East Hampton Inland Wetlands & Watercourses Agency
Regular Meeting
June 25, 2008
East Hampton Middle School Commons
Unapproved Minutes
1. Call to Order: Vice-Chairman Wilson called the meeting to order at 6:31 p.m.
Present: Vice-Chairman Joshua Wilson, Members David Boule, Alannah Coshow, Dean Kavalkovich, Marc Lorah,
and Alternate Member Maureen Heidtmann (6:35~p.m.) were present. The Building Administrator, James Carey, was
also present.
Absent: Chairman Jeffry Foran, Member Peter Wall, and Alternate Member Scott Hill were not present.
2. Seating of Alternates: No Alternates were seated at this time.
3. Approval of Minutes: There were no minutes presented for approval at this time.
4. Agent Approval: None.
5. Communication, Enforcement, and Public Comment:
Communications: Mr. Carey reported that he is in receipt of a CD regarding Low Impact Development Projects in
Connecticut from the College of Agriculture and Natural Resources. If anyone is interested in reviewing it, please let
him know.
The Building, Planning & Zoning Department has received, on June 24th, a notification of a Wetlands and Watercourse
Permit Application by the D.O.T. for rehabilitation of the Comstock Covered Bridge over the Salmon River. The State
will have jurisdiction on this project; however, if you would like to weigh in on any of the specifics, questions may be
forwarded to the State through this office.
We have received notification that the Court has ruled favorably for the IWWA in the Daniel Scroggin v. East Hampton
Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Agency. No appeal was filed.
Enforcement: There were no enforcement actions to report at this time.
Public Comments:
Tom Wells, North Main Street and a member of the Lake Pocotopaug Commission, was present to discuss the Columbia
Lake Watershed Regulation. He would like to have copies distributed to the members of the IWWA. He will be forwarding
that document to the Clerk for distribution.
6. Reading of the Legal Notice: None.
7. Public Hearings:
A. Application of James Haydu, 15 Anderson Way, for Pond Dredging for Residential Improvement by Homeowner,
M 5/B 2/L 7.
Vice-Chairman Wilson seated Ms. Heidtmann at this time.
Mr. Haydu was present to discuss his application. He explained that there were a few things that the town’s engineer,
CLA Engineering had asked to be added to the plan. These revisions have been added and distributed. They include
Mr. Snarski, Soil Scientist, monitor the project, hay bales will be located on the plans, and permanent conservation
markers will be located on the plan. Mr. Richard Snarski is available for questions.
Mr. Carey reviewed the issues at hand this evening. The options available to the Agency are to approve the pond
enhancement that the applicant has requested or eliminate the pond entirely. Mr. Russo has indicated in the past
that either option for wetland mitigation … restoration of preexisting grades or pond enhancement … are ecologically
viable. Mr. Snarski is here to expand on the overall of doing one over the other.
Richard Snarski, Soil Scientist, discussed the application and his expectations for the best method to mitigate the
activity which has taken place in this area.
The Agency discussed with Mr. Snarski and Mr. Haydu their expectations for this area. The Agency questioned the
plans as they pertain to the Conservation Easement on the property. Mr. Haydu referred to a copy of the Conservation
Easement Agreement that is recorded in the land records for his property. The Agency discussed the habitat that has
been created on this site as well as the surrounding area and existing habitats.
Vice-Chairman Wilson opened the public hearing at this time.
Roger Anderson, 17 Anderson Way, stated his concern for the health and safety of the residents in this area. He also
discussed that 25 people signed a petition to do away with the pond.
Patience Anderson, 17 Anderson Way, questioned why no fence would be required on this pond. She also stated that
the animals were present in this area before Mr. Haydu created this pond.
J. Dantonio, Wopowog Road, discussed his concern that the IWWA would take this much time to discuss an existing
pond in such a small area.
Mr. Haydu explained that the petition that was signed by 25 people was not to do away with the pond but to demand
a public hearing on the pond.
Mr. Carey confirmed that and stated that there were 28 signatures on the petition. He also explained the requirement
for fences around drainage structures.
The Agency discussed the advice of counsel at the last meeting, which included that the pond should not be considered
by this Agency as a public nuisance and that this Agency is not charged with public safety concerns.
Mr. Snarski summarized his position on the issues of fencing, creating a marsh fertilizer, and the use of the pond by the
property owner.
Ms. Coshow moved to close the public hearing. Mr. Boule seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
The Agency discussed the application and the need for additional clarification on Item 1, page 2 of CLA’s letter
regarding the statement “leave it alone” and other conditions that might be necessary. They debated how to proceed.
Mr. Wilson moved to continue the application of James Haydu, 15 Anderson Way, for Pond Dredging for Residential
Improvement by Homeowner, M 5/B 2/L 7, to the next regularly scheduled meeting. Mr. Lorah seconded the motion.
The motion carried unanimously.
8. New Application:
A. Application of Town of Marlborough & Town of East Hampton, Route 66, East High Street, Modification of Approval
for Underground Utilities for Municipal Improvements.
Mr. Carey explained that the Agency acted upon this project about two years ago. At which time a permit was issued.
Due to situations that have changed in the project the sewer needs to be extended in the upland area into areas where
it was not planned to go. The WPCA has requested that the permit be amended to include this new area.
Dennis Obee, Weston & Sampson Engineers, was present to represent the Towns of East Hampton and Marlborough.
He explained that the manhole that the project was to discharge to was not the correct manhole for that function. The
sewer line must be moved further down Route 66 about 950’ to the correct manhole. The plan presented this evening
is the revised plan. Since the correct manhole is downhill the pipes have been combined to a single pipe and will flow
by gravity to this manhole. The wetlands have been delineated and erosion control measures will be hay bales and silt
fence to protect those wetlands. The work will be done in the shoulder of Route 66 to keep cost down by staying out
of the concrete road base. There will be no trench work. Construction has started in Marlborough.
Ms. Coshow moved that the Application of Town of Marlborough & Town of East Hampton, Route 66, East High Street,
Modification of Approval for Underground Utilities for Municipal Improvements be continued to the next regularly
scheduled meeting. Mr. Wilson seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
9. Continued Applications:
A. Application of James Marino, 9 Huckleberry Acres, for Activity in the Buffer/Setback Area for a New Residential
Development for a Single Family Unit – M~6A/B~57/L~6B-5.
Attorney Timothy Lee was present to represent James Marino. He reviewed the application and its history with the
Agency. There is no activity within the wetlands itself but they are within 21.5’ of the wetlands. They have revised
the plan to include the additional information that CLA has requested regarding the infiltration rate of the backyard.
Soil tests have been provided to CLA to satisfy their concerns. The additional concerns of CLA have been satisfied
as well. There is no retaining wall in the plans nor is there a need for a retaining wall.
The Agency reviewed the plans and raised a variety of questions.
Mr. Wilson moved that the Application of James Marino, 9 Huckleberry Acres, for Activity in the Buffer/Setback
Area for a New Residential Development for a Single Family Unit, M~6A/B~57/L~6B_5, be approved with the
issuance of the standard, short-form version of the East Hampton Inland Wetlands & Watercourses Agency Permit
including appropriate modifications to Section A, Section B to remain as is, and Section C to include Paragraphs
1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 10 of the standard long-form permit. The reason for the approval is no preferable location in
the area, which is the subject of the application, could reasonably be required. Ms. Coshow seconded the motion.
The motion carried unanimously.
10. New Business:
A. Reschedule July Meeting: Mr. Carey explained that he will be out of town for the meeting in July. He discussed
this with the Chairman who indicated that he would like the Agency to consider rescheduling the meeting for an
evening in July when staff would be able to attend.
Mr. Wilson moved to reschedule the regular July meeting to July 23, 2008 at 6:30 p.m. Mr. Kavalkovich
seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
11. Old Business: None.
12. Adjournment: Ms. Coshow moved to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Kavalkovich seconded the motion. The motion
carried unanimously.
The meeting adjourned at 8:08 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Daphne C. Schaub
Recording Secretary
| 
