MINU=
TES
CONSERVA=
TION
COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
CONTINUA=
TION
OF PUBLIC HEARING
THURSDAY=
, NOVEMBER
16, 2006 - 7:00 P.M.
APPLICAT=
ION #578
– WATERS OF WINNEMAUG
PRESENT: &nb=
sp; =
G=
len
Duplissie
=
; &n=
bsp; =
; &n=
bsp; =
; Joseph Polletta
=
&nb=
sp; =
;
=
&nb=
sp; =
&nb=
sp; James
Zawadzki, Chairman
ABSENT: &nb=
sp; =
=
L=
ucia
DiBona
=
&nb=
sp; =
&nb=
sp; Ron
Jones, Secretary
=
&nb=
sp; =
&nb=
sp; Charles
Thermer
ALTERNATES PRESENT: =
; Denise
Russ
=
; &n=
bsp; =
; &n=
bsp; =
; Martha Sturgis
ALTERNATES ABSENT: =
; <=
/span>Peter Peluso
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 7:15 p.m. (=
no
time given)
2. &nb=
sp; Roll
Call
Mr.
Zawadzki, Chairman, executed the Roll Call.
Mr.
Zawadzki, Chairman, asked Ms. Sturgis to sit in for Mr. DiBona, in his abse=
nce.
Mr.
Zawadzki, Chairman, asked Ms. Russ to sit in for Mr. Thermer, in his absenc=
e.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING
APPLICATION #578– WATERS OF WINNEMAUG
NOVEMBER 16, 2006
PAGE 2
3. =
Hearing
of Applications
&=
nbsp; B. =
Continuation
of the Public Hearing from October 12, 2006 - Application #578 of Anthony
Caruso for construction of Waters of Winnemaug 8 lot Residential Subdivision
located between
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Recess
or Adjourn Public Hearing must be Closed by Nove=
mber
16, 2006 unless applicant grants an extension of time.
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Zawadzki: That should say 7 lot,
right?
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Mr.
Rafey: It's actually 8 lots, there's anot=
her
parcel that was a part of this, but now it is 7 lots, yes. The applicant is not here yet. They probably assumed the public h=
earing
before this would take longer than it did.
Mr. Scoville: The changes that we've made since the last public
hearing were to address all of the engineering department's comments and the
health department's comments. One
of the changes was to move the detention basin which was formerly in an eas=
ement
over Lot #7 on to the parcels to be granted to the Town of
Mr. Polletta: =
You've got 7 lots, rig=
ht?
Mr. Scoville: =
Right, 7 lots and the =
other
parcel which was formerly known as
Mr. Zawadzki: Okay, you didn't look at the possibility of movi=
ng
that parcel at the cul de sac to be deeded to
Mr. Scoville: Yes, I did, I discussed that with Chuck, the Tow=
n Engineer,
and there were a lot of improvements that were proposed, so it was my
impression that he would like to see that stay as Town property, but I don'=
t want
to speak for him.
Mr. Zawadzki: Well I think the question we raised at the site =
walk
was that it wouldn't stay Town property, we were going to try and flip flop=
it
so that all of the Town property was contiguous.
Mr. Scoville: <=
/b> Correct, but the cul de sac and the
drainage improvements and the possibility of a dry hydrant are all located =
on
that parcel, so from my conversation, those are items, since it was busy wi=
th
those 3 items, it was probably a good idea to have it as Town property inst=
ead
of an easement to the Town.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING
APPLICATION #578– WATERS OF WINNEMAUG
NOVEMBER 16, 2006
PAGE 3
Mr. Berger: My reasoning for that is it's a cul=
de
sac, it's not only a drainage outfall, but there's also a storm water quali=
ty
improvement with the stone lined channel with check dams is installed, that=
's a
drainage improvement that the Town needs to own the footprint of that which
pretty much takes up the substantial part of that parcel.
Mr. Duplissie And that has to be in that
spot? You can't have that dra=
inage,
if they move that over to be contiguous with the existing Town of
Mr. Scoville: Because of the way the land is, all the water fr=
om
basically the driveway to Lot #3 is the
Mr. Berger: I don't think it would be feasible
grade-wise to do that without . . . .
Mr. Zawadzki: <=
/b> You have 3 catch basins there right=
?
Mr. Berger: Right, so we'd be fighting grade the
whole way back to get it to go the other way.
Mr. Polletta: <=
/b> How much total land are you adding =
to the
existing pieces that
Mr. Scoville: <=
/b> Approximately 0.43 acres is the amo=
unt of
land that is going to be deeded to the Town of
Mr. Polletta: <=
/b> Are you going to have like
an access way to get to the water there or no?
Mr. Scoville: <=
/b> Correct, I've graded out in between=
the
permanent sediment basin and the existing parcel, a driveway to go in to me=
et
the existing road.
Mr. Polletta: <=
/b> So that detention pond sits in, it's
actually Town property but it's . . . .
Mr. Scoville: Proposed Town.&=
nbsp;
The sediment pond is not proposed on the existing Town property.
Mr. Polletta: I understand, but that's the piece that goes next
with the existing land that the Town owns right now?
Mr. Scoville: <=
/b> Correct.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING
APPLICATION #578– WATERS OF WINNEMAUG
NOVEMBER 16, 2006
PAGE 4
Mr. Polletta: How many square feet is that.
Mr. Scoville: About half an acre, a=
bout
18,566 square feet.
Mr. Duplissie: On these two, it's a grant of conservation restr=
iction
for Lots #4, #5, and #6, and #1 and #3, these are provided to us in the pac=
ket?
Mr. Rafey: Mr. Chairman, I just =
want
to talk about those conservation easements, the document, this is a draft
conservation easement document that was done by Atty. Pilicy. If you remember, the attorney for =
the
applicant submitted a draft limit of disturbance area for those waterfront
lots. I sent it to Atty. Pili=
cy to
see if he had any suggestions. He
drafted these for review and then you can make changes if you want.
Charles Spath, Engineer
Mr. Spath: So we did not propose =
these
and we did not see them yet?
Mr. Rafey:<=
span
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt'> I'll give you one.
Mr. Duplissie: Item #4 where it says the grantor reserves to
himself his heirs and assigns, and Item #4 is to construct septic reserve
systems subject to approval of Conservation Commission and Health District =
as
shown on the site development plans, which means in the conservation easeme=
nt,
they can put septics? That's =
what
this says.
Mr. Rafey:<=
span
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt'> That is for your review. You're the one who is going to rec=
eive
this and make changes with what you don't agree with.
Mr. Scoville: We have no objection with that if Mr. Pilicy wou=
ld
like it.
Mr. Duplissie: I just thought it was strange to have that in
there. We're not voting on th=
is
tonight (inaudible)?
Mr. Rafey: No, it's in the packet for your review, you can =
make
changes tonight or if you need more time . . . . .
Mr. Undercuffler: One thing that confused me on that, while we're =
on
that subject is grantee and grantor.
I mean the grantor would be Caruso, right?
Mr. Rafey: =
The developer.
Mr. Undercuffler: Right.
Now it says here the grantor agrees to pay any real estate taxes, I =
mean
is that . . . . .
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING
APPLICATION #578– WATERS OF WINNEMAUG
NOVEMBER 16, 2006
PAGE 5
Mr. Duplissie: That's typical, it's =
still
their property until it's sold. The
grantor would be the lots, I think they're refer=
ring
to the lot. One of them is
Mr. Spath: =
I'm not sure if the conservation
easements are defined. It may=
be
the whole, I'm trying to look in there, it says Schedule A but I don't see =
it.
Mr. Rafey: This is just a draft for review.
Mr. Spath: Yea, but we don't have any . . . .
Mr. Duplissie: (Inaudible) when I went to a Schedule A or B the=
re's
nothing there.
Mr. Spath: That's why I think it'=
s just
to look at right now.
Ms. Sturgis: It says the grantor is the owner of that certain
land, located (inaudible) protected property is a portion of this land.
Mr. Spath: Yea, I think it says the grantor wishes to prote=
ct
the property and as such the grantees will encounter taking enforcement of =
such
preservation which would be the Town.
Mr. Duplissie:
Mr. Spath: =
I think it just means that they wou=
ld
enforce, just as the wetlands agency.
Mr. Rafey: It's just for your information. For other wetlands on this propert=
y and
other 50 foot setback areas you can put your regular conservation easements=
on
it, but this is only for the waterfront lots.
Mr. Spath: =
Cause a lot of the waterfront lots
right now are being used even though it's a wetlands area (inaudible) there=
's
areas that aren't though.
Mr. Rafey: I suggested to Mr. Pilicy to draft something that
they have like an access to the water, about 15 to 20 feet wide if they wan=
ted
to get to the water, and that should be allowed.=
Other than that the remaining part=
of
the conservation easement area should be undisturbed.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING
APPLICATION #578– WATERS OF WINNEMAUG
NOVEMBER 16, 2006
PAGE 6
Mr. Spath: Well I think what we should have is say based up=
on
what's out there now, are those being used, I think we ought to take that i=
nto
consideration. If there's an =
area
that's 50 feet long that's being used, I think we can cut it down, but I do=
n't
think we have to cut it down to maybe 15 feet, it's already being used beca=
use
it's . . . . right
now it's being utilized, it's not going to improve it, but we can probably =
cut
that area down.
Mr. Rafey: =
But that's a good mitigation for the
activities that you are proposing now, some of the regulated activities that
you're proposing. To mitigate that you can enhance the existing wetlands on tho=
se
lots, by reducing the size of the access way.
Mr. Spath: (Inaudible) we don't have to reduce it to 10 fee=
t or
15 feet.
Mr. Rafey: =
That was just a number to work on.<=
span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> The Commission can discuss that.
Mr. Spath: I think what is missing here is the actual limit=
s,
which we had shown on the, we did have limits shown on our map. These could fit with our limits.
Mr. Zawadzki: Yea, we do too.
Mr. Undercuffler: So the green there, is=
that
the easement area?
Mr. Spath: Yea, we did have easements shown on here, it's actually a cross pass easement. What I can do, it would probably b=
e best
if I could get a large map to each one of you so you can look at it. We took into account what's existi=
ng out
there now and this whole cross section, like this is a conservation easemen=
t in
here, this is the
Mr. Duplissie: When you say cross (inaudible) on my plan, this =
area
here?
Mr. Spath: Yea, it's very diffi=
cult
because we didn't expect this, we haven't changed it. We always had conservation easemen=
t, but
we didn't have the language, so we'll have to take a look into that. On this lot here we have just this=
area cause there's a dwelling and this is all lawn. We have this area, and this is the=
Town
of Watertown and that's not proposed, so we did have conservation restricti=
ons,
and I think if you walk out in the field, this is all conservation, Town of
Watertown, added onto to the Town of Watertown, there's nothing there, cons=
ervation
restriction, this area none, conservation restriction and Town of Watertown
again, so we do have them on there.
I can hand this out.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING
APPLICATION #578– WATERS OF WINNEMAUG
NOVEMBER 16, 2006
PAGE 7
Mr. Polletta: =
The conservation easem=
ent is
just for, nobody can use it?
Mr. Spath:<=
span
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt'> Basically this is the language I t=
hink
that Moosa is saying to go along with the area, and that was the areas that=
we
proposed, so on the lots we have this length, we have an area here, we have
this link, Town of Watertown, this is getting added on, this piece here is =
the
Town of Watertown also, if you want we can put those on there, and here's a=
nother
piece here, and there's another one here, and then after that that's
(inaudible).
Mr. Duplissie: If I understand you correctly, these are areas o=
f wetlands
that are being used now, and will to be used later.
Mr. Spath: =
They will not be used,
they will go with this language.
The only reason it would be used, they do have these, if someone nee=
ded
a septic repair, I don't think any of our septics are proposed in those are=
as,
we wouldn't have proposed it that way, but in an emergency that's common
language to have in there.
Mr. Undercuffler: Which plan are you looking at there?
Mr. Duplissie: Mine is S1.
Mr. Spath: That's a conservation
easement along here, one here, there's an open space, conservation is now T=
own
of
Mr. Undercuffler: I have a question on the October 10th memo from
Charlie Spath, the last item here mentions the remaining open space is
contiguous to the
Mr. Spath: That was from a previous meeting with the Town s=
taff
and the
Mr. Undercuffler: So there's enough room there for a (inaudible)?<= o:p>
Mr. Spath: Yes.
Mr. Duplissie: Not in the wetlands?
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING
APPLICATION #578– WATERS OF WINNEMAUG
NOVEMBER 16, 2006
PAGE 8
Mr. Spath: Correct.
Mr. Polletta: How many total acres do you have where the wetla=
nds
are in the back?
Mr. Spath: In the Fieldstone Su=
bdivision? Ours is 1.4972 acres, that's the t=
otal
on that side of the road. And
opposite that is a little over half an acre, 0.54 acres opposite that.
Mr. Polletta: No, but you're saying=
that
little path that's not in the wetlands, (inaudible) going to serve that, to
access the land in the back?
Mr. Spath: To access the existi=
ng
Town of
Mr. Duplissie: Which is a large area,=
I
want to say 7 acres?
Mr. Spath: Somewhere around the=
re, I
don't have that. The line was
shifted to have a dry area that you can access from the existing Town of
Mr. Polletta: And that open space o=
f the
Town of
Mr. Duplissie: I think it's
7 acres, the back piece.
Mr. Spath: It does make it cont=
iguous
so you'd be able to access the lake.
Mr. Duplissie: And you shifted the
easterly line of this property about 15, 20 feet so that you have dry land?=
Mr. Spath: That's correct, and =
then
the area across in the turnaround is the area that we're keeping, so it is =
all
contiguous.
Mr. Duplissie: (Inaudible.)
Mr. Spath: That's right, the pi=
ece at
the end of the turn around that we were looking at swapping is the access f=
or
that piece, or you could walk down that road.
Mr. Rafey: One other piece of
information remaining is a letter from the Torrington Area Health District =
for
the septic systems for the lots. I
haven't received it yet.
Mr. Zawadzki: =
Yea, we don't have app=
roval
for
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING
APPLICATION #578– WATERS OF WINNEMAUG
NOVEMBER 16, 2006
PAGE 9
Mr. Scoville: I met with the Torrin=
gton
Area Health Department earlier in the week on Tuesday and I'm not sure of t=
he
status, if they had a chance they were going to look at it.
Mr. Duplissie: If it doesn't pass, it=
would
be nice to have that whole (inaudible) waterfront.
Mr. Scoville: =
Looking at it from a
practical standpoint now, there is at least 3 existing dwellings on the par=
cel
that are pre-existing houses and they all have some type of septic system,
whether it be . . . .
Mr. Duplissie: I don't know about se=
ptic system,
but they do have . . . . .
Mr. Scoville: =
I'm sure with the newer
technology and everything we'll be able to get something, I'm very confiden=
t of
that. Some recently approved =
stuff
by the State of
Mr. Zawadzki: =
Any other questions?
Jeff Boisvert,
Mr. Boisvert: =
I haven't had a chance=
to
get a look at the plan here, but from the article in the newspaper it was
stated that this new development would connect with
Mr. Zawadzki: We'll take all the
questions and then we'll let the applicant answer.
Mike Quicquaro,
(Tape #1, Side A ended - may have missed some.)
Mr. Quicquaro: One contiguous street =
with
two names, a little confusing. Id also like to know the reasons why the Town seems to=
be compelled
to push these dead end roads through (inaudible) in that regard.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING
APPLICATION #578– WATERS OF WINNEMAUG
NOVEMBER 16, 2006
PAGE 10
Mike Garrassino,
Mr. Garrassino: This is the first time=
I
read this in the paper, since this is a wetlands issue, well before that, I=
'm concerned
about the cul de sac going straight through road, definitely a negative in =
our
neighborhood, but this is a wetlands meeting so I think our questions shoul=
d be
according to wetlands. Has th=
ere
been any impact studies done, what's existing now that goes into the lake a=
nd
once you do have all these properties, how much more runoff would we have b=
eing
new lawns, a roof, or leaders, I know someone that's building a house on
Icehouse Road right now and their leaders are going into a galley system.
Mr. Zawadzki: Anybody else? Let me just say that the first cou=
ple of
questions were Planning and Zoning issues which we're not going to address
here, but the applicant is free to answer as he sees fit.
Mr. Scoville: =
To go into the first
question on connecting
Ms. Boisvert: Can we see that, we
haven't seen it yet.
Mr. Scoville: =
Currently just to summ=
arize,
we're proposing the extension of
Unidentified Voice: When do the leases r=
un
out?
Mr. Scoville: In about 60 years.
Unidentified Voice: <=
/span>And then they can be
renewed?
Mr. Scoville: =
(Inaudible.)
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING
APPLICATION #578– WATERS OF WINNEMAUG
NOVEMBER 16, 2006
PAGE 11
Mr. Zawadzki: You did say they're =
99
years leases, right?
Mr. Spath: We're not proposing =
the
road to be connected so I'm not sure where you got that from.
Unidentified Voice: <=
/span>Newspaper.
Mr. Spath: If you want to take a
look, it's up here. What we h=
ave to
do for Planning purposes, we cannot just design a road that just dead ends =
400
or 500 feet from another road without looking at it connecting in the future
for Planning purposes, so we have to take that into account and as part of =
the
Town requirements that we design the road for future connection, so we did
design it for future connection. We
are not from the Wetlands Commission to make that, it's been made clear tha=
t if
that connection was ever to be made, we'd have to come in front of the Wetl=
ands
Commission again, but we do not intend to do that. I think it's
660 feet of straight line, they do want (inaudible) 800 feet so you shouldn=
't
notice anything different at the end of your road at all. (Inaudible) will be far in the woo=
ds.
Regarding the wetlands
issues with the drainage calculations, all of those have been provided to t=
he Engineering
Department and have been reviewed.
That was included as part of the application for the Wetlands
Commission.
Mr. Zawadzki: =
How does the detention=
pond
work in a big storm like they're talking about for tomorrow? Can you explain the operation of t=
he
detention pond?
Mr. Scoville: For the most part al=
l o
the proposed structures that are depicted on the plan were for sediment
retention purposes. There is =
some
benefit to the proposed sediment basin on the proposed parcel that's being
given to the Town of Watertown for detention but to summarize it simpler, t=
he
area of the lake is about 120 acres, the volume of runoff from the proposes
site is 1.7 acre (inaudible) which makes a different of .0002 feet on the
difference of the elevation of the lake, which I'm not sure what that would=
be in
fractions, 2 500ths of an inch? It's
a very minimal increase, there's a natural detention basin. Right now our thought wasn't as mo=
re for
detention on it, because the lake is a very good detention basin, but we al=
so
want to make sure that the water going to the lake is clean water. You need to remember that there is
already an existing gravel road, so when you start doing all of the
calculations, that we're removing a lot of cottages, trailers, the trailers=
on
the site, temporary structures, so it's surface area for impervious buildin=
gs
is not really increasing from what's there with all of the existing structu=
res
that are there.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING
APPLICATION #578– WATERS OF WINNEMAUG
NOVEMBER 16, 2006
PAGE 12
Mr. Duplissie: When we were on the site walk on
Saturday, we talked about, instead of putting just a single silt fence duri=
ng
construction, we talked about putting in silt fence and a row of hay bales =
so
that we have a double for that, if we run off, like we had over at Echo Lak=
e or
Mt. Fair, that we'll have a double barrier there.
Mr. Scoville: =
That can be added easi=
ly.
Mr. Duplissie: We had talked about it=
and I
don't know if you designed it or are going to do that.
Mr. Scoville: I believe on most of=
the
plans we're showing a single row of silt fence, but as a condition of appro=
val
we can easily add hay bales behind it.
Mr. Spath: I also want to point=
out
that we are picking up there's an existing drainage at the end of
Mr. Duplissie: That's the 21 inch R=
CP
that you have that's existing?
Mr. Spath: It's off our propert=
y, but
we redesigned our drainage to work with that and to move a gross particle
separator off site to pick that up and improve the quality of the water goi=
ng
into the lake. I just wanted =
to
make that point clear. All of=
these
designs should all be an improvement.
You have to be careful during construction, like always. The hay bales =
is
always a good idea and that will be added all along the lake, the site will
have to be monitored during construction and be done during a time of the y=
ear
where it's less likely to erode.
Mr. Polletta: =
Park and Rec, where th=
e boat
launch is, you propose to do some work there?
Mr. Scoville: =
We propose to do some =
work
there and we'll see what happens.
We'll deal with Park & Rec, the Planning Commission . . . . . we=
are
proposing to do it, we already went to Park & Rec and they gave their
approval. There was State fun=
ding,
you can get funding from the State but everybody would be able to go in the=
re,
so they declined that in the past so they were actually looking at improving
that area now, so for them this would be great. They're really looking forward to =
that,
so that area at the end, it's a big gravel parking lot right now, we're
actually cutting it back, that's part o the mitigation too, we're taking the
gravel and actually bringing it back, putting topsoil down and planting it,=
(inaudible). There's=
some
rocks there, it's on the corner, but as part of our proposal we're looking =
at
improving that for Town use.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING
APPLICATION #578– WATERS OF WINNEMAUG
NOVEMBER 16, 2006
PAGE 13
Mr. Duplissie: That's not this one,
that's the one on the corner?
Mr. Scoville: No, we're looking at =
the
corner, because there is an area right now that is being utilized, but we're
trying to bring it up to par, put some signage up there, put a couple of
pavilions for picnic tables, pave the boat ramp area, pave the entrance, th=
ere
are trees proposed and the topsoil and seeding.
Mr. Polletta: =
So the parking lot wil=
l be
gravel?
Mr. Scoville: =
Part of the parking lo=
t is
gravel, it's gravel now, but there's no topsoil,=
it
will all be brought back in, it will be made smaller, but it will be
better. I do have a plan, we =
did
submit that, I don’t' have a copy tonight.
Mr. Rafey: Mr. Spath, is that p=
art of
this application now, are you accepting (inaudible)?
Mr. Spath: In the plans, this was
always part of it.
Mr. Rafey: Did you calculate the
impact to the wetlands from the original application?
Mr. Spath: That's a different parcel.
Mr. Rafey: During the review pr=
ocess you
came out with this idea for mitigation for open space.
Mr. Spath: This is from the
beginning, the wetlands around this parcel is just the lake itself.
Mr. Rafey: No, but the pavement=
that
you're proposing, all the impacts within the 50 foot setback area, there is=
any
wetlands, is that part of this application or will you submit a new
application?
Mr. Spath: No, it’s not p=
art of
the application. We still hav=
e to
proceed to Planning because this has happened before, Park & Rec and you
may be for it, but Planning may not be for it.
Mr. Rafey: But if they approve =
it,
then you will come back to this Commission to get a permit?
Mr. Spath: Yea, well first we w=
ould
meet with you, because if there's no, we'd like to get your blessing now, b=
ut
it is part of our plans, we would come back for a modification if you thoug=
ht
it was necessary. If you don't
think it's necessary, because the Commission is already reviewing this, the=
n we
wouldn't come back.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING
APPLICATION #578– WATERS OF WINNEMAUG
NOVEMBER 16, 2006
PAGE 14
Mr. Rafey: But this Commission =
issues
a permit, that's a regulated activity.
Mr. Spath: Well we'll have to go
through the Town because we can't actually get the permit ourselves,
it's not our property, so we would be back for a permit on behalf of the
Town. We would have Park &=
; Rec
backing us up, hopefully Planning, and we would =
be
back on behalf of the Town. W=
e're
showing it now because this is part of our mitigation.
Mr. Rafey: Those activities are=
not
listed with this application as of the legal notice. If this is approved by the Plannin=
g and
Zoning Commission they will come back for a modification of the permit.
Mr. Spath: We propose open spac=
e on
our parcel right now, but Planning could come back and say no open space, t=
hey
can say they want a fee in lieu of, I don't think they're going to do that,=
but
we never know so we probably would have to come back, if not for this, for =
something
else.
Mr. Polletta: =
I would like to speak =
for
myself, I think it's a good idea to create a nice, clean parking space over
there, because right now there's no garbage cans,
there's garbage and dirt going into the water, and I think this would be
(inaudible) for that little corner to be cleaned up.
Mr. Spath: And it shows right o=
n here
everything being brought in, we're trying to bring it in with grass, make it
more defined instead of people parking all over the place.
Mr. Polletta: =
I think we should sugg=
est it
to the Planning and Zoning Commission, that we w=
ould
like to see resolution on going to the lake.
Mr. Duplissie: Well the paved boat ra=
mp
will do that.
Mr. Polletta: =
But there's no gravel =
there,
right now (inaudible).
Mr. Spath: No, there's gravel, =
but
there is some erosion with the gravel that's a problem, it comes down and
that's supposed to . . . . plus there will be si=
gns
put up, no motorized boats. P=
ark
& Rec is behind this right now.
They wrote a letter, I don't know if they wrote a letter, Chuck, did
they just contact you regarding that?
Mr. Berger: They gave me an email
indicating their support after your meeting with them which I think is in
either your submission or the packet, the Commission has that. I think that was in your last
submission.
Mr. Zawadzki: =
Any other questions?
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND AGENCY
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING
APPLICATION #578– WATERS OF WINNEMAUG
NOVEMBER 16, 2006
PAGE 15
Gail McTaggart, Attorney Representing Applicant<= o:p>
Atty. McTaggart: When would like the ex=
tension
out to?
Mr. Zawadzki: 35 days.
Mr. Rafey: I have a form.
MOTION:<=
span
style=3D'mso-tab-count:1'> (Mr. =
Duplissie,
sec. Ms. Russ) to Recess the Public Hearing for App. #578 of Anthony Caruso for construction of Waters =
of Winnemaug
7 lot Residential Subdivision located between
Discussi=
on: =
; None
MOTION P=
ASSED
UNANIMOUSLY
&nbs=
p; Public
Hearing Recessed at 7:50 p.m.
&nbs=
p; Mr.
Zawadzki, Chairman, called a 5 minute Recess at 7:50 p.m.
Respect=
fully
submitted,
Ronald =
Jones,
Secretary
Conserv=
ation
Commission/
&nbs=
p; _________________=
_________________
&nbs=
p; Lynn
M. LaForme, Minutes Secretary