Simsbury planners split over Dorset Crossing car wash referral amid aquifer and water-use concerns

The Simsbury Planning Commission on July 14 reviewed a referral from the Zoning Commission for ZC 26-18, an application by Dorset Crossing LLC (agent Dwight Merriam) to add a 7,275-square-foot car wash to Lot F at Dorset Crossing. The meeting was a non-public-hearing referral review; the zoning commission will hold the public hearing on July 20.

The applicant’s team — attorney Dwight Merriam, engineer Brandon Hanfield, architect Brock Lafito and landscape architect Biff Scheckinger — presented site plans, stormwater and wastewater measures, a traffic-impact study and landscape revisions. Merriam said the project uses modern technology to contain and treat wash waters and pointed to 100% native landscaping revisions. “All of the water that’s in there is captured, treated, and the effluent discharged to a public sewer system,” Merriam said.

Engineer Brandon Hanfield said the parcel ties into an existing 2013 underground detention system and ConTek treatment unit and that proposed drainage and treatment would meet the town’s 2023 stormwater-quality manual. Hanfield described the car-wash interior drainage: floor drains lead to a reclamation system of tanks, baffles, filters and pumps; reclaimed water is reused for undercarriage and sidewall cleaning and any excess would be discharged to the sanitary sewer. He told commissioners the team had conservatively submitted a preliminary water-demand estimate to Aquarian Water of about 32,000 gallons per day (including safety and growth factors) and said actual consumption is expected to be lower once the mechanical reclamation system is selected.

The traffic consultant, Scott Hesketh, summarized counts and projections for Route 10 and Dorset Crossing, saying the intersection would operate at acceptable levels of service with the proposed development. Hesketh projected modest on-site queuing under typical conditions and described storage on the site for multiple vehicles; equipment and owner representatives said the tunnel can be operated at speeds from about 100 to 160 vehicles per hour and that the proposed equipment is designed to dry vehicles at top speed.

Commissioners pressed the applicant on two recurring concerns: (1) where runoff and "carryout" (rinse water that leaves with vehicles) ultimately drains, noting some catch basins routed west to the development’s water-quality basin rather than to the municipal sanitary sewer; and (2) water supply during a multiyear drought. Commissioners also sought a formal will-serve (service capacity) confirmation from Aquarian Water. Hanfield said roof runoff and landscaped rain gardens are designed to infiltrate to conservative rates, while interior wash waters are routed to a reclamation system and the sanitary sewer, and that ConTek and deep-sump catch basins would reduce floatables and sediments before discharge to the existing detention/treatment system.

The discussion also touched on chemical safety. The applicant said it contacted Simoniz USA Inc., which provided safety data sheets and a letter indicating the SDS do not list identifiable PFAS compounds; commissioners asked whether detailing-bay chemicals were included in that documentation and the applicant said detailing-bay discharge would not be routed to the sewer.

On policy, commissioners debated whether the car wash aligns with the town’s Plan of Conservation and Development (POCD). Supporters argued the PAD (planned area development) process and updated design reduce impervious area and that the business use serves growing multifamily populations that lack washing facilities. Opponents cited POCD policies prioritizing groundwater protection and water conservation and noted the parcel lies within aquifer protection areas and in a period of drought; several commissioners said these factors make the location a poor fit.

When the commission voted on a motion to deliver a negative referral to the Zoning Commission (citing POCD inconsistency and potential aquifer, water-supply and traffic impacts), the motion failed on a split 2–2 vote. The commission then voted 4–0 to direct staff to prepare a referral record that documents the split vote and includes the commission’s rationales to accompany the pending public hearing at the Zoning Commission.

Next steps: the Zoning Commission’s public hearing on ZC 26-18 is scheduled for the following Monday evening, where the public may comment and the applicant will present the full application. The Planning Commission requested confirmation from Aquarian Water on available supply (a will-serve letter) and asked town engineers to re-confirm that stormwater routing and proposed catch-basin treatments meet municipal requirements before the zoning decision.

The Planning Commission adjourned at 8:49 p.m.