OLD LYME INLAND WETLANDS AND WATERCOURSES COMMISSION
PUBLIC HEARING AND REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 27, 2011
PRESENT WERE: Chairman Robb Linde, Janet Bechtel, Evan Griswold, Dave McCulloch, Skip DiCamillo and Linda Krulikowski.
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING DATED AUGUST 23, 2011
Evan Griswold made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted. Linda Krulikowski seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
MINUTES OF SITE WALK MEETING DATED SEPTEMBER 22, 2011
This item was tabled until the October Meeting.
NEW BUSINESS
11-28 – MAXWELL GREENWOOD – 228-1 MILE CREEK ROAD – 40’ LOG BRIDGE OVER WETLAND STREAM USING TREE LOGS THAT FELL IN HURRICANE
The commission reviewed the drawing submitted with the application. Mr. Greenwood stated during the hurricane he lost three large trees. He stated one fell into the neighbor’s pool and the other two fell into the wetlands. He stated he had always wanted to construct a bridge across the wetlands. Therefore, with the two trees that have fallen that are approximately 80’ long he would like to lay them parallel and place planks across which would enable him to walk over the wetland area into the high beautiful area.
Evan Griswold asked how the logs would be put into the proper place. Greenwood stated he intended to use a fork lift with rubber tires to carry the logs. Griswold suggested the applicant consider using a vehicle or crane that has a grapple that can pick up the log and place it and therefore would eliminate the need to have any sort of vehicle in the wetlands. Greenwood stated that would make the cost prohibitive for him to do the project.
The commission agreed to set a site walk for Wednesday, October 5th at 5:30 p.m.
Page 2 – Minutes
IWWC – 09-27-11
11-29 CHRISTOPHER CAULFIELD – 7 MCCURDY ROAD – MUDROOM ADDITION
Caufield noted the existing dwelling was converted into a two bedroom home and the proposal is to add a mudroom, a small addition off the front as well as a pergola off the back. Caufield noted the tank needs to be moved from its present location which is about 3 ft away from the new mudroom. He stated the wetland falls well away from the work but the mudroom addition as well as the pergola are within the regulated area. He stated there will be silt fencing installed between the construction area and the pond. He noted the foundations are 3’6 which are not full basements. He also noted any excess soil will be removed from the site. Caufield also submitted photographs of the site for the commission to review.
The commission agreed to set a site walk for Wednesday, October 5th at 6:00 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
11-20 – GALCO, LLC – 17 SILL LANE – CONSTRUCT A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE AND SEPTIC SYSTEM IN THE REGULATED AREA
Robert Pfanner stated a couple of months ago some changes were made to the plans. He noted the proposal is for a residential home with an attached garage with an onsite septic system. Pfanner reviewed the wetlands on and adjacent to the property. Pfanner noted the new plan shows an expanded buffer as suggested by the commission. He also noted that the deck has been flip-flopped to the other side of the house. Pfanner also noted that at the last meeting there was discussion about the possibility of seeking a variance to allow the house to be moved forward but after discussions there did not seem to any advantage to moving the house forward the 4 ft because it would still be in close proximity to the wetland.
Pfanner noted the property was located in two different zones but stated the dwelling is located in the R-15 zone. Pfanner stated there was some existing vegetation in the area of the proposed buffer and therefore it might be best to leave the well established plantings and just add to them. Don Fortunato, Certified Soil Scientist, reviewed the soils on the property. He noted there is Mill Brook which is a tidal wetland, as well as an expansive wetland and an intermittent watercourse that has a lot of debris. He noted also that both himself as well as the commission’s consultant Penny Sharp felt that some of the vegetation should be left in the buffer and then filled in with additional species as recommended by Penny Sharp along with a conservation mix which will be a no mow zone and grows
very thick and creates a dense cover and helps to filter out anything that would travel through the wetland area.
Page 3 – Minutes
IWWC – 09-27-2011
Krulikowski asked what type of foundation would be constructed. Pfanner stated it would be a full foundation. Krulikowski asked if there would be any damming of the natural ground water. Pfanner stated the ground water flows very sporadic and noted it generally flows downward and mostly travels to the Mill Brook area.
Evan Griswold also concurred that the invasive species should be left. Linde expressed concern that a homeowner might want to remove the invasive species because they may not be attractive so he would like it to be clear that this is a purposeful buffer that is meant not to be disturbed. Pfanner suggested conservation placards be placed in the area that indicate the area not be disturbed. Griswold also noted that it might be beneficial to have the permit filed on plan that would notify anyone who purchased the property that this was part of the condition of the permit granted by this commission on the property. Pfanner agreed to place the permit on the second sheet of the plan.
Bechtel stated she still has a problem with the location of the deck. Bechtel stated the recommendation from Penny Sharp in her opinion recommended the proposed deck be relocated to the north side of the house. She stated the deck was originally further to the east and was moved just a little further to the south. Bechtel stated when a deck is constructed people tend to store stuff underneath and what ever is stored would be located in the rear of the house and would be impossible for this commission to enforce. Therefore she stated if what the commission wants is to protect the close proximity of the rear of the house to all of the wetlands then the deck should be moved to the north side of the house and that would provide protection to the back side of the house and she didn’t feel this was
a hardship. Pfanner agreed to relocate the deck to the north side of the house.
Fortunato also noted that the site would be inspected for the first couple of years to make sure all the species that were planted survived as well as provide the opportunity to inspect the site to be sure it has not been cleared.
Penny Sharp noted she has not seen the revised plans. She also noted that she concurred with the relocation of the deck. Sharp also remarked about the debris in the ditch and noted it had to of been placed there. Sharp stated the critical time for this property would be during construction and therefore it should be inspected through the construction phase to make sure the silt fence and hay bales are continuing to work.
Linde asked if the junk in the ditch would b removed. Pfanner stated they will be cleaning the area. Sharp asked if a conservation easement would be considered in the buffer area to prevent any future activity. Griswold asked who would be the holder of that easement. McCulloch stated it would be the Town of Old Lyme. McCulloch asked if that would be a tax benefit to the owner. Griswold stated it would be minimal based on the fact the wetlands are assessed at a lower value rate.
Page 4 – Minutes
IWWC – 09-27-2011
Linde asked Pfanner to outline the limits of clearing on the plan. Pfanner reviewed the limits with the commission. Linde stated that the commission could stipulate that this the limit that we want to see cleared. Bechtel asked if the applicant was open to the idea of a conservation easement. Pfanner asked what would encompass the easement. Brown stated perhaps the clearing limits and asked if that would be acceptable. Pfanner stated he would not want it to encompass the front part of the property but noted that area is not actually not part of the property so it would not be possible. Griswold stated he felt a conservation easement seemed a little redundant to him and he felt it also puts a burden on the town and the Open Space Commission in particular to monitor it. Therefore, he felt the stipulation of clearing limits would encompass the area and would be adequate. Linde asked if the stipulation in the permit should be that there be no clearing outside the limits of
clearing and a recommendation for a conservation easement. Griswold stated he would not bother with a conservation easement and felt it was both a burden on the applicant and town for something of this size. Brown stated an easement would preclude any future activity and she felt it might be better to leave the option open to the property owner knowing that any work would require an application back to this commission. Linde stated he is against any work being done outside of the proposed limits of clearing and he would not want the actions of the commission tonight to suggest that we were in favor of that. Therefore, he would recommend that they get a conservation easement but would not require it. Bechtel stated she felt it would be easier just to stipulate that there be no activity beyond the limits of clearing or we insist that there be a conservation easement. She stated she would be more comfortable stating there are clearly defined limits
and there be no activity outside the limits of clearing as shown on the plan. Linde asked Pfanner if he was confident he could build what is shown within the limits of clearing. Pfanner indicated he could.
Bechtel asked if the commission wanted a revised plan with the deck relocated. Pfanner stated he would be revising the plans anyway and would include the deck as part of the revisions. Linde stated if the commission wanted to act on the application tonight we have the ability to stipulate they it would be conditional upon doing all these things and receiving a plan that shows all the changes to Ann Brown’s satisfaction.
QUESTIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE
KEVIN MCMAHON
Mr. McMahon stated it has come to his attention recently with maps dating back to 1958 and 1960 that septic systems from three of his homes are on this property. He stated he called Mr. Pfanner yesterday as well as the owner of the property and explained to him that there are some massive problems. He stated again that he has three septic systems on this land and does not know the exact location. He noted he bought this property at a tax auction at Town Hall as did GALCO. Brown stated the property owners will need to work out these issues and if there are changes that need to be made in order to construct a
Page 5 – Minutes
IWWC – 09-27-11
house on this property than they may have to come back to the commission. She further stated it is not the commission’s responsibility to resolve a property dispute. Linde again stated if there are changes to the plan as a result of any agreements reached the applicant would need to come back before the commission with a new plan but at the moment the commission has to evaluate this plan as currently presented. Linde stated while he empathized with the situation it does not have an impact on the wetlands. Brown stated this commission was not in a position to resolve this issue. Bechtel stated if this is the plan that this commission approves and any alterations are made than the applicant will have to resubmit to this commission again.
Chairman Linde read a letter into the record from Dr. Norman Ashcraft and Ms. Janine Palmer of 23 Sill Lane to the commission dated September 13, 2011 expressing their concerns and objection to a building lot permit. Linde stated after reading the letter he felt the only issues pertaining to the wetlands are the concerns about the potential environmental impact of a septic system and corresponding leach field on that narrow strip. Linde asked Mr. Fortunato and Penny Sharp if they feel there is any potential for impact on the wetlands from the location of the proposed septic system. Pfanner stated the impact of the system would be on the down gradient side and felt there would be no impact. Fortunato stated the system was designed to code and was located in well drained soils and therefore did not
see any impact on the wetlands.
Bechtel stated for the record that this application came to the commission as an approved building lot. Brown stated it was a lot created prior to zoning which has some rights.
McMahon noted for the record that the town came to him about three years ago to extend a culvert across his property to prevent flooding in the adjacent yards. He also pointed out an area on the map that has been cleared for at least ten years and he has been maintaining and mowing the area.
Linde asked if the commission was ready to close the public hearing. Bechtel made a motion to close the public hearing. Evan Griswold seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
11-22 – LYME ACADEMY COLLEGE OF FINE ARTS – 77 LYME STREET – CONSTRUCTION OF 2 BUILDINGS FOR MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING A 1,250 FT. ACCESS ROAD, 2 SANITARY SYSTEMS, PARKING, ACCESS AISLES.
Bob Doane, Professional Engineer was present on behalf of the Lyme Academy College of Fine Arts. He stated the parcel is approximately 39.2 acres located on the south side of 95 and east side of Lyme Street. He stated the proposal is to construct two buildings each containing six apartments which will be accessed by a roadway from Lyme Street
Page 6 – Minutes
IWWC – 09-27-11
approximately 1,200 ft. long and 22 feet wide. He noted there are two sanitarian systems proposed on the site and a 100,000 gallon fire pond for fire protection. He stated there are wetlands on the property from the south which abuts the Regional School District and because of that wetlands there is a stream crossing. Doane stated he has received various letters from DEP for the Coastal Area Management review and also had a meeting with Tom Metcalf pursuant to his review on behalf of the commission as well as the site walk visit.
Doane stated one of the changes he would like to make is that the multi-family regulations require that the roadway be constructed to town standards so initially he took that as being horizontal and vertical requirements of the town as well so he put a minimum slope on the roadway of one percent. He stated he discussed with Mr. Metcalf today the option of flattening the roadway and matching the grade field and getting it down to zero percent and putting a consistent cross slope on the roadway and this would enable him to put a road side swale along the left hand side of the roadway running through the field and noted these comments would also be consistent with Marcy Balint’s comments from DEP. He also noted there would be sidewalks running along the roadway.
Doane stated he received clearance from the owners to put in a 50 ft span low profile box beam bridge instead of a culvert so he will be revising the plan to reflect this change.
Linde asked for clarification that it is a watercourse not just a wetland. Doane stated according to Richard Snarski it doesn’t fall into the watercourse definition because it doesn’t scour and doesn’t flow fast enough to even move the leaves. He noted they are still treating it as a body of water.
Doane stated that the DEP still is not one hundred percent convinced on the galleries used for recharge. So in the exact same position as where the recharge is located he is going to turn it into a wet water quality pond with plants.
He noted he also as shown on the plan the two buildings that will happen in the future. He noted it is not part of this application but it justifies the composition of the road and shows it can be extended without impacting or going through the wetlands. Linde asked if it was stated on the plan that it is not part of this application or approval. Doane stated that language can be firmed up with the commission and put on the plan. Linde stated he just wanted to be sure that another wetland crossing would not be needed in the future to access the buildings in the rear. Linde stated he would like it stipulated that the roadway is to be used for that purpose. Doane stated he was in agreement.
Linde stated from walking the site it appears that the roadway up until the fire pond is actually flat enough to maybe have sheet flow. Doane stated he could do that.
Page 7 – Minutes
IWWC – 09-27-11
McCulloch asked if he was counting on the sheet flow for the pond. Doane stated he was not. He stated the fire pond is a ground water pond. Brown asked why a swale would be proposed if it was not needed. Doane stated because it would determine where the storm water would go and if he ends up with a low point he knows that this area is used for overflow parking and wanted to be sure that he can address water coming off the pavement and with a swale he can be 100 percent sure of where the water will go. Brown asked if that is what he would rather do. Doane stated he would eliminate it but its just that is the typical recommendation from the state when catch basins are not proposed but he would be more than happy to do it without the swale.
Griswold asked if the fire pond was adjacent to the wetland. Doane stated that was correct. Griswold asked if the applicant checked with the state with regard to endangered species in the wetland. Doane stated there is an endangered plant on the property. Doane also noted a report was included with the application and the information was forwarded to the state with regard to the plant (grass) species on the site. He stated it is going to be his recommendation to set aside an area on the right hand side of the road for a buffer and maintain the same mowing schedule. Doane stated when Snarski did the soil testing it was very deep coarse gravel and felt the pond should be in this location and stated that as long as there is deep open water it won’t be a mosquito problem nor
will it affect the quality of the wetland and will probably add some diversity. Brown asked what is the groundwater. Doane stated when they dug test holes it was above the six. Brown stated so at the lowest point during the year it’s about 3 ft. Doane stated he would get the elevations on that. Brown asked if there would be water in the pond all the time. Doane stated that was correct. Brown asked if the salt running off the road would go into the groundwater. Doane stated only if it runs directly from the roadway into the pond. He demonstrated on the plan that very little water would run off the roadway in that area. Brown asked if the roadway would remain in the same location. Doane stated that was correct. Brown stated last time the commission requested that the parking area be shown on the plan and also the berm and any landscaping that might be put in to protect the adjacent property
owner. Doane stated he is still in discussions with Dr. Miller the adjacent property owner. Doane also presented the commission with the landscaping plan that was approved years ago and noted it does have a berm. Doane stated with landscaping plans he is never in favor of a berm because it interferes so much with sheet runoff and drainage he would rather address it with low evergreen plantings or a fence.
Bechtel asked if a building was proposed for the very front of the lot. Doane indicated that was correct.
Doane stated he had discussed straightening the roadway but due to the endangered plants the roadway will stay with the curve. Griswold stated he found an old woods road. Doane stated that is correct. Griswold stated it is densely populated with vegetation and suggested it remain and help as a buffer.
Page 8 – Minutes
IWWC – 09-27-11
Linde asked if Richard Snarski submitted a report describing what impact if any there will be by building the span. Doane stated he did not but the span was very recent change and he will definitely get that information. Doane stated it is a pre-constructed bridge but will require a standard footing with a vertical wall. Linde suggested that Richard Snarski attend the next meeting should the commission have questions with regard to the fire pond, water quality basin, vernal pool and any other issues.
Bechtel asked if there was any future plan to hold that property for a building in the front. Doane stated that was correct. Bechtel stated it might make the most sense to continue with a swale so the water can be directed. She stated otherwise there is the potential of sheet flow into the field. Doane stated it would make sense and noted that Zoning also requested that a plan be presented that would show the entire build out of the site. Linde stated he was flexible on the issue if the applicant wanted to do sheet flow now and come back later with a swale design when the other building was constructed he did not have a problem either way. Bechtel asked Doane if he would need to come back to the IWWC when the front of the property is developed. Doane stated they would have to come back.
Chairman Linde asked the commission if they felt the need to retain their own wetlands expert. McCulloch stated he did not feel the wetlands on the site were very important. Doane stated the nature of the wetlands that will be crossed are modified wetlands with a swale and also noted that no activity is proposed in the wetlands. Bechtel stated she did not have a problem with not getting another wetland expert she felt what was crucial is the construction sequence and that it be supervised because of the work in the wetland. She further added when the commission sees Richard Snarski at the October meeting the details of the pond become mostly an engineering review which will be done by Tom Metcalf. She stated that the Natural Diversity Information that is included as part of the application
and the report that had to be done for the state probably gives the commission all the information that a wetland scientist would provide and really feels the commission will end up relying heavily on Mr. Metcalf’s review.
QUESTIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE:
JEFF MILLER – LYME STREEET
Jeff Miller point out the location of his well on the property line as well as the location of the Chestnut Trees which he felt were located in the center of the proposed roadway. He stated over the last 13 years he has learned that his property is fairly moist. He stated he is concerned that the development of a street will affect his property and have a further impact on the already wet areas. He stated he is also concerned about the environmental
Page 9 – Minutes
IWWC – 09-27-11
impact of what appears to be a place of runoff for water on this road that is towards his well and noted that containments from cars might impact his well. He said he is also concerned that there might be water foul with the collection pool and might also adversely impact his well. He also stated he felt the road placement was because of the high ground and by eliminating the natural area that helps control the flooding will also adversely impact his property not just the well but making the already moist area more moist and/or wet. He also noted he felt the trees under discussion were on his property and stated he would like to keep them. He urged the commission to consider these factors as well as the environmental impact on his property and the water supply for this part of town. He
noted after the most recent storm properties in the area were told not to use the water therefore he feels there is already an issue and therefore felt this should also be further investigated.
Linde stated that wetland is a specific term used in Connecticut which is different than most states. He stated Connecticut defines a wetland by the type of soils not the plants unless it is considered a watercourse. Linde stated the wetlands soil scientist will be present at the next meeting so these questions can be further addressed.
Doane stated there will be two wells on the site one for each building as well as a sanitarian system, therefore he stated they are essentially borrowing the water. Doane stated the water from the roadway will actually flow away from the neighboring property. Doane also noted that the stakes on the property are actually located in the center of the roadway and the chestnut trees are away from the roadway. Mr. Miller asked if the intent was to remove the chestnut trees. Doane stated they would prefer to use as much existing vegetation as possible.
Linde also suggested that Mr. Miller speak with Ron Rose, Sanitarian with regard to the water quality.
Chairman Linde also noted that all plans are available to the public for review in the Land Use Office and this agenda item will be continued to our next meeting on Tuesday, October 25, 2011 at 7:30 p.m.
OLD BUSINESS
11-19 – BUCKLEY FAMILY REVOCABLE TRUST, FRANCIS J. BUCKLEY, JR. TRUSTEE – 84 GRASSY HILL ROAD – REPAIR APPROXIMATELY 50’ OF THE EXISTING RETAINING WALL ALONG ROGERS LAKE TO ELIMINATE ANY SOIL EROSION.
Robb Linde tabled any action on this application until the October meeting. Linde asked Brown to contact the applicant/contractor to submit an extension and a revised plan by the October meeting otherwise the application will be denied.
Page 10 – Minutes
IWWC – 09-27-11
11-23 - TALCOTT FARM – REMOVAL OF FALLEN TREE & BRANCHES – MODIFICATION OF BRANCHES
Mr. Kolber reviewed the application with the commission members that were not present at the last meeting. He noted the application is to modify an existing permit. Mr. Kolber submitted photographs to the members who were not present at the last meeting. Kolber stated the work proposed is in the regulated area and in order for it to be denied it has to have an impact on the wetland itself. He noted the proposed work is far away from the wetland and the removal can’t have any impact on the wetland. Kolber also noted that Penny Sharp submitted a report stating there was no impact.
Bechtel stated there are four areas of proposed work and the commission approved Areas 1 and 4 and had concerns with Areas 2 and 3. Bechtel stated the picture in the area of the vernal pool clearly demonstrates that there is no activity in the vernal pool which makes it much better. Bechtel stated Griswold had a concern with Area 3. Kolber stated he addressed that issue at the last meeting with Mr. Griswold.
Bechtel made a motion to approve the modification of the permit of Talcott Farm to remove the fallen trees and branches. Linda Krulikowski seconded the motion.
Discussion:
Evan Griswold stated the reason he made the comments that he did is because there is always a connection between wetlands and the upland review area. He further stated the wetland and its habitat are very important and human encroachment is always a concern. Griswold stated he is concerned with the development of the Town of Old Lyme and the obsessive neatness in making sure the forest is all picked up. Linde stated he agreed in general that the rotting debris does contribute to the wetlands but in this specific case and based on the testimony from Penny Sharp and our own observations he did not see an impact and in possible future applications perhaps leaving things as they are may be better for the wetlands.
The motion passed unanimously.
11-24 – WILBUR & KING, LLC – 107 BOSTON POST ROAD – PROPOSED GARDENS, PATIOS, & SEATING WALLS WITHIN THE UPLAND AREA
Bechtel stated that she and Robb Linde walked the site. She noted the applicant has pulled all the activity away from the 100’ review zone so the applicant was told he did not need to attend. Bechtel stated they discussed issuing an administrative permit or a finding of no jurisdiction. Brown stated she reviewed the plan and noted there was no activity proposed within the 100’ review area.
Page 11 – Minutes
IWWC – 09-27-11
Bechtel made a motion to find no jurisdiction on this application. Robb Linde seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
11-25 – MICHAEL DESNOYER – 9 MILL POND LANE – REPAIR AND REPLACE STONE RETAINING WALL
Mr. Desnoyers was present and noted that the commission recently visited the site. He stated they will be removing the rest of the wall and digging down for the new retaining wall. Linde asked if there would be minor grading by the patio door. Desnoyer stated that was correct.
Desnoyer pointed out the location of the silt fence and hay bales on the plan as well as the stockpile locations. Griswold asked the size of the stockpile. Desnoyer stated it would be minimal and if needed could be covered.
Dave McCulloch made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Bechtel seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
11-26 – BABASULI – 20 GRASSY HILL ROAD – SEPTIC SYSTEM REPLACEMENT
Joe Wren, Professional Engineer, stated they have a very old septic system with a small tank and they would like to replace the system. Wren stated test holes were dug and shown on previous applications and its all sand and gravel very well drained soils. He said in order to get everything to flow by gravity out of the house there would have to be a tank and in order to get the leaching fields as far away from the lake up on the slope there would need to be a pump chamber. He stated it is a 1,000 gallon tank and 500 gallon pump chamber.
Wren pointed out the wells on the adjacent properties on the plan to demonstrate the 75’ separating distance to the proposed system. He also showed the trees that were located in the area that could be affected by the installation and noted the land owner has no problem replacing any trees that have to be removed with whatever the commission suggests. He also noted the silt fence shown on the plan which will run from the south property line all the way along to the end of the walkway. He noted the soil stockpile area.
Bechtel asked what happens when they loose power. Wren stated there is an alarm on the pump chamber and if the pump fills up and a certain level is reached the alarm will go off and noted it does have battery backup. He noted there is reserve room to allow for three or four days.
MCulloch stated he found it to be a huge change that the leaching area is only 20 feet long and accommodates a three bedroom house. Wren stated it is 39” wide and 36” deep and 16’ long and made by Geomatrix, LLC out of Old Saybrook. Bechtel ask if it was all underground. Wren indicated that was correct. McCulloch asked if a reserve area was required with this system. Wren stated they are not required with an existing house.
Griswold stated he felt it was certainly an improvement to what is there now. The commission concurred.
Griswold made a motion to approve the application as presented.
Discussion: Linde asked if the replacement trees were shown on the plan. Wren stated they are not because he did not want to show a random quantity or placement until the construction is completed. Bechtel stated she would like to revisit the site after construction and see what portion of the hill needed to be stabilized at that point. Bechtel asked if the commission could approve the application with the contingent of a site visit upon completion of construction to discuss planting. Brown suggested the commission do a condition requiring the applicant to come back after the construction is completed with a landscaping plan. Wren agreed.
The motion was amended to add the condition that the applicant comes back before the commission with a replanting plan. Linda Krulikowski seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
GALCO – DISCUSSION – 17 SILL LANE
Ann Brown agreed to draft a proposed motion for the next meeting and email the
commission.
CHANGE OF MEETING TIME
The commission agreed to look at changing the meeting time prior to submitting the calendar for the 2012 year.
SHINKLE – TALCOTT FARM
Brown stated that Mr. Shinkle has a tree that was broken off in the storm and he would like permission to cut down the trunk of the tree and the top of the tree and remove it from the site. Brown stated he is willing to come back to the commission if necessary.
The commission agreed to allow Mr. Shinkle to proceed.
Respectfully submitted,
Kim Groves
Land Use Administrator
| 
