MINUTES<= o:p>
CONSERVA=
TION
COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR
MEETING
THURSDAY,
SEPTEMBER 9, 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: =
; Martha
Sturgis
ALTERNATES ABSENT: =
; Susan
Atwood
=
&nb=
sp; =
&nb=
sp; Peter
Peluso
OTHERS PRESENT: =
; &n=
bsp; Chuck
Berger, Town Engineer
=
; &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 7:30 p.m.
2. &nb=
sp; Roll
Call
Mr.
Jones, Secretary, executed the Roll Call.
Mr.
Zawadzki, Chairman, asked Ms. Sturgis to sit for Mr. Thermer, in his absenc=
e.
3. =
Public
Participation
Sue Schneider,
=
; Ms.
Schneider: I’m representing Philson and=
we
would request to be put on tonight’s agenda for the purpose of instal=
ling
a fence on our property.
=
; Mr.
Rafey: Mr. Chairman, I received this appl=
ication
today and there was no time for me to put it on the Agenda. I asked them to come the meeting a=
nd ask
the Chairman to add it to the Agenda.
You just need a motion to add an item to the Agenda.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 2
MOTION: (Mr.
Polletta, sec. Mr. Beauchamp) to add Agenda Item 6B, Philson, Inc.
Discussion: None<= o:p>
MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
=
; Mr.
Rafey: Mr. Pilicy, you don’t want t=
o add
that modification of permit for Phase I?&n=
bsp;
I think Jim is here. M=
r.
Sakonchick, this is Public Participation, do you want to ask the Commission=
to
add anything to the agenda?
James Sakonchick, Kratzert & J=
ones
Mr. Sakonchick: I would like to ask
something in public participation and it has to do with Guernseytown Farms,
Section I, the existing permit, and the request is for a modification to th=
at
permit to allow one of the discharge pipes which currently is proposed to a=
rip
rap plunge pool then to a line grass swale down the hill to a second rip rap
plunge pool to be modified and that is to install rip rap from the discharg=
e of
the pipe continuously from one plunge pool to the other in a pragmatic
way. It is a clearly more exp=
ensive
way of . . . .
Mr. Rafey: You don’t have=
to
give all of the details now, just ask the Chairm=
an to
add it to the Agenda. When it=
comes
then you can explain what you want to do.
Mr. Sakonchick: Please add it to the
Agenda, if you don’t mind.
MOTION: = (Mr. Polletta, sec. Mr. Undercuffler) to add Agenda Item 6C, Modification to Pha= se I Permit, Guernseytown Estates.
Discussi= on: None<= o:p>
MOTION P=
ASSED
UNANIMOUSLY
Mr. Rafey: Mr. Chairman, I also
received a letter from Hard Rock Development that needs to be added to the
agenda. If you remember the S=
unrise
Subdivision on the corner of
MOTION:<=
span
style=3D'mso-tab-count:1'> (Mr.
Polletta, sec. Mr. Beauchamp) to add Agenda Item 7D, Modification to the Pe=
rmit
for Watertown Crossings.
Discussi= on: None<= o:p>
MOTION P=
ASSED
UNANIMOUSLY
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 3
4. =
Action
on Minutes
&=
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. Public
Hearing, June 10, 2004, App. #495, Patrick Graziano &=
nbsp; N. Regular
Meeting, June 10, 2004 &=
nbsp; O. Regular
Meeting, July 15, 2004 &=
nbsp; P. =
Regular
Meeting, August 12, 2004 &=
nbsp; MOTION: (Mr.
Polletta, sec. Mr. Undercuffler) to Approve Items 4M, 4N and 4O and Table I=
tems
#4A through 4L and 4P. &=
nbsp; Discussion: None<=
o:p> &=
nbsp; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY 5. =
Pending
Applications &=
nbsp; A. Application
#504 of Gerald Roraback for construction of a deck at &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; If
a Public Hearing is not held, then a decision is required by October 15, 20=
04. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Zawadzki: We held a site walk there on Augus=
t 21st. At this point we need to decide if
it’s a significant activity, and then depending on that, decide on the
next step. Any
discussion? &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Polletta: I was on the field trip and I pers=
onally
don’t believe it’s a significant activity that requires a public
hearing. &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: I don’t either. CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 9, 2004 PAGE 4 &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Undercuffler: I don’t. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Beauchamp: I don’t. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION: (Mr.
Polletta, sec. Mr. Beauchamp) that Application #504 of Gerald Roraback for
construction of a deck at &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Discussion: =
; None &=
nbsp; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY Mr. Zawadzki: Mr. Polletta: Mr. Rafey: It’s a 12 x 30 dock,
approximately 5 to 6 feet of the dock will be on the ground and 24 feet ins=
ide
(inaudible) yes. Mr. Zawadzki:
And the concrete is really just t=
hose
cardboard tubes buried until the concrete (inaudible) no excavating is requ=
ired
(inaudible). Mr. Rafey: Just for the record, Mr. Undercuff=
ler
made a visit with me yesterday to look at the site. Mr. Undercuffler: I agree, (inaudible). &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION: (Mr.
Beauchamp, sec. Mr. Undercuffler) to Approve Application #504 of Gerald
Roraback for construction of a deck at &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Discussion: =
; None &=
nbsp; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 9, 2004 PAGE 5 B. Application
#505 of Guernseytown Farms, LLC for construction of 10 =
lot
Phase III Guernseytown Farms Estates Subdivision, Guernseytown Roads Watert=
own,
CT. If a Public Hearing is=
not
held, then a decision us required by October 15, 2004. Mr. Zawadzki: =
Same thing here. We need to decide if it’s a
significant activity and go from there. Ms. Sturgis: Well am I correct th=
at the
only driveway was a little bit in the buffer zone,
otherwise it didn’t touch any wetlands? Mr. Rafey: If you look at the m=
emo I
sent to you in the packet, there is actually 2 insignificant regulated
activities, #1 is disturbing about 4,500 sq. ft. of the 50 foot buffer zone=
for
construction of a driveway on Lot #70, and installation of (inaudible) eros=
ion
and sedimentation control measures within the 50 foot buffer area. I just have a question for Mr.
Sakonchick. I looked at the p=
lan
that I have here, and the proposed lot location for Lot #69, and the footing
drains for Lot #61 and grading for the leaching field for James Sakonchick, Kratzert & Jones Mr. Sakonchick: I’d be more comf=
ortable
if the Commission assumed that being so close there might be some small but
inadvertent activity within the 50 foot buffer. While we do design it to keep it ou=
t,
it’s right on the edge. Mr. Rafey: It’s not reali=
stic
to build that house next to the 50 foot buffer zone and not go in the 50 fo=
ot
buffer area. I mean sometimes
during construction the machines or the contractors go and disturbed that
area. Is it possible to give =
me
some numbers next day to just put it on the . . . of how much area for each=
of
these activities will be disturbed? Mr. Sakonchick: I have to do that for =
the
meeting, yes. Mr. Zawadzki: =
Yea, a
realistic approach based on you know the turning radius of machinery=
and
that sort of thing that you’re going to be working with in that area?=
Mr. Sakonchick: Yes. CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 9, 2004 PAGE 6 Mr. Rafey: Based on my experien=
ce,
that happened on one other application that is on the agenda tonight.,
the house was next to the 50 foot buffer line, and out of the regulated
activity, but during the construction it was not possible to avoid going in=
to
the 50 foot buffer area. Ther=
e is
one application on the agenda just for that purpose. I thought it would be realistic to=
ask
the Commission to approve some activities within those areas. Mr. Sakonchick: That’s right, =
and if
you had a bulldozer that just happened to swing around, assuming that
it’s a 12 foot spot, and 20 or 30 feet long, you’ve got 12 x 30=
you
might get 300 sq. ft. of disturbance at each one, as a practical, realistic
matter. And important point t=
oo is
under the spirit, it would be a temporary disturbance because when construc=
tion
is done there would be no permanent activity there and it would have an opp=
ortunity
to return to the intended buffer state. Mr. Zawadzki: Yea, the other alter=
native
would be, and I assume you already did this is to position those houses so =
they
wouldn’t have to be that close, I mean touching the 50 foot boundary.=
Mr. Sakonchick: We chose to be reali=
stic
that a person would probably, if developing these lots, taking into
consideration all the parameters of development; the better soils, for plac=
ing
the septic system, the fact that footing drains are best served by
gravity. For example take the
footing drain, I would much rather come to you and propose placing that foo=
ting
drain right on the edge of the 50 foot buffer if that footing drain can ope=
rate
by gravity because I don’t think anybody here would have to rely on a
sump pump during a hurricane to keep their cellar dry. It’s a water dependent use h=
aving
to go there. Also the septic =
system
has to be placed in the best way it can be, which requires what they call a
certain level system to create minimum leaching system spread. We work very closely with Bob Smit=
h and
if we can increase the leaching system spread, it reduces the capability of=
a
problem and if we can put the system in full, even though the trenches are =
75
feet away, the fill encroaches close to the 50 foot, so in each one of these
cases we’re spending more money creating a better system that gives t=
he
wetlands more protection. So =
yes,
we are close to the 50 foot buffer, but each one of these was done for a
reason, we thought it was the best alternatives. Mr. Zawadzki: So for the next meet=
ing
you’ll give us an estimate of the approximate disturbance of each of
these? Mr. Sakonchick: That is correct. CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 9, 2004 PAGE 7 Mr. Rafey: Mr. Chairman, I beli=
eve
the first item, the location of the house on Mr. Sakonchick: Very good. Mr. Rafey: Once you clear that =
area
around the house then the homeowner wants to walk there or go to the back of
the property. But those other
items, I agree that they are temporary.&nb=
sp;
Once you install those structures the vegetation will come back after
awhile. Mr. Zawadzki: As I mentioned, we n=
eed to
decide if this is a significant activity.&=
nbsp;
Now even though there is a minimum amount of disturbance, this is a =
very
visible project in my opinion it would warrant a public hearing just becaus=
e of
the public’s interest even though there is minimal invasion in the we=
tlands. We’re open for discussion. Mr. Undercuffler: I tend to agree. MOTION:<=
span
style=3D'mso-tab-count:1'> (Mr.
Polletta, sec. Mr. Jones) that Application #505 of Guernseytown Farms, LLC =
for
construction of 10 lot Phase III Guernseytown Farms Estates Subdivision,
Guernseytown Roads Watertown, CT. is a Significant Activity. Discussi=
on: None<=
o:p> MOTION P=
ASSED
UNANIMOUSLY &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION: (Mr.
Polletta, sec. Mr. Undercuffler) to Schedule a Public Hearing for Applicati=
on
#505 of Guernseytown Farms, LLC for construction of 10 Lot Phase III Guerns=
eytown
Farms Estates Subdivision, Guernseytown Roads Watertown, CT. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Discussion: =
; None &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 9, 2004 PAGE 8 &=
nbsp; C. Application
#507 of Town of &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; If
a public hearing is not held, then a decision is required by October 15, 20=
04. &=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Zawadzki: This is one tha=
t we
saw on our site walk, and again, we need to decide if it’s a signific=
ant activity I
don’t think it is. It&#=
8217;s
basically an emergency repair situation and it has to be done. &=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Undercuffler: Yea, I
don’t think it’s significant. =
; &n=
bsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: I mean it’=
;s
significant in the sense that it’s a public disturbance but that̵=
7;s
(inaudible) nothing to do with wetlands. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: And there is no other alternative =
for
this application, unless they put a cul de sac there. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION: (Mr.
Undercuffler, sec. Mr. Beauchamp) that Application #507 of Town of Watertow=
n,
Public Works Department for reconstruction of a section of Cherry Avenue,
Watertown, CT is Not a Significant Activity. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Discussion: None<=
/p>
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Zawadzki: Any questions f=
or
Chuck? &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION: (Mr.
Undercuffler, sec. Ms. Sturgis) to Approve Application #507 of Town of
Watertown, Public Works Department for reconstruction of a section of Cherry
Avenue, Watertown, CT with the standard conditions. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Discussion: None<=
/p>
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 9, 2004 PAGE 9 6. &nb=
sp; New
Applications A.&n=
bsp; =
;
Application #508 of Rainville Properties, LLC for
construction of a single family dwelling on Lot #2 Peck Lane, Watertown, CT=
. &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; If
a Public Hearing is not held, then a decision is required by November 12, 2=
004. &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: Is there anything significant abou=
t your
application? All we can do to=
night
is accept it because it will have to be carried over until the next meeting=
. Do you have any questions for the
commission? &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; John Rainville, &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Rainville: No. &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: As I explained before =
with
Mr. Calabrese’s application, this house is located outside of the
regulated area. If you look i=
n your
packet, I gave you two maps. =
On top
of one it says plot plan, and the other one is foundation as built. &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Undercuffler: So that foundation is
already there. &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: Yes, the house is already
constructed. What happened is=
this
subdivision was approved by the Commission I think 2 years ago and we issued
the permits and everything. T=
he
house on &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: Well that distance wou=
ld
have been in there anyway, it was that close to what we discussed earlier.<=
o:p> CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 9, 2004 PAGE 10 &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Polletta: We’re pushing the
house back because he was instructed to do that. &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: There was a deed restriction, yes.=
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Polletta: Well my point is like a hardship, =
I mean
he didn’t have a choice. &=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: Yes, we don’t enforce deed restrictions, but if a developer
doesn’t allow them to build a house closer to the road, they have to =
move
it back. &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Polletta: I understand. I’m just saying if he didn&#=
8217;t
have a choice, and it is a restriction, so he had to put the house over
there. How much disturbance d=
id
occur on the corner of the house, in square feet? &=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rainville: 200 square fee=
t, a
10 x 20 area, and it was graded with the material on site. &=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: So in other wor=
ds you
had to bring a machine in there? &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rainville” =
I had no choice to get around the corner.<=
o:p> &=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: It’s not rea=
listic
to just show the house that close on the map and then on the site you do it
without going into that area. &=
nbsp; =
; Ms.
Sturgis: Is this all done=
and
the house is finished, graded, seeded . . . . . &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: Yes, your regulations, I cannot iss=
ue a
zoning permit because when I see that there is a regulated area happening t=
here
and it wasn’t part of the permit, they have to come here and get an o=
kay
from the Commission, and then I can issue the zoning permit, because your
regulation say any activity within the 50 foot buffer zone has to be approv=
ed
by the Commission. &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Polletta: It seems to me it look=
s like
a hardship, he didn’t have a choice, but because he had to go all the=
way
back how do you move a piece of equipment, I mean I understand it’s o=
nly
very little on the corner, how do you work if you don’t have any
room? (Tape #1, Side A ended – may have missed some.) In the regulated area, or did you =
move
it out? &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rainville: No, everything is out. &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Ms.
Sturgis: So it’s all finished? CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 9, 2004 PAGE 11 &=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: That area, yes
it’s finished. &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Polletta: I’m saying is it like whatev=
er you
put into the regulated area, did you move it out of there or are you still =
in
there? Did you clean it up? &=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rainville: Yes, everythin=
g is
pretty much cleaned up. &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Polletta: The way it was before? &=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rainville: Yes, exactly.<=
/p>
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Zawadzki: We can do a sit=
e walk
on this. We can only accept it
tonight, we can’t vote on it. And so we can go look at it. &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: (Inaudible) if you want to go and =
look
at it. &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Undercuffler: Yea, I wouldn’t mind seeing =
it. &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: So at this point, if there are no =
other
questions, we can make a Motion to accept Application #508. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION: (Mr.
Polletta, sec. Mr. Beauchamp) to Accept Application #508 of Rainville
Properties, LLC for construction of a single family dwelling on Lot #2 Peck
Lane, Watertown, CT. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Discussion: None<=
o:p> &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY &=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Undercuffler: One thing t=
hat
gets me on that, though, I mean there’s certain regulations and then =
that
builder, developer comes along and creates a situation that only goes again=
st
those regulations. I realize
it’s the purview of the Commission to approve it, but suppose he said
well it has to be in the wetlands or something like that? &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Rafey: My suggestion to t=
he Commission
is that from now on if a subdivision plan comes in front of you and you see
that they show a house next to the 50 foot buffer area, that doesn’t =
mean
that they can just drop that house (inaudible) exactly on that point without
going into the regulated.
It’s not realistic. In
this case Mr. Rainville was not the developer. Somebody else got the permit with =
that
location of the house near the wetland area and it happened that he build it and then they put that deed restriction. He has no choice, he has to push t=
he . .
. CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 9, 2004 PAGE 12 &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Undercuffler: No, I understand that. When we originally approved this w=
as it
approved for the house to be up 75 feet and since then it was moved back? &=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: Yes, it was not th=
at
close. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Undercuffler: So when we approved it it wasnR=
17;t
that close? &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: It wasn’t that close. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Zawadzki: That’s what your first map s=
hows. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Undercuffler: Right. &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: It shows the little space there. &=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: Even that 5 or 6 f=
eet is
not enough. In the future we =
should
look at these plans, really, and if they show an activity just next to the =
line
or 5 feet from the line, it’s not realistic. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Zawadzki: Okay, so we want to do a site walk=
? &=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: If you want to.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Polletta: Moosa, have you been there?
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: I’ve been there many times, =
yes.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: My point is, the
disturbance when the machine went, it’s been cleaned and removed out =
of
the regulated area?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: No, what happened =
is
this area that I show on this map, if you look, this shaded area, this was all wooded to the edge of the 50 foot buffer
area. During the construction=
of
the house they had to go on this side of the house, they had to cut some of
vegetation and grade that area to get in there. Now it is all re-graded and there =
is no trees.
This is the area that the homeowner is going to use in the future.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Ms.
Sturgis: But that’s not within the 50=
foot
buffer itself?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: It is within the 5=
0 foot
buffer.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 13
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Undercuffler: Well I guess
whether we look at this thing or not, we (inaudible). It’s just an exercise in fut=
ility.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Jones: Yes, that does make the question.<=
span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> If want to approve this anyhow, si=
nce
it’s all after the fact, why do we need a site walk?
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Beauchamp: That’s right.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: That’s our decision.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: It’s up to you.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Jones: Moosa, is there anything that we c=
ould
see at the site walk that would change our opinion as to whether we would
provide the approval?
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: No.
You go there, you see the house, and that side is graded nicely.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Jones: Well I would suggest that we not d=
o the
site walk, unless there’s a reason, and I don’t see the reason.=
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. = Jones, sec. Mr. Undercuffler) to Table Application #508 of Rainville Properties, L= LC for construction of a single family dwelling on Lot #2, Peck Lane, Watertow= n, CT.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Undercuffler: I guess he
can’t prevent (inaudible).
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: No, I didn’t issue the zoning
permit. He has to wait until =
next
month when he gets an approval from you and then I can give him a zoning
permit.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Ms. Sturgis: Why wouldn’= ;t they come back when they knew they were going to get into the wetlands and = ask for the permit? They didnR= 17;t realize it at the time?
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: It’s hard, sometimes . . . .=
the wetland area is flat on the site, but sometimes the
contractor doesn’t know about the 50 foot buffer area, and I think fr=
om
now on we should tell them that they mark both the wetlands and the 50 foot
buffer area, so people don’t make mistakes.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 14
&=
nbsp; B. =
Application
#509, Philson, Inc.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Sue Schneider, Representing Philso=
n
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Ms.
Schneider: This is Paul DeSerbo, Vice Preside=
nt of
Philson. We had a permit into=
the
State of
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: Where are you l=
ocated
exactly on
&=
nbsp; =
; Ms.
Schneider: Right before t=
he
falls. Ri=
ght next
door to the flooring place.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
DeSerbo: We’ve been=
there
for 25 years.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: I know where you
are. You put a new addition o=
n the
building not too long ago.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Ms. Schneider: Yes.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: So the fence go=
es
right along the river?
&=
nbsp; =
; Ms.
Schneider: No. The river is, I really honestly
don’t know how far back, but it’s quite a ways back, there’s not even really any trees, just grass.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: It’s just within the 50 foot
buffer zone, I think that’s why they came =
here.
&=
nbsp; =
; Ms.
Schneider: Yes.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
DeSerbo: The pink line is the
encroachment line and the green line is the proposed fence.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Ms.
Schneider: The green s the encroa=
chment
line and the pink is the fence.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Polletta: What’s the construction of t=
he
fence?
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
DeSerbo: Just a fence.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 15
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Ms. Schneider: Chain link.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: Okay, at this point al=
l we
can do is accept the application for this meeting and Table it until the ne=
xt
scheduled meeting, so at that point we would expect to have copies of the p=
lot
plan provided so we could look at it and discuss it at the next meeting.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Ms.
Schneider: Okay, thank you.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Zawadzki: Is there a numb=
er on
this one, Moosa?
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: Well I didn’t ge=
t a number, I will get a number tomorrow.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: It's just Item #6B at =
this
point, but we need a motion to accept it.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: This will be appli=
cation
#509.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. Polletta, sec. Mr. Undercuffler) to Accept and Table Application #509, Phil= son, Inc.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion: None<= /p>
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
&= nbsp; C. Application #510, Modification of Phase I Permits, Guernseytown Estates
&= nbsp; = ; Mr. Zawadzki: Again, Jim, we don’t have to have all the information tonight because we can only ac= cept the proposal and Table it. We can’t take action tonight so we just want a general summary in 25 wor= ds or less of what you’re going to do.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; James Sakonchick, Kratzert & J=
ones
&= nbsp; = ; Mr. Sakonchick: Keeping it br= ief as requested, in front of you you have a graph and on the left side is what was originally proposed in the plans; on the right side in the cloud is the requested modification, highlight being we’re still taking the rear of the intercepted flow that discharges at Lot #23, and it goes down to the wetlands, going across something that, a ground surface that is not erodabl= e. We originally had rip rap, line swale, rip rap and we’re proposing the w= hole thing to be rip rapped, and further careful eyeball will note that there is kind of a dog leg up and that was because on the ground there was a nice li= ttle place where the water wants to go to that pond anyways and we’re able= to save some vegetation by doing it that way.= That’s the request.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 16
= ; &n= bsp; Mr. Zawadzki: So basically th= e rip rap is going to replace the fabric liner (inaudible)?
&= nbsp; = ; Mr. Sakonchick: Yes.
= ; &n= bsp; Mr. Zawadzki: And this was du= e to the velocity of the water going down there?
= ; &n= bsp; Mr. Sakonchick: Yes, and it&#= 8217;s due to the contractor, Mr. Calabrese, feeling very comfortable that he can = do a proper job with the rip rap immediately and not comfortable with the fact t= hat if he put a line swale that would take a period of time for the vegetation = to be established and he feared with the storms we’re having erosions in= the meantime, this way it’s a more immediate solution.
= ; &n= bsp; Mr. Zawadzki: Yea, personally= I like rip rap better anyway.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Undercuffler: That’s pretty steep there, isn’t it?
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Sakonchick: Yes, sir it is, very steep.
= ; &n= bsp; Mr. Rafey: Not the area where= they put the rip rap, but the pipe is very steep. The drainage pipe that comes f= rom the road to that point is very steep. The area that they put the rip rap = is not that steep. There is a gentle= slope from that point down. Is that correct?
&= nbsp; = ; Mr. Sakonchick: On a relative= scale it is not as steep, but we’re still talking grades in excess of 5%.
= ; &n= bsp; Mr. Zawadzki: Okay, any other questions? Again all we can do tonight is accept it and Table it and decide if we want to do a site walk.<= /p>
= ; &n= bsp; Mr. Undercuffler: Do we want = to arrange a site walk?
&= nbsp; = ; Mr. Zawadzki: Well that’= ;s the next question after we accept it.
= ; &n= bsp; Mr. Rafey: You accepted it al= ready when you put it on the Agenda. Now you can just make a motion to Table and Schedule a Site Walk.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. Undercuffler, sec. Mr. Beauchamp) to Table and Schedule a Site Walk for Application #510, Modification of Phase I Permits, Guernseytown Estates.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion: None<= /p>
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 17
&= nbsp; = ; Mr. Sakonchick: If I might ma= ke one comment. Mr. Calabrese wanted= , he gets a different impression of what I said, and I want you to realize that = this is a field modification where that stone is on the ground, because it’= ;s raining now, so we had to stabilize it and it is in place. So you’re not surprised.
= ; &n= bsp; Mr. Zawadzki: Well I think there’s enough interest that we’d just like to see.
&= nbsp; = ; Mr. Sakonchick: Oh, that̵= 7;s fine too, I just didn’t want to create an improper impression.
&= nbsp; = ; Ms. Sturgis: And all the rip rap is there now?
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Sakonchick: It is.
= ; &n= bsp; Mr. Zawadzki; When will the si= te walk be?
&= nbsp; = ; Mr. Rafey: It shouldn’t= be the same week as our next meeting or the week we have a Z.B.A. meeting. We can figure that out later and I’ll send you a notice.
7. &n=
bsp; Old
Business
A. =
Discussion on Wetland Issues
concerning properties at 603 and 563
Mr. Rafey: Mr. Chairman, I rece=
ived a
letter from Atty. Peter Clark who is representing Mr. Coty, and also I rece=
ived
another letter from the Attorney representing Dr. Neibel. Both want us to Table this item un=
til
next month and they will be present here to discuss this issue with you.
Mr. Zawadzki, Chairman=
read
aloud the following letter:
&#=
8220;Concerning
the wetland issues and properties at 603 and
Attn: Moosa M. Rafey
Assistant
Wetlands Enforcement Officer
Re: Conservation Commission/Inla=
nd
Wetland Agency
September
9, 2004 Meeting
Item #7A, Properties at 603 and
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 18
Dear Mr. Rafey and Mem=
bers
of the
As you know we represe=
nt the
Neibel’s with respect of their property at
We are in receipt of a
letter from Atty. Peter Clark to the Agency dated September 8, 2004. That letter indicates a willingnes=
s of
the Coty’s to work with the Neibel’s to address the siltation
sedimentation problem and the inability of Atty. Clark to attend the above
referenced meeting to further discuss a solution until he returns from
vacation. We are encouraged by
Atty. Clark’s letter. F=
or the
above reason we requested that Item #7A be postponed until the next meeting=
to
enable the parties to work toward an appropriate remediation plan to submit=
to
the Commission for its consideration and approval. We appreciate the Commission's con=
tinued
attention to this matter.
Very truly yours,
Secor Cassidy &
McPartland, PC
Gail E. McTaggert
Cc: Dr. & Mrs. Ken Neibel.
Atty.
Peter Clark
Atty.
Randall McHugh
And the letter was dat=
ed
September 9, 2004”
Mr. Rafey: I just gave you, Mr.
Chairman, a copy of Atty. Peter Clark’s letter, just for your
information. Next month you c=
an
discuss it with both sides. I=
believe
that they all agreed that they will work together to resolve this problem, =
but
they will come next month and discuss it with you.
Mr. Undercuffler: So it sounds like our =
letter
maybe got things started?
Mr. Rafey: Yes, at the last mee=
ting
you told me to send a letter to Mr. Coty and I did send him a letter, and t=
hen
they talked. You just need a =
Motion
to Table this item until next month.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 19
MOTION: =
(Mr.
Beauchamp, sec. Mr. Undercuffler) to Table the wetland issues concerning
properties at 603 and
Discussion: None<= o:p>
MOTION PASSED UNANIMOU=
SLY
&=
nbsp; B. =
Notice
of Violation issued to Mike D’Agostino concerning filling of an inland
wetland on
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: We had a site walk and there was s=
ome
discussion as to whether the situation was created by the Town when they ad=
ded
a drain there or not, and do you want to comment on that at all, Chuck?
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Berger: We’ve asked the Highway
Superintendent and his crew to go out and take a look at that situation.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Zawadzki: Okay, well the =
whole
question as I recall were boulders.
Is there any comment there as far as, he claims, and it’s my
understanding, this was second hand information, that the boulders were left
there by the Town crew and they are too big for his equipment to move.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Berger: I don’t thi=
nk our
Highway Superintendent talked to you.
You didn’t speak to me directly about the boulders.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: No, he didn’=
t, but
Mr. D’Agostino did mention that the Town left those boulders in the
wetlands and he cannot remove them.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Polletta: Will rocks like that affect the
wetlands? I mean I know it’s fill, but it’s not dirt.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Zawadzki: Well it could d=
isrupt
the flow if there is a watercourse there.
&= nbsp; = ; Mr. Rafey: That area that the= rocks are on, the water cannot penetrate through because it is compacted by that (inaudible) and it’s not a significant area.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 20
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: How long ago wa=
s the
construction?
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: 3 years I think.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: So really who k=
nows
how true it is, if they belong to the Town or somebody put them there. I feel, and I speak for myself, if=
those
couple of rocks are there and there is no harm to the wetlands, I don’=
;t
have a problem leaving them there providing for the Town to go over there a=
nd
remove them, because it is soft and it will create a mess, there’s
already grass growing and everything else, so I feel that as long as there =
is no
problem with the wetlands, I would leave them alone. They’re clean, they’re=
not
dirty, and if you go over there with a big machine, you’re going to
disturb more than whatever is already done. (Tape #1, Side B ended – may=
have
missed some.)
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: It’s a situa=
tion
where whatever impact there was on the wetland, it’s already done.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: Did we check on=
those
drainage pipes, if they come from the footing drains or a swimming pool?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: They were
existing from years, even the property owners told me that.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Polletta: Do they come from footing drains o=
r the
pool?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: Probably from the =
roof
and footing drains from the existing houses on
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: Footing drains
(inaudible) I think is good for the wetlands?
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: Well that’s rain water,
that’s what it is.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: Recharge the
wetlands. It’s a small =
piece
of wetlands next to a watercourse, it’s no=
t a
large area.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Zawadzki: Well I think wh=
at Joe
is concerned about, and anybody should be, is that if they use the pipes to
drain their swimming pools, cause there’s a lot of chemicals but
there’s no way to know that unless we did an on site inspection.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 21
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Rafey: I don’t think cause the way = the vegetation is there, all the wetland vegetation = is in good standing.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: Today when we w=
ent on
the field trip, it looked like those white corrugated pipes, or whatever th=
ey
were, was going towards the pool.
Now the question is was it ever checked, or are we thinking (inaudib=
le)?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Zawadzki: But that was an=
above
ground pool. And those pipes =
were
probably underneath it.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: That’s an=
above
ground?
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: Yes, but whatever you see there, t=
hose
pipes and everything, those houses were existing=
for
many years. Even Mr.
D’Agostino, the property owner, knows that those pipes are coming into
his property. I don’t k=
now
what kind of agreement=
they had at that time.
&=
nbsp; =
; Ms.
Sturgis: Does Mr.
D’Agostino want anything removed or are we the ones who want those big
pipes out? Town said the owner
asked them to keep them there?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Berger: The owner asked t=
hat
they be left behind.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Ms.
Sturgis: So is he happy with those there?
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: Why not?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Zawadzki: The pipes were =
not
part of the issue. As I recall
Moosa saw this, or someone reported that they were into the wetlands, and he
went there and asked them to desist and to remove the materials, and at that
point he said the boulders were the principal items and he couldn’t
remove them without equipment, but no mention was made of pipes.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Ms.
Sturgis: So we don’t have to worry ab=
out
that.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Zawadzki: (Inaudible) pil=
es of
dirt, I mean it’s an ugly place.
&=
nbsp; =
; Ms.
Sturgis: Right, but
that’s not part of the issue at all.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: It’s not the issue.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 22
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: I think you were on the site. It’s not like a large area, it’s a small area like between these two
tables. The impact is there, I
don’t know if there is anything we can do to correct it.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Zawadzki: Well I tend to agree with Joe. At this point leave well enough
alone. If you go in there to =
remove
the boulders, you’re going to stir up a lot of things.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: As soon as I learn=
ed
that he was doing something, I went there and I sent a Notice of Violation =
and
I told him to stop what he was doing, to grade and seed and mulch that area=
and
that’s what he did. He =
is not
going to go back to that area and disturb more of the wetlands.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Undercuffler: Sounds like that resolves it.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Zawadzki: I would think
so. So we need to finalize it=
by .
. . .
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: If you want to make a motion to ju=
st
leave it the way it is and no application is required.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Ms. = Sturgis, sec. Mr. Polletta) that Item 7B is resolved and no application is required = as long as the area is stabilized and seeded.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion: None<= o:p>
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
&=
nbsp; C. Discussion
on Soap Suds in Brook adjacent to
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Zawadzki: Well on that on=
e if
you looked in your packet we had a letter sent July 15th to the
Watertown Fire District, Carl Minicucci, and letters were attached that Mary
Barton sent out to residents of the recommended homes, well recommended in =
that
I guess Chuck and Robert Smith concluded that the most likely candidates wo=
uld
be 115 Litchfield Road, 286 and 280 North Street, and these people were
notified by letter, which you have attached in your packet, dated July 22
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 23
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Jones: Yes, I got in touch with Colette R=
eedy
who’s in charge of inspectors in this area for D.E.P. and she said in
order to do a dye test, they would either have t=
o be
welcomed into the homes of the people involved or else they would have to h=
ave
a court order. And I think
that’s the case with any agency probably. She also said suds can come from
tannins, naturally occurring tannins that come from leaves and so on and th=
at
one thing that could be done was simply be take some of that water and shak=
e it
up in a jar and see if it makes suds.
If that were the case that the tannins were naturally occurring and
they’re high enough concentration to cause the problem, then the only=
thing
that causes the problem is agitation.
If the water is running fast enough to irrigate, it will make suds.<=
span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> So she wasn’t really overly
helpful in terms of knowing what the analytical help would be, she
couldn’t determine at what point tannins do become sudsy, cause I gue=
ss
there’s different kinds of tannins and of course it may have to do wi=
th
hardness of the water and other concerns about the water itself separate fr=
om
tannins, but that was her suggestion. We could call on D.E.P. and get sup=
port
from them but I guess the first question is are =
there
still suds in the water?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Zawadzki: Well I can̵=
7;t
answer that tonight, but on the other hand Mr. O’Sullivan has been
tracking this for a couple, 3 years and he gave us his log and it’s b=
een
over a period of a couple of years that he’s been seeing suds there s=
o I
don’t think it’s going to go away, but that’s a good point
about the tannins so my next question would be can we have the water
tested? I don’t think t=
hat
shaking up some in a jar is very scientific, only because if it’s
soap that’s causing it, shaking it in a jar would still make suds so =
it
wouldn’t prove soap or a tannin, so the only thing that would prove it
would be an analysis of the water.
Is there any way that we can do that?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: I can ask Robert S=
mith
if he can just do the test.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Undercuffler: What was Mary talking about yester=
day
when I was down there, she was talking about hav=
ing
testing done.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: Yea, I think that’s the next=
step.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Polletta: For the water?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Jones: There is another
consideration. If it’s a
pollutant, it’s probably (inaudible) from some kind of laundry deterg=
ent
or whatever. That would be
manmade. Tannins are naturally
occurring.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: But if we do the test through our
office, we need a budget for that.
We have to use some of the money that we have in the budget.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 24
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Undercuffler: Well she was going to look into
that. Her comment yesterday w=
as she
thought there was probably some money in there.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: But first I want t=
o ask
Mr. Smith if they can do that through their department, the Health Departme=
nt,
they have funds for those tests, but if he cannot provide funds, then I will
check with Mrs. Barton to see if we can get some money from our budget to s=
end
a water sample for testing.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Zawadzki: So at this point
let’s say we officially request that you request Mr. Smith to give you
that answer and then if he can’t do it, maybe we can find out how muc=
h it
would cost.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: First of all, if he were able to d=
o that
dye test, I think that was better to see if we can find the source, but
unfortunately . . . .
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Polletta: But if we can test the water then =
we
won’t have to disturb these people at all.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Zawadzki: Exactly. I think that’s a very good p=
oint
that D.E.P. made, cause we may be barking up the=
wrong
tree here. If we’ve all=
been
to streams, I know I have, where rivers where you see like a little waterfa=
ll
there’s a little pouch of foam there and so forth, it’s not soa=
p at
all, it’s from decaying vegetation or whatever causes it and you see =
that
naturally occurring in streams all the time.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: I can ask Mr. Smith tomorrow and s=
ee if
he can do the test for us.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Undercuffler: As far as the dye test, I talked to
Ernie Coppock last week and he claimed that they would be more than happy to
approach the residents for a dye test.&nbs=
p;
Now that’s kind of opposite from what . . . .
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: (Inaudible)?
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Undercuffler: Yea, from what’s been talked=
about
and I raised that point to him - well it’s been said that you people
don’t want to do it. He
claims, and I forget the specific situation, but he claims somebody wanted =
them
to go in under the guise of something else and do a test, and I said that w=
as
ridiculous. I mean we want to=
do a
dye test and just ask the people and he claimed that they would have no pro=
blem
doing that.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Jones: I’d like to
suggest one thing, though.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Berger: That is what we hard and (inaudibl=
e) be done.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 25
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Beauchamp: Would the amount of rainfall we=
217;ve
had lately flush out that whole thing before you test the water?
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: Let me talk to Mr. Smith and see i=
f he
can go there and take a water sample and test it somehow.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Jones: May I make this one
thought here, that the letter went out the 25
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Undercuffler: Yea, but once you do a dye test you
don’t really know for sure. I
mean the absence doesn’t mean that they didn’t cause the proble=
m,
or that they solved the problem.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Jones: Well the question
becomes is our goal to correct the problem or to find out who caused it?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Undercuffler: Well itR=
17;s
to correct the problem, but how do you know if you corrected the problem?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Jones: If they’ve corrected it themselves
then we don’t (inaudible) correct it for them.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Undercuffler: Yea, but then you just have to wait
around and (inaudible) of time.
&=
nbsp; =
; Ms.
Sturgis: I like the idea =
of
testing the water.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Beauchamp: Testing sounds=
like
the best way.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Ms.
Sturgis: And I wonder,<=
/span>
should we let Mr. O’Sullivan know if we decide to test the water so he
knows we’re following up.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: I want to do something and then le=
t him
know what we did.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Zawadzki: Yea, I think any
correspondence we should copy him.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 26
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Beauchamp: It would seem as though whatever
happened, happened a couple of years ago, because no one ever reported this
before.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: Well Mr. O’Sullivan claimed =
when
he came here 2 months ago that it was on-going . . . .
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Beauchamp: 2 or 3 years, I
understand.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Zawadzki: Over going back=
, up
to today, and he had said that it was happening now.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Beauchamp: I remember him saying that, but I
didn’t understand how long (inaudible).
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Zawadzki: Well his record=
s, he guess us his records . . . .
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Beauchamp: Well he’s been living on
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Zawadzki: Well he gave Mo=
osa
his records.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: There’s a log of all the dat=
es.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Zawadzki: And it goes back
awhile, a couple of years, right?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Beauchamp: Yea but I̵=
7;m
saying no one ever reported it 5 years ago. He’s been living there longe=
r than
that.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: Well that’s all the more rea=
son,
it may not be that it’s manmade and not naturally occurring tannins,
because if it was tannins it would have been there forever probably but we
don’t know that.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: Let’s try to=
do a
water test and hopefully that will provide an answer.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 27
&=
nbsp; D.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: I gave a copy of a letter from Cha=
rlie Spath, he’s the engineer for Watertown Crossings=
, that
they are proposing a 25 unit active adult community. It’s located in the intersec=
tion
of
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Berger: They are before P=
lanning
and Zoning currently. They ha=
ve not
provided details of their plan.
They are in the process of getting the zone change for the new overl=
ay
for this type of activity within the zone, as well as there is a site plan
approval pending, but I haven’t seen the details. This is the first time I saw, the =
.5
acre increase in impervious area. (Inaudible) show that the detention basin will function prope=
rly
with that additional impervious area, which I haven’t seen yet.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: I got a copy of th=
e site
plan, I received this from Mrs. Barton today to just show you what the chan=
ges
are. I don’t know at th=
is
time if the Commission wants to just act on this letter or you want the
applicant to submit an application for modification of the previous permit.=
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Undercuffler: Yea, I would think so.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: Then Mr. Tedesco i=
s not
here . . .
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Polletta: So this is going to change the way=
it
was before.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: This was a 10 lot
subdivision.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Polletta: I know, but I’m talking abou=
t wetlands.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: Wetland activity will be the same.=
Even in the letter they said that t=
hey
reduced the regulated activities.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 28
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Undercuffler: It would be=
nice
to see the plan to prove that.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Zawadzki: Right. Yea, I think that just the, again
there’s enough public interest in something like this that it behoove=
s us
to request an application.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: An application to =
modify
the existing permit.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: Well we’v=
e got
to go through a public hearing with this all over again? We just (inaudible).
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: It’s not a significant chang=
e to
the wetland activity.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Zawadzki: No, we have to =
still
decide that separately. In ot=
her words
once they submit the application then we decide whether it warrants a public
hearing or not.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Polletta: So they would be starting all over=
again
with this.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Zawadzki: Well if we deci=
de
it’s not a significant activity, then we can make a decision on it.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Undercuffler: We didnR=
17;t
say this was significant in the first place, did we?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: No. If the application . . . .
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: We had a public hearing on this.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Undercuffler: No, not on =
this.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: If the application is for modifica=
tion
of their existing permit, and if this modification doesn’t require
additional regulated activity then this is not a significant activity, but
according to this letter they are reducing some of the regulated activities=
, they
are moving the detention pond from the 50 foot buffer area close to the sit=
e,
but increasing the impervious surface, yes.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Undercuffler: By how much though? They say two .5 an acre or whateve=
r it
was.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: It was kind of
confusing.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Polletta: Why don’t we make an applica=
tion,
come in before us and we’ll decide at that time.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 29
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: Okay. An application=
for a
modification of their existing permit.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: Right, and then
we’ll decide if it requires a public hearing.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Undercuffler: I don’=
;t
think we would accept the . . . .
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Rafey: You don’t ac=
cept
the letter, then okay?
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Undercuffler: We want the
application, would be my reaction.
&=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Zawadzki: I think so.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: Okay, then you need
a motion on this.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. Undercuffler, sec. Mr. Jones) to request an application to Modify Permit #4= 90 and don’t accept the letter.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion: None<= o:p>
&=
nbsp; &=
nbsp; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
8. =
New
Business
9. =
Communications
and Bills
A. =
The Habitat,
B. =
; Jurisdiction
of Inland Wetlands Commissions Defined Further,
&nbs=
p; Mr.
Zawadzki: The Habitate, this one is signific=
ant in
that gives further discussion on the
&=
nbsp; Mr. Rafey: I think the second item that I gav=
e you
from the Connecticut Federation from Planning and Zoning Agencies Quarterly=
Newsletter, that is kind of much easier to understand =
what
the point is.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 30
&nbs=
p; Mr.
Zawadzki Yea, but even there it=
says
in a development which will keep many lawyers busy the legislator saw fit to
further amend the act by inserting a section blah blah blah, so that’s
where I got that phrase. So w=
hen I
saw that I wasn’t too disappointed that I couldn’t understand a=
ll
of it.
&nbs=
p; Mr.
Undercuffler: Well I think the gist of it is you
can’t turn down an application on the basis of affecting wildlife out=
side
the wetlands. If it’s i=
nside the wetlands that’s something else again, but I =
think
that’s what they tried to do in Avalon, the wildlife was outside the
wetlands so they turned down the application which was not being affected by
the application. That was the=
whole
argument.
&=
nbsp; Mr. Rafey: The State wants to change the defi=
nition
of wetlands, they want to include the wildlife i=
n the
definition of wetlands. In the
future if that happens then you can regulate that, but at this moment, you
cannot deny an application only based on the fact that the development will=
affect
the wildlife outside of the regulated area.
&nbs=
p; Mr.
Zawadzki:
Well the part I didn’t understand is they talk about impacting the
physical characteristics of the wetland or watercourse, and what does that =
make
(inaudible)?
&=
nbsp; Mr. Rafey: That is what you should look for.<=
span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> If an application comes in front o=
f you
that the proposed activities really impact the wetlands, (inaudible) or
not. Even discharging water i=
nto
the wetlands, that would change . . . yes.
&=
nbsp; Mr. Zawadzki: Would carry sediment and that sort=
of
thing or cause erosion.
&nbs=
p; Mr.
Undercuffler: But in Avalon that wasn’t the
argument. All they said was w=
ell
the spotted salamanders that (inaudible) were somehow they thought might be
affected.
&nbs=
p; Mr.
Rafey: To kind of guide you, that when yo=
u look
at an application just look to see how the proposed activities actually imp=
act
the wetlands.
MOTION:<=
span
style=3D'mso-tab-count:1'> (Mr.
Polletta, sec. Mr. Beauchamp) to accept Communications and Bills, Agenda It=
ems
9A and 9B as presented.
Discussi= on: None<= o:p>
MOTION PASSED UNANIMOU=
SLY
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 31
10. Repor=
ts
from Officers and Committees
None
11. Repor=
ts
from Staff
Mr. Berger: I’ll start off=
with
some general comments that really apply to 11A, B, and C. This is coming up on two weeks ago=
now,
on a Friday afternoon, we got a significant rainfall event followed by anot=
her
significant rainfall event on that Saturday afternoon, actually it was the =
day
of your field walk, I saw you that morning. Those storms exceeded what typical
sediment erosion control measures are designed for, to be perfectly honest =
with
you. Typical sediment erosion
control measures are designed to be effective somewhere up to about a 2 year
storm event. I don’t ha=
ve the
exact numbers of what that storm event was over those two days. It was, if I use some of the resid=
ents
along Turkey Brook as a gauge and some of the basements that got flooded do=
wn
there, it was not a 10 year flood event but I would say it was greater than=
a 2
year because we did see several of the on-going subdivision failures of the=
ir
sediment erosion control measures.
As it applies to Refle=
ctions,
there was some, I want to say minor release of sediment to
Mr. Polletta: Chuck, are the storm
drains all dumping into the big detention area?
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 32
Mr. Berger: Not 100%. Some of them do. In the paved section they do, but I
think it’s both Moosa and my opinion that we need, why not dump them =
all
in there? There are storm dra=
ins
that go up into the site, in the areas that are not paved, and why not catch
that water now and get it into the detention basin which was all along prop=
osed
to serve as a sediment basin during construction.
Mr. Polletta: =
I think you’re 1=
00%
right, because even if it gets dirty, they can always get in there and clea=
n it
up. But that day after the fi=
eld
trip, and I just happened to drive back over there, I didn’t know wha=
t to
do really. There was nobody a=
round
and when the water came down the hill, it was paved and the road acted like=
a
steed for the water. I mean t=
he
muck and everything went right into the middle of the road and into the
pond. I didn’t know wha=
t to
do so I went back to the office. I
said I didn’t want to call nobody so I called the Chairman,
he wasn’t home, so I didn’t know what to do. There was no protection. I think . . . . I was there when t=
he
water came down, the road was not even clean.
Mr. Berger: Yes, and that was the
original intent.
Mr. Polletta: But they were covere=
d that
day, cause I don’t think the water was goi=
ng
into that thing.
Mr. Berger: That day they were a=
ll
covered.
Mr. Rafey: I gave you a copy of=
a
memo that I gave to Mrs. Barton after I did an inspection. I listed 5 items that they were li=
ke
missing there that they were not there and that caused some of the problem,=
and
then I made another list of recommendations to what to do to correct these
problems. Some of them are
done. I mean that portion of =
the
road that is paved and now it is curved, and at that time it wasn’t
curved, and the catch basins on the paved areas was all clogged. And now they are open.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 33
Mr. Polletta: My question is let&#=
8217;s
say there is damage to that lake. If I was over there with somebody =
else,
and the guy couldn’t believe the amount of stuff that was in there, a=
nd
one of the truckers called in and said please come down so it was a lot of
stuff in there, but whatever damage they put in there, if it’s a quar=
ter
of an inch or half inch or whatever, how is responsible for that? Is the Town responsible for that?<=
span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> (Tape #2, Side A
ended – may have missed some.)
The question that came up that day and this other gentleman that was
with me was amazed at the amount of muck and dirty water that was, I mean t=
he
road was covered. I don’=
;t
know if you were there that afternoon but the idea is if there is any damage
done to the lake in the past I know that whoever, before the water goes into
the lake it goes through some other, be it a detention pond or some kind of
something to clean it, but who’s responsible in case of damage, maybe
10%? Is it the Town’s
responsibility?
Mr. Zawadzki: Isn’t that why we have a bond? These guys are bonded for anything=
like
that if there is a claim against (inaudible).
Mr. Berger: That’s probably
something that’s best for the Commission to decide maybe with some le=
gal
advice. My thought would be t=
he
Commission does have some enforcement powers I would assume if they wish to
exercise those if you believe there was a discharge to the wetlands and
watercourse you could have him clean that.
Mr. Polletta: =
Well we have pictures,=
this
guy took pictures that day of the water crossing the road going into the po=
nd,
and the whole pond was brown.
That’s the reason I said to him, hold off, don’t do
anything, let me call somebody, but I couldn’t get a hold of nobody, =
and
this was going on for all the time it rained. This not was going on for like 15
minutes; the whole afternoon it was like that and I don’t want to say=
the
guy’s name, but the water that was going across the road, through tho=
se
lots and gravel, it was going right over, I mean I couldn’t believe t=
he
amount of water that was coming down.
I want it to be on record that if there is any damage to this thing I
don’t think the Town should be responsible for that to clean it up.
Mr. Berger: My technical thought=
s are
there is a very minor amount of sediment deposited in the lake there, where=
it
overflowed there. As of the o=
ther
day when I stepped out into that area, you could see a half moon shaped area
where it is discolored but it is pretty small, but I’d be happy to, a=
nd
that’s one thing we talked about with the developer this week,
we’ve had similar concerns with Planning and Zoning and anticipated
concerns here tonight, they’re willing to come and talk to you about =
what
they’ve done and what they’re doing out there. You probably should take a field w=
alk.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 34
Mr. Polletta: =
I’m not an engin=
eer,
I’m nobody, however, I only speak of what we saw, and I was not alone=
, so
there was so much, all the dirt that was coming off that hill went into the
pond. (Inaudible) it went str=
aight
in.
Ms. Sturgis: Can they scope it ou=
t,
that half moon?
Mr. Polletta: So if you said that =
there
was no damage, I believe you.
Mr. Rafey: I think that’s=
a
good suggestion that Mr. Berger made, why don’t you just have a site =
walk
and at the same time, if you want the engineer . . . .
Mr. Zawadzki: Yea, we could reques=
t that
the engineer and the site manager come to our next meeting.
Mr. Polletta: =
As a member of the Wet=
lands
Commission I think it was my duty to stop and look at this, but it was scar=
y,
because the water wasn’t going no other pl=
ace
but down.
Mr. Berger: And I think to addre=
ss Mr.
Polletta’s concern, it might be appropriate to have the developers engineers environmental person present to d=
iscuss
the impacts on the lake. I me=
an
that sediment that’s occurred in the bottom of the lake, there is an
environmental impact to that. I
don’t know that I’m the one, I shouldn’t be saying itR=
17;s
a minor environmental impact, that should come from someone with a little b=
it
more experience in those kind of issues than an engineer, with more
environmental (inaudible).
Ms. Sturgis: <=
/b>Can that be scooped ou=
t or
will that just stir it up and make it worse?
Mr. Berger
Mr. Polletta: =
In the past when Mt. F=
air
Farm was developed up there and we had problems in the past, and we lowered=
the
water almost down to nothing and it was partial, was clean, and those two p=
onds
at the beginning were created. He
had to come up with something to correct that problem he caused really. If you cause a problem, I don̵=
7;t
care who it is , you have to be responsible.
Mr. Berger: I’m not sure h=
ow
this compares to Mt. Fair Farm, I wasn’t t=
here
when that happened.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 35
Mr. Undercuffler: That’s a tough s=
pot
too because you got that road that shoots straight down and you’ve got
everything, all the mud that leads into the road and then it picks up speed=
and
goes right on down.
Mr. Polletta: That’s the rea=
son I
was saying to Chuck, if that water goes into that detention pond at that ti=
me,
and then at least it will sterile it even if it’s discolored, but this
thing was going straight down. The
road was covered with dirt.
Mr. Undercuffler: Why would they cover=
those
inlets?
Mr. Polletta: Cause they’re =
easy
to clean.
Mr. Undercuffler: They just didn’=
;t
want to have to clean them.
Mr. Berger: And some water go into them but certainly not . . . . once
the filter fabric gets clogged with sediment, it’s essentially . . . =
.
Mr. Undercuffler: Have they been opene=
d now?
Mr. Berger: All the ones in the = paved section have been opened, they’ve been fitted with something called S= iltsez which is to collect silt and once they get approximately half full they get pulled out by a piece of equipment. Going back to probably my major disagreement with the engineers in h= is report, the developer’s engineers, is we think the rest of them shoul= d be opened up and be used and if they have to clean out the detention basin/sediment basin at the end of the project that was the purpose of it.<= o:p>
Mr. Polletta: The way this thing g=
oes
down, it probably cleans it self as it goes down.
Mr. Rafey: And that was a condi=
tion
of approval for that development to use the detention pond as a sediment po=
nd
during construction.
Mr. Zawadzki: A sediment pond by
definition he water has to stay in there long enough to allow the suspended
materials to settle and when you get a torrential rain it’s not going=
to
happen, it’s going to run right through there because the pond would =
have
to be a different size to allow for a 100 year storm or a 50 year storm.
Mr. Polletta: That day in the dete=
ntion
pond, there was very little water, so probably because most of the catch ba=
sins
were probably blocked because there was nothing going in there.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 36
Mr. Rafey: Definitely because t=
hey
use the detention pond as a sediment pond it giv=
es
more time for the sediment to settle there.
Mr. Berger: And I do just want to
emphasize that those two storms were significant storms and I would say that
all the streams in Town, all the streams in this area of the State were flo=
wing
pretty brown. By the time Sat=
urday
afternoon, Saturday night’s storm were over and done with, all of the
streams were flowing pretty brown.
Mr. Zawadzki: We had 6 inches of r=
ain,
didn’t we?
Mr. Berger: I’ve heard that
number. I look at,
I think our Parks and Rec guy said it was a little less than that. It was under a 10 year storm
(inaudible). That’s sor=
t of
what I’m hearing.
Mr. Polletta: I believe that the discolor is one thing. If you have to go into the middle =
of the
street with the machine to pick up the muck and clean up . . . . there were stones that were flowing right into the
lake. I just hope this
doesn’t happen again. I=
f you
don’t say nothing then it will happen
again. So now we got to make =
sure
that they know about it.
Mr. Berger: They continue to wor=
k with
us. They’re willing to =
come meet with you to answer any questions.
Mr. Polletta: I think they’re
doing a good job, I think they’re doing a great job.
Mr. Berger: They’d welcome=
a
site visit, I guess at any time, just to make another general statement, if=
any
of the Commission members with myself or Moosa, if you have concerns or
suggestions or comment, we welcome that opportunity.
Mr. Polletta: During the day we=
217;re
all working, you meet with them all the time, and my only concern is this, =
let's
say there is a half inch of muck in there, I want to make sure that this To=
wn
is not responsible for cleaning that pond.=
As far as it was bad, we want to make sure that next time it
doesn’t happen, and I don’t think it will happen, but there were
his own people cleaning up muck in the middle of the road.
Mr. Rafey: That wasn’t th=
e only
site that we had problems with.
Mr. Polletta: Yea, but how many si=
tes
have a lake right next to it?
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 37
Mr. Rafey: That’s the
problem. That’s a sensi=
tive
area.
Mr. Zawadzki: And it’s a hig=
hly
visible site.
Mr. Berger: I just want to encou=
rage,
yes, you do all work during the day but you’re also our eyes out in t=
he field and as
you’re driving around town. If
you see something, please call us.
If it's after hours or on a Saturday, call the Police Department,
Mr. Polletta: I didn’t want =
to
make a big thing out of it. I=
said
maybe I should just find out and see if something could be done, so my frie=
nd
came over and then someone else, then the cameras came out.
Mr. Rafey: Could I have some of=
those
pictures?
Mr. Polletta: Yea, because what th=
ey did
was they went on the other side of the lake and there was all this brown st=
uff
coming right out. I’ll =
ask
them for the pictures.
Mr. Zawadzki: And do we want to as=
k the
engineer and the site manager to attend our next meeting?
Mr. Rafey: Okay.
Mr. Undercuffler: Do we want to go on =
record
requesting or demanding that all those catch basins be opened?
Mr. Rafey: We already suggested=
that
and we are going to talk to him this coming Wednesday.
Mr. Undercuffler: I mean does the Comm=
ission
want to . . . .
Mr. Rafey: Sure.
Ms. Sturgis: I think so.
Mr. Polletta: I don’t know if
these guys are coming before our Board, but if they’re working with t=
hem
every day, I mean whatever we say tonight they probably understand what our
concerns are. I mean by them =
coming
over here if they can do anything?
What can they do?
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 38
Mr. Undercuffler: I think it impresses=
on
them the seriousness of the matter, we’d l=
ike
them to come in and . . . .
Mr. Rafey: Plus they would bring
their experts to answer these questions.
Mr. Zawadzki: Moosa listed that as=
one
of his recommendations as far as the catch basins. I don’t know whether this Se=
an
Blyfer has, did he give you (inaudible) going to do these things?
Mr. Rafey: As Chuck said, there=
is
some disagreement with some of these items that we told them to do and I th=
ink
it’s a good idea to ask them to come here and we can ask them questio=
ns
about why they don’t want to do some of these things.
Mr. Berger: But in the meantime =
we
hope to get them to do it anyway. (Inaudible) until next month (inaudible).
Mr. Zawadzki: Schedule a site walk=
for
now? We haven’t decided=
what
date that is yet.
Mr. Rafey: I will work with you=
and
we will send a notice to everybody.
Mr. Polletta: I have one more thing=
on
Mr. Rafey: He didn’t do
anything yet. Actually we were
driving yesterday and we were looking.
Mr. Polletta: I drive by there a l=
ot and
my concern is sometimes like this gentleman tonight who went a little bit i=
nto
the wetlands to do the footings or foundation of the house, here is a situa=
tion
where we said okay, you did it, just clean it up. I don’t think it’s even
clean.
Mr. Rafey: No, he didn’t =
do it.
Mr. Polletta: He should at least f=
ix it
up and throw a little bit of seed like we told him to do. We should send him a letter.
Mr. Rafey: I will talk to him.<= o:p>
Mr. Polletta: Make sure he can jus=
t fix
it up.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 39
Mr. Rafey: Just follow his permit, we issued a permit with that condition.
Mr. Zawadzki: Yea, that was part o=
f the
conditions of the permit.
Mr. Undercuffler: Are these people get=
ting
ready for Winter?
Mr. Berger: That was another one=
of
our priority discussions with them, and they’re beginning to think ab=
out
that, and Moosa and I have been stressing the need to really get some of the
lower parts of the site stabilized, topsoiled, seeded and growing before the
snow flies. You get a couple =
of
days like this and you can’t really work up there right now.
Mr. Zawadzki: =
We have a list here fr=
om Mr.
Sakonchick. I have one questi=
on, do
you or Chuck know on Item 1, he says review of erosion control improvements=
in
last week. Does that mean that
those were completed last week or that they’re jus ton the list from =
last
week? I don’t know what=
he
means by that. I assume it=
217;s
installed.
Mr. Rafey: We have a weekly ins=
pection
the same as we do at Reflections.
We look at the site and see if there are any problems and if we tell
them to correct that, and that becomes a list of the items for them to do f=
or
the next week’s inspection.
But this was the . . .=
.
Mr. Zawadzki: =
Dos that mean that the=
se were
installed, items A through G?
Mr. Rafey: Most of them are
done. Chuck, do you have a co=
py of
that report?
Mr. Berger: Yes.
Mr. Undercuffler: CL&P lines been
installed?
Mr. Rafey: They are working on =
some
of them and some of them are done.
Mr. Berger: #1, A through G were improvements were made in the week prior to
9/1/04. Similar to what we we=
re
talking about n Reflections, Mr. Calabrese had installed some of his storm
water collection system and then blocked the pipes off and was using dirt
swales and other ways to get water off the site there so after the storm Mo=
osa
and I went out there and that’s when we started doing the weekly,
actually it was prior to the storm, we started doing the weekly meetings be=
cause
we had concerns about his erosion control measures out there. We were getting him on track and
that’s when we . . . . .
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 40
Mr. Undercuffler: You were putting dirt
(inaudible).
Mr. Berger: Yea, (inaudible) pipes=
are
blocked. The catch basins are
blocked.
Mr. Undercuffler: The same reason . . . . .
Mr. Polletta: So = they won’t get dirty so they don’t have to clean them.
Mr. Rafey: But so= me of them are open now. We told th= em to kind of create a berm around the catch basins to drain the area upstream of those catch basins into the basins. Hopefully this storm went into the catch basins, I don’t know.=
Mr. Berger: We= 217;ve completed a second meeting now, as a follow up to this report and he has ma= de some progress. He is working = with us and doing what we suggest and we’re requiring that Jim Sakonchick = be on site for those weekly meetings as well to make sure that was is being do= ne is being done according to plan. That’s where we came up with the permit modification that was presented earlier here tonight. There were some things going on there that weren’t really according to plan so we brought those to their attention, they agreed to co= me in for the modification. Agai= n, he’s making good progress trying to get the site and the swales in and stabilized before Winter. He’s working very hard out t= here now.
Mr. Polletta: Do = swales work better than rip rap if you put stones in a swale?
Mr. Berger: It’s going to =
be
site specific answer. If we l=
ook
back a little bit in history over to
Mr. Polletta: So stones could be b=
etter?
Mr. Berger: It got that stabiliz=
ed and
they’re working now.
We’re trying to keep things as green as we can. The stone over time will green up,
you’ll get grass growing in them and Mr. Calabrese’s subdivision
and Jim Sakonchick through his numbers, his calculations show the grass line
swales will work, installed properly and if the vegetation takes, if everyt=
hing
is correct they should work and we shouldn’t have to put rip rap in t=
he
bottom or them.
Mr. Zawadzki: So basically what it=
boils
down to you say site specific, the swales are more suitable to a level cond=
ition
and rip rap for slopes?
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 41
Mr. Berger: Yes.
Mr. Polletta: That makes sense,
Mr. Berger: Some of that is mother nature dependent. If you try to put them in and it k=
eep
raining and raining and raining, you don’t get the grass to grow and =
it
keeps washing out.
Mr. Rafey: There are two exampl=
es of
grass swales in
Mr. Polletta: If it’s pretty=
flat,
and there’s a little pitch in it, the grass will work. If it’s too steep, it won=
217;t
work.
C. Hidden
Oak Subdivision,
Mr. Rafey: Same problem we had
there. One of the silt fences=
were
down during the storm and some of the sediments went into the wetland.
Mr. Zawadzki: Do you get a report =
on
that one every week?
Mr. Rafey: We didn’t get =
the
weekly reports from Hidden Oaks. We
just got one report at the beginning.
That site was kind of under control under recently, but that was the
only major problem that we had. We
already talked to them and hopefully they will give us weekly reports on th=
at.
Mr. Undercuffler: Which is Hidden Oaks
again?
Mr. Rafey: Do you know where
Mr. Berger: Just to put things i=
nto a
little bit of perspective with that, it’s a short section of wetlands
that was impacted by the failure of the silt fence but there are 3 to 4 inc=
hes
of sediment on the wrong side of the silt fence there.
Mr. Zawadzki: And that’s just
because it wasn’t adequate or what?
Mr. Berger: I think just the sto=
rm,
the volume of water during that storm just exceeded the capacity of the ero=
sion
control measures, and (inaudible) the silt fence, knocked it over and the s=
ilt
got to the other side.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 42
Mr. Polletta: When you get that mu=
ch
water it will go right over.
Mr. Berger: I have an Item D that
you’d like to talk about.
Could I add that to the Agenda under Staff report?
MOTI= ON: (Mr. Polletta, sec. Mr. Jones) to Add Agenda Item 11D, Storm Water Management Pl= an.
Discuss= ion: None<= /p>
MOTION = PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
D. Storm Water Management Plan
Mr. Berger: What I handed out to=
you
tonight is the draft of the Storm Water Management Plan for the Town of
Mr. Polletta: So who is holding the
meeting in September?
Mr. Berger: The Town Council wil=
l be
holding the public hearing and I imagine
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004
PAGE 43
Mr. Undercuffler: On Page 6, in the mi=
ddle
there it talks about Woodbury.
Mr. Berger: Why does everybody f=
ind
that immediately? We borrowed=
from
wherever we could, and Middlebury is one of the towns . . . . the watershed group over there helped Woodbury and they
shared what they had done with all the towns in the area. Instead of recreating the wheel we=
used
stuff that had already been developed.&nbs=
p;
That needs to be changed.
12. &n=
bsp; Public
Participation
&nbs=
p; None
13. Adjou=
rnment
&=
nbsp; MOTION: (Mr.
Undercuffler, sec. Mr. Beauchamp) to Adjourn the Regular Meeting at 9:22 p.=
m.
&nbs= p; Discussion: None<= o:p>
&nbs=
p; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
&nbs=
p; Regular
Meeting Adjourned at 9:22 p.m.
Respect=
fully
submitted,
Ronald =
Jones,
Secretary
Conserv=
ation
Commission/
Inland
Wetlands Agency
&nbs=
p; _________________=
_________________