26quarry operations and uh you can set up

45:29those kinds of things where you can make

45:30sure that if you've got over, you know,

45:32overburdened material that you can use

45:34to sort of stockpile around the

45:36different louder sound sources that'll

45:37help to minimize some of that noise

45:39impact.

45:39>> Okay. But none of that's proposed or

45:41presented. So, we just have to assume.

45:44I

45:44>> if I may, um, [clears throat]

45:46>> you got to shut one of them off. Yeah.

45:48>> Sorry. Again, Kevin solely for the

45:49record. If you look at if you read

45:51through the report provided by, uh, Mr.

45:53for Wallace. Um, so that analysis for

45:55that noise receptor was looked at in

45:57that most conservative location with

45:59that crushing operation activity

46:01happening closest to the site, closest

46:03to those residential neighbors. So that

46:05really addresses the that initial

46:07driveway construction as it uh enters

46:09from Putnham Pike and traverses up the

46:11site. the the the the vast vast majority

46:15of the earth removal operations will

46:18actually take place further east for the

46:21easterly building as that is the

46:23greatest cut. And as I showed in that

46:24section, that front building and where

46:27they even put those those noise source

46:29sources for the construction phase of

46:31the noise study um did represent a

46:35conservative analysis because that did

46:36take into account where that initial

46:38access would happen. And again, the vast

46:40majority of that operation is actually

46:42going to happen further east. So the

46:43construction modeling was taken with the

46:45worst case scenario for that very front

46:48entrance. Um, and when when the

46:51predominant of that operation is going

46:52to happen further east away from those

46:54noise receptors.

46:55>> So am I mistaken that you don't have a

46:5730 to 40 foot rock wall going up your

46:59front entrance?

47:01>> No, not at all. for for that driveway as

47:03I just indicated and the the modeling

47:05that was done is in that location and in

47:08figure one of his report which we showed

47:10a few slides ago does show that closer

47:12to Putnham Pike um than where that uh

47:16where the vast majority of that

47:17operation will actually take place.

47:25All right. So if I overlay these two,

47:27this is your construction one. This is

47:29your noise one. To me, it looks like

47:30those dots are where your building one

47:32is.

47:36The one that he presented with the white

47:38dots and and all the red squares where

47:40you're crushing operation processing and

47:42the white dots and stock piles looks

47:44looks to be where building one is

47:46located. So that'd be inside your

47:49property, not at the front entrance. And

47:51I'm just curious, I believe you have a

47:52lot of rock crush, a lot lot of rock

47:53blasting going up your front entrance,

47:55correct?

47:56>> Yes, for that driving.

47:57>> So my question is where is that

47:58processing going to occur? You can't you

48:00can't process it inside your property

48:01because you don't have access to it yet.

48:03So, what's going to happen to all that

48:04rock? Is that going to be processed on

48:06site? Is that [clears throat] going to

48:06be hammered on site? Is it going to be

48:07taken off site?

48:08>> Sure. So, if you were just

48:10>> trying to understand if there's a noise

48:11issue at the beginning of your project,

48:13not so much when you get into the

48:14project,

48:16>> right? And and I think

48:19I think actually

48:22a lot of that can get addressed as I

48:24once Mark's finished talking about the

48:25noise, I'm going to talk about the

48:27phasing and the solar road sentiment

48:28control plans because those have been

48:30further um expanded upon through our

48:34work with with um Tai Bond. So we can

48:36kind of talk through how that phasing is

48:38going to take place. Um because you know

48:42uh to to that point, a lot of that heavy

48:44activity is going to happen in the rear.

48:45our initial phase to get the access road

48:47up, you know, is is going to be

48:49accessing that rear property so we can

48:50kind of focus on that removal and work

48:52east to west from the property. Um, we

48:56can certainly look at and talk about

48:58where that material needs to be

48:59processed and if the commission would

49:01rather have that material processed

49:02further into the site, so essentially

49:05um, you know, blasted and then hauled up

49:08to the east to bring that further away,

49:10we're we're certainly happy to to

49:11incorporate that into our phasing. Well,

49:13I just want to make sure your noise

49:14engineers aware of that there's a lot of

49:16processing up front and again his

49:17modeling assumed the middle of the site

49:20processing and I'm just curious what

49:21happens on that initial phase and how

49:23does that affect the sound issues for

49:24the residents during that phase from the

49:27construction side

49:30>> because what he said is that there are

49:32options none of those options are

49:33presented in the report.

49:45Yeah,

49:47you showed uh something earlier where it

49:51showed the uh egress uh you know access

49:54road reconfiguration.

49:56>> Yeah, I've got it here, but

49:57>> No, Mike. Mike.

49:58>> Oh, excuse me.

50:00>> Uh could you bring that back up? Yeah.

50:02>> Make sure you're talking.

50:03>> Well,

50:05I've got I've got the smaller ones here.

50:08Now, you're going to uh it's my

50:10understanding you're going to move that

50:11stop

50:1340 ft inward on Route 12 where the

50:18vehicles are to

50:20to come to a stop before entering Route

50:2312.

50:25>> You mean for our driveway striping and

50:27where that stop bar is?

50:28>> Uh yes.

50:30>> Where is the stop light going to be?

50:31Right on 12 itself.

50:32>> We we are not proposing a a traffic

50:34signal for the

50:35>> You're going to have a stop there. the

50:36stop sign

50:37>> and you're going to move that in 40 ft

50:39from the road. Is that what you're

50:41saying?

50:42>> No, I I don't believe our stop bar is 40

50:45foot from the edge of the travel way.

50:46It's normal conventional driveway

50:48design.

50:49>> You're you're talking about John. What?

50:50Sorry, John. What? The 40T you're

50:52referencing I believe is the

50:53intersection of 12 and 101.

50:56>> That's on 101.

50:57>> That's on 12 coming into 101. That's

50:59separate from the sound study issue that

51:01we're talking about right now.

51:02>> So that driveway

51:04[clears throat] you had a what was it?

51:05an eight or a nine

51:07degree

51:09uh grade on that thing.

51:12>> Are you going to have a sign there say,

51:14you know, on your property informing

51:17drivers that they're facing a grade of

51:20that degree heading downward?

51:24Yes, we we have been working with Ty

51:26Bond to incorporate additional signage

51:28into the driveway. It's not a it's

51:29actually a a 3% slope at the um driveway

51:33for the initial throw.

51:34>> Say that again. It's a 3% slope at the

51:36initial at the uh intersection with

51:39Putinham and then it and then it does

51:40with a vertical curve migrate up.

51:43>> But when they make that turn then

51:45they're going up considerably steeper,

51:47aren't they?

51:48>> Correct. And and that driveway grade is

51:50actually less than what the town road

51:52standard is which allows for a 10% road

51:55grade. We are not proposing that steep.

51:57We are uh we have shallowed it out.

52:02>> Yeah. Actually,

52:03>> what is the grade again? is I believe

52:04it's 8%.

52:07>> Federal Highway, you know, that's what

52:08I'm thinking of. 6% is maximum. You

52:12know, you've got a

52:148 9% grade in there coming down to a

52:18sharp turn leading on to to Route 12.

52:22And then it further, you know, this uh

52:27consultant says you should recommend

52:29your drivers not use J brakes coming

52:32down. Well, you can tell them not to use

52:34them all you want to, but they're going

52:36to use them. And that's extremely noisy.

52:39Plus, trucks going up that grade and

52:41down. Uh I don't know.

52:45>> I don't know how you uh put together

52:47your your sound, but uh there's going to

52:49be a tremendous amount of noise.

52:53>> Uh

52:54and another question is why is that so

52:58close to uh to being parallel with 12?

53:02Can't you move that inward?

53:04>> We we're trying to minimize the impact

53:07to the existing topography. So, we have

53:09to build that driveway in the optimal

53:11location to minimize that impact. If we

53:13were to push that driveway further away,

53:15we would be resulted to have a lot more

53:17uh earthwork activities, a lot more rock

53:20blasting, a much taller rock face, which

53:22could prolong and extend the

53:24construction schedule.

53:25>> Would the grade be less?

53:26>> Uh not not really. No. Um and one of the

53:31other reasons is when we actually

53:32initially first started this project, we

53:33actually had a longer driveway. We

53:35accessed uh Putinham Pike further um

53:38south. And in an effort to reduce our

53:42overall impact to the environment, the

53:44site and minimize that disturbance that

53:47really actually through discussions with

53:48the wetlands commission and initial

53:50discussions with planning staff, we we

53:53refined our driveway to really minimize

53:54our overall limits of disturbance. So we

53:56were able to maintain more existing

53:58vegetation on the site, reduce the

54:00impervious coverage on the site, reduce

54:01the storm water uh generated from the

54:03site and that was something that

54:05actually we think was a a stark

54:07improvement to the overall development

54:08of the over the over overall site plan.

54:14Well, I look at these maps and it looks

54:17like this. You know, I I don't see why

54:21that would be such a uh a difficult

54:24thing to to move it almost in line with

54:30that first building or

54:35the parking facility.

54:37If you know that would get it away from

54:39that highway and also would give you a

54:43greater distance leading on to route

54:4612 where the trucks wouldn't be

54:49contending with coming down a steep

54:51grade breaking and immediately exiting

54:54route 12.

54:56[clears throat]

54:57You know, seems to me that that would uh

55:00would solve a lot of problems. And you

55:03mentioned uh uh that it's a a wet site.

55:08Uh I know this moratorium in Kelan is on

55:11the waste

55:13plant is being lifted. Have you people

55:15considered tying into the Kellingly uh

55:20uh surge system

55:21>> rather than putting in your own leech

55:23field with all that water up there?

55:27>> When did I indicate it was a wet site?

55:28What What do you mean by that?

55:29>> You just said it.

55:30>> I I said it was a

55:32I said it was a wet site.

55:34>> Yeah, I I said there's a small there's a

55:37there's a pocket of wetlands that runs

55:39north to south in between the two

55:41proposed buildings and our activity was

55:43approved by the wetlands commission. The

55:45the site itself isn't overly wet though.

55:48Jesus, I've been reading that report on

55:50on uh you know the configuration of uh

55:54of uh these collecting facilities that

55:58you have to put in up there and it

56:00continuously talks about you know the

56:03fact that uh you have to go to a

56:05different model because of you're going

56:08to be in the water table if you go down

56:10to the uh original depth for those

56:13facilities. So there's got to be

56:17>> quite a bit of hydraulic water up there.

56:18>> So So as part of [clears throat] our

56:20storm water management plan, we have to

56:22ensure that the proposed development

56:25will not result in an increase of of you

56:27know rate of rate of runoff leaving the

56:29property as it does today. So when you

56:31have an existing site that's wooded, we

56:33have to provide underground storm water

56:35detention to allow for that water to be

56:37attenuated and retained on our site.

56:39through working with Tai and Bond, we've

56:41looked at those systems both as

56:42infiltration and actually now we've

56:43removed that infiltration um so that uh

56:47that storm water we're still meeting and

56:49complying with the letter of the

56:50regulation by the Department of Energy

56:53Environmental Protection with their

56:54storm water quality manual and the DOT

56:56drainage guidelines. Um, additionally

56:58regarding the the septic, we have done

57:00testing on site and identified our areas

57:03for adequate sanitary effluent discharge

57:06in accordance with um local health

57:09department and department of public

57:10health um requirements for those septic

57:13systems. Um the the testing was done

57:16with the local sanitarian and those

57:19systems are designed and will not have

57:21an an impact or or an issue with you

57:24know ground. we have the appropriate

57:25separations from groundwater and and

57:27everything related to those systems. So

57:30um so I think

57:33when I mentioned the you know you

57:35mentioned the driveway right so we

57:37obviously we want to design a site

57:39that's going to function and um we need

57:42to do so that's in accordance with

57:44standard engineering methodologies and

57:45and the the town code and um the DOT

57:50design guidelines and and and all of the

57:52like. So, we're our driveway, while

57:56there is some a portion of it that is is

57:58upwards of 8%. Um, it is in full

58:01compliance with any and all applicable

58:02standards. And again, as I indicated

58:05before, it's actually shallower in in

58:07grade than what the town of Killingly

58:09allows and even builds your own roads

58:11for. So, we're very confident and

58:14comfortable that the the proposed

58:15driveway grades will not create or

58:17represent a nuisance or or any potential

58:19harm for the operators of the facility

58:21or the visitors to the facility. And

58:23again, we we had, you know, initial

58:25iterations. We did look at a longer

58:27driveway which would access Putnham Pike

58:29further south. However, we wanted to put

58:32conservation as on more of the forefront

58:34and limit and and minimize our overall

58:37um area of disturbance on the site,

58:40maintain and preserve as many, you know,

58:42mature trees as we could um and and

58:45reduce, you know, our overall uh

58:47impervious footprint. So, that was part

58:49of all of those factors went into our

58:51design of our driveway and how that how

58:53the site would be accessed.

58:56Well, seems to me it's awfully tight

58:58coming down that steep grade and trying

59:02to make a uh a left turn onto that route

59:0512. Half that trailer is going to be up

59:07on top of the grade.

59:11They're 80 ft long.

59:14>> We have provided truck turning move

59:16templates and that has been reviewed um

59:19uh you know by the the town's fire

59:21marshall and uh engineering staff and

59:24the third party peer reviewer. We've

59:26reviewed those at the last hearing. We

59:27can certainly review them again tonight

59:28if you'd like to

59:37>> Mr. Chairman. Um, how about we continue

59:39on the sound study with this for the

59:41operation of

59:42>> fine?

59:49Go ahead. Okay.

59:52>> Okay. So, um, so the sound study we

59:56performed for the warehouses was based

59:58on the, um, the two proposed buildings,

1:00:02uh, to demonstrate compliance with the

1:00:04Connecticut Deep and Town noise

1:00:06ordinance.

1:00:08Um, as I said, it was two warehouse

1:00:10buildings that [clears throat] include

1:00:12loading docks, uh, trailer parking,

1:00:14vehicle parking, and again,

1:00:16demonstrating compliance with those

1:00:18regulatory standards.

1:00:21And what are those applicable

1:00:22regulations for Connecticut deep? Um,

1:00:25>> that's what I was talking about.

1:00:26>> This is class C emitter. It's a

1:00:27warehouse to class A receptors

1:00:29residential. The daytime limit is 61 dB.

1:00:33Nighttime limit is 51. Um, the town of

1:00:36Killingly has identical uh limits. Um,

1:00:40so complying with the Connecticut Deep,

1:00:42you're complying with the Killingly uh

1:00:44noise limits.

1:00:47The primary noise sources that were

1:00:49included in the analysis included

1:00:51mechanical rooftop equipment on both

1:00:53buildings. Uh intermittent truck

1:00:56activities which included trucks

1:00:57circulating around the site,

1:00:59acceleration and braking, backup alarms.

1:01:03Um and then for the loading dock

1:01:04operations, air brake releases, trailer

1:01:06coupling and decoupling. Um, the

1:01:10trucking activities are technically not

1:01:13regulated under the Connecticut Deep

1:01:15regulations, but we did include those in

1:01:17in our sound study. And again, we're

1:01:19assuming all of this equipment is

1:01:22operating simultaneously to be

1:01:23conservative.

1:01:26So, this is uh figure two from our

1:01:29report. Uh, this is the sound sources

1:01:31that were included in the model. Uh the

1:01:33red hash marks represent the HVAC

1:01:35equipment um on the rectangular white

1:01:39rectangular blocks which are the two

1:01:40warehouse buildings. Um we also had

1:01:44trucks driving around the site. Um

1:01:48um and then we also included peak truck

1:01:51sounds uh at several locations where we

1:01:53looked at the grading of the uh of the

1:01:56roadway areas to assume some of the

1:01:59worst case uh sounds from trucks from

1:02:02those particular locations. Um, we also

1:02:05included the loading docks and their

1:02:07activities which included the backup

1:02:09alarms uh and the the uh truck idling

1:02:13and the um as well as the trailer

1:02:16decoupling activities.

1:02:22We use the same acoustic model that was

1:02:23used for the construction noise

1:02:25analysis. Um, and again predicted that

1:02:28all these pieces of equipment are

1:02:30operating simultaneously whether they're

1:02:32stationary or mobile sources.

1:02:36And so the first round of modeling

1:02:39uh did not include mitigation. uh the

1:02:42daytime limit of 61 and the and the

1:02:44nighttime limit of 51. When we compare

1:02:46our predicted sound levels at the six

1:02:49receptor locations, the same ones that

1:02:50were used in the construction uh noise

1:02:53analysis, the predicted sound levels

1:02:56range from 43 dB to 55 dB. So, we're in

1:03:00compliance with the daytime, excuse me,

1:03:02[clears throat] daytime limit of 61, but

1:03:05at 136 Putnham Pike, we were exceeding

1:03:08the nighttime limit of 51 at at 55 dB.

1:03:12So, that made us take a look at what

1:03:15types of mitigation measures could be

1:03:16implemented. Uh we were aware of the uh

1:03:20screening acoustic fence that was being

1:03:23proposed initially. Um we then did

1:03:26modeling to assume a more fortified

1:03:30uh acoustic fence material. Uh what

1:03:32we're looking for is something that's at

1:03:34least 2 lbs per square foot as far as

1:03:37density goes. We would also say there

1:03:39should be no gaps between any kind of

1:03:41the uh slats between the the the

1:03:45different panels. And then should also

1:03:47probably have crushed rock material

1:03:50underneath to make sure that no sound

1:03:52leaks out from the bottom of the fence

1:03:54as well. So that way you allow drainage

1:03:56to come through that as well. So that

1:03:58helps to reduce want to make sure that

1:04:00we're making it as solid of a structure

1:04:02as possible. And it would be as Kevin

1:04:05had shown before uh along the north and

1:04:08west side of that first loading dock uh

1:04:11front uh warehouse building

1:04:14approximately 520 ft long again to help

1:04:17shield uh those residential areas that

1:04:20are closest to that loading dock area.

1:04:24So when we did that um the sound levels

1:04:27uh came down uh substantially down at

1:04:30Putinham Pike 136 from 55 down to 49. So

1:04:34now we're demonstrating compliance with

1:04:36the nighttime limit. Um and so with the

1:04:42modeling we did this is figure three

1:04:44from our report. Uh these are contour

1:04:47figures. The green line represents the

1:04:4951 sound level and the yellow line

1:04:52represents the 61. So that's basically

1:04:54the day and night uh limits. Um so this

1:04:59takes in again topography and what so

1:05:01you can see that it's not sort of just

1:05:03the circular contours but you can see

1:05:06that sort of jagged because that's

1:05:07taking into account shielding from the

1:05:09buildings or from any of the u you know

1:05:12grading and topograph topographic

1:05:14features on the site or around the site.

1:05:17Uh you see that the red the green line

1:05:18sort of extends out to the west into uh

1:05:22a couple of those homes. But when we

1:05:25install the wall now, you can see that

1:05:28in figure four of our report that that

1:05:30sound now is now shrunken down back

1:05:34towards the loading dock area because

1:05:36again that's the purpose of trying to

1:05:38reduce the sound lovers from that

1:05:39because when we do the acoustic modeling

1:05:42we can focus not only on the total sound

1:05:45but we can also figure out what is

1:05:47driving the the sound impacts and in

1:05:50this case it was the loading dock

1:05:51activities. So by just having this

1:05:54acoustic uh fence being put up, it

1:05:57helped to reduce that sound level

1:05:58because that's one of the higher sound

1:06:00levels is from the loading dock areas.

1:06:05So with that um again this is our

1:06:07conclusions that we did a a full

1:06:09evaluation used the CAD model predicted

1:06:12sound levels were in compliance with the

1:06:15Connecticut deep and killingly daytime

1:06:17and nighttime limits with the with the

1:06:19sound barrier included and we do not

1:06:22expect to have any exceedence of those

1:06:23applicable daytime and nighttime limits.

1:06:29>> The uh the cross-section again please.

1:06:33Go back.

1:06:41>> This is one here.

1:06:43>> So, how tall are the exhaust on those

1:06:46trucks, do you think?

1:06:51>> I don't know. About eight 8 feet

1:06:52probably.

1:06:53>> Not more than 8 feet, but not more than

1:06:568 feet.

1:06:57>> Very close to the roof of a door. 13t

1:07:00door a lot of times. depends on the

1:07:01trucks and you don't know what trucks

1:07:02are going in there. You don't know

1:07:03what's in

1:07:04>> we've done

1:07:05>> pre-established fleet because you don't

1:07:06know what's moving in there and then you

1:07:09don't you have the backup alarms and as

1:07:11I said along with the other applicant

1:07:13>> this noise is going to carry across the

1:07:15valley. So you're approaching the noise

1:07:18which seems to work for the house right

1:07:21there but it's not taking care of the

1:07:24noise that's going to go across the

1:07:25valley the echoing. Um,

1:07:29so I don't think you've addressed the

1:07:32noise from my point of view as a layman,

1:07:35but somebody who has dealt with this

1:07:38through this commission for quite a few

1:07:41years

1:07:43seems you need to do something more than

1:07:44an 8ft wall there to to really address

1:07:48that.

1:07:49>> So, uh, if you may, if I may. Um, so

1:07:53when we look at the the the sound from

1:07:56the truck itself, the the tractor

1:07:58trailer part of it, that sound is and

1:08:02it's been based on many studies from the

1:08:04federal highway, that sound energy is

1:08:06really down around four or five feet.

1:08:09It's not at the exhaust area. The ma

1:08:11major sound from the source of the truck

1:08:13is from the from the center of the of

1:08:16the tractor trailer. So when we did our

1:08:18modeling analysis, we looked at at that

1:08:20at that center. So that you know again

1:08:23we can reduce the sound levels based on

1:08:24a 8ft tile tall fence. Now obviously it

1:08:28could be a taller wall. Um it would

1:08:30probably get you another decibel or two

1:08:32of sound reduction.

1:08:33>> It's more about the distance than it is.

1:08:35>> Well yeah. So um our sound impacts are

1:08:41showing that the general sound levels in

1:08:43the area are in the low to mid high 40s.

1:08:46Right. And we have 395 in the area. We

1:08:50have other sound sources in the area.

1:08:52Um, we didn't do any ambient monitoring

1:08:55because that wasn't required as part of

1:08:56this, but there could be if need be down

1:08:59the road. But, you know, to demonstrate

1:09:02compliance, you don't need to do that

1:09:03because these are regulatory emission

1:09:05limits. Um, but, you know, based on my

1:09:08experience in this, you know, in these

1:09:10kinds of studies, I suspect those sound

1:09:12levels are very very similar to what

1:09:14we're already predicting already from

1:09:16from the uh from the project itself.

1:09:20Well, I just I disagree. I mean, I

1:09:24>> I think you should be doing more for the

1:09:26public than that for the noise in that

1:09:29westerly direction. Everything goes down

1:09:31elevation wise from that elevation down

1:09:34to Route 12 to Route 395 and then across

1:09:37next to it is Owen Bell Park and a

1:09:39school system and residential. The

1:09:42residential starts to climb a little

1:09:43bit. So now you anything that's

1:09:46traveling over the top of that tree line

1:09:48down to that elevation ends up carrying

1:09:50it further into the uh pleasant view.

1:09:54>> Yeah.

1:09:54>> And I can certainly understand your

1:09:56concern about that. And so a couple of

1:09:58things, you know, I like to bring out is

1:10:00first of all when we're doing this

1:10:02acoustic modeling analysis, we're

1:10:03assuming worst case atmospheric

1:10:06conditions. And what what do I mean by

1:10:07that? We're talking about sort of an

1:10:10inversion, right? So from a

1:10:11meteorological perspective, we're

1:10:13certain we're we're capping that, you

1:10:14know, so the sound can't escape out. And

1:10:16so when we do our modeling analysis,

1:10:18we're saying that sound is propagating

1:10:19further away. Um, and that's not

1:10:22generally the case all the time,

1:10:23obviously. Uh, but that takes into

1:10:25account late night activities. Um, we

1:10:28could certainly put more receivers out

1:10:30further to the west, you know, and um,

1:10:35those sound levels are going to be from

1:10:37the project itself are going to be much

1:10:39lower than what we've already predicted

1:10:40already because again, we're going to

1:10:42take into account not only the

1:10:44topography and grading of the site, but

1:10:46also the topography and, you know, of

1:10:48the surrounding area in the areas that

1:10:50you were talking about. Well, I can tell

1:10:54you I know exactly what you're talking

1:10:55about when you're talking about the

1:10:56weather, the high low ceilings and the

1:10:59noise bouncing off like like that was

1:11:01brought up earlier in the testimony. I

1:11:04live on a high hill at 345 elevation and

1:11:08I can get stuff from Fredo and uh travel

1:11:11that far on certain days where backup

1:11:14alarms, trucks backing up all kinds of

1:11:16noise versus other days I don't hear

1:11:19nothing. I'll hear 395 and I'm several

1:11:22miles from it.

1:11:23>> Yeah. That that distance so I know it's

1:11:25carrying.

1:11:26>> And I'm not saying I'm not saying that

1:11:28it wouldn't be audible. I'm just saying

1:11:30that based on the standards that were

1:11:32have here we're demonstrating

1:11:34compliance. I'm not saying that at times

1:11:36it would not be audible.

1:11:37>> Well, that's all.

1:11:39>> I think we need to address it a little

1:11:40further than that. I think, you know, I

1:11:44think you need to be more concerned with

1:11:45the public, the public's uh the

1:11:47residential situation out there and with

1:11:50the public trying to protect their noise

1:11:53levels.

1:11:55Um,

1:11:59>> go ahead. You got something to say?

1:12:03>> So, so again, as as engineers, we

1:12:07we're we're simple creatures. [laughter]

1:12:10>> I wouldn't say that. We we we have to

1:12:13>> excuse me.

1:12:13>> Hey, excuse me.

1:12:14>> We have to operate within the standards

1:12:17and um requirements that are established

1:12:20wherever we work. So, so what I think

1:12:23what Mr. Wallace did to the best of his

1:12:25ability was look at those applicable

1:12:27standards and complete a scientific

1:12:29study to demonstrate that we met and

1:12:30achieved those standards.

1:12:32>> So, we we we we certainly appreciate the

1:12:35concern and the comments. It's just

1:12:38sometimes it's hard for us to

1:12:40to know to what level you want us to

1:12:43meet if we're if we're meeting what's

1:12:45required as of now and and that's it's a

1:12:47general inquiry so we can try to do a

1:12:50better job of uh satisfying the concern.

1:12:54>> Well, the wall is a different approach

1:12:56and it's it actually works. I mean we

1:12:58see it everywhere you go anymore on the

1:13:00highways. uh previous cases we've had

1:13:02tree growth you know Fleet particularly

1:13:05had three you know uh three rows of

1:13:08trees that at different elevations and

1:13:11that was their approach. I mean, um, I,

1:13:16you know, I don't care what you do as

1:13:17long as you do something. To me, you

1:13:20need to do more than what you're doing

1:13:22to help alleviate some of that noise

1:13:24down in the valley across the valley. It

1:13:27does carry. I mean, I understand your

1:13:29the theoretical. I understand that, but

1:13:33I also understand the theoretical, the

1:13:34low ceiling levels and how noise carries

1:13:37out there.

1:13:39Um, I just think there should be

1:13:41something more done to it. That's all.

1:13:44>> Mr. Germany, we're happy to take a look.

1:13:47As as Kevin and Mark has indicated, you

1:13:49know, we're left with what your

1:13:51regulations say, what the state

1:13:53requirements are, what your town

1:13:55requirements are, and we've demonstrated

1:13:57that we will comply with those

1:13:58requirements. I mean, we can continue to

1:14:01look at it, but at the end of the day,

1:14:03we need to think about what this what

1:14:05your special permit standards are in

1:14:08terms of noise and [clears throat]

1:14:09nuisance and if we have a demonstration

1:14:12and your own peer reviewer determines

1:14:15that our sound study was done in a

1:14:18proper fashion and that we comply with

1:14:20the standards which the town itself has

1:14:23enacted, then I would say that we comply

1:14:26with your special permit criteria. when

1:14:27it comes to sound. It's not to say we

1:14:29won't continue to look at it, but I

1:14:31think we would help to understand what

1:14:34our guide rails in terms of what we're

1:14:35required to do under your special permit

1:14:37criteria, but we'll continue to look at

1:14:39it.

1:14:40>> So, what is you're arguing that you're

1:14:44you're done or are you saying that

1:14:45you're going to continue to look at it?

1:14:47>> No, what I'm saying is

1:14:50>> even if we did nothing further and and

1:14:52listen, this is

1:14:53>> this is going to sound combative. It's

1:14:55not intended to be combative. It's just

1:14:56I'm just being honest. If we did nothing

1:14:59more, our demonstration our

1:15:02demonstration is that we comply with

1:15:04your noise ordinance. We comply with the

1:15:06state requirements and therefore we cry

1:15:08we comply with your special permit

1:15:10criteria uh which are sort of general in

1:15:14terms of noise impacts and I and I would

1:15:16say that that would be sufficient.

1:15:19Nonetheless, even though we have

1:15:20demonstrated compliance with your

1:15:22regulations and your noise ordinance, we

1:15:25will take another look at to see if

1:15:26there's anything further we can do. But

1:15:28I would tell you like even in those

1:15:31instances where you may hear it from and

1:15:34I'll talk to Mark and and let him know

1:15:36if he agrees that if you could hear from

1:15:38a greater distance, the mere fact that

1:15:41you can hear something doesn't mean it

1:15:44exceeds the sound requirement or the

1:15:47sound standard. I mean, you may

1:15:48>> I think it's more than hearing

1:15:50something. I mean,

1:15:52you're talking an industrial facility

1:15:54with backup alarms that what we have to

1:15:57have. You have to have the backup

1:15:59alarms. You can't get into them. And

1:16:02those decibb are the decibb of a backup

1:16:04alarm. And how far does that carry, you

1:16:06know, then you don't know what trucks

1:16:08are going in there. So, you don't know

1:16:10if it's the guy from the Midwest that's

1:16:12got a, you know, open exhaust on his

1:16:15horse and he's driving in there with all

1:16:17the noise in the world because that's

1:16:19what they do out west. They don't care.

1:16:21So, we got to we look at it from the

1:16:25point of the public, you know, safety,

1:16:28health, and welfare. So, you're looking

1:16:30at it technically, we're looking at it

1:16:33socially, I guess, would be a

1:16:35>> Yeah, sure. So that's what I'm bringing

1:16:38up. Okay.

1:16:39>> I'm thinking that you know from my

1:16:41experience

1:16:42it's uh insufficient. That's what I'm

1:16:46saying.

1:16:46>> Okay. Understood. Um there's no other

1:16:49questions for Mark then. Kevin I I not

1:16:52>> Okay. I'm sorry.

1:16:53>> Yeah.

1:16:53>> Sorry. I apologize.

1:16:57>> You want me to go first?

1:16:58>> No.

1:16:59>> Go ahead.

1:16:59>> I'll go I'll go first. Make sure to shut

1:17:01that up so I have back. I just want to

1:17:03address the the public for a second as

1:17:06far as name calling. Um, again, as an

1:17:08engineer, I don't appreciate the

1:17:09uneducated idiots comment that someone

1:17:12threw from the public and we have a lot

1:17:13of people here to present. So, please no

1:17:15name call and show a little bit of

1:17:16hospitality to the people here

1:17:17presenting and to some commission

1:17:19members. So, thank you for that. Um,

1:17:22sir, a couple questions for you. Just on

1:17:25the class C, class B receptor, I know I

1:17:27read the rules, the class C receptor

1:17:29warehouse is false, class C admitter,

1:17:31sorry. Right? Warehouses fall into

1:17:33class, but class C is also typically

1:17:34industrial discharges of noise. Class B

1:17:37is typically commercial, right? And

1:17:39given that this is a general commercial

1:17:41zone, would it be more appropriate to

1:17:43use the class B to class A criteria?

1:17:47>> You could do that. Um, but the, you

1:17:50know, again, I think it lists warehouses

1:17:53as under under the class C stuff.

1:17:55>> I understand. I'm just going to what the

1:17:56chairman said as well, being a little

1:17:57more conservative here again for the

1:17:59public. We know this is a contentious

1:18:00issue, right? We know noise is a

1:18:02problem. We know this is a rural area.

1:18:04>> Would the class B to class A be more

1:18:06appropriate for your evaluation given

1:18:08that again class B is typically

1:18:09described as more general commercial

1:18:11related nature which you guys are

1:18:13describing this as a general commercial

1:18:14use. Right.

1:18:15>> Right.

1:18:15>> Versus the industrial use which is again

1:18:17typically more factories and stuff like

1:18:19that which this is not.

1:18:21>> So I just want to throw out there for

1:18:22consideration for you guys to consider.

1:18:23I think that would be more appropriate

1:18:24and that would be a 45 dBA limit which

1:18:26you don't hit at this point in time. All

1:18:28right. Then if you can go to your maps

1:18:30for me. I got a couple questions for you

1:18:31on your maps,

1:18:35particularly the base zone map, the the

1:18:38next one, I believe.

1:18:41Yeah. Um just curious why that little

1:18:44jog in around that one residence on the

1:18:4651 DBA. What caused that? Um I don't

1:18:51have a specific answer for you right

1:18:52now, but it would have to be something

1:18:54related to the to the grading in that

1:18:56>> topography is most the same there.

1:18:58Right. It's a hill coming down. I I

1:18:59can't figure out what that causes. I

1:19:01mean, as to why that occurred. Seems to

1:19:03be an anomaly in the modeling. I'm not

1:19:05sure why.

1:19:06>> We we can certainly take a look at that.

1:19:07But, you know, again, I think it's, you

1:19:09know, because it was something that I

1:19:11was curious about myself when we were,

1:19:13you know, putting out the contour maps.

1:19:15Um, and I believe it's something where

1:19:17it has to deal with with the, you know,

1:19:19the grading in that particular area. But

1:19:21we can certainly take a look at it.

1:19:22>> It would be good if your report

1:19:23addressed it, right? its sticks out like

1:19:25a sore thumb when you when you look at

1:19:27that mapping.

1:19:28>> Um, second question is we looked at base

1:19:30case and you looked at obviously the the

1:19:31proposed case.

1:19:32>> Did you account for again the high walls

1:19:34coming down the the main road from a

1:19:36topography standpoint? The main access

1:19:38rate. You got 40 foot high walls on both

1:19:40sides essentially of your main driveway

1:19:41access rock walls as well. One's an

1:19:44exposed rock face. The other one I think

1:19:45is a rock face and an MSE wall which I

1:19:48assume is going to be brick or something

1:19:49to that effect.

1:19:50>> Yeah.

1:19:50>> Do you account for the basically the

1:19:52bouncing and the acoustic effect off of

1:19:53the would take the model would take that

1:19:55into account the reflectivity of of the

1:19:57grade grading in that area. Yes.

1:19:59>> Yep. And would it be bouncing up and

1:20:00traveling farther because of that? I

1:20:02mean the modeling again I would think it

1:20:04would because but the modeling really

1:20:05doesn't show that here. It does show 61

1:20:07coming down the driveway, right? 51 kind

1:20:10of outside of that. Right. Um again, uh

1:20:15the model takes into account, we were

1:20:16assuming trucks driving up that that

1:20:19ramp there and and um you know, as the

1:20:23grade changes, the sound the model takes

1:20:26in that in account and and then

1:20:28propagates that sound based on on the

1:20:30reflection of of the of the materials

1:20:32there and as well as the department,

1:20:34>> right? But sometimes models have a hard

1:20:36time accounting for a high wall, right?

1:20:38All right, because you got two points

1:20:39almost right on top of each other, two

1:20:40different elevations. All right, I'm

1:20:42just want to make sure you looked at

1:20:43that from a modeling perspective. Make

1:20:45sure the model I know when you do air

1:20:46dispersion modeling that sometimes has

1:20:47an issue, right, when you're looking at

1:20:49that. So, I just want to make sure from

1:20:50the noise perspective that you

1:20:52>> I'll certainly take a look at that, too.

1:20:53Sure.

1:20:53>> And then the other thing I will throw

1:20:54out too is you do have a lot of noise

1:20:56bleed off of your property, right?

1:20:58Especially to the north, right? Um and

1:21:00again, you're hugging that when you go

1:21:02to the next the next slide,

1:21:04>> right? Um, even with the wall, you still

1:21:06got a lot of noise bleed going to the

1:21:07north. It's getting awfully close to

1:21:08those residences that is actually onto

1:21:10their property,

1:21:11>> right? To an extent. Uh, it's off of

1:21:13your property and you got noise bleed to

1:21:14the south as well. And you got some

1:21:15noise bleed to the west across the road,

1:21:17right? It would be good if those were

1:21:19addressed as well to try to keep that

1:21:20confined the best you can. I understand

1:21:22the ordinance and the rules and you

1:21:23haven't hit a receptor, right? But you

1:21:25have noise bleed onto people's property,

1:21:28>> right? It's not at the residence. Yeah.

1:21:30>> It's onto their property. And what we

1:21:32can show you um is

1:21:36that this again is all all the silence

1:21:38horses operating at the same time.

1:21:40Right. Okay. So,

1:21:41>> which is what you do from a pering

1:21:42perspective. You always look at worst

1:21:43case,

1:21:44>> right? Right. Exactly. Right. You work

1:21:45at look at the worst case kind of

1:21:46situation. But

1:21:48>> we could also show you what the contours

1:21:50look like if it was just the HVAC

1:21:52equipment, right? No trucks driving

1:21:53around or some of the other sources.

1:21:55>> And as a regulator, I would ask you to

1:21:57look at worst case scenario,

1:21:58>> right? No, I'm just saying if you wanted

1:22:00to see that is what I'm getting at. If

1:22:02that I mean just to show you that this

1:22:04is the worst case where again late at

1:22:06night you're assuming all these trucks

1:22:09driving around the site, you know, the

1:22:11backup alarms going off at the same

1:22:13time, air brakes, everything doing all

1:22:15at the same time and this is like as you

1:22:17said the worst case scenario,

1:22:18>> right? But our goal as engineers is we

1:22:20designed for 100% compliance, not for

1:22:2195% compliance, right? We we want this

1:22:23to show worst case. We want to show that

1:22:25we're affecting controlling it to the

1:22:26best of our ability from an engineering

1:22:28standpoint. Right? We don't want to say,

1:22:29"Well, 90% of the time it's fine. I'm

1:22:31sorry about the 10% of the time that you

1:22:32hear it." Right? So, again, I'm just

1:22:34saying that it would be good if we

1:22:35looked at those noises. And again, I was

1:22:37wondering why you just stopped the wall

1:22:38along that western side when you could

1:22:40have wrapped it up around the north

1:22:41again to try to block some of the noise

1:22:42up there and bring that contour in as

1:22:45well. So, throwing it out there for you

1:22:46guys to look at and consider.

1:22:48>> Yeah, I mean, we can certainly take a

1:22:49look at that. Again, um I'd have to look

1:22:52and see what sound sources are

1:22:54contributing to that that larger

1:22:55footprint. So, I'm bringing up for you

1:22:57guys to consider. It's part of what

1:22:58we're looking at and what we're, you

1:22:59know, thinking about.

1:23:00>> Okay, great. Thank you.

1:23:06>> You know, I took a look at the figures

1:23:08projected uh generated traffic on the

1:23:12>> Tish Bond uh report. There's going to be

1:23:16uh a total of 646

1:23:19new vehicle trips. 323 entering, 323

1:23:24exiting during a typical uh weekday. You

1:23:29know, I did a little math. I think that

1:23:31figures out to one every two minutes of

1:23:34a vehicle going in and out of that

1:23:36facility. Uh

1:23:39then I'd like to get back to this storm

1:23:40water thing. And this is from from the

1:23:44same report from Tishan Bond.

1:23:47Uh

1:23:53just give me a minute here

1:24:04and I'm on page 21. Uh,

1:24:21>> it says applicants response after the

1:24:24site value.

1:24:26>> Sorry, Mr. Sanopos, I'm assuming you're

1:24:28talking about the time bond letter of

1:24:30September 18th. Yeah.

1:24:31>> Okay. We just want to be able to follow

1:24:33along with you. That's all.

1:24:34>> Okay. Okay. Well, that's why I gave you

1:24:35the page.

1:24:36>> Okay. Page 21. Great. Thank you.

1:24:37>> Okay. Uh

1:24:41it says that uh

1:24:45the absence response after the

1:24:47evaluation it was determined that

1:24:50underground infiltration systems are not

1:24:52feasible. The design has been modified

1:24:55to utilize underground detention systems

1:24:59uh enclosed systems and apprentices in

1:25:02lie of infiltration. the plan and models

1:25:05have been revised accordingly

1:25:08and that was due to the fact that they

1:25:11said that these systems were going to be

1:25:13in in water at the the water table and

1:25:16that's what I was referring to earlier

1:25:19you know so I mean if that water table

1:25:21is that high there's going to be a lot

1:25:22of water up there this is on top of a

1:25:24hill hydraulic water and if I could

1:25:27could I'll just comment on on one other

1:25:29thing

1:25:31>> concerning the

1:25:34that uh the traffic again. All right.

1:25:39Uh

1:25:56where you move this thing fur

1:25:59further from the intersection. Uh, I

1:26:03looked up on Kelan's regulations. The

1:26:06maximum for is 8% for roads and it's

1:26:11required that you have a 75 foot apron

1:26:15with a maximum of 3 in which you've now

1:26:18gone to uh for that entrance.

1:26:22But again, I'm going to say that coming

1:26:25down off of a steep grade like that,

1:26:28making a sharp right turn

1:26:32into your 75- ft area, that that's a

1:26:35hazard. And you're going to have Jake

1:26:37brakes going off like crazy. Coming to a

1:26:40stop and

1:26:42with an 80oot trailer

1:26:45stopping at that intersection and making

1:26:47a turn, I mean, there's going to be uh

1:26:50congestion. I'm I'm certain of it. Uh

1:26:55again, it seems to me that if there was

1:26:58a longer apron there somehow rather than

1:27:01just 75 ft further inland, uh that would

1:27:06accommodate

1:27:07uh whatever uh difficulties are

1:27:10experienced by the grade. Uh there would

1:27:13be more room for that intersection to

1:27:15function properly. That's my opinion.

1:27:18and I spent 45 years in the trucking

1:27:20industry. Uh so

1:27:23I'd like to throw that out there.

1:27:26>> Okay. Jonathan,

1:27:29>> so I had two questions related to the

1:27:30sound modeling. Uh first off, that kind

1:27:33of bleed map there. Why no sound bleed

1:27:37to the east? Sound just stops at the

1:27:40building. Is that because there's no

1:27:41receptors out that way?

1:27:43>> No. So,

1:27:46um, no, we have a a we have an expansive

1:27:50receptor grid. Um, the sound levels that

1:27:53we were focusing on here were 51 and 61.

1:27:56So, there are sound levels less than 51

1:28:00go on on the probably on the other side

1:28:02of the building here. The building is,

1:28:05you know, 35 or 40 feet tall. You have

1:28:07the receivers up at the, you know, the U

1:28:09HVAC equipment on top. there's going to

1:28:12be some shielding of that just from the

1:28:14roof itself from that angle. So that so

1:28:17the sound levels are going to be much

1:28:18less on the other side of the building.

1:28:20We can certainly have shown sound levels

1:28:22that were less than 51, but our focus

1:28:24here was trying to not get too messy of

1:28:27a contour figures and just sort of focus

1:28:30on the 51 and 61 uh limits.

1:28:34>> Okay. And then the other question, it

1:28:36was more to the type of trucks. So we're

1:28:39assuming dry storage. I think the

1:28:41applicant might have brought that up

1:28:42before that these buildings are dry

1:28:44storage. So there are absolutely no

1:28:46reefer trucks or refrigeration trucks

1:28:48being proposed.

1:28:50>> Okay. Yeah, we didn't include reapfer

1:28:52trucks in our analysis.

1:28:53>> Okay. It's more of a question. I'm not

1:28:54sure if that is

1:28:57definitively there'd be no cold storage.

1:29:01>> Yeah. I mean, yeah, our analysis didn't

1:29:02focus on refrigeration trucks,

1:29:04>> which would be louder.

1:29:05>> Which would be louder and we'd have to

1:29:06deal with that on a on a different

1:29:08scale, right?

1:29:08>> Okay. So, can we restrict

1:29:12if this hypothetically was approved, can

1:29:14we restrict the site from those trucks?

1:29:20I I mean, generally, I mean, we have the

1:29:21town attorney here, but if you're if

1:29:22they're proposing dry storage only, uh

1:29:25to not include refrigeration trucks,

1:29:27then yeah, um that that would be a

1:29:29condition um uh related to the

1:29:32application. So, you yes, you could

1:29:34restrict that.

1:29:37If if I may, I think similar to the

1:29:40discussion regarding the proposed

1:29:42intended use and the trip generation

1:29:44associated with it, there's a lot of

1:29:46concern about well, what if it's a

1:29:47different type of use that generates a

1:29:49different amount of traffic if it's a

1:29:50different land use code. I think we've

1:29:51maintained and represented that if a

1:29:54different user is identified that isn't

1:29:56consistent with what's being approved by

1:29:58this commission, we'd be we'd have to

1:29:59come back before this commission and get

1:30:00approval and mitigate any impacts

1:30:03related to a change in use, a change in

1:30:05the approval. I think the uh

1:30:08incorporation of refrigerated trucks

1:30:10would follow the same path. So if if a

1:30:13user was identified who wanted to do a

1:30:15refrigerated warehouse rather than a dry

1:30:17warehouse, we would have to come back

1:30:19before this commission and seek approval

1:30:21and if we had additional mitigation

1:30:22measures required from a noise

1:30:23standpoint, it would be the same process

1:30:25if the if the user changed from a

1:30:27traffic standpoint.

1:30:29>> So Mr. Roberts, could you speak on the

1:30:31record for that, please?

1:30:33>> No, I agree that's accurate. So we that

1:30:36all those are all conditions that we

1:30:38could go back on. So deny somebody until

1:30:41they came back before the commission. If

1:30:43somebody else was going in there

1:30:46and they're going to be all different

1:30:47than what is being proposed,

1:30:50then we could deny them use until they

1:30:52altered it or come back before the

1:30:54commission for such.

1:30:55>> Yeah, you can limit your approval to

1:30:56what they're applying for and exclude

1:30:59other It seems I was reading somewhere

1:31:01in there in in all this manage that that

1:31:05wasn't the case. So I want that's why

1:31:07I'm clarifying.

1:31:09Mr. Chairman, I want to be really clear

1:31:12and we and Kevin has said this multiple

1:31:14times and it always comes up in the

1:31:16context of traffic generation. We will

1:31:19build what we get approved. We will come

1:31:22back and it's not a it's not a condition

1:31:26approval for reapproval. I've spoken to

1:31:28Jonathan about this. If XYZ company

1:31:32wants to utilize those buildings in in a

1:31:36manner consistent with what we have

1:31:39presented to you from a traffic and

1:31:40every other standpoint, we're happy to

1:31:42come and say here's XYZ and they can but

1:31:45but I want but I think it bears

1:31:47repeating and I think we're all saying

1:31:49the same thing. Um I think it's

1:31:52important for the public to hear that

1:31:53because we're questioned on this

1:31:54frequently. There's a refrigeration

1:31:56question that came up was a good

1:31:58question and we hadn't anticipated that

1:32:00but I think Kevin's absolutely right but

1:32:02from the beginning we've been very

1:32:04consistent. We will stay within our IT

1:32:06code for the use that we have applied

1:32:08for and any change that would that will

1:32:11require or that would lead to more

1:32:13traffic or refrigeration or greater

1:32:16impacts will have to come back and we're

1:32:19happy to do that but we don't we

1:32:20certainly don't anticipate that being

1:32:22the case. My question is based around

1:32:25the fact of this

1:32:27living with in these guidelines that we

1:32:30create all the time and inevitably

1:32:34we all move on other people are here and

1:32:38unless it's written in the deed

1:32:39somewhere and somebody actually reads

1:32:42the deed it doesn't happen. So I

1:32:45understand everybody's intent and I

1:32:47appreciate that. But that's why I'm

1:32:50trying to be very thorough in this and

1:32:52seeing that make sure that it's in the

1:32:54record somewhere so that if it actually

1:32:56does come to play out, we actually are

1:32:59all on the same page. That's all.

1:33:01>> I think there are guidelines that or

1:33:04guardrails that we can impose upon

1:33:06ourselves. We can work with your staff

1:33:09and your town attorney. Um, I know that

1:33:12Ken is uh probably on vacation this week

1:33:15and give and work on language that they

1:33:18give the commission an assurance that

1:33:20whether it is at building permit stage,

1:33:22whether it's at CO stage that you can

1:33:25confirm that everything we're saying

1:33:27during the public hearing is in fact the

1:33:29truth before this tenant begins their

1:33:31operations. We're happy to do that. We

1:33:33want to do that.

1:33:35>> Thank you.

1:33:36Um, Jonathan.

1:33:37>> Okay.

1:33:39>> Uh, again, I want to go back to this

1:33:41report uh from Tishan Bond on on page 13

1:33:46at the bottom part. It says Tishan

1:33:48Bond's response incorporating the

1:33:50proposed warehouse use as a condition of

1:33:53approval is appropriate use as a high Q

1:33:57fulfillment center warehouse

1:34:00uh or highQ parcel hub warehouse

1:34:06uh

1:34:08a UPS or FedEx uh facility primary

1:34:11focuses on sorting and transferring of

1:34:14packages should be prohibited. without

1:34:17prior planning approval. And then it

1:34:20goes on, it says, additionally, the town

1:34:23could require a post, and this is what

1:34:25you're talking about, post occupancy, a

1:34:29trip generating study to qualify the

1:34:32actual number of vehicles, trips

1:34:35generated by the development. The study

1:34:38could include an automatic traffic

1:34:40recorder at the site driveway to collect

1:34:44traffic volume data throughout the day,

1:34:47supplementing

1:34:48uh by peak hour turning movement counts

1:34:52at the intersection of uh the site

1:34:54driveway and Putinham Pike. The turning

1:34:57movement counts could also be used to

1:35:00access whether or not the trucks were

1:35:02traveling north or south on pocket pipe.

1:35:07Such a study could typically be

1:35:10considered approximately 6 months to one

1:35:13year following occupancy. In other

1:35:16words, you're you're basing those

1:35:17figures on volume off of the fact that

1:35:22you're going to you're going to be using

1:35:23one of or I guess they've combined them

1:35:27uh which at the top of the page it says

1:35:30uh land use code 155, land use code 156,

1:35:36and it determines the type of operation

1:35:38of those warehouses. and you've

1:35:40generated your

1:35:43figures based on that.

1:35:46It's recommended by this guy that we

1:35:50that uh have a survey once this

1:35:54structure is completed for a six-month

1:35:56period of time to confirm whether or not

1:35:58those figures are correct and if not uh

1:36:03would be able to have a voice.

1:36:05>> Sure. Sure, Commissioner. So, so

1:36:07absolutely. So just to to um so in the

1:36:09time bond review they indicate that our

1:36:12proposed land use code is 150 warehouse

1:36:15and that's what our traffic study was

1:36:17based on. That's based on the what we

1:36:19intend to put from a user standpoint.

1:36:21>> What they did is they elaborated that

1:36:23there are other uses in an industrial

1:36:25code 155 and 156. Yeah.

1:36:29>> Those would generate more trips. What

1:36:32we're maintaining is that we're

1:36:33proposing to put in land use code 150

1:36:35onto this site. If

1:36:38uh a land use code 155 or 156 said,

1:36:42"Hey, we want to go occupy these

1:36:43buildings," we would be forced to come

1:36:45back to this commission, provide a brand

1:36:47new traffic study based on that based on

1:36:49that land use code. We'd have to propose

1:36:51any mitigation improvements that would

1:36:52be necessary to accommodate the traffic,

1:36:55and that would be required before either

1:36:56of those uses could occupy the building.

1:36:58We are we we are we are we we are

1:37:01testifying to that. We are maintaining

1:37:02that. We are we are saying that as

1:37:04>> this again would give some protection to

1:37:06the community.

1:37:07>> Of course.

1:37:08>> So I was so I was going to go to my next

1:37:10point. So Tyion Bond recommended that we

1:37:12provide a post occupancy traffic study.

1:37:15Yes. To confirm our analysis. This is

1:37:17while this isn't a common uh this isn't

1:37:20necessarily that common in Connecticut.

1:37:23This is the part for the course in

1:37:24Massachusetts. Every project that gets

1:37:26done, mo most projects that are higher

1:37:28generators like this in Massachusetts,

1:37:29they're required to do post opening

1:37:31traffic. We are we are happy to accept

1:37:34that as a condition so that when this

1:37:36project, you know,

1:37:38>> we're proposing what we're proposing.

1:37:40We're proposing users in in accordance

1:37:42with what we're proposing and we are

1:37:45happy to accept a condition of approval

1:37:46that post opening we come out we do a

1:37:49follow-up traffic study we confirm our

1:37:51assumptions and and then that can be

1:37:54part of this part of this approval.

1:37:56Absolutely. We think that's a great

1:37:57suggestion. I think we even respond at

1:37:59the time bond saying that we'd be happy

1:38:01to accept that.

1:38:04[clears throat]

1:38:06Anybody else wants at this time

1:38:10>> on on anything or not? Noise.

1:38:13>> Just noise for now.

1:38:14>> Let's get through the noise.

1:38:15>> Okay.

1:38:15>> Anything else? Are you anything else you

1:38:18guys want to present? But

1:38:20>> um uh aside from noise or Well, we had a

1:38:25couple more slides just to run through

1:38:26our our phasing plan because there was

1:38:28something I wanted to touch on there. Um

1:38:30and we had some uh discussion regarding

1:38:32the fire marshal. So, I can do that now.

1:38:48my apologies. Lots of paper for a

1:38:50meeting like this. Um so, uh as I

1:38:54indicated again, we've we've been going

1:38:56back and forth time bond. We made a lot

1:38:57of uh revisions um to a number of

1:39:00things. So we have uh further detailed

1:39:03and expanded upon our overall soil

1:39:05sedimement control plan. This is one of

1:39:07the most robust uh phased and broken out

1:39:11um plans uh for a project like this. And

1:39:14um one of the components in your

1:39:16excavation permit regulations is that

1:39:18you do have a requirement that we

1:39:20demonstrate how a site can be developed

1:39:22limiting disturbance to only five acres

1:39:24at a time. It does, this commission does

1:39:26have the ability to expand that to up to

1:39:2910 acres at a time. We have provided uh

1:39:32very detailed plans to show how this

1:39:34could be done in five acre increments. I

1:39:37do uh want to say that we would request

1:39:40that this commission consider allowing

1:39:41us to do 10 acres at a time simply

1:39:43because it would do a number of things.

1:39:45It would it would um uh it would reduce

1:39:48the overall construction timeline

1:39:50required so we could get in and out

1:39:53faster than doing it in five acre

1:39:55chunks. Um, additionally, it would

1:39:57better allow us to manage the um rock

1:40:01removal and processing of the same so

1:40:05that it could be better um strategically

1:40:08situated to minimize disruption to uh

1:40:11any of the surrounding properties closer

1:40:13to Putnham Pike. So, but to that end, we

1:40:16did provide the comprehensive plan

1:40:18showing how that could be done in 5 acre

1:40:19increments. Um, and again, we actually

1:40:22have it in two phases. So we have

1:40:23clearing and partial grading to

1:40:25essentially create an access road um and

1:40:29uh develop and construct some of the um

1:40:32storm water basins which would serve as

1:40:34both uh sediment basins during

1:40:36construction and then the ultimate uh

1:40:38and eventual um storm water management

1:40:41basins and with water quality components

1:40:44as well. And we would start with and

1:40:46creating the access drive um up to that

1:40:495 acre area. We would then expand a

1:40:51little bit further up the site. This is

1:40:53essentially, you can see this dash line

1:40:55represents the building closest to

1:40:58Putnham Pike. As we continue this access

1:41:00drive around and uh establish some of

1:41:03the um sedimentation basins and access

1:41:06road, then we would continue further up

1:41:09um uh essentially further clear the

1:41:14lower phase of or the lower portion of

1:41:16the site closest to Putnham Pike. then

1:41:19continue um establish our wetland

1:41:21crossing which has been approved by the

1:41:23wetlands commission to gain access

1:41:25towards the rear of the site where the

1:41:27principal um earthwork activity is

1:41:29really taking place with that fill um

1:41:31exercise. Uh as of right now, we've

1:41:34shown it in in that 5 acre increments

1:41:36where we can basically um you know

1:41:38disturb no more than 5 acres at a time

1:41:40and essentially start north to south as

1:41:43we move down along that area

1:41:45establishing our perimeter soil erosion

1:41:47sediment control measures and our

1:41:49sedimentation basins as we go

1:41:51establishing our limited disturbance

1:41:52demonstrating that it's within that 5

1:41:54acre um limitation. And then um ending I

1:41:58guess to that last portion would be in

1:42:00that southwest corner of that easterly

1:42:03building. Um and then the second phase

1:42:06the overall SEC plans and the more um

1:42:10extensive earthwork operations. Again um

1:42:13we would actually propose to start the

1:42:15significant earthwork and excavation

1:42:16activities in that northeast corner of

1:42:18the site. So where that um easterly

1:42:22building is furthest away from Putinham

1:42:23Pike and establishing our um uh our our

1:42:27rock cut and removing a lot of that

1:42:29material and then we would move north to

1:42:31south along that easterly building um in

1:42:35those five acre increments. who

1:42:36demonstrated how we can do that. And

1:42:38then ending in that southeast corner and

1:42:40then after that we would continue closer

1:42:42to Putinham Pike with um with the more

1:42:47uh formal establishment of the full

1:42:49driveway with the required width to

1:42:52provide um you know all the geometric

1:42:54designs that were required to do so.

1:42:56Continue closer to Putnham Pike. um

1:42:59finish the uh westerly building pad

1:43:02starting north to south and then finish

1:43:06with the final grading of that final

1:43:08access drive as it extends all the way

1:43:10to um Putinham Pike. Um and as part of

1:43:13that overall earth work, we're obviously

1:43:15installing and establishing our storm

1:43:17water management measures um our catch

1:43:19basins, our pipe network and utilities

1:43:21and the same and then um continuing that

1:43:24and finalizing that that final piece.

1:43:27So, um, again, we've demonstrated that

1:43:30we can satisfy and we meet the, um, uh,

1:43:34language, the the regulations as

1:43:35established. We would request to allow

1:43:37us to expand to a 10acre disturbance

1:43:39because we do believe it would actually

1:43:41help us do this in a faster and more

1:43:43expeditious manner and it would allow us

1:43:45to better manage um you know that

1:43:48overall earthwork activity to to

1:43:50minimize um the duration of construction

1:43:53which could be uh uh bothersome to to or

1:43:59perceived as as bothersome. Um, we have,

1:44:03you know, additional comments and and

1:44:04changes that we've done since since our

1:44:06last meeting. We've additional details

1:44:07for the culvert head walls. They're

1:44:09added to satisfy the comment from tying

1:44:11bond. We have the crossing section, the

1:44:14headwell details, um, and the culvert

1:44:17section detail. Um, additionally, we've

1:44:20added some additional components for our

1:44:22underground detention systems. Um we

1:44:25have dry detention systems and then we

1:44:27have the um line systems to ensure that

1:44:30we were uh satisfying those comments and

1:44:33and uh commissioner um John I I don't

1:44:37want to mispronounce your last name.

1:44:39[laughter]

1:44:40Um you know you you you did make a

1:44:42comment and you read one of the comments

1:44:44regarding the infiltration. So the

1:44:47latest uh storm water quality manual and

1:44:49commercial general permit has created

1:44:51some additional restrictions regarding

1:44:53how large of a contributing area you can

1:44:55put into a single xfill or infiltration

1:44:58basin. So that was the impetus for the

1:45:01changes that we made to add the liner

1:45:04and because the uh westerly underground

1:45:07detention system is within the um

1:45:09aquifer protection area. So in order to

1:45:11ensure that we were strict adherence to

1:45:14all the applicable requirements, we

1:45:16added that liner. It wasn't that because

1:45:18the site is overly wet. It was because

1:45:20we were trying to meet the the the

1:45:22strict intent and the letter of the

1:45:24regulation with that latest general

1:45:26permit which was just issued earlier

1:45:27this year and became effective through

1:45:29DEP.

1:45:31Um, additionally, there were some

1:45:33comments in the Tyen bond letter. Again,

1:45:34I mentioned before there were 101 total

1:45:37comments. We've successfully addressed

1:45:39uh 94 of them and there are seven of

1:45:41them that are still um uh very much

1:45:44achievable. However, we just have to

1:45:46provide some additional detail. Several

1:45:47of those had to do with um uh

1:45:51coordination with the fire marshall. We

1:45:53have had extensive and ongoing

1:45:55coordination with the fire marshall um

1:45:57and he's been uh very helpful in his

1:46:00review. Um so these were two time bond

1:46:02peerreview comments that said that was

1:46:04asking about the fire marshall comments.

1:46:06We've had conversations with them. Um

1:46:09the um you know, initially there was a

1:46:12comment about uh two points of access.

1:46:15We've addressed that by providing that

1:46:17raised median down our driveway. We have

1:46:19a much wider driveway profile with that

1:46:21raised median and a guide rail which

1:46:22essentially creates two dedicated access

1:46:25points by via by manner of that um that

1:46:29barrier that raised median and that

1:46:31barrier. Um the gated access we have uh

1:46:34confirmed with him and coordinated with

1:46:35what's required for the Knox box. Those

1:46:38and those details are added to our plan

1:46:39that those gates will be equipped with

1:46:41knockbox knockboxes. Um additional there

1:46:44were some other uh further

1:46:46correspondence and um comments from the

1:46:49fire marshal and what he wanted to make

1:46:52sure that I brought up and I'm not sure

1:46:53if he's here this evening. I thought he

1:46:54may be coming um

1:46:56>> was was his formal review process

1:46:59happens at a subsequent date and that

1:47:01happens through as part of the building

1:47:02permit review but the more we can

1:47:04incorporate into our plans we feel just

1:47:08again makes the projects better. So, we

1:47:09were talking about the um refill period

1:47:12for the water tanks. Um adding some

1:47:15additional hydrants towards the rear of

1:47:17building uh of the easterly building. Um

1:47:20you know, we talked about uh backflow

1:47:23design. Um

1:47:24>> excuse me for a second.

1:47:25>> Hey Randy,

1:47:29>> I think you should be here because it's

1:47:31all your issues. [clears throat]

1:47:38Sorry.

1:47:39>> No, it's it's okay. I appreciate you you

1:47:41you uh bringing him. So, um Randy, we

1:47:44were just Kevin Sully, for the record, I

1:47:46was just indicating that my office has

1:47:48had several correspondents with um the

1:47:50fire marshal about his comments and that

1:47:52his formal review happens at a later

1:47:54date, but we've been able to address and

1:47:57we can address um many of his his

1:47:59concerns in this package. So, it's going

1:48:01to be addressed before we even get

1:48:03there. Um, we talked about the access

1:48:05with the raised median. We talked about

1:48:07the knock boxes on the gates. Um, some

1:48:10of these other comments that we just

1:48:12wanted to share with the commission that

1:48:14we are working actively with him on

1:48:15addressing the refill periods, the loop

1:48:18hydrants, um, uh, you know, the

1:48:21mechanical building, the backflow

1:48:23design, um, fire hydrants and propane

1:48:25tanks located in a specific area in in

1:48:28separation from the building. um the

1:48:31water tank location we talked about um

1:48:33addressing and modifying that as part of

1:48:35a part as part of his comments

1:48:37additional hydrant for distribution

1:48:39center one and looking at collapse zones

1:48:41and things like that. So so his formal

1:48:43review comes later but I wanted to to

1:48:46give this commission um the comfort and

1:48:48also tying bond that we have been we

1:48:50have been in um extensive coordination

1:48:53with with with the fire marshal. He has

1:48:55been very helpful. Um, and we appreciate

1:48:57him, you know, putting his thought and

1:48:59and time and effort into this while

1:49:01we're at this stage. So, I just wanted

1:49:03to to say that. Um, and then, you know,

1:49:07one other comment, uh, let's see, we

1:49:10talked about the post-opening traffic

1:49:11study. Thank you, uh, Commissioner John

1:49:13for bringing that up and and as I said,

1:49:15we're happy to accept that as a

1:49:16condition. We talked about the fire

1:49:18marshall coordination. Um,

1:49:22we talked about the the the recharge and

1:49:26the Y. Um, uh, there were some comments

1:49:29regarding the [clears throat] DOT

1:49:30drainage and I know I I I said this at

1:49:32the last meeting. A number of the

1:49:34comments that, um, haven't been fully

1:49:36closed out is we have been in extensive

1:49:37coordination with the the Department of

1:49:39Transportation, the Office of State

1:49:40Traffic Administration. I mentioned that

1:49:41at the last hearing. Um, they have

1:49:43determined this this will meet the

1:49:45administrative decision uh, aspect of

1:49:47their review. We've had two round of

1:49:49comments with them regarding the

1:49:51traffic. We are in the last round of

1:49:53comments with them regarding drainage.

1:49:55Um and that was one of the comments that

1:49:57Tai and Bond also touched on was some of

1:49:59the drainage analysis related to the um

1:50:01Putinham Pike. So um that was one thing

1:50:04that we had not gotten to Tyen Bond and

1:50:06we recognized that this hearing is going

1:50:09to be continued to the next meeting.

1:50:11We're going to be able to provide all of

1:50:12that, satisfy the DOT, satisfy tying

1:50:15bond, and we'll provide the commission,

1:50:16all the correspondents with DOT

1:50:18regarding both their traffic review and

1:50:21their drainage review as well. Um,

1:50:23additionally, um there was some uh

1:50:25questions uh regarding the D manual and

1:50:29the water quality manual regarding both

1:50:31um surficial runoff and groundwater and

1:50:34there was concerns about impacts to the

1:50:36groundwater. Um and we have sufficient

1:50:38data through test pit logs and

1:50:41understanding where groundwater is on

1:50:42the site its relation general relation

1:50:44to um finish grade and um the uh as part

1:50:50of our project we are extending public

1:50:52water down Putinham Pike to our

1:50:55driveway. Um however we know that um

1:50:57there are some structures in the area

1:50:59that are on um well and we know that

1:51:02there's you know the concerns regarding

1:51:04uh potential impacted groundwater. I

1:51:06wanted to bring this slide up because I

1:51:08want to make it very clear that the

1:51:09majority of our cut is happening to the

1:51:12east of the site. So on the other side

1:51:15of the wetland corridor furthest away

1:51:17from these residents and as I think was

1:51:19evident in our section um there's an

1:51:22considerable grade change from the

1:51:24existing elevation with Putnham Pike and

1:51:26where our proposed structures are going.

1:51:27So I just wanted to show this that um

1:51:31most of the activity the majority of the

1:51:33activity in and around um Putinham Pike

1:51:36is in a filled condition. So this shows

1:51:38that this area and its entirely will be

1:51:40filled and the cut doesn't happen till

1:51:42we're much further away. Because of that

1:51:45topographic um uh that topographic

1:51:50change, how groundwater exists on the

1:51:52site, we will have no impact to the

1:51:54underground um groundwater related to

1:51:58any of those structures along Putnham

1:52:00Pike. We can provide all that addition

1:52:02additional detail to Ty Bond and we're

1:52:04confident we're going to be able to get

1:52:05that um addressed the same way we've

1:52:07addressed those other 94 comments to

1:52:09date with them. So, um, um, that'll all

1:52:12be part of, uh, you know, our final

1:52:14submission again. And I think we've had

1:52:16some great discussion tonight regarding

1:52:18our noise study, our me our proposed

1:52:20measures, recognizing that we believe

1:52:23they comply, but we understand the

1:52:24concern. So, we want to we're going to

1:52:26go back and see what else we can do to

1:52:28further um, improve the situation. And I

1:52:32think um, that will all be wrapped up

1:52:34uh, as part of this in addition to these

1:52:36comments that I just made. and um

1:52:38hopefully look to close that out. So I

1:52:40think with that happy to answer any

1:52:42other questions that the commission may

1:52:43have.

1:52:45>> Um can you go back to that figure

1:52:47please?

1:52:48>> So I think you so it's not

1:52:50misrepresented. You have a significant

1:52:51cut to the right of that as well. Your

1:52:53access road's a cut.

1:52:55>> That's correct. Yes, there is some cut

1:52:56through this through this driveway as

1:52:58well.

1:52:58>> Yeah and sign it's significant cut. It's

1:53:00all through bedrock. So that needs to be

1:53:01addressed and whatever you're going to

1:53:02address in issues. That's one of the

1:53:04things I've been harping on and I need

1:53:05to see as well. Um, so I'd be interested

1:53:07in what you say there. Um, I'd also like

1:53:09to see I mean, and you have no

1:53:10landscaping if I remember right on that

1:53:12that uh 3 to1 slope right there in front

1:53:14of the pond. Do you have anything above

1:53:16that pond?

1:53:17>> We we do have some landscape. We don't

1:53:19have

1:53:20>> You have it at the entrance. I'm talking

1:53:21about above above your sedimentation

1:53:22pond

1:53:23>> here.

1:53:23>> Yes.

1:53:24>> Um, I believe we have it shown as most

1:53:26likely hydro seated, but we can

1:53:28certainly look at adding some slight

1:53:29line through there. going to the

1:53:30commission uh the chairman's point of

1:53:32view. The sight line through here is

1:53:33you're going to see nothing but your

1:53:34retaining wall in the building I think

1:53:36through that sight line. So that's

1:53:37something that should be looked at as

1:53:38well.

1:53:39>> Okay.

1:53:39>> Just while you had that open

1:53:41>> some additional landscaping through

1:53:43here.

1:53:44>> Well, it's going to be tough because you

1:53:45have a level spreader I think somewhere

1:53:47up in there.

1:53:47>> Um you got storm water coming down, but

1:53:49um your level spreads on the other side.

1:53:51Sorry. But again, just something to look

1:53:53at because that's going to be smack dab.

1:53:56People can look up there and see

1:53:57aesthetically retaining wall.

1:53:58>> Okay. up through there. Um, going back

1:54:01to the the fire marshall's comments, so

1:54:02the tanks need to be filled in eight

1:54:03hours. Sorry. Now, that's different than

1:54:05what was in your April memo or February

1:54:07memo for water supply that called for a

1:54:1024-hour refill and all the design and

1:54:12couchs were based on that. I think your

1:54:14your at will letter or well serve letter

1:54:16was based on that as well. Has that been

1:54:17addressed?

1:54:18>> Well, we have to we just received the I

1:54:20think we just received that comment from

1:54:21Randy either yesterday or this morning.

1:54:24Um so it's something we're going to work

1:54:25on and and you know make sure we can

1:54:28meet those requirements. I I yes there

1:54:30there is that does

1:54:31>> you know again this is a situation where

1:54:34um

1:54:36[sighs]

1:54:38the likelihood of that tank being

1:54:40completely uh used is low. So we have to

1:54:44figure out how we can make sure that we

1:54:46can satisfy that because again from a

1:54:48public water standpoint our whale server

1:54:50letter only gives us a certain duration.

1:54:52So we have we're going to have to come

1:54:53up with another way whether it's another

1:54:54well or something else to with with

1:54:56pumps to make sure we can do that. So

1:54:58we're going to work on that and we'll

1:54:59provide that back to the commission.

1:55:00>> Okay. Because that was one of my

1:55:00comments from last meeting was I I

1:55:02couldn't remember and I wanted you to

1:55:03summarize the water supply stuff. I went

1:55:05back and looked at that memo and that

1:55:06memo had a comment in there that

1:55:07bothered me at the time that said even

1:55:09though you're going to get a main

1:55:10extension. You might meet the pressure

1:55:11but the supply may be limited. There was

1:55:14some I don't know who wrote it. It was

1:55:15on the back page of like the memo. It

1:55:17was like a write up. I don't know if

1:55:18that was the water department or your

1:55:19engineer, but it was something that must

1:55:20supply potentially still may be limited

1:55:22and I don't think that's been addressed

1:55:24yet.

1:55:24>> Well, the the that's the reason for the

1:55:27again so so when we're dealing with fire

1:55:29protection, right? Um it's both that

1:55:33those water towers are needed for both

1:55:35volume and uh pressure.

1:55:37>> Correct.

1:55:38>> So, so yes. So we have we know that you

1:55:41know through working with the water

1:55:44company you know what those flow tests

1:55:46are along you know closest to the site

1:55:48obviously we're proposing an extension

1:55:50talking about the terminus of a line and

1:55:52then we're talking about coming up up up

1:55:55gradient to get to these two buildings

1:55:56which is why we have our utility our

1:55:58utility structure along the along the

1:56:01road to help assist with that pressure

1:56:02and then and then getting the volume

1:56:04again so that those tanks are doing two

1:56:06purposes they're serving both additional

1:56:08volume capacity

1:56:09and applying additional pressure

1:56:11capacity in addition to um fire pumps

1:56:14which will be located with inside each

1:56:15of these buildings. So So yes, so we

1:56:17will we can further um expand upon that

1:56:20and and provide additional information

1:56:21for your for your review before the next

1:56:23meeting.

1:56:24>> Yeah, I just want it cleaned up because

1:56:25to me it's an open comment that looks

1:56:27like we did not address the comment of

1:56:28supply may be limited. So somehow that

1:56:30needs to be cleaned up and clarified for

1:56:31us. Sure. And then obviously the 8 to

1:56:3324hour change different than what was

1:56:36presented I think what was presented in

1:56:37the well serve letter. Okay.

1:56:39>> So,

1:56:42>> any more questions, Mr. Sole, at this

1:56:44point?

1:56:46>> I just got a couple on the uh start of

1:56:50the construction when you bring in your

1:56:53equipment.

1:56:54Uh I'm taking it will be probably on

1:56:57flatbeds or something

1:57:00and people will be arriving with private

1:57:03vehicles. Where is the parking situation

1:57:06going to be?

1:57:08Well, we'll we'll be creating that um

1:57:12we'll be creating that at the entrance

1:57:14at the entrance way as we establish our

1:57:16initial cut for our road. Again, we have

1:57:18a very wide throat road because we do

1:57:21have that raised median. So, we will be

1:57:23creating a you know conventional access

1:57:25road and have areas for parking along

1:57:27that front until we can get to the rear

1:57:29and then all of those vehicles be able

1:57:31to move up towards the rear of the site.

1:57:32>> Initially though, where are you going to

1:57:35park all the vehicles?

1:57:37Well,

1:57:37>> do you get into your to your lot?

1:57:41>> Well, again, on our site, we're we're

1:57:44creating along the frontage from our

1:57:46driveway all the way up to the limit of

1:57:48our basin. Up on the screen, if you

1:57:50follow my cursor,

1:57:51>> right at Putnham Pike,

1:57:54>> you have to start clearing

1:57:57>> correct the earth. So, so

1:57:59>> where are you putting private vehicles

1:58:02and the tractors and all the equipment?

1:58:06>> They will all be located on our

1:58:07property. They will not be in Putinham

1:58:09Pike. They will not be in the right of

1:58:10way.

1:58:12>> I don't know how you're going to put

1:58:13private vehicles on if you haven't

1:58:15started clearing any of the any of the

1:58:18land.

1:58:19>> You're going to show up the you know in

1:58:21a private vehicle. It's going to be

1:58:23parked on Putnham Pike till you start

1:58:25clearing till you can get into the into

1:58:28your land.

1:58:30>> Well, [clears throat]

1:58:33vehicles arriving and offloading that

1:58:35will happen along the frontage. We we

1:58:38can't we can't drop them in. It has to

1:58:41happen there. But

1:58:42>> and then they will take off

1:58:44>> the if something's being delivered.

1:58:46Yeah.

1:58:47>> We certainly don't intend to leave

1:58:49>> delivery vehicles in the right way. Are

1:58:53We have to clear so we can bring all

1:58:56that stuff inside of our site. That's

1:58:58our

1:58:59>> correct.

1:59:00>> Yes,

1:59:00>> can understand that. But you you need a

1:59:02person in the seat to start clearing it

1:59:05and he's going to show up in his own

1:59:07vehicle probably.

1:59:09>> Yes.

1:59:10>> Where is that vehicle going to be?

1:59:13>> It will be out of the travel way. It

1:59:16will we will have to create an act an

1:59:18area on our site where that can happen.

1:59:20Like with when any site when any site is

1:59:22constructed there's always that initial

1:59:24exercise of removing trees and starting

1:59:27the clearing

1:59:28>> thinking button pike is not that you

1:59:30know I don't want to see private

1:59:32vehicles parked on button pike of of

1:59:35course not we would never intend

1:59:36>> it'll have to be till you start clearing

1:59:38some of the land.

1:59:41[clears throat and cough]

1:59:43>> Anything else? I don't know what to say.

1:59:46>> Uh

1:59:47on the employee parking lot and I think

1:59:49it's on the second building, you got

1:59:54signs going up there about falling

1:59:56rocks.

1:59:58Is have you considered putting any

2:00:00netting up?

2:00:01>> So So we we added the sign. So,

2:00:05whenever we're doing a a rock face such

2:00:08as this, um those are designed um far

2:00:13more than what I think most people

2:00:15realize. And um through through cores

2:00:19and pre-splitting of that face, it is

2:00:22and what we know about the existing

2:00:24ledge in that area, we will be able to

2:00:26design a system that should be a stable

2:00:28rock face um once the once the once all

2:00:31of that material is removed. And that

2:00:33means that we have to have a specific

2:00:35batter on the drill. That pre-split has

2:00:37to be done at a certain spacing. And as

2:00:40that rock breaks, it should be left in a

2:00:42stable condition. Now, rock that's

2:00:45underground, you don't know what you

2:00:46have until it's exposed. Now, from all

2:00:49of our investigations on the site, we

2:00:50believe that we're going to be able to

2:00:51create and establish stable rock faces.

2:00:53If as that rock breaks, something else

2:00:55is presented, we have to provide

2:00:57stabilization to ensure that whether

2:00:59it's netting or rock anchors or things

2:01:01like that. A lot of that can't be

2:01:03determined until we actually get to see

2:01:04it. Um, but from a design standpoint,

2:01:07we're confident that we're going to be

2:01:09able to have that pre-split um with that

2:01:11stable face. Um, we added the additional

2:01:14signage. It was one of the comments from

2:01:16from a peerreer is more of like a belt

2:01:18and suspenders type thing. You should

2:01:19put these signs up just so people are

2:01:21aware. Um, but we wouldn't expect to to

2:01:23have any condition where there would be

2:01:25falling rock. And we certainly wouldn't

2:01:27wouldn't build and and invest in

2:01:29something like this if that was a a you

2:01:31know, we would provide additional

2:01:33stabilization measures of course if

2:01:35>> needed your employees.

2:01:37>> Nobody wants to. Yeah. [laughter]

2:01:40>> Uh, the other thing that came to mind

2:01:43yesterday was with winter coming,

2:01:47>> how are you going to clean off the top

2:01:49of the truck, the trailers?

2:01:53Do you have a

2:01:55some kind of uh brush or something that

2:01:57you're installing to clear off the snow

2:01:59off the top of the trailers before they

2:02:01leave?

2:02:03>> Um we don't have that incorporated now,

2:02:05but it's certainly something we could

2:02:06look at to see if we can incorporate

2:02:07into the design.

2:02:08>> State law why you can't, you know,

2:02:10coming off that property [music] snow.

2:02:13>> Not uncommon to add like a it's called a

2:02:15snow break.

2:02:16>> Yeah.

2:02:16>> Yeah.

2:02:17>> And and by the way, I we all feel the

2:02:19same way. you get really upset whether

2:02:21it's a truck or whether it's a passenger

2:02:22car and the snow is blowing off into

2:02:24your windshield. So, I'm I'm sure we can

2:02:26find an appropriate place. And by the

2:02:28way, when we're talking I just look at

2:02:30Google Street View of our sites. I think

2:02:32there's we'll identify locations where

2:02:36the construction workers can park off

2:02:38the travel way. I mean, there is a

2:02:40little bit of a grade there, but if

2:02:42they're showing up in any SUV, pickup

2:02:46truck, probably the grades there are

2:02:48fine that it can accommodate a vehicle

2:02:50like that. I'm just concerned that that

2:02:54you got school buses going on Putnham

2:02:57Pike and you also have

2:03:01young

2:03:03inexperienced

2:03:05drivers going to school at the high

2:03:07school that you know I I like to keep

2:03:10that as clear as possible.

2:03:13>> I'm sure that we can give you a plan

2:03:14indicating what the slopes are in that

2:03:16area and where an appropriate place for

2:03:18them to park.

2:03:19>> Okay, good.

2:03:24I have one more.

2:03:26>> Sorry, one more question. Um has to do

2:03:28with your capacity analysis. I just make

2:03:29sure I read this right and I didn't miss

2:03:31something. um you talked about at the

2:03:33intersection of Route 12 and this is on

2:03:35page um 15

2:03:39not the September 21 report

2:03:42but uh the last one the last set of

2:03:44comments I think it was August

2:03:46so I didn't have the September one but

2:03:49um page 15 on the capacity analysis

2:03:51third paragraph where most movements um

2:03:54so this is the eastbound assume this is

2:03:56route 12101 eastbound turn lane that the

2:03:59Q distance is expected increase from 123

2:04:01to 209. I believe that was changed from

2:04:04123 to 224.

2:04:07All right. In comment 31 there.

2:04:10>> Comment 31 on the on the most recent

2:04:13letter.

2:04:14>> No, I can't find in the most recent

2:04:15letter, but I'm on the last version of

2:04:17it. Oh, yeah. So, page 17 on the most

2:04:19recent letter. It's right here.

2:04:25>> And it's comment number 31.

2:04:27>> Yep.

2:04:28So talking about the queuing space on

2:04:30the eastbound left turn lane on route

2:04:3212101 intersection. I assume this is

2:04:34Route 12 southbound.

2:04:43Do I have the right location?

2:04:48Yes, that that's correct. So there's so

2:04:50there's 230 ft of storage. It's 224t.

2:04:55Um the the the big thing that we look at

2:04:58when we're designing storage lengths and

2:05:01for queuing vehicles is that 95th

2:05:03percentile Q during that morning peak.

2:05:06So all of our 95th percentile cues are

2:05:08less than that storage that's available.

2:05:10>> So So my question to that and I

2:05:12understand that part my question there

2:05:13is with that 40 foot pullback of that

2:05:15stop bar on that left turn lane that you

2:05:17want to propose does that adjust that

2:05:19queue? So that was so we go from 230

2:05:23down to 190 of available Q space

2:05:29>> because I didn't see that address

2:05:31anywhere in your traffic report.

2:05:33>> Well, I think that

2:05:34>> it talks about the 40 foot movement. I

2:05:35>> I think that latest study it reflects

2:05:37that.

2:05:38>> It talks about the 40 foot movement, but

2:05:39I didn't see the adjustment in the the

2:05:41number because that was a comment prior

2:05:42to your updated traffic report.

2:05:47>> I mean, I I will we will revisit that.

2:05:50Um, but I but I believe that's been

2:05:51taken into consideration, but we will

2:05:52reook.

2:05:53>> Just like that clarified, please. That's

2:05:55>> Don't know if that was overlooked.

2:05:56>> Yep.

2:06:05>> More questions at this point.

2:06:08I would like to Are you set at this

2:06:11point?

2:06:12>> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like

2:06:15to hear from Ty and Bond at least at

2:06:18least a brief summary of something of

2:06:20this letter

2:06:22before [clears throat]

2:06:30[clears throat]

2:06:31ju just real quick commissioner I think

2:06:33that's the eastbound movement so that's

2:06:34turning left onto Putinham Pike

2:06:38it's not the southbound left turn it's

2:06:41the eastbound left turn so the the the

2:06:43the adjustment of the stop bar wouldn't

2:06:45affect that queue. I believe it's a

2:06:47different approach.

2:06:48>> Well, that's why I started that's why I

2:06:49saw that's why I started with my

2:06:51question. I want to make sure I

2:06:51understood. It was unclear where that

2:06:53was in intersection. So, it just

2:06:55>> I I will double check, but after I read

2:06:56it again and I and I thought about the

2:06:58movements and the directions, I'm pretty

2:06:59sure that eastbound left would be on to

2:07:01there, but I will confirm for you.

2:07:03>> Okay.

2:07:21Good evening. For the record, Andrew

2:07:22White, professional engineer with Time

2:07:24Bond.

2:07:25>> I'm Alan Includier with Time Bond as

2:07:27well.

2:07:30>> So, we had reviewed the most recent uh

2:07:34documents that were provided by the

2:07:35applicant. uh as they did state, there

2:07:38are a few uh remaining items that we've

2:07:41requested additional information for. Uh

2:07:43they're primarily focused around uh the

2:07:46continuing fire marshall review, which I

2:07:48believe has been uh stated and

2:07:50documented. There were a few more

2:07:53additional storm water management uh

2:07:56questions we had particularly in regards

2:07:58to expanding on their peak flow

2:08:01reduction particularly in the 2-year uh

2:08:03storm as well as documentation of the

2:08:06water quality uh requirements for the

2:08:09site. They provided water qual uh they

2:08:11pro they explain uh expanded on the

2:08:15provide on the required water quality

2:08:18volumes uh but we needed to have them

2:08:20provide some more explanation on how

2:08:23those are being provided specifically to

2:08:25the site where those are being uh

2:08:26provided to the site. Uh and with that

2:08:30too also the uh groundwater volume

2:08:33reduction uh now that they're going from

2:08:36infiltration to detention because of the

2:08:40amount of rock that is on the site. Uh

2:08:43how that's being addressed in accordance

2:08:44with the state storm water manual. Uh

2:08:47and there is uh guidance in there for

2:08:50sites that cannot receive

2:08:52uh groundwater recharge. We want that

2:08:55documented in the report and an

2:08:57explanation uh for the project site.

2:09:01Um we also had comments regarding uh

2:09:04acid rock. Uh they had responded that

2:09:07they had looked at available

2:09:09mapping

2:09:11and that they don't believe that there

2:09:13is any uh in the area. We would request

2:09:17that they consider or that they should

2:09:20do testing prior to any excavation of

2:09:22that rock material to verify before

2:09:24uh any excavation of the bedrock uh is

2:09:27considered and that should be presented

2:09:29back to you and then the uh largest

2:09:33point that we still have uh outstanding

2:09:35is the changes in groundwater. So they

2:09:38provided a statement saying that they do

2:09:41not believe that there is impact to the

2:09:43groundwater and surface waters. uh from

2:09:45the testimony in the storm water

2:09:47management report certainly the surface

2:09:49waters are being treated through their

2:09:50storm water management facilities as

2:09:54documented in the report we don't have

2:09:57other than the questions and comments

2:09:59[snorts] mentioned before don't have

2:10:00more to opine on the storm water

2:10:02management uh but the groundwater

2:10:06has not been documented for uh

2:10:09thoroughly to say that there is no

2:10:11change though we've requested additional

2:10:13information there. As uh Commissioner

2:10:16Card had mentioned before in that figure

2:10:18that was presented, there is a concern

2:10:19with the driveway cut the it's

2:10:22approximately 40 ft in that 90° bend. Uh

2:10:26the wetland that bisects the site north

2:10:28to south is at approximate elevation

2:10:31420. Uh some of that cut is down 40 ft

2:10:36uh below that surface of that water

2:10:38course. and even the uh first floor

2:10:41elevation of the western building is

2:10:44below the elevation of that wetland. So,

2:10:47additional information on the

2:10:48groundwater is uh requested and we'll

2:10:51review that when presented.

2:10:55>> Any other questions from commissioners?

2:10:58>> So, if you you know maybe I'm not up to

2:11:01speed or something on a d ground um

2:11:04drainage situation. I was looking at the

2:11:06maps earlier today and you got the two

2:11:08detention basins along parallel the road

2:11:11one the one that was being discussed

2:11:12earlier and the one down by the

2:11:14intersection and then you got the

2:11:16spillways coming out of that those

2:11:18spillways end up being within 20 ft of

2:11:20the route 12 I'm not trying to

2:11:22circumvent Mr. from sole. So,

2:11:25um I'm just asking the question here,

2:11:28but um

2:11:31shouldn't isn't that a concern with that

2:11:33discharging so close to Route 12 or is

2:11:36has the state already approved that

2:11:39um that discharge that close? I mean, I

2:11:41I know just from traveling the road that

2:11:43there's a lot of water on that road and

2:11:45they have ice situations all winter from

2:11:47that. So, I'm wondering if that is an

2:11:49issue that is being considered or or

2:11:52already approved. I'm not up to speed

2:11:55with it.

2:11:57>> No documentation has provid been

2:11:59provided to us regarding DO's review of

2:12:02the state drainage. I believe as was

2:12:04testified this evening. Uh that invest

2:12:07or that determination is ongoing and

2:12:09will be provided. And so the purpose of

2:12:13the level spreader though is to reduce

2:12:15those non-erosive velocities.

2:12:17uh so that you're not having any erosion

2:12:20scour and their report is documenting

2:12:22that they're reducing peak flows from

2:12:24the existing conditions that are going

2:12:26to the state road. Um so that it is

2:12:31mitigating water going to that

2:12:33direction. uh and then the state has

2:12:35final say whether that is acceptable to

2:12:39uh

2:12:41be accepted by their drainage facilities

2:12:43whether that needs to be culverted how

2:12:45that is handled so that's uh would be

2:12:49forthcoming in the DOT review for the

2:12:50drainage

2:12:53>> and so will you you'll be reviewing more

2:12:55of the comments tonight from the sound

2:12:58all the sounds we were studies that we

2:13:00were presented

2:13:03>> you I haven't pre reviewed them yet.

2:13:05Have they? I don't think you were giving

2:13:08them.

2:13:08>> We did receive the uh sound reports from

2:13:12their uh their expert in looking at

2:13:16those just against the

2:13:19regulations.

2:13:20We did not have additional comments. I

2:13:23believe your comments were were

2:13:25certainly valid, but uh in our capacity

2:13:28as third party reviewers looking at what

2:13:30they is written in the regulations, it

2:13:32did not for us appear that there was uh

2:13:36more for us to opine on for going above

2:13:39and beyond.

2:13:42>> So is that all you got to add at this

2:13:43point besides your report?

2:13:48Well, I happen to be the traffic

2:13:49engineer. So, mostly I'm here really to

2:13:51answer questions you have. Um, I guess

2:13:54just as a little bit of a maybe

2:13:56presentation, we have reviewed kind of

2:13:58the latest set of comments by now.

2:14:00Really, they've addressed all the

2:14:02comments we have. Couple things of

2:14:04clarifying that we've just kind of

2:14:05gotten into um you know, we we've

2:14:08already talked a lot today about, you

2:14:10know, the land use and whether they

2:14:12were, you know, had to come back if

2:14:13there was a change. So, I think having

2:14:15that as a condition of approval um and a

2:14:18post occupancy um trip generation study,

2:14:21I think that's very appropriate. We

2:14:23didn't want to get into a thing of as

2:14:26one of you mentioned, oh, you know, 3

2:14:29years from now might have different

2:14:31people on the board. Well, what did the

2:14:32traffic study say? But actually just

2:14:34having it as part of the decision

2:14:36someplace that's easy to find. Um you

2:14:40know, that's appropriate. Um kind of a

2:14:42couple actually a couple things I did

2:14:44want to mention about the intersection

2:14:46um just to the south that's kind of the

2:14:48main entrance almost to the site the

2:14:52moving back the stop line on that's a

2:14:54southbound approach that's kind of

2:14:57essentially necessary for this because

2:14:58otherwise trucks can't make that left

2:15:00turn. Um it doesn't interfere with the

2:15:03eastbound left turn that you were just

2:15:04kind of talked about but it does kind of

2:15:06cut off a little bit of the that right

2:15:09turn. It makes that area where you can

2:15:11get into the right turn a little bit

2:15:12shorter. Um, but it's kind of without

2:15:15it, you can't without the changes, you

2:15:17really can't get a semi-trail around

2:15:19taking a left turn there. Um, so one

2:15:21comment that we mentioned being that

2:15:24it's Connecticut DOT is in charge of

2:15:26that, we want to make sure that they're,

2:15:29you know, keeping you guys up to date on

2:15:30the latest developments with that. You

2:15:32know, there are some other tweaks that

2:15:34would have to change. you know, the

2:15:35detection for the intersection would

2:15:37have to be adjusted once you start

2:15:39moving the stop line. Um, one thing that

2:15:42also at that intersection, I was a

2:15:44little bothered by the amount of crashes

2:15:45at that intersection. So, I tried

2:15:47looking to see what can be changed. And

2:15:49one thing that I kind of noticed coming

2:15:52northbound, there's good amount of

2:15:54crashes I think especially from uh maybe

2:15:56sideswipe type crashes and better

2:16:00signage to know what lane you should be

2:16:02in essentially if you're trying to take

2:16:04395.

2:16:06So solely I' said that they will

2:16:08coordinate with. Again, it's Connecticut

2:16:10DOT as far as approving the signage. So

2:16:12again, want to make sure that they're

2:16:14keeping you guys apprised of any of the

2:16:16latest developments with that. Um, and

2:16:20as far as the site driveway, you know,

2:16:22we've talked about that a a bit already

2:16:24tonight. As far as the the slope, the

2:16:28signage is great to uh tell them no Jake

2:16:31breaking or no engine breaking on the

2:16:33roadway. However, signs are easy to easy

2:16:35to ignore. Um, so we thought that might

2:16:37be something where having that part of a

2:16:39condition of approval as well. Um, so

2:16:42that way the, you know, owner can, you

2:16:44know, inform the drivers. Um, and I'm

2:16:48not so much worried about the, you know,

2:16:49emergency situation where somebody has

2:16:51to do it, but we don't want them doing

2:16:53it regularly to, you know, avoid using

2:16:55their their regular brakes. So, having

2:16:59the no engine braking as part of the of

2:17:01a condition, we thought that might be

2:17:02very prudent to have.

2:17:05And that's kind of all I had to present

2:17:08to you guys. But I'm here for any

2:17:09questions you have.

2:17:12Um, so a couple question follow. So, we

2:17:15mentioned that same thing with that 40

2:17:16foot stop sign coming back that it cuts

2:17:18off the righth hand turn lane.

2:17:19>> So, that we asked them to look at that

2:17:21as well and um it'd be nice if we can

2:17:23get DOT to opine upon that before that

2:17:25occurs because that could be a major

2:17:26impact to that.

2:17:27>> Also, in appendix C of their traffic

2:17:28report, they show a tractor trailer

2:17:30making that right-hand turn and trying

2:17:32to get into the leftbound lane to go

2:17:33south on 395. Basically covering both

2:17:36lanes.

2:17:37>> Yeah.

2:17:37>> As he's sitting there in traffic. I

2:17:38don't know if you have an opinion on

2:17:39that or what can be done to address that

2:17:41because once he's sitting there at that

2:17:42red light and then all of a sudden the

2:17:44northbound route 12 wants to turn left.

2:17:46Um now there's going to be a traffic

2:17:47issue there uh with blocking of traffic

2:17:50there.

2:17:50>> Yeah.

2:17:50>> Um the other thing is the modifications

2:17:52they made coming out of the site

2:17:54entrance to turn north. They made some

2:17:56modifications to reduce that radius. So

2:17:58the tractor trailers would be

2:18:00disinterested or disenfranchised from

2:18:01making that turn. But I don't know if

2:18:03it's prohibiting them to make that turn.

2:18:04I'd like to get your opinion or time

2:18:06bond's opinion on that. Is is that

2:18:07enough to make them not be able to make

2:18:09that turn? Because I still think they

2:18:11can make that turn if they go into the

2:18:13other lane.

2:18:14>> Well, especially trucks. I mean, that's

2:18:16what we're talking about trucks not

2:18:18doing.

2:18:18>> I'm talking about tractor trailers, not

2:18:19cars coming out of the front.

2:18:20>> Um, so I think that's where the first of

2:18:24all with the post monitoring study, we'd

2:18:25be able to know if they are doing it or

2:18:27not. Um,

2:18:28>> right. But we don't have enough analysis

2:18:29up on the um the road up there at the

2:18:32Edwalkan Road crossing in route 12.

2:18:34>> No, no, I know. And that would kind of

2:18:36be after the fact, right? It's already

2:18:37open. Um, be great to know it. But I

2:18:40think you can, that's again something

2:18:41that you could put in as a condition

2:18:43that u truckers aren't going to listen

2:18:45to.

2:18:46>> So the question is, can we physically

2:18:47make them not make the right turn?

2:18:49>> Oh, well, I mean, I think that that

2:18:51radius is already pretty tight. So, it

2:18:52it is going to be a little tricky, but

2:18:54again, I I think you

2:18:57I think it may be more of a belt and

2:18:58suspenders kind of where you have a

2:19:00tight radius, have a condition of

2:19:02approval. If they're doing it and not

2:19:04supposed to, then the owner is in

2:19:06violation of their approved plans. He

2:19:09can still tell people you can't take a

2:19:12right turn. Obviously, we'll sign it or

2:19:14they'll sign it. Not not not we will,

2:19:16but I think there are a few things. And

2:19:18then of course the post monitoring if if

2:19:20they find out that they're turning right

2:19:22then it's not oh you know anecdotal it's

2:19:26you know you got data you know this

2:19:28amount of trucks turned turned right um

2:19:31and we don't want that.

2:19:36[clears throat]

2:19:38Let me put a situation to you. If you've

2:19:41got a tractor trailer heading north on

2:19:4512

2:19:46>> to go into that site and you've got a

2:19:49tractor trailer that's coming down off

2:19:51that site and they meet at that

2:19:53intersection,

2:19:55you know, there's nowhere for that

2:19:56trailer to go on Route 12. He's not

2:19:59going to back up with traffic behind

2:20:02him. And the other guy, if what's he

2:20:05going to do? Back it up a grade? I mean,

2:20:07that truck is gorgeous.

2:20:10>> I don't know what what the difference is

2:20:11on that curve, but you know, okay,

2:20:13you're going to have a 3% for the first

2:20:1575 ft. That's the length of the truck.

2:20:18He starts backing up. He's going to be

2:20:20backing up into that that curve. That's

2:20:23what I'm talking about.

2:20:24>> No, no, definitely. We don't want that.

2:20:26And I I believe they actually did some

2:20:28turning templates because that is first

2:20:30of all, that graphic is going to be

2:20:31really tough to to point at. So, such a

2:20:33small scale. the you can kind of see on

2:20:36it just how wide the the radius is going

2:20:38into the site. So, um

2:20:42actually no, they probably don't have

2:20:44any, but I know they did run some

2:20:45turning templates, so they could

2:20:47probably show that they should have them

2:20:49and showing that there's not an overlap.

2:20:54>> I think that thing needs a little work.

2:21:03>> Oh, yeah. But you you you probably have

2:21:05a turning template, right?

2:21:07>> Because I know that's how the right turn

2:21:09was that radius was developed.

2:21:12>> Yeah. But what do you apply the turning

2:21:14radius to the truck on Route 12 or the

2:21:16guy that's going to be backing up coming

2:21:18out of the facility?

2:21:19>> We don't want We don't want anybody

2:21:21backing up. Well,

2:21:22>> so I think that's where making sure that

2:21:24radius is proper. So, is that opening

2:21:26going to be wide enough so that,

2:21:28>> you know, if that driver comes down off

2:21:31that hill, he stays over to the right as

2:21:33far as he can,

2:21:34>> you know, uh, and the other guy's going

2:21:37to try to make a turn going into the

2:21:38facility.

2:21:41>> Okay. So, there we go. And this is

2:21:44>> What kind of truck is this, Kevin?

2:21:47>> Okay.

2:21:49>> Oh, hold on. No, that first one's a fire

2:21:51truck. So, maybe there we go. took down.

2:21:57So

2:22:06>> go down, I think. Is that is that the

2:22:08fire truck?

2:22:28This particular graphic, this was not

2:22:30mine. This is Mr. Sullie's. Um, this

2:22:32shows a truck taking a left out of the

2:22:35driveway. You can kind of see, it's

2:22:37really faint, but the green and blue

2:22:39lines and red.

2:22:43isn't driving in.

2:22:44>> Okay. So, I guess the question is yes,

2:22:47if uh

2:22:50if a truck is taking a right turn in and

2:22:53a left turn out.

2:22:58>> It would be a problem.

2:22:59>> We can certainly accommodate that.

2:23:01>> Pardon?

2:23:01>> We can accommodate that. [clears throat]

2:23:03>> Well,

2:23:05sorry.

2:23:05>> We can accommodate that. This This is an

2:23:08incredibly wide driveway with a raised

2:23:10median separating the ingress and

2:23:11egress. We can certainly accommodate

2:23:12that.

2:23:34So I I think kind of in response is

2:23:36maybe they should have should put

2:23:38together a graphic that shows both

2:23:39movements happening at the same time.

2:23:48>> Um might be a foolish question.

2:23:52>> Might be a foolish question, but

2:23:55would a rumble strip situation at the

2:23:58exit for the people coming down the

2:24:01hill? that do anything positive to slow

2:24:04down or or not or does it lose traction

2:24:06and you don't?

2:24:07>> No, usually rumble strips you use for um

2:24:11like if it's an area actually they do

2:24:12have one kind of in the median where

2:24:14trucks might have to turn over it but

2:24:16you know passenger cars don't. We don't

2:24:18want to just kind of introduce a rumble

2:24:20strip

2:24:21>> just to kind of shake people up.

2:24:23>> Um

2:24:26>> Okay. Anything else you should add at

2:24:28this point or Jonathan?

2:24:33Okay, thank you.

2:24:47>> So, I think that's all we have, Mr.

2:24:48Chairman, unless the commissioner has

2:24:50any other further questions. I think

2:24:52it's a really constructive and candid

2:24:54conversation we had. We look forward to

2:24:56responding to all the questions. sound

2:24:59access into and out of the site. Um, in

2:25:02terms of how do you memorialize the

2:25:05conditions of approval? Keep in mind

2:25:06that is this is a special permit. It

2:25:08needs to be recorded in the land

2:25:10records. So, um, there is a way that

2:25:13this will be, you know, the world will

2:25:16will be put on constructive knowledge

2:25:18that we have to comply with these

2:25:19conditions. So it' be easy for even

2:25:22whether it's in your own planning zoning

2:25:24files, but it's going to be on the land

2:25:26records easily to easy to find. And so

2:25:29there is an opportunity for uh people to

2:25:32know whether it's a a buyer 10 years or

2:25:3420 years from now about, you know, what

2:25:36the requirements are with regard to the

2:25:38site.

2:25:40>> Um any other questions from

2:25:42commissioners or staff at this point? Uh

2:25:45I don't want to bother you now, but

2:25:47something about the signs. I don't think

2:25:49we reviewed your signs at all. I don't

2:25:52remember we reviewing the signage. Any

2:25:54kind of signage you're going to have as

2:25:55far as uh big signs identifying the site

2:25:59or Joe Blow's warehouse or [snorts]

2:26:01whatever. Okay. That type of thing. Not

2:26:04traffic signs.

2:26:04>> Okay.

2:26:05>> Um if there's nothing else then we'll

2:26:09continue this if somebody make a motion.

2:26:11I'm going to get that. But that

2:26:14>> Yeah. Okay.

2:26:15>> No.

2:26:17>> Thank you. come up and speak.

2:26:19>> Just uh reminding the commission. So

2:26:22about 15 minutes from now, we usually

2:26:24would entertain a motion to extend the

2:26:26meeting not to go past 11 p.m. Um decent

2:26:30amount on here, so uh just kind of

2:26:32keeping that in mind.

2:26:33>> Yep. Yep.

2:26:37>> All right. This should be about 3

2:26:38minutes. So

2:26:39>> Well, it doesn't it's public hearing, so

2:26:42>> Okay, no problem. It'

2:26:43>> be nice if you could, but

2:26:45>> it is. So Alfred R. Dufrain um talking

2:26:48about 90 Putnham Pike application. Uh

2:26:52good evening. My name Alfred R. Durrain

2:26:54a killingly resident. I want to focus on

2:26:57several issues that become clear from

2:26:58the testimony tonight. First is the

2:27:00sheer scale of earth removal operation.

2:27:03According to the applicant's earth

2:27:05removal operations memorandum, this

2:27:07project involves approximately 509,000

2:27:11cubic yards of cut, 265,000 cubic yards

2:27:14of fill, and approximately 244,000 cubic

2:27:18yards of material exported from the

2:27:20site. That represents approximately

2:27:2318,770

2:27:25loaded truck loads with the earthwork

2:27:28operation extending for roughly 470

2:27:31working days or about two years.

2:27:34Um, tonight we also heard about the

2:27:37testimony from Tyen Bond Commission's

2:27:39independent peer reviewer concerning

2:27:40groundwater. Tyen Bond stated that the

2:27:42groundwater information has not been

2:27:44documented thoroughly enough to conclude

2:27:46that there will be no charge. Uh they

2:27:49specifically identified approximately 40

2:27:51foot deep driveway cut including

2:27:54substantial bedrock excavation and its

2:27:57relationship to the elevation of the

2:27:59wetland and water course. We also heard

2:28:01that the infiltration was determined to

2:28:04be infeasible and the storm water design

2:28:07was changed to enclo enclosed detention.

2:28:10Tyen Bond is still requesting

2:28:12documentation uh documentation

2:28:14explaining how groundwater recharge will

2:28:16be addressed under the state groundwater

2:28:19requirements. They also recommended acid

2:28:21rock testing before bedrock excavation.

2:28:24Those are significant outstanding

2:28:26questions particularly with the portions

2:28:28of development in involving an aquifer

2:28:32protection area. Traffic also deserves

2:28:34careful attention. and Tyen Bonds

2:28:36traffic engineer discussed the stop line

2:28:39relocation necessary to accommodate

2:28:40tractor trailers uh Connecticut DOT

2:28:43coordination intersection crash history

2:28:47truck turning movements and the need for

2:28:49a post occupancy traffic study. We also

2:28:52heard from the science that telling

2:28:53drivers do not use engine brakes may be

2:28:55not enough. Tai and Bond suggested that

2:28:58no braking uh no engine braking

2:29:01requirement and actual condition of

2:29:02approval with approximately 18,770

2:29:06loaded truck loads. These are not minor

2:29:08details. I heard I also heard the

2:29:11applicant uh request permission to

2:29:13disturb as much as 10 acres at a time

2:29:16instead of five acres. their own plans

2:29:19de demonstrate that the project can be

2:29:20constructed in five acre increments

2:29:23considering the blasting exposed soil

2:29:25groundwater questions and storm water

2:29:27issues. I asked the commission to

2:29:28carefully consider whether doubling the

2:29:31active disturbance area is warranted.

2:29:34Finally, many things tonight were

2:29:35described as matters that can be

2:29:36addressed later or through additional

2:29:39information. I respectfully ask the

2:29:41commission to make sure the outstanding

2:29:43tie-in bond groundwater, storm water

2:29:44traffic, and rock excavation issues are

2:29:47fully resolved in the report before

2:29:49final action. And where the commission

2:29:52relies upon promises concerning truck

2:29:54routing, engine breaking, noise

2:29:56mitigation,

2:29:58rock processing, or future warehouse

2:30:00operations, I ask those commitments be

2:30:02placed directly into the plans or make

2:30:04clear enforceable conditions of

2:30:06approval. Thank you.

2:30:13Evening. [applause]

2:30:17>> Go ahead.

2:30:20>> Good evening.

2:30:21>> Russ Daniels Sales Avenue in Dave.

2:30:24>> Daniels.

2:30:25>> Yeah, I already let her somebody on the

2:30:27phone.

2:30:28>> Oh, I'm sorry.

2:30:28>> Nope. It's all right. Just stand still

2:30:30for a minute. Go ahead. Stay with us.

2:30:33>> Hi. Thank you. Uh, my name is Jasine

2:30:35Birdie, 125 Davville. Um

2:30:39there's a few things that I want to um

2:30:42speak about. First, um when Kling High

2:30:44School is being built, uh there were

2:30:46many issues with the bedrock and

2:30:48blasting as well as water issues. Um and

2:30:51if there are similar issues and

2:30:52neighboring homes in the schools are

2:30:54affected, what are you going to do? Um

2:30:57an 8% slope is also really dangerous for

2:30:59tractor trailers. Um and especially if

2:31:04they're leaving empty. um it's harder

2:31:08for them to break rather than having a

2:31:09full load. Um and on sound, it's going

2:31:13to travel to the Cing High School

2:31:15athletic fields. Um and that's going to

2:31:17cause a major problem, too. What about

2:31:19what if it's during school hours, etc.

2:31:21Um and you keep saying comply like a

2:31:24broken record. Um remember when we were

2:31:27told to comply, you know, during COVID,

2:31:29get the shot or lose your job. Yeah.

2:31:31Comply doesn't mean that's right.

2:31:32Comply, comply, comply. these

2:31:34developers, you know, they don't care

2:31:36about what's right. They don't care

2:31:38about, you know, this area and keeping

2:31:40it rural, not their home, sugar coating

2:31:42it. Um,

2:31:46we're a community. [clears throat]

2:31:47This is a home to all of us. Um, speaks

2:31:50volumes that both parties are coming

2:31:53together to fight this.

2:31:56This monstrosity is not welcome here.

2:31:59So,

2:32:02um I just don't understand how

2:32:06this has gone on for so long and yet

2:32:08there are still so many things that have

2:32:10gone um not fixed that have not been

2:32:12fixed yet or not properly addressed. Um

2:32:18you know, have you considered about have

2:32:20you considered um with the dog pound

2:32:24that's right across the street on

2:32:25Putinham Pike? um you know how that's

2:32:27going to affect all the animals there.

2:32:29Um

2:32:31it's it's just ridiculous. I mean

2:32:35according to Google

2:32:37apparently and supposedly

2:32:40um you know Brian Companies has

2:32:45lawsuits um they have a bad reputation

2:32:48and according to Google they have

2:32:50lawsuits for contract violations and

2:32:52environmental ones as well. Mr. Chair, I

2:32:55hope you

2:32:56>> It's It's not Ryan Companies isn't the

2:32:58applicant.

2:32:59>> Oh, this isn't Yeah, this isn't on Ryan.

2:33:01This is all on 90, please.

2:33:05>> Just a 90 put a bike, right? Whoops.

2:33:06Sorry. Um, so I hope that you realize

2:33:10that, you know, this will no longer be

2:33:12the last street valley if this goes

2:33:13through. Instead, we'll be known as the

2:33:15town that gave in and ruined the last

2:33:18Green Valley. And it's going to ruin

2:33:21this for generations to come. all of our

2:33:23kids, our grandkids. Um,

2:33:28you know, and we just don't need any of

2:33:30this near the schools. It's ridiculous.

2:33:32The traffic studies were not, in my

2:33:35opinion, a lot of other people's

2:33:37opinions don't like didn't include the

2:33:40stuff that needed to be included. Um, I

2:33:44don't think this is the right place for

2:33:45it. It is so dangerous. People have

2:33:47almost died there this year. High

2:33:49schoolers are walking there. I mean,

2:33:52who's going to be responsible and take

2:33:53all the the legal issues, um, you know,

2:33:56lawsuits and damages, etc. Um, if

2:34:00attracted jailer comes out and hit the

2:34:01school bus, what's going to happen to

2:34:03those kids? What's going to happen to

2:34:05the bus driver? What's going to happen

2:34:06to the traffic coming in and out of the

2:34:08schools? It's It doesn't add up. It's

2:34:11not right. This monstrosity does not

2:34:13belong here. You guys should pack up and

2:34:14leave. Thank you.

2:34:22Good evening. Uh Russ Daniels, Sales

2:34:24Avenue, Daveville. Um it doesn't take a

2:34:28traffic engineer to figure this out, but

2:34:30on some nights when they're racing at

2:34:32Thompson Speedway, I can hear them

2:34:33racing. And that's about 11 miles as a

2:34:35crow flies.

2:34:38Uh water. When the high school was being

2:34:42uh built, there's a tremendous amount of

2:34:43blasting that went on top of that hill.

2:34:46And as everybody remembers, there was a

2:34:49steady flow of water coming down the

2:34:50driveway 247 for I don't know how many

2:34:53months in a row because of the high

2:34:55water table. This proposal is south of

2:34:58the high school and it's a lower

2:34:59elevation, meaning the water is going to

2:35:01flow south. And what are you going to do

2:35:04with the tremendous amount of water that

2:35:06you have coming through uh this this

2:35:09bedrock? Uh how are you going to handle

2:35:12it? Nobody nobody's really addressed

2:35:15this question yet. Um, as far as traffic

2:35:18goes, I I think, correct me if I'm

2:35:20wrong, but did I hear somebody say an

2:35:22average of 363 trucks a day?

2:35:26If that's the case,

2:35:29we know that 400 to 800 trucks are going

2:35:32to be coming in Amazon. God forbid it's

2:35:33ever built, but the nominal number is

2:35:36600. If you take 600 and add that to

2:35:39363, you've got 963 tractor trailers

2:35:42coming in and out of Kingley every

2:35:44single day. And that doesn't include

2:35:47tractor trailers for other businesses.

2:35:49You're going to destroy this town. These

2:35:51are horrible proposals.

2:35:53Turning, excuse me, turning radiuses.

2:35:57First of all, I think you asked an

2:35:59excellent question about how you're

2:36:00going to get into that to build the

2:36:02site, the driveway. It's the that ledge,

2:36:05correct me if I'm wrong, comes right

2:36:06down to the edge of R route 12. Correct?

2:36:09So, you can't take a bulldozer, a black

2:36:11a backhoe, and just go through there cuz

2:36:14that's not going to work, guys. You're

2:36:16going to have to do some blasting right

2:36:17on Route 12 to make the entrance to that

2:36:20building.

2:36:22Also, um the returning radiuses,

2:36:27you're right, and you're not a traffic

2:36:30engineer, but um yeah, you're going to

2:36:32go over the yellow line coming right

2:36:35turn out of that place and going left.

2:36:38It's the the road is not up to par. Um

2:36:41it doesn't have a breakdown lane. It's a

2:36:43very narrow road and it should never be

2:36:46considered for a project of this scale.

2:36:49And another concern of mine is, and I I

2:36:52hate to bring this, I hate to say this,

2:36:53but I can picture on a in the winter

2:36:56time on a bad storm night, a tractor

2:36:59trailer going out, what is it, 8°, did

2:37:01you say, John? I think you said coming

2:37:05down that driveway, skidding right

2:37:07across 32 and hitting someone and

2:37:09killing a whole bunch of people. That I

2:37:11hate to say that, but it is so easy to

2:37:14see that happening. There's nothing that

2:37:17is correct about this site. Everything

2:37:19is negative, negative, negative,

2:37:22you know. And so, please, when you

2:37:24consider these things, gentlemen, put

2:37:26the future killingly number one. Please,

2:37:30because we have a great town here. If

2:37:33Amazon goes through and this goes

2:37:34through, it's all it's all over,

2:37:36gentlemen.

2:37:41>> [applause]

2:37:44>> I did not I'm not prepared at all. I'm

2:37:46just uh going to speak on one point and

2:37:49that's uh safety first. So

2:37:52[clears throat] we um Williamsville Fire

2:37:54Engine Company, we um go mutual aid to

2:37:57Davville. So I do that Hartford Pike

2:37:59stretch a lot and just in the Kill Only

2:38:03Commons area. There's [clears throat]

2:38:05between and one of the gentlemen

2:38:07addressed that

2:38:10uh there's like between four and 500

2:38:12accidents right in that one small

2:38:14section from from the where the tough

2:38:16turn is down through past Jersey Mike's

2:38:20right there alone. Um, when I'm driving,

2:38:23I'm chief engineer there, and when I'm

2:38:25driving a truck through there during the

2:38:27day, it's almost impossible a lot of

2:38:29times, and Mike Hugo would know that we

2:38:31got to go into the into the westbound

2:38:34lane to get around traffic to get where

2:38:36we're going. So, if you're looking at

2:38:38safety, you know, for any reason, I'm

2:38:40I'm I'm all for tax base and everything

2:38:42else. I I'm also uh on the assessment

2:38:45board of appeals, so I hear all the sad

2:38:46stories on taxes, but I get all that.

2:38:49This is just on the safety thing. Um,

2:38:52taking that corner by Burger King, it's

2:38:54tough. Uh, coming back around, banging a

2:38:57right right there, you you you that it's

2:39:00been stretched like Stretch Armstrong so

2:39:03many times trying to fix that whole four

2:39:05corners. There's a cemetery right there,

2:39:07one of the oldest ones in town. And you

2:39:10can't take any of that land. Otherwise,

2:39:12yeah, it'd be easy. But they can't vote

2:39:14anymore of those people, you know. So,

2:39:17um, it's it's very concerning anytime

2:39:21during the day. You know, I I I was kind

2:39:23of against the Plaza jersey. Mike's

2:39:25going in there saying who, you know,

2:39:27what state guy did this traffic study?

2:39:29He needs to go back to school. I think

2:39:31they sent one guy down to drink a coffee

2:39:33during the day and watch the traffic.

2:39:35And and they they they didn't even

2:39:38permit that until October and they

2:39:40started the work in June. So, we're kind

2:39:43of skeptical of of things like that, but

2:39:46I'll I'll tell you the um I've never

2:39:49seen a place in a plaza where there's

2:39:51been I I lost count of rollovers. The

2:39:54cars are rolling over in a parking lot.

2:39:56You know, they drive like nuts down

2:39:58there. And if you have that many tractor

2:40:00trails in the noise study and thank you

2:40:03come um I I think about uh jumps for I

2:40:07have relatives up there and I wouldn't

2:40:10want to do a noise study on 495 and

2:40:12Route 3 right there. That's and we don't

2:40:14want this town to turn into that. You

2:40:16know, we're pretty chill with with our

2:40:18quiet corner here. And and um again,

2:40:21I've been doing doing the truck driving

2:40:24thing for 45 years through that area.

2:40:27And that's my own traffic study is it's

2:40:29kind of crazy right there already. Um uh

2:40:33and you really got to consider that the

2:40:35safety of the public. That's what the

2:40:37government's job is, number one job is

2:40:39is safety first. That's all I got.

2:40:43Thanks.

2:40:45Thank you guys for volunteering your

2:40:47time and you guys for doing your thing.

2:41:00Ulatique Barklay 26 Dark Lantern Hill

2:41:03Road Danielson. I'm here as a citizen

2:41:05and also as um third district counselor

2:41:09representing my district. Um so these

2:41:12are some comments from the professional

2:41:15sound engineer in the modeling the sound

2:41:18modeling assume predict assumption don't

2:41:22expect assumed assuming

2:41:26could be suspect predicted predicted so

2:41:32where is the evidence sounds like all

2:41:36like speculative to me

2:41:39um I would rather have uh sound from um

2:41:4450 dB from tree frogs than from trucks.

2:41:49Um

2:41:51so I would urge because this is still a

2:41:54black box distribution centers and we've

2:41:57given no hours of operation. I would

2:42:00urge the planning and zoning commission

2:42:02to look at restricting the hours so that

2:42:04we don't get stuck with another 247

2:42:07um distribution centers and um more

2:42:10disruption to this town. Um I did like

2:42:14the comment from Commissioner um Card

2:42:17about being polite and this is um

2:42:21addressed to attorney.

2:42:23uh your comments about um your law firm

2:42:26and your um professionals know more

2:42:30about this town than the residents and

2:42:33probably the commissioners. Um we have

2:42:36many many intelligent pe people in this

2:42:40town.

2:42:41Commissioner Cart is an engineer. Uh

2:42:43this is the same that I had spoken to um

2:42:46Robinson Cole to attorney Tom Cody. One

2:42:50of my sons attended um West Point.

2:42:54My I have another son uh who is um a

2:42:59mechanical engineer. He's currently a

2:43:01captain in the United States Air Force

2:43:03and he is a helicopter instructor pilot.

2:43:06Big accompl accomplishment of somebody

2:43:09of just 30 years old. Um my other son

2:43:14attended Dartmouth and he recently

2:43:16graduated from University of

2:43:18Pennsylvania. Drew Kerry Law School. So,

2:43:22we're not just a bunch of hicks and we

2:43:25don't we're not going to have the wool

2:43:26pulled over your eyes. I believe all of

2:43:29these companies are coming here because

2:43:31they think we're just a bunch of

2:43:33rednecks and we don't know what we're

2:43:34doing and um we're very intelligent

2:43:37here. So, please be polite to this

2:43:39community. Thank you.

2:43:43[applause]

2:43:45>> Okay, I'm going to interject here.

2:43:47>> I have not said anything disparaging in

2:43:51any way about any member of this

2:43:52community. I've been doing this for 30

2:43:54plus years. I have never uttered one

2:43:56negative word about any town in which

2:43:58I've worked. It's a privilege to be

2:44:00before you. It's a it's a privilege to

2:44:02do what I do in front of commissions, 90

2:44:05commissions or actually 90 different

2:44:07towns over those years. So, I don't know

2:44:09what the reference was to, but that's

2:44:11not who I am and I would never do such a

2:44:13thing. So, I just want to be that make

2:44:15make it clear for the record. Thank you.

2:44:17>> Thank you.

2:44:19Yeah. Uh Ian McDonald, 548 Valley Road.

2:44:23Um you know when the you know operation

2:44:26of hours were mentioned in terms of the

2:44:29work, it's you know a lot of that

2:44:31roughly corresponding with the hours

2:44:33that the schools are in operation both

2:44:35KHS and and KCS. I don't know that their

2:44:40impacts there were considered in

2:44:42modeling. I understand that there's you

2:44:44know various uh sense of how something

2:44:48is affecting in terms of like being a

2:44:49you know a danger and in terms of the

2:44:52decibb and whatnot but you know when it

2:44:55comes to schools it's sometimes it's I

2:44:58don't know how how many people are

2:44:59around kids much but they're pretty

2:45:00easily distracted so it doesn't take a

2:45:03lot for blasting some of the truck

2:45:06breaks um you know this is does doesn't

2:45:09make for a great learning environment um

2:45:12and and I think that needs to be looked

2:45:13at more carefully. Um, as far as the 8%

2:45:17grade and that being allow allowed in

2:45:20the town or if there's 9% being allowed

2:45:22in the town, I I seriously would ask if

2:45:25if we would were resiting our town

2:45:28garage if anybody would consider putting

2:45:30our town garage at the top of an 8%

2:45:33grade. Uh, especially coming down to a

2:45:35site like this. Um, you know, would that

2:45:39be wise? Um, and I have a lot of, you

2:45:43know, I have decent amount of faith in

2:45:45the bus drivers and the the town crew in

2:45:48this town. And I I still don't know that

2:45:50that would be, you know, something any

2:45:52of us would be uh recommending. Um, you

2:45:56know, with that grade, you know, I I

2:45:59think um, you know, I've talked about

2:46:00safety concerns coming out onto 12

2:46:03before, but also I'm not entirely sure

2:46:06in terms of the you're going to be

2:46:08putting a lot of salt down there, I

2:46:09imagine. And depending how, you know,

2:46:12how much snow we're getting in any given

2:46:13winter, I know there's things about

2:46:15detention ponds, but I think we got to

2:46:18look real careful on on that surface

2:46:20runoff and, you know, some of that goes

2:46:22down to our town garage and or or goes

2:46:24in that direction and, you know, we

2:46:26don't want to get in a doghouse with

2:46:27deep because there's u pollution issues

2:46:31along with any impacts on the wells. So,

2:46:33I think we got to look real careful at

2:46:34that. Um,

2:46:38you know, I

2:46:41as Mr. Goodro is saying that that

2:46:44section coming off Killingly Commons and

2:46:47along with that intersection,

2:46:49you know,

2:46:51I don't know anybody who thinks that

2:46:53that's that's really a great either of

2:46:56those are great situations traffic-wise.

2:46:59You know, the the Walgreens plaza is can

2:47:02be kind of a nightmare in and out. Um

2:47:05and then you you have that turn around

2:47:07the graveyard um getting on to 395

2:47:11north. I could easily see, you know,

2:47:14that whether it's uh you know three

2:47:18trucks per

2:47:20you know a truck every 3 minutes or 4

2:47:22minutes or whatever it is um or vehicle

2:47:26at least. But it doesn't take that much.

2:47:28Those aren't going to all happen. those

2:47:30aren't all evenly spaced out and it

2:47:32doesn't take much for you to get get a

2:47:34backup there at the um 395 north onramp

2:47:40and then coming through uh the where the

2:47:44395 south exit ramp and and on-ramp is

2:47:49and then you have that turn with that

2:47:51very restricted

2:47:53uh space for somebody to turn onto 395

2:47:56south. I mean that's Mr. Goodro is

2:47:58absolutely right. that's already that's

2:48:00already a problem and um

2:48:05you know I don't know what the

2:48:06definition of adverse impact is here but

2:48:09to I don't I don't know how you look at

2:48:10that and say that that this is not

2:48:13creating an adverse impact on on our

2:48:15traffic. I think it's already we're

2:48:16pushing it already. We're we're and

2:48:19adding this is just feels nuts to me,

2:48:22you know, along with just turning out on

2:48:25onto a Putinham Pike.

2:48:28um you know if we have an empty building

2:48:33some of the and I I might not have

2:48:35totally uh you know I'm not sure about

2:48:38what code 150 is and whatnot but you

2:48:42know the idea that we have

2:48:44an a building and a new applicant and

2:48:49you know there's obviously pressure to

2:48:51let that applicant in if we don't have

2:48:53tax revenue if we don't have

2:48:57um or we just have a monstrosity there

2:49:00sitting empty. So then to come back with

2:49:02a heavier use is a problem. So I think

2:49:06those uses should be to whatever extent

2:49:08they can be determined from the start

2:49:10and not you know I don't know what the

2:49:12restrictions on your end are there. So

2:49:14um but that's not a great situation. Um

2:49:19you know and and I think Mr. Uh,

2:49:21Chairman Therolo is absolutely right

2:49:22that we need to have everything uh

2:49:25buttoned up and and in the most uh

2:49:29in writing in the right places. I think

2:49:31with the uh project over on 101, I

2:49:35think, you know, my understanding is

2:49:37that this planning and zoning committee

2:49:39asked for a a written DOT permit and I

2:49:43guess that was waved. There's some sort

2:49:44of verbal wave with that. I think there

2:49:46was some indication about only primarily

2:49:49being box trucks going in there and and

2:49:51I've seen the tractor trailers going in

2:49:53there. I think there's been questions

2:49:56about the parking as it was presented

2:49:58and I think there's also questions about

2:49:59snow storage at that site. And I think

2:50:01there was a lot of things said around

2:50:03that that weren't necessarily borne out.

2:50:06So just as a matter of prudence, I think

2:50:08we need to be uh really cross our eyes

2:50:10and dot our tees that everything that

2:50:13this commission has been said or

2:50:15suggested is absolutely um it is on

2:50:20paper and and enforceable and if it's

2:50:23not I think we have to ask some

2:50:24different question difficult questions

2:50:26but I just don't see how we this is not

2:50:29a traffic problem. You know, I didn't

2:50:31even talk about the schools and the town

2:50:33garage and and and there

2:50:38seems just nuts. But thank you.

2:50:44>> You want the motion?

2:50:47>> Um, just so we can get on the record,

2:50:48we'll make a motion

2:50:51make a motion to extend the meeting till

2:50:5311:00.

2:50:55>> Second.

2:50:59>> Any discussion? All in favor say I.

2:51:02>> I

2:51:02>> oppose abstensions.

2:51:06>> Hi, my name is Claudet Rogers, 294

2:51:09Putham Pike, and I just wanted to say

2:51:12that I am here 100% for the water. 100%

2:51:17for the water and the water quality. And

2:51:21I will go on to talk about the

2:51:24topographical map that I was talking

2:51:26about earlier. And I'm sorry when I said

2:51:30like I was implying that Dolly was a

2:51:32girl when realizing that the town of

2:51:35Killingly is really like a dog. There's

2:51:38many nipples, many nipples all over

2:51:41town. So the high school is a 400 ft

2:51:45nipple. And then 540 ft is in the back

2:51:50of this property up to the northeast is

2:51:53540 ft. So, and it goes down 540

2:51:58520 is like

2:52:02um the center up there and then

2:52:06480 to 440 is that second building I

2:52:11guess we're calling it the one that lays

2:52:12in more 4. So that's 40 foot like grade

2:52:18that has to either get blasted or

2:52:20brought in. I don't know, you know,

2:52:22because like I said, it's like multiple

2:52:24peaks all around town. We have multiple

2:52:27peaks all around town. There's Cook

2:52:29Hill, there's Mashant Tuck Hill, there's

2:52:31uh Slater Hill, there's Mason Hill.

2:52:34These are all towns. These are all the

2:52:36town roads that we drive on as bus

2:52:39drivers. And um Okay, so 480 at the

2:52:45second building. And then you go to the

2:52:47sec the first building is between 440

2:52:50and 420 within the topical grade. And

2:52:54then from 420 down to 320. So it is a

2:52:58100 foot

2:53:00like grade of stuff that has to happen

2:53:04between that building and the bottom.

2:53:08And um you guys asked earlier where

2:53:10they're going to park their trucks. When

2:53:12the restoration place went in across

2:53:15which is at the other end of their

2:53:17property, their L when the restor they

2:53:20had to park at the town garage because

2:53:22there was nowhere to park on Route 12 to

2:53:25get their trucks and stuff up there. I

2:53:27don't know what agreement we had, but

2:53:29they parked over there. But so 100 ft of

2:53:33grade the the the pressure of that water

2:53:37the the homeowner showed us how fast

2:53:40that water flows like at the beginning

2:53:43of this the first application the first

2:53:46application showed how fast the water

2:53:48flows. If you go there, you see ledge

2:53:51and big cannons from where the water

2:53:54flows. Right now, road right down there.

2:53:57The town garage, 320 ft at the first and

2:54:0220 uh 300 ft on the other side over by

2:54:06395. So, that's a 20ft grade. It looks

2:54:09like a flat surface. It's not flat

2:54:12surface. The water runs across there. We

2:54:15have two members of our community. one

2:54:18that was a bus driver for over 40 years

2:54:20and one I don't know how long he was

2:54:22with us on the town side. Both of them

2:54:25out forever on workman's comp because we

2:54:28got slated with ice. The water runs and

2:54:32when it's cold outside and it hits

2:54:34pavement, it's ice. So we as a town as

2:54:37taxpayers are paying two people for the

2:54:39rest of their lives.

2:54:42So then I'll tell my Mason Hill story.

2:54:44Mason Hill. I've driven that for 15

2:54:47years. There very very steep upgrade. I

2:54:50don't know the slope. Thank you, John

2:54:51Sarintopulus, for putting that into my

2:54:54vocabulary. I I you know, being a bus

2:54:57driver, nobody ever really tells us

2:55:00about grades and stuff like that that

2:55:03those are things that you should be

2:55:04worried about. I do not think our

2:55:07younger generation

2:55:08has the knowledge

2:55:11and to to be a good workforce to know,

2:55:15you know, they didn't grow up in. We

2:55:17even have bus drivers that will call out

2:55:19if it snows because of the town, you

2:55:22know. So if you got somebody delivering

2:55:24to this town that's never been here and

2:55:27doesn't know that you know out of ledge

2:55:30comes water and out of water comes ice

2:55:33on cold days um is just going to be a

2:55:38nightmare. Um

2:55:40so the adverse impact of the town I

2:55:45soleie solely is the company that is

2:55:47here representing for 90 Putnham Pike.

2:55:50So is also the company that did the Five

2:55:52Guys that we have tractor trailer trucks

2:55:55parked on

2:55:57101 right there. They park and go get

2:55:59their Duncan or not their Duncan. There

2:56:01are Five Guys or whatever. I don't know.

2:56:03There's a tractor trailer truck. I pull

2:56:05out of Otis Street. There's tractor

2:56:07trailer trucks that park along that

2:56:09intersection during the middle of the

2:56:11day dur like when we're school buses and

2:56:15high school and KISS are getting out.

2:56:17There's trucks parked on the side of the

2:56:19road inhibiting our thing and I have

2:56:22seen the fire trucks try getting through

2:56:24when and there's there's a good there's

2:56:27a good amount right there for the

2:56:28killing commons. We got many lanes and

2:56:30many yes the signage is awful. People

2:56:33don't understand where it goes in and

2:56:35out. Um but and they did the um

2:56:41Walgreens intersection too. Soleie was

2:56:44that company. Solely was that company

2:56:46that the other day when I was taking a

2:56:48right going towards

2:56:51um

2:56:53uh the Dunkin Donuts intersection and

2:56:55subway or whatever, the guy's yelling at

2:56:57me for turning my blinker off cuz he was

2:56:59going to pull out in front of me. Well,

2:57:02you're taking a wide right, your blinker

2:57:04doesn't turn off. It's two feet from the

2:57:06intersection. That's why we have 500

2:57:09accidents there all the time. Um,

2:57:13yeah. So, that and knowing that you're

2:57:17going to have to add

2:57:19more salt and stuff and that the aquafer

2:57:23is right there. I don't feel like this

2:57:26is um

2:57:28a good thing for the town. I do want to

2:57:30thank uh Keith Eurolo for being thorough

2:57:34earlier and getting things put on the

2:57:36record. I do want to thank thank um

2:57:39Brian Card for in 22 um September 22 um

2:57:46voicing concerns that the language about

2:57:49these um the change of the language

2:57:53because we're not really fighting with

2:57:54solely and Amazon. we're fighting with

2:57:57our town like that reszoned these areas

2:58:01to be what they are or I I don't even

2:58:04think you know they they thought this

2:58:06was going to happen like I don't

2:58:08understand that and to to answer your

2:58:12question earlier Ryan about turning

2:58:15right with a tractor trailer truck you

2:58:18can't do it you can't do it I can barely

2:58:21take a bus and we got we got I don't

2:58:23even know what a size foot we got 40 ft.

2:58:27Like me taking a bus the other way, I

2:58:30have to make sure like I swing it way

2:58:32out in the parking lot because we have a

2:58:35huge flat parking lot to swing it the

2:58:37other way. There was no a trailer truck

2:58:41could not bend that way. Um

2:58:45but that in what Mr. Serenopoulos said

2:58:48earlier, 21 is not a a pitch at all. You

2:58:52can't see in a truck if you have like

2:58:57your cab in your way. If you're on an

2:58:59angle, you can't see to your right. I

2:59:03hope the Connecticut DOT really looks

2:59:05into that. Um,

2:59:09and I think that's it. Oh, the wildlife

2:59:13displacement. We have VOAG. Our high

2:59:16school is known for its VOAG department.

2:59:19We have animals that is, you know, a a

2:59:25little bit over the hill. There's um and

2:59:28it it is multiple hills, multiple hills

2:59:30throughout there, but right over not too

2:59:34far from there, probably half a mile is

2:59:37our high school with all our animals.

2:59:39And where is all this wildlife going to

2:59:41go? That's a lot of um wildlife that we

2:59:45chose to put into a commercial zone.

2:59:50Thank you.

2:59:55[applause]

2:59:58Rebecca Rainville Road. Um,

3:00:05okay.

3:00:07Sorry, I couldn't write anything down

3:00:10because um between this and the Amazon,

3:00:13Danielson has just got um worked up. I

3:00:15can't get thoughts on paper. But um

3:00:20I think this is another bad idea for our

3:00:23town. Um, I think it's going to cause um

3:00:26a lot of economic and environmental and

3:00:31um it's going to be just a disaster for

3:00:33us. We are

3:00:37in the country. We have smaller roads.

3:00:40Route 12 where they're going to build

3:00:41this. Like she said, they had no

3:00:43sidewalks. Some of the kids ride their

3:00:45bikes and walk to the high schools or

3:00:48KIS uh KCS, which is right down the road

3:00:52from the high school.

3:00:54Um I was also concerned about the

3:00:57tractor trailer trucks coming down there

3:00:59with full loads at a grade at 8%. cuz I

3:01:03was just um down south in the mountains

3:01:06um and they had 8% grazed on their

3:01:09highways, but they had runaway truck

3:01:10ramps, you know, on the end where here

3:01:14they're just going to come right on out

3:01:16to um Route 12 and go.

3:01:19>> No. And with all the buses um and the

3:01:22school kids driving, I mean, that's just

3:01:24a dangerous situation

3:01:28alto together. Um and then with um the

3:01:32last meeting with this this gentleman

3:01:35said that they were going to you know

3:01:37not let the tractor trailers go right

3:01:39heading route 12 north. They would just

3:01:44direct them to go um left heading south

3:01:47on 12 if I remember correctly.

3:01:50So, if you have I don't know the amount

3:01:52of proposed tractor trailers, is it like

3:01:54400 a day um heading, you know, into

3:01:59downtown Daveville at the intersections

3:02:03with school buses and the regular

3:02:05traffic for all the businesses and there

3:02:10so the lights are already not long

3:02:13enough as it is and and traffic backs

3:02:15up, you know,

3:02:18um way before Burger you know, kids

3:02:20waiting to get out of school. So, you

3:02:23know, you're already waiting at the

3:02:25light and now you have 53 foot tractor

3:02:27trailers coming what every 3 or 4

3:02:30minutes and they're going to be backed

3:02:31up for a really long time because

3:02:34they're also on schedules, but also our

3:02:36school buses are on schedules to get the

3:02:39kids. They have to be dropped off at a

3:02:40certain time. So now you have tractor

3:02:43trailers,

3:02:44high school kids, people going to do

3:02:47their shopping and buses all backed up

3:02:50waiting to um you know turn say

3:02:54um heading west on route uh 101 right

3:02:58there. So now they're trying to get on

3:03:00the highway, these tractor trailers. The

3:03:03buses are trying to go straight or get

3:03:06in the left lane to go 395 south. And I

3:03:09still haven't heard how that whole

3:03:11situation is going to be fixed. How are

3:03:14you going to have all of these tractor

3:03:17trailers, regular cars, and buses trying

3:03:20to get to their destinations all on

3:03:23limited time and especially that left

3:03:26lane to head 395 south. I mean, it's

3:03:29it's only as long as this room right

3:03:31here. And sometimes we're all cramped up

3:03:33and we're still waiting to turn left

3:03:35because there's no light there because

3:03:37you have the eastbound traffic coming.

3:03:40Um,

3:03:42so sometimes you're waiting there for a

3:03:44while. So if you're waiting there for a

3:03:45while and there's three or four cars

3:03:47because that's all that you can fit. Now

3:03:49traffic's backed up back there because

3:03:52they're they're trying to get on 101 to

3:03:54either go straight merge on to 395 north

3:03:57or trying to get on south. And then we

3:04:00also have a train station down the road.

3:04:03So what happens if we have a train and

3:04:05the lights are on and it's a couple

3:04:08miles long and it's going very slowly.

3:04:10So now you have traffic backed up there

3:04:12and you have buses coming out of KCS off

3:04:16of soap street trying to get on 101, but

3:04:19they're not going to be able to get

3:04:20through because there's so much traffic

3:04:23[laughter]

3:04:24from all of [snorts] these tractor

3:04:25trailers. And then you add right on top

3:04:28of that the proposed Amazon site in

3:04:31Danielson with all of those 400 to 800

3:04:34tractors.

3:04:35>> 90 please. So, I'm sorry, but I'm just

3:04:37saying all of this stuff, all of these

3:04:41big businesses, we make industrial parks

3:04:43for them,

3:04:46not stripping and tearing apart

3:04:51our pristine forests, ruining our

3:04:54wetlands,

3:04:56creating havoc in our town that we're

3:04:59not going to get any benefit from, but

3:05:02hell, it's going to be hell from us from

3:05:04the day they start construction. ction

3:05:07for the rest of our lives. For the rest

3:05:09of our lives and I'm just saying like

3:05:12everybody from the town and the people

3:05:14are listening,

3:05:17this does not belong in our town. If

3:05:19they want to build it, go up in the

3:05:20industrial park, build something up

3:05:23there, but not in our woodlands, not in

3:05:26our downtowns, in our in our rural roads

3:05:29that are not meant for tractor trailers.

3:05:32It's just a bad idea and it brings our

3:05:35property values down. It's going to

3:05:37raise our taxes. Um the wildlife um it's

3:05:42just going to affect our our wildlife,

3:05:44everything. It's just it's a bad move.

3:05:47And I ask you to deny this special

3:05:49permit especially. They don't even tell

3:05:50you what's going in there. So, how do we

3:05:53even know what is going in there? It's

3:05:56just not right. It's not right. We live

3:05:58in this town. We should know what's

3:05:59going on. who wants to go in there. We

3:06:02don't know what they're going to be

3:06:03distributing.

3:06:05It's just wrong. And um I thank you for

3:06:08all your time and I'm sorry you have to

3:06:10listen to all of us, but you know, this

3:06:12is our lives here. Our lives. You guys

3:06:15are going to just come and go and we're

3:06:18stuck with the

3:06:19>> Please go.

3:06:20>> We're stuck with the rest of this. So,

3:06:22thank you.

3:06:25[applause]

3:06:30Michelle Murphy, Break Neck Hill Road.

3:06:32Uh, just listening to people just makes

3:06:34me think, do we have anything this large

3:06:36in general commercial or would this be

3:06:39the largest thing? Uh, Fredo Lelay to me

3:06:42seems comparable, but that's industrial.

3:06:44Uh, I could be wrong. I just throw that

3:06:46out there. And then I keep going back to

3:06:48700 and reading it. To me, it just seems

3:06:51discretionary. Like tonight people spoke

3:06:53on how if it meets the applications of

3:06:56your special permit, you know, that

3:06:59wasn't said but it was kind of implied

3:07:01you have to do it. 700 just reads

3:07:04discretionary to me like that's why we

3:07:06have special permit. uh [clears throat]

3:07:08700. Um the commission may grant a

3:07:12special permit after considering whether

3:07:14the use and associated site plan are

3:07:17appropriate for the pro proposed

3:07:19sitebased on the following factors.

3:07:23And I know you guys know this, but I I

3:07:25just keep going back and thinking about

3:07:26it like do we have the power if if we

3:07:28just said, hey, this is really an

3:07:30industrial

3:07:32site on a general commercial. It doesn't

3:07:33really fit. So some of those things that

3:07:36you can consider kind of discretionary

3:07:39to me. It says number one, the size of

3:07:41the lot. Two, the nature and intensity

3:07:43of the activities involved in or

3:07:45conducted in connection with the use.

3:07:48The streets giving access to it are such

3:07:50that the use shall be in harmony with

3:07:53the appropriate and orderly development

3:07:54in the neighborhood in which it is

3:07:56located. And four, the impact on the

3:07:59neighborhood properties and residences

3:08:01of the development of the district.

3:08:04appropriate improvements. The design

3:08:06elements shall be attractive and

3:08:08suitable in relation to the site

3:08:09characteristics, the style of other

3:08:12buildings.

3:08:12>> We all have the rags. I mean,

3:08:14>> well, these guys might not from the

3:08:16public, Keith, I know you guys got a lot

3:08:18still.

3:08:18>> Oh, this is the last sentences.

3:08:20>> I'm sorry. I don't mean to rush you, but

3:08:21>> No, no, it's okay, but I just keep going

3:08:23back to it's it is discretionary 700 for

3:08:26the public. Uh, killingly regulation 700

3:08:29permit. Thank you.

3:08:31[applause] Anyone

3:08:36else?

3:08:39>> Okay.

3:08:40Um,

3:08:42going to assume any other questions for

3:08:43commissioners at this point? Going to

3:08:46ask for a motion to continue.

3:08:49>> Make a motion to continue special

3:08:50permit. Whatever whatever the numbers, I

3:08:53can't see it.

3:08:53>> So, the October 19th meeting

3:08:56>> 26, 1368 to October meeting.

3:08:58>> Second.

3:09:00>> Motion and a second. Any discussion? All

3:09:02in favor say I.

3:09:04>> I.

3:09:04>> Opposions. Okay,

3:09:07that's continued.

3:09:10Okay.

3:09:13Subdivision application 2613. Anyone

3:09:15that needs a Dora and Suns

3:09:18have a motion to continue. That's going

3:09:19to be continued. Got a request.

3:09:22>> Motion to continue.

3:09:23>> I have a second

3:09:26for October

3:09:27>> October meeting.

3:09:28>> October.

3:09:28>> Any further discussion? All in favor say

3:09:31I.

3:09:31>> I

3:09:32>> oppose abstensions.

3:09:34>> And just to be clear, those meetings are

3:09:36here in this room just for the record.

3:09:40>> Okay.

3:09:45All right. Special permit 261368 K1 LLC.

3:09:50Um

3:09:52motion to continue. It's on unfinished

3:09:55business.

3:09:56I don't think we need that.

3:09:57>> We don't need a motion,

3:09:59>> John. Because they requested an

3:10:01extension. We don't need a motion.

3:10:03>> Yeah, it's not unfinished business at

3:10:05this point. Public hearing still open.

3:10:10Uh

3:10:13site plan review application 261376

3:10:18at Espazito construction of 100 by 50

3:10:21foot warehouse for storage material 79

3:10:23Commerce A map ID 5335

3:10:27alternate ID 181-15 central business

3:10:31district

3:10:32inland wetlands approved in September

3:10:3414th

3:10:37Anybody here to represent that?

3:10:41>> Uh yes sir. Thank you. Uh um Mr.

3:10:44Chairman, members of the commission, uh

3:10:46uh Norm Tibo, uh Killingly Engineering

3:10:49Associates. I am here uh representing

3:10:52Edward Espazito this evening uh for a

3:10:55proposed

3:10:57um I know you said it was a warehouse.

3:10:59It's kind of a garage. He's using it to

3:11:01store his equipment for his glass

3:11:02company on Commerce Avenue. Um, it's uh

3:11:06the uh uh location of the building is in

3:11:10an area where the the uh the former I

3:11:13think it was Connecticut Farm and Pet

3:11:14that was there that uh that burned down

3:11:16a number of years ago. Um and uh the the

3:11:19site is currently vacant. Uh and uh he

3:11:22is proposing just to uh put this in.

3:11:25There's not going to be any plumbing uh

3:11:26water or sewer in it. Uh simply to store

3:11:29his equipment that he has outdoors

3:11:32currently. Uh he's got a number of uh

3:11:34trucks and lifts and and so forth uh

3:11:37that are are stored outdoors. Uh and uh

3:11:40he's looking to uh put this uh garage in

3:11:44uh in order to uh store his equipment as

3:11:46part of his glass company. Um as you can

3:11:51see uh on the screen that John put up uh

3:11:53that that is the building that he's

3:11:55showing. It's 50 by 100 ft. Uh we have a

3:11:58proposed water quality basin at the rear

3:12:01of the of the of the uh the building

3:12:04which will take uh the roof drainage uh

3:12:07and there'll be some infiltration into

3:12:09the soil there. They are very well

3:12:10drained. Uh any kind of overflows for

3:12:13for um uh some of the larger storms will

3:12:16um uh simply uh flow over the level

3:12:19spreader uh and uh and ultimately sheet

3:12:23flow down the slope to the five mile

3:12:25river. uh we are proposing overhead

3:12:27utilities. Uh the one comment uh that uh

3:12:32engineering review had was that uh it

3:12:34was it was simply we had a little bit of

3:12:36a of an error in the zoning table uh

3:12:39that we fixed. Uh we're showing a uh

3:12:43either paved or um or a milling uh

3:12:48entrance to the building. Uh this would

3:12:49be um utilized just by the client

3:12:53himself, by the owner. Uh he's not going

3:12:55to be doing any kind of repair work in

3:12:57there. We have no floor drains. Uh no no

3:13:00connections to a sanitary sewer. Uh

3:13:03there is a current currently a utility

3:13:05pole in front of the site uh that he's

3:13:08going to have to maneuver his way

3:13:10around. We are showing Ballard

3:13:11protection around that utility pole. U

3:13:15he should have plenty of room to get in.

3:13:17These are 16 ft doors. So, um we don't

3:13:20anticipate there being any issue uh with

3:13:22accessing the building or and with the

3:13:25uh installation of these ballards uh any

3:13:27kind of uh interference uh by that

3:13:30utility pole. I think that's kind of it

3:13:32in a nutshell. I'd be happy to answer

3:13:34any questions you may have.

3:13:37>> Norm, what's the gravel parking area

3:13:39for?

3:13:40>> Uh just for employee parking.

3:13:44>> So, no vehicle storage outside the

3:13:46building at all?

3:13:47>> No. No, they I mean they do they do park

3:13:50there now as employees they come and

3:13:53they they park sort of in the paved area

3:13:54and on the gravel there. So I was just

3:13:56showing uh a couple of dedicated spaces

3:13:58where they could go up against the

3:14:00building.

3:14:01>> Yeah. Um you said inside the building as

3:14:03far as what's for what's going to be

3:14:05stored in the building again?

3:14:07>> He is uh he uh he he installs um um

3:14:12essentially glass windows and doorways.

3:14:14A lot of big commercial projects. Uh

3:14:16he's got lift trucks. Uh he's got uh his

3:14:20glass trucks that have the the mounts on

3:14:22them that carry large panes of glass,

3:14:25things of that nature. And uh he just

3:14:27wants to store them indoors.

3:14:29>> Any maintenance activities going to be

3:14:30performed inside the building?

3:14:32>> No.

3:14:33>> Any storage of oils or fluids or lubes

3:14:35inside the building for that equipment?

3:14:37>> No.

3:14:39>> Is there any This So there's no floor

3:14:40drains. No plumbing in the building.

3:14:43>> No plumbing in the building.

3:14:49the the main office is the is the

3:14:51building uh further to the uh to the

3:14:53south uh where where they do all the

3:14:55assembling of of the glass products and

3:14:58um uh they do have uh all the the the

3:15:02plumbing and so forth in that building.

3:15:04So that that's where all of the uh of

3:15:06the actual uh glass manufacturing work

3:15:08is done within that building.

3:15:12So John, is that uh central business

3:15:14district requires zero setback from the

3:15:17property line?

3:15:19>> Uh central business district has um 100%

3:15:22the possibility for 100% lock coverage

3:15:24and has no setbacks.

3:15:26>> Okay,

3:15:27that was my only question. Any other

3:15:30questions, commissioners?

3:15:34>> John,

3:15:37staff?

3:15:40>> Nope. Um I mean I see it noted on here

3:15:42the inlet protection in the catch basin.

3:15:44That was one of the conditions of

3:15:45approval by the wetlands commission uh

3:15:48in that existing catch basin uh because

3:15:50it does discharge um to the five mile.

3:15:55>> So they end up paving something around

3:15:57that or just some kind of a erosion

3:15:59protection basin. uh they specified a

3:16:02silt sack um to be placed in there um

3:16:04while uh the work is being done and um

3:16:07they didn't really specify beyond that

3:16:09but it would be something that we would

3:16:10look into.

3:16:13Uh well there's no other questions not a

3:16:16public hearing. So

3:16:18entertain a motion

3:16:23anybody

3:16:26a motion to conclude the public hearing

3:16:28on that.

3:16:28>> There's no public hearing on it.

3:16:29>> Oh okay. So to accept the accept the

3:16:32plans as

3:16:33>> to approve it.

3:16:34>> Yeah. As as described.

3:16:37I make the motion to accept the plans as

3:16:38described for um construction of the 100

3:16:43by 50 foot warehouse for storage.

3:16:46>> And by accept you mean approve.

3:16:48>> Approve. Yes.

3:16:50>> Have a second.

3:16:52>> Second.

3:16:53>> Any further discussion?

3:16:56All in favor say a roll call, please.

3:16:58I'm sorry. I won't.

3:17:02>> Sorry. I wasn't prepared to

3:17:04>> get late. I understand.

3:17:07Okay. Brian Card,

3:17:09>> yes.

3:17:10>> Norm Farren,

3:17:11>> yes.

3:17:12>> Michael Huo,

3:17:13>> yes.

3:17:13>> John Sarenopoulos,

3:17:15>> yes.

3:17:16>> Keith Thurlo,

3:17:16>> yes.

3:17:17>> Motion carries unanimously.

3:17:19>> Okay.

3:17:22All right.

3:17:26Application 261381. Lenoran Sons

3:17:31is where are we John? Is that

3:17:34>> that was the public hearing was

3:17:35continued. So um as uh it's shown on

3:17:38here we we don't deliberate on it

3:17:40because

3:17:41>> Okay.

3:17:42>> So that's continued. Okay. Then site

3:17:44plan application number 261383 Ryan

3:17:46Company's US Incorporated

3:17:50construction of a new warehouse and

3:17:52distribution center 1.288

3:17:56220

3:17:58square feet.

3:18:01Sir,

3:18:08>> good evening members of the commission.

3:18:10Evan Seaman Robinson and Cole on behalf

3:18:12of the applicant and we are just getting

3:18:14our slides up on the screen right now.

3:18:17>> Seaman, can you spell the last name just

3:18:19for

3:18:19>> Yes. S E M an

3:18:25>> Thank you.

3:18:27>> And given the hour, we're going to try

3:18:28to keep the presentation relatively

3:18:30brief. I know there's also an issue

3:18:31after this involving the intervention

3:18:33petitions that we'd hope to get to. Um

3:18:37so as you know this is an application

3:18:39for site plan approval. Uh um about the

3:18:43project site consists of about 340 acres

3:18:46and assemblage of 20 parcels warehouse

3:18:48and distribution center use. Um there's

3:18:50also um as part of the wetlands

3:18:52application that's that's also pending

3:18:54right now an additional 216 acres that's

3:18:57proposed to be put in conservation uh

3:18:59and it and includes additional um

3:19:01parcels. Uh this property as you know is

3:19:04in the business park district warehouse

3:19:06and distribution center uses are allowed

3:19:08as of right there. Um so I wanted to

3:19:12briefly touch on uh kind of a road map

3:19:15for this presentation and and who's here

3:19:17with me this evening. Um uh uh as part

3:19:22of my introduction, I'll give a status

3:19:23update where we are uh where we've been.

3:19:26Um [clears throat]

3:19:27hand it over to uh uh Adam Win Stanley

3:19:30and Parker Davis to discuss site

3:19:31selection and project benefits. Um some

3:19:34site design updates from our civil

3:19:36engineer who's joining us via Zoom. Tim

3:19:38Mandero from Langan. Mark Feruchi is uh

3:19:42seated to my left. He's from Fussen

3:19:44O'Neal, our traffic engineer. Um, and we

3:19:47also have Dustin Curran from Ryan

3:19:49Company's uh seated uh and controlling

3:19:51the slides.

3:19:56So, if you could please Yes, thank you.

3:19:59So, this application is substantially

3:20:01similar to the site plan application

3:20:02that you reviewed uh over the first half

3:20:05of the year. Um the application was

3:20:08ultimately withdrawn before this agency

3:20:10rendered a decision and the reason it

3:20:11was withdrawn was because the in the

3:20:14town's inland wetlands and water courses

3:20:16commission um denied the wetlands

3:20:18application without prejudice. Um

3:20:21subsequent to that the site plan

3:20:22application was withdrawn. Both

3:20:24applications were submitted again. U we

3:20:27just had the first public hearing before

3:20:29the wetlands agency last Monday. Uh it's

3:20:32been continued to October 5th. That

3:20:34process is ongoing. Um, and this is

3:20:36really the first meeting uh with you

3:20:38giving a substantive presentation of um

3:20:41uh updates about what's changed since

3:20:43the last the last site plan uh that was

3:20:46before you. Um, and we view this

3:20:48application as I mentioned as

3:20:49substantially similar to the one um that

3:20:52was presented uh earlier in the year in

3:20:55our cover letter. We've incorporated by

3:20:57reference for efficiency um the entire

3:20:59record from that first application. Um,

3:21:02we've included some reports and and all,

3:21:05you know, as part of our actual

3:21:06submission uh to the town, but

3:21:08everything from that record we've

3:21:09incorporated by reference uh to

3:21:11hopefully streamline this process a

3:21:13little bit. Um, and as part of our

3:21:15presentation this evening, um, we're

3:21:17going to give an update about what's

3:21:19changed in the plans. There have been

3:21:21some modifications that Timurko will get

3:21:24to in just a minute. Um but uh as part

3:21:26of this presentation this evening, we're

3:21:28not going to go through every report and

3:21:30study that we've been through in the

3:21:33first uh process, we're happy to do so.

3:21:36Please let us know if there's any aspect

3:21:37of that tonight or in the future that

3:21:39you'd like to hear from about and and

3:21:41we'd be more than happy to accommodate

3:21:42that. Uh next slide, please.

3:21:44>> That's a quick Can I ask a quick

3:21:45question?

3:21:45>> Yes, sir.

3:21:46>> Are you going to be updating all those

3:21:47reports to modify them to reflect your

3:21:50new application? So the storm order

3:21:52management report has been revised and

3:21:54and submitted. Um and that that was

3:21:59recently submitted along with the civil

3:22:00site plan sheets. Um I uh I will leave

3:22:04that to is any anything for traffic?

3:22:06Nothing nothing else.

3:22:08>> Nothing else has changed. So So what has

3:22:10changed has been submitted a new um

3:22:12everything else that uh has previously

3:22:15been submitted remains unchanged.

3:22:16>> Will you be resubmitting all those

3:22:17again? Because again all those documents

3:22:19are gone. I don't have any copies of any

3:22:21of them. So, we need copies of

3:22:22everything you've submitted already.

3:22:24>> We can provide those.

3:22:26>> Yes.

3:22:26>> And and for record, I'm requesting you

3:22:29go through all of that information again

3:22:30so it's on the public record for this

3:22:32hearing, not just referencing the old

3:22:34record that everything you stated that

3:22:36needs to happen is stated again.

3:22:40>> That's my opinion. Okay. Commissioner

3:22:42can say otherwise, but otherwise I don't

3:22:44know.

3:22:44>> Yeah. Um, you know, we defer to what the

3:22:47commission would like our, you know, our

3:22:50we we believe for the sake of efficiency

3:22:52that incorporating everything by

3:22:54reference. Um,

3:22:57uh, we're happy to present the evidence

3:22:59again if the commission would like to,

3:23:01but if the commission is is okay relying

3:23:03on what's been submitted so far, we're

3:23:05happy to move on as well. So if you

3:23:07could provide if this commission could

3:23:08provide some direction on that uh that

3:23:10that would be

3:23:11>> helpful.

3:23:14>> I'm sure you're aware that this

3:23:16moratorum on this sur has been lifted.

3:23:20Are you people going to apply for that?

3:23:22And uh

3:23:24>> it's not totally lifted.

3:23:26>> Pardon?

3:23:26>> It's not totally lifted. They just

3:23:28>> I know it's not total, but uh I don't

3:23:31know how much they're allowing,

3:23:33>> but uh it seems to me that that would go

3:23:36a long way in alleviating some of the

3:23:38concerns if that septic went to the

3:23:40system rather than into that wetland.

3:23:44>> Yeah, that that's something we can

3:23:45certainly look into. Um uh we're not

3:23:48prepared to address it tonight, but

3:23:49certainly for the next meeting.

3:23:50>> Well, I just wanted to make much of it.

3:23:52>> Yeah. Thank you.

3:23:54Um, and here are just some of the, you

3:23:57know, expert reports, testimony from the

3:23:59applicants, expert that you've heard.

3:24:01Uh, laying in Fussen O'Neal. We

3:24:04submitted an acoustical analysis,

3:24:06architectural plans. You heard from our

3:24:08fire protection engineer. We're happy to

3:24:11to bring our blasting experts. We're

3:24:13happy to bring all these folks back and

3:24:14and go through everything again if this

3:24:16commission would like. They're not with

3:24:18some of them are not with us this

3:24:19evening, but can join us in future

3:24:20meetings if that's the preference.

3:24:22Again, just from my perspective, this is

3:24:25a whole new application. You pulled the

3:24:26last one. You need to present everything

3:24:28again for this application. That's my

3:24:30perspective. So, if you want it to be

3:24:32considered for this application, needs

3:24:34to be presented to this commission and

3:24:36go over exactly what you're doing for

3:24:37this project.

3:24:38>> Okay. All all those plans and reports

3:24:40have been included with this

3:24:41application. We're happy to present it

3:24:42again if members of the commission would

3:24:44like us to do so,

3:24:45>> including any changes, updates,

3:24:46modifications to reflect your current

3:24:48application. So, there's any references

3:24:50to the old stuff in those reports. It

3:24:52needs to be it need to be scrubbed and

3:24:53wiped clean.

3:24:55>> Yes, sir.

3:24:57Um you've also heard from your

3:25:00peerreview consultant Tigen Bond and

3:25:02your town fire marshall um as part of

3:25:05that and and those have all been

3:25:07incorporated into the record as well. We

3:25:08understand that Tigen Bond is going to

3:25:10be conducting a new review of the

3:25:12modified plans that we'll get to in a

3:25:13minute.

3:25:18And here's just the uh uh the schedule

3:25:21of the tigen bond review of the first

3:25:22application. Uh Commissioner Huo, you

3:25:25also submitted some uh questions as part

3:25:27of that first application which we

3:25:28responded to. Um the meeting in uh the

3:25:32last meeting in which we presented um

3:25:34you also requested some additional

3:25:35modifications, clarifications. Those

3:25:37have been incorporated into the plans

3:25:39and I believe Tim can go over them

3:25:41tonight if you'd like or in the future

3:25:43given the time. Um and ultimately Tigen

3:25:45Bond uh after three rounds of comments

3:25:48um the overwhelming vast majority of

3:25:50comments were uh addressed to their

3:25:52satis satisfaction. There were a couple

3:25:54that they recommended as conditions of

3:25:56approval. Next slide please. And um I

3:26:00wanted to talk a little bit about the

3:26:02business park district. Um we've heard

3:26:05some uh discussion about it in the

3:26:08context of the first application during

3:26:10public comment tonight. Um and and what

3:26:13is your planning of conservation and

3:26:15development? It's your long as the

3:26:17commission knows it's your long range

3:26:18planning document. You set this every 10

3:26:20years. It it's a guidance document. It

3:26:23establishes the the long range planning

3:26:25policies, the goals that this commission

3:26:28hopes to achieve for its community. And

3:26:31um uh so the POC

3:26:35specifically identifies this property uh

3:26:39the in the business park district as

3:26:42appropriate for the the use that we're

3:26:45proposing. Um here's some language from

3:26:47your plan of conservation and

3:26:48development. It specifically calls out

3:26:50the business park district uh and its

3:26:53proximity to I I395.

3:26:56um and uh notes that it can capitalize

3:26:59on the growing use of trucks to

3:27:01transport goods uh and it encourages the

3:27:04business park district which was created

3:27:05in about I believe 2000 uh it's largely

3:27:09remained undeveloped and that was never

3:27:11the intent. It's always been viewed as

3:27:14an opportunity for the town for economic

3:27:16growth. And in 2020, this plan of

3:27:18conservation and development recognized

3:27:20that and ident and called out the

3:27:22business park district as appropriate

3:27:24for economic uh economic growth. Next

3:27:27slide, please.

3:27:29Here's your town zoning map, which uh

3:27:32lists all your zoning districts. The

3:27:34business park district is highlighted in

3:27:36in the green text right next to uh the

3:27:40interstate. And so when the plan of

3:27:42conservation and development is talking

3:27:44about business park district property

3:27:47that's appropriate for use involving the

3:27:49transportation of goods, it's talking

3:27:52about this property. There's no other

3:27:53business park district in the town of

3:27:55Killingly. This is what it's talking

3:27:57about. Uh next slide, please.

3:28:01And and so what did the town do? Well,

3:28:04uh, as I mentioned, the plan of

3:28:05conservation development, it's only it's

3:28:07just a guideline document. It it's not

3:28:09the same as zoning regulations. Um, but

3:28:12in response to uh the plan of

3:28:15conservation and development, the zoning

3:28:17uh the town uh in an effort to move

3:28:20forward and advance those policies in

3:28:21the POC uh uh initiated a couple updates

3:28:24to the zoning regulations. The first in

3:28:272020 by private property owners, updates

3:28:30to the BP Park District. Um at that time

3:28:32there were some ownerous uh limitations

3:28:34and restrictions on warehouse and

3:28:36distribution center uses. Um they were

3:28:38allowed by special permit. They were

3:28:40accessory uses, size limitations, really

3:28:44restrictive setback requirements, I

3:28:45think 750 ft or so at the time. And so

3:28:49recognizing uh the goals set forth in

3:28:52the PCD, the town approved that

3:28:54application to allow uh [clears throat]

3:28:56warehouse and distribution center uses

3:28:58by special permit. Um and then uh

3:29:02following that the town um updated not

3:29:04just the BP district regulations but all

3:29:06of the zoning regulations I believe. Um

3:29:09and there were many workshops that were

3:29:11held. They were it was very open to the

3:29:13public. Uh members of the public

3:29:15attended, members of the council

3:29:16attended, members of the economic

3:29:18development commission attended. And as

3:29:21part of that application or that process

3:29:23in 2023, ultimately the town also um

3:29:27revised the zoning regulations further

3:29:30through a public hearing process subject

3:29:32to notice requirements and changed

3:29:34warehouse and distribution centers from

3:29:36special permit in the business park

3:29:38district to allowed to being allowed as

3:29:41of right subject to site plan review and

3:29:43approval. And what does this uh what

3:29:46does this show? This shows that the town

3:29:49[clears throat]

3:29:50uh not only in advancing the goals set

3:29:52forth in the plan of conservation and

3:29:53development and and updating the zoning

3:29:55regulations, but it also demonstrates

3:29:58that the town as a matter of policy uh

3:30:01by making this use um permissible in the

3:30:04business park subject to site plan

3:30:06review believes that's it's it's an

3:30:08appropriate use for this zoning

3:30:09district. Next slide, please.

3:30:15And um so the next couple slides uh

3:30:20Commissioner Chairman Thurlo towards the

3:30:22end of the first application process you

3:30:24really we were preparing um kind of a

3:30:27final summation showing compliance with

3:30:29all of the zoning requirements and and

3:30:30and we understand that um this is a new

3:30:34application. We're happy to go through

3:30:35all the reports and plans again. Um but

3:30:38this this project has been designed to

3:30:41comply with all those requirements.

3:30:42those site plan criteria. Uh warehouse

3:30:45and distribution allowed in the zone

3:30:47complies with the setbacks area bulk

3:30:49height set plan requ uh setback

3:30:51requirements. The height was reduced

3:30:53from 53 feet to 50 feet during the first

3:30:55proceeding. U comprehensive landscaping

3:30:58plan phototric plan. Um we can get into

3:31:01more of this later. Compliant parking.

3:31:03Uh next slide please. I think one of the

3:31:06last comments I had to the previous

3:31:07attorney at the previous application was

3:31:10I'd like an explanation about how it

3:31:14fits. A building of this size fits the

3:31:17zone when when we went through the rags.

3:31:21The whole indication was it was supposed

3:31:23to be multiple small buildings on

3:31:24smaller lots. So I think I think it

3:31:28surprised us to see something so huge

3:31:31and contradictory to what our we thought

3:31:34what we

3:31:35>> I understand that um there was

3:31:37>> at some point

3:31:38>> yeah we're we're hap in the in a future

3:31:41meeting we can go through compliance

3:31:43with in really in depth but and then

3:31:45this uh uh commission members this is

3:31:48taken from it's a little hard to read on

3:31:50the screen but it's uh this is an

3:31:53excerpt this is the zoning table and the

3:31:55parking table from the the site plan uh

3:31:58submissions that were uh recently

3:32:01submitted that shows the revised

3:32:02modifications

3:32:04Um,

3:32:05and just for the sake of time, I think

3:32:07we're going to bypass this now and get

3:32:09on with the rest of our presentation.

3:32:20>> Uh, good evening, uh, members of the

3:32:22commission. Uh, for the record, um, my

3:32:26name is, um, Adam Winstanley. I'm a

3:32:29principal and founder of uh Win Stanley

3:32:31Enterprises.

3:32:33Um I thought it would make sense um for

3:32:37to kind of like demystify the process a

3:32:40little bit. Um I just wanted everybody

3:32:42on the commission to know that I am the

3:32:46contract holder of all 25 land sites.

3:32:50Um, I was the one that came to

3:32:52Killingly, put this project together,

3:32:55and um brought my client to this this

3:32:58town and this site. Um, I've been in the

3:33:01real estate business for 37 years. Um, I

3:33:05did my first project in Connecticut in

3:33:071994. I've done over 60 projects in

3:33:11Connecticut. I've worked out throughout

3:33:13the entire state. My company has

3:33:15developed the biotech zone in New Haven.

3:33:18We've developed um all around the state

3:33:21all different types of projects. I also

3:33:24have five leases with Amazon and um

3:33:27they're one of the best uh customers

3:33:29that I could possibly bring to the

3:33:30table. But basically the the history is

3:33:34I don't come to communities unless

3:33:36there's a reason.

3:33:38and I received a call um from a broker

3:33:42representing a number of land owners

3:33:45here that were interested in attracting

3:33:47our company to this site and this

3:33:49community. That's ultimately what

3:33:51brought me here. This site was reszoned

3:33:54to the BIS business park district. If

3:33:57this was a special permit site,

3:33:59[clears throat]

3:34:00I'm not picking on the other project,

3:34:02my company would not have picked up this

3:34:04project. That's the main reason why

3:34:07we've arrived here. And this particular

3:34:10site, if you look at it from a density

3:34:12standpoint, 600 acres, I'm the one that

3:34:15put together all the buffers around this

3:34:17site. Um,

3:34:19Pineacres, the Hunt Club, I'm the one

3:34:22that came up with the idea to basically

3:34:25bring that into the mix. That came in

3:34:27much later because I thought it would be

3:34:29really attractive to put huge buffers

3:34:31around this project.

3:34:33And something else I just wanted to say

3:34:36that, [clears throat] excuse me, I had a

3:34:39opportunity to work with three different

3:34:41companies. Um, I [clears throat] chose

3:34:43Amazon because I have the most

3:34:46experience with them. I feel like that

3:34:48they they are the most flexible. Other

3:34:50companies that were also Fortune 500

3:34:52companies that I could have brought

3:34:54here, they were not as flexible. They

3:34:56were not willing to work with me on the

3:34:58wetlands, on buffers, and things of that

3:35:00nature. And I know this building, this

3:35:03project, um, I understand and I I' I've

3:35:06listened very carefully to all the

3:35:08comments in the community, but my client

3:35:11has, I think, done an amazing job to,

3:35:14you know, we started with a um a a two

3:35:17exit plan. They've gone to one exit

3:35:18plans. They've shrunk the building down.

3:35:21They've done a lot of good work here.

3:35:22They've been very flexible and I feel

3:35:25like that this is the best possible

3:35:27client that I can bring to this site and

3:35:29I hope that um I am going to continue to

3:35:32be part of this process and I want to be

3:35:35responsible. Um I've done projects all

3:35:38around Killingly. I'm familiar with the

3:35:40area. I'm not, you know, based in

3:35:42California. I have an office in

3:35:44Hartford. I have an office in New Haven.

3:35:46Um, I turned around the American

3:35:48Standard Plant in Planefield and rehab

3:35:50that at 85 Musa Pond Road. I'm the one

3:35:53that bought the dog track site and

3:35:55redeveloped that site. So, I'm all

3:35:57around this area and I do projects um

3:36:00all over the state. I'm hoping that we

3:36:03can do a great job here and I'm very

3:36:05convinced that my team and the people

3:36:07here will do a good job as well. Thank

3:36:10you.

3:36:24Good evening. My name is Parker Davis

3:36:26and I'm on Amazon's economic development

3:36:28policy team. I just want to thank the

3:36:29commission and the town of Killingly and

3:36:31everyone here today for having me uh

3:36:33having us here to talk about this

3:36:35project. Really appreciate it. Um, as

3:36:37this is a continuation, we really are,

3:36:40you know, you know, we will work with

3:36:42the commission and, you know, get you

3:36:43everything you need. We'll work with our

3:36:44team, right, to make sure that

3:36:46everything is presented. But, you know,

3:36:47tonight and the sake of time, you know,

3:36:49I'll just briefly cover over, you know,

3:36:50reaffirming the project and, you know,

3:36:52kind of some of the project benefits.

3:36:55So, as previously presented, this propos

3:36:57proposed facility is an Amazon sortable

3:36:59fulfillment center. Uh this is a first

3:37:01mile inventory warehouse where products

3:37:03become available for purchase by our

3:37:04customers throughout the northeast

3:37:06region. So we're talking about books um

3:37:09you know warehouse uh houseware toys you

3:37:12know uh for reference it typically holds

3:37:14goods that fit inside of an airport

3:37:15security bin a variety of products most

3:37:17often purchased by our customer base. At

3:37:20this facility inventory arrives as

3:37:22supplies. It is broken down and stored

3:37:24within the building. And then as

3:37:25customers place orders, it becomes

3:37:27available on our app on Amazon and our

3:37:29app and website. And so then once a

3:37:32customer orders it, it is pack picked,

3:37:34packed and ready to be delivered to our

3:37:36customers. This proposed facility would

3:37:38play a major role in our distribution

3:37:40network. This first mile facility hands

3:37:42the inventory and packaging phase,

3:37:44delivering projects of product, sorry,

3:37:46excuse me, delivering products via

3:37:48linehaul trucks to our middle mile

3:37:49sortation centers and ultimately to our

3:37:51last mile delivery stations before

3:37:53arriving at our customers doorsteps.

3:37:55Facility type and general operations

3:37:57made largely the same as previously

3:37:58presented. We will continue to work with

3:38:00our development partners Ryan company

3:38:02and the team right and the other experts

3:38:04tonight to address any comments as

3:38:05throughout the process and any other

3:38:07meetings. Just quickly um the project

3:38:09benefits the probes facility remains a

3:38:11meaningful increase to killing this task

3:38:13base. This is a capital investment of

3:38:14estimated over 150 million with the at

3:38:18this time what we are projecting a

3:38:20property annual property tax of 2.6

3:38:22million revenues that will go directly

3:38:24towards supporting the community. This

3:38:28facility will also provide at least 500

3:38:30permanent full-time positions. Our

3:38:32national average starting wage for those

3:38:33roles is $23 an hour. This includes

3:38:36comprehensive benefits that start day

3:38:38one, including but not limited to

3:38:41medical, dental, and vision insurance,

3:38:43401k with company match, and parental

3:38:45leave. Amazon also offers our career

3:38:48choice program. We partner with schools

3:38:49such as Yukon, Quinn Valley, and Three

3:38:51Rivers. Our associates choose their

3:38:53program, register for classes, and

3:38:55Amazon pays the tuition directly to the

3:38:57school. Whether they advance with Amazon

3:38:59or take their education elsewhere, we

3:39:01are investing in their future. We also

3:39:03anticipate at least 200 construction

3:39:05jobs and we believe this to be a

3:39:07conservative estimate based on our

3:39:08proposed plans. Again, it would be

3:39:11brief. Thank you for your time and I

3:39:13will hand it back over to the team, but

3:39:14I also remain available for questions.

3:39:16So, thank you.

3:39:17>> So, before you step away, if you could,

3:39:19can you walk me through a package?

3:39:21[music] So, you said the products are

3:39:23packaged and and picked and packaged for

3:39:25shipment.

3:39:26>> Yes. Um,

3:39:27>> so how do they get to the customer after

3:39:28that?

3:39:29>> So, how do they get to the customer

3:39:30after that? So they they go via linehaul

3:39:32trucks to our middle mile facilities

3:39:34then to our last mile distribution

3:39:35centers.

3:39:36>> So what's a what's a line hall truck for

3:39:37the general public?

3:39:38>> Sorry, apologies. So we're talking about

3:39:40the 18 wheelers um apologies just

3:39:42terminology. So the 18 wheelers. So

3:39:44that's where the truck traffic which our

3:39:45traffic expert expert will talk about

3:39:47and then we'll go to our facilities and

3:39:48then to our last mile distribute

3:39:50delivery stations that will go to our

3:39:52customers.

3:39:53>> So all packages coming in or all

3:39:54products coming in are 18 whalers.

3:39:56>> Yes.

3:39:57>> Then all packages going out are leaving

3:39:58by 18 whalers. Uh, all those to our

3:40:01middle mile and delivery stations. Yes.

3:40:02>> Okay. So, now you're caveing it. All

3:40:04those to middle mile. So, all packages

3:40:07leaving via 18 wheelers or other

3:40:08vehicles leaving with packages for

3:40:10delivery.

3:40:10>> Yes. I know we had previously referenced

3:40:12flex delivery drivers which we included

3:40:14in our traffic studies. We have

3:40:15anticipated a future use for it. That's

3:40:17why I was just restating. I was just

3:40:18primarily the facility is dedicated

3:40:21towards inventory warehouse. That's

3:40:22primary uh use of our application.

3:40:24>> Okay. But this could be considered a

3:40:26highQ picking facility where localized

3:40:28trucks are going out for local

3:40:29deliveries.

3:40:30>> Again, that might be a part of the

3:40:32operation if the demand meets it, right?

3:40:34Like this facility as indicated and as

3:40:36we have proposed, right, is for

3:40:38inventory, right? And that's why it's

3:40:41such a facility. We just based on demand

3:40:43also can offer that if the demand is

3:40:45there, right? And so we want to

3:40:46anticipate that.

3:40:47>> Okay. But again, if you listen to last

3:40:48application, if it's going to be

3:40:50considered, it needs to be part of the

3:40:51application. So my question is it is or

3:40:53it is not. If it is, it sounds like it's

3:40:55contemplated. So then all the studies

3:40:56need to reference the fact that this

3:40:58could have localized delivery trucks

3:41:00leaving.

3:41:00>> Yes.

3:41:00>> And then those traffic counts and those

3:41:02numbers and those vehicles need to be

3:41:03contemplated and reflected in the

3:41:04reports.

3:41:05>> Yes. Understand. And we'll make sure

3:41:06those clear for you and the October

3:41:08meeting. We'll make sure to be very

3:41:09clear and upfront about it. So that way

3:41:11you have everything sorry everything

3:41:14that you can uh consider at your propos

3:41:16as you consider this project.

3:41:18>> Okay. Thank you,

3:41:19>> Commissioner Carr. Just

3:41:21sorry.

3:41:23Uh Dustin Curran uh Ryan Company's here.

3:41:26Uh just to reflect what we had

3:41:27previously said in the last application,

3:41:30the idea of flex or delivery station

3:41:33from uh direct to uh consumers from the

3:41:36site is a potential future use that

3:41:38would have to come back in front of this

3:41:40commission before being applied. So it's

3:41:41not considered in our site plan.

3:41:43However, uh we've kind of kept our

3:41:45traffic counts to include all of the

3:41:47traffic coming in and out of the

3:41:48facility contemplated at the time as a

3:41:50conservative um estimate. and we'll talk

3:41:52through that um when Mark gives his uh

3:41:55>> Yeah, you'll need to remind me of that

3:41:56because I remember asking those

3:41:57questions and was told no, there would

3:41:59be none. It was it was just I think 150

3:42:01was what you guys used for traffic

3:42:03>> code I believe in ITC or I don't think

3:42:05because I was asking about the higher

3:42:06ones. I don't think you guys changed I

3:42:08think your traffic engineer said

3:42:09there'll be no difference,

3:42:10>> right? We'll let Mark get into that when

3:42:12we jump into traffic.

3:42:13>> But what I'm hearing from him is that it

3:42:14is what I'm hearing from you is that

3:42:15it's not. So

3:42:16>> it is not part of the site plan

3:42:18currently. So it's not contemplated as a

3:42:20part of the site plan. That's just going

3:42:21to be reflected in some document that we

3:42:23see. Please,

3:42:32we'll turn it over to Timo. Tim,

3:42:49Tim, we're working on the sound here.

3:43:04Try again, Tim.

3:43:05>> Okay.

3:43:05>> Can you hear me now?

3:43:09>> How about now?

3:43:11>> Yes.

3:43:12>> Excellent. Thanks. Uh, apologies for

3:43:15being remote tonight. Had to deal with

3:43:17ever source and lack of power to the

3:43:19house. But, uh, again, Timuro,

3:43:22professional engineer with Langan.

3:43:23Thanks for taking the time to hear our

3:43:25application this evening.

3:43:27uh wanted to to quickly mention some of

3:43:29the revisions that we've incorporated

3:43:31into this submission and uh completely

3:43:34understand from Commissioner Carr the

3:43:36the desire to run through all the

3:43:37materials again to make sure we've got a

3:43:39complete record. U but just an update

3:43:41from what you've seen previously to the

3:43:44latest materials that we'll expect you

3:43:46you'll want to be reviewing over the

3:43:47next month and that we expect would also

3:43:49be reviewed by Tai and Bond. Uh but we

3:43:52made a small change to the building uh

3:43:55and took a section of the the southern

3:43:58side about 58,000 square feet of the

3:44:01building was removed to slightly reduce

3:44:04the building footprint. Uh this has been

3:44:06a function of discussion with the

3:44:08wetland commission looking at

3:44:09alternatives and find ways to uh try and

3:44:12tighten up the development footprint uh

3:44:14as well as reduce impervious area. Uh in

3:44:17addition to the building footprint

3:44:19reduction,

3:44:21uh we also removed 230 parking spaces

3:44:25that kind of coincide with the the use

3:44:28uh from that area of the building and

3:44:30eliminated 29 trailer stalls uh around

3:44:33the the back and sides of the building.

3:44:35Uh and all in between the reduction in

3:44:37parking and the reduction in building

3:44:39footprint uh we were able to reduce the

3:44:41total impervious for the site by about

3:44:43four and a half acres. Uh that also let

3:44:46us uh shape shift a little bit and we

3:44:48were able to provide some separation

3:44:50distance to one of the on-site wetlands

3:44:52at about another 40t of buffer. Uh

3:44:54recognizing that's not uh your purview

3:44:57um but did allow us to to move a little

3:45:00bit um and with the reduction in

3:45:03impervious uh were able to reduce the

3:45:06storm water management underground

3:45:08detention system uh by a little bit less

3:45:10than 10%. So, uh that that co cor

3:45:13corresponded to um that that reduction

3:45:16in impervious and adjustments to the

3:45:18watershed. Uh as attorney Seaman

3:45:20mentioned, we've uh completed an updated

3:45:23storm water management report that

3:45:25reflects the calculations associated

3:45:27with these changes um and have submitted

3:45:29that as part of the record.

3:45:31>> Mr. Before you before you move on, I

3:45:34lose track.

3:45:35>> You said you asked uh how many parking

3:45:37places?

3:45:39Uh we removed 201.

3:45:42>> Okay. And now they

3:45:44>> car spaces, 29 trailer spaces.

3:45:48>> Okay.

3:45:49>> Thank you.

3:45:50>> Yep.

3:45:53Uh go to the the next slide here. Uh

3:45:57this is a copy of the building

3:46:00elevation. the um

3:46:04the uh red box on the the top image

3:46:08identifies the portion of the building

3:46:09that was removed. So uh at the top was

3:46:12the existing uh building elevation uh

3:46:16and then the image at the bottom is the

3:46:18current building elevation. So uh that

3:46:20is a small section from the southern

3:46:22side of the building.

3:46:25Um again um we can spend more time on

3:46:30this uh but wanted to note that um we've

3:46:34incorporated all of the the comments and

3:46:36discussion that we had uh with the

3:46:38commission and the fire marshall uh

3:46:41including showing uh emergency vehicle

3:46:45movements through uh the employee

3:46:48parking lot, including all of the drop

3:46:50off areas at the front of the building.

3:46:53Uh as part of the meetings with the fire

3:46:54marshall, we identified the fire command

3:46:56center, provided confirmation on

3:46:59vertical and horizontal clearances uh

3:47:02and also worked through a number of

3:47:05revisions to uh on-site fire hydrants,

3:47:08on-site fire loops, and on-site fire

3:47:11tanks. uh and certainly could come back

3:47:13with our fire protection engineer uh and

3:47:16and walk through all those items again,

3:47:18but have incorporated all of the the

3:47:21things that we worked through previously

3:47:22in in this application and reflect those

3:47:25in the plan set. Uh next slide. Uh

3:47:28similarly to all the testimony and

3:47:31information we provided in the prior

3:47:33application regarding storm water

3:47:34quality and storm water management, we

3:47:37still have the storm water treatment

3:47:38train where we have a number of steps to

3:47:43the capture, cleaning and uh release of

3:47:46storm water from the site using deep

3:47:49catch basins, hydrodnamic separators. We

3:47:52have underground detention systems to

3:47:54hold back uh the rainwater that falls in

3:47:57the site and meter its release. Uh we

3:47:59also use a a media filter to meet the

3:48:04current uh Connecticut storm water

3:48:06manual requirements and then have a

3:48:09number of level spreaders that dissipate

3:48:11the velocity uh as that storm water is

3:48:14released to the on-site wetlands. Those

3:48:17locations have been coordinated with our

3:48:21uh wetland scientists and uh actually

3:48:23kind of GPS located in the field to make

3:48:25sure that where we reintroduce storm

3:48:28water uh from our storm water management

3:48:30system is the mo most appropriate place

3:48:33on site and mimics uh natural drainage

3:48:36patterns. So again uh all of those those

3:48:40items are incorporated into the new

3:48:42application. Similarly, we include

3:48:44information on uh post construction

3:48:47maintenance and operation for all of the

3:48:51components. So, it's not just they get

3:48:53installed and no one knows how they

3:48:55operate or how they're maintained.

3:48:57There's uh frequency of inspection for

3:49:00all of the components as well as uh what

3:49:03to look for uh and identify when

3:49:06maintenance is actually needed and not

3:49:08just observations. Um so that

3:49:11information is also included in the

3:49:12storm water management report. Uh we

3:49:16continue to include uh soil erosion and

3:49:18sediment control plans that identify uh

3:49:21how the work moves across the site and

3:49:23what various phases of development look

3:49:26like. This project uh because it

3:49:29disturbs more than 5 acres uh requires a

3:49:32Connecticut D stormwater general permit

3:49:34uh and because it disturbs more than 15

3:49:36acres total requires a third party

3:49:39review completely separate from uh my

3:49:42firm and the the third party that has

3:49:44peer reviewed the application on the

3:49:46commission's behalf. uh they have to uh

3:49:49be retained by the developer and uh have

3:49:53to certify to the state that they review

3:49:56independently reviewed the materials

3:49:58prepared by our office and that those

3:50:00meet the general permit requirements.

3:50:02And then during construction

3:50:05uh we have uh weekly monitoring or more

3:50:09frequent monitoring depending on

3:50:11rainfall events. Um, and that work is

3:50:14kind of twofold in that there's a civil

3:50:16component as well as a wetland

3:50:18component. Um, the wetland component

3:50:20being regulated by the wetland

3:50:22commission. Uh, and the the civil

3:50:25component uh regulated by uh Connecticut

3:50:28deep and the stormwater general permit.

3:50:30Um, the next slide. Oh, sorry. Did I uh

3:50:33we flipped too fast? Yeah, this is uh we

3:50:35thought it was appropriate to include uh

3:50:38as part of the presentation and can

3:50:39certainly spend more time on this next

3:50:40month. uh what one of those inspection

3:50:43reports look like. Uh this is from I

3:50:46believe the Waterberry that's under

3:50:47construction or the Amazon that's under

3:50:49construction in Waterberry and Ngatuck.

3:50:52Uh provides a summary of the site,

3:50:55includes photos, identifies

3:50:57deficiencies, identifies corrective

3:50:59actions that may be needed, and closes

3:51:01out prior corrective actions that have

3:51:03been identified. So um kind of a gives

3:51:06you a glimpse into uh what occurs as

3:51:09part of the inspection that we we have

3:51:12to do as part of the uh storm water

3:51:14general permit uh controlled by the

3:51:16state.

3:51:18>> We got to uh extend it or decide whether

3:51:22we're extending beyond 11.

3:51:24>> I believe your bylaws are pretty clear

3:51:26that 11:00 is a hard stop. Uh there's no

3:51:31option under your bylaws to go past 11

3:51:34o'clock.

3:51:34>> This is our last section, so we can hit

3:51:36a couple slides here real quick and then

3:51:39move on.

3:51:40>> Keep it quick. Uh good evening. Uh I'm

3:51:43Mark Fertuchi, senior transportation

3:51:45engineer at Fussen O'Neal uh in Harford.

3:51:48Um also registered professional engineer

3:51:50and professional traffic operations

3:51:52engineer. Uh wanted to give you a brief

3:51:54uh history of uh the submissions for our

3:51:57our traffic study. We did under the

3:51:59prior application, we submitted an

3:52:01initial study uh analyzing the two

3:52:04separate driveways, one for passenger

3:52:06car and one for u uh the trucks only. Um

3:52:11then uh in response to comments we had

3:52:14received from OTAA and your peer

3:52:16reviewer Ty and Bon, we revised that

3:52:18traffic study to analyze all traffic

3:52:21coming in from a a single sight driveway

3:52:24approximately uh 600 ft east uh of 395

3:52:28interchange on Westcot Road. That study

3:52:31is the same study we submitted uh as

3:52:34part of this updated um application. Uh

3:52:37it is conservative. We did not take any

3:52:39credit for the reduction in car and

3:52:41trailer spaces that Tim just talked

3:52:43about. Um so it's a conservatively high

3:52:46impact of the uh the traffic we're

3:52:48generating here. So just to give you a

3:52:50high overview again of the findings of

3:52:52the study, our recommendations

3:52:54uh were to install um replace the

3:52:57existing traffic signal at the Wescott

3:53:00Road Gothier 395 southbound off-ramp

3:53:04intersection. Uh we are proposing new

3:53:07traffic signals at Knox Avenue at WCOT

3:53:10and the 395 northbound on-ramp

3:53:14uh to facilitate safe and efficient

3:53:16operations for uh the cars and trucks

3:53:19coming into and out of the site. Also

3:53:21proposing a new traffic signal at the

3:53:24site driveway at Reynolds Hillside View

3:53:26and Wescott Road as well. Um, as far as

3:53:31uh lane arrangements, we're we're

3:53:33proposing the addition of a new

3:53:35eastbound left turn lane um on Westcot

3:53:37Road entering the site. There's some

3:53:39minor road widening involved with that.

3:53:41And also the addition of a new westbound

3:53:43left turn lane on Westcot Road onto

3:53:46Gothier Avenue. This is under the 395

3:53:50overpass. And that's a restriping.

3:53:53Um so the summary u of the findings of

3:53:55the traffic study the the site distance

3:53:58requirements are met um at the site

3:54:00driveway exit. We exceed DOT criteria

3:54:03for safe egress. Uh and upon

3:54:05implementation of those off-site

3:54:07improvements I just talked about um all

3:54:10of the intersections in the study area

3:54:12operate at an acceptable level of

3:54:15service by Connecticut DOT standards.

3:54:17and the additional daily vehicle and

3:54:19truck traffic is consistent um with

3:54:22typical roadways uh typical roadways of

3:54:25that classification. The um major

3:54:28collector roads that exist in the study

3:54:29area wanted to hit on truck traffic very

3:54:32quickly.

3:54:34I've been there's been a lot of

3:54:35statements made regarding um high ranges

3:54:38of trucks ranging up to 800 trucks per

3:54:40day. That is not accurate. um the volume

3:54:44of truck daily truck traffic that this

3:54:46development will be generating again on

3:54:48an average day 30 about 334

3:54:52uh trucks per day. If you break that

3:54:54down to hourly uh truck trips it's about

3:54:5914 per hour um on average. So some hours

3:55:02are a little bit more, some a little bit

3:55:03less, but uh it could get up to about 20

3:55:06trips uh per hour for trucks uh leaving

3:55:09the site on Wescott Road. And then when

3:55:12they get to the 395 interchange, as you

3:55:14can see in this graphic here, uh they

3:55:16split. You've got about, you know, five

3:55:18trucks, five truck trips heading uh

3:55:21north on 395 um and coming in from the

3:55:25north and then five truck trips uh

3:55:27leaving heading south on Gothier towards

3:55:30395 southbound and five trips coming in

3:55:33northbound and getting off on Knox. So

3:55:36just to equate this, I mean the five

3:55:38truck trips in an hour, that's one new

3:55:41truck trip every 12 minutes. So this is

3:55:44not a constant volume of of trucks

3:55:47you're seeing here um coming in and out

3:55:49on these roads in the in the peak hour.

3:55:52Um moving forward, these are the

3:55:54off-site improvement graphics that um

3:55:56basically are illustrating what I

3:55:58described earlier, the new traffic

3:56:00signals um at both of the 395 ramps. Uh

3:56:04we're showing the addition of the the

3:56:06westbound left turn lane um under the

3:56:09overpass onto Gothier.

3:56:12And on the next slide, um again, this is

3:56:14our site driveway intersection here. New

3:56:17eastbound left turn lane being proposed

3:56:19into the site, two lanes exiting, and uh

3:56:22a new traffic signal there at the um

3:56:25Reynolds Hillside View and Site Driveway

3:56:27intersection. Uh and on the last slide,

3:56:31uh just to update you where we are with

3:56:34DOT, um we are we are through the

3:56:38scoping review process for them. The

3:56:40step one volume uh process. They've

3:56:43approved our volumes and trip

3:56:45projections. Um into the step two

3:56:48process now and nearly complete with it.

3:56:50Um we did receive uh comments from them.

3:56:54We have addressed them all resubmitted.

3:56:56We're just waiting to hear back from

3:56:58them on any additional comments they

3:56:59might have uh on the step two process.

3:57:02Um and once we do address any additional

3:57:05comments, we would move to the final

3:57:07step three and that's where OSA approves

3:57:10the application and and develops a a

3:57:12list of conditions of approval that uh

3:57:14we'll need to adhere to

3:57:17and I can address any next meeting.

3:57:21>> Mr. See, is it possible give us a couple

3:57:23minutes just to go through

3:57:25>> so so you guys can go on to the next

3:57:27meeting?

3:57:30>> Yes, Mr. Chair.

3:57:31>> I appreciate it.

3:57:33>> So, we want to uh receive these other

3:57:36two applications before we

3:57:39go away for the night or

3:57:41>> Yeah, I just just some housekeeping. The

3:57:44intervention thing, I think that would

3:57:45have to be for next month. Okay.

3:57:47>> Um uh uh I don't know if you can quickly

3:57:50touch on that or I think that might be

3:57:51better touched on on a fresh meeting.

3:57:54>> Um but that's up to you.

3:57:55>> Yeah, I mean I think it would be better

3:57:57fresh because I don't think the

3:57:58applicant has a had a chance to review

3:58:01the revised intervention.

3:58:04>> I don't know if the applicant has had a

3:58:06chance to review the re revised

3:58:08interventions.

3:58:10Um although

3:58:12you know I think things are similar

3:58:14enough to the last time that the advice

3:58:16that we gave in Ken's memo dated June

3:58:2027th probably is still valid.

3:58:24>> All right. So so we'll do that for next

3:58:26month.

3:58:26>> Yeah.

3:58:27>> All right. Should we receive these or

3:58:29>> uh so so generally if the meeting ends

3:58:31the new business items are received by

3:58:33default. I mean so they just will appear

3:58:36on your agenda as unfinished business

3:58:38next month unless for some reason you

3:58:40want to look at them and look to

3:58:42schedule say public hearings or anything

3:58:44like that.

3:58:48>> It's up to the I mean you want to

3:58:49discuss it now.

3:58:51>> Just keeping in mind it is 11:01. Your

3:58:53bylaws say the meeting ends at 11.

3:58:55>> We're done. So, um, you'll have to do by

3:58:59default. Then,

3:59:02>> do you have a motion to adjurnn?

3:59:04>> I'm waiting for one.

3:59:06>> Make a motion. Journ. Have

3:59:07>> a second, please.

3:59:10Second.

3:59:10>> No.

3:59:11>> Second by John Sarintopolis. All in

3:59:13favor?

3:59:14>> I

3:59:16oppose.

```*