INLAND WETLANDS COMMISSION
Amended Minutes
Regular Meeting of November 10, 2010 at 7:30 pm
Newtown Municipal Center, 3 Primrose Street, Newtown, CT
Commissioners Present: Bryan, Curran, Hammar, Kotch, Peters, Pieragostini and Salling
Staff Present: Rob Sibley, Deputy Director of Planning and Land Use;
Ann Astarita, Conservation Official and Tammy Hazen, Clerk
Commissioner Peters convened the meeting at 7:35 pm.
PUBLIC HEARING
IW #10-22 12 Sugar Street, Newtown Hook & Ladder. Application for the Construction of a New Fire Station.
Commissioner Peters opened the hearing and explained the factors that the commission needs to consider in order to render a decision. She reviewed the State Statutes, the Town Inland Wetlands Regulations and the commission’s charge. She quoted Section 2.1, specifically the definition of “Regulated Activity” and “Prudent”, and then Sections 10.2 and 10.3 of the regulations. She then summarized and said the commission will first consider whether there will be a significant impact on the wetlands and watercourses, then in the case of significant impact, they look at whether or not there are feasible and prudent alternatives to the proposed regulated activities on the site. They do not consider if there are other sites where the activity can be conducted.
Chris Smith, Attorney with Shipman and Goodwin, Hartford, CT, summarized their application and stated reasons why the commission should approve the application.
Chris DeAngelis, P.E., reviewed his 11/8/10 letter responding to Land Tech Consultants’ letter dated 10-25-10 and a letter dated 10-27-10 from Environmental Land Solutions. He distributed a map outlining the wetlands and a letter from Dr. Clarence Welti, P.E., P.C., from Geotechnical Engineering, regarding a geotechnical study of the proposed site. Also distributed was a memo dated 11-10-10 summarizing the changes made to each sheet of the revised set of drawings.
Commissioner Curran was concerned about the word “degraded” used in terms of degraded water and asked if water containing chemicals or salt would pass through the system and end up in the wetlands. Mr. DeAngelis explained the stormwater management system and catch basins in more detail.
Richard Camejo, a resident of Newtown and volunteer firefighter, distributed information on the Redi-Rock retaining wall. Commissioner Kotch asked questions about the channel width and the width of the blocks. Mr. DeAngelis said the bottom block will be 24” wide.
Megan Raymond, Senior Ecologist, William Kenny Associates, reviewed her letter addressed to Rob Sibley dated 11-10-10 responding to comments raised at the last public hearing. Ms. Raymond also distributed copies of a letter to Mr. Sibley, dated 10-27-10. She closed by saying there will be no significant impact to the wetlands or watercourse.
Atty. Smith then asked Ms. Raymond to verify for the record that relative to the plans that are currently before the commission with any changes and modifications that have been incorporated, in her opinion will the regulated activities result in an adverse impact to a wetland or watercourse. Ms. Raymond answered that they will not. Atty. Smith then asked Ms. Raymond if the proposed regulated activity satisfy statutory factors for consideration as provided in Sections 22a-41 of the CT General Statutes, as well as the factors for consideration in the Commissions regulations. Ms. Raymond answered that yes they do. He then asked the same questions of Mr. DeAngelis. He answered with the same statements as Ms. Raymond.
Robert Manna, a firefighter for 19 years and who serves on the building committee, said the professional team has done an excellent job at addressing comments and concerns and said on behalf for the department and the community they serve, he respectfully asks for approval of the application.
Public Comments
Francois DeBrantes expressed his concern that the project will remove wetlands, result in the permanent disruption of wetlands, and damage and alter an existing watercourse and further downstream effects to Hawley Pond. He said some of the experts have shed some light on clear defects on the request for the permit. He noted the lack of mitigation for the wetlands. He discussed the topography of the area and concerns over the removal of the wetland soils. He noted other choices of uses for the property owners and asked the commission to deny the project.
Mark DeWolfe, 1 Misty Vale, Newtown, a member of Newtown Hook & Ladder for 27 years, asked for the project to be approved and said that by their charter and by default, the fire department protects the wetlands from oil and chemical spills. Commissioner Peters said the commission cannot look at the overall activities, only at the property in question and the proposed project.
After further discussion, Commissioner Kotch motioned to close the hearing. Motion seconded by Commissioner Pieragostini. Motion approved unanimously.
IW #10-21 12, 38, 40 Cold Spring Road, Norman Nagy. Application to restore and repair existing dam and perform maintenance of the pond.
Commissioner Curran recused herself. Mr. Nagy reviewed his application and said he would propose to leave the dam as is and remove trees and brush away from the dam and excavate the east side of the pond. Commissioner Pieragostini motioned to extend the application to the next meeting.
IW #10-23 31 Swamp Road, Todd Bolmer. Application to remove a violation & permit for an access road.
Commissioner Hammar recused herself. The applicant submitted materials for review and requested an extension to the 12-08-10 meeting. Commissioner Peters stated concerns that the new plans shows a significant impact to the wetlands. Mr. Sibley asked if the soil scientist marked the wetlands. Mr. Bolmer said they did. Commissioner Salling said the plans are unclear and that they need to be revised to reflect what exactly exists and that the commission would like to see an alternative plan.
IW #10-27 52 Great Quarter Road, Mike Bohnet. Application related to the removal of a violation and installation of a dock and access way.
Mr. and Mrs. Bohnet and Dan Holmes were present. Mr. Holmes presented conceptual planting plans dated 10-30-10 and explained his findings on the property. He explained an area that needs to be seeded and erosion and sediment controls. He explained the planting and mitigation plans, stating that no more trees will be removed. They will leave native plants to re-grow and will removal invasive plants. They propose leaving the pathway as is and place stone retaining walls around certain trees. He described a field stone walkway and patio area. The dock will be applied for under a different permit. Commissioners asked questions about where lawn is proposed and what will be used to stabilize the steep slope going down to the lake. Mr. Holmes said the soil is stable on
the site, although steep. He will also revisit the site to determine if a retaining wall is needed along certain areas of the woodchip path. The commission asked for clarification on the map what areas will be left for native re-growth and what will be planted with grass. The applicant has requested an extension until the 12-08-10 meeting.
IW #10-29 40 South Main Street, Daniel Amaral. Application to repair a retaining wall.
Mr. Amaral was present. The commission reviewed updated plans. Commissioner Salling motioned to approve the application with plans dated 10-19-2010 revised with standard conditions A, B, and C. Commissioner Kotch seconded the motion. The application was approved.
IW #10-31 171 Huntington Road, Sticks and Stones. Application to remove tree and armoring disturbed stream banks.
Timothy Currier was present. Commissioner Peters recused herself. Mr. Currier explained his application and request for an agricultural exemption. He explained there are currently 50 apple trees over fifty years old and would like to plant additional apple trees. He explained he armored the stream bank because of erosion. The permit is to remediate the violation. It was noted that the activity does not fall under agricultural exemption.
Commissioner Curran motioned that the applicant’s request for an agricultural exemption does not meet the conditions of an agricultural exemption. Specifically,
- The “As of Right and Non-regulated Use” provisions of the Town of Newtown Inland Wetlands Regulations state that the exempted activities do not include, relocation of watercourses with continual flow, or filling of watercourses with continual flow; and
- The non-regulated uses do not include diversion or alteration of a watercourse.
Commissioner Kotch seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
The commission recommended that the applicant resubmit his proposal as an Inland Wetlands permit application in order to mitigate the violation.
IW #10-32 Commerce Road (Tech Park), Town of Newtown. Application for an Industrial Condominium Complex.
The Public Hearing is scheduled for December 8, 2010.
OTHER BUSINESS
Acceptance of New Applications.
#10-34 55 Botsford Hill Road, David Butz.
#10-35 40 Parmalee Hill Road, Justin Scott.
Trails On Open Space – Mr. Sibley opened discussion regarding a determination whether a planned trail by the Parks and Recreation Trails Committee for open space property on Point O’Rocks and Deep Brook Roads is considered to be a regulated or non-regulated activity. Commissioner Peters read State Statutes 22a-40 b2 and Section 4.2 of the Inland Wetlands regulations. It was noted that the trail is proposed to be used for mountain biking, equestrian riding, and hiking. The commissioners discussed the details.
Commissioner Salling motioned that the trail does meet the conditions of a recreational exemption. Specifically, the planned activity falls within the allowed uses under 4.2.b: Outdoor recreation including the use of play and sporting areas, field trails, nature study, hiking, [and] horseback riding. Commissioner Kotch seconded the motion. Commissioner Pieragostini abstained. The motion was approved unanimously.
Concerns Regarding a New Mining Technique – Commissioner Salling attended a meeting of Trout Unlimited and heard a speech by a member of a special task force, Cold Water Conservation Corp, discuss a new mining technique that extracts gas from shale. Currently there are no permits required. Oil companies are buying other companies for the rights (Chevron bought a company called Atlas). Atlas and other companies have developed a vertical/horizontal drilling technique to go into shale where fissures are created through piping and drilling. Six to nine million gallons of water are pumped per well. The water is taken out of brooks, streams, rivers, lakes, and ponds, then mixed with a chemical. The water solution is pumped into the fissures to extract the gas. The gas
is trucked off and the untreated used water is then dumped back into the environment. There are 2,250 wells in the US with estimates of an additional 150,000 more. Connecticut has yet to be affected. She said there was an enormous fish kill in one area where 7,000 fish died and there have been dissolved solvents found in drinking water in Pennsylvania. She said there are thousands of well plans currently in progress.
Approval of Minutes – The approval of the minutes have been tabled.
The meeting adjourned at approximately 10:45 p.m.
| 
