|
Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Meeting
INLAND WETLANDS AND WATERCOURSES AGENCY
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, July 20, 2004
A Regular Meeting of the Enfield Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Agency was held on Tuesday, July 20, 2004 in the Council Chambers, Enfield Town Hall, 820 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut. Chairperson Gretchen Pfeifer-Hall called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Gretchen Pfeifer-Hall, Chairperson
Frank Poirot
Patrick Storey
Richard Szewczak
Louis V. Tallarita (7:16 p.m.)
David J. Wawer, Alternate
MEMBERS ABSENT: Joseph Jedynak
Michael Mosschetti
ALSO PRESENT: Neil Angus, Wetlands Agent
Susan Berube, Recording Secretary
PUBLIC HEARING(S)
None.
REGULAR MEETING
1. Call to Order:
The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Gretchen Pfeifer-Hall at 7:07 p.m.
2. Pledge of Allegiance
3. Roll Call:
Present were: Chairperson Pfeifer-Hall and Agents Poirot, Storey, Szewczak, Wawer, and Tallarita (7:16 p.m.).
Also present were Neil Angus, Wetlands Agent and Susan Berube, Recording Secretary.
Agent Wawer was seated as a full voting member for this meeting.
A motion was made by Agent Storey and seconded by Agent Wawer to add the following to the agenda:
Under New Business: IW#421. Under Other: Change of Meeting Dates and Parsons Road Monitoring Wells: DEP Enforcement Action. Vote was 5-0-0. (Agent Tallarita was not yet present).
4. Executive Session - Matters regarding specific employees, pending litigation, acquisition of real estate and / or matters exempt from disclosure requirements, as needed. The specific reason should be stated for each session:
There were no items for discussion in Executive Session.
5. Public Participation - Issues of concern not on the agenda:
No one in the audience came forward to speak.
6. Correspondence:
The following items of correspondence were received:
" copy of certified letter from Mr. Angus dated 7/7/04 to Richard and Mary Ann Stroiney of 6 Bush Lane regarding compliance with IW #323;
" copy of same letter to Douglas & Mary Slater of 7 Bush Lane;
" letter dated 7/16/04 from Mr. Angus to Bob DiGennaro of Somerset Development Corp. regarding final compliance with IW#323;
" letter from Mr. Angus dated 7/15/04 to Richard and Mary Ann Stroiney, 6 Bush Lane, in response to their letter;
" copy of same letter to Douglas & Mary Slater, 7 Bush Lane;
" copy of letter from Richard & Mary Ann Stroiney, dated 7/11/04 to Mr. Angus regarding IW#323;
" listing of bills approved by Connecticut Legislature;
" article on home landscaping (April/May/June, 2004 issue of College of Agriculture & Natural Resources);
" article on shrinking lawns (Hartford Courant 7/2/04);
" article regarding home lawn chemical use (Hartford Courant 7/2/04);
" article on Greenroofs from 6/25/04 issue of Nations Cities Weekly.
7. Commissioner's Correspondence:
Agent Storey noted a recent Journal Inquirer Article on a lawsuit against the Town of Somers and noted that their board & commission members are not always present for every meeting and do not make note of it during subsequent meetings when called upon to vote on a matter.
8. Approval of Minutes -- July 6, 2004 Meeting:
After brief review, a motion was made by Agent Poirot and seconded by Agent Wawer to approve the minutes of the meeting of July 6, 2004 with one correction: page 6, 7th paragraph. Agent Wawer did not vote against the application. Agent Wawer abstained from voting. Vote should have read 4-0-1(Wawer).
Vote on minutes of July 6, 2004 meeting was 6-0-0 (Agent Tallarita was present to vote on this matter.)
9. Wetlands Agent Report - July 1, 2004 through July 14, 2004:
Mr. Angus briefly reviewed the Agent Report which highlighted follow up visits to numerous sites, such as Anocoil, Road 2000, Section 7, Costco, 145 Hazard Ave., Red Robin and Bernies.
He reported that he has attended several ART meetings and investigated possible violations at 8 Strawberry Lane and 16 Clear Street.
In response to questions by Chairperson Pfeifer-Hall, Mr. Angus stated that he is unsure if funding for additional boardwalk will be provided by Town Council. D.E.P. approval for at least a 90' section is still needed.
He also stated that there has been no recent activity on a clean up project started last year on South River Street.
10. Old Business
IW#416 of Retail Brand Alliance, Inc. for a proposed walkway/fire lane and retaining wall involving excavation, regrading, filling and paving within 100 feet of wetlands and watercourses. Property located at 100 Phoenix Avenue (Map 46 Lot 1); Zoned I-1; [Submitted June 18, 2004, 2004; Received July 6, 2004; PPE July 20, 2004; MAD, September 9, 2004].
Mr. Gary Hath of CR3 and Mr. Salvatore Iervolino represented the applicant.
Mr. Hath briefly reviewed updated plans that he presented to the Agency members.
He stated that in response to comments from Agency members at their previous meeting and by the Town Engineer, several changes to the plans have been made.
The additional 5,000 square feet of proposed additional impervious surface was a drainage concern of the Engineering Department so the plans have been changed to have a 6' wide paved walk with 5' grass pavers on either side with the balance of the 24' wide roadway to be gravel under grass. This has been approved, in theory, by the Fire Marshal. Plantings will be used as a guide for emergency vehicles.
The impervious surface was reduced from 29.5% to 29.42%.
Hay bales have been added for additional erosion control protection.
Chairperson Pfeifer-Hall mentioned that the Agency had suggested that invasive species such as phragmite be removed from one of the existing ponds.
Mr. Iervolino stated that the applicant plans to address this issue in the future but would like to concentrate on getting the rest of the project completed before winter.
Agent Szewczak noted that removal of the invasives would improve the quality of the basin.
Agent Poirot asked what is below the walkway to support the pavers.
Mr. Hath referenced the plans as self explanatory. The crushed stone has approximately a 10" depth. Geo-textile fabric will be used.
Agent Storey noted his appreciation for use of the grass pavers on this project. He also asked if the invasive species removal would be part of this application or a separate application.
Mr. Hath responded that it is not part of the current application but it is the intent of the applicant to take care of the invasives at a later date.
Agent Szewczak noted that with screening being planted near the pond, it might be easier to remove the invasives prior to the planting taking place.
Mr. Hath stated that he would make certain that the new plantings will not be affected by future removal of the invasives.
Members and applicants discussed the extent of pond cleaning anticipated by the Agency. There was some confusion over the original intent of the pond. No one present knew whether it was meant to be a detention basin, retention pond, or if it is natural or manmade. This will need to be determined prior to deciding the degree of clean up of the pond.
Agent Storey noted that it would be unfair to the applicant to hold up the permit for this information and asked for a commitment from the applicant that the issue would be addressed later this fall.
Chairperson Pfeifer-Hall noted that, depending on the type of basin it is found to be, this may be a maintenance issue and no further permit requirements will be needed.
Agent Szewczak reiterated the Agency members are looking for a commitment to a long term plan to clean up the pond.
Mr. Iervolino responded that he was not comfortable in making such a commitment without management approval, however, he will bring it to the attention of the management.
He added that the applicant's intention is to definitely move forward with the clean up next year. There is not enough time left this year.
Mr. Angus noted that this could be made as a condition of approval.
A maintenance plan would be required to come before the Agency to determine if a permit is necessary. It is the intent of the Agency to bring the pond back to the original intent of design and be maintained appropriately.
Mr. Angus noted that he received a response from the Fire Marshal who has requested a detail of the pavers and markers for winter visual reference.
Mr. Angus has added a proposed condition of approval to address this issue. The plans have been revised through July 16, 2004.
A motion was made by Agent Szewczak and seconded by Agent Tallarita to approve IW#416 with the 10 standard conditions in addition to the following numbered 11 through 14:
11. The applicant is to submit a maintenance plan to deal with invasive species removal in the westerly most pond within 6 months of the date of approval (January 20, 2005);
12. All Town Engineering comments and concerns must be addressed prior to the issuance of a building permit;
13. All Fire Chief comments and concerns must be addressed prior to commencement of construction.
14. With the exception of the additional items stated in these conditions, this application is approved in accordance with Site Plans entitled "Site Plan Ammendment - Proposed Atrium/Patio/Firelane Site Layout/Grading - Retail Brand Alliance (Casual Corners) 100 Phoenix Avenue, Enfield, CT 06082", Sheets LP-1a through LP-4a, dated 9/9/02, revised through 7/16/04; prepared by CR3 Land Planners, Landscape Architects LLP. Any changes that would potentially cause greater impact to wetlands or watercourses, such as enlargement or reorientation of structure footprints, from the plans and any denial or changes made by any other regulatory agency or commission shall require the permitee to come before the Enfield Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Agency for a Permit Modification or Determination of Permit Need (Jurisdictional Ruling).
Vote was 6-0-0. Reason for approval was that the applicant has demonstrated that the project will not adversely affect wetlands and watercourses.
IW#417 of Turf Products Corp. for a proposed 38,920 square foot warehouse facility, associated parking and drainage improvements within 100 feet of wetlands and watercourses. Property located at 173 Moody Road (Map 93 Lot 12); Zoned I-1; [Submitted June 30, 2004, 2004; Received July 6, 2004; PPE July 20, 2004; MAD, September 9, 2004].
Dana Steele of J.R. Russo and Soil Scientist John Ianni represented the applicant.
Mr. Steele reported that he attended an ART meeting after the Agency's last meeting on this application. In response to the meeting, updated plans have been submitted.
The wetlands have been flagged and a report prepared by Mr. Ianni.
Mr. Steele briefly reviewed the proposed project.
The front portion of this 33+/- acre site will be developed. Several of the existing buildings will be removed.
One of the existing buildings, 32'x24', will continue to be used for storage of office files as has been done for the past 9 years. This will go through the approval process by Planning & Zoning and may be a regulated activity because of its' proximity to the wetlands.
The Agency members had previously expressed concern on the use of the building because of vehicle access.
In response to this, Mr. Steele has proposed creating a sidewalk so that no driving from the other building will be necessary.
Mr. Steele reviewed comments provided by the NRCS from a 2002 application for the property and in response to those concerns moved the building forward and the parking in front of the building has been eliminated.
The detention basin was moved further west so as not to encroach on the wetland vegetation. Some of the existing graveled area will be disturbed instead.
An emergency spillway has been revised so as to have rip rap down the slope to the existing vegetation. It should be well armored and protected in this way.
Also, the basin has been revised to become a wet basin, per NRCS recommendations. The shallow marsh area will be planted with 50 marsh type plants. The rest of the basin will be planted with a wetlands seed mix.
The basin provides a meandering path for water before it reaches the outlet to maximize treatment.
The revised plans have been submitted to Engineering and Mr. Steele stated his willingness to work out any engineering issues with that department.
One of Mr. Cabibbo's concerns was regarding the ability of Moody Road drainage to accept an increase and Mr. Steele has concluded that it will.
He did note however that the existing outlet is above the existing water level and is overgrown and rip rapped. It needs to be maintained by the DPW and the applicant would agree to a condition of approval to add additional rip rap if DPW requests it.
This area also has an easement by the State of Connecticut because of the railroad passing through the site.
Mr. Ianni stated that the wetlands have been mapped over a period of years and are accurately depicted on the map submitted to the Agency.
The wetlands north of the proposed building are well vegetated. The area is coming back to woody vegetation and is quite stable and will remain un-mowed.
A second wetland area is a short section at the outlet of the pond before connecting to the wetland to the east. It was filled in 30 to 40 years ago, has 15" to 20" caliper trees and is also quite stable.
The third area is a tributary of Freshwater Brook and flows in a northerly direction.
This proposed project has no encroachment into wetlands. The storm water management plan is well designed.
The shallow marsh area is below the water table and the sides, planted with a conservation seed mix, will not need mowing. This is not intended for habitat or mitigation but for water quality treatment.
Mr. Ianni addressed one of the comments from the NRCS letter regarding trees. He does not feel that trees should be planted around the basin for several reasons. This has the potential to destabilize the basin by erosion if the trees should blow over; leaf matter can fill the basin and, by screening the basin, needed maintenance might be forgotten.
In response to a comment by Chairperson Pfeifer-Hall, Mr. Ianni noted that the trees in the buffer area are coming back so the white pines previously planned will not need to be planted. The large existing trees will remain.
Mr. Steele added that the area to the north of the proposed parking lot will have a split rail fence to define the area not to be mowed.
Agent Szewczak asked where snow will be stockpiled.
Mr. Steele responded that it would be pushed to the curb. Because there are not a lot of areas available for a large snow stockpile, it may have to be removed from the site. The fence will help define the buffer area and prevent snow from being stockpiled there. The proposed trees could be moved back slightly in the landscaped area to allow some additional snow storage.
Agent Szewczak asked how much traffic is associated with the use of the current storage building.
Mr. Steele was unsure, however it is his impression that it is for archiving of files only, with no regular traffic. The location is not conducive to many trips in relation to the location of the existing building.
Mr. Angus noted that a catch basin in the gravel parking area was offered by Mr. Steele at the previous meeting.
Mr. Ianni pointed out that the gravel area is well drained. There is no runoff toward the wetlands from it. It is an infiltration area.
Mr. Angus asked why the vortechnic unit was removed.
Mr. Steele pointed out that the NRCS had recommended a Vortechnic or equivalent. The vortechnic is a brand name. The applicant prefers to have options on the brand used.
Agent Szewczak asked if the building would include a dumpster site.
Mr. Steele stated that yes, it would. It would be located against the building and accessed from the loading docks. Although no screening or gating is planned, the applicant would be willing to provide this on the plans and the dumpster would be located in one of the 2 corners of the loading area.
Agent Szewczak asked how the overgrown easement area could be improved and also asked if it is still functioning.
Mr. Steele stated that it does function and it needs to be maintained by either the DPW or the State D.O.T.. The applicant has offered to add rip rap stabilization if the D.P.W. determines it to be necessary.
Chairperson Pfeifer-Hall asked if some of the gravel area would be used for snow storage, since it is not all likely to be needed for parking.
Mr. Steele added that some of the agricultural access road could also be used for storage since it is unlikely that any agricultural activity would take place in the winter.
The applicant would be willing to have as a condition of approval that snow storage would be limited to areas draining into catch basins.
Members began discussion of the proposed conditions of approval.
The soil scientist still needs to sign the plans, the latest set being dated 7/16/04.
During discussion of Agent Szewczak's concerns over vehicular traffic at the storage building, Mr. Ianni stated that the use of the building as a file storage facility is an existing use over which the IWWA does not have authority.
Mr. Angus pointed out that the Agency does have authority because it is an agricultural building being used for commercial purposes.
Mr. Steele offered to eliminate the gravel area in front of the storage building, have grass planted and have only pedestrian traffic access by sidewalk.
Agent Szewczak agreed to having the gravel removed and extending the grass line directly to the north.
A motion was made by Agent Szewczak and seconded by Agent Poirot to approve IW#417 with the 10 standard conditions in addition to the following 8 conditions:
11. No hazardous materials are permitted to be stored within the existing outbuilding. The proposed grass area is to be extended to the north in front of the existing building to eliminate vehicle access;
12. The condition of the existing Town drainage outfall into the wetlands area is to be evaluated. If additional stabilization is required to accommodate the increased flows as a result of this development, the Applicant shall do so under direct supervision of the Engineering Department and the Wetlands Agent;
13. Any disturbed areas beyond the rip-rap detention basin overflow is to be reinforced with a native pre-seeded straw-hay/mulch jute netting mat or acceptable alternative to aid in erosion control in the upland review area and adjacent wetlands;
14. All snow stockpiling areas must drain into the proposed stormwater management system. These areas are to be included on a plan and provided to the snow removal contractor. Any excess snow must be removed from the site;
15. Final plans must be signed by the Soil Scientist prior to commencement of activities on site;
16. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, foreign objects, including the existing swingset, within the regulated areas, are to be removed using non-invasive methods (no machinery or major disturbance);
17. Fertilizer application rates must be minimized or eliminated surrounding and within the detention basin area to avoid potential nutrient overload within the adjacent wetlands and watercourse.
18. With the exception of the additional items stated in these conditions, this application is approved in accordance with Site Plans entitled "Industrial Warehousing Facility, 173 Moody Road, Enfield, CT, prepared for Turf Products Corporation, 157 Moody Road, Enfield, CT", Sheets 1 through 7, dated 6/30/04, revised through 7/16/04; prepared by J.R. Russo and Associates, Land Surveyors and Engineers, 1 Shoham road, east Windsor, CT 06088. Any changes that would potentially cause greater impact to wetlands or watercourses, such as enlargement or reorientation of structure footprints, from the plans and any denial or changes made by any other regulatory agency or commission shall require the permitee to come before the Enfield Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Agency for a Permit Modification or Determination of Permit Need (Jurisdictional Ruling).
Vote was 6-0-0. Reason for approval was that the Applicant has demonstrated that the project will not adversely affect wetlands and watercourses.
IW#418 of Troiano Professional Center, LLC for a proposed 18,400 square foot commercial building, associated parking and drainage improvements within 100 feet of wetlands and watercourses. Property located at 841, 851, 867 Enfield Street (Map 26 Lots 21, 22 and 23); Zoned B-L; [Submitted June 30, 2004; Received July 6, 2004; PPE July 20, 2004; MAD, September 9, 2004].
Mr. Dave Ziaks of F.A. Hesketh & Associates and Mr. Frank Troiano represented the applicant. Mr. Ziaks briefly reviewed the plans.
The site had been residential and with a recent zone change is now Business Local.
The proposed headquarters of Enfield Federal Savings and Loan will have drive-throughs and one curb cut on each of Enfield Street and Elm Street. The parking lot will have 67 parking spaces, the minimum allowed by Zoning.
The northeast corner of the site has an existing manmade swale and intermittent watercourse that collects runoff from the abutting owner and discharges to the north. Some wetland areas are associated with the swale and the 100' upland review area takes in part of the parking area.
Mr. Ziaks reviewed the 6 outstanding issues raised at the Agency's last meeting.
He provided written permission from the abutting owner as requested.
He also provided a soil scientist report dated July 13, 2004 from Michael Gragniolatti. The report states that the wetland areas is primarily Walpole soils and the vegetation and condition are typical of an urban location.
A drainage calculation narrative has been provided. There should be no increase in drainage from the site.
The drainage now is distributed to three locations and will continue to do so. As requested by the Engineering Department, an analysis for up to a 50 year storm event has been completed.
The increased volume from the site will be addressed by an underground chamber system to control peak volume.
There is no room on the site for a detention basin.
A particle separator will be provided at each discharge location. Technical information was provided in the members' packets.
Mr. Ziaks also explained that he did not move the location of the proposed dumpster, citing the fact that there is no other feasible location in which the dumpster truck could service it with ease. The dumpster will be surrounded by a 6' high fence as well as arborvitae and trees for screening. The slab will be sloped toward the parking lot for drainage. It will be used mostly for paper recycling.
Snow stockpile areas will be within the landscaped islands with runoff going into the separator structures. Major or cumulative storms may require removal of snow from the site.
Mr. Ziaks also stated that he prefers to keep with his plan to use rip rap instead of jute netting because it is more permanent and needs no maintenance. He added that the swale is currently in excellent condition; the rip rap will assure that it remains so.
Agent Szewczak noted that the drainage analysis shows a 20% increase in design point 1.
Mr. Ziaks stated that point #1 is at the discharge of the existing catch basin on the corner. #2 is on Enfield Street and #3 is to the swale.
The state is concerned only on drainage up to a 25 year storm event. The current flow is 1.4 cfs. It is proposed to increase to 1.6 cfs. This is not a lot of water.
Agent Szewczak asked what the co-efficient of the runoff is and if the original area had been calculated on mostly grass or paved area.
Mr. Ziaks explained the analysis for sizing the storm drainage. .9 is for paved surface and .3 for landscaped areas. The computer generated model uses curved numbers with an equivalent of .9.
The original use was heavily suburban and the proposed use is commercial.
Mr. Ziaks feels that the calculations provided are conservative and that it is appropriate for some of the drainage to continue going to the swale as it has historically flowed for possibly the past 50 years.
Agent Storey asked for an explanation of the underground storage system.
Mr. Ziaks explained that it could be likened to an underground detention pond. It has infiltration capabilities and also a slow flow into the drainage system. He prefers not to use it under paved parking surfaces but it is the only place to put the flows. The infiltration will depend on the frequency of rain. It is designed to store all the water up to a 50 year storm. It is likely that all of it will infiltrate.
It is an elevation of 117 with Walpole soils at 110. The Geo-technical survey reports show the water table to be at least 8' below the surface.
In response to a question by Chairperson Pfeifer-Hall, Mr. Ziaks stated the proposed fence is for a buffer. The area will be bermed up for a landscape buffer. Snow will be stockpiled at the top of the berm on the side that slopes down toward the parking lot. This will not affect the trees being proposed there because once there is no room for additional snow, the excess snow will have to be trucked off site.
In response to questions by Agent Szewczak regarding the water table, Mr. Ziaks explained that although the wetlands are at elevation 113, above the elevation of the underground basin at 111, they are different soil types. Soil borings show the water table at 8' down.
The proposed building will have an approximate 5,000 square foot basement.
A back up sump pump system will be utilized for the static water table. The basement floor will be at an elevation of somewhere between 103 and 105.
Although there may be some recycling of the recharge, the infiltration rates at that depth will not be that high.
Mr. Angus distributed comments from both he and the Engineering Dept. The proposed conditions of approval were reviewed.
Mr. Ziaks agreed to use New England Seed Mix instead of a mowed lawn in the north east area, clean the swale of debris and work something out with Mr. Angus regarding use of jute netting and/or rip rap on the swale.
The sediment units should be cleaned in both spring and fall.
He added that although the Engineering Department has not completed its' review, the project also needs to be approved by the State. If there are significant changes, the applicant will need to come back before the IWWA.
A motion was made by Agent Storey and seconded by Agent Poirot to approve IW #418 with the 10 standard conditions in addition to the following:
11. Permanent stabilization of the outfall area is to be achieved using rip-rap and native natural vegetation reinforced with jute netting, to the satisfaction of the Agent and Engineering;
12. Snow Stockpiling areas or non-stockpiling area must drain through the stormwater treatment system prior to discharging to wetlands. These areas must be clearly defined and signed. These areas must be identified on a plan and be provided to the snow removal contractor. Any excess snow must be removed from the site;
13. All Engineering comments and concerns must be addressed prior the issuance of a building permit. If Engineering comments/concerns require substantial drainage modifications, the applicant will be required to submit a request for modification application;
14. A revised landscape plan to is to be submitted showing additional upland tree and shrub plantings, in addition to a New England Conservation seed mixture (instead of regular lawn) in all regulated areas to restabilize all disturbed regulated areas, to the satisfaction of the Agency and/or Agent;
15. Existing construction debris, discarded toys and other foreign objects must be removed from the wetlands using non-invasive methods, prior to the issuance of a building permit;
16. Limits of disturbance within the regulated area should be marked with construction fencing and have silt fence re-inforced with haybales to reduce the potential for impacts to wetlands during construction;
17. A maintenance schedule for catch basin cleaning, parking lot sweeping and water quality structure maintenance must be added to the final plans to the satisfaction of the Agency and/or Agent;
18. Any dewatering activities during construction must pass through a treatment area prior to discharging to wetlands;
19. With the exception of the additional items stated in these conditions, this application is approved in accordance with Site Plans entitled "Proposed Enfield Federal Savings and Loan, Corner of Enfield Street and Elm Street, Enfield, CT, June 30, 2004 Site Plan and Inland Wetland Permit Submission, Revised July 14, 2004", Sheets LA-1, LS-1, GR-1, UT-1, SD-1 thru SD-5, NT-1, PS-1, A401 thru A404, F200 thru F202, A203; prepared by F.A. Hesketh & Associates, Inc., 6 Cremery Brook, East Granby, CT 06026. Any changes that would potentially cause greater impact to wetlands or watercourses, such as enlargement or reorientation of structure footprints, from the plans and any denial or changes made by any other regulatory agency or commission shall require the permitee to come before the Enfield Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Agency for a Permit Modification or Determination of Permit Need (Jurisdictional Ruling).
Vote was 6-0-0. Reason for approval was that the Applicant has demonstrated that the project will not adversely affect wetlands and watercourses.
IW#419 of Michael and Farrah Schultz for clear-cutting and re-stabilization of land within 100 feet of wetlands and watercourses. Property located at 38 Abbe Road (Map 102 Lot 99); Zoned R-44; [Submitted July 2, 2004; Received July 6, 2004; PPE July 20, 2004; MAD, September 9, 2004]:
Michael and Farrah Schultz represented the applicant.
Mr. Schultz felt that the information submitted by Ruth Klue of the North Central Conservation District was incorrect. He insisted that some of the area that has been cleared was done by the developer.
Mr. Angus noted that the existing rip rap was required to stabilize the footing drain outlet. The developer re-stabilized some areas.
Chairperson Pfeifer-Hall stated that no one was "finger-pointing". At this point, it doesn't matter who cleared the areas, they must be re-stabilized.
Mr. Angus added that a plan has been proposed that allows the owner an expanded lawn area, yet stabilizes and protects the wetlands.
Mr. Schultz stated that he spoke with George Logan of REMA Associates. Mr. Logan suggested that white conifer trees be used instead of arborvitae.
Mr. Schultz asked where the 100' buffer is located on his property so that he knows what his limitations are.
Chairperson Pfeifer-Hall noted that the area is regulated meaning that a permit is needed. An engineer may be required if the applicant wished to construct an outbuilding in the area of the escarpment soil, even if it is outside of the 100' buffer.
Mr. Angus added that this lot has numerous stipulations due to the constraints of the lot. There are really 2 issues - the area needs to be stabilized before anything else can be addressed.
Ms. Klue's letter recommended a follow-up visit to make sure the area has been stabilized. It would then be likely that future projects outside of the 100' buffer and escarpment areas could be done. After further review of Ms. Klue's letter, a motion was made by Agent Storey and seconded by Agent Poirot to approve IW#419 with the 10 standard conditions in addition to the following:
11. The planting/stabilization modifications recommended by the North Central Conservation District are to be implemented by the Applicant;
12. A follow-up inspection within 1 year is required. Any dead or dying plants shall be replaced and any remaining exposed areas must also be permanently stabilized;
13. With the exception of the additional items stated in these conditions, this application is approved in accordance with the plan attached to the July 19, 2004 letter from Ruth Klue of the North Central Conservation District. Any changes that would potentially cause greater impact to wetlands or watercourses, such as enlargement or reorientation of structure footprints, from the plans and any denial or changes made by any other regulatory agency or commission shall require the permitee to come before the Enfield Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Agency for a Permit Modification or Determination of Permit Need (Jurisdictional Ruling).
Vote was 6-0-0. Reason for approval was that the project, with mitigation, will not adversely affect wetlands and watercourses.
11. New Business
IW#420 of MSC Liquid Filtration for a proposed 4,380 sq.ft. building involving excavation and egarding within 100 feet of wetlands. Property located at 198 Freshwater Boulevard (Map 55 Lot 3); Zoned I-P; [Submitted July 14, 2004; Received July 20, 2004; PPE August 3, 2004; MAD, September 23, 2004]:
Mr. John Morgan, architect, represented the applicant. He gave a very brief overview of the proposed project.
The proposed project is a 4,000 square foot addition to the existing building. The parking lot was expanded approximately 3 years ago.
There will be no alterations to the existing pavement or drainage.
The building will be recessed into the ground by 4' due to the topography. Materials to be excavated will be removed from the site; the area is already cleared.
The high point of the property is located between the new building and the wetlands. It runs in a semi-circle and seems to be an old farm road.
There is little topsoil on site but what there is, will be preserved and re-spread around the building.
Mr. Morgan stated that he attended an ART meeting and the only comment by the Fire Marshal was that a fire exit to a hard surface is required.
There is a fire hydrant located on the north end of the site but it needs to be determined whether or not it is still hooked up.
There are currently no plans for a fire lane.
Mr. Angus added that a letter was submitted by the Fire Marshal requesting that the applicant provide more information on the intended use of the building.
Mr. Morgan stated that the plans are not yet fully developed but an exit will be provided on the north side of the building, which is located outside of the upland review area.
He added that the existing building is being used for offices on the north side and warehouse and manufacturing on the south side. The addition will provide more manufacturing and storage space.
No hazardous materials are stored on site.
A motion was made by Agent Storey and seconded by Agent Poirot to table further discussion on IW#420 until the meeting of 9/7/04. Vote was 6-0-0.
At 10:28 p.m., a motion was made by Agent Wawer and seconded by Agent Poirot to hold a brief recess. Vote was 6-0-0.
The meeting reconvened and was called to order by Chairperson Pfeifer-Hall at 10:35 p.m.
Roll Call:
Present were: Chairperson Pfeifer-Hall and Agents Poirot, Storey, Szewczak, Wawer, and Tallarita. Also present were Neil Angus, Wetlands Agent and Susan Berube, Recording Secretary.
12. Other Business
IW#421 - Town of Enfield - Oliver Road Culvert Replacement:
Mr. Angus stated that a member of the Engineering Department would be present at the Agency's next meeting, September 7, 2004. He briefly explained the proposed project. There is a watercourse that flows under Oliver Road. There are three existing undersized culverts crossing under a private driveway. During heavy storm flows, the pipes back up so much that the water covers Oliver Road.
The applicant proposes an 8'x5' 40' long concrete box culvert with reinforced inlets and outlets to provide an unobstructed flow for the brook.
The existing culverts are filled with sediment and also the sediment in the channel will be removed and stabilized.
Grading of the area will require removal of several large willow trees. Red maples will be planted as replacements.
The culvert is located in a town right-of-way.
After a brief review of the plans, a motion was made by Agent Szewczak and seconded by Agent Storey to table further discussion on this application and that this activity is considered a potential significant impact for which a public hearing should be held on the 7th of September at 7:30 p.m. in the Enfield Room. Vote was 6-0-0.
Change of Meeting Dates:
Mr. Angus explained that normally the Planning & Zoning Commission meets on the same week as IWWA, allowing applicants to have their applications heard and acted upon during the same week.
Because the 1st Tuesday in December will not arrive until after the 1st Thursday in December, Mr. Angus asked if the Agency members would be willing to adjust meetings as follows: Hold meetings on November 30 and December 14, 2004 instead of December 7 and 21, 2004.
It was noted that this will be a conflict for members that are also members of the Conservation Commission.
After brief discussion by members, a motion was made by Agent Poirot and seconded by Agent Storey to cancel the meetings for December 7 and December 21, 2004 and instead hold meetings on November 30, 2004 and December 14, 2004. Vote was 6-0-0.
Proposed Regulation amendments:
Mr. Angus suggested that a public hearing be held at the meeting of September 7, 2004 for the statutory changes and the required timeline changes from D.E.P.
Mr. Angus would like to also hold a public hearing at that time for the fee changes but they have not been approved by Town Council and there may not be enough time to notify D.E.P. as required.
A motion was made by Agent Storey and seconded by Agent Tallarita to hold a public hearing on the statutory changes at the Agency's regular meeting to be held on September 7, 2004 at 7:30 p.m. in the Enfield Room. Vote was 6-0-0.
A motion was made by Agent Poirot and seconded by Agent Tallarita to extend the meeting beyond 11:00 p.m. Vote was 5-1(Wawer)-0.
Parsons Road Monitoring Wells: DEP Enforcement Action:
Mr. Angus briefly explained that the D.E.P. contacted the Town regarding monitoring wells and a pump house along Parsons Road, located within 200' of the Connecticut River (installed in 1993-94). If these structures need to remain, the Town will need a Stream Channel Encroachment Permit. Coincidentally, the Town also received information that remediation is now at acceptable levels and the wells can be removed.
If no action is taken by August 16, 2004 or the Town will be issued an enforcement notice from the CT DEP.
The WPCA is requesting emergency authorization to remove the 10 wells in a sand area by slicing them off and capping them. The pump house is a shed on blocks and will be removed. No excavation will be needed. The fence also needs to be removed. The posts are sonotubes so minor excavation will be involved.
The Dept. of Public Works will erect silt fence and the work will be done in August, a low-flow period.
The only concern Mr. Angus has is that no vegetation be removed and that any disturbed areas be properly stabilized.
No heavy machinery will be used and a dumpster will be kept at the top of the slope.
The project will take a maximum of 5 days to complete. The wells can be capped within one day.
The Agency can require the full permit process, however, that would leave the Town if violation with the D.E.P.
A motion was made by Agent Storey and seconded by Agent Szewczak to authorize the Town to remove and cap the ten wells, remove the fence and posts and that the work is to be done manually, during a period of low-flow and under the supervision of the Wetlands Agent. Vote was 6-0-0.
o Next regular meeting will be Tuesday, September 7, 2004 at 7:30 PM in the Enfield Room.
13. Adjourn:
A motion was made by Agent Wawer and seconded by Agent Storey to adjourn the meeting at 11:11 p.m. Vote was 6-0-0.
Respectfully Submitted,
____________________________
Frank Poirot, Secretary
|