Conservation Commission / IWWA Minutes 09/20/2016

CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS

AND WATERCOURSES AGENCY MINUTES

SEPTEMBER 20, 2016

REGULAR MEETING MINUTES

I.             CALL TO ORDER

Darren Cunningham, Acting Chairman, opened the Regular Meeting of the Conservation Commission at 7:30 p.m. in the Main Meeting Room at the Town Offices.  Also present were Michael Glidden, Assistant Town Planner; Janis Prifti, Commission Clerk; and other interested parties.

II.            ROLL CALL

Commission Members and alternates in attendance were:  Darren Cunningham, Charles Haldeman, Jason Levy, Craig MacCormac, and Jim Morrison. 

1.            Appointment of Alternates

Chairman Cunningham appointed Commissioner Haldeman to serve for Margery Winters.

III.           APPLICATIONS

1.            Old Business

a.            Applications:

i.              Application #16-20 of Joshua and Kerra Maurer, Owners, for the placement of a storage shed in mapped wetlands on the property located at 38 Sunset Hill Road (Assessor’s Map C18, Block 601, Lot 112). Zone R-40. (received 09/06/2016; decision must be rendered by 11/10/2016)

Chairman Cunningham read Application #16-20 into the record.

Mr. Maurer indicated they need storage for a lawn mower, hay bales, and tools, none of which are dangerous with a small amount of gas in the mower for the winter.  He has a small stream in the back woods of the property and provided the Commissioners with photos of the area, which is primarily mowed lawn, and outlined the proposed 12x22 foot area of crushed stone that the 10x20 foot shed will sit on.   Regarding flooding, Mr. Maurer responded that the stream is 2 ½ feet deep and has never overflowed.  He believed this dry location to be the only one where the shed could be placed; the only other area shown on Exhibit 4 has a 2-foot grade that would require major grading and disruption.  He noted it would take 6-8 weeks to prepare the site and in early November the shed would go in and the roof built.  Mr. Glidden provided the 9/12/2016 Staff Report with recommended Standard and Special Conditions for approval; for the record he noted Exhibit 5 shows the shed would be located in mapped wetland soils.  It was noted the house was built in 1964 pre-dating wetland regulations.  Regarding soil removal, Chairman Cunningham indicated that would be a condition for granting the permit.

Commissioner Morrison made a motion finding this is a regulated activity because the proposed construction of the shed will be in the mapped wetlands..

Commissioner Levy seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.

Commissioner Morrison made a motion finding this is not a significant activity based on the plans presented it does not appear there will any effect to the wetlands that are actually functioning as wetlands, and the area disturbed is limited to grassy lawn.

Commissioner Levy seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.

Commissioner Morrison made a motion to approve the Application subject to the Special Conditions and Standard Conditions in the 09/12/2016 Staff Report

Commissioner Levy seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.

ii.             Application #16-21 of Alice M. Yokabaskas, Owner, for a 2-lot re-subdivision of the property located at 224 Old Farms Road (Assessor’s Map C05, Block 301, Lot 008A). Zone R-40. (received 09/06/2016; decision must be rendered by 11/10/2016)

Chairman Cunningham read Application #16-21 into the record.

Brian Denno, of Denno Land Surveying, represented the Applicant noting the 5.8-acre site is located on the west side of Old Farms Road south of Holcomb with an existing house and barn remaining on one of the lots and an existing septic system served by public water.  He indicated the 3 wetland pockets on the property have been flagged.  Mr. Glidden confirmed they have not yet received approval from FVHD for the septic design on the proposed lot and recommended tabling the Application to next month, but this presentation should go forward.  Mr. Denno explained the existing house/barn lot would be 3.3 acres and the new lot with house/septic/driveway would be 2.5 acres with minimal clearing and a footing drain as the biggest intrusion into the area.  Mr. Denno noted that Staff found some clearing around the pond and they checked with the soil scientist on how to remedy it; the owner provided before/after photos and indicated they cut down only overgrowth to keep out poison ivy; the scientist suggested putting in some wetlands vegetation, e.g. mountain laurel.  Mr. Denno noted the property backs up to a State Forest which will remain vegetated.

Commissioner Levy made a motion to table Application #16-21 to the next meeting pending FVHD septic system approval.

Commissioner Haldeman seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.

Chairman Cunningham noted a decision on Application #16-21 must be made by 11/10/2016.

iii.            Application #16-22 of Paul Serafino, BLA, Winterberry, Applicant; James and Lora Rancourt, Owners; for the construction of a natural boulder retaining wall along a watercourse on the property located at 8 Minister Brook Drive, Weatogue (Assessor’s Map E17, Block 204, Lot 074). Zone R-40. (received 09/06/2016; decision must be rendered by 11/102016)

Chairman Cunningham read Application #16-22 into the record.

Mr. Serafino represented the owners and provided the Commissioners with a description of the plan/project, map, and photos.  He indicated the owners have experienced heavy erosion on one part of Minister Brook which runs through their entire backyard and, as a result, propose constructing a natural, permeable boulder wall consisting of a rip rap base with locally-sourced granite boulders ranging in size from 24-48 inches, dry stacked, backfilled with drained stone to keep the entire system permeable, which would be backfilled geo fabric; everything would be kept permeable.  He noted the photos show the area of erosion and owners hardship with large trees leaning toward the house, some of which are severely eroded and marked by an X that would be removed by a tree service and the material taken offsite; the stumps would be flush cut with the roots remaining as a hillside structural element; at project conclusion, they would seed and repair the disturbed area along with grading to the wall and would use sediment and erosion control hay bales throughout the project.  He confirmed they would like to begin as soon as possible due to the tree hazard; they would do the work in segments beginning at the most severely eroded area in order to not disturb the entire area at once.   He showed the Commissioners on Photos 4 and 5 the most eroded tree root area in the watercourse, which would be the first to be removed with erosion control measures begun uphill of that; the 12-inch rip rap base with the highest wall height is 3 feet with up to 3-4 foot boulders compacted into the wall – the boulders would be 48 inches long, not tall. 

Mr. Serafino indicated the two hardships for the owners are the trees leaning toward the house and the constant erosion of the bank, which is coming closer to the house corner as time passes.  Commissioner Morrison commented removal of the trees eliminates the tree hardship and the purpose of the wall would be to prevent erosion toward the house.  Regarding the corrugated pipe dropping several feet and contributing to the bank instability, the owner explained when the pipe was put in originally it was flush with the bank and when a tree broke off from its roots at least 20 years ago the 5-6 feet of erosion began.  Mr. Serafino added between the times he visited the site this past winter and when he took follow-up photos, he saw noticeable erosion as shown in Photos 4 and 5.  Commissioner Morrison indicated concern that the pipe and the bank elevation look about 5-6 feet higher with a 3-foot wall and another 3 feet of grading and asked whether that would be sufficient to keep the bank in place.  Mr. Serafino indicated it would be 3 feet at the highest point and then graded; he believed that would be sufficient to keep the bank in place with everything permeable behind the wall; however, there are flash flood situations and he noted this is within the 100-year flood zone which would be above this.  Commissioner Morrison also expressed concern about existing large rocks moving in the stream channel, as they are bigger than 24-48 inch boulders in the retaining wall.  Mr. Serafino responded their experience stacking boulders and stones locked in with a rip rap base and no organic material to be washed away are less apt to move; boulders set in sand in the watercourse tend to move with it, as opposed to boulders stacked together without organic material.  Mr. Glidden added that some of the stones originated from the ongoing erosion and they originally looked at a softscape but found it would not work and the boulder retaining wall is a better option given the watercourse is jumping its bank in this area; planting the slope would result in losing material similar to material already lost and this wall will act as a permanent barrier to hold erosion back.  Mr. Glidden was concerned about machine operation in the stream channel and the Applicant’s agent confirmed the work will be done upland of the watercourse and filling/grading behind the wall will be done in segments as the wall is built; and once trees are lost this type of erosion can speed up and this solution utilizing a wall to stabilize the area can stop erosion.   The Owner noted the large boulders have been present many years and he may have moved some of them to shore up the bank.  The Commissioners indicated their concern was whether the boulder wall would be enough to stop erosion.

Commissioner Haldeman asked how high the water could be in spring.  The Owner responded it can go to the top of the bank, but it now spreads out more due to the erosion.  Chairman Cunningham encouraged the Applicant to use native plantings and noted the Town can provide a list; Mr. Glidden indicated that could be an additional Special Condition and he would bring that information back for approval by the Commission’s designated agent.  Mr. Serafino noted they have constructed similar walls for other projects; they would use a mini excavator from the bank with a 10-foot arm and thumb to manipulate boulders/trees and remove material with a disturbance about wall width; wetland soils will likely be stockpiled on site and removed when dry.  Regarding the pipe off the roof leader, Mr. Serafino indicated they could relocate it; Mr. Glidden suggested it could be moved downstream of the disturbance edge – as putting it back toward the house would undermine the wall – the plan should illustrate where it would be moved; Mr. Serafino drew the pipe location on the plan, which was submitted as an Exhibit.  The Commissioners noted the goal was to improve the situation for an extended period.  The Agent confirmed they typically follow up in the future to be sure everything is working; Mr. Glidden suggested an erosion/sediment control bond could be posted to assure the wall holds through a rainy season and the Commissioners agreed with that idea. 

Commissioner Morrison made a motion finding this is a regulated activity because the proposed construction is within a watercourse.

Commissioner Levy seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously

Commissioner Morrison made a made a motion that this is a significant impact activity because the purpose of the construction is to inhibit the natural dynamics of the watercourse.

Commissioner Haldeman seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously

Commissioner Morrison made a motion to approve Application #16-22 finding there was no prudent and feasible alternative to the Application.

Commissioner Levy seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.

Commissioner Morrison made a motion to approve Application #16-22 subject to the Standard Conditions and Special Conditions in the 09/12/2016 Staff Report; also subject to the re-routing of the roof drain such that it reaches the channel downstream of the new wall; and subject to a performance bond of $1000.00 that will be held for a year to insure the viability of the construction.

Commissioner Levy seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.

iv.           Application #16-23 of Kevin Lange/Darold Baum, KW Lange Remodeling, Agent; Perry Steinmetz, Owner; for the construction of an addition to the existing dwelling in the upland review area to a wetland on the property located at 8 Pinecrest Drive (Assessor’s Map B20, Block 510, Lot 028). Zone R-40. (received 09/06/2016; decision must be rendered by 11/10/2016)

Chairman Cunningham read Application #16-23 into the record.

Mr. Baum indicated the reason for the addition was to provide housing for a close family member who is ill, but because of the kitchenette proposed and the lengthy hearing process involved, they have moved to an alternate solution.  However, Mr. Baum indicated the bank requires a denial, either for the wetlands or kitchenette.  Mr. Glidden clarified it is a simple addition 87 feet from mapped wetlands and meets the regulations with no impact, and Staff recommends approval; the Applicant was asked to withdraw the Application, but did not.  Mr. Glidden has recommended to the Applicant that they apply for a building permit and the Zoning Officer will then recommend they apply for a special exception for the kitchenette, and if they do not apply for that special exception within 30 days, it will be denied.  Mr. Glidden noted the Commission has very specific criteria for denying an application.  Mr. Baum clarified that under the bank’s construction loan, the bank requires a denial and will not allow them to withdraw this Application.  Mr. Glidden noted with this approval the Applicant has 5 years to build and could change their mind in 2 months; an application to the Zoning Commission for the kitchenette would require a public hearing.

Commissioner MacCormac made a motion that Application #16-23 presents a regulated activity because it is in the upland review area.

Commissioner Levy seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.

Commissioner MacCormac made a motion this is not a significant activity given the limited nature of the disturbance and situation presented.

Commissioner Levy seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.

Commissioner MacCormac made a motion to grant Application #16-23 subject to the Standard Conditions and Special Conditions in the 09/12/2016 Staff Report.

Commissioner Levy seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.

2.            New Business

a.            Receipt of New Applications

Mr. Glidden indicated receipt of one new application for Wagner for a 7-lot re-subdivision off of Old Farms Road.

b.            Referrals

i.              Referral from Planning Commission for review of erosion and sedimentation plan on Planning Commission Application #16-02 of Mansour Prime Properties, LLC, Agent; Royce Palmer, Owner; for a 19-lot affordable housing subdivision under CGS 8-30g on the property located at 80 Climax Road (Assessor’s Map D20, Block 608, Lot 001). Zone R-40.

Chairman Cunningham read the referral for Application #16-02 into the record.

Andrew Quirk, PE, from Kratzert, Jones and Associates, reviewed this referral and noted the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan was approved on two previous occasions by this Commission, and provided those narratives.  He indicated this proposed plan is for a reduced 19 lots and is similar to the plan approved by the Commission in May, the narrative is on Sheet G1 includes construction sequence, phasing and discussion they will not stump individual lots until they are developed; and there is 3.7 acres of disturbance associated with road and house construction. 

Mr. Quirk noted two underground galley storage areas are redesigned as above-ground stormwater basins that would not be brought online and connected to the stormwater system until they are stabilized – Mr. Glidden clarified they will construct and stabilize the basins before they put drainage in for the road, which modifies the construction sequence and that criteria requires the soil to be seeded and stabilized, e.g., grass is cut for a second time to confirm no further seeding is required.  Mr. Quirk indicated the roadway construction would continue with water diverted away from catch basins and the road system with swales proposed on either side of the road during construction at the limit of top soil removal with temporary sediment basins allowing water to settle out prior to overflowing to the basins; house development could not begin until they take out the temporary swale and allow the water to come through.  Mr. Quirk indicated the new basins are designed to be infiltration basins utilizing bio-retention soil, which is primarily composed of sand, untreated hardwood bark mulch, and only 20% organic allowing a lot of water to be absorbed.  Regarding basin overflow, Mr. Quirk explained there would be two dry wells as the first level of overflow set above the pond bottom, so if they exceed 12 inches of water in the basin bottom it would go through the dry well system, which would also help in the winter below frost level when the ground is frozen; and if they overtop flow, the water would go onto Climax Road, as it does today.  Mr. Glidden noted the Commission is reviewing the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan under Chapter 128 and when the road is constructed a very limited area is cleared.  Mr. Quirk indicated Step 5 in the E&S narrative calls for tree clearing for the 3.7 acres of disturbance with stumping/grinding activities limited to within 15 feet of the road on either side or 80 feet, which allows for utility construction.  Mr. Quirk confirmed they reviewed the Staff report and are in agreement with the Special Conditions.

Commissioner Morrison made a motion to send a positive referral to the Planning Commission with respect to the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan for the proposed construction subject to the Special Conditions and Standard Conditions in the 08/29/2016 Staff Report.

Commissioner Levy seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.

IV.          GENERAL COMMISSION BUSINESS

1.            Correspondence

a.            River Alliance of Connecticut

Mr. Glidden reviewed that this letter was forwarded by Commissioner Rieger to Chairperson Winters regarding a position on the water coordinating committees; Simsbury is part of the Central Corridor and the working plan for water usage is in its early stages, and River Alliance is pointing out concerns regarding timing and environmental impacts with time of the essence.  The Commissioners reviewed the letter and approved signing it.

Commissioner Levy made a motion to sign the correspondence.

Commission Haldeman seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.

Mr. Glidden confirmed receipt of the written report documenting relocation of the Farmington River freshwater mussels.

V.            APPROVAL OF MINUTES of the September 6, 2016 Regular Meeting

Chairman Cunningham accepted for the record the September 6, 2016 Regular Meeting Minutes, as written.

VI.          ADJOURNMENT

Commissioner MacCormac made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:43 p.m.

Commissioner Levy seconded the motion, and it was passed unanimously.