Town of Newtown, CT Archive

12-08-10

INLAND WETLANDS COMMISSION

Minutes

Regular Meeting of December 8, 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 7:30 pm.

IW #10-22 12 Sugar Street, Newtown Hook & Ladder. Application for the construction of a new fire station building.

Commissioner Peters opened discussion and said she recognized the amount of work that has gone into the application, but has concerns over the conflicting expert reports. She shared concerns about the fairly substantial amount of wetlands disturbance with very little in the way of mitigation. She said for an application of this magnitude, she would expect to see significant mitigation.

Commissioner Kotch said the commission recognizes that the applicant is an esteemed and valuable part of the community and are staffed by volunteers who are in need of a new firehouse. But he explained concerns about the application and the loss/filling of almost 5,000 square feet of wetlands with impacts to the stream. He said the stream is already being impacted by man throughout its course in Newtown, which flows into Deep Brook and the Pootatuck River. Although he values the applicant, he feels the site is inappropriate for the firehouse.

Commissioner Curran said the commission has a mandate from the State to protect the wetlands and watercourses. She said water is a vital and limited resource and to keep it pure, maintain it from erosion and loss, and control flooding are just some of the reasons for its protection. The State has made it clear that the preservation and protection of wetlands is essential to the health, safety and welfare of the citizens. She also recognized that the Fire Department is also essential to the same, but both the commission and the Fire Department has that responsibility in their own way. She explained the application has no room for mitigation and that the applicant acknowledged that was no room for future expansion. She said risks of significant impact remain both during construction and long term. Erosion and sediment build up in the stream, potential flooding, potential higher groundwater levels, and unknowns regarding the wall, are reasons that the site is not an appropriate place for the application.

Commissioner Peters agreed with the other commissioners stating there may be a way to make the site more suitable, but that the current plan does not satisfy the regulatory requirements. She stated that although the applicant is a very worthy organization and that a new fire station is needed, the current plan does not satisfy the requirements of the wetlands regulations.

Commissioner Kotch then motioned to deny the application, specifically,

The application poses a significant adverse impact to wetlands and watercourses.

Specifically, the Land Tech report dated November 29, 2010 which states the “proposed site development will have a significant impact on wetlands and watercourses and that the proposed mitigation activities will not adequately replace lost wetland and upland buffer functions”.
Specifically, the Land Tech report dated October 25, 2010 which states that “proposed site development will have a significant impact on wetlands and watercourses…[which include] filling within close proximity to a perennial watercourse and loss of associated riparian buffer and filling nearly 5,000 square feet of wetlands and loss of associated wetland functions including flood storage.”

The proposed activities would cause an irreversible and irretrievable loss of wetland resources.

Specifically, Land Tech’s November 29, 2010 report which states that “proposed mitigation activities will not adequately replace lost wetland and upland buffer functions” and their disagreement “that disturbance to the buffer area along the stream is minimal, short term, and will not result in an adverse impact to the watercourse or any wetland areas.”
Specifically, Land Tech’s October 25, 2010 report which states “These impacts include…loss of associated riparian buffer and filling nearly 5,000 square feet of wetlands and loss of associated wetland functions including flood storage.”

3. The application contains insufficient management practices and other measures designed to mitigate the impact of the proposed activity on wetlands and the watercourse.

Specifically, the November 29, 2010 Land Tech report which states “the applicant has not sufficiently demonstrated that filling within wetlands, the watercourse buffer, and the FEMA Flood Zone “X” will not result in increases in flooding or increases in water velocity and stream bank erosion.”
Specifically, Land Tech’s October 25, 2010 report which states “that proposed mitigation activities will not adequately replace lost wetland and upland buffer functions.”

4. The adverse relationship between the short- and long-term impacts of the proposed regulated activity on wetlands and the watercourse and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity of such wetlands or watercourses.

Specifically, the Land Tech reports dated November 29, 2010 and October 25, 2010 which state “Long term impacts associated with these activities include the partial loss of wetland and upland buffer functions including flood storage capacity, stream bank stabilization, wildlife habitat, aquatic food sources, water temperature moderation, nutrient removal and sediment attenuation”.

Motion seconded by Commissioner Curran. Motion carried unanimously.

CEASE AND DESIST ORDERS

IW Vio #10-16 2 Avalon Way,~ Kelley DeLuca

Commissioner Pieragostini motioned to uphold the Cease and Desist order. Failure to pursue an approved permit application within 30 days will result in such fines and penalties as the law allows. After 30 days, the file will be sent to the Town Attorney. Commissioner Kotch seconded the motion. The motion was carried unanimously.

IW Vio #08-81 199 Great Quarter Road, Gail & Frank Miranti

Ms. Astarita provided an overview for this Cease and Desist and provided pictures of the dam, stating concerns over the work that has been completed. There is also a discrepancy over who owns the dam.

Mr. Miranti discussed the work he has completed. Commissioner Peters explained that any work within the wetlands or watercourse requires a permit. Ms. Astarita suggests that an engineer be involved with further plans. Commissioner Salling said a survey will need to be submitted. It was also noted that any activity completed thus far without a permit constitutes a violation.

Commissioner Salling motioned to uphold the Cease and Desist order. Failure to pursue an approved permit application within 30 days will result in such fines and penalties as the law allows. After 30 days, the file will be sent to the Town Attorney. Commissioner Kotch seconded the motion. The motion was carried unanimously.

IW Vio #10-15 16 Still Hill Road, Jason & Shelly Petrelli

Commissioner Curran motioned to uphold the Cease and Desist Order. Failure to pursue an approved permit application within 30 days will result in such fines and penalties as the law allows. After 30 days, the file will be sent to the Town Attorney. Commissioner Kotch seconded the motion. The motion was carried unanimously

PUBLIC HEARING

IW #10-32 Commerce Road (Tech Park), Town of Newtown. Application for an Industrial Condominium Complex.

Commissioner Pieragostini read the public notice. George Benson, Director of Newtown Planning and Land Use, discussed his December 7^th memorandum concerning the parcel of 11.6 acres proposed for easement or open space.

Bill Carboni from Spath-Bjorklund Associates presented an overview and displayed site plans for the commission. He asked if the records from their previous application #10-11 be moved into this application.

Michael Klein, Biologist and Soil Scientist, provided a lengthy review of the application and answered questions regarding the mitigation, planting and maintenance plans. Mr. Klein distributed a response letter to Steve Danzer’s report.

Ms. Astarita asked for the conservation easement to be marked on the map. Commissioner Kotch asked for the maps to show the upland review areas. Commissioner Pieragostini asked for the mitigation areas (with their dimensions) to be marked on the map.

Public Comments

Atty. Robert Hall asked if lots on Commerce Drive were allowed to expand, would there be compensation paid to the Town.

Joe Hovious, Chair of the Conservation Commission, said the file is confusing, the map is unclear, and the applicant should provide more specifics. Also, the stormwater management plan refers to the LGB report that is not in the file and that the information regarding the property shift is unclear.

Ted Kreinik, Chair of EDC, explained the three specific parcels being discussed: The commercial condominium; The conservation easement that they are working with the Agricultural Department for a swap; And the parcel along Commerce Drive that would be kept for expansion.

The hearing will be continued to January 12, 2010

PENDING APPLICATIONS

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 explained revised plans that were submitted.

After a discussion, Commissioner Pieragostini motioned to approve the application with standard conditions, A, B, C, D, E, and

The approved plans, Overall Site Plan, Dam Restoration * Pond Maintenance, Coger Pond, 38 Cold Spring Road, Newtown, CT, dated revised November 23, 2010, and new submitted Pond Maintenance Plan, received on December 1, 2010, and
A quarterly status report on forms provided on the Town of Newtown website or in the Land Use office will be submitted to the commission until the project is complete.

Commissioner Kotch seconded the motion. Motion approved unanimously.

IW #10-23 31 Swamp Road, Todd Bolmer. Application related to the removal of a violation.

Commissioner Curran re-joined the commission. Commissioner Hammar recused herself.

Mr. Bolmer was present. Commissioner Peters questioned the wetland flags since it appears that a good portion of the property in the front (that is not marked) is wet. She asked who delineated the wetlands. Mr. Bolmer said Soil Science and Environmental Services tested the entire property. Commissioner Peters asked if the soil scientist issued a report or map. Mr. Bolmer said no, that he was told an engineer or surveyor would need to provide the information on a map. He supplied what was received from the soil scientist. Commissioner Pieragostini asked if the map submitted was the only map he had. Mr. Bolmer answered yes. He said his plans show that he would move the wood 60 feet from the wetlands and that wood would be cut and split 80 feet from the wetlands.

The commissioners asked questions about the two gravel roads and what would be done with the road currently in the wetlands. The commissioners said the map and wetlands scientist report was incomplete and that a narrative needs to be submitted. Mr. Bolmer said the soil scientist sketched the wetlands on the submitted map. Commissioner Salling stated concern about the significant amount of disturbance and whether the gravel road should be left as is. The application was out of time. Mr. Bolmer withdrew his application. He was requested to reapply before the next meeting.

IW #10-27 52 Great Quarter Road, Mike Bohnet. Application related to the removal of a violation.

Commissioner Hammar rejoined the commission.

Commissioner Kotch motioned to approve the application with standard conditions A, B, C, D, E, F and

The approved plans are “Bohnet Residence, 50 Great Quarter Road, Newtown, CT Conceptual Planting Plan, 1” = 16’ dated October 30, 2010 and revised November 20, 2010, by Holmes Fine Gardens stamped 12/8/10 and do not include any activities occurring east of the property line at the waterline at Lake Zoar.
A quarterly status report on forms provided on the Town of Newtown website or in the Land Use office will be submitted to the commission until the project is complete.

Commissioner Pieragostini seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.

IW #10-34 55 Botsford Hill Road, Dave Butz. Application related to the removal of a violation.

David and Daniel Butz were present to discuss the application. Commissioner Peters noted concerns over the steep slope and that the erosion and sediment controls were thoroughly compromised. David Butz said that Mr. Sibley suggested he place the wood chips on the slope but that water run-off caused them to slide down the hill. Ms. Astarita provided a background on the violation that stems back several years. She said the slope was to be seeded with pachysandra in 2008. There were several extensions but the E & S controls were compromised and no plantings were completed.

Daniel Butz said he brought in fill from the Highland Plaza site and explained why he was unable to complete the work. It was noted that there needs to be remediation on site, the slope should be re-graded and planted with vegetation that has good root structures. It was noted that the slope on the applicant’s property is dramatically different from that of the neighbors. The applicant needs to clarify mitigation intentions. It was noted that the application does not have enough detail and that additional information is needed.

IW #10-35 40 Parmalee Hill Road, Justin Scott. Application related to the removal of a violation.

Mr. Scott was present and said his consultant was not available. He explained the work he completed on adjacent property. Since he will be out of the country, he will attend the second meeting in January.

OTHER BUSINESS

Officer Positions for 2011 – Commissioners Kotch and Hammar were asked to be on the nominating committee.

Adoption of Annual Fees – Commissioner Salling motioned to approve the fees for 2011. Commissioner Kotch seconded the motion. The motion was carried unanimously.

Approval of Minutes – Commissioner Curran motioned to approve the minutes of October 27, 2010 as amended. Commissioner Salling seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously as amended. Commissioner Kotch motioned to approve the minutes of November 10, 2010 as amended. Commissioner Hammar seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously as amended.

Commissioner Kotch motioned to adjourn. The motion seconded by Commissioner Curran. The motion was approved unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 11:25 p.m.