Conservation Commission / IWWA Minutes 11/18/2014

CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLANDS &

WATERCOURSES AGENCY MINUTES

SUBJECT TO APPROVAL AT NEXT MEETING

NOVEMBER 18, 2014

REGULAR MEETING

I.          CALL TO ORDER

Chairman Rich Miller called the Regular Meeting of the Conservation Commission to order at 7:35 p.m. in the Main Meeting Room at the Town Offices.  Other members and alternates in attendance were Phil Purciello, Jim Morrison, Patrick Kottas, Darren Cunningham, Margaret Sexton and Donald Rieger.   Also present were  Rachel Blatt, Assistant Town Planner; Janis Prifti, Commission Clerk; and other interested parties.

II.        APPOINTMENT OF ALTERNATES

Chairman Miller appointed Commissioner Kottas to serve as an alternate for Margery Winters and Commissioner Morrison to serve as an alternate for the Commission vacancy. 

III.       DISCUSSION ON THE ELECTION OF A NEW CHAIRMAN

Commissioner Rieger made a motion to discuss the election of a new chairman later in the evening.

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

IV.       PUBLIC HEARING(s)

a.         Application #14-39 of Greg Maglieri Development, LLC, Agent for Timothy E. and Elinor E. Ellsworth, Owners, for a Wetlands Map Amendment to define the wetlands soils on the property located at East Weatogue Street (Assessor's Map H11, Block 106, Lot 037). Zones R-40 and R-80.

Application #14-39 was read into the record pursuant to Section 15 of regulations allowing audience members to comment.

Commissioner Rieger made a motion to open the public hearing.

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

Application #14-39 was read into the record.  Commissioner Rieger noted for the record a Simsbury Land Trust indirect connection to this transaction as the Land Trust has pending a transaction to acquire adjacent property with access across the property of this evening's two applications.  As an active Land Trust member, Commissioner Rieger believed that indirect connection and his focus on other Land Trust matters did not require him to recuse, unless others present have a concern.  Chairman Miller thanked Commissioner Rieger for this information and indicated he should continue to serve.

Attorney Mark Needleman represented the Applicant and introduced Brian Denno, Engineer and Surveyor, George Logan, Certified Soil Scientist, and Greg Maglieri.  Application #14-39 was for a wetlands map amendment, which they believe better, reflects actual soil conditions on the property determined by their field survey.  The attorney reviewed the property is 15.6 acres with 10.6 acres dedicated to three residential lots and the rest an agricultural easement area.  If the wetland map amendment were approved, they would proceed with their second application for a subdivision plan.  No activity is proposed in the confirmed wetlands and minimal activity in the Upland Review Area (URA). 

The Applicant's engineer described the 15.6-acre portion of the total 92 acres remaining of the Ellsworth property on East Weatogue Street as having a ridgeline running through the middle with the water path coming east towards the Talcott Mountain Road cul de sac and pond and the rest filtering overland toward East Weatogue Street in a very deep ravine running along the north property line.  In consultation with Town Staff, it was decided to determine the actual wetlands line.

The Applicant's soil scientist reviewed that the proposed map amendment accurately reflected soil delineations he found on the site in October at three different locations and at three different times.  The soil scientist indicated the proposed map showed site soils below the blue line to be seasonally saturated and poorly drained with additional pockets of poorly drained soil as you move away from the site; this was reflected in the report provided to Commissioners entitled, "On-Site Soil Investigation & Wetland Delineation Report".  Soils on the site were derived from thick glacial til 60-70 feet thick in areas and defined by a mantle on top.  The soil scientist followed the topographical break at the field edge with about 15-feet of decades-old agricultural fill soils present at the wetland edge with undisturbed soils on either side and the 100-foot URA was noted.  The soil scientist clarified that the red on the map shows the current wetlands on the official Town map.  The auger locations were shown to the Commissioners and the soil scientist confirmed that contained in the proposed map amendment.  The Connecticut soil survey was provided to the Commissioners showing in green mapping similar to the Town map with 803 soil shown and the soil scientist noted that 308 disturbed upland soil needed to be added, along with 44 rainbow silt loam soil, based on his field investigation.

The public was invited to comment.

Ann Weld of 5 Heather Lane asked if there was a verification process by the Town or regionally regarding the soil tests.  The Commissioners explained these map amendments are typically confirmed by a certified soil scientist hired by the Applicant who bears the burden of demonstrating to the Commission that the map should be amended; and this amendment would increase the size of the wetlands.

Jim Miller of 22 Talcott Mountain Road asked if the wetlands were south or north of the proposed line.  The Applicant's engineer explained the proposed line was moved up the hill increasing the wetland size and should be added to the official wetlands map.  The soil scientist believed the process for the current map utilized index mapping provided by the USDA and large scale maps with aerial photos were used to map out land forms with forms of 2-3 acres the smallest, but in Simsbury it was believed soil scientists were hired in the '80's to provide more map accuracy. 

Sue Bednarcyk of 119 East Weatogue Street was not able to attend the field trip and asked if any other information was requested by the Commissioners at the site walk and should be provided to the public.  The Commissioners limited questions without members of the public present and there were no other substantive questions.  Town Staff confirmed that where things were located were shown to the Commissioners and additional photos are available in the file. 

Michelle Baker of 18 Talcott Mountain Road asked about the soil boring locations with one near where the proposed road would be.  The soil scientist confirmed that was from 200-300 feet from the cul de sac.

Commissioner Rieger made a motion to close the public hearing.

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

Commissioner Sexton made a motion to accept the map amendment as presented by the Applicant.

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

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

V.        DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION

a.         Application #14-38 of Greg Maglieri, Maglieri Development, LLC, Agent for Timothy E. and Elinor E. Ellsworth, Owners, for the review of a proposed re-subdivision on the property located at East Weatogue Street (Assessor's Map H11, Block 106, Lot 037). Zones R-40 and R-80.

Town Staff provided the Commissioners with full-size copies of the map.

The Applicant's attorney summarized that Application #14-38 was for a wetlands permit for a re-subdivision on the 15.6 acre site utilizing 10.6 acres for 3 residential lots with one substantially larger lot and all lots meeting Town zoning regulations, and a 5-acre lot would be transferred to an adjoining property owner under an  agricultural and conservation easement restricting site development with no residential use.  No activity was proposed within the confirmed amended wetland areas; minimal activities are proposed within the Upland Review Area (URA).  The attorney believed the minimal proposed activities in the URA would warrant the Commission's issuance of a permit at this meeting.

The Applicant's engineer reviewed that the 15.6-acre site on the northwest side of the cul de sac on Talcott Mountain Road is a portion of the remaining 92-acre Ellsworth property on East Weatogue Street.  This site would provide three building lots, 5 acres transferred to an abutter in an agricultural easement, and the remainder in negotiations to be transferred to the Simsbury Land Trust.  Considering Town regulations, they proposed a private road and 50-foot right away to take advantage of LID to put in less pavement lessening the environmental impact and reducing hard surface on the site.  The drive was pushed west as far away from the wetlands as possible; however, an area of 340 sq. ft. near the road was shown impacting the wetlands in the regulated area requiring some minor grading and clearing and planting of grass.  There would also be about 1 1/2 acres of impact in the URA, including putting in storm drainage, clearing of trees, driveways and a common driveway.  The storm drain would consist of collection areas on the uphill driveway side taking roof leaders and footing drains into drainage areas with floatables sinking out and staying and then piped across the street to a grass-lined bottom area and continue down to a pond.  The engineer described the current situation with ponding in the cul de sac and they proposed a catch basin at the road entrance to collect the water to stop the ponding and water going across the Miller's driveway causing icing problems in winter and taking it across the street, putting it into the existing catch basin to the flared end and to the pond.  The engineer noted the Miller's remediation request to the Town for a pipe across to the pond which was determined to not be feasible with no erosion found in the Town system which appears to be working as it should; the existing rip rap is working exactly as it should.  The lower wetlands act as storm water retention for Lucy Brook before going into a pipe and entering the pond.  While the Millers have wetlands in their back yard, the engineer hoped to lessen the water coming onto their property.  The Applicant would have a swale along the side of their road with an under drain to catch water coming across their property, including water from roofs and footing drains, and put it into the system with a vegetative filter recharging ground water, or in a negative event, go over the edge and continue on down the hill.  The lots range from 2 to 5 acres with another 5 acres deeded as open space to abutters; they proposed a conservation easement on one lot of 2.2 acres with no tree cutting allowed and protection of almost all the wetlands.  They have also proposed along the edge of the wetlands a 15-foot footpath for pedestrian access or maintenance only for the Simsbury Land Trust.  They would save trees wherever possible, including along the border.

The Applicant's soil scientist provided the Commissioners with a report and attachments with additional recommendations; the report included figures, topographic maps, relatively recent and archived aerial photos, resource maps, bedrock superficial geology, national wetlands inventory figures showing more extensive wetlands further east, northeast, and southeast from the property, annotated photos, and the soil report.  This property has forested wetland that is easily saturated at the edge of an agricultural field with til feeding the wetland in the spring with actual discharge at the wetland edge that runs easterly and in the summer the silt loam soil is relatively dry with water present when it rains.  A 1934 aerial photo showed the area completely cleared and dotted with cedars; in the 50's it was abandoned resulting in a young forested wetland with some invasive plants and as part of the Application, the soil scientist proposed, grading out about 200 sq. ft. of Japanese Stilt Grass which is the only way to eliminate it.  Some partial clearing areas would allow for emergent white grass.  The 40-50 acre wetland system includes the headwaters of Lucy Brook, runs up trap rock ridge to Bloomfield to a pond and bog area which can be traversed on boardwalk, down a steep hill to the CL&P right of way, and includes a manmade pond with a nice habitat.  The soil scientist clarified that the entire system has some high functions and as Lucy Brook runs to the Farmington River there is excellent water quality, therefore what is done on the site to maintain the ecological system is important.  Information of estimated habitats was provided to the Commissioners and the soil scientist is awaiting an official response, but there appears to be 3 potential endangered species including the Hob Nose Snake, the Red Bat, and the Jefferson Salamander which is dependent on wetland vernal pool habitats.  The impact on trees would be relatively limited.

The soil scientist indicated it would be most important to not encroach any more than necessary within the URA, and they have limited direct wetland impact as shown on the plan utilizing some direct fill and clearing for the 200 sq. ft.  Short-term impacts during construction were described as there being level ground but the highly erodible soils would require proper maintenance of erosion and sedimentation control to protect the wetlands.  Long-term they need to assure water quality coming off these lots and would utilize best LID practices.  There are only certain locations FVHD would approve for septic systems; while it is not yet on the plans, he noted vegetative storage areas they would like to turn into bonafide vegetative rain gardens because of problematic soil infiltration.  Another mitigation measure they have added was specialized planting for the level spreader with 2-inch stone edge kept level to dissipate forces during large storms.  They also discussed with Town Staff a small give back for encroaching in the URA that they would carefully remove 1-2 invasive shrubs totaling about 60-80 shrubs from the edge and replacing them with native shrubs, e.g. Gray Dogwood or Arrowood, etc.  The soil scientist summarized they have provided feasible and reasonable alternatives, minimized direct and indirect impacts, maintained wetlands functions and values, and protected overall water integrity of the system into the future.

Regarding the conservation easement grantee, the attorney indicated it may be an easement or restriction, the Land Trust would be a possibility, but it is not decided yet.  The Commissioners noted that for conservation reasons, it might be a good idea for someone to be able to remove material in the future.  The attorney clarified that maintenance of the area would be allowed and they currently plan to remove invasives or diseased trees in the area with the objective of achieving balance.  It was clarified that the conservation easement would be part of Lot #5.  Regarding terms and conditions for the 5-acres transferred to the abutter, there would be a  restriction there be no buildings on that property and it would likely be used as a horse run.  It was believed the easement grantor would be the abutter and the grantee would likely be the Land Trust.  The goal would be for everyone to have a more valuable and desirable property.

Regarding LID features, the soil scientist indicated the concern was for water quality with vegetative rain gardens, as well as for control of water volume.  They would utilize 18 inches of prepared filter media with a bed of gravel/stone at the bottom with an embedded under drain that would leak off at a slow velocity toward the level spreader or wetlands for better water quality and filtration.  The Commissioners asked about maintenance of residential rain gardens over time and encouraged that the Town have an easement over rain garden areas.  The attorney indicated that could be considered to improve the situation and they would continue working with Staff.  The engineer added that this private road would have its drainage system inspected yearly, as they have done in other locations, and the Town has approved of that.  Regarding salt spreading on the private road in the winter and its impact on the wetland, the soil scientist acknowledged its impact but believed this was the best option and there would be no curbs with a long vegetative swale filtrating into the ground before reaching the wetland and tying into the existing point discharge system.   They would recommend usage of the most environmentally benign materials which are more costly, and have worked to safeguard with LID.  The attorney believed the road would have light use and a minimal amount of compounds would be used.  Regarding pervious pavement, the soil scientist noted it is often used in lower-traffic area without much water quality renovation, whereas here they have a swale with under drains and vegetative areas to renovate it.  The Commissioners also noted the street would be a narrower 18-foot width with no curbs or crown and swales running on the downgrade with maintenance a key factor.  The attorney indicated they are working with the Fire Marshall regarding the road width and turnaround; Town Staff added that a final determination by the Fire Marshall has not been issued.

The Chairman noted this was not a public hearing and subdivision plans had been presented and that consideration was being given to what the developer might add to the plans.  Residents present expressed concern that the Town received detailed plans and that existing drainage issues not be exacerbated.  Regarding water quality concerns, the engineer indicated water would be caught in roof drains and go into their systems.  The Commissioners noted the proposed system would be more natural and less complicated to maintain with usage of conservation easements and homeowners association requirements in place.  The Commissioners noted the NRCS always recommend a 15-20 foot protective buffer uphill from a wetland which is not in place here and the engineer clarified the vehicle access would be for mowing.  The soil scientist responded that this would be a change in land use and suggested putting in a 5-10 foot filter strip past the shrub edge maintained by occasional mowing and no chemicals on that area.  The attorney thanked the Commission for their consideration and requested they take the matter up this evening.

A neighbor took exception to some of the information provided, including drainage history.   Appreciation was expressed for the remediation efforts planned.  Mr. Miller indicated he sent an email sent to the Town and said there had been a good water course when he moved in to his property, but sand built up and land has been lost to the conduit.  He believed this development would greatly increase the amount of water with reduced access to his back land.  He described details regarding ponding in the area and efforts made to deal with those issues over the years.  He has taken these issues up with various Town officials, but there has been no resolution to date and he believed it may be part of the Commission's purview.  The Applicant's attorney believed the development would not make the situation worse, and extraordinary requirements are not merited.  The Commissioners asked the engineer to clarify the situation.  The engineer described the existing movement of the water and indicated the only way to better disperse the water would be tie it into the catch basin system; the proposed system increase in water is picked up by their drainage system reducing actual runoff to less than pre-construction levels.  Mr. Miller believed addition of impervious surfaces with the presence of poorly draining soils means the water has to go somewhere aggravating ponding and washing out an existing structure with more rapid flow and removing access to part of his property.  The engineer responded that the water would be stored and held back and would not increase site runoff as shown in the report provided.  Mr. Miller asked for clarification of whether the water flows into the ground very well but flows over the surface with a terrible percolation rate which is not well understood.  The attorney indicated the modifications proposed increase retention, slow the water, and add an additional catch basin addressing many of these concerns, and the Applicant should not bear the burden of curing previous problems and these matters should be addressed with Town Staff.  The Commissioners clarified they operate within the scope of their authority considering wetlands and water courses. 

Regarding the erosion and control plan, the engineer indicated it included silt sacks on street catch basins, filter fabric fence all the way up the downhill construction side, drainage basins to stop erosion after construction, and tree protection details.  The attorney indicated they appear before Zoning next week and the Applicant said they would like to begin construction in 1 1/2 to 2 months.  Town Staff added that a reference made to King Philip Road should be corrected to Talcott Mountain Road, and construction would go forward with the silt fence removed on a section-by-section basis due to amphibian traffic.  The Commissioners discussed their need to read the reports and material provided, the public interest and whether a hearing was required, the need to hear from the Fire Marshall and Town Engineer, drainage report, and erosion and sedimentation control plan.  Town Staff indicated the Application was received 10/07/2014 and could be noticed in time for a public hearing.  The Applicant's attorney discussed a public hearing would require a finding for substantial impact or in the public interest and asked they not go through those additional requirements.  The Commissioners discussed that a hearing could be called in the public interest.

Commissioner Cunningham made a motion to hold a public hearing based on Section 9.1.c. concluding that a public hearing regarding this Application would be in the public interest.

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

Commissioner Sexton made a motion to continue the hearing on Application #14-38 to 12/02/2014 at 7:30 p.m. in the Main Meeting Room of the Simsbury Town Offices, including review of:  the drainage and erosion control plan submitted 11/18/2014 and the short-term and long-term impacts for these highly erodible soils; updates regarding the Fire Marshall's determination; a report from the Town Engineer, specifically regarding drainage and whether he concurs that whatever enters the Town storm drains will not have a materially adverse impact on Lucy Brook; review of the REMA report presented 11/18/2014; rain gardens and how they are constructed, what is their base material, where do drains fit in, and whether there would be a conservation easement; the Stilt grass question raised; the potential addition of native shrubs; consideration of the filter strip for wetlands protection; determination of conservation easement restrictions; and assuring all necessary details are on the plans for Commission review.

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

b.         Proposed 2015 Meeting Schedule

The Commissioners discussed a solution regarding the Finance Commission meetings running over and possibly moving to the Board room for this Commission's meetings.

Commissioner Rieger made a motion to approve the Proposed 2015 Meeting Schedule as offered with the provision an alternate meeting site may be identified.

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

VI.       RECEIPT OF NEW APPLICATIONS

a.         Application #14-40 of The Ethel Walker School for erosion control and storm drainage discharge within the Upland Review Area to a wetland on the property located at 230 Bushy Hill Road (Assessor's Map E14, Block 115, Lot 006 and Assessor's Map E15, Block 115, Lot 006). Zone R-40.

The Applicants representative reviewed the overall 100 anniversary renovations at the school, and this project was described as the culmination with a swimming pool, squash areas, wellness areas, gym, and provide a large gathering place for the girls.  The 2-story building footprint would be about 45,000 sq. ft. and they would come before the Commission for erosion control and a regulated activity.  Storm water currently discharges at various locations negatively impacting the field and they would propose a storm water basin design for water quality and peak flow rate discharge.  A slope with erosion problems would discharge at the same point previously approved by the Commission and the closest grading to the wetland is over 600 feet away.  They will present at the next meeting.

Commissioner Cunningham made a motion to amend the Agenda to include consideration of granting Michael Glidden permission to serve as the authorized agent in consultation with the new Chairman.

Commissioner Sexton seconded the motion, and it was approved unanimously.

b.         Application #14-41 of Landworks Development LLC, Agent; Ensign-Bickford Realty Corporation, Owner; for clearing in the Upland Review Area to a wetland on the property located at 225 Powder Forest Drive (Assessor's Map F14, Block 103, Lot 005-5). Zone PAD.

Town Staff indicated the Applicant plans to go forward with re-subdivision of lots #5 and #6 and whether they would go to public hearing.  The Commissioners did not feel a public hearing was warranted and the Applicant will appear at the next meeting.  The Commissioners discussed meeting dates in December and agreed to cancel the 12/16 meeting and scheduling a special meeting for 12/2.

VII.     CORRESPONDENCE/ANNOUNCEMENTS

None.

VIII.    APPROVAL OF MINUTES of October 21, 2014

Regarding the October 21, 2013 Minutes:

On Line 133, the words "at two Stone pillars" are deleted.

On Line 137, the word "one" is deleted.

On Lines 198, 204, and 210, the words "made a motion to approve the permit as written." are deleted and replaced with the words, "seconded the motion, and it was approved unanimously."

Commissioner Sexton made a motion to approved the October 21, 2014, meeting minutes, as amended.

Commissioner Kottas seconded the motion, and it was approved unanimously.

III.       DISCUSSION ON THE ELECTION OF A NEW CHAIRMAN

Commissioner Sexton made a motion that the Vice Chairman assume the Chairman position until the Commission holds an election of officers.

Chairman Miller seconded the motion, and it was approved unanimously.

Commissioner Rieger made a motion to appoint Michael Glidden as its authorized agent.

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

IX.       ADJOURNMENT

Chairman Miller made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 10:10 p.m.

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

_____________________________

Donald Rieger, Secretary