INLAND WETLANDS COMMISSION
MINUTES
Regular Meeting of January 9, 2013 at 7:30 pm
Council Chambers, Municipal Center,
3 Primrose Street, Newtown, CT
These Minutes are Subject to Approval by the Inland Wetlands Commission
Present: Pat Boily, Ed Bryan, Kristen Hammar, Katja Pieragostini, Anne Peters and Sharon Salling. Absent: Mary Curran. Staff Present: Steve Maguire, Land Use Enforcement Officer and Tammy Hazen, Clerk
Ms. Peters convened the meeting at 7:32 pm.
PENDING APPLICATIONS
IW #12-41 22 Wendover Rd, Mark Edwards, Application for disturbance within a pond area, resolving IW Vio #12-11.
Ms. Peters opened discussion. Mr. Maguire distributed a plan submitted by the applicant. Ms. Peters shared concerns stating it looked like the plan shows a buffer of one plant deep. Mr. Edwards said it will be more of a two foot buffer because it includes wild grass and that they had no history of erosion problems. Ms. Peters explained in detail why a buffer is important, how it provides a barrier for water infiltration and prevents erosion. She said the buffer should be deeper and that it should encompass the entire perimeter of the pond.
Mr. Edwards asked about the trees near the pond and if their root systems are sufficient to hold the soil. Ms. Peters said the trees are in the back area, not in the front, and that other plants are needed to soak up the water. She discussed concerns over the trench and the statement Mr. Edwards made in his letter that said he will continue to maintain grass as he has done in the past. Mr. Edwards said that because he’s mowed that area for the past 38 years it should not be a concern.
Ms. Salling re-stated what she explained at a previous meeting, explaining the reason for a buffer and why grass along the pond is not sufficient. She said the amount of Irises he planted could not fill a two foot buffer around the entire pond. Mr. Edwards said the Iris’ were to provide color and that the wild grass should be sufficient.
Ms. Peters said the commission had asked for wetland vegetation, plants and bushes with sturdy root systems, as stated on the plant list he was given by Mr. Maguire. She then handed Mr. Edwards additional lists of wetland buffer plants for his use. Mr. Edwards said several times that he would do whatever the commission wants but asked for a recommendation on buffer size and what plants to use.
Ms. Salling said it is not the commission’s responsibility to provide specific recommendations, but suggested Mr. Edwards use the lists provided and work with Mr. Maguire and a professional at a nursery to come up with a plan. She asked Mr. Edwards if he was clear on what the commission was asking. He said he was. Ms. Peters said the plans could include a little path to the pond for access but that there should not be any wide expanses of open areas around the perimeter.
Mr. Bryan shared concerns over the digging that was done in the wetlands and asked if it was understood that there will be no further use of equipment, no more movement of soil, and no more mowing around the pond. Mr. Edwards then asked about the outfall and if he can clean out the pipe. Ms. Peters said the area should be allowed to return to its natural state, the pipe should not be cleaned out or removed, and that there should be no more digging. She said the area may become soggy, but that wetland vegetation will help soak up some of the water.
Mr. Maguire and the commissioners reviewed the map to discuss what they are looking for as far as buffer depth and explained to Mr. Edwards how to delineate the wetlands with either boulders or a fence to prevent mowing beyond the designated non-mow area.
Ms. Peters said the application will need another 30-day extension. The commissioners explained to Mr. Edwards that no further work is to be done until the application and final plans are approved. The commissioners took time to make sure Mr. Edwards understood what they were asking for. Mr. Edwards then confirmed that he will contact Mr. Maguire to review the types of plants and buffer width and that he will go to a nursery and get professional recommendations for a new planting plan. Mr. Edwards said he will return to the commission at the next meeting (January 23, 2013) with a new plan. He submitted a new application extension request.
ITEM ADDED TO THE AGENDA - Ms. Peters motioned to amend the agenda by allowing Bill Pieragostini to discuss his request for Forest Practices. Ms. Hammer seconded the motion. Ms. Pieragostini recused herself. The motion was approved.
CORRESPONDENCE – Ms. Peters opened discussion regarding a letter dated December 10, 2012 with attached Forest Stewardship Plan from Katja and William Pieragostini. Mr. Maguire explained the request was originally submitted as a determination. The commission is presented with it as a Forest Practices application, as per Mr. Sibley’s suggestion.
Ms. Peters stated the concern is whether an application is required. Mr. Pieragostini said he was told it falls under a farming exemption. Mr. Maguire said the Forest Application was filled out so the commission can determine whether the application is required or not. Ms. Peters said the Forest Practices regulations would regulate this activity if it is a commercial sale. She asked Mr. Pieragostini if the Conservation Commission needs approval since it involves the conservation easement. Mr. Pieragostini said there was a side agreement regarding a timber harvest on the land and since activities are for creating cotton tail habitat, it does not need approval by Conservation. He said the forestry people and attorneys felt he needed a jurisdictional ruling from Wetlands and not from the Conservation
Commission. Mr. Boily and Ms. Hammar asked if there was anything to be concerned about regarding wetlands. The commission discussed wetlands crossing, etc. Mr. Pieragostini said the letter asked for jurisdictional ruling and that if they are not exempt from the forestry regulations, they are exempt from paying fees for the forestry application. Ms. Peters said the statutes need to be reviewed before making a determination. Mr. Pieragostini will return to the next meeting.
ACCEPTANCE OF NEW APPLICATIONS: IW #12-49 148 Taunton Hill Road, Meghan Beard and Tom Gavati. Mr. Maguire explained the application for the installation of a BioNova pool system where a wetlands system is used to clean the water instead of chemicals.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES – Mr. Boily motioned to approve the minutes of November 14, 2012 and seconded by Ms. Salling. Ms. Hammar and Ms. Pieragostini abstained. The minutes were approved as written.
ELECTION of OFFICERS – Mr. Boily motioned that the commission remain intact with re-election of the same officers. Ms. Hammar seconded the motion. The motion was carried unanimously.
STAFF REPORTS – Mr. Maguire distributed a summary of all applications for 2012. The list includes the long form permits (those brought before the commission), all short form permits (those signed by the staff) and all non-regulated activity permits.
Mr. Maguire then discussed a letter he will mail to existing wetland permit holders regarding quarterly reports that are not being sent in as required. Ms. Salling asked if this could be done on-line. Mr. Maguire noted that option is unavailable at this time, but that the quarterly reports could be emailed to him. Automatic reminders were also discussed. Mr. Maguire will keep the commissioners updated on this.
ADJOURNMENT – Ms. Pieragostini motioned to adjourn the meeting. Ms. Hammar seconded the motion. The meeting was adjourned at 8:20 pm.
Respectfully submitted by Tammy Hazen
| 
