Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Meeting
INLAND WETLANDS AND WATERCOURSES AGENCY
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, February 16, 2010
A Regular Meeting of the Enfield Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Agency was held on Tuesday, February 16, 2010 in the Enfield Room, Enfield Town Hall, 820 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Karen Camidge
Maryann Abar, Alternate (seated)
Joseph Albert
Jo-Marie Nelson
Brian Peruta
Robie Staples
Patrick Szczesiul, Alternate (seated)
MEMBERS ABSENT: Douglas Maxellon, Chairman
Robert Lemay
ALSO PRESENT: Katie Bednaz, Wetlands Agent
Susan Berube, Recording Secretary
REGULAR MEETING
1. Call to Order: The meeting was called to order by Vice Chairperson Karen Camidge at 7:31 p.m.
2. Roll Call: Present were: Vice Chair Karen Camidge and Agents Abar, Albert, Nelson, Peruta, Staples and Szczesiul. Also present were Katie Bednaz, Wetlands Agent and Susan Berube, Recording Secretary.
Agents Abar and Szczesiul were seated as full voting members for this meeting.
3. Pledge of Allegiance: The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
4. Executive Session
(Matters regarding specific employees, pending litigation, acquisition of real estate and / or matters exempt from disclosure requirements): None.
5. Public Hearing
a. IW-534- Enfield Properties - is requesting a permit to construct two office buildings and five residential apartment buildings on vacant lots and 153 South Road (Map 55, Lots 80, 93 & 99), within the regulated area. Submitted 12/15/09, received 12/15/09, PPE 12/29/09, MPHCD 2/23/10: The applicant requested that this agenda item be taken up later in the meeting due to their attorney being delayed. A motion was made by Agent Nelson and seconded by Agent Albert to move agenda item 5a out of order and be heard after agenda item 13a. Vote was 7-0-0.
6. Call to Order of Regular Meeting
7. Public Participation - Issues of concern not on the agenda: None.
8. Correspondence
a. CT Federation of Planning and Zoning Agencies - 62nd Annual Conference
b. IW-518 Petsmart Store Project Update Letter
c. Article - Salt: No Easy Answers: Ms. Bednaz noted the need for education on the applicator’s part.
d. Letter from Groundwater & Environmental Services, Inc., dated 02/09/10 regarding test borings at the Exxon station located at 76 Hazard Avenue. Ms. Bednaz stated that she felt that no permit for this work is necessary since it is an extension of what has already been approved.
9. Commissioner's Correspondence
a. Site Visit Updates: Agents Peruta and Camidge gave brief reports.
Agent Peruta reported that the Villages subdivision project has not yet begun. It is under PZC appeal.
Agent Camidge reported that the silt fence is still down at both Five Guys Restaurant and Petsmart. She added that she felt that the condition of Five Guys looked worse at this visit. More soil has moved down toward the silt fence.
Ms. Bednaz stated that after the Agency’s last meeting, she left a message with representatives from Five Guys but has not yet had a response. She is not very concerned at this point, but when the ground thaws, rain could allow mud to travel toward the wetlands at both locations. The hay bales at Petsmart are still doing their job, at least until the fence can be re-erected.
Agent Camidge also reported that she will be receiving the logo proof for the Agency’s shirts, for review soon.
Agent Camidge also noted that she recently visited friends who live at Mr. Fortune’s development. The friends have questions about the conservation easement and also mentioned that the neighbors behind them on Steele Road are cutting trees within the wetlands. The friends also have some plans for outdoor projects, such as installation of a shed or fence.
Ms. Bednaz stated that homeowners can always call her with questions. She also suggested that the friends put all of their plans for the next 5 years onto one permit application so as to save money on application fees.
Ms. Bednaz also noted the importance of contacting her quickly when someone notices clearing activity. One day can make a huge difference in damage control and restoration costs.
Agent Camidge asked if her comments at this meeting would constitute as notification to Ms. Bednaz regarding the cutting of trees within the wetlands behind her friends’ home.
Ms. Bednaz replied that yes, it is considered notification and she will check into it.
Agent Camidge also noted that the IWWA phone list has a mistake on the Agent’s phone number. The correct number is 253-6358, not 6368.
10. Approval of Minutes -January 19, 2010 & February 2, 2010: Agent Peruta reported that he had gone to the library to review the meeting of January 19, 2010, regarding the portion on IW-534- Enfield Properties. He requested that additional comments be added to the minutes.
Agent Albert asked if Agent Peruta’s questions from that meeting will be addressed at this meeting also.
Ms. Bednaz replied that whether the questions were included in the minutes or not, if they were asked, the members should make sure that their questions are answered at a meeting.
A motion was made by Agent Nelson and seconded by Agent Peruta to table approval of the minutes of January 19, 2010. Vote was 6-0-1(Staples).
Agent Abar stated that she did not believe that she seconded a motion made on page 5, 4th paragraph and another on page 6, 3rd paragraph.
Agent Camidge noted a clerical error on page 8, 2nd paragraph, 2nd sentence: change “sate” to “state”.
A motion was made by Agent Peruta and seconded by Agent Abar to table approval of the minutes of the meeting of February 2, 2010 to the meeting of March 2, 2010. Vote was 6-0-1(Nelson).
11. Wetlands Agent Report: Ms. Bednaz gave a brief verbal report. She reminded members, if interested, to sign up for the CAWS meeting to be held on February 23, 2010.
She noted that the Agency has planned a special meeting to discuss the regulations updates on February 25, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. Revisions made to date will be presented at that time. At this meeting, Ms. Bednaz hopes to complete the review of application requirements.
Ms. Bednaz also noted that she will have information at the meeting on how much and when fees were last changed.
Ms. Bednaz reported that the Meadowlark channel work is complete except for final grading, seed and mulch. Erosion and sediment controls are still in place.
12. Old Business: None.
13. New Business
a. IW-535 - T.P. Rentals, LLC - is requesting an amendment to the Town of Enfield Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Map for the property located on the south side of Hazard Avenue, immediately east of 150 Hazard Avenue (Map 74, Lot 118). Submitted 1/19/10, received 02/02/10, PPE 02/16/10, MAD 4/8/10: The applicant was not present and requests that a public hearing for this application be held at the March 16, 2010 meeting.
Ms. Bednaz stated that she has visited the site and conducted several soil tests. She recommends moving forward with the public hearing for the map changes.
A motion was made by Agent Nelson and seconded by Agent Albert to hold a public hearing for IW 535 at the regular IWWA meeting of March 16, 2010. Vote was 7-0-0.
b. IW-534- Enfield Properties - is requesting a permit to construct two office buildings and five residential apartment buildings on vacant lots and 153 South Road (Map 55, Lots 80, 93 & 99), within the regulated area. Submitted 12/15/09, received 12/15/09, PPE 12/29/09, MPHCD 2/23/10: Agent Staples recused himself from discussion on this application and left the meeting for the evening.
The public hearing began at 7:58 p.m.
Mr. Frank Troiano, Dave Ziaks, P.E., George Logan, soil scientist and biologist, and Attorney Thomas Fahey represented the applicant.
Mr. Troiano briefly reviewed the project, stating that the applicant proposes to construct 2 office buildings and 5 residential apartment buildings for seniors aged 62 and older. This will be a deed restricted use.
Mr. Ziaks, of F.A. Hesketh and Associates thanked the Agency for their patience in waiting for all of the applicant’s representatives to arrive this evening.
He explained that the 2 commercial office buildings will be 20,000 square feet each.
Plans have been slightly modified. More information on storm water discharge and watershed has been provided on the plans.
Mr. Cabibbo has reviewed the modifications. There will be no runoff to the abutting properties or to the watershed to the south of the property. Runoff will go only to the Freshwater Brook watershed.
The applicant is trying to emulate the existing sheet runoff by utilizing small detention ponds instead of one large pond.
The applicant met with the neighbors who attended the public hearing held on January 19, 2010. They all walked the site and plans have been modified to add a landscape buffer and fencing, if the neighbors desire, after construction is complete. The applicant is also adding a drain which will connect to the project’s discharge to relieve ponding in the neighbor’s backyard.
Also, some small modifications to the residential area were made to improve separation between the improvements and wetland. The southwest corner of building #5 is now further from the wetlands. Also, a water quality basin was moved and another one was reconfigured to save 3 existing, mature trees. And, additional woodland was saved by reducing the size of another basin.
Landscape buffering has been added, as has a snow stockpile area.
Sheet NT1 shows the long term storm water maintenance plan. Mr. Ziaks suggested that this be enacted as part of the conditions of approval. He added that this has been done in the past.
Plans have been revised through 2/10/10 but have not yet been distributed to Agency members.
With regard to the second fire lane off of South Road, leading directly to the apartment complex, this was done at the request of the Fire Chief.
The applicant is currently proposing work in up to 3 phases. Phase one is the first two apartment buildings; phase two would be the remaining three apartment buildings and phase three would be the commercial buildings. The phasing would depend on market conditions. The plans show the snow stockpiles to fit with the phasing.
Landscape plans are now included, based on Mr. Logan’s comments. They include wetland creation and mitigation to compensate for the loss of approximately 4,900 square feet of wetlands.
There is a loss 2,900 square feet of wetlands at the proposed crossing but the remaining wetlands there will be enhanced and additional wetlands will be created from a small pocket of uplands.
The buffer will be enhanced as well.
Mr. Logan presented his report to the Agency. It includes photos, soil survey, plant list and a discussion of the existing and proposed wetlands.
Mr. Logan stated that he visited the site with Ms. Bednaz. 4,949 square feet of wetlands will be filled, half of which are small, isolated, mowed wetlands. The main impact will be to the area along the edge of the forest.
Between 2 lobes of wetlands is an area of uplands. Enhancement and restoration will be done. Invasive species will be removed and a scrub/shrub area will be created.
A shallow marsh area will be created.
Another wetland area has been mowed. It has little diversity and is flat. Trees will be added, along with perennials and shrubs. The top layer will be plowed and seeded to create diversity, and then left open.
A third area is an upland island of approximately 8 to 9,000 square feet. It is choked with invasives such as autumn olive. A marsh area will be created and will retain additional runoff from the stream running through this spot during larger storms.
A fourth area has a large population of spring peepers. It is currently 3” from being a wetland already and has vegetation that likes sandy areas. This is known as a New England sandy marsh, a critical habitat. The applicant is looking to create an area such as this.
The final area is an agricultural ditch, created to drain the field. The applicant proposes to reduce the number of purple loosestrife with biological means – beetles. Other invasives will be removed and the area enhanced with plantings.
A program will be in place so that every three or four years the woody vegetation will be removed to preserve it as a wet meadow. The plan LS-4 has details and notes for each area to be created or enhanced.
Regarding direct impact, Mr. Logan states he believes there will be a net enhancement because there will be .6 acres of enhancement and restoration.
Mr. Ziaks added that the applicant is also looking to create a 5.5 acre permanent conservation area in the residential area. It is a combination of uplands and wetlands. The third commercial development would also add conservation area at a later time, once it is determined if development will take place. For now, that area will also act as a conservation area.
Ms. Bednaz stated that she has received the revised plans and drainage calculations. She will provide the first part to Agency members, unless a request is made for the entire package. Mr. Logan’s report will be included in the next meeting packet.
Mr. Coppler, Town Manager, has signed off on a letter acknowledging that the application is being submitted. Along with a mitigation report it is now a complete application and this information will be provided in the next meeting packet.
Ms. Bednaz suggested that the proposed fencing along the neighbor’s backyard be included in this permit application because it would be located within a regulated area.
She also noted that on the last page of the plans, the wetland lines appear to be off in the southern area.
Agent Peruta noted that there might be a few places like that.
Ms. Bednaz also stated that one purpose of phasing is to make sure that not too much land is open at one time during construction. The applicant needs to decide before IWWA approval if construction will take place with two or three phases.
The next regular IWWA meeting is scheduled for March 2, 2010, after the mandatory public hearing closure date of February 23, 2010. The applicant will need to request an extension if the public hearing is not to be closed at this meeting.
The Town Attorney recommends conservation restrictions, not conservation easements. The applicant will need to decide which is being presented.
Agent Peruta asked if Mr. Logan’s report is similar to the one that he completed in 1991 for this site.
Mr. Logan replied that it is about 50%.
Agent Peruta stated that he walked the site and noticed bluebird houses. The old application had included a condition for bluebird houses.
Mr. Ziaks stated that the applicant does not know who erected the houses but they will be retained.
Agent Peruta asked if the enhancement planting plan is included in the notes.
Mr. Logan replied that is include on the plans, LS3 & 4.
Agent Peruta asked about the impact of this development.
Mr. Logan explained that in open areas with past disturbance, the rule of thumb is that undisturbed hedgerows are part of the interface protecting the wetland. As long as the buffer is undisturbed, there is usually no disturbance to the wetland.
If the forested buffer were being cut, creating an open area, then there would be big changes.
He also noted that the wetlands are located at the rear of the proposed buildings, giving them a more aesthetic value. The development has been pulled back so as not to impact the buffer.
Agent Peruta asked if there are any plans for access to the conservation area; it is a nice place to walk.
Mr. Logan stated that the applicant had been thinking of creating a loop for the residents; perhaps with a 4 to 5’ wide path, kept open by periodic mowing.
Agent Peruta expressed his appreciation for the mitigation.
Mr. Troiano agreed that the loop is a good idea, it just has not been incorporated in the plans yet.
Agents Albert and Nelson requested that Mr. Logan point out on the aerial photo where the areas of mitigation, enhancement and restoration would be. Mr. Logan did as requested.
Agent Nelson asked if the yard drain is part of this application.
Ms. Bednaz stated that she would need to see where it is on the map.
Mr. Ziaks explained that it is a very small, simple pipe. The current topography doesn’t allow their yard to drain. It is not a wetlands issue. The applicant may provide a drainage easement.
Ms. Bednaz asked if the plans specify the exact location of the pipes. He concern is that the neighbors’ yards are not delineated for wetlands.
Agent Szczesiul noted that some of the proposed plantings are of non-native plants. He asked if these could spread, becoming a problem.
Mr. Logan stated that he hasn’t scrutinized the plant list. His partner was impressed with the selection. Upon brief review, he stated that none that he sees are known to create a problem.
Agent Szczesiul also stated that he feels that the suggested trail would be great.
Mr. Ziaks stated that he is glad that the IWWA is in favor of the trail and that it will be relatively easy to do.
Agent Camidge noted that numerous changes to the plans have been discussed. She asked if a list of changes has been developed, making it easier to review the updated plans.
Mr. Ziaks replied that he will email a list to Ms. Bednaz on Wednesday.
Agent Camidge asked if there is a monitoring plan for the mitigation areas.
Mr. Ziaks replied that it is on page LS-4.
In response to another question, he stated that the snow stockpile area notes are also on the plans as are the details for the porous pavement and construction staging area.
Agent Camidge asked if the applicant will be cleaning out the neighbor’s ditch that was noted at the 01/19/10 public hearing to be blocked with debris.
Mr. Ziaks stated that it is located right on the property line. There is a large tree growing in the ditch. The yard drain will take care of the drainage so that the ditch will not act as a ditch anymore.
Agent Camidge asked if a condition of approval should be added to address the fact that construction traffic will be banned from using Barrett Road.
Mr. Ziaks stated that it is already noted on the plans. PZC will likely require this as well.
Agent Camidge asked if the prudent and feasible alternatives analysis is in writing.
Ms. Bednaz replied that a written narrative has not been received.
Mr. Ziaks stated that a written narrative will be provided. He will also provide a letter requesting an extension to the meeting of March 2, 2010.
At 9:06 p.m., a motion was made by Agent Nelson and seconded by Agent Peruta to grant an extension to the public hearing for IW534 to the IWWA meeting of March 2, 2010. Vote was 6-0-0.
14. New Applications to be Received
a. Applications to be received after Town deadline for Agenda: None.
15. Other Business
a. IWWA Fines Ordinance
b. IWWA Fee Schedule
c. IWWA Regulation Revisions: A motion was made by Agent Albert and seconded by Agent Peruta to table discussion of agenda items 15a, b, & c to the special meeting of February 25, 2010. Vote was 6-0-0.
Ms. Bednaz stated that packets for the meeting of 03/02/10 will be distributed at the special meeting. Anyone not planning to attend the special meeting should let Ms. Bednaz know so that the packet can be mailed.
d. Next regular meeting is Tuesday, March 2, 2010 at 7:00PM in the Council Chambers.
16. Adjourn: A motion was made by Agent Albert and seconded by Agent Nelson to adjourn the meeting at 9:11 p.m. Vote was 6-0-0.
Respectfully Submitted,
__________________________
Jo-Marie Nelson, Secretary
|