Board Members Present: Arnold Koehler, Charles Wentworth, John Kaufman
Alternate Members Present: Stephen Sackter
Absent Members: George Carrington, Charles Dorman
Others Present: Bill Donovan, Land Use Inspector/Clerk
Chairman Koehler called the meeting to order at 6:37 p.m. S. Sackter was seated for G. Carrington.
Old Business:
A. Application 16-05: Toll Brothers, Inc., 120 Scott Road. Elderly Housing Project. The public hearing for
this project was closed on February 22, 2006. Commissioners began an initial review of the application.
B. Donovar presented a complete set of approved minutes for the Toll Brothers public hearings to each
commissioner. He also distributed a "Summary of Regulated Activities Data Sheet, Prospect Commons, by
Toll Brothers" thai describes overall site data, wetland disturbance summary, 75' upland review area
summary and conclusions or various impacts within the project. Bill also presented a draft Resolution
of Approval for the commissioner's review. It was suggested the commissioners review the minutes of the
public hearings and the regulatec activities summary data sheet and include additional conditions or
statements mat they feel should be added, 01 deleted, in the Draft Resolution. A general discussion followed:
issues mentioned included no back wash wate; from the pool should discharge into wetlands, no sodium chloride
(salt) to be used in winter road maintenance use of organic fertilizers only in the community garden,
requiring any fueling or maintenance of constructor equipment to be at least 100 feet from wetlands.
J. Kaufman indicated sand utilized for road maintenance shoulc not be recycled as it becomes pulverized
from traffic, becoming more of a silt material. Commissioners directec Bill to contact Land-Tech Consultants
to work up a bond figure for erosion control measures within the project C. Wentworth also mentioned marking
out the boundary of the 50-foot buffer area by numbers and with "Conservation Area" tags and having this made
a permanent record on a map. Commissioners discussed me remaining undisturbed area within this parcel that
is mostly wetlands and whether there could be a "conservation restriction" placed on the land to further
protect the wetlands. It was also noted that neither the town's consultant nor the applicant's ecologist
observed vernal pools on the property.
New Business:
a. Establish commissioner site inspection schedule. At recent scheduled meetings, the commissioners
determined there is a need for a structured site inspection schedule on approved applications by commissioners
to confirm compliance with erosion control applications or other conditions of approval. J. Kaufman presented
proposed worksheet outlining various classes of violations and the corrective actions needed to be taken by
the applicant. John suggested two commissioners would go together — an experienced commissioner and a newer
member. A rotating schedule would have one commissioner going out on the next scheduled inspections with a
different commissioner, who in turn then makes the following scheduled enforcement inspections with another
commissioner. Commissioners should have emergency numbers to call if they observe a condition needing
immediate attention. John also stated a bond should be in place and called if the violations are not
corrected within a required time period. C. Wentworth and S. Sackter presented pictures of existing conditions
at the Prospect Estates Subdivision on Cook Road that they feel still do not satisfy the applicant's erosion
control plan A site walk was scheduled for Thursday, March 30th at 4:30 p.m. for "Prospect Estates".
Adjournment: Motion by S. Sackter, seconded by J. Kaufman to adjourn at 9:50 p.m. Unanimous.
Arnold Koehler, Chairman