The Town of Washington, Connecticut
Minutes: Inland Wetlands Commission, 2004
|
www.WashingtonCT.org The Town of Washington, Connecticut Minutes: Inland Wetlands Commission, 2004 |
|
Disclaimer: While we have attempted to reproduce them accurately, the electronic documents you see here are not the official public documents. Official copies may be obtained on paper from theTown Clerk . Also note that minutes of recent meetings are often not yet approved by the Commission, and are subject to correction.
Jump down to: General information about the Inland Wetlands Commission
December 8 •November 23 •November 10 •October 27 •September 30 •September 22 •September 8 •August 11 •July 28 •July 14 •June 23 •June 9 •May 26 •May 12 •April 28 •April 14 •March 24 •March 10 •February 25 •February 11 •January 28 •January 14 •Meetings in 2003 •Meetings in 2002
December 8, 2004
MEMBERS PRESENT: Mrs. D. Hill, Mr. LaMuniere, Mr. Picton, Ms. Purnell
MEMBER ABSENT: Mrs. Gray
ALTERNATES ABSENT: Mr. Bedini, Ms. Coe, Mrs. Korzenko
STAFF PRESENT: Mr. Ajello, Mrs. J. Hill
ALSO PRESENT: Atty. Fisher, Mrs. Gatto, Mr. Neff, Press, Mr. Churchill, Mrs. Kraft, Mr. and Mrs. Klein, Mrs. Pullaro, Mr. J. Fiorilla, Mr. M. FiorillaSHOW CAUSE HEARING
Gatto/155 Woodbury Road/#IW-04-01/Unauthorized Deck
Mr. Picton called the hearing to order at 6:45 p.m., noting the purpose was to give the property owner an opportunity to show why the 11/30/04 enforcement order should not remain in effect.
Atty. Fisher represented the Gattos. He briefly reviewed the history of the approvals granted and work done at 155 Woodbury Road. In particular, he noted that 1) during its site inspection conducted on 1/26/04 the Commission had no apparent problems with the deck, 2) in its 1/28/04 motion of approval there had been no condition that the deck must be removed, and 3) minutes in the file incorrectly stated that the deck overhangs the stream. Ms. Purnell noted in its current configuration and during normal water levels the existing deck does not overhang the stream.
Atty. Fisher presented before and after photos of the deck; 1) the deck as it was when the Gattos purchased the property and 2) the deck after it was rebuilt. He noted the Assessor's card had the deck size listed as 6' X 12' and the rebuilt deck is 5' X 12'. He then summarized the Inland Wetlands and Zoning Board of Appeals application procedures that the Gattos had gone through to obtain approvals for the second story addition.
Ms. Purnell asked if the deck had been shown on the plans approved by the ZBA. She stated that the plans submitted to the Wetlands Commission did not show the deck and if they had, there would have been a more careful review. She noted Mr. Gatto had indicated the deck would be removed, that the Commission had considered this a trade-off for approval of the second story, and it had been noted for the record the deck would be removed.
Atty. Fisher asked the Commission to take a common sense approach. He noted the old deck had been pressure treated wood and the new deck was mahogany with only the supports being pressure treated so there would now be little leaching into the watercourse. He asked what the potential harm was from the new deck and why a pre existing deck was a concern to the Commission.
Mr. LaMuniere said the Commission had approved the second story addition with the understanding the deck (and its associated maintenance) would be removed. He said it was clear that the plans submitted to the Commission did not include the deck and the minutes stated the deck was to be removed.
Atty. Fisher maintained it was not clear that the Gattos would remove the deck, pointing out that Ms. Purnell's timeline indicated Mr. Gatto said he would "probably" remove it.
Ms. Purnell said the Commission had discussed whether to condition the approval on the removal of the deck, but since the deck had not been part of the plans submitted, it was noted for the record it would be removed, rather than made a condition of approval. She said it was a trade off in the Commission's opinion; approval of the second story, "a lesser evil," for the removal of the deck, which if it remained would continue to leach into the stream. She noted it was the Commission's job to minimize both long term and short term impacts to wetlands and watercourses.
Mr. Picton agreed, saying that structures located so close to the wetlands almost certainly have a negative impact, and therefore, the Commission's policy has been not to allow structures that close to streams.
Mrs. Gatto noted the Commission had asked Mr. Gatto to make three revisions to the application, and asked why removal of the deck was not also specified. Ms. Purnell responded that it had not been necessary because Mr. Gatto had informed the Commission the deck would be removed. Because it was being removed, there had been no need to discuss it or to make stipulations.
Mrs. Gatto remarked that no one on the site inspection had commented negatively regarding the deck. She said that they thought they were improving the deck by eliminating the pressure treated wood. It was noted that during earlier discussions about this deck, Atty. Fisher had stated the wood used was not be pressure treated, but Mr. Ajello said he had checked the tags on the wood, and in fact, it was the old type of pressure treated wood with the application of a sealer that had been used.
Mr. Picton again pointed out that the deck had not been shown on the plans submitted with the application. Mrs. Gatto responded that her architect had been focused on interior work and so had not been concerned about the deck. Mr. Picton noted the Commission had based its decision on the documents in the file, which did not include a deck. Mr. Ajello pointed out that not only did the plans submitted show no deck, but they also did not show a doorway to lead to the deck.
Regarding possible impacts of the deck on the wetlands and watercourse, Mr. Picton noted that shade affects the growth of vegetation, which is essential to the ecology. He also pointed out that maintenance work for the deck would involve chemicals to control mold and paints or stains and that during maintenance work the exposed soils would be compacted, which would also affect plant growth.
Atty. Fisher again noted the 4/7/04 approval made no stipulation that the deck must be removed.
Ms. Purnell stated the tapes of the meeting definitely reflect the fact that the deck was not shown on the plans, and therefore, was not an item for discussion. Mr. LaMuniere agreed the Commission acted based on the plans submitted.
Mr. Ajello noted the site plan submitted, dated 11/20/03, did not show the deck, either.
Ms. Purnell said if the Commission had realized a deck was proposed, it would have discussed feasible and prudent alternatives, such as alternate locations and materials.
Mr. Picton advised Mrs. Gatto the Commission would consider whether to uphold the enforcement order later in the meeting under Enforcement.
There were no further questions or comments from Mrs. Gatto, Atty. Fisher, or the Commissioners.
MOTION: To close the Show Cause Hearing for Gatto/ 155 Woodbury Road/#IW-04-01/Unauthorized Deck. By Ms. Purnell, seconded by Mrs. Hill, and passed 4-0.
Mr. Picton closed the hearing at 7:15 p.m.
This hearing was recorded. The tape is on file in the Land Use Office, Bryan Memorial Town Hall, Washington Depot, Ct.
REGULAR MEETING
Mr. Picton called the Meeting to order at 7:17 p.m. and seated Members Hill, LaMuniere, Picton, and Purnell.
Consideration of the Minutes
The 11/23/04 Regular Meeting minutes were accepted as amended.
Page 3: next to the last line under Holly Hill Farm: There is no e in Sharp.
Page 4: in the 12th line under Matthews: Change crossing to flow path.
Page 4: end of 4th line under Ross: Change "notice of violation" to enforcement order and in the 5th line after Land Records add: "and wants the enforcement release filed on the Land Records."
Page 5: in the 8th line from the top: Insert a semi colon after house, and combine this sentence with the following one.
Page 5: in the 2nd line under Carter: Change the beginning of the sentence to: Mr. Picton requested an engineer's as-built and report....
MOTION: To accept the 11/23/04 Regular Meeting minutes
as amended. By Ms. Purnell, seconded by Mr.
Picton, and passed 4-0.
Pending Applications
H.O.R.S.E. of Ct./43 Wilbur Road/#IW-04-57E/Construct Sheds and Fence: Mr. Ajello placed the property boundaries on the USDA soils map and pointed out the wetlands soils. It was noted water tests at the Montessori School had indicated high level of contaminants from the horse farm, but to address this problem, Ms. Wahler had since begun to take the manure off site. The Commission scheduled a site inspection for Tuesday, December 14, 2004 at 3:30 p.m.
Stiteler-Giddins/198 Tinker Hill Road and West Shore Road/2 Lot Resubdivision: Mr. Neff, engineer, submitted the map, "Proposed Site Development Plan," by Mr. Neff, revised to 12/8/04, which added a 41.5 ft. long intermittent watercourse west of wetland flag #128. He said this was a relatively small watercourse that did not change the proposed construction plan. He also noted he had previously submitted the four conservation deeds, which had been requested at the last meeting. Ms. Purnell said she would review them. Mr. Neff also submitted his analysis of alternatives, dated 12/8/04. Mr. Picton noted the contours dip to indicate a swale within 20 ft. of the house site and then the swale continues along the driveway. He asked if the swale would intercept water, and said the Commission must consider surface flow. Mr. Neff stated the proposed scope of development was as compact as possible. Ms. Purnell worried about the cumulative impacts of future activities. Mr. Neff stated additional activities would require separate permits. Mr. Klein spoke on behalf of the neighboring property owner, Ms. Weeks. He pointed out the very steep slope to the west of the leaching fields, said all the runoff would flow towards the proposed house, and noted the area to be developed is very muddy. Mr. Neff said this runoff would be deflected by the base of the existing stone wall, said the soil scientist did not find any watercourses in the area uphill from the house and leaching area, and noted there was no construction proposed in this area. Mr. Neff said a curtain drain was proposed and there was a specific erosion and sedimentation control plan and sequence that would be implemented. Mr. Picton asked if recontouring was proposed along the side of the house to deflect the runoff. Mr. Neff said the site would be graded and a 6" to 12" swale installed so the runoff would flow around the house. Mr. Picton was concerned that during construction, the runoff would pick up sediment. Mr. Neff said there would be a silt fence installed in the lower flat area to catch any silt. Mr. Picton did not think the proposed silt fence would be able to catch all the runoff, but Mr. Neff said it would be adequate because 1) the flow would not be funneled, 2) existing vegetation would be left in place on the side of the hill above the construction area, and 3) only modest disturbance was proposed. Ms. Purnell asked what percentage of the proposed 12.8 acre lot was upland soil or nonregulated area. Mr. Neff said at least 3 acres. Mr. Picton thought the applicants had given up possibilities for feasible and prudent alternates and had left themselves a marginal site when they created the four existing conservation easements. He asked for calculations for how many square feet of the proposed lot were unregulated, the size of the watershed, and how much water will flow through the house site and down the access corridor. Mr. Picton suggested there might be so much runoff that a quarter acre detention pond would be required, but Mr. Neff stated this would not be necessary because the runoff would diffuse into the wetlands on both sides of the driveway. Ms. Purnell said her concern was about the long term impacts to the lake because of salt and sand from the driveway and the proposed tree cutting would generate more runoff flow. Mr. Picton thought that monitoring of the construction site would be critical and so Mr. Neff said he would review the construction sequence. It was noted the Commission would send the application to the NW Conservation District for review of the proposed erosion and sedimentation controls and Mr. Neff would submit a written request for an extension.
Holly Hill Farm, LLC./87 Whittlesey Road/#IW-04-65/Restoration and Reforestation: The report from the Commission's consultant had not yet been prepared and no one was present to represent the applicant. Mr. Picton asked Mr. Ajello to make sure all work on the property had stopped and to determine whether stabilization measures were required for the exposed dirt at the dump site. Ms. Purnell asked that Mr. Child's report be faxed or emailed to all Commissioners prior to the next meeting.
Dore-Jepson/144 East Shore Road/#IW-04-67/Renovate Cabin: The contractors were present. Ms. Purnell proposed a condition of approval that hay bales be staked around the existing catch basin, but Mr. Ajello said the bales would be too close to the traveled portion of the road. He thought possibly crushed stone could be placed around the catch basin. Mr. Picton asked that Mr. Ajello's recommendations be followed during construction.
MOTION: To approve as submitted application #IW-04-67 by Dore-Jepson per the map, "Property of John Smart," by Mr. Osborne, dated 12/21/62 to rebuild and increase the height of the cabin at 144 East Shore Road. By Ms. Purnell, seconded by Mrs. Hill, and passed 4-0.
Adams/57 West Shore Road/#IW-04-68ATF/Site Improvements: Mr. Churchill and Mr. Neff were present. Mr. Ajello's 12/8/04 report and the map, "Proposed Site Improvement Plan," by Mr. Neff, dated 11/1/04 were reviewed. It was noted driveway drainage, driveway repair work, and construction of a dock were not included in the current application. Driveway drainage was discussed, however, and Mr. Churchill said he would talk to a state DOT drainage engineer about what measures could be taken to improve the existing drainage conditions. Ms. Purnell stated she was concerned about the runoff flowing into the lake, but Mr. Picton pointed out that condition is existing; it was not caused by the proposed site work. Mr. Picton asked if additional erosion controls would be needed. Mr. Ajello noted the proposed stone wall with filter fabric behind would be built first and then backfilled. Mr. Picton asked Mr. Ajello to monitor the work in progress and to request additional erosion controls measures if necessary. Mr. Picton thanked Mr. Churchill for the detailed information provided.
MOTION: To approve application #IW-04-68ATF submitted by Mr. Adams for site improvements at 57 West Shore Road per the map, "Proposed Site Improvement Plan," by Mr. Neff, dated 11/1/04; approved as submitted for items #1-#9 in the project description narrative dated 8/19/04 with the stipulation that items #10-#13 in the narrative and also described in Mr. Ajello's 12/0/04 report as #10, #11, #12, and #13 are excluded from the application being acted on at this time and with the stipulation that no work on the portion of the driveway below the existing retaining wall and the existing shed, no associated drainage improvements, and no docks are included in the approval. By Mr. Picton, seconded by Mr. LaMuniere, and passed 4-0.
Ross/10 Sunny Ridge Road/#IW-04-69/Driveway: It was noted the application was for the "passway" only and that its location was shown on the map, "Site Plan - Wetlands Restoration," by Bradford E. Smith and Sons, dated 5/2/03, revised to 5/28/03 drawn in blue ink by Mr. Ajello. This was consistent with the 5/2/03 mylar submitted by the applicant with overlays showing the passway drawn by hand in black. Ms. Purnell thought there should be an as-built survey to document the completed location of the passway, but Mr. Ajello reported the stakes on site lined up exactly with the mylar location indicated. It was noted it would be difficult to reference the location of the passway in any motion due to the nature of the maps submitted. Mr. Picton asked for photo documentation of the location and condition of the passway for the file.
MOTION: To approve the location and present condition of the passway on the Ross property at 10 Sunny Ridge Road in the location shown in blue pen on the map submitted with application #IW-04-69, "Site Plan-Wetlands Restoration," by Bradford E. Smith and Son, dated 5/2/03 and revised to 5/28/03, which location was derived from a mylar overlay provided by Mr. Ross on another map, "Wetlands Restoration As-Built Survey," by Bradford E. Smith and Son, dated 4/26/04 also submitted for this application. The rock surface of this passway is not elevated above the adjacent ground, is no more than 12 feet wide, and is the existing rough rock surface. By Mr. Picton, seconded by Mr. LaMuniere, and passed 4-0.
Matthews/142 Upper Church Hill Road/#IW-04-72/First Cut and Driveway: Mr. Neff, engineer, was present. The map, "Proposed Site Development Plan," by Mr. Neff, revised to 11/23/04 was reviewed. It was noted Ms. Coe had expressed her concern about the inevitable impacts when activities are approved in areas comprised of so much wetlands. Mr. Picton said the slopes were minimal here, however, and all construction activity and landscaping would be limited to an envelope at least 100 ft. from wetlands. It was also noted the application was for the driveway and feasibility for development only so future activities would require additional permits. The Commissioners requested that notes be placed on the map that 1) only the driveway crossing is approved, 2) the limit of disturbance is the line of silt fence as shown on the map, 3) clearing is allowed only for the driveway; no clearing is to be done beyond the point where the driveway leaves the regulated area and enters the building envelope, except for a small turning area, and 4) the right of way off Upper Church Hill Road is not approved for driveway access. Mr. Neff agreed to add these notes to the map and to revise the DEP reporting page in the application form.
New Applications
Kraft/53 Shearer Road/#IW-04-71/Extend Wall and Fence: Mrs. Kraft was present. Mr. Ajello said he had inspected the site and found the actual wetlands differ from those shown on the subdivision map. They are located within 30-40 ft. of the boundary line where the stone wall is proposed. It was noted the clearing had already been done, shallow scraping for the base of the wall would be required, and the wall would be dry laid. Mr. Ajello thought there would be no impact to the wetlands on the adjoining property. Ms. Purnell noted the large nearby wetland areas and asked that gaps be left in the proposed wall to enable wildlife to pass through. Mr. Ajello recommended tubes be installed every 20 ft. along the ground and Mrs. Kraft agreed to do so. Mr. Picton asked that the construction narrative be revised to include installation of the tubes and a note that the excavated material would not be spread on the wetland side of the wall. Action will be taken at the next meeting.
Ranieri/25 Nettleton Hollow Road/#IW-04-72/Dry Hydrant: Mr. Woodruff's 12/1/04 letter, which accompanied the application, was read. Mr. Ajello stated he had reviewed the application and it was complete. It was noted there was no fee submitted with the application, but that other dry hydrant applications submitted by the Fire Dept. had included the application fee.
Enforcement
Gatto/155 Woodbury Road/#IW-04-01/Unauthorized Deck: Mr. Picton noted the Commission must decide whether the enforcement order issued on 11/30/04 should remain in effect. Mrs. D. Hill read the order. Ms. Purnell stated the deck was inconsistent with the permit issued because the application and plans did not include a deck and that it was not known whether a deck would have been approved because it had not been applied for and so had not been discussed by the Commission. Mr. LaMuniere said that Mr. Gatto had told the Commission the deck would be removed. Ms. Purnell noted the cumulative impact of chromium copper arsenic to invertebrates and to the wetlands. She said the Commission's job is to protect the resources of the state and town and so it should take every opportunity to improve their quality. Mrs. Hill did not think there was a strong enough reason to make the Gattos remove the deck. Mr. Picton noted the Commission must be able to conduct its business in an orderly, consistent, and effective manner and could not be expected to "double back" to permit a deck when clearly the application did not include it. Mr. LaMuniere agreed the Commission must abide by its standards and treat applicants consistently.
MOTION: That the 11/30/04 Enforcement Order issued to Mr. and Mrs. Gatto concerning the deck at 155 Woodbury Road remain in effect. By Mr. Picton, seconded by Ms. Purnell, and passed 3-1. Mrs. Hill voted No because she did not think there was a strong enough reason to order the deck to be removed.
Other Business
Pullaro/23 Calhoun Street/#IW-04-35/Request to Amend Application to Include Gravel Parking Area, Gravel Path, and Fence: Mrs. Pullaro read her letter dated 12/3/04. She explained the proposed fence would have non pressure treated cedar posts and the holes would be hand dug. The map, "Site Improvement Plan," by Mr. Neff, dated 8/10/04 with hand drawn notations by Mrs. Pullaro was reviewed. Mr. LaMuniere reminded Mrs. Pullaro that fill is still needed along the edge of the driveway so the runoff will sheet flow down the drive instead of washing over the lawn. Mrs. Pullaro said she had already contacted her contractor to request this area be filled. It was noted on the map the area with native plantings would be extended the length of the area between the new proposed fence and the stream, the fence would be non pressure treated pickets and posts, and crushed or clean stone would be used instead of gravel for the parking area and path.
MOTION: To approve the revisions to permit #IW-04-35 requested by Mrs. Pullaro for a fence, parking area, and walkway at 23 Calhoun Street per the 12/3/04 narrative and the revisions noted in black pen on the map, "Site Improvement Plan," by Mr. Neff, dated 8/10/04, which was submitted with the request. By Mr. Picton, seconded by Mr. LaMuniere, and passed 4-0.
Enforcement Report
Armstrong/72 Mygatt Road: Mr. Ajello reported there were unstable stockpiles of material, surface runoff, and an overflowing well on this property. He will reinspect and said he would not sign off until either the site is stabilized or a bond has been posted.
Brody/Bee Brook Road/IW-02-06: Several Commissioners were disappointed that so much of the rock outcropping had been excavated. Mr. Ajello explained the rock had been too porous for footings and so had to be chipped out.
Fowler/138 Nichols Hill Road/#IW-04-V5: Mr. Ajello reported Mr. Fowler will comply with his specific directives, will hire a professional to draw a planting plan, and will propose to reduce the slope going down to the wetland area by removing material.
Holly Hill Farm, LLC./87 Whittlesey Road/#IW-04-65: Mrs. J. Hill noted the $2500 consultants fee had been submitted.
Gatto/155 Woodbury Road/#IW-04-01/Unauthorized Deck: It was noted the 11/30/04 enforcement order had been upheld.
Gentile/38 Winston Drive: Mr. Ajello reported the erosion control measures requested last month had not been installed. Mr. Picton advised Mr. Ajello to notify Mr. Gentile that if the erosion controls are not installed as soon as possible, a notice of violation will be issued.
Greenfield/12 Ives Road: The Commission is still waiting for an application for clearing in or near the wetlands.
Guliano and Robbins/Winston Drive: The driveways on these two properties had been paved without permits. It was noted that although this is a regulated activity, permits are frequently overlooked by property owners. Ms. Purnell suggested that the Selectmen put an advisory note on the Town website that paving a driveway within 100 feet of a wetlands or watercourse requires a permit. Mr. Picton asked Mr. Ajello to write to both property owners to ask if the recent driveway work resulted in any change to the surface runoff. This matter will be discussed again in January.
Matthews/89 Lower Church Hill Road: Mrs. Corrigan's 12/6/04 letter was read. She found numerous groundwater seeps on this property, which she thought could be impacted by the blasting required for the proposed dwelling and pool. Ms. Purnell stated these were ephemeral wetlands. Mr. Picton asked how close the seeps were to the construction site. Mr. Ajello said they were in the cleared area and immediately below and in the blasting area. The groundwater hydrology and surface runoff of the site were discussed. Mr. Picton noted that seeps within 100 feet of the construction area and any regrading and redirection of surface runoff that could change the flow towards a wetlands and/or watercourse would be under the Commission's jurisdiction. He said, too, the Commission must consider erodable soil in the event that surface water is redirected. Mr. LaMuniere stated blasting could compress the stone, which would compact the seeps, affecting the hydrology. It was the consensus that Mr. and Mrs. Matthews should submit an application with a complete site plan by a qualified professional. Mr. Ajello will send a letter to notify the property owners.
Howard/99 West Shore Road/Tree Cutting: Mr. Ajello circulated photos of recent cutting of damaged trees. Ms. Purnell asked if this would impact the steep slopes above the lake. Mr. Picton advised Mr. Ajello to stipulate to the property owner that the roots may not be dug out so there would be no soil disturbance. Ms. Purnell recommended installation of a jute mat, seeding, and mulching to stabilize the slopes over the winter if they have been disturbed by the tree work.
Meeker/269 New Milford Turnpike: An application was submitted on 12/8. It will be received at the next meeting.
Rheinhart/10 Perkins Lane: Mr. Ajello reported Ms. Rheinhard wants to cut trees in a possible wetlands area. He will inspect the site, check the soils map, and possibly request an application.
Sasson/4 June Road: Mr. Ajello showed photos taken in June 2004 and the summer of 2002, which Mr. Sasson claims show the configuration of the previous stone deck. Mr. Picton and Mr. LaMuniere remained skeptical that the photos were taken before the new work was done. Mr. Sasson's 11/29/04 letter was read. Mr. Picton asked for a photo of the current deck so the stonework could be compared with these photos. Mr. Ajello will provide one.
Young/113 Litchfield Turnpike/Drainage Ditch: Mr. Ajello noted there was no permit for the drainage work done on this property. He will discuss the matter with Mr. H. Underwood, contractor, and will require either restoration or an after the fact application.
Ross/10 Sunny Ridge Road/#IW-02-V2/Wetlands Restoration: Mr. Ajello reported Mr. Ross had filled in the gullies and had dug the silt out of the wetlands as the Commission required. Mr. Picton noted there was no as-built showing the successfully completed restoration, but upon review of the approval of the permit, it was noted this had not been stipulated. Mr. Ajello said he had been on site, had checked the staked locations, and had found the restoration was complete. It was the consensus to approve the restoration as substantially complete based on Mr. Ajello's inspection, noting the approval would be for 10 Sunny Ridge Road only and not for the adjoining property where material had been deposited without a permit. Mr. Ajello will send a letter to Mr. Ross to inform him he is required to remove the material deposited within 100 feet of wetlands or to apply for a permit.
MOTION: To approve the restoration on the Ross property at 10 Sunny Ridge Road as substantially in conformance with the approved restoration plan based on Mr. Ajello's inspection, and therefore the Commission files a release of the 9/3/02 enforcement order for 10 Sunny Ridge Road. By Mr. Picton, seconded by Ms. Purnell, and passed 3-1. Mrs. Hill voted No because she thought Mr. Ross should be required to submit an as-built map prior to taking the order off the Land Records.
A copy of the above motion approving the restoration will be filed on the Town Land Records.
Carter/292 Walker Brook Road/#IW-04-V8/Repair of Retaining Wall: Mr. Picton noted a notice of violation had been sent. If no citation check has been received by the next meeting, the Commission will take appropriate action.
Discretion of the Chair
It was noted the New Milford Zoning Commission had approved the zone change for Walker Brook Road and the number of lots applied for, and had since requested an environmental review by Kings Mark.
The procedure for writing/filing site inspection minutes detailed in Mr. LaMuniere's 11/24/04 memo was briefly discussed again.
Mr. Picton said he had discussed with Mr. Jontos of Land Tech previous problems the Commission has had with consultant reviews. Mr. Jontos said the problems could possibly have resulted from unclear instructions. Therefore, Mr. Picton noted that in the future the Commission would have to be careful when describing what work it wants done and should ask for environmental as well as engineering reviews. He circulated brochures about the services offered by Land Tech Consultants.
MOTION: To adjourn the meeting. By Mr. Picton.
Mr. Picton adjourned the meeting at 10:45 p.m.
FILED SUBJECT TO APPROVAL
Respectfully submitted,
Janet M. Hill
Land Use Coordinator
November 23, 2004
MEMBERS PRESENT: Mrs. D. Hill, Mr. LaMuniere, Mr. Picton, Ms. Purnell
MEMBER ABSENT: Mrs. Gray
ALTERNATES PRESENT: Ms. Coe, Mrs. Korzenko
ALTERNATE ABSENT: Mr. Bedini
STAFF PRESENT: Mr. Ajello, Mrs. J. Hill
ALSO PRESENT: Mr. Neff, Mrs. Matthews, Ms. Paca, Ms. Weeks, Mr. ChurchillMr. Picton called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and seated Members Hill, LaMuniere, Picton, and Purnell and Alternate Coe for Mrs. Gray.
MOTION: To add the following subsequent business to the Agenda: 1) approval of 2005 Calendar, 2) 11/29/04 aquifer protection seminar in Goshen, and 3) discussion of 9/20/04 LaMuniere memo re: site inspection procedures. By Mr. Picton, seconded by Ms. Purnell, and passed 5-0.
Consideration of the Minutes
The 11/10/04 Regular Meeting minutes were accepted as amended.
Page 1: Mrs. Gray is a Member, not an Alternate and Mr. and Mrs. Matthews were present.
Page 2: It is Dr. Gorra, not Mr. Gorra.
Page 3: In the fifth line from the bottom under Kelsey: "In the same direction" was changed to "within the same path."
Also under Kelsey, the last sentence on the page should begin, "It was the consensus of the Commissioners who had inspected the site...."
Page 5: Under Holly Hill Farm: In the parentheses in the 7th line add "contour line" 670.
Page 8: Under Pullaro: The run off does not flow down the driveway, it flows along the east edge of the driveway.
MOTION: To accept the 11/10/04 Regular Meeting minutes as amended. By Ms. Purnell, seconded by Mr. LaMuniere, and passed 5-0.
The 11/17/04 Ross site inspection minutes were accepted as corrected.
Under Wetlands Restoration: Add a sentence: Members noted a silt fence in the reclaimed wetlands.
Under Dumping in Wetland in Back: 2nd line: The fill was within 12 to 50 feet of a wetland edge.
Under Dumping...: Last paragraph: Change the last sentence to: Members discussed the need to keep all such stockpiles away from wetlands. Delete the remainder of the paragraph.
MOTION: To accept the 11/17/04 Ross site inspection minutes as corrected. By Mrs. Hill, seconded by Mr. Picton, and passed 5-0.
MOTION: To accept the 11/17/04 Matthews site inspection minutes as written. By Mr. LaMuniere, seconded by Mr. Picton, and passed 5-0.
Pending Applications
H.O.R.S.E. of Ct./43 Wilbur Road/#IW-04-57E/Construct Sheds and Fence: No new documentation has been received. Mr. Ajello reported he had spoken with Mrs. Wahlers and had requested a site plan showing the location of buildings, paths, roads, drainage, and wetlands. Hopefully this will be submitted for the 12/8 meeting.
Stiteler-Giddins/198 Tinker Hill Road and West Shore Road/#IW-04-64/Resubdivide: Mr. Neff, engineer, submitted a copy of the USDA map, which showed Ash Swamp was some distance away from the subject property. Mr. Picton noted there were no apparent wetlands immediately to the west or south of the property, but there were wetlands on the property. Ms. Purnell pointed out the open field to the west feeds down into a whole series of watercourses. The map, Proposed Site Development Plan," by Mr. Neff, dated 10/7/04 was reviewed and it was noted the Tisbury soil shown on this map was the same as that indicated in Mr. Temple's soil report amendment dated 11/22/04. According to the amended report, one watercourse will be flagged and added to the site plan and no wetlands soils were found at the proposed driveway location. Ms. Purnell noted that the seasonal flows and/or high water found in this area were a concern. Mr. Neff said he would take a second look at the proposed development area. Ms. Purnell noted there were conservation easements on the surrounding parcels owned by the applicants and asked if their language allowed any building. If so, this could be a feasible and prudent alternative. Mr. Neff will submit the easements for review at the next meeting. Mr. Picton said the Commission would not decide whether to hire a consultant until all the wetlands and watercourses were shown on a revised map. Ms. Purnell noted at the last meeting she had requested a detailed analysis of alternatives. Mr. Picton read the 11/16/04 letter from Ms. Weeks, adjoining property owner. Ms. Weeks advised the Commission about her observations of the conditions in this area; 1) the hillside is covered by rivulets and watercourses, 2) water "bubbles up" from the hillside and she has curtain drains in her back yard at 265 West Shore Road to handle it, and 3) the area where the house and driveway are proposed was always so wet that a tractor could not drive through except during droughts and that was the reason it was overgrown. She also thought it would take an excessive amount of fill to make the driveway viable. Ms. Purnell said the Commission should keep in mind that the removal of trees for site development will increase the amount of water in the area.
Holly Hill Farm, LLC/87 Whittlesey Road/#IW-04-65/Restoration and Reforestation: Ms. Paca, landscape architect, was present. Mr. Childs, forester, was hired to review the proposal and to submit his findings and recommendations. The Commission will wait for his report before taking any action. The status of the dump site was discussed. Mr. Ajello circulated photos and noted all the work to date had been done by hand. Mr. Picton noted he had thought the wood to be removed was on top of the ground and that a heavy mulch would remain and said he did not foresee so much soil disturbance on the steep slope. Ms. Korzenko thought only the large pieces were to be removed. Ms. Paca said Mr. Childs had inspected the dump site and had recommended a jute mesh be installed to stabilize the slope and then trees planted in the disturbed areas. She said he also thought boulders should not be placed in the gullies and that he would discuss this matter with Mr. Neff, engineer. It was noted that at the last meeting the applicant had been given permission to go ahead with three areas of work, but having considered the impact of the work at the dump site, the Commission now thought that other than stabilization of disturbed areas, nothing further should be done until the consultant's report is received. Ms. Purnell asked Ms. Paca if she still planned to consult with Ms. Sharpe, biologist. Ms. Paca said she did. It was noted a Notice of Violation had been issued as requested at the last meeting.
Jepson-Dore/144 East Shore Road/#IW-04-67/Renovate Cabin: It was noted the cabin had been torn down, but no excavation had begun. Ms. Purnell asked that hay bales be staked around the catch basin before work begins. The Commission will act on the application at the next meeting.
Adams/57 West Shore Road/#IW-04-68ATF/Site Improvements: Mr. Churchill, contractor, and Mr. Neff, engineer, were present. It was noted the 8/19/04 complete list of the proposed site work had been submitted. Mr. Churchill noted the following items would be applied for under separate applications: 1) dock, 2) driveway repair, and 3) drainage work. The map, "Proposed Site Improvement Plan," by Mr. Neff, dated 11/1/04 was reviewed. The drainage plans were discussed. Ms. Purnell asked that an infiltration system be implemented, but Mr. Neff said this would be difficult due to the ledge on the property. Mr. Picton noted it is the Commission's policy to minimize the concentration and acceleration of storm water and to trap sediment before it reaches the lake. Mr. Churchill thought the State might be persuaded to improve the drainage system along this section of West Shore Road. Mr. Picton asked if storm water could be retained on site and Ms. Purnell suggested a water garden system, but Mr. Neff said there were constraints due to the location of the septic system and ledge, but he agreed to study the matter. Mr. Ajello was asked to study the application and to write up appropriate conditions for the permit. Mr. Churchill noted the specs for the propane tank had been submitted as requested. The Commission will act at the next meeting.
Matthews/142 Upper Church Hill Road/#IW-04-70/First Cut and Driveway: Mr. Neff, engineer, and Mrs. Matthews were present. A revised map based on input from the site inspection, "Proposed Site Development Plan," by Mr. Neff, revised to 11/23/04, was submitted. The driveway entrance was moved to the right of way off Sunset Lane. Although this location would require a wetlands crossing, the driveway would be shorter, would not disturb as much regulated area, and would require less tree cutting. Mr. Neff noted most of the regulated area along the new route and the wetland soils at the crossing are not in a heavy flow area. There was a lengthy discussion concerning the size and type of the culvert(s) to be used for the crossing. The Commission recommended and the applicant agreed to install three 15" culverts set at least 6" below the existing grade at the middle of the crossing, to make a narrow driveway, approx. 10 feet wide, using geo textile fabric and as little shoulder fill as possible. One 4" and one 2" conduit were added to the proposal. Mr. Neff will submit redesigned plans for the crossing. Mr. Picton requested a cross section for the section of the driveway where there was no culvert as well as for the culvert portion. Mr. Neff noted silt fencing was indicated on the site plan and this was to be the limit of disturbance. Ms. Purnell stressed that the Commission would be approving a feasibility plan only and so there should be a condition of approval that if any changes to the permit are proposed, even if not within 100 feet of wetlands, they must be reviewed by the Commission to ensure there will be no impacts to the wetlands. It was noted the driveway proposal was for an unpaved driveway. The Commission thanked Mrs. Matthews for agreeing to the revised driveway route. They also considered whether to stipulate that the right of way shown from Upper Church Hill Road on the map could not be used for a driveway, but it was noted that was not part of this application and would have to be applied for separately if a future owner proposed to use it.
Ross/10 Sunny Ridge Road/#IW-04-69/Passway: Mr. Ajello reported no new information had been received. It was the consensus that it would be helpful if Mr. Ross would draw in the passway on the map submitted. It was also noted that although Mr. Ross would like the Notice of Violation removed from the Land Records, the current application had little to do with its release. The Commissioners had viewed eroded areas when conducting the last site inspection. Mr. Picton asked Mr. Ajello to instruct Mr. Ross to remediate these washout areas, to hand dig out any sediment that flowed into the wetlands from the washout areas, and to show the correct location of the passway on the map.
Enforcement
Fowler/138 Nichols Hill Road/#IW-04-V5/Excavation of Wetlands and Watercourse: There was a discussion regarding how Mr. Fowler should be instructed to remediate the damage done to the wetlands. The consensus was that the ditch should be filled in using as much as possible the earth material that had come out of it and that the wetlands vegetation should be restored. Mrs. Korzenko noted the house is located in wetlands and has major water problems and so thought input from Land Tech on proper remediation techniques would be useful. Mr. LaMuniere pointed out that there had been filling nearer to the house. It was agreed this area should be left alone and the natural vegetation allowed to regrow. Mr. Ajello was instructed to issue specific instructions and to ask for a planting plan for the wetlands restoration.
Pullaro/23 Calhoun Street/Pave Driveway: Mr. Ajello reported the side dressing would have to be repaired to enable sheet flow. He added no planting would be done until spring.
Ingrassia/East Shore Road/Reconstruct Barn: The concrete work is completed, but has not been backfilled yet. The silt fence is in good condition.
Gatto/155 Woodbury Road/#IW-04-01/Unauthorized Deck: Ms. Purnell had researched the record and file and read her 11/23/04 memo, which was the timeline for the application. It was noted again that: 1) the deck was not on the plans submitted with the application and that the owner said at the meeting that it would be removed and so it had not been discussed, 2) if it had been discussed, feasible and prudent alternatives would have been reviewed, and 3) Mr. Ajello ordered the Gattos to remove the deck, but they have not done so. It was the consensus that this was a significant issue and that enforcement should proceed.
MOTION: To request the Enforcement Officer send an Enforcement Order to Mr. and Mrs. Gatto/155 Woodbury Road and to schedule a show cause hearing at 6:45 p.m. on December 8, 2004 in the Land Use Meeting Room, Bryan Memorial Town Hall. By Mr. Picton, seconded by Ms. Coe, and passed 5-0.
Sasson/4 East Shore Road/Repair Stone Deck, Retaining Wall: At the last meeting it had been agreed that if an application was not submitted by the 11/23 meeting, an enforcement order would be issued. Mr. Ajello noted an application had not yet been submitted. The Commission asked Mr. Ajello to issue a Notice of Violation.
Carter/292 Walker Brook Road/#IW-04-V8/Repair of Retaining Wall: Mr. Ajello discussed this matter with Mr. Carter's attorney who said he would send in the citation fine. Mr. Picton requested an as-built and a report from Mr. Neff regarding how the original work should have been done, how the work actually done varied from the approved plans, and whether the retaining wall is now structurally sound.
Young/113 Litchfield Turnpike/Excavation: Mr. Ajello circulated photos of drainage work done without a permit. Mr. Ajello will send a Notice of Violation and prepare recommendations for the Commission to consider at the next meeting.
Bailey/93 Old Litchfield Road/#IW-04-V7/Destruction of Wetlands by "Quads": Mr. Ajello reported there was no recent activity, but some lagoons remain. He noted there were trees being cut on the other side of the wetlands and so he will reinspect the property.
Beck/132 Calhoun Street/#IW-02-V1/Cutting, Clearing in Wetlands: Mr. Ajello noted Mr. Beck had reopened the driveway.
Greenfield/12 Ives Road/Clearing In or Near Wetlands: The Commission is still waiting for the submission of an application.
Meeker/269 New Milford Turnpike/Parking Area: An application will be ready for the next meeting.
Matthews/89 Lower Church Hill Road/Site Development: It must be determined whether there are any wetlands issues, and if there are none, this item will be taken off the agenda. Ms. Purnell noted a site inspection had been conducted and thought a Special Meeting notice should have been filed with the Town Clerk. It was noted, however, that there had been no quorum of any Town commission invited or in attendance and so legally a meeting had not been held and a notice was not required. Ms. Purnell said the Commission must guard against any appearance of impropriety.
Other Business
2005 Calendar: After a brief discussion it was decided to eliminate the first meeting in July and to hold the second meeting in November on the fifth Wednesday, November 30.
MOTION: To approve the 2005 Calendar as amended. By Mr. Picton, seconded by Mrs. Hill, and passed 5-0.
It was noted there would be a seminar on aquifer protection on 11/29 in Goshen.
Mr. LaMuniere's 9/20/04 memo on site inspection procedure was circulated. The importance of keeping together on site inspections so that all notable points could be gathered for inclusion in the minutes and writing the minutes promptly so they would be filed on time with the Town Clerk was stressed.
MOTION: To adjourn the meeting. By Mr. Picton.
Mr. Picton adjourned the meeting at 10:10 p.m.
FILED SUBJECT TO APPROVAL
Respectfully submitted,
November 10, 2004
MEMBERS PRESENT: Mrs. D. Hill, Mr. LaMuniere, Mr. Picton, Ms. Purnell
ALTERNATE ABSENT: Mrs. Gray
ALTERNATES PRESENT: Mr. Bedini, Ms. Coe, Mrs. Korzenko
STAFF PRESENT: Mr. Ajello, Mrs. J. Hill
ALSO PRESENT: Dr. Gorra, Mr. Towne, Mr. Churchill, Mr. and Mrs. Klein, Mr. McNaughton, Ms. Paca, Mr. Neff, Mr. J. Fiorilla, Mr. M. Fiorilla, PressRegular Meeting
Mr. Picton called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and seated Members Hill, LaMuniere, and Picton, and Alternates Coe and Korzenko for Mrs. Gray and Ms. Purnell.
MOTION: To add subsequent business not already posted on the agenda: 1) Matthews/142 Upper Church Hill Road/#IW-04-70/Lot Division and Construct Driveway 2) Approval of 2005 Calendar, 3) The Gunnery School/South Street/#IW-00-63/Construct Driveway/ Request for Renewal of Permit. By Mrs. Hill, seconded by Mr. Picton, and passed 5-0.
Consideration of the Minutes
The following corrections were made to the 10/27/04 Regular Meeting minutes:
Page 5: 5th condition in the Ross motion of approval: Mr. Picton asked that it be added that the purpose of this condition was to maintain the area as a semi natural buffer.
Page 8: Holly Hill Farm, 5th line from the bottom: Add: in the already disturbed, so the sentence reads, "...interplant in the already disturbed test spot...."
Page 10: Wortzman, 3rd line: Add own so sentence is, "...deteriorate on its own..."
Page 10: Site Inspection Procedures: There was disagreement about whether this paragraph was clear. The minutes will remain as written, but before the next meeting Mr. LaMuniere will recirculate his memo to Mr. Picton on this matter.
MOTION: To accept the 10/27/04 Regular Meeting minutes as amended. By Mrs. Hill, seconded by Mrs. Korzenko, and passed 5-0.
MOTION: To accept the 10/19/04 Holly Hill Farm Site Inspection minutes as written. By Mrs. Hill, seconded by Mr. Picton, and passed 4-0-1. Mrs. Korzenko abstained because she had not attended the inspection.
The Stiteler-Giddins 11/1/04 site inspection minutes were accepted as corrected. At the end of the first line, "an existing pathway" was added. Also, the time of adjournment, 5:00 p.m., was added.
MOTION: To accept the 11/1/04 Stitler-Giddins Site Inspection minutes as corrected. By Mrs. Hill, seconded by Mrs. Korzenko, and passed 5-0.
Ms. Purnell arrived at 7:14 p.m. and was seated for Mrs. Korzenko.
The Kelsey 11/8/04 site inspection minutes were accepted as corrected. Mr. Ajello's name was corrected, the applicant's name and site inspection date were added, and the time of adjournment, 10:15 a.m., was added.
MOTION: To accept the 11/8/04 Kelsey Site Inspection minutes as corrected. By Mrs. Korzenko, seconded by Mr. Picton, and passed 5-0.
Pending Applications
Gorra/278 New Milford Turnpike/#IW-04-56ATF/Septic Repair and Stream Remediation: Ms. Purnell recused herself and Mrs. Korzenko was seated. Mrs. D. Hill said she would abstain because she had not inspected the site. Mr. Gorra submitted a planting plan, untitled, dated 10/23/04, which he said was done by Aspetuck Gardens after a review of the minutes. It was noted the site inspection minutes called for plantings on both the north and south banks to provide a natural buffer. This was added to the plan and initialed. Mr. Picton noted there was no rip rap proposed at the culvert outlet. Dr. Gorra also added this to the plan. Dr. Gorra asked if he had to apply for a permit each time he cleans out silt. The Commissioners agreed if it was removed by hand during low water conditions, a permit would not be required. The check dams were discussed and it was noted they were correctly shown on the site plan. It was noted the planting would be done next spring and the rip rap put in place now.
MOTION: To approve application #IW-04-56ATF submitted by Dr. Gorra for septic repair and stream remediation at 278 New Milford Turnpike per the map, "Untitled," dated Saturday, October 23, 2004 subject to the following conditions:
1) all unstable or vertical banks of exposed soil on both sides of the stream shall be planted with durable perennials from the plant list,
2) rock armoring shall be placed on the stream bank below the culvert,
3) plantings shall be added on the south side of the stream as drawn in at the 11/10/04 meeting, and
4) the check dams are to direct the flow towards the center of the stream.
By Mr. Picton, seconded by Mrs. Korzenko, and passed 4-0-1. Mrs. Hill abstained because she had not inspected the property.
Ms. Purnell was reseated.
H.O.R.S.E. of Ct./43 Wilbur Road/#IW-04-57E/Sheds and Fence: Mr. Ajello reported he had sent the applicant a letter as directed, but had not yet had a response. It was the consensus an accurate map should be submitted before a site inspection is scheduled. Mr. Ajello will call the applicant with this request.
Thorne/228 West Shore Road/#IW-04-58ATF/Well, Water Line, Septic System: Mr. Towne, contractor, presented a revised site plan showing the scope of the work, measurements, location of the septic system, and erosion controls. Mr. Ajello noted the limit of disturbance was the silt fence. Mr. Towne's 11/1/04 letter was reviewed. He added a statement that the duration of the work would be 5 days.
MOTION: To approve application #IW-04-58ATF submitted by Mr. Thorne to install a well, septic system, and water line at 228 West Shore Road per the construction sequence and revised plans submitted at the 11/10/04 meeting. By Ms. Purnell, seconded by Mrs. Hill, and passed 5-0.
Kelsey/39 West Morris Road/#IW-04-62/Install Driveway Culvert: Mr. Neff, engineer, was present. Mr. LaMuniere asked if a 36" flat bottomed culvert could be installed rather than the proposed 24" culvert. Mr. Neff explained the plans, which called for flared inlet and outlet sections of the culvert and said an arch culvert with a flatter bottom would be possible. Mr. Picton noted the objective of the arch culvert was to have a wider streambed of natural material and unrestricted flow and that the flow should continue in the same direction as it currently flows. Mr. Neff stated the application was for the installation of the culvert and conduits only and not for construction of the driveway. Mr. Picton asked if there were feasible and prudent alternatives. It was the consensus the proposed location for the crossing was the most appropriate from a wetlands point of view and that it would be difficult to move the driveway further from the wetlands due to the steep slopes in the area. It was also noted moving the drive would require that more trees be cut. Ms. Purnell thought the application could be approved as the proposed crossing was the best plan and the potential for both short term and long term impact would be minimal if the erosion control measures were implemented as proposed.
MOTION: To approve application #IW-04-62 submitted by Mr. Kelsey to install a driveway culvert at 39 West Morris Road per the map, "Driveway Crossing Plan," By Mr. Neff, dated 10/4/04 subject to the following conditions:
1) approval is for the culvert only, not the entire driveway,
2) the round culvert proposed shall be replaced with an arch culvert, minimum size 24" X 36", placed in line with the original stream bed and set approximately 6" below the stream bed level to allow natural material to accumulate, and
3) the actual driveway and house sites require Inland Wetlands Commission approval prior to construction.
By Mr. Picton, seconded by Mr. LaMuniere, and passed 5-0.
Stiteler-Giddins/198 Tinker Hill Road and West Shore Road/#IW-04-64/ Resubdivision: Mr. Neff, engineer, said he had asked Mr. Temple, soil scientist, to reexamine the area of a potential watercourse and that this would be done as soon as possible. A sketch map with the location of test holes and auger holes indicated was requested. Mrs. D. Hill also requested a supplemental report from Mr. Temple. Mr. Picton requested the USDA soils map be submitted. It was noted the Commission will wait for Mr. Temple's report before deciding whether to hire its own soil scientist. Ms. Purnell asked for an analysis of feasible and prudent alternatives. Mr. and Mrs. Klein, abutting property owners, were present.
Holly Hill Farm, LLC./87 Whittlesey Road/#IW-04-65/Restoration and Reforestation: Mr. Neff, engineer, and Ms. Paca, landscape architect, were present. Copies of Ms. Paca's 11/5/04 letter were circulated and the maps, "Holly Farms," by Ms. Paca, dated 10/1/04, scale 1"=20' and "Site Plan," unsigned, dated December 2003 were reviewed. The Commissioners instructed Ms. Paca to toe in the bottom of the silt fence on site, which they had observed was improperly installed. Ms. Paca's letter was discussed point by point and the following provisional agreements made: 1) Placing rocks in the gullies to prevent further erosion: This would be OK only in the gullies labeled A, B, and C on the site plan. The rocks were to be no larger than the size one man could handle and after deposition the existing defined channel should remain. No machines may operate below the silt fence at the top of the steeper slope and there may be no excavation, digging, filling, regrading, nor exposure of the soil. 2) Converting the lawn to a wildflower meadow: First, silt fence must be installed along the entire length of the work area. As it is too late in the season to begin work this year, the planting may begin in May or June of 2005. The work will be done in strips approx. 30 feet wide and several hundred feet long, beginning at the highest elevation (approx. 670) so that the undisturbed ground and vegetation immediately below will continue to function as a silt trap and buffer as the new plantings are establishing themselves. The first strip will be allowed to fill in with continuous cover before work on the second strip is started. It is understood the growing in of each planting strip may take longer than one month. 3) Allowing unstable boulders in the dump to roll down into river: Boulders may not be rolled into the river, flood plain, flood channel, or into any intermittent stream. 12 to 15 boulders may be permitted to roll down to the toe of the slope if they are unstable where they lie. Old concrete may be left where it is. 4) Planting woody shrubs below the meadow section: The Town's consultant will review this proposal. No work is to be done at this time. 5) Reestablishing the American under story in a pilot area: The Town's consultant will review this proposal. No work is to be done at this time. 6) Remove the dump by hand: Only heavy wooden debris and foreign material may be removed by hand. All other organic material will be left in place as mulch. No soil is to be exposed. Materials removed will be taken to a neighbor's field, where the woody material will be burned. 7) Replant the area where the Japanese knotweed was removed. The Town's consultant will review this proposal. No work is to be done at this time. Mr. Picton read his 10/27/04 memo. It was the consensus that the clearing and disturbance of soil to date has the potential to compromise the forest community, wetlands, and the long term stability of the slopes. The work proposed in the floodplain, on the steep slopes of the riverbank, and in the areas close to the top of the steep bank where the runoff develops into channels has significant potential to further impact these values. Furthermore, it was the consensus that pending a review by a Wetlands Commission consultant, all cutting of vegetation, disturbance of the soil and its cover of organic material, and planting of any material should be discontinued and the under story left to regenerate in all areas from the river to a line 50 feet above the top of the steeper slopes and in and within 30 feet of all watercourses and wetlands. Enforcement was discussed. Mr. Picton noted the Commission had decided at the last meeting to issue a Notice of Violation and a citation, but that this had not yet been done. It was the consensus the Commission should act in a consistent manner and should send out the NOV and citation immediately.
Wallis/32 Sunny Ridge Road/#IW-04-66/Reconstruct Barn and Generator: The application had been discussed at the last meeting and there had been no concerns or questions raised. The proposal was straightforward, the barn would be reconstructed on the existing footprint, and efforts would be made to stay away from the pond. There was no potential impact to the wetlands.
MOTION: To approve application #IW-04-66 submitted by Mr. Wallis to reconstruct a barn and generator at 32 Sunny Ridge Road per the sketch map submitted, scale 1" = 50'. By Mrs. Hill, seconded by Mr. Picton, and passed 5-0.
New Applications
Jepson-Dore/144 East Shore Road/#IW-04-67/Renovate Cabin: Mike and Joe Fiorilla of Kehoe Construction were present. Mr. Ajello had inspected the site and found the cabin was more than 100 ft. from Lake Waramaug, but that there were steep slopes involved. He said protecting the catch basin at the start of the driveway would be critical. The map, "Property of John K. Smart," by Mr. Osborne, dated 12/21/62 was reviewed. The cabin roof would be raised and all work done within the existing footprint. Any disturbed material would be temporarily stockpiled around the perimeter of the foundation. Mr. Ajello did not think any silt would reach the catch basin if the digging was done by hand. The locations of the silt fence and utility trench were added to the map. The Commissioners will inspect the property on their own prior to the next meeting. It was noted action could not be taken at the next meeting, which was being held early due to the holiday. As there would be minimal chance of impact to the lake, Mr. Picton advised the applicants they could begin demolition work if the silt fence was installed first and there was no other soil disturbance.
Adams/57 West Shore Road/#IW-04-68ATF/Site Improvements: Mr. Churchill, contractor, and Mr. Neff, engineer, represented the owners. The map, "Proposed Site Improvement Plan," by Mr. Neff, dated 11/1/04 was reviewed. Mr. Churchill apologized for the trench dug without a permit. He summarized the proposed work. 1) Installation of fence and gate. 2) Installation of patio and retaining wall on the west side of the house: The proposed patio was flagstone on a permeable surface. The Commission asked for an additional description and the percentage of permeable surface. 3) Well improvements: This work would be beyond the 100 ft. regulated area. The existing 6'X6'X6' cold water storage tank/well room would be eliminated and the water line rerouted to the mechanicals in the basement. It was noted machinery would be used, but that the house was between the lake and the work area. 4) Installation of air conditioning condensers next to the garage: A small part of the hillside will be excavated and a retaining wall built. Mr. Picton asked for silt fence, but Mr. Neff stated the work area is so small it would be difficult to work with silt fencing in place. Mr. Ajello will inspect the site to determine whether erosion controls are necessary here. 5) Installation of propane tank: Mr. Churchill will provide specs. It was noted plans should eliminate the potential for leaks by use of double wall construction, geotextile fabric lining, etc. 6) Installation of power to the dock for recreational purposes and to operate a bubbler in the lake: It was noted the Lake Waramaug Task Force was going to conduct a study concerning the ecological impacts of bubblers. The proposed conduit would be in concrete near the waterline. 7) Extension of dock: A U shaped dock is proposed. Mr. Picton asked for design specs. Mrs. Korzenko advised Mr. Churchill to study the revised Zoning Regulations concerning docks. Mr. Churchill said, in addition, the driveway must be regraded and drainage installed. Mr. Picton asked that a narrative of all the proposed work be submitted prior to the next meeting so there will be time to review it beforehand.
Matthews/142 Upper Church Hill Road/#IW-04-70/First Cut, Construct Driveway: The application was submitted on 11/9/04. Mr. Neff, engineer, and Mr. and Mrs. Matthews were present. The map, "Proposed Site Development Plan," by Mr. Neff, dated 11/5/04 was reviewed. It is proposed to divide the 55.87 acre parcel into two lots with a lengthy driveway within the regulated area to the interior lot. Ms. Purnell asked for the percentage of wetlands on each of the proposed lots. Mr. Neff noted a shorter alternative driveway route from Sunset Lane, had been considered, but would have required a wetlands crossing. A site inspection was scheduled for Wednesday, November 17, 2004 at 3:30 p.m.
Other Business
Washington Montessori School/240 Litchfield Turnpike/Progress Report: Mr. McNaughton submitted a cover letter dated 11/10/04 and progress report, which included a turf management plan and water test results. The letter stated how the school had complied or was in the process of complying with the conditions of its permit. He asked for guidance on how to clean the eastern vernal pool because due to its difficult access and the type of plant material in it, it was not possible to remove the silt using the method originally approved by the Commission. He circulated photos to show the condition of this pool. It was the consensus the pool could be cleaned by machine and by hand, that it was OK to remove the saplings growing in the middle, but some vegetation should be left around the perimeter. Mr. McNaughton noted all 33 catch basins had been pumped out in October. He proposed to plant around the vernal pool and plunge pool area and to specify an area not to be mowed in the future. He advised the Commission he would request the release of the school's bond upon the completion of the cleaning of the remaining vernal pool.
New Application
Ross/10 Sunny Ridge Road/#IW-04-69/Clear Trees, Deposit Stones in Roadway: Mr. Picton asked if the actual driveway location had been drawn on the map. Mr. Ajello noted the driveway was not being applied for; only the after-the-fact work in the "pass through." The Commission was not sure what was meant by the "pass through." Mr. LaMuniere questioned why a map had not been submitted. A site inspection was scheduled for Wednesday, November 17, 2004 at 3:00 p.m.
Enforcement
Arciola/9 Dark Entry Road: Mr. Ajello reported the property had been mulched except for the swale, which has a very gentle grade. Mr. Picton recommended that except for areas under water, all disturbed areas be mulched and vegetated.
Brodie/Bee Brook Road.#IW-02-06: It was noted the equipment used to construct the bridge had forded the stream.
Fowler/138 Nichols Hill Road/#IW-04-05: Mr. Ajello reported there has been no activity since he last inspected the property on 9/29. The citation fine was paid. Mr. Ajello will write another follow-up letter regarding what specific work must be done to correct the violation.
Gatto/155 Woodbury Road/#IW-04-01: A deck has been added to the rear of the dwelling, but this was not included in permit #IW-04-01. It was noted Mr. Ajello had sent Mr. and Mrs. Gatto a Notice of Violation on 11/3/04 and had received a letter dated 11/10/04 in response. Ms. Purnell did not think the Commission would have approved the construction of a deck cantilevered over the brook because there would have been feasible and prudent alternatives. Mr. Ajello noted the plans approved by the ZBA to raise the roof of the dwelling had not included the deck, either. Ms. Purnell will review the file for the reasons cited for the record why the deck was not included in the approval. It was thought the Commission should act in a consistent manner and not respond to any threat of a lawsuit. The course of action to be taken will be discussed at the next meeting.
Guttierez/13 Dark Entry Road: Mr. Ajello reported the replacement of a wall or a fence to its original specs does not require a zoning permit. A conduit had been installed at the front of the property, but did not appear to affect the wetlands.
Kilbrith/Tinker Hill Road: It was noted Mr. Kilbrith had installed a pressure treated dock, which did not conform to the revised Zoning Regulations for the Lake Waramaug Residential District.
Leddy/82 Baldwin Hill Road: Mr. Ajello was asked to inspect the property to make sure the silt fence had been properly installed.
Matthews/89 Lower Church Hill Road: Mr. Ajello reported the property owner wants to blast Judson rock for his foundation, but various people in Town are working to determine whether the rock has any historical or archeological significance.
O'Toole/46 Kielwasser Road: Mr. O'Toole wants to add a dormer that was not included in any of his initial permits. He has been advised to apply for a variance due to the building's proximity to the stream.
Pullaro/23 Calhoun Street: Mr. LaMuniere pointed out that runoff now flows down the paved driveway to Canoe Brook. Mr. Ajello said a finish card has not yet been submitted and that more filling and edge work will be done.
Mr. Bedini left the meeting at this point.
Beck/132 Calhoun Street/#IW-02-V1: Mr. Ajello reported the invasives had been sprayed, but the Notice of Violation would remain on the Land Records.
Sasson/4 East Shore Road: A new application with supplemental information is expected. Mr. Ajello will write to the owner to advise him that unless the application is submitted by the next meeting, an enforcement order will be issued to remove the platform from the lake, pulling it back to the point where a wall is shown on an older survey map as the previous extent of the structure.
Other Business
Beck/129 Calhoun Street/#IW-04-06/Request to Revise Permit: A modified site plan dated 10/13/04 was submitted. It was noted the proposed lot lines were the same, but the density calculations had been revised and the conservation easement area extended to include most of the hay field. It was the consensus to accept the modified site plan.
Consideration of 2005 Calendar: The usual calendar with two meetings per month, except for August and December with only one meeting
each, was discussed. Mrs. Hill suggested the first meeting in July be deleted so that July would only have one meeting as well. This will be discussed at the next meeting.
The Gunnery School/South Street/#IW-00-63/Request to Extend Permit: It was noted in February 2004 the Gunnery had been told it was premature to file for an extension because the permit would not expire until the latter part of 2005. The Gunnery has now asked again informally for an extension. It was noted that although Wetlands had approved the driveway, Zoning had denied it. It was also noted The Gunnery was anxious to have an extension or it would have to begin working on development plans. Ms. Purnell stated the driveway had been approved for a specific use. After a review of Section 11.9 of the Regulations, it was the consensus the permit would most likely be renewed unless there was a significant change, but that it would be renewed for only two years from the date of request.
MOTION: To adjourn the meeting. By Mr. LaMuniere.
Mr. Picton adjourned the meeting at 11:29 p.m.
FILED SUBJECT TO APPROVAL
Respectfully submitted,
By Janet M. Hill, Land Use Coordinator
October 27, 2004
MEMBERS PRESENT: Mrs. D. Hill, Mr. LaMuniere, Mr. Picton, Ms. Purnell
MEMBER ABSENT: Mrs. Gray
ALTERNATES PRESENT: Mr. Bedini, Ms. Coe
ALTERNATE ABSENT: Mrs. Korzenko
STAFF PRESENT: Mr. Ajello, Mrs. J. Hill, Mr. Solley, Ms. Paca,
ALSO PRESENT: Mr. Lecher, Mr. Neff, Mr. Sherr, Mr. Charles, Mr. Wallis, Mr. J. Ross, Mrs. Payne, Press, Mr. W. RossMr. Picton called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. and seated Members Hill, LaMuniere, Picton, and Purnell and Alternate Bedini for Mrs. Gray.
Consideration of the Minutes
The 9/30/04 Citation Hearing Minutes were accepted as corrected. Mrs. Hill inserted the following sentence in the 7th line on page 2: It was noted by those present, including Atty. Kelly, that the Show Cause Hearing referred to was part of an Enforcement Order procedure and therefore an issue separate from the Citation.
MOTION: To accept the 9/30/04 Citation Hearing minutes as corrected. By Mrs. Hill, seconded by Mr. Bedini, and passed 3-0-2. Mr. LaMuniere and Ms. Purnell abstained because they had not attended the Hearing.
The 10/13/04 Regular Meeting minutes were accepted as corrected.
1) Page 5: Ms. Purnell was actually reseated after the discussion of H.O.R.S.E.
2) Page 4 under Carron, 1st sentence: Change presiding "officer" to presiding "Member."
3) Page 6 under Hildemann: The size of the paddocks was 112' X 16' (not 15').
4) Page 7 under Holly Hill Farm: Mr. LaMuniere said a wildflower meadow, not a wet meadow, would be created, but Mrs. Hill said it had, indeed, been called a wet meadow.
5) Page 7 under Holly Hill Farm: The permit number, #IW-04-65, was added.
6) Page 8: The time of adjournment, 9:45 p.m., was added.
MOTION: To accept the 10/13/04 Regular Meeting minutes as corrected. By Mrs. Hill, seconded by Ms. Purnell, and passed 5-0.
MOTION: To accept the 10/19/04 Ross Site Inspection minutes as written. By Mr. LaMuniere, seconded by Mrs. Hill, and passed 5-0.
The 10/19/04 Steep Rock Assn. Site Inspection minutes were accepted as corrected. Added to the end was that the Members left the property at 4:40 p.m.
MOTION: To accept the 10/19/04 Steep Rock Assn. Site Inspection minutes as corrected. By Ms. Purnell, seconded by Mr. Picton, and passed 5-0.
It was noted the minutes for the Holly Hill Farm site inspection had just been submitted and so they would be considered at the next meeting.
Pending Applications
Pickett, Johnson, Gillette, Skorski/4 New Preston Hill Road and 19, 23, 25 East Shore Road/#IW-04-50/Dredge Pond, Install Dry Hydrant: Mr. Solley, Selectman, submitted the 10/27/04 memo noting repair of the dam had been deleted from the application and providing some of the construction details requested at the last meeting. Mr. Solley said the exact location of the basin, which would be determined based on the depth of the silt and the location of ledge and the amount of material to be excavated would not be known until the excavation was underway. At this time he knew only that the basin would be installed on a firm bottom. He noted the Fire Dept. currently has no water source for the Village of New Preston and so was anxious to install the hydrant this fall. Construction details were discussed. These included: 1) water flow through the work site would be reduced by use of the gate at the Lake Waramaug outlet, 2) the entire pond would not be dredged, only the area immediately surrounding the hydrant, approximately 30 ft. in diameter, 3) estimated duration of excavation was 2-6 hours, 4) installation of a 6" pump to pump the flow around the work site was not feasible, and 5) the hydrant would be set on crushed stone. Mr. Picton was concerned about the turbulence and sedimentation, which would be caused by the proposed dredging, said all possible sedimentation control measures must be utilized, and noted the proposed work was necessary for public safety. There was a lengthy discussion about conditions of approval to define the scope of the work.
MOTION: To approve application #IW-04-50 submitted by property owners Pickett, Johnson, Gillette, and Skorski to dredge the pond and install a dry hydrant at 4 New Preston Hill Road and 19, 23, and 25 East Shore Road per the plans, "Dry Hydrant Installation," dated 10/27/04 and "Dry Hydrant, New Preston," received 9/13/04 because this is a public safety issue and subject to the following conditions:
1 there shall be no excavation of original soil in or around the pond except as needed for the settling basin and pipe,
2 the excavation for and around the basin shall be no wider than approx. 30 ft. in diameter,
3 the water flow will be controlled by use of the gate at the outflow of the lake to reduce the flow during construction,
4 all measures to reduce turbulence and sedimentation will be implemented,
5 the excavation shall be completed within 6 hours,
6 if the scope of the work expands beyond these specified limitations, the WEO must be consulted,
7 the basin shall be anchored in place as needed with heavy rock,
8 the work is to be completed before the end of November 2004, and
9 the work shall be completed under the supervision of the WEO.
By Mrs. Hill, seconded by Mr. Bedini, and passed 5-0.
Lake Waramaug Country Club/19 Golf Links Road/#IW-04-49/Golf Course Drainage Improvements: Mr. Lecher submitted the revised map, "Golf Course Drainage Improvement Plan," by Mr. Neff, revised to 10/26/04, which addressed the concerns raised at the last meeting. Revisions to the drainage system to reduce the scope and define limitations, addition of a planting plan, and addition of a Phase I - Phase II work sequence were noted. Mr. Lecher explained the completed work would be evaluated after the wet season to determine whether the pipe installed was adequate. Mr. LaMuniere was concerned that installation of the drainage channel to the edge of the wetlands could increase drainage from the meadow. Mr. Picton suggested it begin at ground level near the wetlands and continue at a 10:1 slope toward the basin. Mr. Lecher agreed to do so. The planting plan was reviewed. Invasive yellow flag irises were removed and cardinal flowers added and the change initialed on the plans. Mr. Neff noted the filter basin had been enlarged to 30' X 70' and would act to remove the nutrients from the drainage. Mr. Lecher said he hoped to complete the project during the winter. Mr. Picton said he was not concerned about erosion due to the gradual slope of the land.
MOTION: To approve application #IW-04-49 submitted by the Lake Waramaug Country Club for golf course drainage improvements at 19 Golf Links Road per the plan, "Golf Course Drainage Improvement Plan," by Mr. Neff, revised to 10/26/04 with handwritten notes made at the 10/27/04 meeting and subject to the following conditions:
1 the inlet of the swale shall be installed at the existing grade at the wetlands end and then drop down at a slope of 1:10 as it extends towards the filter basin,
2 the trenches on the south side are to be evaluated 12 months after installation,
3 the duration of construction shall be 4 to 6 weeks, and
4 the basin shall be dug first and connected to the swale to act as a filtration basin during construction.
By Ms. Purnell, seconded by Mr. LaMuniere, and passed 5-0.
Mr. Picton noted the golf course and its drainage system were existing conditions that predated the Inland Wetlands Regulations and that providing for drainage of the golf course was different than allowing homeowners to drain land to install lawns.
Gorra/278 New Milford Turnpike/#IW-04-56ATF/Septic Repair and Stream Remediation: Mr. Ajello reported Dr. Gorra would attend the next meeting. It was noted there are two more meetings before the time to act on the application expires.
H.O.R.S.E./43 Wilbur Road/#IW-04-57E/Construct Paddocks, Fence : Mr. Ajello had written Ms. Wahlers a letter to inform her of the additional information required, but had not yet received a response. Mr. Ajello circulated the DEP definition of agriculture. Discussion of the application was tabled to the next meeting.
Thorne/228 West Shore Road/#IW-04-58ATF/Install Well, Water Line, and Septic System: Mr. Picton noted at the last meeting the Commission had asked that silt fencing be shown on the map and that a line to mark the limit of disturbance had also been requested. These were still missing, as was the location of the water line. Mr. Ajello will write a letter to remind Mr. Towne, contractor, of the additional information required. Further discussion was tabled until this information is added to the map.
Ross/24 Wilbur Road/#IW-04-59/Commercial Building, Parking, Detention Basin: Mr. Ross was present. The map, "Septic Plan," by Altermatt Engineering, LLC., revised to 10/26/04 was reviewed. Mr. Ross submitted a sketch of the existing knotweed in the neighborhood and a lengthy discussion ensued about the most effective way to remove it. Ms. Purnell thought it was important to eliminate it from the site so it would not spread to Meeker Swamp, but Mr. Ross said this was beyond his control as it already exists along Wilbur Road and in the swamp. He assured the Commission he would not take any disturbed material off site to prevent it from being spread to another property in that way. Mr. Ross said he had revised the site plan by moving the driveway and detention basin so that less fill would be required near the existing white pines and a buffer could be maintained between the parking area and the adjoining property. The drainage plans and planting plans were discussed. Regarding the proposed use of the commercial building, Mr. Ross said there would be no businesses using hazardous materials and no outside storage of fuels. He thought there might be a small food store in half and books or antiques on the other side. He noted the plans had been revised to enlarge the septic system to accommodate the possible market use. Mr. Picton asked if the parking lot could be narrowed to avoid excavation and filling up to the edge of the wetlands. Mr. Ross explained the Zoning Regulations specify the amount of parking required and also that there be a 50 ft. buffer between commercial parking and adjoining residential lots. It was noted the revised plans addressed most of the issues raised at the site inspection and the previous meeting.
MOTION: To approve application #IW-04-59 submitted by Mr. Ross for a commercial building, driveway, parking area, and detention basin at 24 Wilbur Road per the plan, "Septic Plan," by Altermatt Engineering, LLC., revised to 10/26/04 subject to the following conditions:
1) no topsoil material is to be trucked off site,
2) the knotweed is to be pulled out or cut, then dried and burned and after construction is to be managed by cut stem application of an herbicide,
3) there shall be no outside storage of fuels or hazardous materials,
4) the limit of disturbance is the silt fence shown on the plan, and
5) the berm and the area within 20 feet of the wetlands shall be mowed only once a year.
By Mr. Picton, seconded by Mrs. Hill, and passed 5-0.
Steep Rock Assoc./124 Christian Street/#IW-04-60/Construct Parking Area and Accessway: It was noted a site inspection had been conducted, the application was straightforward, and there was only minor activity proposed in the upland review area.
MOTION: To approve application #IW-04-60 submitted by Steep Rock Assn. to construct an accessway and parking area at 124 Christian Street per the plan, "Driveway and Parking Plan," by Mr. Neff, dated 9/28/04. By Mrs. Hill, seconded by Ms. Purnell, and passed 5-0.
Parent/71 Calhoun Hill Road/#IW-04-61/Reconstruct Bridge, Restore Disturbed Area: Mr. Neff, engineer, represented the applicant. The map, "Proposed Site Improvement Plan," by Mr. Neff, dated 10/5/04 was reviewed. Mr. Neff explained the driveway, which had extended into the regulated area, would be abandoned and that boulders would be deposited at the corners of the existing headwalls at the bridge to prevent further erosion. He explained how these would be put into place. Having inspected the site, Mr. Ajello and Mrs. Hill said there was a problem with water running down the driveway and "oozing" into the stream. Mr. Picton asked that "leak-offs" be added every 150 feet along the drive and Mr. Neff so amended the map. Mr. Picton also asked that a note be added to the map that water will be directed away from the driveway. The Commissioners were concerned the property owner might clear down to the streambank, noting the importance of maintaining the canopy over any stream. Mr. Neff said there were no plans to do so, and pointed out the area already cleared for the house.
MOTION: To approve application #IW-04-61 submitted by Mr. Parent to reconstruct the bridge and restore the disturbed area at 71 Calhoun Hill Road per the plan, "Proposed Site Improvement Plan," by Mr. Neff, dated 10/5/04 as amended at the 10/27/04 meeting and subject to the stipulation that any cutting of vegetation within 100 ft. of any wetlands or watercourse is a regulated activity requiring the issuance of a permit before the work is done. By Mr. Picton, seconded by Mrs. Hill, and passed 5-0.
Kelsey/39 West Morris Road/#IW-04-62/Install Driveway Culvert: Mr. Neff, engineer, stated the Commission had previously approved a lot line revision and it had been noted at that time a driveway culvert would be needed. The current application is for the culvert only and not for any driveway improvements or construction of the house. The lot is for sale, and the sellers want to access the potential house site. The map, "Driveway Wetland Crossing Plan," by Mr. Neff, dated 10/4/04 was reviewed. Mr. Neff noted the watercourse is intermittent, is dry part of the year, and would not require a larger, flatter culvert. Mr. Picton asked why the driveway could not be installed where there are no wetlands. Mr. Neff responded the alternate route is much steeper and would disturb an area not already disturbed. Mr. Picton asked Mr. Ajello to inspect the site and advise the Commission as to whether there was a more appropriate location for the driveway. It was noted the conduit for underground utilities was also included in the application because there would be less disturbance to the wetlands if it was installed at the same time as the culvert.
Mayfair Properties/116 Woodbury Road/#IW-04-63/Renovate Barn: The map, "Barn Renovation Erosion Control Plan," by Mr. Neff, dated 10/11/04 was studied. Mr. Picton noted the barn was being renovated for the purpose of treating and storing the domestic water supply for the upper buildings. He noted, too, that the silt fence shown on the map was the limit of disturbance. Ms. Purnell asked if the entrance could be switched to the opposite side of the building. Mr. Neff said it could not because it is a two level structure with a walk out on the lower level. Mr. Neff pointed out the location of the proposed water lines and of the trenching that would be required within the regulated area. He stated the soil removed for the foundation work would be used as backfill.
MOTION: To approve application #IW-04-63 submitted by Mayfair Properties to restore the barn at 116 Woodbury Road per the plan, "Barn Renovation Erosion Control Plan," by Mr. Neff, dated 10/11/04 subject to the following conditions:
1) the equipment used to lift the barn shall remain on already compacted areas and
2) except for the installation of the water and utility lines, the excavation may be done only within 10 ft. of the existing barn.
By Mr. LaMuniere, seconded by Mrs. Hill, and passed 5-0.
Stiteler-Giddins/198 Tinker Hill Road and West Shore Road/#IW-04-54/Resubdivision: Mr. Ajello noted he had not yet reviewed this application. The applicants proposed to divide the 72+ acre parcel into a large lot with the existing dwelling and a 12.78 acre lot with frontage on West Shore Road. Mr. Neff said the applicants want another dwelling unit on the property, but already have a detached apartment, and so are proposing the resubdivision. The application includes the construction of the new dwelling. He noted there are wetlands and watercourses located throughout the property. Ms. Purnell asked that a detailed analysis of feasible and prudent alternatives be submitted. She pointed out that the proposed dwelling was being squeezed into an area in close proximity to Ash Swamp and Lake Waramaug, which was unfortunate because there were many more suitable locations in what now are conservation easement areas. A site inspection was scheduled for Monday, November 1, 2004 at 4:00 p.m.
Holly Hill Farm,LLC./87 Whittlesey Road/#IW-04-65/Restoration and Reforestation: Ms. Paca, landscape architect was present. It was noted the complementary report by Mr. LaMuniere, dated 10/25/04, the 10/27/04 memo from Mr. Picton, the 10/19/04 Site Inspection Minutes by Ms. Purnell, and a list entitled, Banned Invasives" were included in the file. Ms. Purnell's minutes were read aloud. Mr. Picton said the plans for extensive removal and replanting of vegetation could be considered in four general categories; 1) conversion of the lower third of the lawn to a wildflower meadow, 2) renovation of the young forest and brushy areas above the steep slope, 3) thinning of the existing forest and addition of trees and shrubs on the very steep slope down to the river, and 4) work in the floodplain. Mr. Bedini added 5) removal of trees along the stream flowing from Whittlesey Road. Ms. Purnell added 6) the dump, which she said was a critical area. Mr. Picton noted there were wetlands violations that would be discussed under Enforcement. These were: 1) the clearing of vegetation and deposition of top soil within 100 feet of an intermittent watercourse above the steep bank, 2) the clear cutting of under brush on the slope going down to the river, and 3) clearing in the floodplain. The Commission was generally in favor of converting part of the lawn to meadow as it would diversify the vegetation, chemicals would not be required for maintenance, and there was the possibility that more wetlands species would be planted in the wetter areas. However, Mr. Picton asked that this work be done in stages so the entire area would not be disturbed at once. It was also noted the Commission would be supportive of removal of the material and invasives from the dump area. Several Commissioners questioned whether the mixed forest on the steep slopes should be thinned or remain as is and evolve naturally. They were concerned removal of vegetation would increase the speed of runoff as it flowed towards the river. Ms. Purnell thought the proposed removal of large amounts of vegetation could have a significant impact on the Shepaug and so suggested a public hearing be held to consider the application. Mr. Picton agreed, adding he would like an opinion from an ecological consultant. Ms. Purnell suggested a "pilot program" to see if there would be any negative impacts from the work done. Mr. Picton thought there had been enough work already done without permits to serve as a pilot program. Mr. Ajello thought the Conservation Commission might be consulted for input. Mr. Picton asked the applicant to review the Commission's concerns and to revise the application for the next meeting to limit the scope of the proposed work, propose a construction sequence, and provide specific details on how the project would be undertaken. Mr. Picton advised Ms. Paca she could install erosion controls and interplant in a test spot, but could not do any further work at this time. There was a brief discussion regarding enforcement. Mr. Ajello will send the owners a citation for 1) dumping, 2) the clearing of the under story in the flood plain, and 3) activities within 100 feet and next to wetlands and watercourses.
New Application
Wallis/32 Sunny Ridge Road/#IW-04-66/Reconstruct Barn and Generator: The proposed barn is to be rebuilt on the original foundation approximately 85 feet from a pond. Silt fence would mark the limit of disturbance. Mr. Wallis stated the disturbed materials would be stockpiled and then used for backfill. Mr. Ajello said he did not foresee any problems. The site plan, "Gordon Wallis, 32 Sunny Ridge Road," no date, no signature, was reviewed. Mr. Wallis was advised the Commission could not act until the next meeting.
Enforcement
Ross/10 Sunny Ridge Road/#IW-02-V4/Wetlands Restoration: Mr. Ross brought a site plan with overlay, which was used for discussion purposes. Mr. Ajello noted he had requested a new application for the construction of the driveway and had found deposition of material at the rear of the property. Mr. Ross stated that had occurred at 40 Nettleton Hollow Road, not 10 Sunny Ridge. The driveway work done without a permit was discussed. Mr. Ross asked that the Notice of Violation on the Land Records for 10 Sunny Ridge Road be removed. It was noted the Commission is in the process of reviewing the work completed to make sure it is in compliance with the approved restoration plan. Mr. Ross said he had submitted an application for the driveway, but Mr. Ajello said it had been taken back by an agent who was going to complete it. Mr. Ajello also noted the approved restoration plan called for the relocation of the driveway, but did not specify where. Mr. Ross agreed to work with Mr. Ajello on the submission of a new application.
Matthews/89 Lower Church Hill Road/Tree Cutting: Mr. Ajello noted trees had been cut although not near wetlands and with no damage to the slope. Ms. Purnell advised him there are vernal pools throughout this area. Mr. Picton asked Mr. Ajello to keep an eye on the ongoing work to make sure it does not occur too close to wetlands and watercourses.
Gatto/155 Woodbury Road/Deck: Mr. Ajello reported the deck was now being completed. The Commission had previously asked the owners to remove it, but they have not done so. It was the consensus that a citation and an Enforcement Order should be issued, but to start the process with a formal Notice of Violation.
Sasson/4 East Shore Road/Repair of Stone Deck, Retaining Wall: Mr. Sasson had called the Land Use Office to voice his concern that his application had been denied without prejudice. He said he is working on obtaining documentation that these structures pre existed the repair work done. He said he would attend the next meeting. It was decided not to issue a Notice of Violation at this time.
Fowler/138 Nichols Hill Road/#IW-04-V5/Excavate in Wetlands and Watercourse: It was noted Mr. Fowler's appeal of his citation had been denied and he had since been sent an enforcement letter regarding what specifically he is required to do to correct the existing violations on his property. Mrs. D. Hill noted that at the Show Cause Hearing Mr. Fowler agreed to hire a soil scientist or engineer to draw up a proposal to address the Commission's concerns. This has not yet been received. The 5/17/04 Enforcement Order and 6/1/04 follow up letter were reviewed. Mr. Ajello will send Mr. Fowler a follow up memo.
Gorra/278 New Milford Turnpike/Septic Repair and Stream Work: It was the consensus the Commission should be consistent and should issue Dr. Gorra a citation for the excavation work done in the watercourse without a permit.
Meeker/269 New Milford Turnpike/Parking Area: Mr. Ajello reported Mr. Meeker is currently respecting the setback for parking from the river. The Commission is still waiting for an application for the parking area and for the accessory building, for which Zoning had received an application.
Wortzman/148 Nichols Hill Road: Beavers have constructed a dam and have flooded part of this property. Mr. Ajello advised Ms. Wortzman the dam would deteriorate on its and that using equipment to break it up would require a permit.
Guiliano/19 Winston Drive/#IW-04-V1/Violation of WEO Approval: Mr. Guiliano purchased the adjoining property, which had been impacted by drainage work on his property. This matter will be removed from the agenda.
Bailey/93 Old Litchfield Road/#IW-04-V7/Destruction of Wetlands by Quads: Mr. Picton asked Mr. Ajello to inspect the disturbed areas to determine whether the wetlands vegetation has grown back.
Greenfield/12 Ives Road/Clearing In or Near Wetlands: Mr. Ajello advised the Commission he is expecting an application for the work done without a permit.
McGorty/134 South Street/#IW-01-71/Final Driveway Plan: Mr. Picton reported Mr. Ajello had forwarded recommendations regarding the driveway and said this item should be taken off the agenda.
Other Business
Site Inspection Procedures: Mr. Picton asked that all site inspection minutes be circulated within a few days of the inspection so a final report can be submitted by the Monday before the meeting. Mrs. D. Hill noted these minutes must be filed in the Town Clerk's Office within 7 working days of the inspection. Mr. Picton thought it would be helpful to include a list of the Commission's questions and concerns in these minutes, and that applicants be advised these lists are preliminary.
MOTION: To adjourn the meeting. By Mr. LaMuniere.
Mr. Picton adjourned the meeting at 11:23 p.m.
FILED SUBJECT TO APPROVAL
Respectfully submitted,
Janet M. Hill
Land Use Coordinator
September 30, 2004
Citation Hearing
Fowler/138 Nichols Hill Road/Excavation, Filling, Clearing in Wetlands
Present: Atty. Powers, Mr. Ajello, Mr. Picton, Atty. Kelly, Mr. Fowler, Mrs. J. Hill, Mrs. D. Hill, Mr. Bedini, Mrs. Korzenko
Atty. Powers called the Citation Hearing to order at 7:04 p.m. and administered an oath to those who would be providing testimony.
Atty. Powers stated Atty. Kelly had sent him a position paper regarding the reasons why he did not think the citation should be upheld. These reasons were noted for the record and discussed in detail.
1. The citation was invalid because Mr. Ajello, Wetlands Enforcement Officer, did not have the authority to issue the citation: Mr. Ajello presented a letter dated 11/7/03 from Mrs. Luckey, former First Selectman, which assigned the citation officer duties to him. He also noted he had been sworn in by the Town Clerk. Atty. Kelly argued that Mr. Ajello could not have been appointed before the effective date of the Ordinance, which he claimed was 11/10/03, but it was pointed out the Ordinance was effective 11/1/03.
2. The citation was invalid because the Ordinance failed to comply with CGS 22a-42g because a) it created a schedule of fines rather than a single fine and b) it failed to protect the due process rights of property owners: Atty. Powers dismissed this argument because it was not under his jurisdiction as Hearing Officer to rule on the validity of the Ordinance on constitutional grounds. He noted Ct. Superior Court was the proper venue to consider this argument.
3. The citation was invalid because it was issued before there was a determination that the Regulations would apply and
4. The citation and the record failed to state any findings of facts or to give notice as to a finding of a violation of any regulation or to identify the regulation claimed to be violated: and
5. The citation ignored evidence presented at the Show Cause Hearing and/or relied on evidence that the WEO and Commission failed to present at the Show Cause Hearing, which violates Mr. Fowler's right to due process. Arguments #3, #4, and #5 were considered together at length. Atty. Kelly argued Mr. Fowler could not be cited for an activity, which was not regulated by the Inland Wetlands Commission, and so would not have been in violation if he had applied for an exemption. He also stated it was not fair to his client that the section number of the regulation violated had not been noted for the record so that Mr. Fowler could adequately prepare his defense. It was noted that the 6/1/04 citation listed the violation as excavation, filling, and clearing in wetlands and watercourses, although the number of the regulation violated had not been included. Mr. Picton, Chairman, and Mr. Ajello explained they did not consider the above activity to be as of right because the scope of the work was significant (use of machinery in wetlands) and had the potential for adverse impact and damage to the wetlands.
Atty. Powers stated he disagreed with Mr. Kelly's arguments that Mr. Fowler was denied due process, and also disagreed that the citation order did not provide enough specific information as to the exact description of the violation. He therefore upheld the citation order and noted his decision could be appealed to Ct. Superior Court. He adjourned the hearing at 8:25 p.m.
FILED SUBJECT TO APPROVAL
Respectfully submitted,
Janet M. Hill
Land Use Coordinator
September 22, 2004
MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. LaMuniere, Mr. Picton, Ms. Purnell
MEMBERS ABSENT: Mrs. Gray, Mrs. D. Hill
ALTERNATES PRESENT: Mr. Bedini, Ms. Coe, Mrs. Korzenko
STAFF PRESENT: Mr. Ajello, Mrs. J. Hill
ALSO PRESENT: Mr. Neff, Mr. Velseboer, Mr. Armstrong, Mr. Johnson, Mr. SearsRegular Business
Mr. Picton called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and seated Members LaMuniere and Picton and Alternates Bedini, Coe, and Korzenko.
MOTION: To add the following subsequent business to the Agenda: New Applications: 1) Carron/ 58 Gunn Hill Road/#IW-04-55/Addition, Terraces, Generator, Driveway, 2) Gorra/278 New Milford Turnpike/#IW-04-56ATF/Septic Repair and Stream Remediation; Enforcement: 1) Brown/96 Romford Road/#IW-03-09/Permanent Dam Repair; Other Business: 1) Review and Approval of Draft Letter to New Milford Zoning Commission Re: Proposed Zone Change, 2) Armstrong/72 Mygatt Road/#IW-99-16/Revision of Approved Plan. By Mrs. Korzenko, seconded by Ms. Coe, and passed 5-0.
Consideration of the Minutes
The September 8, 2003 Regular Meeting minutes were accepted as corrected. On page 2 in the third line under Turner, "pressurized" should be "pressure treated." On page 5 in the second sentence under Carter, "rip rapped" should be "armored." In the sixth line on page 6 under McGorty, it was Mr. Picton, not Ms. Purnell, who recommended culverts. On page 7 in the first line, the spelling of New Milford was corrected.
MOTION: To accept the 9/8/04 Regular Meeting Minutes as corrected. By Mrs. Korzenko, seconded by Mr. Bedini, and passed 5-0.
MOTION: To accept the 9/14/04 Special Meeting Minutes (Lake Waramaug Country Club) as submitted. By Mrs. Korzenko, seconded by Mr. Bedini, and passed 5-0.
Mr. Ajello noted the Kent-Washington town line goes through the pond referred to in these minutes.
The September 14, 2004 Special Meeting minutes for Pickett et. al. were accepted as corrected. "Mr. Cable" should be changed to "Mr. Skorski." Mr. Picton noted another question raised was how would the flow be regulated during construction.
MOTION: To accept the 9/14/04 Special Meeting minutes (Pickett et al.) as corrected. By Mr. Picton, seconded by Mrs. Korzenko, and passed 5-0.
MOTION: To accept the 9/14/04 Special Meeting minutes (Town of Washington) as written. By Mrs. Korzenko, seconded by Ms. Coe, and passed 5-0.
MOTION: To accept the 9/14/04 Special Meeting minutes (Lovelace) as submitted. By Mr. LaMuniere, seconded by Mr. Picton, and passed 5-0.
The September 14, 2004 Special Meeting minutes were accepted as corrected. The spelling of Trevenen was corrected.
MOTION: To accept the 9/14/04 Special Meeting Minutes (Mayfair) as corrected. By Mr. LaMuniere, seconded by Mrs. Korzenko, and passed 5-0.
Pending Applications
Sasson/4 June Road/#IW-04-44ATF/Repair Deck, Retaining Wall, Walkway: Mr. Ajello reported Mr. Sasson is trying to collect photos to verify the deck and retaining wall were pre existing structures. Discussion was tabled to the next meeting.
Miles-Marsh/204 Wykeham Road/#IW-04-47/Driveway: At the last meeting the Commission asked whether Nova Scotia Hill Road was a viable accessway and whether the Town continued to have the responsibility to maintain it. Mr. Ajello will call the applicants to advise them of the information needed.
Lake Waramaug Country Club, Inc./19 Golf Links Road/#IW-04-49/Golf Course Drainage Improvements: Mr. Neff, engineer, submitted a copy of the USDA soil map, the report, "Turfgrass Management Plan for Fairways and Roughs," by Mr. Dest, dated 1/16/97 and the revised map, "Golf Course Drainage Improvement Plan," by Mr. Neff, revised to 9/17/04. He noted the main revision was the riprapped silt basin had been changed to a vegetated buffer. Ms. Purnell noted the mowed areas shown on the plan did not match the mowed areas observed on the site inspection. Mr. Picton noted the issues to be addressed were listed in his 9/17/04 memo and in the 9/14/04 site inspection report. Mr. Neff also noted the existing 8" clay tile would be replaced with a vegetated open swale that would have a greater capacity than the tile and would slow the runoff and act as a biofilter. The Commission asked that a note be placed on the map regarding how the wet meadow would be maintained. Mr. Picton said one of the aims of the Commission was to prevent wetlands from being turned into lawn, which would require additional drainage systems. He asked if the golf course could still function adequately if less land were drained. Mr. Neff said he had provided a typical drainage system for an area that size. Discussion of drainage details continued and Mr. Picton again requested that each of the issues listed in the site inspection report be addressed. It was noted Mr. Lecher will attend the next meeting and that he might consider installing a larger sediment basin to allow an area for clean out without removing vegetation. Mr. LaMuniere stressed the importance of maintaining a wetland buffer on the north side of the wet meadow area and also asked for details on the size of the silt basin and the kinds of plantings proposed. It was noted the Town of Kent had been notified of the application as required per state statute.
Pickett, Johnson, Gillette, Skorski/4 New Preston Hill Road and 19,23,25 East Shore Road/#IW-04-50/Repair Dam, Dredge Basin, Install Dry Hydrant: It was noted neither specific engineered plans nor a precise map had been submitted. Questions and concerns raised by the Commissioners included; 1) how water levels would be adjusted during construction, 2) what were the basin parameters of the silt removal, 3) how much silt would be removed, 4) exactly how would the dam be repaired, 5) how high must the dam be, 6) what measures would be taken to minimize turbulence in the stream during construction, 7) would the retaining wall along the east side of the pond be rebuilt, 8) were any erosion and sedimentation control measures proposed, and 9) what would be the potential impact to wetlands and watercourses downstream and to public safety? Mr. Picton noted if substantial work was proposed, engineered plans may be required.
Town of Washington/17 East Shore Road/#IW-04-51/Repair Retaining Wall: Construction plans had not been submitted. Ms. Purnell stated this was a repair of an existing wall and the Commission would want to make sure the work was done properly and the wall would be structurally sound. Mr. Picton noted the 9/14/04 site inspection report listed many of the Commission's concerns and said another issue to be addressed was what measures would be taken for flow control during construction.
Lovelace/Upper Church Hill Road/Assessor's Map #6-8, Lot #23/ Drainage for New Dwelling: Mr. Picton recused himself and Ms Purnell was seated. Mr. Neff, engineer, submitted a copy of the USDA soil map and the map, "Proposed Site Plan," by Mr. Neff, revised to 9/20/04, which showed the existing tree line as the Commission had requested at the last meeting. The Commission thought it was important to protect the wooded buffer.
MOTION: To approve the application, #IW-04-52 submitted by Mr. and Mrs. Lovelace for drainage for a new dwelling on their property on Upper Church Hill Road, Assessor's Map #6-8, Lot #23, per the map, "Proposed Site Plan," by Mr. Neff, revised to 9/20/04 with the condition that the woodlands in the wetlands and along the east edge of the wetlands remain in a natural state. By Ms. Purnell, seconded by Mrs. Korzenko, and passed 5-0.
Mr. Picton was reseated.
Velseboer/337 Romford Road/#IW-04-53/Garage: The map, "Zoning Location Survey," by Mr. Farnsworth, dated 9/2/04 was reviewed. Mr. Ajello said he did not see any other appropriate location for a garage, which would be constructed in the existing parking area. It was noted two stone patios, which were not included in the original permit for the dwelling, had been constructed. As the patios had caused no adverse impact to the wetlands, the Commission asked Mr. Velseboer to add them to the application and to pay the after the fact fee of $60.
Mayfair Properties, LLC./116 Woodbury Road/#IW-04-54/Dredge Pond, Replace Dam and Culvert: Mr. Neff, engineer, submitted the USDA soil map and the "Pond Maintenance Plan," by Mr. Neff, revised to 9/20/04, which included the proposed dam and culvert cross section. At the last meeting the Commission had asked for some terracing and a shelf in the pond. Mr. Neff noted the proposed 3:1 slope for the sides of the pond and the shelf area on the back side near the inlet. When asked why the pond would be so deep, he said a depth of 10 feet was recommended for trout, that taking the organics out would improve the water quality, and that if only the immediate area around the hydrant was dug out, it would fill back in quickly. Mr. Picton reviewed the questions raised at the 9/14/04 site inspection and in his memo. Mr. Picton asked how storm events in excess of a 50 year storm would be handled. Mr. Neff noted the size of the outlet pipe would be increased to handle a 100 year storm rather than installing an emergency spillway. He said this would cause less disturbance to the wetlands. Mr. Picton questioned whether the proposed shelves were adequate. Mr. Neff stated they were proposed around one third of the pond and that the other sides would have a 3:1 slope, which would support emergent vegetation. He also stated some of the bottom would be left in its natural state. Mr. Neff reviewed the plans to pump down the pond and for a silt basin with hay bales to catch the silt before the water flowed overland back to the stream. Ms. Purnell suggested the applicant provide a greater vegetated buffer to compensate for the smaller shelf area. The landscaping plan was reviewed and a buffer planting plan agreed upon.
MOTION: To approve the application, #IW-04-54 submitted by Mayfair Properties, LLC. to dredge a pond and replace a dam and culvert at 116 Woodbury Road per the plan, "Pond Maintenance Plan," by Mr. Neff, revised to 9/20/04 and the landscaping plan, "Pond at Mayflower Inn - Washington, Ct.," by Mr. Suford, dated 9/8/04 with the condition that on the north and northwest sides of the pond where the planting plan shows a perimeter of ferns, that there be a minimum 10 ft. wide buffer between the edge of the pond and the path planted with a variety of herbaceous perennials and low growing native shrubs. By Mrs. Korzenko, seconded by Mr. LaMuniere, and passed 5-0.
Velseboer/337 Romford Road/#IW-04-53ATF/Garage and Patios: The 9/2/04 map, "Zoning Location Survey," was reviewed again. Mr. Picton noted the application form had been revised to include the two stone patios shown on the map and that a check for the $60 ATF fee had been submitted.
MOTION: To approve the application, #IW-04-53 submitted by Mr. Velseboer to construct a garage at 337 Romford Road per the map, "Zoning Location Survey," by Mr. Farnsworth, dated 9/2/04 with the addition that two patios be added as after the fact components as they were not approved in any previous application. By Mr. Picton, seconded by Mrs. Korzenko, and passed 5-0.
New Applications
Carron/58 Gunn Hill Road/#IW-04-55/Addition, Terraces, Driveway, Generator: Mr. Picton recused himself and Ms. Purnell was seated. Mr. Collins, contractor, represented the applicant. He presented the map, "Addition and Improvements," by Archimuse, dated 9/17/04 with hand drawn additions and notes by Picton Brothers, LLC, dated 9/21/04. Mr. Collins briefly reviewed the plans to construct terraces and an addition to the existing house, put in a retaining wall, improve an old driveway and add a new parking area, and install a generator. He noted the improved driveway would not be paved and would be the only construction entrance and said silt fencing would be installed along the entire length of the driveway and around the construction area. It was noted the line showing the extent of the wetlands on the site plan was estimated, but the work on the house would be approximately 92 feet from the pond and the landscaping work 80 feet away. It was noted a construction sequence had been submitted. A site inspection was scheduled for Tuesday, September 28, 2004 at 4:00 p.m.
Mr. Picton was reseated.
Gorra/278 New Milford Turnpike/#IW-04/56ATF/Septic Repair and Stream Remediation: Ms. Purnell recused herself. Mr. Ajello presented photos of the disturbed areas and noted the Town Sanitarian had approved the septic repair, but the applicant had not realized he also need Wetlands approval because the work was within 50 feet of an intermittent watercourse. Dr. Gorra stated while the machinery was on site he had cleaned out the sediment and stones from the watercourse. It was noted the work had been done late in July and had been completed within five days. Dr. Gorra proposed to replant the area and to install a series of sediment basins or check dams. The Commission asked for a detailed remediation plan that includes the size and number of plantings to restore the streambank to its natural state and to help prevent erosion and the size and location of the proposed check dams. Mr. Picton noted in the past the Commission has asked to have citations issued for this type of activity and would try to be consistent in this case. A site inspection was scheduled for Tuesday, September 28, 2004 at 4:30 p.m. Enforcement will be discussed at the next meeting.
Other Business
Armstrong/72 Mygatt Road/#IW-99-16/Revision of Approved Plan: Mr. Armstrong, property owner, and Mr. Johnson, contractor, explained the CL&P hookup was actually located more than a hundred feet from where it was shown on the approved plan, "Subsurface Sewage Disposal System," by Mr. Neff, revised to 11/4/03. This meant the underground service would have to cross an intermittent watercourse near the access to the property. They presented the above referenced map with the proposed route drawn in by hand. Ms. Purnell suggested the crossing be made perpendicular to the streambed so it would be shorter and cause less disturbance, but the applicant said the proposed route was through an area, which had been disturbed in the past and so would actually cause less impact. Mr. Johnson stated the service would be buried in sand at least two feet deep and covered with rip rap and that the work could be completed in a day. Ms. Purnell objected to the proposed rip rap and that the wetlands would not be crossed at its narrowest point. Mr. Ajello did not think there was a viable alternative because there was a more natural area above and it was wetter below. Mr. Picton did not think the proposed work would cause a lasting adverse impact.
MOTION: To approve the revision requested by Mr. Armstrong to permit #IW-99-16 to run the underground electric service through an intermittent watercourse at 72 Mygatt Road per the map, "Subsurface Sewage Disposal System," by Mr. Neff, revised to 11/4/03 and with revisions drawn in color by the applicant, as the Wetlands Enforcement Officer had inspected the site and determined there were no alternatives with less impact to the wetlands and because the proposed work can be done without any lasting negative impact and with the following conditions: 1) the installation across the stream area must be completed in one day, 2) the excavated material must be stockpiled at least 20 feet from the watercourse, and 3) the trench must be covered with 3 inch rip rap extending at least 5 feet out from both sides. By Mr. Picton, seconded by Mrs. Korzenko, and passed 5-0.
Ms. Purnell said she objected to the revision because the work could cause a long term potential for scouring.
Enforcement
Meeker/269 New Milford Turnpike: The Commission was concerned that Mr. Meeker's application to extend the parking area had been denied because it was incomplete, yet he continued to use the area for parking. It was noted the parking could potentially cause erosion of the streambank, compaction of the soils, and leaks from vehicles could contaminate the water and soils. Mr. Ajello advised the Commission Mr. Meeker had been told to keep all vehicles away from the river until an application was approved. It was the consensus Mr. Meeker should be notified by certified letter that if the parking is not kept away from the stream a citation will be issued.
Thorne/228 West Shore Road/Well Drilling without a Permit: Mr. Ajello reported the work had stopped, an ATF application would be submitted for the next meeting, and a letter of apology had been sent by Mrs. Thorne. It was noted there is an ongoing problem with the Health Department because it does not inform property owners that they must obtain Inland Wetlands permits for wells and septic systems in regulated areas. Mr. Ajello was asked to advise Mr. Straiton, well driller, that in the future he will be issued a citation if he begins work without the required Inland Wetlands permit.
Brown/96 Romford Road/#IW-03-09/Permanent Dam Repair: Mr. Ajello reported the Browns had misinterpreted the 5/25/04 letter from the DEP advising them of necessary work to be done on the dam to address deficiencies, and had filled in the emergency spillway. He also noted some minor points, such as installation of a grate and removal of trees in the vicinity of the dam, discussed during the site inspection with the DEP officials had not been included in the letter. Mr. Picton thought it was imperative the spillway be restored as soon as possible. It was the consensus that the work should be done by mid October and the disturbed areas seeded and mulched and if this is not properly completed, a citation should be issued. Mr. Ajello will notify the Browns by letter what corrective work must be done and will copy Mr. Bartos of Land Tech and the DEP.
Arciola/9 Dark Entry Road/#IW-03-19/Single Family Dwelling: Mr. Ajello noted there had been little progress. Mr. Picton asked him to inspect the swale on the property.
Ross/10 Sunny Ridge Road/#IW-02-V4: Mr. Picton read the 9/17/04 letter from Mr. Ross. The Commission asked Mr. Ajello to again ask Mr. Ross to either submit an application or to remove the material deposited in the upland review area. It was also noted an application would be required for the construction of the driveway referred to in the 9/17/04 letter.
Fowler/138 Nichols Hill Road/#IW-04-V5:The citation hearing was rescheduled for Thursday, September 30, 2004 at 7:00 p.m.
Lake Waramaug Country Club/West Shore Road/Remodel Beach House: Mr. Ajello thought the proposed work would cause no adverse impact to the wetlands. Mr. Picton asked the Commission to reconsider its request for an application rather than an Agent's approval. It was the consensus that extreme care should be taken because the work would be done so close to the shoreline and so the decision would stand.
Other Business
McGorty/134 South Street/#IW-01-71/Review Final Driveway Plan per Condition of Approval: The map, "Septic System Plan," by Mr. Neff, revised to 9/12/04 was reviewed. Mr. Picton noted a drainage swale had been added, but thought that was minimal as far as providing construction details for the driveway. He asked for specific details showing where the runoff would flow and how it would be directed to spread out across the hillside. Mr. LaMuniere suggested a culvert at the mid point, a cross section, and a few "bumps" in the driveway to direct the flow. Mr. Ajello pointed out the house and septic system had been moved farther from the wetlands, the watershed was small, and a culvert installed under the driveway would have a tendency to heave. Mr. Picton will inspect the property to determine whether cross culverts should be required.
Discretion of the Chair
1) There was a brief discussion about site inspection procedures. Ms. Purnell noted the DEP advises observation only, no discussion, but Mr. Picton stated when conducting an inspection, the Commission is trying to gather all the information it can. He advised the Commissioners to keep together rather than going off in separate groups and to get together at the end to review points and make sure no important information is omitted from the report. He said the goal would be to provide the applicant with a list of all the information requested by the Commission so that it could be submitted by the next Regular Meeting.
2) Emails were discussed. It was noted there should be no discussion of applications between members between meetings, not even by email. Concerns regarding applications may be emailed to staff who will place copies in the files, but should not be sent to other commissioners.
Referral from New Milford Zoning Commission/Proposed Zone Change/ Walker Brook Road and Rt. 109: The draft letter written by Mrs. D. Hill based on input she had received from Commissioners was circulated. It was the consensus it should include more specific reasons about why the Inland Wetlands Commission is concerned about the proposal. Ms. Purnell will provide more details and will most likely hand deliver the letter to the New Milford Zoning Office.
Communications
1) Copies of the Land Use Brochure were handed out. Mrs. Korzenko was congratulated on a job well done.
2) There will be a course on site plan review in Bantam on 9/30.
3) There will be a conference of the Ct. Federation of Lakes on 10/23.
4) There will be an invasive species conference in Storrs on 10/7.
MOTION: To enter Executive Session at 10:41 p.m. to discuss Bolek, #IW-03-65 and the Guliano appeal of Ficalora, #IW-03-54. By Mrs. Korzenko, seconded by Mr. Bedini, and passed 5-0.
MOTION: To end Executive Session at 10:45 p.m. By Mrs. Korzenko, seconded by Mr. Bedini, and passed 5-0.
MOTION: To adjourn the meeting. By Mrs. Korzenko.
FILED SUBJECT TO APPROVAL
Respectfully submitted,
Janet M. Hill, Land Use Coordinator
September 8, 2004
MEMBERS PRESENT: Mrs. Hill, Mr. LaMuniere, Mr. Picton, Ms. Purnell
MEMBER ABSENT: Mrs. Gray
ALTERNATES PRESENT: Ms. Coe, Mrs. Korzenko
ALTERNATE ABSENT: Mr. Bedini
STAFF PRESENT: Mr. Ajello
ALSO PRESENT: Mr. Segla, Mr. Haber, Mr. Neff, Mr. Beck, Mr. Sasson, Ms. Grant, Mr. Velseboer, Mr. Lecher, Mr. Trevenen, Mr. G. McGorty, Mr. J. McGortyRegular Business
Mr. Picton called the meeting to order at 7:08 p.m. and seated Members Hill, LaMuniere, and Picton and Alternates Coe and Korzenko for Ms. Purnell and Mr. Bedini.
MOTION: To add the following business not already posted on the agenda: New Applications: 1) Lovelace/Upper Church Hill Road/#IW-04-52/ Drainage for New Dwelling, 2) Velseboer/337 Romford Road/#IW-04-53/Garage, 3) Mayfair Properties/116 Woodbury Road/#IW-04-54/Dredge Pond, Replace Dam and Culvert and Other Business: 1) McGorty/134 South Street/#IW-01-71/Review Final Driveway Plan per Condition of Approval, 2) Municipal Inland Wetlands Commissioner Training Program-October 2004, 3) Town Planning Process, 4) Annual Report. By Mrs. Hill, seconded by Mrs. Korzenko, and passed 5-0.
Consideration of the Minutes
The August 11, 2004 Regular Meeting minutes were accepted as corrected. On page 2, the motion for Adams was made by Mr. Picton and seconded by Mrs. Gray. On page 3 under Sasson, it should be noted that Mr. Sasson was asked to provide photos to prove the prior existence of the deck and a planting plan for the area between the wall and the road. On page 3 under Haber, Mr. Haber was asked to add the location of the septic system to the map and it should be noted that part, not all, of the work was proposed within the 100 foot setback. In the third paragraph on page 3, "vegetation" should be deleted. On page 4, in the sixth line under Miles-Marsh, "as" should be added to read, "...Nova Scotia Hill Road as a driveway...." On page 5 under Swanson, the fourth line was corrected to, "...will require an Inland Wetlands permit although it was an emergency."
MOTION: To accept the August 11, 2004 Regular Meeting minutes as corrected. By Mrs. Hill, seconded by Mr. Picton, and passed 5-0.
The August 18, 2004 Special Meeting minutes were accepted as corrected. The correct spelling of Ilsley was noted.
MOTION: To accept the August 18, 2004 Special Meeting minutes (Haber/#IW-04-46) as corrected. By Mrs. Korzenko, seconded by Mr. Picton, and passed 5-0.
MOTION: To accept the August 18, 2004 Special Meeting minutes (Miles-Marsh/#IW-04-47) as written. By Mrs. Korzenko, seconded by Ms. Coe, and passed 5-0.
Pending Applications
Turner/185 West Morris Road/#IW-04-45 ATF/Generator: The information requested at the last meeting; ATF fee, DEP form, and details about the fence materials and installation had been submitted. No pressurized materials will be used, the post holes will be dug by hand, and all disturbed areas will be mulched.
MOTION: To approve as submitted application #IW-04-45ATF for Turner/185 West Morris Road/Install Generator and Fence per the site plan scaled 1" = 20', no title, no date. By Mrs. Hill, seconded by Mrs. Korzenko, and passed 5-0.
Haber/58 Upper Church Hill Road/#IW-04-46/Additions to Existing Dwelling: Mr. Haber and Mr. Segla were present. Mr. Ajello pointed out the proposed changes to the existing driveway, the proposed catch basin, and the wetlands boundaries on the map submitted at the last meeting. Mrs. Korzenko noted the silt fencing required by the Commission had been indicated. Mr. LaMuniere, Mrs. Korzenko, and Mrs. Hill had inspected the site and had no concerns. Mr. Picton noted it was important that the silt fence be installed as shown on the map to mark the limit of disturbance. No additional clearing beyond this line into the wetlands is permitted. Mr. Haber added the location of the septic system to the map and initialed his revision.
MOTION: To approve application #IW-04-46 for Haber/ 58 Upper Church Hill Road/Additions to Existing Dwelling per the map, "Topographical Survey," by Dymar, dated 8/3/04 and received 8/18/04 with the condition that silt fencing be installed between the construction area and the wetlands to the west before the work begins to mark the limit of disturbance during construction. By Mrs. Korzenko, seconded by Ms. Coe, and passed 5-0.
Miles-Marsh/204 Wykeham Road/#IW-04-47/Driveway: No one was present to represent the applicants. The map, "Topographic Map Prepared for David S. Miles, Trustee," revised to 8/10/04, by Mr. Alex was reviewed. Mr. Picton explained Mr. Marsh proposed a lot line revision and a driveway from Wykeham Road to access this parcel rather than using his existing frontage on Nova Scotia Hill Road. Access from Nova Scotia Hill Road over an existing wood road would not require a wetlands crossing, while the proposed access from Wykeham Road would run between two pockets of wetlands compromising the wetlands buffer plus would require a crossing and the cutting of many trees. Mr. Marsh had previously stated he proposed the Wykeham Road access so he would not need a maintenance agreement with the other property owners who use Nova Scotia Hill Road. Mr. Picton stated the Commission could not approve an activity, which would adversely impact the wetlands, if there was a feasible and prudent alternative with less or no impact. He requested better documentation from the applicants that the existing access has been compromised by the Town. The Commission thought since the Town had not legally abandoned the road, it still had an obligation to maintain it. Mr. Picton also thought there was a possible driveway location off Wykeham Road that would have less impact than the one proposed. Further discussion was tabled to the next meeting.
Sasson/4 June Road/#IW-04-44 ATF/Repair Deck, Retaining Wall, Walkway: Mr. Sasson and Ms. Grant, landscape horticulturalist, were present. Mr. Picton explained that if the work done was, indeed, repair work, it still required a permit from the Commission. Mr. Sasson submitted affidavits from two neighbors who stated the stone deck and walls existed for several years prior to the repair work. Ms. Purnell arrived at 8:12 p.m. and was seated. Mr. Picton stated he had inspected the site, saw that the work looked new, and requested more specific documentation to prove what had existed there previously. Mr. Sasson