MINUTES<= o:p>
CONSERVA=
TION
COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR
MEETING
THURSDAY=
, MAY
13, 2004 - 7:30 PM
PRESENT: =
; &n=
bsp; =
; Bernard
Beauchamp
=
&nb=
sp; =
&nb=
sp; Ron
Jones, Secretary
=
&nb=
sp; =
&nb=
sp; Joseph
Polletta
=
&nb=
sp; =
&nb=
sp; Edwin
Undercuffler, Vice Chairman
=
&nb=
sp; =
&nb=
sp; James
Zawadzki, Chairman
ABSENT: =
; &n=
bsp; =
; =
Glen
Duplissie
=
&nb=
sp; =
&nb=
sp; Charles
Thermer
ALTERNATES PRESENT: =
; Peter
Peluso
=
&nb=
sp; =
&nb=
sp; Martha
Sturgis
ALTERNATES ABSENT: =
; Susan
Atwood
OTHERS PRESENT: =
; &n=
bsp; Chuck
Berger, Town Engineer
=
; &n=
bsp; =
; &n=
bsp; =
; Paul Jessell, Town Att=
orney
=
; &n=
bsp; =
; &n=
bsp; =
; Moosa Rafey, Assistant
Zoning Enforcement Officer
1. =
Call
Meeting To Order
Mr.
Zawadzki, Chairman, called the Regular Meeting to order at 9:40 p.m.
2. &nb=
sp; Roll
Call
Mr.
Jones, Secretary, executed the Roll Call.
Mr.
Zawadzki, Chairman, asked Mr. Peluso to sit in for Mr. Thermer, in his abse=
nce.
Mr.
Zawadzki, Chairman, asked Ms. Sturgis to sit in for Mr. Duplissie, in his
absence.
3. =
Executive
Session
MOTION: (No O=
ne,
sec. No One) to enter into Executive Session at 9:42 p.m. to discuss land
acquisition with the 6 members of the Commission, Moosa Rafey, Chuck Berger,
Lisa Carew, and Joseph Tadia.
= ; Discussion: None<= o:p>
=
; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 2
=
; Mr.
Zawadzki, Chairman, reconvened the Regular Meeting at 10:05 p.m.
4. =
Public
Participation
None
5. =
Action
on Minutes
MOTION: (Mr.
Polletta, sec. Mr. Undercuffler) to add Agenda Items 5N, 5O, 5P, 5Q.
Discussion: None<= o:p>
MOTION PASSED UNANIMOU=
SLY
&=
nbsp; A. Continuation
of Public Hearing, May 10, 2001, App. #415, Cathie Caton &=
nbsp; B. =
Continuation
of Public Hearing, May 10, 2001, App. #421, YMCA &nbs=
p; C. Continuation
of Public Hearing, May 10, 2001, App. #422, Mary Ann Cathcart &=
nbsp; D. Public
Hearing, May 10, 2001, App. #423, Mark Lovely &=
nbsp; E. =
Public
Hearing, May 10, 2001, App. #424, Domenic DiNunzio &=
nbsp; F. =
Public
Hearing, May 10, 2001, App. #425, New Millennium Development, Inc. &nbs=
p; G. Regular
Meeting, May 10, 2001 &=
nbsp; H. Continuation
of Public Hearing, July 12, 2001, App. #423, Mark Lovely &=
nbsp; I. &=
nbsp; Continuation
of Public Hearing, July 12 2001, App. #424, Domenic DiNunzio &=
nbsp; J. &=
nbsp; Continuation
of Public Hearing, July 12, 2001, App. #425, New Millennium Development, In=
c. K. Public
Hearing July 12, 2001, App. #428, Echo L. =
Regular
Meeting, July 12, 2001 M. Regular
Meeting April 15, 2004 N. Continuation
of Public Hearing, March 11, 2004, App. #486, Guernseytown Farms Estates O. Continuation
of Public Hearing, Mach 11, 2004, App. #487, Guerseytown Farms Estates P. =
Continuation
of Public Hearing, Mach 11, 2004, App. #488, Patrick Graziano Q. Regular
Me3ting, March 11, 2004 &=
nbsp; MOTION: (Mr.
Polletta, sec. Mr. Undercuffler) to Approve Items #5N through 5Q, and Table
Items 5A through 5M. &=
nbsp; Discussion: None<=
o:p> &=
nbsp; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY REGULAR MEETING MAY 13, 2004 PAGE 3 6. =
Pending
Applications &=
nbsp; A. Application
#486 of Guernseytown Farms Estates LLC, Phase II for 26-lot residential
subdivision and extension of &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; A
decision is required by May 26, 2004. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: At the last meeting the Commission
directed the staff to draft a Motion for approval and another draft Motion =
for
denial. You might want to tak=
e time
to read them and then discuss it. &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Sturgis: I have a question on this - wetland
performance bond shall be posted.
Will this bond be there throughout the building of any lots that are
sold and developed as houses, or is this bond just for his development and =
the
building of the roads and so forth? &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: It’s for the development of =
this
property (inaudible). &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Ms.
Sturgis: Right, just the roads and so forth=
. &=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Beauchamp: I’m not =
sure I
understand this part of it, the draft Motion for approval #1, and the draft=
Motion
for denial #1, (inaudible) say exactly the same thing and why is that? Because it say=
s . . .
. . &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: Well that’s the proposal, or=
is
that . . . . . &=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: It just explains w=
hat
the application is. (Inaudibl=
e)
regulated activities that are involved with this application. There are 3 items on this list, &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Beauchamp: It’s just information? &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: Yes. &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Beauchamp: It doesn’t mean something ha=
s been
left on or not . . . . &=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: No. You should know what you are appro=
ving
or denying. This application =
is in
front of you for all the wetland impacts, and they are listed as 3 items. &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: Also we can add or delete items
individually that are included here. CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY REGULAR MEETING MAY 13, 2004 PAGE 4 &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: This is just a draft, you can
(inaudible) or you can (inaudi8ble). &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Undercuffler: Does it follow that for us to vote=
no,
we would have to agree with the charges made or the judgments made in the
application to say no, or in the write up, Moosa? &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: You should have some reason why yo=
u want
to deny the application. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Undercuffler: Unless we have a reason to vote no=
, we
should vote yes, we have to have a . . . . yes comes before no if it’s
even a 50/50 case or whatever, but I’m looking at the 3 items that you
put down on the no program, and I’m saying does it follow them we hav=
e to
agree with these pretty much in order to vote no? &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: Yes. &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Undercuffler: Or other reasons. &=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: That you think,
yes. But if you disagree with
these, you can just ignore them.
It’s just a draft, just a guideline. You should determine which Motion =
you
want to use and then read that into the record and then you can discuss each
item if you want. &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: How do the Commissioner’s fe=
el
about approval or denial? &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Polletta: I mean the way I read it, we just =
go in
this thing over here, the thing is I have to
agree. I think the way it’s written makes sense, but I will not add any=
thing
else to this, the 3 items. &=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: Those are the regu=
lated
activities involved. No matter
whether you want to approve or deny it, this is all they’re asking.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Polletta: If we make a Motion it would incor=
porate
1, 2, and 3?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: Yes, these are the=
regulated
activities involved.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Polletta: So we’re voting on these reg=
ulated
activities? I mean we’re
voting on the whole thing, right?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: Yes, you are appro=
ving
or disapproving this application tonight.&=
nbsp;
This is the regulated activities that are involved in this applicati=
on.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 5
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: But we don’t have to accept
this? We can modify it if we =
want
to?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: Yes. Suggest a Motion, read it into the
record, and then (inaudible).
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: So the next question is do we want=
to
read into the record the Motion for approval or the Motion for denial?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Beauchamp: I’ll rea=
d into
the record the Motion for approval.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: Is that okay with you Martha?
&=
nbsp; =
; Ms.
Sturgis: It’s okay =
with
me.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: Joe?
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Polletta: Approval.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Undercuffler: I would agr=
ee.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: For the record, I’d like to =
read
the draft Motion for approval.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; WHEREAS, the Conservation Commission/Inland Wetland Agency has received an applicati= on from Guernseytown Farms, LLC for construction of Phase II, Guernseytown Far= ms Estates, consists of 26 lot residential subdivision and construction of approximately 2,230 linear feet of new roadways which involves the following regulated activities:
&=
nbsp; 1. =
Disturbance
of approximately 1,600 sq. ft. of wetland buffer area by installation of a
drainage pipe and construction of a plunge pool located on the north side o=
f
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 2. = Discharge of storm drains into wetlands watercourse.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 3. = Installation of erosion and sediment control measures inside the wetlands and wetland bu= ffer areas.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; WHEREAS, the Agency has held duly called public hearings and meetings on November 13, 2003, December 11, 2003, January 15, 2004, February 19, 2004, Mach 11, 2004, March 23, 2004, April 15, 2004 and May 13, 2004 and,
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; WHEREAS, the Agency has carefully considered all of the evidence and testimony recei= ved at the duly called public hearings and meetings;
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 6
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; WHEREAS,
the Agency recognizes that inland/wetlands and watercourses of the State of=
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; WHEREAS, the Agency recognizes, pursuant to Section 1.1 of the Inland Wetlands and W= atercourse Regulations the preservation and protection of the wetland and watercourse = from random, unnecessary, undesirable, and unregulated uses, disturbance, or destruction is in the public interest and is essential to the health, wealt= h, and safety of the citizens of the state.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; The purpose of the inland/wetland regulation is to protect the citizens of the State by making provisions for the protection of inland wetlands, and watercourses by:
1. = Minimizing their disturbance and pollution.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 2. = Maintaining and improving water quality in accordance with the highest standards set fo= rth by Federal, State, or Local authority.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 3. = Preventing damage from erosion turbidity or siltation.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 4. = Prevent loss of fish and other beneficial aquatic organisms.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 5. = Prevent loss of wildlife and vegetation and the destruction of natural habitats.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 6. = To deter and inhibit the danger of flooding and pollution.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 7. = To protect the quality of wetlands and watercourses for their conservation, economic, aesthetic, recreational and other public and private uses.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 8. = To protect the State’s potable water supply and provide an orderly proce= ss to balance the need for the economic growth to the Town and State use of its lands with the need to protect the environment and ecology in order to guarantee to the people of the Town and the State the safety of such natura= l resources for the benefit and enjoyment of generations yet unborn.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; WHEREAS, the Agency recognizes that the proposed open space for Phase II, Guernseyto= wn Farms Estates is not in conformance with the Watertown Plan of Conservation Development and also recognizes the importance of the protection of the wat= er supply of the Watertown Fire District within the Pampering River Watershed.=
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 7
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Watertown Conservation Commission/Inland Wetland Agency finds that a prudent and feasible alternative does not exist= and pursuant to Section 11.1 of the Watertown Inland Wetland and Watercourse Re= gulations the Agency may grant the application as filed, granted upon such terms, conditions, limitations or modifications necessary to carry out the purpose= of the Inland Wetland Act or deny it.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; The Agency approves Application #486 submitted by Guernseytown Farms, LLC for t= he construction of a 26 lot residential subdivision located between Bayview Ci= rcle and Killorin Road, Watertown, CT as shown on site plan entitled Guernseytown Farms Estates, Phase II, Route 63 Killorin Road and Guernseytown Road, Watertown, CT dated October 8, 2003, latest revised date March 17, 2004 with the following conditions and modifications:
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 1. = The creation of a 150 foot conservation restriction easement area on lots #37, = #38, #39, #40, #41, #42, #43, and #44 located 150 feet from the 50 foot regulated wetlands setback and creation of a 50 foot conservation restriction easement area on Lots #45, #46, #50, and #60 located 50 feet from the regulated wetl= ands setback for the following reasons:
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; a. = Pursuant to Section 10.2 a, b, c, d, e, f, and g, creation of conservation restricti= on easement areas will mitigate the environmental impact of residential home development and associated storm water system and discharge and will enhance the environmental quality of the inland/wetland and watercourses and wildli= fe habitat and still achieve the basic objective of the application which is residential development and evaluate an alternative to safely discharge the storm water which minimizes environmental impact to the wetlands, watercour= se, and wildlife habitat.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; b. = Pursuant to Section 10.2 of the Inland, Wetland, and Watercourse Regulations the Age= ncy recognizes the suitability of this residentially zoned property fro the development of residential building lots while still balancing the need for economic growth of the Town and State and the need to protect the environme= nt and ecology of the Town and State for the future benefit of generations unb= orn.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 8
c. = The application’s own expert, Jodi Chase, Wetland Ecologist in a report d= ated July, 2003 describes the existing conditions of the project site and provid= e a detailed inventory and description of the regulated areas inland, wetland, = and watercourse, ecological communities and wildlife on site. According to the report, “the inland, wetland located to the rear of proposed Lots #36 through #44 provid= es open water, food, nesting, and cover site for wildlife. The dense shrub layer and lower tr= ee layer of vegetation surrounding the wetlands provides excellent cover and nesting sites”. The woo= ded area is approximately 600 feet by 1,600 feet as shown on Sheets S1 of the s= ite plan, as an existing tree line.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; d. = The author recommends that a buffer of 200 feet on both sides of the regulated areas will provide an excellent protection to the inland, wetland, and wildlife. The conservation restriction easement areas will provide a dedicated area to be protected and will assure the Agency that this important and vital resource will be forev= er protected from activity pursuant to 10.2G of the Inland, Wetlands and Watercourse Regulations. This easement area will provide an additional biofiltration area to enhance water quality and support the inland wetland capacity to prevent flooding, to pro= tect surface and groundwater, support fish and wildlife habitat, control sedimentation, facilitate drainage, to control pollution, and promote public health and safety.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 2. = A wetland performance bond shall be posted for Phase II of Guernseytown Farms= Estates. The bond estimate for all site work shall be provided to the Department of Public Works which shall include the following:
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; Soil erosion and sediment control, drainage, site stabilization, including regra= ding and planting of disturbed areas on site and off. The applicant shall furnish to the= Town a bond with proper surety in the form and amount satisfactory to the Wetlan= d Enforcement Officer, Town Engineer, Director of Public Works and Town Attorney. (Tape #1, Side A ended – did not miss anything.) before any activity is initiated on site.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 3. = A preconstruction meeting shall be held with Agency staff prior to any on site activity. A 24 hour name, add= ress, and telephone number must be provided by the site construction manager in a written notification, 3 business days prior to any on site activity.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; 4. =
While
construction activities on site are occurring, attendance at weekly job
meetings with Town Staff at the Planning and Zoning Office is mandatory.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 9
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 5. = No later than August 1st of each year, while the site is under construction, the site manager shall provide to the Wetland Enforcement Off= icer a narrative of how this site will be managed during the Winter months in relation to soil erosion, sediment control measures to reduce sedimentation, and detrimental impact to inland, wetland, and watercourses.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; 6. =
All
conservation restricted easement areas shall be field located and staked wh=
en
the roads are located in the field by the applicant’s surveyor
engineer. Once road construct=
ion is
completed, these conservation restriction easement areas shall be placarded=
on
site. Where posting on trees =
is not
possible, then the placards shall be posted on 4 x 4 posts in the ground.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 7. = A note shall be placed on the final plans indicating that no topsoil or loam shall be removed from the project site until all regulated activities associated with road construction and storm drainage is completed unless af= ter a written request from the applicant and written permission is granted join= tly by the Director of the Department of Public Works, Wetland Enforcement Offi= cer, Zoning Enforcement Officer, and the Torrington Area Health District. Topsoil shall be evenly distribute= d on all disturbed areas at a minimum of 5 inches.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 8. = There shall be no other on site disturbance except what is proposed by the final plans within the limits of clearing and regulated activities.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; 9. =
The
following note shall be placed on the final plans and a written notice on t=
he
land records of the Town of
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; a. = There shall be no burial of stumps on site.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; b. = There shall be no floor drains permitted in any home or garage.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; c. = There shall be no underground fuel tanks permitted within the subdivision.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; d. = Homeowners within the subdivision must be encouraged to create environmentally sensiti= ve lawn maintenance plans with wild flowers and other species that would create diversity and ground cover and enhance biofiltration on site as well as cre= ate an aesthetic value to the community. Agency staff will provide literature to potential homeowners within = the subdivision.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 10
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 10. Final= plans must be reviewed and approved by Agency Staff, i.e., Director of Public Wor= ks, Town Engineer, and Wetlands Enforcement Officer to ensure that the plans include all the conditions of approval.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 11. The following notes must be placed on the site development plan:
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; a. = The Director of Public Works and Wetlands Enforcement Officer may require additional work and modifications to this Plan as field conditions warrant. The Wetlands Enforce= ment Officer must report to the Commission any additional work or modifications = to the plan.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; b. = Prior to any on site activity, all soil erosion, and sediment control measures sh= all be in place and inspected by the Wetlands Enforcement Officer. The Wetlands Enforcement Officer m= ay require additional soil erosion and sedimentation control measures as field conditions warrant.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; c. = Prior to the acceptance of permitted activities and release of bond, all disturbed areas shall have turf vigorously established and mowed at least once.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; d. = No activity or site disturbance of soil or vegetation such as trees, bushes, e= tc. shall occur until a preconstruction meeting is held with Town Staff.
&= nbsp; 12. The applicant shall provide written notice to the Wetlands Enforcement Officer = of the date when site disturbance is to begin at least 3 business days before = said date.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 13. The applicant must minimize the amount of soil disturbance on site at any one time. A narrative phasing pla= n must be submitted for review and approval by the Wetlands Enforcement Officer and Town Engineer.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 14. Tempo= rary sediment traps must be constructed upgradient of the wetlands prior to any = land disturbance to protect the wetlands and watercourse located on site and off. Location and number of sediment traps to be determined as site conditions warrant.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Zawadzki: At this time we’d ask for any additions, deletions, changes, or let it stand as read?
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Undercuffler: Can that recommendation of 200 feet= for the easement be justify the 150?
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 11
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Rafey: It’s 150.
&= nbsp; = ; Mr. Undercuffler: Yea.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Rafey: In back of these lots there’= s an (inaudible) that goes to the wetlands and it’s all vegetated now and I don’t think that the applicant proposed any activity within that area. The main reason was to = keep that vegetation there to protect the wetlands and all the houses, driveways, the septic systems, and future accessory structures will be located outside= of that area. I don’t think there is any uses proposed for the at area. (Inaudible).
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Polletta: Do we approve this as written?
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Zawadzki: Yea.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Rafey: That condition doesn’t prohib= it the applicant from using these lots. He can put houses, septic system, and all (inaudible). These lots are very long, and in t= he back it slopes towards the wetlands. That 150 foot buffer area will cover that sloped area which is no us= e for the (inaudible).
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Ms. Sturgis: I have one comment on the denial, o= n the business about the plan to eliminate by moving this plunge pool, I don̵= 7;t recall there was a lot of discussion about the fact that they had to move it. It seems to me that issue resolved itself rather well, but I’m not sure I remember.
&= nbsp; = ; Mr. Rafey: That’s (inau= dible) to what originally was (inaudible) on the upland area, and then (inaudible)= was to move it down close to the wetlands because we don’t want to create like water problem there, create erosion in the future. That’s one of the regulated activities that is proposed.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Ms. Sturgis: My impression was that that was fin= e, I mean we didn’t have any issues, I mean we wouldn’t deny it beca= use of the plunge pool.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Rafey. No.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Undercuffler: We’re not going that route a= nyway.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Rafey: We are not discussing that Motion a= nyway.
&= nbsp; = ; Ms. Sturgis: Right, I guess I= was trying to say why I thought it would be okay.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 12
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. Polletta, sec. Mr. Beauchamp) to Approve Application #486 of Guernseytown F= arms Estates LLC, Phase II for 26-lot residential subdivision and extension of Bayview Circle, Watertown, CT as written in the draft Motion.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Discussion: =
; None
&=
nbsp; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
B. Application #488 of Patrick Graziano for 18-lot residential subdivision, “Fox Crossings” Phase II, Pond View Estates and Extension of Lovely Drive, Watertown.
A decision is required=
by
May 26, 2004.
Mr. Zawadzki: At the direction of =
the
Commission, Staff drafted a Motion for approval and a Motion for denial on =
the
above application. Now weR=
17;ll
take a look at those and read them.
Mr. Undercuffler: I would go for appro=
val.
Mr. Peluso: I’m actually g=
oing
to recuse myself also.
Mr. Zawadzki: So we need a Motion.=
&nb=
sp; =
MOTION: (Mr.
Polletta, sec. Mr. Beauchamp) to Approve Application #488 of Patrick Grazia=
no
for 18-lot residential subdivision, “Fox Crossings” Phase II, P=
ond
View Estates and extension of Lovely Drive, Watertown, subject to condition=
s.
= ; Mr. Zawadzki: Now we can stil= l add or delete any sections.
=
; Mr.
Rafey: You should read the Motion.
=
; Mr.
Zawadzki: I’m going to read the Motion=
for
approval on Application #488:
&= nbsp; WHEREAS, the Conservation Commission/Inland Wetland Agency has received an applicati= on from Patrick Graziano for construction of a 18 lot residential subdivision = and construction of approximately 2,500 linear feet of new roadways which invol= ves the following regulated activities:
&=
nbsp; 1. =
Filling
of approximately 7,160 sq. ft. of an inland/wetland watercourse for
construction of a proposed
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 13
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 2. = Realignment of approxmately150 linear feet of a watercourse for installation of reinforced concrete arch.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; 3. =
Filling
of approximately 8,815 square feet of wetland and watercourse buffer area f=
or
construction of
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; 4. =
Disturbance
of 980 square feet of wetland buffer area by road grading near
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 5. = Disturbance of 14,700 square feet of wetland buffer area for construction of a proposed detention pond.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 6. = Disturbance of approximately 4,500 square feet of wetland buffer area by construction b= y a 12 x 280 foot access driveway to a proposed detention pond.
7. = Discharge of storm runoff into wetland watercourse.
8. = Installation of erosion and sediment control measures inside wetland watercourse and wet= land buffer area.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; WHEREAS, the Agency has held duly called public hearings and meetings on November 13, 2003, December 11, 2003, January 15, 2004, February 19, 2004, March 11, 200= 4, March 23, 2004, April 15, 2004 and May 13, 2004 and,
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; WHEREAS, the Agency has carefully considered all of the evidence and testimony recei= ved at the duly called public hearings and meetings;
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; WHEREAS,
the Agency recognizes that inland/wetlands and watercourses of the State of=
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; WHEREAS, the Agency recognizes, pursuant to Section 1.1 of the Inland Wetlands and Watercourse Regulations the preservation and protection of the wetland and watercourse from random, unnecessary, undesirable, and unregulated uses, disturbance, or destruction is in the public interest and is essential to t= he health, wealth, and safety of the citizens of the State.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; The purpose of the inland/wetland regulation is to protect the citizens of the State by making provisions for the protection of inland wetlands, and watercourses by:
1. = Minimizing their disturbance and pollution.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 14
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 2. = Maintaining and improving water quality in accordance with the highest standards set fo= rth by Federal, State, or Local authority.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 3. = Preventing damage from erosion turbidity or siltation.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 4. = Prevent loss of fish and other beneficial aquatic organisms.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 5. = Prevent loss of wildlife and vegetation and the destruction of natural habitats.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 6. = To deter and inhibit the danger of flooding and pollution.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 7. = To protect the quality of wetlands and watercourses for their conservation, economic, aesthetic, recreational and other public and private uses.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 8. = To protect the State’s potable water supply and provide an orderly proce= ss to balance the need for the economic growth to the Town and State use of its lands with the need to protect the environment and ecology in order to guarantee to the people of the Town and the State the safety of such natural resources for the benefit and enjoyment of generations yet unborn.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; WHEREAS, the Agency recognizes that the proposed open space for Fox Crossings, Phase III, of Pondview Estates is in conformance with the Watertown Plan of Conservation and Development.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Watertown Conservation Commission/Inland Wetland Agency finds that a prudent and feasible alternative does not exist= and pursuant to Section 11.1 of the Watertown Inland, Wetland, and Watercourse = Regulations the Agency may grant the application as filed, granted upon such terms, con= ditions, limitations, or modifications necessary to carry out the purpose of the Inl= and Wetland Act or deny it.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; The Agency approves Application #488 submitted by Patrick Graziano, for the construction of an 18 lot residential subdivision located between Kimberly = Lane and Middlebury Road, Watertown, CT as shown on site plan entitled Fox Crossings, Lovely Drive, 18 lot residential subdivision, Watertown CT dated October 15, 2003, latest revision date March 17, 2004 with the following conditions and modifications:
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; 1. =
The
combination of
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 15
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; a. = Pursuant to Section 10.2 a, b, c, d, e, f, and g, creation of conservation restricti= on easement and combination of Lot #9 with open space area will mitigate the environmental impact of residential home development and associated storm w= ater system and discharge and will enhance the environmental quality of the inland/wetland and watercourses and wildlife habitat and still achieve the basic objective of the application which is residential development and min= imizes the impact to the wetlands and watercourse.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; b. = Pursuant to Section 10.2f of the Inland, Wetland, and Watercourse Regulations the Ag= ency recognizes the suitability of this residentially zoned property for the development of residential building lots while still balancing the need for economic growth of the Town and State and the need to protect the environme= nt and ecology of the Town and State for the future benefit of generations unb= orn.
c. =
The
combination of
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 2. = A wetland performance bond shall be posted for Fox Crossings. The bond estimate for all site work shall be provided to the Department of Public Works which shall include the following:
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; Soil erosion and sediment control, drainage, site stabilization, including regra= ding and planting of disturbed areas on site and off. The applicant shall furnish to the= Town a bond with proper surety in the form and amount satisfactory to the Wetland Enforcement Officer, Town Engineer, Director of Public Works and Town Attor= ney before any activity is initiated on site.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 3. = A preconstruction meeting shall be held with Agency staff prior to any on site activity. A 24 hour name, add= ress, and telephone number must be provided by the site construction manager in a written notification, 3 business days prior to any on site activity.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 16
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; 4. =
While
construction activities on site are occurring, attendance at weekly job
meetings with Town Staff at the Planning and Zoning Office is mandatory.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 5. = No later than August 1st of each year, while the site is under construction, the site manager shall provide to the Wetland Enforcement Off= icer a narrative of how this site will be managed during the Winter months in relation to soil erosion, sediment control measures to reduce sedimentation, and detrimental impact to inland, wetland, and watercourses.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; 6. =
All
conservation restricted easement areas shall be field located and staked wh=
en
the roads are located in the field by the applicant’s surveyor
engineer. Once road construct=
ion is
completed, these conservation restriction easement areas shall be placarded=
on
site. Where posting on trees =
is not
possible, then the placards shall be posted on 4 x 4 posts in the ground.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 7. = A note shall be placed on the final plans indicating that no topsoil or loam shall be removed from the project site until all regulated activities associated with road construction and storm drainage is completed unless af= ter a written request from the applicant and written permission is granted join= tly by the Director of the Department of Public Works, Wetland Enforcement Offi= cer, Zoning Enforcement Officer, and the Torrington Area Health District. Topsoil shall be evenly distribute= d on all disturbed areas at a minimum of 5 inches.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 8. = There shall be no other on site disturbance except what is proposed by the final plans within the limits of clearing and regulated activities.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; 9. =
The
following note shall be placed on the final plans and a written notice on t=
he
land records of the Town of
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; a. = There shall be no burial of stumps on site.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; b. = There shall be no floor drains permitted in any home or garage.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; c. = There shall be no underground fuel tanks permitted within the subdivision.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 17
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; d. = Homeowners within the subdivision must be encouraged to create environmentally sensiti= ve lawn maintenance plans with wild flowers and other species that would create diversity and ground cover and enhance biofiltration on site as well as cre= ate an aesthetic value to the community. Agency staff will provide literature to potential homeowners within = the subdivision.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 10. Final= plans must be reviewed and approved by Agency Staff, i.e., Director of Public Wor= ks, Town Engineer, and Wetlands Enforcement Officer to ensure that the plans include all the conditions of approval.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 11. The following notes must be placed on the site development plan: (Tape #1, Side B ended – did= not miss anything.)
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; a. = The Director of Public Works and Wetlands Enforcement Officer may require additional work and modifications to this Plan as field conditions warrant. The Wetlands Enforce= ment Officer must report to the Commission any additional work or modifications = to the plan.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; b. = Prior to any on site activity, all soil erosion, and sediment control measures sh= all be in place and inspected by the Wetlands Enforcement Officer. The Wetlands Enforcement Officer m= ay require additional soil erosion and sedimentation control measures as field conditions warrant.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; c. = Prior to the acceptance of permitted activities and release of bond, all disturbed areas shall have turf vigorously established and mowed at least once.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; d. = No activity or site disturbance of soil or vegetation such as trees, bushes, e= tc. shall occur until a preconstruction meeting is held with Town Staff.
&= nbsp; 12. The applicant shall provide written notice to the Wetlands Enforcement Officer = of the date when site disturbance is to begin at least 3 business days before = said date.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 13. The applicant must minimize the amount of soil disturbance on site at any one time. A narrative phasing pla= n must be submitted for review and approval by the Wetlands Enforcement Officer and Town Engineer.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 18
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 14. Tempo= rary sediment traps must be constructed upgradient of the wetlands prior to any = land disturbance to protect the wetlands and watercourse located on site and off. Location and number of sediment traps to be determined as site conditions warrant.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; 15. All
technical issues as outlined in the Town Engineer’s memorandum dated
March 18, 2004 shall be addressed to the satisfaction of the Town Engineer =
and
the Director of the Department of Public Works.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; 16. The r=
ecord
subdivision and development plan must be signed and dated by the Soil Scien=
tist
and Surveyor.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; 17. Const=
ruction
Manager/Contractor shall implement all motes and details included in the fi=
nal
plans. It’s the
permittee’s responsibility to provide the final site plan and conditi=
ons
f approval to the site contractors.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; 18. Recom=
mendation
to the Planning and Zoning Commission that the open space plan as modified =
is
in accordance with the Plan of Development.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Berger: Mr. Chairman, I b= elieve on Page 1 there is a typographical area, in the first WHEREAS, the 26 lot should read 18 lot, just to clarify that.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Rafey: We can discuss this draft Motion o= r just agree with some of the items or you can eliminate or add to that. You already voted on this Motion?<= /p>
Mr. Zawadzki: No.=
Mr. Rafey: Okay, = a Motion was made and it was seconded.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Zawadzki: So we’re discussing it. Does anybody have any comments,
additions, deletions? How do =
you
feel about that combination of
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion: Mr. Undercuffler: Well I think it’s probably a = good idea, but it hadn’t really been discussed before, so I think it’= ;s questionable.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Rafey: You can change that if you want.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Undercuffler: Yea, we can drop that out.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Polletta: Is
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; = ; Mr. Zawadzki: Yea, it’s 65,000 sq. ft.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 19
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: I have a plot here. This is the open space and
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Polletta: So this goes wi= th this?
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Rafey: Yes.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Polletta: If we take this out by itself, (inaudible)?
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Rafey: Yes.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Zawadzki: Yea, it’s got 65,000 square <= span class=3DGramE>feet, it’s still over an acre.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Jones: (Inaudible) feel pretty good about = it.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Rafey: This was suggested as a mitigation.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Polletta: So that way we have access to the = open space?
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Rafey: Yes.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Polletta: I don’t s= ee a problem with that.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Ms. Sturgis: No, I think it&#= 8217;s good.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Zawadzki: To leave it in there?
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Polletta: Well I think
it’s the only way we can have access to the open space is through this
area.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Many people talking at once (inaudible).
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Zawadzki: Or leave it as a building lot.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Polletta: I will,=
this
one over here? I will leave i=
t as
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Rafey: Yes.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Polletta: So I would leave it alone.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 20
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Rafey: Yes, you can access the open space= from here.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; = ; Mr. Polletta: Otherwise we don’t have any way to get in there.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Undercuffler: It was just steep, that’s al= l.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p;
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Undercuffler: Yes.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Polletta: It doesn’t really make that = much difference, but I know for us . . . . .
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Zawadzki: That’s it right there.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: This is
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Polletta: Yea, but if we leave it alone, it&#= 8217;s always accessible to us. If y= ou combine it with the lot then it will not be accessible.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Rafey: Well if you leave it alone, itR= 17;s not going to be yours. It wil= l be a building lot.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Zawadzki: We could make it all open space, that’s the way this reads.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Rafey: The question is whether you’= re in favor of combining this with the open space or just leave it alone the way it is, another building lot?
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Polletta: I would leave it alone.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Zawadzki: Okay, (inaudible) leaving
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Undercuffler: I would tak= e that out.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: Basically we=
217;re
saying that
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; = ; Mr. Undercuffler: I guess we = need a Motion to Amend.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 21
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: A Motion was made and seconded,
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Polletta: I want to make sure I understand correctly. Right now this is = not a building lot?
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Rafey: This is the propos=
ed
open space. They want to deed=
this
to the Town of
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Polletta: And that’s what I said.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Rafey: This is open space, not a building= lot.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Polletta: Right, just leave it as open space= , just the way it is now.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. Undercuffler, sec. Mr. Jones) to change the Motion that was read to drop out #1.
Discussion: Mr. Rafey: To approve the 18 lot subdivision a= s it was presented to you.
= &nb= sp; = ; Mr. Undercuffler: Right, drop= #1 on that Motion, 1A, 1B, and 1C.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
= ; &n= bsp; Mr. Zawadzki: Now I need to v= ote on the Motion that’s on the Table.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: You just eliminated, you just want =
to
leave that
= ; &n= bsp; Mr. Zawadzki: Right.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: Just to leave
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 22
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Zawadzki: Yes.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
C. Application
#495 of Patrick Graziano, proposed 4-lot Willowbrook Farm Subdivision,
Northfield Road, Watertown in an R-30 Residential Zoning District.
If a Public Hearing is=
Closed on May 13, 2004, then a decision is required by=
July
16, 2004.
Mr. Zawadzki: =
We agreed to keep the =
Public
Hearing Open on this, so I need a Motion to Table this.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. Undercuffler, sec. Mr. Beauchamp) to Table Application #495 of Patrick Graziano, proposed 5-lot Willowbrook Farm Subdivision, Northfield Road, Watertown in an R-30 Residential Zoning District.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion: None<= o:p>
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
7. &nb=
sp; New
Applications
A. = Application #498 of Michael Keane, 608 Echo Lake Ro= ad, Watertown, for construction of a parking area on west side of Ice House Roa= d at 608 Echo Lake Road, Watertown, CT.
If a Public Hearing us=
not
held, then a decision is required by July 26, 2004.
Michael Keane,
Mr. Keane: One change I’d =
like
to make, it’s not exactly a parking area, it’s an access area to
the rear of my property on Ice House Road, where I have the horses, to the =
back
paddock, so it’s not a parking area per say, even though there were h=
orse
trailers parked there in the past, and there probably will be again, but
it’s not a parking lot.
It’s more like a rear access.
Mr. Zawadzki: Can you just go thro=
ugh it
briefly, tell us what your proposal is?
Mr. Keane: I’d like to bu=
ild a
rear access road from
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 23
Mr. Undercuffler: You say what you gav=
e was
wrong?
Mr. Keane: Yea, the measurements=
I
gave Moosa were wrong. ItR=
17;s
probably like 20 feet by about 150.
I made an error when I was reading the map.
Mr. Rafey: Mr. Chairman, what
happened, Mr. Keane decided to fill some wetlands on his property from Ice =
House
Road to put a driveway to get access to the back of his property from Ice H=
ouse
Road, and Mr. Keane’s property is located, it’s not on the corn=
er
of Echo Lake and Ice House, but it has frontage on Echo Lake and Ice house
Road. I noticed that and I co=
ntacted
Mr. Keane and told him there are wetlands and he needed a permit from this
Commission in order to do any activity within that area, and actually I did
issue a Notice of Violation and I told him to stop whatever he was doing and
removal of those, there was some garbage and vehicles parked there, and I t=
old
him to remove those and put a silt fence and cover the area with hay until =
Mr.
Keane could come to this Commission and see what you wanted to do with
this. Mr. Keane followed the =
Notice
of Violation and he stopped that activity and he put a silt fence around the
area, and hayed the whole area. He
wants to build a driveway to get access to the back of his property from
Mr. Jones: Doesn’t it foll=
ow
that if we do as Moosa proposes, we will be discussing this next one after =
we
have seen the site, and therefore it might move things along if we just agr=
ee
at this point to do the Site Walk and to Table this.
Mr. Rafey: Yes, you can make a =
Motion
to Table this and then take the site walk.
Mr. Zawadzki: The sketch here is f=
airly
self explanatory as far as where he wants to go so we do need to take a loo=
k at
it.
Mr. Poletta: Lots #12d, is this y=
our
lot? Right next to it, that&#=
8217;s
probably the school.
Mr. Keane: There’s a ques=
tion
mark in regards to this. At t=
he
moment it is school property, I think the Town purchased it.
Mr. Polletta: That’s what
I’m saying. This is you=
rs.
Mr. Keane: This is me right her=
e.
Mr. Polletta: That’s where t=
hat
water goes across.
Mr. Keane: Yea, the stream goes r=
ight
down here, right down here.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 24
Mr. Rafey: When do you want to =
go on
the field trip?
Mr. Zawadzki: The Saturday before =
the
next meeting.
Mr. Rafey: There are a few other
applications that I may be recommending for a field trip, and if it’s
possible, can we do them sooner?
Can we go next Saturday? The 22nd.
Mr. Zawadzki: =
That’s okay.
Mr. Peluso: Moosa, in the past
we’ve done site walks before the meeting. Is that . . . . . .
Mr. Rafey: There are like 3 or 4
sites that I want the Commission to look at; I don’t know if we can g=
o to
4 of them, and I want the Commission to go as soon as possible because I is=
sued
some violations and I want to see what the Commission wants to do with those
applications.
MOTION:<=
span
style=3D'mso-tab-count:1'> (Mr.
Polletta, sec. Mr. Undercuffler) to Table and Schedule a Site Walk for
Application #498 of Michael Keane, 608 Echo Lake Road, Watertown for
construction of a parking area on west side of Ice House Road at 608 Echo L=
ake
Road, Watertown, CT.
Discussion: None<= o:p>
MOTION PASSED UNANIMOU=
SLY
&= nbsp; B. = Application #499 of William Joyce, 325 Woodbury Road, Watertown, CT for maintenance and digging of an existing pond at 325 Woodbury Road, Watertown, CT.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; If
a Public Hearing is not held, then a decision is required by July 26, 2004.=
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; William Joyce,
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Joyce: Basically I want to do some simple=
pond
maintenance.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: I think basically we need to come =
out
and take a look at what you want to do and have you explain it to us on sit=
e,
which would be better, and then we can come back here to discuss it.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Joyce: Moosa has been out=
there
a couple of times, right?
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 25
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: Yes. I received this application on Apr=
il 29th,
and on April 30th I went to look at the property, before I revie=
wed
the application, I think the contractor already started working within the
regulated area. I did tell hi=
m to
stop those activities. These =
trees
next to the pond, they were removed, and they stopped, but I recommended th=
ey
put a silt fence there and hay the area, which they did. They want to clean the pond. I issued a Notice of Violation bec=
ause
they didn't have a permit to do these things, and I made some recommendatio=
ns,
and they followed the Notice of Violation.=
I want the Commission to go and see this.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Zawadzki: Do you want to do this on the 22
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: Yes.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Ms.
Sturgis: (Inaudible).
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Joyce It’s not a big, there̵=
7;s
no, it’s a manmade pond, it’s just overgrown. It’s been there forever.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Zawadzki: That’s why we’re g=
oing
to do it next week.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: By State Law they cannot make a de=
cision
tonight because they received the application tonight. It goes to next month, but the
Commission will come to your property next week to look at it.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Zawadzki: Is that satisfactory?
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: I will send you a notice about the=
time
and the date.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION: (Ms.
Sturgis, sec. Mr. Undercuffler) to Table and Schedule a Site Walk for
Application #499 of William Joyce,
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion: None<= o:p>
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
&=
nbsp; C. Application
#500 of Dr. Ken Neibel and Doris Neibel,
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; If a Public Hearing is not held, then a decision is required b July 26, 2004.<= o:p>
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 26
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Brian Baker, Licensed Professional
Engineer
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Baker: I’m here on behalf of Dr. and=
Mrs.
Neibel. They own property on =
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Below
that I listed some items we think could help remedy the situation. Those included:
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Now
of those 4 items that I've indicated would help the situation, we really on=
ly
have control over one, and that would be the last one, establishing a plunge
pool or settling basin on our property.&nb=
sp;
The other issues are all on the neighboring property and we’d
actually like the Commission to come out and take a look and see what the
situation is, see if you feel that there is any action needed by the neighb=
or
on the situation that’s producing the sediment, but for the applicati=
on
in front of you we’re proposing to do what we can on our property to
provide an area to get the sediment to settle out and maintain it that way.=
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 27
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Zawadzki: Now this sketch here shows the pond
overlapping the two properties. My
understanding is that’s not accurate.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: This is just appro=
ximate,
Mr. Chairman. This is not
accurate. The pond is located=
on
Dr. Neibel’s and the watercourse goes through the abutting property on
the south of this property and then it drains into the pond.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Baker: This is probably the large property=
map,
so this shows that the pond is all on the Neibel’s property and this
would be the area of the plunge pool.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: This is the property line.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Baker: The map that you have in front of =
you
there shows the pond entirely on the Neibel’s property and a sketch of
the area where we’re proposing a plunge pool,
and it also shows a watercourse coming in from the neighboring property.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: Well I think we’d like to sc=
hedule
a walk.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Undercuffler: The pipe that was recently install=
ed in
the watercourse - does that go across the watercourse, or how does that set=
up?
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Baker: Yea, the neighbor actually put a c=
ulvert
in the watercourse, so a pipe, so they could get access over the watercours=
e,
so they installed about 16 feet of pipe or so, so whereas there was a natur=
al
channel with rocks in it that was slowing the water down, now you have a sm=
ooth
line pipe that’s really increasing the velocity and there’s no
outlet protection. As an engi=
neer
you design a size of pipe, you make sure it has a plunge pool or rip rap pa=
d,
something to slow down the velocity after the water gets out of the pipe.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: Some of the Commission members mig=
ht
remember, this letter was submitted to you in the packet in February. I received this from Dr. Neibel an=
d I
sent it with Communications and Bills, and the property owners for the abut=
ting
property that’s located on the south side of Dr. Neibel’s prope=
rty
came to the meeting. At that =
time
he didn’t get a permit to put that pipe, but the Commission told him =
it
was okay to leave the pipe for now because removing the pipe may cause more
problems. It was already in w=
ithout
a permit. I think it's a good=
idea to
go to this property and look at the situation and see what other activities
caused this problem.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 28
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Zawadzki: Do you want to do this on the 22
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: Yes.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Baker: We do have some pictures just to s=
ubmit
that you can take a look at, at your leisure, and we’ll have copies of
them at the walk too. And tho=
se are
all labeled too.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: I’ll bring these with me on =
the Site
Walk so you can see them.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION: (Mr.
Undercuffler, sec. Mr. Beauchamp) to Table and Schedule a Site Walk for
Application #500 of Dr. Ken Neibel and Doris Neibel,
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion: None<= o:p>
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
8. =
Old
Business
A. =
Application #497 of Guernseytown Farms Estates, LLC=
for
Modification of Permit #467, Phase I, Guernseyto=
wn
Farms,
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; A
decision is required by June 18, 2004.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr. Jones Recused himself from this Application.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Franklin
Pilicy, Attorney Representing Guernseytown Farms Estates, LLC
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Atty.
Pilicy: This application, as you may recal=
l, was
filed at the last meeting and we provided some preliminary comment as to the
nature of the application, and discussed in a preliminary way the reason for
the application and the opinion of the applicant that there was no wetlands
related activities on the lots that we’re seeking to have restored to=
the
subdivision plan. The Commiss=
ion
asked me to provide to the Wetlands Officer a copy of a court decision, whi=
ch I
did provide, and it’s the applicant’s position that that court
decision, timing-wise, came out from the State Supreme Court approximately 1
month after the decision of this Commission, and this court decision emphas=
ized
the jurisdictional limits of a wetlands agency to its buffer areas and
emphasized the provisions of the Statute as amended in 1996 to provide that
there must be a finding of a likely impact on regulated wetland areas in or=
der
to allow jurisdiction to be exercised over wetland buffers. And taken in combination with the =
fact
that double, and in some cases triple buffers were provided and there were =
no
wetlands activities at all on any of the lots being proposed, that really is
the nature of our coming back to this Commission and seeking restoration of
these lots.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 29
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; There
is another editorial comment with respect to the timing of our application =
and
why we were doing it now, and so forth, which I don’t feel I need to
repeat now, unless the Commission would like me to. I believe it’s adequately in=
the Minutes,
but Mr. Calabrese and I are both here to answer any questions. Mr. Sakonchick is not available to=
night;
he’s on vacation.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Atty.
Jessell: You do have a copy of a memorandum=
that
I've written at the request of Mary Barton with regard to this matter, that you might hand out to the other Commission
members.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Undercuffler: The fact that this decision was a =
month
before the Avalon case would seem to affect this thing.
&=
nbsp; =
; Atty.
Jessell: Really the impor=
tance here, or the real impact is the language of the Statute
itself. In the
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Undercuffler: Subsequent =
to
that, the Legislature did pass some changes. Any affect there?
&=
nbsp; =
; Atty.
Jessell: No, not in regar=
d to
the specific issue that we’re talking about.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Undercuffler: This is a n=
ew
application?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: Yes.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Undercuffler: So we can&#=
8217;t
decide it tonight anyway?
Mr. Rafey: No, you accepted the
application last month. You c=
an
make a decision tonight.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 30
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Undercuffler: It seems pr=
etty
cut and dry to me.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: I think I sent a c=
opy of
all the Minutes of Phase I to the new members.
&=
nbsp; =
; Ms.
Sturgis: Yea, I read them=
all.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: And you should hav=
e a
copy of that
&=
nbsp; =
; Ms.
Sturgis: Yea, I do, and I=
also
went on the site walk and I will admit that hill is steep that it drains do=
wn
from, if we added more housing there, it’s a pretty steep drop to tho=
se
wetlands. It would seem to me=
you
would get a lot more water coming off and then down. That’s a personal opinion an=
d I
must admit in reading what went before, it seemed to me there was good
agreement on the whole thing by the time you all got done that it would be =
as
terminate those lots and so not to put the 5 back, I mean I don’t, I =
know
that you think the court case says it’s okay to put them back, but if=
the
court case isn’t pertinent, then I don’t know the reason there
would be to put them back.
That’s a steep drain off.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Undercuffler: \Well I thi=
nk the
question is should they have been taken out in the first place?
&=
nbsp; =
; Ms.
Sturgis: There was I thou=
ght in
reading it, but I could be mistaken.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Undercuffler: What was the
reason?
&=
nbsp; =
; Ms.
Sturgis: You have too much
impervious surface draining into those wetlands with that, what you saw at =
the
bottom a fairly steep hill, it didn’t make sense to build that many h=
omes
there. That was my interpreta=
tion
and when I walked it.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Undercuffler: Okay, makes
sense.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Jones: Is it the position=
of
you folks that the problem here is that this was purely a legal matter, and=
in
affect at the time that this decision was made, we didn’t have the ri=
ght
to make that decision? That&#=
8217;s
the way I read it.
&=
nbsp; =
; Jos=
eph
Calabrese, Applicant
Mr. Calabrese: That’s what
we’re saying, Ron. Firs=
t of
all I think everyone understands, as I understand it the Wetlands Commission
does not have authority to change lot lines. That’s a Zoning procedure, an=
d as
it stands this minute, those lots are still approved by Zoning, and Wetlands
does not have the authority to do that.&nb=
sp;
That was the major factor.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 31
The other factor was t=
hat as
far as the question that you proposed, we did all the calculations and
everything and they were approved by Engineering. That was all taken into considerat=
ion by
the drainage and the mitigation that we proposed for the wetlands. That was all approved. So what we’re saying is, and
we’re not saying that we want to go back to what the case says, IR=
17;m
not saying that. As I proposed
I’m willing to leave a larger buffer zone, but it does affect, and I =
gave
you a revised plan, so I’m not saying that I want to go back to what =
the
law says, that you only have the right to regulate the 50 feet outside of t=
he
wetlands, the first maybe 5 lots can stay the way you approved it, but I ne=
ed
some space on the upper lots, there’s maybe 4 lots that I need space =
for
the septic systems, and I think that's a good compromise. And with that, if that’s the =
case
naturally I was losing money with those lots, with that I’m able to g=
et
money, and I told the Zoning and everyone else they need Killorin Road fixe=
d,
that’s a major danger to the Town, and now that it’s been put on
record that the Town Engineer said that this was a danger to the Town, as a
resident, taxpayer, if someone gets hurt there now, some lawyer could grab a
hold of that and have a heck of a case and sue the Town. Obviously I need money to fix
In talking with Staff =
and
Engineering everyone agreed that it seemed like a good, reasonable
request. I know people were
surprised I came in. I was
surprised myself because I thought this was brought to your attention befor=
e I
came to the meeting last time. I was surprised after I talked to Mary she s=
aid
she didn’t get a chance to tell anybody that this was coming up, or I
wouldn’t present it the way I did.&n=
bsp;
I thought everyone was aware of it and that’s why I presented =
it
the way I did. I wasn’t
trying to, I know you took offense to it, but honest to God, that wasn̵=
7;t
my intent. I thought you were=
aware
of it and it’s a win/win situation for everyone. Everyone agrees, all the neighbors=
, I
talked to the neighbors up there, everybody wants that road fixed. It’s good for the Town. As far as, like I said, the draina=
ge was
all figured in. We had it mit=
igated
as far as the amount of water going in, that was all approved by Engineerin=
g,
so there is no problem with any of it, and again I’m not saying I wan=
t to
go with what the law says, back to the 50 feet; most of it can stay the way=
it
is, I agree with it.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 32
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Zawadzki: Do we have draw=
ings
on this?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: Yes.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: Joe, bottom lin=
e, you
want those 5 lots back?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Calabrese: Well if I get =
the 5
lots back, I will fix
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: I understand.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Calabrese: Let me explain=
the
way it took place. That day t=
hat we
had the meeting, I went to see Mary and she was writing up, I asked her abo=
ut,
I wanted to see what the, she was writing, Moosa, she was drafting the pape=
rs
for the meeting, and this was like 3:00.&n=
bsp;
She said I can’t talk to you, you can’t come in here,
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: My question is<=
span
class=3DGramE>, why right away didn’t you people appeal the
case? Lik=
e you
have 30 days to appeal it.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Calabrese: They told me I=
could
appeal it, I've been working on this project. I’m the only one in this Tow=
n that
has been waiting 4-1/2 years - I still have not been able to
start my project. I (inaudible).
They said you could appeal this, and anybody in their right mind is =
not
going to appeal it, cause all of a sudden it wou=
ld
take another year and a half. (Inaudible). I
have to get these lots done.
Okay? And that’s=
why I
couldn’t appeal it, I had to accept it, and they knew that. I was told you could appeal it, go=
ahead
and appeal it, they wanted me to appeal it.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: Cause the way I=
see
it now is, I mean this Chairman is new, there is a lot of new people, and I
mean if I took time from my family and my wife to come over here until 11:0=
0 at
night to make a decision, and the new Board comes in, you will serve another
board, all of a sudden whatever Joe Polletta did or the other members,
it’s no good, I will feel hurt by taking time away, and I just
don’t understand the whole thing about this, why it was taken away, b=
ut
at the other end I just don’t understand why it was taken away, why
didn’t you just come back and say hey, this was wrong. Do you know what I'm saying?
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 33
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Calabrese: The only way I=
could
do that is by appealing it. Y=
ou go
to court, it takes 2 years, or file a new application which I already filed=
3
applications. I’m the o=
nly
guy in Town that’s been working 4-1/2 years on a project and I keep
getting turned down and reapply and reapply. I designed this project 5 times.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: Joe, I’m =
asking
these questions because I was not present and I’m . . . . . .
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Calabrese: Well I’m
trying to explain . . . . .
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: No, I understand
(inaudible).
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Calabrese: Why I didnR=
17;t
appeal it. I couldn’t a=
ppeal
it because then I would either have to reapply or go to court which would t=
ake
another 2 years. I have to ge=
t this
project started because I've got a lot of money into it and I have to get g=
oing
with this project. So I final=
ly got
it approved, so I wasn’t about to say well I can’t accept this
because of that, but the important factor is Wetlands does not have authori=
ty
to change lot sizes or boundaries, and as it stands right this minute, Zoni=
ng
has approved 34 lots, and again there’s a whole thing here as far as
I’m willing to leave the beginning lots the way they are, I just need
some relief on, there’s about 4 lots that I need relief for the septic
systems so I can get the lots that were taken from me, and anybody in their
right mind, whether it be me, you, or anybody else, would have done the same
thing. Put yourself in my
position. If you all of a sud=
den
after 2-1/2 years you had a chance to get approval, are you going to stop it
and go it court where it will take you another 2 years? (Inaudible) so now I’m asking
after this case came out, that I get some relief, I want those lots back,
I’m not taking the whole thing for myself, willing to give some to the
Town to improve the road, which makes all the sense in the world.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: And the total c=
ost of
the road that you’re going to be doing?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Calabrese: It’s upw=
ards
of $275,000- approximately. W=
e have
to widen the road, make it 20, for that 500 feet, we’re going to impr=
ove
the site lines, we’re going to widen the road, we’re going to c=
ut
all those pine trees out of there because we have to move the road over, so=
we
don't affect the neighbor next door, I gave 20 feet to the Town so we could=
put
the banks on this side, and we also hook up to the drainage that we're putt=
ing
in from the original design, so it makes a lot of sense for the Town, the
taxpayers, the safety factor, and if I don’t get it, I don’t ge=
t it,
but then I can’t afford to do the road.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: I’m askin=
g the
question because I was not present and I just, you know, I was confused abo=
ut
the whole thing.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 34
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Calabrese: Well that̵=
7;s
what happened.
&=
nbsp; =
; Atty.
Pilicy: Let me just comme=
nt
briefly. It was always Mr.
Calabrese’s right and always his intention to come back with a new
application and attempt to persuade this Commission that there are no wetla=
nds
related reasons to keep these lots that were combined still combined, but
(inaudible) wasn’t going to do that right now. The plan was to get the project bu=
ilt
and prove to the Commission that he could build this project and still prot=
ect
the wetlands, and we believe we can do that. What caused the application to com=
e in
sooner than originally planned was the opportunity to use that money to fix=
&=
nbsp; =
; Uniden=
tified
Voice: The last two is 50=
.
&=
nbsp; =
; Amr. Polletta:&nb=
sp;
So these lots (inaudible) there are no wetlands at all?
&=
nbsp; =
; Atty.
Pilicy: No wetlands at al=
l on
any of those lots. It’s=
just
an issue of how big is the buffer going to be, and most lots the buffer is,=
I
guess it’s all but 4, the buffer is still 200 feet and then it tapers
down to 50, I guess the narrowest one is 50 on one lot, but there area stil=
l no
wetlands, they are all approved by Planning and Zoning and the Torrington A=
rea
Health District.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: When you said t=
hat
those lots are already approved by P & Z, so that means that you got th=
at
approval from them and then you came to this Board?
&=
nbsp; =
; Atty.
Pilicy: No. That’s how unusual this
application is. This applicat=
ion
was approved with 34 lots by the Planning and Zoning Commission before Wetl=
ands
approved it. So
on the subdivision map as approved by the Planning and Zoning Commis=
sion
it still shows 34 lots. And f=
rom
the Torrington Area Health District’s perspective, all of these lots
qualify for on site septic, so these lots are fully approved by the Torring=
ton
Area Health District, fully approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission.=
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 35
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; It
was always Mr. Calabrese’s opinion that we could someday come back to
this Commission and persuade you that there is no wetlands related reason to
disqualify these lots, however, we were kind of jumping the gun because we
didn’t intend to do it this quickly, but the issue of Killorin Road
presented itself and was a genuine concern to Town Staff. How are we going to fix
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Jones: Does this follow t=
hen,
that the question about the salamanders and the Avalon and so on really
doesn’t matter, but the important thing here is that you have no wetl=
ands
impact and salamanders or no salamanders, that’s not part of the issue
and neither really is the road.
It’s simply a question of whether we have an impact on the
wetlands. And that’s th=
e only
meaningful case, is that what you’re saying?
&=
nbsp; =
; Atty.
Pilicy: In its simplest f=
orm,
yes, that’s exactly correct.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Jones: These other things=
are
sort of on the side.
&=
nbsp; =
; Atty.
Pilicy: Well they are alo=
ng the
side but we feel that what the Salamander case does has nothing to do with
salamanders. It reinforces the
statutory criteria of when a Wetlands Commission has jurisdiction over buff=
ers
and it gives us an opportunity to have just another tool when we try to
persuade you that we’re not going to impact the wetlands, that you ca=
n do
your job of protecting the wetlands, we can still get our lots, we can build
the road, and we feel that everybody can win/win here.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Calabrese: See what happe=
ned
here, us again, I know you were surprised and I was shocked because I thoug=
ht
the whole Board was talked to, that’s why I presented it the way I
did. I wouldn’t have do=
ne
that. We were going along to =
get
approval for this project, just the way it was. We went in with staff, Roy Cavanau=
gh was
there, Chuck, Mary, and Franklin and myself and =
we
start discussing it, and the subject came up about fixing
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 36
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; But
then the discussion came up that that was a danger and they started discuss=
ing
about how they could fix this road.
So then I came up, which I always wanted to get those lots back beca=
use
actually they’re still in place, and I figured here’s an opport=
unity
where I will volunteer with Engineering and Staff that I will pay for this =
on
my own, cause they said he checked with, who did you check with, Chuck, to =
find
out how long it would take to get money for this road?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Berger: The Public Works =
Subcommittee
has a 10 year capital improvement (inaudible).
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Calabrese: They found out=
that
they would not have money for 10 years for this road, and it would remain t=
hat
way for 10 years at least, minimum, if even then, so then I suggested, I sa=
id
what about if I got my 5 lots back and I will pay for fixing Killorin Road =
500
feet, correct the site line so it’s a safety factor for the Town, the
Town doesn't have to worry about getting sued on it, and that’s how t=
his
thing developed. I had no int=
ention
of doing this before we went into that meeting.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Undercuffler: Would you be
opening up the access? Take t=
he
chain away and make that a regular road?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Calabrese: Yes, right.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Zawadzki: Well I guess we=
could
ask for a Motion.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Undercuffler: Do we have =
all
the details of exactly, if we were to approve this, do we know what we̵=
7;re
approving (Tape #2, Side B ended – may have missed some.) and all the=
way
out to
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: Yes, the plan in f=
ront
of you is the revised plan that shows the original 34 lots, and with moving=
the
conservation easement on some of these lots back to provide enough room to =
put
a house and a septic system.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 37
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Calabrese: See this is al=
l the
same, cause it was, then these lots we just push=
ed
back a little, we didn’t push it back all the way. You still have, I think there̵=
7;s at
least 100 feet here, plus 50, you’ve got like 150 feet here, 150 feet
here. The only place I had to=
cut
it back here is 50 feet for this lot, these 2 lots, and over here, and the =
rest
remains the same.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Undercuffler: And this wo=
uld be
open?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Calabrese: Yes, this woul=
d be
open, and we take 500 feet both ways, we cut this down 4.5 feet and the lin=
e of
site, so now when the car is coming, you can see a car coming, it’s n=
ot
dangerous.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Undercuffler: Does that m=
ake a
cut here?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Calabrese: Yea, this goes=
down,
we’re putting drainage in here and we’re going to push this bac=
k 2
feet. We’re going to ma=
ke it
24 feet. We’re going to=
put
curb on that 500 feet, both sides, and then that curb will bring the water =
down
so we have a pipe coming here, we’re going to bring a drainage pipe o=
ver
here into the pipe that we’re bringing in that was proposed.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Undercuffler: So this des=
ign is
the existing
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Calabrese: Yes. That’s existing.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Undercuffler: And this wo=
uld be
the new?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Calabrese: We're going to=
go
back 24 feet. This is about 2=
2 feet, we’re going to go to 24 feet. Some places it's less, some places=
it's
between 21 and 22 feet.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: Was this a cul =
de sac
over here?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Calabrese: At one time it=
was a
cul de sac, but when they approved it at that meeting . . . . .
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: Which one is the 5 lots that were taken away from you?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Calabrese: Well 1, 2, 3, =
4, 5. Nothing on
that side. And there was no r=
eason
to take these away anyway because we were still . . . . .
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: Okay, but the c=
hain
was right here, you mean?
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 38
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Calabrese: Yea, there was=
a
chain right here. But by doin=
g that
we still protect the wetlands, cause we have all this buffer zone which we =
don’t,
by that case which I don’t even want to talk about, we could come bac=
k to
the 50 feet, right here, we could come back to here, but I’m not even
going to talk about that, all I want is to be able to build these houses he=
re
and put septic systems. You s=
till
have plenty of, this is the way it was here, and we just cut it back a litt=
le
bit over here.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: When we h=
ad
this thing closed over here, so when they plow the truck had to turn around=
and
go back this way?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Calabrese: No, we’r=
e putting
a hammerhead here.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: Yea, so they ha=
ve to
turn around and go back this way?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Calabrese: Yes.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: Right now when =
they
plow you have a . . . . .
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Calabrese: Yea this is be=
tter
for many reasons. You have to=
fix
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Zawadzki: So it would loo=
k like
this?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Undercuffler: Right.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: As Mr. Jones menti=
oned
that the issue of the road, that was an issue for the Planning and Zoning
Commission, they will review this.
The only thing in front of you is that giving ba=
ck
those 5 lots and move the conservation easement area back to allow t=
he
septic system o these lots.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. Undercuffler, sec. Mr. Polletta) to Approve Application #497 of Guernseytown Farms Estates, LLC for Modification of Permit #467, Phase I, Guernseytown Farms, Litchfield Road, Watertown, CT as presented on the plan revised date April 15, 2004.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion: None<= o:p>
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY (Mr. Jones recused himself).
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: Just one second. I think there is a gentleman (inau=
dible). There was a Public Participation a=
t the
beginning of the . . . . .
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 39
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Unidentified Man =
From
Audience: Yea, but this i=
s a significant
change. This is a significant
change. I think we ought to be
allowed to say something.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Zawadzki: Well there was Public Participation
earlier.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Unidentified Man =
From
Audience: But this is on =
the
Agenda. This is a significant
change on another number application.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Polletta: Can he speak in this public hearing=
?
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Unidentified Man =
From
Audience: He’s got =
to
have a Public Hearing on it.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Polletta: No, I’m just saying can you =
speak
tonight?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: No, only under Pub=
lic Participation. There is no Public Hearing, the pu=
blic
cannot . . . . .
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Unidentified Man From Audience: That application, (inaudible)
application #467 for Phase I. You
now have application #497 to revise Phase I, and the revision is a signific=
ant change. You’re going to tell me the =
public
doesn’t have the right to say something?
&=
nbsp; =
; Atty.
Jessell: There was no Pub=
lic Hearing
ordered by the Commission on this application so your opportunity to speak
would have been during Public Participation. There is another Public Participat=
ion on
the Agenda at the end of the meeting, if I read the Agenda correctly.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: Yes. If there is no Public Hearing, the
public cannot participate. We=
have
a Public Participation at the beginning of the Agenda.
&=
nbsp; B. =
Referral
from Town of Woodbury 9 lot subdivision,
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: This is just a referral from the T=
own of
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: But there’s no i=
mpact.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: No, there is no impact and Mr. Ber=
ger
reviewed this and I think this was on the Agenda last year and we looked
(inaudible) problem with it. =
Just
to let you know, and the Staff didn’t have a problem with this.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 40
9. &n=
bsp; New
Business
A. Request
for Bond Release, Perugini and
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Jones: I live on
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: This is not an application. No, the Commission should vote on =
this.
You can recuse yourself.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: Let the record show that Ron Jones
recused himself from voting on Item 9A.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Berger: The project is
substantially done. The site =
is in
good condition. There was some
additional stabilization (inaudible) that needed to be done, some additional
details such as (inaudible) and things of that nature that are still
outstanding. What I have
recommended in the memo given that I still need, the as built drawings need=
to
be revised, I’m recommending that the $56,=
759
bond be reduced by an amount of $42,283 leaving a balance of $14,476. If you read the last paragraph of =
the
memo that balance will be available should the revised as builts indicate a=
ny
items that need correction, and I based that on one half of the culvert bon=
d,
there are a series of culverts there and they look to be installed
properly. I recommend (inaudi=
ble) one
half of that. Another item to
ensure that the topsoil, seed, and mulch is comp=
leted
which was a bonded item for $2,400 as well as to provide a one year mainten=
ance
bond of $5,676. Those 3 items=
total
up to the balance, but I’m recommending we hold $14,476.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: That doesn’t include the pav=
ement
or the driveways?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Berger: It does include t=
he
pavement and the driveways, cause that was not a
bonded item, so that’s in all of that. The pavement and the driveways were=
not
included in the bond. We stil=
l have
the $1,000 bond . . . . .
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: For the individual lots.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Berger: As well, and I=
217;m
not anticipating any problems with the as builts so . . . . .
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Polletta: So the total b=
alance
. . . . . .
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Berger: I’m confident that propo=
sing
the $14,476 (inaudible).
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 41
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Polletta: That would be the total balance th=
at you
will retain.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Berger: We will retain (inaudi=
ble)
that will be enough to get the project stabilized (inaudible).
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: That’s the $5,676?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: No, the $14,476, t=
hat is
what we’re keeping, and the remaining will be released.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Polletta: So we’re releasing basically
$42,000.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Berger: Yes, $283.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. Polletta, sec. Mr. Beauchamp) to reduce the bond from $56,759 to $14,476.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion: None<= o:p>
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Undercuffler: So you were=
happy
with what they did up there?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Berger: Yes.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Undercuffler: There’= ;s already a concern about that thing. We never heard anything after they got started.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Berger: Well there were a
number of, the process of topsoil and seed, the yard level is there, and the
mitigation work up on the golf course property and grass is already growing
(inaudible). Walking along the
downstream side is silt fence so there’s no evidence of any released
material downstream.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: They did a good job on this site, =
we are
satisfied with this.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 42
&=
nbsp; B. =
Discussion
on the Notice of Violation issued to David Leo on April 29, 2004 concerning=
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: The Planning and Zoning Office=
was
notified that the property owner at
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION: (Mr.
Polletta, sec. Mr. Undercuffler) to Table and Schedule a Site Walk for the
Notice of Violation issued to David Leo on April 29, 2004 concerning
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion: None<= o:p>
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
10. Commu=
nications
and Bills
A. =
The Habitat
MOTION:<=
span
style=3D'mso-tab-count:1'> (Mr.
Polletta, sec. Ms. Sturgis) to accept Communications and Bills, Agenda Item=
9A
as presented.
Discussion: None<= o:p>
MOTION PASSED UNANIMOU=
SLY
11. Repor=
ts
from Officers and Committees
None
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 43
12. Repor=
ts
from Staff
Mr. Rafey: We received those week=
ly
reports from Reflections at
Mr. Polletta: They removed that big
mountain.
Mr. Berger: Yea, they're making
progress.
Mr. Polletta: It looks good.
Mr. Rafey: You ha= ve a copy of the recent report that we received. I don’t want to go into deta= ils because the time is kind of late, unless you have any questions.
Mr. Berger: Yeste=
rday
afternoon we had an incident on
We have structural engine=
ers from
the engineering firm out there with us today and they are beginning to work=
on
that, but in talking with Moosa and Mary today, and as well with Roy who is
heading up this effort, tomorrow we would like to go in there and remove the
material that has fallen into the stream channel. The stream channel is flowing okay=
now,
but it would be obstructed if we had a major rain event, so we’d like=
to
pull that material that’s failed out of the stream channel and get it
shored up with a couple of posts on the remaining section. The roadway will remain closed.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 44
Mr. Polletta: Is = that where the water flows (inaudible)?
Mr. Berger: Yes.<= /p>
Mr. Beauchamp: (Inaudible).
Mr. Berger: IR= 17;d be happy to answer any questions.
Mr. Zawadzki: No,= if it’s an emergency situation you’ve got to . . . . .
Mr. Rafey: They c= annot wait to submit a formal application. They went through the 2 month process.
Mr. Berger: It= 217;s continuing to deteriorate as we speak.&nbs= p; More sections have fallen in and the longer we wait the more impact,= or the potential is there, so I wanted to (inaudible) get it stabilized.
Mr. Rafey: Just authorize the staff to issue the permit to fix that problem. You don’t need a Motion, jus= t for the record that you authorized this, if you want to mention it.
Mr. Zawadzki: Wel= l you have our authorization to take whatever emergency steps are required.
13. &n=
bsp; Public
Participation
Mr. Sabis: I own property on
I sat here tonight and
listened to you people on #6, A and B, read a whole list of things that you=
had
to take into consideration before you made a decision as to accept or rejec=
t a
proposal. I can only assume,
because I was not able to make the meeting on Phase I, that you read those
things and considered those items before you made your decision. Therefore, the 5 lots were refused,
taken away. This now becomes a
legal matter, who is right and who is wrong. But what this states right here is=
that
the Town of
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 45
There is a prudent
alternative. Mr. Berger state=
d at
the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting and he stated here tonight, ther=
e is
no plan for the next 10 years to fix
Very nice of Mr. Calab=
rese
to offer to fix it, but no Town can force a contractor to contribute to the
repair of an existing road. W=
hen
Wheeler Farm was built, the bank offered the Town $10,000 towards the fixin=
g of
This sets a precedent.=
If the Town is right and knuckles =
into
this, the next LLC or contractor or anybody else comes into this Town, you
don’t give them what you want, well we’ll build you a Town Hall,
we’ll fix this if you give us what we want. Be very careful, because if you sa=
y no,
they’ll say well you let Guernseytown Estates do it; why are you
discriminating against me?
14. Adjou=
rnment
&=
nbsp; MOTION: (Mr.
Polletta, sec. Ms. Sturgis) to Adjourn the Regular Meeting at 12:35 a.m. (M=
ay
14, 2004).
&nbs= p; Discussion: None<= o:p>
&nbs=
p; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 13, 2004
PAGE 46
&nbs=
p; Regular
Meeting Adjourned at 12:35 a.m. (May 14, 2004).
Respect=
fully
submitted,
Ronald =
Jones,
Secretary
Conserv=
ation
Commission/
Inland
Wetlands Agency
&nbs=
p; _________________=
_________________