OLD LYME INLAND WETLANDS
AND WATERCOURSES COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, JUNE 27, 2006
Present were: Chairperson Janet Bechtel, Martin Griswold, Dave McCulloch, Linda Krulikowski, and Skip DiCamillo. Also present were: Ann Brown, Kim Groves, Jeffery Torrence, Jim Bernardo, Attorney Ron Stevens, Don Fortunato, Geri Deveaux, and Fred Holth.
The Chairperson called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES DATED MAY 23, 2006 AND JUNE 1, 2006
Bechtel made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted. Dave McCulloch seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
APPROVAL OF THE SITE WALK MINUTES DATED JUNE 8, 2006
Bechtel made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted. Martin Griswold seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
ENFORCEMENT REPORT
Ann Brown distributed copies of the enforcement report to the commission members. She reviewed the items outlined on the report. She further noted that the Selectmen have authorized the Resident State Troopers, OL Police, Inland Wetlands Enforcement Officer and IWWC Chairman to issue citations. She also reported that a hearing board as been appointed. The members of this board include: Geraldine Foster, Steven Ames, and Tom Degnan.
NEW BUSINESS
DAVID & LISA WURZER – 3 LAKESIDE AVENUE – RENOVATIONS TO EXISTING STRUCTURE, MASTER BEDROOM ADDITION, AND FOUNDATION AND PORCH ADDITION.
Geri Deveaux, Architect for the applicant explained the proposed application. The renovations include rebuilding a roof which would allow the property owner to take better advantage of the second floor area. She noted this impacts the existing house and foundation because the existing pier foundations, which is supporting the house, would be need to be investigated and possibly brought up to code. Ms. Deveaux reviewed the site plan and photographs of the property with the commission members. She also noted the applicant has received the necessary approvals from the Zoning Board of Appeals. Janet Bechtel asked for the size of the two additions. Ms. Deveaux indicated one is 4’6” x 10’6” and the other is 4’ x 12’, which includes an outdoor
shower. She noted these would be constructed on piers.
Ms. Devaux noted her client received a letter from her insurance company indicating the property was no longer located in a Special Flood Hazard area, therefore they do not need flood hazard insurance.
Page 2 - Minutes
June 27, 2006
She noted her structural engineer has assessed the property and his report includes the investigation of the piers which is part of the application to the commission.
The commission agreed to set a site walk for Thursday, July 6, 2006 at 5:30 p.m.
RICHARD O’CONNOR FOR PROPERTY AT 108 SILL LANE, TO CONSTRUCT A DECK OVER THE SPILLWAY OF MILL BROOK AT UPPER MILL POND
Mr. O’Connor was not present, therefore, Ann Brown presented the application. She stated this was an application for a covered deck that is over the spillway at the dam on Upper Mill Pond. She noted it has already been built without the necessary permits. She presented the plot plan to the commission that the applicant had submitted. She further stated she had spoken with a person in DEP’s Dam Safety Area Division who visited the site and indicated they did not have any issues or concerns with the structure. Janet Bechtel informed the commission that the plan presented dates back to 1998.
The commission agreed to set a site walk for Thursday, July 6, 2006 at 6:00 p.m. Ann Brown will notify the applicant of the site walk.
OLD BUSINESS
APPLICATION OF NEW ENGLAND NATIONAL, LLC FOR PROPERTY AT 29-1 HATCHETTS HILL ROAD, EIGHT LOT SUBDIVISION WITH ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE UPLAND REVIEW AREA
Janet Bechtel stated there was a letter addressed to her from Mr. Metcalf dated June 27, 2006. She noted this letter indicated that Mr. Metcalf had reviewed more recent plan submissions dated June 11, 2006 but he still has some of the same concerns that were indicated in his letter of May 22, 2006.
Mr. Torrence, on behalf of New England National, LLC introduced the staff working on the project. He noted the last time he met with this commission he thought the issues had been narrowed down as they relate to this application with this particular commission. He stated those items were the drainage calculations on the wetlands crossing, and that the septic systems on Lots #2 and #8 be designed out so the grading can be shown on the plan. He noted that on the plans submitted to the Planning Commission and Mr. Metcalf on June 8, 2006 he took one step further and actually laid out the systems for all eight lots and was prepared to show proposed grading on these system areas.
Janet Bechtel stated when she reviewed this plan it showed an 18” pipe at the wetland crossing. She stated that originally when the commission walked the site they requested an oversized box culvert. Mr. Bernardo indicated he had done calculations and the pipe at it was currently designed could more than adequately handle the flow associated with a 10 year storm event. Mr. McCulloch stated the intent of the box culvert was not for flow, but to provide a crossing for the critters and to maintain natural conditions. Mr. Bernardo indicated he could make this change and add it to the plan.
Page 3 – Minutes
June 27, 2006
Mr. Bernardo stated he had inadvertently located the well radius within 75 ft of the septic tank. He noted this has been corrected. Mr. Bernardo stated most of the concerns by the commission were on Lots #2 and #8, however septic and leaching systems have been designed for all the lots. He further stated there were no wetlands on Lots 3, 4, 5, and 6. Mr. Bernardo stated Sheet #4 demonstrates that Lot #2 can fit 12” galleys to support a four bedroom house with a leaching system in the front with approximately 2 feet of fill and still keep the grading outside the 100 ft. regulated area. Mr. Bernardo stated that Mr. Rose felt that the septic layouts for the eight lots met the requirements based on the testing that was available. Mr. Bernardo stated Sheet 7 addressed Lot
#8 and stated this lot’s grading will also be outside the 100 ft regulated area, however the footing drain activity will be within the regulated area.
Mr. Bernardo stated he would try to address the comments in Mr. Metcalf’s letter dated June 27, 2006. He stated Mr. Metcalf indicated the drainage calculations were sufficient but stated that the drainage area mapping is unclear. Mr. Bernardo submitted three copies of new maps.
Mr. Bernardo indicated the culvert pipe exterior would be corrugated with a smooth interior. The drainage calculations will be signed and sealed. He further stated the rip-rap size can be specified to ConnDOT requirements and added to the plan along with sizing requirements and calculations for the outlet protection. Mr. Bernardo stated that Mr. Metcalf is concerned because the driveway has been widened from 40 ft. to 50 ft. in the area between the common driveway and the identified wetland. Mr. Metcalf suggests that this area not be cleared or disturbed. Mr. Bernardo stated it is the applicants hope to be able to meander the driveway in the field while still staying beyond the 100 ft. regulated area.
Ann Brown stated she had walked the site with Wendy Goodfriend, Soil & Water Conservation District, at which time they looked at the vernal pool on the site. She further stated the pool presently had more water in it than when the commission walked the site. She further stated they did not see any particular activity in the pool, however Ms. Goodfriend suggested the commission consider absolutely maintaining the 100 ft. protected area around the pool.
Mr. Bernardo stated a note requiring a pre-construction meeting have been added to the plans. He also stated it was his understanding that only the coverage sheet needed to be signed in a bound set. He further stated the final mylars would be signed.
Mr. Bernardo stated that the Old Lyme Zoning Regulations state that the applicant must demonstrate that the lots can support an on-site septic to the satisfaction of the commission’s engineer or reviewing agent. He further stated in his conversations with Mr. Rose, Town Sanitarian, over the last two months, he has indicated that the applicant has adequately demonstrated that each lot can support an on-site septic. He referred to the Health Code which states that in order to install a septic, no lot can be built on unless it has four feet of material. (two of those feet occurring naturally). Mr. Bernardo stated it is the interpretation of Mr. Metcalf, however, that the submission of additional information is warranted at this time to accurately assess the capability of the proposed lots
to support septic systems and demonstrate compliance with both the regulations and the public health code. Mr. Bernardo further added he had not seen Mr. Rose’s memo, but was under the impression that he is also now supporting this opinion. Ann Brown clarified that Mr. Bernardo had indeed received the memo dated June 16, 2006. Mr. Bernardo stated he thought there was a memo from Mr. Rose since that date. Mr. Bernardo stated he disagreed with Mr. Metcalf’s interpretation and stated he was not convinced that Mr. Rose supported it either. Mr. Bernardo stated he did not agree
Page 4 – Minutes
June 27, 2006
that an applicant should have to prep primary reserve septic system areas on the speculation where a house may be built down the road.
Chairman Bechtel stated a lot of these issues are Planning Commission issues, however, Mr. Metcalf acts as staff and advises this commission. She noted this commission has received two letters, dated May 27th and June 27th, that state that Mr. Metcalf does not feel he has adequate information to currently advised the commission properly as to where the commission should be going with this plan. She further stated this commission does not override its engineer, therefore she did not feel comfortable proceeding until she gets something from him that is more concrete.
Mr. Bernardo stated this commission is concerned with Lots #2 and #8. He stated the applicant has adequately demonstrated that these two lots can support on site septic. Bechtel stated that Mr. Metcalf also requests and reads the meeting minutes of both commissions and he is well aware of what this commissions concerns are; he is not comfortable advising us to proceeding at this time. Ms. Bechtel asked the applicant if they would be willing to grant an extension until next month at which time, hopefully, this will all be resolved. Janet Bechtel stated she would ask Mr. Metcalf if he could specifically address Lots #2 and #8 and to leave everything else out the mix and see if this would allow the application to move along. Ms. Bechtel recommended the application be
extended until next month if the applicant is willing to do so.
Ann Brown stated there was a letter to the commission from Mr. Rose which quotes a lot of health code numbers, and in translation it means that fill must be brought into the site and the testing be done before the plans can be approved. She further stated this is an area of special concern because of the large amount of ledge.
Mr. Torrence stated he has dealt with this issue in the past and has received guidance from the State Health Department. He further stated unless something has changed in the last year, the position the State Health Department took in the past, was to request a note be placed on the plan that says it is a fill system that has to be engineered and fill must be put in place before the system is approved. He further stated this is typically done at the time the house is constructed, not when subdivision is developed. He stated this was the determination made by the State Health Department last October on a prior project. He stated as it relates to this application and this commission the applicant is requesting to undertake certain activities in the crossing and in the wetland
upland review area. He further stated these are very specific areas; this amounts to the entry road and the wetland crossing. He stated the applicant is not asking this commission to give a free pass on anything else. He stated it is his position that if this application as requested was approved for those two activities and for some reason the ultimate resolution of the septic issue required the applicant to undertake work in the upland review area because of some type of fill requirement that needed to occur then the applicant would be required to come back before this commission and request the necessary approvals. The applicant is asking to build a box culvert crossing at the wetland and to put the driveway in the upland review area and to build a common drive in an upland review area. He stated if the septic issue gets to the point where they are asked to bring in fill, design the systems and lay the whole thing out, if there are
changes because of grading or clearing then the applicant will have to come back before this commission for approval. He stated his frustration is because that is not what is being requested at this time in the application.
Page 5 – Minutes
June 27, 2006
Linda Krulikowski asked if the initial plan could be approved as Phase I and then work could begin at the subdivision and if additional items are required it could be reviewed as Phase II. Mr. Torrence stated additional items may or may not be required.
Skip DiCamillo expressed concern that if the commission approves the application and after the fact it is determined that something else has to be done it could become a problem.
Ann Brown stated that Mr. Rose’s letter to the Planning Commission and the applicant as it’s written, requires that before Mr. Rose can approve any of these lots, the systems need to be designed, the fill needs to be brought in and the testing completed and proved out. She further stated this letter was written in consultation with Mr. Scully, from the State Health Department. She also noted she had spoken with Attorney Harris today, agent for the applicant, to whom she recommend he be in touch with Mr. Scully for questions or clarifications. Therefore, she stated the plan is not complete because the commission does not know what the grade will be until it is proved out.
Mr. McCulloch stated he felt the risk was with the applicant, because if there are any changes to the plans the application would be back before the commission. Therefore, if the commission determined it to be unsatisfactory the applicant takes the risk of losing a lot. Ms. Brown stated if the applicant does not have the plans with the fill on it for the Planning Commission at their next meeting it will not be approved by the Planning Commission.
Janet Bechtel added she would also like the box culvert included on the plan. She reiterated that Mr. Metcalf is aware of the parameters of the commission’s jurisdiction, and he is not prepared to give the commission the full scope of the impact at this time.
After much discussion, the commission agreed to try to narrow the scope of the impact with Mr. Metcalf as it relates to the Inland/Wetlands Commission.
Attorney Ron Steven, agent for the applicant, agreed to grant the commission an extension.
FRED HOLTH FOR ROGERS LAKE AUTHORITY, APPLICATION TO ALLOW SELECTIVE HARVEST OF WEEDS IN THE AREA OF ROGERS LAKE 200’ X 200’ AND 6’ DEPTH, 2 MOWINGS OF APPROXIMATELY 10 ACRES EACH
Mr. Holth presented the plan. He discussed the mechanical harvesting and outlined what needed to be done and stated he added a condition to the proposal that the machines be cleaned prior to entering the lake. Mr. Holth also asked if the commission would be comfortable allowing them to do selective harvesting in the town beach area of the lake.
Dave McCulloch made a motion to approve the application as presented including the latitude requested for selected areas for a period of at least five years. Linda Krulikowski seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
Page 6 – Minutes
June 27, 2006
DAVID CIMADON – PROPERTY OF WESTWINDS CONDO ASSOC. ON POND ROAD, MAINTENANCE AND GRADING OF A GRAVEL PARKING LOT, PAVING OF DRIVEWAY ENTRANCES AND FOUR WALKWAYS.
Don Willis made a motion to approve the application. Dave McCulloch seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
OTHER BUSINESS
CITATION ORDINANCE - Hearing Board Appointments : Tom Degnan, Steven Ames and Geraldine Foster
Mr. McCulloch stated he did not feel any citations should be issued at this time. He stated the ordinance documentation was not filed in the Town Clerk’s office prior to the vote at the Town Meeting. The commission agreed the ordinance was approved under a defective procedure and this would have to be corrected. Ann Brown agreed and will follow-up on this matter.
IWWC Model Regulations – Update
Janet Bechtel stated that DEP has come out with new Inland/Wetlands model regulations. Ms. Bechtel suggested the commission review the model regulations and perhaps incorporate the updates because this would allow the language to be tightened and brought into compliance. The commission is willing to hold an additional meeting later this year to update the regulations.
Respectfully submitted,
Kim Groves
Land Use Administrator
| 
