OLD LYME INLAND WETLANDS
AND WATERCOURSES COMMISSION
PUBLIC HEARING & REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2007
PRESENT WERE: Chairman Bechtel, Don Willis, Mike Moran and Jim Sipperly. Also present were Ann Brown, Bob Doane, Enok Pedersen, Tom Londregan, Rich Snarski, K. Flynn and other members of the public.
Chairman Bechtel called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
MINUTES OF MEETING DATED JULY 24, 2007
Bechtel made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted. Don Willis seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
NEW BUSINESS
ROBERT L. DAY COMPANY, COMPANY, - WETLANDS CROSSING ON GRANDVIEW AVE.
Brown reported that no application fee has been submitted and therefore the application is incomplete and recommended the application not be received. Bechtel stated that the application would not be accepted at this meeting.
GRAYBILL PROPERTIES, LLC – HALLS ROAD – REQUEST FOR FINDING OF NO JURISDICTION
Bechtel stated this is a request for a finding of no jurisdiction. Bechtel stated this property borders on the Lieutenant River, which is a tidal wetland, and therefore this commission would not have any jurisdiction.
Brown also noted that Richard Snarski evaluated the property and determined that there were no inland wetlands.
Bechtel made a motion that there is a finding of no jurisdiction on this application. Don Willis seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING
Robb Linde and Skip DiCamillo arrived at 7:45 pm.
Page 2 – Minutes
August 28, 2007
ENOK PEDERSEN – 1 BURR ROAD – 17 LOT SUBDIVISION WITH CONSTRUCTION OF ROADWAYS WITH TWO WETLANDS CROSSINGS AND ACTIVITIES IN THE REGULATED REVIEW AREA
Bob Doane presented the application on behalf of Enok Pedersen. Doane stated the commission requested Richard Snarski, the soil scientist, provide some information to them for the application. Doane also noted that revised plans have been submitted and the significant feature on the revised plans is that he has increased the conservation easement as much as possible on each lot. He stated the total of the 87.36-acre parcel there is 26.91 acres of open space and 34.54 acres of conservation easement. The total between the conservation easement and the open space is now 61.45 acres which is 70 percent of the property. Doane also presented a colored drawing depicting these areas for the commission to review. He also stated some of the clearing limits have been modified. Doane noted
the revised plans have been submitted to Mr. Metcalf and there are revised plans pursuant to his requests also. Doane also stated that Mr. Metcalf has submitted a review letter to the commission dated August 27, 2007.
Richard Snarski visited the site and evaluated the wetlands. He stated the two most productive vernal pools are located in the northern part of the property that consists of wooded swamps, shrubs and pockets of water throughout the area of the swamps, which enter the intermittent watercourse. He stated he turned over rocks and logs looking for critters in the upland and noted a number of spotted salamanders; all were young, there were no adults. In addition, there were many adult wood frogs. He noted this northern wetland is the most important wetland. He also stated he saw a ribbon snake which likes the open habitat. He explained that as a result of his findings, he recommended certain corridors be provided for the amphibians and that the building area be limited as much as
possible. Snarski also noted that on his initial visit to the site he neglected to check out the isolated vernal pool (located in the southern section of the property on Lot #10). He stated it appears to be a classic vernal pool, he is not completely sure, but has recommended it be treated like one. Therefore, he and engineer Doane discussed the driveway location on this lot and its' proximity to this vernal pool and whether to would be best to take the ledge out and put the driveway across that area. However, he felt it was better to locate the driveway around the ledge which would encroach approximately 30’ into the review area but would, in his opinion, cause less impact. He concluded that this proposal was very aggressive between conservation and open space easements and therefore stated that the overall impact will be minimal noting that there will be some decrease in the amphibian population but with the amount of land being preserved
the vernal pools will remain functioning with a good population of amphibians. He stated there would be some mortality, which occurs with any development.
QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC:
Nancy Moll – 5 Mansewood Road – asked what effect the blasting would have on the habitat and the vernal pools.
Snarski indicated the impact would be little and short term. Doane indicated the silt fence would also act as a barrier to protect the amphibians. He further noted that most of the blasting will be shallow blasting and mats will be used to keep the material in place.
Judy Breault – asked how much of the blasting would not be shallow blasting. Doane indicated about 1 to 2 percent of the blasting would not be shallow. Doane indicated that typically the deeper blasts would be in
Page 3 – Minutes
August 28, 2007
the area of the catch basins. Breault asked if there would be any blasting that would be less than shallow in the northwest corner of the property. Doane indicated there should not be.
QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION:
Jim Sipperly asked whether the wetlands associated with the vernal pools were controlled by the bedrock or by the hydrology in the soils, Snarski indicated it was controlled by the soils.
Robb Linde asked if the conservation easement language included how much clearing for maintenance could be done on the individual driveways. Doane stated he would establish maintenance clearing limits on the individual driveways. Chairman Bechtel asked Linde to review the conservation easement document for comment to the Planning Commission.
Skip DiCamillo inquired about the proposed driveway surfaces. Doane indicated because of the slope he is recommending pavement but not curbs in the conservation easement.
Slippery asked Doane to explain the stormwater management discharge areas. Doane indicated there are 7 or 8 acres of roadway, side slopes and drainage areas that are being controlled. He stated because of the rugged nature of the property there are two discharge points. There is a detention basin and forebay at the southern end of the roadway and the majority of the runoff will go to that detention basin.
Bechtel asked if the clearing on the individual properties had been reduced to about 1.2 acres on each lot. Doane indicated that was correct.
Brown asked Doane if he would clarify the paving on the shared driveways. She asked if the portion of the driveway that was shared by more than one house would be paved and the actual access to the houses would be unpaved until it is purchased. Doane indicated that was correct.
As there were not further questions from the public or the commission, Chairman Bechtel made a motion to close the public hearing. Robb Linde seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
OLD BUSINESS
ENOK PEDERSEN – PROPERTY AT JOSEPH O’NEAL – 43-1 SAUNDERS HOLLOW ROAD, TO MODIFY STREAM CROSSING AND REPLACE THE CULVERT
ENOK PEDERSEN – REPLACEMENT OF A CULVERT AT SAUNDERS HOLLOW ROAD, PROPERTY OF THE TOWN OF OLD LYME.
Doane indicated that last month he submitted revised plans that contained more detail at the request of Mr. Metcalf. He stated both of the above applications are included on one sheet. Doane further noted that Mr. Metcalf felt it would be advantageous if we did a temporary stone berm on the down grade side of each of the crossings and after the construction it will be pulled back and this will form the basin of the rip-rap.
Doane also noted he reviewed the culvert at Saunders Hollow with the Board of Selectmen and they have authorized Selectmen Griswold to sign the application.
Page 4 – Minutes
August 28, 2007
Doane stated he thought they were all set on both of these applications with Mr. Metcalf. He also noted he will be discussing the traffic flow during the construction process. Doane indicated these were fairly simple projects.
Bechtel stated the commission has closed the public hearing on the 17-lot subdivision and they have until next month to make their final decision. She felt this decision needed to be discussed among the commission members in order to create a cohesive response, therefore she was not in a position to recommend that the commission vote on the 17-lot subdivision tonight. She further noted the commission needs
to make applicant a decision on the other two applications unless the applicant grants an extension until next month at which time a decision can be given on all three applications. Doane indicated he did not have a problem granting the extension if the commission felt more comfortable acting on all three applications at the same time. Bechtel stated it would be her preference to act on all three applications at one time.
TIMOTHY LONDREGAN – 3 HUNTLEY ROAD – CONSTRUCTION OF A DAY CARE FACILITY (Change in use to Office Building)
Attorney Tom Londregan was present to represent the LLC known as Huntley and Halls. The principle in the LLC is Tim Londregan. Attorney Londregan stated he understood the commission has had this application before them in the past and that is why it is under Old Business on the agenda. He noted he was not at the prior meetings, but understood the commission had already conducted a site walk on the property and therefore is familiar with the location. Londregan stated the first question he always asks his client is, "are you proposing to cross any wetlands". For this application, the answer is "no". The second question is, "are you filling any wetlands". Again, for this application the answer is "no". He stated obviously this application is here
for the review area, which is outside the wetlands. Londregan provided the commission with highlighted copies of Connecticut General Statutes, CGS §22a-41(d) (factors for consideration) and reviewed the language which states “the municipal inland/wetlands agency shall not deny or condition an application for a regulated activity in an area outside wetlands (review area) on the basis of an impact or effect on aquatic plants or animal life unless such activity will likely impact or effect the physical characteristics of such wetlands" and also with Connecticut General Statutes, CGS §22a-36 (legislative findings) which concerns the "orderly process to balance the need for the economic growth of the state and the use of its land with the need to protect its environment and ecology …". Attorney. Londregan also stated the statute has recently been changed for the review area as of 2004.
Chairman Bechtel pointed out for the record that a number of commission members present have taken the DEP Commissioners Training Program and are aware of the regulations. She further stated she would appreciate it if he did not take up the commissions' time tonight going over material that is within the scope of the commissions' jurisdiction and outlined in the wetlands regulations.
Londregan stated it was his job to make sure the record is complete in case there are issues down the road.
Bechtel suggested a public hearing could be held on this application if Atty. Londregan felt it was important.
Londregan introduced the team for the project; architect, Christiaan Dinkeloo, soil scientist, Ken Stevens, and engineer, Don Lucas. Londregan stated this team would go through what is proposed for the site and its' effect, if any, on the wetlands. He stated the goal of this team has been to design a site that will keep the flow of water into the wetlands substantially as it is now, before development. Bechtel noted that "effect" is what the commission determines.
Page 5 – Minutes
August 28, 2007
Christiaan Dinkeloo, Architect, stated the site plan before the commission this evening is slightly different than the one previously submitted. He stated the previous building was a single-story 9,000-sq. ft. day care center. This project is a two-story 14,600-sq. ft. office building. He stated the footprint has remained the same 150 feet by 60’ on the first floor and 5,600 ft. on the second floor. He stated the orientation of the footprint has remained the same (parallel to the edge of the wetlands) and the parking has been increased to 75 spaces. He noted the playground has been removed from the plan.
Ken Stevens, Soil Scientist, presented an Environmental Assessment Report to the commission for the proposed development. He noted Jennifer Beno, Biologist, and he prepared it. Mr. Stevens submitted copies to the commission. Bechtel noted for the record this report was received in the office on the afternoon of Monday, 8/27/07. Mr. Stevens reviewed the report with the commission. (Copy in file)
Atty. Londregan asked Mr. Stevens, based upon the knowledge of these plans and the information in the report, if the proposed activity in the review area, in his opinion, would likely impact or effect the physical characteristics of the wetland. Mr. Stevens indicated it would not.
Don Lucas, Professional Engineer, indicated again that there are no activities planned within the wetland area itself, and he has worked very hard to keep the stormwater control measures outside the wetlands and the review area. He stated the parking required by zoning is 73 stalls for a 14,000 sq. ft building, which has been provided on the plan. Lucas also noted that the way the building has been oriented on the lot will limit the use of the parking located in the review zone.
He stated a system has been designed consisting of five catch basins on the site. All of the stormwater will be collected on the property area and piped into a StormTech infiltration chamber. He further noted that the stormwater on the parking lot is all contained. The roof water will be collected and discharged through the level spreader. He noted with the installation of the level spreader they have tried to augment all of the stormwater from the parking lot and discharge it directly into the ground to replenish the water that use to flow to the wetlands. In addition, the dumpster is located in the NW corner, away from the wetlands.
Bechtel asked if Mr. Metcalf had received a copy of the plans. Mr. Lucas stated he will be forwarding a set of plans to him.
Attorney Londregan asked if the water that was going to go into the wetlands via the level spreader was only the water coming from the roof. Lucas indicated that was correct. Londregan also verified with Lucas that all of the other water from the parking lot would go into the filtration system.
Linde asked if the water running off the driveway and the roof would be at an elevated temperature versus what the water is today. Lucas stated once it runs through the level spreader it will be probably be at an ambient temperature.
Ken Stevens stated the average ground temperature in the area is 50 degrees and the water from the parking lot could be 80 degrees but once it gets down into the ground itself it will cool down.
Page 6 – Minutes
August 28, 2007
Brown stated that in the plans submitted a survey was not included that was signed and sealed by a surveyor. Lucas stated there is an A-2 survey that shows the 2.15 acres of upland and the 4 acres of wetland area. Brown asked if this would be submitted as part of the plan. Brown also asked who marked the wetlands. Lucas stated it was Bob Russo who marked the wetlands.
Stevens stated he had visited the site twice and confirmed the accuracy of the wetland line and would be willing to state that the wetland line is substantially correct. Linde asked if any samples were taken. Steven stated he did take samples. Linde asked how many samples were taken. Stevens stated about six were taken. Brown also noted there was a lot of information on the survey plan that the commission did not have access too. Brown asked Lucas if he had signed and sealed the plans as the engineer. Lucas stated he had not yet done that. Brown asked if he intended to do that. Lucas indicated that was correct. Brown stated that the commission usually receives signed plans. Bechtel stated since there is only one copy of the A-2 survey, additional
copies will be required to be submitted along with the revised plans. Brown asked if the plans show where the area would be landscaped as proposed by the biologist. Lucas indicated there was not an actual planting plan for the 54' from the edge of the wetlands to the building. DiCamillo asked for clarification on the 20-ft buffer between the building and the wetlands. Steven stated there is 20 ft. from the of edge of clearing back to the sidewalk and the level spreader will be in that location taking up approximately 5 ft. so there will be about a 15-ft. area that will be planted. DiCamillo asked what the plan was for planting at the edge of the wetlands. Stevens stated this area would be left in its natural state. Bechtel stated since there is some concern from the commission that the wetlands flagging was done in 2004 she suggested Mr. Stevens put up some fresh flags at the rear of the proposed building. She also suggested a second
site walk and that the applicant stake the four corners of the building and also stake the 20 ft area where the construction will be done and the level spreader will be located. Linde also stated he would like to receive Mr. Metcalf’s comments prior to the site walk and suggested an additional wetlands expert review this application for the commission.
Mike Moran asked what the depth of the water is in the pond. Stevens stated they do not know the depth of the water. Moran also asked what the soil types were in the building area, the depth of the basement and how deep would the excavation hole be to install the footings. Mr. Stevens will confirm his belief that the soils are Hinkley.
Lucas stated test holes were dug at the site approximately 112” to 120” to the bottom of the hole and it was dry. He stated they did not anticipate encountering groundwater at the site and that the full basement would be 9-9 1/2' into the ground.
Atty. Tom Londregan, agent for the applicant, submitted a letter granting a 65-day extension.
Bechtel concluded by stating if the commission receives the information from Tom Metcalf and the Soil Scientist before the next meeting she will contact the commission members to set up a walk prior to the September meeting.
EMILY FOWLER – 15 LIBRARY LANE – BUFFER & SEEDING PLANTING PLAN
Katherine Flynn presented on behalf of the applicant, Emily Flower. She stated she was present to modify the existing wetlands permit #06-45 to allow work to replace the existing swimming pool fence with a new fence and to comply with the conditions of the permit to extend the wetlands plantings to the northeast boundary property line. The proposal is to install wetland appropriate plantings to replace the brushy undergrowth. She also noted the combination of wire fencing and wood fencing would enhance the visual
Page 7 – Minutes
August 28, 2007
openness of the plan allowing small animals free access while providing privacy in the area of the pool and yard. She stated all of the work proposed is to be done by hand as described in the plans.
Bechtel stated the commission member that requested to see this plan is not present tonight, but she stated everything about this plans addresses his questions and concerns.
Robb Linde asked how the bramble would be removed and the soil sterilized prior to the installation of the new plants. Flynn stated they would be hand removing, but she was not aware of a sterilizing of the whole mat of the ground. She further stated this plan has been given to landscape people to bid on the work because they would like to begin planting in October. Linde stated he would like to see plantings installed that would require very little maintenance because of its proximity to the wetland.
Bechtel stated in the large wetland corner area that is being cleaned out the commission was concerned there was a fair amount of debris that had been deposited. She further noted when commission member Moran walked the property he walked all the way down to the end he said the ditch had started to fill in. Bechtel stated the commission wanted to be sure that the ditch continues to handle the flow of water. Flynn stated that was an assumption that this would be maintained. Moran stated one of the adjacent property owners expressed concerns that the water was backing up on her lawn because of the ditch. Flynn suggested that the commission notes any of their concerns in the approval and she was sure there would be no problems complying with this request.
Sipperly expressed concerns about the permitting process of the removal and clearing of the ditch as well as the access to the ditch for the removal of debris. Brown suggested the work be done by hand as is the other work on the site.
Bechtel suggested a note be put on the plan stating that the homeowner will continue to maintain the surface flow of water in the ditch and it will be inspected and cleaned as part of the construction process and it will remain open.
Bechtel made a motion to approve the Buffer and Planting plan as submitted with the addition of a notation on the plan that the ditch along the back will be checked to make sure it is clear and will be kept open to maintain natural water flow. Moran seconded the motion.
DISCUSSION:
Linde asked how this clearing was different than the action taken by the commission in the brook at Point O’Woods. DiCamillo stated they presented a planting plan. Brown noted the commission also approved the action of cleaning Sheffield Brook with machinery. Linde stated their proposal did not include planting around the area just clearing out the brook. Linde asked the commission if they would allow them to clear an area on each side of the brook and replace it with bushes. Bechtel stated she did not recall much clearing on the site.
The motion passed. Linde abstained.
Page 8 – Minutes
August 28, 2007
LORDS WOODS REMEDIATION PLAN
Bechtel stated the commission has a remediation report that was submitted by Jim Sipperly, Certified Soil Scientist and noted that this is the direction she feels the commission should be moving in. Bechtel submitted a memo listing all of the documents that have been reviewed to date re: the remediation plan and outlining the points in Sipperly's letter. Bechtel stated the Open Space Committee meets again on September 14, 2007 and this commission now has a plan to forward to that Committee.
Bechtel reviewed the nine points of her memo with the commission. She noted the applicant must respond to the Open Space Committee, regarding the tree clearing, but that the specifics were not within our jurisdiction. She stated all work on the remediation plan must be completed by October 23, 2007 and that status reports be presented to the commission at the next monthly meetings. She further noted that at any point in time should the activities or reports fail to meet the satisfaction of this commission then this project will risk the possibility of having its' permits suspended, modified or revoked.
DiCamillo noted that the Tree Commission should be included under Item #6.
Linde requested that Mattern be contacted to determine if it is within the jurisdiction of the IWWC to “require” the applicant (Lord’s Woods) to come to an agreement with the Open Space Committee and can a deadline be put on this?
Bechtel stated that the wording to Item #7 would be based on Atty. Mattern's input.
Bechtel made a motion to approve that the Lord’s Woods Remediation plan based on James S. Sipperly's, letter of August 16, 2007, and as outlined in her 8/28/07 "draft motion for discussion", with the wording to Item #7 being subject to Attorney Mattern's comments. (See attached).
Skip DiCamillo seconded the motion. The motion was approved with Sipperly abstaining.
The meeting adjourned at 9:55 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Kim Groves
Land Use Administrator
| 
