Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Meeting

INLAND WETLANDS AND WATERCOURSES AGENCY

MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING

THURSDAY, January 14, 2010

A Special Meeting of the Enfield Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Agency was held on Thursday, January 14, 2010 in the Enfield Room, Enfield Town Hall, 820 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut.

MEMBERS PRESENT:     Douglas Maxellon, Chairman

Karen Camidge

Jo-Marie Nelson

Robie Staples

Patrick Szczesiul, Alternate

MEMBERS ABSENT:      Joseph Albert, Alternate

Robert Lemay

Brian Peruta

ALSO PRESENT:           Susan Berube, Recording Secretary

Katie Bednaz, Wetlands Agent

SPECIAL MEETING:

1.     Call To Order:  The Special meeting was called to order by Chairman Douglas Maxellon at 6:36 p.m. 

2.     Roll Call:  Present were:  Chairman Maxellon and Agents Camidge, Nelson, Staples and Szczesiul.  Also present were Katie Bednaz, Wetlands Agent and Susan Berube, Recording Secretary.

3.     Other Business:

        a.  IWWA Regulation Revisions:  Ms. Bednaz stated that she has reviewed some of the definitions in the regulations with the Town’s attorney. 

Regarding conservation easements and covenants, the attorney recommends restrictive covenants.  A covenant and easement accomplish the same goal but Ms. Bednaz will ask the attorney what rights a covenant gives the town, such as the ability to have passive recreation.  This would not be allowed with an easement.  An easement requires P&Z and Town Council approval and would be a liability to the Town.  She wondered if a restrictive covenant would ever allow use by the Town.

Chairman Maxellon and Agent Camidge brought up that the Agency at this time is only creating definitions, not determining when or how they would be used.

Ms. Bednaz noted that the phrase “designated agent” has been removed from the D.E.P. model. She is unsure why; there may be another term that is used instead.

She also noted that the model regulations do not have a definition of “farm”.  It could also be removed from the Town’s regulations.  If it were ever needed, it could be taken from the State Statutes.  It was the consensus of the Agency members to remove the definition of “farm” from the town’s regulations.

Ms. Bednaz also noted that a recent handout give to Agency members on slope stability could be used as additional information for escarpment issues, as a separate handout.

SECTION 4:

Ms. Bednaz pointed out that the Town’s regulations must mirror the model regulations unless the IWWA decided to make their regulations more stringent. 

Ms. Bednaz will check on the definition of forestry. 

Members held discussion as to whether or not the definition of forestry should be included in the regulations.  Ms. Bednaz asked if the Agency wants to have any oversight over timber cutting activities.  It was the consensus of members to discuss this again after the definition is created.

SECTION 5:  This section must conform to the model regulations as it addresses activities regulated by the state.

SECTION 6:  It was the consensus of the Agency members to leave this section as is.

SECTION 7:  .1, it was the consensus of the members to change “Planning & Community Development” to “Development Services”.

.3, it was the consensus to strike the phrase “of the issues”.

.5, it was the consensus to strike “per model”.

.5a, insert the state model and “and/or representative if applicable”.

.5c & d, add state’s model to town’s regulations.

Members held lengthy discussion on adding a requirement that larger projects show trans sects which include showing the water table height, vegetation and soil types, on both sides of the wetland line.  This would be very helpful if mitigation may be required on a site.

Ms. Bednaz noted that this would be helpful to her during her review process.

This will be discussed again during review of 7.8.

The symbols key will be removed from the town’s regulations.

The model for .5f will be used, the town’s .5m will b removed and both the town’s and state’s “.5d” will be merged.

After further discussion, it was the consensus that e & f be “ 1”=100’ or legible for purposes of plan”.  Ms. Bednaz will add a list of other required items.

Also, a block is to be added to plans for the IWWA application number.

Lengthy discussion was held on the definition of “abutter”.  Ms. Bednaz suggested the following:  “owner of land within 100’ of property line, including across a roadway, stream or municipal line.  Notification of condominium owners would be made to the association’s executive board.

Agent Staples noted that ZBA requires notification of abutters within 250’.  Ms. Bednaz will check on this and P&Z.  While it is good to be consistent with other commissions, some IWWA projects could potentially affect owners further than 250’. 

Agent Camidge left the meeting at 7:46 p.m. and returned at 7:48 p.m.

Ms. Bednaz distributed 2 photos of large properties in town to show distances and potentially how many abutters might be involved in a notification. 

Members also discussed the possibility of development taking place within the center of a large tract of land that might not impact any abutters.  Would all abutters still need notification?

After discussion, it was the consensus that if a project takes place at least 1,000 feet from a boundary line, no abutter notification is necessary.

.5j will be from the model regulation.

.5k from the model regulations will be added.

The town’s .5n is a duplicate of .5j and will be removed.

.5p is to be added and will state that the date and certification of delineated wetlands will be required on the plans.

Electronic submission is to be added.

SECTION 7.6

Agency members discussed the need for this section since it does not appear in the model regulations.

This section discusses the information needed for a project that may have significant public interest but may not meet the criteria for significant impact requirements.

Agency members held lengthy discussion as to when such information might be necessary.

Ms. Bednaz will compare 7.6e with 7.5e&f.

7.6h and k will be removed; k is a duplicate.

7.6i will be revised to include “365 days or prior to starting construction or modification by subsequent town reviews”.  Change references of “digitally to “electronically”.

4.     Adjourn:  A motion was made by Agent Camidge, seconded by Agent Nelson and unanimously voted to adjourn the meeting at 8:46 p.m. 

Respectfully Submitted,

________________________

Jo-Marie Nelson, Secretary