Conservation Commission - Minutes - 10/27/2022

MEETING MINUTES
Conservation Commission
October 27, 2022 6:30 PM
Waterford Town Hall
Members Present: Tali Maidelis, Rich Muckle, Dave Lersch, Wade Thomas
Members Absent: Matthew Keatley, Geneva Renegar 5 = 2
Alternates Present: Ivy Plis o S39
Alternates Absent: Bud Bray 4 3S Ba
Staff Present: Maureen FitzGerald, Environmental Planner f° = pea
Leanne Santos, Recording Secretary S ~ aoa
Attorney Nick Kepple ey yg 83
BN\ om
aS = te
1. CALL TO ORDER AND APPOINTMENT OF ALTERNATES . - 2g
The meeting was called to order at 6:34p.m. I. Plis was seated for the vacant seat. ed
2s APPROVAL OF THE October 13, 2022 MEETING MINUTES
Motion: Motion made by T. Maidelis, second by D. Lersch to approve the October 13,
2022 meeting minutes.
Vote: 5-0-0
3._ PUBLIC HEARING - Continued
C-22-9, 21 Gurley Road, Commercial Office and Warehouse Complex, Stone Ridge R E, LLC,
Owner & Applicant, CLA Engineers, Agent
R. Muckle, Chairman opened the public hearing. Attorney W. Sweeney, counsel for applicant
and Ellen Bartlett PE. (CLA Engineers) were present for the applicant. Staff noted the exhibit
list has been updated to include the responses to comments submitted by CLA Engineers as
exhibits 16 and 17.
Attorney Sweeney spoke briefly about the third party review submitted from Trinkaus
Engineering, LLC and the extension granted in order to address the comments. Revisions were
made to the plans to address the suggestions and comments. He also noted they have had
positive communications with one of the directors of Save the River Save the Hills.
E. Bartlett PE. of CLA Engineers presented a summary of the plan modifications and responses
to comments from the September 22, 2022 public hearing. The drainage calculations have been
revised using the TR-55 method. In response to the public concerns of flooding along the stream
and potential impact to a shallow well, E. Bartlett submitted a comparison of the existing to the
proposed storm run-off volumes contributing to the stream for the 2-year through 100-year storm
events. She noted that the basins are over-sized and provide detention and retention which
reduce the volume of run-off as well as peak flows. (Entered spreadsheet with calculations into
the record as Exhibit #18).
E. Bartlett addressed comments from the Trinkaus Engineering report. She stated the
topography has been verified in the field and 31 test holes were logged. Permeability test results
were submitted. The bottom of all the basins are at or near seasonal high groundwater levels so

Conservation Commission Minutes
October 27, 2022
p.20f4
basin plantings will be supported. She stated that basins will infiltrate and recharge groundwater
and additional pavement will not be needed for parking or truck circulation.
E. Bartlett reviewed the revisions made to the drainage report in response to comments. In-flow
and outflow summary sheets for the basins were added, groundwater recharge calculations were
completed and exceed the required recharge volume. The plans were revised based on
recommendations from the report including increased depth of the temporary sediment traps,
increased depth of basin forebays, inclusion of a reverse bench in the eastern cut slope and a
curtain drain along a portion of the top of slope. Elevations of the rip-rap outlets were added to
sheet 3. Fore bays have all been reconfigured for depths ranging from 4 to 8 feet and inlets and
outlets have been reconfigured to maximize the travel time. E. Bartlett noted she could not find
the study Mr. Trinkaus referenced from North Carolina State University regarding roof run-off
pre-treatment. She stated that there will be no roof top units on the buildings for this project and
the metal roofs will be treated with an elastomeric coating. E. Bartlett noted there are 4 feet of
native soils between the infiltration chambers and seasonal groundwater elevation that will filter
run-off. The plans have been revised to include pre-treatment of roof run-off through rain
gardens with standpipes and the first row of infiltrators are wrapped in filter fabric. E. Bartlett
stated they have made all the physical changes to the plans to address the concerns in the
Trinkaus report. They have provided extra stormwater treatment to buildings 1 and 2. Run-off
from buildings 3, 4 and 5 flows to a man-made wetland in the center of site, which provides
natural storage and detention, after being treated through a series of treatment train components.
(Revised drainage report entered as Exhibit #19, revised plans discussed entered as Exhibit #20).
Chairman R. Muckle opened the floor for questions from commission members.
1. Plis noted the concerns about pollutants reaching the Niantic River and flooding have been
addressed. She asked how the roadway run-off is treated.
E. Bartlett reviewed the drainage collection and treatment systems on site, and that each basin
will retain the 2-year storm, which is 3.45 inches of rain. The project will include installing
sewer 1000 feet up Oil Mill Road and 500 feet up Gurley Road, there will be no septic systems
on the site.
Attorney Sweeney referred to the October 7, 2022 letter (Exhibit 11) responding to potential
bacterial loading. The project does not direct flow from the development into the stream or
utilizing on-site septic systems. The project is designed to protect the perennial stream.
D. Lersch asked for a definition to the term “storm water wetland” used. E. Bartlett responded
the CT DEEP storm water manual includes 4 different examples of stormwater wetlands, but she
does not use that term in the design. The basins are hybrids based on the site conditions.
D. Lersch asked about the potential for sediment basin failure during construction referenced in
the comments. E. Bartlett stated the basins are sized to contain 2 times the predicted sediment
volumes and they do not anticipate failure.
R. Muckle asked if the run off from I 95 can be mitigated. E. Bartlett stated the highway run off
goes to a paved swale and is not on the project site. They cannot do anything about that run-off.
Staff asked E. Bartlett to clarify for the record if there will be down stream flood impacts and
what type of stormwater basin is proposed. E Bartlett states she feels there will be no down
stream impacts from this development. The basins intercept seasonal high groundwater

Conservation Commission Minutes
October 27, 2022
p.3 of 4
elevation and the soils are well drained. The basin functions as a wet bottom infiltration basin.
Staff asked E. Bartlett to provide an estimated exfiltration rate for the basins for the record and to
assist with long-term maintenance. E. Bartlett said she will provide the estimate but thinks it will
be a2 to 3 day time frame. Attorney Sweeney stated they can provide that. Staff asked how the
provision of no outdoor storage of materials will be enforced. Attorney Sweeney stated it is not
permitted through zoning, but they could include a provision in the agreements/lease.
Chairman R. Muckle opened the floor to public comment, asked three times if anyone would like
to speak in favor of the application. No one spoke.
Chairman R. Muckle asked three times if anyone would like to speak that is not in favor of the
application. No one spoke.
Motion: Motion made by W. Thomas, second by I. Plis to close the public hearing.
Vote: 5-0-0
Motion: Motion made by T. Maidelis, second by W. Thomas to take a five minute recess.
Vote: 5-0-0
4. APPLICATION REVIEW
C-22-9, 21 Gurley Road, Commercial Office and Warehouse Complex, Stone Ridge R E, LLC,
Owner & Applicant, CLA Engineers, Agent
Staff will prepare a review of the public hearing record for the commission to review at the next
meeting. The request for an estimate of the rate of exfiltration from the basins was discussed by
the Commission. Staff clarified she is looking for a general rate of discharge from the basin to
substantiate the basins will drain within 2 to 3 days.
5. NEW APPLICATIONS
C-22-12, 23 Spithead Road, New construction of single home, Curtis C. & Urusla M. Carboni,
Owner & Applicant, John Paul Mereen (Gerwick-Mereen, LLC), Agent
Staff explained this is a re-submittal of a previously approved plan under permit #06-07 that has
since expired. No changes are proposed in the regulated activity. Staff will visit site to review
and report to the commission at the November 10, 2022 meeting.
6. VIOLATIONS
1122, 1124 Hartford Turnpike, Unauthorized fill, grading & deposition of materials adjacent to
inland wetlands.
Staff reported most of the plantings are complete, boulders need to be placed. She believes the
owner will satisfy the October 30, 2022 deadline and will have a report at the November 10,
2022 meeting.
7. OTHER BUSINESS
72 Spithead Road, Review shed authorization.
Motion: Motion made by D. Lersch, second by T. Maidelis, that the shed does not involve
regulated inland wetland activity and to concur with staff approval.
Vote: 5-0-0
Conservation Annual Report (7/1/2021-6/30/22), Staff and commission reviewed the report.
Motion: Motion made by W. Thomas, second by T. Maidelis to approve the Annual
Report.
Vote: 5-0-0

Conservation Commission Minutes
October 27, 2022
p.4of4
Conservation Commission Annual Budget 2023-2024, Staff and commission reviewed the
draft budget.
Motion: Motion made by W. Thomas, second by T. Maidelis to approve the 2023-2024
Commission budget as written.
Vote: 5-0-0
8. CORRESPONDENCE - None
9. CONSERVATION OUTREACH
10. ADJOURNMENT
Motion: Motion made by I. Plis, second by T. Maidelis to adjourn at 8:03pm.
Vote: 5-0-0
Respectfully Submitted,
&, (Ad Ab 4
Leanne Santos
Recording Secretary