Conservation Commission Meeting Agenda/Materials 109R and 131 Clark Lane Exhibit List (linked)

C-22-14
. or 109R & 131 CLARK LANE
To: Conservation Commission, Town of Waterford BURUE HEARING DL75-23
From: Arlene Sherman 1/9 C/v4 Cane EXHIBIT #63
Date: 2/23/23
The proposed Kingston clearing and trailer park development, located adjacent to
a pristine head watershed and Fenger Brook wetland stream, will cause adverse
impact and undo harm including wetland destruction to this watershed in a short
time. Activity scheduled to be done outside the wetland and in the buffer will
adversely impact this wetland complex.
The proposed activity will increase sediment accumulation in lowland wetlands by
increasing sedimentation in upland areas, alter hydrologic and chemical changes
by changing the natural input of nutrients, stream channelization forming due to
retention basin activity and flooding therefore promoting sedimentation of Brook,
uncontrollable runoff from Bio and retention basin activity especially during large
rain storms (2 “ and greater), changes in the flood regime of the area bringing too
much or too little water, nutrients, metals and hydrocarbons changes to the
Fenger Brook water quality leading to a major changes in plant and animal
habitat. In general these changes will alter the present balance of the wetland,
changing the plant and animal habitats, alter the present wetland chemistry and
promote unexpected die off of plants and animals.
This activity in conjunction with present climate change that is promoting intense
rain fall in short durations, increase the vulnerability of the proposed housing
development activity and potentially destroying this present pristine area. There
has been no activity on this area for over 100 years. It has been allowed to
balance the climate changes and still promote a thriving animal and plant
wetland. The severe changes expected to occur due to the construction activity,
addition of over 50 % impervious surface and enormous bio and detention basins
will adversely impact this area forever. The following are some, not all, problems
and the adverse impacts on the wetlands.
Problem: ;
1. Soil diversion ditch of 3 feet behind Clark Lane houses for 2000 ‘ will under-
cut present mature'tree roots killing them; will move water from upland
review area to bio retention basins.
Adverse Impact to Wetlands:
Moving water from upland review area will create drought in upland review
area. The excess water to lowland review will change wetland plant habitat

and cause die off of plants remaining; 35 foot buffer in northern part of
development is too close to development (requires a 50 ft. buffer); steep
slopes created by ditch diversion (moving soil from west to east) will promote
a steep slope (6’-8’ on west side) which is subject to erosion and sediment fill
creating death to upland review and wetland buffer leading into wetland ;
function of wetland is altered forever and wetland will eventually fill in.
Moving water to bio retention basins forces water into one 60 area versus
being spread out over greater surface area, as it has in the past and naturally
watering the entire wetland. It will eventually find its way to Fenger Brook
(300 feet away) but the force of the water during various intense climate
events will create erosion, gulley’s, rivulets and sediment along the 300’ to
Fenger Brook; sediment will be created as well and into Fenger Brook. Some
of the soil is fine in this area and vulnerable to moving through bio retention
basin quickly, with nutrients, phosphorous and metals attached and will go
directly into Fenger Brook missing the filtering process of the basin.
Problem:
2. Clark Lane water should remain draining into present 3 locations off Clark
Lane. The proposed ditch water, the 44 trailer roofs, the street runoff and
catch basins, sidewalk runoff will go into bio and detention basins and
directed with a 60 foot spreader in one direction to Fenger Brook. A
different path than the water has taken in over 100 years.
Adverse impact on Wetlands:
This is too much water diverted out of wetland area that’s present hydrology
has balanced and thrived with the present water it receives. This is proven in
the thriving plant and animal species living in the habitat and the present
clean quality of Fenger Brook. There is natural absorption and retention that
the area has used to balance all plant and animal species successfully.
addition of these water forces and gallons of water in an over 2” rain storm
will create water logging, tree mortality , micro nutrient over load or not
enough nutrient. Any huge change and disruption such as expected and
predicted will alter this balance causing die off, excessive nutrient load and
excessive metal and hydrocarbon load.
Problem:
3, Any major storm: 100 year, 50 year or 2” or greater rainfall or lasting for
many days will adversely impact this wetland. The present rain storms are
intense producing a lot of rain in a small amount of time that overwhelms
present catch basins, gutters and ponds.

Adverse impact on Wetlands:
This area has a higher than normal ground water level. The huge amount of
water from any storm will quickly fill up the bio and detention basins and
surrounding ground with little or no ground infiltration depending on the
season or past rainfall. This will immediately create gulley formation and due
to the fine silt soil will create sediment into Fenger Brook. It is imperative to
do asummer infiltration study of the area to see the ground water level
during the driest times of the year. The north area of the development with
the smallest buffer of 36 feet will likely be washed out leaving severe erosion,
sediment and gulleys. In addition, with an overload of water, the bio
retention basin will only be emptying with little opportunity to remove
toxins, pollutants, nutrients from the runoff water as the basins will be
overloaded with water. In a large rain event only the first flush will remove
the pollutant material with the remaining rushing into the wetland missing
the filtering of the basins. The basins will also be overloaded with sediment
and silt brought along with the intense water and will clog the filter systems
of the basins quickly.
Problem:
4. Per the Jordan Brook Watershed document the wetland buffer should be a
buffer to the wetland and not used. The potential for dumping of hazard
waste (car oil, paint cans, insecticide, and rodent control), furniture, moving
debris, food, domestic animal usage and children playing is a hazard. There
is no bulky waste area and tenants move throughout the year.
Animal use of the buffer area including regular defecating, hunting and
usage.
Adverse impact on Wetlands:
There is no accountability or monitoring of this activity scheduled. There are
shared sheds which most likely will not hold enough extra storage for a family
of four which the developer is promoting as his tenant. There are severe
slopes into the wetland buffer off the back of these units. Four of the units
have a 36 foot buffer and the remaining have a 50 foot buffer. The wrong
toxic material, the continual use by domestic animals, no maintenance of
these areas regulated by the owner, could be havoc for an area that has not
had this type of pollutant exposure in over 100 years. It will change the
wetland buffer forever with the continual abuse of the area as there are no
green spaces for children, no dumpsters for bulky items, no proper animal
area, no snow storage planned in the development.

Problem:
5. Too much density for the area they are building. This area does not support
47 families, activities, shared storage sheds, shared driveways, driving,
vehicles, green areas, snow storage.
Adverse Impact on Wetlands:
This is a narrow flag lot that is too small to accommodate 47 houses, 47
families of 4 and the necessary infrastructure for the complex. In order to
make room for the developers’ road, entrances, shared driveways and houses
there is a sacrifice of green areas for water absorption, trees for shade and
cooling, play areas for children. There is 50% of the development impervious
surface and is detrimental for the wetland. There are better design solutions
for housing developments that have affordable housing options and that will
not impact a watershed as severely as this housing design will. At minimum
this development could have fewer houses and located on one side of the
road leaving open areas for passive living. That design will do much less harm,
Problem:
6. Bio retention Basins will diminish efficiency and effectiveness of removing
pollutants, metals, toxins, nutrients, hydrocarbons, PH, N over time.
Adverse Impact on Wetlands:
The Bio retention basins are effective during first flush of storm water of a 2”
rain event or in the early days of the basin operation for pollutant removal.
Over time the silt will clog the medium, the spreader will not be effective, the
intense rains coupled with the water from so much impervious surface will
not be handled effectively. The developer will not maintain the basins
effectively and they will be clogged and growing weeds. The bio retention
basins need the medium replaced regularly. This area should be monitored
monthly and especially after a large weather event for erosion and gulley
formation and repaired (pictures taken). If the water is running through these
mechanisms and they are not maintained properly , gulleys will be forming,
erosion occurring and the developer will not have experts handling the basins
or the damage immediately causing repeated pollution going into the
wetland and Fenger Brook. The potential for increased accumulation of
sediment will alter the chemical and hydrologic regime of these wetlands in
short time. The result will be tree die off and Fenger Brook filling up with
nutrient and sediment. Certain sediment (like fine silt) attaches itself to
metals and is difficult to manage.
Developer could handle this more effectively by having several rain gardens
and small meadow basins in housing area versus so much impervious surface,

Problem:
7. Excess sediment
Adverse Impact to Wetlands:
Re suspension of fine sediments and especially with the finer soils that this
area has will not settle out in the basins. This limits the effectiveness of this
large basin removing the sediment (the attached metals, phosphorous and
nitrogen). There will be limited sediment removal creating a permanent
damage to the wetland and Fenger Brook. Also there are metals, and
carbons that attach to the fine sediments that will not be removed causing
more irreparable issues in the wetlands. All dense wetland grasses, trees,
shrubs will be stressed and heavy die off will occur. Too much water shifting
will be hard on plants and the diversity of the present wetland will suffer and
die. These retention basins are too large, there is too much volume of water
going through them into the down gradient which will cause destruction and
death of too many plants, animals and scouring of Fenger Brook. Any 100
year storm or hurricane will destroy this area beyond repair and benefit to
Long Island Sound
Problem:
8. Climate change and high intensity storms
Lack of inspection, repair, accountability, management of basins
Adverse Impact on Wetlands:
This proposed development is, in part, theoretical. We do not know the
future large rain/storm events. There is no proof that these ‘predictions’
coupled with the extreme weather and rain events will do the job they claim.
Human error and delay in action to remedy problems will play heavily in this
proposed wetland activity. The owner must be responsible, remain flush with
cash for repairs and replacement of basin material when clogged, needs to
have gulley fill workers available after all large storms and monitor the
development.
If the work is not done and money not spent this project will do harm to the
wetlands. Who will monitor this project? Will it be bonded and for how
many years? If developer isn’t liquid then what? Wetland is left to be
polluted and the once pristine area another wetland casualty? It is a lot of
runoff, impervious surface and a possibly inexperienced developer to let a
wetland be the loss so he collects rents. The wetland belongs to everyone

and this project could expose it to certain death (we know there will be
mature forest tree die off). Does the developer care enough about the
environment or will the wetland suffer so the developer makes money?
Problem:
9. Clear cutting all trees is the loss of approximately 250 trees
Adverse Impact on Wetlands:
The cutting of all trees behind the present Clark Lane houses and the trees
in the basin areas will affect the hydrology and cycle of nutrient necessary
for a thriving wetland area. The trees provide shade, cooling and uptake
and transpiration of hundreds of gallons of water per day. Due to the
overload of water from the bio retention basins there will definitely be a
tree die off coupled with the clear cutting of trees. The removal of this
many trees changes chemistry of the wetland. A developer taking this
number of mature trees should be required to note the trees 18” width and
specimen on this property and should be required to replant with new
trees.
Problem:
10. Turtle habitat
Adverse Impact on Wetlands:
Both the SLR engineer and the Thoreau forester and Carya Ecologic Services
noted that the area the developer is planning to locate the retention basins
is potential for turtle hibernating, feeding, housing and nesting area. There
should be a turtle study done starting in May of this area to monitor if this
activity exists.
In addition there should be a vernal pond study done in both Waterford and
New London land areas attached to this development as significant plant
and animal species inhabit and use these vital natural areas and are
significant to the wetland complex.
Problem:
11. Pileated Woodpecker habitat:
Adverse Impact on Wetlands:
The Pileated Woodpecker is a ‘protected species’ in CT and has been sited
and heard in the back yards of Clark Lane residents (photo attached). They
are a keystone specie and play an important role by excavating nesting and
roosting cavities that are subsequently used by many other non-drilling

birds, small mammals and invertebrates therefore creating habitats suited
to other woodland wildlife. They are important to control varied
populations of insect pests in trees and stumps throughout the forest and
wetland. They require large territories of mature woodland forest year
round. De foresting the large trees on this land will severely damage the
habitat of this magnificent bird.
In conclusion, market rate and affordable housing could be developed on
this property. The design this developer presently has puts multiple aspects
of this watershed at risk. At this time the Commission should deny this
application without prejudice and ask the developer to come back to the
Commission with a wetland sensitive design. The present design causes too
much harm to the watershed.

:
’