001Commission meeting for the town of Trumbull for March 3rd, 2026. I'll ask our clerk, Colleen, to give us a roll call of the commission. >> Richard Gerard, >> present. >> John Lauria >> here. >> Carmine DeFao >> here. >> Rich Deacon >> present. >> David Baraspi. >> Greg Cernica >> present. >> Bob Frigno >> present. Town staff Tatiana Soliv >> here. >> John Mayer >> here. >> Attorney Cardone, >> I'm here. >> Thank you, Colleen. All right. At this point, I'm going to our town attorney to give us the legal aspect of doing a video conference meeting if you would, sir. >> Yes, Mr. Chairman. As is the practice of this commission, the meeting is being conducted pursuant to Connecticut law um remotely over the internet and telephone. The agenda and supporting application materials were
002posted on the town website 24 hours in advance of tonight's meeting. Um if there is a public hearing, I don't know if there is one that's happening this evening, um instructions will be given at that time for public comment. And I would remind everyone that tonight's meeting is being recorded and to be acknowledged by the chair before speaking. Thank you. >> Thank you, counselor. All right, we're going to go to new business and application 26-05, which uh is 38 Pinewood Trail. I'm going to go to um our town engineer, John Mayor. I understand you received a letter. Uh yes, the applicant requested in writing that um the application be withdrawn earlier today. >> All right. So that being said, I need a motion to close new business. >> So moved. >> And seconded by Bob.
003All in favor? >> I. >> All right. That's good. All right. We're going to old business. And at this point, I'm going to ask Greg to make a motion to take application 25-25 out of order uh for deliberation purposes. Uh I make a motion to take application Plum Tree LLC. Um take that application out of order and to be handled uh for deliberation purposes. Okay, I need a second. Seconded by Rich. All in favor? I. >> Okay. Unanimous. All right. I'm also at this point going to uh ask you to do a motion for u denial of application 25-25. >> Yes. I make a motion to deny without prejudice application 2525 15 Plum Tree LLC. a permanent approval to construct three three-story apartment building and nine attached town houses. A retaining wall, subsurface storm water
004detention system, level spreader, sidewalks, and storm drainage within a regulated area at 5 and 15 Plum Tree Lane for the following reasons. Number one, the commission finds that the applicant failed to satisfy the application submission requirements and that the applicant is therefore incomplete. The application is therefore incomplete. Pursuant to sections 8.7 of our regulations, an incomplete application may be denied. Specifically, required plans and supporting documentation were not submitted to the town of Trumbull. Point two, items submitted were not sub submitted within the time frame sufficient to allow proper review by the engineering department and the inland wetlands and water course commission. Additionally, materials required for the public hearing were not submitted in advance or made available for public review and comment prior prior to the noticed public hearings. Third bullet, as a result, the commission
005and the public were denied access to timely and complete application materials and plans. Reason number two, the commission finds that based in part on independent expert testimony pre presented at the January 13th, 2026 public hearing that substantial evidence exists that certain drainage channel is an intermittent water course. Further observation of this channel is required in the spring. For the f forgoing reasons, the commission denies the application without prejudice. >> Right. I need a second. >> Seconded by Rich. All in favor. >> Okay. Unanimous >> discussion uh discussion on the motion before voting, Mr. Chairman. >> Okay. Nope. At this point, we're um I'm going to ask u Greg to u go over details that support the first reason for the denial. >> Yes. uh the backup details for uh discussion that support the first reason
006for the denial. Number one, the applicant did not meet the requirements for submitting required plans with supporting documents to the town of Trumbull so they could properly re be reviewed by Trumbull's engineering department submitted to the inland wetlands and water course commission the IWWC and to be posted on Trumbull's wetlands website for public review. The applicant failed to meet requirements of section 8 application procedures. The applicant did not provide documents to the office of the town and engineer 15 days prior to the hearing date as required by section 8.1. The applicant failed to provide additional information as the agency reasonably requested as required by section 8.5. 1A for the January 13, 2026 public hearing, which was a remote meeting via Zoom and a continuation of the original in-person December 4th, 2025 public hearing. The applicant
007presented and recommended to the commission an entirely different proposal for the commission's consideration. The applicant called this proposal an alternate plan for the site. There were no plans or documents that were submitted prior to the meeting for engineering. the commission or the public to view and prepare for this public hearing. The plans presented at the meeting were also incomplete, i.e. no information on proposed contours and gradings, locations of utilities, etc. The plans presented were more of a schematic and did not comply with the requirements of IWWC application for permit and checklist or the IWWC regulations section 7.5, 7.6 6 A and B and 7.8. No hard copies pre presented are uh as required by our regulations but only ecopy was submitted on 113. uh 1B. Also at this meeting, the applicant granted its approval to
008extend the public hearing 13 days to January 26th, 2026, which was a remote meeting via Zoom at 7 p.m. so they could complete and present the proper supporting documentation. Trumbull's engineering group requested the documents be submitted in advance to engineering so they could be properly reviewed and forwarded to the commission and posted on Trumbull's wetlands website for public review one C. The applicant failed to submit any documentation for the January 26, 2026 public hearing except that the applicant submitted for the Trumbull's engineering department an electronic package at 4:54 p.m. Town offices were closed and this was after hours on January 26, 2026. This late delivery did not allow any persons to review the applicant's plans before the public hearing. There was no delivery or receipt of 10 full-size copies of all the applicants required site
009plans with all the supporting design information and documentation prior to the meeting as required by Trumbull's IWWC's application for permanent checklist and the town regulations. Because the electronic set was also late, there were no documents posted on Trumbull's IWWC website for public review. The applicant presented their plans via Zoom with no prior review by engineering, the wetlands commission, and the public. And these entities were only able to view what the applicant presented on screen. One hard copy was dropped off on 12726 the day after the meeting. 1D. At the end of the January 26, 2026 public comment portion of the public hearing, the applicant requested that the commission closed the public hearing in order to meet the statutory expiration date for this public hearing. The commission voted to close the public hearing. One E. Additional
010non-compliance that added to the total time to process this application occurred initially when the applicant failed to provide documentation USPS certificate of mailing that all adjacent property owners were mailed in a timely notice of the original November 13, 2025 in-person public hearing. The applicant requested that a new public hearing date be scheduled. The first public hearing commenced on December 4th, 2025. This applicant failed to submit an alternate plan at the December 4th meeting as required by Trumbull regulations section 7.5F. So that's sort of the facts uh that I've been able to put together for um the first reason uh for denial and I'm just going to go in right now the backup details for the second reason of denial. Um, number one, there was an expert hydrogeeologist report from WSP. Michael Mandel Lacis, a certified
011professional geologist and licensed environmental professional leap, whose specialty area of practice is hydrogeeology, which was presented at the January 13, 2026 public hearing, that substanti that substantial evidence exists that the drainage channel is in an intermittent water course and it's and is located in the project area. He recommended that further observations be conducted in the spring. 1A. The hydrogeeologist noted evidence of scouring deposits and recent alovvium and convey surface runoff from Plum Tree Lane toward Mill River 1B. The hydrogeeologist noted that because drought conditions were seasonally low groundwater levels, flow was not observed in the permanent channel and bank. He noted that these determinations are normally made with observations in the spring and recommended that further observations be conducted in the spring. 1C on several dates in 2025, assistant town engineer and a few commissioners
012heard and witnessed water flow from the outflow of the drainage pipe located on the southern portion of the site near Plum Tree Lane. And just southwest of the home at 15 Plum Tree Lane. On May 16th, civil engineer John Mayor. On May 23rd, uh Tatiana Soliv video uh the sound of the flow under heavy brush growth. And on May 28th, Tatiana Soliv with commissioners Richard Gerard and David Vby along with the applicants team on both September 22nd and October 22nd. Civil engineer John Mayer. 1D. The applicant soil scientist William Kenny PWS PLA report did not see flow in the channel when they made their inspection, which was from William Kenny Associates letter July 10th, 2025. He claims he made his inspection on May 28th and June 20th, 2025. He also confirms he was on site
013with town representatives for the May 28th meeting. William Kenny also issued a letter report on May 12th, 2025 with similar conclusions from an investigation on August 9th, 2023. Again, these determinations were normally made with site observation. These determinations are normally made with site observations in the spring onee. On January 10th, 2026, WSP dug a shallow test hole beneath the base of the channel and returned on January 11th, 2026 and observe groundwater in the hole presently approximately 1 ft below grade. With Fairfield County experiencing abnormally dry conditions, there is potential that a portion of the channel flow is also fed by groundwater. 1F. A revised 1959 town of Trumbull map prepared for nearby parcels shows a spring flowing onto the site. A deed for five Plum Tree Lane also references a flow of a certain spring.
014This suggests that a potential intermittent stream channel qualifies as an intermittent water course 1G. After further observations in the spring of 2026, typically this would occur in April or May, there is a potential during seasonal high groundwater levels that at least a portion of the channel flows and is fed by groundwater. If this is the case, the channel would be classified as an intermittent water course. One H. The project design has 50 mature trees being removed that would be in the review area of this intermittent water course. So that's kind of the facts just digging through a lot of reports and meeting notes uh that we compiled to come through this uh motion. >> Thank you Greg for uh all your efforts. Okay, I'm opening it up to the uh commission for comments, thoughts if
015there be none. All right. In that case, the move to make a U. We did second it, right? >> Yes. >> Let's go to a vote then. I'm a yes. Bob, >> yes. >> Carmine, >> yes. >> Greg, >> yes. >> Rich, >> yes. >> John, >> yes. >> Right. So move six uh six approvals and or six yays and David's not here. So all right, let's move on to our next application. >> So just for the the clerk, Mr. Chairman, that was a motion to deny without prejudice was approved six to nothing. >> Yes. Thank you, councelor. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> All right. Um, this application 26-02 Joseph Juliana is a permit approval for an ingground pool within a regulated area at 17 Applegate Lane. Uh, we were to walk that and
016unfortunately we had another wonderful blinding snowstorm with something like what was it 12 15 inches of snow and uh we were not able to walk it. I know I talked to Tatiano about asking them to uh agree to a continuence. Uh because the other reason for walking this um in fact John in fact I'm going to go to John Laura you made the point John. >> Yes. Well, one of the other things as part of approval of this project with the pool was to also look at what the happened in the first phase of this project and that make sure that everything in that mitigation uh is correct and agreeable to the commission and we won't be able to see that as well if it's all snow covered. So, I think that we have to
017wait until we don't have snow cover to go out and inspect these things. All right. >> Thank you, John. That was a good point. Um, so Tatiana, are they okay on it? I don't u I see Tracy did uh you wish to speak about this, Tracy? >> Yes, that would be great. But if Tatiana has any comments, I'd be happy for her to provide those first. >> No, go ahead. Go ahead. >> Thank you. >> Um, uh, so again, Tracy, >> I got to stop you for a second. Yes, >> you better do your spiel. >> Yes. Um, >> free advertising >> for the record. Um, I'm Tracy Shalof, landscape architect based in Danbury, Connecticut. Um, on the call tonight, um, I also have Manny Dilva with um, Rose Andiso, who's the project engineer. So,
018if you have any questions for him, he'd be happy to answer the engineering related questions. Um I'd like to begin with um addressing the questions of the commissioners that had come up last month. Um so if I may share my screen please visible to everyone. >> Yes. Now it is >> wonderful. Okay. So, um, the proposed 16 by34 swimming pool is here. There's been no change to the pool location since the last plan that you saw. However, the items that were addressed and clarified would be that um, the pool will not have a backwash system. It's a cartridge filter system. So, there's no discharge or backwash necessary. So, we don't have to worry about anything being discharged to the wetlands. Also, uh, Mr. Vespie had asked if there might be a planting plan to accompany
019the application and I discussed that with the owners and, um, we decided that we would propose some native plantings and on the lower level to this retaining wall here. And we're incorporating seven heavy metal switchgrass, which is a native plant and it's also deer resistant. Um so that that covers the proposed plantings. The other comments were about the propane tank. Currently there's an existing tank in this location and the owner plans to remove that and in lie of it install a 500galon underground propane tank in this location. So we verified all the setbacks for that and were able to meet the required setbacks from the septic system and the house for this 500 underground tank. There are also some comments regarding the labeling of the plans. Um so to alleviate and clarify alleviate confusion and
020clarify um we've added labels calling out what elements are existing versus what is proposed. For example, this this picket fence had not been labeled on the previous plan, I believe, on the engineers plan. So, we've clarified that existing fence, existing steps here. And also, we corrected our sheet numbers, our plan sheet numbers, so that they're not redundant. So, the landscape plans are labeled SP1 and SP2, and the engineering plans are now labeled EP1 and EP2. So we know that all of the plans should be part of this package. Additionally, I believe there had been a question about the area of disturbance, whether it was in square feet or cubic feet, like in volume. And this is on the application form, but I just wanted to reiterate that the area of Upland Upland review area disturbance
021is um just over 4,000 square ft, 4150. And then the area to be excavated is around 3,900 square ft. So that's for the excavation related to the swimming pool and also the play area. And the goal is to balance the cut and fill I understand the commission would like to have a sitewalk, but I did want to ask if the commission may consider uh the approving this conditioning the approval based on the outcome of the sitewalk. Um I don't know if that's possible, but I just wanted to inquire about that. Uh, and if there are any questions regarding the drainage system, again, Manny Dilva is on this call. Thank you. Uh, Tiana or John, Mayor, you have any comments? Uh, we've looked at the plans. They u, as Tracy said, they've covered, I think, all
022the questions raised at the last meeting. And as far as I believe they the only outstanding item is the actual sitewalk. Um and there are a couple of conditions of approval that I would recommend with this application, but we can discuss it next meeting. >> All right, with that said, um any comments, questions from the commission? the chair. >> Go ahead, Carmine >> Tracy. On the application, as far as areas to be cut or filled, it gives area and volume. It would be appreciated if you can provide the volume of disturbance also. >> Okay, thank you for that. Yes, we can provide the volume that that is being moved um to achieve the cut and fill balancing. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Through the chair, >> go ahead. Uh Rich, >> uh
023did we determine what type of monumentation would be along the wetland limit line? I know there was a discussion about either using placards or boulders. >> Yeah. Yeah, there's actually three stakes and each stake will have one of our uh our um monument. What am I trying? Our decals on it that designates that it's a wetland >> through the chair. >> Yep. >> I thought on the last plan that we saw I thought I saw two of them called out on the plan and I don't see them now at all. places where the placard would be >> between the rocks. There were supposed to be three I saw stakes when I went out there. >> I thought they were I thought two of them were called out on the last set of plans and I
024don't see any >> there there is something right here. We're unable to move it, but see where that little red line is that I've drawn. If if we could just perhaps move over a little bit so we can see that better. >> Yes, absolutely. And also I think I can help clarify. >> Okay. Does that red line show up on your >> I guess it's all >> Yes, the red line's to the left of my plan. Um >> I guess but it says demarcation boulder there. Maybe you might be able to >> Oh, I'm sorry. I move. So I I'll motion to it. So um these these black symbols, these are the demarcation boulders as they have been installed. So they exist right now. and um on either I two or three of the boulders
025that the plaques actually have been applied to the rocks and those exist as well. >> Okay. >> A question for you. How were they applied? Because originally we spoke about putting 4x4 post because I don't know. I mean I I don't know what type of adhesive. But I mean, you know, I guess we'll look at it when we go out. If it's fine, we'll go for it. Otherwise, what we had discussed was there was going to be three, four by four posts, and I swore I saw him the last time I walked out there. Tatiana, were they out there or am I uh, you know, confusing that with another walk? >> Um, not sure. Tracy, maybe you can help. >> Yeah. Yeah, sorry. I I believe I have clarification now from the owner. Um there
026there are three posts out there. My apologies. I misspoke. I thought they were on the rocks, but apparently there are three posts. >> So, and that's what they're being applied to. All right. Anything else, Rich? >> Um no, just that um as long as they're, you know, put on there securely and they're free. The town supplies them free of charge. So, every wetland owner should you consider those. Thank you. >> There. All right. Anyone else? Any other questions for the chair? >> Go ahead, Greg. >> I I don't think it's any issue, but uh an underground uh propane tank. I'm not familiar with in uh an area. If if the thing starts leaking, I don't know what it's going to end up, as I'm thinking through this, it's just going to end up flashing and
027moving moving uh out of the ground. I don't from a pollution point of view. Uh I'm just assuming everything anybody's going to be looking at it, it's going to be uh the building department with fire rags, I guess. I don't know if anybody knows of any 500galon propane tanks. Um, I mean, I worked at a company, we we had underground propellant for aerosol, uh, but they were all secondary containment. So, I've never I have no experience with just burying a tank like that. I don't know if anybody has a comment on that. >> Um, I know it would be uh overseen by Megan, who is our fire marshal and also the building department. Do you have a comment, Rich, because you're P&Z? Well, P are you're referring specifically to the placement of the tank like
028uh Well, >> I'm just saying if a tank starts corroding, you bury a tank, you're going to start having a leak. It's not a liquid tank. So, you're not worrying about it trans I don't think you're going to see any of that stuff transferring down toward the wetlands. It's likely going to flash and come up high uh try to percolate through the soil. So, I I from that point of view, I guess that's the only reason I'm talking. It's do we have a pollution risk here? like fire we're not going to deal with. That's uh our uh fire inspector, whatever the codes are. Um I'm just I'm talking kind of a problem solver. Has anybody ever worked with something like that? I haven't seen a buried propane tank in a uh uh in this type
029of environment. That's all >> normally >> zoning, but I mean hopefully there'll be some type of uh monument around it so no one inadvertently disturbs it during excavation. >> But it's also generally encased also >> in concrete. >> So one I've seen they put it in and then like a plastic and then they do the uh steel, aluminum, whatever the tank is just to keep the moisture away from the metal. But >> and also won't be pierced then by some future excavation. Somebody forgets that tank is there in 50 years. I mean >> so long as I'm not in the neighborhood, I'm not worrying. So sorry there. >> Yeah, I'm just more as a pollution risk and I I don't see that unless >> um you know I if it starts leaking, it's likely just
030going to be bubbling up through the soil and try to escape that way. It's a gas >> through the chair. >> Go ahead. >> Propane is he propane is heavier than air. >> Propane gas is heavier. It will stay low. It will not dissipate up into the air. >> But it's a fire it's a fire explosion risk, right, Carmine? It's not necessarily >> groundwater. That's all I'm We should be dealing with groundwater. That's all. I I don't see that risk. I'm just talking through what that risk could be. >> I'm going to they're going to they're going to put some type of a marker that there's a uh tank there just so you don't get somebody that uh >> decides to dig around the pool or something. So, but like I said, that would be
031building or Megan who's our fire marshal. >> Correct. So, >> correct. Yep. >> All right. Good point, Greg. Any other comments, questions? So, um, did any of you want to have any questions for, uh, Manny? Should we have him do a quick presentation? Were there any questions from our last meeting? I'm trying to think. Um, Tatiana, did we have any for Manny? >> Uh, we we had a couple of internal questions, but they revised the plan and they were addressed. So, nothing outstanding from us. >> All right. Uh, Mr. Silva, if you won't feel left out, I guess uh, unless you have a few comments you want to uh, add to the record. Good evening. My name is Manny Silva from Rose Tisone Company, registered civil engineer in the state of Connecticut. Uh, I really
032have don't have much to say except um, the uh, the tank underground uh, propane tanks, they look like submarines where they have a tower in the middle and that tower is exposed outside. So, you could see that uh, there's a tank there. Um and the uh commissioners are correct. Uh you know it doesn't uh it's not a groundwater uh it's not a pollutant um to or any kind of risk to the wetlands if it were to leak. Um the uh propane is heavier than air so it would stay in the hole but if it is pressurized like it normally is it would just dissipate into the air. Um but that's it. Thank you. >> All right. That being said, then um no other comments. We'll move on to the uh next application. Thank you both
033>> to the chair. >> Go ahead, John. Are we having a continuence of this or >> we're going to at the uh end of the uh session we'll determine when we're going to walk it again because our last couple of walks have been tough because of this uh that awful snow season we're having. >> I didn't know what I'm going to try to do is >> move it as close to our next meeting as possible. And by then hopefully the uh snow will have dissipated and we'll be able to see what we need to see. All right, John. >> Okay. Right. All right. That being said, we're going to go to uh application 25-43 Paris W. Salis. It's a permit approval for restoration and reconstruction of existing residents, landscaping, replacing driveway and frontw walk and
034insulation of storm water retention system within a regulated area at 2011 Old Dyke Road. Again, unfortunately due to the weather, this was on our walk and we couldn't do it. Um, I know that I had Tatiana reach out and explain that we won't be able to decide on this until we do our walk, but I see um, Mr. Salis is here. If you have a few comments, go ahead, sir. >> Uh, thank you. Thank you very much uh, for allowing me to take up your your time. Uh, just to kind of review where we are. Last time we met was uh, December 5th. Um and as as you mentioned the sitewalks have been postponed two times now. Uh personally I um oh again for the record Aristo with Arisle and studio. Um it's finally we
035have a good Connecticut winter. Um but some of the items that were brought up in December having to do with the project included tree removal. So we added we tried to quantify how many trees were removed. Those plans were submitted in January. Uh we added some more plantings with larger shade trees to the planting plan. uh the stormwater question was asked in that December meeting and that there is no impact uh if we were to include the the um the existing stone wall in terms of imperous area there's more than enough volume there in the system that's been designed. Um, as you're waiting, we we have lined up uh a wetland scientist to review that that swale that's there to confirm that it's not a water course. Um, and again, they are waiting on the
036on the snow to melt as well. And then I did want to ask on behalf of the the applicant because the work he wants to do is just to the building itself at this time. And if the commission could grant that, we'd be very appreciative as a call it a allowance to do building work. Let's put it that way. >> All right, they're fine. Are you talking interior work, exterior work? >> Just um taking off the roof and starting to do just work on the building. So, they have to remove the existing roof and start doing the framing to put on the second story. Tiana and John Mayor, your thoughts because I mean, you've got the driveway that goes up to the uh to the residence. Um, only concern I'd have there is you still
037have the snow cover. I don't know about debris and everything, you know, being spread around and unable to be cleaned up because of the uh snow. And we've already had a few of the neighbors been upset because it's just been sitting there for so long. What are your thoughts, Datiana? >> Um, so it's I don't think it's a question for us. I think it's really procedurally. I'm not sure how we can make work. A wetland permit is required for building permit sign off and if the commission is willing to grant the permit, you know, that's what we can plug into into the building permit. But otherwise those two they kind of have to uh follow steps that >> so let's let's do the walk and then we'll uh we'll grant it because I think we're
038we're going into gray area here. So, >> okay. >> Would love to extend the courtesy, but and again, I think it's got to be because I build I'm doing a couple projects and I think we're looking at a good two, two and a half, three weeks before we lose this snow and our ground is soft enough to work in again. So, >> uh any comments, questions for uh Mr. Stellis while we have him here? Are we good? All right. Thank you, sir. Thank you very much. >> Right. We'll catch you in next month. >> Yep. >> All right. Okay. We're going to application 25-10, which is a old business continuation of public hearings. Um, I'm going to go to attorney Cordone because he has a letter from the U applica or application applicants rather attorney.
039And this is for application 21-07 and for lot 321 at Sycamore Street. And that's application 25-11. It's all yours, counselor. >> Thank you. Um, this is a letter from attorney Willinger uh sent to me today after we just had a conversation for applications 2510 and 2511. This letter confirms our recent telephone conversation. As of March 1st, 2026, the state of Connecticut, Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, has promulgated major revisions to its cleanup regulations. Our LEP has been in communication with the town's LEP WSP and they have agreed to seek clarification from DEEP of the new releasebased cleanup regulations as they impact the above mentioned properties. It is anticipated that a meeting with DEP will take place within the next month. Based upon the foregoing, I request that tonight's hearing be continued until the April
040April inland wetland public hearing. On behalf of my client and with full authority, I hereby wave all statutory time limits which may affect applications 2510 and 2511. Very truly yours, Charles J. Willinger Jr. >> Thank you, counselor. All right, uh Greg, can I get a motion for continuance of >> application? Can we do them together? Um Attorney Cordone. Okay. So, we're going to be looking for a motion for a continuence on application 2510 and 2511. >> Right. I make a motion to uh um ext uh continue uh applications 2510 and 2511. Amelia Ferry um to the April 7th, 2026 meeting uh with the applicant's representative granting a waiver to extend the statutory time frame. Need a second? Seconded by Bob Frigno. All in favor? Okay, we have a dissension by Rich Deacon. So it's five
041yay and one nay. Um, all right. Uh, need a motion to close old business. >> I make a motion to close old old business. >> Okay. Seconded by >> second >> by Mr. Deacon. All in favor? >> I >> All right. Um, >> you you did have me down as >> Oh, wait a moment. Something I have to point out, by the way, is that John Laura uh >> abstained from this because he was he's not been participating with this one and just caught it. >> Every now and then a miracle comes along. >> I was getting at you. As soon as you heard me button in there, you >> No, no, it's just it was coming to me, you know. Hey, hey, >> this constitutes elder abuse, >> you know. >> Okay. >> All
042right. Um, Greg, um, approval of the minutes for February 3rd, 2026. >> I make a motion. >> I'm sorry. >> It's Colleen, excuse me, through the chair. >> Do you have to do um motions and votes on the continuation for 2543? and 2602. >> Oh, good catch. Do we uh Tony Cardone? >> Um, they're not public hearings. Do we do norm I'm draw I'm having a >> a uh >> senior moment. >> Yes. Thank you. >> Uh through the chair. I brought it up on 2602 and you said you would do it in the work session. >> You did, Commissioner. >> We're doing these both in the work session now. I I normally think we do them right while we're hearing them. It does. It doesn't hurt, right? We can do that, >> right? Because
043I don't think we should close all business yet then. >> Go ahead. >> Because we have to go on those other two first. >> Good catch. Uh, Colleen told you >> the main job is to watch my backside. Thank you very much. >> And when he doesn't listen to me, he'll listen to Colleen. >> There you go. All right. Let's go back then to uh >> You want me to start? >> Sure, if you would. Thank you. >> Motion to continue application 2602 Joseph Giuliano permit approval for an ingground pool within regulated area 17 Applegate Lane to the uh April 7th, 2026 meeting with um the applicants uh granting a waiver to extend the statutory time frame. that part. >> Second. >> All right. Do I need a Who's going to second? Okay. Bob Fno.
044Okay. All in favor? >> I have a question. >> Go ahead. Common. >> Did they agree to the extension? >> Yeah. >> No, Tatiana spoke with them. Yes. >> Okay. >> So, all right. Go ahead, Greg. on 25-43 >> extension though because we're still >> not extension. It's a continuence. So >> yeah, >> um I make a motion >> 65 days >> for application 2543 Aristalis uh permanent approval for the restoration and reconstruction of an existing residence landscaping replacing driveway and front walk and installation of storm water retention system with a regulated area at 2011 Old Dyke Road. um to the April 7th, 2026 meeting um with the applicant granting uh a waiver to extend the statutory time frame or not extend to continue. >> No, it's just continuence. >> Continue the >> Yeah, >>
045within the current time frame. Yeah. >> Okay. I need a second. >> Go ahead, John. You can second it. >> Okay. Seconded by Carmine. All in favor? >> I. >> Hey, that's unanimous. >> John, you you're on board. >> Let's see. So, we did uh everything's done. Thank you, Colleen. >> Oh, hold on. Just through the chair. Was it was there Mr. Mr. Lauria? >> Yes. >> Oh, all right. I didn't know if if I was the only >> I'm here. >> Oh, >> no. But I didn't I didn't even raise my hand on that last vote because I don't think we were granted any extension as well. It's we're still within the six. >> We spoke we spoke to Scott Diana spoke to the applicant for me and uh Mr. Salis knew we had
046asked ahead of time. We also knew he was going to be asking about doing the u uh construction work which you know I think we've got to just keep it kosher as they say. >> All right. >> Well, vote me put me down for a yes. >> All right. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Now that uh we'll do it again. >> Motion to approve. >> Motion to close old business. >> Oh, I make a motion to close old business. >> Seconded by. >> Okay, Carmine. All in favor? >> I. >> Okay, we've got it. Now, um Greg, if you can tell us about the February 3rd >> minutes. I make a motion to approve the minutes of the town of Trumble Inland Wetlands and Water Course Commission meeting held on February 3rd, 2026. Okay.
047Seconded by Okay, very good. Approved by all in favor. Okay, that's good. Um Tatiana and John, I need your attention for a moment. Uh, John Mayor, um, I'm looking at the, um, calendar. I would like to go all the way to the end of March, either the 30th or the 31st, and we'll hope and pray that the snow is gone and we can, you know, safely walk. Is there any problem for you on uh, March 30th? >> Either one works for me. >> Okay, good, John. Okay. >> Yep. both work. >> All right. So, what we will be doing on um let me see here on March 30th, which is a Monday, and we'll meet at 2:30 at the site, and that will be for application 26-02-43. And uh Colleen, anything else that needs to
048come before the uh commission? >> No, Richard. >> All right. Thank you again, >> Mr. Chairman. >> I was going to ask you too, anything uh happening over at uh P&Z? >> I finally actually have a report. Um >> so there's there's two applications that may be of note to the commission. Uh, one of them is, uh, 200 Teller, uh, excuse me, 211 Teller Road LLC. Uh, if you're interested in looking at application 2603 on planning and zoning, uh, that's where the old horse farm was. There's housing being planned there um at some future date. They came for a text amendment and, um, there are wetlands on that property, so that may come before us at some point. >> Also, for a second. Isn't there a pond on that property? >> There's a pond and
049there's also additional wetlands there. >> And I remember the house, one house was going to be, it was a weird configuration because they came in, but I remember they wanted six lots. They weren't building. They were just getting them uh semi permitted and approved. >> So, that's coming back for uh what reason? for um >> well they they did a they did a text amendment um creating a new active adult community zone. Um so again nothing planned right now but that will be something potential coming down the pike. Also uh Reservoir Avenue there was a 830G application that was unanimously denied and one of the reasons given by the commission was that during their phase one investigation of the property uh this is south of Lindan Drive. Um, one of those investigations yielded a potential
050intermittent brook on the property. Uh, they did not come before wetlands. For that and numerous other reasons, you can read the minutes to find the exact details. Uh, that was denied. That may come before wetlands as well. Um, it is an A30 A30G denial. Um, so obviously there are other legal implications that come along with such a denial that may potentially happen. Uh but again, one of the reasons given was a wet a water course that did not come before wetlands. They may come before us at some point. >> All right, sounds good. Okay, anything else uh from the gang here? We're good. Attorney Cardone, any uh words of wisdom for my uh my musketeers here? >> No, Mr. Chairman, thank you. Very efficient meeting tonight. >> All right. All right. As always, I thank
051you all. And if there be no objection, I move to uh adjourn. Thank you. Thank you. >> Good night. >> Take care everyone. >> Good night everyone. >> Good night all. >> Think sunshine. Think sunshine. No snow. >> Good night. Good night. Thank you Mr. Bill. Good night Bob. Thank you. >> Good night gentlemen. Good night everyone. >> Good night. Okay, there we go.