211 NOV 24 AM 9: 09

TOWN OF NEWINGTON

CONSERVATION COMMISSIONMEETING MINUTES

November 16, 2021

This meeting was presented as a Zoom Webinar/Meeting..

^ECfr(VE8FO^RECOWO"! s.;r^jMoroN, CT

211 NOV 24 AM 9: 09

^^H..^^) /*1--i^^€J

T»w,i«»rk'

I. CALL TO ORDER

Chairman Sadil called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m.

II. ROLL CALLBen Ancona IIIJohn BachandJohn CasasantaBernadette ConwayAlan PaskewichAndreas SadilJeff Wagner

Also presentRenata Bertotti, Town PlannerErik Hinckley, Inland Wetland AgentBen Ancona, Town AttorneyGail Budrejko, Town CouncilorSusan Gibbon, Recording Secretary

Chairman Sadil: I believe for point of order Commissioner Conway will sit for CommissionerLavariere this evening. Moving on to Item III, Public Participation on Non-Agenda Items, eachspeaker limited to two roinutes.

III. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS(each speaker limited to 2 minutes)

Chairman Sadil: Is there anyone on the line waiting to speak?

Ms. Bertotti: Mr. Chair I have...

Chairman Sadil: I think Mr. Zelek has raised his hand. Please, please, Mr. Zelek, pleasespeak.

Jeff Zelek, 55 Wells Drive North: I just want to talk about two items. First item is CedarMountain and second item is commissioners voting on applications. So regarding Cedar Mountain. Itwas about 10 years ago that Toll Brothers approached the town with an application to develop CedarMountain. They came in with a team of experts that they had hired and that team of experts testifiedthat the impact would be minimal. We had one astute commissioner, his name was Ray Harlow, andhe put forth a motion to.the conservation commission that the commission should request as CERTReport. Now a CERT report is a report that is done by the Connecticut Environmental Review Team.It's a free service that the state of Connecticut provides to help municipalities work their way throughcomplex or large applications and it allows the town to make wise land use decisions. Now that reportcame back to the commission and it provided a number of items that the commission had overlookedand the applicant had overlooked and ultimately that CERT report provided sound reasons for the denial

Newington Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes (11-16-2021)Page 1

of the Toll Brothers application. So I just want to recognize Commissioner Harlow, he has sincepassed away but without his courage and putting forth a motion to have a CERT report done, weprobably wouldn't have Cedar Mountain the way it is today preserved. So, he's always going to beremembered in this town for the hard word and the help he did in saving Cedar Mountain. The seconditem I want to talk to you guys about is voting on an application. I want to remind the commission thatyou don't always have to vote to approve or deny an application. There's a third option, which isseldom used, and that option is to make a motion to find the application as incomplete, and you do thatwhen you find that you don't have all the information you need to make a sound, reasonable decision.So if you are at the end of an application and time is running out, and you feel as though you don'thave all the information in front of you - the reports that you might want or you have open questionsyou're not comfortable, you can find that the application in incomplete. You don't approve theapplication, you don't deny the application, you simply tell the applicant to go back, come back withthe information you need or if's there other information being generated by other parties, you wait untilthat information is available and then you can move forward with the application. It helps you make amore sound decision, the more information you have, So I just want to remind the commissioners thatyou don't always have to vote to approve or deny. If you're not comfortable and you don't have all ofthe infonnation you need you can always find the application as incomplete. So, I leave you with thatand I hope you guys have a great evening.

Chairman Sadil: Thank you Mr. Zelek, is there anyone else on the line Ms. Bertotti?

Ms. Bertotti: No Mr. Chair, nobody else has raised their hand.

Chairman Sadil: Ok. Moving on to Acceptance of Minutes, Item A. Amendment to thePreviously Approved Minutes ofthe Sept. 21, 2021 meeting.

IV. ACCEPTANCE OP MINUTES

A. Amendment To The Previously Approved Minutes ofthe Sept. 21, 2021 Meeting

Chairman Sadil: This is the Newington Conservation Commission Meeting minutes update ofpage 8.

Mr. Hinckley: Correct, that was a misidentification of...

Chairman Sadil: Update my memory on this.

Mr. Hinckley: That was misidentification of the application number of a particular motion thatwas made. It was one thing that was picked up and we just want to correct it.

Chairman Sadil: Ok, are there any other comments on the minutes, corrections to that page.Commissioner Paskewich: Yes, Chairman Sadil, Commissioner Paskewich here.

Chairman Sadil: Go ahead.

Coinmissioner Paskewich: Yeah on page 8, it's about halfway down, I state "okay, well thesecond part then" and then move down about six lines, seven lines, to the left of the paragraph, it startsout saying pools was an imitative of mine, which should be spelled initiative. Not imitative.

Chairman Sadil; Is this on the page, excuse me, is this on the September 21, 2021,1 don'tquite see that. I see the 2021-20 line, construction activities in the regulated area on 203 Costello Road.Is it above that?

Newington Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes (11-16-2021)Page2

Commissioner Paskewich: Well, it's on page 8, if you move it from the bottom, if you move upone, two, three, further paragraph up. I state Commissioner Paskewich, "ok, well the second part thenwould be the title ofthis article is record setting breading season."

Commissioner Casasanta: Mr. Chairman.

Chairman Sadil: Go ahead Commissioner Casasanta.

Commissioner Casasanta: I believe Commissioner Paskewich is looking at the October minutes.

Chairman Sadil: Yes, yes, I see that now, I've got the minutes now in front of me.

Mr. Hinckley: Yes, the first item is you'rejust correcting the minutes from September whichhappens to be on page 8 as well.

Chairman Sadil: What a coincidence. Ok. So relative to the September 21 minutes are thereany additional corrections from the commissioners. Seeing none, may I have a motion to accept theamendment from the previously approved minutes of the September 21, 2021 meeting of theConservation Commission? So moved by Commissioner Casasanta.

Commissioner Casasanta: Yes.

Chairman Sadil: May I have a second?

Conunissioner Paskewich: Second by Commissioner Paskewich.

Chairman Sadil: Second by Commissioner Paskewich. All in favor?

Commissioners: Aye.

Chairman Sadil: Any abstentions? Ok the amendment passes. Thank you. Moving on to ItemB, Acceptance OfMinutes: October 19, 2021 Regular Meeting.

B. Acceptance OfMinutes: October 19, 2021 Regular Meeting

Chairman Sadil: Are there any additions or corrections from the commissioners? I think now isthe time Commissioner Paskewich, you may proceed.

Commissioner Paskewich: Ok, yeah, I believe that was on page 8 and about halfway down Istarted to communicate speaking Commissioner Paskewich and down along the paragraph on the leftside it states imitative which should be initiative. Do you see that?

Chairman Sadil; Yes, I see it. Do you see it Ms. Gibbon?

Ms. Gibbon; Yes, I see it.

Commissioner Paskewich: That's all there is. Thank you.Chairman Sadil; Are there any other comments from Commissioners? Do the commissioners

feel that they've had enough time to review these minutes? I think we got them on Thursday of lastweek, um...I would like, prefer a little extra time to go over them. I don't know how the rest of thecommissioners feel. Do.we just want to table this and approve this at our next meeting? It's quite alengthy document.

Commissioner Wagner: I'll second that. I need a little time too.

Chairman Sadil; Thank you, I do too. So Erik can we just table this to the next meeting to givecommissioners a little extra time review the minutes.

Mr. Hinckley: You can.


Chairman Sadil: All right, so I'm going to table these minutes since we have an ongoingdiscussion on that application I want to give the commissioners some time to review this so we'll tablethat for next time. Moving on to New Business, Application ff2021-27, For Construction Activities InThe Regulated Area 85 Reservoir Road, Applicant: Anna Reynolds Building Committee, Owner: Townof Newington, Contact; Stephen Woods.

V. NEW BUSINESS

A. Application #2021-27, For Construction Activities In The Regulated Area 85 ReservoirRoad, Applicant: Anna Reynolds Building Committee, Owner: Town Of Newington,Contact: Stephen Woods

Chairman Sadil: Mr. Hinckley, do you have a presentation for the commission?

Mr. Hinckley: I believe they have some people in the room that are ready to speak.

Brennan White: That's right. My name is Brennan White, I'm a landscape architect withKaestle Boos Architects, Here with me tonight is...

Chairman Sadil: What's the address for you, we just need the company address for the record.

M:r. White: My address is 1040 Paper Street, Suffield, Connecticut; or 416 Slater Road, NewBritain is Kaestle Boos address.

Mr. Hinckley: Quickly Mr. Chairman. Mr. White you can share your screen if you havethings as well.

Mr. White: Well, I'm going to share my screen. We've also got a few people here tonight, atleast they were invited. Jennifer Mangiagli, who may speak, she's the project architect. RobertNewton is the civil engineer on the project and I think Marnie Aliska [sp?], the OPM on the project andpossibly Tom DiMauro from Newfield Construction and I don't know if Steve Woods is on, We dohave some things to share with you tonight. We has submitted a package and you should have it. It'svery complete and very detailed write up on the project which should give you a good description and avery extensive plan set was included in that so you should have all of the documentation. I'm going topull up some of the plans and share them with you. Can you see my screen?

Chairman Sadil: Yes.

Mr. White: Ok. First of all, the existing site, the project is for additions and renovations forAnna Reynolds Elementary School at 85 Reservoir Road. I'm sure you are all familiar with the site.I'll walk through and point a few things out on the existing site. The existing building is here and thisis Reservoir Road; it's actually flipped around, north is pointing down on the sheet. So Reservoir Roadhere, the access drive in, it's really a one way through the site and Fenn Road is over here wherevehicles exit. On each side of the site are a little over 4 acres of wetlands and distributed throughouteach area there are some watercourses including a stream on the east side and kind of ponded areas onthe west side. This is the existing parking and circulation throughout. Playing fields are in thissoutheast location and there are playground areas around the school. Our proposed project is a renovateto new project meaning the facility will be completely renovated to new. The existing building will berenovated and it will also have a small addition for an elevator located in this corner. So this littleorange dot is actually the addition for the elevator and the rest of the school will be renovated. Therewill also be site improvements associated with the project, none of which will impact the wetlands.Our mapping has compiled GIS wetlands mapping as well as previous project mapping. There's aslight discrepancy between the field mapping and that was to the west. This was actually field locatedwetland and I think back in 2008, there was a major drainage work that drains water from the west side


to the east side that drains water through a 48 inch RCP. The water flows actually down andunderneath Fenn Road here. There's also a 36 inch line with spills out in this location and drains downas well. This project will not be as extensive as that work. It's very contained to the existing developedareas which is small parking expansion. The intention of this is to improve site circulation throughoutand upgrade the facility to have the parent drop off come in, loop around here and exit back out toReservoir Road and separate that from the bus traffic which will come in here and then loop around. Sowe are doing some improvements to enable that bus circulation. There will be a little bit of wideninghere to allow the turning radius of the bus as well as vehicles being able to come down and loopthrough the lot and we're picking up a few additional parking spaces which is beneficial to the mainentrance which is located here. As I said, there is really no impact and everything is essentially inalready previously developed areas. There is some grading associated with the radius and any workthat is done here will be seeded, I think it's around 3,000 sf, with conservation seed mix along thissloped edge right here. The mapping of the wetlands is actually based on the town GIS and it actuallyoverlaps an existing sidewalk, so the actually wetlands are probably further in, so even though that linecomes out, that is an existing walk that we'll essentially be reconstructing to blend into an existingasphalt walk in this location. So, very minimal work here, essentially a redo of the sidewalk, justrepaving with asphalt and this is a concrete sidewalk which will allow students to cross through to theschool without having to cross vehicular traffic. This is obviously the wetland area and this redline righthere is the 100 foot upland review area. So very minimal work, essentially this whole area, with theexception ofa small corner, here in the northeast side, you can see it's currently already paved; we'rejust picking up and improving the circulation in through here, There are some reductions in sitepavement and as you can see here were cutting out some asphalt. It's kind of a balance throughout thesite to make up for that. As I mentioned, there is no impact or work in the wetlands; it is limited to theupland review area. The natural diversity database, in reviewing the documents the state has, indicatedthat there is a threatened species. We looked into it, had correspondence with CT DEEP, it's includedin the package, and the response we received from DEEP indicated the that Eastern Box Turtle havebeen found in this general location, not on this site, and the construction manager (NewfieldConstruction) is aware of that. Essentially they said though construction to keep an eye out for theseturtles, There will silt fence around the site perimeter and certainly any disturbed areas will have siltfence, construction fence as well and that will prevent them from migrating on to the site. The will alsomake it known to any of the contractors and how to deal with that, relocate if necessary. Forconstruction, the schedule is to start in the Spring of 2022 and will continue and end in the Fall of2024, so two years of construction. Because it is an occupied facility, most of the site work will occurin the summer months. During the summer months will be a drier situation and as I said there iserosion sediment controls which will be maintained throughout the site throughout the duration ofconstructioo until everything is completely established and there is no concern for erosion in terms ofconstruction. Por the staging area they will be utilizing the southeast corner of the site, an existingplaying field area, which will be completely restored after. We also included mapping to indicate whatthe staging area might look like with access up to the school throughout the duration of theconstruction. Really, the activities as I mentioned before, for the mostpart the existing paving areasare going to remain existing paved areas. There is going to be some improvements to the base material,there is some general filling to the base material throughout and some regarding to blend in. As Imentioned that will primarily occur in the drier months of the year and throughout the summer whenthe school it not occupied. We've broken it down in terms of time frame for each area; it's not allcompletely opened up at once so we'll maintain good control over the site. Certainly, if Tom[DiMauro] is on, he may want to speak to the dates of these activities,

Tom DiMauro: Hi this is Tom DiMauro with Newfield. So the yellow area at the top ofyourscreen, that's the staging area and that will be constructed in the Spring of 2022 and then there's really


two major phases of the site construction. The reddish area at the bottom of the screen is the firstsummer, summer of 2022 and then light brown area occurs in the summer of 2023.

Mr. White: Thanks Tom. In terms of the drainage on site, I spoke a little bit about the grading.The drainage will be improved. Currently there is not water quality attenuation on the site. Ourgrading plan was included in the set. Just to speak a little bit about drainage. Like I said, we areimproving the drainage and the water quality leaving the site. We've got two water quality devices onsite which will remove the total suspended solids and we've got an underground detention system here,So generally this access drive will drain back down to Reservoir Road. We are connecting to some ofthe existing drainage pipes within the core of the site. The 48 inch line really connects one wetland tothe other and there will be no disturbance to that line. Some of this drainage will be tied in to that, aswell as conveyed to this drainage over the existing underground detention system. The soils are notgood for infiltration so it's really a matter of detaining the water and metering it out to reduce the peakflow. The water will drain down the drive utilizing some of the existing piping and go to another waterquality device here before it is discharged. Rob, ifyou're here, you want to add to that?

Mr. Newton: We are going to try to utilize as much as the on-site drainage system as we can.Of course, we will be adding more drainage to it to pick up some of the new paved areas. We do havea small detention system to help meter out any increase in stormwater flows. As also mentioned,before the water flows into Fenn Road or Reservoir Road the water will pass through a water qualityunit to help trap any sediments, debris, oil that may be leaving the site and that's an added feature tothe drainage system that doesn't currently exist. Really we're just improving and reworking the currentdrainage system. There is minimal increase in impervious and that's the reason for the detentionsystem; to help meet or reduce peak flows off the site.

Chairman Sadil: So, the bottom line is, this drainage is going to the MDC, there's not deltaincrease of drainage going into that wetland on the left side of your map here.

Mr.. Newton: There is no increase in drainage going into that wetland.

Chairman Sadil: Ok, thank you.Mr. White: Site lighting will also be improved. They will all be LED fixtures with full cutoffs

focused on the site, so there will be no impact to the wetlands or adjacent areas. As I mentioned therewill be no impact to the wetlands, we are doing some work in the upland review areas, but they areareas where you have seen previous work and disturbance. This certainly won't be to the extent ofdisturbance that occurred during the 2008 drainage line work.

Chairman Sadil: Mr. White, there's no connectivity between these two wetlands on the left andthe right, there's no connectivity between these two wetlands, Does that flow underneath that parkingarea?

Mr. White: It flows underneath the parking lot yes.Chairman Sadil: Ok. Where is that water coming from right to left and it goes into Piper Brook

on the left I assume.

Mr. White; Yes. Eventually it makes its way down underneath Penn Road and then acrossdown to Piper Brook further to the east. There's a watercourse that mns through here and as Imentioned there's also a 36 inch pipe and there's an easement somewhere in here and it drains out.This are is kind of a rip rap with a head wall and takes it underneath the parking lot across andessentially there's no impact to that drainage line.

Chairman Sadil:. Ok.


Commissioner Bachand; Mr. Chairman, ifl could ask a question ofthe applicant.

Chairman Sadil: Go ahead Commissioner Bachand.

Commissioner Bachand: So, the .45 acres of disturbance, is that the aggregate, in other words,are only adding another 08 to the .37 that we have already or is it on top of the .37.

Mr. Hinckley: I'm looking at the application myself, it looks like what you said firstCommissioner Bachand.

Commissioner Bachand: The aggregate.

Mr. Hinckley: Correct. I believe so. The applicant can verify.

Mr. White: Yes, there's a chart on the document. We've broken it down to pre-constructionpavement area and post-construction and the area will be increased by...

Commissioner Bachand: Point zero eight.

Mr. White: The .08 is actually the conservation seed mix along this area, we're actually goingto add this in as a conservation seed mix as well, so a general wildflower area.

Commissioner Bachand: So just to be clear, the disturbance is a permanent improvement.

Mr. White: Yes, correct, it is.

Commissioner Bachand: All right, thank you.Chairman Sadil: All right, are there any other questions? Is your presentation concluded Mr.

White?

Mr. White: Yes, I think I've covered everything.

Chairman Sadil: Are there any questions from Commissioners at this time?

Commissioner Paskewich: Chairman Sadil, Commissioner Paskewich here.


Commissioner Paskewich: You actually satisfied questions I had already, so thank you verymuch I have no further questions.

Chairman Sadil: Any other commissioners at this time wish to speak? Ask any questions of theapplicant.

Coinmissioner Casasanta: Mr. Chairman.

Chairman Sadil: Commissioner Casasanta go ahead.

Commissioner Casasanta: Thank you. Just a quick question for clarification. The Eastern BoxTurtles that DEEP said, is this in the eastern or western wetland that they're found.

Mr. White: So it's not necessarily on the site, it's based on the NDDB. The natural diversitydatabase from the state indicated that there are species, it didn't indicate what species, I'm pulling it upright now. You can see my screen.

Mr. Hinckley: Yeah, that should be helpful.

Mr. White: Yeah, so generally within these bubbles they say it could be somewhere within thisarea. So, I suppose it's safe to assume that they could be on site within either of the wetlands. But it'scertainly nothing that they said you can't construct, it's just something that has to be monitoredthroughout construction and Tom has dealt with this before. As I said before, the erosion and


sedimentation control, even indicated in DEEP's letter, silt fence is a deterrent and will actually preventthem from migrating onto the site while under construction. General observation during constructionand educatiog contractors to be aware of that during certain times of the year, I think it's an advantagethat most of the site work will be being done during the summer months, outside of any migratoryactivities. Hopefully that answered your question. So, there's no specific location.

Commissioner Casasanta: Thank you Mr. White.

Chairman Sadil: Any other questions from commissioners? I do not see anyone with their handup. So, our main purpose this evening is to determine if this application requires a public hearing. Ithink we need to vote on a motion on whether or not this will or will not have a significant impact tothe wetlands. My personal feeling is to waive the public hearing, I think this is a pretty straightforwardapplication. I think there's to be a minor redo or increasing of the electro to the area, there's no deltachange in the hydrology. of the wetland in my opinion, so feeling is to forego a public hearing on thisapplication. I welcome comments from the other commissioners.

Commissioner Paskewich: Commissioner Paskewich, Chairman Sadil.

Chairman Sadil: Please proceed.

Commissioner Paskewich: I concur with you. After reviewing these documents and listeningto the presentation, it only seems like a slight increase in the parking area near the wetland, it will notbe discharged into the wetland and maybe some changes up above that area in grading or curbing, so itdoes not seem like a significant impact to the wetland and the abutters south of that do not look likethey would be impacted to me which would determine whether or not we may need a public hearing.So, I would also waive the need for a public hearing.

Chairman Sadil: Tank you Commissioner Paskewich. Any other commissioners wish tocomment? Commissioner Casasanta.

Commissioner Casasanta: I agree with you and Commissioner Paskewich, I don't think thereis any need for a public hearing on this application.

Chairman Sadil: Thank you Commissioner Casasanta.

Commissioner Bachand: [Inaudible]

Chairman Sadil: Who's speaking?

Commissioner Bachand: John Bachand.

Chairman Sadil: Commissioner Bachand go ahead.

Commissioner Bachand: Yeah, I agree that the impact is minimal, but because ofthe scope ofthe project, I wouldn't be against a public hearing anyway just to give the public a chance to chime in. Idon't think it would be something like we've seen with the other recent application where there's goingto be a lot of opposition to it, but I think that maybe the public would be interested. Unless this is, um,unless this is, uh, you know, would want to delay the school project, of course, but I see no, uh, I seeno downside to a public hearing, that's what I'm trying to get at.

Chairman Sadil: Thank you Commissioner Bachand. Commissioner Wagner.

Commissioner Wagner: I agree with you Commissioner Sadil that we don't need a publichearing. It's minimal and I don't want to delay the project.

Chairman Sadil: Thank you Commissioner Wagner. Commissioner Conway?


Commissioner Conway: I feel comfortable with moving forward and agree that with, uh, theminimal impact we, I, don't see a need for a public hearing.

Chairman Sadil: Thank you Commissioner Conway. Commissioner Ancona you wish tospeak?

Commissioner Ancona: Yeah, I'm comfortable with no public hearing.

Chairman Sadil: All right, so I think there is a consensus there to waive the public hearing.Then let's move, I need a motion for Application #2021-27, Por Construction Activities In TheRegulated Area 85 Reservoir Road, Applicant: Anna Reynolds Building Committee, Owner: Town OfNewington, Contact: Stephen Woods. May I have a motion waive the public hearing Mr. ViceChairman since we do not have an acting secretary, can you please submit the motion as actingsecretary.

Coinmissioner Wagner: Yes. So the Motion: The commission believes this activity will haveno significant impact tp the regulated area and/or not be in the best interest of the public then thisapplication will not require a public hearing.

Chairman Sadil: Thank you. May I have a second?

Commissioner Paskewich: Second.

Chairman Sadil: Seconded by Commissioner Paskewich. Ms. Gibbon, please call the roll.

Ms. Gibbon: Sorry. Commissioner Ancona.

Commissioner Ancona: Yes.

Ms. Gibbon: Commissioner Bachand.

Commissioner Bachand: Yes.

Ms. Gibbon: Commissioner Casasanta.

Commissioner Casasanta: Yes.

Ms. Gibbon; Commissioner Conway.

Commissioner Conway: Yes.

Ms. Gibbon: Commissioner Paskewich.

Commissioner Paskewich: Yes.

Ms. Gibbon: Chairman Sadil.


Ms. Gibbon: Commissioner Wagner.

Commissioner Wagner: Yes.

Chairman Sadil: That's a unanimous motion passes. Thank you Mr. White and your team foryour presentation this eyening.

Mr.. White: Thank you very much. Have a good evening.

Chairman Sadil: You too. Moving on to Old Business, Application ^2021-23, ForConstmction Activities In The Regulated Area At 35, 67, & 69 Culver Street And 258 Deming Street,Applicant: AR Building Company, Inc., Owner: RDTHREE LLC., Contact: The Bongiovanni Group,Inc.


VI. OLD BUSINESS

A. Application ^2021-23, For Construction Activities In The Regulated Area At 35, 67, & 69Culver Street And 258 Deming Street, Applicant; AR Building Company, Inc., Owner:RDTHREE LLC., Contact: The Bongiovanni Group,Inc.

Mr. Hinckley: Mr. Chairman before we begin if I may. Just a reminder, when preparing todeliberate and take action on this application, please refer to Section 10.2 of the regulations to considerthose items and that section was referenced in my original memo, staff memo for this project and it'sup on the screen for your use and review as needed.

Chairman Sadil: Ok. Is the applicant present or are we going to deliberate amongst ourselves?

Mr. Hinckley: It's really.-.the public hearing is closed, so there really shouldn't be any inputfrom anybody at this point. It's your deliberations and your action this evening.

Ms. Bertotti: And if I may jump in Mr. Chair and for the record the town attorney is presentin the room so if you have any procedural questions you are welcome to ask.

Chairman Sadil: Ok.

Commissioner Bachand: I can start Mr. Chairman.

Chairman Sadil: Please go ahead Commissioner Bachand.

Commissioner Bachand: So the first question is when are we required to render a decision.

Mr. Hinckley; You have 35 days after the public hearing so that's tonight's meeting.

Chairman Sadil: I thought it was 65, not 35 Mr. Hinckley.

Mr. Hinckley: It's 35. You can ask for an extension.

Commissioner Bachand: So, so we have no further uh, we can't push it off until the nextmeeting in other words.

Mr. Hinckley: Not unless you get an extension from the applicant.

Commissioner Bachand: Ok and then this discussion...

Chairman Sadil: By the way, if I may interrupt, I see the applicant does not wish to have anextension, Correct?

Mr. Hinckley: I have not formally asked him, so, I don't know, I mean he, they gave a smallextension for TPZ.

Chairman Sadil: Ok, please continue Commissioner Bachand.

Commissioner Bachand: Well, you know, I did watch the TPZ meeting and there seems to be alittle confusion about the whole situation. Um...I know that even they were instructed, even they wereonly considering a zone change. But there is this, um, legal quandary or this uh technical quandary,um, maybe we could have that explained to us as they had it explained to them since the town attorneyis here or since Renata is also here too. Um, I know that it's not part of our decision, but it's not partof the zone change decision either, but it was explained to the commissioners in the TPZ meeting. So Idon't know if anyone, there's a consensus on that, someone would like to hear about that.

Commissioner Paskewich: Commissioner Paskewich here Chairman Sadil. Question for JohnBachand.



Commissioner Paskewich: I'm not quite sure what you're alluding to. Could you expand inmore terms that I can understand that you're...of what you're looking for.

Commissioner Bachand: Um, ok, if the uh Chairman doesn't mind.

Chairman Sadil; Go ahead Commissioner Bachand.

Commissioner Bachand: Well we heard from some of the public that um, in essence, this is ahypothetical application because it can't go through TPZ as it is now. I could be completely wrong so Ihope Renata will correct me ifl am wrong, but apparently other things have to occur, so we're kind ofconsidering .a hypothetical.

Attorney Ancona: Mr. Chairman, please. Commissioner Bachand...

Chairman Sadil: Attorney Ancona.

Attorney Ancona: This is a rabbit hole we have no business going down into, please. You needto be focused on the application in front of you, the record before you and that's it. This extraneousstuff does not belong in this hearing. Please.

Commissioner Bachand: Ok. Coming from the town attorney I will withdraw that request.

Mr. Hinckley; I mean, you're charge Commissioners as you know is the impact to thewetlands. It's not a zone change, it's not a future TPZ application. That's what you look at. Andgoing forward, it you approve, deny, whatever, and something gets approved at the TPZ level thatchanges what you approved, they would have to seek a modification their wetland permit if it changesanything that you've approved this evening on the wetland end. So I just offer that.

Commissioner Bachand: Ok. Thank you.

Chairman Sadil: Was there anything else Commissioner Bachand?

Commissioner Bachand; No, not at this time.

Chairman Sadil: I want to ask the commission, I want to lay this out in the open, there was amention earlier about a CERT report. Attorney Ancona can you shed some light on that, is that withinthe purview of the commission to request the report or something similar to that effect?

Attorney Ancona: Mr. Chairman it is not. You must look at the record before you and moveforward, one way or another.

Chairman Sadil: That's unfortunate.

Commissioner Conway: Uh, Mr. Chairman Sadil, I'd like to know why that wouldn't besomething that we within our purview that we couldn't do. Uh, being the conservation committee, thewetlands that having that in our, in our purview and having to get it. I'd like to get as much informationas I can and I came into this meeting tonight with that in mind, you know, thinking of requesting thatpossibly. Bringing that before the rest of the commissioners. Just to get more information, so I don'tunderstand why that wouldn't apply here.

Attorney Ancona: Well, I guess the simplest answer, and Renata you canjump in here, Erikplease; the simplest answer is that at this point we are running up against a deadline and I'm not surewhich way or how we caa goabout concluding this matter if we pursue that avenue.

Mr. Hinckley: I think Renata has reached out to the CRT...

Ms. Bertotti: I did and let me just quickly report on that. So, first of all, no new informationshould be introduced into the record after the close ofthe public hearing. So let's say we approached

Newington Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes (11-16-2021)Pagell

CRT and were able to get that report, you as a commission would not be able to consider informationin that report in making a wetland's decision on this matter. So that's number one, Number two, I didreach out to them and they, when they did Cedar Mountain report and this was up until I understandlike some recent time ago, the CRT, which is an extension of UConn had at their disposal help fromDEEP. So through that DEEP assistance, what they actually got was some professional immunity forthe volunteers thatwould normally do these reports. At this time, this group considers environmentalreview reports for either town projects, town owned land or for the land tmsts. When it comes todevelopment application, because DEEP withdrew the help that they used to give them, the team ofvolunteers that conducts these reports no longer has professional immunity and they, the group then, theorganization, is very sensitive to entering into any kind of report review when there is a developmentproject. The reason for that is they have a small group of volunteers, they do not want them in courthaving to testify and not having the level of professional immunity that developers, specialists, perhapshave. With that in mind, if we were to file a formal application, what would happen is the group wouldreach out to DEEP to see if they can get some assistance. It is unlikely because DEEP is not fundingthis any longer. If in some kind of, you know, very hopeful universe they were able to get DEEP'sassistance, they wouldn't be able to get this project before spring and what that would mean is wewould ran qut of all of the deadline time. Now, all that being said, going back to the fact that you maynot consider information that is received before you that's received after the public hearing, because theapplicant doesn't have authority to.-.doesn't have the opportunity to rebut, You know if you were tomake a decision based on that report, the CRT team would be, would be perhaps in court over adecision that was made based on that and that is why that's really not a practical or viable option. Nowwhat we can do actually with this group that does environmental reviews, is if we sit down and design amap and itemize parcels that we would like or have some concerns for preservation, even if thoseparcels are privately owned, but are not currently under pending development application, and we getauthorization from the property owner, they would do that. So, for future planning, they can help us,for the current stuff I don't think that's really an option.

Chairman Sadil: Ok, I'm sorry to hear that. So, um, if I voice my concerns right now, this iswhere I'm at and what my concerns are relative to the and looking at, I will go through 10.2, but here'swhere I'm at. I am concerned about the southerly portion of the project where buildings 3, 4 and 5 are,that very narrow area, it's about 75 yards if I judge from the map, from the upland review area. Thatis a very narrow area, you have very large embankments on both sides, both where that otherwatercourse is and where pond number two is, where the vernal pool is, that is a very steep grade, ok.If they want to go in there and clear that area, I mean how stable is that ridge area going to be whenthey go in there with ten ton of cement trucks, you know go back and forth, and 75 yards is not verywide. So I am concerned once you take out the old vegetation and the trees and whatnot, then maybeyou have tosome blasting to level spread that area to get to get to those buildings, what is the impact tothe wetland. Are we going to have a bit of a landslide, mudslide, what have you when they comethrough there with their.heavy machinery. Where is the gravel pile going to be, where is the dirt pile,that's not on that plan, that little pile out front, but you're talking about a major excavation here. So, Ihave concern within that 75 foot area, all that construction, how stable is that ridgeline going to bewhen you have such a cliff basically on either side of those buildings, ok. And with that regard, theparking area goes right up to the edge and there's nothing in the report that I see as far as what thecurbing is, if a car jumps, you know people drive, they jump the curb and they go down into the uplandreview area, that is a very steep area, I didn't, I don't see anything that addresses that steepness thatcould impact get a vehicle in the upland review area, that was a, it's a, look at the grading map, that isextremely steep. Apparently someone with some geeking out in the past, I don't know, but thatconcerns me, what type ofbarrier is around those three buildings, especially in the narrow area aroundthe vernal pool pond, pond number two. So that is a concern to me. Second is the drainage into that,


on the southerly side, the drainage from those buildings. They are going to dump that into that area onthe southerly portion, I mean, what's the velocity ofthat flow going to be? That's going to causeerosion no matter how they slow it down, they're going to have water flow into that, that's going tocause erosion. There are trees in that area, is that going to uproot the root balls of those trees. That isa concern to me, so that's....the plantings in that same area, a very, very steep slope. What are thechances of those plantings taking hold when you are right up against ridgeline? You're going to havesome tipping over with the wind, you know that, they're right on the edge there. And then detentionpond C2, how deep are you going to dig into the upland review area to put detention pond C2, again, ina very unstable soil, what's going to happen there. So I have questions about erosion control, are theygoing to have to remove some of the underbrush, particularly on the corner there by Deming Streetthere in order to put the erosion control in place they're going to have to take out a lot of surroundingsaround the wetland there near watercourse number 1. That is a concern. Those are the highlights thatis still have concerns with. And um, I don't know how other people feel, where else we're going togo, but uh... I don't see a maintenance plan, there's significant wetland assets on this property. Threeof them right. Does the applicant have experience, I know he has a lot of properties, but otherproperties where he has wetlands adjacent to what is his best practice and that's something um that isopen in my mind as far as given the sloping, especially with pond number 2 and wetland course number2, the southeriy one along Costello Road and that whole area. How is that going to be maintained?That is an active watercourse there. These are some of the questions that I have, I open it up to thecommission, so um, what your feelings are.

Commissioner Paskewich: Commissioner Paskewich here Chairman Sadil.


Commissioner Paskewich: You've done a very thorough evaluation. I've been trying to spendtime on this.myself and being very conscious and looking at all the elements around the wetland thatwill be disturbed from their current status of upper parts of the wetland and the forest canopy that'saround the wetlands, it's all part of the complete ecosystem with the wildlife and the aquatic life on thisproperty. It's a very significant area of wetland and I heard some terms during the sessions with theapplicant regarding a lot of fallow farmland. So I did some research and found that there's not thatmuch fallow farmland, in fact, there's very little former farmland it's only about five to six acresencompassing the 25 which is a small amount. Which typically would have only been up in the northwest corner just south of the water course there because if you look at the topo's on the mapping it'sfairiy flatter there which is only about five or six acres. All around that it's very steep and as you movefurther southeriy, it becomes very, very, steep. Farmers in any era would not be farming that at all. Itwouldn't be [garbled] sloped land. So, I feel that this wetland is very significant and I can't findanother, you know, more information from the applicant that I asked about the excavation process andI'd like to know how long that is going to take. Is that going to take a year, two years, how manymonths; what the schedule for the excavation as significant as I can see it could be because there'sgoing to be quite a bit of cut and fill to make the land flat in order to put on a parking lot and buildings.And from past reviews of construction sites, large excavation going on here, it's going to disturb thewedands and the life around it.

Chairman Sadil: Commissioner Casasanta you have your hand up.

Commissioner Casasanta; Thank you Mr. Chairman. My concerns are similar toCommissioner Paskewich's. The applicant was dealing with each of the wetlands on this property as ifeach was in a vacuum and I think the whole site is interconnected and I think by fragmenting the site,the fragmentation will do irreparable harm to all three wetlands. You know, that's what I'm wrestlingwith right now. Because you know, they've taken, mitigating, you know the plans take mitigating


actions not to harm the individual wetlands but overall, I assure you, those three wetlands areinterconnected. The frogs or the toads that are breeding in that western middle vernal pool aremigrating north to the north wetland; migrating south to the southerly water course. I see them allinterconnected and what the whole development does is fragment that eco system. That's my mainconcern up to last month and it still is.

Chairman Sadil; Thank you Commissioner Casasanta. Any other commissioners wish to speakat this time? Commissioner Bachand.

Commissioner Bachand: Mr. Chairman, I have a slightly different take on it. When I first sawthe application I thoughf it was quite an ambitious yield of housing units, but I thought that Mr,Bongiovanni did an excellentjob in condensing it into this small area and pretty much staying out ofthewetlands completely but almost completely staying out of the wetland review areas. So, as far as theproperty getting fragmented now, I think it does fragment the whole ecosystem, but I'm not soconcerned for the wetlands. So, I still would like some more time to think about it because it's such alarge scale, because of the scope of the project. So, I don't know, who do we ask for permission ifthere was any consensus that we wanted to even hold off and who would we ask for and then theseother questions that we're asking now are these questions for Mr. Bongiovanni or for the applicant or ifthere is no more, if there's no more back and forth at this time, I'm not sure, you know, what theprocess is at the moment. Erik if you could answer that.

Mr. Hinckley: The public hearing is closed, you really are at the deliberation stage oftheapplication. So whatever action you guys take is the action you take.

Commissioner Bachand; I'm not really raising questions, but there was questions raised by thefirst two speakers, so I just didn't know if those would get answered. So my one question is, and Ithink it's a valid question, if we did want to ask for an extension, who we ask at this stage. Is there anyrepresentative of the applicant here?

Mr. Hinckley: Go ahead Renata.

Ms. Bertotti: Mr. Bongiovanni is in the room.

Alan Bongiovanni: Por the record, Alan Bongiovanni, 170 Pane Road, Newington,Connecticut. The applicant has no desire to grant an extension to the commission.

Commissioner Bachand: So, if I may continue then. That's where I am. When I first saw thisapplication I thought Mr. Bongiovanni did a good job with what he did, condensing it the way he didand kind of saving as much of the open space as possible. With that said, I'm talking about theapplication before us with the driveway coming out on Culver Street. So, I might have a differentopinion of something changed in that regard, but that's how I feel right now. I'm yeah, I'm ok with it.

Chairman Sadil: Ok. Commissioner Conway.

Commissioner Conway: Yes, I still have many concerns myself for many of the reasons thathave already been discussed tonight. This is a large ecosystem and I don't feel comfortable that with thefragmentation of the three different water courses or the water areas uh that they I don't feelcomfortable that they wouldn't be disturbed or impacted in a negative way. So, you know, I still havea lot of concerns and don't quite feel comfortable with it as a whole. I was hoping to get, and I guessyou know I'.m learning a lot, it would have been nice if we could have requested the CRT, that wouldhave made, given me a lot more confidence in my making a decision on this uh and that's what I washoping to do. So right now I'm not feeling comfortable with that. I still have a lot of concerns.

line.Chairman Sadil: Thank you Commissioner Conway. Commissioner Wagner, are you on the

Go ahead.


Commissioner Wagner: Yes, I'm on the line. I think we're debating if all of these areconnected. Do we have any proof that they are connected? That's the questions i think are beingbrought up. But we're affecting a very small area of the wetland, upland review and I think with whatis presented so far, I don't have an issue with it. Just like Commissioner Bachand said, if they dochange the road from Culver to the Berlin Turnpike, they'll have to come back to the commission anddo another application for it. And by the regs I think they are going to have to go off of 5 15, thedriveway, so I think at that point, if we didn't want to we could bring up, we can maybe get anotherexpert in there to check if they are connected, but right now I don't see them being connected with anyproof, you know.

Chairman Sadil: Any other comments Commissioner Wagner?

Commissioner Wagner: No.

Chairman Sadil: Ok. Let's go to Commissioner Ancona.

Commissioner Ancona: I don't see how fragmentation is under our purview with this. I thinkthe applicant has done what we asked and I think we have an obligation to vote yes on this.

Chairman Sadil: Ok, to I think we've heard from everyone I believe, right, we've heard fromall commissioners here. So, let's review 10.2 here. So it says: In carrying out thepurposes andpolicies ofsections 22a-36 through 22a-45, inclusive, ofthe Connecticut General Statutes, includingmatters relating to regulating, licensing and enforcing of the provisions thereof, the Agency shall takeinto consideration all relevant facts and circumstances, including but not limited to:...the environmentalimpact of the proposed regulated activity on wetlands or watercourses; um, I think overall this is aplus, this is not a minus in my mind here as far as the overall health of the wetland and I still havequestions regarding Item B...the applicant's purpose for, and anyfeasible andprudent altematives to,the proposed regulated activity which alternatives would cause less or no environmental impact towetlands or watercourses (such alternatives may include low impact development techniques); what wehave in front ofus rightnow is the one alternative, right, there is, I cannot design RD3's buildingshere. I don't have a feasible important alternative in front of me or can tell him of one. I don't knowif any of the commissioners have any ideas, I do not have one right now, I'm only looking at theapplication that's before us. Item C...the relationship between the short term and long term impacts ofthe proposed regulated activity on wetlands or watercourses and the maintenance and enhancement oflong-term productivity ofsuch wetlands or watercourses; me personally, that's an open item, that hasnot been addressed. I don't care how all the commissioners feel, but we have significant assets on theproperty and I feel that's an open item. I asked for it, I nevergot that. Item D.. .irreversible andirretrievable loss ofwetland or watercourse resources which yvould be caused by theproposed regulatedactivity, including the extent to which such activity would foreclose afuture ability toprotect, enhanceor restore such resources, and any mitigation measures, including low impact development techniques,which may be considered as a condition of issuing a permit for such activity including, but not limitedto, measures to (1) prevent or minimize pollution or other environmental damage, (2) maintain orenhance existing environmental quality, or (3) in the follo-wing order ofpriority: restore, enhanceand create productive wetland or watercourse resources; I think that area as far as maintaining, I don'tsee any low impact development, maybe with regards to the drainage yes, but as far as the placement ofthe buildings, I do not see that as low impact. Item E...the character and degree ofinjury to, orinterference with, safety, health or the reasonable use ofproperty which is caused or threatened by theproposed regulated activity; I've stated my issue about that with the three buildings and the immensesteepness on either side of buildings 3, 4 and 5. I think that's going to be a safety issue, in my mind. Ican'tspeak for the other commissioners. Item F...impacts of the proposed regulated activity on


wetlands or watercourses outside the areafor which the activity is proposed andfuture activitiesassociated with or reasonably related to, the proposed regulated activity which are made inevitable bythe proposed regulated activity and which may have an impact on wetlands or watercourses. So thatbasically says, you know, we can't do anything outside our purview right there that would impactsomething that is outside ofthe wetland, that's my interpretation ofthat.I don't think that really applieshere, Item P, unless you want to talk you know, outside the wetlands and I don't think that's going toaffect something outside, I think Item F is fine in my mind as far as this application. So, anybody haveany fiirther comment? .

Commissioner Paskewich: Commissioner Paskewich here Chairman Sadil,


Commissioner Paskewich: Speaking to fragmentation. My knowledge and background offragmentation of wetlands and forested canopy and trails in which that habitats are established bywildlife and aquatic species are established, long term. Their next generation uses those same paths,those same burrows, those same places across the wetlands on any property anywhere and when youbreak that connection and you put a building in there, and parking lots, and more buildings along thosepaths, you are completely disrupting the connectivity of their habitats and their survival, So yes it isfragment, it would be fragmented. That's my knowledge of fragmentation of wetlands. Thank you.

Chairman Sadil: Anyone else wishing to speak?

Commissioner Bachand: Mr. Chairman.

Chairman Sadil: Commissioner Bachand.

Commissioner Bachand: Yeah, I think I'm still in the same spot, I mean, I think we're all..,Ithink I speak for all of us when I say we're all um, I don't want to say environmentalists, but in a waywe are, we all appreciate nature and everything. There has to be a balance and so far it's not an easydecision for me to say that I think that I said I'm ok with it. It's not an easy decision to say that, but Ithink as you know as a whole or in the balance, that's where I'm still at, I think the wetlands could beimpacted somewhat, but not enough that changes my mind and I think that there is some dire threat tothem. That's it.

Chairman Sadil: All right. Anyone else?

Commissioner Ancona: I do.

Chairman Sadil: Go ahead Commissioner Ancona.

Commissioner Ancona: I agree with Commissioner Bachand. I think this is one of those timeswhere you have to reluctantly vote yes.

Chairman Sadil: I care to disagree with you. Given a project this size, I disagree. All right.Anyone else?

Commissioner Paskewich: Commissioner Paskewich here.

Commissioner Paskewich: I'm opposed to the word used "reluctantly" meaning that you'rethinking about yes or no but you're doing it reluctantly. What does that mean Mr. Ancona? Why areyou reluctant?

Commissioner Ancona: Well, if you don't like the project that should not change whether it isunder your purview or not what we are dealing with, the wetlands. You're opinion of a projectshouldn't change whether it's legal or not.


Commissioner Bachand: I'll take a stab at that questions from Commissioner Paskewich.

Chairman Sadil: Commissioner Bachand.

Commissioner Bachand: I'm kind of reluctant too and that's what I was getting at. Maybe that'snot the right term to use, but I would love to see everything stay natural, but again, I'm talking about abalance, a fair balance, and, so again, I think it's on balance. There has to be some development and Ithink that the applicant did a pretty good job on this spot. As high a yield as it is.

Chairman Sadil: Ok, Mr. Kambitsis is on the line. Jason Kambitsis is on the line and he wishesto speak.

Jason Kambitsis: Yes, sorry, I'm coming to this late as I had another one. I know Alan was onthe call and Emily was on the call, so I just hoped on, so I appreciate you guys letting me get on here.Ijust wanted to touch base regarding this application. I know that we handed in everything. I know thatwe've talked about this at various meetings. We've talked about how we've got three separatewetlands, we're not getting info the setbacks. I think that there was just a comment made,just becauseyou may not like something, doesn't meant it doesn't pass the test as being correct and legal or illegalor however you want to put it. For us, I think we've gone above and beyond what we needed to dohere. We're adding species to it; there's a lot of invasives that are on the property that are leaving.You know we're not here to ask for any variances or any changes, it's not something we're asking for.We're only asking for the rule of law which does exist, which are the requirements of the town. Wehave not asked for anything different and I feel that with that in mind, that's really how the vote shouldbe done. We're not askihg for special treatment or anything else other than what has been asked by thetown and has been given as such. So, you know, I'm happy to discuss that deeper than that, but in myopinion, and of course it's biased, I'm the developer, so of course I want to see it go, but I also wecome into these plans with the idea of, you know, how do we make this work for everybody involved.How do we make sure that we do a plan and we're not asking for more than we deserve, that's reallywhat we're doing here. I think all ofthe analysis that's been done has shown what's on there, which iswe've got separate wetlands, all of our conversations have gone around a lot of other things such as thebee and all fhat kind that kind of stuff originally. We had those conversations and I just feel that basedupon that and I think how forthright we have been that this does pass the muster. It's not really aquestion of like or not, it's a question of legal or not and this does meet all of the criteria that was setout in the town, so I just want to make sure that I'm on record stating that as the applicant.

Chairman Sadil: So, um, am I allowed to ask Mr. Kambitsis a questions,Mr. Kambitsis: You can ask me as many questions as you want.

Ms. Bertotti: Mr. Chair if I may interject and you know we again, we can defer this to thetown attorney, but at this point the public hearing is closed. What you have just heard from Mr.Kambitsis is essentially a recap of what was presented during the public hearing while it was open sothis portion of the conversation was ok. I would caution you against engaging in discussion.

Chairman Sadil: All right, I'm ready to vote. I'm ready to vote.

Commissioner Bachand: If I may add one more thing before wego that far.


Commissioner Bachand: I would ask the applicant again, only for my own, this isjust myopinion if, uh, to reconsider the granting us an extension. I know Mr, Bongiovanni said he representsthe applicant but now that the applicant is here and present...

Mr. Kambitsis: I'mhere, yeah...


Commissioner Bachand: I'm not asking, I don't want to ask this myself, I would like to havethe chainnan.,.

Mr. Hinckley: Yes, through the chairman.

Chairman Sadil: We're certainly open...

Commissioner Bachand: I would ask the chairman if there was a consensus to ask for anextension, that's where I would be.

Commissioner Wagner: Can I ask a question?


Commissioner Wagner: What would the extension do? Would it give you more time to reviewit? What is the outcome of the extension?

Commissioner Bachand; For my reason for asking for it, it would just give me more time tothink about it, to consider it.

Chairman Sadil: You know I do have a few, to answer your questions, I do have a few extraquestions that are unanswered in my mind. That's all, I would use that time to create a list of questionsthat I would have to give to Mr. Bongiovanni and work with the applicant. Now, I don't knoweverything, you know I'm not an environmental scientist, I'm not a construction guy, but there are afew questions that I have and I would want to work through those. I wouldn't ask for a CERT report tobe honest with you, I think there are a few items I would want, some comfort items just to give mesome reassurances that it didn't think about. I'm busy running the meeting, a lot of information here,that's where I'm at. If that was the case, I regret closing the hearing. I will go on record, I regretclosing the hearing, ok, because I do have some questions, thinking about this and looking at the plans.That's where I'm at.

Mr. Kambitsis: So, um, I guess, you know, I don't know if the attorney has an answer forthat. Look, I'm here to figure out how we make this work. I don't know what questions you mayhave, I know that we've had, you know, we've already gone through this. I don't think the legality is inquestion. What, and just so I can ask, I mean you'resaying what other questions you may have and asthe applicant talking to the commission what would you have. What are the other questions you mayhave, what are other things that are of importance. I'm not saying this from a place of debate, butrather a place ofunderstanding. So what are things that are still unanswered in your opinion?

Chairman Sadil: Ok, ifl may, ifl may.

Mr. Kambitsis: Yeah.

Chairman Sadil: Man to man, talking to you.Mr. Kambitsis: Yeah, yeah, that's what I'm saying.

Chairman Sadil: My question to you is you own a lot of properties, ok, and I assume some ofthem have a wetland in the neighborhood or are adjacent to wetlands I assume. Right.

Mr. Kambitsis: Yes.

Chairman Sadil: What are your best practices in maintaining since this what this property hassignificant wetland. What in, what are your best practices. I'd like to have an insight into that. I knowI'm not allowed to this, not allowed to do that, you know. I'm getting a little annoyed by that, but Iwant to know what can we put in, what are your best practices.


Mr. Kambitsis: I mean our best practices are what is natural stays natural. We don't let peoplewonder through things. It it's something that people want to keep natural and stay in its natural wedon't do that. I mean, for us, the wetlands are the wetlands. The wetlands are a protective bufferbetween us, you know that are sits there is the protected buffer between us and the water courses. It'snot a place where, I know there were conversations of "oh what if paper flies in, what if all that", weclean up our properties. We would do that, we would do clean ups to make sure it stays in propercondition, because it's not like since it's a wetland and it was part of some legal requirement we're justgoing to look back on it; that's our property and we like to maintain it. So something that is natural,natural growth, we like to keep it as natural growth. We're not going to cut it down and put in, youknow, pesticide and stuff in the buffer or within the wetlands, that's not what we do. I mean for us thewetland is part of our maintenance and is kept as such. I hope that answers the question. If you need adeeper answer, I'm happy to answer that, but, you know, what we do in those parts is we kind of keepthem as natural as possible orjust keep them natural.

Mr. Hinckley: And if I may interject Commissioner and Jason, they are going to be donating,you know, 15 acres or so of conservation easements, which is over all those wetland areas, and thewording of your conservation easements gives very strict language as to the do's and don'ts in there.You know, no depositing material, no stmctures, things like that, so they are, that is part oftheirapplications, that is one of the conditions that I put on the motion.

Chairman Sadil: Commissioner Casasanta has his hand raised.

Commissioner Casasanta: Oh, yeah, the conservation easement is great, that, you know Iapologize if I offend anybody with this comment; the town's record on enforcing conservationeasements is checkered at best. So, that being said, I appreciate the fact that the offer is being made togive conservation easements but, you know, I'm not sure how much weight that's going to have and theoverall impact on those wetlands. But the offer is very generous.

Chairman Sadil: Ok, going back to.,.can I ask you another concern that I have Mr. Kambitsis.You there?

Mr. Kambitsis: Yeah, I'm right here, yup.

Chairman Sadil: So the other concern is have is relative to those three buildings that are in thatcorridor, I call them, three, four and five.

Mr. Kambitsis: Yeah.

Chairman Sadil: And the,..I am startled by the amount, the grading on either side of thoseproperties. You know, you only have about 75 yards in that whole corridor, because you've got, youknow, buffer on both sides of that, ok.

Mr. Kambitsis: Uh...uh...

Chairman Sadil: How stable is that are going to be, you know, you're going to have big, youknow, cement trucks going through, what have you, going through once you clear that site, there's a lotof clearing, a lot of good trees, a lot of downed trees, how is all that construction equipment...you'rebuilding a four story building on that corridor...

Mr.. Kambitsis: Yes.

Chairman Sadil: How is that going to, you know, I'm not talking about silt fence or hay baleshere, what is there possibly if there's a heavy rain or something than you can, you have a bit of a minilandslide going on, on either side, because I don't know how firm that soil is, it's not wetland soil. Butthen if there's an accident of some sort, you can have a bit of an avalanche of material coming down on


either side. I'm concerned about that, the heavy equipment that's required, that's going to have to getin that corridor, you know that, could there be an accident that we could have material going into thatupland review area as a result of something like that happening. Number one.

Mr. Kambitsis: I mean, that hasn't happened in the past, I mean, these things are engineeredand designed to make sure that doesn't occur. When we talk about that you said 75 yards, 225 feet. Imean the slopes are there in a way that we're not building walls so your built up to it, we're buildingthem so there is a nice grade that goes to it that helps the water flow. Regarding the construction ofthat, we do use erosion sedimentation control beyond the bales that keep any excess water out. So, Imean, we use engineered techniques in order to protect those areas. Those areas are not something thatwhen you constmct you somehow drive over and then when you're done whatever is left is called thebuffer. I mean those are protected wetland areas and something that we choose to protect and have toprotect. Even if we didn't want to, we have to protect. So you know, at this point I mean I canunderstand that, but, you know, this has been engineered in a way to protect that and to also grade intothat as a way not to slide into the hillsides; that is how we designed it and how we do it.

Chairman Sadil: Ok, so when the constmction is done, there is one area in that, um...I thinkit's the middle building of that three building set.

Mr. Kambitsis: Uh,.uh...

Chairman Sadil: The slope ofthat is incredible. What type ofbarrier, ok, everything is built upas you planned, what type of curbing, how high is that curbing go to be. We have someone cominghome drunk one night, they go in and they are going to jump the curb. Is that.,.1 didn't see that in theplan, that is a question that I have.

Mr. Kambitsis: That's a...look, that's a question you can ask on any project at any point at anytime and it has nothing to do with the wetland. It's really a question of what do you do if some sort ofoccasion that were to occur. I mean, we have...! can't design a property for if somebody comes homedmnk at night and they're going to jump the curb and go into the woods. I think we do have...

Chairman Sadil: At least a deterrent, at least there's a deterrent from that happening.

Mr. Kambitsis: Would a guard rail in the back...hold on, let me ask you...Chairman Sadil: It you look at the map, you are right up to the edge.

Mr. Kambitsis: Would a guard rail,...

Chairman Sadil: That slope is like this.

Mr. Kambitsis: I understand. Would a guard rail make a difference?

Chairman Sadil: I would ask Mr. Bongiovanni, or something as a deterrent, as a safetymeasure, to protect persons as well as the upland review area.

Mr. Kambitsis: I'm happy to put in a guard rail as long as we can keep the material open. Idon't want to be relegated to a big metalone, I might want to do a wooden one that has the sameamount of protection, but is more aesthetically pleasing. But I'm happy to do that, I don't have an issuewith that.

Chairman Sadil: Great.

Commissioner Wagner: Commissioner Wagner here.


Newington Cohservation Commission Meeting Minutes (11-16-2021)Page 20

Commissioner Wagner: I think a wood one would be sufficient. We can't do the what if's issomeone is drunk, but if you're putting in,..he's willing to put in a wood barrier that's going to protecta vehicle from going all the way down. And if for some reason he's driving impaired and goes throughits, that's going to be insurance; insurance would have to cover all that clean up, everything like that.So if he's going to put up a wooden barrier, I would be fine with that.

Chairman Sadil; I would too. Something there to prevent, you know, something like that fromhappening. That for protecting the wetland and the upland review area.

Mr. Kambitsis: Yeah, good, we're happy to do that. That's not an issue for us.

Chairman Sadil: The other question I have is relative to the erosion control. Especially on the,um, by the, by Deming, on the Deming side of the property. Are we going to have to remove all thoseinvasives to put that erosion control? I was looking on the map on that, and, um, you know, I wasconcerned is that how much of the invasives going to have to be removed, you know, to put the erosioncontrol in place.

Mr. Kambitsis: Um, I don't have that right in front of me as I just hopped on. I could say Alanmay be able to answer that clearer that I can. I don't want to just throw out stuff and not be precise.Alan, are you able to give them an answer to that?

Mr. Bongiovanni: I am Jason. So, all of our work is either outside of the regulated area orjuston the edge which would be the back ofbuilding number one, the northwest corner. We are notplanning on going into that area to remove all the invasive species, because we feel it would be toomuch disturbance to the upland review area and eventually to the wetland. We are planning onremoving invasives in all the open fields and everything where we are proposing to do our work. Butwe do not have the clear the upland review area to put our erosion sediment control measures along thenorth side ofthe site.

Chairman Sadil: My other question, and this is my final question. On the opposite side there,on the drainage, you havelike a little, let me turn to the sheet right there.-.the drainage on the back sideofbuilding number five and number three, you have like a rip-rap going down the slope there, I'mon...you know what I'm talking about Mr. Bongiovanni?

Mr. Bongiovanni: Yes, so we have two outlets. Behind building five we have detention basinC2 and it goes out to a rip-rap pad C41 and then behind building three, we have detention basin Clgoing out to C40. These detention basins were designed so that we store and detain all of the stormwater so that there is no increase in runoff from the existing conditions today. So what that means iswe're holding that water back, we're metering it out at a very slow pace and this has been reviewedthoroughly with the town engineering staff to make sure we don't create any velocity issues with ourdischarges leaving those detention basins. We have rip-rap energy dissipaters at the end ofthose basinsthat will reduce any speed or velocity of that water so that there will be no erosion down stream of that.There's very, very little flow; the water is going to be held back and metered out very, very slowly.These basins, because of the length of time that it's going to be required to actually drain, these basinswould have been designed as open, above ground basins, but because of the safety factor and waterstaying in there for such an extended period of time they were designed to be underground structures.

Chairman Sadil: Yeah, ok.

Mr. Bongiovanni: We have a very conservative design here. We're not even taking advantageof the fact that we have pervious soils that a lot of that water will infiltrate into the ground naturally.

Chairman Sadil: Thank you. Any other questions. That was my last questions, my lastconcern. Any other questions for the...


Mr. Kambitsis: Can I add one more thing? I just want to say thanks for letting me talk. Iknow I came on here late and I hope I was able to answer your questions and we could get you to asolid footing and understand what we are trying to do here, so I appreciate that.

Chairman Sadil: Thank you.

Commissioner Bachand: Uh, Mr. Chairman, just if, I just might reiterate my one question thatI had from the beginning and that was uh, on the issue of the extension to delay our vote for anothermonth and that would be through you or through a consensus of the um...and with the permission of theapplicant of course.

Chairman Sadil: Again, the question came up, my questions have been answered. Ok, I us,personally, my questions have been answered, what does, I will ask Jason, I think what is asking youface to face and I asked the other commissioners. I don't think an extension would benefit me, I thinkhe's answered my questions. I'll throw it to the rest of the commissioners on what their consensus is.Is that going to change minds?

Commissioner Casasanta: Mr. Chairman.

Chairman Sadil: Commissioner Casasanta.

Commissioner Casasanta: I'm ready to vote tonight.

Chairman Sadil: I'm ready to vote to. I understand, but you know...

Commissioner Bachand: Ok.

Commissioner Wagner: I think that they, with good faith, they've proven that through theirdesign, giving conservafion of 15 acres back, they're doing everything they can do to satisfy. I knowit's not going to be 100% satisfied, because it's kind ofemotional because they're putting in 200 andsomething units, but I think this,..they did a good enoughjob to prove, you know, they're going to dothis project right. And we need to vote off of are they disturbing the wetlands, what's the significanceof it and you have to take the what if's out of it. That's just my opinion.

Chairman Sadil: Ok, thank you, Anyone else?

Commissioner Ancona: Yeah, I agree, I think, you know, the environment's being impacted,but our job is to look at the wetlands and I agree with Commissioner Wagner.

Chairman Sadil: All right.

Commissioner Conway: I don't feel any need to um, for a delay or an extension, I'm ready tovote tonight.

Chairman Sadil: Ok, I think we've heard from everyone, Commissioner Paskewich, we haven'theard from you.

Commissioner Paskewich; No, I'm going to hold until we vote. I'm not going to speakanymore. Thank you.

Chairman Sadil: Ok. All right, I think we've come to that time, unless any other comments,I'm going to move to the vote,

Mr. Hinckley: Renata, can you bring that up if it's ready. Ok, she's just making a correction.


Chairman Sadil: You want to take a short recess Mr. Hinckley?

Mr. Hinckley: We can do that if you like sir.

Chairman Sadil: If you need to do some editing, we can take a break for 10 minutes, It's8:38, 8:40, ifwe come back at 8:45 is that sufficient time?

Mr. Hinckley: I.think that'll work. Thank you.

Chairman Sadil: We are standing in recess. We will return at 8:45.

Recess.

Mr. Hinckley: It's 8:45 Mr. Chairman.

Chairman Sadil: Ok, do we have everyone back, let me check real quick.

Mr. Hinckley: Everybody's still logged on,

Chairman Sadil: All right. Por the record, its 8:45 and the Newington ConservationCommission is back in session. All right, Mr. Hinckley is the application complete for Application^2021-23, Por Construction Activities In The Regulated Area At 35, 67, & 69 Culver Street And 258Deming Street, Applicant: AR Building Company, Inc., Owner: RDTHREE LLC., Contact: TheBongiovanni Group, Inc.

Mr. Hinckley: Yes, the application is complete and um, just so you know, on the motion, I'veadded, I believe, five extra conditions at the end that were somewhat recommended by their biologistand the other ones about the conservation easement, so, they're there as well for your consideration.

Chairman Sadil: Mr. Acting Secretary, may I have a motion on Application 2021-23 and readin the standard conditions and the special conditions.

Commissioner Wagner: Yes, can you go back to the first slide?

Mr. Hinckley: Yeah, one second.

Commissioner Wagner: Thank you sir.

Mr. Hinckley: And that should be application 2021-23, not 2.

Commissioner Wagner: Ok. Motion to approve Application 2021-23 with thefollomngstandard conditions:

1. Permits are not transferable without the prior written consent oftheAgency.

2. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH ANY CONDITION REQUIRED BYTHIS PERMIT SHALL AUTOMATICALLY REVOKE THIS PERMIT ANDSUBJECT THE APPLICANT, HEIRS, SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS TO THEENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY OF THE COMMISSION.

3. All conditions Usted on this permit must be printed on the approvedplan(s) within six (6) months ofthe report issued by the Commission. The annotatedplan(s) must be presented to the Commission for signature by the Chairman wthin six(6) months ofthe report issued by the Commission; otherwise thispermit is null andvoid.

4. Applicant mll incorporate the "Official Notification ofAction " ontooriginal tracings>


5. When the actualfield conditions differfrom those asserted by theapproved plans, the Town Engineer in consultation with the Chairperson may directthat certain modifications or amendments be made to accomplish the intent ofthispermit.

6. No regulated activity within the designated wetlands, watercourses,and/or buffer area shall be performed on the site until all soil and erosion controlmeasures are installed in accordance with the plans and approved by the TownEngineer.

7. The Agency has relied in whole or in part on information provided bythe applicant, andif such information subsequently proves to befalse, deceptive,incomplete or inaccurate, the permit may be modified, suspended or revoked.

8. All permits issued by the Agency are subject to and do not derogateany present orfuture rights orpowers ofthe Agency or the Town ofNewington, andconyey no rights in real estate or material nor any exclusive privileges, and arefurther subject to any and all public and private rights and to any federal, state andmunicipal laws or regulations pertinent to the subject land or activity.

9. In conducting the authorized activities, the permittee shall implementsuch management practices consistent with the terms and conditions ofthe permit asneeded to control storm water discharges and to prevent erosion and sedimentationand to otherwise prevent pollution ofwetlands and watercourses.

10. This permit is validfor wetlands only; additional approvals/permitsmay be required from other Town departments, State or Federal agencies. It is theresponsibility ofthe applicant to verify what other approvals/permits may be requiredfor this project.

11. Subsequent to the shrub and tree plantings, an inspection oftheplanting areas should be conducted by a biologistto document the placement andvigor of the shrub and tree plantings. Additional yearly inspections of the plantingareas should be conducted during the growing seasonfor at least three (3) subsequentyears to ascertain survival rates. Reports finding the reports documenttng thefindings ofthe inspections (including the presence ofany invasive species) shall beprovided to the Town ofNewington Conservation Commission. Ifmortality rates ofthe plantings exceed 15% (fifteen) the plantings shall be replaced, A written report ofthisinspection shall be providedto Conservation Commission through the WetlandAgent.

12. Invasive species to be removedfrom the upland review area plantingsites, noted as follows; north ofbuilding 1, middle pond, and southeasterly ofbuildings 4 and 5, for a period of 5 years.

13. An invasive species management plan shall be provided to theConservation Commission by the applicant prior to the approved mylars being signedby the chairman.

14. The plans shall be revised to show the conservation easements on thefinalplans.


15. The conservation easements shall be recorded on the land recordswithin 30 days after the final plans have been submittedfor signature by thechairman.

Chairman Sadil: All right, thank you Commissioner Wagner, may I have a second?

Commissioner Bachand; I'll second it, John Bachand.

Chairman Sadil: Second by Commissioner John Bachand. Final discussion. Ms. Gibbon, pleasecall the roll.

Ms. Gibbon: Commissioner Ancona.

Commissioner Ancona: Yes.

Ms. Gibbon: Commissioner Bachand.

Commissioner Bachand: Yes.

Ms. Gibbon: Commissioner Casasanta.

Commissioner Casasanta: No.

Ms. Gibbon: Commissioner Conway.

Commissioner Conway: No.

Ms. Gibbon: Commissioner Paskewich.

Commissioner Paskewich: No.

Ms. Gibbon: Chairman Sadil.


Ms. Gibbon: Commissioner Wagner.

Commissioner Wagner: Yes.

Ms. Gibbon: Four yes, three no.

Chairman Sadil: Thank you Ms. Gibbon.

Ms. Gibbon: You're welcome.

Mr.. Kambitsis: Thank you all very much.

Chairman Sadil: All right, moving on to Public Participation On Non-Agenda Items, eachspeaker is limited to 2 minutes. Is there anyone on the line?

VII. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS(each speaker limited to 2 minutes)

Chairman Sadil: Is there anyone on the line?

Mr. Hinckley: No one has their hand raised.

Ms. Bertotti: Mr. Chair, no one has their hand raised.

Chairman Sadil: Thank you. Moving on to Item VIII. Communications and Reports. Item A.Agent Communications.

VIII. COMMUNICATIONS AND REPORTS

Newington Coiiservation Commission Meeting Minutes (11-16-2021)Page 25

A. Agent Communications

Chairman Sadil: Mr. Hinckley, do you have anything to report?

Mr. Hinckley: Yes, I've done a number of agent approvals the last couple of months. Iprobably neglected to tell you last month. I had an agent approvalfor a deck at 126 Mountain ViewDrive; an agent approval for a detached garage in the URA at 15 Pisk Drive; an agent approval for aporch replacement in the URA at 23 Schoolhouse Road; an agent approval for a building addition usinga helical pile, so itjust augers into the ground, in the URA at 66 Patriot Lane. Also, recently last weekI had an agent approval for the installation of some storage racks for outdoor material at 60 HolmesRoad. I'd also like to report the prior application approved at 72 Wells Drive North, that work has beencompleted, the chips have been removed, the debris has been removed from the brook, the plantingshave been installed and the silt fence is also installed. That's what I have.

Chairman Sadil: Moving on to Item B. Town Council Liaison Communications.

B, Town Council Liaisons Communications

Chairman Sadil: Councilor Budrejko, do you have anything to report?

Councilor Budrejko: No, you know, between the election and the swearing in and whatever,there hasn't really been a lot of business.

Chairman Sadil: Item C. Pond Life Research and Education.

C. Pond Life Research And Education

Chairman Sadil: Commissioner Paskewich do you have anything to report?

Commissioner Paskewich: No, I do not at this month. Thank you.

Chairman Sadil; All right, on to adjournment. May I have a motion to adjourn?

IX. ADJOURNMENT

Motion to adjourn at 8:56 p.m. by Commissioner Conway. Seconded by CommissionerPaskewich. Motion passed unanimously.

Respectfully submitted,

Susan GibbonRecording Secretary


Documents

211 NOV 24 AM 9: 09