-----date----- |
---name---- |
------------comment------------ |
Mon Jun 20 23:18:05 2005 |
administrator |
Archived the old comments. See above. |
Tue Jun 21 09:57:32 2005 |
|
Great Commentary from the Courant. Cut and paste this link
into your browser...
http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/commentary/hc-plcsevigny0619.artjun19,0,7591060.story?coll=hc-utility-commentary |
Fri Jun 24 11:57:32 2005 |
|
So...what's going on? Did anything happen at the wetlands
meeting on Tues? Are they going to planning yet? |
Fri Jun 24 22:08:33 2005 |
|
What is going on down the street ?? Why didn't you try to
stop THAT development ? ? |
Sat Jun 25 22:53:23 2005 |
formerfangonesour |
all i can say is that this is not surprising in the least
given my knowledge about how business is run by certain parties, and
this is a tough model to be putting forth to the next generation of
civically-engaged, politically motivated young women. making decisions
without representative input... |
Mon Jun 27 07:50:41 2005 |
|
The conservation commission did not vote on the wetland map
amendment last Tuesday, June 21. The citizens' group intervened in the
process. This allows them to present their own data and cross-examine
Landquest's presenters. The citizens' group says their soil scientist
has found missed wetlands that are not on the Landquest map. The
commission extended the hearing until July 12 and requested that the
soil scientists meet on the property and try to come to a consensus
then present their findings on July 12. EWS stated that they are
currently not willing to grant a time extension to the commission. The
commission will therefore need to take action on the map amendment at
this next meeting before the allowed 35-day window closes. |
Tue Jun 28 21:20:17 2005 |
Susan |
I'm not sure if they have to take action AT the meeting. But
unless EWS grants an extension of the public hearing July 12 is the
last opportunity for public comment. |
Wed Jun 29 14:13:34 2005 |
|
Help |
Wed Jun 29 14:14:15 2005 |
|
help |
Wed Jun 29 20:31:17 2005 |
John |
In response to the person who asked, "Why not stop THAT
development down the street?, that site was zoned for business use many
years ago. The town defeated an earlier proposal for housing on that
site in the hopes that a tax producing business would build on the
parcel. That did not occur and thus we have this fairly dense
residential development. (approximately 185 units in four "villages" on
110 acres) My family moved to Simsbury in 1962 and the liberal open
space requirement, wetlands and the presence of state parks and town
forests seemed to assure that the town would always have undeveloped
areas. The problem is much of that land is fragmented. The importance
of the EW parcel is that it is contiguous to other open space AND it
constitutes a large unfragmented tract that provides wildlife with
uncompromised habitat. And am I the only one who finds the concept of
"wildlife corridors" laughable? Deer, for example, will continue to
travel along established trails even when confronted by development
often to their detriment. I wish Ethel Walker would better appreciate
this irreplaceable asset. |
Thu Jun 30 10:05:32 2005 |
Mary |
HI! This message is for Rev. Dave and Jack. I have reviewed
the Health Dept. Criteria for Septic Systems. A max. 450 gal/day
discharge is equivalent to a 3 bedroom home, not including a bonus room
over the garage. A bonus room is considered another bedroom. |
Thu Jun 30 10:10:33 2005 |
Mary |
A McMansion has an average of 4-5 bedrooms with a bonus room.
This would equate to a maximum of 900 gallons/day wastewater discharge,
not considering a jacussi in the bathroom or a garbage disposal, add
another 250 gallons/each to the tank size not on a daily basis though.
Although the health dept standards give criteria for increase the
septic tank it has changed it's position on increasing the field size.
I still increase my field sizes or put notes on the plans that
disposals or oversized tubs are not allowed without furthur review. Any
questions e-mail me. |
Tue Jul 5 05:32:40 2005 |
Jack |
Message for Karen, Mary and Rev. David: Considering Mary's
comments of 6/30 Simsbury's Zoning Regulations, Article 10 Special
Regulations, J. Aquifer Overlay Zone, 4. Prohibited Uses and, 5.
Restricted Uses, 6. General Design Requirements for Uses in an Aquifer
Protection Zone may present a serious discharge limitations for any
planned homes that may have septic systems. Assumming the reg. as
posted on Simsbury's web site is still current, it imposes among other
conditions and limitations the following: "Residential sanitary
wastewater discharge to on-site septic systems at a rate greater than
450 gallons per 40,000 sq ft per day," Residential uses greater than
one unit per acre," and "Individual lots with on-site septic systems
shall be at least 40,000 square feet in size or connected to a public
sewer." The regs also cover the need to cover by permit excavation,
filling, or the removal of dirt and stormwater drainage design. We
obviously need to monitor any attempts to get variances from these regs. |
Sun Jul 10 20:31:09 2005 |
Diane |
the Flamig Farm event was a great forum for Keep the Woods I
know the Chases and Bill H were involved in putting together the
presentation Whoever did all those maps, overlays, and the
notebook...Great! I think we managed to get the message back to Ethel
Walker...at least to have some questions answered. |
Sat Jul 16 11:47:31 2005 |
|
http://www.courant.com/news/local/hc-highlands.artjul16,0,4243963.story?coll=hc-big-headlines-breaking |
Thu Jul 21 22:02:01 2005 |
administrator |
http://keepthewoods.csideaworks.com/?p=1#comments ---Try that
link. Some have had trouble posting comments using this interface. My
apologies. The above link is to a more robust comment system dedicated
to our efforts. It it not hosted by this web server. |
Sat Jul 23 17:48:53 2005 |
AyeTeach |
We would like to know why one of our more vocal opponents to
this development can in good conscience take this position while they
have an un-finished monstrosity in their back yard because they are too
cheap to hire a contractor? How can they oppose real progress while
they live in Simsbury like it is a Mississippi trailer park with a
basketball goal that's been laying in their front yard for months and
rusty pieces of scrap metal they try to pretend is art and sell out of
their front yard like a hillbilly flea market????? |
Mon Jul 25 14:30:45 2005 |
Mary |
This is in response to AyeTeach. While you may view another
120 McMansions as progress, most of the town would not. If this
property was being used for the Children's Science Center then I would
have to agree with you. That would be progress! And the best kind of
development for the land. However, this is not the real issue we all
are fighting for. It for the quality of YOUR drinking water and life. |
Tue Jul 26 13:15:56 2005 |
John |
I agree, Mary. Sadly, AyeTeach deflects from the serious
issues at hand. Once developed, this pristine forest is lost forever.
Perhaps you read the NY Times article about a similar matter in that
state. On Friday Governor Pataki announced that the 500 acres (over 100
McMansions had been proposed) had been purchased for open space. Let us
hope the same result is achieved with regards to the Ethel Walker
property. |
Tue Jul 26 18:12:35 2005 |
|
http://www.state.ny.us/governor/press/year05/july22_05.htm
Thats the announcement not the Times article... |
Tue Aug 9 20:48:19 2005 |
|
Group Appeals Panel's Ruling - K. Melone's Hartford Courant
article -
http://www.courant.com/news/local/fv/hc-simselect0809.artaug09,0,1524815.story
Cut and paste the above link into your browser... |
Wed Aug 10 14:27:15 2005 |
|
Today, 8/10/05, is the first time I have been able to get on
your web site. We live in Washington, D.C., but my husband, Tom
O'Toole, is from Simsbury, and we visit his mother and the town's
beautiful natural spaces often. Last Fri. I discovered heavy machinery
making roadways in the EW woods. Is it a done deal? |
Wed Aug 10 16:49:26 2005 |
|
It is far from a done deal. The heavy machinery you saw was
digging pits for soil testing. |