|
Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Meeting
INLAND WETLANDS AND WATERCOURSES AGENCY
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, APRIL 6, 2004
A Regular Meeting of the Enfield Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Agency was held on Tuesday, April 6, 2004 in the Council Chambers, Enfield Town Hall, 820 Enfield Street, Enfield, Connecticut. Chairperson Gretchen Pfeifer-Hall called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
PRESENT: Gretchen Pfeifer-Hall, Chairperson
Frank Poirot
E. Patrick Storey
Richard Szewczak
Joseph Jedynak
Louis V. Tallarita
Michael Mosschetti
ABSENT: David J. Wawer
ALSO PRESENT: Neil Angus, Wetlands Agent
Susan Swiatek, Recording Secretary
PUBLIC HEARING(S)
1. Call to Order:
The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Gretchen Pfeifer-Hall at 7:05 p.m.
2. Pledge Allegiance to the Flag
3. Roll Call:
Present were: Chairperson Gretchen Pfeifer-Hall and Agents Frank Poirot, Richard Szewczak, Louis V. Tallarita, Michael Mosschetti, Joseph Jedynak, and E. Patrick Storey (7:09 p.m.).
Also present were Neil Angus, Wetlands Agent, and, Susan Swiatek, Recording Secretary.
New Agents Tallarita and Mosschetti were welcomed.
4. Hearings:
Continuation of IW#406 of Alford Associates, Inc. for a building addition, parking lot expansion and associated drainage improvements within 100 feet of wetlands and watercourses. Property located at 135 Freshwater Boulevard (Map 56 Lot 24) Zoned I-P [Submitted February 11, 2004; Received February 17, 2004; PPE March 2, 2004; MPHCD April 6, 2004].
Mr. Skip Alford, Jr. of Alford Associates came before the Agency to represent the applicant.
The property is on the easterly side of Freshwater Boulevard. The applicant is proposing to increase the size of the existing building and parking areas.
All drainage from the site will be picked up and brought to the water quality basin, discharging to the North. The only impact to the wetlands is where it meets the existing ditch. The proposed swale meets minimum water detention area.
He noted that the drawings submitted now include notes on the lighting, landscaping, and sediment controls.
The plans now also include additional landscape buffer on the south side to protect and buffer the wetlands on the adjoining.
He stated that as for feasible and prudent alternatives, he has provided added landscaped area by removing some walks and an island within the existing parking area.
Previous comments by the Agency members and Mr. Angus have been incorporated into this final set of plans.
As an alternative from moving back from the wetlands, the applicant proposes to remove invasive species and create a better environment than currently exists. The proposed project will have minimal impact on the wetlands.
He also noted that the pre-cast concrete curb and detail for light bases noted on the memo from the Town's Engineer are not wetlands related issues.
One other item on the memo is regarding the location of one of the yard drains. If the Agency would prefer that it be removed, the applicant will do so. The yard drain in question is to be located on a lawn area.
Agent Szewczak asked if there will be curbing on the south side.
Mr. Alford stated that the entire parking lot will be curbed and the lot will be pitched toward the drainage which will flow to the water quality basin. The intent is that the whole site be curbed.
Agent Poirot asked if snow storage will take place on the easterly side. Mr. Alford stated that it would be and in several other areas as well. The site is pitched toward the parking lot. The existing pitch is ½% and all new storm drainage will have a minimum pitch of ½%.
In answer to another question by Agent Poirot regarding loss of vegetation in the islands, Mr. Kevin Rothschild Shay, Landscape Architect, noted that additional landscaping will actually be added by reducing walkways in the parking lot. Also, 3 parking spots have been removed, bringing the available amount down to 251 in order to obtain the required green space.
Chairperson Pfeifer-Hall noted that it would be easier to show on the plans where snow stockpiling would not be permitted and asked if signs would be erected in those areas.
Mr. Alford answered that, yes, there would be signs. He also responded to another question by Chairperson Pfeifer-Hall by stating that moving the parking spots and crosswalks to incorporate additional green space was, by his consideration, a feasible and prudent alternative. Also, there would be improvements to areas near the wetlands and proposed water quality swale by removing invasive species and adding better quality vegetation for wildlife habitat.
Mr. Rothschild Shay reviewed and incorporated a number of alternatives that are already in the plan. Enhancement plantings are upward of 2 ¼ acres. The applicant has tried to balance the needs of the client with the requirements of the Town. He added that there are not many alternatives available to the site. There will be no adverse effect on the wetlands and Mr. Alford stated that he felt that feasible and prudent alternatives are necessary only if a project affects wetlands. This project affects only 100 square feet of wetlands. There are activities within the upland review area.
Chairperson Pfeifer-Hall asked if any maintenance would be done on the man made ditch along the property line.
Sigrun Gadwa of REMA Environmental Services stated that the growth is not causing a problem and it is taking up nutrients.
Agent Szewczak noted that the southwest corner of the building on the south side of the property seems to be approximately 40' within the upland review area and the roadway is an additional 20' within the area. He expressed concern that there be no effect on the wetlands. Currently the grading seems to flow toward the wetlands. Because the proposed roadway is to be so narrow, he is concerned that truck traffic will damage curbs to the point that their effectiveness in holding back water flow is lessened.
Mr. Alford explained that the existing pitch is 3/10' toward the roadway. He suggested installation of pre-cast concrete curbing instead of the proposed bituminous curbing. The concrete curbs are stronger and more durable, and could be made higher or longer to ensure drainage will stay in the parking lot/roadway.
Chairperson Pfeifer-Hall noted that the man made ditch on the north side contains a great deal of autumn olive. She asked if it is wise to allow that to remain when it is being removed elsewhere on the site.
Ms. Gadwa stated that the autumn olive is only one of the species in the ditch.
Mr. Alford stated that although it is not noted specifically on the plan, all invasive species in the ditch are slated to be removed and that note could be added to the plans.
Mr. Angus also noted that the plans, on sheet 3, note 38, states that the entire site is to be treated but only mentions the invasive species autumn olive. Other species will also need to be removed.
Mr. Alford stated that the bottom and 2/3 of the ditch which will be owned by his client will have the invasive species removed and will be cleaned.
At this time, the hearing was opened for public comment.
Dominic Salzone of Enfield Realty spoke in favor of the project.
Charles Woods of 11 Westerly Drive spoke of concern over construction near the wetlands in various sites around town, especially where foundations are required. He was reminded that comments must be limited to the current public hearing site by Chairperson Pfeifer-Hall. He continued that he is in favor of surface drainage improvements only, not subsurface improvements.
Mr. Alford noted that this project will have a "slab on grade" foundation with no basement or footing drains.
Mr. Angus noted that majority of Staff's comments have been addressed.
A motion was made to close IW#406 by Agent Storey and seconded by Agent Poirot. Vote was 7-0-0.
A motion was made to close the public hearing portion of the meeting at 7:50 p.m. by Agent Storey and seconded by Agent Poirot. Vote was 7-0-0.
REGULAR MEETING
1. Call to Order:
The regular meeting was called to order by Chairperson Pfeifer-Hall at 7:51 p.m.
2. Roll Call:
Present were: Chairperson Gretchen Pfeifer-Hall and Agents Frank Poirot, Richard Szewczak, Louis V. Tallarita, Michael Mosschetti, Joseph Jedynak, and E. Patrick Storey.
Also present were Neil Angus, Wetlands Agent, and, Susan Swiatek, Recording Secretary.
3. 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.
4. Public Participation - Issues of concern not on the agenda.
Charles Woods of 11 Westerly Drive again spoke of his concerns of new construction's effect on wetlands. He asked the Agency to pay close attention to contractors that do deep digging and lower water tables. The town is losing and encroaching on too many wetlands and he does not want to see any more of them lost.
Agent Szewczak agreed and noted that the Agency does try to encourage use of detention and retention systems for better groundwater recharging.
Mr. Angus also noted that some wetlands re-charge and some discharge groundwater, depending on location and situation. Many design alternatives that the Agency considers provide for local recharge rather than redirecting surface flows completely off-site.
At this time, a motion was made by Agent Storey and seconded by Agent Poirot to move agenda items #5,6, and 8 to come after New Business. Vote was 7-0-0.
7. Approval of Minutes -- March 2, 2004 Meeting:
A motion was made by Agent Storey and seconded by Agent Szewczak to approve the minutes of the meeting of March 2, 2004 as presented. Vote was 4-0-3 (Jedynak, Mosschetti, & Tallarita).
8. Wetlands Agent Report - February 26, 2004 through March 31, 2004
9. Old Business
IW#406 of Alford Associates, Inc. for a building addition, parking lot expansion and associated drainage improvements within 100 feet of wetlands and watercourses. Property located at 135 Freshwater Boulevard (Map 56 Lot 24) Zoned I-P [Submitted February 11, 2004; Received February 17, 2004; PPE March 2, 2004; MPHCD April 6, 2004].
Mr. Angus reviewed the Agent's Report and suggested conditions of approval for this application.
Mitigation bond amounts for wetland detention and wetland enhancement plantings to plan proposals need to be determined.
He discussed the yard drain referred to in Mr. Cabibbo's memo and stated that the main concern would be excess fertilizer and pesticide residue affecting the wetlands. However, the lawn area draining to the yard drain was fairly small so the vegetative buffer between the lawn and wetlands would likely aid in filtering any excess nutrients. In addition, the plans call for the use of slow release fertilizers and soil testing to minimize fertilizer and pesticide applications. He suggested that the yard drain be left up to engineering. He also suggested adding a 17th condition, that pre-cast concrete curbing on the south side along the drive and road be added and also #18, that note #38 on sheet to be modified to include removal of all invasives.
Members discussed removal of the yard drain.
Chairperson Pfeifer-Hall noted that the applicant reviewed feasible and prudent alternatives and it appears that there are none. The plan provided is the most feasible to accomplish the applicant's goals and minimize impacts to wetlands.
Agent Storey agreed and made a motion, seconded by Agent Szewczak, to approve IW#406 with the 10 standard conditions in addition to the following numbered 11 through 18:
11. A bond, the amount to be approved by the Wetlands Agent must be posted for all approved buffer enhancement plantings and stabilization of disturbed upland areas. The bond shall not be released until all plantings have been installed and maintained for a period of one to two years (depending on the time of year the plantings are installed);
12. Limits of Disturbance (silt fence) are to be marked with construction fencing and modified to follow the limits of grading, to aid in retaining a vegetative buffer between the wetland area and the proposed development. Erosion and sediment controls and construction fencing must be installed prior to issuance of a building permit.
13. The Snow Stockpiling area must be clearly defined so that all drainage from the stockpiling area drains through the detention facility and not directly into the wetland areas. These areas must be identified on a plan and be provided to the snow removal contractor. "No snow stockpiling" signage must also be placed along the southern boundary of the parking lot, access drive and loading areas;
14. Wetland construction activities for the detention outlet shall take place only during low flow conditions (generally June 1 through September 30) to minimize excessive erosion and sedimentation as a result of excessive runoff and heavily saturated soils.
15. All Engineering comments and concerns must be addressed prior to the issuance of a building permit;
16. With the exception of the additional items stated in these conditions, this application is approved in accordance with Site Plans prepared for Cambridge Credit Counseling, 135 Freshwater Blvd., Enfield, CT by Alford Associates, Sheets 1 through 6, dated February 11, 2004, revised through April 2, 2004; Plan entitled "Boundary and topographic plan of land in Enfield, CT surveyed for Cambridge Credit Counseling Corporation", Sheet 1 of 1, dated November 13, 2003 prepared by Heritage Surveys, Inc.; and Plans entitled " Site Landscaping and Planting Plan", Enfield Realty Corporation, 135 Freshwater Blvd., sheets 1 through 4, dated February 11, 2004, revised through April 2, 2004 prepared by William A. Canon, Landscape Architect. 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).
17. Pre-cast concrete curbing is to be installed along the parking, drive and loading area along the south side of the site
18. Note #38, sheet 3, shall be modified to include all invasive species to be removed.
Vote was 4-0-3 (Jedynak, Mosschetti, & Tallarita). Reason for approval was that the project, with mitigation, will not adversely affect wetlands and watercourses.
IW#407 of Dennis Rand/Hull Forest Products for four (4) temporary wetland/watercourse crossings associated with a selective cutting forestry operation. Property located on the south side of Weymouth Road (Map 16 Lot 40); Zoned R-44; [Submitted February 24, 2004; Received March 2, 2004; PPE March 16, 2004; MAD May 6, 2004].
Mr. Angus noted that the applicant was unable to attend this meeting.
A motion was made by Agent Storey and seconded by Agent Jedynak to table further discussion on IW#407 until the meeting of April 20, 2004. Vote was 7-0-0.
IW#408 of Frank Vono for a re-subdivision involving the construction of a septic system within 150 feet of wetlands. Property located at 1 Salerno Drive (Map 103 Lot 66); Zoned R-44; [Submitted March 10, 2004; Received March 16, 2004; PPE March 30, 2004; MAD May 20, 2004].
Mr. Len Norton and Mr. Frank Vono represented the applicant.
Mr. Norton explained that the subdivision was originally approved in the early to mid 1990's. The drainage improvements and house were started but then the subdivision approval expired.
When applying for re-approval the Health Department questioned the septic system at this one site. After more than one year, approval for the septic system was obtained.
One of the septic galleys ended up within 150 feet of the wetlands and the contractor installed them without approval by the Town.
The Health Department has reviewed the application and agreed with Mr. Norton's pollution renovation analysis calculations, as shown in a memo provided in the Agency members' packets. The area has been stabilized and since it was installed last summer, already has an established lawn. The house has already received a Certificate of Occupancy.
The wetland is located off the property and crosses under Broad Brook Road.
Mr. Angus explained that this is a combination re-subdivision/enforcement issue. Any septic system installation within 150' of wetlands requires approval by the Agency. The previous system was approved with the septic outside of the 150 foot upland review area. A number of the other 17 lots in the subdivision have been approved. Each one is being reviewed with the original IWWA approvals.
After further brief discussion, a motion was made by Agent Poirot and seconded by Agent Story to approve IW #408 with the standard 10 conditions, in addition to the following #11 through 13:
11. Erosion and sediment controls must be added to Lot #2, to the satisfaction of the Wetlands Agent;
12. No subsurface sewage disposal system, in part or whole, is permitted within 150 feet of the high water mark of the detention basin west of Lot #2;
13. With the exception of the addition of the items stated in these conditions, this application is approved in accordance with the plans entitled: "Lot 1 and 2 Salerno Drive, Enfield, CT" prepared for John Titarelli by Dennis G. Rehmer, Land Surveyor, Sheets 1 and 2, dated November 27, 2001, Revised through August 16, 2003. Any changes that would potentially cause greater impact to wetlands or watercourses shall require the permitee to come before the Enfield Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Agency for a request for Modification or a Determination of Permit Need (Jurisdictional Ruling).
Vote was 7-0-0.
Reason for approval was that the applicant has demonstrated that the project will not adversely affect wetlands and watercourses.
IW#397.02 of SEA Enfield Commons LLC - Request for modification to expand flood compensation area, requiring additional excavation within 100 feet of wetlands. Property located at 25 Hazard Avenue (Enfield Commons) (Map 45 Lot 8); Zoned BR; [Submitted March 11, 2004; Received March 16, 2004; PPE March 30, 2004; MAD May 20, 2004].
Susan Hays of Updike, Kelly & Spellacy and Brian McCarthy, Engineer from Carter Burgess represented the applicants.
Ms. Hays explained that the applicant obtained approval in the original application for a Red Robin Restaurant last summer.
Because of erroneous information received regarding the floodplain requirements, the applicant is requesting a modification.
The floodplain requirements require that the building be either flood-proofed or built 1 foot above flood level. The applicant felt that making the building flood-proof would not be feasible due to technical and operational issues.
Instead, the building must be raised one foot, requiring additional grading which results in additional fill in the floodplain.
Mr. McCarthy reviewed the site plan with the Agency and showed that the proposed flood storage area is currently a parking area. The pavement and some fill would be removed to create a flood storage area.
In the previous application, an excess 5,000 cubic feet would be created, however the proposed change would require an additional 8 to 9,000 cubic feet creating a shortage of 3,000 cubic feet.
The applicant proposes to re-grade the eastern end of the storage area, lowering it more and landscaping it, creating an additional 5,000 cubic feet of flood storage area.
Sediment erosion controls will include hay bales and filter bags over existing catch basins.
Ms. Hays provided a construction time line. The contractor proposes to start construction at the end of April, 2004, beginning with the construction pad. Existing pavement will be removed and existing drainage will be re-routed. Then pavement will be removed from the flood storage area, during the first 2 weeks of May. This will be the best time of year for planting of seed mix and plantings for that area. All erosion control measures will be in place during that time.
Also, a D.E.P. permit for storm water discharge will be required, ensuring that the area will be monitored.
Agent Storey asked how the surcharge on the building pad would be protected.
Mr. McCarthy explained that the stock pile would be covered in plastic and have staked hay bales surrounding it. Temporary construction fencing would also be erected. It is anticipated to take 3 months for settlement of the building pad material.
Mr. Angus noted that there would be a net gain in pervious over impervious surface.
A motion was made by Agent Szewczak and seconded by Agent Tallarita to approve IW#397.02 with the previously approved conditions, amended condition #15 and condition number #17:
15. With the exception of the addition of the items stated in these conditions, this application is approved in accordance with the Site Plans entitled "Proposed Red Robin, Enfield Commons, Enfield, CT 2003", prepared by Carter Burgess; sheets CO.1, CO.2, N-1, C-1, C-2, C-3, C-4A, C-4, L-1, C-5A, C-5B, C-6A, C-6B, C-7, C-8 - project no. 302527, revised through March 11, 2004. 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 request for Modification or a Determination of Permit Need (Jurisdictional Ruling).
17. A bond, the amount to be approved by the Wetlands Agent must be posted for all approved floodplain creation/restoration plantings and stabilization of disturbed upland areas. The bond shall not be released until all plantings have been installed and maintained for a period of one to two years (depending on the time of year the plantings are installed);
Vote was 7-0-0. Reason for approval was that the applicant proved that with mitigation, the project will not adversely affect wetlands and watercourses.
IW#409 of Carl Nelson Construction Inc. for a new house construction involving excavation, filling re-grading and placement of structures within 100 feet of wetlands and watercourses. Property located on Elm Avenue (Map 59 Lot 72); Zoned R-33; [Submitted March 12, 2004; Received March 16, 2004; PPE March 30, 2004; MAD May 20, 2004].
Mr. Carl Nelson, applicant, explained his request to construct a 1,500 square foot cape, 30x28'.
He feels that all concerns are addressed on the plot plan, and he will alter the erosion control limits to follow the limits of construction.
He will provide plantings along the border towards the wetlands and will install all erosion controls prior to construction.
In answer to Agency members' questions, he stated that the house will have a full basement and the house will be constructed at the highest point of the lot. The flood plain is at 124' and the basement elevation is at 127'.
He does not feel that curtain drains are necessary; downspouts will be directed to a dry well.
In answer to a question by Chairperson Pfeifer-Hall, Mr. Angus stated that Water Works Brook is near this property, but roadwork should not affect this parcel.
Mr. Nelson went on to state that he is looking to clear only around the proposed house area - 20' to 25' feet to the sides of the house.
Agent Szewczak suggested that medallions be installed or deed notations made regarding the wetlands and upland review area restrictions. This is a sensitive area and should not be developed.
Mr. Angus noted that these are not escarpment soils according to the soil scientist. The lot is tiered, left to right. He suggested adding notes to the deed because the lot is so small, it would be difficult for a homeowner to expand the lawn.
Agent Szewczak asked that there be no clearing beyond the toe of the slope.
Mr. Angus noted that the soil scientist has suggested vegetation types for the buffer that would discourage traffic.
Mr. Angus also noted that the sloping will limit the area in which lawn could be established and the size of the lot and set back requirements limit any future outbuildings.
Chairperson Pfeifer-Hall asked if a condition could include a restriction that the lot not be cleared further than the existing limits of clearing so that future owners would know of the limits.
Mr. Angus noted that the applicant does not own the lot and the lot is an existing lot. He did suggest that the restriction be added to the plans.
Mr. Angus also stated that the contractor could be required to provide the future owner with a copy of the site plans so that they would know the limits.
Any future crossing of the limits or disposal of yard waste would become an enforcement issue.
Mr. Nelson stated that he always provides the new owner with a copy of the plot plan.
Agent Storey suggested that a note also be placed on the plans requiring that leaf and grass cuttings be disposed of off site and that the limits of clearing not be crossed as shown on the site plan.
Mr. Nelson stated that he had no objection in adding these to the deed when the property comes under his ownership.
In answer to a question by Agent Poirot, Mr. Angus stated that the Town's Engineer had no concerns with the proposed dry well to be located on the slope.
After further, brief discussion, a motion was made by Agent Szewczak and seconded by Agent Poirot to approve IW#409 with the 10 standard conditions in addition to #11 &12 as proposed by the Wetlands Agent and #13 and 14:
11. Silt fence locations should follow the limits of disturbance more closely to avoid unnecessary clearing of existing native and mature vegetation.
12. With the exception of the addition of the items stated in these conditions, this application is approved in accordance with the plans entitled: "Plot Plan Prepared for Carl Nelson Construction Inc. Showing proposed House to be Constructed on Property of Paul and Susan Rivard Jr. at Elm Avenue Enfield, CT, dated January 5, 2004, revised through March 12, 2004. Any changes that would potentially cause greater impact to wetlands or watercourses shall require the permitee to come before the Enfield Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Agency for a request for Modification or a Determination of Permit Need (Jurisdictional Ruling).
13. A note is to be added to the plot plan and future deed that all yard waste is to be properly disposed of off site.
14. A note is to be added to the plot plan and future deed that no additional clearing is permitted beyond limits of clearing on approved plans. Any additional clearing would require a permit from Enfield IWWA.
Vote was 7-0-0. Reason for approval was that the project will not have an adverse impact on inland wetlands and watercourses.
14. New Business
IW#410 of Camerota Truck Parts for the construction of a 29,000 sq. ft. industrial building, parking area and associated improvements involving excavation, filling and re-grading within 100 feet of wetlands. Property located at 239 Shaker Road (Map 94, Lot 10); Zoned I-2; [Submitted March 31, 2004; Received April 6, 2004; PPE April 20, 2004].
Mr. Michael Camerota explained that his business remanufactures parts for trucks. He recently became an authorized dealer for Crane trucks and Alison Automatic Transmissions and needs to expand his building. He would like to construct a 29,000 square foot building to be used for warranty work and the remanufacturing facility and warehouse.
Mr. Wes Wentworth, engineer, stated that the site is 600' east of Bacon Road, located on Shaker road. It is a 4.6 acre site within the Industrial II zone. It is surrounded by Industrial zone.
Michael Gragnolatti will be available at the next meeting to review his report with the Agency.
A flat bottom detention basin is proposed. The site is not within the 100 year flood plain.
In discussion regarding possible need for a public hearing on this application, Chairperson Pfeifer-Hall noted that the site is approximately 300' from the nearest house, on Shaker Road.
Agent Storey noted that this site is near the headwaters of Freshwater Brook.
Mr. Angus expressed concern over a ditch along the road. The report does not note whether this is an intermittent watercourse, which would be a regulated area.
Mr. Wentworth stated that he assumes that it is.
Agent Storey stated that at the next meeting he will be interested in hearing about proposed oil separators and what curbing is proposed in the parking lot.
A motion was then made by Agent Storey and seconded by Agent Jedynak to continue IW#410 to the meeting of April 20, 2004. Vote was 7-0-0.
A motion was made by Agent Storey and seconded by Agent Szewczak to hold a brief recess at 9:50 p.m. Vote was 7-0-0.
Call To Order:
The meeting reconvened at 10:00 p.m.
Present were Chairperson Gretchen Pfeifer-Hall and Agents Frank Poirot, Richard Szewczak, Louis V. Tallarita, Michael Mosschetti, Joseph Jedynak, and E. Patrick Storey.
Also present were Neil Angus, Wetlands Agent, and, Susan Swiatek, Recording Secretary.
At this time, the members returned to the original agenda order:
5. Correspondence.
The following items of correspondence were reviewed:
from the meeting of March 16, 2004:
" A letter from Mr. Angus, dated 09/19/03 to Jeffrey & Jessica Duga regarding proposed house addition at 101 Cottage Road;
" memo from Mr. Angus to IWWA members regarding DOT General Permit (DOT Project #48-173);
" March 2, 2004 warning letter from Mr. Angus to Jeff Bord regarding Septic System at 1 Salerno Drive;
" 3/3/04 Notice of Violation to Devcon Freshwater, LLC regarding improper storage of salt stockpile at 51 Palomba Drive;
" letter from Mr. Angus to Steven Provost dated 3/10/04 regarding deck addition at 117 Parson Road.
From the packet to members for the meeting of April 6, 2004, the following:
" Letter from Mr. Angus, dated 3/12/04 to Dave Beers of Conwood Forester, Inc., regarding timber harvest on property off of Booth Street;
" letter from Mr. Angus to Robert DiGennaro dated 3/12/04 regarding Detention Pond at Bush Lane Subdivision. Agency members asked Mr. Angus to continue to monitor this.
" Letter from Mr. Angus to Rick Sarandrea regarding South Road Daycare;
" Notice from Environment Committee of CACIWC regarding SB 445;
" copy of 3/22/04 draft letter from Mr. Angus to homeowners abutting Waterworks Brook;
" notice of Land Use Educational 2004 workshop schedule;
" copy of 3/26/04 Journal Inquirer article regarding joint commissions meeting for Plan of Conservation and Development;
" copy of D.E.P. application for Crescent Lake treatment of algae;
" copy of Summary & Outline of the Aquifer Protection Land Use Regulation, revised 2/04;
" 2003 Report of results of Wadeable streams and Rivers;
" copy of response from D.O.T. to D.E.P. regarding permit renewal for Project 48-173 and response to IWWA comments;
" copy of 3/17/04 memo from OPM to Town of Enfield regarding Recommended Conservation and Development Policies Plan for CT, 2004-2009;
" copy of March/April issue of Connecticut Wildlife.
6. Commissioner's Correspondence.
Chairperson Pfeifer-Hall noted receipt of a letter of resignation from former Agency member Kathy Sarno as well as a letter from the Town Manager regarding the appointments as regular members Mosschetti and Tallarita filling the vacancies of Roger Olson and Kathy Sarno, respectively.
8. Wetlands Agent Report - February 26, 2004 through March 31, 2004:
Mr. Angus briefly reviewed the Wetlands Agent's Report for the meetings of March 16 and April 6, 2004.
11. Other Business :
As two of the new Agency members will not be available for the April 20, 2004 meeting, Mr. Angus will postpone the legal procedure review to the agenda for the meeting of May 4, 2004.
A motion was made by Agent Storey and seconded by Agent Szewczak to table all other agenda items this evening. Vote was 7-0-0.
Discussion on Proposed Regulation Amendments:
1. Map Amendments
Draft Plan of C&D update
o Next regular meeting will be Tuesday, April 20, 2004 at 7:00 PM in the ENFIELD ROOM
12. Adjourn:
A motion was made by Agent Jedynak and seconded by Agent Tallarita to adjourn the meeting at 10:35 p.m. Vote was 7-0-0.
Respectfully Submitted,
_____________________________
Frank Poirot, Secretary
Last Updated: Friday, May 28, 2004 |