beagenda

MINUTES

&nb= sp;

CONSERVA= TION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY

PUBLIC H= EARING

&nb= sp;

WATERTOWN HIGH SCHOOL TECHNOLOGY CENTER

THURSDAY= , AUGUST 10, 2006 - 7:00 P.M.

&nb= sp;

APPLICAT= ION #563 – GOLDEN ACRES, LLC

&nb= sp;

PRESENT: &nb= sp; = L= ucia DiBona

= &nb= sp; = &nb= sp; Ron Jones, Secretary

= ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; = ; Joseph Polletta

= &nb= sp; = ; &= nbsp; Edwin Undercuffler, Vice Chairman

= &nb= sp; = &nb= sp; James Zawadzki, Chairman

ABSENT: &nb= sp; = = G= len Duplissie

= &nb= sp; = &nb= sp; Charles Thermer

ALTERNATES PRESENT: &nbs= p; None=

ALTERNATES ABSENT: = ; <= /span>Peter Peluso

= &nb= sp; = &nb= sp; Denise Russ

= ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; = ; Martha Sturgis

OTHERS PRESENT: &n= bsp; = ; Chuck Berger, Town Engineer=

= ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; = ; Moosa Rafey, Assistant Wetlands Enforcement Officer

1. = Call Meeting To Order

Mr. Zawadzki, Chairman, called the Public Hearing to order at about 8:20 p.m. (= no time given).

2. &nb= sp; Roll Call

Mr. Jones, Secretary, executed the Roll Call.

&nb= sp;

3. = Hearing of Applications

&nb= sp;

&= nbsp; D. Application #563 of Golden Acres, LLC for construction of 11-lot Golden Acres Subdivisi= on, Litchfield Road, Watertown, CT.

&nb= sp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Recess or Adjourn Public Hearing must be Closed by Sept= ember 14, 2006, unless applicant grants a time extension.

CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY=

PUBLIC HEARING

APPLICATION #563– GOLDEN ACRES, LLC

AUGUST 10, 2006

PAGE 2

&nb= sp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Mr. Jones, Secretary, read the Legal Notice for the record:

&nb= sp;

"Legal Notice

&nb= sp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; The Conservation Commission/Inland Wetlands Agency of the Town of Watertown will hold a Public Hearing at 7:00 p.m. on Thursday, August 10, 2006 at Watertown High School Technology Center, 324 French Street, Watertown, CT to hear and= act upon the following applications deemed a significant activity by the Conser= vation Commission/Inland Wetland Agency pursuant to Section 2.1(dd1-7) of the Watertown Inland Wetlands and Watercourse Regulations.

&nb= sp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Application #563 of Golden Acres, LLC to conduct the following regulated activities involved in the construction of 11-lot Residential Subdivision and approximately 1,673 linear feet of new roadway located on the westerly side= of Litchfield Road, Watertown, CT in an R-70 Residential Zoning District:=

&nb= sp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 1. = Filling of approximately 11,150 square feet of inland wetland by deposition of 2,270 cubic yards of fill and piping of approximately 70 linear feet of a waterco= urse for construction of the proposed roadway.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 2. = Disturbance of approximately 10,450 square feet of upland review area by 185 cubic yard= s of fill and 260 cubic yards of cut for construction of the new roadway.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 3. = Disturbance of approximately 250 square feet of wetland and 3,150 square feet of upland review area for construction of a driveway to Lot #8.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 4. = Installation of erosion and sediment control measures within wetlands/watercourse and up= land review area.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 5. = Discharge of storm runoff into inland wetland areas.

&nb= sp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; At this Hearing interested persons may be heard and written communications received. A copy of the applications is on file at the Planning and Zoning Office, 51 Depot Street, Suite 502, Watertown, CT.

&nb= sp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Dated at Waterto= wn, CT this 27th day of July, 2= 006.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Dated at Waterto= wn, CT this 3rd day of August, = 2006.

&nb= sp;

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Ron Jones, Secretary

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Conservation Commission/Inland Wetland Agency"

&nb= sp;

Dan Bouchard, Professional Engineer, Civil One

Mr. Bouchard: <= /b> We prepared the plans that we'll be showing tonight. Again I woul= d like to submit the certified mail receipts and a wetlands report that was compil= ed by Environmental Planning Services.

CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY=

PUBLIC HEARING

APPLICATION #563– GOLDEN ACRES, LLC

AUGUST 10, 2006

PAGE 3

&nb= sp;

For the benefit of the public I'd like to give a brief overview of the subdivision. The site is located on the west si= de of Route 63 and it abuts the Bassett Hollow Subdivision which we just spoke of. The Bassett Hollow Subdiv= ision is located to the south of this proposed subdivision. It includes about 29 acres in the = R-70 zone and we are proposing 11 lots including one existing residence. The road is a continuation of Curtiss Lane from the Bassett Hollow Subdivision. It heads northeast to end on Route 63. We've designed the storm drainage system for a 25 year storm and we'= ve done this through the design of a wet bottomed detention basin per the 2004= D.E.P. Storm Water Quality Manual and we also have a rain garden near a low point = in the road before it discharges to the wetlands. There are 2 wetland systems on the property. The larger wetland = system is the upper reach of the Steel Brook where the watercourse is not very wide. Our first wetlands acti= vity is minimal and it's for a driveway to Lot #8 where we are using an existing wetlands crossing that is already located on= the site. The second wetlands act= ivity is for the road crossing and it is necessary to cross the wetlands to acces= s this property. We cannot create a = long cul de sac from the Bassett Hollow Subdivision because Planning and Zoning would require a through road in keeping with the Town's Plan of Development. At a site walk a= nd during the last wetlands meeting the Commission asked us to look at using t= he area of the existing crossing where the road is crossing the wetlands, ther= e is an existing crossing for a little dirt path, and the Commission asked us to look at crossing our road in that area to minimize the disturbance. We have since realigned the road t= o use this existing driveway and it does significantly reduce the wetlands impact. Where the old wetlands impact was about 11,000 square feet, we're not looking at about 7,000 squar= e feet. We have recommended to Planning and Zoning to reduce the width of the road from I believe 30 to 24 feet to redu= ce the shoulder width and we will be having a sidewalk along the road, so we're also recommending that the sidewalk be adjacent to the road in this wetlands area with no grass strip dividing it form the road itself. This will further reduce the square footage to below 5,000 square feet of wetlands impact. If the Wetlands Commission has the ability, they could approve the standard 30 foot road that is shown now wit= h a recommendation for the 24 foot wide road that we would prefer to build.

Additionally we origin= ally proposed a 4 foot high by 5 foot wide 4 sided box culvert that hydraulically could handle the 50 year storm for this crossing. The Commission asked us to look at = an alternate of an open bottomed arched structure. We did look at this and our current proposal is for a 12 foot span, 4 foot wide, Conspan Precast Arched Bridge to cross the wetlands, and this has an open bottom. This 12= feet spans more than 1.5 times the width of the watercourse and it leaves the channel in a natural state. I= t does not impede or concentrate the flow and if it's installed during the Summer months, it will have a minimal impact to the wetlands, even during installation. If you head out there right now, and I was out there earlier this we= ek, there is very little to no water flowing through this watercourse.

CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY=

PUBLIC HEARING

APPLICATION #563– GOLDEN ACRES, LLC

AUGUST 10, 2006

PAGE 4

&nb= sp;

Additionally we were a= ble to eliminate the larger rip rap plunge pool that we had originally proposed at= the end of our culvert outlet because now we're not piping the water, it's not required. Arched bridge struc= tures like the one proposed, are recommended by the Army Corps and the D.E.P. bec= ause they have minimal impact to watercourses and aquatic wildlife.

We have received a fun= ction value assessment from Environmental Planning Services which I just handed o= ut to the Commission. I'd like t= o go over a couple of the brief points which were described in the report. The wetlands described as a narrow forested wetlands, flanking an intermittent watercourse the upper portion of which has been dammed and excavated to cre= ate a farm pond. The watercourse = which bypasses the pond and flows through the entire system is intermittent and t= hey also noted that there was no flow on either day that they were present on t= he site. They did note invasive species in the wetlands and in my judgment these are indicative of the dryer than normal conditions in this wetland.&nb= sp; They did a wetlands functional value assessment in which they looked= at 10 functions and assessed the value of the wetlands. The overall wetlands value was rat= ed low to moderate and they also reviewed our plan and reviewed the arched stance = that (Tape #2, Side B ended - may have missed some). And what they had to say about the arched bridge, is that it is located as close to the existing streambed as possible and will provide for unimpeded passage for existing flows and wild= life along the stream. Fill will be required on the downstream side, but the length of the arch as well as the volume and area of fill required has been minimized by the use of wing wall= s on the span. A planting plan has= bee prepared and it included native shrubs and small trees on the road side slopes. We do have the origin= al planting plan on this proposed plan shown today but we do not have their ne= west planting plan, cause we have just received this = report yesterday.

Additionally we have n= ot received a memo from Mr. Berger.

Mr. Berger: Yes, that is correct.

Mr. Bouchard: <= /b> Then we have not received a memo fr= om Mr. Berger. We do have Torrington= Area Health District approvals and we had our first Planning and Zoning Public Hearing last Wednesday, and at this point I'd like to open up to any questi= ons from the Commission.

Mr. Polletta: <= /b> During the field trip we moved the = road down from the house, right? W= e're crossing the wetlands in the same location?

CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY=

PUBLIC HEARING

APPLICATION #563– GOLDEN ACRES, LLC

AUGUST 10, 2006

PAGE 5

&nb= sp;

<= span style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt'>Eric Strachan, Develop= er

Mr. Strachan: Joe, where that was was where we drove down and there was a trickle of water. It's a farmer's crossing. Througho= ut the years they've added gravel in there and it was less intrusive to go that way than to go through a virgin site which was further down.<= /p>

Mr. Polletta: So you moved it up a little?

Mr. Strachan: <= /b> That's correct.

Mr. Undercuffler: On the drawing it says open space at the top, th= en there's a heavy vertical line, is open space that whole thing or is it just= to the left because I noticed here on the right it talks about conservation and pedestrian easements, so where is the easement, where is the open space?

Mr. Bouchard: <= /b> The heavy vertical line, this one, that is the edge of the open space. The conservati= on and pedestrian easement in favor of the Town of Watertown= over Lot #11, that you're looking at, that is to protect the farmer's pond,= but it's an easement across Lot #11.<= o:p>

Mr. Undercuffler: And what is the purpose of that eas= ement?

Mr. Bouchard: <= /b> The purpose of the easement, well a= s it's stated, it's conservation, it's to protect the farmer's pond so no one can build anywhere within that conservation easement and also a pedestrian ease= ment for use from the open space, if people would like to walk around the pond.<= o:p>

Mr. Undercuffler: So in a way there's kind of like mo= re open space there?

Mr. Bouchard: <= /b> In a way, yes.

Mr. Undercuffler: Except the Town doesn't own it.

Mr. Bouchard: True.

Mr. Undercuffler: Town just has an easement.

Mr. Polletta: How many acres of open space do you show there a= nd how much uplands do you have?<= /p>

Mr. Bouchard: <= /b> Total open space provided it's 149,= 000 square feet and the total wetlands in the open space is 31,000 square feet,= so we're looking at about 120,000 square feet of uplands which is roughly close to a little less than 3 acres.

CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY=

PUBLIC HEARING

APPLICATION #563– GOLDEN ACRES, LLC

AUGUST 10, 2006

PAGE 6

&nb= sp;

Mr. Undercuffler: What is the purpose of the strip, there's a narr= ow strip that goes across the top?

Mr. Bouchard: <= /b> That strip connects the open space = to the Wheeler Farm Subdivision, I believe.

Mr. Zawadzki: Is that an easement, an access, or what to allow= the Town of Watertown, I see this other land over to the extreme left owned by = the Town of Watertown so that little strip connects it to the proposed open spa= ce?

Mr. Bouchard: Yes.

Mr. Zawadzki: Is that to allow access?

Mr. Bouchard: It is open space.

Mr. Zawadzki: It already is open space?

Mr. Bouchard: No, we are proposing it to be open space.

Mr. Zawadzki: And so what, you're going to give the Town an easement? How wide is that?

Mr. Undercuffler: Well that's part of the open space going back th= ere.

Mr. Zawadzki: That's what I'm saying, so that would all be one piece, but how wide is that flagpole connector there?

Mr. Bouchard: We believe it's 50 fe= et wide.

Mr. Rafey: 10 feet I think. We didn’t see this new plan = yet, we just received it last night.

Mr. Polletta: <= /b> Chuck, you still have to review the drainage calculations? A lot = of this stuff is not complete?

Mr. Berger: Correct.

Mr. Zawadzki: Moosa, have you received any of the things you i= ncluded in your memorandum, feasible and prudent alternative (inaudible) and functi= ons etc.

CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY=

PUBLIC HEARING

APPLICATION #563– GOLDEN ACRES, LLC

AUGUST 10, 2006

PAGE 7

&nb= sp;

Mr. Rafey: The relocation of the road is a good alternative compared to what was originally proposed because it is crossing an existing watercourse crossing that they are already using. If you remember on the site walk, = the original area that they proposed for crossing, there is a wider wetland area and it's all wooded, and it’s not a good idea to even disturb that ar= ea, this is a better alternative compared to the original plan. I also asked the same question about putting in drainage swales for this subdivision; I don't know if they had a chance to look at that as an alternative or not. I received a report tonight but I = didn't get a chance to review it. I = will look at this before the next meeting and I will revise my memo.<= /span>

Mr. Zawadzki: Also the other item there is measures to mitigate the impact of the proposed activity and I already reduced the proposed acti= vity but still any mitigating things would be appreciated.

Mr. Undercuffler: It looks like most of the open space is wetlands. Am I wrong on that?=

Mr. Bouchard: The majority is uplands.

Mr. Undercuffler: Well there is the section we were just talking a= bout and then below the road there is another open space and both those are wetlands, aren't they, pretty much, I mean the green shaded? I don't see the legend here.<= /o:p>

Mr. Zawadzki: Yea, what is the green shading (inaudible), is t= hat supposed to be wetland, I see it inside the flag symbols, so that shaded gr= een area is wetlands, right?

Mr. Bouchard: There is the cross shading within the wetland fl= ags is wetlands. There is other c= ross shading which is the regulated area which is considered upland area. But as I previously stated, there = is total open space provided, 149,000 square feet and total wetlands in open s= pace is 31,000 square feet, which is 21% of the open space. I would also like to point out tha= t we do have an open space down here which is completely uplands area.

Mr. Rafey: Is the detention pond a wet bottom pond or a dry bottom?

Mr. Bouchard: I believe it will be a wet bottom pond.

Mr. Rafey: Okay, then this will be a wetland. Right now it's= upland but you are changing to wetlands.

Mr. Undercuffler: This is not part of the open space I don't think. The open space I take = it comes down to that horizontal line below the road?

CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY=

PUBLIC HEARING

APPLICATION #563– GOLDEN ACRES, LLC

AUGUST 10, 2006

PAGE 8

&nb= sp;

Mr. Bouchard: Yes, right there.

Mr. Undercuffler: So below that is Lot #1. There are a lot of wetlan= ds on that, but it's part of Lo= t #1.

Mr. Bouchard: Yes.

Mr. Undercuffler: And that what, you'll mark as a conservation eas= ement, or you'll mark it as wetlands, post that?

Mr. Bouchard: Yes, whatever the Commission requires we will do= .

Mr. Zawadzki: Well at the very least you'd prefer an easement = and then normally that would be marked as such with stakes and markers.

Mr. Undercuffler: So what, the yellow is the upland review area?

Mr. Zawadzki: (Inaudible.)&nb= sp; Any other questions from the Commission?<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> At this point I'll open the floor = to the public if they have any questions concerning Application #563, Golden Acres= , LLC. Sta= te your name and address.

<= span style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt'>Diane Forenbach, 893 Curtis Lane, Watertown, CT&nbs= p; 06795

Ms. Forenbach: I have an original map of this development but I have not seen that, and I would like to know exactly where that road is. I abut this Simonen property and i= t's . . . . I haven't seen it so . . . . .

Mr. Strachan: I believe you have the horses, you are, that's y= ou, and this is where the road was going to cross, actually down by your horses= , we didn't bother them but anyways, by moving this up here it diverts everything away from all that and we're leaving it virgin territory.=

Ms. Forenbach: My question is this is the tree line, this is a buffer, these trees are I don’t' know how many years old, and I think Mrs. Simonen also has that same, in talking to her, are these trees staying= ?

Mr. Strachan: The trees are staying as a buffer, yes.

Mr. Zawadzki: Any other questions from the public? Anything else?= We haven't reviewed all the data o= n this one yet and I know Chuck has got things to look at, we do too, so we have u= ntil the next meeting to keep the Hearing open without an extension so at this point, if there are no other comments, I'll go for a motion to Recess the P= ublic Hearing on Application #563.

CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY=

PUBLIC HEARING

APPLICATION #563– GOLDEN ACRES, LLC

AUGUST 10, 2006

PAGE 9

&nb= sp;

MOTION:<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:1'>       (Mr. = Polletta, sec. Mr. DiBona) to Recess the Public Hearing for App. #563 of Golden Acres, LLC for construction of 11-l= ot Golden Acres Subdivision, = Litchfield Road, Watertown, CT.

&nb= sp;

Discussi= on: = ;      None

&nb= sp;

MOTION P= ASSED UNANIMOUSLY

  &nbs= p;         Public Hearing Recessed at about 8:40 p.m. (no time given).

Respect= fully submitted,

&n= bsp;

&n= bsp;

&n= bsp;

Ronald = Jones, Secretary

Conserv= ation Commission/

Inland Wetland Agency

  &nbs= p;         _________________= _________________

  &nbs= p;         Lynn M. LaForme, Minutes Secretary