East Hampton Inland Wetlands & Watercourses Agency
Regular Meeting
July 23, 2008
Town Hall Meeting Room
Unapproved Minutes
1. Call to Order: Chairman Jeffry Foran called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.
Present: Chairman Jeffry Foran, Vice-Chairman Joshua Wilson, Members David Boule, Alannah Coshow,
Marc Lorah, Alternate Members Maureen Heidtmann, and Scott Hill were present. The Building
Administrator, James Carey, was also present.
Absent: Members Dean Kavalkovich and Peter Wall were not present.
2. Seating of Alternates: Alternate Members Maureen Heidtmann and Scott Hill were seated as voting
members at this time.
3. Approval of Minutes:
A. April 30, 2008: Ms. Coshow moved, and Mr. Wilson seconded, to approve the minutes of the
April 30, 2008 meeting. The motion carried unanimously.
B. May 28, 2008: The minutes of the May 28, 2008 meeting have not been presented for approval
at this time.
4. Agent Approval:
A. Application of Marek Szkotak, 167 Hog Hill Road, for activity in buffer/setback area for
residential improvement by homeowner – M~07/B~21/L~13E.
Duly Authorized Agent Jeffry Foran described the application to the Agency. He explained
that he has approved this application for a deck in the buffer area with the condition that hay
bales and silt fences be used to ensure that there will be no erosion and sedimentation into the
wetlands.
B. Application of Thomas Crean, 35 Lake Drive, for activity in buffer/setback area, excavation, for
residential improvement by homeowner – M~03A/B~44C/L~14.
Mr. Foran reported that he had not received this application in time to review it for this meeting.
He will have completed the review by the next regularly scheduled meeting.
Mr. Foran moved to add this item to this evening’s agenda under New Applications and
continue it to the next regularly scheduled meeting pending possible agent approval. Mr. Wilson
seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
5. Communication, Enforcement, and Public Comment:
Communications: Mr. Carey reported that he is in receipt of the Connecticut Association of Conservation
& Inland Wetlands Commission’s periodical. If anyone is interested, please contact the office.
Enforcement: There were no enforcement actions to report at this time.
Public Comments: Tom Wells, North Main Street, discussed the wetlands violation that took place at
Theater Square and the heavy layer of woodchips that is present.
Mr. Carey explained that the woodchips were placed there at the recommendation of Bob Russo when
the violation was initially found. At the request of the Agency the developer has received the formal
remediation as recommended by Mr. Russo. He is developing his plan for the remediation now and
should have it underway by the end of September.
6. Reading of the Legal Notice: Mr. Carey read the legal notice into the record.
7. Public Hearings:
Mr. Wilson moved to move Agenda Item 7.B, Application of James Haydu, to Item 9.B, Continued
Applications. Mr. Lorah seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
A. Proposed Amendment to Section No. 8.9 of the East Hampton Inland Wetland and Watercourses
Regulations: “In order to afford the Agency adequate time to review submissions and to
consult with experts, as determined by the Agency or its staff, all submissions of any revisions,
modifications, or supplemental or supporting materials to any application, petition, or other filing,
including environmental intervention, whether requested by the Agency or offered to the Agency,
shall be received by the town staff before the close of business, a minimum of fifteen (15) calendar
days before the next regularly scheduled meeting at which the matter is scheduled to be heard or
considered.”
Mr. Carey described the proposal and explained that it has been drafted and reviewed by the Town
Attorney, Janet Brooks. The intent is to require that all submissions be received by the Town staff
prior to the close of business a minimum of 15 days before the next regularly scheduled meeting if
the matter will be heard or considered at that meeting. This is an effort to avoid the situations that
we have had in the past. Frequently applicants with large revisions/submissions present them for
the first time at the IWWA meeting allowing the Agency no opportunity to review the plans. This
will also allow the Agency to get more input from Staff prior to the meetings.
The Agency discussed their concern that by making this change to the regulation the Town would
then be committed to respond with Staff’s comments by the meeting. Large applications with
substantial revisions will likely take longer than 15 days to review. The Agency is also aware that
frequently the Town Engineer responds to revisions 3 days prior to a meeting. This amendment would
not allow the applicant to respond until the next meeting. Mr. Carey indicated that one of the intentions
behind this amendment is to put the applicant on notice that the Town needs sufficient time to review
any changes made, including those made right before a meeting at the request of the Town Engineers.
The Agency indicated that if they were to pass this amendment, they would also expect that any
response from the Town Engineers be received at least seven days from the meeting. The Agency
discussed the methods used to notate revisions on plans and the need for the applicant to ensure that
the proper notation is in place for ease of review.
The Chairman opened the meeting to the public at this time.
Tom Wells, North Main Street, believes that this amendment is a step in the right direction. He questioned
what would happen if an applicant came in at the last meeting of their public hearing with additional
information.
Mr. Carey responded that the Agency cannot limit what would be presented at a public hearing. The
Agency will still have the discretion to determine what will need to be done to proceed in the case of
untimely presentations during a public hearing. If necessary, and appropriate, the Agency may request
an extension of the hearing in order to be able to review the documents. If an extension is not possible,
and the issue pertinent, the application may be denied. In some cases documents may also be received
as they merely need to be approved by Staff.
Mr. Foran moved to close the public hearing on the proposed amendment to section No. 8.9 of the
East Hampton Inland Wetland and Watercourses Regulations. Ms. Coshow seconded the motion.
The motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Foran moved that the proposed amendment to Section No. 8.9 of the East Hampton Inland
Wetland and Watercourses Regulations be adopted with an effective date of August 18, 2008.
Mr. Wilson seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
8. New Application:
A. Application of Thomas Crean, 35 Lake Drive, for activity in buffer/setback area, excavation, for
residential improvement by homeowner – M~03A/B~44C/L~14. This application was added to the
Agenda and continued to the next regularly scheduled meeting by motion under Item 4. above.
9. Continued Applications:
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
reviewed the status of the application with the Agency.
Dennis Obee, Weston & Sampson Engineers, was present to represent the applicants. He
explained that the modification was necessary because the original plan called for the sewer
to discharge to an incorrect manhole. The additional footage of sewer pipe is to bring it to
the correct sewer system manhole.
Mr. Wilson moved that the application of Town of Marlborough and Town of East Hampton,
Route 66, East High Street, modification of approval for underground utilities for municipal
improvements be approved with the same conditions as when the application was originally
approved. Mr. Lorah seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
B. Application of James Haydu, 15 Anderson Way, for Pond Dredging for Residential Improvement
by Homeowner – M 5/B 2/L 7 – Continued from 6/25/08. Mr. Carey reported that he has received
and distributed further clarification from Bob Russo of CLA Engineers regarding the appropriate
nature of the remediation for the site.
Mr. Wilson discussed his views on this application and concluded that a motion to approve it is
in order because the pond has already been created and a restoration to woodland would not address
the issue of the drainage to the site which had not been addressed by the developer or builder.
The pond retains water and creates an open water habitat. The proposed mitigation to have wetlands
of varying types is supported both by Mr. Haydu’s soil scientist and the Town’s engineer.
Mr. Wilson moved that the application of James Haydu, 15 Anderson Way, for pond dredging
for residential improvement by homeowner, M_5/B_2/L_7, be approved by the issuance of the
standard, long-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, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10. Paragraph 3.a to read, “The permittee shall
modify the existing pond in manner consistent with the plan dated June 20, 2008 and planting
schedule submitted by Richard Snarski, received on April 11, 2008, and specified as Items A.1.
and A.2, respectively.” Paragraph 3.e is to be added and should read, “The permittee shall show
on the final plans the location of the dewatering outlet and treatment areas.” The term for the
construction of the wetland area in Paragraph 4.a is for a three year period. Paragraphs 10
and 11 shall b modified to read “… final site plans…”. Ms. Coshow seconded the motion.
The Agency discussed their concerns over the ponds presence in the area of a conservation
easement. Routine maintenance is permitted in the conservation easement. The parameters
that are set by the Agency will limit the activities that the applicant will be able to conduct.
The conservation easement supersedes the creation of the pond. The Agency discussed
dewatering, treatment areas, and riparian buffer. The Agency made the recommendation to
the applicant that the area immediately surrounding the pond only be mowed once or twice
a year.
The Chairman called for the vote. The motion carried (4-3-0). (Yes votes: Boule, Heidtmann,
Hill, and Wilson. No Votes: Coshow, Foran, and Lorah. Abstentions: None).
Mr. Foran indicated for the record that he is opposed to the application because he feels that the
pond should not be where it is. It should not have been put in a conservation area.
Mr. Lorah commented that the pond was put in illegally and he believed that the best solution
would have been to remove the pond from the conservation area.
Ms. Coshow believes that the entire property should be restored back to the original
wetland woodlands.
10. New Business:
A. Election of Officers: Mr. Hill moved, and Mr. Boule seconded, that Jeffry Foran be
appointed to Chairman and Joshua Wilson be appointed to Vice-Chairman of the
East Hampton Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Agency for the coming year.
No other nominations were made.
The Chairman called for the vote. The motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Lorah asked to add 10.B. to the Agenda. The Chairman granted his request.
B. Application Checklist: Mr. Lorah suggested that an application checklist should be
added to the application package to give the applicant notice of the requirements for
the application upfront in the application process.
11. Old Business: None.
A. Adjournment: Mr. Wilson moved to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Lorah seconded the
motion. The motion carried unanimously.
The meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Daphne C. Schaub
Recording Secretary
| 
