Meeting transcript
Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Commission - Regular Meeting
September 15, 2020 · Watch on YouTube · All meetings
And wetlands and watercourses commissioned to order. Linda, can you hear me okay this evening? You sound really good tonight. Okay. So let's do roll call. Vice chairman Elliott. Present. Commissioner Larson. Present.
Thank you. Commissioner Hallisey. Here. Sherman Lawley is here. Have, let's see, it looks like Commissioner Smith is not on the call. Don't see him present. Commissioner Smith is absent And we have no alternates presently to be seated. So we'll just continue with the the four commissioners that we have present and if Commissioner Smith joins the meeting, I'm going to mute non commissioners to prevent feedback or having some issues with that. Okay, we'll move on to the next item on the agenda which is item three. Are there any additions or changes in order to the agenda? Is Ruby Cuerto on the call? I don't see her yet. They had
put in an application and asked that it be considered at this meeting.
Can you confirm that the application materials and the fee were received by the town yesterday
or sooner than that? Yeah, it was actually a while ago. There's an application, a site plan, they submitted a drawing of the fence design, I did a reporting form and then there was a $150 fee along with the $60 state fee. I think that was in late May or early June I was paid.
Okay. Alright. So if all those materials are in then legally the commission will receive the application this evening. If a commissioner wishes to make a motion to add the application to the agenda we can do so.
We don't need to do so. I'll move to add. Yep.
Correct. Application to the agenda this evening's agenda. Thank you. So I have a motion from Commissioner Halsey to add application I WWC 20 dash 27 submitted by Mr. And Mrs. Puerto. Do I have a second for the motion? Jed seconds.
All right, motion is seconded by Commissioner Larson. Any discussion?
Megan, Chairman Lawley, I wanted to ask if the proponents of the applicants are present for the meeting.
It does not appear that they are. Is there any additional discussion?
This is Jed. I did not look at their application in detail. But I see that one of the things and it doesn't relate to wetlands is a garage with an apartment above. So Jim when you're discussing with them make sure they enter the special permits that will be required for that.
Okay, so right now let's just limit discussion to discussion on the motion. So if there's no additional discussion on the motion, I will call for a vote on it. Vice Chairman Elliott, how do you vote? I vote aye. Thank you, Commissioner Larson. Aye. Commissioner Halsey. Aye.
And I vote aye as well. So the motion carries four zero zero. We'll add that as item 6B under permit applications on the agenda. All right. Are there any additional changes or additions to the agenda? Hearing none, we'll move on to the next item on the agenda, which is item number four, public comment. Does anyone you can use the raise hand feature, or you can unmute yourselves and speak. I We think have a small enough audience tonight that if anyone wishes to do so. The raise hand feature. Linda, does anyone have their hand raised that you can see? I don't see anybody. So I will take that to mean that there is no public comment this evening. So we'll move on to item five on the agenda, which is the approval of the minutes. The August 31, 2020 minutes specifically. I will move to approve said minutes. Thank you. There was one thing that I saw on it. Hold on.
Wagner, hold on a minute. Okay. Do I have a second for the motion? Ten seconds. Thank you. Okay. Is there any discussion? You can go ahead now, agent Wagner.
On page three and four, where you, Megan, moved to amend the prior motion and add four special conditions. I looked at the YouTube feed of it, and it should be the two conditions for the 57 Hendy Road permit. Conditions three and four were actually recommendations and they weren't weren't part of your motion.
Which page of the minutes are you referring to? Page
three and four. It's the bottom of page three and then on the page four. Any other changes to the minutes?
I see we didn't have anything, at least the copy I saw on the roll call seating of alternates.
Oh, as far as I think that's covered under members present there is no alternates person to be seated. I can just add. I'm actually here, Megan.
Oh, hi Gabrielle. Okay, so we're discussing the August 31 minutes. Jed, is the members present at the top of the meeting minute? That probably works. I just saw the open line and
didn't think back. I can throw it in there if you want. It doesn't matter to me.
I think it's fine the way it is. It's covered. Okay.
Any additional discussion? Okay, so with the one correction noted by agent Wagner to have the minutes reflect the record. It appears there's no other changes for recommended hearing no further discussion. I'll call for a vote on the motion to approve the meeting minutes. Vice Chairman Elliott, how do you vote? Aye. Commissioner Larson, how do you vote? Aye. Commissioner Hallisey, how do you vote? Aye.
And Chairman Lawley, vote aye as well. So the minutes pass four zero zero. All right, I'm gonna back up a second. Gabrielle Anderson is on the call as well. Gabrielle, did you have a chance to get sworn in at town hall?
I called today to try to get it done today, but she didn't answer the voice or the phone. And then I tried leaving a voice mail, but the voice mailbox was too full. So I'm gonna try calling again tomorrow.
Alright. So I don't think I can seat you until you're sworn in. So we're not gonna seat you this evening. And I would say, how does the commission? So I'm jumping ahead on the agenda a little bit to item 9A but yesterday's board of selectman meeting. They did formally appoint based on our recommendation Gabrielle to the commission of an alternate. Normally alternates, even if they're not seated have the right to participate in discussion, they just can't vote on motions that are made. She has not been sworn in officially by the town clerk however. So how does the commission feel about allowing Gabrielle to discuss items on the agenda this evening? I'm fine with it, Alicy.
It is too. I think that'd be great. Okay, thank you. Mr. Manelliott?
I'm sorry, I lost my connection there for a moment. But I take it the discussion is whether to allow our prospective alternate to participate without voting?
Correct. Okay yeah I'm okay with that. Okay all right so we won't officially see you tonight Gabrielle but please feel free anytime so you won't be able to make any questions either but anytime there's discussion or if you have questions feel free to participate in the meeting.
Chairman Lely, this is Halsey. Can I just interject? Yep. I just have a comment or something to direct to Gabrielle is the town hall phone system really doesn't work. Assume it's broken. Busy, continuously busy. I would just I would recommend you just assume that the town clerk is there and and make a point to go there during regular hours. And the town clerk will will make will be available. Okay, thank you. She's used to people coming in. That's it.
All right, so we'll move. We'll move back to the agenda. We'll move on to item six, which is permit applications. We have two new permit applications to consider with the addition of application IWWC twenty-twenty '7. So the first item on the agenda is 6A which is application IWWC twenty-twenty six submitted by Gary Partridge for property at 151 Lakeside Drive. The application describes the activity as construction of a 20 foot by 20 foot outbuilding or storage shed within the Andover Lake Upland review area. I'm gonna ask agent Wagner to comment on whether he had a chance to review the application to determine whether it was complete.
Yes. I looked at it. There's the application was submitted. The fee for $210 was collected, so single family plus $60 state fee. There was a site drawing and then a plan on the building that is to be deliveredconstructed on the site. So I believe it's complete.
Okay thank you. Is Mr. Partridge on the call this evening? Yes I am. Hello nice to meet you. Would you like to go ahead and present to the Commission what you're requesting a permit for?
The permit basically is for the 20 by 20 outbuilding storage shed to be delivered and constructed on a crushed stone pad so there's no excavation and therefore no concrete foundation. We're in need of this building mostly for storage because we moved from a much larger house and we have snowblower, etc. That is existing outside right now. And the wetlands commission is because the building, the lakeside, the east side of the building, will be approximately 165 feet from the lake. And yes, there's the drawing. And that's basically it. We will be going to zoning for the rest of the variants because it's a non conforming lot. As you can see from the drawing, have 50 feet wide, so anything that we put out there would be in need of variance from UWall and Wetlands and also following through with zoning board appeals.
Is this a is there a difference between this first map and the second map?
No. Okay, looks like it was just scanned twice then. It could could have been two pages in your case. Okay. Nope, you've got everything on there.
All right and then is this this is for your application as well correct?
That's the building side of it. It would not have two garage doors. It would have one garage door and then an entryway and then another door to go in and out with a snowblower. It's a one story, a couple of windows, it's about it. Okay. Does the commission have any questions?
I do have one question, and that is, I noticed that the drawing, the site plan shows the western side of the shed, right where the tree is going to be cut down. That tree a huge boulder under it and I thought it would be, you know, two feet closer to the lake so you could avoid that. My
wife is also on this call. I don't see that that could be a problem. I'm also looking at 21 feet to the well on the east side. Now that from what we've ascertained with the removal of those two trees, it does give us a little flexibility if you wish, but the boulder is it's not going to be intrusive with the The boulder is west of the the crushed stone pad by like a foot or two. So I don't know if that would actually enhance the crushed stone pad, but we need to remove anything from that, whether it be boulders, just which are very large I must admit and probably would be coming down in the next few years anyway. Okay. Thank you.
Do any of the other commissioners have any additional questions or comments?
Chairman Lalit, I wanted to inquire about if there are any plans to deal with the runoff from the shed. You're adding 400 square feet of impervious surface. And I didn't see anything in looking through the plan or permit application for dealing with the runoff that's going to inevitably occur from that roof. Are
you questioning about the the stone pad installation and the construction?
No the shed per se. In general. Excuse me. The shed per se That is to say the shed roof is going to cause runoff,
which will Okay. What would the recommendation be by the commission?
That some measure be taken to mitigate or alleviate that runoff. In the past, let's see, the most recent shed construction we approved involved simply a gravel catch perimeter. Jim you could Commissioner Hallisey could speak to that I think more effectively but there might be other means of again mitigating that runoff.
I believe on the application of which you speak it was conditioned upon the addition of stone extending past the drip edge And there was a there were some dimensions into that. And that's one option.
Agent Wagner, do you have any thoughts on ways it sounds like what the commission is talking about is any any roof runoff either capturing it or directing it to infiltrate into the property. Do you have any thoughts on that or would you be able to work with the applicant between now and next meeting to come up with a plan to address that question?
Yeah, I think we could come up with something. I think the gravel doesn't sound like a bad idea. It sounds simple. But I'm sure we could figure something out.
This is, Halsey. It seems to me that the plan should note, which trees were coming down. And one of them may be obvious because it's where it's created with the shade. I'm simply saying if the plan could identify those.
They're on the plot plan. When the trees are coming down?
Well, no, I'm suggesting that the plan just identify that they are to be removed. But that's your I
believe that's listed on the application. If it's not, my apologies. So If you're shown shown on the plot plan, I guess I didn't put it on that specific application. I also want to go back to the runoff. We're more than willing to talk and discuss with Agent Wagner about what is deemed appropriate for that. We want to make sure we're doing the right thing. In fact, that is specifically why we're not doing excavation and not doing any concrete foundation because we felt that was more invasive of that area. So with the Commissioner or excuse me, Agent Wagner's suggestion, I'm fully agreeable to talk with him about any runoff.
There's other, I mean we mentioned the the gravel option was on Route 6. An individual was looking to construct a shed in the Upland review area for firewood storage and that's when there was a proposal to basically excavate down to a certain depth and and fill it in with crushed stone for stormwater storage but that's not the only solution. Know if you have gardens on your property for example linking rain barrels to the roof, that would be another option too. So there's many ways out there to control roof runoff but I think the commission, it sounds like would be interested in seeing that addressed in the plan. On the application item nine, usually we see as an attachment. So if you could work with agent Wagner to address that aspect of the application a little bit further, the proposed erosion and sedimentation controls and other management practices and mitigation measures, I think that would cover basically the questions that have popped this evening. Okay.
I think I don't know. This is agent Wagner. I just I was looking at the application and there is he did mention it on the bottom of page three. I'm not sure if it got scanned in. Yeah. It's right there on the bottom of that page. It talks about the two trees that need to be removed. Okay.
Okay. Thank you for pointing that out. Does the Commission wish to do a site visit for this application?
I don't think it's necessary, but I walk by it every day as I do my walk around the lake, so I've seen it.
Don't see Chairman Law, this is Vice Chairman Elliott. I don't see any need for a sidewalk for this application.
Commissioner Hallisey? I have no reason to I will take a look at it in my eyes someday
between now and the next meeting, but I'll see any reason for it so I won't. Okay, so it sounds like we want to entertain a motion on that. Mr. Cartridge, is the location visible from the road? Very much so. Okay that's what I assumed and in terms of the trees that would be removed is it obvious which trees that would be? Are there multiple trees on the property?
There are multiple trees most of them are on the periphery of the property line but these two will be very obvious. There's large trees probably on the street. Okay all right so then I would ask the commissioners
to you know drive by prior to the next meeting so you have some familiarity with the site. We're not able to make a decision on any application within two weeks of receipt. So we won't be doing so this evening. It sounds like the commission would like you to work a little bit further with agent Wagner between now and October's meeting to address some of the questions that came up this evening and then hopefully we can issue a decision at our next meeting.
Okay, I appreciate that. I do have one more question about the runoff. I'm wondering what might be the easiest way to approach this or if we need to have runoff knowing that, you know, the buildings in the area, including our house, really don't have any anyway. So I guess I don't understand or question the real need for runoff from rainwater from the roof.
Sure, so when you replace the natural vegetated surface with what we would call an impervious surface when the water you know can't flow down through I'm assuming you don't want the water flowing down through your shed, that's the whole point. Normally the water would go down into the grounds and then move from there, most likely given your proximity to the lake. That filtration down through the ground, it helps eliminate some pollutants before it enters nearby water bodies. So anything you can do to encourage the water to go back down into the ground rather than just run off the surface of it during storm events. It's gonna
essentially improve water quality that's entering I the understand that, but a gravel, it's somewhat of a gravel driveway. I have a gravel lawn between the well and the house. I have a new grass lawn that was put in when we did the septic. I'm just it we've never had any difficulties with runoff and I just wonder the viability of that in this case, knowing the building is 165 feet from the lake. Sure.
Whereas we didn't have really have to do anything in the backyard where the septic was 80 feet from the lake.
Practical at this site or it may be that it's not necessary, but I think that's where working with agent Wagner over the next month and having
That's a good answer, thank you. I look forward to working with Agent Wagner on what he sees are the possibilities or if there's any need at all then. I appreciate that. Okay. Any additional questions before we move on? I'm good on my end.
Okay, any questions from the commission? All right, so agent Wagner we would ask that you follow-up with Mr. Partridge regarding the application.
I'll do that. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Thank you for your time and all that you do for the town. Appreciate it. Are
we dismissed at this point? You're welcome to remain on the call, but you're also welcome to leave. All right, thank you very much. You're welcome. Okay, so we'll move on to the new item 6B on the agenda which was application IWWC twenty-twenty '7. I did see it looks like Ms. Cuerco joined the call. I'm going to try and pull up those application materials since they were not distributed previously. Sorry. Let me go back one. Well, here's the application. Agent Wagner, are you familiar with this application? Yeah, looked at it.
Were you involved in helping the applicant prepare it? No, that was before
I got there. Partially prepared, and then I asked for a drawing of the fence design, which they submitted over the weekend. And then the site plan was all done before before I started here. So
Miss Puerto, see it Mr. Puerto, is it? I'm gonna unmute you guys. It looks like you're on the call. Is anyone else on the call representing this application? It's not unmuting for some reason, Linda? Yeah.
Perfect. Okay. All right. So I would say, would you either of you like to go ahead and present the application to the commission, what you're proposing doing and requesting a permit for? Oh you're muted again. All right, the audio on your screen keeps getting muted. I tried to do it from my end now.
Does that work? No, it's working. Yes. Thank you. Okay. All right. So where would be a good place to start? The side drawing here?
I don't know how to start, so maybe one of you guys do it. All right,
Megan, this is Linda. Yep. Can you just state exactly what this application is for? Because the application did not open up, so there's nothing on the screen.
Oh, you don't see anything on the screen? Nope. Alright. Let me try and redo my screen share. Sorry about that. How about now? Yep, it's there. Okay. All
right. So I will slowly scroll through this. Agent Wagner, did you have a chance to review this application for completeness? Oh, you're muted, Joe.
Yeah, that would help. Is it better? The only thing I noticed on there was there was no calculation of the upland acreage disturbed in the Upland review area. They had a wetlands one, but no upland acreage. But I think everything else looked good.
So what is the application for fencing? I'm trying to read it as we go.
It's for the fence that surrounds the property, a construction of a garageapartment in the Upland Review area, and then an in ground swimming pool in the Upland Review area. And accessory shed in the Upland Review area. No yeah to the 15 by 12 shed.
Okay. So given that this was a last minute receipt, and it's a fairly complicated application. I'm not sure how far we can get tonight discussing this if the application doesn't have anything further to share. Does the commission want to schedule a site visit?
I think we will need a site visit for this because it's not clear exactly what the disturbance to the wetlands will be or where it will be in relation to the wetland features. Is that a motion? I will move that we schedule a site visit. Is there a second for the motion? I second that, Allison.
The motion's been made by Vice Chairman Elliott and seconded by Commissioner Hollissey. Is there any discussion? You have a time and day?
Not yet. So typically we've been scheduling site visits for Saturday mornings. I don't know if that works for agent Wagner or for the applicants. Which, what Saturday?
You tell us, is there one that works better for you? At what time do you guys usually come?
Again, it's flexible. In the past we've done them around nine in the morning but if you know, I think it would be helpful to have you both there. If that's not possible, we could do it independently if we needed to. No, it's fine. 09:00 in the morning is fine. Okay.
Just a reminder to the board that your next meeting is October 5. So you only have three weeks.
Sure. Thank you, Linda. Alright, so we're looking at, the nineteenth, the twenty sixth or the October 3. Are there any conflicts in those three dates? We can do the nineteenth at 9AM. Does that work for the commissioners? I don't have any conflict. Commissioner Larson, are you available? Yes.
Gabriel, are you available this coming Saturday, the nineteenth at 9AM? You're on mute.
I'm sorry. Could you repeat that for me, please? Sure. Are you available
this coming Saturday, the nineteenth at 9AM to do a site visit for an application? So we would go to the property to see what the applicant's proposing on the site what they would like to do? Yes. Okay and agent Wagner does this Saturday at nine work for you as well? Yeah it should work. Okay.
But I actually myself, I'm not available, but I think given it works for everybody else, that seems to be a good date and time. So if there's no additional discussion, we can Chairman
Lawley? Sure. I'll go by Chairman. Point out to the applicants that it would also be helpful if the engineer of the project could be present. It's not essential, but certainly the engineer would be most knowledgeable of the conditions and requirements of the permit
yeah we would talk with him you know see if he's available Yeah,
whoever can best represent the application because typically the way it works is it's up to the applicant to describe everything you wanna do, what impacts there might be and how you would mitigate them. Then based on that information, the commission would make a decision. If you guys don't feel comfortable doing that, it makes more sense to have a paid representative do it, that's fine. We just need someone that can speak to the details of the project. Not necessarily at the site visit because we try to limit discussion during site visits, but potentially next meeting as well if that's an option to have them participate. Okay.
You have comments if it's appropriate? I just happened to notice that a number of the abutters were wrong. Noticed that people have moved. That would have to be updated. There a previous This is item 10? Yes. Okay.
I just happen to know that, because it's a Also small just, I would like to advise the, yep, they might want to check with their design engineer as to who approves that septic system for the accessory apartment. It may have to be approved at the state level, in which case you'd want to know that early on, I think.
Okay, before we get too much further in discussion on the application, let's close out the motion regarding the site visit. So I will do a roll call vote. The motion is to meet this Saturday, September 19 at 9AM at the property to do a site visit related to the application. The motion was initially made by Vice Chairman Elliott and I believe seconded by Commissioner Hallisey. And I'll do a roll call vote. Vice Chairman Elliott, do I commissioner Halsey, how do you vote? Aye. Commissioner Larson? Aye.
And I vote aye as well. So the motion carries four zero zero. Okay, so that motion is closed out. Any additional discussion on the application? Is there any information that commission would like the applicant to prepare prior to the October meeting?
At this point, I would like to just make sure the applicants are aware that with the accessory apartment that does require a special permit through the Planning and Zoning Commission. Yes.
Alright, Agent Wagner, can you work with the applicants on this application as well between now and the October meeting to make sure it's thorough and complete so that hopefully we can move it along in a reasonable timeframe. Oh yeah, I can do that.
Okay, thank you. Do the applicants have any questions before we move on? No.
No, okay. All right. You're welcome to stay on the call. You don't need to. Well, actually number seven C. Yes. I make a motion. We should have done that. It's out of order, but I'd like to make a motion that we move item 7C on the agenda, which is the enforcement action regarding 129 Hebron Road to the next item on the agenda. I'll second that. Motion seconded by Vice Chairman Elliott. Any discussion? Hearing none, I'll call for a vote. Vice Chairman Elliott. Aye. Commissioner Larson. Aye. Commissioner Hallisey. Aye.
And I vote aye as well. So the motion carries four zero zero. So that'll become new item seven A and 33 87 will become B, forty one Route eighty seven will become C. Okay. Agent Wagner, can you give us an update regarding the enforcement action related to that property?
Yeah. I visited 129. I met with the property owner, Najin, last Thursday. I took some pictures and made some notes on the pictures. They're posted on the website. I don't know if the commission had a chance to look at them. He showed me the area of the trench, which he filled in earlier in the year. And then yeah. It looks like I mean, stuff's starting to grow back in there. The trench is filled. There some erosion that's in the picture. I don't know if you'd bring them up. I think it was number three. Are they on the screen? Yeah. Photo Okay. Three?
It's the one above that. It's photo two. Okay. Sorry. Yeah, you can see a little bit of erosion towards, it's kind of in the center of the picture next to the small tree that's there. But other than that, it really doesn't look bad. Like I said, the trench was filled in. I didn't have a tape measure, but most of the disturbance there looked like it was outside of the 100 foot review area anyway. Can you walk us through the photos and what you're Yeah, first this is the first picture is looking towards Heben Road from the backyard up the side of the property. You can see like it looks like there's a neighbor's shed kind of peeking through up on the top right. And then this this line of that has less vegetation and it is where the trench used to be so you can see that's all filled in now
move on to the next photo yeah go to the next one
All right. Next one, this is the one where I said there's a little bit of erosion next to those two trees there. But that's starting to grow back in over there too. And then you can see the wetland behind it. Then this tree, the small tree that's visible on the right of the picture is has a tape marker. I believe that's the wetland flag on it. So that's like the edge of the wetland over there. And then hang on to the next picture. Let's see. This is yeah. Looking east. So this would be towards the backyard, I believe. I'll have the map in front of me.
I 'm gonna move on to the next photo. Yeah, you can. Is photo four.
And this is a close-up of the tree. It's hard to tell in this picture, but this smaller tree that's in kind of in the foreground, in the middle of the two other trees has a wetland flag on it. So this is that that tree that was in the earlier photo. And then you can see the extent of the wetlands in the back there. So that's what the site looks like as of September 10.
Is there any additional action that you feel like needs to be taken related to the cease and desist order that was issued? I don't think
so. I can't see anything that you would need to do. It's starting to revegetate anyway, and it's it's kinda late in the season. The trench has been filled. There's no more work going on over there. They're waiting for their permit. I don't know. I would I would think I would recommend to close the cease and desist order.
Okay, thank you. Does the Commission have any questions of Agent Wagner or the property owners regarding the enforcement action? No.
Would anyone like to offer a motion regarding agent Wagner suggestion to close-up the enforcement off order?
I'll make a motion to close out the enforcement action on 129 Hebron Road. Thank you. Is there a second for the motion? I'll second it, Hallisey.
Okay. Commissioner Hallisey seconds. Any discussion on the motion? I'm gonna see if I can bring it up on the screen. So just to reference the original order, The order related to the excavation of a ditch along the front and side property line, disturbance of materials within 100 feet of an intermittent stream and probable wetland soils along the rear of the property. And the activity resulted in the placement of fill in a regulated area and the trench appeared to alter the flow of surface runoff and channel it towards the aforementioned stream. The order cites the applicable laws and regulations And the order itself was to cease and desist from any further regulated activities within the regulated area or within 100 feet of a regulated area.
Agent Wagner, can you confirm that that aspect of the order has been complied with? Yeah,
it looks looked like it when I visited the site. Thank you.
The order also requests submission of a restoration plan depicting the type of vegetation for the disturbed area and reinstallation of materials along the road bank. The plan was supposed to be prepared by a qualified landscape architect or contractor and the restoration plan should employ an acceptable method to restore the property to a condition which is suitable to the agency. Do you feel that this aspect of the order is still necessary?
Well-being that the roadside is well out of the wetland area. I feel like that I I don't see how that could be under jurisdiction of the agency.
We did rule at a meeting, it may have been the show cause hearing, that the front property line, the one adjacent to the road itself, was not within the jurisdiction of the commission.
Being Yeah. That that paragraph doesn't really relate to the order as it's currently understood, I would say that it would be fine to proceed, I guess.
Okay. So do you feel that there's anything remaining in the order that needs to be addressed? No.
Those are all my questions. Does anyone else have any questions?
It's Chairman Lauvin, George Eliot. It seems to me we're approving the remediation, even though we never really saw a plan for remediation. And we are still absent details of this, guess that natural revegetation is occurring and yes, the area has been filled, but procedurally I would rather have seen a plan prior to the activity, even though the activity may be satisfactory.
Any other comments or questions from the Commission? Okay, hearing no further discussion then I will call for a vote on the motion which was to close out the cease and desist order regarding 129 Hebron Road. Vice Chairman Elliott, how do you vote? Aye. Commissioner Larson, how do you vote? Aye. Commissioner Halsey, how do you vote? Aye. And Chairman Lely, I vote aye as well. So the motion carries four zero zero. The cease and desist order is closed, for 129 Hebron Road and will be removed from, the October regular meeting agenda. Okay, so if there's no further discussion on that property, we'll move on to what is now item seven B on the agenda, which is regarding 33 Route 87, enforcement action against, Mr. Kurt Bohm. Is Mr. Bohm on the call this evening? Okay, don't believe so. Agent Wagner, you can combine your response with a new item 7C which is the enforcement action related to the adjacent Parcel 41 Route 87 which is owned by Sandra Nichols. There's also a order to remediate on that property for Mr. Boehm and Ms. Nichols. Can you provide the commission with an update regarding those two enforcement items?
Yeah, I've talked to Kurt a few times over the past month. I've visited his property. He explained to me he has the opportunity to trade his existing 32 foot shed for a 24 foot shed, and then his plan was to move the shed 10 feet away from the hill onto a part of the driveway, which would make the back end of the shed about 18 feet away from its current location, and then he could remove all the deposited material from the slope. And it looks like there's some vegetation there, and I didn't see it originally, but judging from the old slope, it looks like most, if not all, the material that was deposited could be removed. So I recommended that he file a remediation plan and then a permit modification before this meeting, but apparently, that didn't happen. So that's where we stand with that. I was gonna have him file a remediation plan separately to remove the material and then concurrently file a permit for a shed installation that could be, you know, approved on condition that the remediation was completed, but no permit was submitted. Yeah. You're on mute, Megan.
Thank you. So this is hopefully, it's showing on your screens the order to remediate that was issued 02/24/2020 regarding the violations. So I just wanted to revisit the actual language in the order to see where we're at with compliance. So the commission had ordered Mr. Baum and Ms. Nichols for the portion of the violation that was on her property to remediate the disturbed areas within the regulated areas specifically including but not limited to the removal of all the material deposited by the owner of 33 Route 87, which is Mr. Bohm involved in the leveled area and along the stream bank on the premise of 41 Route 87 Andover, Connecticut. Has any action been taken towards that aspect of the order, Agent Wagner?
No, when I visited the site, was all, as far as I know, it was all still there.
Okay. Has any action been taken to stabilize the area?
It no. It looked stable to me. I didn't see any evidence of erosion because it was mostly gravel and rocks. So there wasn't a lot of erosion, but no, it wasn't a there was no hay bales or soap fence or anything like that.
And is the material that was deposited 41 Route 87, is that still in its original location?
Yes. According to Kurt, he doesn't have permission to go on the Nichols property and he was waiting for that. Have you spoken to miss Nichols? I have not.
Okay. Could you I am I am on this call. This is Sandy. Oh, you. Sure. Go ahead, Sandy. Would you wanna provide any information?
Sure. So I've been having this discussion at your past meeting. Unfortunately, this has been mister Bowen's MO that he claims he doesn't know the rules and all that. You ask him to do things. He never follows up on it. The latest thing was, correct, we do not allow him on our property. There was supposedly, a contractor that was going to be contracted, I believe, a Mark Williams to do this, And we were waiting for his contract license and its insurance of liability for stepping on our property. And I know the commission has asked on two different occasions, and he is yet to provide this. And at the last meeting, that was my concern because you had the cease and assist, and it's still we're still waiting on mister Boheme.
And, again, the reason why I keep bringing this up, we have known water issues. We had put former owners have put money into the front because of the the water in the stream, and we are just concerned. We have a our basement finished, and we just don't want the ripple effect. So we just still don't understand why the cease and desist isn't going forward because everything is contingent on mister Bohlen who hasn't followed through on multiple conversations of what needs to be done.
So if is Wagner able to assist with obtaining it sounds like you're looking for a copy of mister Williams license and proof of insurance.
Would you Yeah. We need to know that he's a licensed contractor and what his his certificate of insurance. And I know when mister Halsey stepped in, he did request that on two separate occasions, and our attorney even draft a letter looking for that information, and we're yet to see it. And this was back in, I believe, June.
Agent Wagner, have you had any contact with mister Bell during this?
What did you say? You broke up a little bit. Sure.
Miss Nichols is requesting a copy of Mark Williams, the contractor that mister Bohm would like to use to remove the material from 41 Route 87 of his license, his general contractor license, and then proof of insurance. Have you discussed that with Mr. Baum?
I don't think I did. No. Okay. I was the most of the discussion that we've had when I met was was him clearing the debris off of his property, which was the stuff that was in the brook. So I think that part would probably make the most impact with the water problems on the Nichols property.
Okay. It would be good if we could close out the portion of the order that applies to 41 Route 87. Can you please follow-up with Mr. Baum and try and obtain the information that Ms. Nichols is requesting regarding Mr. Mark Williams? Yes. And
can you share that information when received with Ms. Nichols? Yeah, I can do that. Okay.
So you should be acting as a kind of a intermediary between the two property owners. They do not wish to communicate directly and I think that's for the best at this point. So if you can provide Ms. Nichols with any updates as you receive them and Ms. Nichols, you can feel free to reach out to agent Wagner if you haven't heard from him and are waiting for an update still.
And can I have a timeline because I know that you reached out already on two different occasions and I mean I have the emails that were sent to me saying we're waiting on this we're waiting on this so I mean we reach out and then there's no follow through and I guess that's what my bigger concern is?
Sure. I think that's reasonable. Agent Wagner, so if you're unsuccessful in getting that information from Mr. Brom, can you touch base with attorney Brantz and find out what the alternatives are? Are we able to or is Ms. Nichols able to select a contractor and bill Mr. Boehm for example? Like what are our options?
Well when I talked to him, he said, attorney Brantz said the commission should discuss whether or not because it's ongoing and unresolved, the commission should discuss whether or not they want to commence legal action through the Supreme Court, and that's what he recommended as the next step would be. And he said that the commission can hold an advisory and formal vote to decide whether they want me to commence legal action with through the court. That's what last time I talked to him about it. That's what he had to say. Do any of the commissioners have questions or comments?
Yes, Commissioner Chairman Lawley, George Elliott. Question for Agent Wagner. The letter that's entitled Effectuation of Order to Remediate, in other words, the letter from Attorney Elliott in the last paragraph mentions the continued clearing and addition to debris to the pile within other parts of the designated wetlands area. In other words, it's essentially a complaint that further wetlands disturbance has occurred since our order to cease and desist was issued. Were you able to view any of that in your visits or discussion with Mr. Bohm?
No. When I visited, I didn't see any. But I mean, I had only been that was the only time I visited the property. So I'm not sure what it looked like before. So I got I have answer that.
This is Sandy Nichols, and I think that was our concern is because this wasn't enforced down further past his garage, he built a platform on the side of the brook so a clog can go over it. So that was our concern because the cease and desist wasn't enforced. He continued to do some other, disturbance of the wetland down further. So that was our concerns. But I have my photographs go back probably since whenever my first meeting with you guys were probably October, November. I mean, I have those photos with the dates on them. You're more than welcome to look at it. But the new work that we were referencing was down, further. Is there a photo visible on the screen? Yes.
Okay. Miss Nichols is this I'm trying to look for something. I believe this is taking from the culvert between your two properties and new shed is off to the left of photo. Are you saying kind of back where the car is back here in the photo that there's additional activity going on in that portion of the property? No.
Do not have the new photo. So it's not even close to that area. It's down. So the stream, you know, runs between the two properties. So past, miss Bohem's shed is his garage, and right past garage is where the new activity was. So there's no you have no photo on record of the new activity down further.
Okay. I'm just trying to get a sense for where on the property.
Yeah. You you can't see it from any photo that was submitted. This is definitely much further from the road in that. And that again, that that's what the concern was because there wasn't the enforcement. He worked down further, still truly not understanding that you're not allowed to disturb near a wetland. So that was, again, the second concern.
Agent Wagner, can you formally investigate that complaint and be prepared to report back to the commission at the next meeting as to your observations. Yeah, I'll take a look at the property.
Is there an email that I could submit what I have for you? So that way you know what you're looking for. I mean, I can do to help you. Yeah. It's wetlands at Andover c t dot org.
Okay. I'll see what's in my phone. If not, I'll go out tomorrow afternoon, and I'll do that. Like I said, it's it's well past his garage, so you wouldn't have seen it from where you were looking. Okay. Thank you. Yep. Thank you. Okay.
Agent Wagner seems like there's three items that follow-up with him to see if he can obtain the requested copy of Mark Williams general contractor license and proof of insurance. The complaint that Ms. Nichols made regarding additional activity on the property further downstream on the property border. And then if you could speak to attorney Brantz and if we've made no progress, I think the commission would appreciate having a draft motion regarding next steps to take. Okay.
Chairman Lale. I think we definitely should consider taking further action at our next meeting if we haven't seen any forward motion on these complaints and orders.
Any additional discussion on this item? Okay, hearing none. I think we can, is there anything else the commission would like is Wagner to do between now and the October meeting related to this enforcement matter? Hearing none we'll move on to the next item on the agenda, which is item number agent report.
Thank you very much. I'm gonna sound loud. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Nichols.
This is an opportunity for you, Agent Wagner, if there's anything else that you wish to bring before the commission either enforcement or otherwise related to wetlands.
Let's see I saw I visited Matthew Hagerty's property on Townsend Road. He installed a silt fence along the wetlands. He was I talked to him. He was waiting for his contractor to bring a different machine in to install the silt fence along the wetland crossing area. And because he said the the other guy's excavator machine or whatever is better suited to that job. So, yeah, I drove by there today on my way to the town hall, and I saw somebody working. So per our permit, our scheduled visiting days are Monday and Thursday. So I'll go check that out probably on Thursday to see how the progress is going with that. What else? Eric Eric Anderson told me that town project, IWWC 20 Dash 24, the Whales Road near Shawty Mill drainage repair. He told me a few weeks ago that the project may be delayed due to that cleanup from the storm damage. I haven't got an update from him in the past couple weeks. Those that may have changed, but he just wanted me to advise the commission that it might be a little bit behind schedule. The other thing, sent you guys an email with the standard permit conditions that are attached to all the permits. Jim had suggested that the commission review and familiarize themselves with the standard permit conditions that we give with applications that are approved. So if you guys wanna take a look at that.
Can you run what we have by attorney Brantz and see if he has any thoughts on them in particular because I think that's problematic. And can we also ask you to look into what other towns have for their standard permit conditions? Yeah, I can do that.
Okay, and you might want to start with him and see if he has recommendations for towns that you know, he would suggest as models. But just to make sure if there's anything we need to add, I guess the third piece of that is whether we need to do so through the regulations update or if that can be done separately. These are written into the regulation. So I think it would need to be done as part of the regulations update. But if we could check with him on that. Did Eric mention to you the town's interest in installing stairs near the town ball fields along the recreation trails?
No, I haven't talked about that.
I got a call from Scott Persson who's one of the select men and I think he's charged with recreation issues in town. There was an accident from what I understand someone fell. I think most of us have been down to the trails that circle the soccer fields. We went down to look at some trees that the town was interested in taking down and decided it wasn't necessary for a wetlands permit. If you follow that tree line heading upstream, it trail narrows and goes down kind of a short but steep incline. There's a little bench there and I guess someone recently fell there. So the town wants to make a safer access point there. And he was talking about doing kind of wooden staircasing and inquired whether thought whether we thought a wetlands permit was required. I didn't think one was necessary. I felt that based on our previous conversations as a commission, we had multiple times stated that that was recreational use. And I think if anything that would improve erosion at the site but I wanted to run that by the commission and make sure there was agreement with that conversation. And if needed, I could issue an upland approval for the activity and ask them to submit something in writing but I did wanna run that by the commission.
Chairman Lawley. Go ahead. I believe that since this involves a construction in a Wetlands area, that it would be good to have a permit on that. And I think that you would be able to issue a summary permit without bringing it before the commission but I think just a matter of procedural it would be good to cross that I and dot that t. Okay any other thoughts?
Again, Halsey, is this I'm trying to understand what what we're talking about as far as the structuring, something that would potentially float away or?
I don't think so. Right now it's just dirt trail but there's some natural stones there. I don't know if they were you know manipulated to be there in the past or if they just happen to be there but it's not it's not a flat staircase down. For somebody who's not young and nimble it is potential for another accident to happen there. So they were looking to provide something more stable and potentially that did have handrails in it. So I guess I'm not an engineer, so I can't speak to whether it would float away. But it would be placing material on the existing trail. So it wouldn't be outside of the bounds of the existing recreational trail. I don't know if it's considered wetlands at that location, but it is definitely the the Upland Review Area. Thank you.
So how would the commission like me to proceed? If different from what I previously told him?
I will repeat my earlier assertion that I think that the activity should be subject to permit. And add that I think that that permit does not require the action of the full commission, but could be made as an executive action.
Maybe I'll put this in the form of a motion. So a motion that the installation of stairs with a railing at the existing trail crossing is a permitted use as of right because it's recreational in nature and therefore does not require a permit application.
I'm sorry. Heard two different things. Megan, I heard you say that it doesn't require an application. And if I understood George correctly, he says it does.
I'm trying to make a motion that we can actually formally discuss and make a decision on. Okay. I see. Yeah. So I'm putting a motion out there that I believe that the activity is described as recreational in nature. It's in the upland review area, and therefore it would be permitted as of right as it's recreational in nature. Anyone like to second so we can discuss? I'll second it. Okay, thank you, Commissioner Halsey. Okay, floor is open for discussion.
I'll withdraw my previous comment. I didn't understand you to say that there was a recreational and therefore permitted us, right. I missed that part of the previous discussion.
Well, it's up to the commission to decide that only the commission can really make it. Well, right. But
Can I add something? Sure. I just I feel like the definition of recreation would be like hiking, fishing, bike riding, something like that. So, like, construction for a purpose of recreation would be different than actual recreation.
I'm pulling up the regs to see. Okay. So I'm citing section 4.2B specifically. So the following operations and uses shall be permitted as non regulated uses in wetlands and watercourses provided they do not disturb the natural and indigenous character of the wetland or watercourses by removal or deposition of material, alteration or obstruction of water flow or pollution of the wetland or watercourse. Outdoor recreation including the use of play and swimming areas, golf courses, field trials, nature study, hiking, horseback riding, swimming, skin and scuba diving, camping, boating, water skiing, trapping, hunting, fishing, and shell fishing and cross country skiing or otherwise legally permitted and regulated.
Yes. Yeah. Think construction of hiking trails wouldn't fall into that. I think the use of it as a hiking trail would, but actually, it's like constructing a structure on it wouldn't wouldn't fall under that definition. Any other discussion?
I agree with agent Wagner. And I'd also say that without seeing the place that we're looking at, it's hard for me to participate in the conversation knowledgeably. Any other thoughts?
Yeah, I'm familiar with the location, and I can see the virtue of having better access to the footpath that runs alongside the river from the recreational field. No question about that. It is, in fact, steep and could be treacherous under certain conditions. So again, having an improvement, having improved access to the footpath would be desirable. I'm simply asserting that insofar as it involves construction that it should be permitted, requires a permit.
Is there an aerial photo on the screen that everyone Yes, yeah. All right, so just, I am almost certain everyone has been down to this location, but basically the ball field trail, there's, you know, a trail along the fence edge. We had walked that to consider removal of some of the dead trees along there. And then there's another trail that forms along this side and they kind of converged here. And there's a bench right here. And then there's a short incline here before the trail kind of moves upstream along the river. So that's the location I'm talking about if that's helpful. Quite a ways from the river actually.
That's within the stream bed at least and certainly within flood conditions it's within the riparian area.
It's up in the Upland Review area. Mean, no questions within 200 feet of the Hop River. All right, so let's vote on whether or not this is a an activity that is trying to check my language here, permanent as a non regulated use. As cited regulation section 4.2B. So I'm gonna call for a vote on that and then we can proceed. So Vice Chairman Elliott, how do you vote? I vote no. Okay, Commissioner Halsey, how do you vote? I vote no. Commissioner Larson, how do you vote? No.
And based on the discussion, I vote no as well. So the motion fails four zero zero. And therefore a permit application would be required. So I will relay that to the board of selectmen. And if the commission is comfortable with me doing so, as long as based on the information I receive it is within the upland review area and not a significant impact issue and administrative approval if the commission feels it would be appropriate.
I would certainly feel it appropriate. If you want a motion on that, will make it. Sure, that would be good. Okay. I'll move to authorize chairman Zolle to issue administrative approval for an anticipated permit application for the activity on the Hop River. I will second that motion.
Thank you. Any additional discussion? Hearing none, I'll ask for a vote. Vice Chairman Elliott. Aye. Commissioner Hallisey. Aye. Commissioner Larson. Aye. And Chairman La la I vote aye as well. So the motion carries 400. I will follow-up with Sefan Persson regarding that. Sorry to interject on your agent report. I just remembered I needed to circle back to the commissioner. Was there anything else? Any other activity you've done on behalf of the commission since our last meeting? I
think that's all I had to report on. I think you have any questions for me? This time.
Did you have a chance? I know Eric Anderson had asked us a meeting or two ago to look at how other towns handled permit approvals of kind of routine culvert maintenance and those types of activities?
Yeah, looked into it a bit. Had a lot of them do administrative approvals, but they'll do it through a separate permit, like a minimum minimal impact permit. There's different wordings depending on the town. That's basically like a a light version of the application that you use for stuff like that. So it would just go through, like a like a authorized agent approval with the use of a minimal impact permit.
Okay. Could you put your findings in writing for the commission to take a look at? Okay.
A work example of such a minimal use permit application would be helpful there. Yeah, I'll find a few to send to you. Okay.
And just as a reminder, we can't you can send materials to us outside of the meeting for the commission to review at, but everything does need to be on the public record. So we need to make sure. Yeah. I would think with this because it's not a specific application. It's just that it's yeah, I mean.
No. The advice we've been given is just put everything on the public record. Don't discuss anything outside of meetings. Better
safe than sorry. Okay. So all right. If there's nothing further for agent report, can move on to items nine on the agenda, other business. So under nine a, I did present Gabrielle Anderson to the board of selectmen, the nomination of her to the board of selectmen at yesterday's meeting and they motion to approve that. So as soon as she's able to get sworn in by the town clerk, Gabrielle is officially an alternate member of the commission. So welcome to Gabrielle. Indeed. So
just so you understand kind of what that means, Gabrielle. So on an evening like tonight where commissioner Smith wasn't able to attend, you would potentially be seated. And if you were seated, then you would behave just like any other commissioner who's seated. You would be able to make motions, second motions, vote on motions, participate in discussion, all those things. Alternates during annual meetings and certain other bigger votes outside of applications, they do at other times have the right to vote regardless of whether they're seated, but in a typical meeting, it's only if you're seated. So welcome to Gabrielle. The Board of Selectmen also formally received Wayne Thorpe's resignation letter last night. So he's officially resigned from his position as alternate on the commission, which means that we still have two vacancies on the commission to fill. So I'd like to formally acknowledge Wayne's service over the years and thank him for that and wish him well in his pursuits with cars and traveling to Florida, and all of that and, and just thank him for his service because he did serve for a long time. So there's two that remain. William Monroe, who's on the call, has expressed interest in filling one of those vacancies and previously submitted a letter to that effect to the commission. We asked him to sit in last month's meeting, which he did to kind of get a feel for the commission and see if he was still interested. William, you want to speak to whether you're still interested and if so, introduce yourself to the commission?
Yes. Can you hear me? Yes. Okay. Can you see me too? Oh, good. Only portion.
I wasn't sure if we had this right or not. That was a very interesting meeting. Anyway, yeah, I'm interested in pursuing this position as an alternate on the Wetlands Commission here. I have lived in town for my wife and I have lived in Andover for over thirty years. So we're pretty familiar with the town. The areas that you were talking about when you were talking about that stream there. I knew I know that spot very well and it is quite treacherous especially if it's wet. But I think I could add some you know on the you know like a different perspective possibly because I I really I have done a lot of hiking in the area and I'm very familiar with like Bishop Swamp area and any area that has a stream. A lot of the areas that I've hiked have streams on them. I have a background on hiking as far as trying to get into the wetlands part of it, but not really much experience in meetings and Zoom and this kind of thing. This is all new to me. But I think I could learn. But I am interested. So and you did get did you get a copy of my resume?
I had trouble receiving it. I don't know. So the town email I've had issues with in the past with attachments. It may be that the town issue is kind of scrubbing the attachment on me. I think that's okay if you want just share your background if there's anything else that was relevant that would have been on the resume that's fine to just do orally.
I did get an associate's degree in public administration at MCC, but that was forty years ago. But I guess what I have an interest I had an interest in government or, you know, this field, But then I went to work. I I worked for thirty five years as at UPS delivery driver, and I didn't have any time to do anything else. That was it. That's all I did. So now I've retired recently, I have some time. And I had about a little time of just free time and now I'm looking for some, you know, more of that like a job, not looking for a job, I'm just looking for, you know, like a volunteer position. And this this was available so I I said, this might be a good fit for me, possibly.
I I don't know if you were notified but at the board of selectman meeting yesterday they did also approve your nomination to I believe it was board of zoning appeals. Okay,
so I don't know if that changes anything if you're willing to serve on two commissions. There's no conflict with you doing so.
No, don't believe that's going to be a conflict. I did volunteer for that and comes to find out that their meetings are usually the third week of the month. Think so what I got out of And so, unfortunately, that's gonna be a little problem for me for a couple of weeks because I a couple of months because I already made a commitment somewhere else. So but, anyway, the yeah. So I I don't really had one meeting. It was very, very brief. And I believe they're gonna have another one next week and I'm pretty sure I'm gonna miss that. I'm not gonna be around. I'll try where I am. I could try to do this but I don't know if I can do it. This is Linda. The meeting is supposed to be tomorrow but it's been canceled. Okay. Good. So
I won't miss that. Okay. Yeah. But I would be okay with both. I am actually a member of that commission now
as a member. Oh, perfect. Okay. Yeah. I just wanted to make sure that I didn't know if it was going to be one or the other if you had time to do both. Oh, no, no. No. This this is that's
this is very interesting. I I like this this that you guys seem to be doing more of the of what I'm interested in more so, I think, really because this seems to be the the the real oh, I don't know what's the term you but the the nails of the operation, know, you if that doesn't get through the wetlands commission, it's not gonna go to the zoning. Right? Do the commissioners have any questions of Mr. Munroe?
Yeah, I just have one and that's kind of how do you feel about wading through a thick book of regulations to get up to speed on what we have to do. Because we are a regulatory agency. We had to refer to it, in fact, during our discussion on the Hop River access. And we have regulations that specify what and what may not be permitted and so I just generally feeling about how you you would approach that and how you feel about again working regulation not just the issues involved but the actual detailed regulations the bylaws of operation and so forth.
I'm okay with that I do a lot of reading and I don't have the retention that I'd like but I don't read and retent as well as I'd like but I if I have it in front of me I can understand it. I'm okay with it. I
always keep my copy of the regulations with me for every meeting. No, I don't think anyone would expect anyone to them. Right. And Gabrielle that reminds me I need to make sure you get a copy of the bylaws as well as the regulations. So if I don't get those to you, please follow-up with me and I will. Okay.
Any other questions of Mr. Monroe? Does the commission want to make a motion regarding his application to serve on the commission? Okay, I will move to approve the application. It's not Allison's iPad, William Monroe. William J. Monroe as an alternate for the IWWC. Is there a second to the motion? I'll second.
Thank you, Commissioner Larson. Any additional discussion? I believe I already asked you Mr. Monroe, but just to confirm you are a resident of the town of Andover and a registered voter in town, correct? Correct. I
don't think it's a requirement. Would the state of Connecticut, the DEEP offers an online training course for commissioners to become better familiar with the charge of the commission and the regulations? Is that something you would be interested in completing? It's on your own pace computer course. Oh, computer.
It's basically it's well, actually, Gabrielle just went through it. I don't know. Gabrielle, are you still on the line? Yes, I am. Can you speak to your experience going through the course?
It was extremely informative and easy to follow. It took me, I did it mainly in one day and was able to complete it in a couple of hours and felt comfortable with information.
Yes. I'd be interested in taking a reading through that.
Encourage all the commissioners to do it. I've completed it. Believe, agent Wagner, you've completed it now. Correct?
Yeah. Yeah. The DEP has a YouTube channel with a bunch of wetlands videos on it too. Stuff that's not in the course. It's pretty, pretty useful. It's easy because it's just a video and like a bunch of different series wetlands video.
Yeah, I think those were from the previous version of the course. Some of them were integrated into the new online course, but not all of them. But yeah, I mean, there's a lot of information out there. I would be happy if the commissioner's just to be online, the current online training. So just curious whether that was something that was of interest to you. The commission only needs to have one person, by state statute that's completed it. So at this point, we're good to go with that. But I think it's good for everyone to do to just be familiar with the material. Any other discussion or questions of Mr. Monroe before I call for a vote? Are you generally, I know tonight's a Tuesday, are you generally available Monday evenings?
Yes, generally. And
would doing site visits on Saturday mornings be problematic for you? No not normally but sometimes.
Okay, if there's no further discussion then I'll call for a vote on the motion to recommend William Monroe to the Board of Selectmen for appointment to the Wetlands Commission. It was made by George Elliott, I believe, and seconded by Commissioner Larson. Mr. Chairman Elliott, how do you vote on the motion? Aye. Thank you. Commissioner Larson? Aye. Commissioner Halsey. Aye.
And Ali, I vote aye as well. So the motion carries four zero zero. I know Jim brought up to me via email, the town charter and the appointment process. For these two appointments, I'm asking the commission to make a motion to nominate them to the board and have the board appoint them because it's a little fuzzy after a vacancy has been open for sixty five days, what the process is. I think the charter basically says prior to sixty five days, there's a process of a vacancy arises. The commission has to notify the political parties and the public within thirty five days and then they can fill the position themselves. If after sixty five days they haven't acted, the board of the supplement can fill the position. But it's not clear if after sixty five days the commission has the right to still self. When we put our slate to the Board of Selectmen last September there was a conversation that was had and it was agreed at that time that it's good for the Selectmen to you know potentially still have veto power in case, I don't know, future issues arise that we can't think of right now. So just to address that question if it was on anyone's mind. So what I did for Gabrielle was I wrote a letter of recommendation. I included her resume that she provided and the certificate of completion for the deep course
and gave that to the board of selectmen for their meeting packet. So I'll do that for Mr. Monroe as well. And hopefully they would receive it at their October regular meeting under the appointment sections of that agenda. I don't know offhand how the meeting dates fall relative to each other. So I don't know if there would be an opportunity for you to be officially, seated at the next wetlands meeting or if you'd have to wait until the following meeting, but regardless, and for you guys as alternates, I mean, even if I try to ask people, you know, if you know for certain you're not gonna be available to attend a meeting to let us know in advance, mainly so if we don't have a forum, we know that going into the meeting. But if we know that we will have all the regular members present, you're still welcome to attend and participate and we would certainly encourage you to do so. I think the alternate position is a really great training position. It gives you a chance to kind of learn the ropes without a lot of pressure. And then typically we would, rotate who we seat, as alternates, say somebody, you know, was on extended leave and we knew there was going to be a recurring vacancy.
We would try and alternate who gets seated to give you experience. In some cases that makes more sense to seat someone that had been seated the previous meeting because the other person wasn't present and had missed information that was a continuing discussion or something like that. So it may not always alternate perfectly but just so you guys have some expectations going into this regarding how you'd be seated and when. Any questions?
I do have questions but it's it's like there's probably a lot of questions but I'm not quite sure what question I want to ask There's like when I was looking at some of your documents that I picked up the very first time that you dropped them off and it appears that you mail letters to like say people that live near door next door or near somebody else that's putting in a permit making a permit to build something. What are those letters? What are they about?
So it depends on the application. We ask all applicants to provide us with a list abutters in the event that in particular, if an application wants a public hearing to make sure that they were notified of the public hearing. But just for a general application that doesn't go to public hearing, I don't believe we typically mail out letters to the public. What we've been doing instead to try and keep the public informed is under the legal notices on the town website, we'll include any applications that were received for the ones that go to paper because we have to pay by the entry only include formal decisions of the commission. So whether something was, whether we basically approved or denied a permit, and a few other things, we wouldn't put in receipt of application. So, members of the public can always check the legal notices to see what applications are coming and going.
But we haven't, it's something that commission can talk about. We haven't procedurally been mailing out letters every time we get an application to the list of letters. I'll make sure you get a copy. They should be online but they are lengthy documents. I will ask Susan who's in the building department. She assists the commission as well to print out copies of the bylaws and the regulations for both Gabrielle and William. Read them knowing that we've been talking about updating both of them. So don't memorize them. They're gonna change hopefully soon. Not substantially, regulations, there's been some guidance from the state that's come down over the years since we've last updated our regulations. So those need to be changed, but it requires going to public hearings. So we've kind of been dragging our feet on that a little bit. I guess that's a good segue into the annual report. I don't believe it was posted online because it's a draft version, but did everyone receive a copy of the draft annual report? I had emailed it out prior to the meeting, I think last week.
I can attempt to pull it up. Let me see.
I think you had a comment. Let's see if I can share my screen. Okay, is there an annual report on the screen? Yes.
Okay. Did anyone not have a chance to go through this? And by anyone, I specifically mean George, Jim, or Judd.
Hey, I just have one comment. Sure. Oh, clear. The annual report is, I believe it's a fiscal year, and it's July one year? Yes.
And and I you don't really make it clear on that. What anything that I've seen. I don't know. In this particular document or No. I say it down here. I I'm saying I do see it here. It's when when I've seen the the memos go out asking for input on it, it never defines the year.
Oh, okay. So, yeah. So down here, it's always as same as our terms. It's always July 1 to June 30. Yep. Which think it's too late to change it now about in in trying to prepare this. One thing that came to my mind is we've been, labeling applications by the calendar year instead of the fiscal year, which in hindsight, it would have been good if we did it by fiscal year for reporting purposes, but too late now. So most of this was regurgitated from the previous year's report. I think there was a comment that was mentioned to me, it's somewhere along the way regarding this line here that the regulations require that all landowners and their agents superpose activity either one within a wetland or water course, two within the upland review area of a wetland or water course, or three, in any other location when the activity is likely to impact a nearby wetland or water course first obtain a permit from the commission. These activities include, but are not limited to the cutting of trees, removal or deposition of any material, disturbance of natural drainage or that's a typo and or construction of new residences. There was a question regarding whether we wanted to permit the cutting of trees. My response to that would be we don't seek to permit the cutting of every individual tree, particularly within an upland area.
But we had an administrative review along the lake if I recall a year or two ago where a lot was cleared of pretty much all trees. And I think that's kind of what we're looking to have come before us if it's being I agree with that thought.
I don't know how you put that into words, but.
Yeah, I don't know if we need to. I think it's really just to let the public know that that is considered an item that's regulated. And I think you know, it'll be up to the individual whether they feel the activity is extensive enough that they would, you know, themselves come before the commission. And then if something more significant comes along, I think that's where the zoning and wetlands agents would come into play with advising the property owner that the activity requires a permit. The case law on it's a little fuzzy. This has come up quite a few times in the CACI trainings and different lawyers feel differently whether a tree is considered material and so on and so forth. But there is case lot of support, particularly, you know, if you're cutting many trees, that it is a regulated activity. Oh, that's right. So this took me some time. We had, just to explain kind of why it was a little bit chaotic this time around. If everyone recalls in June, we had a big turnover in the board of selectmen. So it delayed reappointments. The commissioner terms were up and it delayed reappointments until September. So reporting the membership was this is what I came up with as a solution. Saying we had turnover in the agents as well.
So I think I captured everything correctly, but if you see any mistakes, certainly please let me know. So covered membership, the agent turnover standard report includes the number of meetings. So I just included that again, as well as a summary of the applications we received, the decisions that were made related to them and enforcement. And I included any applications that were discussed at some point during the calendar year. So there were a few that were received in the previous calendar year, but not decided until the calendar year that I'm reporting on. And then one or two that were received within this calendar year, but that we didn't, decide on until the current calendar year.
And then we didn't really have too much other activity. Mention of trainings, the application tracking system that we started to implement and our work with Alma and Alcoa. And I did run into Linda Dirk recently and she reminded me that I had had a meeting scheduled prior to COVID to meet with the leadership of, I guess it would be Alcoa just to talk about potential overlap, what they're requiring in permanent applications to them versus what we're requiring and just making sure that they're not, from our perspective that they're not asking applicants to do something that what, my concern was going into the meeting, but, also just relationship building. So we are going to try and revisit that, discussion about getting the two commissions to just have venue for communicating, which we haven't done before. Any changes to the annual report or am I okay to finalize it and submit it?
I think it's fine. Do need a motion? Sure. I can move that the annual report for 02/2020 as presented. We accepted it already to the board's letter. I'll second that motion.
Any discussion? Okay, hearing none. I'll call for a vote. Vice Chairman Elliott. Aye.
Commissioner Larson. Aye. Commissioner Helicy. Aye. And Chairman Elliott, I vote aye as well. Motion carries four zero zero. So I will finalize that report and submit it to the Selectman via Amanda. The other item I had under other business was the annual CACIWIC membership. I received an email from them that I had forwarded on to the commission just reminding us that the membership is follows the fiscal year as well. I did confirm with the town treasurer that we have $65 in our budget for this in particular. So there is money in the budget to cover the membership. The bylaws authorize the chair to make decisions under $100 but I just wanted to bring it before the commission partly to remind the commission that we are a member of CACIWIC. So any trainings that they offer, know, they're good for the commission to attend. But I would ask the commission to make a vote so that or make a motion so that I can submit the CACUIC membership for the current fiscal year. So moved.
Thank you. Is there a second? Second. Thank you. Any discussion?
I have a question. Do they issue a do they put out a newsletter?
They do. And it's it's kinda ebbed and flowed in, how frequently. I think in the past, they did a quarterly newsletter. This year with COVID, there was a a spring summer or no. I guess it would have been winter, then they said they're working on their their spring summer one. I will forward any I receive. I think they're trying to switch to an online format and I would encourage everyone, attorney Janet Brooks usually writes an article for them that's typically wetlands focused And I find them to be excellent. Is this kind of relevant recent case law and Connecticut specific stuff that's gone on. I found them really helpful, particularly as a newer commissioner. So yes, and if I receive copies, I'll forward them. I don't know if they're doing hard copies anymore. And I think I did forward as part of that communication, there was a link to the one that went out earlier this year. You did.
Okay. Alright. Did we, we didn't vote yet though, right? Or did we vote? No, not yet. Okay. So we'll do roll
Any other discussion? Okay. So we'll do roll call vote. Vice Chairman Elliott. Aye.
Commissioner Larson. Aye. Commissioner Halsey. Aye. And Chairman Elliott vote aye as well. So motion carries four zero zero. I will submit that paperwork to the treasurer. Item 10 on the agenda is that our next regular meeting is back to the first Monday of the month. So it'll be Monday, October 5 at 07:00. This is Linda's last meeting. So I just wanna reiterate, thank you again to Linda. Thanks so much. Thank you. It's
been fun. I've enjoyed everything. Thank you so much. Thank you, Linda.
We will we will miss your excellent note taking. So, hopefully, we'll have somebody else on board to take Linda's place. By that time, I I believe the town is is working on finalizing a usual clerk. So we'll meet that person in October. And if there is nothing else, I will entertain a motion to adjourn.
I do have one other thing, Megan, I'd like to And just bring that is while you've got the final page of your annual report on there. I know there's a meeting of Alma Alpoa, a semi annual meeting coming up sometime late October. Okay. And at the previous meeting, which I think was in June, one of the is they were reading through the minutes of the previous year, they had mentioned how the Planning and Zoning Commission had passed new lake regulations. And so I had to fess up that no, we were hoping to have done that, but hadn't done that and for a lot of different reasons hadn't made much progress on that. We are trying to get started on moving that ball down the field again. In anticipation of briefing the Alma Alpoa meeting, I have come up with a little presentation, what I thought that the purpose and what the lake regulations would involve. And I was thinking that maybe on the October 5, because we've got a new wetlands agent, we got a couple of new members that might be a good time to go through that. I know when George was bringing up the comment on the runoff from the shed, you know, that is exactly what the lake regs are trying to address and put some structure in. So we've got a way to make sure that we're making the runoff into the lake better after we improve a property as opposed to
degrading. So anyhow, all that, it's timely with, we are trying to get the lake rakes up and running again. They're not done yet, but at least I understand better a concept than I did a year ago. And I'd be happy to share that with everybody here.
So would you like me to make sure that goes on the agenda for the October meeting?
If time permits, and I think it would probably take fifteen, twenty minutes maybe to have that discussion. I'm not sure. Haven't gone through it with anybody yet. It's just something I worked on myself at this point, but I do know there's gonna be, there is interest in the late regs. Excellent.
Okay, yep. And I would like to put the bylaws on the October meeting. Will resend out. I think we've done edits to them and just never gotten around to finalizing it. Main edits were clarifying the expectations of the staff associated with the commission. So the board clerk, the land use assistant and the wetlands agent. So I had spoken with Eric Anderson and just got clarity regarding who should actually be doing what. And I think the board clerk in particular had a lot of duties assigned to it in the bylaws that are not the duties of the board.
I thought they were great Megan. I plagiarized the report or your bylaws and put planning and zoning at the top and so that
Well if my memory is correct I think John had plagiarized them several years back from Columbia So I think credit's due to Columbia.
Our last discussion, Jim had some comments which we should sort of revive. I believe they were in the minutes for that meeting. Some cogent points about going forward with hybrid meetings especially some of the pre hearing procedures as well. Let's make sure we pull that up too.
I will revisit those minutes because I believe I was not present for that meeting. I will see if there's anything I can incorporate into the version I send out for next meeting to kind of get ahead of that. Okay, perfect. All right. Anything else? Alright. Hearing nothing else, I will entertain a motion to adjourn. I move we adjourn. Second.
Alright. So there's a motion by commissioner Larson, seconded by vice chairman Elliott. The meeting is adjourned at 08:58PM. Or do we vote? See you all Saturday. I always forget, oh, aye. Commissioner Larson. Aye.
Commissioner Hollisie. Aye. All right. Chair Lolly, I vote aye as well. Motion carries four-zero-zero. Meeting is adjourned.
Thank you. We are going all press the little red button on the lower right hand screen. Yes. Have a good