Inland Wetlands Commission
MINUTES
Regular Meeting
June 24, 2009 7:30 p.m.
31 Pecks Lane, Newtown, Connecticut
Present: Peters, Salling, Pieragostini, and Bryan
Staff Present: Rob Sibley, Deputy Director, Ann Astarita, Wetlands Enforcement Officer and Ann Mazur, Clerk
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commissioner Peters opened the hearing at 7:30 p.m.
Violations
Vio #09-03 One Simm Lane, Newtown Car Wash.
Commissioner Peters opened with a statement that the owner submitted correspondence from council and an environmental report from Sovereign Environmental. She noted that the request before the Commission is that the applicant does not want to file an Inland Wetlands application for work off site based on the report that indicates that no work is needed.
Atty. Joseph Williams from Shipman and Goodwin asked the Commission to modify their request to submit an application. He noted this conclusion resulted from the testing done by Sovereign Environmental and conversations with CT DEP. They feel that remediation has removed any soils that had any levels of contaminants that were discharged. They also feel the wetlands have been impacted historically by run off from Route 25 and other sources and that offsite mitigation would do more harm than good.
Sheri Hardman from Sovereign Consulting stated that she reviewed data from Moran Consulting and based on that data, her determination is that all the excavation and remediation work that was done by Moran was successful in removing all the impacted soil on the car wash property. She contacted Ken McClure of the CT DEP and they agreed that the remediation on the property was complete and that no further investigation or remediation is warranted. They discussed the sample taken at the end of the discharge pipe in the wetland area that did have some elevated ETPH and, based on her observation in the wetlands, there are many point sources into the wetlands. They feel that doing more investigation and excavation would be detrimental and that it should be allowed to attenuate over time.
Commissioner Peters stated that although the storm water system may not be functioning the way it should, she doesn't feel this is the issue before the Commission. Commissioner Bryan asked if there were retesting done downstream. Ms. Hardman stated that there was only one sample taken by Moran downstream and one sample taken from the sediment at the bottom of the discharge pipe. Commissioner Bryan said that there were samples taken farther downstream that had high readings. Mr. Sibley noted that the DEP and Staff also took samples before excavation. Commissioner Bryan stated that the Commission requested a map showing where all the samples were taken. Ms. Hardman said that Ken McClure did not mention that the DEP took any samples.
Atty. Williams stated that he submitted a letter from Moran detailing what they did when they first responded to the site. Commissioner Bryan said that one sample taken down in the wetlands showed levels much higher than the standard. Ms. Hardman said that the only data she has from any sampling done in the wetlands was at the end of the discharge pipe.
Commissioner Peters clarified that there are two separate activities; one being on-site remediation to eliminate the source and then, should the applicant be required, go into the wetlands and determine what should be done.
Mr. Sibley asked if the applicant knew how much material was released at the end of the pipe. Atty. Williams said they didn't. Ms. Hardman said it might be in the Moran report. Mr. Sibley asked if the amount of material discharge impact the decision of whether or not it would be necessary to do mitigation on the site. Ms. Hardman said she didn't know, it would depend on what was in the discharge, it could have been a very small discharge of a high concentrated or a large discharge of a smaller amount. To her observation there was no sheen at the discharge area.
Commissioner Salling asked if there is only one way to potentially remediate the impact that would not potentially do more harm. She noted that this was a significant event and saying that any remediation would do more harm than good, makes her feel that not all avenues have been explored. Ms. Hardman said that where the discharge occurred, a majority of the contamination was contained in the discharge basin and they were not sure how much went into the wetlands. As far as alternative remedial processes, because there are many point sources, they wouldn't know where one ends and another begins. Should they have to investigate if there are other issues out there. The other remedial alternative is natural attenuation.
Commissioner Salling asked if they have monitoring plans. Ms. Hardman said they do not but if there were visual evidence in the future, they would all come back.
Commissioner Salling asked for them to look into alternatives that won't do more harm than good or at least put together a serious monitoring plan. Atty. Williams said that monitoring is no problem but said there are other discharges in the area and until other sources are removed, to what extent are they responsible.
Ann Astarita asked if the chemical composition of the wastewater discharge has been identified. They could see if the discharge could be linked to any samples taken in the wetlands. Atty. Williams stated that there is only soap in the discharge, and perhaps some oils. He doesn't think there are any other chemicals.
Commissioner Bryan asked if they could find out the chemical composition of what is currently in the tank.
Ms. Astarita said that she contacted the CT DEP and a memo from Ed Finger stated that the on site remediation was sufficient, but that the remediation to the wetlands and watercourse are the municipality’s concern.
Mr. Sibley said there is no quantitative information provided on the discharge or the impact it has had on the wetlands. He is very concerned that the applicant states that it is a pre impacted wetlands, that they don’t know what happened on their discharge, and that they don’t want to clean up what they’ve put in there because it's already been impacted by something else. He stated that the Commission clearly asked them at the last meeting to come up with a summary conclusion of the impact of the discharge, which has not yet been provided to the Commission. There have only been soil reports submitted on the discharge on the property but not to the wetlands. The Commission also asked them to come up with a mitigation plan for the wetlands and the streams. The DEP clearly
stated it is not their jurisdiction.
Atty. Williams said that there was a consensus that there should not be any mitigation work done in the wetlands.
Commissioner Bryan stated his concerns over a sample taken in the wetlands that showed levels three times the standard. He fells the applicant should test downstream.
The applicant is asked to return with a round of samples, submit the results, and make a recommendation.
#09-15 Joyce William, Sherman Road & Berkshire Road. Application for a 38 lot subdivision.
Mary Kaley, member of the Conservation Commission, 5 Winslow Road, Newtown, CT, discussed the Conservation Commission’s concerns regarding this subdivision. A memo on this was submitted for the record.
Pam Davis, 25 Sherman Street, asked about controls to protect the wetlands and is concerned over pesticides impacting the wetlands and wildlife. She also noted that that on one lot, there’s a great deal of water nine months out of the year.
Richard Boritz, 30 Still Hill Road, discussed two wells on his property that is on a spring. He is concerned how additional 38 homes would impact the water quality. He said the pond is twenty feet from the road and it is forty feet wide and two feet deep. He asked about environmental assessments.
Michael Herdes, Herde Construction, 33 Perry Lane, Oxford, noted that he is a green builder and is the builder on the project. He encouraged the Commission to see his work that was done on lower Hosey Coach Road. He is the Chairman of the Oxford Wetlands and Conservation Commission.
J. Patrick Bovino, 10 Old Mill Road, said this property was originally only to have ten homes. He asked about water drainage and noted there are eight different water courses feeding the property. He feels they are trying to squeeze too many houses on the land and that it’s an unworkable concept. He is also concerned that the wildlife corridor will be in jeopardy; he has seen Deer, Turkey, Red Tail Hawks, and other wildlife on the property.
Carole Ando, 98 Berkshire Road, stated that it is a beautiful piece of land and that the lot on Sherman Road is totally under water.
Terrance Ford, 45 Toddy Hill Road, shared concerns over the Pootatuck Aquifer being in jeopardy if it’s not protected. He also noted that the property is very wet. He asked for the Commissioners to step forward to protect the aquifer.
Marianne Brown, 4 Sherman Street, stated that her husband was the caretaker of the property and that they have walked the area many times and noted that there is a variety of wildlife. She said the water from that property flows into the Pootatuck and then into the Housatonic. She has submitted a letter.
John Reed, 18 Sugarloaf Road, noted that there is sand and soil in that area that is very special and assists with purification and cleansing of the water. He wants to know if the sand will be dredged and sold.
Commissioner Peters stated that the Commission has received reports from their experts and that they are available for the public at the Land Use Office.
Larry Edwards, Professional Engineer, 227 Stepney Road, Easton, CT, stated that they staked out the site but that cattle are destroying them. They also have a key to get into the gate. He asked the Commission to give him one day’s notice before the walk and they will go out and re-stake the property. The application will return with responses.
#09-22 Norman Nagy, 12, 38, 40 Cold Spring Road. Application for restoration of a dam and the dredging of a pond.
Larry Edwards, Professional Engineer, 227 Stepney Road, Easton, CT, provided an overview of the project. He stated that the Old Mill Dam was built in the 1800’s and that the pond varies in depth and that there are no open water characteristics. The first phase is to reinforce and stabilize the dam, including constructing a formal spillway and installing a fish ladder. They require a DEP storm water diversion and dam restoration permit. The spoils will be deposited in a borrow area. The application is at the State, awaiting approval.
Commissioner Peters asked for a functionality study and to identify any trees that are to be removed. Mr. Sibley asked the applicant to check for wetlands on the road to the borrow area. The hearing will be continued.
Pending Applications
#09-03 Simm Lane, LLC, 3-6 Simm Lane – Item Tabled.
#09-10 Lewis & Maria Gotch, 18 Bridge End Farm Lane – Item Tabled.
#09-17 Jeremy Frommer, 63 Taunton Lake Road – Item Tabled.
#09-18 Alan Laurenco, 56 Schoolhouse Hill Road – Item Tabled.
#09-19 Nazzaro, Inc., 310 Hammertown Road. Application to excavate pond in Monroe near Newtown border.
Mr. Nazzaro, from Fairfield County Fish & Game was present.
Commissioner Bryan motioned to approve the application with standard conditions A, B, C, and
1. The approved plans for the activity are: Fairfield Fish and Game Hammertown Road, Monroe, CT, Dated Revised May 5, 2009 and supporting materials.
2. On the first day of each quarter the applicant will submit a completed quarterly report to the commission, on a form provided by the Town office, containing the status of the permit; until the permit activity is completed. Completion of the permit will be approved by the wetlands agent.
Motion seconded by Commissioner Pieragostini. Motion carried unanimously.
#09-20 James Palmer, 18 Butternut Ridge – Item Tabled.
Other Business
Acceptance of New Applications
#09-23, David & Wendy Clarke, 9 Taunton Lake Road, Newtown, CT. Application for removal of trees.
Approval of Minutes – The minutes were deferred to the next meeting.
Commissioner Kotch motioned to adjourn at 10:40 p.m., second by Commissioner Salling and unanimously carried.
| 
