Inland Wetlands & Watercourses Commission - Regular Meeting

Okay. All righty. I call the Bloomfield Inland Wetlands and Waterourse Commission meeting to order. Today is February 17th, 2026. The time is 700 p.m. Whoa. Right on the button. Um, so far we have myself, Steve, Adam, Byron, David, and Glenn. Uh, so we have one, two, three, four, five. We have six commissioners. All right. And we now have Kevin Wilcox. How you doing, Kevin? All right. So, first order of business is uh we need a motion to bring up nine proer Lane off the table for public hearing.

So moved. made by Kevin, seconded by second Len. All in favor? I posted stain. All right, Peter, where are we with this? And do we have the uh applicant? Yes. I just promoted um Yep. Got Daniel Jameson and Dennis and Sharon Clark. They're the property owners and applicants. Mr. Jameson is the engineer, right? And uh he probably has revised plans to go over it with you guys. Yes, indeed. Good evening, everyone.

Good evening, Peter. These are the ones in our package. Yes. Dated 2826. Those are the newest plans, I believe. So, yes. Okay. All right. Let's proceed. Yep. And um our wetland so scientist Ian Cole should also be on. Paul Shipman has joined the uh Zoom meeting. Hello everybody. How you doing?

Good. How are you in Cole? All right. My screen in the background. Get my screens all set. Hold on. Sorry about that. All right. Are you ready for us to begin? Yep. Go ahead.

All right. Well, good evening everyone, Mr. chair and the commission. Um, for the record, my name is Daniel Jameson, professional engineer in the state of Connecticut. And here with me are the applicants, uh, Sharon and Dennis Clark, and our wetland soil scientist, Ian Cole. Um, thank you for your time and continue consideration of this application. We have made further revisions to the plan to reduce the proposed disturbance to the existing vegetation on site. um to address comments related to the inland wetlands uh regulation section 6.5 regarding vernal pool habitats. Uh we have removed the accessory dwelling unit um as will be discussed and are now just proposing a single family house and associated improvements related to construction of the house driveway and sewer main relocation. Uh Mr. Cole has also assessed the vernal pool habitat area around the site and a report of his findings was included in the last submission for your review. Um before Mr. Nicole and I go over the vernal pool assessment and changes to the plans. Um, Mrs. Clark, uh, Sharon Clark, the applicant and owner of the property, would like to say a few words regarding what brings us before you to request this permit. At this time, I would ask Mrs. Clark to leave.

As as long as it only pertains to wetlands issues. Yes, it is regarding the wetlands issues and why we're here requesting the permit today. Okay.

Okay. Well, thank you and good evening. um appreciate the opportunity to address the wetlands commission in regards to our permit. Um we are Sharon and Dennis Clark of Two Proer Lane, Bloomfield, Connecticut. And as you're aware, this is our third meeting to review the permit application. Uh we have not spoken in any prior meeting because we felt that you all are the professionals in ensuring that our habitat and our environment is protected. And because we also take it seriously, we invested in hiring Mr. Jameson and Mr. Cole as our professional engineer and wetland soil scientists from the very beginning of the project. Uh we have owned and lived and paid taxes at the property for over 20 years and we've never even thought about developing any portion of the land. We are in a situation though where we need a need has surfaced to move our mother-in-law from the other side of Bloomfield.

Wait, wait a minute. I'm going to stop you right there. Uh-huh. Wetlands issues only, please. Okay. Okay. Um, but there was a caregiver unit, so I do want to address that if that's okay. I mean, there was a separate It's not on the plans now.

Okay. Okay. Well, we have listened to your concerns and we have adjusted our plans to ensure that we're not adversely impacting the environment and while we we're still able to meet our needs. So today you will hear our last feasible option which includes the vernal pool report to use a portion of the land that we own. My hope is that you'll see that we've taken everything you've recommended very seriously and we have adjusted our plans accordingly. My ask is that you take all these things into cons consideration as you review the updates that will be discussed today. So with that I thank you so much and I'll turn it back over to Mr. Jameson and Mr. Cole to walk through the details.

Thank you. Thank you, Mrs. Clark. Um, so at this time, a project weather scientist, uh, Ian Cole will go over his findings in the vernal pool assessment. Ian,

uh, good evening everybody. Uh, for the record, my name is Ian Cole, professional soil scientist, professional wetland scientist. I am the soil scientist of record supporting this application. Um from at our last uh January 20th meeting uh the commission had requested some additional information regarding impacts of vernal pools. Um, specifically, uh, in accordance with section 6.5 of the, uh, town of Bloomfield, uh, inland wild regulations, uh, it calls out specifically that all applications or properties that include uh, proposed developments within uh, the vernal pool habitat area, that being uh, the area within 500 ft of any known or potential vernal pool. um indicate that on the subject plans and provided an analysis of the existing land coverages uh that fall within the entire vertical habitat area on and off the subject parcel. So with with that being said um we developed uh the graphic that's on the screen before you um as you can see uh in the center of the site uh is the subject vernal pool. Uh roughly 90% of the vernal pool is located to the south off the site and roughly 10% of it uh falls just on the site. The pool's, you know, sizable. It's 140 ft long and at its widest it's about 70 ft wide. It's got a surface area of roughly 9,000 square ft. Um the entire 500 ft uh vernal pool area encompasses roughly 22.77 acres, which you can see on this graphic. uh the majority 65.7% is wooded and essentially 34% is already developed. Uh there's a roughly there's 12 homes uh within the 500 foot existing homes within the 500 ft uh vernal pool

buffer. Most of them are concentrated to the southwest. Um there's also 11.4% 4% imperous surface uh within this area including roads that fragment the habitat to the north and south corridors uh primarily to the north where you have route 178 and to the south where you have uh Burnwood Drive uh which is the main thoroughway for the uh subdivision to the south of the site. Um it's important to note that the pool itself sits uh roughly 140 ft south of the proposed activities. All of that land will remain in its undisturbed uh existing condition. Uh and along the uh development envelope uh it will be softened up uh with a bunch of mitigation plantings uh as Daniel will go over when he goes over the changes on the plants, but but essentially the the development's backs stopped by essentially 40 shrubs and and two trees uh to to further reduce impacts. Um overall the development of the site um will result in 15,954 square ft of disturbance or roughly.36 acres. Uh this equates to roughly 1.6 of the overall 500 ft area but on site it relates to 24% disturbance of the vernal poolool habitat. and that's with the significant reductions that have been undertaken which again Daniel will uh we'll go through in depth uh the proposal now I know previously there were some discussions about using straw waddles for ENS controls but in accordance with the BMP manuals and practices to uh protect uh any kind of migration path during construction uh we defaulted back to traditional sill fence to use as exclusionary fencing uh

particularly along the southern limits of the site Uh the project is also committed to not using any synthetic mesh uh products for slope stabilization that can entangle and kill wildlife uh and ent trap amphibians and reptiles. Um so we're not going to use any of that. Um, and then you know lastly I guess just in conclusion and I'll kick it back over to Daniel just uh again the the project leaves the vernal pool basin itself untouched. It leaves that critical 100 ft vernal pool envelope uh untouched uh and more so it extends it to that 141 ft of separation distance in their existing undisturbed condition. And again, overall the the project will disturb less than that 1.6% of the overall 500t peripheral habitat. Basically, it's a reduction in the overall woodland coverage from 65.7% migrating it down to 64.1%. So, it's a it's a 1.6 reduction in in wooded coverage for the overall vernal poolool habitat area. But again on site that that number is larger um because the site as you can see from this graphic falls entirely within the vertical habitat area. So with that being said I'll I'll kick it over to Daniel and I'll be available for uh questioning with Daniel uh at the end of Daniel's presentation.

Thank you Ian. Um so I will switch over to the proposed plot plan so we can talk about the um changes since the last submission. And um I I first like to restate the site constraints that kind of led to the location of the house. Um the lot is restricted with the 50 foot front yard um that required us to set the house you know 50 ft from the rideway line. Um there is an existing 20 uh sewer main and 20 foot wide easement of course that um we've discussed and will need to be relocated. And then we also have about um 27,84 square feet of repres of of wetlands which represents approximately 43% of the property. Um with this the area remaining for the structure was limited. But um after hearing the conservative commission and town staff um the applicant has decided to eliminate the accessory dwelling unit um and all permanent direct wetland disturbances um remove the uh and also reduce clearing to only what's needed for construction of the single family home and attached garage driveway and relocation of the sewer main. You'll see now that the limit of clearing is tight to uh you know edge of driveway just to kind of get the grading for the driveway in there. Um and then just adjac uh directly downstream or downhill of the um sewer easement uh for the installation of the sewer main. Um the only direct disturbance to remain will be a temporary uh 31 square ft of temporary disturbance for the installation of the foundation drain and that's shown here still. Um the proposed mitigation area was also increased from um 929 square ft to approximately 1,120 ft with the layout of native wetland plantings to include as Mr. Cole alluded to 39 shrubs and two trees to be planted along the perimeter of clearing um as discussed in pre prior meetings. Um and the construction sequence was also updated to require the contractor to

consult with a wetland scientist to determine where silk fencing can be added to exclude wildlife movement through the active work zone as Mr. Cole was alluding to with the um uh addition of or reverting back to the use of silk fence to work as exclusion exclusatory fence u to stop the migration of wildlife into the construction active parts of the construction zone um during construction activities. Um so with that and I just uh changed the plan page so we're looking at the uh erosion control plan now. So that is the sewer relocation plan was reduced um to just be what's necessary for the sewer relocation. Um we removed the uh installation of utilities during this phase and have that all as part of phase two. Um and you can see here that yes we do have the silt fence around the perimeter of clearing. Uh we have our uh dewatering station still shown uh in the sewer relocation plan. We still show the bypass area for the pumps and the um uh hose that would be installed temporarily to convey the pipe or flows through the sewer main during the relocation of the sewer. Um um as Mr. Cole stated um we are not using any erosion control matting will be net free. um the rosary control magnet that is specified underneath the sediment logs and that is to protect wildlife from being entangled in the netting if they do try to pass through um an a non-active uh portion of the construction site. Um uh the total proposed disturbances were reduced from approximately uh 23,520 square ft which is um 0.54 acres in the first submission to approximately 15,954 square ft approximately um 0.37 acres with this submission um totaling to a 7,566 square ft decrease in disturbance area since the first submission. Um, of the

15,954 square feet of total disturbance, um, 12, uh, 679 square ft would be onsite and, um, 3,275 square ft would be offsite for the installation of utilities and just, uh, work in the rideway for the relocation of the sewer main and, uh, construction of the driveway. Uh but considering the entire 15,954 square feet uh that's uh would be approximately 24.7% uh disturbance area um if only the on-site area was considered it would represent about 19.6% of the site. Um but as uh Mr. Cole stated um the 15,954 ft does uh represent about 1.6% 6% of the 500 ft vernal poolool habitat area um surrounding the vernal poolool on site. So um in closing I just would like to point out that um section 6.5 of the inland wetland regulation does state that the applicant shall limit the disturbance of the vulner vernal poolool habitat area as much as possible with the goal of disturbing less than 10% of the vernal pool habitat area located within the subject parcel. Um the current plan does exceed the 10% disturbance goal but um it would appear that the regulation does allow flexibility in the 10% goal at it states that uh the applicant should limit the disturbance as much as possible. Um so with this the plan presented does limit the on-site disturbance to the max extent practical considering the minimum improvements needed to support the construction of the single family home and relocation of the sewer. Uh with that I'd like to thank you all for your time and Mr. to call and I are both available for any questions. Thank you.

Okay, Peter, do you have a staff report?

Uh, yes, I do. Uh, it's in your agenda package and it's dated February 9th. I believe Mr. Jameson and Mr. Cole and the Clarks all received a copy um by email and in the regular mail. And I I think it's important to it's important to understand that the uh I believe at least that the applicant has has um shown that they're receptive to the commission's requests to reduce the impacts. Um this is not an easy lot to develop because of the vernal pool habitat area without some you know some serious uh losses. Uh although they again were reduced from the first the second and now the third um uh you know uh iteration. Um I think they have made um uh a good effort to comply with the requirements of the uh vernal poolool habitat area regulations. Um and I think that uh um my uh recommended conditions of approval are pretty much the same as they were from the first one. um my first recommendations although the areas um have been reduced uh accordingly uh this is again this is a difficult site um to develop uh because of the wetlands and because of the sanitary sewer. So you know in in my in my view the applicant has uh uh you know attempted to comply with with the full uh regulations and this is the you know a

small very small footprint within the within the vernal pool habitat. So I'm uh I would recommend that the commission um vote to approve the application. Uh I do want to talk a little bit about the um the mitigation measures. Um I think uh Mr. Jameson, can we um maybe turn to what where the vegetation is is shown?

Certainly, Mr. Costali. Yes.

Okay. So, we have some spice bush, some sweet pepper, some silky dog wood, uh, and a couple of of red maples. My my um uh my recommendation would be for a couple of more trees um to fill it out a little more. Um but it's also important to note that um the uh uh vegetative plantings are shown at the edge in some cases of the wetlands and that they can be um they can be partially inside partially outside of the wetlands line and it's really a call that needs to be made in the field exactly where these go. So um that's in my conditions of approval too. There's no uh proposed plantings on the new sanitary sewer easement generally because the uh uh the sewer uh easement is uh is to the MDC and they don't want any uh any new trees planted. Uh Mr. Jameson, can we go back to the uh site plan?

Yes. So, the site plan shows um the easement in um uh cross-hatched, I guess, square or diamond shaped cross-hatching. And I think there's going to need to be some additional clearing within that easement in the lower right hand part of the the drawing. So, I think there's room for more plantings along, you know, just outside of the easement. So, I think those two uh a couple more trees and some more along the the easement area uh just outside the easement area at the limit of clearing I think would be appropriate. Um the commission uh may recall that there was a lot of discussion the last time about relocating this sanitary sewer. Um, and uh, to do that, they'll still need approval from the NBC. Um, and assuming that they that they get that approval, that would have to be the first step in the project. In my mind, first step is relocating the sanitary sewer, then building the house. So, two two pretty significant, you know, parts to the project. They have produced um soil erosion plans for both of those phases as were requested and they have um I think addressed some concerns about using mesh wrapped uh straw waddles for erosion control. Although I don't remember that one necessarily coming up, but it it could have and that's that's good. I think the in this case the silt fence will protect the wetlands from mud

washing off the site and also uh prevent um amphibians or turtles whatever they have there from walking into the um construction zone where on the uh with a straw waddle they could crawl over it. Um so that's good. And then, you know, they have uh a single um driveway out to uh Laughler Road. So, um that's where most of the or all of the construction entrance is going to be from from Laughler Road, not from um not from Proer Lane or uh um whatever Burnwood. was thinking Brentwood, but it's Burnwood.

Uh they have, you know, again, shown to uh be receptive to the commission's concerns about wetland impacts. There's no longer a direct wetland impact and to their concerns about the vernal pool habitat. So, uh again, my recommendation is the for the commission to approve the application with my 22 recommended conditions of approval. Uh last thing I'll say and then I'll be quiet is that the uh tonight's public hearing was extended from the last meeting and either has to be closed this evening um or uh continued with the applicant's consent to the March uh 16th meeting.

Okay, Mr. Chairman, that's all I have. Thank you. Thank you. Does the applicant agree to all the conditions? Yes, we do. Okay. Thank you. All right. Any questions from the public? Does everybody I don't have anyone.

Does everybody know how to raise your hand on Zoom? At the bottom of the screen, click on raise hand. Okay. All right. Questions from the commission. Nobody. I have uh I have a question. Al

um Mr. Cole, in the on your report, you talk about um the proposed plans uh will use uh best management practices and low impact development techniques. Are are have those been discussed uh in this conversation or are there other techniques that you will be using?

Uh I'm sorry if it was misleading. the the the the techniques being uh to mitigate any impacts of the vernal pools during construction practices are are limited to reducing the development footprint uh the inclusion of the additional plantings. um maintaining that 141 ft separation distance uh and its existing uh configuration and and swapping back to the silk fence for exclusionary fencing uh for the protection of the wildlife movements.

Okay. What about construction materials? You know, the the the materials you use to to build the house. Um where will they be stored during the construction? they would be I'll leave it to them.

Oh, no problem Ian. Um, so I guess Mr. Mr. Breland, we do show temporary stockpile areas for um, you know, top soil, but you know, we all would envision that if they do need stockpiling, they'll be kind of adjacent to the sewer easement in the front of the house. um would be where materials would be stockpiled until the home is constructed and and the um you know then they'll move materials in and out of the house footprint um at that time. So nothing will be stored down near the vernal pool.

Nothing will be stored down near the vernal pool. No, we would all activities would be contained within our limit of clearing and disturbance line that we show on this plan. Go ahead. Okay. Uh Steve,

um and the conditions for approval, I think last time, uh there was a note, did we still need condition 19 for the um monitoring for 3 years? I can't remember if I think last time there was a a mention that that wasn't needed because there was no longer a a direct or permanent wetlands.

That's correct, Mr. Millet. Uh the condition 19 says uh wetland mitigation areas shall be completed during the first construction season uh and monitored for a minimum of three years. But in preparing the minutes from last meeting um that was discussed um by the commission or by me uh as number 19 not being necessary. Um the previous um um plan, I think the original plan actually had a small wetlands mitigation area, a created wetland mitigation area. That's no longer on the plan. So I don't think that condition 19 applies anymore.

Okay. So that's the same as the last time. I think that was the only item I had. Thank you. Uh David, hi. Um can you talk about temporary impacts versus permanent impacts for the project and were they and what are what are the calculations for um because you you're you're throwing out some numbers, but I don't know if those include temporary temporary impacts to the wetlands or is that what you're talking about, Mel? No, to the vernal pool habitat area. Um

are all impacts permanent? I guess we'll go with that.

Yeah. All all clearing in the limit of disturbance that we show um is essentially permanent. I mean outside of where the utilities are shown to um go outside of our tree line. You know, we'll have to of course excavate the trenches for the installation of those utilities, but uh we have no intention of clearing around those utilities. just doing what's necessary for installation of the utilities and then letting um the area kind of revert back to its natural state over time after they are constructed. But we did um include those areas within the total about 16,000 square ft of disturbance that we reported in the application and on the plan. Um so but the the major area around the house that we show as the the uh main clearing area would be permanent and would be you know grass lawn area after um construction.

Okay. I understand that. I'm I'm still a little confused about the temporary because you said you included it, but they're cuz you So, one of one of the areas I'm wondering about is where you're doing the uh the connection for the sewer line that when it goes to the souththeast of the property, um it extends it extends beyond where you're showing your clearing limits, but obviously you have to if you're moving the sewer line, there has to be some work there. Um so can you talk more about that disturbance?

Yeah. Well, I mean we would remove the portion of the sewer line that is necessary for the construction of the home. Um the remaining portion of the line would be abandoned in place. So we don't necessarily have to dig up the existing line um to do the relocation. But yes, we would need to trench for the new sewer line and to make the connection to the manhole. But um it's not a deep excavation. uh is probably three to four feet deep that we would have to trench. So, it's not going to require a a big expanse of um of a excavation area um just to trench to uh install that pipe. And then also, just like we stated for the other utilities, that area would be left to revert back to its natural state over time. Um but, um yeah, it would require a little bit of clearing, which is why we included that area. Uh it's like a 4ft trench that we considered um for the installation of that sewer main and the total disturbance reported.

So that's that's the trench itself. What about getting equipment in there? Um you know if there's if there's vegetation so we're talking about the habitat area and the habitat area is you know strongly defined by the vegetation that's there. So to get the equipment in there to dig that trench, how much clearing do you need to do? Not just the width of the trench, but the width of the access. Um,

well, I mean, I'm thinking it'll be a mini excavator. A mini excavator is probably about maybe five to six feet wide. Um, so yes, there would be potentially some um vegetation that could be impacted along that route. Um, but uh, as Mr. Castali alluded to, we would be willing to work with him and replanting any vegetation that is have that needs to be removed for the construction of that sewer man. Um there is a requirement that we locate um the larger trees um as a condition of approval which would be done and if any of those larger trees are uh in the way of the sewer main relocation which you know the location is pretty much set to reduce um extens extending the sewer main to further reduce the slope. um we could offer as a condition of approval to replace those trees um removed for the installation of that sewer on main.

And so similarly on a a different graphic you had shown a a stone check dam on the east side of the property. Yes.

How is that going to be installed? I mean I'm I'm assuming some equipment has to get out there to put it in. Um well the the current utility easement is um very low. There's no trees within the utility easement on the east side of the property. Um just like low growing shrubs um that is allows access to all the utility companies through that area. So, I envisioned that a machine would work from that area and deposit the materials off to the side um just so that we could have that filtration of uh any potential sediment that does if it does happen to migrate past the um silk fence. It could protect it from going underneath the um uh covert conveying water underneath Laughler Road.

And then um I I assume it's a temporary stone check dam. So, it's going to be removed. It would be removed after construction. Correct. Right. Okay. So, all all that work will be done from the utility easement. Yeah. So, um the the discussion about the silt fence and the waddles. Um I know we had mentioned waddles because we didn't want um critters going into or getting trapped inside the construction site. Uh we changed that to silt fence or back to silt fence. Is the silt fence going to be a full perimeter of the of the entire project area or just on the southern end?

Um, right now we are showing it as a full perimeter, but we did add, as I stated, um, a note that we'll work with the wetland scientists to allow that silk fence to be located in um, you know, proper locations to exclude the movement of uh, wildlife into the construction site. Um, and then once there if there's an area that we're no longer working on, we could open up the cell fence and leave the waddle under behind it so that wildlife could migrate past the construction site. We just want to make sure that it's it's safe for them and they kind of are guided to inactive areas of the construction site and not the active areas.

Yeah. Yeah. So, I mean, obviously, we want to not trap anybody on the inside. Um, so ideally if if we're going to go with silt fence, um, we have to consider timing so that we're not, you know, doing it while they're actively moving, um, put it up before they get moving. Um, and then keep that perimeter control. Um because if we're if we're assuming that, you know, the the habitat area encompasses the entire property, we've got the northeast corner um that's not going to be disturbed, which could be habitat and there could be critters in there, so we don't want them walking into the site. Um so there's two phases, phase one and phase two. Um, is your entire disturbance area calculated inclusive of both of those phases?

Yes. Phase phase one does not take up the entire disturbance area. It's limited to just what's necessary for the installation of the sewer main relocation and bypass pump. And then phase two is the entire area. So, um, phase one works within the total area that would be disturbed for phase two.

Okay. Um, and I guess my my last comment or question I guess is it has to do with the house size um, and feasible alternatives. Um, and and I don't want to I don't want to suppose or you know assume what needs you have for the house. Um, but you said this is the minimum house size that you can build. I assume that's based on need, not based on zoning. Yes. It's based on the what we feel would be a a comfortable house to live in. Yeah.

Okay. Because I you know there's there's restrictions on house sizes based on zoning. So when we say minimum house size this is need not zone. So you know I guess the what I'm getting at is was there consideration of making the house smaller or is that not feasible for the needs? I would say not feasible for the knees. This is a the size that we show as a garage and I believe it's a 1500. Let me not speak. Let me get the actual dimensions for you. That's about the the house itself is a um uh 1,240 ft footprint and then the garage adds another uh uh 372. So 372 + 1240. So we're about 1,600 square footprint. Um, now I think that is a, you know, what we feel is a comfort a small enough size house to respect the disturbance, but also provide a comfortable living space.

Um, I guess my I said that was my last one, but I I I do want to comment though that about the percent impact and I I appreciate the reduction. Um, you're still more than double the the the goal um for the property. Um I I am a little concerned though about the the areas that may have been uncalculated. So those um temporary disturbance areas for the sewer lines um you know and and whatever else may may come up during construction. So, you know, we're at like 21% or so right now. And, you know, theoretically could bump up a little bit more because if we're talking about a temporary impact to the sewer line that is more than the width of the trench, so it's the width of the equipment, it's going to take some time for that to grow back in. So, that's that's just a concern I have. Um, but I'll uh I'll pass my talking stick on to someone else. Thanks, Kevin

Kevin Wilcox. Yeah, sorry. Trying to find the uh everything here to click on. So I don't I don't have a question. I actually have a comment or a change for let's

hold on hold on hold on. This this isn't this is pertinent. So what I have is a change on condition number 10. And if Peter could look at uh his note condition number 10, the second line where it says corners shall be pinned and by uh the word and needs to be removed. You don't want to be adding that into into the conditions as stated. Yes, I agree. All right, that that was it. I will save my comments for the comment period. Okay. Thank you.

No problem. All right. Any other questions from the public? We got nothing. Okay. Comments from the public pertaining to wetlands only. Any comments? If you want to raise your hand, the bottom of the screen, little icon says raise hand. Just click on that. Okay. All right. Uh, comments from the commission. Anybody want to make a comment?

Nothing. Yes, I I do. However, uh, I would I would sooner let David go first. I I kind of snuck my comments into my questions, so I think I'm good. Are you sure? I Yeah, I think I think I'm okay. All right. Maybe you might inspire me for more, but we'll see.

Maybe. Maybe not. Um, just there's something I would like to read that came from Mr. for Cole and his uh sure anyway the evaluation of of the vernal pool habitat area and that is it's under the vernal pool assessment and there's a wonderful sentence here and I quote importantly what is worth noting based on the location of the pool in the landscape, elevation and geology. Verno pool wildlife utilizing or potentially relying on this pool all belong to the same conservation strategy guild for early successional mosaic habitat dependent species. having gone to college uh and studied horiculture which is a science-based patient. Uh this sentence really drives home to me the fact that communication is dead and that every profession has its own nomenclature own definition of words and therefore you can't relate an idea to somebody outside your own profession. And I wish that that sentence was a little more readable to people who are not of that same profession. However, what I do like is the second sentence after the sentence after that which starts therefore. So he he's saying this wonderful thing and based on that comes to a decision. Um anyway having having read this I I I

think it's a wonderful piece literature but what I would like to say basically is this that is stated here that within the 500 ft vernal pool habitat area 34.3% of that habitat that is already developed and that goes beyond 10% for any of the properties within that area. And since this area, this property is completely 100% within the vernal pool habitat area u doing any kind of work whatsoever just adds to the amount of disturbed area for that vernal pool habitat area. So typically when when people do disturbances of a wetlands, they do a mitigation of a one and a half to one for the disturbance. And since there is no possibility within this property to do any kind of mitigation aside from trying to plate us by putting plants around the perimeter, uh I I just don't feel that this is really a good idea to to uh and I'd be happy to have David continue if he would like. Um, I think I've probably said more than I should have.

No, no, you're good.

I I I can continue a little bit. Um, if if it helps. Um, and it it does have to do with the consideration. So I I you know when we were developing the language for the regulations about vernal pools um the reason we put a goal of 10% had to do with indirect and cumul the cumulative effects on vernal pools and their habitats with the understanding that the habitats will often extend beyond one property. Um and also with the understanding that some of because you know many areas were already developed in town um we would already be behind the eightball um trying to make up for loss lost land basically. Um so with a goal of 10% it would theoretically help to compensate for some of the already developed portions of that habitat area. Um, so when a project comes at us that's double or a little bit more than double our goal, it's it's difficult for me because we put a lot of work into the regulations and a lot of, you know, real thought into why we had those numbers. So, it's difficult for me to accept um any pro any project that is double or more than what the goal is because we're not helping the habitat area. Um which, you know, we're supposed to which, you know, this this commission is charged with protecting. Um so, I think I'll leave it at that. I don't want to ramble on too much longer.

Thank you, David. Yeah, thank you. Any other comments? Yeah, I have a comment. Okay.

Um I obviously I wasn't involved like David was in developing these regulations for the town. Um but I in on this particular lot uh I don't I don't see where any building is going to get even close or maybe even close to 20% of uh disturbance. Um so if this is a if this is a buildable lot then um I I I don't understand how how this um how this lot could be a build buildable lot and have a vertal pool on it. So it it's just um I'm not sure what what we're doing here. Okay. All right. Um, yeah, I'm I'm kind of stuck. Um, I know when we uh approved the Vernon pool regulations, I know the state, I think, wanted us to go to 700 ft radius. Uh, and we cut it back to 500. And I think that by going from 10% to 20%, I think, you know, we're we might could be doing more harm than good. Um I am concerned that there is other vacant lots in this neighborhood which could fall into this c you know the same situation and then to be fair we have to allow them the same consideration. So

yeah, one one other comment that I want to make is that it says that the goal uh is 10% but it doesn't give any guidance as to what will not be accepted. So how do we deal with that question? Um I think that's something we each individually have to decide. you know, how much I'll be willing to tolerate, you know, for disturbance.

I think one of the one of the largest difficulties for this this particular site is that sewer line. Um, if the sewer line didn't have to be relocated, there's a large swath of land that could have remained wooded. It could have remained undisturbed as habitat. Um, so you know, it was it I I understand that there may be restrict planting restrictions on top of the sewer line. Um, but I'm also wondering if there may be some ability to plant, you know, shrubs, woody shrubs on top of the sewer line that can sort of give a a softer or a more usable habitat for some of the species than a lawn. Um so there may be there may still be a compromise here in the type of vegetation that can be replanted. Um the I guess the you know it's sort of on the applicant whether they can give up lawn space to maybe give back a little bit more of that habitat. And in that way the disturbance to the to the sewer line can be almost completely temporary um as opposed to almost completely permanent. Um because we're talking about temporary, we're talking about impacts to habitat, not not impacts to wetlands. Um so that habitat can be restored with vegetation, but it can't be restored if it's lawn. So there may be an opportunity for some a little bit more of a compromise, but it's on the applicant whether that would be something that they would be willing to do.

So there there's one other comment. Sorry I'm going to make this. The genie has been let out of the bottle because it has been I'm going to comment on it. I do understand the need of looking after family seeing as how I spent four years helping my wife look after my mother-in-law only to have that end with my mother-in-law dying in my arms. Kevin, be careful. And yeah, so I understand how I understand the need for the house, but the genie that was let out of the bottle was telling us this because they're they're they're just they live just a little ways away.

Yeah.

And one of the things that we Well, here's the thing. This is the crooks. Human nature tells me that they're going to be walking from their house to this house and they're going to be creating a pathway. They may be clearing a path. I mean, it's unstated, but it can be assumed. And I don't really like that idea either. Then again, to get into your car to drive around to get to that house when the house is only 300 feet away, you know, there's there's something They either need to put that on the plan that there's going to be a dedicated walkway because, you know, there's they're going to do it. And I don't have an issue with that. I do have an issue with it not being on the plans.

Yeah. All right. I understand looking after your own. Yeah. Um All right. Okay. Any other comments from the commission? All right. So, what's your pleasure? You want to close the public hearing and move forward? If we close the public hearing, we don't have to vote tonight. We can vote next meeting. Correct, Peter? Where'd you go? I think the applicant should have an opportunity to see if they want to last word. Yeah, I was just going to say the same thing. Yes, I agree. Well, we don't have to vote. We don't have to vote tonight. that we could vote the next meeting. Correct. That's right. Yep.

All right. Does the applicant have any last words?

Um, you know, I guess I'll just state that um, you know, we do understand the concern and we could certainly, you know, do the process of MDC, see if there's ability to plant shrubs, um, within the, uh, sewer easement area. But um end of the day, we're not going to have a drastic decrease in the disturbance. Um we have done multiple changes to the plan to reduce it as best we can uh to reduce the lawn area around the structure. Uh kind of we we had to put some material over the sewer man to uh provide adequate cover to meet MDC's requirements. Therefore, you know, I didn't want to put a cliff right off the side of it. So I provided a slow general trans a gradual transition um to the clearing line as shown and and then also to mitigate the uh disturbance inherent to that we offer to put the plantings at the clearing limit as discussed and are even willing to um replace plantings or trees disturbed uh along the sewer main easement. Um, so I I I feel that, you know, we have offered everything that is practical for us. Um, at this time I we really don't want to plant stuff in the sewer main easement because um, you know, I wouldn't want any of those shrubs to bore into the sewer mane and cause problems long term. So that's kind of why they clear it and they don't plant shrubby materials on top of it so that it doesn't compromise the integrity of this man over time. Um, you know, the the applicant does live nearby, but um, you know, it's just a short drive to get over here. Um, I think, um, you know, so with that, uh, you know, we're not going to talk about, as as Mr. uh, Mr. Chair stated, you know, that's not what the wetland's purview is. We are here to talk about the wetlands. And I feel that

um we have reduced and considered all the comments and offered to work with the town um to allow this structure to um work with the environment as best we can. We are uh you know in a in a condition where we have the entire property within the vernal pool habitat area. So it is improbable and impractical for us to meet the 10%. There's no way that we can meet 10%. Um so in line with the regulation since it does allow for it to be uh the max extent possible um it does have that wording and it has as much as possible is the wording in the regulation. I feel that with the plan presented um as the applicant has allowed us to pres prepare um does meet that regulation um with the max uh as much as possible caveat that is in the vernal pool regulation of inland wetlands regulation 6.5. Um so with that um I think um as we stated we are willing to work with Mr. Castaldi to uh provide additional trees along the limit of clearing and also to replace and we also offer to replace any trees removed with the installation of the sewer or any other utility for the uh to service this house. Um with that I think um yeah we we could certainly um be okay with closing the public hearing.

Okay. What's the commission's pleasure? Any may want to make a motion to close the public hearing. Uh be before we do, could I make can I make a rebuttal to uh Mr. Jameson? Just a clarification.

Okay. Go ahead. When it comes to trees, shrubs versus perennial and annual plants, trees and shrubs, probably 95 to 98% of the species native and introduced do not put roots down any deeper than 21 in. And therefore, they're not going to affect the sewer line in any way, shape, or form. Uh perennials and annuals on the other hand uh can put roots down six or eight feet yet their strength isn't so great that they're going to do any damage to a sewer line. So in that respect I don't see any reason why you couldn't plant shrubs over top the sewer area. That's that's my com. Anybody want to make a motion to close the public hearing?

So moved. Made by Kevin, seconded by I'll second. Who was that? That was me. David. Oh, David. Made by David. All right. All in favor say I. I. I. I. Opposed. Abstain. It's unanimous. All right. So now, do we want to kick the can down the road or do we want to vote on it now? What if why why put it down the road? I'm just I'm asking if we put Let me Let me finish. Okay.

If we put it to the next month, we cannot take any new evidence from the uh applicant. It has to go through the staff. So, so what are you hoping to achieve if we wait another month to vote? I'm not I'm not I'm just asking what's your pleasure. Okay.

I'm I'm willing to vote tonight. Somebody wants to make a motion. I will also remind everybody that if the if the motion fails um you have to state your reason why you voted against it. So anybody want to make the motion? The motion has to be made in the positive. Is there a vice chair who's available? I uh just unmuted. I just unmuted. I will I will make a motion. Um, as usual, I'll rely on the village to keep me in line here.

Yeah.

Um, uh, I, uh, would, uh, propose a motion, uh, to approve the application for, uh, uh, 9 Proer Lane/29 Laughler Lane, unique ID 4,100. uh applicants uh Dennis and Sharon Clark and that the um uh the uh approval uh be subject to the conditions uh set forth by the wetlands agent and uh also uh the map dated

uh February 8th, 2026. Yes. Thank you. Yes. All right. I'll second. Seconded by Kevin. All right. Do we uh want to um exclude 19 as previously discussed? Condition 19. Right. Uh Paul. Yes, we do. I thought that was understood, but uh yes, my my error. Uh we we uh I'll I'll change the uh motion to reflect that it uh approved with conditions uh set forth by the wetlands agent with the exclusion of condition 19 and the correct I agree with that

the correction of number 10. Yes the word and take the word and out. Yes shall be pinned by a licensed surveyor. Yep. All right. And the seconder approves that. Yes. Okay. All right. Time for discussion. All right. Let's have some Anybody want to discuss this before we vote?

All right. Yeah. Do the other commissioners have any questions still like Breland? No more questions. No. Well, no. Well, that's part of the discussion. Questions for us. Discussion is discussion. Questions is questions. Moving forward. I told you communication is dead. I liked you better when we couldn't see you. Come back, Kevin. All right. So, what's your pleasure? Take it to move it to a vote. Yeah, there's a motion on the table. It's been seconded. Yeah. All right.

Unless there's discussion. Y more discussion. All right. All in favor say I. I. All right. Why Why don't you raise your hand? I I. Byron, Paul, Glenn, Adam, were you and I? No. Okay. So that's one, two, three in favor. Opposed raise your hand. Nay.

So we got Kevin, myself, David, and Steve, and Adam. No. So the motion fails. Um, Peter, do you remember how we have to do this? We have to go through and poll everybody on why they voted no. I Does there have to be a motion to deny or is just it just fails? No, it just fails. Okay. So, we go through the four no votes should say why. Okay. All right. Five no votes. Five, wasn't it? Yeah. I think so.

Yeah, it was five. I have five. Five no votes. Yes. Yes. All right. So, Kevin, you were Yes, I was a no. Uh, my no is based on the fact that the property is completely within the vernal pool habitat area and there is no possibility of mitigation of any sort. and they're going to be doing 24% of that property in development when there's already over 34% in the entire 500 foot range. All right. Um, now do I also need to state that that's done without prejudice? No,

because I really have nothing against them. No, I mean they're free to, you know, it's denied. I it wasn't denied with Periculus so they could come back, you know, with another plan. Okay.

But they know what they're up against. Um I voted no because um our regulations are 10%. I think it was um I think it I think we made that for a reason and I'm concerned on how it affects the other vacant land in the area and what kind of uh what kind of statement we say to the others and the other people in the area and other Vernon pools. Vernon pools are becoming more and more an issue. So I voted no. David Yeah, I voted no for the same reasons. Um that the um application failed to meet the requirements of the inland wetland water courses regulation 6.5 vernal pool habitat um for reduction down to as close to 10% as possible. And I I I understand that it was reduced and the applicant believes this is as much as possible, but it's still more than double the the goal. And I don't think that's acceptable. Stephen,

I concur. I the the 10% was it's it's very it's very difficult to reach that. Um we could have a a smaller house, but um it you're still left with a lot of yard and the sewer. So, you know, basically it comes down to there's not a lot of room to even I think it was said mitigate and get close to that 10%. Okay. And who else though? Adam. Adam.

Yep. Same. It's because of the impact and accumulative impact with to the vernal pool and exceeding the regulation. All righty. And that's everybody, right? One, two, three, four, five. Okay. Alrighty. So, thank you all for your time and hope you have a great evening. Thank you. All right. Bye.

All righty. Let's move on to Peter. The uh the golf course. Is that That's not Is that going forward tonight? Repeat or go.

I'm here. Um, no. The commission cannot open this public hearing. The letters that were sent out to the abuters did not go out with a uh proof of mailing receipt. Uh so by the requirements of public hearings, um those notices need to go um need to be mailed again with a with a uh uh receipt of mailing or or certified mailing. And so um the uh uh the golf course has requested that the uh public hearing be rescheduled to the next meeting, which would be March 16th. And I think that's a that's the right way to go. The commission will have to uh um readvertise and new letters will have to go out

for the March meeting. Okay. Okay. All right. So, it brings us to number two in new business MDC easement and sewer. Uh excuse me, Mr. Chairman. Uh, in full disclosure, I may have a conflict of interest on this one. Um, so I'll seek your your opinion. Uh, I'm the Bloomfield representative for the MDC and so therefore I'm not quite sure I should sit in on this application.

I would say that that and it could create issues down the road and and I think it's best that if you recuse yourself from this application. Okay. Um usually you you know years ago we used to have you leave the room but now you can just shut off your mic and your shut off your camera and you can listen you know. Okay. All right. We'll do. All right. Thank you. Anything else?

Similar question. And I received a letter for this one. I am in the zone that's affected by this work. Are you are they digging on your property? No, but it's right behind me and I just received one of these letters from the MDC saying this is happening. So there's no real impact to your I shouldn't say that. There's no uh disturbance to your property. Correct.

Okay. I I don't see that as a conflict. Does anybody else Okay. All right. Anything else? All righty. Uh, public hearing. Let's go over the rules a little bit. We're only interested in I shouldn't say that. We're only concerned with wetlands issues. We're not uh we're not looking at traffic. um affect the value of properties or anything that's not wetlands related. Um generally what we do is the applicant will give their presentation, the staff will give their presentation, then we'll take questions from the public and then questions from the commission. um with a public hearing when there's me a number of um people from the public I'm a little more lenient on additional questions. So don't get in a ty if we go back and forth between comments and questions that we're trying to give the people a chance to voice their uh questions and then the applicant will have the last word. Um, and I also would ask that all your answers be direct. Um, I would I've been known to be quick with my mouse here muting people uh to keep the meetings moving along. Our goal is to be out by 10. Um, and we hope to achieve that. So,

who's here for the applicant? Speak first. Mr. Chairman, we have to open the public hearing first. Oh, yeah. Good idea. Is there a motion to open the public hearing? So moved. Kevin Wil. Kevin. Seconded by Second. Glenn. This is the public hearing for the MDC Eastman Sewer Rehab. Correct. Correct. All in favor say I. I. Dane. It's unanimous. Okay. Now we're open.

Okay. So, um I believe of we we have promoted Julie uh Borkman. Um and it looks like a bunch of other folks. Is Julie, is everybody been promoted from your side that needs to be? Hi, Peter. Thank you. Uh can you hear me? Yes, we can hear you. Okay. Um, yes, I believe we have um Clarence Corbin and Josh McCullik from uh the MDC, Joe Green and Dylan Doris from Brown and Caldwell and Ron Gro from Imeg. So, our soil scientists. So, I think that's all. I think I think we got everything. I sent Rebecca a list quick before the meeting. I just wasn't sure. Okay, good. So,

I I thought they were coming up pretty quick there. Okay. Yes, I know. Thank you, Rebecca, for getting us on. Um, I just need Can I share my screen so I can put I have a presentation to pop up. Yes. Okay. Um, just give me a second. Bear with me. Sorry, I um don't know how this works. Uh, okay. You have to have it. Uh, oh, okay. I see. Share. Yeah. But what you want to share has to be up on your right on your desktop in the background. Okay. Sure. Um, can you see can you see the presentation or can you see a I see a cat.

Okay. Um, no cheetahs in our Yeah, I know. Let's It's There's screen one and screen two. And I picked the wrong screen. And let me see how this works. Is that better? There you go. Make it as big as big as you can. I will. Yeah. Let me get it um to run from the beginning if it will run now. There we go. Okay. Is that full screen now? View view for you guys. Okay, perfect. Thank you for bearing with me. Um so, good evening and thank you um Peter and commission uh for hearing us tonight. I'm going to just

I'll be running the PowerPoint and I'm gonna pass it around to our team as we need to. And I'm going to first pass it over to uh the folks at MDC who are going to just give a brief overview of the project and then um we'll introduce our team again just so we have it all on the record and then I'll just kind of walk you through the specific aspects for the permit application. So I'm going to hand it over to Josh and Josh can you um take it away? Excuse me. Just let me know. Yes. What's your position? Are you with I'm sorry. So,

no, I'm um I'm a Connecticut licensed professional engineer by my company is JKB Consulting. I'm a subconsultant to Brown and Caldwell who are the design engineers for the project and uh we all of us work for the Metropolitan District Commission. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. So, Josh, just let me know when you're ready to advance or pass it back to me and I will be quiet for a minute.

Sure. Good evening everyone. Uh I'm Josh McCullik, senior project manager with the MDC. Um I have with me here tonight uh Clarence Corbin, who is the project manager. Uh he has uh the most familiarity with this project. Um so I think he's going to be the one that's actually going to run us through this first slide here.

Oh. Oh, certainly. Um welcome everyone. My name is again Clarence Corbin. Um and I'm the project manager as Josh stated. Uh just want to start this project off. you you do have an introduction of the other participants. So you'll have conversation from other part other parts of the team. So this project is part two uh phase um two of u of a earlier phase project that we completed in 2024. Uh essentially it's the same type of work which is to use the technology of CIP lining. CIPP lining is a um uh the cured in place uh pipelining technology. Uh it often is used to repair sewers and extend the life of a sewer. Uh in this case we want we want to do that because of the critical location of these sewers and the opportunity to extend the life of the sewer without to avoid the um pipes that may fail due to age and condition. Um and and if they do fail, then we're looking at a team of excavating equipment to come into the site to to make an improvement. So part of this improvement is really preventative. So if as soon as we can get in there and protect the sewer, we extend it life and that's in our best interest. So the project, this is phase two. Um the actual project schedule is to uh start the bidding process sometime in the spring of 2026 with the construction thereafter sometime this summer. We are looking for approval from DEP. Um they're part of the funding source for for this project and so we need to you know go through the process of submitting the plans and getting the approval and they will allow us to actually get um get the project

moving forward once we get all the permits in place. So, the project is about a two-year uh time frame starting again in, you know, like I say, resuming 2026, hoping to uh finish sometime in the fall of 2028. Um part of the consideration of this kind of project is the conditions and what weather will do for us in terms of having access. So, we're going to work as much as we can to complete this work uh within that time frame, but it's a weather dependent u activity. And again to reexlain the curtain place lining, it's a technique that we've used throughout the district. We use it in order to to accomplish the two things I said earlier is to extend the life of the pipe which uh is critical to us. Uh pipe failures are difficult and and costly for us. So if we could do this before it fails then we pretend we we actually add to the the length of the pipe and essentially we can get another perhaps 50 years of continuous use of that pipe which is important to us. And the way we do that is actually to you know put in this uh carried in place liner. You stick that into one manhole and out to another one and at the same time we bypass the flow and then we wait for it to cure. Normally the curing time is somewhere around um 12 to 15 hours and then we have a new pipe without joints and the real benefit of that is that we reduce what we call the INI which is the inflow that comes into our system where you have you know wet soils and wetlands and so forth that's where we get a large source of inflow into our system and at some later point we have to treat that and it becomes a problem with the volumes that we have in other parts of the of our system. Um, so as much as we can get out of our out of our our the inflow out of our system, it's a benefit to us.

So this project gets like I said state funded. It's under the clear clean water fund which is again deep as a partner on this. So we continue to work with them on projects like this. Um again this is the second phase. Hopefully this is all we want to do in this area. But there are other parts of the district that we always looking at uh any opportunities to get rid of the INI or inflow that comes into our system so that we can have more efficient sewers. In this case, um this is sewers that are only in the MDC easement. So again, we're not looking to be working in our in our normal locations, which is in, you know, normal um road u improvements. If you're working in any of town, West Harford uh in Harford, you'll see the MDC crews and the contractors out there and you would see the whole process of working right in front of uh people's homes. So this is in the easement. So we're going to be working in in the back of homes, you know, primarily and it has the you know the least impact to to the customers that we're we're serving. So um we're looking to line these uh segments u that lie within the wetlands. And again I say you again the wetlands is the indicator of high infiltration that goes into our sewer that that's where we want to you know protect ourselves from. And it's within the 100-year flood plane, which is kind of a a matter where again there is accumulation of um open channels that we have to mitigate. But our goals is to do this work, line the sewer, restore the area, and then we're able to uh you know, leave it kind of in the same condition that we found it. So, I think Julie's going to take you through the rest of the um the slides so we can kind of uh answer any of the questions you may have. uh we're looking to make sure

that we have all the information you need to make a decision about um this particular project which is really important to us and hopefully we we do get the kind of conversation that would give us um all of your questions answered. So Julie,

thank you Clarence. Great overview of the project. Um uh and just so as as Clarence had said, you know, obviously it's a this is a critical wastewater infrastructure piece of infrastructure within Bloomfield. And I realize it might say site here work area, but it really is throughout a large segment of town is it's about 47,000 lineal feet of pipelining, which is almost 9 miles of sewer to be lined. So it is quite extensive but we um again it's a we're trying to be preventive, proactive, get these uh sewers fixed and minimize the disturbance at the same time. Um and on top of that everything is really planned to be temporary all temporary impacts. We get in, do the work, get out and and move on and everybody's happy because the sewers are working. So that's the the focus. Um, I'm just going to run you quickly through the project permits, uh, overview. Um, we did pre-application coordination with the town of Bluefield, um, and Connecticut Deep and the Army Corps of Engineers last year during May and June and discussed with them a lot of details, but basically came down to this list of permits here. So, we're here for this uh, Bloomfield wetlands permit. Obviously, we did submit also for a flood plane permit. Um, and I've been in touch with Rob Troier uh with the town of Bloomfield and he does not anticipate any excuse me issues with that. We did a fairly um well actually Brown and Caldwell and the district had done some fairly extensive coordination with Connecticut Deep, their land and um land acquisition and management group and dam safety because to coordinate some of the work on a couple of the flood flood control areas that are owned by Connecticut Deep. Uh we received a Connecticut uh uh NDDB determination which is the natural diversity database

that um where the uh endangered threatened species are located within the some of the project areas. Um so and I'll get into a little bit more detail on that later. And we are we submitted for a self-verification under Army Corps permit the Connecticut general permit for impacts less than 5,000 square feet. That's the broad overview. And um I know we'll get into the discussion later u regarding Peter's memo and all of that as well and then and then take questions at the end hopefully. So um now I'm going to hand it over to Ron who um Ron can jump on and uh say hello. Ron Gotro from IMEG um is going to give you a little bit of the history of the wetlands delineation which is a little bit interesting and long and I will pass it over to Ron if you're there. Uh good evening Ron Petro IMEG formerly Fitzgerald and Holidayiday formerly FHI Studio now IMEG. Um I'm here on behalf of um Dan Dan Hagamman who is a soil scientist of record who could not be here this evening. Um so this project was in we worked on in 2015 and delineated several a lot of the um wetlands within the rightways at that time and produced the wetlands report of excerpts of which are in the um application. Then we were were re-retet retained in 2025, 10 years later, and we looked at additional areas within the sewer rightways as well as um reconfirmed the delineation that was done in 2015. So it was piecing these things together. Um but it's it's one cohesive wetlands delineation now from data that's two separate events two separate field events. Um so we worked within the

easements um and we also looked 25 ft to the east side of the pipe. Um, we did not identify any vernal pools within the area we investigated and the the work was near and along the named water courses such as Washbrook, Beansbrook, Phillybrook and Tumbleber, Tumble Down Brook um as well as unnamed water courses. So, the figures in the application came from us and with annotations from Julie to bring things up to speed as far as which of the sheets that the figures pertain are associated with. So, was there was quite a bit of challenge there. So, that's that's it for us. That was our role.

Thank you, Ron. Um, yes. So, this was just an excerpt and yeah, the site plan sheet numbering we won't get into, but it changed a few times along the way. So, um so it's a little bit of a it's a pardon the pun Frankenstein of wetlands deliation, but we we pieced them all together and um showed uh the locations of you know along the easements that are wetlands and the areas that are that are not wetlands. Um so again, I apologize the word site description. It's really all over town, but uh it involved, you know, uh IG and Ron and Dan's um you know, field investigation work for wetlands delineations. Uh Brown and Caldwell also did extensive field investigations to figure out the real hard part of where do we actually access these areas? How do they get in with minimizing disturbance to, you know, property owners and doing a lot of property owner coordination? So, they did a large chunk of the um the leg work of that ahead of time. Um just I know this table is terrible and it's um it's got a lot of information. You probably can't read it, but was it included in the application, but just give you an idea uh that of the colored shading. You know, these blue um shadings over here, this is all by by sheet plan number are the three locations we've limited the access the temporary access fills within wetlands. Um, and then these green areas are are uh potential temporary stream crossings. The light yellow is work in NDB shaded areas. And then this other blue text is work within flood plane areas. But as we talked about, all of the work is in the wetlands and in the flood planes, which are pretty much coincident because where you've got the wetlands and these small water courses, you're in the flood plane. Uh, now I'm going to send it over to Joe Green and have you introduce yourself,

Joe Green from uh, Brown and Caldwell. And he's going to just kind of walk you through. I know Clarence gave a lot of this, so um, of how the work is actually done, but he's going to kind of give you an overview of that and just a typical sequence. Do we have Joe? Sorry about that. Trying to mute. No worries. Thanks.

Yeah. Um, yeah, I won't repeat everything Clarence went through. you can see what's on the slide. Uh I'm Joe Green, the project manager for this project for the design phase for Brown and Caldwell. Uh Dylan Doris has also been heavily involved with this project and helping us uh what Julie just mentioned about the access points in coordination with property owners and trying to really minimize uh disturbances where we're going to have them to access uh the easements to get in to do this work. Um the easements the they're generally 20 foot wide centered on the pipe. Um most of that um has been cleared under prior uh work by the MDC and the intent would be just to do minimal cut cutting of smaller banner saplings or whatever is needed to just gain access for the the truck vehicles to get in there and do the work. Um the uh coordination that we're going to do during construction will be um uh mailers and door hangers and reaching out and um uh establishing uh good rapport with the the abutters as we need to access the properties or the easements to do the work. Uh and that will be by field staff that'll be assigned to the project uh on a full-time basis. Um the typical equipment that is used this kind of work um are generally uh box trucks you know roughly 15 to 17 foot long somewhere in that range and uh pickup trucks and other similar trucks to bring in the material and bring it out. There may be a smaller um either skid steers or bobcat type to help pull bypass pipe or set bypass pumps as needed to bypass a sewer while we do the work. Um so there

is no tracked or shouldn't be any tracked heavy equipment excavators loaders that kind of stuff. This is all generally stuff that you'll see working in the streets. Um on the right side of the slide we'll see the typical sequence of work. Uh the first step we'll do will be to notify the property owners that the work is uh imminent, usually within a couple weeks notice so they're aware that we're going to be starting work. Um the environmental controls will go in place, the silt fence, uh waddles, whatever is determined uh for those locations will be installed. Um there'll be the selected cutting as we mentioned if there's saplings or broth since they've cleared it. Um I think is a little out of order. The the next thing would would be the temporary matting. We will be using temporary timber matting for the areas delineated as wetlands. Um and we minimize that to stay just within the wetlands and minimize that impact. And we also made an effort to um not use it if it's not necessary, if we have access from other areas uh that don't require the matting or don't require um access. So the matting would go in um we would set up a temporary bypass piping system to remove the flow from the pipe that's been lined. Um sometimes that can be uh between two manholes or sometimes three depending on the lengths and the angles of the sewer. Um that would be maximized as much as possible but also up to sort of the means and methods of the contractor on how they want to perform that. So when we talked earlier about those temporary stream crossings I think we listed 24. Um, we're sort of taking a worst case scenario that we would anticipate a contractor employing for their means and

methods to do the work. Uh, there's certainly opportunities there depending on how they decide to attack the project to have less than that. But, um, I think that's the number we set on to to make it sort of a worst case scenario that we're permitting for in case we need all 24. Um, so anyway, they'll set up the bypass piping. Then they'll actually go in with the trucks and the equipment and line the pipes. Uh, some of those can take 12 hours or more from start to finish by the time they clean the pipe, install the liner, cure the liner, and then do all the trimming they need to do. And then they also do a post CCTV inspection of the pipe before they demobilize. And once they do that, the bypass piping and pumps will come down and be set up for the next install. So it'll be a continual serial uh progression throughout the work. Uh potentially two crews working into different areas. That's still under discussion how we we schedule the work. Um but we we planned it for the two years based on just a linear project of of a single crew uh to do the work. And then once all that is removed and we're done with the area, the matting would be removed and the site restoration would commence uh with the approved uh wetlands mix or whatever is approved in the in the specs for uh this site. That's all I have.

Great. Thank you, Joe. Um okay, so I'll just jump into a little bit more detail on the permits. Uh I mentioned the NDDDB uh determination from Connecticut Deep. So basically there's three species, the box turtle, spotted turtle, and ribbon snake that may be potentially be within the area. Um we do I did see uh in your memo, Peter, something about um the protective measures. It is included on uh site plan sheet C 801. We do have a note there that does specifically call out this contractor awareness program, daily inspections, all of this kind of stuff right here. Um, a note 22, but just just know it is covered, but we are talking internally maybe the need if there's the need for us to put a specific note on each of the specific sheet plans. Um it is only on a few a select I think seven sheet plans 604 601 through 604 and 607 through 609. These this is over near um the Wintenberry golf course and um I think this is close to the Blue Hills Reservoir but I'm not sure. Um so as needed we might might put a note on those specific plan sheets as well but basically it involves exclusionary practices such as putting up a silt fence. It is seasonal. I think it's April 1st to October uh 1st for these species. Uh where exclusionary practices daily walks by the contractor to you know do a sweep a look for these species if they're there pick them up move them not not out of the area but out of the actual work area report to deep and so on. So that's the um general idea with the NDB protected measures that are included. um Army Corps general permit which we hope it's been

submitted. We're hoping we'll get that letter um of concurrence from the core fairly soon. We did all the required preliminary consultations. Uh and of course the project has to meet all the general conditions with in that permit which if you're familiar with are fairly extensive. Um the floodplane permit I mentioned hopefully that is also in progress and we'll go back to Rob TRA and um uh you know close the loop on that one. But we did write a flood contingency plan, excuse me, for the project for the contractor to follow because as we know the large there's a large segments of work all occur within the flood plane and crossing of these water courses etc. Uh and we would submit a verification letter that everything's been restored and we haven't put any new new fill in the flood plane at the end of the project. Um, I also mentioned and if we have any questions, I know Dylan did the large Dylan from Brown and Cobbell the large lion's share of work of coordination with Connecticut Deep um, regarding the work on the deep stateowned dam uh, properties. Um, and so I'm just going to walk through the meat of the wetlands permit application items. And just to reiterate what Joe had kind of just said there a minute ago is what we did show on the our approach for the application and what we showed on the site plans. We did show matting all anywhere in within the easement lines where it the work would be in wetlands. Um, we also showed sort of a worst case scenario of these temporary uh 20 approximately 24 temporary wetland crossings. As Joe was kind of saying, you know, we can't really dictate means and methods to the contractor. We're hoping to encompass all of that. We're hoping to not need all of that. And so hopefully if the contractor can access from one

end and the other and maybe not have to go the full length. That's that's the idea. But that's kind of um how we approached what we did show on the plans. So we have the temporary wetland access fills. Um well timber mats will be used where needed where for the access points in wetlands um where we need it. And then these wetland access fills or locations basically where there were steep grades and equipments could just couldn't make make it. So these there's three areas on three plan sheets and they'll all be protected with uh geoexile fabric and then some stone so we can you know take everything out. Whatever was put in can be taken out and then restored back to previous condition. So, and there's details in on C 802 and the site plans. Um, and also following the Army Corps general conditions. Um, and I just pulled out I'm kind of kind of breezed through these. We can always come back if there's specific questions, but I just um threw a sheet up for each of the areas. This was sheet 601 uh near the Wilton Whittenberry Golf Course. Um, that's Waltz Hill Road here, I think, is a culde-sac. And so the idea is they come in here and I think this was the steep grade. And anyone from my team feel free to jump correct if I've got any of this wrong. But each of these three impact areas, this one is about 900 square feet. It's just an area where we think we're going to need to um adjust the grades for the equipment for the trucks and whatnot to get in there. Uh and this is the one at Gillette Ridge Golf Course sheet 612. Similar situation. um fairly small footprint of temporary access um fill just to get get the grades right so we can get the equipment in. And then the

same on 613B um near Wash I think this is Washbrook. Um and those were the temporary access fills. We as we mentioned the temporary stream crossings. We had a lengthy well a really good conversation with the Army Corps of Engineers during our pre-application and discussed the uh proposed configuration of the temporary crossings either using timber map bridges or this um I guess these are sort of folding bridges you can bring in plop them out they fold out sounds lovely. Um so basically a a type of crossing that keeps the impact above the resource so we're not having any impact within the actual um stream or water course. That's that's the idea here which also reduced our our impacts um for within the wetlands and water courses. So, I only have a couple of pictures and I think Joe has on the side maybe some other pictures if we if we have any specific crossing location questions or or um uh things to discuss about that. But here's here's one of them on sheet 606. Um I'm trying to remember where this one is, but um this is one of the smaller, you know, streams. And this is this picture lines up to um uh this location here in sheet 606. And then we have 607 which is near the lintberry reservoir. I think there's another just an example of one of the smaller streams with a temporary crossing. Um as mentioned you know a lot of work is in the flood plane. We're applying for a flood plane permit from the town of Bloomfield. We confirmed with

Connecticut Deep we are not required to get a flood management certification from them. Um but they recommended we write a flood contingency plan which we did and we included with our application for the wetlands permit. It was also included with the flood plane permit application. And that's basically going to require the contractor to, you know, continuously monitor the weather um and maintain their communications. And if there's a big storm coming, they need to either secure uh anchor, restrain, secure equipment and or get it out. And that's that's going to be up to them. Uh ENS control. Uh I know Joe talked a little bit about some of this. Um, basically we have silt fence. Uh, I know there were a couple of comments in your memo, Peter, but we have silt fence shown um, not specifically shown on the plan view. We have notes on the temporary uh, access fill location sheets that silt fence will be used at those specific locations. As I mentioned, we were uh discussing internally about maybe adding a note to those other specific plan sheets specific to the NDDDB areas um to to mention what what uh is required seasonally or whatever um to meet those those requirements. Um and the rest of the areas will be matted uh with the timber mat. Um, we have kind of have provisions for anti-tracking as needed and we're happy to have a discussion about that towards the end. uh we do not specifically show locations of anti-tracking pads at entrance points at the moment and we can get into that a little bit more but our initial thoughts on that were uh sometimes that can be more disruptive than helpful and based on the short-term duration nature of some of the um the the segmented work.

Um, so we we're, you know, open to discussing that, but each plan sheet in general is going to take what we a guesstimate of anywhere from 3 to six weeks uh based on, you know, the specifics of of each plan sheet. Some are a little shorter, some are longer, etc. Um but basically again protect uh what we need to get in get out and then restore with all um native 21 species. Uh and this I think it's missing an an or are proved equal um on this list but we did have um specified seed mix on there as well. And uh I think that's I think that's general ENS plan. So I know we talked about we were not really considering alternatives although we did do significant leg work to reduce the impacts based on our discussions with the Army Corps of Engineers and in terms of the uh the stream crossings and the use of the timber mats is also another item that really significantly reduced any impacts. Um sewers can't be relocate relocated. So uh we're we're kind of stuck. We we really want to protect, restore, rehabilitate this critical wastewater infrastructure so that it is properly functioning and it will prevent any future uh unplanned pipe releases which could result in a much larger mess. Um all the impacts uh will be temporary, no permanent uh direct impacts and we have we feel we have appropriate ENS and other BMP measures in place to mitigate um uh the the temporary impacts including the flood contingency plan. And also just a note, we are in receipt of your memo,

Peter, and uh so we're happy to discuss questions tonight. Um there's a lot to go through there. So I'm not sure if we'll get through everything tonight or if we need to have a more formal, you know, letter response uh in the coming days, but we can see where that where we go with that tonight. So um I think uh Clarence gave a good overview of the schedule earlier couple years hopefully starting this summer, fall, and and taking a couple years from there. And I think that's the end unless any my body on my team has anything else to add and otherwise we'll send it back to the commission.

Thank you. Anything else from your team? Okay. Uh Peter, you have a staff report. Mr. Chair, can I jump in real quick? Sure. Um I believe I have to recuse myself. Um I didn't realize until they were presenting that they were using the 2015 flagging. Um, I did most of those delineations, so I'm gonna step back. Okay. Does that leave us with a quorum? One, two. We should still have six, I believe. Have six. Six. Yep.

All right. Thank you, David. Now we got Adam, two, three. Okay, so we have six. Okay, we're good. All right. Anything? Uh, okay. So, Peter, you have a staff report?

Yes, I do. Uh, staff reports uh in your agenda package dated February 6th. Um, I want to start by saying that uh I received last week um the uh mailing uh certificates for the buyers letters and uh today I received the uh signed posting affidavit. Um, I also uh on on behalf of the commission sent a uh notice uh of this public hearing to the uh town clerk in the town of West Hartford. Um part of the project is within 500 ft. So uh this is a this is a big project and it encompasses, you know, a lot of areas in town. Um, most of the uh uh most of the areas are uh as the MDC likes to say over overland rather than in the roads. In fact, I don't think they're they're uh lining any pipes uh that are in roads. So, the um uh you know, the locations are are all over town. Um, Julie, do you have a uh an overall view where we can see the sheet locations? It was in the package.

Yes. In the plan set. Yeah. Um, yeah. Oh, this one. Is it on the other one? Here we go. That one. Can you see that? Yep. Can I ask you to zoom into the to the bigger squares? Yeah. Do you want any particular one? Yeah, that that No, that's that's fine right there. That's good.

So, uh the smaller rectangles are the sheets and uh the uh you know the the um uh what am I trying to say here? The scope of the project is is all over the place. So up in the upper leftand corner here is a part that goes through the or goes around the town golf course. I don't believe there are any areas uh involved that are close to the playing surfaces. Um, but this extends uh through the uh open space between Watams and Terry Plains around the golf course and over to the uh entrance to the Tungstus reservoir. For the most part, these are uh um smaller streams, but they are in in the flood plane and in the wetlands. Um, if you look at the uh lower part of the of the plan that we have here, you can see there's uh some sections uh running parallel to Tungstus Avenue uh at the intersection with Brown Street. Um that's uh 605, 606, and 607 run through the uh Wintonberry Reservoir. Uh and 608 and 609 run through the Blue Hills Reservoir. Um and uh the two blue water courses that are shown there uh at 607 and 609 uh are the outfalls from those reservoir uh you know from the flood control reservoirs. They come together at Wittenbury Avenue or just south of Wittenberry Avenue and that becomes Beaman Brook. That's the headarters of Beamanbrook right there. And then uh

where we have uh further south we have 611 and 614 that run right along the brook. Um 610 is uh also uh along the headarters of uh Phillybrook and the and near the railroad tracks in the center of town. Um, when you look at uh the uh I think I guess it's 615, 612, 613 A and B, those are all around and through the Gillette Bridge uh golf course, the Gillette Green um uh condos uh that are around the golf course. And then there's 617 is is along uh Hall Boulevard. Um and those are all on on Tumble Down Brook. Uh 616 is one that I want to look at in uh in more detail. And it it's along Washbrook and the uh um you know where uh Tumble Down Brook comes in. And so, um, that's just, uh, east of Blue Hill, uh, Bloomfield Avenue. Uh, and that one is that one is, I think, the the most, uh, interesting of the bunch and will require the biggest water course crossings. I think the plans indicate at one point that uh, they need to do a crossing where the brook itself is 30 feet wide. So, that's a pretty good size crossing. Julie, can I ask you to uh

sheet 616, please? Yes. Yeah. Sorry. Second.

Oh, there we go. That's it. Yeah.

Yeah. And then zoom in on on There you go. So, uh, for those, uh, who are, uh, uh, familiar with this area, uh, Bloomfield Avenue runs kind of parallel to Washbrook here. Um, and, um, some of the, uh, uh, offices and and, uh, medical buildings uh, that are at 701 and 7-Eleven Cottage Grove Road are to the north of this um, of this particular section. Um, and there's a an interesting um house on an island uh in the water course here. That's the site of an old an old mill. Uh, it is uh just above the call out for temporary stream crossing for bypass only on the right hand side.

Yep. Yeah. So just north of that is a house that exists on an island where the the brook goes all the way around all four sides. Oh, right here maybe. Yep. Right there. Interesting. Yes, it is. It's uh it's an old site of an old uh water powered mill.

Uh I believe it was the Gillette uh grist mill location. And uh it's uh you know it there's um uh sanitary sewers as you can see that run kind of right in the brook if you will although the manholes are are outside of it. And it's that just to the left of there and also uh further over where there's another call out for the same thing. Temporary stream crossing for bypass only. um that are you know fairly wide sections of the brook. And I understand that the stream crossing in this case would be only for the bypass pipe but not for the other equipment. So the bypass pipe is a temporary thing that's installed while the section between the manholes is uh is uh cleaned and and lined. Um, but there are some there are some fairly good size uh crossings here even for the just for the bypass pipe. Um, they're not going to be able to lay that in the brook. Uh, so, you know, there's uh some of the pictures that we saw and and I'm glad you showed those additional details because I've seen the one with the stacked uh timber mats uh for a water course crossing before. Um, and that's the kind of thing that's going to have to be done, I think, for for the smaller water courses, but these bigger ones may need more. And I'm not sure. I think the access to this one is from 711 Cottage Grove Road. Uh, but it's again, all of the all of the uh white shaded area of Bloomfield wetlands. The green shaded

areas are are flagged in the field wetlands and every sheet I think has a line with I don't know if it's two or three dots that is the flood plane elevation 100geear flood plane line. Mhm.

So there's there's lots of work in sensitive areas and the timing is definitely going to be critical to you know to keep the uh the uh the impacts uh minimized. Um I see in some cases like like on this sheet um inside the easement it's cross-hatched indicating timber mats. Um, but there's other spots outside uh in the upper leftand corner where there are no there are no mats indicated. There will there will definitely need to be some kind of a crossing right there in the upper leftand corner probably just for the just for the uh bypass pipe. Um, but you know, I think there's there will be more than 24 water course crossings and I think there will likely be more than one access point for each of these sections or each of these sheets. So it's important to I think have enough flexibility uh during construction to say we need another water course crossing here or we need more mats here where they're not shown on these plans. Um certainly any any areas within the flood plane I think should have mats and that's going to be you know most of the most of the project. Um there's also um you know a uh um I forget how many it is 47 some thousand feet of pipe to to line. That's that's a lot of pipe. That's I forget if it's seven or eight miles worth of pipe. Um, so I think it's it's real important to understand where access points are going

to be and and how different times of the year may be um you know may affect the may affect the job. Certainly um you know working uh in these areas uh a little bit of rain may not bring the water course out of its banks but particularly in this one which is uh Washbrook um that drains twothirds of the town of Bloomfield if there's significant rain uh or even uh moderate rain these water courses will come out of their banks. So the the uh temporary measures have to be flexible enough to to deal with them to deal with those kind of conditions. Um I believe I had um some recommendations if the commission wants to consider um approving the plan. um most of which are uh listed on page two and three of the of the report. Um only for consideration if the commission wants to um to uh close a public hearing and consider uh taking a mo taking a vote on on this plan um or on this application. Um, and I know that uh we had we had the MDC put up um signs uh where these projects or most of these sections uh cross the roads. So you folks may have seen them all over town and the uh um I've gotten quite a few calls about this. I forget how many letters were sent out, but I'm getting a lot of calls. People are interested in this. Most people want to know if it's going to be in their street or in their

backyard. And for the most part, um, it's going to be in the backyard. Um, or, you know, in the easements that are that are outside of some, you know, outside of developed property or outside of a, you know, a residential development. Certainly, the locations of these easements, you know, is where they have to go. So there really aren't any um prudent and feasible alternatives to the temporary uh impacts. I think the um the access uh issue is a concern and I think that there might very well be the need for like I said before for more uh water course crossings andor more access points. So, um, coordination with the, uh, you know, with the contractor as the project is going on is going to be critical here. Um, and I know I know that there's a lot of people here, um, hanging around um, through the meeting that want to ask questions. Um, so I really don't have much more than that, Mr. Chairman. uh keeping in mind the scope of the project there's a and where it is there's a lot that could go wrong um you know one of the one of the questions that I have uh for Julie is whether uh or for the team I should should say is whether um uh silk fence or straw waddles are proposed where there are no mats and maybe there might be some uh uh conditions or some locations where the if the mats are are are not sufficient to keep the soil disturbance down to a

minimum that there may have to be additional silt fence or waddles put up in those, you know, in some of those areas. So, I think that has to be left as an open option as well. Okay, Mr. Chairman, that's all for me for now. Okay. Thank you, Peter. Uh questions from the public. Uh Jason, uh you have a question? No, actually um this is Jason Wbury, system manager engineering for the MDC. I'm sorry I couldn't join earlier. Oh, okay. Um I was off today. I drove back from Richmond, Virginia today. I got in kind of late. Um but I I did want to I don't know why my um Sorry, my screen is doing something.

Yeah. Well, I guess promoting a panelist. Okay. Okay, Jason, you should be Well, have to rejoin. Yeah. Okay. Am I here? Yeah, I can hear you.

Okay. Thank you. I'm sorry. I wasn't expecting that. Um, again, Jason Waterberry, MDC, assistant manager of engineering. I I I wanted to thank the commission for hearing the application. Um, this is a pretty important project for us. This is actually tied to um I know uh Clarence earlier mentioned that the project is at deep uh awaiting approval of plans and specs um as we're getting receiving deep funding on this and that's because the project's tied to both our consent order and consent decree. Um one thing I did want to point out is uh you know the project has about 9 miles of lining uh in it. Um obviously that's 9 milesi of sewer that we we won't or anything happens to it that would require any kind of emergency excavation repairs. Um but along those lines, Bloomfield will be the first town um that will have uh nearly the entirety of its cross-country sewers lined. Um uh while 9 miles seems like a lot, uh we have approximately 100 miles of cross-country sewer uh across our eight member towns. So there is a fair amount of this work that we still have to do outside of Bloomfield, but I wanted to point out that Bloomfield with this project will be the first one that has all of its crosscountry sewers lined and that's obviously a benefit to its residents um and you know all the district as a whole. I know there was mentioned that Peter me one Peter mentioned m uh that he's received a lot of phone calls already. Um we will be doing an extensive outreach uh when we do this project. Obviously not yet because we haven't even received deep approval or commission approval and gone to construction. Um but the outreach will be similar to what we did for our uh easement clearing which uh went ahead of this where you know we would have whether it be uh town council meetings if need be. if not um public meetings followed by notices to butterers and property owners and whatnot in advance of the work and then probably follow followed up with um door knockers and other outreach. So, uh outreach is something we take a lot take very

seriously. So, if people do have questions, they can certainly reach out to us too as well. So, that's uh all I wanted to add. Okay. Thank you. Any questions from the public? Uh, seeing none, any questions from the commission? Uh, Kevin Wilcox.

Yeah, I just have a couple questions. Uh, I'll I'll ask my questions and then they can answer them later on. That way they don't have to do it piece by piece and then I also have a question for uh you and for Peter. So, first off, the CIP liner, is it a styrene or non-styrenebased product? Um, and not that I want to be a fatalist, I'm just curious, how often or what percent chance is there of an improper curing process? And then three, if the curing process spectacularly fails, you then trench the area. So those are my three main questions. But then the question for you and for Peter is this. If if there is a failure in the lining process, do they have to come back and get a permit from us in order to do the trench?

All right, that's all I had. Yeah, I would answer the last question to say yes. Okay. If they have to excavate to, you know, to remove a pipe and and liner, then they're going to have to come back for another permit or revised permit because this permit does not include any any excavation uh for for the lining project. And they'll have to answer your other questions, I guess.

Yeah. I can I I can say we've lined um approximately 100 miles of sewer since uh 2019 and we haven't had a mainline sewer liner failure. Um obviously I can't say it's impossible. Nothing is impossible but we do um have a pretty extensive uh QAQC process through our contract documents and this would be following that same process. Uh it is a styrene impregnated resin that is typically used. We do allow for epoxy resins. Both are allowed under our under our specs. Um, typically it's a water or steam cure. Uh, that's kind of dealer's choice up to the contractor because both are acceptable. Um, and then as far as the u permitting piece, if it did fail, um, you know, in the rare instance that that would happen, we would come back to Peter and the commission as an emergency authorization to go repair it. But um I like I said, we we it's very I I can't guarantee it won't happen, but I can say it's very improbable.

Yeah, I hope that answers your questions. Jason, I want to also add that some of the the repairs of liners is done within the without excavations. So that's true. Yes, there are trenchless methods. Yes. Yes. Okay.

Thank you. I I would say that any emergency uh trunction had to be done. If Peter felt he could do it with an Rutland's agent permit, you know, he would do it. So, um I got a question. Could you explain the curing pro process? I know you've you've told this before, but I it slips my mind. What do you actually do? You put in the plastic liner and then you expand it with steam. So it aderes to the pipe. Joe, do you want to do this one or do you want me to?

No, I can do it. Yeah, it it does depend whether it's steam cured or or water cured, but generally you pull the liner through the pipe from manhole to manhole and you expand it with the air and then uh it is a steam cure for a duration of time until it uh sets and cures and then uh you trim off the excess at each uh access point of the manholes. And then you would also have to cut out if there were any lateral connections to homes, which we have a minimal amount on this project. Uh I think less than a dozen. So, uh but that's a real simplified version of what it is, but that's generally the process that we

Thank you. Uh Glenn, you got a question? Yeah. Yeah. Um just uh quickly is is any do you have any information if any of these pipes are currently leaking?

Um we have some data that represents like sections of the system but not specific to pipe segments. Um there's also a lot of pipe segments that I mean I there's some percentage and Joe can probably fill in the blanks of this where we don't have complete inspection data already because we don't have good access to them. So while there may be somes that are some that would be leaking, we don't I don't think we really know specifics on individual pipe segments. So there's no leak detection in inside.

No, not per pipe segment. No. When we when we do that, it's usually a flow meter that represents um thousands of feet of of sewers. And to pinpoint it to one section, we don't really have that information. And just add to that, Jason is just that, you know, generally what we're doing is getting rid of the pipe joints. So these these pipes are put together by joints um you know, in order to create a whole segment. And when we line it, they're the joints are going to be gone. Um and you know, prevents a lot of the you know, the leakage that could come from joints.

You don't you don't take them out. You just basically line it so that it doesn't matter if it leaks. Is that correct? Yeah. You're essentially creating a new pipe inside the old pipe. Yeah. Yes. To Clarence point, it'll be one single continuous monolithic pipe from manhole to manhole as opposed to a joint every 13 feet or 18 feet depending on the the material. Yeah. Okay. Uh Stephen You're muted.

All right. I lowered my hand. I didn't unmute. Thanks. Um, similar question. So, it sounds like you can't identify the what you I think you called inflows. Um, and specific locations. Um, but is there like a percentage of flow or something that that you're expecting that will be fixed by this? And I'm asking with curiosity because a lot of the flow into the park branch and I know the water quality of that water course is terrible. So typically when we line the mainline sewer and the manholes, we get uh 10 to 30% out of infiltration and inflow. Um the other thing is if you did actually line one segment and not another, you would move a lot of times what happens, you just move that leaky pipe down to the next one. So just if we did actually look and see one pipe segment was was leaking and the next segment wasn't. Um and then we did line that one one pipe segment that was leaking. If we went back and checked the one that was not leaking previously now would be leaking. We have seen that before. So now we take more of a continuous approach and line everything. Um but in in we've done studies where um we've done metering before and after and it's typically somewhere in the range of 10 to 30%. A lot of those studies were in uh public rightaways and not in wetland areas. So I would expect that since this isn't a wetland area that it's going to be on the higher end of that spectrum.

And possibly the opposite. I don't even know if you could estimate this, but if there's inflows, could there be outflows?

Um, I wouldn't say there'd be outflows, but um, what we could see is if there was a blockage, it would flow out of a manhole. Um, that's typically what you're going to see for an outflow. And again, lining in is going to prevent that from happening by removing the possibility of roots and debris and building up. So we don't there's not it's it's more of a concern of the pipe failing in the future. This lining will give it an extra 50 years. Not a big concern about you know sewage leaking at the moment.

Correct. And and if there was I mean I I I I would assume that that probably would have shown up in some MS4 testing or whatnot if you if you saw Okay. Uh all of Bloomfield, my understanding, is completely separated for sewer and combined uh and runoff. That is correct. It is a separated system. Um it doesn't always act like a separated system, but it is a separated system and going at least into I don't know if it continues on to Harvard, but that it's not I guess in the scope of this conversation. But thank you. You're welcome. Um,

yeah. Have you done other projects like this in town? Smaller scale you did? Yes, we did one, Joe. What was that like three years ago?

Yeah, it actually feels like it was, you know, 10 years ago now, but it's Yeah, that one much smaller scale. Um, and I guess further to to reiterate the point, Peter, too, we we didn't have any issues on that one either. Um, and obviously the NDC's done a lot more. So, uh, I would just back up Jason's point there. Uh, the failures are rare and when they do occur, you know, there is the alternatives for trenchless. So, it's not an automatic excavation that we have to do. And unfortunately, sort of a case by case basis depending on the pipe size, location, and access. So, you know, even if we have a failure, I think there's a good chance that would be more than likely be able to do uh repaired by trenchless. All right. Any other questions from the public? Give you guys another chance. Nobody there. Any other questions from the commission? Kevin,

just one quick question. So, the inside diameter of the pipe that you're lining is reduced by how much when you do the lining? So, in other words, how thick is the liner? The liner thickness varies, but um one thing that we found is that um when we do the liner, it because it's so much smoother than the actual pipe and doesn't have the joints, it actually increases or maintains capacity. Yeah. Yeah. All right. I'm assuming that's where you were going with that question. Yeah. So, you actually have a reduction in friction. Yes, that's correct. Even though it's a smaller diameter. Correct.

Okay. Thank you. Anything else to add? Um, Peter, any last comments from you? Where is he? I'm here. Sorry, I'm just keeping my stuff off. Um, I did have another question. Uh, what some of the callouts uh or some of the specifications I should say call for a monolithic um repair of the manholes. Is that a similar type of lining or are we talking about um you know concrete or mortar to uh to seal up or to pge the the manholes?

Joe, um I'll defer to you. It's a on that one. Yeah, it it's in this project. It's going to be a similar product. Um, I don't have the specifics. I have to get back to you on the specifics of it. But it's a similar process except it's uh not like pipe. You're not you're not inserting a liner and um inflating it and curing it. It's either going to be a trled on, rolled on, sprayed on uh epoxy type liner, but I I'd have to get into specifics that there's different types and I'm not sure what we have speced there right now. I'd have to go back and look.

Okay. So, it wouldn't be um um getting a concrete truck in there to or an excavator to put more risers on or anything like that. You're talking about they they use the same truck, same equipment. Uh sometimes they'll have a different version of instead of a box truck, you might have a flatbed um that'll come in with the the tools. Um, in some instances they might have to fix, you know, the framing covers and the bricks that bring that up. But again, there's no excavation involved in that. That'll just be hand work, uh, labor, uh, work. So, um, and I'll I'll ask Dylan, too, if I got that. He's got more experience than I do.

Yeah, most of the manholes actually are above grade out there, the framing grades. Most of the evenings I've walked at least. But to Joe's point, um we use epoxy or a cement based spray. Um usually it's a truck and a trailer, even pickup truck and trailer mounted or a box truck. So very minimal impact and same similar equipment that they use for lining as well. Um but it's usually anywhere from about 3/4 thick of a spray. Um they put along the manhole walls all the way from invert up to the base of the rim essentially.

Okay. I have I have a follow-up question. Um uh many of these manholes and sections were built in the 60s uh 50s60s and 70s of last last century. So they're they're fairly old and I know that MDC uh old MDC specifications included a weephole in the manholes. Uh it was usually just above where the pipe comes into the manhole to allow any um groundwater uh to get into the manhole. I don't know if the MDC still does that, but would that be a consideration for the for the relining of the manholes?

So, uh Peter, we do not still do that. that was done usually uh to help dewater the trench during excavation. Um and a lot of times they were they um they're also known as puddle caps. They were capped during construction. Um although we've found them to, you know, decades later to be uncapped. Um but if we do find them on any project, whether it be a lining project like this or or just a normal construction project, we do permanently cap them because we do not want that ground water getting in there. And it was only its only purpose originally was to help dewater the trench from when the manhole went in.

Okay, that makes that makes sense. And I do know that a lot of the infiltration that gets into these pipes can come in through the manholes, not just Yes. And that's also why when we line the pipes, we do a end seal. It's a hydrophilic seal um at the junction between the pipe and the manhole underneath the liner. So that way if any ground water does actually get behind the liner, um it swells up and actually can't get past that seal to go down the pipe. Okay, that's all for me again, Mr. Chairman. All right. Thank you. Any other questions?

Can I respond? If there's no other questions, I'd like to just make a comment. Uh, well, we'll do comments now, I guess. One second, though. Uh, comments from the public. Any comments from the public? All right. Comments from the commission or applicant. Go ahead, Julie. Go ahead.

Thank you, Alan. Um, I just wanted to make a point. I know Peter uh had uh spoken on sheet 616. I don't know if you could still me see my screen here. um about no matting and this area appears in in the wetlands and our team were discussing and any from on from my team please jump in if needed but that the the blue shading is the field delineated wetlands um and the other white hatching was just the GIS wetlands and we thought that we were putting the matting in the field delineated wetland areas um but we you know were open to accommodating what's what's required. So, I just wanted to clarify that. Great. Thank you.

Thank you. All right. Any other any comments from the commission? Okay. Um, is there a motion to close the public hearing? Move. I'll take that motion made by Who was that? Kevin. Doesn't matter. It can it can be Paul and I'll second it. That's fine. Made by Kevin, seconded by Paul. All sounds good. Kevin, you can make the motion. Yes. I Who's going to make the motion?

I did. You want to state it? Not necessarily. It was just closing the just closing the public hearing. Okay. All right. We still need to vote on it. All right. Any other comments on it? All in favor of closing the public hearing say I. I. I. I. Opposed? Abstain. It's unanimous. All right. Now, what's your pleasure on uh voting? I think we should. All right. Somebody want to make a motion?

Mr. Shipman, you feeling good? I was kind of hoping you would do it, but uh sure. I'll take another swing. What the heck?

Let's see here. Let me go back to the part of the picture that was involved. So, uh I move that we uh uh approve the wetland permit application of the Metropolitan District Commission for easement sewer lining and rehabilitation phase 2 in various locations referencing wetlands file 75-2025-23 and that it uh includ include the recommendations uh suggested by the wetlands agent. Okay. Um one thing I forgot. Does the applicant um agree with the uh conditions of approval? Is there a problem there? Jason.

Um, I thought I thought we had to talk to Peter about a couple of them, wasn't there? I apologize again. I wasn't in our meeting today. So, you guys, I was I wasn't even sure you were coming. Sorry, I didn't introduce you, Jason. I didn't know here tonight. Yeah, I wasn't sure how long the drive back from Richmond, Virginia was going to take. I thought you were out of town. Um, so we discussed earlier, um, and I'll I'll uh defer to Clarence and Josh as well. Um, we were just curious on a couple of clarifications, but I don't think there were any specific deal breakers per se, but I will defer to Clarence and Josh to speak on that on the specific conditions. I think you guys both have Peter's memo there.

Yeah, I think the issue was the wet weather limitation. It wasn't that specific. Um, he said no activity, I believe, during wet weather. Yeah, restricting construction during rain or snow events and we just wanted to if it's light sprinkling, we don't want to stop work. But yes, um that was one of the issues.

That was one of the questions. Correct. Yep. So, I don't know if um Peter, you can uh maybe describe what you were envisioning for that. Well, it's condition number 10 and it says all construction activity shall follow best management practices BMPPS to limit the amount of ground disturbance, restrict construction during rain or snow events to prevent soil erosion and sedimentation and to ensure prompt stabilization of the disturbed areas and protection of of vegetation and trees. So it was the vagueness of the rain or snow events. Was that the question?

Yes. Um we have uh in the past restricted uh um uh work in wetlands uh for two or three days after a um a half an inch storm or more. um that could be uh you know that could be uh um included in here or um something similar. Uh Peter, Jason, would we be expected to remove the masks because that would probably do more disturbance than leaving them there.

Well, yeah. See, that's a that's a good question actually. And maybe we should have talked about that a little bit, but right now I think we're talking about uh you know when it would be appropriate not to attempt it. And it would certainly be during rain or snow events and we could put in there of a half an inch or more um on the uh regarding the mats. If there's going to be a significant rain event where we expect flooding in the flood planes, I think the mats are going to have to come out or they're going to float downstream. I guess we would need the commission's guidance as to, you know, um what the flooding definition would be. Um, you know, obviously, you know, if if we're if our work zones are going to be underwater, then yes, we would probably agree with you. Um, the only other thing is, you know, if we're there are times when you have pop thunderstorms or whatnot in the summer and they just kind of happen and and we may not, you know, expect that to be the case. I mean, um, it's a lot of times the weather people themselves don't know that's going to happen. And unfortunately once the lining process starts, you don't stop it. It's you're kind of pock committed. You're going. So I I agree that it's probably in the best interest that if it's you if we know there's a significant rain event coming, um then yes. Um but I think, you know, there's there's probably cases where we can't guarantee that we won't be there when it's raining, like I said, like a pop thunderstorm or something. And and adding to that, one of the biggest consideration for us is that we want to handle the flow in the sewer. So if there's an excessive amount of uh

inflow, um we would limit our, you know, ability to try to handle that with pumps and and try to avoid um trying to do, you know, carry that much rain water in and in in our bypass systems. Um but also coupled with that, we do take a look before we go to any of our sites. We do take a look we we we have our contractors review um you know future next steps um and then make a determination as to whether we have clear weather or a threat of not so clear weather and make a decision. So it's a constant battle for us to you know to continue to um evaluate you know forecast or expect expecting expectation of heavy rains um and then we would probably try to make the site safe and continuously safe. It sounds like it sounds like you really need to have a line of communication with Peter during weather

and then he basically has a final say. But yeah, we we will be limit the contractor will be limited by his bypass pumping capabilities. So, we're going to hit, you know, rain events that will automatically keep them from doing the work based on the capability of the bypass system because we're basing that on uh flow data that's not necessarily for, you know, a summer thunderstorm or a large rain event. So, um that's in the contract that way now. Yeah. You know, and if it's, you know, a one-hour storm, before you even know it's there, it's gone. Yeah. you know,

so how do we want to modify condition 10? Um, I agree. There might be it might be a benefit to have keep it flexible and not necessarily limit it to a particular storm event uh like Jason was saying, but some flexibility of, you know, coordination with with the town. Yeah. for discussion with my team. It sounds like this project has a lot of moving parts

and that in the event of a a a major rainstorm, you don't know where you're going to be. You know, are the pumps going to be out or manholes going to be uncapped or you your trenches, you know, to put in the um liner going to be open where the mats are. Those are all moving parts. And I think there's got to be a way where you communicate with Peter all the way. And you know, you're not going to open up all these at one time. You're going to do them one by one. I would assume

that's that's the intent as I understand. But Jason or Joe, feel free to jump in. But yeah, segment by segment unless they get two crews and maybe they're doing two segments. So if you notify Peter of where you're working and what phase you are in those linings. So uh Mr. Commissioner. Yes, Mr. Commissioner. Uh Mr. Chair, excuse me.

Now we're we're overlooking recommended condition of approval number three. The permittee shall seed schedule a pre-construction meeting with the wetlands agent and the site work contractor prior to the start of any construction activities and at that point they should be talking about weather and everything else. So that sort of goes handinhand with number 10. So that they will should be talking to each other. I agree.

No no no offense but I think that we've been going in circles and we've already had the answer in front of us. I I would make a suggestion that we modify condition 10 to say to restrict construction during forecasted rain or snow events uh of 1/2 an inch or more. So, in 5 days or 2 days, if the weather forecast says we're going to get a half an inch of rain or or 3 in of snow or whatever, whatever, you know, we get, that would, I would assume, preclude them from starting a new section and certainly would preclude them from having um you know uh um uh you know, more more uh areas is exposed than than they need to, you know. So, you know, maybe that's a maybe that's a compromise for number 10.

Did that work for you, Jason?

Sorry, I was muted. Um, yeah, and I agree with Kevin. I think when we, you know, when we set up to to start a given area, there may be some areas where we're uphill and out of the wetlands and for some majority of the work and it's probably not as big of a deal. Um, and again, I I mean, we'll we will watch the weather. I mean, you can watch probably channel 3 and get one forecast and channel 30 and get another, but we'll do the best we can to to um you know, look for events like that are a half inch of rain or more. Um, and as long as it's in our contract documents, that's fine. It's it be it only becomes an issue for us really um if this were something that changes during construction because then obviously the contractor has a claim possibility against us. I I will say um maybe it's something that we allow us to work with Peter for a little more flexibility because if we do have uh areas that become problematic, it just extends our contract time and it means we're there longer. So

I would agree with Kevin and Jason that under item three I think it is kind of covered and then if we don't if we ch leave the conditions as they are without adding that half inch spec specific number it does give us a little more flexibility as long as we're in touch during the project. Okay. Mr. Chair, could I ask a clarifying question on this question? Sure. Um, we've done some of this work in town already. The MDC has done some of this. Uh, the project phase one was, uh, ended 2023. Is that what I recall?

That's correct. Um, did we encounter similar concerns and did you work with Peter on the problem at that point? I mean, what was our what was our process then? I don't believe we had this um um requirement in that one. Um, but I do know that we did work with Peter at that point in time. Sorry, Julie. Sorry, Jason. It it was there. It was the same exact conditions. It was okay. pretty much word for word. So, it was not an issue. Yep. And it wasn't Yeah.

Yeah. Uh I tried to keep the con the conditions recommended conditions the same as for the last one with you know some maybe some minor modifications for this particular project. And these these conditions were acceptable last time. Yeah. So it it and it and we didn't have significant issues, Peter. That's correct. We did not have significant issues.

Okay. I mean, weather being what weather is, there's, you know, you can never say never, but uh it sounds like we have this system in place from past practice, I would say. So, yes, as written. Yeah. Does that satisfy the question, Peter? I think so. Okay. All right.

So, we'll we'll modify condition 10 to indicate restrict construction during forecasted rain or snow events of 1/2 inch or more. Okay. Does the maker of the uh motion accept that? Uh uh yeah. Yeah. I I I think um honestly I'm I'm not sure it's needed because it didn't fail before, but I'm okay with it. Okay.

Well, the the question the question is whether or not they agree with it. Yeah, that would be the next prepared to accept the conditions. Yeah, Julie, to your point, we had the same conditions before and we didn't have an issue. Um, I guess Yeah, Jason. Yep. Joe, um, I would prefer to keep the conditions the same as before and not include that half inch requirement if possible if the commission is is agreeable to that. I think the the maker of the motion is okay with that.

The maker of the motion is okay with that. Uh yes. Okay. Then I think you need a positive statement from the district that they agree to the conditions proposed as is. Is that Yeah, that's I I think my actually original question was just does that mean removing the mats? And I think we kind of talked about that. That's only only if there's a significant flooding issue, which I think we can handle. So, I I don't have any other comments on it. Uh Josh, Clarence, I think we're good. Okay. Yeah, agreed. I think that's something you got to put in your contracts that it may be necessary to remove the mats. You know, Mr. Chair, that's a very good point.

Okay. After all that, I second the motion. Okay. All right, get this rolling. All right, all in favor say I. I I oppos. It's unanimous. Thank you very much.

Yeah. One uh one more point from uh from our uh leisure services uh um department uh as a request. It's only a request that they would prefer to have the work at the town golf course happen during the fall of 26 and the spring of 27, but it's only a request. So, it's I didn't put it in a condition of approval. If that works with your contract, that would and your your project timing, that would be great. parents. I'm assuming that probably won't be an issue. I guess the the goal is just to avoid golf season.

Yeah. And and we're doing it on the other courses likewise. So, and it's for your safety, too. Yes. I especially if I'm golfing. Yeah. I mean, we could have the site meetings on the golf course. I'm okay with that. I I have no problem with that. Um I'll meet you in a nice hole. There we go. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Thank you everything. Thank you very much. Good night. Are we journed? All right, we're done with you. We're done. All right. Thank you very much. Good evening. Thank you.

All right, Peter. Number five. New applications official receive. Determine the need for public hearing. None. Oh, that says none. None. None. Wherever. Enforcement actions. None. minutes. Kevin. Yes. Hold on. Let me get my draft. Okay. Page two. Page two. Rest of the story.

Under questions from the commission. It's one, two, three. The fourth paragraph. Commissioner Wilcox, which it's interesting. I no longer have Secretary Wilcox, but you know, I'll take that to motion. Uh, Commissioner Wilcox asked about the location of the extended plantings. Mr. Jameson stated, he didn't state the, he stated that.

Right. Now I think the next one is just a clarification for me because again when it comes to nomenclature I may not fully understand what it is I'm reading. Uh the next paragraph where it says chairmanovski it's the second line. Okay where the impact to the vernopool habitat area would render the project unfeasible or would it render the project feasible? I'll let you decide that. we can move it on.

It might be infeasible rather than unfeasible. But the question I think from Mr. uh from the chairman was whether uh further reducing the impact of the vernal pool habitat would render the project infeasible. Um okay. I think infeasible would be better or notable. About feasible would be okay. Not feasible would be better. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Okay.

Okay. Page number six. Uh under a motion was made. There's number three. Clearing of tree shall not be started until the revised site plan is approved. Not approval. I'm sorry. Tell me where we are. Page six. Yep. Oh, under number three. Three. Number three. Page six. Number three. Clearing of trees shall not be started until the revised site plan is approved. Correct. Not approval. Yep. Okay.

And just so you know, I I do read books that are published and I do find errors in them, too. Yes. I'm sending you all my work ahead of time, Kevin. Before deadline, I'm sending everything to you. Okay. Um as to as to the point um in the uh in section three of the draft minutes uh on page one there was election of officers. And so uh prior to that election um uh Mr. Wilcox was the secretary, but after the election,

he wasn't. And he's just a regular commissioner from the just regular. Yeah. Um and so, uh Okay. Anybody else for minutes? I got a couple of small small ones, I think. Okay. On page three, uh toward the bottom, the par the paragraph that starts with Mr. Cristaldi. Um, you go down about four or five lines, it um says wetland flags 101 through dash 109. That dash doesn't need to be there. Uh, it's uh that's how they appear on the plan. Oh,

okay. So, there are a couple others there are a couple others in the next sentence. So, that's how they appear on the plan. Yes. And that was the question that we found in the field. We had, you know, you go along and typically the n the flags are numbered sequentially and we're going through and we found, you know, 16 uh, you know, 67 166 and then all of a sudden there's a 109. Um, and those flags are just dash whatever the number is. All the other flags are W1, which I assume stands for wetlands one flag, whatever the number is,

right? Okay. Did you have another? No, I'm good. Is that it? I had uh I had one going back to uh page one um on uh nine Proer Lane. The Clark's name uh is misspelled. It should have an E at the end. Whoa, Kevin. Damn. How'd you miss that, Kevin? I have no idea. and in and in the BA and in the it's in the heading and in the uh first paragraph. Okay. Yep. I should have caught that, too.

Wow. All right. So, is there a motion to approve the minutes as corrected? Move. Second, Glenn by Paul. All in favor? I posted abstain. It's unanimous. Thank you. Uh yeah, I do have one one thing under under um other business.

Other business. Um I mentioned it to you this morning on the phone, Alan. Uh there's an open notice of violation at 69 Charter Avenue. Uh that was heard last month and the uh commission wanted to hear it again in March. and the uh property owner has has requested an extension uh a one-mon extension due to the weather conditions. U supposed to be taking material out of filled wetlands and uh there's still a foot of snow on top of it. Um I think his uh his request um may be reasonable. Um but uh the commission can if they want to u take his request under adisement and still ask to hear him or to see them see him in at the March meeting.

I I think I think it's reasonable to give them another month. I mean will we have 18 inches of snow? Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Do do you want him to come back in March and give us an update or wait till April? Well, March meeting is what? One, two, three, what? Four weeks. About a month away. Yeah, it's on the 16th and the uh the April meeting looks like it's on the 20th. And we're getting more snow coming. Yeah. We're supposed to get a couple more inches this weekend, right?

Yeah. Right. Yeah. So, let's give them another month. I mean, even if it melts, it's going to be a a Yeah. Yeah. I I tried to kind of make that point to him when we were out there. He says, "Yo, I can't move I can't move the dirt because I have to move the snow first, and that's going to make a big mess." And I said, "Yeah, but at least it's frozen. You know, if the if the dirt, you know, or the materials that he put on there, uh, thaw, they're likely to make a bigger mess. But I think an still I think the extension is is reasonable." Yeah. All right. So, we need Do we need the vote on that? I don't think so.

No. If you guys are okay with the extension, he made the request. I'll let him know that uh that that's the case and and he'll come back in April. All right. We also have to discuss uh Lester. Lester. Oh, yeah. Um uh Lorenzo Jones, rather. Yeah, Lorenzo. Yeah. Um Mr. We don't have a We don't have a secretary anymore. What happened?

I don't know. Mr. Jones uh decided to um uh resign from the commission because he feels he had I think because he felt that he had some conflicts with his his business uh and being a wetland commissioner. So Kevin, you know anybody that wants it? You know, it's it's it's the easiest job you'll ever have. I just have to sign your name and sign the date that Peter tells you what the date is. Yeah. So, uh thing is just checking your email often enough to see when he he wants you in there.

Yeah. Uh so, we're going to have election of secretary on the agenda for next month. We have to have seven members there. So, gives everybody time to draw up their campaign posters. That's right. That's right. vote for me. And there's and there's they're campaign slogans. Well, we can't make Rebecca that because she's not a commission member. Right. Right. Neither am I. So, we're both Okay. So, Well, does Rebecca live in the town? Because technically, if she lives in the town, she could be a commissioner. She doesn't even live in the state.

I was gonna say that. I said I'm disqualified. I don't live in Bloomfield. All right. Oh, public comments. Any public comments from the public? No. I saw somebody was still in there. Yeah, Stacy. Does Stacy want to talk to us? Nothing. Okay. Oh, I just unmute. Stacey, was there something you wanted to ask us?

It's possible she just forgot to sign out. Possible she's she's able to unmute herself. She could be trying to get out. Is it possible she logged in by mistake? Really? What's second prize? All right. So, is there a motion to adjurnn? Uh, so move. I'll second that. No reason to hesitate on Paul.

All in favor? I I stayain is unanimous. Thank you. Boy, look at that. Five of 10. Oh. That's why I'm chairman. That's right. That's the only reason.