MINUTES
CONSERVA=
TION
COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY
REGULAR
MEETING
JOHN TRU=
MBULL
PRIMARY SCHOOL MEDIA CENTER
THURSDAY,
DECEMBER 15, 2005 - 7:30 PM
PRESENT: =
; &n=
bsp; =
; Glenn
Duplissie
=
&nb=
sp; =
&nb=
sp; Ron
Jones, Secretary
=
&nb=
sp; =
&nb=
sp; Joseph
Polletta
=
; &n=
bsp; =
&nb=
sp; Edwin
Undercuffler, Vice Chairman
=
&nb=
sp; =
&nb=
sp; James
Zawadzki, Chairman
ABSENT: &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Berna=
rd
Beauchamp
=
&nb=
sp; =
&nb=
sp; Charles
Thermer
ALTERNATES PRESENT: &nbs=
p; None
ALTERNATES ABSENT: &nbs=
p; Peter Peluso
=
&nb=
sp; =
&nb=
sp; Denise
Russ
=
&nb=
sp; =
&nb=
sp; Martha
Sturgis
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 9:21 p.m.
2. &nb=
sp; Roll
Call
Mr.
Jones, Secretary, executed the Roll Call.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 15, 2005
PAGE 2
3. =
Public
Participation
Mr. Church:=
I live on Butternut Lane. I just want to put on the record t=
hat
the subdivision going in above me, that we’re opposed to the Butternut
Subdivision, especially Lot #1, which is directly above our farm and our
home. This lot is on a 45 deg=
ree
slope, which is in and itself absolutely idiotic to put a house on a 45 deg=
ree
slope. Not only that, but the=
Town
has 3 road drains that come onto the, discharge directly onto this lot. Right now it’s heavily woode=
d and
(inaudible). The purpose of t=
his
argument, I will only talk about the first one which is directly above my
house. During the October sto=
rm I
had members of the Planning and Zoning Commission up to see this because of
this proposal. The pipe is a =
12
inch diameter pipe and was running full blast. This by target in Thomaston repres=
ents
2,580 gallons per minute was being discharged onto that lot from one
drain. That’s 154,820 g=
allons
per hour and it ran for 6 hours or more.&n=
bsp;
Thank God for the trees, at least they acted as a buffer as the good
Lord intended. Now these peop=
le
propose to put a parallel road driveway and a very large home on this lot,
which is only about 200 yards wide.
Not only that, but this discharge pipe of 154,000 gallons a minute is
running down the hill directly onto the septic tank of that lot. That septic tank is 100 feet from =
my
well. And it’s 30 feet =
above
my well. It’s a 45 degr=
ee
slope, it’s like this.
We’ve been working extensively with the Department of Agricult=
ure
and the Department of Internal Protection to preserve and protect these
wetlands. This land on my lan=
d is
extensively (inaudible) probably wetlands, a lot of wetlands down there, al=
l of
this drains into it. This is =
going
to have a major negative impact on those wetlands. Can’t help it, we’re g=
oing
to take away the bugger. Every
piece of septic system and all the work to be done on the septic system is
going to have to be clear cut. No
trees, no trees. We’ve =
been
in contact with Joseph Renna, of the D.E.P., he’s been working with m=
e on
my project to preserve and protect the wetlands that I have. He’s familiar with our proje=
ct. He agrees that this is 100% wrong,=
but
he has no jurisdiction in local matters.&n=
bsp;
I want you to please at least for the sake of the wetlands, at least
address this issue. We feel
it’s an ecological disaster in the making. We can easily get required signatu=
res to
form a petition to go to Public Hearing on this, I know at this point
it’s not a public hearing, but we were short noticed here today and we
had to come, and I just had to bear with us, give some thought to especially
Lot #1. It’s a major
disaster. Thank you.
Mr. Rafey: =
The application in front of this
Commission tonight, that is not for a subdivision. It’s a part of that subdivis=
ion,
but only for the drainage system.
Mr. Church: Right, I knew this had nothing to d=
o with
the, I’m not talking about that.
Mr. Rafey: =
The Commission is not going to revi=
ew the
lots and the location of the septic systems on the houses on those lots, it=
is
only for the drainage swale on . . . .
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 15, 2005
PAGE 3
Mr. Church: All right, as I said, I would like =
to put
this at least on record that I think that the wetlands, someone should be a=
ware
of the negative impact that Lot #1 is going to have, I think you should be =
well
aware of this before it goes through, before it ramrods through.
Mr. Lacilla: I’m on the last part of the
Agenda. I was talking to
Moosa. I have a sick 5-1/2 ye=
ar old
at my house with a stomach flu and my wife is home taking care of him, so I=
was
hoping that you guys would allow me to just make a quick, go over some of t=
he
things pertaining to Stonybrook Lane, if that was possible.
Mr. Zawadzki: Well we’re in Public
Participation, then we’ll pick you up as soon as, we don’t have
anybody else who’s got comments form the public. So just stand by.
Mr. O’Sullivan:<=
/span> I’m also towards the end of =
the
Agenda and I’d like to put forth what my concerns are now.
Mr. Zawadzki: <=
/b> Okay, we’ll pick up your item=
a
little later, because we do have an Agenda we have to follow.
4. =
Action
on Minutes
<=
span
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt'>A. =
Public Hearing, September 15, 2005, App. #531, Nelson Lynn
<=
span
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt'>B. =
Regular Meeting, September 15, 2005
<=
span
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt'>C. =
Continuation of Public Hearing October 13, 2005, App. #531, Nelson =
Lynn
<=
span
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt'>D. =
Public Hearing October13, 2005, App. #533, Concetta Guerrera
<=
span
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt'>E. =
Regular Meeting, October 13, 2005
<=
span
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt'>F. =
Continuation of Public Hearing November 10, 2005, App. #531, Nelson
Lynn
<=
span
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt'>G. =
Continuation of Pubic Hearing November 10, 2005, App. #533, Concetta
Guerrera
<=
span
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt'>H. =
Public Hearing November 10, 2005, App.. #536, Angelo Tedesco
<=
span
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt'>I. =
&nb=
sp;
Regular Meeting November 10, 2005
&=
nbsp; MOTION: (Mr.
Undercuffler, sec. Mr. Duplissie) to Add Item 4J, and Approve Items 4A and =
4B
and Table Items 4C through 4I as presented.
&= nbsp; Discussion: None<= o:p>
&=
nbsp; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 15, 2005
PAGE 4
5. =
Pending
Applications
&=
nbsp; MOTION: (Mr. =
Jones,
sec. Mr. Polletta) to Move Item 5D to right before Item 5A.
&= nbsp; Discussion: None<= o:p>
&=
nbsp; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
&=
nbsp; D. Application
#543 of Kevin Lacilla to conduct regulated activities within a conservation
easement area and watercourse setback area at 119 Stonybrook Lane, Watertow=
n,
CT 06795. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; If
Public Hearing is not held, then a decision is required by January 14, 2006=
. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Kevin
Lacilla, 119 Stonybrook Lane, Watertown, CT 06795 &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Lacilla: I’m here t=
o come
back to review, I guess you guys had a walk through of the property regardi=
ng
the conservation easement on the land.&nbs=
p;
I did a proposal, I had a landscape architect go through and suggest
some wetland plantings that will be there and I submitted that along with s=
ome
other stuff on the application that the Board wanted to review, so the ball=
is
really in your court at this point, as far as what you want me to do. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Zawadzki: My feeling on this is you should p=
ut it
back to the way it was or at least as close to the way it was as possible a=
nd
restore it to an undisturbed area, not undisturbed, but a natural area, with
plantings and that type of thing. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Lacilla: Well I’ve =
got
pictures of what used to be there and there is nothing there again, the only
thing that I did was put topsoil over existing dead brush. There was a lot of leaf litter the=
re,
there was nothing there. If y=
ou
want to take a look and see where all that was is a line here, 2 years ago =
actually
before I started building but if you look there, you’ll see that there
was nothing, there were no trees cut down whatsoever, the only thing that w=
as
there was a bunch of dead brush that was sitting there and we just scraped =
up
all the leaves and there was some surface rock that was there, w just put a=
bout
4 inches of topsoil over it and allowed some grass to be there. What we noticed is we had a letter=
from
Envirocare, what I wanted to do is (inaudible) I had ticks on me going down
there and I got a letter from Envirocare which I submitted and they would n=
ot
spray down there for me and the letter is here and I submitted the letter so
that the best thing to do, and this was the recommendation of the Torrington
Health District which I submitted the pamphlet, I did what they suggested a=
nd
that was to get rid of the brush area, get rid of the leaf litter that was
there and clear up that area a little bit.=
Again, there is nothing really for me to put back there. CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 15, 2005 PAGE 5 As far as me doing, I =
went
through the exercise just because I wanted to respect the Commission, I was
wrong, I probably should have came to you guys beforehand, I’m correc=
t in
that, I want to do what’s right, but at the same time I want to be ab=
le
to protect the area down there.
There’s not going to be any fertilizers going on anything, I p=
ut
some grass down there, there was already grass there prior, it’s just
that the area was the dead branches were cleared out, the leaf litter was
cleared out and that was it. =
The
only part of the area that I did trim out that did have a little bit of stu=
ff
over there was on the right side that was trimmed. There area lot of kids that plays =
down
there, so to be honest with you, I got the recommendation from the Torringt=
on
Area Health District, I went to a pest control company, I exhausted my opti=
ons,
the only thing I really did, I didn’t clear out any bushes, I just put
topsoil over the existing area and planted some grass, that’s all tha=
t I
did, and the pictures there show that. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Zawadzki: What does that line represent? &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Lacilla: That line is for=
you
to see that that’s right where the border is where I have sort of like
where the perimeter is of the water, just so you get a perspective of where
things are. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Zawadzki: Well yea, becau=
se
what we’re talking about, does that line represent the border or boun=
dary
of the easement area? &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Lacilla: No. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Zawadzki: Because that’s what we’=
;re
talking about there, it's the conservation easement area which was disturbed
and basically the whole idea of a conservation easement area is to leave it
undisturbed and that includes, I mean so people might think that going in a=
nd
raking leaves and removing sticks and stuff is not doing anything, but
that’s all a shelter to provide habitat and it does things I mean the
natural order of things is disturbed when you take away rotten vegetation ,
sticks, shrubs, and all that stuff may seem like not much to you but in fact
it’s part of the natural order of things for that stuff to be there a=
nd
that’s why the conservation easement is to leave the land, even though
you own it, in tact and not go in there and rake and mow and trim it, whate=
ver
you did and that’s what you’re not supposed to do. CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 15, 2005 PAGE 6 &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Lacilla: I agree with you=
and I
honestly understand what you’re saying but I want to define what, you=
get
to a point where definitions in terms of saying well leave it undisturbed
there’s a lot of things that are happening. Nothing was happening there but
ticks. There was no life goin=
g on
there except potential hazards for either me, my family, or my child to
potentially be down there. Th=
ere
was nothing growing there. Th=
ere
was nothing that was going to happen.
I can understand that the Commission would be very upset if I started
clear cutting trees around there but we’re talking about, there was
nothing down there. I’m=
just
asking you guys to be a little, just have a little (inaudible) because other
things that have happened around that property that were far more reaching =
than
what I did, far more reaching, and I’m not going to get into them, I
think the Board knows this because you were out there, and I’m not ev=
en
going to say anything, but what I did was grade school stuff, it really was,
and I’m asking you guys to please take that into consideration. I’m here making a good effor=
t, and
if you want me to put some stuff back, no problem, but honestly I did not c=
lear
cut any trees, there was nothing happening over there. I raked up some leaves, there were=
ticks
there, I brought in a pest control company, they didn’t want to spray,
they gave me a recommendation, I put it on the application, I made second
efforts to try and rectify the situation, I had a legitimate company in the=
re,
I talked to Bob Smith, I got pamphlets.&nb=
sp;
I did all those things. I
mean I’m at a position now where I’ll do whatever you guys want=
me
to do but please make it within reason. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Zawadzki: We want you to =
leave
it alone. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Lacilla: I’ll leave=
it
alone, not a problem. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Zawadzki: As far as the p=
est
control people they don’t have any concern about anything except pests
and you call them in and you say you want to spray for ticks and they’=
;ll
do it. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Lacilla: They wouldn̵=
7;t do
it, that’s why they gave me the letter. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Zawadzki: Well (inaudible=
) for
him. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Lacilla: He wouldn’=
t do
it. I called two companies up=
, not
only them but I called other companies out of Waterbury and they wouldnR=
17;t
do it, and they said they couldn’t do it because it’s near the
waterway and then finally I said tell me what I can do. One company wouldn’t tell me,
Envirocare said Torrington Health Area, and he gave me the pamphlet, and
that’s where I cleared up the brush and I just put some topsoil back =
so
the ticks wouldn’t come down there anymore, and I planted some grass
there. I won’t fertiliz=
e down
there and you know I kept all the perimeter nice, I mean where the wildlife=
is
around the perimeter, that’s all in tact, we talking . . . . CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 15, 2005 PAGE 7 &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Zawadzki: Basically
that’s what we want, is for you to leave it alone. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Lacilla: I won’t to=
uch
it. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Duplissie: It’s not just the back thoug=
h,
it’s on the, if you’re facing the house from the road, on the r=
ight
and side is all wetlands also and it shows on your site map where you’=
;re
supposed to stay away from that. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Lacilla: No, problem, I’ll stay away =
from
that. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Duplissie: And then the spacing in the back, =
you
have a silt fence area that’s supposed to be maintained and as you can
see on the right hand side of your house, where the drainage is coming from=
the
front of your house, when we were on the site visit you could see all the
erosion going right down the side of your property into the wetlands, and y=
ou
can see it (inaudible) from the water so that area shouldn’t have been
lawn, it should be wetlands, not lawn, and so it’s eroding cause
it’s washing down. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Lacilla: That’s fin=
e, but
we also had a torrential rain storm, I had no, that rain was coming, if you
look at the pitch of the land, that rain was from some serious torrential
downpours that we had from the front of the house on over and then it was g=
rass
that was legitimately supposed to be placed up there, but obviously because=
of
those unusual conditions that we had, we had an unusual situation but I res=
pect
what you’re saying and I agree, no problem, I’ll respect the ar=
ea
over there and . . . . &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Polletta: Do you know whe=
re the
conservation easement is, exactly where it is on your property? &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Lacilla: Yes, I do. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Polletta: I think if you =
stay
out of there everyone would be happy. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Duplissie: (Inaudible)
there’s a 50 foot, 25 foot conservation . . . 50 foot (inaudible buff=
er. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Polletta: Do you know whe=
re
that is? &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Lacilla: Yes. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Polletta: I think you sho=
uld
flag it and then (inaudible). CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 15, 2005 PAGE 8 &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Rafey: There are 2 layers=
of
regulated area, one is a 50 foot setback from the pond your regulation and =
on
top of that there is a 25 foot wide conservation easement area from the edg=
e of
the pond, yes, on top of that. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Lacilla: Correct. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Rafey: (Inaudible) but th=
e 50
foot setback for the wetlands, any decision you want to make it’s up =
to
you, but the 25 foot conservation easement area should be left alone and I
suggest that Mr. Lacilla talk to landscapers to see what kind of shrubs or
bushes that you like to put these and just plant some things and leave them
alone. Right now there is alw=
ays,
and I don’t want the lawn to be there near the edge of the water, cau=
se
that’s a problem for the watercourse. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Polletta: Once you plant
you’ll know that you can’t go beyond that point. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Lacilla: I put the planti=
ngs
there and I already submitted the plans for you to see for some wetland
(inaudible) that I had a landscape architect draw. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Duplissie: See where some=
body
brush out the right hand side of that pond going all the way up on the right
hand side. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Lacilla: Right. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Duplissie: That’s a=
no,
no. You (inaudible) in there =
at
all. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Lacilla: Actually I never
planned for that to happen. W=
hen
the company came to go and trim, they went around the pond. Honestly, its not a cop out, I nev=
er
asked them to do that, they just went ahead and did it cause they thought it
would look nice, and then it was just left that way, but that was honestly =
what
happened. It’s my
responsibility, it’s my fault, but I did not ask them to go around, it
was only supposed to be right where you saw it. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Duplissie: (Inaudible.).<=
o:p> &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Lacilla: That’s cor=
rect. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Rafey: This is your propo=
sed
landscaping plan? &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Lacilla: Correct. I probably went overboard on it, I
probably have too much on it to be quite honest with you. CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 15, 2005 PAGE 9 &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Rafey: From the edge of t=
he
water can you put like 25 feet the conservation easement area, can you put =
some
shrubs, whatever you like there, just plan it there and leave them there
(inaudible) edge of pond. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Lacilla: Yea. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Zawadzki: There is no dim=
ension
on here. What is this (inaudi=
ble)? &=
nbsp; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Lacilla: I wrote (inaudib=
le). &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Zawadzki: Is that the 25 =
foot
line or is that a 50 foot? &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Lacilla: It’s part =
of the
package, it should have been in there, I put it as part of the site plan,
there’s another separate sheet of paper, non-stapled, I don’t k=
now
if it’s there now or what. I
know where you guys want it. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Duplissie: Your site plan=
shows
your wetland boundary and your 50 foot setback. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Lacilla: Right, I know wh=
ere it
goes. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Rafey: The plot plan, the=
final
as built, all of those plans show where the 50 foot setback area is and the=
25
foot conservation easement area is. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Duplissie: You know where=
it
is, Moosa, you can (inaudible). &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Rafey: That’s like =
mid
far from the edge of the pond and go 50 feet. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Lacilla: Correct. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Duplissie: (Inaudible) on=
the
property and just show us (inaudible). &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Polletta: Moosa will come with you and the t=
hing
is you said whatever you guys want, that’s what we want, those are the
rules and regulations that we have to follow and if we allow one person to =
do
them then everybody else wants to do the same thing, so it’s not we w=
ant
to do this to you. &=
nbsp; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Lacilla: I agree with you=
but
people always come in front of this Commission, that’s why you guys a=
re
here, cause there are certain things that come before you that directs off =
of .
. . . CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 15, 2005 PAGE 10 &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Polletta: Your lot was ap=
proved
that way and you knew from the beginning, so we can’t talk about that
right now, but you should get a hold of Moosa and he’ll call you and =
. .
. . &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Rafey: I suggested instea=
d of
doing the walk, Mr. Lacilla submit a planting plan for that 25 foot
conservation easement area, the staff will review it and then I’ll gi=
ve
you the permit. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Undercuffler: Can we vote on it now and approve =
it
with conditions? &=
nbsp; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Duplissie: So that weR=
17;ll
know that it’s done now. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Rafey: Of course after th=
ey
submit the plan I will go there. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Lacilla: So I won’t=
have
to come back again. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Rafey: You won’t ha=
ve to
come again. If the Commission=
wants
to make a decision tonight whatever conditions they want to put, I’ll
follow up with you. You can j=
ust
submit a planting plan to me and I’ll review that for the 25 foot
conservation easement area. So
it’s okay to just put the plants there and leave it alone. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Zawadzki: So I need a motion to approve with=
the
conditions (inaudible). &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Duplissie: Subject to the
condition that he submit a planting schematic to Moosa and that it’s
approved by Moosa and then once it’s done then Moosa goes out and
actually physically walks the property (inaudible). &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Rafey: It is only 25 feet=
wide
(inaudible) setback area you approved the lawn there, that’s okay. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Duplissie: But no more mowing of that lawn wi=
thin
the 50 foot area. The plantin=
gs
will be in 25 foot, but to stay away from the 50 foot. You can put the plants there, but
don’t mow within 50 feet of the water. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Lacilla: I’m not go=
ing to
make any promises. I’m =
an
honest person. I’m not =
going
to sit here and tell you, if you guys want to do whatever you want to do to=
me,
go ahead. I’m not going=
to lie
to you, I’m not going to sit here and yes you and the chance that you
guys coming out and checking out if I mow my grass, it’s fine if you =
want
to do that but I won’t lie to you, I’m not going to make any
promises to you that that’s going to happen, but if it gets out of
control, if I get high grass and ticks, my family come first, I come first,
it’s not going to happen that way, so I’d rather be up front and
honest with you know, and if there’s action that you want to take aga=
inst
me go ahead. CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 15, 2005 PAGE 11 &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Undercuffler: I don’=
;t
think there’s anything that says he can’t mow that. &n=
bsp; =
; Mr.
Zawadzki: No, but we̵=
7;re
really concerned about is the conservation easement. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Undercuffler: That first =
25
feet. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Rafey: The conservation
easement area (inaudible) minimum. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Duplissie: (Inaudible) 50=
foot
buffer (inaudible). &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Rafey: That is regulated by this Commissi=
on
that’s why I said that. That
was my suggestion for the 25 foot conservation easement area. The 50 foot buffer zone is somethi=
ng you
discuss (inaudible). &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Polletta: Well I’ll go along with the =
25
feet. &=
nbsp; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: There was that =
other
instance where the 50 foot buffers are mowed, I think it’s excavation,
bulldozing moving stuff around that . . . . &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Duplissie: If you put the planting schedule a=
t the
25 foot and he stays away from that (inaudible) line, I’ll be happy w=
ith
that. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Lacilla: I appreciate tha=
t. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Rafey: And (inaudible) is
already there, they already put the topsoil and planted the grass and
everything, but the 25 foot conservation easement area will protect the pon=
d. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Zawadzki: Okay, so we wer=
e in
the process of drafting a motion. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION: (Mr. =
Duplissie,
sec. Mr. Jones) to Approve Application #543 of Kevin Lacilla to conduct
regulated activities within a conservation easement area and watercourse
setback area at 119 Stonybrook Lane, Watertown, CT subject to a planting
schematic that will be submitted to Mr. Rafey at the 25 foot conservation
easement line and we will allow him to mow and maintain up to that point, b=
ut
no further than the 25 foot and that once he’s done, to invite Moosa =
over
to take a look at his plantings and then Moosa can report back to us on tha=
t. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Discussion: None<=
/p>
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 15, 2005 PAGE 12 &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; (Tape
#3, Side A ended – may have missed some.) A. Application #536 of Angelo Tedesco Real Estate f=
or
construction of Section II of Oakwood Acres Subdivision consisting of 21
building lots, Pine Ridge Drive, Oakville, CT 06779. If the Public Hearing =
is
Closed on December 15, 2005, then a decision is required by February 18, 20=
06,
unless applicant grants a time extension. Mr. Zawadzki: We closed the Public Hearing,
(inaudible) other issues, I think Chuck is satisfied (inaudible) we can loo=
k to
make a decision on this. Mr. Duplissie:<=
/b> I (inaudible) they did a good job,=
I was
very happy with the fact that they changed the pond, they moved it, I like =
the
wet pond, so I think before we approve it I just wanted to say that this is=
one
of the instances where we made a few recommendations and they took it and t=
hey
ran with it and they did a good job. Mr. Polletta: I agree. MOTION:<=
span
style=3D'mso-tab-count:1'> (Mr.
Duplissie, sec. Mr. Jones) to Approve Application #53
Discussi= on: None<= o:p>
MOTION P=
ASSED
UNANIMOUSLY
B. Application #540= of Arthur Howland of 11-lot residential subdivision, Old Baird Road and Woodbu= ry Road, Watertown, CT.
If the Public Hearing =
is
Closed on December 15, 2005, then a decision is required by February 18, 20=
06
unless applicant grants a time extension.
Mr. Zawadzki: I just need a Motion =
to
Table this since the public hearing is still open.
MOTION: (Mr. Duplissie, sec. Mr. Undercuffler) to Table Application #540 of Arthur Howla= nd of 11-lot residential subdivision, Old Baird Road and Woodbury Road, Watert= own, CT.
Discussi= on: None<= o:p>
MOTION P=
ASSED
UNANIMOUSLY
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 15, 2005
PAGE 13
<=
span
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt'>C. =
Application #542 of William Davidson for construction of 18-lot
residential subdivision and associated roadway, Morris Town Line Highway,
Watertown, CT.
If a Public Hearing is
Closed on December 15, 2005, then a decision is required by February 18, 20=
06
unless applicant grants an extension of time.
Mr. Zawadzki: I need a Motion to Table.
MOTION: (Mr. Duplissie, sec. Mr. Undercuffler) to Table Application #542 of William Davi= dson for construction of 18-lot residential subdivision and associated roadway, Morris Town Line Highway, Watertown, CT.
Discussi= on: None<= o:p>
MOTION P=
ASSED
UNANIMOUSLY
<=
span
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt'>D. =
Application #543 of Kevin Lacilla to conduct regulated activities
within a conservation easement area and watercourse setback area at 119
Stonybrook Lane, Watertown, CT.
If a Public Hearing is=
not
held, then a decision is required by January 14, 2006.
This item was moved to=
right
before 5A.
6. &n=
bsp; New
Applications
&=
nbsp; MOTION: (Mr.
Polletta, sec. Mr. Duplissie) to Move Item 7B to this part of the Agenda, r=
ight
before Item 6A.
&= nbsp; Discussion: None<= o:p>
&=
nbsp; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 15, 2005
PAGE 14
&=
nbsp; 7B. Discu=
ssion
on Suds in Brook at North Street, Watertown, CT.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Dennis O’Sullivan, 238 North Street,
Watertown, CT 06795
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. O’Sullivan: The reason why I’m here tonig=
ht is
the same reason I was here a year ago and brought some photographs of suds =
that
were in the brook near my home. I
know that there was methods on the part of the Town forces to look for those
sources of suds in the brook and then they disappeared. I don’t know if it was seaso=
nal,
low flows, but I did send in a memo to Moosa noting that the suds were
back. They came back for, do =
you
have a copy of that Moosa?
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: Everybody has a copy of=
it.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. O’Sullivan:
Good. The suds came ba=
ck and
then the only other thing I can mull about is that the Fire District is doi=
ng
some sewer smoke studies to try and determine where water is coming into th=
eir
sewer lines, and we’ve had an awful lot of locations where the sewer
manholes were smoke was coming out of them, and since then I have not seen =
any
suds in the brook. It’s=
a
ball of frustration. You guys=
spent
an awful lot of time with this previous guy and I know that it’s real
hard to get everybody to try and protect those wetlands, but when I see sud=
s,
when I walk the dogs in the morning and/or I see it at night, and they
don’t come and go, I’m a ball of frustration. What do I do? I went to the Fire District and th=
ey
said we’ll help tremendous but we’re not going to be
(inaudible). It must be a sew=
er
line that is maybe taking old, brown water sewer line that is not functioni=
ng
or maybe they tie it off a different way or they do something else with it,=
I
have no idea. I’m just a
person who lives on North Street.
I’ve got suds in my brook.&nb=
sp;
Who do I go to?
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Undercuffler: It’s interesting based your m=
emo
here they’re all at 7:00 in the morning. Now is that because that’s w=
hen
you go buy, or is that only when it occurs, do you think?
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. O’Sullivan: No, I’m sure that it occurs o=
ther
times. I take the dogs out,
they’re a pain in the ass, I take them out 3 times a day, and I’=
;ve
been trying to look in the brook and (inaudible). They’re not my dogs either,
they’re my wife’s dogs.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Duplissie: I’d be willing to=
take
a ride out there. If you want
I’ll give you my cell phone number and you call me when you see suds =
in
the brook and I’ll take a ride out there. I don’t know what else to do=
. I’ve never seen it so I have=
no
idea.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 15, 2005
PAGE 15
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. O’Sullivan: Bob Smith has been very helpful, he=
gave
me his home number. Moosa tel=
ls me
that any time I call he’ll be out there, except if he’s got ano=
ther
assignment or it’s towards the end of the month, or the end of the we=
ek,
and he’s trying to take a sample and we can’t get it into the l=
ab,
but I think we’ve got that sorted out now, right?
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: The problem is that I w=
ent a
few times but I didn’t see anything.=
One time I took a sample to the office and it was sitting there for =
24
hours and I gave it to Mr. Smith who took it to the Torrington Area Health
District, they sent it to the State, it took another 24 hours, and then it =
was
too old and then they couldn’t analyze for what they’re looking
for.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Zawadzki: Except that they found
(inaudible).
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: They said they didnR=
17;t
find anything. And (inaudible=
) yes,
that we have. I mean I wish I=
had
the resources to go there and take a sample and (inaudible).
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. O’Sullivan: Let me ask you, do you not believe
me? If you say that you took a
sample and you didn’t get anything.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: That sample yes, they d=
id
analyze it and there was nothing there.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. O’Sullivan: But did you ever go out, Moosa, and=
see
the suds?
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: Yes, I took a sample.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. O’Sullivan: So you saw the suds?
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: Yes.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. O’Sullivan: Do you believe me that there are su=
ds in
my brook?
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: Of course, yes (inaudib=
le) I
went there 5 6 times, I didn’t see it, but the last time I don’t
know the date, I have it in my book, and that’s why I took a sample a=
nd I
gave it to Bob Smith.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. O’Sullivan: How about the pictures that I submi=
tted?
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: I have all of the pictu=
res in
the file.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 15, 2005
PAGE 16
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. O’Sullivan: Do you still, is there any doubt th=
at
I’m getting suds in the brook?
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: No.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Duplissie: I go hunting in Canada =
and
I’m off on the west branch of the St. John River up in Quebec, and I
think somewhere around 15, 18 miles form the nearest town and we have I thi=
nk
about a mile and a half of waterfront property on the west branch of the St.
John River, and I’ve walked that trail, we have a trail that walks
probably as wide as this table, all along the length of that river, and we =
call
it the St. John Boulevard.
Sometimes I walk that trail and we get into a certain nook of the ri=
ver
and sure enough there are suds the size of this table. There’s nobody there, there&#=
8217;s
no activity on this river, there’s nobody for 15 miles, yet there are
piles of suds this high. One =
day
it’s there, and walk back the next day and there’s nothing
there. And once in a while
you’ll see this kind of suds just floating down the river, and I know
it’s not somebody with a washing machine cause there aren’t any,
there’s nobody there. T=
he
only thing is maybe a deer or a moose on the side of the river (inaudible) =
it
could be something naturally occurring.&nb=
sp;
It might not be anybody’s washing machine or it might not be, =
it
could be the soil decaying, it could be a bunch of different things. We’re not saying we don̵=
7;t
believe you, cause he went out and saw it.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: I have an entire file o=
n this
issue and these are some of the dates that I went there.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. O’Sullivan: Let me ask this question cause I gu=
ess
there’s a question in your mind as to whether this is naturally
occurring.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Duplissie: I don’t know, it =
could
be.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Zawadzki: I have that question, y=
es.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. O’Sullivan: So is it my responsibility then to =
do
something? What would you sug=
gest I
do to confirm that it is or it isn’t naturally occurring.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Zawadzki: Well one thing that mig=
ht
help is next time you see the suds is to get a sample of the water and brin=
g it
to Moosa and see if Bob Smith can test it maybe he can do it in less than 24
hours, but I’m no water pollution expert but my gut feeling on it is =
if
they didn’t find any chemical contaminants, even though the suds were
gone and even though the sample had been sitting in the refrigerator for 24=
, 48
hours it’s already dangerous things in there, they would have still b=
een
in there, but that’s only my opinion so one suggestion I would have i=
s to
bring a sample to Moosa and try again with Bob Smith. The other might be the D.E.P.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 15, 2005
PAGE 17
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Jones: I did environmental
consulting before I retired and when this came up before we had no question
about whether there was suds, I saw the suds too and we tried to find, get =
the
D.E.P. to do an evaluation to confirm the fact that these are not naturally
occurring, so I retired, I have contacts with the D.E.P., and it’s be=
en a
long time since I’ve been up there, but if you call me in the morning
when you see suds, I live right up the road, Hollow Road, it’s less t=
han
a mile, I’ll come down with my own bottle, I’ll take the sample
according to testing procedure and I’ll run it directly up to the Sta=
te
Health Lab with the approval of D.E.P. and we’ll have the D.E.P.,
they’ll be probably looking for (inaudible) because it would have to =
be
an organic material or something (inaudible) not a natural occurring materi=
al. I think the last thing that we hea=
rd was
that there was a potential for this to be an organic product, a breakdown f=
rom
(inaudible) and that could be, but it just doesn’t resolve the
problem. If it reoccurs we as=
sume
it’s bad rain, but that’s as far as I know we can do, but
I’ll be happy to do that. Just call me, I’m in the phone
book, Ron Jones, I’ll pick up the sample and you go down with me and
I’ll get the sample in your presence, then it’s nice and foamy =
and
then we’ll run it up to D.E.P. and there won’t be any delay and
that should solve the problem, cause I know it’s very frustrating, th=
is
has been going on for a year.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. O’Sullivan: Now I’m not looking in that b=
rook
for first year, I’ve lived in my home for 34 and I haven’t seen=
it
in the past, so if it’s naturally occurring, that’s a very odd
thing. And since it’s a
populated drainage area, I would think the more likely candidate would be an
errant sewer line from a washing machine or something along those lines.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Jones: Someone would have to p=
ay the
freight if a local lab was to do it, unless they volunteer to pick up the c=
ost,
but if that’s something that your department can handle, we can run it
through any of the local environmental labs.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. O’Sullivan: If I get a sample and it’s ma=
nmade,
will you pay the tab, and then if it’s natural, then I’ll pay t=
he
tab? Would that be acceptable=
?
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Jones: Not my discharge, I wou=
ldn’t
pay the tab.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. O’Sullivan: Moosa, you had a (inaudible)?
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: It has to be approved b=
y the
Town, by the time I take it to my boss and my boss contacts the Finance
Department to see if we can use any funds, but I don’t know. I cannot promise you that yes, we =
have
the money to do this.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 15, 2005
PAGE 18
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Undercuffler: (Inaudible.)
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: I don’t know, it
depends on what you’re looking for.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Duplissie: Yea, because it all dep=
ends
on what you’re testing for.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: (Inaudible) cheaper to =
do
that, test the soil, (inaudible).
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Jones: If you’ve ever se=
en an
analytical result from the State :Lab or any lab, they can test for practic=
ally
everything and they’ll find little bits of practically everything.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Zawadzki: Soap?
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Jones: (Inaudible) but I don&#=
8217;t
know that phosphates themselves (inaudible).
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Polletta: (Inaudible.) He’s willing to come and see=
you
and (inaudible).
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Zawadzki: I think to make a valia=
nt
effort to try and determine what (inaudible). We could try to find out what=
it
is first of all and that would be (inaudible).
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Duplissie: Another set of eyes.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Polletta: You worked before in
environmental?
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Jones: Yes, I used to do
environmental work, (inaudible).
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Polletta: (Inaudible.)
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Zawadzki: So would that be accept=
able,
give Ron a call?
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. O’Sullivan: Sure. I’ll give anybody a call.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Duplissie: And in the meantime
(inaudible) suds.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. O’Sullivan: Joe, can I have your number to give=
you a
call too?
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 15, 2005
PAGE 19
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Polletta: No.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Zawadzki: If we don’t get r=
esults
we’ll try a different approach.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. O’Sullivan: Okay, could I get a piece of paper =
and
write it down? Thank you.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Rafey: I took these pictures from there, =
I went
there twice on August 29, 2004 and October 27, 2004. Yes, these are the ones that you g=
ave
me.
&=
nbsp; A. Application
#544 of Donald Curtiss for construction of 13-lot Bassett Hollow Subdivision
located on the north side of Hollow Road, Watertown, CT. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; If
a Public Hearing is not held, then a decision is required by February 17, 2=
006
unless applicant grants a time extension. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Emily Jones, Engineer, Civil One &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Ms. Jones: I’m here represen=
ting
the applicant Don and Ann Curtiss.
Also with me is Joe Taddia, he’s an agent for the applicant. There are two intermittent watercourses on the property in the vicini=
ty
of here and here that flow from Hollow Road. In general this wetland system is =
the
largest wetland system on the property.&nb=
sp;
It flows from the north part of the property down through the proper=
ty
and across underneath Hollow Road, from north to south, and there are issue=
s on
this property with some Town drainage from Hollow Road and Wheeler Farm Road
that are going on the property in various locations as well as Trolane Road
that are causing some problems with erosion right now and the Town
doesn’t have a right to drain as of now onto the property so part of =
this
application will be to allow the Town to obtain those rights to drain and to
address some of the erosion that is currently occurring. For instance in this area there ar=
e some
deeply scoured areas on the property. CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 15, 2005 PAGE 20 &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; The
second wetland system is this, it’s a berth that flows from north to
south and under Hollow Road through an existing culvert. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; The
third system is here on the eastern portion of the property, there mostly
exists one watercourse that flows kind of split here and flows under Hollow
Road under an existing culvert.
There is also an issue with Trolane Road. Trolane Road, correct me if I̵=
7;m
wrong on this, it’s an accepted Town road for maintenance only. Is that right, the classification,=
but
it hasn’t been accepted as a Town road officially because there is a
drainage issue where Trolane Road is draining without a right to drain and
causing erosion along this portion of the Curtiss’ property and
it’s fairly deeply scoured in this area, and part of this application=
, or
I guess it would be the Planning and Zoning application would be to allevia=
te
this problem, and in conjunction with working with Public Works and the Town
Engineer so that we can get Trolane Road to be an accepted Town road as it
should be. (Tape #3, Side B e=
nded
– may have missed some. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; To
summarize, the proposal that we have created is you create a 13 lot residen=
tial
subdivision with about 1,000 linear feet of new proposed roadway. Four of the lots will be served by=
driveways,
other (inaudible) not coming off of the new roadway. (Inaudible) will be served off Tro=
lane
Road and the remaining 3 will be served off Hollow Road. They will all be served by on site
septic systems and private wells and the septic systems are placed and sized
and designed in accordance with the Torrington Area Health District standar=
ds;
they are currently reviewing the property. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; For
a quick summary of the wetlands regulated activity, we find that on the last
page of the plan there are some corrections that I had to make to this when=
I
looked at the last page of the plan today and it actually decreases the amo=
unt
of regulated activity that’s listed on the plan so just to go down, t=
he
first item is the construction of the detention basin, the detention basin =
was
sized . . . . . &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Zawadzki: Excuse me, what page are you on?&nbs=
p;
We’ve got 17 of 17. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Ms. Jones: Yes. That’s correct. It should be on the right side of =
the
page where it says earth work (inaudible) estimate and wetlands regulated a=
rea. I just want to quickly summarize b=
ecause
originally when this was done it was confused, the line between the 50 foot
wetlands setback and the 75 foot Torrington Area Health setback so some of =
the
information is regulated area activity within that 75 foot setback so I had=
to
revise some of the numbers to show what was in the 50 foot setback and the =
main
change is the construction of the detention basin which is sized to not
increase the flows from the storms all the way through the 100 year storm, =
that
remains the same. For the
construction of the roadway there is no wetlands regulated activity so that=
has
been deleted, that is all outside of the 50 foot regulated area. CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 15, 2005 PAGE 21 &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; For
the construction of the driveway to Lot #1, this is the area of the only di=
rect
wetland impact is the wetland crossing for the driveway. It’s a very small;, narrow b=
and of
wetlands and there is the activity in the wetlands is correct on the plan, =
and
the activity in the 50 foot regulated area is actually 3,284 square feet, I
think you have within the vicinity of 5,500 or something. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; The
construction of the driveway for Lot #7 has wetlands regulated activity, but
it’s a lower amount than what you have, it is only 331 square feet, w=
ith
17 cubic yards of fill. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; The
final, I misspoke when I said the only direct wetland impact is on Lot #1, =
the
other direct wetland impact is a direct result of the drainage problem that=
is
caused by Trolane Road that’s draining without a right to drain onto =
the
Curtiss’ property and in speaking with in pre-application meetings wi=
th
the Town Engineer and everyone, it was determined that we needed to do
something. There is significa=
nt
erosion in this area here coming off of Trolane Road so our wetland impact =
in
this area is really a stabilization of that channel and the installation of
some rip rap until the channel flattens out so we can stop the erosion
that’s currently happening. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Basically
that summarizes the project and I recognize this is only our first meeting,
you’ll probably want to schedule a site walk and things like that so
I’ll keep it brief. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Undercuffler:
Does Hollow Road have to be updated as part of this? &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Ms. Jones: It’s not current=
ly part
of the proposal. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Undercuffler:
So Lot #1, they can get into Lot #, the road doesn’t go that f=
ar,
or does it? &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Ms. Jones: It does, is it dirt in=
that
area, it’s a dirt road in that area. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Undercuffler:
It’s a sign that says (inaudible). &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: Emily, you mentioned t=
here
are two intermittent watercourses, there is a permanent watercourse going
through there. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Ms. Jones: Yes. There’s actually two perenni=
al
watercourses on the site, one is this watercourse that comes down here and =
goes
under Hollow Road which meets up with this watercourse, also a permanent
watercourse, that meets up and goes under Hollow Road, the intermittent
watercourses are simply a result of drainage off of Hollow Road and you can=
see
where there’s evidence of scour erosion in these two areas. And then the second permanent
watercourse is this watercourse right here that runs from north to south on=
the
property. CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 15, 2005 PAGE 22 &=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Polletta: Do we want a field trip? &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Zawadzki: Yes. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Undercuffler:
(Inaudible.) &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Rafey: Well you’ll be able to see t=
he
wetlands, it snowed, but you can see the landscape and the location of the
roads. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Zawadzki: Well that’s cert=
ainly
the next thing. I guess are t=
here
any questions for the applicant? &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: (Inaudible) watershed =
off
the paved road, we have two (inaudible) on Hollow Road (inaudible) third pa=
rty
review of the application. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Zawadzki: Yea, I think it’s
pretty extensive. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: Anyway you have to
(inaudible) Land Tech Consultants.
We hired Land Tech Consultants. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Ms. Jones: Okay, because we did, =
I mean
it was a requirement for a complete application that we submit a functional
wetland evaluation so we did submit that for environmental plans, so
we’ll be required to do a second evaluation. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: We just give everythin=
g to
them and they review it and if there is anything missing (inaudible) what t=
he
impact of this development is on Steele Brook, which is a major watercourse=
in
Watertown. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Zawadzki: Well we prefer to have=
a
neutral party looking at it for our benefit. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Ms. Jones: Yea, I understand, I g=
uess I
would have waited if it had been asked beforehand. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Rafey: And that road issue isn’t
something that you will discuss with the Planning and Zoning Commission, Ch=
uck? &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Berger: It will be discussed with Planning=
and
Zoning and it may be discussed here as well depending on the condition of t=
hat
section of that road. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: But if you have to imp=
rove
that section of the road, what kind of drainage system you will have and the
impact on the watercourse and wetlands. CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 15, 2005 PAGE 23 &=
nbsp; =
; Ms.
Jones: Yes, I haven’t been able to talk with Mr. Berger about that so
obviously that’s a major item that we will be discussing. Did you review the document from
Environmental Planning Services because I know the applicant is going to be
concerned about having to pay for a wetland evaluation twice, it was
recommended that we get one prior to applying so that we had a complete
application which we many not have done if we had know that we had to do it
again anyway, so I’m just wondering if you would do this and found it=
to
not be good enough? &=
nbsp; =
; Mr.
Zawadzki: Well we’re not qualified in t=
hat
sense to review it for technicalities and that’s why we’d like =
to
have a third party or neutral party because we feel that there is a signifi=
cant
impact on wetlands, or potential impact at least, that’s our
recourse. We’re volunte=
ers
here and we’re not land use experts or soil scientists, we just try to
apply the rules. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Ms. Jones: I understand that
(inaudible). &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Duplissie: We’re not redoing it, weR=
17;re
just having a third party review it. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Ms.
Jones: I understand. I just know there’s going to=
be a
question so I wanted an answer. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr.
Rafey: If there is (inaudible) informatio=
n that
you present, then they don’t have to do that again. If something is missing then they =
will
complete the review. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Duplissie: Which is what we would=
ask
you to do anyway. If somethin=
g was
missing you’d have to (inaudible). &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Ms. Jones: Yes. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION: (Mr.
Polletta, sec. Mr. Duplissie) to Order a Third Party Review for Application=
#544 of Donald Curtiss for construction of
13-lot Bassett Hollow Subdivision located on the north side of Hollow Road,
Watertown, CT. &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Discussion: None<=
o:p> &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 15, 2005 PAGE 24 &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION: (Mr.
Polletta, sec. Mr. Duplissie) that Application #544 of Donald Curtiss for construction of 13-lot Bassett Hollow
Subdivision located on the north side of Hollow Road, Watertown, CT is a
Significant Activity. &=
nbsp; &=
nbsp; Discussion: None<=
o:p> &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION: (Mr.
Polletta, sec. Mr. Duplissie) to Schedule a Site Walk for Application #5
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion: None<= o:p>
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. Duplissie, sec. Mr. Polletta) to Table Application #544 of Donald Curtiss for construction of 13-lot Bassett Hollow Subdivision located on the north side of Hollow Road, Watertown, CT.=
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion: None<= o:p>
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
&= nbsp; B. = Application #545 of Big Sky Enterprises to conduct regulated activities in the construc= tion of a drainage swale as part of Butternut Views Subdivision located on Butte= rnut Lane and Linkfield Road, Watertown, CT.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; If a Public Hearing is not held, then a decision is required by February 17, 2= 006.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Emily Jones, Engineer, Civil One
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Ms. Jones: You have seen this
subdivision before. We came t=
o you,
I think it was last Summer and there were no wetlands activity, there was no
wetlands regulated activity so basically it was deemed that this project
didn’t need a permit from this Commission. It has since been to Planning and =
Zoning
and gone through extensive review with that Commission and also with Mr. Be=
rger
discussing every aspect of this site and the biggest issue on the site was =
the
storm drainage.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 15, 2005
PAGE 25
We did many calculations and a significant amount of analysis and the
reason that we’re back to you is because a request from the Planning =
and
Zoning Commission was made due to some public participation that we attempt=
to
put a drainage ditch or restore the drainage swale that was along the north=
ern
side of Butternut Lane. When =
you
walk out there it’s clear that it’s not functioning as it
should. There are places wher=
e you
can see that that soil once existed, maybe it’s been filled in or was=
hed
in, or one thing or another has led it to not function as it should, so a
request was made by the Planning and Zoning Commission that we look at
recreating that swale along Butternut Lane and that’s what we did, and
it’s kind of a circular pattern, as we seem to be going here that has
caused us to have a small amount of activity in the upland review area and =
the
50 foot setback area.
If you turn to page 204 in your plans, you can see on the right hand =
side
of the page there’s the wetlands and the watercourse that runs down
through the existing pipe under Butternut Lane and although the swale was t=
here
at one point it’s no longer there, so the double line on the plan that
you see is a proposed 1 foot deep swale, 2 feet wide at the bottom with 2:1
side slopes. The land is real=
ly
very flat in that area and the grading is minimal. As you can see on the last page of=
the
plan, sheet 4 of 4 where it says Earth Work Quantity Estimate in Wetlands a=
nd
50 Foot Wetland Regulated Area, there is no activity proposed in any wetlan=
d. The wetland in that area comes rig=
ht to
the pipe inlet. So any constr=
uction
of the proposed drainage swale, the activity in the 50 foot upland review a=
rea
it will be about 7.7 cubic yards of cut and about 350 square feet of
disturbance. We feel that
it’s really a minimal amount of activity in that area, again because =
the
request from Planning and Zoning we came back and this really is restoring =
what
used to be along Butternut Lane back into working condition. It’s really not a lot of act=
ivity
but it is something that you need to review and approve obviously.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Zawadzki: This double line that b=
egins
there, is the (inaudible) for the rip rap?
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Ms. Jones: Yes, 3 x 3 foot modifie=
d rip
rap pad, and that’s the double line.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Undercuffler: And the water flows from north to s=
outh?
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Ms. Jones: Yes. So basically it (inaudible) the wat=
er
before it goes into the pipe. And
there will be no more water flowing through that swale under proposed
conditions than there is under existing conditions. It’s just that right, it flo=
ws
right down the middle of Butternut Lane because that swale is not functioni=
ng
as it should.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: After this subdivision =
is
completed, there is no change?
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 15, 2005
PAGE 26
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Ms. Jones: There is no change.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: Do you want to make any
comments concerning the Church concerns?
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Ms. Jones: Sure. Mr. Church obviously, as you point=
ed
out, lives below this subdivision, he is below Lot #1 which I guess I have =
to
point out is the furthest lot from the wetlands. It’s this lot right here, th=
is is
Mr. Church’s house. Jus=
t to
be clear, we have gone back and forth with Chuck many, many times and he=
217;s
spent a lot of time reviewing this project, we’ve spent a lot of time
analyzing this project, and we have taken into consideration all of these p=
ipes
that come across Linkfield Road.
Right now they come across Linkfield Road, they’re concentrated
flow, they come out of these pipes, there’s nothing there to spread t=
he
water out or anything like that, it comes down, it runs down the hill in li=
ttle
streams, or I guess they’re just drainage features because there are =
no
intermittent watercourses, but there is some evidence of erosion right at t=
he
outlet of the pipe. So in all=
of
these pipes what our proposal is to do and what we proposed to the Town
Engineer and the Planning and Zoning Commission, we’ve been going back
and forth, we want to put additional rip rap at the outlet of those pipes,
that’s additional erosion protection.
We also have what we’re calling clean water interceptor swales =
on
each of the lots. So for inst=
ance
this pipe and this pipe coming across the road, this one runs down the lot =
line
between 2 and 3, the drainage pattern on that pipe doesn’t change at
all. The pipes that are above=
the
houses we’ve collected them and clean water interceptor swales and are
piping them under the driveways where they’ll outlet to additional
erosion protection and they will go over a level spreader. Now what this level spreader will =
do is
it will promote sheet flow, which is what we like to see because concentrat=
or
flow runs in a small channel and it doesn’t infiltrate into the groun=
d so
what we’re doing is we’re taking this concentrated flow that co=
mes
under Linkfield Road and we’re taking it, not concentrating it anymore
than it is, in the swale and underneath the driveway but then we’re
spreading it out again, so the water then can have a chance to infiltrate a=
nd
it doesn’t cause erosion like it does when it’s concentrated fl=
ow. We’ve also taken the runoff =
from
all of the driveways and the houses and we’ve designed infiltrator
systems for those impervious surfaces.&nbs=
p;
Basically the way we did that was we analyzed those areas under exis=
ting
conditions, we analyzed what the increase in runoff would be due to the add=
ed
impervious surface, we took the percolation rate of the soil, figured out h=
ow
much of that increase could infiltrate into the ground in the area of our
infiltration system in a 24 hour period and anything that can’t has t=
o be
stored in those infiltrators. So
through extensive analysis and going back and forth with the Town Engineer =
and
the Planning and Zoning Commission we have established that there is no
increase in runoff in peak runoff rates for the 2, 10, 25, 50, or 100 year
storm.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 15, 2005
PAGE 27
So while I understand Mr. Church’s concern that he has a fairly=
wet
property, this project is not going to increase the problem on his property=
and
in fact, because we’re taking some measures to promote sheet flow on =
our
property and we’re doing sort of a good neighbor gesture by restoring=
the
swale on Butternut Lane, it should actually help alleviate the problem, whi=
ch I
understand doesn’t always make a neighbor feel better but we have com=
e up
with a good design on this piece of land and again, I ask the only wetland
regulated activity that we’re talking about is about 350 square feet =
for
the restoration of that drainage swale along Butternut Lane.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Undercuffler: How does the swale improve the
Church’s situation though?
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Ms. Jones: Well the swale is above
Butternut Lane and he is below Butternut Lane so it’s going to interc=
ept
a lot of that water and carry it away from his property.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Undercuffler: Where is that water going now? Isn’t it coming down
Butternut? It’s coming =
down
there anyway.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Ms. Jones: Yes, it does. I really haven’t stood on Mr.
Church’s property in a rainstorm or anything like that, I just heard =
from
him worries about water coming from wherever it comes from, but there’=
;s
no way that this development is increasing his problem at all.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Undercuffler: You mentioned the sheet flow. Where would the sheet flow occur?<= o:p>
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Ms. Jones: The sheet flow occurs, =
if you
look on the plans, but on this map there is a pipe under the driveway and a
little rip rap plunge pool, so the water goes into the plunge pool, it slow=
s it
down, and then there’s a level spreader, so it’s as an exact le=
vel
elevation so the water goes over that all at the same time at an even rate,=
and
that promotes the sheet flow which occurs right below the driveways (inaudi=
ble)
on all of these properties.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Undercuffler: That isn’t something that a f=
uture
homeowner would be liable to monkey around with, is it?
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Ms. Jones: That’s also been =
taken
into a great deal of consideration.
In the Planning and Zoning process there will be several drainage
maintenance agreements, everything goes into all the deeds so it’s so=
mething
that they’re concentrating on quite a bit. And there is also a note on the pl=
ans
that there will be no changes to house locations, driveways, drainage syste=
ms,
septic systems, without prior authorization of the Town Engineer, the Zoning
Enforcement Officer, and our firm, the design engineer.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 15, 2005
PAGE 28
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Berger: The homeowner that is
proposed that the homeowner would be responsible for maintaining the draina=
ge
facilities that are being installed for each lot.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: You (inaudible) make a
decision on this tonight.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Zawadzki: Right, but what about t=
he
waiving of the fee? How do yo=
u guys
feel about that? Planning and Zoning requested this=
, not
the applicant. Normally if the
applicant made a mistake or provided incomplete information and had to reap=
ply,
we don’t look at that too kindly, but in this case they were asked by
Planning and Zoning to do this and when we passed on this the first time th=
ere
was no need for a permit, so my inclination is to waive the fee.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Undercuffler: =
I
agree.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey: (Inaudible) there was no
permit required. Now theyR=
17;re
asking to waive the fee for this application.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. Undercuffler, sec. Mr. Duplissie) to Waive the Fee for Application #545 of = Big Sky Enterprises to conduct regulated activities in the construction of a drainage swale as part of t Butternut Views Subdivision located on Butternut Lane and Linkfield Road, Watertown, CT.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion: None<= o:p>
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. Duplissie, sec. Mr. Undercuffler) to Table Application #545 of Big Sky Enterprises to conduct regulated activities in the construction of a draina= ge swale as part of t Butternut Views Subdivision located on Butternut Lane and Linkfield Road, Watertown, CT.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion: None<= o:p>
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
(Tape #4, Side A ended – may have missed some.)
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 15, 2005
PAGE 29
7. &n=
bsp; Old
Business
A. Preliminary Discussion on Heritage Woods Active Adult Retirement Community Development<= o:p>
&=
nbsp; Bob
Houlihan, Heritage Development
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Houlihan: We just wanted =
to
stay in touch with the Board just to keep continuity, communication about h=
ow
we’re going to approach this site, it’s a small project so I th=
ink
it’s important that we, as the applicant, understand what your needs =
are
so that we can work together.
We’re moving along in the land use approval process. The active age restricted planned
residential development text has been approved by the Planning and Zoning
Commission and there are some re-zoning activities going on that will hopef=
ully
conclude in January, and we will be meeting informally with the Planning and
Zoning Commission about the site plan, and up until this point, it’s
taken us 10 months now just to get to this point, we’ve been juggling
work, going forward we’ll be doing quite a bit of engineering so
it’s very important for us to avoid getting ping ponged back and
forth. We need to know what y=
ou
want, what you need up front so that we can do that, we can go back to Plan=
ning
and Zoning, find out what they want and need, identify what the differences=
are
and try to get them resolved so that we can march forward. We’re going to be spending a=
lot
of money on this and we simply can’t afford to be doing things twice =
and
over and over again. Our goal=
is to
try and work together on this.
&=
nbsp; Since
we walked the property, I’ll just kind of review the walk through with
you a little bit. If you'll r=
ecall
we met at the end of New Wood Road, we followed the trail around here,
there’s a weird tent in the woods.&n=
bsp;
We kind of walked up in here and got to the first wetland crossing, =
and
really nothing has changed in that regard.=
Then we came down to here to this crossing and then walked down, kin=
d of
stopped at this point, observed this crossing here and walked back and look=
ed
at this crossing before we went around Middlebury Road. The big thing we’re trying t=
o do
here is we have 2 crossings of this wetland corridor and we’d like to=
be
just 1. There’s less we=
tland
impact, and less road for us.
Usually when you work with land it really is a win/win. Very rarely are we (inaudible) the=
same
side of the (inaudible). So we
looked at that and Ken spent some time evaluating where the optimum point w=
ould
be. What we found out was the
optimum points was this existing crossing here, not some point in between, =
and
we don’t just look at wetland impacts. We looked at wetland impact, buffer
impact, environmental impacts outside of all that, and we tried to balance
these things. So Ken and I ju=
st
sort of came to this conclusion recently, we haven’t gotten to Planni=
ng
and Zoning yet, but we’re going to be pushing Planning and Zoning, th=
ey
tend to be pushed to allow this single crossing. We’d like to eliminate this.=
I don’t think there’s =
any
reason why they wouldn’t.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 15, 2005
PAGE 30
There’s a dead e=
nd cul
de sac issue but just based on some conversations that I’ve heard with
other applicants in front of them that’s really more related to tempo=
rary
dead end cul de sacs, this is to a temporary dead end cul de sac and to the
extent that we can demonstrate that fire and safety issues can be addressed,
which we think we can, we’re hopeful that they’ll approve that,=
but
we’ll see. So that̵=
7;s
something we’re working on.
&=
nbsp; Another
thing that Ken is working on, and maybe he can talk to you about that now, =
is
taking this cartoon drawing and getting it into CAD so that it synchronizes
with the topography and the wetland corridors and in some instances they
don’t. This entrance ro=
ad for
example tends to kind of wander in and out of wetlands when it really
doesn’t need to and we can’t do that. We have to be very diligent about
getting to the points where we’re minimizing our impact. Now having said that, there are so=
me
existing paths in roads that are in regulated areas. And it is our opinion, from an
environmental design standpoint, that it makes sense to follow those rather
than go build a new road outside of the regulated area. That’s our opinion, we’=
;re
certainly be looking to get some direction from you on that, but that’=
;s
an important piece of environmental design as far as we’re concerned.=
This also has a double road coming=
in
here which is the, when you have one way in and one way out, there’s =
the
what if the tree falls across the road scenario and so this is a typically
accepted practice by providing a boulevard you arguably have a second means=
of
egress or ingress for emergency vehicles&n=
bsp;
We are proposing to have all these (inaudible) would be best to have=
an
emergency access road out here onto Middlebury Road, which we looked at, an=
d we
can talk to you about that a little bit, to the extent that we can get Plan=
ning
and Zoning to agree to that, we’d like to reduce this except for the
entryway to a single road. The
reason being is we’re coming across the wetlands here and these roads=
are
24 feet wide. Double road wil=
l have
a lot more impact; we don’t think it’s necessary so we want to =
get
these hot issues out in front of everybody and try to get some direction on
that Ken, you might want to c=
ome up
and talk. Ken has looked at t=
he
orientation (inaudible). If
you’ll recall we said we weren’t sure if it made sense to follow
the old farmer’s road or build a new one and Ken can answer that a li=
ttle
bit.
&=
nbsp; Ken
Hrica, Professional Engineer and Licensed Land Surveyor
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Hrica: Good evening. I’ve been working with Bob o=
n this
project for most of the 9 months that he’s been working on it, and ju=
st
recently because of the Planning and Zoning decision to go ahead and change=
the
zone, we really started to take a serious look at the actual layout. When you look t the picture, basic=
ally
represents a good job of site planning but the picture doesn’t
(inaudible) exactly where these roads are.=
It does cause some concerns in wetlands so we’ve taken the pic=
ture
off and laid the roads on now (inaudible) and we’re finding areas, as=
Bob
mentioned, like the entranceway that are kind of meandering back and forth
through wetlands so we’re trying to straighten all of that out and ju=
st
get the actual impacts down to a minimum.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 15, 2005
PAGE 31
As Bob raised a good p=
oint
and that’s probably my biggest question is some of these existing
paths. Although taking a look=
I
noticed that some of the existing disturbed paths and roadways maybe are 30=
or
40 feet away from the wetlands so they are definitely inside the buffer.
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Undercuffler: That makes =
sense
to me.
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: Well another th=
ing
too, in a perfect world we would ask for no impact whatsoever on any of the=
se
wetland buffer areas (inaudible) you already know that. That being the case why obviously =
the
minimal impact is what is preferred.
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Hrica: Absolutely.
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Undercuffler: And like he=
said
if getting out of that buffer (inaudible) means cutting down a bunch more
trees, I think it’s probably better to do . . . . .
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Hrica: And just basically=
to
meet the Town’s 50 foot regulated area, tabling it from here and movi=
ng
it to here and then having to clear a big swath doesn’t make a lot of
sense. We’re still adja=
cent
to the wetlands, whether we’re 20 feet area on an already disturbed a=
rea
of 60 or 70 feet away and cutting a brand new swath, (inaudible) maybe a li=
ttle
bit more in most instances.
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: The other thing=
we
look at is feasible and prudent alternatives. So he can present in a situation l=
ike
this where there’s more than one way to skin a cat, so you okay this =
is
one way to do it, but these are the consequences, and here’s another =
way
to do it and these are the consequences.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 15, 2005
PAGE 32
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Hrica: And that’s e=
xactly
what we’ll do, look at all of those areas and figure out or surmise w=
hich
would create the most impact and go with the other choice.
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Undercuffler: (Inaudible)
you’re not going through wetlands, you’re going through the buf=
fer.
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Hrica: It’s definit=
ely
through the buffer. The paths
themselves are upland area. I=
n some
cases they are pretty skinny, which may mean following a path and then havi=
ng a
little bit of wetland impact on each side by the time we take that, the path
that’s there and widen it up to a road standard, but again prudent and
feasible alternatives that’s still probably the best way to do it bec=
ause
we’re taking a disturbed area and we’re making it a little bit
buffer rather than creating a brand new crossing somewhere else.
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Polletta: The path that we
walked Saturday, were you proposing or (inaudible) same area that we walked=
up
there?
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Houlihan: Yea, we’re
trying to follow the existing road.
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Hrica: As much as
possible. There will be areas=
where
we’ll have to deviate, once we’re farther removed from the
wetlands, some of the paths take a pretty steep grade straight up some hills
that we just can’t follow a path that we’re going to have cars
going in and out of all the time, but most of those concerns we’ll be=
away
from the wetlands. Anywhere t=
hat
we’re adjacent to wetlands or near wetlands those paths seem to
(inaudible) in most cases be the best solution for going either adjacent or
through the wetland area. I d=
id
take a look at the entrance.
I’ve looked at a couple of different scenarios on how to put an
emergency access way and it turns out probably the best way, well thereR=
17;s
two ways, there’s an existing access now towards the south end of this
little piece of property and the access way comes in and does an immediate =
left
hand turn, runs along the property line and then comes across the contour d=
own
into a wetlands area on an uplands finger.=
I’m not sure of the history, but that finger looks suspiciously
like it’s a filled area for farm access. And then (inaudible) your ends and
there’s probably a 70 or 80 foot span of wetlands that probably has b=
een
traversed. (Inaudible) again
it’s because of that area being used and already disturbed, I thought
that might be the best solution, but I took a look at how severe the curve =
was,
it really doesn’t accommodate emergency vehicles to come in and try to
make that kind of a turn and I really couldn’t get a feasible roadway=
in
there that could accommodate emergency vehicles. So I took a look to the north side=
, and
found that I could come down and cross over the wetlands and this picture i=
s a
little misleading, there’s actually a spot right here from the flat
wetlands on the actual topo map, it’s about 12 feet wide, but
there’s two wetlands impacts obviously and there’s 80 feet here
although it may have been (inaudible) before or a short 12 foot jump over t=
he
wetlands here and the grades aren’t all that severe coming in and out=
of
there, they’re about 7% coming down the hill and 7% going back up, so=
I
chose to use the 12 foot crossing in that instance because (inaudible).
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 15, 2005
PAGE 33
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Polletta: Better site lin=
e when
you get to the road.
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Hrica: Better site line, I
don’t have to make any major corner coming into the site so we can
achieve that. There is one
possibility and if we find that we can’t satisfy the emergency vehicl=
es,
then we’re looking at possibly crossing the wetlands and going back t=
o a
2 road system. Actually Bob a=
nd I
sat down before the meeting tonight and we were just looking at the plans.<=
span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> I think we’re still going to=
avoid
this, but what we may do is there is a little strand down in here that
represents a fairly narrow crossing, if we have to accommodate a circular
pattern around the site for the emergency vehicles, we’re going to ta=
ke a
look and see if that’s feasible.&nbs=
p;
Again we’re looking at a cartoon picture right now, and we sor=
t of
think that we might be able to do it but as this project progresses we̵=
7;ll
take a good, hard look at what kind of impact that would be a necessity for
that so it’s just something that we may throw out in the future, but =
as
of right now we’re not planning to go through here, but again that ma=
y be
something we’re looking at and really the gist is to take a look at b=
eing
as environmentally sensitive and as wetland sensitive as possible. During there’s some mitigati=
on in
the entranceway we do have a little bit of disturbance, we do have a crossi=
ng
here that we can’t avoid, and so we’re going to start to at this
point, take a good, hard look at what we can do with the plan to meet the n=
eeds
of this Commission and to meet the needs of Heritage.
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: Well another th=
ing
that we ran into recently on several applications was the issue of bridging=
, a
rainbow bridge or an arch across the wetland crossing as opposed to filling=
it
in and putting a culvert, that sort of thing, with the idea being that you =
want
to try and impede the flow of water from one side to the other as little as
possible and leave it as natural as possible, so the less bulldozing and
excavating the better, so you might want to consider where you have the
crossing, look at the feasibility of arches and that sort of increased stre=
ss
whatever (inaudible). That=
217;s
something to keep in mind.
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Houlihan: Okay. We will take a look at every cross=
ing
that we have individually.
I’m not going to stand here and say I’m going to use a b=
ox
culvert on every (inaudible). I do
agree with you, I have used arched culverts and/or open box culverts in the
past that really don’t prohibit the flow and keep the stream bottoms =
as
natural as possible.
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: Right, it’=
;s
particularly important where you have a watercourse.
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Houlihan: Or there may be=
some
low lying areas that we just throw a culvert in that aren’t necessari=
ly a
wetland or a stream crossing but if we find they’re going to be backi=
ng
up some water on one side of the road we’ll put a culvert in to trans=
fer
it across. There’s a lo=
t of
things we’ll be looking at to try and make sure that we respect the
wetlands and that we don’t cause any problems by doing things in the
wetland areas also.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 15, 2005
PAGE 34
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: The other thing=
to
keep in mind is what areas might be primed for conservation easements as
opposed to open space or both obviously but easements are a little differen=
t in
nature because the conservation easement can be owned by the Town or by the
property owners, but those are sometimes hard to enforce, so that’s
another thing we like to have is contiguous open areas, supplemented by
easements.
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Houlihan: Yea, to that ef=
fect
our text amendment had required that we provide a 25% open space that is
contiguous and additionally I believe there’s another 10% of private =
open
space that doesn’t have the same contiguous requirement and that̵=
7;s
because when you provide contiguous space it constrains obviously other are=
as
of the site and we’re looking to do that in this area here the perime=
ter,
we are hopeful that there will be little areas inside that will be private =
open
space, we don’t want to encourage public access inside the community,=
but
this particular format, it’s a condominium, it’s a planned deve=
lopment,
those types of restrictions are very easy to enforce and are very well enfo=
rced
historically so that’s an important aspect of our plan. Also Ken will be working I’m=
sure
closely with Chuck on the storm water quality techniques that we’re
hoping may become the model for the Town to use in the future. We’re going to be following =
Best
Management Practices to the largest extent practical and I emphasize that w=
ord,
good environmental design involves a balance, you know we can’t do
everything that might be on someone’s environmental wish list. It’s a balance, that’s=
what
a development is really all about, and I think you’ll find that
we’ve hired the best people and we’re going to put our best foot
forward here and that this will be something that we can all be proud of fr=
om
an environmental design standing.
That’s our objective as developers.
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: Is this going t=
o be
the kind of place where the Association will maintain the lawns and the
property and so forth, not the individual residents?
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Houlihan: Yes, all of the
exterior maintenance is done by the Association.
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: So in that case
easements are nice because the one group will be responsible for
maintaining. You won’t =
have
individuals mowing to the back line of their lot like some people do, even
though there is a conservation easement there, so that’s a good thing=
.
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Houlihan: No, it’s =
much
more easy to control and of course that’s the selling advantage of th=
ese
types of communities (inaudible).
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Undercuffler: How do you =
work
the sewage on this? Is this g=
oing
to be city?
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Houlihan: Yes, the requir=
ement
t of this development is public water and sewer.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 15, 2005
PAGE 35
(Tape #4,=
Side
B ended – may have missed some.)
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: The Commission has=
a
policy on whether (inaudible) how you can minimize it and then how you can
mitigate for those things. Bu=
t on
some of those trails that are already existing, (inaudible). In situations where you can have a=
road
outside of the regulated area (inaudible).
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Houlihan: You’re tr=
ying
to say in the first instance there may very well be a situation where we co=
uld
easily avoid not going in the regulated area but it wouldn’t make sen=
se
not to from an environmental design standpoint. We’re not talking about a 5 =
foot
wide paths here, we’re talking about farm roads that have been utiliz=
ed,
so what we’re saying is that we will, our objective is to minimize the
impact of wetlands. And we
understand that to the extent that we do that, the easier this will be and
it’s our job to get through this so then we can start buildings, but I
can’t promise you that we won’t have any impacts in the regulat=
ed
area. There will be impact to=
the
regulated area on this site, I can guarantee that, but I can promise you th=
at
we’ll do everything we can to minimize that.
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: Minimize it as muc=
h as
possible.
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Houlihan: Absolutely.
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: But again, look=
at
alternatives.
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Houlihan: Yes, we are alr=
eady
in the process of working on that.
This plan can be refined quite a bit to help do that, but as this pl=
an
sits, it’s got very little impact I think for a 200 acre site and
you’ve got ¾ of an acre of wetlands on it. That’s pretty good. Particularly if you look at the pe=
rmit
that was issued for the industrial site 15 years ago, there was a wetland
permit issued and I haven’t found out what the impacts were there bec=
ause
we’re looking at it, you know what were they like 60 foot roads and I
mean it had to be 3.5 acres and that’s only on half the property. I don’t know what their thin=
king .
. . .
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Polletta: How many units =
are
you proposing?
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 15, 2005
PAGE 36
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Houlihan: Well we donR=
17;t
know yet. The Zoning approval
allows 2 per gross acre which would be 390, I can guarantee we won’t =
get
that. My guess, I’m hop=
eful
that it will be between 300 and 350, closer to 350. And that’s part of our job of
balancing this. We can’=
t do
this design if it gets diluted. The
problem with sprawl is that it isn’t dense and we can’t do good
design if you don’t have density generally speaking. You can’t spend the money to=
do
the right thing. Like avoid t=
he
wetlands. You just kind of fo=
rce
the do what you got, so if we get around 350 I think we can make it work.
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: Okay, thank you=
.
<=
span
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt'>B. =
Discussion on Suds in Brook at North Street, Watertown, CT.
This was moved to right
before Item 6A.
8. =
New
Business
Mr. Rafey:<=
span
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt'> I gave you a revised copy of the b=
udget
(inaudible).
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: Well unless any=
one
has a major problem, we can make a motion to . . . .
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: If you look at the=
first
column, that was for last year and the last column is what we’re
proposing for this year.
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Undercuffler: What’=
s in
the advertising? Why did that=
go up
so much?
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: The legal notices =
in the
newspapers.
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: I know I talked=
to
the Town Times and they’re going up January 1st and also I
believe there’s been more applications lately.
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: Yea, but sometimes=
you
have to send it to (inaudible) Waterbury Republican and they are more
expensive.
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Duplissie: Don’t we=
get
money from the applicant for that?
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: Yes, most of these=
costs
will be covered by the application fee.&nb=
sp;
We cannot use that money directly for those costs. We take that money and give it to =
the
Town and then they have a budget for legal notices.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 15, 2005
PAGE 37
&=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: It’s kind=
of
like Connecticut paying taxes and then we get some back.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; MOTION: (Mr. Duplissie, sec. Mr. Undercuffler) to approve the Conservation Commission/In= land Wetland Agency Budget for Year 2006/07.
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Discussion: None<= o:p>
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
&= nbsp; B. = The Conservation Commission/Inland Wetland Agency Meeting Dates for Year 2006.<= o:p>
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; MOTION: (Mr.
Duplissie, sec. Mr. Jones) to approve the meeting dates for 2006 as present=
ed.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Discussion: Ms. Allen (Clerk):
The meeting in July, when we sent the packet out we didn’t talk
about the July meeting. It=
217;s
July 20th, not the 13th. We decided that today.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Duplissie:
Because that’s the one that falls after the P & Z meeting.=
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Ms.
Allen (Clerk): Yes.
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey:
The Planning and Zoning Commission didn’t want to have a meeti=
ng
after 4th of July. They
pushed their meeting one week (inaudible).
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Ms. Allen (Clerk): Otherwise we’d have 2 packets=
in
one week. It’s very har=
d for
us, plus there’s a holiday there.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: A=
nd
June is the 3rd Thursday.
And April is the 3rd Thursday.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: T=
he
Planning and Zoning Commission cannot have a meeting on the first week,
there’s no Wednesday on the first week, that’s why.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki:
(Inaudible.)
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey:
No. (Inaudible.)
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 15, 2005
PAGE 38
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: We
usually do the second Thursday, that’s all I’m saying.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Undercuffler: A=
ll the
other dates all okay? We were
talking January before is that still the same?
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Mr. Rafey:
Yes.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki:
(Inaudible.)
=
M=
OTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
9. =
Communications
and Bills
10. Repor=
ts
from Officers and Committees
&n= bsp; None
11. Repor=
ts
from Staff
=
; None
12. &n=
bsp; Public
Participation
&nbs=
p; None
13. Adjou=
rnment
&= nbsp; MOTION: (Mr. Duplissie, sec. Mr. Polletta) to Adjourn the Regular Meeting at 11:10 p.m.<= o:p>
&nbs= p; Discussion: None<= o:p>
&nbs=
p; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 15, 2005
PAGE 39
&nbs=
p; Regular
Meeting Adjourned at 11:10 p.m.
Respect=
fully
submitted,
Ronald =
Jones,
Secretary
Conserv=
ation
Commission/
Inland
Wetlands Agency
&nbs=
p; _________________=
_________________