Charlotte Planning Commission

Meeting Minutes

Thursday August 8, 2002

 

Approved: September 19, 2002

 

Members Present:     Chair Jeff McDonald    Gordon Troy    Jim Donovan

                                    Al Moraska

Officials Present:       Dean Bloch

 

Members Absent:      Josie Leavitt     David Brown

 

Meeting Called to Order at 7:15 PM

 

Continued Discussion of Informal Site Plan Review of Hinsdale LFO

 

1.      Continued Discussion of Traffic Increase and Circulation of Parking

 

Jeff McDonald asked the Hinsdales if they were able to obtain any site plans with  any contours or  elevation views.

 

Clark Hinsdale III responded that since the previous meeting they were able to create a memo regarding the flow of traffic, which was handed out to the members of the Planning Commission and members of the public.  He also stated that they were able to produce a contour map from an aerial photograph, which could show elevations on the site and from a distance.

 

Jeff McDonald asked Clark Hinsdale III to go over the memo concerning the flow of traffic on the LFO.

 

Clark Hinsdale III reviewed the memo which marked out trips on a daily basis and also trips that occurred out of a routine, but would be necessary.  He explained that the memo showed an average of fifty trip ends per day on the LFO. 

 

Dean Bloch asked Clark Hinsdale III to specify the definition of trip end.

 

It was determined that one trip end constituted a single trip either arriving or departing from the farm.

 

Clark Hinsdale III estimated the daily activity on the LFO as being twice that of the Titus Farm already in operation.  He also explained that the biggest increase in traffic would be seen during the manure spreading in the spring and fall.  He estimated two hundred trip ends would be necessary during these time periods.

 

Lynn Neuegyashi asked that if the estimates presented were based on 690 cows, then what would the projected traffic flow be for the farm once it reached its goal of 2,400 cows?

 

Clark Hinsdale Jr. responded that they were not proposing to grow to 2,400 cows, and that their intentions were to keep within the regulations of the proposal for which they were applying, which is for 690 cows.

 

Peter Joslin asked if the number of milk truck deliveries would increase with the number of cows.

 

Clark Hinsdale Jr. responded that a bigger truck would be used for pick-ups.

 

Jeff McDonald inquired about the increase in size of the truck.

 

Clark Hinsdale Jr. answered that the truck would change from a straight-job to a tractor trailer.

 

Dick Hong asked if the Hinsdales were committed to a maximum number of cows that would not be exceeded.

 

Clark Hinsdale Jr. responded that they are not committed to a maximum number.

 

Ann Corrigan shared her experiences from living near a large farm operation.  She expressed her belief that the farm had disturbed her environment, and overall created an unpleasant atmosphere in which to live.

 

Jeff McDonald asked the Hinsdales how many parking spaces they intended to have on the farm.

 

Clark Hinsdale III responded that according to Charlie Proutt’s plans, there would be eight in front of the barn and six in back of the barn.

 

Gordon Troy proposed that the Planning Commission and the public give the Hinsdales more direction as to which site is more appealing.

 

A discussion took place regarding the advantages and disadvantages of both sites.

 

The Planning Commission expressed an opinion that the second site offered more advantages than the original site plan.

 

Linda Hamilton expressed her concern over identifying the edge of the wetlands within the LFO boundaries.

 

Jim Donovan explained that on the Federal and State levels if a wetland is contained within agricultural lands it is not considered a regulated wetland.

 

Sylvia Knight expressed her concerns about the pesticides being used on the farm eventually ending up in the groundwater.

 

Clark Hinsdale Jr. explained that 1,000 gallons of leakage per day is based on the pit being filled with pure water.  If the pit had a clay liner of two feet then the infiltration would be a foot a year of pure water.  For pure water to move 800 feet it would take 800 years.  He explained that this equation was based on pure water in relation to the amount of clay, and that the material in the pit would contain small particles, which would clog up any small holes.  He also remarked that they are voluntarily increasing the size of the clay liner.   

 

Al Moraska asked if it was possible for the manure pit to have any kind of liner.

 

Clark Hinsdale Jr. explained that if one does not have clay, then one is required to have a liner.  He reiterated that clay is the best impermeable liner one can have. 

 

Jack Galt suggested using both the clay and a liner.

 

Jeff McDonald asked if there were leakage detection systems incorporated in the design of the manure pit.

 

Clark Hinsdale III responded that it currently did not, but that he was looking into the matter.

 

2.      Landscaping and Screening

 

Clark Hinsdale III described the trees to be planted around the farm as:

 

Disease resistant elms around the barn to allow for proper ventilation and to provide adequate screening

Green ash to be planted at sixty foot intervals

Sugar Maples to be planted along the route

Three burrows in front of the barn

Trees in front of the milking barn to screen out employee parking

 

Al Moraska asked how many elms were to be planted, and how far apart they were  intended to be.

 

Clark Hinsdale III counted out twenty four trees.

 

Clark Hinsdale Jr. remarked that he was, “still wrestling with this”, and explained that this was what Charlie Proutt recommended.  He expressed that he was concerned that the trees would take away a lot of agricultural land.

 

Gordon Troy asked if there was to be any screening on the north side of the manure pit.

 

Clark Hinsdale Jr. explained that the north side would not show.

 

Gordon Troy pointed out that the north side is the only major visible view when approaching the farm heading south on Guinea Road.

 

Jim Donovan suggested letting the natural growth along the stream grow up to create a natural buffer along the north side.  He also suggested having more of a mix of trees on the farm to avoid the trees from dying out.

 

Jane Wallace pointed out that the hedgerows were there naturally to block light, dust and noise, and although they may take away from agricultural land use, she believes they play an integral part in screening the farm from view.

 

Steve Cantor pointed out that the northerly and easterly hedgerows along Quarter Mile Road are already protected from cutting by the Planning Commission.  He cited a document which stated that before any cutting could be done to this hedgerow, the Planning Commission must first approve the cutting.

 

Jeff McDonald remarked that the general consensus from the public reported a strong desire to preserve the hedgerows already in existence.

 

Clark Hinsdale II responded to this comment with, “we have a twenty year track record for preserving them…why do you think they are all still there?”  He also mentioned, that they may be plans to plant more, rather than take some down.

 

Jeff McDonald asked if there was a way to install the lighting so they would not shine out.

 

Clark Hinsdale III explained that the lighting currently being retailed is all designed to keep from shining out, and that he had no intention of attaching lights to power poles.  He also mentioned that power would be run to the farm underground, so there wouldn’t be any poles.  He did say that there would be small exterior lights installed for employee safety, but that the lights running inside of the barn all night for the cows would be a shadowy, dusky light set on a timer. He also explained that the lights installed inside of the barn would be above the levels of the sides, to hinder light from shining out. 

 

3.      Adequacy of  Water Supply and Sewage Treatment and Disposal

 

Clark Hinsdale III explained that the barn is rated to need 17.6 gallons per minute, per day.  The well-drillers estimated yield is 35 gallons per minute.  He explained that in order to get a permit for a small scale water supply system they must first stress the water in a 72 hour pump test.  He asked if any of the neighbors would be willing to allow their wells to be involved in the testing to see if the neighbors wells would be effected.

 

Jeff McDonald asked how deep the well is.

 

Clark Hinsdale Jr. stated that it is 305 feet.

 

Dean Bloch asked if there was any storage facility.

 

Clark Hinsdale Jr. explained that the water runs into an initial storage tank, then runs into a storage tank at the Titus barn, where it is pumped under pressure to feed the cows.

 

Clark Hinsdale III remarked that the water is running twenty four hours a day, so the water in take from the cows is relatively constant, as opposed to the cows “binge drinking” and putting a strain on the system.

 

John Lawlis asked what volume of water would be used per day.

 

It was estimated to be 25,344 gallons per day.

 

John Lawlis inquired as to the average volume of water per day used in a home.

 

Dean Bloch answered 450 gallons per day.

 

Clark Hinsdale III estimated the water used on the farm to be roughly equal to fifty homes.

 

Jeff McDonald asked when the pump tests were planned on being run.

 

Clark Hinsdale III that it was undeterminable at this point, and that it depended on when the other necessary permits were obtained.

 

Jeff McDonald asked if there was estimated flow for the wastewater.

 

Clark Hinsdale III responded that there was an estimated 15 gallons per day per employee, and that they were estimating to put in a 450 gallon septic system.

 

Jeff McDonald asked if they would be using the existing well.

 

Clark Hinsdale III answered yes, but that they were discussing installing a second well for safety purposes.

 

Nancy Goodrich inquired if there was any one in the state testing wells for  traces of herbicides and pesticides.

 

Clark Hinsdale III explained that Jeff Comstock has been working full time for the past eight years testing wells.  He also stated that the results were posted as public information.

 

Steve Cantor asked which herbicides and pesticides were being used.

 

Clark Hinsdale Jr. explained that they gave all the labels of any chemicals currently used to Sylvia Knight.  He also remarked that if any one wanted further information, as to where and when and how much chemicals they used, he would be glad to supply this information to them.

 

4.      Recognition of Natural Features

 

Jack Galt explained that according to his research, the Town Plan recognized the area of the proposed LFO to be a connecting area for various species of wildlife habitat, and that it is cited in the Town Plan as being one of nine scenic view vistas.  He also stated that his understanding of the intentions for this parcel of land was that it was to be retained as an agricultural district with the intent of preserving its natural beauty.

 

Clark Hinsdale III responded that the New Farm Bill provided incentives to farmers to retain buffers and cooperate with retaining the landscape’s natural beauty.

 

A discussion took place regarding alternative options to the LFO.  It was decided that the Hinsdales and members of the public would meet on an informal basis to discuss these alternatives.

 

5.      Historical Structures

 

Clark Hinsdale III stated that there were no historical structures on the proposed sites.

 

Adjournment

 

A MOTION was made by Jeff McDonald to adjourn.

 

Jim Donovan SECONDED the motion.

 

The meeting ADJOURNED a t 10:10 PM.