OLD LYME INLAND WETLANDS/WATERCOURSES COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MARCH 25, 2008
PRESENT WERE: Janet Bechtel, Don Willis, Sabine O’Donnell, Robb Linde, Skip DiCamillo, and Dave McCulloch. Also present were: Ann Brown, Kim Groves, Frank Martone, John Alexander, Christina Gotowka, Darcy Collins and Robert Chapman.
Chairperson Bechtel called the meeting to order at 7:36 p.m.
MINUTES OF MEETING DATED FEBRURAY 26, 2008
Janet Bechtel made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted. Skip DiCamillo seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
MINUTES OF SITE WALK MEETING DATED MARCH 15, 2008
Janet Bechtel made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted. Robb Linde seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
NEW BUSINESS
PRELIMINARY DISCUSSION – LOLHS – REGIONAL DISTRICT 18 – RECONSTRUCTION OF TRACK
John Rhodes, Director of Facilities, Lyme/Old Lyme High School introduced Richard Webb from Cliff Harbor Associates. Rhodes stated a family in Lyme donated $1.1 million dollars to the Lyme/Old Lyme School District to install a track. Rhodes thanked the commission for allowing them the opportunity to discuss this preliminary application in hopes of getting their input before presenting their final application to the commission.
Richard Webb presented some graphics to the commission. Webb stated the track is proposed to stay in its current location. Webb oriented the commission to the site. He stated as the track is improved from a cinder track to a synthetically surfaced rubber resilient track the drainage will become a key issue. He stated that tracks are constructed with a half inch thick material that is laid on top of bituminous concrete. He stated with the construction of the new track there would be about 6,000 sq. yards of additional or new pervious coverage. He stated the existing maintenance building, which is located in the southwest corner of the project, will be converted for use for pad storage for the high jump and pole vault equipment. He noted outside of the track, to the west,
there will discus and javelin areas, and to the north there will be the long and triple jump running lanes. He stated the entire track would be fenced in with a 42” high fence for security to protect the investment being made for this project.
Page 2 – Minutes
March 25, 2008
He stated he prepared this graphic because he has reviewed many different options with regard to storm drainage. He stated there are two existing storm lines that currently drain the majority of the high school site.
Option A & B - He noted currently a storm line drains underneath the existing high school facility, and the second one skirts the north end of that facility. He stated the drainage modeling of the site demonstrates that there is not capacity or inverts in either one of those options to take some of this storm drainage in a northerly direction. He stated one of the issues right now for the storm drainage for the track is it eventually works into a small line that directs drainage to the south toward Library Lane and this is very problematic. He noted the line is undersized and continually clogs.
Option C - He stated they also looked at a drainage option to skirt the south end of the high school but the complication here is the amount of utilities.
Option D – They looked at the proposed improvements to the south line toward Library Lane all the way to the discharge point at Duck River Lane which would be a considerable length and expense and would involve many area properties.
Option E – They focused on just dealing with the increase runoff in a detention approach where the water would be detained from the area and metered very slowly into the existing line but not improve that line.
Option F – He stated this option has been identified as the preferred option. He stated this takes the storm drainage from the track and also a portion of the storm drainage that exists to the south of the Middle School and east of Center School and directs that drainage to the new outlet again on the Duck River which is downstream of the ice dam so they are able to capture a little more invert and effectively address some of the existing drainage issues on the entire site. He stated this option does require some rock removal (blasting) as it goes through the knoll before it drops down to the lower playing fields. He stated they are currently profiling that to get an idea before they come back to the commission with a formal application. He stated one of the advantages the building
committee saw in preferring Option F is the fact that it provides the ability to properly drain and treat with a vortechnics unit and also allows them to address the pre-existing conditions at the site. He also noted there is the potential to begin to plan for additional capacity for the system.
Bechtel asked what the topography was under Option F. Richard Webb reviewed the site with the commission members. Bechtel asked if there were fields below. Mr. Webb indicated on the graphics the existing fields. Webb stated they have proposed to bring the drainage line under the fields and the outlet would be outside of the wetlands. He further stated the water would be treated with a vortechnics unit. He stated in his preliminary discussions with Mr. Metcalf that they felt detention itself might not be warranted.
Sabine O’Donnell asked what the track would be constructed of and its impact on the environment. Webb stated there are different types of synthetic surfacing systems. He stated the majority of them are constructed with a paved base mat (very similar to what is used in playgrounds). O’Donnell asked if they were recycled tires. Webb stated that technically the epdium rubber is not a recycled tire. He stated many of the fellow communities along the shoreline have the paved base mat tracks, which is a very common surface. O’Donnell asked how long that surface has been around. Webb stated for about 40 to 50 years.
Page 3 – Minutes
March 25, 2008
Robb Linde asked what the leaching characteristics were of the track in terms of volatile organics. Webb stated they are insignificant but that information will be provided as part of the formal application. Linde also suggested that the piping installed for the track have sufficient capacity to handle any high school improvements to avoid a second encroachment on the wetlands. Linde further stated if Option F is the best option for draining water from the site there would be intrusion and disturbance in the wetlands when this construction is done. He stated he would be more comfortable knowing that this would be a one-time event and that whatever piping or drainage is installed would be sufficient to handle additional work on the high school at a future date. Webb stated he could certainly
coordinate with the building committee to get a level of assurance that the correct pipe size is installed. Linde stated he would personally be disappointed if an application has to come back before this commission when the construction at the high school is eventually approved that requires a larger piping system.
Rhodes stated that this particular line, at whatever size it is, would be what was expected to accommodate drainage on the south side of the high school, track and the wet conditions behind the Center School. He further stated, however we manipulate the paving on the north side of whatever the project ends up being, the objective is not to change the number of parking spaces, but, what will change for sure is that additional paving will be added to accommodate a separate bus drop lane and a parent drop off lane.
Skip DiCamillo asked what type of chemicals are used on the soccer field that is surrounded by the track.. Rhodes stated the fact that there is no drainage at the track today is incorrect. Rhodes stated what is happening is they are replacing the path from the track that intercepts the Duck River at the Library Lane bridge. He stated the proposal is to take it off that system with Option F. Rhodes stated as far as a fertilizer plan for the schools - they use natural fertilizer for four of the five applications and further stated there is a state statute requiring a pesticide management plan. In addition he said they apply prophylactic dosages to treat grubs.
Bechtel asked where the maintenance shed would be relocated. Rhodes stated the plan is to move the maintenance shed on top of the knoll and build a new one. Therefore it will be fully accessible to the baseball field and provide storage for the track equipment.
McCulloch asked if the fields were sprinklered in the summertime. Webb stated the field is currently irrigated and the proposal is to reconstruct the existing field with natural grass and that field will have a formal automatic irrigation system. McCulloch asked if any of the water could be trapped and used for irrigation. Webb stated one of the difficulties with athletic field irrigation is they require a lot of water in a very short time span.
Alexander asked if artificial turf had been looked at as an alternative. Webb stated that was not part of the design. Linde asked if that would multiply the amount of impervious surface. Webb stated synthetic fields are a pervious system. Rhodes stated at this point turf would be cost prohibitive. Rhodes stated the water for the fields would come from the water tank located on site.
Bechtel asked about the proposed timing of the application and stated the commission raised several questions:
How much blasting?
What kind of impact it would have on the site?
What type of distance are we talking with the pipe – will it include any degree of overland flow?
Page 4 – Minutes
March 25, 2008
Will a separator be used?
What sort of leaching characteristic will be used on the track?
Bechtel stated these would be things that would need to be included in a formal application. Becthel stated in terms of getting a read from this commission as to whether Option F is better than Option C she could not directly comment but that there are a lot of other properties involved with Option D. She further stated this application would require a Public Hearing.
Rhodes stated it was his intent to submit an application in April. Bechtel stated then the public hearing would be held in May. Bechtel also stated it would be her preference to hold a site walk prior to the public hearing.
MODIFICATION TO AN EXISTING PERMIT – ENOK PEDERSEN – BURR ROAD
Darcy Collins, Professional Engineer was present to represent the applicant. Collins stated that during the original submittal to the commission the applicant proposed a fire tank for fire protection. She stated during the application process to the Planning Commission both the Planning Commission and the Old Lyme Fire Department determined that they would prefer to have a fire pond. Collins stated there is a fire pond on the Pederson property, which can be utilized for fire protection. She stated in order to do that Mr. Pedersen needs an easement over the Plimpton property. Collins presented a letter to the commission signed by Mr. Plimpton stating it is his intention to allow this access. Collins stated no legal documents have been drafted at this point because they were waiting
to see if the commission was in favor of this modification. Collins stated the pond was about one acre in size and would be accessed from Bill Hill Road. She stated a gravel access drive would be constructed to a staging area for the fire trucks. The commission reviewed the design.
Bechtel stated this application was one of the applications that prompted Harold Thompson, Chairman of the Planning Commission to institute the meeting with the Fire Department, Zoning Commission, Inland/Wetlands Commission and the Planning Commission members which was held on March 19, 2008. She stated at the meeting the pros and cons of fire tanks were discussed. She stated this particular pond, based on the information presented by Mr. Doane at the meeting, was very appealing to the Fire Department and they were comfortable with the distance to the subdivision because of the amount of water available. She stated there was a consensus reached at the meeting that when there is a viable pond that has an embankment where a standpipe can be put into it, which provides an adequate water supply, then that is
to be considered a viable alternative to a tank. She stated she still maintains that in some of the subdivisions being developed, where there is not adequate water available, that a fire tank is most appropriate.Willis stated this pond would also serve the surrounding area of Bill Hill Road, which does not currently have adequate fire suppression. McCulloch asked about standpipes versus just throwing a hose into the body of water. Bechtel stated that tidal wetlands would not have standpipes and ponds would.
Linde asked what the standard was for fire suppression throughout the country. Willis stated the standard is standpipes when water can be reached.
The commission discussed whether the application could be voted on this evening since it was a modification to an existing permit. Bechtel stated it was her understanding that the Fire Department had
Page 5 – Minutes
March 25, 2008
reviewed the application and it was more a Fire Department issue than an engineering issue. Brown asked if the commission was happy with the sedimentation and erosion control measures shown on the plan. Bechtel stated she thought that the commission was satisfied. Bechtel asked Ann Brown if it is a modification to an existing permit can it be voted on tonight or does must the commission wait until next month. Brown stated modifications have been approved in this fashion prior and no one has objected. Brown further stated she did not feel this was a tweak in engineering and further suggested that the neighbors should have an opportunity to know what is happening. Bechtel asked if she meant in terms of a public hearing. Brown indicated not necessarily. Bechtel stated she
did not feel it required a public hearing.
Collins stated she could add a complete construction sequence to the plan and was willing to abide by the commission’s preference.
Bechtel inquired about the status of this application with the Fire Department. Brown stated she did not know where the Planning Commission was with the application. Kim Groves stated the hearing has been closed by the Planning Commission and they were waiting until next month to approve the application in the hopes that the fire issue would be resolved so that the final approved plan would be consistent between the two commissions (IWWC/Planning).
Linde stated he would not be comfortable approving this application with a lot of conditions and he further noted he felt the applicant had sufficient time to get some of the outstanding items on the plan such as construction sequence details. Bechtel stated the approval could be based on final engineering review by Metcalf which would mean it would not come back to this commission and therefore could go on to Planning for their vote. She further stated she did not see the impact being that great and the application had already been reviewed by a number of commissions and discussed in great detail.
Linde stated this commission has made a pretty bold statement stating it does not want to have a whole lot of conditions to an approval and would like to remain consistent in the process.
Janet Bechtel made a motion to approve the fire pond modification to the existing Enok Pedersen permit based on final engineering review and approval by Tom Metcalf. Don Willis seconded the motion.
Motion passed 3 to 1 (In favor Bechtel, McCulloch, Willis) (Against – Skip DiCamillo) –
Abstained – O’Donnell - Recused – Linde
APPLICATION OF STEPHEN & MARY JANE DIX – 2 COULT LANE – EXPANSION OF A DECK
Bechtel stated the commission walked the site and indicated the deck was constructed without a permit. She stated discussion at the site walk was that the applicant must submit an application, pay the permit fee and that there would be a violation fee of $250.00 imposed upon the applicant. Bechtel stated based on the work that was done there was not enough impact to warrant removal of the deck..
Brown stated she thought the violation fee was to be included in the new regulations. Bechtel stated this would be included in the rewrite of the regulations, however she would still like to issue an infraction or ticket at this time. She further stated that if the applicant is not happy with this process they could appeal to the Inland/Wetlands Hearing Board. Linde asked if the commission has the authority to increase the fees should the applicant be delinquent in payment. Brown indicated there is a process for this type of action.
Page 6 – Minutes
March 25, 2008
Linde stated he would not approve the application until the fee is paid. Brown stated the applicant has paid the application fee. Brown also noted the applicant was informed of the process prior to making application.
Linde also suggested the fee be set at a higher amount when it is incorporated into the rewrite of the regulations.
Linde made a motion to approve the application and to impose a $250.00 infraction fee/ticket. Don Willis seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
TIMOTHY LONDREGAN –HUNTLEY & HALLS, LLC –1 HUNTLEY ROAD – INSTALLATION OF A DRY HYDRANT
The applicant formally withdrew the application because he was able to satisfy the requirement for fire suppression at the site. Joe Wren and Fire Chief Jewett met at the site and determined the applicant was approximately 1,900 ft from a water source. Wren submitted a map documenting the distance. Chief Jewett will be submitting a letter to the Zoning Commission.
GEORGE BLATCHFORD – 31 BOUGTON ROAD – CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING
Bechtel indicated the commission walked the site and was less than impressed with this piece of property. Brown asked if revised plans were submitted. Groves indicated not to her knowledge. Bechtel stated the applicant would still need to be present to explain the revised plans. The commission agreed to table any action and asked Brown to notify the applicant to attend the next meeting.
ROBERT CHAPMAN – 63 SHORE DRIVE – CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING
Bechtel stated this piece of property is located on Rogers Lake and noted it is a tear down of an existing house to rebuild and reorient the new house so it stays within its setback limits. Bechtel stated the map shows the location of the silt barrier as well as the stockpile location. She also noted the area under construction is fairly level.
Skip DiCamillo indicated that if there was not a buffer proposed he would like to see one added to the proposal. Bechtel stated the commission has been requesting of the properties in the Rogers Lake area a 15’ buffer setback from the lake.
Dave McCulloch made a motion to approve the application with the condition that a 15’ buffer zone is provided. Robb Linde seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
CHRISTINA GOTOWKA – 25 LIBRARY LANE – CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING
Fern Tremblay of Angus McDonald & Gary Sharpe & Associates was present to represent the applicant. He stated there is a 1 ½ story bedroom home on the site. He displayed a map which shows both the proposed
Page 7 – Minutes
March 25, 2008
and existing home and stated the proposal is to remove the existing home and replace it with a 2 story, 3 bedroom home. The property is bordered to the south by a tidal wetland and in addition, there is small portion of inland wetlands and Tremblay stated the new home would not encroach any further to the wetlands. He stated there is presently an existing shed that is located in the inland wetlands and as part of the application, it will be removed and a new shed will be put on the southeastern portion of the property. He stated a code compliant septic system has been shown on the plan, therefore, if they are not able to use the existing septic the applicant understands he will need to come back before this commission for a wetlands permit to install the new septic system.
McCulloch asked if the excavated material would be removed from the site immediately. Tremblay indicated the proposal is for a crawl space so there should not be much excavation. He also showed the location of the silt fence. Bechtel asked if the deck would be constructed on piers. Tremblay stated the deck would be constructed on sonitubes. Bechtel asked if it was approximately 15’ from the corner of the deck to the edge of the tidal wetlands. He indicated that was correct.
Brown asked if Tremblay knew at this time if the septic system would need to be relocated. He indicated they are not sure of the status of the existing system. He further stated since the flow is not being changed, he believes it should have the capability of replacing the system in the same area. He also noted a new tank would be installed. Brown asked how long the project is expected to take. Ms. Gotowka stated they hoped to be moved in by September since they are using modular housing. Bechtel asked what type of decking materials would be used. Gotowka indicated it would be similar to treks.
Brown asked if any landscaped was planned. Gotowka stated she was an avid gardener, but since there are several steps for this process they have not yet retained a landscape designer. Brown asked about buffers on the property. Gotowka stated they would like to have a property that required as little maintenance as possible.
Bechtel asked about the distance from the edge of the house to the inland wetland. Tremblay stated it was approximately 18 feet. Bechtel stated there was not much property to work with on this site. DiCamillo asked Mrs. Gotowka if she knew what variety of plants would be used on the site. She stated she did not at this point in time, but would like to have plants that would flower at different times of the year. DiCamillo suggested she obtain a copy of the guide for planting produced by Marianne Pfieffer of the Conservation Commission.
Bechtel stated a two story house is proposed on the site, however the elevation already needs to be raised, therefore she asked what type of gutter system is proposed. Bechtel stated this commission does not get into roof design but there is not a lot of ground for runoff. Gotowka stated she is not sure exactly what the gutter system will be on the house. Gotowka stated the current house does not have gutters. Bechtel stated the current elevation is not as high. Gotowka stated except for the addition portion for the house. Bechtel stated the concern for this property is the fact that there is not a lot of ground for the water to cover before it immediately outlets into either the tidal wetland or wetland. She further stated depending on the volume and rate it could be rather
erosive if it does not have a fair amount of distance.
Linde stated the town has chosen not to regulate the tidal wetlands. Brown stated the Zoning Commission regulates these activities through a Coastal Site Plan Review. Brown stated this particular project is going to the Zoning Board of Appeals (because of its close proximity to the property boundary lines) where they will conduct a Coastal Site Plan review and look toward the impact on the tidal wetlands. Linde suggested that if
Page 8 – Minutes
March 25, 2008
the commission chooses to approve this a letter be submitted to the Zoning Board of Appeals strongly recommending a natural 10’ buffer that requires no fertilization around the tidal wetland.
Linde made a motion to approve the plan as submitted with two modifications.
A strong suggestion to the applicant to incorporate a 10’ buffer around the tidal wetlands and require a 10’ buffer to the wetlands.
Submit a letter to the Zoning Board of Appeals asking that they require a 10’ buffer to the tidal wetlands.
Don Willis seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
OTHER BUSINESS
FMTM PERMIT APPROVAL CLARIFICATION – LETTER FROM METCALF DATED MARCH 15, 2008
Bechtel asked Mr. Martone if he had walked the property to see the status of the silt fencing on the site. Martone indicated he had and that the silt fence does need some attention. He further stated his excavator would be there before the end of the week.
Linde asked if there was a reason for the delay in getting back out there to repair the fence. Martone stated he just received the letter from Mr. Metcalf within the last five days and he has contacted his excavator, but he is currently on another job site.
Bechtel stated at the February meeting the project was discussed and the commission stated they would like to receive as-builts. Bechtel stated it was her understanding that this information was to be relayed to Mr. Martone. Brown stated that if she was supposed to relay the information she had not. Brown stated she had left a message for Mr. Martone with regard to the reports the commission requested. She further stated they have been exchanging messages but have not yet connected. Martone indicated he would contact his engineer for the requested items. Bechtel asked whom he was using for his engineering; Martone stated it was still Tony Hendriks. Bechtel stated that Mr. Hendriks credibility was not as high as she would like to see, especially in the matters of as-builts and that his
veracity had been severely undermined on a number of issues. Martone asked if that meant his engineering reports would not be accepted. Bechtel stated his engineering reports would be resubmitted to Tom Metcalf for final evaluation and review at his (the applicant’s) expense. Martone asked if Mr. Hendriks was still a licensed engineer. Bechtel indicated he was not a licensed engineer but a licensed land surveyor. Bechtel stated Lee Rowley could review the plans or Mr. Martone could contact Mr. Metcalf or use another engineer of his choice if Metcalf felt it was a conflict for him to do the review. Martone stated he was not aware of Mr. Hendriks position, but now that he has been told he would make other arrangements. Bechtel stated that as the chairperson she did not have any confidence in the material submitted by Tony Hendriks without the benefit of further engineering review. Martone agreed to contact Mr. Metcalf about the
situation and see what would be the best approach.
Page 9 – Minutes
March 25, 2008
Martone stated that Mr. Metcalf in his letter to the commission stated he had concerns about the driveway alignment, but when he came out to visit the site there were a couple of swales in the road that his contractor repaired. He stated then Mr. Hendriks visited the site with his survey crew who confirmed that everything was fine. Mr. Martone expressed concern that maybe everything was really not fine because Mr. Metcalf is again reiterating that he has a question about the alignment of the road. Martone stated he had Mr. Hendriks out to the site after the first time Metcalf questioned the alignment of the road.
Brown stated that in the commission’s approval of this application they expressed their desire for construction to stop during the time that the slithers (amphibians, i.e. salamanders, frogs, etc) would be active on the site. Brown stated she did not think the commission would want construction to start back on the site right away. Bechtel stated not on the wetland crossings. Brown read from the motion when the application was approved that one of the conditions stated that “the timing of all construction activity should be delayed until after the spring breeding of amphibians and coincide with the driest period possible”. She asked if that meant only in the crossing areas or on the entire site. Bechtel stated she thought it was the entire project. Martone asked when
the spring breeding period started and stopped. Bechtel stated when the temperatures are warmer and we begin to get our spring rains so about April or May. Martone stated he had planned to dig a trench for utilities, which is a small two-foot trench on the left side and then he would put on the sub-grade. He asked if he could proceed with that portion of the work. He further stated this would stabilize the site. Brown asked if this could be completed in the next two or three weeks. Martone indicated it could. The commission requested that Ann Brown contact a soil scientist to get a date range and get back to the applicant as soon as possible with the information.
LORDS WOODS – LETTER FROM DIANA ATWOOD JOHNSON DATED MARCH 14, 2008
LETTER FROM TOM METCALF DATED MARCH 15, 2008
Bechtel stated that Diana Atwood Johnson wrote a letter to Attorney Block and Attorney Mattern expressing her profound frustration at the slow pace at which she feels things are being addressed at the site. Bechtel stated as a result, Attorney Mattern and Attorney Block have both responded and a number of issues are being addressed.
Bechtel stated that Ms. Johnson has been handling the open space issue which is what Attorney Block was asking about this evening prior to the meeting. Ms. Johnson has requested signatures on a letter stating that the town will be compensated. Bechtel noted Attorney Block had the letters in his possession and would be dropping them off at Town Hall for Ann Brown to circulate for the appropriate signatures. Bechtel stated she did not ask Attorney Block to stay for the meeting. Bechtel stated she had a conversation with Mr. Metcalf today pertaining to the level spreader and the erosion at its outlet. Bechtel stated Allen Hull has been to the site and they have been dealing with the silt fencing and hay bales.
(INTERVENER)Robb Linde asked if Mr. Metcalf was of the opinion that the level spreader was of sufficient size and design. Bechtel stated it was his recommendation that the design engineer should review and assess the situation. Brown stated she had asked this question specifically prior to our last meeting and Metcalf said when the road was redesigned he evaluated the size and adequacy of that level spreader and
Page 10 – Minutes
March 25, 2008
thought it was, however there appears to be some sort of failure in how it was constructed. Brown stated it was not that there was too much water it was that something was not compacted right or washed out.
Bechtel stated that Attorney Block, Tom Metcalf, Lee Rowley and Allen Hull are scheduling a site walk in order to address this issue. Bechtel stated the commission needs to schedule a site walk in order to go out and evaluate the plantings because the commission had deferred the remediation planting plan until this Spring. Bechtel stated the commission needs to determine who they would like to attend the site walk. Brown suggested the professional who designed the planting plan be invited to access the re-growth.
Willis stated the level spreader is currently creating a dam and the water is washing underneath. Willis stated the level spreader should be letting water filter slowly through.
John Alexander (member of the public) stated the amount of water was sufficient enough to pick up and move a hay bale six feet. He further stated the silt fence was not built up behind the hay bales because if it had been you would have that flow of water against the silt fence and there would be a dam of a silt fence. He stated today there is water flowing through the spreader and that is coming from a spring that has been intersected by the drainage for the road and the water is continuing to flow and is carrying silt from the trench that it continues to dig and it is depositing it on the fallen silt fence. He further stated the volume of water that can move a hay bale that is 10’ to 15’ away and then move it six additional feet is a lot of water.
Willis stated a dam is being created. He stated a level spreader is made to disperse the water equally over the top. He further stated he did not like the looks of this spreader and does not feel it is functioning properly. He further stated he would be contacting someone from the state that deals with hydraulics.
(INTERVENER)
Linde stated the applicant has failed to fill the requirements of the permit and is trying to sell property. Linde suggested the commission do everything in its power to resolve this quickly.
Bechtel stated Allen Hull did immediately deal with the E & S controls. Brown stated there have been heavy rains since that time and it has blown them out again.
Alexander stated that the repairs were not done as Metcalf recommended. Brown stated Metcalf visited the site after it was completed and felt it was adequate. Bechtel stated she spoke with him today as well and he felt the work that has been done was adequate but he also agreed that with this continually happening there are design or constructions problems with the spreader.
Which is why a meeting has been called for them to meet at the site to figure out what to do to correct the situation.
Brown and Bechtel stated that Attorney Block has been responsive to all issues of the situation. DiCamillo stated the issue is not responsiveness but quality of what is being done at the site.
Page 11 – Minutes
March 25, 2008
INTERVENER
Linde expressed his frustration with the situation. He suggested that a new plan be submitted which determines what needs to be done to remediate the level spreader and recommended if that can all be done and in place by June. He once again suggested the commission resolve this situation as soon as possible.
Bechtel agreed to find out the results of the meeting between Metcalf, Rowley and the group and ask that they get a plan into us by our April meeting. She then asked the commission when they would like to walk the site. The commission agreed to walk the site in May. Linde also suggested the plans be submitted by April 15 so they can be reviewed prior to the April meeting.
Brown stated she would contact Mr. Metcalf tomorrow to see if something could be put at the site to get an immediate solution.
FIRE WELLS – FIRE PONDS
Don Willis stated there is currently a standpipe in the back of Bob Cashman’s office which is full of litter and debris. Willis stated he went to the DEP to ask what they do about cleaning waterways. He stated the state has an ongoing permit with the DEP for five years at a time to remove as much silt as they want to allow flow through a pipe or a culvert. Willis stated Evan Griswold expressed concern about digging around in a wetland to allow for a standpipe. Willis stated that the state allows the DOT to do this type of work on a routine basis. Bechtel stated Griswold expressed concern about creating disturbance for an insufficient water source. The commission discussed various situations in town. (A copy of the March 19, 2008 Fire Ponds/Fire Tanks meeting minutes
were distributed to the commission members)
Respectfully submitted,
Kim Groves
Land Use Administrator
| 
