Board members Present: Arnold Koehler, John Kaufman, Charles Wentworth, Stephen Mulhall
Alternate Members Present: Stephen Sackter, David Michaud
Absent Members: Charles Dorman
Others present: William Donovan - Land Use Inspector, Diane Lauber - Clerk
Chairman Koehler called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. S. Sackter was seated for C. Dorman. The meeting was taped.
Approval of Minutes: Motion by J. Kaufman, seconded by C. Wentworth to approve the minutes of tin November 13, 2006 meeting as amended. Two votes in favor with three abstentions. Motion to approv< carries. Motion by S. Mulhall, seconded by J. Kaufman to approve the minutes of the November 27 2006 special meeting as amended. Three votes in favor with two abstentions. Motion to approvi carries.
Communications: None
Old Business:
a. Earl & Jean Reilly, 179 Union City Road. Significant sedimentation in pond. Hank Berberat, Bouldei Brook Estates, was not able to be in attendance. This item will be carried to the January 8, 2007 meeting.
b. Application #06-11, Paulo DaCosta, 245 Straitsville Road. Install water service line in a wetlands Chairman Koehler stated that a site walk was held on December 2, 2006. The brook crossing was markec about 30 feet left of Mr. DaCosta's driveway. A. Koehler stated that Mr. DaCosta's excavator will be ir the wetlands at the tow of the Straitsville Road slope with a small bucket loader, but will have a largei machine available if any of the larger rocks in the area need to be moved. A. Koehler stated that he didn' see any ledge at the crossing. J. Kaufman noted that when he visited the site he didn't see any ledge at the crossing, but did notice ledge further down from Mr. DaCosta's property. A. Koehler asked Mr. DaCoste for a site plan showing sedimentation controls. J. Kaufman asked what type of soils were in the wetlanc crossing area and what type of fill should be used to backfill the trench to prevent silt from travelling downstream. The Commissioners discussed concerns with sedimentation control further down from the wetland crossing area to ensure that there will be no disturbance. A. Koehler suggested a stipulation be made that, prior to work being started, the contractor provide Bill Donovan with an adequate sedimen control plan. J. Kaufman felt that the Commission needed to specify what the control plan should be. A Koehler stated that he gave the applicant permission to go ahead with the road cut only, citing concern; that the asphalt plants may be shutting down for the winter. No work is to be started in the wetlands. The Commissioners discussed possibly moving the proposed crossing to an area with a lesser-concentratec flow of water. J. Kaufman suggested that due to the issue of moving water in the crossing area, ar engineer needed to design a plan and supervise the work to ensure proper sedimentation control. Bil Donovan reminded the Commissioners that budgetary constraints hinder the Commission's ability to pa) for engineering fees. A. Koehler will draft a letter to Land Tech Consultants advising them of the Commissions' concerns. Mr. DaCosta was instructed to contact Land Tech Consultants to discuss the best way to cross the brook with minimal disturbance to the wetlands. The applicant will be responsible tc pay any engineering fees. J. Kaufman asked that Land Tech Consultants specify what type of fill to use in the trench to prevent silt from travelling downstream.
Public Hearings:
a. 7:30 p.m. Application #10-06: Rosen field Enterprises, Inc., 157A Summit Road. Regulated activities
associated with a proposed residential subdivision. Chairman Koehler stated that a letter dated 12/1 I/Of has been received from the applicant's engineer, Roland Desrosiers. Mr. Desrosiers is requesting a 35-
day extension for the public hearing to allow time for Land-Tech Consultants to review revised plans am give the applicant's engineer the opportunity to revise the plans accordingly from any additiona comments from Land Tech Consultants. The public hearing will continue on January 8, 2006 at 7:30 p.m
Old Business:
c. Prospect Estates Subdivision - Spreda Pond Restoration. Note: C. Wentworth and S. Sackte recused themselves from the meeting. Chairman Koehler read a letter dated December 7, 2006 fron Michael Guaglianone of the South Central Connecticut Regional Water Authority regarding thei: concerns with the erosion control problems at 193/193R Cook Road. A letter dated December 11, 200( from Charlene Spreda regarding corrective action of restoration of the pond located at 35 Candee Roac was submitted for the record as well. Chairman Koehler asked if Prospect Estates and the Spredas hac reached an agreement regarding restoration of the pond. Attorney Stephen Tower, representing Prospec Estates, stated that there is no agreement. Charlene Spreda stated that since the IWC meeting or November 27, 2006, they had not been contacted by Prospect Estates or their representative. Chairmar Koehler asked what Prospect Estates would be willing to contribute to restoration of the pond. Attornej Tower stated that Prospect Estates was offering a total of $6,500.00 without any admission of liability bu for settlement purposes, hoping that the Commission would see the offer as being reasonable toward: remediation of the pond. Mrs. Spreda rejected the offer stating that based on the proposals submitted a the last meeting, the offer is far from the cost of restoring the damage that has been done. Mrs. Spredz further commented that Prospect Estates is willing to look to the future in offering the cost to install the forebay, which Prospect Estates has an interest in, but are unwilling to address what has happened in ths past. Chairman Koehler commented that the pond when originally built was beautiful but over the yean and prior to October 2005 the pond has collected a lot of silt from various areas. Being an in-line pond experts have stated that an inlet going directly into the pond with an outlet at the opposite end, the pone acts as a detention basin. Chairman Koehler stated that the occurrence from Prospect Estates in Octobei 2005 contributed approximately 40-50 yards of additional fines into the pond and tipped it. Chairmar Koehler further stated it would be difficult to say when the pond would have tipped if not for the Prospec Estates development, but now the pond is destroyed. In Chairman Koehler's opinion, the offer o $6,500.00 from Prospect Estates is legitimate. Mrs. Spreda stated that she has photos from the yeai before Prospect Estates started construction showing not much silt buildup in that area and then, based or the development by Prospect Estates, the increasing water flow coming downstream is what caused the silt to build up so much. Mrs. Spreda stated she has brought pictures and the Commissioners have seer the sediments brought down and now she has to deal with the problem. Mrs. Spreda feels her lettei submitted this evening was fair in attributing only a portion of the cost to Prospect Estates and they are not asking for 100% restoration but the bare minimum that the contractors would charge for the problerr that Prospect Estates created. The Spredas feel that $6,500.00 is far from the estimates given to them b) the professionals who would do the work. J. Kaufman stated again that the Chairman had referred to onl) one occurrence, but there were about three instances where a tremendous amount of silt traveled down tc the pond. Mr. Kaufman commented further that when Roaring Brook breeched it's bank and went intc the detention pond that was most likely the major incident which started the problem, but it wasn't jus that one instance. Subsequent flushings of large amount of water from other breeches pushed the problerr further downstream and will continue to do so. Mr. Kaufman restated that the proposed costs foi restoration presented by George Logan at the previous meeting was for removing the minimum layer o siltation, not for the complete restoration and felt that Mr. Logan's proposed costs were closer to wha Prospect Estates should pay. Mr. Kaufman stated that based on his observations, he could attest to the quality and clarity of the pond prior to October 2005, and that any time there is a disturbance to moving water it is a very sensitive area that the Commission should require adequate bonding for. J. Kaufmar suggested that there might have been some engineering flaws with the detention pond as, in Mi-Kaufman's opinion, it may be a little too close to Roaring Brook. Referring to the letter received fron the South Central Regional Water Authority, Mr. Kaufman stated that it is very important that the Spred< pond be restored because it influences the drinking water downstream. Attorney Tower stated that the $6,500.00 offer was not based on the estimated cost to construct the forebay but on a review of the quotation submitted. Attorney Tower further commented that the contractors could hydro-rake 30-5C varHs of siltation in one dav. however the estimate was for two davs. J. Kaufman stated that the
Commission has the charge to protect the wetlands and ensure that the quality has not been jeopardized It is not just what the property owners' wishes are, but what is in the best interest of the wetlands tha have been jeopardized. Mrs. Spreda commented that page 2 of the proposal submitted from Aquatii Control Technology, Inc., states that the contractor has a 16-hour minimum on a hydro-rake project which would mean paying a minimum of two days. S. Mulhall asked for clarification as to whether it i the Commission's determination to figure out the cost of what's reasonable and what is not. Attorne1 Jennifer Yoxall, representing the Town of Prospect, stated that this is not a typical scenario before th< IWC as the damage has been done on an adjacent property. The Commission can't just tell the develope to restore the property, as an agreement needs to be reached with the adjacent property owner. Th< Commission can say that the developer is responsible for fixing a portion of the problem, but tin Commission is not obligated to set a monetary amount. The Commission has been provided with ai estimate to use as a guideline to find a resolution to fix the problem. S. Mulhall stated that he had visitec the site and has an idea of what has happened. Mr. Mulhall asked that as a neighbor, did Mrs. Spred; approach Mr. Beausoleil regarding the incident prior to coming before the IWC. Mrs. Spreda stated tha Mr. Beausoleil was not a neighbor at the time this incident happened. Prospect Estates transferred the property to Mrs. Beausoleil and then Nutmeg Investments purchased the lots. Mrs. Spreda described the pond as now having a film on the top that is discolored and with any heavy rain, the silt gets stirred uf and the pond becomes a brown color. Mrs. Spreda further stated that Guiliano & Associates, engineer: for Prospect Estates, stated that they observed no silt at the inlet of the pond when they started theii readings. After the October 9th occurrence, they observed a good amount of silt. August Lenhart, owne; of Prospect Estates, stated that erosion had been occurring prior to any development. Mr. Lenhart furthei stated that Prospect Estates did not create the watercourse (Roaring Brook) and with the October 200f rainstorm, siltation would have flowed into the Spreda pond even if there were no development. Prospec Estates is willing to offer money towards the removal of 30 yards of sediment and Mr. Lenhardt feels the $6,500.00 offer is fair. Charlene Spreda responded that documentation of several storm occurrences ovei the past ten years show that there was no disturbance of the pond whatsoever prior to Prospect Estate: installing an incomplete detention pond. Mrs. Spreda also stated that Prospect Estates indicates that the) are willing to pay for the cleanup and yet when given the minimum costs that contractors are charging tc remove what Prospect Estates deposited, they are not willing to pay that cost. Prospect Estates also ha: not offered any support to show that the estimate submitted is not correct. The Spredas just want the issue resolved. A recess was called for the two parties to hold discussion.
Bill Donovan suggested that the Commissioners move to New Business during the recess.
New Business:
a. John McNulty, 2 Laurel Lane. Septic Replacement. John McNulty explained that the septic needed tc be replaced and it was not possible to locate it in the same area. Two new tanks will be installed in the front of the house and pumped to leaching fields in back of the house. Chairman Koehler noted that the leaching fields would be 52 feet from the McNulty well and 63 feet from the neighbor's well and thai Chesprocott requires 75 feet from a well. Mr. McNulty stated that Chesprocott and the State healtr department have approved the site and agreed that there is no other area to install the new system. J Kaufman stated that if the old system has failed due to a high water table, curtain drains could be installec to intercept the water and alleviate the problem. Mr. McNulty stated that his contractor indicated that the septic could not be put back in the same location. Mr. McNulty also indicated that a pipe was discoverec on his properly that drains water from a neighboring property to Mr. McNulty's back yard. Chairmar Koehler stated that the Commissioners would visit the property on their own before the next meeting Application fees have been paid. Dwana DaSilva stated that she had recently purchased the property frorr Mr. McNulty. Mr. McNulty indicated he had started the process of replacing the septic system prior tc selling the property and felt he should follow through with the replacement for the new owner. Change: were made to the application to show Dwana DaSilva as the property owner. Motion J. Kaufman, seconded by S. Mulhall to accept Application #06-12, Dwana DaSilva, 2 Laurel Lane, for a septic replacement. Unanimous.
d. Inland Wetlands Regulations Revisions. No discussion was held.
Public Participation: None
Land Use Inspector's Report: Bill Donovan stated that Toll Brothers has now purchased the Scott Roac property. They are requesting a temporary crossing over the brook to bring equipment to the other side o; the brook. Toll Brothers is proposing to use the recommended method from the 2002 D.E.P. Erosion & Control Manual. Motion by J. Kaufman, seconded by S. Mulhall to allow Toll Brothers a temporary crossing with the stipulation that proper siltation controls are in place and inspected before beginning an) excavation. Unanimous. It was noted that C. Wentworth & S. Sackter had not been called back to the meeting. A. Koehler stated that there was a quorum present.
Motion by J. Kaufman, seconded by S. Mulhall to adjourn at 9:10 p.m. Unanimous.
Arnold Koehler, Chairman