Skip Navigation
This table is used for column layout.
Inland Wetlands & Watercourses Commission Minutes 02/21/2013
Unapproved
INLAND WETLANDS & WATERCOURSES COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
Thursday,~February 21, 2013 – 7:30 p.m.
Town Hall – 1st~floor conference room
302 Main Street

I. ~~~~~~~CALL TO ORDER

          The Chairman, Paul Smith, called the regular meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.

II.~~~~~        ROLL CALL

               Members Present~
               Paul Smith, Chairman
               Janis Esty
               Kimberley Gallagher
               Judith Preston
               Charles Wehrly
               William Pollock, Secretary
               Carl Fortuna, First Selectman, Ex Officio Member

       Members Absent
       Brendan McKeown
Charles Sohl

       Staff Present
       Sandy Prisloe, Inland Wetlands Enforcement Officer
       Stella Beaudoin, Administrative Clerk
       Michael Cronin, Esq., Attorney to the IWWC

Chairman Smith stated that Aquifer Protection Agency meeting has been cancelled due to lack of business.

Chairman Smith opened the Public Hearing.

III.~~~~        PUBLIC HEARING

Application #12-018~~“Tractor Supply Company” Regulated Activity for Commercial Construction
~       401 Middlesex Turnpike (Map 52 / Lot 96)
~       Applicant: New England Retail Properties, Inc.: Agent: James Cassidy, PE
       Action:~Continue or Close Public Hearing by 3/21/2013 (NLT 3/22/2013) Deliberate and act.

Commissioner William Pollock recused himself from the Public Hearing for Tractor Supply Company.

James Cassidy, P.E. with Hallisey, Pearson & Cassidy of Rocky Hill, CT, presented on behalf of the Applicant, Mark D’Addabbo, Managing Member, NERP Holding & Acquisitions Company, LLC. Mr. Cassidy informed the Commission that notification of this application was sent via certified mailing to the abutters, the fees associated with this application were paid and the sign notification of this application was posted eight days prior to the meeting.  

This is an application seeking to obtain a wetlands permit in order to conduct a regulated activity in the upland review area. The applicant proposes to construct a new 19,097 sq. ft Tractor Supply retail store on this site, with a side yard display area and parking lot.  There is a small wetlands area on the property, consisting of about 412 sq. ft., which is part of a larger wetlands system.

A letter from the CT Water company dated January 22, 2013 has been received along with comments and recommendations from Jeff Jacobson, town engineer, dated February 5 and February 13, 2013.  

Mr. Cassidy reviewed with the Commission those revisions and recommendations as put forward by the CT Water Company and by Mr. Jacobson and noted that the revisions have been addressed.

Chairman Smith entered into the record the following:  

  • January 22, 2013 response from CT Water Company to the Zoning Commission;  
  • January 21, 2013 letter from NERP Holding and Acquisitions Co granting an extension to close the Public Hearing in order to allow time for the Commission to receive comments from the town engineer and review the revised plan;
  • A favorable letter and acknowledgement of this Public Hearing, dated January 18, 2013 from Robert W. Bradway, Jr., of the Valley Railroad Company, Essex Steam & Riverboat.
Chairman Smith asked if Commissioners if they had any questions of the applicant.

Ms. Holland stated that she is not familiar with the term “wetlands plugs”.  Mr. Cassidy stated that wetlands plugs are small caliber plants which generates better wetlands growth than a seedling would.
 
Mr. Wehrly stated that he had no further questions of the applicant.

Ms. Gallagher questioned how the applicant proposes to handle the salting and treatment of the parking lot in inclement weather, noting that the use of sodium chloride as a deicing agent should be prohibited.  Mr. Cassidy stated that sodium chloride will not be utilized as a deicing agent.  Mr. Cassidy stated that emergency spill clean-up material will be located in the store.  Mr. Cassidy commented on the use of a molasses-based product as a deicer.

Mark D’Addabbo, President and member of NERP presented.  Mr. D’Addabbo stated that the corporation is agreeable to the prohibition of the use of sodium chloride as a deicing agent on this property.

Mr. Cassidy stated that repair/maintenance of equipment will be prohibited on this property.  

Mr. Cassidy stated that a meadow mix will be utilized on the property which requires little maintenance and no fertilizer or pesticides will be used.  Mr. Cassidy stated that there will be snow storage around the perimeter of the property and that all of the storage area is situated on the southerly boundary so the drainage system will be utilized for the snow.  

Ms. Esty questioned if there were any recommendations in the Jacobson report for which Mr. Cassidy is not in agreement with.  Mr. Cassidy stated that he is in agreement with all of the recommendations and revisions.

Ms. Preston suggested the prohibition of an inorganic fertilizer and pesticides as a condition of the Permit approval.  Ms. Preston stated that an organic fertilizer may be utilized. Mr. D’Addabbo was in agreement with this condition.  

Chairman Smith had no further questions of the applicant.

Chairman Smith asked if anyone wished to speak in favor or in opposition to this application.  There were not comments from the audience.

Chairman Smith closed the public comment portion of the Public Hearing.  

Mr. Jacobson stated that he has reviewed this application for the Commission and agrees that the applicant has complied with all of the concerns and conditions as stated in the January 22, 2013 CT Water Company letter.  Mr. Jacobson commented on the set of revised #2 drawings with a revision date of Feb 16, 2013.  Mr. Cassidy stated that there is an additional revision to reflect the pipe situated at the bottom of the basin which was dropped.  This is reflected on the revision dated February 21, 2013 which has been submitted for the record.

Chairman Smith closed the Public Hearing on Application #12-018~~“Tractor Supply Company” Regulated Activity for Commercial Construction.

MOTION to approve a Permit to Application #12-018~~Tractor Supply Company Regulated Activity for Commercial Construction for a 19,097 s.f. retail sales building and a 15,000 s.f. outdoor sales area, 401 Middlesex Tpke., Map 52 Lot 96, B-4 District; Aquifer Protection Area with conditions: 1) The applicant agrees to adhere to requirements set forth in the January 22, 2013 CT Water Company letter; 2) The use of organic fertilizer will be allowed and the use of inorganic fertilizer and pesticides are prohibited; 3) As stated in the letter from the CT Water Company dated January 22, 2013, more specifically item #2 which prohibits the use of sodium chloride as a deicing agent; 4) The most recent approved plans dated February 21, 2013 which include all of the recommended revisions as made by Jeffrey Jacobson, Town Engineer;  MADE: by K. Gallagher; SECONDED: by J. Esty; VOTING IN FAVOR: P. Smith, J. Esty, J. Holland, K. Gallagher, J. Preston, C. Wehrly; OPPOSED: None; ABSTAINING: None; APPROVED: 6-0-0.

MOTION to amend the conditions as set forth in the previous Motion for approval of a Permit to Application #12-018 Tractor Supply Company Regulated Activity for Commercial Construction for a 19,097 s.f. retail sales building and a 15,000 s.f. outdoor sales area, 401 Middlesex Tpke., Map 52 Lot 96, B-4 District; Aquifer Protection Area with conditions: 1) The applicant agrees to adhere to requirements set forth in the January 22, 2013 CT Water Company letter; 2) The use of organic fertilizer will be allowed and the use of inorganic fertilizer and pesticides are prohibited; 3) As stated in the letter from the CT Water Company dated January 22, 2013, more specifically item #2 which prohibits the use of sodium chloride as a deicing agent; 4) The most recent approved plans are dated February 21, 2013 which include all of the recommended revisions as made by Jeffrey Jacobson, Town Engineer and 5) The applicant will be bound by testimony presented at the February 21, 2013 Public Hearing with regard to snow removal; MADE: by K. Gallagher; SECONDED: by J. Esty; VOTING IN FAVOR: P. Smith, J. Esty, J. Holland, K. Gallagher, J. Preston, C. Wehrly; OPPOSED: None; ABSTAINING: None; APPROVED: 6-0-0.

At this time Commissioner William Pollock returned to the meeting.

Application #12-019~~“Max’s Place”~Modification of Original Permit
       Corner of Boston Post Road, Spencer Plain Road & Center Road West (Map 25, 26 /  
        Lots 2, 28, 29, 30 / 6-10, 6-11, 6-12, 32, 32-1)
       Applicant: Max’s Place, LLC; Agent: Attorney David M. Royston
       ACTION:~Open Public Hearing; Continue or Close by 3/21/2013 (NLT 3/28/2013);
        Deliberate and act.

Chairman Smith opened the Public Hearing.

Attorney David Royston presented on behalf of this application. David Ziaks, Project Engineer Hesketh & Associates, Inc. was also present.  Ronald Lyman, principal member of Max’s Place LLC was unable to attend this Public Hearing.

Attorney Royston stated that the first, previously issued IWWC Permit was to allow for the removal of the pavement on Center Road west beyond the cul de sac and the new cul de sac of Center Road west to be created. That Permit remains in effect and no changes are requested to that Permit.  Attorney Royston stated that the 2006 IWWC Permit project consisted of four buildings and reflected on the map. Attorney Royston stated that the northeast corner of this property will remain undeveloped, however the southeast corner may be developed in the future.  

Chairman Smith stated that any proposed future development of the southeast property corner would require an application to the IWWC.  Chairman Smith stated for the record, Exhibit A-1 reflects the previously issued 2006 permit approval however it does not reflect the current proposal.  Chairman Smith stated for the record, Exhibit A-2 which is an aerial of the modification to this application.  

Attorney Royston stated that the two buildings in the eastern sector of the property are being changed in their location and part of that change moves one of the buildings closer to the wetlands area.  Another portion of the building at the northeast corner is being moved away from the wetlands. The Kohl’s building is 56,500 s.f. and to south is the Big Y which is 54,100 s.f.  The total square footage of those two buildings is greater than the previous two proposed buildings. A new retail building as shown on the westerly property side of the site is off of Spencer Plains Road. The proposed single building on Spencer Plains Road is 8,000 s/f which replaces the previously proposed two buildings at 7,500 square feet each. There is a total of 126,000 s.f. for this Phase 1 of building space.

Attorney Royston stated for the record that notification of this application was sent via certified mailing to the abutters, the fees associated with this application were paid and the sign notification of this application was posted eight days prior to the meeting. Attorney Royston stated that comments from Jeff Jacobson, town engineer has been received and responded to.    

Mr. Royston stated that at a previous meeting the chair made an inquiry as to the necessity of assigning a new application number to this proposal and in a discussion with the Commission’s legal counsel it was indicated that a new IW application number would not be necessary.  

Mr. Royston commented on the overall drainage of storm water effects leaving the site referenced the Nathan L. Jacobson Associates letter dated February 21, 2013 which was made a part of the record.  

Dave Ziaks, P.E. presented.  Mr. Ziaks referenced Sheet MA-1 with a revision date of 1/11/2013.  The northeast property corner is comprised of a wooded conservation area and there is a wetland which flows through that area.  Mr. Ziaks referenced the stormwater basin and rain garden at north end of the property noting that drainage improvements will be made to Center Road west.  Mr. Ziaks presented for the record Exhibit A-4 Sheet W-I1 revised 1/15/2013 responding to first set of Jacobson’s comments.  

Mr. Ziaks stated that in the northwest property corner there exists a small pocket of wetlands associated with a drainage ditch that services Spencer Plains Road and continues along the northerly boundary line.  Mr. Ziaks indicated that there has been no significant change in the coverage on the site.  The impervious areas between the previously permitted and the new proposal are the same, within a percentage point or so.  The only measurable change in the wetland review area is in the northeast corner due to the change in the configuration of the building.  

Mr. Ziaks stated that a small employee lot area will be part of the porous pavement treatment.  The grading around the back of the building will remain the same.  Mr. Ziaks stated that the applicant has worked to insure that there is no further disturbance to conservation area and to minimize the grading.  Mr. Ziaks stated that he has worked with the fire department to eliminate the two proposed fire lanes.  The treatment building for the onsite septic system is located under the Kohl’s parking lot on the north side of the proposed Kohl’s building, which is closer to the leaching area and a Permit for discharge has been issued by the DEEP.  Mr. Ziaks stated that there are no changes proposed in the area of  Pond #3.  The focus of the revisions is to the northeast corner.  Mr. Ziaks stated that the amount of disturbance in upland review area is the same.  

Mr. Ziaks commented on the overall drainage from previous application noting that this is a complex system which has been blended to include the overall watershed analysis that goes as far as Chalker Beach, which has been compiled and put into a large hydrodynamic review.  The Army Corps of Engineers, the DEEP and Jeff Jacobson, P.E. have reviewed as well.  
Per the Jacobson report, there has been no change as a result of the drainage from the previous application.  Mr. Ziaks stated that the Stormwater Plan has no impact to the crossing at Route 1 nor at the Chalker Beach marsh.  
 
Mr. Ziaks referenced the 2/15/2013 Jacobson report regarding the pavement areas and noted that he has addressed all but a few small conditions which are left remaining and will be addressed on the next set of plans.

Mr. Jacobson stated that three of four housecleaning items left remaining which he has enumerated as suggested Permit conditions in his letter dated February 21, 2013.

Chairman Smith noted for the record that the conditions suggested in 2/13/2013 Nathan Jacobson letter has been superseded in the 2/21/2013 Nathan Jacobson letter.

Chairman Smith asked members for their questions and comments on this application.

Mr. Pollock had no questions on the application.

Ms. Holland had no questions on the application.

Mr. Wehrly stated that the entire area of intermittent nature of the watercourse that runs through the parking lot from north to south has a high water table.  Mr. Wehrly questioned if the bulk of the storm water drainage system is situated in this area.  Mr. Ziaks stated that there is a drainage ditch which runs along the stone wall, and over the years has developed characteristics of wetland soils.  It is labeled an intermittent watercourse, however it is a dry ditch most of the time and was dug to drain a wet backyard.  There is a high water table in that area.

Ms. Gallagher stated that there is more coverage of the under-roof on the new plan but the amount of total impervious cover is unchanged.  Mr. Ziaks stated that the additional impervious coverage is the additional roof area of the larger buildings.  The change of square footage under-roof does not change the water flow and there is no change over what was previously approved in downstream conditions as a result of this project.  Ms. Gallagher referenced the Jacobson letter of 2/21/2013 under Section C. Environmental.  

Mr. Royston stated that one of the agreements made by Mr. Lyman in original permit application was that he would clean out the drainage system running from Center to off Center Road and clean out the culvert crossing off Center Road, and also clean out the culvert under-bridge under the Boston Post Road and running parallel to Chalker Beach Road to a trolley crossing where it then becomes tidal wetlands. That work has all been completed in the past three or four years.  

Ms. Gallagher asked Mr. Jacobson if he planned to maintain this on a basis of every four to six years.  Mr. Jacobson stated that it the need for maintenance is not anticipated. Mr. Jacobson stated that part of the drainage analysis is based on the system being clean and working at optimum.  Mr. Jacobson suggested a second look at the drainage basins.  Ms. Gallagher stated that this should this be looked at particularly after a big storm.  Mr. Jacobson stated that maintenance of the same is the responsibility of the  town.  

Chairman Smith stated that this is an existing downstream system and continual maintenance of that is a municipal responsibility as it transcends multiple properties en route to LI Sound.  

Chairman Smith stated that Mr. Ziaks previously testified that the work requested in the 2006 IWWC Permit was performed by the end of 2008.  Mr. Ziaks stated that the work is not entirely completed. The repair, replacement or removal of the tide gate was a condition of the 2006 IWWC Permit.  However, the DEEP forbad the applicant from doing anything with the tidal gate as it was believed to be a State of CT tide gate.  

Attorney Royston stated that the tide gate remains in the same condition as was in 2006.  Mr. Lyman made an application to the DEEP to repair the tide gate which is within their jurisdiction.  The DEEP indicated that prior to reviewing that application permission must be obtained from the property owners to allow traverse across the tide gate which is located within the Summerwood Condo Association.  An eighteen inch un-gated, unobstructed pipe runs underneath and at the 2006 IWWC meeting there was a question as to the shape that the pipe was in.  Permission for access was not denied, however it was ignored.  Subsequent to April 2010 no further communication has been made with the Chalker Beach Association or the Summerwood Condo Association and no work has been done to this tide gate.  Attorney Royston stated that in recent review of the pipe it was noted that it has further deteriorated.  The amount of stormwater that goes into the Chalker Beach path raises the surface area less than one inch. In recent storm, the tidal water comes over the berm and fills the tidal basin which takes a long while to recede.

Attorney Royston stated that this project will not worsen the condition of the gate in its current unimproved state.

Chairman Smith stated that the Commission appreciates the applicant’s willingness to continue to offer to again perform maintenance if allowed access to that system to the extent that it may need maintenance in the past four years.  

Michael Cronin, Commission counsel stated that the State of CT appointed tide gate commissioner who has statutory authority to regulated and maintain the tide gates.

Attorney Royston stated that prior to the commencement of construction, applicant will check that channel going down to the trolley crossing to make sure that it is still operational. Once that is done, it is part of the town drainage system and their responsibility to maintain.  It is the recommendation of Jacobson Associates that the gate will be inspected prior to construction and to ensure that work previously done is still functional.  

Ms. Gallagher stated that the drain-off form the roof should be used for irrigation.  Need 75,000 to 100k gallons of water for irrigation.  Will capture the roof rain water and made part of the irrigation system for the miscellaneous grasses throughout the site.  

Ms. Esty stated that all of her questions have been answered.
Ms. Preston questioned who will maintain the Conservation easement in the northeast property corner.   Mr. Ziaks stated that that is a private conservation area and the property owner would have some responsibilities to clean it.  

Attorney Royston stated that the easement document has been executed and presented to the town counsel for approval and the town is the enforcer.  

Ms. Preston questioned if the DEEP supports the idea of addressing the tide gate?  Mr. Ziaks stated that there is currently an internal debate as to whether to repair or release the tide gate.  Preston went on to say that in light of climate change, sea level rise and intensity and duration of storms, the need to address the tide gate issue will worsen as time goes by and Ms. Preston suggested that it would be worth the effort to get it fixed.  

First Selectman Fortuna stated that he is happy to write a letter to DEEP regarding the tide gate situation.  

Attorney Cronin stated that this is an important issue from a FEMA.  

Chair Smith stated that, in summary the issue here is not one of approaching the DEEP regarding this matter as yet.  However the Board of Selectmen would consider sending a letter to the Chalker Beach Association and the Summerwoods Condo Association and suggest a dialogue between those two property groups to allow access to the sites to review the properties.  Attorney Royston indicated that he will provide the first selectman with the contacts for both the Chalker Beach Association and the Summerwoods Condo Association.    

Chairman Smith stated that the plans that are up for consideration are a composite of different documents to include a set of plans revised thru January 11, 2013 which was the first set received at the January 17, 2013 IWWC meeting when the application was accepted. A new drawing, DA-1 was part of the drainage report and is now a color version and has been submitted separately with a new date of January 11, 2013.  Chairman Smith indicated that other drawings submitted are replacements dated revised February 15, 2013.  Chairman Smith stated for the record, the Commission is looking at plans dated with revision through January 11, 2013 with subsequent sheets revised through February 15, 2013.  The drainage reports had previously been submitted along with review comments by Jacobson and Associates.  

Chairman Smith asked Commissioners if they had further questions. There were no further questions.  

Chairman Smith opened this matter to the public and asked if anyone wished to speak in favor or in opposition.

Bob Fish, 49 Obed Heights Road presented.  Mr. Fish stated that once the environmental issues have been addressed, he would urge the IWWC to approve the project.  Mr. Fish stated that this proposal is important as far as the economic development of the town is concerned.  

Selectman Fortuna stated that this is an important and wanted project and it has been along time coming.  Mr. Fortuna indicated that it would appear that the applicant has done extensive work on this project and is fully supportive of the project.  

Chairman Smith closed the public comment portion of the hearing.  Mr. Smith asked Mr. Jacobson if he had any issues or concerns surrounding this application.  Mr. Jacobson stated that he has no significant concerns, however he does have some suggested conditions of approval of permit as stated in the February 21, 2013 letter.  

Mr. Smith summarized the five bulleted recommendations for conditions in the Jacobson letter of February 21, 2013:
  • The monitoring of groundwater observation wells within Stormwater Pond #3 should be conducted on a weekly basis until the end of August for further evaluating site hydrology with regards to restoration of the proposed marsh.
  • The design engineer will provide inspection services including the coordination of soil testing services (sieve analysis, compaction, etc), with regard to the construction of the earth embankment section of Stormwater Pond #3 to ensure that it is constructed in substantial conformance with the design drawings.
  • A joint inspection with an IWWC representative of the previously completed cleaning and restoration of existing downstream storm drainage pipes, culverts, channels and swales will be conducted prior to initiation of any on-site construction to determine if any follow-up work is necessary.
  • A copy of the required CT Department of Energy and Environmental Protection stormwater permit, including the Stormwater Pollution prevention Plan will be submitted prior to the start of any construction activities.   
  • The proposed Conservation Easement area to the east of the Kohl’s Building will be redefined with bearings and distances and permanently marked and identified as such in the field.  Easement documents will be submitted for review and approval by the Commission’s legal counsel.     
Attorney Royston suggested that this motion include mention of the approval in the section of property referenced in the original Permit classified as Phase 2, is superseded by this approval and all other terms and conditions of the 2006 IWWC Permit #06-PO26 shall remain in full force and effect.

Any Phase 2 improvements to this property will require an application from this Commission as well as other governing Boards and Commissions.  This is a modification from the original permit issued which included development on site and the conditions of the original permit remain in force unless modified herein.


MOTION to approve Permit Application #12—19 Max’s Place” Modification of Original Permit, corner of Boston Post Road, Spencer Plain Road & Center Road West (Map 25, 26/ Lots 2, 28, 29, 30 / 6,-10, 6-11, 6-12, 32, 32-1 Applicant Max’s Place, LLC: agent attorney David Royston with the following conditions: 1) The monitoring of groundwater observation wells within Stormwater Pond #3 will be conducted on a weekly basis until the end of August for further evaluating site hydrology with regards to restoration of the proposed marsh; 2) The design engineer will provide inspection services including the coordination of soil testing services (sieve analysis, compaction, etc) with regard to the construction of the earth embankment section of Stormwater Pond #3 to ensure that it is constructed in substantial conformance with the design drawings;  3) A joint inspection with an IWWC representative of the previously completed cleaning and restoration of existing downstream storm drainage pipes, culverts, channels and swales will be conducted prior to initiation of any on-site construction to determine if any follow-up work is necessary; 4)  A copy of the required CT Department of Energy and Environmental Protection stormwater permit, including the Stormwater Pollution prevention Plan will be submitted prior to the start of any construction activities; 5) The proposed Conservation Easement area to the east of the Kohl’s Building will be redefined with bearings and distances and permanently marked and identified as such in the field.  Easement documents will be submitted for review and approval by the Commission’s legal counsel; MADE: by K. Gallagher; SECONDED: by J. Preston VOTING IN FAVOR: P. Smith, J. Esty, J. Holland; K. Gallagher, J. Preston, C. Wehrly, W. Pollock; OPPOSED: None; ABSTAINING: None; APPROVED: 7-0-0.

MOTION to amend the conditions as set forth in the previous Motion for approval of a Permit to Application #12—19 Max’s Place” Modification of Original Permit, corner of Boston Post Road, Spencer Plain Road & Center Road West (Map 25, 26/ Lots 2, 28, 29, 30 / 6,-10, 6-11, 6-12, 32, 32-1 Applicant Max’s Place, LLC: agent attorney David Royston with the following conditions: 1) The monitoring of groundwater observation wells within Stormwater Pond #3 will be conducted on a weekly basis until the end of August for further evaluating site hydrology with regards to restoration of the proposed marsh; 2) The design engineer will provide inspection services including the coordination of soil testing services (sieve analysis, compaction, etc) with regard to the construction of the earth embankment section of Stormwater Pond #3 to ensure that it is constructed in substantial conformance with the design drawings;  3) A joint inspection with an IWWC representative of the previously completed cleaning and restoration of existing downstream storm drainage pipes, culverts, channels and swales will be conducted prior to initiation of any on-site construction to determine if any follow-up work is necessary; 4)  A copy of the required CT Department of Energy and Environmental Protection stormwater permit, including the Stormwater Pollution prevention Plan will be submitted prior to the start of any construction activities; 5) The proposed Conservation Easement area to the east of the Kohl’s Building will be redefined with bearings and distances and permanently marked and identified as such in the field. Easement documents will be submitted for review and approval by the Commission’s legal counsel; 6) The approval in the section of property referenced in the original Permit classified as Phase 2 is superseded by this approval and all other terms and conditions of the 2006 IWWC Permit #06-PO26 shall remain in full force and effect; 7) Any Phase 2 improvements to this property will require an application from this commission as well as other governing Boards and Commissions.  This is a modification from the original permit issued which included development on site and the conditions of the original permit remain in force unless modified herein; MADE: by K. Gallagher; SECONDED: by J. Preston VOTING IN FAVOR: P. Smith, J. Esty, J. Holland; K. Gallagher, J. Preston, C. Wehrly, W. Pollock; OPPOSED: None; ABSTAINING: None; APPROVED: 7-0-0.

Chairman Smith stated for the record the Public Hearing on Application #12-19 Max’s Place is officially closed.  The closing of the Public Hearing was not mentioned prior to voting, however was closed as a part of the action to approve the application.

        Application #13-001~~“Dolan”~Regulated Activity for Residential Construction
       100 Chalker Beach Road (Map 18 / Lot 87)
~~~~~   Applicant: Robert & Patricia ~Dolan; Agent: Joseph Wren, PE
       ACTION:~Open Public Hearing; Continue or Close by 3/21/2013( NLT 3/28/2013)

Chairman Smith opened the Public Hearing.

This is an application to demolish the existing house, and reorient a new house along the property line.  The southern setback would be increased slightly; the northern setback would be decreased slightly.
 
Joseph Wren, P.E. presented on behalf of the applicants. Mr. Wren informed the Commission that notification of this application was sent via certified mailing to the abutters, the fees associated with this application were paid and the sign notification of this application was posted eight days prior to the meeting.  The plans were revised through February 7, 2013 based on the comments made by the town engineer.  Richard Snarski, soil scientist visited the site as well.  This property was directly impacted by Storm Irene and Storm Sandy and the house was first floor flooded.  The existing dwelling is on the western side of the property with close proximity to Chalker Beach Road. The dwelling is a 3-bedroom seasonal house built in 1945. There is presently one shed on the property. The original metal shed on the property was located within the wetland area. The shed was damaged during storm sandy and was removed from the property.  A new shed was constructed on the property and placed on a crushed stone pad.  The floor of the former shed remain in place.  The septic system on site is located behind the house and goes into an antiquated single row leaching system which is completely failed.  The applicant proposes to repair that system with a code compliant system and will be situated in the area of the southern property line which is the wetland. The area of inland wetland on this property is 0.02 acres and is an upland fringe of the tidal wetlands.  Soil testing on site revealed poor soil conditions toward the wetlands, with fill and debris from the tidal marsh land.  This map was labeled Exhibit A-1 with a date of 2/7/2013.  The solid line on exhibit A-1 delineates the wetlands; the green dash line that hugs the southern property line and goes up to wetland flag 6 is inland wetlands area.  The remainder of wetlands onsite are tidal wetlands. There are no spot elevations reflected on the coastal jurisdiction line as there is no proposed work. Because of WPCA’s requirements which are stricter than public health code requirements the septic system will be expanded 3.3 feet on either end.  Mr. Wren stated that there has been no negative feedback regarding the proposed sanitary waste system from the WPCA.  A new 20 x 40 foot 800 s/f first floor with two stories structure is being proposed.  The house will be elevated on pilings which meet the new FEMA and Town flood ordinances.  The elevation will go from 6.8’ to 14.5’ which is an 8 foot height increase. The surface below the elevated structure will be crushed stone.  There is a 35 foot front setback due to the 30 foot required right-of-way.  The septic tank system will be replaced with a combination concrete septic tank and pump chamber. Per regulations, the septic system must meet 50% of required effective leeching area and 50% of minimum leeching spread. Mr. Wren referenced Sheet SD 1 which is Exhibit A-2 and reflects a cross section of the leeching field.  

The shed floor will be removed and replaced with sloping fill and planted with grass. Added existing grades and proposed elevations along the north side of the property varying in height from 18 inches to 25 inches.  The drainage to the north grade has been added in the legend and one grading to the east has been added.  The system will be above existing grade. There will be six to seven cubic yards of fill in the wetland area to meet the requirements of having fill 10’ from the edge of the system.. Richard Snarski, soil scientist flagged the wetlands and provided his report to the IWWC in a letter dated January 21, 2013 letter which has been made part of the record.  Mr. Snarski suggested planting 14 shrubs and a planting schedule has been added to the proposal along the edge of the fill and the inland wetland.  This is the only viable area in which to locate the septic system.   The existing house has been renegotiated to run parallel to the property line.  

Chairman Smith commented on the email from Jeff Jacobson in which Mr. Jacobson agreed that all of the revisions have been made and are all acceptable.  The offer from applicant’s engineer is if allowed fill to the property adjacent to the north.  

Chairman Smith asked members for their questions and comments on this application.

Mr. Pollock had no questions regarding this application.

Ms. Holland had no questions regarding this application.

Mr. Wehrly stated that this is a difficult lot to deal with and noted that Mr. Wren has done  the very best with the location of the septic system. Mr. Wren stated that he has received approval from CRAD and stated that the WPCA has reviewed this proposal. The WPCA has received the comments and revisions which were made to the plans two weeks ago.  Mr. Wehrly stated that there does not appear to be other alternate locations for the placement of the shed.    Mr. Wren commented on the potential for ponding on the adjoining northerly property, noting the engineer added spot grades along the northern property line.  There is an existing spot elevation of 4.1.  With the proposed retaining wall encompassing the spot elevations, there is potential for a small area.  The neighbor to the north, Mr. Sohn has been notified via certified mail of this proposal.  
 
Ms. Gallagher commented on the house size with a proposed footprint of 20’ x 40’.  Ms. Gallagher stated that considering the difficulties of the septic system, has the applicant considered downsizing the house?  Mr. Wren stated that the system length will not be affected if the house is downscaled to two bedrooms in that it will still project the same fill to the wetland area.  Mr. Wren further commented on the value and benefit of the proposed wetland plantings to the wildlife habitat in the area.  

Ms. Esty had no questions regarding this application.

Ms. Preston stated that she is in favor of the wetland planting schedule.  Ms. Preston suggested the installation of Bayberry in place of the proposed Winterberry.  Ms. Preston further recommended consideration to an alternative to lawn or vegetation, noting that if the applicant is considering planting a lawn, an organic fertilizer may be used.   

Chairman Smith commented on the 70 foot area of ponding that runs on the adjacent property to the north.  Mr. Smith stated that further information is needed to make a determination if the northern property line will be impacted with this proposal and if in the future flooding will occur.  Mr. Wren stated that due to the drainage, as with many of the systems in Chalker Beach the system in this proposal has to be elevated.  Mr. Wren stated that the applicant has evaluated every single option with this proposal.  

Chairman Smith asked if the applicant considered placing the shed under the structure noting that if it went under structure the proposed shed roof line could be modified. Robert Dolan stated that he would be willing to locate his shed under the house structure.  Mr. Smith stated that if the shed were located to the east there would be room for 1 or 2 parking spaces on the west side of the property.  Mr. Wren stated that the finished floor elevation is 14 feet high which would allow for the proposed shed to be situated under the house in excess of 8-9 feet with a flat roof.  Mr. Wren stated that the Wetlands Commission Attorney did review this application and found no issues.  

Attorney Cronin stated that every property owner has the right to drain on the adjacent property owner’s property.  However, as soon as you break that pattern you are liable. If you put up a barrier that causes back up of water, you are creating a legal problem .  

Mr. Wren stated that in order to repair the failed septic system you must create a mound.  There is nothing you can do to remedy that without going onto the neighbor’s property.  

Chairman Smith stated that the adjacent property owner needs to receive specific information that shows the elevations and the impacts on his property.  One of the alternatives would be a creation of a swale on the north side of the wall going to the east. Mr. Smith asked that the applicant contact the property owner and work to achieve an agreement.  If applicant is willing to come up with a solution that is agreeable with the property owner to the north, report back to the IWWC.  

Chairman Smith asked the Commissioners if they wished for the applicant to personally speak with the neighbor who will be affected by the installation of the sanitary waste system and return to the Commission with evidence that the Sohn’s are in favor of this proposal.  Mr. Smith stated that the IWWC is obligated to look at the drainage pattern as it exists and consider the impacts.  

Mr. Pollock stated that it is not within the purview of the IWWC to go to this length with an adjacent neighbor.  If the Commission denies the application, we are denying the applicant’s use of the house.   

Ms. Holland stated that it is a wonderful gesture to ask the neighbor weigh in, but it is not a standard that the IWWC has previously set.

Ms. Gallagher stated that can we as a Commission do something that is not legal, such as changing a watercourse.  Commissioners must either decline the application or allow the applicant the opportunity to speak with the neighbor.  Ms. Gallagher went on to say that it is the job of the Commission to ensure that the lines of communication are open.

Ms. Esty stated that knowing that there would be damage to the adjacent property, she would like to hear from the neighbor.
Ms. Preston asked the repercussions of denying this application as it was clarified that Mr. Wren feels that this is the best proposal for this property.  Ms. Preston stated that the repair of septic dramatically improves the groundwater.  

Chairman Smith stated that if the Commission denies the application and it is decided that the applicants will try to make modest repairs to live in the house, the septic system will still need to be replaced and this Commission will not be involved.  

Attorney Cronin stated that if the applicant wishes to tear down the house, there will then exist a vacant lot, and there is no benefit of carry-over.  Before the applicant demolishes, zoning approval must be obtained. If the applicant repairs this system, IWWC approval will not be necessary.  

Chairman Smith stated that if the Commission issues a Permit and approves a plan that by its nature will violate laws of redirection of surface water run off.  

Mr. Wren suggested that the Commission continue to the next meeting and offer the applicant the opportunity to receive permission with the adjacent property owner.  

Mr. Dolan stated that he has many conversations about the plans for this proposal and he has been good neighbor with Mr. Sohn.   Mr. Dolan stated that he has not specifically spoken with Mr. Sohn about the detail and the ponding, however he would be more than willing to do so.  

Chairman Smith requested that the applicant get something in writing  from Mr. Sohn stating that he is aware that Mr. Dolan is raising the elevation two feet and doing so for the installation of the septic system.  Mr. Smith further suggested that the applicant might wish to invite Mr. Sohn to come to the March 21, 2013 IWWC meeting.  Mr. Smith stated that the Commission is looking for something which indicates that Mr. Dolan has reached out and dialogued with the neighbor who is aware of the two foot increase in elevation.

Mr. Wren stated that town engineer and town attorney has been provided with ample time to review this proposal and noted that he was not made aware that this information was necessary and to be made available at this evening’s meeting.   

Attorney Cronin stated that he has not made any opinion on this application and has not provided an approval on this application as he was concerned about the drainage.  The law is clear on drainage on the property. Ideally, the applicant would obtain a drainage easement from the neighbor.  Attorney Cronin stated that this proposal was just heard before the ZBA.  An application for CAM approval went before the DEEP who had no objection on the environmental impacts.  However, the DEEP felt that by increasing the size of the building, they were creating a fire hazard because the house was in a flood zone.  The DEEP further recommended that the boards and commission deny applications of this type.  Mr. Cronin stated that the board does not have the authority to adopt such a rule.

Chairman Smith stated that Application #13-001 on behalf of Dolan, is  without further notice to next meeting on March 21, 2013 at 7pm, Old Saybrook Town Hall, First Floor Conference Room, 302 Main Street.

IV.~~~~~NEW BUSINESS – No new business.

V.~~~~~~~~REGULAR BUSINESS~~~~~~
A.~~~~~~~~Minutes – January 17, 2013
        
MOTION to approve the Minutes from the January 17, 2013 Regular Meeting, as presented; MADE: by J. Preston; SECONDED: by J. Esty; VOTING IN FAVOR:  P. Smith, J. Esty, K. Gallagher, J. Preston, C. Wehrly, W. Pollock OPPOSED: None; ABSTAINING J. Holland: APPROVED: 6/0/0

B.~~~~~~Correspondence
A letter from the Lower CT River Valley.

  • Committee, Representative & Staff Reports~– No reports and no comments. ~
VI.~~~~~ADJOURNMENT

MOTION to adjourn the meeting at 12:22 a.m. to the next regularly scheduled meeting to be held on Thursday, March 21, 2013 at the Old Saybrook Town Hall, 1st floor Conference Room, 302 Main Street at 7:00 p.m.: MADE: by; J. Preston SECONDED: by J. Esty; VOTING IN FAVOR: P. Smith, J. Esty, K. Gallagher, J. Preston, C. Wehrly, W. Pollock, J. Holland; OPPOSED: None; ABSTAINING: None; APPROVED: 7-0-0.

Respectfully submitted,

Stella Beaudoin
Recording Secretary