MEEETING MINUTES
OLD LYME INLAND WETLANDS AND WATERCOURSES COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2008
PRESENT WERE: Janet Bechtel, Robb Linde, Don Willis, Sabine O’Donnell, Skip DiCamillo, Mike Moran, Evan Griswold and Dave McCulloch. Also present were: Attorney Eric Knapp and Ann Brown.
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING DATED AUGUST 26, 2008
Skip DiCamillo made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted. Robb Linde seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
MINUTES OF THE SITE WALK MEETING SEPTEMBER 10, 2008
Janet Bechtel made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted. Sabine O’Donnell seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
MINUTES OF THE SITE WALK MEETING SEPTEMBER 13, 2008
Due to the fact that the minutes were not complete no action was taken.
NEW BUSINESS
DISCUSSION OF ACTIVITIES AT 8 AVON ROAD (Elton Vail- 7 Avon Avenue & Sean Clark – 50 Rogers Lake Trail)
Bechtel noted the commission received a letter dated September 9, 2008 from Sean Clark and Elton Vail. Bechtel reported that Mr. Vail had been in contact with Ann Brown regarding the activities that are taking place on the site. Bechtel stated that Mr. Vail indicated in his letter to the commission that no permits have been issued for this property but there has been considerable site work done, including extensive digging and the removal of many large trees and stumps.
Mr. Vail recalls wetlands being located on the property, however Ann Brown has been provided with conflicting information stating there are no wetlands on the property.
Page 2 – Minutes
IWWC – 9-23-08
Mr. Vail stated that in 1994 there was a proposal to build a house on the property and water was found at 54”. He also noted at this time a wetlands survey was conducted. He further stated he walked the property while the survey was conducted and there were wet spots in two locations on the property. He also discussed the fact that this property continually floods.
Bechtel familiarized the commission with the property. She further noted that she reviewed the file for the property that is diagonal across from this property under discussion and no wetlands were located on that property. (46-48 Roger’s Lake Trail).
Brown noted she has had several conversations with Mr. Vail with regard to the property. Brown further stated she was provided with mapping as well as information from Richard Snarski, Soil Scientist, stating there are no wetlands on the property and that he had conducted a careful study and there were no wetlands within 100 ft of this property. Brown stated that Snarksi specifically stated that there are no intermittent watercourses on the property. Brown also reported that she has reviewed prior minutes and agendas in the town clerks office and there has been no applications made for this property. Brown also noted that there is a flood zone that runs through the property, therefore, she did not feel this is an inland/wetlands issue.
Bechtel asked why the plan was not submitted to the Land Use office at the time the soils were mapped by Mr. Snarski. Pat Looney, relative to the property owner, explained that the map was not provided because the applicant planned to submit the entire package at the time of application for the property.
Bechtel asked if the property soils were mapped prior to the site clearing. Looney stated the land was cleared after the soil scientist visited the site.
Evan Griswold stated that the clearing could impact the water table and may have raised the saturation level but not the dirt content. Robb stated that wetlands are determined by dirt content and watercourses are determined by the level of water and its specific boundary so therefore the dirt content would not change as a result of the clearing.
The commission further discussed the situation and determined that this was not under their jurisdiction.
Knapp clarified to the applicant that this commission cannot take jurisdiction over things that are outside of the commission’s purview.
No action was taken.
Page 3 – Minutes
IWWC – 9-23-08
NEW BUSINESS
08-17 – BEVERLY PIKNA – 85 SHORE DRIVE – REFACING THE CONCRETE WALL LOCATED ON ROGERS LAKE.
John Mason, contractor for the applicant presented the proposal. Mr. Mason explained that the proposal is to reface the concrete wall that borders the lake’s edge. He noted he would like to begin this process soon because they are currently in the process of lowering the water level of the lake.
Mason explained that everything would be done by hand and therefore no machinery would be used in the vicinity of the lake and the process would take approximately one week to ten days.
The commission reviewed the photographs provided by the applicant which illustrate the proposal. Bechtel asked the commission if they would be comfortable handling this application as an administrative permit. Robb Linde stated he had no problem with that, but suggested that Ann Brown visit the site to determine if silt fencing would do a better job in protecting the lake then the applicant’s proposed system. If so, he would recommend that the applicant be required to install the fencing.
Janet Bechtel made a motion that this application be handled as an administrative permit. Sabine O’Donnell seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
16 MANSEWOOD – REQUEST FOR FINDING OF NO JURISDICTION - ROBB LINDE AND JOAN BOZEK
Mr. Linde stated he would like to apply for a permit. He stated the rationale for requesting a permit is because if the commission changes its regulations in the near future he would be on the record for retaining a permit under the current regulations. He noted all the activity proposed is well outside of the current 100’ review zone. Bozek stated that they are in the process of getting final drawings and the specific concern is that they would like to be able to begin and move forward with construction without there being potential changes in the wetlands regulations that might impact the project mid-construction. Linde stated it is a 10 acre site and all of the work is going to be done outside the 100’ review zone. He noted there is ledge between the work that is being done and
the wetlands. He stated the proposal is to remove an existing two bedroom house and replace it with a four bedroom house, install a new septic system, well and relocate the driveway. Bozek stated the testing has been completed for the septic and the location chosen was where the soils were most appropriate. The applicant agreed to submit a fee for his application to the Land Use Office.
The commission agreed to walk the site on Saturday, October 18, 2008 at 8:30 a.m.
Page 4 – Minutes
IWWC – 9-23-08
08-18 – WAYNE WHIPPLE – 308 FERRY ROAD – CONSTRUCTION OF ADDITIONS
Mr. Whipple reviewed the proposal with the commission. The commission agreed to set a site walk for Saturday, October 18, 2008 at 9:30 a.m.
08-19 – MICHAEL BRADY – 83 SHORE DRIVE – REPAIR EXISTING DECAYING DECK
Mr. Brady reviewed the proposal with the commission members. Ann Brown noted that she had received several phone calls from the neighbors expressing their concerns about the project and the fact that no permits had been granted for the project. Brown also noted that the neighbors feel the deck has been enlarged and would like the opportunity to address the commission with their concerns.
Robb Linde questioned the applicant with regard to his statement indicating that the square footage of the deck has not changed, and therefore, should he assume the footprint of the deck has not changed. The applicant indicated that was not correct. He stated there are two decks on the property and one deck overhangs the other deck so therefore the square footage has not change based on useable space. Linde stated then the square footage of the wooden deck is exactly the same as it was before. The applicant stated the square footage of the wood deck has probably increased approximately 12” but it is cantilevered over the existing deck underneath it so it is not a square foot issue as far as lot coverage.
Linde stated as far as a public hearing goes the neighbors certainly have the opportunity to submit a petition requiring a public hearing, but either way, the public still has the ability to individually submit their concerns to our Land Use office. Robb Linde stated he would like the applicant to submit photographs that would describe the pre-existing conditions at the site.
The commission agreed to set a site walk for Saturday, October 18, 2008 at 10:00 a.m.
08-20 – JOHN P. SHEGIRIAN – 4 LONGACRE LANE – 2 STORY ADDITION TO SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING
The commission reviewed the proposal. The applicant submitted a map that outlined a proposal for an addition and also indicated the wetlands line and the regulated area. The commission agreed to set a site walk for Saturday, October 18, 2008 at 9:00 a.m.
OLD BUSINESS
08-08 – OLD LYME HILLS – WOODS OF OLD LYME – OLD STAGECOACH ROAD – 38 LOT SUBDIVISION
The applicant, Hussein Mushin, submitted a letter formally withdrawing the application because of the timing. Bechtel noted that the applicant, his engineer, the commission’s engineer and Ann Brown
Page 5 – Minutes
IWWC – 9-23-08
met today and discussed some the issues with regards to the proposed plans. Brown noted that a lot was accomplished at the meeting. Brown suggested that the commission accept the resubmission of the application and not charge another application fee. She noted the applicant has been extremely patient in waiting for a full evaluation from Mr. Metcalf. Brown stated she felt the next submittal the commission receives will have addressed most to all of the issues and be ready to submit to the Planning Commission. Brown noted the applicant has agreed to pay for our engineers’ evaluations of the plan, and therefore requested the commission waive the 2nd application fee. Linde stated normally he would not be in favor of waiving the fee, but given the fact that the delay was
not entirely due to the applicant and he has been working diligently with the commission he saw no reason the fee could not be waived. Bechtel stated she agreed about waiving the fee but disagreed with the reasons stated by Linde. She noted that while the applicant has been patient, it has taken over a year to impress upon the applicant’s engineer that he had a lot more work to do. She noted that the applicant’s engineers’ level of work differs greatly from the commission’s consulting engineers’ level of work. She said that when she receives a review letter from Mr. Metcalf that is in excess of eight pages listing items that still need to be done on a application, that it is not our engineer not getting the job done properly, but probably the applicant’s engineers’ level of attention to detail not being sufficient to what we expect on a plan. Bechtel noted that drainage is crucial on this site considering the slope
involved in accessing this subdivision. Bechtel stated she agrees with waving the fee because the applicant has been paying for Tom Metcalf’s consulting but she disagrees with the reasons set forth. She noted the outcome will be the same but she wanted to clarify that point.
The commission agreed to waive the fee for the 2nd submittal.
08-09 – SHORT HILLS PROPERTIES, LLC – 16-2 SHORT HILLS ROAD – 7 LOT SUBDIVISION
Bechtel stated that at the last meeting the commission asked Attorney Knapp if he would draft an acceptance because we had a discussion on the record under Other Business stating that after all of the testimony that the commission had heard they did not feel there was a reason to deny the application. Bechtel distributed the motion for the commission. The commission reviewed the motion and materials that had been presented to the commission.
At a regular meeting of the Old Lyme IWWC held on 5/27/08, application #08-09 was presented by Chris Smith, Land Use Attorney, on behalf of the applicant, Marty Smith. The proposal is for a 7-lot subdivision on 25 acres with associated construction activities within the 100' regulated upland review zone. The application was discussed and a site walk was scheduled for 6/10/08 at 6:00 pm.
On 6/10/08 commission members met at the site to discuss the application with Martin Smith and Michael Bennett, P.E. The wetland activities proposed (marked WA1 & WA 2) on the Wetland Activity Plan were walked and reviewed. Due to time limitations (late arrival and 7:30 Special Meeting) other wetlands on the site were not walked by the commission members at this time.
Page 6 – Minutes
IWWC – 9-23-08
At a regular meeting of the Old Lyme IWWC held on 6/24/08 Chairman Bechtel stated a petition had been received from numerous property owners requesting a public hearing. Although the 14 day statutory period had already been passed, commission members agreed to call a public hearing in the public interest. The public hearing opened at the 7/22/08 regular meeting and was continued to 8/26/08. At the regular meeting on 8/26/08, after further testimony from the applicant, the public and the Commission’s Attorney, Eric Knapp, the public hearing was closed.
The Commission has reviewed the materials submitted with the initial application and during the public hearings. Per the requirements of Section 7.3 of the Regulations, the Commission finds the application to be materially complete and to contain “such information as is necessary for a fair and informed determination”. In addition, per Conn. Gen. Statues §22a-41(a)(6), the Commission is permitted to evaluate not only the activities actually depicted on this application, but also those that are reasonably foreseeable or made inevitable by the proposed activities. Finally, pursuant to Section 10.1 of the Regulations, the Commission has considered the reports of the following other agencies and staff in its review of the application.
These submittals are listed below:
- 5/27/08 regular meeting - application #08-09 Proposed Subdivision, Short Hills Properties, LLC
* Site Plan sheets 1-16 dated 5/1/08, revised to 6/13/08, 7/15/08, 8/05/08 and 8/22/08 Bennet & Smilas Engineering, Inc.
- 5/29/08 Penelope C. Sharp’s, Environmental Report Inland Wetlands, Short Hills Rd, Old Lyme, CT
- 6/10/08 Site Walk. 6:30 pm
- Fire Suppression correspondence:
* Fire Protection and Storage Plan, dated 6/23/08
* Bruce Spiewak to Martin Smith dated 6/24/08
* M. Smith email to David. Roberge, Fire Marshall & David Jewett, Fire Chief, dated 6/30/08
* David Jewett's Site Plan review letter to Kim Groves, Land use Administrator, Town of Old Lyme, dated 7/6/08
- 7/10/08 – “Dear Resident” letter from Martin Smith, VP, Real Estate Service of Connecticut to homeowners
- 7/17/08 - article in The Day "Old Lyme resident organize against Short Hills project"
- 7/21/08 - site plan review by W. Goodfriend, Natural Resource Specialist, CRCCD
- 7/21/08 - Bennet & Smilas Engineering, Inc. response to W. Goodfriend's 7/21/08 site plan review.
- 7/22/08 – Bennet & Smilas Engineering, Inc. “Impervious Area Presentation Plan ‘A’, dated 7/21/08.
- 7/22/08 - submission of requested action by property owners V. Lanier and J. Eicholz.
- 7/24/08 - letter from O.S. South End Volunter Ambulance Assoc. Inc. to Board of Selectmen re: road concerns
- 8/02/08 - review of "The Oaks", 17 sheets total, revision #2, revised 7/15/08 submitted by T. Metcalf.
- 8/11/08 - Bennet & Smilas Engineering, Inc. response to T. Metcalfs, 8/2/08 site plan review.
- 8/19/08 – review of site plans revised to 8/5/08 by W. Goodfriend, Natural Resource Specialist, CRCCD
- 8/19/08 - letter from Branse, Willis and Knapp, LLC re: "IWWC's ability to consider potential future development when
reviewing present applications”.
- 8/22/08 - Bennet & Smilas Engineering, Inc. response to W. Goodfriends, 8/19/08 site plan review
- 8/25/08 - review of "The Oaks", revised to 8/5/08, submitted by T. Metcalf
- 8/26/08 - review of site plans dated 8/22/08 by W. Goodfriend (via email)
- 8/26/08 - submission of resume’s: Bennett, L.S., Smilas, P.E., L.S., Atty. Smith and Ms. Sharp, Environmental Consultant
- 8/26/08 - Bennett & Smilas Engineering, Inc. Construction Narrative dated 8/26/08
- 9/20/08 - letter from T. Metcalf, re: engineer's assessment of Short Hills Rd. and per Cronin's request 8/26/08 public hearing.
Page 7 – Minutes
IWWC – 9-23-08
The Old Lyme Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Commission has used its criteria set forth in Section 10.2 of the Regulations to evaluate the application and makes the following findings:
a. The environmental impact of the proposed activities in the upland review area has been minimized and mitigated through the proposed modifications submitted by the Applicant as well as explicitly conditioned by the Conditions of Approval set forth below,
b. The Commission finds that there are no feasible and prudent alternatives to the application, as explicitly conditioned by the Conditions of Approval set forth below.
c. The Commission has evaluated the relationship between the short term and long term impacts of the proposed activity on wetlands and watercourses and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity of such wetlands and watercourses and does not find that the long-term health of the wetlands both on and off-site would be negatively affected by the proposed permitted activities, as explicitly conditioned by the Conditions of Approval set forth below.
d. The Commission finds that there would be no irreversible or irretrievable loss of wetlands or watercourse resources which would be caused by the proposed regulated activity as explicitly conditioned by the Conditions of Approval set forth below.
e. The Commission finds that there would be no adverse impacts on the aquatic, plant or animal life in habitats in wetlands or watercourses from the proposed regulated activity as explicitly conditioned by the Conditions of Approval set forth below.
f. The Commission finds that the activity proposed for this location is suitable and is an appropriate balance of the need for economic growth as against the need to protect the environment for the people of the Town.
Janet Bechtel made a motion that based on those findings and the conditions set forth below, the Old Lyme IWWC hereby moves to APPROVE the application for regulated activity in connection with a 7-lot subdivision to be located on 16-2 Short Hills Road. This approval is granted with the following conditions, each of which is considered integral to the Commission’s decision to approve this application:
Page 8 – Minutes
IWWC – 9-23-08
1. The applicant shall provide to the Planning Commission at the time of subdivision application a homeowners association document that includes the operation and maintenance of the private road (if applicable), stormwater management facilities and monitoring wells in the "Conservation Easement Area". The homeowners association shall include in the language a maintenance schedule for the private road (if applicable), wet water quality swale, dry water quality swale,
2.
detention/bioretention basin, catch basins, and "Conservation Easement Area". The language
shall include requirements and assign responsibility for the inspection, operation, and
maintenance of each structure/facility. The language shall include methods of fee assessment,
collection, and penalties to insure the facilities are properly maintained. The Commission shall
forward the Association documents to its counsel for review and in no circumstance shall the
Association documents be recorded prior to their being approved by the Commission’s counsel.
3. The homeowners association and the individual lots shall file a "Stormwater Treatment Facility Maintenance Declaration" that creates obligations to protect and maintain the stormwater facilities. The declaration shall incorporate the maintenance schedule specific to this application for each stormwater facility.
4. The homeowners associations shall provide the Town Land Use Office with an annual report by September of each year prepared by an engineer/consultant familiar with maintenance for the private road (if applicable), wet water quality swale, dry water quality swale, detention/bioretention basin, and catch basins. The inspection shall occur in the summer growing season and the report shall include photos of all of the stormwater facilities. All maintenance work and repairs recommended by the engineer/consultant shall be completed in a timely manner as weather permits.
5. The applicant shall provide to the Planning Commission at the time of subdivision application a written Conservation Easement in the Town format. The easement language shall include mapping that can be filed in the Town Land Records. As stated in the Town Conservation Easement language, "Before commencement of site work on any property of the Grantor which contains or is adjacent to a Conservation Easement Area, Conservation Easement boundaries are to be marked with oak stakes labeled "Conservation Easement" with waterproof ink and tied with red flags. These stakes are to be
located at each change of boundary direction and at every 100-foot interval on straight-aways. Stakes are to remain in place until the Grantor installs easement boundary markers. All Conservation Easement corners shall be permanently marked with iron pins which protrude from ground surface not more than one inch and such pins shall not contain sharp edges."
Page 9 – Minutes
IWWC – 9-23-08
5. The limits of clearing shall be corrected to include all areas proposed for construction and alteration. And in addition, a note shall be added to the site plans stating that the stumping of cleared lots will not begin until final construction is scheduled. To the extent that there are any changes in clearing limits which would alter the Regulated Area, a new application must be submitted to the Commission, for a new or modified permit.
6. As noted in Note #16 on the Site Development Plan”, drawing number 5, the shrubs and herbaceous plants shall be installed once permanent ground cover up-gradient from the quality basins has been established.
7. The applicant shall construct the stonewall now shown across the foot trail north of the proposed lot #5 to deter non-pedestrian traffic.
8. Water bars must be constructed for all driveways with grades greater than five percent (5%), as shown on “Site Development Plan” drawing number 6.
9. Regarding the two water quality basins:
a. The Town’s consulting Engineer shall review the final sizing to demonstrate the Water Quality Volume (WQV) will be held/treated in the basins.
b. The Town’s consulting Engineer shall review the final plans to verify that at least 10% of the WQV will be pretreated prior to discharge to the basins.
c. Soil tests must confirm that the depth of the basins, along with the required growth medium beneath the basins is adequate for placement of the basins without blasting or digging out. Alternatively, if blasting or digging out is required, evidence that such blasting or digging out will not substantially alter the seasonal high water table should be provided.
d. A schedule for inspections post-construction to evaluate plant survivability, invasive species management needs, water levels, slope stability and inlet/outlet stability shall be provided in a manner acceptable to the Inlands Wetlands and Watercourses Agent.
10. The wetland flagging, the erosion control measures, construction fencing, the limits of vegetative clearing, and the Conservation Easement signs and pins shall be inspected by the Old Lyme Inland/Wetlands Enforcement Officer as part of a pre-construction meeting or meetings, and no construction shall commence until the IWWA Enforcement Officer inspects the subdivision and approves for compliance with this condition.
11. A copy of these conditions and the endorsed plans shall be available at the construction site at all times.
Page 10 – Minutes
IWWC – 9-23-08
12. A bond shall be in place prior to commencement of construction to cover the cost for erosion control measures and potential corrective work for erosion control failures. A bond estimate shall be part of the Planning Commission subdivision application.
13. On Lot 1, Lot 4, Lot 5 and Lot 6, the upland review area shall be marked with a placard at 100' intervals unless the review area is within the conservation easement.
14. All plans and reports submitted to the Old Lyme Planning Commission shall include the above conditions.
The Commission’s determinations are based upon the accuracy of the information provided by the Applicant, as noted in Section 11.9 (a) of the Regulations. If any of the information provided subsequently proves to be false, deceptive, incomplete or inaccurate, the permit may be modified, suspended or revoked.
If any of the said conditions or modifications set forth in this approval are not met, the Commission reserves the right to reconsider and revoke this decision pursuant to Section 14 of the Regulations.
As part of the review, the Commission also has the following recommendations for the Planning Commission subdivision applicant and asks the Commission to consider:
1. The applicant should provide the Planning Commission a final map that includes all metes and bounds for the proposed property and conservation easement areas. All drainage easements, driveway easements, fire protection facility easement, and other easements should also be noted on the final maps. The applicant should provide the Planning Commission maps with bench marks that match the elevation datum and accuracy of the topographical survey.
2. The plans should be submitted to the Public Works Department for review of final design. Prior to any construction on Great Oak Road, a pre-construction meeting will be required with the Public Works Department, Town Engineer, and Land Use Administrator to finalize design and construction methods and post necessary permits, bonds and insurance certificates with the Town.
Robb Linde seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
08-13 – Corey & Kristin Bullock – 30 Champlain Drive – Proposed house addition, garage, filling and grading.
Bechtel noted that the commission walked the site.
Page 11- Minutes
IWWC – 9-23-08
Bechtel made a motion to approve the application with the following conditions:
1. The applicant maintain a 4-foot no mow zone along the watercourse.
2. The applicant stabilize the embankment at the end of the driveway immediately
3. The applicant install a silt fence with hay placed to the inside of the silt fence and a jute map.
Don Willis seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
08-14 – Bedri & Daniel Babasuli – 20 Grassy Hill Road – Proposed Driveway Construction to provide off road parking and septic system repair.
Janet Bechtel noted that neither the applicant nor his representative were present to explain the application. Brown noted that she asked the applicant to explain to the commission how this application was different from either of the previous two. Bechtel noted that the commission received a letter from the applicant’s engineer, Lee Rowley, dated September 18, 2008 in which he indicated he would not be able to attend tonight’s meeting but Mr. Hendrik’s would be present to explain the application. Kim Groves agreed to forward the letter to the commission members prior to next month’s meeting.
Janet Bechtel made a motion to table the application. Skip DiCamillo seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
08-15 – Pramod & Minexiban P.W. Patel – 268 Shore Road – Proposed Retail Facility and Associated Parking
Bechtel noted that neither the applicant nor his representative were present to explain the application and stated the commission walked the site and at that time they had some suggestions for the applicant and the applicant’s representative. She noted those suggestions were to take a look at where the building is located because of its proximity to the wetlands. The commission questioned why it could not be relocated a bit more toward the street.
Bechtel made a motion to table the application. Skip DiCamillo seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
08-16 – Tom McConnell – 3 Mill Pond Lane – Site improvements to include retaining walls, terraces, fire pit and planting beds.
Bechtel noted that the commission walked the site and at that time told the applicant he did not need to attend the meeting. Janet Bechtel made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Robb Linde seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
Page 12 – Minutes
IWWC – 9-23-08
OTHER BUSINESS
FMTM
Bechtel reported that Tom Metcalf had written a letter to Frank Martone indicating that paving could begin. Bechtel noted the letter stated that upon completion of paving, additional items were to be completed. Bechtel reported that paving has not yet happened. Bechtel also noted that Mr.Metcalf did reiterate to Mr. Martone that he could not go on to Phase II until the as-built was submitted and he came back before this commission to get permission to go onto Phase II.
LORDS WOODS SUBDIVISION ENFORCEMENT
Bechtel stated last month the commission requested that Attorney Knapp send a letter to Attorney Block in attempt to resolve the issues on the site. She noted Attorney Block sent a letter back to Attorney Knapp acknowledging receipt of his letter of August 28, 2008 concerning the status of the subdivision. Attorney Block stated in his letter dated September 12, 2008 that it was his client’s intention to perform all his obligations in connection with the requirements of the Old Lyme Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Commission. He further noted that this matter would be resolved promptly.
Bechtel stated at the last meeting the commission asked Attorney Knapp whether the commission should call the bond and use those monies to hire our own people to complete the work in the subdivision. She noted that Attorney Knapp gave a concise report as to why it would not be in the best interest of the town to do that and he stated he would like to see all other attempts made prior to taking that action.
Bechtel also noted she received a letter today from Diana Atwood Johnson, Chairman of the Open Space Committee, stating her displeasure in the progress of getting the outstanding items completed. She requested that this Commission consult with its attorney as to a more formal step it can take to get the items completed.
Robb Linde (Intervener)
Mr. Linde asked if the Cease & Desist Order had been filed on the Land Records. Brown indicated it had not been done yet but she would file it tomorrow.
Mr. John Alexander was present and expressed his concerns about the site due to the lack of the remediation of the level spreader by the applicant.
Bechtel stated if it was up to her she would vote to take the bond money and hire B & L Construction to fix the level spreader now before we go into winter. Bechtel stated unfortunately there are other issues to be considered when the commission calls the bond on a site.
Page 13 – Minutes
IWWC – 9-23-08
Knapp stated if the town gets into the business of hiring contractors to do work on private property then the town will have liability issues. Discussion ensued about the fact that the level spreader was located in the open space on town property and that it would ultimately be the town’s responsibility. Knapp again stated the town would be responsible after the level spreader was installed and functioning properly.
Knapp stated if the commission feels it has given the developer sufficient time the next step would be to notify the developer the bond would be pulled on such a date and it will be used to get the work done. He further stated notification to the developer that the bond is being pulled might get some results.
Evan Griswold stated that when the Cease & Desist Order and liens are filed on the land records it will make it very difficult to sell the lots. The commission discussed the fact that once the Cease & Desist is recorded on the land records and the realtor marketing the property is made aware of this recording it will be very difficult for anyone wanting to purchase the property to secure a mortgage. Griswold stated this information on the land records must be disclosed to any potential buyer.
Knapp also cautioned the commission that if they pull the bond money now and use it to fix the level spreader then down the road should there be any new soil and erosion problems the money will not be there for those problems.
O’Donnell asked if it would be worthwhile for the commission to get an estimate of the cost to complete the work at the site. Bechtel stated even though that the level spreader is on town owned property all access to it is across private property.
Knapp stated the commission is legally required to provide the applicant notice of pulling the bond. He stated at the point the applicant would have the opportunity to come in and be heard by this commission. Knapp stated this may be a way to get the applicant in front of the commission to discuss these issues. Knapp stated once again the risk of pulling the bond is that if there is other work to be done later the money is not there so the commission needs to be sure that this is a sufficient encroachment that you are willing to spend the money on should other issues arise.
O’Donnell stated if the commission was to hire a contractor he would also have to cross private property and if the property owner was denied that access would that not render the bond ineffective. Knapp stated if the property owner blocked access totally the commission’s remedy would be to bring enforcement action and would effectively force him into doing the work himself or allow the commission to proceed. Knapp stated he did not recommend anyone force their way onto the property and reiterated that the commission would need to notify Attorney Block that on such a date, at such a time, a contractor would be appearing to complete the work. Thereby giving Attorney Block the opportunity to appear before this board and discuss his bond. Knapp stated if the contractor showed up and there
was no one there stopping him he would argue that absent someone there telling him not to go across the property, the property owner is on notice that it is going to happen and does not object. Knapp stated the commission needs to give explicit notice of its intentions.
Page 14 – Minutes
IWWC – 9-23-08
The commission further discussed the site. The commission agreed to visit the site individually prior to next month meeting. They also agreed to record the Cease & Desist Order and notify the listing real estate agent.
Bechtel asked Ann Brown if she would ask Tom Metcalf for an idea of what it would cost to fix the level spreader. Don Willis suggested that Alan Hull of B&L Construction be contacted an asked for an estimate. The commission discussed the option of a wetland scientist, Ann Brown agreed to informally contact Don Fortunato and see if he has been out to the site recently.
CONSTRUCTION ON BLACK HALL POND
Dave McCulloch asked Ann Brown if she has had an opportunity to visit the new construction go on in the area of Black Hall Pond. Brown indicated she has not but will do it prior to next month’s meeting.
WOODCREST ESTATES
Robb Linde expressed concern about the condition of the silt fencing at this project.
Bechtel made a motion to adjourn.
Respectfully submitted,
Kim Groves
Land Use Administrator
| 
