Inland Wetlands Commission
FINAL APPROVED MINUTES
Regular Meeting
July 25, 2007, 7:30 p.m.
31 Pecks Lane, Newtown, Connecticut
Present: Peters, Kotch, Pieragostini, Salling, Curran and Gillingham
Staff Present: Robert Sibley, Conservation Official; Tammy Hazen, Clerk
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commissioner Peters opened the hearing at 7:30 p.m.
Pending Application
#07-06 Newbrook, LLC & Obtuse Road. Application for a four lot subdivision and associated development activities.
Commissioner Curran made a motion to deny this application without prejudice, based on the following reasons:
1. An incomplete application.
a. Specifically, that the applicant provided amended proposed plans for regulated activities on the day of the closing for the public hearing. This did not afford the public suitable time for review and response.
b. Specifically, that the applicant provided amended proposed plans for regulated activities on the day of the closing for the public hearing. This afforded the Inland Wetlands Commission a minimal review period to question the amendments.
2. Impacts of the proposed regulated activity on wetlands or watercourses outside the area for which the activity is proposed and future activities associated with, or reasonably related to, the proposed regulated activity which are made inevitable by the proposed regulated activity and which may have an impact on wetlands or watercourses. Specifically, the expert testimony, which has stated that “for the size of the development and the steep slopes and moderately erodible soils, certain risks still exist”.
Commissioner Kotch seconded the motion. Commissioner Peters asked for discussion.
Commissioner Pieragostini was pleased with the way the applicant handled the Commission’s concerns and felt in some ways surrounding properties could be improved. In denying it, neighboring properties may have continuing issues with erosion. Also she added the applicant’s plans to include open space and a conservation easement.
Commissioner Salling had comments on both sides. Although she felt the incompleteness and lateness of the application affected a proper review, she also favors the merits of the application as a whole and feels the applicant has responded over and above what was requested.
Commissioner Curran stated that although the applicant made every effort to cooperate with the Commission, the steep property and risks during the construction phase (above a pristine brook for the whole community) is too high.
Commissioner Kotch agreed with Mary Curran and does not see where development can improve the environmental situation on this property. He feels a development would have a major impact on the preservation of Pond Brook and it would be too much development for this property. He believes that over time, additional surfaces would be added to these sites that would affect the area overall.
Commissioner Peters stated concern that there was not enough time for interested parties to review the information that came in late. She asked for a vote on the motion to reject application without prejudice on the grounds of incompleteness and that certain risks still exist. The vote favored a rejection 4 to 2. The application was rejected.
#07-08 Mt. Pleasant Road, LLC, 174 Mt. Pleasant Road. Construction of office buildings with associated activities.
Commissioner Kotch motioned to table item. Commissioner Pieragostini Seconded. Item tabled.
#07-16 Mark Valentine, 27 Bankside Trail. Application for activities related to the construction of a single family residence.
Mr. Sibley noted the applicant provided a letter of consent from First Light and submitted hand drawings of plantings. He also reviewed the area from the lake with Mr. Wood from First Light. The sea wall and patio area came into existence within the last few years without wetlands permits. This was confirmed via A2 Survey dated Oct. 30, 2003. The applicant can withdraw the current application, submit an application for the work that has already been done on the sea wall and then reapply later for the deck. Commissioner Peters shared concerns over the differences between the 2003 approved plans versus what has actually been done.
The applicant withdrew the application but will proceed with what has been approved on the prior permit.
#07-19 82 Great Quarter Road – Sandra Kuzmich previously withdrew an application for a single family home.
Commissioner Pieragostini motioned to table the item. Seconded by Commissioner Salling. Motion carried.
#07-20 Manuel & Crystal Carvalho, 21 Whitewood Road. Application for activities within a regulated area.
Mr. Carvalho presented information regarding trees that were cut down without a wetlands permit. A contractor working on installing a curtain drain noticed 4 to 5 dead Ash trees, covered in vines, on the west side of his property bordering wetlands. He has requested a landscaper to plant wetlands vegetation where the trees and vines were cut down.
Commissioners will go to the site within the next two weeks.
#07-21 Lucille Pieretti, 14 Brandywine Lane. Construction of an in-ground pool and associated improvements within the wetland review limits.
Richard W. Contois, L.S., L. Edwards Associates, LLC, 227 Stepney Road, Easton, CT presented and distributed information to the Commission. He reviewed a map noting the wetlands and a 25’ conservation easement. The proposed pool plans include a retaining wall ranging from 2’ to 4’ high. Mr. Sibley stated that the lot slopes down to the wetlands, which protects it in some cases, but makes it difficult to do future work within the constraints of the easement. The applicant has kept the disturbance to a minimum and remaining sensitive to the wetlands. Commissioners will visit the site.
#07-22 Nunzio Sasso, 42 Great Ring Road. Evacuation of petroleum imported soil.
Scott Biels, Sovereign Consulting, representing the applicant, discussed the applicant’s willingness to clean up petroleum soaked soil from property that was purchased in 2004. The soil was originally found in 1992. Applicant proposes to remove 1,200 yards of soil. They will use field instrumentation and do soil sampling that will be sent to a fixed laboratory for results. Most of the contamination is below water table. In order to remove the contamination, they will drain and dry the soils. The water will then go into a FRAC tank, the sediments will settle, the water will be pumped into a series of sediment filters then through carbon filters. The water will be discharged into a storm drain that spills into the pond. The contaminated dirt will be pre-classified and
sent to a licensed disposal facility. The area will be replaced with clean fill.
Commissioner Peters asked them to stage the equipment safely from the wetlands. Commissioner Kotch asked about sediment or erosion controls, especially since the excavation is close to the wetlands. Commissioner Peters asked the applicant to return with plans that include sediment controls and the staging of equipment.
Modification #97-52 Talon Ridge Builders, LLC, 8 Pecks Lane. Application for activities related to the construction of a commercial building.
Commissioner Pieragostini motioned to table. Seconded by Commissioner Kotch. Motion carried.
Forest Practices
FP #07-01 Ed Moyle, Osborne Hill. Application for activities within the regulated area.
Atty. Ward Mazzucco, representing applicant, discussed how they need to clear the property to prepare the site for septic testing. The next step would be to go before Planning & Zoning for approval to divide the property. In the remote event that the septic system is not approved, the property would have to be restored. Previous plans call for restoration by planting white pines because they grow best in well-drained soil. The Commission asked the applicant to provide plans that include hard woods. The Forester, Mr. Jim Gillespie, provided an updated report that would include other hard wood trees in case replanting is necessary.
Commissioner Kotch asked what would be the criteria for deciding to leave or remove the fill. Mark Lancor, PE, Dymar Engineering, stated they would bring in the amount of fill necessary to make it health code compliant. He stated his confidence that the septic testing will be approved. There was a discussion about the restoration of the area if the septic is not approved.
Commissioner Peters summarized by stating that the applicant will clear the area, bring in fill and apply for approval for the septic. If approved, the clearing stays, if it is denied, then one of two things would happen. (1) The applicant will be told by Planning & Zoning to remove the fill, in which case it would be replanted with a hardwood mix, or (2) Planning & Zoning will allow the applicant to leave the fill (well-drained sandy material) in which white pine would be planted.
Commissioner Salling shared a concern that the area of mature forest would be forever destroyed. It was explained to her that only .35 acres would be cleared and the area is long and narrow. Mr. Gillespie explained that both mature and young forests have their own benefits. The trees currently there are 50’ to 60’ tall.
Commissioner Peters read for the record a memo from James E. Gillespie, dated July 25, 2007, entitled “Attachment to Forest Practices Application”.
Commissioner Kotch made a motion to table. Seconded by Commissioner Pieragostini. Motion carried.
Aquifer Protection
APR #07-03 TUV Rhineland, Commerce Road. Application for Site Development Plan to construct building.
Commissioner Kotch motioned to approve with no significant impact. Seconded by Commissioner Gillingham. Motion carried. Application approved.
OTHER BUSINESS
Acceptance of New Applications
32 Lake Road, Paul Genna – Activities within a regulated area.
16 Beaver Dam Road, David Barzetti – Replacement of a Barn within a regulated area
Letter of Request for change in 5K Site Plans. Mr. Sibley read for the record a letter from Larry Edwards requesting a change in the 5K site plans. The Commission agrees that Mr. Sibley will sign-off on the request.
Letter of Request. Atty. Bob Hall discussed his request for an extension of a 2002 wetlands permit for Hunter Ridge, LLC. After consulting with Commissioner Peters and the town attorney, Mr. Sibley sent Mr. Hall a letter stating that the request was denied. The request was to be sent in 65 days prior to the expiration date. Mr. Hall stated he was not aware of the 65 day regulation, but stated it should be reconsidered since his request was sent in before the actual expiration date.
Mr. Sibley shared concerns raised by council and the Chair that the applicant had three years to submit the request and the 65 day period has been part of the regulations since 1997. Commissioner Peters stated the applicant should bring arguments on this decision to the attention of Atty. David Grogins.
Minutes
Draft Minutes of July 11, 2007 were reviewed and approved with one change. Commissioner Peters motioned to approve. Seconded by Commissioner Pieragostini. Motion carried.
Commissioner Pieragostini motioned to adjourn at 9:45 p.m. Seconded by Commissioner Salling.
| 
