MINUTES
OLD LYME INLAND WETLANDS AND WATERCOURSES REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, MARCH 23, 2010
Present were: Janet Bechtel, Robb Linde, Skip DiCamillo, Sabine O’Donnell and Evan Griswold.
MINUTES
Minutes of Meeting dated February 23, 2010
Robb Linde made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted. Evan Griswold seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
NEW BUSINESS
10-4 – Donna Scott – 43-1 Saunders Hollow Road – Permit for existing deck.
Bechtel stated the commission had requested the applicant to submit a permit for the existing deck. Bechtel noted that she didn’t attend the site walk but stated it was her understanding that the deck under discussion already existed on the site and the commission requested a permit to make it official. Brown stated there was an existing deck on the house that needed to be rebuilt. Brown stated when she issued the permit it noted that if the rebuilding required any ground disturbance it was to come back to the commission for a permit. Brown stated it never came back for a permit. Brown stated since that time the applicant has added onto the deck with steps down, another deck, and more steps down to a deck with a hot tub toward the wetland. Brown stated the elevated deck is what
the commission was expecting for an application, however since that time there have been other additions constructed to the existing deck. Griswold asked if the construction took place since the commission visited the site. Brown stated that was correct and the applicant fee has been doubled for doing work without a permit.
Griswold stated it was discussed at the site walk that the applicant needed a permit for the initial deck due to the ground disturbance for the sonitubes, therefore he did not understand why the applicant would construct more structures without a permit.
Scott stated there were initially stairs down from the deck but they were rotted and needed to be replaced. She also stated that the hot tub had to be moved from her prior residence in Lyme and therefore needed a platform to be set on.
Griswold stated it is the law to obtain permits and it is the job of the Inland Wetlands Commission to uphold the statutes for the State of Connecticut and the regulations of this commission.
Page 2
IWWC- 3/23/10
Bechtel stated the commission would schedule another site walk to look at it again and requested that the applicant do nothing on the property that faces the existing stream which is the wetland area until the commission meets again and decides which way to handle this application. Bechtel stated there is also a very good chance that the commission may require the additional structures to be removed.
Scott stated she did not understand since a permit was given for the deck.. Griswold stated that no permits were obtained for that deck., or the additions to the deck. Scott stated it is not an addition but just steps going down from the deck. Bechtel stated a platform was also added for the hot tub; which are all additional encroachments into the buffer area.
Griswold stated whether it is a further encroachment or not, the applicant failed to follow the procedures set forth by the State of Connecticut and this commission to do work in the regulated area. O’Donnell stated she also found this issue to be frustrating because she felt all of these issues were explained to both the applicant and the contractor and they were very much aware that a permit would be required for any additional activity. Scott stated she was not aware that she would need a permit for stairs off an existing deck. Griswold stated the contractor should have been aware and was equally responsible.
Linde asked if the applicant if she understood that there would be no further activity prior to the commission visiting the site. The applicant stated she understood.
The commission agreed to set a site walk for Saturday, April 17, 2010 at 8:30 a.m.
10-5 – Joan Bozek, Robert G. Linde – 16 Mansewood Road – Repair driveway and install catch basin.
Robb Linde recused himself as he would be presenting his application.
Robb Linde stated he was proposing a repair to a driveway to correct an existing condition on the site. Linde presented the commission with an overall site map of the area. Linde stated to the right of Lot 1 there is probably a vernal pool and when there is rain that pool overflows and washes to the west and comes down the east side of the driveway for a little bit and then cuts across the driveway scouring the gravel and dirt driveway down into a low area which actually may feed into a wetland on the Pedersen Property.
Linde stated his property was Lot 10. He noted that Lot 9 is a vacant lot and both Lots 8 and 1 contain homes. Linde stated that as the water comes across the driveway it takes
Page 3
IWWC – 3/23/10
the sand and gravel from the driveway. He stated they measured approximately 50 to 75
feet of driveway debris going towards the wetlands. He stated they would like to avoid dumping more stuff into the upland review area around the wetland area to the west.
O’Donnell asked about the ownership of the driveway. Linde stated that they owned the driveway.
Joan Bozek introduced the property owners who have a deeded right of way over the property and occupy their residence full time.
Brown stated the map shows the structure starting on Lot 9. Linde stated that was incorrect and the drawing would be modified to reflect the actual location. The commission reviewed and discussed the maps presented by the applicant. Joan Bozek noted for the record that the commission was reviewing a Richard Snarski Wetlands Map which was done for a prior wetlands permit that was obtained by the applicant. It was also noted that survey map was done by Matthew White of Angus McDonald and Gary Sharpe and Associates. Bozek also noted for the record that the area of concern is not on their property. O’Donnell asked the applicant to transfer the information onto the larger map.
Linde stated the proposal is to install a catch basin on the uphill side which will run into a pipe under the driveway to prevent the scouring and depositing into the wetland review area and rip rap will be installed to slow down the water volume and spread it out. Bozek noted that they have currently put some rip rap down to allow the Barton’s to have use of their property and prevent further runoff into the wetland area.
Bozek submitted a fee of $135.00 for the application.
The commission agreed to set a site walk for Saturday, April 17th, 2010 at 9:00 a.m.
OLD BUSINESS
10-01- Robert Beaudoin – 86 Grassy Hill Road – Repair lawn after removal of tree
stumps from trees that were cut down by previous owner, also install drywells at
corners of house.
Bechtel stated the commission walked the property. The site has had tree and stump removal down to the hay bales along Rogers Lake. Bechtel stated that after last months site walk, the commission requested a landscape plan be submitted outlining what was planned for the rear yard down to Rogers Lake. The applicant distributed a landscaping plan done by Koller Landscaping of Waterford, CT. Rich Koller reviewed the plan with the commission. He stated that he recommended and installed some drywells to prevent
Page 4
IWWC – 3/23/10
any roof runoff from entering the lake. He removed the stumps and suggested the yard be reseeded. He also proposed a berm which would contain some ornamental
grasses or such ,that would not require much or any fertilization, to help prevent any salts or fertilizers getting into the lake. Griswold discussed plantings with Mr. Koller and stated that he felt the commission would prefer a landscape that would require no fertilizers because the lake is under stress and any additional stress from nitrogen would be counterproductive. Koller stated grasses do not need to be fertilized at all and will sustain from the natural nutrients in the ground. DiCamillo asked if a 6” berm would be high enough. Griswold stated he felt it would retain anything from coming over it.
Koller stated the installation of the lawn will also help prevent runoff. Griswold asked Mr. Beaudoin what his plan was for the use of the lake front. Mr. Beaudoin stated at some point he would like to have a dock. Griswold stated then there would need to be a foot path for access to the dock. Linde stated the commission has been recommending a vegetative buffer area of approximately 20’ ft in depth covering all but six feet of the lake front to allow access to the lake.
O’Donnell asked if other plants were proposed in addition to the lawn area. Mr. Beaudoin stated that maybe down the road but currently just lawn was proposed for the area.
Linde asked about the proposed dry well retaining area. Koller stated there was no dry well proposed; they exist already. Koller stated it would just be rip rap installed. He stated he noticed when the lake rose it would create free standing water so he thought the installation of stone would minimize this issue. The commission also discussed that the installation of plantings might accomplish the same thing. Linde stated the more stuff growing the less water that will be left sitting.
Lind stated what he would like to see in the final plan:
1. A 20 ft berm or vegetative buffer
2. A proposed location for the six foot opening for the walkway.
3. The 20 ft. vegetative buffer back from the lake not be mowed except for once
or twice a year and require minimal fertilization.
Bechtel stated she marked up the plan the applicant submitted with a 20 ft vegetative buffer and noted that the area should include a berm and/or swale with 4’ to 6’ access to the lake, and the vegetative buffer to only be mowed one or twice a year maximum.
Linde made a motion to approve the application with the following stipulations:
1. A plan be submitted showing a 20 ft. buffer extending across the entire lake with
the exception of a 6’ wide area of access to the lake.
Page 5
IWWC -3/23/10
2. The buffer area is not to be mowed more than twice a year and should contain
shrubs and grasses that do not require more than minimal fertilization.
3. The permit is not to be issued until a plan describing the conditions is submitted
to the Inland Wetlands Enforcement Officer.
Janet Bechtel seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
Old Lyme Country Club – Release of Bond Request. Wetlands restoration plan to be discussed.
Evan Griswold recused himself from this application.
The commission received correspondence from Richard Snarski, Certified Professional Soil Scientist dated March 22, 2010.
Bechtel asked who would be doing the work at the site. The representative from the OLCC stated they had not retained a contractor as of yet but noted it would not be done by staff. Bechtel stated after reviewing Snarski’s letter and receiving the information at the site walk from Sara McCracken she felt the restoration plan was satisfactory and therefore when the work is completed the bond could be partially released.
Snarski stated that back in August 2007 he submitted an invasive plant eradication plan which was approved as part of the plan. Brown stated since that time she contacted him informing him that the site was not completed as approved. Snarski stated the current situation is that the exotic invasive plants were not removed and noted that part of the area had been filled in with wood chips. Snarski stated he then wrote a report with his current recommendations. Snarski reviewed the report with the commission as outlined as Wetland Area North of Ditch and Wetland Area South of the Drainage Ditch.
O’Donnell clarified that on the southern side the plant were marked that should stay and on the north side it was the opposite. Snarski stated that was correct. O’Donnell asked if it was easy to determine the two sides. Snarski stated there was a ditch for clarification. O’Donnell asked that based on the letter the wetland area north of the ditch “states that the native plants in pink are to be saved”. Snarski stated that was correct. Linde suggested that the flag colors be changed prior to the contractor starting work.
Linde stated that it sounds like it is a project that can be done up front but will require several years of maintenance. Snarski stated he recommended a two year monitoring period. Linde expressed concern that it wasn’t done right in the first place that there could be issues with the necessary follow-up and therefore was reluctant to release the entire bond when the first phase is completed.
Page 6
IWWC – 3/23/10
The representative from the OLCC stated it was their intent to satisfy the commission. Bechtel stated once the plan is implemented and reflagged with the appropriate color to avoid any confusion then the OLCC could come back before the commission for a release of the majority of funds but noted a portion would be held until the two year monitoring period is completed.
The commission also discussed lighting at the site. The representative stated he had no problem placing shields on the lights that face the wetlands. He also noted the lights are currently on a timer in addition to being controlled by daylight. He further stated they are only allowed to come on from 7 a.m to 10 p.m. and that is what the zoning permit required. O’Donnell asked why they had to be on so long. He stated that was the time they were allowed to come on but if there is adequate daylight they won’t go on.
Bechtel stated the commission’s concern was the amount of light that they shed onto that particular area. The representative stated that each one of those lights have four faces on it and the face toward the wetland can be shielded. Bechtel stated they would like to have those lights shielded toward the wetland side.
DiCamillo asked about the specific plantings for the area that were not planted. The representative stated when the plants were ordered the nursery was out of the type recommended so they substituted them with what is currently on the site. He noted they will be replaced with what was recommended and approved.
Linde summarized by stating the lights will be shielded on the wetland side, the three trees will be replaced and Richard Snarski’s recommendation will be followed as outlined in his letter dated March 22, 2010.
ENFORCEMENT REPORT
Discussion of a format and required follow-up for an expanded Enforcement Report
Linde distributed copies of an excel spread sheet to the commission members which would help the commission track all the applications reviewed by the commission, the fate of those applications, and how many enforcements. Linde stated he would also like to have the spreadsheet posted on line so that it is available to the public. The commission reviewed and discussed the individual columns in the spreadsheet. Linde also noted that will help the commission track fees. He stated that the Zoning and Planning Commission do not issue permits until all the fees are paid and suggested the IWWC do the same. The commission also discussed the engineering review fees. Linde stated it was goal to have a high level accounting of what the commission is doing and what is coming up and where the
application stands. He stated it should be fairly easy to
Page 7
IWWC – 3/23/10
maintain. The commission agreed it was an excellent tool and would be implemented immediately.
OTHER BUSINESS
Regulation Rewrite
Linde had distributed copies of the proposed buffer language at the last meeting. The commission agreed to review the language and discuss at the April Meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
Bechtel made a motion to adjourn at 9:25. Linde seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
| 
