001Turn on your mics. Frank, >> turn on your mic. Jeff, >> your mics. You're ready. Okay, ladies and gentlemen, it's uh exactly 700 p.m. September 18th, 2025. Uh I'd like to call the Inland Wetlands Water Course Commission to order. >> Uh Steven Molinelli, chair, present. Russ Davenport, vice chair, >> present. >> Jeff Libincott, secretary, >> present. >> Uh Frank Olivi, >> present. >> Carrie Paganelli, >> present. >> Matt Clawson, >> present. >> Jamie Colligan, >> present. >> Maryanne Marino, >> present. and we still have one vacancy on the board for public information. Um, next order of business is under agenda review. >> Uh, nothing to speak of at this time. >> I'll I'll add that I this is a this is my error. It's a copy paste error, but uh 5B uh 632 East Wakefield
002is not a modification of an existing permit. you accepted it at your last meeting as a new application uh for the reconstruction of the steps within the wall and repointing of the wall. So I just want to clarify that. >> Okay. And my understanding also is that um the first order of business has been withdrawn. >> Uh correct. Uh new business item 6A uh the application came in prior to my availability to visit the site. >> 6A or 5A? 6A >> Under new business, >> applicant Matt Smith, 662 East Wakefield. >> Oh, you know what? I'm looking at last month. Okay. >> Okay. Go ahead. Thank you. >> All right. Uh, in any event, uh, after visiting the site and Commissioner Lipicott was available to join us as well, it became clear that this was
003by right maintenance. Uh, the water draw going down allowed us to see what was really going on. >> So, that's not going to be on the agenda. >> Correct. That's remote. >> Okay. Um, any other changes, any other suggestions for the agenda review? >> I don't think, uh, we're going to have much difficulty con concluding the meeting by 10 tonight. So, uh, if we have to, uh, keep that in the back of your mind for the 10:00 >> Sure. >> adjournment. Um, we have no public hearings. Um, oh, before we do that, the acceptance of the minutes from last month. Is there a motion? I'll make a motion to accept the minutes for the uh September 18, 2025 uh meeting minutes. >> Second it. >> Um >> can I ask for somebody else to make
004the motion? You weren't here. >> Oh, that's right. All right. >> That's why. So >> I'll make the motion. >> Okay. Go ahead, Gary. >> Make the motion. >> I'm sorry. It's just the technicality. >> So you make the motion, Gary, and a second by Jeff Lipman. All those in favor? Any corrections? unanimous. Thank you. Uh >> okay. Uh under road business application IWWC25-24. The applicant is Michael Block 928 Main Street. Uh the proposal is a post facto application for the removal of auto business building and regrade area. >> So if you will recall uh last month uh Michael was able to join us and the commission felt that he needn't come back this month due to the uh nature of the work there. The site is stabilized. Uh it was just a postfacto application
005uh as we discussed. How far is the wetlands from from that the area where the work is? >> So the uh concern is actually not the river in the back but the river across the street. Okay. >> Uh he did not have a survey which uh we were able to use to get that. So according to uh snapping a line on GIS it was uh within the 100 ft. I don't want to give you an exact measurement but out of an abundance of caution uh we made them go through the process. >> All right. I I would suggest not with this application but you revisit the site. look at the river in the back and see what's going on back there. >> Yeah, there's going to be a full uh site plan coming to us.
006He has some other ideas for for the property. It may not come to wetlands, but when I say us, uh staff, land use that we'll be reviewing. We have a meeting coming up with him. >> Okay, good. Yeah. Okay. >> Um anything any questions regarding uh this application? >> All right. Is there a motion for approval? I'll make a motion. >> Great. Yes. >> Motion to approve IWWC25-24 uh 928 Main Street post facto application for removal of auto business building and regrade area. >> Second. >> Okay. And uh there's a a comment in the um from the town office that the front area of the property be fully stabilized to satisfy the town concerns. Uh can you explain that? >> Yeah, your site plan that was submitted doesn't show any landscaping or grass or any
007sort of stabilization, permanent stabilization. Jeff and I talked and I think just stand you know a condition of approval would be full stabilization satisfaction >> and he's aware of that. >> Yes. >> Okay. So we'll include that for uh approval. Do we need a bond? >> Not with this application. >> Uh all those in favor of approval with the additional u comment regarding from the town unanimous. Okay. Uh, next application is uh IWWC25-35. The applicant is John Abrams at 632 East Wakefield Boulevard and the proposal is for modification of existing permit uh IWWC 21-31 to repair and rebuild the existing lake wall in the same location. And that's what we were talking about before. >> Yeah. So after the last meeting uh I did visit the site with Mr. Abrams uh and uh one of
008his potential masons. Uh we looked at the scope of work for the the wall maintenance that was needed and that actually uh is okay under by right maintenance. However, uh he is interested in expanding the steps that go down into the water for safety reasons uh and such. So because of that work, uh an application is still appropriate, but it is um just on the steps themselves. >> Okay. >> Uh Mr. Abrams is not able to join us tonight. Uh somebody Thank you. >> Come come on up. >> But we don't have any plans, do we? >> This I believe we have the Are you the >> Mason? >> Fantastic. >> So So the stairs take apart the wall a little bit from just wall. >> And he when I was there, he was talking
009about the possibility of a railing. Uh did did he land on something there? >> Um yeah, he was thinking if we can get a railing, we'll get a railing. We'll just drill concrete. Nothing is going in the water. We're not making the stairs any bigger water. They're just wise because they're getting older problems. >> That's about it. >> Okay. They may have more questions, but I just want to also share for the commission. I did explain to Mr. Abrams that should he get approved for this once the work was done, it would require an asbuilt survey uh to represent the changes on the site as well. >> Say that again. >> He'll need to get an asbuilt survey when it's done because the the notch is going to be different. So, we need to have
010an accurate representation. are going into the wall. So the walls are not going at all, >> but the indentation changes there. >> I think the stairs are kind of like middle of the house area. >> Normally, we [snorts] wouldn't approve anything of this consequence without a plan, not an oral plan, a plan. And uh I think the commission is going to have to decide whether or not we want to move ahead with a verbal plan that you're presenting. And my understanding is also is that the town has asked for a a plan of sort to be presented. >> Well, that's after the job. So the measurements are exact. >> We don't know what the measurements are. >> Well, you do have a write up in your package that Mr. Abrams put together himself. The reason
011why I requested the mason to come tonight was to talk about the actual methods, but he does uh talk about the the doubling of the width. >> It wasn't in the >> Nothing came in our packet. >> If you give me a moment, I'll I'll go make copies and you can continue. >> We've got it online here. Gonna pop it out. Um, correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought we asked the applicant to bring a survey and a plan to this meeting. >> Well, look at the minutes and see what it says. You know, >> good point. >> You get that? >> This was I got this from last month. This is where this is. set of steps right here. >> Yeah, >> that was last month. It doesn't have a detail. >> It
012didn't go in the minutes, but I recall us having a discussion. >> Yeah, you did ask for. >> Okay. Thank you. >> It's not reflected in our minutes. >> Yeah, it didn't get reflected in the minute. >> Jeff. >> Yes. >> Is that what you're looking for behind you? >> Yeah. I'm going to skip this this one. >> Okay. 25. Okay, I have it here. Okay. >> Okay. >> So, the opening right now is 36 in or so. Where do you want to go to it? >> So, 36 to 72. Yeah, that was the initial thing. >> So, it's right in the middle of room. Yes, of course. >> Is there any reason why you didn't or your applica your your the person you're working for didn't provide a plan to the town so we
013would have it? Oh, I thought >> So, this this is what the applicant provided to us. For further details on the actual construction work, we were hoping you could fill them in. >> Yeah. I mean just where the stairs are center. So he's thinking about putting a one piece on top of same >> one slab just on top. concrete stairs just so it's not >> you're saying blue stone up here it's saying >> whatever >> to me it's a pretty good narrative I mean lacking only lacking maybe a picture but I mean >> I don't think >> yeah I mean I don't detailing anything on the plan as far as work of that nature. >> But you're you still can see the steps on the plan, right? I mean, >> I >> Yeah, putting you're
014you're adding >> I could go either way left or right. >> There is going to look out. You're going to come into the dock, aren't you? >> Yeah, that's where the fence sill fence is, right? I think that's where I think that's where our problem is. We have to have a detail, >> right? I mean, I'm speaking that we have to have a detail laying out that area. Not not not the survey plan, but a detail laying out the stone the stairs with the silt fence coming around it. You know what I mean? Just so Jeff knows. Whoever the inspector is that's going out, the enforcement agent knows what's going on. And for us to do our due diligence as a commission, >> do we have to >> whether it doesn't have to be >>
015Mary? Wait a minute. >> It doesn't have to be I don't I don't I personally don't feel it has to be drawn on this plan. I feel that if something is submitted to Jeff, a detailed plan. The question is, do we want to move ahead with approval or do we want to wait for a plan to be submitted and then we have it in front of us? >> More going towards an approval. I mean, he's got a a list there. I mean, I think we should do an approval of a condition from him giving uh a drawing to Jeff. Correct. >> As as a condition only because time matters here, you know, you know what I mean? That that's that's where I am. If it wasn't >> this summer, it wouldn't matter. >> Stuff like
016that, I'd say no. >> How much time do you need? So, so a week, two weeks, >> would be good for two weeks. >> So, you could do all the wall without the steps. >> Yeah. Before the freeze. >> So, so this survey we have has the steps located on it. And I guess if we could do it the approval contingent upon I guess the steps going to the north side of the property. three, no more, not exceed, you know, three feet or six feet overall to the north side. I mean, you can't go to the south because the dock's there, right? >> So, it's sort of a no-brainer there. You can't, you know, and beforehand, I guess you could measure the exact dimension from the dock >> is on the west side. >> What's
017that? >> The dock is on, according to this drawing, the dock is on the west side of the property. The >> dock is on the south side. >> Yeah, it's north would be to the top of the drawing. >> It is, right? They're excavating into the property, right? They're excavating into the property >> and they're >> right. That's the thing like methods and means have to be very specific like >> what are we doing? What are we doing by hand? what's going, you know, is do we need to think about drainage or rip wrap behind the steps? Anything like that? >> Well, that's typically shown in the drawing, >> right? >> Which we don't have. >> Typically, we get a drawing of what the steps are going to look like, >> the steps, the stone
018behind it, the pavement behind that. I mean, it just makes me uncomfortable because we require this of every other applicant >> and you know, I understand that the clock is ticking, but at the same time, you know, >> is that our responsibility to make an exception because the homeowner didn't plan in advance? >> We can go two ways. We can approve the application, but before any work begins, the plan has to be submitted to the town and it has to be approved by Jeff or Jeremy and then they can move forward. Uh, or we could say submit the plan first and come back next month. >> So, >> can I just clarify? So, you're >> all the other work other than the stairs is maintenance by writing. >> Correct. >> Yes. >> So, you can
019start on all that now. >> Yes. >> How deep is water there? Is it dry at the bottom of the wall? Oh, the water there. >> Yeah. >> Water's down by four feet already. >> Have you been to the property? >> Oh, yeah. Okay. >> How deep is the water when it was when it's all in there? >> Couple feet. >> How many steps did it come up? Did the water come up on the steps >> roughly? >> Okay. >> So, it's probably dry at the bottom now. >> Oh, I'm sure it's dry. says five steps. >> We've been pretty consistent with all the other applicants of what we're looking for. >> Yeah, let's be consistent. >> And you can start you can start with all the other work that you have with the exception
020of the steps if we didn't approve it till next month. >> Yeah. His concern is with the meeting like how long it takes already >> come back and forth. >> Well, don't don't turn don't make the burden on us. >> Oh, no. >> You know what I'm saying? >> Yeah. >> You know, you have a responsibility. We have a responsibility. >> So, >> when are you going to start work? Next week, maybe. >> Well, he doesn't have approval yet. >> No, I mean on the other stuff. >> Oh, it's going to be like first week of November. So if you started that and you did bring back the plan, I mean it would we would pro it would probably be approved on the fifth the middle of the month >> on the 20th. So I
021mean you'd be pushing it a little with December but >> we're not asking for a lot just a drawing of what it's going to look like when it's done. >> When he gets back something >> he's not here now. >> Right. >> Yeah. But he heard the same thing last month. >> Yeah. You know, I'm just saying >> it was tough because the zoom wasn't working right. >> Yeah. Again, that's again that that's not our bird, you know. >> Yeah. Know he came in front of us last month. He wanted the whole wall. >> Oh, yeah. >> So, he changed right from that. He stopped that. I thought we made it clear with the communication was good. And again, the staff knows >> the staff spoke with them after that. Jeff, >> yeah, spoke with
022him, visited the site. That's why he knows no machinery and you know that got through. >> But everybody else would require how much how long how far back is it going to be? You going to put paper behind? >> Yeah. Like really specific methods and means, >> right? >> Yeah. Mr. Abrams, >> this is not that >> can't do that. That's you know, >> let me just say something. On October 9th, Jeremy sent us staff notes and under comments, uh, as of this date, October 9th of this memo, a revised project narrative has been submitted, but no plans to match. Staff has reached out to the applicant requesting a plan. We still don't have it. So, it's, you know, >> all right. What's our comfort level? We want to >> uh ask to come back
023>> with that statement. They can come back. >> Okay. >> All right. So, we have >> start on the wall though. >> Yeah. The maintenance. >> Yeah. >> Motion to continue. >> All right. There's a Well, we have to separate the motion because if we're to give him permission to start the wall, >> he doesn't by right. >> That's by yours. Yeah. Okay. So, then >> this is just for the steps. >> All right. So, then we can request a continuation or it has to be from the applicant. >> Hasn't been 65 days yet. So, you've got time. >> Yeah. >> We can. All right. So, do we have a motion to uh just uh continue this application until next month? >> Motion to continue IWWC25-35 632 East Wakefield Boulevard. Um it's a new permit,
024right, for >> Yeah. >> rebuilding or enlarging the stairs. >> Is there a second? Second, >> Gary, all those in favor of continuing for next month, >> you're voting. picture with stolen for 20 years. I mean, that's the thing. It's like I don't know what's under the stairs, so I don't know what's >> Well, you're going to dig it out. >> No. The wall down, >> correct? >> Exactly. I don't know. >> The drawing is what's going to be back there when you're done, >> right? >> Erosion, sedimentation controls. All right. So, we have a unanimous vote for continuation next month, >> right? >> Are you sure you have a clear understanding of what we need for next month? >> It sounds like you want to draw. >> Yes. >> And corresponding methods and means
025like specific >> like what's behind it? What's the sil fences? Not behind not behind it. What how you're going to do it, not the unknown of when you dig it out. You know what I mean? Like of course you don't know that. >> I was within my top 10 I was like these are concrete stairs been here forever. >> Right. >> So whatever's there >> right >> also a little you know what I mean it's you're saying it's concrete stairs and it's solid concrete and you're going to mimic. Can I make a suggestion that either you, preferably you, or the applicant, meet with Jeff one day and sit on site and talk about what you're planning and then he'll guide you as to what we need on a piece of paper and we'll move ahead
026with that. >> All right. Okay. >> Thank you very much. Have a good night. >> I will be in touch. >> So that that's continued. 37. >> Okay. Uh, next application under new business would be IWWC25-37. The applicant is Sean Stanzial at 504 East Wakefield Boulevard to demolish existing home garage and construct new home with attached garage. >> Steve, for the record, I'm going to recuse myself from discussion and voting on this application because I'm going to see it at DBA. But I will listen. >> Yeah, I think you have to leave the room. >> Do I? >> I think so. >> I think you just have to sit back there, right? >> I I still sit as a >> Jeff. Does she should Does she leave the room? >> Yeah, I thought you could
027listen, but that's fine. I'm happy to leave. >> You don't have to leave the room. >> Okay. >> No. Okay. >> You should leave the table. >> You got to turn around backwards though because we can't have facial expressions. [laughter] >> No, we used to have to leave the room. So, I'm just, you know, anyway. Uh, for the record, gentlemen, introduce yourselves, please. >> Hello, I'm Sean Stanziel. My address is 504 East Wakefield Boulevard. I'm the home homeowner. >> Kyle Case, KCC Consulting, professional engineer on the project. >> Okay. You want to talk to us about your application? >> If I may, for the project is for most of you knew the original plan. Um, we previously had an approval roughly four years ago. Um, and the project is very similar except our plan is
028to attach our garage to our home and knocking down our old garage. Um, and after u meeting with Jeremy and Jeff, one of the things that we uh learned that would improve um for the ZBA is to change the position of my garage. So, my garage is actually going to be exa one inch uh farther away from the property line, the Pollock property line, but be attached to my home. So, we shifted the uh garage I think roughly 5T away from the Pollock property, but because of the way our property um is situated, um it improves the distance from my property lines uh for both both my neighborhood to the north and south. Our drainage plan is very similar and our impervious service is actually reduced even more in this program. So we tried to
029improve every single situation on this plan for my current home. >> I'll go through the plans here. >> You want to speak up? Sure. >> So here's our uh existing plan. Existing plan and demo plan. Existing garage to be removed and relocated. Existing house and decks are going to be removed. Pretty much everything on site is is remove being removed except that the shed's going to stay in its current location and the well and sewage pump will stay where they're located. Come down here to the proposed work being completed. We'll have the driveway relocated more towards the center of the property coming down to meet the garage which ties into the the house with the deck uh covered porch walkways. Moving down, we're going to use a pvious paver system for the walkways to help
030alleviate storm water runoff. Currently, the the property is very sloped and very impervious. So, we're we're lessening the slope of the property with the blasting and grading of the rock that's there. Uh this will add vegetation grass surfaces for uh to to absorb water and treat water as it flows towards the lake from the property. Coming down the sides we have rip wrap slopes for slope protection which will also ask act as a water filtering filter out sediment and debris and contaminants. And then down here in front of the retaining wall stair the stairs coming down from the patio we have our infiltration system which will uh catch roof runoff from from a portion of the house in the front to capture that before. And then the other two areas footing drains and roof gutters
031will dump out is are in those rip wrap slopes to again treat the water and slow it before it gets gets downward towards the lake. So that's the the gist of what's being done on the property. >> Go to your rip detail. >> And and I'm not an engineer. You are. But my only recommendation that I went through is this plan pretty explicitly your rip wrap is fine your and everything but me personally I would have silt fence between my granular fill and my rip wrap you know towed in on the bottom and towed in on top only for the fact that being a 12in modified rip wrap your water is going to go right down through it to the gravel and you're going to find your gravel is going to come out the bottom.
032You know what I mean? Without without having a fabric >> that keeps it from leing. That's primarily the only thing I saw. >> You're saying a layer of filter fabric on top of the 6 in granular. Correct. >> Before you put the stone down. >> Correct. Otherwise, that water goes right down. It goes into the sand and all the fines are coming out right. Okay. The other thing I noticed is, you know, like like you said, you you lessened your you lessened your your impervious by 72 some foot and it um I don't know I seems to work very nice to be honest with you. That was the only thing going down through the whole thing that I found. I would I mean it doesn't necessarily have to go that way but >> it's just
033a recommendation. You don't want We don't want to see this wash out >> stuff running out on the bottom and I don't think you want to see it to where that starts hollow out. >> Yeah, that's very fair. >> You know, it's a pitch to fix it later. >> I know you have experience in construction. That's >> Yep. You know, so we have these details here for trenches and pvious paver detail. Got a reservoir underneath it. crush stone, wash stone, woven fabric around that that's sized to take the the 1.3 inch water quality uh rainstorm event. We have our silk fence and erosion control matting details uh stockpile detail and then the um straw waddle barriers for each side dur each side of the the house structure during construction to slow the water and catch
034the sediment going down. That's the steepest part of the property once it's finished. Innesota to control the water coming down that that slope during construction. >> Just let me because of the proximity of of your house to abudding neighbors. Are you planning any kind of uh uh straw bales or anything on the sides of the property as opposed to >> sil fence as well? >> Both sides. So it's like a U-shaped horseshoe shape sil fence going around the property. >> So that's that's on our erosion control plan. So, we have the the sill fence coming down around in front of the lake and then back up. And then we have our our straw waddles coming down each each embankment here. And then we have our tracking pad entrance and our stockpile area surrounded by silk
035fence. And then the hatched areas with the gray hatch here and here is erosion control matting in the interm between con before construction is finalized and finished. uh draft is established. So, we'll have our temporary erosion control measures in place while it's open Earth, so to speak. And we just have our erosion construction standards page and our narrative talking about all the steps to take for different scenarios that may occur during construction process. The last one. This is just the impervious surface comparison page showing what's currently there. The colors match and just shows you where the the reductions are coming from. A big reduction is the driveway being cut by a third approximately which is a big net savings for the the property. >> Approximately how much blasting will you need to do? >> So,
036Let's see. This area here need to do blasting pretty much on the the front half of the the lot will require >> garage toward the street. >> Yeah. From the probably from the covered porch towards the the street will require the blasting. >> Right. >> Are you planning on using blasted rock for the wall like the neighbor did? Well, that would have been approvals a while ago because I won't have time to do that because I probably if everything goes right, I probably won't have a building permit for I'll miss the window. So, to be honest, no, I would love to. That was the original plan, but I'm going to have to buy the stone >> for Jeremy or or Jeff. And I don't know the answer. Um, natural [snorts] ledge is imper it's per
037impervious is pvious. We don't we don't we do not count it as impervious. >> That's a good answer. >> Yeah. >> You don't count even though realistically it is. >> It is. So that's not count. >> It doesn't get counted that way. >> Okay. >> The reason it doesn't get counted to be honest with you is has fissures and it is not >> well yeah impervious. It is impervious. >> And and and we also I mean we're looking at man-made >> I was just going to use the same term man. >> Say impervious. We're talking about asphalt, concrete, you know, structures, things. We're not looking at the natural environment. >> Okay. >> There's moss and there's other stuff that grows on that ledge, too. So, it's not just a sheer face. >> All right. This
038is a new application. So, you know, all we're going to do is accept it tonight. Um the normal next normal question would be public hearing. Um, is there any any indication from the to the town that there's a a need for a public [clears throat] hearing? >> We know that the neighbors are interested, of course, in the project. There's also going to be a public hearing at ZBA. >> Um, I think, you know, with regard to this, you need to look at whether or not it's significant activity and act accordingly. I mean, we had a public hearing on this project a couple months ago >> or public interest. >> Yeah, public interest. And I think you you as the commission need to determine if that's one neighbor or if it's more than one neighbor. We've
039heard from one neighbor. We have not heard from any anybody else. So I I think that's up to the commission whether or not you consider that public interest. >> So he can chime in. >> Depends upon well at a public hearing it could but not now. >> Okay. >> So there is a request for a public hearing. >> There there's interest in a public hearing. Yes. from one of the neighbors that we've talked to. I have not spoken to the other neighbors. >> Well, one of the things we can do is deem it public interest, have a public hearing, and we can close the public hearing next month and take a vote on the application and not lose any time. >> That's right. >> So, that's one way of satisfying everybody. you know, we're not
040delaying the project unless there's enough information that comes out at the public hearing to warrant us not being satisfied enough to vote. So that's that's pretty fair. >> But then also ZVA is having >> again >> you're saying that go with Maryanne. >> [laughter] >> The only the only thing like in in if we have a public hearing, the only thing I want to hear, >> the only thing I want to hear is strictly >> waterfront water. Correct. >> That is it. I don't care about the house being close. I don't care about I don't care about pvious impervious coverage. That's not us. That is zoning. >> Agreed. And and one thing that I would say about a public hearing is, you know, we've done it on this, you know, on this site. We've had
041public hearing already. uh you know and there there's there's other avenues to get comments right uh verified interveners can make their comments to you so that's a process and you know applicate or uh if interested parties can force a public hearing by submitting a petition with 25 signatures I have not heard of either of those two things happen so you know it it's it's up to you but you're right I mean it's it's it's got to be based on the plan and any It's got to be reasonably likely to cause unreasonable harm to the public trust, right? That's what you are tasked with ensuring that it's not doing. You're tasked with those types of things. So, any comment outside that box is irrelevant. >> I don't I don't see where again we're only accepting tonight.
042The question is a public hearing or not. That's that's where we're at. >> Is there consensus on the part of the board? >> I mean, I would we've already had it. Like I said, there's one for zoning that may not factor into this. That's not That's nothing relevant to this. >> No. >> All right. Well, then I that's fine. I would still say I don't see any reason for another public hearing on it. >> I don't feel there's a reason for >> Frank. >> You have Frank. >> I know. [laughter] The proposal is to leave have the meet have accept the application and have the public meeting next month and we could accept then public hearing and then vote on then vote on the application >> if we feel the conversation is exhausted specific to
043the application >> and if it's closed then we could act on it >> as soon as we get to move down the >> only acting on what we're responsible for Correct. >> Nothing with the building. Nothing else. >> Nothing at all. >> I think that would be fair to somebody. >> Okay. >> I mean, I mean, I don't think there's a need for another public hearing. >> Speak up so the microphone will pick it up. >> I don't think there's a need for another public hearing on the project. I mean, we had one and comments were made there. I'm not sure we need to have another one. >> Okay. Matt, >> I know I asked at the last public hearing in regards the only concerns were to the waterfront and there was no concerns on
044the rest of the project. So, um yeah, I don't see any I think it's a pretty thorough plan design. >> Yes, >> I have mixed feelings. Pick one. You know, [laughter] I think you vote against me. I just think because of the scope of the size of the project, everybody should have their say. >> But with that said, I think we've heard everything there is to say anyways. >> So, I have mixed feelings. >> Well, again, don't don't forget one once an application is approved or denied, it's over. >> So, so this is a new application. >> This is a new application now. So, we're starting from scratch with regard to this application. My comfort level being I've asked everybody else would be to have a public hearing. I don't think there's going to be
045an extensive conversation regarding the public hearing or the input from the public but at least we satisfy the public and in my feeling I've always tried to be transparent and you know this falls under that same guise. I mean we it is a new application >> and and you know technically from the applicant's perspective we don't necessar they don't necessarily lose time because we can close the public hearing >> next month and move ahead with a vote. So it's just a matter of allowing the public maybe one >> a voice and move ahead. Did we discuss on this as a new application any of the waterfront >> that was done >> that was all done while you were in Chicago? >> Okay. >> All right. [laughter] >> What we did what we did as a
046committee we separated out the waterfront >> and dealt with the waterfront >> and let the house stand alone and the property of the house stand alone. >> Understood. >> Okay. All right. So then >> just a recommendation then just to separate the two. I we feel you should have a separate vote whether or not you want to have the public hearing first and then vote to accept and yeah >> don't couple the two together in one motion is the thing. >> Can we accept first and then decide if your pleasure? >> All right. Do we have a motion to accept application number 25-37? The applicant is uh Sean Sanszi Ali at 504 East Wakefield Boulevard. The proposal is to demolish the existing housing and garage and construct a new home with an attached garage. There
047are a motion make that motion >> to accept. All right, Frank accepted. All those in favor of accepting the application. Okay. The next question is, is there a motion to have a public hearing? I will make that motion for IWWC25-37 applicant Sean Stenzi at 504 East Wakefield to uh have a sorry >> public hearing for interest >> public hearing next month for the accept and at the same time without delay >> that's all this the public hearing we don't preclude anything >> okay is there a second for a public hearing F. All those in favor? >> Yeah. I think it's the right thing. >> One, two, three, four. Abstain. >> You're voting or abstaining? >> Voting. I'm voting. >> Yes or no? >> No. Okay. So, one, two, three, four. Did you vote? >> Yeah.
048Um, I don't feel we need it. >> Okay. So, one, two, three, four out of eight. So >> seven extend. Thank you. So then there will be a public hearing. >> So it's 402. So you get a public hearing. >> We will have a public hearing. >> Okay. Um I think you know the drill. Um my my sense is it may be beneficial to meet with Jeff. make sure you all you know >> we we >> again >> I will we will meet whatever >> just because you know we'd like to bring this to closure so that it's not prolonged uh into the winter so to speak. All right. >> Okay. >> Yes, I will. >> All right. Thank you very much. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. This is uh Main Street.
049This is this >> what you call agent. All right. Um, uh, agent determinations, there are none, Jeff. >> Uh, no new determinations. Uh, we did >> Oh, sorry. >> Go ahead. As of right. >> Yeah, a couple. As of right, we already discussed Matt Smith's, uh, which which was deemed as of right maintenance at 662. Uh, also had a visit to the office by Mr. Sabia at 638 East Wakefield. Uh, and he presented me with enough information and I'd been on his site before to make that same determination. Uh, so those are both as of right maintenance. Um, violations. Uh, I think maybe we talked about this last month already, but 139 West Wakefield Boulevard, uh, Miss Babage's, uh, trial. We did have a court hearing uh, and the judge decided to meet again in
0506 months. Uh, I believe his hope is that she successfully sells the property. It is still for sale. Uh, as you guys know, the dock never went into the water this past season. And on top of that, one of the um co-owners of the property has made some indication that he may go fix it himself uh to remove himself from the the court case. >> So, go do the the shaving down. I mean, if you recall, we're talking inches >> uh out of whack here. So, that's all I've got to say about that. >> Okay. Is he an owner of record? He He owns 1% >> one of the 1% owners. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Uh >> he owns that one. >> He's taking it with him. Yeah. >> Any communications? I saw a
051communication from you, Jeff. I didn't mean to say it that way. >> Yeah. We don't need to cover that here. Um Okay. You're talking about the email I sent late in the day. >> Yeah. I just saw it. Yeah. So, that's not the conversation. >> Not for the rest of these folks yet. >> Okay. Uh under other business public works guys you guys uh Jeff you see um >> yeah I called Jim today. Um so just a couple things they did the drainage of the third and the driveway >> next week after >> which driveway down the >> that's in 800 down there. Yeah. Yeah. I just drove by. I saw that they had put the RIP. >> Oh, good. >> The drainage is done. >> DM Hawkeye is scheduled to pay for traffic contract.
052>> And what is not addressed because he doesn't know how to fix it is the issue with the house at the bottom of the hill that the river goes underneath it. >> That's not addressed. >> That's not his is that his responsibility? >> Well, I don't know what you say. The water keeps coming out. >> That's where it dams up because it freezes under the house and then bubbles out and goes across the road. And we went out there with Jim and it's a tough one to try and >> he's got he's got to get easements onto the property in order to try and fix it, but they don't have a way of fixing. >> That makes that >> everything up to them is down on that corner, >> right? So >> that's all you
053can do. Um, let's let's figure try to figure out that because that's that impacts on the road. >> Is that what >> that all everything contributes to the road? >> I don't know. I think you know the driveway is a mess, but he also replaced several culverts there and put drainage in under there. >> Yeah. >> So, I'm just thinking he doesn't have a plan for the the last thing. Let's see what happens over the winter. >> We have no choice. >> Maybe address it again next year. I don't >> Who would we call? Engineer. Another >> but but why are you spending town expense on something that's on private property? >> They they're being um putting a lean on their house >> that the driveway for driveway driveway is lean. >> Oh yeah. >>
054So that's actually being paid for out of the uh blight and beautifification fund. Uh it was deemed that because of the continued wash out onto the road and a few other factors that it did qualify to spend the blight money on there. uh and the fact that it will likely address some of the problems in that area, it seemed like a a home run to do it. >> And so she will be responsible to pay it back. >> She plans to make payments over time or if the when the property sells, it would need to be satisfied. The town will be made whole. >> Let's let's go down to the rent the house where the water goes under. >> That's a whole another thing. Yeah, >> that's a whole another problem. There's no funding that
055can be taken to fix something like that, is there? I don't even know how like we went out, we met and the problem is the sewer goes through. There's a sewer man hole right there. That's where Maine is. >> Not sure if you can get a catch basin in there because of the um >> the sewer >> conflict with the sewer. >> What is the main issue with the >> right over but this this is where I'm going with this. So the water comes down a brook comes off the mount off but it's freezing under the house because the house doesn't >> the house is on the lake side. >> No no the opposite side of road. It freezes there and then it flows over >> and it goes across the road. Now, there's no
056erosion. Okay? There's no there's no erosion there whatsoever that we have any control over. Um there's no it's not doing anything to the lake. Where is our where is our end to this like you just answer >> other than other than he has to salt the out of it. keep it clean. >> My recollection from that visit was there was twofold. There was a problem on the other side of that property too where the water was kind of perching out of the hillside, >> not even associated with the brook. Yeah, it was coming out of the hillside right down the driveway and running over. >> There's a green pipe sticking out that I should take care of. >> No, that's the other one. that that's almost like on the homeowner to resolve that, but you've
057got no room to do anything. Correct. That's the problem. >> There you go. >> So, that's what I'm saying. Where do we chase this? >> We with the city. We did this once in Staten Island. >> Yeah. But, you know, I mean, there's no answer. There's no answer. There's no answer. But it's impacting on on the lake and the road, >> you know. >> Mostly the road though, right? >> Yeah. Well, eventually whatever whatever public works spread to to address the the the you know the grooves and >> that's our only claw in this. >> Then that winds up in the lake. So that's that's problem. That's our only claw is what they're putting on the road and going into the lake. >> Let's hope that this does something. >> Let's hope what they did.
058>> Maybe it'll remedy. >> It should it should help it a little bit because a lot of water did come out of that guy's driveway and come down through. Obviously, all the, you know, >> along with this dirt belong >> and everything else that came comes off that hill. So, >> we made narrowed it down at least to the bottom of the >> We made leaves and bombs. We just got >> uh Mr. Chairman, just a point. We skipped discussion and I actually do we have a few items for you. >> Uh >> oh, you want to finish? >> Finish public works first because we got we started it. >> Oh, okay. Um >> the when we drain the lake, it overflows boy street 263. >> The DOT is going to put a catch basin
059at at Boyd Street to get all that overflow. >> You sure? I heard >> uh that's what he said. That was today. That was today. >> I heard last week from somebody who works with DOT, they're sending it back to the town. the the the superintendent of the office that we sent it to is sending it back to us saying it's not their responsibility. >> Okay. >> That's what I heard from somebody. >> I'm just saying that's what I heard last week. I'm just saying >> this was about 1:00 this afternoon. >> I don't I'm just saying that's what I heard. >> And then one last thing is he has one more round of cleaning of the basins before the winter. >> Do you ever see him cleaning? >> Yeah. Yes. [laughter] >> Listen, I'm
060around town all the time and I don't see much happening. >> You know, at one point we had >> in there. >> At one point we had sort of requested some kind of a not a schedule ahead of time, but sort of like >> like a permit we were talking about. >> Yeah. And and that's something as we get into winter, Jeremy and I are going to work with Jim to to get that put together. Um you know, he's obviously got a lot of projects going on, a lot of work to do. So to sit down and put time towards that, we're going to help out with that. >> Okay, good. >> All right. Uh Marian and uh anybody meet with Highland Lake? >> Um okay, so I was on vacation, so Jamie and I
061did not meet because I just got back. So we'll get into a rhythm of meeting, but I can give you guys the update. Um uh so just so that everybody knows um on October 8th the you guys probably got this the department Connecticut uh deep >> yeah Connecticut department deep basically um the voting law administrator Peter B. Francis sent out a note to First Selectmen, mayors, town managers. Um, I'll just read it because it's short. Wake Surfing is a recreational activity of growing interest to many residents and businesses in Connecticut. Therefore, Connecticut Deep will be conducting anformational study on the operation of wakeboats and the activity of wake surfing in the state. Because circumstances vary across water bodies, the findings of this study may be of interest to municipalities considering future approaches regarding wake surfing
062or wakeboat use. And the study could also help inform state level policy. We would like to hear from you. Deep has published a public notice. There's a hyperlink which details opportunities for public comment and engagement on the scope of the study. Comments are due by October 22nd. So this came out October 8th and can be provided as outlined in the notice. So it's not a lot of time to review the available data and studies etc etc. So the Highland Lake Wershed Association hasn't I mean you know there's a board but the board represents all the membership right which is comprises many homeowners on the lake. So the high lake wershed association did not feel they had enough time to consult membership to pull together comments to comment on this. So people can comment as individuals
063but the organization doesn't have enough time to do it properly. >> But they did in the paper yesterday did approve for wakeabago the one the three towns voted for theagoes. >> Yes. Yes. Yes. >> So they so they're setting the president. >> Yes. But every lake's different. Um, I will say I'm not saying one way or the other what I support or not. I am a little concerned about people who would have been wakeboarding on Waramog now coming to >> our course. >> But in any event, I do think it would be good to distribute this to the commissioners because if they as individuals want to make comments before October 22nd, they h so they have the opportunity to. Um, so that's one thing. The other thing is um as I understand it, the 504
064acres uh that's going to the land trust upland of the lake on the east side closed today. Is that right, Gary? >> Correct. >> Um so that's very good news for the lake. Uh that's going to protect water quality tremendously and uh that's very positive. So that was a result of a lot of work from High Lake Wershed Association and the Land Trust. >> Yeah, they worked hard. >> What's that? >> They worked hard. >> They worked very hard. >> Um, and a lot of people in the community rallied around the project, really believed in it. So, um, it's just really great for the health of the lake. >> Well, thank you too, Gary. Thank you. Thank you. >> Let's not let's not overlook why it happened and how it happened. Well, I think >>
065that's up to that person to take the credit >> publicly if that person wants to. Or >> you want television now. [laughter] >> Thanks again, Gary. >> Thanks, Gary. >> My wife and I both feel it's a great thing. It's It's great that it's going to be preserved >> forever what it is. >> Yeah. >> Some of the neighbors living around there never have to worry about a house in their backyard. [laughter] I think we think it's great. >> All right. Um, you want to go back to the discussions, Jeff? >> Yeah, please. Uh, so the Highland Lake Ski Club came in. They are in the process of renewing their uh permit for the slalom course and the markers they have in the water. Uh, they're just asking for a letter which states there have
066been no complaints or erosion control issues as a result of their activities. However, since we've been discussing mooring balls and everything else, I wanted to just bring it to your attention. If you had any concerns, please let me know. If not, I'll simply pen the letter. >> Do they have to go to the state for this? >> Yeah, it's an application to the state. Uh, it's just a letter from the town. >> Does anybody do it? >> I don't >> I've never seen anybody 30 years. >> First of all, you're at the other end of the lake and they first >> they do they do. I tried to use >> they're out early [laughter] in the morning or up. >> Okay, good. So, it is it is being used. >> Yes. >> Okay, good. Very
067good. Thank you. >> So, if if no comments, I'll I'll pen the letter and get that to them. So, that's good. Uh next, uh we have a recommendation to either add a new standard condition of approval to our approvals or did you find one that could be modified? >> No. >> Okay. So to add a new condition uh where a project has an engineer of record uh that they'd be required to visit the site before work starts uh and uh make sure that the erosion controls were properly installed to their specifications. Uh furthermore, we would ask for a picture to be added into the permit portal that would live with the record. Uh always as we know one of the conditions is that all applicants are supposed to notify the office before they start. That
068doesn't always happen. Uh but with this we we will put it on that engineer to actually go visit the site and make sure it's secure. >> It's only as an engineer >> engineer of record. Correct. >> Right. If there's no engine >> if there's no engineer it still falls on staff to to make sure uh and again we need to be notified to know properly >> before the bonds returned. >> Yeah. Bond returns at the end of the project >> after they sign off and everything is done properly. >> Yeah. Correct. >> That's great. >> Yeah. So, this is the start and then that's the end. >> Yeah. That's beautiful. >> Yeah. >> You know, going back to one of the comments you made where somebody uh starts a project without notifying the town or
069you specifically, you know, to me if they start without notifying you, I would put a stop to the to the project and bring them before us again. >> The word will get out that, you know, you start without notifying the town, >> right? then the town is going to say stop your work because you didn't notify us >> and now let's move ahead with a conversation. >> I agree. >> So, so the one comment that I'll that I'll make about that and and generally speaking I think you're right. Most of the time >> that's your one comment now you're done. [laughter] >> You're done. >> So my second phrase there there are cases and and I've been involved in a number of them. There are cases where somebody gets into a project and if you
070stop it, >> it's going to cause more harm than it will if you allow it to at least wrap up or or get them to to stabilize the site in some manner. >> If you're dealing with slopes and you just say timeout, you're done and wait until you get an application and they walk away >> and you get a heavy rain, >> that can be more detrimental. So there's a little bit of a judgment call I think that has to happen. I think generally speaking, you're right. most projects it's whoa time out still fence around this thing and walk away but sometimes that's not the best course of action. Well, that's my two. >> I mean, could we say that >> we would require the homeowner to stabilize the project and then stop? >> Well,
071right. And I think that's where sometimes the judgment call comes from from staff, you know, and and the time of year can be tricky, too, because if we get into a project and somebody's plan is, I'm tearing this all up and I'm going to plant grass. >> Well, it's October 16th, so the time to do that is like now, you know? So, That's all I'm saying. Sometimes it requires a little bit of a judgment call. >> Well, you know, again, if if if the word gets out that they're being stopped because they didn't notify the town, people will catch on. >> You know, and and again, you know, we should make a point to that at the meeting here when we approve that, you know, one of the conditions is no work starts until the
072town is notified. And uh and there will be consequences if we you know if you don't notify the town >> even with an approved permit >> with an approved permit. Yeah. >> Other towns are very stern with things too like if the sil fence that gets knocked down or whatever I know it's like you have 24 hours 48 hours to fix it. >> Yeah. >> End of story. Non-negotiable. >> It's not you know when you get around to it or anything you have x amount of time >> get it stabilized get it fixed >> for the most part. We operate that way. I mean, if Jeff if Jeff sees, you know, ENS controls out of place, he he pretty much gives him 24 hours. Especially if there's rain coming, he'll be like, "Uh, end of
073day." >> Yeah. >> Or that's the way. Yeah. >> The trouble. But the thing is, if you're too tight, then he walks away. Then you got the problem. >> Can I ask a question sort of on this subject? Um, I know you are around the lake a ton, Jeff, right? So you're a you're around it so much that you catch violations. But this whole town is a wetlands basically, right? Like we have two rivers, we have ponds, we have several lakes. Like >> are are we paying as much attention to the rest of the wetlands that were responsible for as we are Highland? Maryann the problem the problem we have okay is and it's come up in our discussions before Highland Lake self polices itself people complain >> right yeah >> the people who live
074up on blue lake blue street up why I forget the name of the lake that's up there park pond >> if nobody's going to complain nobody's going to know what's going on no one sees them up there >> nobody sees there's >> there's also very limited building up in those areas I'm trying to But doing anything >> here it's it's constantly in the eye. >> Our Winchester Lake has that whole buffer all the way around. >> Even he said it last year. Nobody nobody comes in here and says they're on Winchester Lake to do anything. >> No. Because because the person who owned the majority of that land essentially protected a buffer zone all the way around the water. >> But not even not only that one. There's there's 15 different ponds and lakes. Exactly.
075anybody. >> And there are two rivers. >> And there's two rivers. Like I I Mil River Mil River coming down side of 44. Well, if you go out 44, you see a big excavator sitting in the guy's yard, right? >> He just stumped the whole backyard which butts up against the river. >> So yeah, I would say >> there is probably a little more we could do as a focus. >> There's the other water. >> And I'm not blaming anybody. I mean, you you guys can't just get in the car and start driving around every street. That's not where I'm going. There is no policing >> other than people calling >> driving up around the lake and looking at projects. The majority of our projects take place where? Highland Lake. >> Right or wrong? >>
076Well, those are the permits we see, but that doesn't mean there aren't projects without permit. >> Majority of projects that we have where I'm going with it. Majority of projects that we have take place up there. So, where is Jeff and Jeremy travel? They're traveling up up there and that's what they're policing, right? What you see is what you police, right? You're not getting out going towards Colebrook and seeing an excavator in a yard. You you know what I mean? Pardon? >> Not often. >> No, that that's where I'm going. So, our policing program >> is minimal. It's it's it's just on things that we have approved >> that they're >> So, should each of us take a zone and drive around every now and again? >> No, but I mean I live >> in
077front of my house. [laughter] >> Maryanne, my backyard >> faces East Lake Street. >> This summer, four houses. We started with the guy with the garage. He was ripping up his lot. Then the neighbor was knocked down trees and built something. >> Frank's already got his own. I mean, you know, it's like we had a guy last week. The brain [laughter] comes in and takes out the guy's dock, >> you know. I mean, it's like I sit I look out my window and there they are. None of them got permits. None of them came to us. I call him and he goes out and looks. >> But I do think I would agree that there's a lot of water course. I mean, we do have a lot of rivers and there's stuff going on that
078needs to be looked at more closely. It's somewhat up to neighbors and citizens and any of us to see, but there's stuff that go that's goes on on other rivers. I >> we have a huge industrial site on what is that behind D or uh this Mad River. >> Yeah. I mean, >> we've never walked around back there. I mean, there's >> We did when we got Pam the guy moving the >> What I'm saying is there's a lot of activity and that's a very sensitive huge wetland zone that >> it is. >> We don't really No, I mean I'm just saying >> one at a time. >> Yeah, we don't really get to look at too much, but maybe it should be a little bit more of a focus. >> And I guess what
079I'm getting at is a lot of this like people often do stuff not even knowing, right, that they're doing damage, right? There's a certain amount of public education that could be happening and may I mean, what's going on with the website? >> It's coming, >> right? >> It's there. It exists. >> I'm working on it. >> Right. So Jeremy's putting together like a landing page and a lot of resources on the website to, you know, help create a place for people to go to learn about some of these issues. Perhaps when that's up and running and it's robust, we can, you know, maybe do some programming around public education around these. I would agree with you to the fact that you're going to hit some of the people with that. But let me ask you
080something. If majority of the people who come in and buy a piece of property on a pond or on a lake, they don't even go far enough. We haven't even educated them to go far enough buying it and checking what's on the deed and checking what permits they have for waterfront. Nobody checks it. They just arbitrarily look and see there's a dock out there. Everything's good and away we go. >> Well, as you know, I've been wanting to do a program with realtors for a long time. >> You know, we haven't we haven't gotten that covered. Never mind somebody that lives out there on on on Park Pond Park Pond is going to say, "Oh, I'm going to get on a website and look at something." That's >> But but what I'm saying is like
081right now people don't even I mean the website's not done yet, but once the web the landing page and the resources are there, people won't know they're there unless we direct them to it. We can do a Maya maybe we I mean I really do think like we should do some >> you know maybe not quarterly but by yearly public events bring bring somebody in from deep serve cookies and donuts >> should that come from this commission or from Highland Lake Wershed >> Highland Lake Wershed is only Highland Lake I'm talking >> so not to stifle this conversation it's very important Marian you didn't see the email yet because it started with leaders ship the email that Steve referenced earlier. Uh we Jeremy and I had a meeting earlier today with Candi talking about a
082lot of different lake and water quality issues and everything. Uh so what we're requesting is what was the date now? December 11th >> 11th uh trying to put a meeting together with leadership of all the land use commissions, conservation commission, EDC, uh public works, recreation, sewer department, getting everyone in the room and discuss starting to discuss all these issues. Great. >> A lot of people are going in different directions. A lot of them are positive, but we're trying we want to try to rein it in get everyone going in the same direction. >> So these kinds of conversations are going to be happening at this super group. >> Great. Uh, and we're public. The super group. >> Uh, yeah. I mean, sure, it'll be public. Uh, it's we're going to have it at five o'clock
083on that Thursday. Uh, we have to be careful though. We can't have a quorum from any different commission. >> So, that's why I started with just the the chair of each commission and the appropriate staff person. >> But the public will be invited. >> Absolutely. >> So, we can show up as members of the public, not commissioners. >> Yeah. We got to be careful about who roles. You just got to post it online and today it's going to be a meeting >> just like you did with your thing with Lance last year. >> Yeah. When we did that, we all showed up. >> Well, and maybe it'll become that, but this just just started today. >> The concept is to just get everybody rowing in the same direction. Part of the problem that I see
084>> is that you don't you have Highland Wake, which does a ton of work on Highland Lake, right? But you don't have I mean, there's a conservation commission, but there's nobody sort of steering the ship in. This is a regulatory group. So, this isn't really the right place for that info session and all that stuff either. You you guys have a whole set of regulations you need to follow. You have a charge with the state. >> You don't have sort of a conservation commission that's out there doing that type of work and and overseeing all bits and pieces of it, right? And so what we're trying to do is >> the first step to that is get the people in the room that are working on this in various capacities in different and get everybody
085onto the same boat row going in the same direction. So it's not we're not holding a land use meeting of sorts. We're not doing a symposium. We're doing a okay room and huddle. What are you doing? What are you doing? and how can we coordinate so that our efforts are going in the same direction >> and I did request the chairs or their designate so you know if Steve's not available or think someone else is better fine you know that that kind of thing but we just got to keep it kind of tight it's a big group already right >> so we got to you know navigate properly >> well that sounds positive >> well how many people from inland wetlands if x number of people came to that what makes it a quorum >>
086four can't be >> it has to be less than score, right? >> Yeah. >> But if Maryanne is there >> and somebody sees that there's four, she can say, "No, I'm with zoning." >> Right. Well, and some people have dual hats, right? You know, Willie Platt's chair of uh zoning and also the chair of the ad hoc water level committee. Marian's on ZBA and wetland. So, we need to be careful about all those boxes. >> I I I just I don't know. There's there's got to be some something happening, >> some way of policing a little bit more >> than we are right now. Um, with some of these other >> other little ponds and Brooks and stuff. >> I don't disagree. Uh, >> I don't want to be the one. Hold on a minute.
087>> I don't want to be the one that that's going to be the guy ratting out, ratting out, ratting out. I did call you a while back because of of an application that we had in that people are building decks out over this brook >> and they're building brand decks. You know, I bought a piece of property and I walked upstream a little bit. You got to be kidding me. What's happening here? >> So, what became of that? >> Well, we haven't done any anything with that yet, but it's going to get approached. But I'm just saying there's just stuff is happening everywhere with this. You know what I mean? It's unfortunate. >> You know, it's almost impossible if you you do due diligence as a commissioner to visit sites that are applications and if
088you look over at the neighbor's house either direction, you see stuff, >> right? >> You know, I mean, it's that that simple, >> right? >> You know, we did let's try to go ahead. What we did in the city, we had a regulation control department and what our field supervisors did in water and sewers when they were out in the field if they s we gave them some guidelines, >> but if they saw something going on that wasn't there Monday and all of a sudden Wednesday it's there, they reported it. >> Y >> and then that they're our eyes and ears. >> Yeah. That's a >> we have other staff in town that does report stuff back to us and you know it goes >> Jim you know if we can use I'm not I'm
089just saying not that they go out and look I mean because they're not take them away but in their realm of traveling Winchester the town of Winchester they're out there. They're our representatives. >> They see things. Let them report it. >> Yeah. >> It's not costing us anything. But I'm glad you're doing that because like even the concert, you know, there's a Highland Lake cleanup that happens in the spring, one happens in the fall. I think there's maybe a river cleanup, but but like if there if the conservation commission even just figured out a way to do cleanups at all of the water bodies, all of those areas, you know, a couple of times a year, then things would be seen. more people would get involved, you know what I mean? There would be like
090some more education going on, right? I mean, when I walk that property that, you know, is now the the land trust property, like, you know, it's got beer cans here and garbage there and it's going to be clean. Now, >> let me ask you a question. Uh, like I was saying, guys building decks over and stuff of that nature, okay? And we don't act on it while they're building it. We act on it afterwards. Is it theirs? Is it theirs already? Is it already in place? Is it, you know, just like our dock and moing ordinance. If they don't come in, we can't do anything. >> Well, I think you can ask people to take it down. >> Yeah. It can be removed, especially if if when if you act while it's being built. >>
091Even if it's even even after the fact. So the reason why that hasn't specifically been approached yet is because it's going to be dealt with with the larger site plan for that entire property. So that's the situation with that. If that wasn't going on, >> the problem with some of those are >> up there. I think some of those trailer parks are owned individually. >> Some are. >> Yeah. >> So how do how how if you're going in for the whole thing for Mr. Block? >> Okay. Mhm. >> You can't go after me being a on my own piece of property. >> It's kind of like a condo unit though, I would think. Right. >> He's got control of the ground underneath it. >> No, somebody he he owns like 75% of the units there
092as well as the land. There are a few that own and I guess they own the land too. But either way, the entire site is going to be looked at under that. Yeah, it is a strange situation. Yeah. >> Where are we with buoys? Any movement on that? Just we're going to pay attention to where the state is going with that and >> buoys and markers. You mean >> markers? >> Yeah. She >> Yolanda was going to send us and she did send us some follow-up information. Um and and enforcement basically she told us that enforcement on the lake is our problem. >> Um it's the town's problem. I mean really that's what it came down to. So it was sort of like we need to if we find out that there are markers out
093there that shouldn't be there then you know we we can inform their conservation officer and their conservation officer can deal with it. >> Then we have to start out knowing which markers should be >> right. So we have we have that information. There are five permits out on the lake. We have those here's one of them. >> There's only five >> for markers. >> So it's pretty easy to work the other way >> for booies. Well, so so you you have control over you have control over the the mooring and they have control over the markers. Got it. So if it's a buoy, it's sort of our problem, >> right? Like if the buoy gets pushed where it's not supposed to be, we have to do >> right. That's an enforcement problem on our end.
094If it's a marker that's regulated by D, we can contact their conservation officer and then they can do. Of course, they don't have a boat. So then we have to get them in touch with our PD and get them on a boat so that they can go out there and deal with it. It's >> I didn't invite the police. >> It's a it's a >> again we're still kind of working on that. >> Where do we stand with the stuff we sent in a select >> came back. They want us to revisit it again. And you know what? To me, I'm I don't think I'm not willing to go through that whole thing all over again because I think >> what they're asking for is uh language in the ordinance that any anybody who wants
095an appeal to any challenge of the ordinance has a right to appeal. I'm not going back say we opened it, we looked at it >> in any official capacity. Yeah, >> I think it's dead in the water right now. >> I said it's dead in the, you know, but the dead part the things that we want implemented are dead in the water also. >> You know, I mean, I'll give you a perfect example. You know, there are homeowners where they have two lifts. Our ordinance says one lift can contain a boat or a pontoon and the other lift has to have a jet ski on it. Somebody's got two boats, you know, we say, "Who cares? That's no different." So, everyone that has the second boat is in violation now. Does Jeff go, you guys
096go out and say, you know, do something to get it out of the water or whatever. You know, that's what they're holding up in reality. And a couple of other things of that sort that make it, you know, a more user friendly ordinance for common sense. Let's put it that way. In my opinion, >> working just like our government. >> Yeah. >> Well, Um, I just asked Jeff if we should give submit something to them in writing with our position so that it can be discussed in their meeting and go into public record and he said might be a good idea. So if you want I'll draft something for the next meeting for us. >> Leave it in our have it in our packet. >> Yeah, I'll give it to you and it can go
097packets. >> Yeah, no problem. >> And one more item. >> Go ahead. >> Sorry. Uh, as you guys are aware, one of the additional conditions that was put on the Stanziel waterfront project, which was approved, was for a soil scientist to review the findings of the biologist that they brought in for the materials underneath the pier. >> Uh, so we've struggled with that a little bit here for a couple of reasons. Uh, one, if we're going to have somebody double-checking someone else's work, they need to be of like or greater credentials. >> So, a soil scientist checking a biologist is upside down. >> Uh, and furthermore, we kind of feel it's not necessary. Uh, we have a biologist that they brought in that's working on this. He's fully certified. We could show you his credentials.
098Uh, you know, we don't go secondguessing surveyors and engineers and so forth. I think that I personally don't feel that is right. You know, you're you're a certified engineer from the state of Connecticut, >> right? >> And now you have somebody that is just a peer, just a peer going against you. >> Not somebody greater, just a peer. Right. And like you just said to the soil scientists in in biologists, that's not the way it is. You have to have gra. >> Yeah. >> You know what? This whole thing in my opinion started where instead of the soil scientists extracting the dirt from that area of the lake, the homeowner extracted it, >> piled it up on the dock, and now that's what he's saying. And I I'm not questioning the homeowner's credibility, but he's
099saying it came from there. >> Yeah. >> But you know, he shouldn't have >> should have done that. It should have been the soil scientist. >> This is where it came from and that's why it became a question. The only reason >> it does question the It does question for me anyway. It makes me question the judgment of that particular biologist that he would test the dirt that he didn't dig up and >> certify it. >> You know what I mean? And then certify it. Like I I don't know. I wouldn't do that. >> So we've already made good about that is >> John Pollock said that the dirt came from down there. There are the samples. We were there when John Pollock told us those are the samples of the dirt that's on the
100bottom. >> Well, anyway, so going back to your original question. >> So ju just to finish that though, uh we we do have the independent engineer on the project. Uh we have requested that the biologist go back out, take the new samples, get them tested. uh you know so it's your pleasure of course but we just wanted to if we're going to have somebody reviewing them we need to modify that condition anyhow to make it a biologist or greater uh so it's what do you guys want >> when we ask for a townointed engineer to review the plans >> a Tom Grimaldi >> y >> we don't go through that that kind of procedure greater than and less than and and whatever we say you know Tom, these are the engineers's plans. This is the
101project. Review the plans. Make suggestions or agree with it, you know. >> Yeah, that's an engineer reviewing an engineer. So, all I'm saying is it should be a biologist reviewing a biologist, not a soil scientist reviewing a biologist. >> So, we would need to modify it to clarify we want a biologist or we don't feel that extra level is necessary. >> Well, again, you know, one of >> this is the kind of first time >> Oh, yeah. >> happened because of the way it was done, >> right? Had it been the soil scientist extracting it and testifying, okay, we're good. >> Yeah. >> You know, >> I mean, from my point of view, the part that's that where they Okay, so if the biologist that they hired, who is a certified biologist, takes the samples,
102tests them, and delivers the results. >> I'm comfortable with trusting that he did that because we asked him to do it. The part where I think a peer review or oversight might be meaningful is when they're mixing material to replace the like material to put into the lake. >> And that's what I thought we asked them to do. >> That's the part that's really the part we have to be extremely mindful about. >> That's what I thought we asked. >> And obviously we approved that application based on Tom Grimml these conditions, >> right? Did you and that nothing was in our package to even know what we approved >> like you know what I'm saying? We just bl we just approved it and okay Tom everything's on your >> he says >> yeah anything else
103he says but like nothing was ever the recommendation to go with a biologist instead of a soil scientist is coming from Tom >> okay >> so >> okay so what so he submitted a full list of requirements >> yeah we've got a whole list of stuff >> so I think what Matt's saying is can that be distributed to us >> well I mean I just I was curious about that too just where >> yeah no it's good for it to come back to us so I agree with you But we know what >> what we approved and also we gave guy a hard time about a stone wall is yet we just blanketly approved. >> I totally agree with that and I also think that it is useful and informative for us because it could
104inform our decision about the next application that comes in that's like that. The only thing I will say to this whole thing, all right, if we're going to make somebody hire our independent engineer, which they are paying for, okay, they should come a little bit more prepared than the Maldi Kane the last time. >> It was embarrassing. >> We just we spoke I spoke to Jeff about that. >> It was embarrassing. >> Yeah. >> All right. And we're making the man pay for that. >> That's crazy. Hang on though, Gary. Didn't Tom I thought the issue there was Tom did not have enough time lead time. He I felt that I thought that he qualified it and said I [clears throat] just got this in X amount of time so I didn't have enough time
105to review. >> I don't recall exactly. >> Probably the newest he said that. He said that but this took place for over a month. >> Right. >> Okay. It was embarrassing to to have the man that we made him pay for >> stuttering and not have a paper in front of him. >> Well, we're not limited to Tom Grammal or anybody else. >> Good. Like on the last project Tom was over the over the top good or if the fact is that Tom's like, "Hey, sending this to me. I'm backed up. I'm not going to get to it." >> That's what I'm saying. He should be in correspondence with Jeff. >> Yeah. then then we might need to come request an extension because he doesn't have the time. So in the future what we should
106ask for is you have the capacity to review it in a timely manner and get it back to the com the applicant and the commission so that everybody can behave accordingly and move ahead >> you know just beg the question that's all >> right we good anything else >> well I don't think we made a decision >> on >> oh the biologist business >> that's in that's already been in the u >> I think >> in the approval and the language is in the approval of it as a condition. >> What he's saying >> can we you're talking about for the future? >> No, I'm talking about for this one. It it should be modified for if you're going to have that extra review, it should be a biologist reviewing that biology. >> Yeah. And
107I just want to clarify that in the last meeting, the man was not identified as a biologist. He was identified as a soil science. So now it is being surfaced to us that he is a biologist and therefore >> we thought we were asking for a peer review but we weren't because we did not know it was a biologist. So I think we can go with Tom's suggestion and ask for it to be a biologist. >> But again good point that you know he he introduced himself as a soil scientist. >> Yeah. >> So the the chain of command we did go up the ladder. >> Yeah. you know, so I would say leave it alone. >> Uh, you know, if if he or he or she has more than one title, do we want
108to ask that question? Are you testifying as a soil scientist, as a biologist, as a surveyor, as an engineer, >> you know, and see where they are or just leave them alone? >> Well, to that end, anyhow, we we do have a recommendation from Tom for a soil >> biologist to so we're going to reach out to him. I wanted to wait until we have this conversation. >> Okay. >> Uh and as a matter of fact, now that the water's down, uh Mr. Stanziel asked about doing a little exploration because he still feels that that jetty is right on the lake bed and there's no foundation to deal with. >> And if that's the case, then this is all moot for us. Let's hope it is. >> We're hoping for that. >> Yeah. All right.
109>> All right. There. Anything else, Jeff? >> I'm done. >> Jeremy, >> I'm good. >> Anybody >> in the audience? Anybody? [laughter] >> Is there a motion to adjurnn? >> Motion to adjurnn. >> Second. All those in favor. We will see each other before Thanksgiving. Correct. >> 20th. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Yeah. >> Thanksgiving.