Planning & Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

Welcome everybody. Welcome back from a nice summer. We had a month off, so I'm kind of excited. Today is Tuesday, September 1st, 2026. It's about a little bit after 7pm. Tonight we have a planning and zoning public hearing and general meeting. and we are here in Room 206 in Town Hall. The first thing we'd like to do, if permitted, is reorder the agenda, if we may, because certain people are leaving and have to go early, and certain people other things we can wait. So what I would like to propose to do is to reorder the agenda, go into the general meeting first, and move deliberations only, which is the item that's relative to lights at the high school, effectively, to the first item. Can I get a motion for that and a second? All in favor? Fantastic. Great. So we're going to go into the general meeting first. The first item in the agenda is I just read the whole thing, Fred? Not just the continuation part?

Yeah.

Okay. Here we go. By order dated December 4th, 2025, in the matter of Paul Mahowski versus the Planning Zoning Commission of the Town of Darien and the Board of Education, docket number FST-CV22, Judge Trial Referee Charles Lee remanded the matter back to Darien Planning Zone and Commission for consideration of the Darien Sound and Noise Regulations applicable to the application and of the appropriate conditions relative to the approval of the amendments to the special permit number 188F as in Frank. The legal notice for the original application read as follows. Continuation of public hearing regarding proposed amendments to the Darien zoning regulations, COZR number 4-2022, amendment to the special permit application number 188F as in Frank, Darien Board of Education, 2 and 880 high school lane proposal to amend the darien zoning regulations to permit the lighting and public address facilities at the stadium field on the darien high school property to be utilized for non-profit educational and community purposes inclusive of but not limited to athletic activities the pros proposal to amend the upkins previous special permit to expand the hours and number of days that the lighting and public address facilities may be utilized and to expand the permissible uses of the facility from limited athletic use to include community-wide events and activities, including those of groups and organizations unaffiliated with the town or the school district, The subject property is located on the north side of High School Lane, approximately 800 feet west of its intersection with Middlesex Road, and is shown on assessment number nine as lots 80 and 81, and is located in the R2 residential zone and the municipal use MU overlay. The hearing closed on July 28, 2026. So tonight, what we're going to do is the existing proposal that we got from last time. At our last hearing, we heard from the applicant's representative. What was the lawyer's name? Hey, John. What was the lawyer's name? I'm sorry? Joe Williams. We heard from Joe Williams, the lawyer for the high school inside. I apologize. I didn't bring my hard copy of it. Do you have a hard copy of his letter? I do. Oh, I do have it, too. I do have it. I do. I'm sorry. I got it. Yeah, inside his letter. which is dated June 10th, 2026. At the end of the day, he wants to add, or the applicant wants to add proposed conditions for existing planning zoning, amendment to the resolution from last time. There was discussion back and forth about certain parts of the amendment, certain ways to interpretate the judge's ruling. I want to put that aside because my proposal would be to take the existing resolution that we did last time, create a new paragraph or subparagraph, and put that within the existing resolution that was from basically two years ago. So everything else inside the resolution is going to stay the same. We're just going to add a new section, which is basically, and that's what I want to talk about, the proposed conditions that the applicant put forth. So the applicant's proposed conditions, and I'll just read it. Go ahead, any questions?

No, no, I'm sorry.

We're good so far?

The applicant is the Board of Ed, right?

The applicant is the Board of Ed, and their representative was Joe Williams, which is their lawyer. Board of Ed lawyer, yeah. Correct. So what the applicant's letter states is the board proposes conditions listed below for the commission's consideration in revising special permit number 188 F. Frank. The conditions are intended to limit disruptions to the neighbors of the stadium lights, stadium field, while continuing to permit a reasonable use of the PA system. Some of these conditions overlap with the conditions imposed in the commission's September 22 approval. However, they're inclusive here and warranted to be relevant and limited on reasonable noise pollution. So I said it was from two years ago. It's actually, we're in 2026 now, it's 2022. So it was almost exactly four years ago. Is it okay, it makes sense if I read them?

Yeah, if you want to. Are you going to read what's in the letter or what you want to add?

No, what's in the letter.

Okay. I'd rather you read what you want to add, but okay.

I don't know what I want to add. I just wonder what you want to add.

Oh, I thought you had a proposal for a new paragraph.

Oh, no, no, no, no. My proposal is to take this and drop it into the resolution. Oh, I see. OK. And if we want to tweak this, add to it, subtract from it, we could do that. I mean, it looks like I added something in my little notes here. the the and do we have the existing resolution now from 2022 i do not have a copy of the existing resolution okay we can look at that next time um when we have it so the first one be any we'll still get just to be clear we'll still get a uh

The draft resolution that will then have to review and we can make edits on so this is just deliberating on what could then go into the draft resolution.

Yes So I think what we'll do at next meeting in our packets will get the 22 resolution and the new 26 resolution Right, and I bet you this ends up being red line or black line or something.

Yeah, maybe a red line, black line kind of thing. Okay. Just so everybody's clear. Yep. General.

Exactly. So the first bullet, and I'm going to just read it as bullets. It might end up being like M1, 123A, or whatever the numbers are. Any use of the PA system must conclude by 8 p.m. on Mondays through Thursday. 9 p.m. 9 p.m. by 9 p.m. Monday through Thursday and 10 p.m. on Fridays and Saturdays. The PA system will not be used on Sundays. If the event for which the PA system is being used extends beyond the hours, the PA system may not be utilized regardless of the reason for the extension period. That, I guess it's fine, but if you had a Friday night playoff game and it went to overtime, maybe it goes, maybe you have no sound system after overtime. I don't know, but that's just something to think about. The PA system may not be used for practices. I wrote down athletic practices, and the reason why I added that word is because I always consider the band, if band's gonna practice. and the band announced it, the leader of the band, whoever the guy is, wants to make an announcement, he's gotta have some kind of voice out there.

At practice?

Don't they, don't they?

I don't know, you can't talk to, as opposed to the coach of a football team, they can't talk?

Most of the time when I've seen football coaches, you're usually on the team, on the field. To me, if it's like the professor, someone said, who leads the band? Like a professor?

Yeah.

If he's up on a podium?

Yeah.

I just think that in practice, there's a line coach, there's a football coach, and in the cross, there's usually a coach working with the goalie, there's a coach working with the offense, defense.

And our cheerleaders, are they athletic?

I'm sure they are. I mean, they would make it. Yeah, they're athletic.

Next item, the PA system must be used at reasonable volume and must not create a nuisance to the neighboring property owners. Kind of self-explanatory. The volume control to the PA system shall be accessible only to the athletic director and individuals designated by him or her. to ensure that the volume cannot be altered without the approval of the athletic director. Who's the athletic director again? Chris, what's his name?

He said there's only like three people that have access to it anyway right now. They've already sort of like soft implemented that rule.

Right.

So he's the only one that can alter it.

Right. If it can only go up to volume seven?

Yes. So it's not like some junior can get up there and just crank it up to 11.

Right, or the guys that work for like Darien Media, whatever it is, D-A-F, Darien. More than 10. Next item is the board encourages the neighboring property owners to submit any complaints concerning the sound level of the PA system to the board. I guess that means the board of education through the athletic director's office. I don't know whether that would be in a resolution, but it's telling the board to access the neighbors, okay? The board shall properly address any complaints it receives about noise emanating from the PA system and take appropriate responsive measures, including but not limited to adjusting the volume of the PA system to a reasonable acceptable level. And lastly, strike the condition stating noise reduction shall be governed by the state of Connecticut General Statute 22A-69. The things that I wrote in my notes were, yeah, that was another one. When I said the pace you may not use for practices, what about graduation practice? You don't have graduation. You go out there at the beginning. I mean, I know my four kids graduated there. Someone's using the PA system to tell the kids where to stand. And band practices.

It's more of a rehearsal practice. Right, yeah. So you want to change the word to rehearsal. I mean, they're not going to be practicing in the evening, which is what this really applies to, isn't it?

We can just say athletic events. And then I think that .

Right, that's why I said athletic practices. So it said for practices, so what you're saying, graduation practice, band practice, athletic practices. Is there anything else that, at this point in time, that we want to think we should add to the resolution based upon ?

Well, you should note there is another provision on the next page.

Oh, I apologize. Sorry about that. One more provision. At the conclusion of each school year by July 1st, a report shall be submitted to the planning zoning office detailing the dates and hours of the lights were used, which team or group used the stadium field as well as any complaints or comments reviewed and how they could do it differently. The report will also allow the Board of Education to consider what they could do differently to reduce the impacts to the neighboring property owners and better understand the impacts of the lights and the public trust system. My comments to this was things like fireworks, when they do the fireworks, those lights are turned on at a lot of times when we do fireworks on 4th of July. And then after graduation, and I remember when I was at graduation, it was loud and that was at four o'clock in the afternoon or three or something like that. But this whole, their whole spin on this is related to athletics, which is fine, but that field does get used for other things in athletics, i.e., graduations and whatnot.

Does the Board of Ed have any control over the fireworks, for example, or is that the town?

That's a gray area in my mind because the Board of Education is custody and control over all educational facilities, so technically the Board of Education has to give permission to the town to use it.

And then the town has to abide by all the Board of Ed's rules so that gets backed into it.

Correct. I was at fireworks at the high school this year. To me personally, I don't remember taking a picture of it, but I don't remember the stadium lights being on when I left. Because after the fireworks go off, the dudes go out there and check all the mortars that they're done. And they could have turned them on or something like that. I just want to be covered.

Well, this is about the sound, not the lights.

The last sentence says lights and sound.

Yeah, but we shouldn't be addressing lights at all.

It said, and we better understand the impacts of the lights and the public addresses.

Yeah, but that's not what the subject of this change is all about. Specifically as to noise. If they want to do that, let the Board of Ed do that.

Isn't this describing the report, though?

Yeah, but if the Board of Ed wants them to require a report, we don't need to do it as part of the sound policy.

Right.

I would strike any reference to those. Yeah, I agree.

All right, so let me just read that again. Obviously, we're going to get this again in draft form. We can strike stuff when we get the draft form that's written. But it says, at the conclusion of each school year, By July 1st, a report shall be submitted to Planning and Zoning Office detailing the dates and hours that the lights were used, which team or group used the stadium field, as well as any complaints or comments received.

So I think what we're saying is- I would substitute public address system for lights.

Do you think the public address system is used without the lights?

I don't know. I don't care. It's not about lights. Lights is a big issue. We just don't want to get in the middle.

I wouldn't even bother to report it. If Board of Ed wants to require a report, Board of Ed can do a report.

Well, we do require reports to the planning zone and other things.

That's true. We do. Yeah, but we don't need to add that. Certain special permit uses as far as activities that the commission has allowed or permitted.

The football team. The junior league football team.

Junior league football team, Mather Homestead.

If we want to change that, then we need the report to limit the scope only to the south, which seems to kind of let the board of ed deal with the reports and the complaints and everything.

Okay. All right. So draft the resolution, and then we can look at it again when it's drafted. Sure. Does anyone want to add anything else to this that we can remember? No. Mr. Mahowski's representative wrote his letter. We all have that.

We'll put that in the bindings.

And that was really the only thing in that application, right? Yes, we had this. Okay. Staff, please draw up a positive report or a positive resolution and add those items.

The commission is likely to see that in front of you on September 21st.

Fantastic. Thank you. Is it okay if I excuse myself?

Amy will be here on September 21st.

Is that one of the meetings she's missing?

Yes.

She will be here, but I will not be on October 13th, because I'm going to.

Because Mr. Riley won't be here. And if Mr. Sheedy's out and Amy's out, then we won't have a forum on that date.

I don't know if he's going to be around.

He's got to be here today. Huh. OK. We'll figure it out. All right. Did you say? Yeah. It doesn't have to be that night.

Yeah, you can always punt the resolution. We've got ample time for voting on it.

OK. Now we're going to go back to the public hearing. I'm going to read the first one that's on.

Do we need to vote to go back in the front line or no?

No, we just reordered the agenda to move the one item first. I want to read the next one into the record, but we're not going to talk about that one tonight because Fred's going to tell us why. The next item in the agenda is continuation of public hearing regarding business site plan application number 186G as in good, special permit, also known as PL26-82, Image Studios Darien at 800 Boston Post Road. Proposed to establish a new salon suite providing 34 salon studios to salon professionals in a 6,564 plus minus square foot second floor space of the building. The 1.17 plus mark acre subject property is located on the southeast corner formed by the intersection of Boston Post Road and Cedric Avenue and is shown on assessor's map number 71 as lots one, two, three, and 17 in the central business district CBD zone. The public hearing was opened on June 9th, was continued to July 7th, July 14th, and September 14th. September 1st, 2026, which is today. And Fred, we're not seeing this because the traffic study or the parking study?

That's right. The commission is going to immediately continue this matter to September 8th, your next meeting. The applicant recently submitted a parking study for the record, which we are in the process of having peer reviewed. So we expect the applicant to come back before us on September 8th here in room 206 of Town Hall at 7 p.m. We are good on time. The applicant has granted the necessary extension. it out to that date, however... Which is the 8th. Which is the 8th.

But if we're not ready by the 8th, then they have to pull the application and resubmit it, probably, right?

The 8th is the last meeting that the Commission can continue the hearing to. We run out of time after that, so if there's issues, concerns going forward, they would have to withdraw the application and resubmit at a later time.

Okay. And you're recused on that one or not recused on that one?

I am.

Okay.

We have bodies in there. Okay. All right. Next on the agenda. Sorry about that.

Next item on the agenda, landfilling and recreating application number 603, also known as PL 26-131, Thomas O. and Sandra Holm at 64 Gardner Street, proposed to regrade the property in association with the construction of a replacement single-family residence and stormwater management. the and perform related site development activities the 0.51 plus minus acre subject property is located on the southeast corner formed by its intersection of gardener street and pleasant street and it's generally assessment number 54 as lot 121 in the r1 third zone fred what do we got

Yeah, this application is before the commission for land filling and regrading for construction of a new five bedroom single family residence and related improvements including regrading of the property and installation of storm water management. The property was previously developed with a single family residence that has been demolished. The site has undergone preparations for the construction of a new residence, including excavation for the foundation that occurred without a foundation permit being issued, though one has been filed for. Following site preparations by the contractor, the Planning and Zoning Office determined in late June that a landfilling and regrading permit was required and directed the applicant to submit an application to the Commission. Between the applicant's late March Foundation permit filing and the Planning and Zoning Office's late June determination that a landfilling and regrading permit was required, The applicant's engineer, Muller Engineering, and Joe Canis of Ty and Bond engaged in extensive discussions regarding site design and stormwater management. In late June, three neighbors, Those of 7 Pleasant Street to the east of the property, 60 Gardner Street to the south of the property, and 56 Gardner Street, also to the south of the property, retained Redness and Mead to review the application, resulting in further discussions among the applicant's engineer, Joe Canis, and Redness and Mead relative to stormwater impacts of the new development. The review memos from Joe Canis in the record dated April 13th, May 14th, May 28th, June 15th, and September 1st. There's review memos from Redness Mead in the file dated June 16th and August 27th. And there are responses from Mueller Engineering, the applicant's engineer, dated May 21st, July 24th, and August 31st. Finished grades along the easterly and southerly property boundaries will remain unchanged except for depressions along each boundary to retain off-site runoff on-site. Material from the foundation excavation will be used for regrading. The proposed development includes a new stormwater management system designed to reduce runoff into abutting properties during the two through 100 year storm events using the fresh meadow approach. A separate system for managing groundwater is included in the design. The applicant also submitted a landscape plan for the record. Bob Maslin is here this evening as the applicant's representative, along with his team, including, I believe, Brian Mueller from Mueller Engineering, Matt Popp of Environmental Land Solutions. Bob is going to present the details of the application.

So, one second, Bob. You sent an email this afternoon with more attachments. Is that Joe Kanitz's letter from September 1st and this Mueller letter from September 1st? Yes. Yes, it is. I didn't read those yet. So, I want to read those before we go super further. Anyway, Bob Mazin, welcome, sir. How was your summer? Okay. Just okay. Wow. Good, actually. You look tan. You had a lot of color. Good, welcome, sir. Welcome back.

Good evening. Nice to see you, Commissioner Sini. I haven't seen you since the last time you were on the commission. Six years ago? Whatever. He's really not here.

He's just passing by.

Robert Maslin representing the applicants. Couple of... changes to what Fred just told you. But who's here tonight? Thomas Ho and I got the PowerPoint up here. For some reason, the other screen is not connected anymore, but I'm not yet doing. So Thomas Ho and Sandy Hom are in the second row there. Rob Sandalo over here at the table is from Muller Engineering, so it's not Brian Muller, it's gonna be Rob Sandel. Nick DiMeo is the architect who's not able to be here tonight, but this is about grading, I don't think it's about architecture. Matt Pop, you know Matt? Matt's back there, landscape architect and me. So what I'd like to do is just kind of run through a summary and then have Rob come up, talk about the engineering, And then I kind of come back once or twice and talk about a few other things. But the things I want to mention first are today there was another memo from Joe Canis. And we responded, Rob Sandelow submitted a memo in response to that. That's uploaded. It was later in the day. It's in the record. I think both of them are uploaded. And Rob did an amendment to the site plan to address Joe Canis' comments and a couple of other things that are with his single submission, and that's all uploaded.

Yeah, I saw it come through. I did click on it.

It was late, and we're trying to get everything in as thoroughly as we can. I appreciate that. We've been at this since March 23rd. Sounds like it. The landfilling and regrading permit is basically regrading for a stormwater management system, which doesn't exist now. It didn't exist before. Management of surface flows is part of that. And an installation of a basement floor above the groundwater so that we don't have a groundwater problem. That's seasonal high groundwater. Rob will discuss that a little bit further with you. As Fred mentioned, the existing materials will remain on site for the regrading and the shifting is, according to Rob's calculation, 700 cubic yards in either both directions so it balances out.

Instead of materials, you're talking about the dirt mounds. Pardon? You're talking about the dirt mounds. Dirt, yeah. Okay, got it.

What was here before a single family house with a detached garage and two driveways, one on Pleasant, one on they have since been demolished the pavement, taken up for the driveway, so now we're back with a, as Fred mentions, an excavation for the foundation and material piled up around the perimeter and there's water in the hole.

So the proposed development. Just for the record, there was a permit issued to demolish the house, right? Yes, yes.

And what happens, and I want to belabor this because we're here on an application, but what happens is one part of the project flows into another. The permit is supposed to go contemporaneous, and here we are. For some reason, it took three months for somebody to decide we needed a grading permit. And so we're just dealing with a grading permit right now. Two stories with an unfinished attic and a partially finished basement, a new engineered stormwater, system fresh metal approach under the current version of the drainage manual, and it reduces both peak runoff and peak volume, rate and volume for the one through 100 year storms, which is a vast improvement from what was there before. There's a separate system for groundwater, which we'll get into as we go along here. As I mentioned, the basement floor elevation's gonna be above the seasonal high groundwater, so this groundwater system is not gonna run very often. It's for the rare cases when there's an extreme high water table, and that's very temporary and very rare. The peer review, as Fred mentioned, we thought was complete. It was completed when I prepared this. I think it's fairly complete now. and then we engaged Matt Popp for the landscape plan. This is an aerial photograph of the existing, pre-existing house. The house was right up on the corner, detached garage. You see the driveway coming here, and the other driveway is somewhere down here.

Can I ask you a question about that real quick? Sorry? Can I ask a question about that real quick? That area or that tax map includes a little tilde piece that's on the bottom? Yes.

It's not on the survey. Because it's an error in the assessor's map. Okay. This little rectangular strip was conveyed over to this property back when a prior owner owned it, but it never... It wasn't incorporated into the assessor's map. So that's why it's there. And I made a note to that effect in the list of abutters and proof of mailings, so that explanation is in the record.

Okay, so that blue line, that was created by the assessor's system?

This is the old configuration.

Right, I get it.

Kind of like a panhandle or a flag. So now it should go right here.

Okay, got it. Has that been fixed in the assessor's map?

Pardon?

Has that been fixed? Has the assessor's map been updated?

No. They'll eventually get around to it.

Once this gets filed, this has to get filed. That's what I'm saying. So that will be corrected as potentially.

Yeah, most of the time what's going to happen is the neighbor at 60, his land is going to get bigger and his assessment is going to go up. So he's going to get pissed.

I think you got it. They update it when they get around to it and that's what happens. This is a survey of the property. I don't think we need to dwell on this much.

That's the proposed property.

But it has the new footprint superimposed on the site. Now the existing conditions. We went through the demolition. I mentioned the foundation permit application March 23rd. Site preparation began in April, and I mentioned this kind of that continuous flow of construction on a site. Peer reviews, I have it all in here. I'm not going to rehash it. Fred went through the whole thing. The important thing is, though, on June 15th, Joe Canis issues a memo saying that all stormwater management comments were addressed. and for the first time said that a land filling and regrading permit may be required, not the existing site conditions. The excavation, meaning the bottom of the water and the water levels have been laser level measured, which is a surveying technique or an engineering technique then it's very accurate. The water levels? Water, yeah. I'll show you a picture of that. Well, I'll go right to the picture, okay. Fred Donite sent me these pictures back in July, July 21st, so it's right around that timeframe that I believe these were taken.

But it still looks like that exactly today.

This is roughly a foot of water, give or take a few inches. This is taken from Gardner looking to the east. That's a little bit farther back on Gardner. The banks are pretty well defined.

Then you're staring at 7 Pleasant Street, right?

This is 7, yes.

Correct. So that water is only a foot and a half deep? Roughly, yeah.

I mean, it fluctuates with rain, and right now... No, it's full today. It's full right now. You go over there right now, it's full. That's right now. I took this picture this afternoon after the rain stopped. Right. You can see it's up a little higher. This is 60 Gardiner, and then that's 7 Pleasant. Yep. But it's rainwater. It's not groundwater that does that. So now for the site plan. Why don't, Rob, you come up and we'll talk about the site plan. Let me see. Try to figure out a good way to do this. Because I can run this. Is that? Yeah, but we need you on the microphone. Oh, okay. Yes. Just state your name for the record. Oh, wait. There's a microphone right there. Will that pick me up? You'll be able to pick it up. Yeah, but I want you on TV. The TV's 79.

It's got a, oh, okay. Yeah. Yeah, they're tired of seeing me. Robert, if I stood there?

You can sit wherever you want. Okay. Do you have a laser? You can point us up.

Okay. For the record, Rob Sandola.

licensed professional engineer in the state of Connecticut with Mahler Engineering. So what you're looking at here is the proposed site plan. I'll give you a run-through of the bigger pieces. So we've got the house situated very central on the site with the proposed driveway curb cut coming off of Gardner Street. The parking court and garage parking court is a permeable asphalt system with a gravel reservoir beneath it. So that will handle all of the driveway runoff as well as a couple of the roof leaders on the garage side of the house. The rest of the house roof leaders are piped to the large Caltech system located in the southeastern corner.

Can I stop here for a second? Sure. In one of the letters, it says that the Caltech system was 12, and then in the Renaissance meeting letter, it says it's 25 plus an additional 12.

Right. How many are there?

There's 25. There's 25 plus 12? No, just 25.

So during the review process, we had the original design didn't utilize the fresh metal approach, the very first iteration. So then once we implemented the fresh metal approach, that system had to get bigger. And so that was the jump from 12 to 25.

Great. When we listen to Joe Canis, let's just make sure it's right, because Joe Canis' boat number 14 consists of 12 Coltec units. and then Redness meets and it's 25, but then I thought they said there was another 12 on top of the 25. So where's Canis? You gotta change your 12 to 25, dude. You'll get your time.

My guess is it's a remnant from, it was 12 at one point.

It's dated June 15, so I don't know what it is.

So the stormwater system is 25 units, and then the groundwater system located in the northeast corner of the property is 8, 330 units. And that system is a standalone system for groundwater.

I got that. So in total, you have 8 plus 25 is, what, 33? Yes. You have 33 cultics. OK.

And that's a byproduct of the Fresh Meadow approach, which results in a very robust system. How many square feet is the house?

5,200.

A floor area, not footprint. 5,200 for a floor area.

It's five bedrooms. How many bathrooms?

Four.

You have to tell him. He's got to tell me. Four.

Four bathrooms.

Five bathrooms, four bathrooms, okay.

I guess we did need Nick.

Four and a half, sorry. Four and a half.

Four and a half. Got it. Okay.

Got to have that powder on. Okay.

Obviously groundwater is a big concern here. We dug test holes early on, four test holes around the property. I would say the most critical test hole is test hole number one. That's located in the southeast corner, which we have identified as the point of concern for our drainage analysis. That test hole revealed a modeling layer at 36 inches below existing grade. Modeling, as you probably know, is evidence of your seasonal high groundwater table.

That's the first time I heard that word in 13 years. It's M-O-T-T-L, something like that?

M-O-T-T-L-I-N-G. And what that is is oxidation in the soil layers, and it's essentially rust. So as groundwater rises and falls at the highest level, it leaves a rust line in your soil. And that tells you where your record seasonal high groundwater is. That was identified very clearly in test hole number one at 36 inches below existing grade. And existing grade at test hole number one was 54.6. which put our modeling layer at 51.6. Initially...

So it's three feet below, okay. So 54 minus 51 is three feet. Okay.

So initially that Jocanus was questioning those numbers. The original survey had two foot contours and not a lot of topographic information in that back corner because the nature of the site is very flat in that back corner. There's only one contour in that area.

That's the lowest point of the site that's closer to 60 and 56, right?

Correct.

Because the high point's on the corner of Pleasant and Gardner.

That's right. High point's at the intersection.

What's the difference of grade between the high and the low?

The highest point on site is about 62, and the lowest point in the corner is 54.

Where's the 50? The 51's where the rust line is. So it's a 62 to 54, so it's an eight foot drop.

Okay. Eight inch drop.

Eight foot drop. Oh, sorry. It's an eight foot drop. I thought that too. I thought it was 54 inches and 51 inches, 36 inches, but because in the letter it doesn't say, it just says 54, it doesn't say feet or inches.

Okay.

That's my mistake. I should have. No, no, that's in the tie-in bottom. I said elevation 54 by 54. Don't worry about it. That's fine. We're good. So the ground level was identified, or the mottling layer was identified as 51. You guys confused me. 51. 51.6. Initially, our basement was set a little bit lower. It was set at 53. And through all the iterations of the design and the concerns about groundwater, we've conservatively raised it up to 54, which is a little more than two feet higher than the modeling that was discovered in testable number one.

The modeling is 51.6, right? That's right. And now the foundation starts where?

The basement is at elevation 54.

Great, so that's three and a half feet. No, two and a half feet.

Yeah, a little less than two and a half.

Okay. The letter says 36 inches, but okay.

Well, it's 36 inches from existing grade at the test hole location down to that modeling slash seasonal high water table level. Okay.

We're just trying to not flood the basement, right?

We don't want to flood the basement, definitely not. There is a groundwater pump system included and that's sort of fail safe, a belts and suspenders kind of system because as we all know there's groundwater concerns in this area. That would be set to pump only if groundwater were to rise to the finished slab elevation or maybe slightly below it. So finished slab is 54. That pump would only kick on if groundwater reached 53.5 or 53.75. It's a sump pump. Correct. And it's an exterior sump pump in this case located right there.

I've never heard of that. Yeah, what's an exterior sump pump?

So instead of putting a hole in your slab inside your house, which very easily lets water in your house. You put the pump outside and it does exactly the same thing. How do you cover it so rainwater doesn't see it? It's basically a manhole and you connect all of your footing drains to the manhole and have the pump in there. So now you have no penetrations in your foundation or your slab.

And it discharges right into the Coltac.

Right, so now, correct, so now that pump would only kick on if groundwater really rose. Yeah, it's got the float in it. Yeah, it has regular sub pump. Correct, and then one that kicks on, it's not discharged off site, it's discharged into that eight unit R330 Coltac system. And then only if that system were to be overtaxed, then it would overflow and be piped down to the ultimate discharge point of the levels right in the southeast corner.

Why would you pipe it into the street? Why would you go the other way? Are the grades the wrong way?

Well, so a few reasons. That is a best-case scenario, kind of, if you have the ability to connect to a town system. There's not really that ability here. There's a system in Pleasant Street that appears to be on their side. I'm not really sure.

Is there a storm drain in Pleasant Street?

I think there's a couple of drains further down the road, further east. It wasn't feasible to connect anything.

It's a hack.

It doesn't appear to be the town standards, I would say, the system in Pleasant Street.

Where was I going with that? The grading.

Can you just, with the overflow, like how much excess capacity it was to overflow to the larger Coltec system?

Well, so when the groundwater system overflows, it will overflow directly to the level spreader. And that's not expected to ever overflow, but it's there if it ever does.

That's when they get spun 45 degrees or 90 degrees?

That's right. That's right. So to move on to the, sorry, go ahead.

So if the eight unit call tech fills up, then it goes down to the 25 unit call tech system?

In the vicinity. It's not connected to that system, but it discharges in that same vicinity. Okay. Okay. So I'll move on to the grading. Generally, so the intent of the grading plan, is to maintain existing flow paths. So in the existing condition, everything flows to that southeast corner. In the proposed condition, we need to get everything to that southeast corner. We can't discharge flows to areas they weren't previously going. So all of our course driveway, our roof leaders, our groundwork system even, is packed to that southeast corner. All the overland flow, Well, now there's a house in the middle of the site, so the grading intent is to direct flow from the front yard easterly to the side yard, route it into this swale that then directs it to the southeast corner. Similarly, but to a lesser extent, we have this small area of grass adjacent to the driveway. It's about 1,000 square feet right here. We're creating a swale here. to again, same concept, direct runoff easterly toward the corner instead of southerly directly onto 60 Gardiner. So we've got this swale to direct runoff easterly to the corner, and in addition to the swale, add the recommendation of Rennes and Mead. And again, this is sort of a belts and suspenders fail-safe sort of feature. We've added these three yard drains.

That's what I was going to ask. Where are the yard drains?

One, two, and three. So all runoff in this rear yard, this little area near the driveway that will get directed easterly along the property line. get picked up in these yard drains, and route it to the southeastern corner.

Do you have yard drains on the east side, too, where it goes from the 8-unit to the 16-unit? Over here?

Yeah. No, there's none there.

What's that box right there?

This box?

No, that. Three down. One higher. One higher. There's a black one. That's a junction.

This one? That's a contour label. That's just not really coming in good with the resolution.

So it's going to sheet flow from the 8 unit to the 25 unit.

Right. So in this eastern side yard, we're able to create a nice gentle swale through there. So we've got yard drains in the front yard to capture any runoff that's getting trapped in the front yard and directing it around. All the runoff in the side yard can flow freely, naturally, to that southeastern corner. There's no slope directing runoff easterly. It's all already flowing southerly.

Okay, let me ask you a question that's a little out of the box. Every single one of these houses that we look at has a level playing area for the kids to play in, to play soccer. What is your flat backyard?

There's a flat area.

They're going to come later and be like, oh, can we flatten out the yard to put in the soccer yard? And we see $50 a year. There's no flat yard area, is there?

Well, this Coltec system is fairly large. So that's probably almost 30 by 50. That's probably larger than a swimming pool. And that's all flat over there. So that's a flat area there.

That's on top of a concrete, it's on top of a 25 concrete box.

Yeah, but it would be dirt on it. It's buried. Yeah, it's plastic chambers with a bit of stone and then topsoil and grass above it.

What about a patio and that sort of thing in the back?

Yeah, there's a covered patio here. And then there's a walkway with a larger area here that kind of connects to the covered patio. So there's an entertainment space here that, you know, for outdoor enjoyment. Perfect. Okay. And then I was also going to state that the front yard is also relatively flat. Yeah, but Gardner Street's a busy street. So it's better.

Is there a generator? Do you play in your front yard? All the time.

We're little boys. It's not wet.

We're not showing a generator at this time. Usually we see generators with sumps, right? Because the sump's going to stop working when the power goes out. Sometimes you've got to mount battery back up.

Yeah.

They're building a new 5,000 square foot house.

A generator is definitely a possibility. I would say if we had to locate one, there's a good opportunity. Like on the side.

Yeah, you're right on top of lot coverage, aren't you? Like 84% lot coverage.

Can we go back to the proposed survey?

Your lot coverage is like humongous, and the way you're getting around it is with the porous asphalt, which doesn't work anyways. It doesn't. He has it in his house. Okay.

I never understood how we're getting over it with that. Because I was going to get mowed over and then.

Correct. Like it's sanded and it gets clogged and it doesn't work. What's the staff's recommendation as poor salesperson?

It's a little bit, I don't know that we necessarily have a staff recommendation, but from the perspective of DBW and what we've heard from engineers over the years relative to this project, pervious asphalt is that, you know, if you're laying it down on flat surfaces, it's going to be more durable than if you were to lay it down on a grade, right? So it's, I guess, the tensile strength of the material itself isn't

particularly it's not as durable as right but my question was really relative to does it work in terms of allowing drainage oh absolutely yeah you're an engineer i've seen it i got a guy it doesn't work in his house no that was i can't speak to that uh i've seen dozens of successful installs and long-term performance. I have seen... You've got to maintain it. Yeah, it's got to be maintained and it's got to be installed properly, totally. And to answer your question, your earlier question, there's about almost 5% of coverage available after the proposed plan.

We have that someplace.

And the allowable is 20.

What's the lot, Kevin?

So the allowable is 20 and the proposed condition is 15.6.

I'm going to read this 84 something. Okay, keep going. You're on the roll.

I don't see it here either. We'll pass. Oh, there. So...

If you're ready, I'll move on to the erosion control plans.

Any questions so far?

I had just one kind of silly question. So from the west side to the east side, the grade is down what, about how many feet again?

Eight feet, from the highest to the lowest point.

Okay, so.

From the corner. Yeah, and that's from corner to corner.

So in order to build a substantial home and deal with that kind of grade, do I really need 33 cult text boxes, or is this more than, necessary or is this the minimum required?

So the size of the home, oh sorry, the change in grade doesn't affect the size of the Caltech system. The fresh metal requirement is what's forcing that Caltech system to be as big as it is. So if we were able to account for the existing house, pre-existing house and driveway and any other hardscaping, then this drainage system would be a bit smaller. But the fresh meadow approach requires us to count the entire lot as meadow.

Wait, but we voted for the fresh meadow approach for 20 years.

No, no, I'm not, I see about that. I just wanted to understand the scope of what we're dealing with.

So it's not the change in grade that's driving the size of the drainage, it's the fresh meadow approach specifically.

Thanks, that's helpful.

So for the erosion control plan, to manage erosion and sedimentation and then storm events during construction. We're proposing a temporary sediment track in the southeastern quarter. That's where all water's flowing. And what that will do, what that consists of is you dig a temporary pond and you line it with gravel. You build a berm around it so it can contain. and you'll have a gravel spillway, and what that does is trap sediment, trap water in the sediment in it, so the sediment can settle out and the water, any trapped water can be controlled, you know, released at a controlled rate. That's in the vicinity of the proposed cultic system.

That's the same exact spot.

Right, same exact spot. So that's where we're excavating already, and then Before installing the Coltec system, all that will have to obviously be removed. Any trap sediment will have to be removed to ensure that the Coltec functions accurately. We have...

I don't know if you've ever seen that before.

They're more typical in larger commercial developments. But through the reviews, the iterations and the reviews, it became sort of necessary.

We'll ask Candice about that. I've never seen them put in a temporary pond and replace it with a co-tech system.

They're often created by contractors by themselves, and they're more so required in larger commercial developments when you're disturbing numerous acres at once.

In larger commercial developments, they don't put in co-tech systems.

Different version here. The other big component or another component of the temporary erosion plan is the utilization of a dirt bag that's not a person. I stole that joke from someone.

And what that does is

If you need to dewater anything during construction, and we don't anticipate needing to dewater much because we've raised the basement so much. So the existing hole with the water in it has to get backfilled with gravel. We need to get up to the now higher elevation of the finished slab, which is out of the groundwater. So once that's all done, we don't anticipate having to pump any groundwater. If the need should arise to pump groundwater during construction, You connect your groundwater pumps into this dirt bag, and it's a big black thing. It's what was at Tilly Pond, right?

If you've been around Tilly Pond and you've seen those giant things. It's made of the same material as a silt fence. You pump water into it, it holds the sediment and releases the water. Just a question. In the hole that's there currently that has at least, we'll say, a foot and a half of groundwater in it, From the bottom of that, how much will you, once that water's out and you remove the sediment, how much will you be raising that hole up with edge fill?

Probably 18 inches of stone. 18 inches of stone. So we need to get to the... to the bottom of the proposed slab. So we need to bring stone in up to probably 53.5.

Right, so what I'm saying is where the water level is now, there'll be stone in replace of the water before the slab is even poured. So the basement's not going at the bottom of that hole, but you'll get that water out, you'll get the sediment out, you'll backfill it almost all the way until it's just about level, and then put the slab on.

Right, exactly. I was going to talk to you about that, but you pretty much covered it.

What's the clear height in the basement? Because I'm trying to figure out what the first floor of the house is.

I think we're at... So we started at 10 or... We started at 9, we're down to 8. Because we held the first floor elevation and we brought the basement slab up. So the clear height in the basement is 8 feet.

Okay. Okay.

And as you can see on site already, stockpiles will be along this boundary here, and we'll also stockpile some material there as needed. We'll have to clear any stockpile material here to create this temporary sediment pond, although some of it will be used to create the berm for that pond.

Are you calling the stockpiles that exist today that are in the front of the property? Are you calling those stockpiles or not?

Right, yeah, those are soil stockpiles.

They sit there today.

Right, they do.

And on this landscape, you've got a tree in that spot, right? You go with the same thing?

I don't want to skip anything, but yes, I believe so. A proposed tree. Right. So this is just a summary table showing that we're reducing peak flows and volumes in the 1 through 100 design storm events. So what this tells you is that the proposed condition, post-construction condition, is actually an improvement to the existing condition. So less water.

When you say existing condition, is that as of today or as of a month ago? Or are you talking about?

As of both. Fresh meadow. Fresh meadow, so as of today as well. And what that tells you, it's an improvement to the existing condition. I lost my train of thought there. We're reducing peak flows and volumes to that point of concern, which is the southeastern corner.

So you're decreasing by, on the top, it's an average of 18% or 15% in the bottom?

It's about.

What's the difference runoff flows and volumes?

So runoff flows is the rate, cubic feet per second.

Because you're putting in a 33-unit system as well.

And that peak flow is measured at, in a 24-hour storm, it's measured at approximately a 12th hour where you have your surge in flow.

What's the footprint of the house?

Let me see.

Go back to the sheet. That should be here. Oh, over here.

Well, I want to say it's around 2,500 square feet because the finished floor area was... 5,200. 5,200, so it should be approximately half or less than that.

It's a two and a half story house, right?

Are we going to get to the end of this?

Yeah.

Any other questions for Rob?

I think we're good right now.

I don't know that we need to wait.

Yeah, because it's required. That's Joe Canis' thing. He just asked for it. Yeah.

Good evening. I'm Matthew Popp, landscape architect, Environmental and Land Solutions. I've prepared the landscaping plan. Welcome back, Matt. Good to see you all. It's been a while. Typically, when I've asked to prepare a landscaping plan for just a general landscaping plan, such as a project like this, there's probably three things I try to cover. Street trees. screening of neighbors and maybe some habitat plantings. So just to start off, you can see the house is centrally located. There's three existing trees. There's a large spruce down in this corner. Up at the corner of Pleasant and Gardner is a large red maple. So those are the two significant trees. And there's just a smaller one.

Because that one on the bottom looks like it's on the neighbor's property, but it's actually on your property. No, no, no, the one on the street, the street tree. Crazy.

It's not on this property. I know. It's probably right out of the corner.

Yeah, there's a lath right next to it, and it's wrapped in ivy.

So for street trees, usually what I do, the first thing is, where are the utility lines? So utility lines are on the opposite side of Gardner. And they're unpleasant. They're on our side of the street. So where there's no overhead utility lines, I have larger growing trees. So we have an oak tree. So it's called a shade tree. Then we have a smaller, kind of medium-sized hornbeam. And there's one over here, too. And since there's overhead utility lines at Pleasant, we have three smaller growing trees. Those are winter cane hog thorns. They're flowering. They have red berries. They're good for wildlife. And then for screening along the other kind of the rear property line, we have a Arborvitae, a green giant, so everybody uses that, it seems like. And then in the corner here and up here, we have four American hollies. There's a telephone pole back up in this corner, so try to screen the pole with the hollies from the house. And then as far as, you know, habitat plantings, We have some clephora down in here. It's a native shrub. Also for screening, we have the parking area in the front. Gardener, I have some evergreen shrubs along just to screen the parking area from the road. Also proposed is tree protection, just on this tree and this tree. There is an existing driveway that comes in right here, so this fence could probably be pulled in a little bit closer to that tree. Let's see where it is. The walkway's showing on here.

That tree protection, the fences, And that's proposed?

Yeah, that's proposed.

Okay, so we should really propose.

So I can't tell, but I can probably get pulled in a bit right where that asphalt, where the driveway came in. Okay. The sidewalks are, you know, conceptual on my plan, just for the record. But I think they are pretty close to the site plan.

You said the sidewalks?

Yeah, going out there. Okay, okay. They're on our sidewalks.

They're on the street sidewalks. No, just on site.

Yeah, I'd put a landing here because there'd probably be a landing at the bottom of the steps. That's squared off when it hits the driveway. All of the plants are native except for the green giants down here at the rear of the property. They're foundation plantings. I don't really specify them because that's kind of a tough thing to be permitted because they'll change from year to year and from homeowner to homeowner. So I didn't specify those. And that's it for the landscaping. Are there any questions?

Any questions?

No. Thank you.

We're getting there. There was a question that was raised about the calculation of the average grade before and after construction. The original calculations were taken a few feet away from the foundation. They're now at the foundation, so that, plan view, this is existing, and that table is basically the elevations and distances that give you the weighted average. And the number is 56.80. And then when you go to the proposed, sorry?

That's the grade of today.

That's the average grade. And then same thing with the proposed contours. and we're at 59.67, so under the height regulation, we're allowed to go one foot above this number, I mean existing, which is 56.8, and these are prior to any of the site work.

So the proposed is, what's the regulation gonna be? Sorry? You said proposed is gonna be 59? 59.67. Okay, and then what's the height of the slab? I thought it was 53. The height of the slab?

Yeah. 54.

54, okay. So you said your basement's eight feet high? That's impossible. It's only five feet. 54 minus, 59 minus 54 is five.

You can't talk. That's the difference between the. Okay, so. so just to back up a little bit so this is the existing grade the average existing grade around the proposed house footprint and that comes in at 56.8 that's interesting that's proposed right well i care about the proposed so the average grade around the proposed house footprint the proposed average grade is 59.67 right Okay, and that's relative to a first floor elevation of 63 and a basement slab of 54.

But how do you go from 59 to 63? You lost me.

63 is the first floor elevation, and then the 59 is just the average rate around the house. So on the front, it's 61 or 62. In the back, it's 54. I'm sorry, 58 in the back. So when you average it, you get an average of 59.67. Yeah, but the trusses are 8, 10 inches.

Well, look at that. I don't get your math, but... Because we're making sure the house isn't too tall. That's why I asked you what the clearance of the basement was. Because I knew this was coming, and if you have nine foot clear and all the other footings, you're going to be way above the height of the house. Right. Because right now you're 29 feet 10 inches or something like that? 29 feet 1 inch. I thought I saw 29 feet 10. I thought you had 2 inches to swing.

After these calculations were done, the correct way, the elevation ended up having to be changed.

So what happened was... Where's the text box on the survey? I'm sorry? Can you go to the survey where it has the zoning text box?

Text box. The zoning table on the survey.

possible if that wasn't updated there you go there you go you just passed it 29.8 it's proposed so the bottom run max like 29.8 this is 29.8 yeah we've got four we're lower than that now

Right, so you get updated.

Yep, yep.

I'll just show you what we actually, the architect ended up doing to address this, and that was, this was a dormer that had a roof to project it out with an eave. And so the building height was the midpoint between the highest peak and that eave. This dormer is now inverted so it's into the panel so there's no eave, which is something that's been done time and again when there's an issue. And as a result of that, we're down And so that brings us to, let me just make sure I didn't miss any. Nope. So what I did was I took Joe Canis' last letter of today that included both his previous recommendations during the progress of construction and he added a section with four points from the neighbor's engineer and So, we have these four addressed here and I just want to touch on, I'm not going to belabor them because I know we're going to hear from Joe Hannes. Weekly groundwater readings, that, I think that's been explained. The water that's in the excavation now is not groundwater, it's rainwater on top of whatever groundwater is in there. and it accumulates, so it doesn't accurately reflect groundwater. That's number one. Number two, when a trap rock or crushed stone is put into that excavation in preparation to put in the foundation and the basement floor, that water is basically gonna be under the basement floor. So you won't have a water elevation once that's in. So there's really no need for weekly groundwater measurements because there just won't be any that will be exposed. And then I also mentioned that routinely, as you know, stormwater management systems are based on modeling and deep test holes and all of that. They worked fine. The amount of fill, after receiving Joe Canis' letter today, Rob Sandelow calculated the fill plus and minus approximately 700 cubic yards, balancing the one against the other with no import or export of material. And as a matter of course, on applications like this, there's usually a condition of approval that says when it's built, the engineer has to certify that the grading and the stormwater management systems are all according to spec. Grading at the proposed yard drains, Joe mentioned spot elevations. Rob Sandalo's solution to that was to revise the plan. You've seen it. And obviously, when you're installing these things, you're not going to install the yard drain higher than the lawn. I mean, it's just a field adjustment. I mean, it can be a condition of approval, but it kind of is a self-correcting thing. And then finally, the swale and the parking court. Rob, do you want to come in and explain this? Yes, sir. Because this is the last... kind of substantive issue that I think you're better to hear from the engineer.

Right, so two of the sort of outstanding issues as far as stormwater was concerned was the proposed swale adjacent to that parking area and similarly the proposed overflow of that same porous asphalt parking area. The concern was raised by Redness originally, and the concern was that the proposed swale wasn't adequate to convey whatever water might be running through it. So we did a calculation. We did submit it. It came in late, so you may not have had a chance to really look at it, but what that calculation demonstrates is that the anticipated flow through that swale is zero point... Let me get this right. I have my own copy. So the expected flow through that swale is 0.08 CFS, so eight hundredths of a CFS. The capacity of that same swale is 8.69 CFS, or 108 times more than the expected flow. So that calculation demonstrates that the swale is sized properly, and then we also did a calculation for the proposed overflow here of that driveway. which is, if I can go back, I'll just show you exactly what I'm talking about. So the proposed overflow to that porous system is this curb line, the eastern curb line of that parking pull-off. So if this driveway ever fills up and overtops it, spills over this curb line and runs down the yard to that southeastern corner. So we did a calculation to ensure that any overflow out of that weir is less than two feet per second, and that's a CTDP number that, well really an engineering number, not just CTDP, that tells you that that flow shouldn't erode soils. So we did the calculation, and the calculation told us that we needed .08 feet of weir length to ensure that the zero... What's weir?

I've never heard of this weir word.

So weir is just, it's a length, so in this case it's a length of curb that the water will flow over when that system overtops. So that system has 0.02 CFS of overflow in the 100-year storm event. In order to ensure that that overflow, it doesn't erode slowly beyond it. The calculation tells us that we need a one inch wide weir to produce a slow enough velocity. And we've got a 14-foot wide weir. So. 14-inch wide weir. And we have a 14-foot wide weir.

So it's, it allows it to overflow 14 feet. Right.

So it's taking that .02 CFS, which is a very small number, and spreading it over 14 feet, which is. So it's not constant. Which is next to nothing. Like. Right. Waterfalls.

So that's just going from corner to down, it's 14 feet. What's the width of the thing?

The width of the overflow? Yeah, of the curb. 14 feet. Oh, the thickness? 4 inches, 4 or 6 inches, a block curb, yeah.

If you had paved the driveway, not that you can because you'd be over the limit, but if you paved the driveway, you'd probably put a Coltec underneath the driveway with a drain in it, right?

That would be the alternative.

It seems like, I get that it all works, but I think the concern is like, imagine five years from now, and that little stretch of backyard that's got a little bit of a swale that's not very noticeable, but then just over time from mowers and snow, it just gets pushed down, and maybe you put in a rock wall in the back or something, and they bring a backhoe through it, and it slowly gets matted down. then it ruins all of these things. So like day one, it seems like it could potentially work, but I think the concern is just natural wear and tear on such a little bit of land in the future could really destabilize the whole system.

I see your point, and to respond to your point, I would say a couple of things. So in this case, the swale is proposed in our plan, right? And it's also sort of solidified by the planting plan, because along this boundary, we have a row of green giants going in, which is going to create the swale all by itself. So we're proposing as a stormwater measure, and Matt's proposing it by accident by his row of green giants that he's putting in. Yeah, I get that they'll act as some absorption.

Well, no, they're going to have a planting part.

It'll be the southern bank of our swale, the row of trees. And then to also to your point is and include in the drainage report is a maintenance declaration, a maintenance plan that gets permitted along with everything else that requires a certain level of inspection and maintenance for all these systems. And that would include the forest driveway, the overflow of the forest driveway, the swale. because it's not just lawn area it's a it's a designed feature of the stormwater system so it would be included in that maintenance plan as something that needs to be maintained so the swells here yeah everything goes to here everywhere right at the corner and then i'll go back to uh i mean it's also eight feet up to down

That's what I'm saying. It's all going to go there anyway. Okay, last slide.

is from Joe Canis' last report.

Can Mr. Canis talk about his report instead of you talk about Mr. Canis' report?

Well, we're talking about how we're addressing it. And for the most part, they're all typical, common conditions of approval.

Rob sent this back to Canis already today. Sorry? Rob sent this back to Canis already today.

It was submitted. I don't know. I'm not sure. Oh, that's all in. It's all uploaded. I'm just trying to see if Joe has seen this before. We'll ask Joe when he gets it. It was submitted shortly after we received Mr. Kanz's memo.

Which was submitted to Mr. Kanz. This afternoon.

This afternoon, right.

OK. That's fine. Install erosion S&E controls before construction. We do that all the time. Maintain them during construction. We do that all the time. Reports to the town evaluating dewatering. I don't think there's going to be much in the way of dewatering, but perhaps the frequency doesn't need to be once a week. It depends on conditions. But I know in Darien, the staff rides around and takes a look at sites on their own. So whatever you put in there, we'll live with.

Calvi can do that. That'd be fine.

Finally, Consideration of submissions of neighbor's representative engineer. I think we've addressed everything, unless there are new issues that we haven't seen before. So that's basically it. So if there are questions, next thing on this next slide here. Otherwise, I'll go sit down.

No, you go sit down. Why don't you hear from Joe Katz? Okay. Thank you, Bob. You don't have anything from Redness and Mead, right? No, nothing additional from Redness and Mead. Yes, correct. So, candidates, welcome. How was your summer?

It was fantastic. I wonder why I came back from vacation, but here I am.

Vacations are never long enough, that's for sure.

They never are.

For the record, Joseph Canis. I'm a licensed professional engineer in the state of Connecticut, principal engineer at Ty and Bond. We were retained by the commission for the review of this application through our... on-call agreement for applications but so you know my first memo on this was back in April of this year and as Fred had mentioned in his introduction I had subsequent memos dated May 14th May 28th and June 15th and by that time You know, my, my comments have been addressed and I understand the neighbors had some lingering concerns. They retained the services of readiness and need Brian McMahon, who had picked up some additional items that. The applicant and Mr McMahon have been working through for the past 2 months. I know that Brian had issued a new memo in August with some additional comments and I was asked to comment on that. So I went to this site this morning just to take a look because I hadn't been there yet. So I was able to put eyes on it during the rain this morning. So it was a perfect time. And I generated this additional letter when I came back. This is the one that's dated September 1st. So this is the one that's dated today. And essentially what I'm saying here is, so some of the comments, like for the groundwater level, yeah, I understand it's full because of rain. But it's just something that should be monitored if we're gonna continue these hearings to the next time, just to see how it changes. But based on the information that's been presented, and I have not seen the response to this September 1st memo. I haven't even been able to review that. But it sounds like to me that, The groundwater is relatively steady where we would expect it to be based on the observation presented by Mr. Miller, which would be good because that is a foot, foot and a half below the space and slab elevation. So that some pump system would operate infrequently. It's more like a belt and suspenders type of thing. And as somebody who's had their basement flooded, it's certainly something that I would want as a homeowner, even if I really didn't need it.

And it's the generator.

Right.

Is there a difference between groundwater and rainwater? That's the first I've ever heard of.

Rain comes up in the sky, groundwater comes up. Well, yeah. Groundwater, essentially, is anything that we're going to be pumping out, right? And then, you know, stormwater is anything that hits the surface and flows on.

No, rainwater. Because he's saying today it's got rainwater and groundwater in it. That's why it's higher.

Right. Well, yeah, I anticipate because of the amount of rain that we got, especially this morning, it was pretty high. I would suspect when it dries out, it'll go back down and it'll come down to a static groundwater level, more or less static.

So you're buying into what Madeline said about groundwater and rainwater?

Yeah. But to be clear, rainwater can. raise the groundwater level temporarily. Right, yeah, you won't see the impact immediately.

There's usually a lag. Like when my basement flooded, it rained really hard the day before, the soil was saturated, and then my basement flooded the next day. Right, so there's a kind of a response.

As it absorbs the water, that's when the basements usually flood.

Yeah, so the next item on here I had was about the amount of fill, and that was more of a comment because it is a land filling and regrading application. Right, and you know, sometimes as engineers, as we make revisions to plans, not everything gets updated. So that was more of just a check to make sure that the latest earthwork numbers are in, because you'll need that to evaluate the landfill and regrading aspect.

Yeah, but that's just, if they bring in 10 cubic feet or take away 10 cubic feet, it doesn't move the dial. If they're bringing in 700 cubic yards, it's a difference. Right, exactly. If it's off by 10%, it doesn't affect anything.

But, you know, for us, it's a good practice. And then I had some comments about the grading at the proposed yard drains along the south side. And, you know, certainly I agree, most contractors will put the yard drain lower than the surrounding grade. But I just wanted everything to be, you know, tightened up on the plans. So that's just a minor comment. And really, the key takeaway here is that I think all the elements are there. It's, you know, to have a successful stormwater management plan, it's just that, you know, some of the details need to be filled in.

So you're not signing off on this yet? Plus, you have to read today's letter.

I have to review, right? Yeah. Uh, this well, the parking court, uh, that's what the, uh, we are in the overflow. Uh, and, you know, it was my suggestion was, you know, uh, either move it as I read as somebody suggested or provide calculations, right? Because, uh, the comment was, you know, it seemed that it was, it wasn't like specific that, uh, it wasn't like. It seems like it would or something like that. So by providing the computations, at least they can demonstrate that it meets a certain velocity standard. And then I know...

So are you agreeing with the new SWEL, the new WEIR that you're talking about?

Well, I have to review what they put together, right, the computations. But it sounds like it should be okay, but it needs...

I need to review that to prove that out.

And then I believe you, Chairman Albany, had a question about the sediment trap.

Yeah, I never heard of that.

Yeah, typically we use them on larger sites. They would be infrequently used on a residential site like this. But here, because you're not pumping out to the street, your low point is going through other people's yards. And what I was trying to accomplish by requesting that was to avoid having that coffee-colored water discharging across those properties. So what that sediment trap does, it collects the runoff from whatever is contributing to it, It allows the particles to settle out. And then it is pumped out through the dirt bag. Incidentally, dirt bag did make hats back in the early 2010s. So I have one. Maybe I'll come in the next hearing variant. So that's the whole concept. Like at West Hill High School, the building in New School, we have like eight of them scattered throughout the site.

The dirt bags you're talking about?

Dirt, well, sediment traps. We also have dirt bags.

Right, right, right. But my question is, you're putting the cul-tex at the same exact where the sediment trap's in, so one day you're gonna rip out the sediment trap, and two days later you're gonna put in the cul-tex. Right. So you're exposed for the time in the middle.

Right, yeah. You better do it on the Sunday. Right, yeah. So you'd have to time your installation for it. It's a relatively dry period. During the summer, it would have been great. Now, it's a little more challenging.

This is just construction mitigation. This is a long-term issue. Right, yeah. Temporary construction.

Exactly. And then the recommended construction measures. Again, a lot of that's just standard language. Given how this site uniquely drains through other properties to the south, I just wanted to add some word builds and suspenders, some additional measures here. And for the dewatering, as Mr. Maslin said, you might not need it all the time. You might dewater for a day, and it would be fine for the rest of the construction period. But it's just something to be documented, and that's all.

Okay. If you want us to do it, we'll do it.

No, but it sounds like he needs to review some documents. Yeah, no, he's definitely not done.

Yeah, I got it. Okay, you're done for now? I'm done for now. Fantastic. Anybody else you're bringing up? Okay. Okay, would anybody in the audience like to speak to this application?

It's going to be.

We're going to continue this to another day. I want to try to, for me personally, I'd like to try to get this done in 15 minutes total.

I can be less than 10. I'll be quicker.

I think you might take more time.

Okay. Please. The weather, are you part of this whole squad or are you separate? I don't know. Are you going to save your powder for next time?

The plans are going to be revised. We're going to get updated documents as well. Just updated comments. Joe's going to re-review everything. We'll get more comments from him. Just so you're aware.

And I assume our engineer will get a chance, just for the record.

I'll keep it brief then, just with the anecdotal depiction. My name is Bradford Glick.

Why don't you state your name and where you live and your affiliation?

I'm Bradford Glick. I'm at 60 Gardner Street. I'm at the property directly south of 64 Gardner Street.

Your backyard just got bigger.

Yep.

Congratulations.

You got free land. Actually, I'm happy to see that there's so it doesn't come up as a question as to who it is. You're welcome. Thank you. There's a number of issues that were raised with the , the grading, the drainage systems. The one I'll speak to just because it's, you know, what I can see and observe on a, you know, daily annual uh just regular basis is the runoff and i think what's depicted i don't have the powerpoint or any photos in front of me but the the drive the driveway port or the drive corridor and the proximity the increase in grade especially with the proximity to our driveway i mean it's an increase in eight feet You know, they showed it goes from 55 feet to 62, you know, six, seven, eight feet. And as much as they talked about the drainage system along the southern edge, if you look at where it's proposed to start, it's farther west or farther east than the slope. So if you look at the slope, It goes directly seven feet straight to our driveway with no barrier. And the idea that they're going to be able to direct the rain over there, it's just not realistic. I think anybody, like the rain's gonna come, it comes in torrents. I think a number of us are traumatized from the 2021 floods. Our basement flooded. We have a sump pump, but it wasn't able to keep up. And so on an anecdotal, our driveway, if anything comes onto our driveway from 64 Gardner, it'll float down our driveway in front of our garage and basement. And I've had to use a float switch pump outside of our garage to keep on some of the heavier rains from the rains getting high enough to flood our driveway and basement again. And so that system has been adequate to control the amount of rain that comes currently. But if there were to be any increase from 64 Gardiner, I'm pretty sure it would overwhelm our drainage system. So looking at, I mean, just the visual of that, I mean, it's a virtual rampart, you know, six or seven feet, you know, going from the edge of our driveway. up to their driveway or our drivers whatever the term was it's a dramatic slope it slopes down your driveway it's up from garter street down to the bottom of your driveway see a lot of the water i bet you nickel and i've not been there when it rains comes off the street down your driveway so that's an issue it definitely comes off that it's a good point when they did the initial picture of the uh what 64 gardener looked like before they did the berms you can actually still see it now from the edge of our driveway to the north where the berms are it actually slopes downward so anything that rains what falls in our driveway flows down you know reaches our drainage system whatever fly flows or whatever rain falls on 64 gardener flows north and yeah that slows north which means it's gone towards pleasant right yes and you know the the distance between our driveway and the berm presently is about 10 feet and that slope that grade away from our driveway has been what it was beforehand if the berm wasn't there that slope away from our driveway would be farther but at that point You know, when it rains, the rain flows inward towards 64 Gardner. It doesn't collect on our driveway. Farther down at our lowest point of our drive, the berm is only about three feet away from our driveway, and that's where our driveway flattens out. The 64 Gardner also flattens out, and at that point, rain pulls up and collects and flows onto our driveway. So if that slope that they have depicted, that seven to eight feet grade, is in the same proximity of our driveway that the berm is at the middle point, I can only expect that rain would be coming, all rain flow would be coming onto our driveway the same way it does now at the lower point.

The only thing I will tell you is you got to remember that property that stood a year ago had no drainage system, had nothing. So what happened three years ago, what's going to happen when this thing's all done, done, done, done? It's night and day. So you're not dealing with what is happening today. We have to deal with what's going to happen when they're finished. Between where they're starting today and when they're finished, that's the separatory sediment control measures. But in concept... They're not allowed to have one drop of water come off their property onto your property. That's the concept. That's what we're solving for.

Okay.

So if any water comes off their property and it goes out to your property, then it doesn't pass.

For what, 50 years to over 25 years?

100.

100 years. 100, sorry. Well, I appreciate that. And even just the perspective that I wouldn't have been able to articulate this before, but what they said at Pleasant Street, down to our yard of Gardner. They said it starts at 62, it goes to 54. So basically, that entire distance of the backyard is an eight feet grade. And they're going to compress that in between our driveway and where our driveway starts and their driveway port ends. So I mean, you're talking about the entire great elevation of the property. They don't give dimensions as to the driveway to our property, but it's remarkably steep, remarkably slow. And to the questions that were asked, the idea that any swale or berm You know, say it's a foot, the idea that that's not going to, that it's going to last, it's not going to compress that eventually there's going to be a weak point within that swell that the water finds and then, you know, widens over time. Uh, you know, there's nothing in these plans or nothing. I can do to enforce that swale later on once it's over. And the driveway, the porous driveway, as much as it may work when it's first built, there's nothing I can do as a property owner to force them to maintain that later after it's built. The town can.

You have to tell the town or the town doesn't.

You can call the zoning office.

We enforce it. There's a guy called the zoning enforcement officer. Come out and look at it. If three years from now it doesn't work and you say enforce it, Do you call the zoning enforcement officer? You don't have to be involved. All right.

Well, I appreciate that part, but yeah. I'll leave it at that. I may have an opportunity to speak again, but I know my neighbor has...

If I may ask a question, what would be the remedy if you were sitting in these seats at this point? I mean, we're in the midst of a... construction site we're trying to remedy so it meets the you know the conditions of our regulations which actually going to improve the impact on your property yeah so what's your biggest concern the most immediate thing is where the driveway extends south below the house

The original plans showed the driveway extending from Pleasant, wrapping around, and they didn't extend anywhere farther south of the house.

So you don't like the steepness of that hill that builds up the driveway that extends towards your... Yeah, the steepness of it, and it goes right to the edge of my property.

There's no buffer of any kind.

What I want to figure out is what's the spot elevations at the top of the, at the surface of the driveway and the road. Because that's where you're driving down into the driveway. I think it's, you know, two feet difference. We'll figure that out.

We'll figure it. But if you look at the one map, they show the current contour is at 58, and the proposed elevation of the driveway after finish is going to be 62. So it's a four-foot increase. Got it. All right. Thank you, sir. I appreciate your feedback.

You're driving down the driveway. You're going. You're going.

No, I know he's got five

I might as well start without the... Why don't you start with your name and affiliation. Yes, I am Jim Gleason. I live at 56 Gardner Street, just south of... just south of Brad, and I've lived there for 35 years. I do all my own yard work, so I know what's going on there pretty closely, talk to the neighbors. And there's been two construction projects around me in that time, and I can talk to it every day. But I'm going to focus on just the water levels. It's all about the water and what it's doing and where it's going. We definitely know, we know about Canis, we know about Mueller and all these people. So the neighbors, our engineer was McMahon who read this. Our attorney happens to be Gleason. He's my brother.

You want this over. I love you. You've seen the layout, so I won't go through that. I probably should get my. You must be the younger brother. What I want to say to each slide.

and I apologize for gimping around. I'm the owner of a new hip 20 days ago. Good for you. 20 days. I got one. Good. 22 days.

Oh my God.

Okay. Yeah, what I really want to talk, generally the contour is this way. Yep. My lot is here. Yep. Glick's Yacht is here. Actually, it's the Blisses that bought this strip of land from Rolf. And then when Rolf died, the property moved to the homes, et cetera. So that's the general contour. Gorski, in 2013, Gorski built on his lot a very large house, driveway, and two-car garage, and needed a water retention unit to retain the runoff. He tried to put it in. It was too close to the water table. He had to elevate all his property, fill it, and get the border retention units up higher. I don't have the elevations. I would have gotten them if I had time, but this whole thing is compressed. He had to build a retaining wall along this red line. It's a shallow retaining wall here, but it's three and a half feet high at my property line. All the engineers agreed that that would be what they needed to do and that it would take care of the water in here and make sure they actually buried it four feet deep so that all the water from this retention unit got forced lower and didn't interfere with all the other flow. All the engineers agreed it would work and they put it in. What it did that we didn't realize is it took all the flowing water in a southeasterly direction and redirected it due south into Lick's yard and my yard. And so every spring, we already had a drainage problem. It's wet down there in the spring, well into the summer, every rainstorm it's muggy. But it's got noticeably worse. And I think it's, whoops, oh goodness, I can do that, okay. definitely was an . We're right at the edge of being able to handle this. So there is a drainage problem.

So are you saying that it's gone from 7 Pleasant to 64 Gardner?

I don't know if there's water coming out of here, but those stone walls are

Yep.

In the ground. Yep. And what I do know is that any flow in this direction gets redirected and goes along the back of...

I agree, because there's no stormwater management system on 64 today.

Oh, in 64, there's actually a swale there, a natural swale. And when they constructed their house. No, that's 54.

At 64, there's no stormwater management system they assist today at all. No, none. Zero. None. Okay.

Okay. Does that take care of that?

So all their water goes to you. Yes. That's how it works today.

All I want to establish here is we've got a drainage problem and engineers aren't perfect.

Yep. Okay. But all the water that's on 7th is staying on 7th. All the water that's on 7 Pleasant is staying on 7 Pleasant.

Yes, to my knowledge. It's getting pushed deep enough that it doesn't... Is this what I do? Now hit the arrow. Swipe the screen.

Go the other way.

Fred, you got it. The next slide is what you want. He's trying to exit the whole slide.

It's like a control tab. It's a touchy tab over.

Hit one of those left and right things.

How did you do it?

Fred, put your hand on the screen and just go like this. There you go.

All right. Well, we've got the package. We didn't check it. We got this up.

All right, the next one's a picture. Okay.

Yeah, we've got the pictures.

We saw the pictures. There's a hole. There's water in it. Yeah, we're with you.

Okay. So he gets that figured out. It's in some sort of drawing mode.

Mr. Cleason, just go right ahead. Okay. We can hear you.

Yes. So work started. They got their permit. Work started in early April. Yep. Proceeded to do site preparation. And by April 21st, they had dug a full foundation. You can see the huge berms of dirt on the side. And water had started to accumulate in the hole that they had dug.

Yep, there's the hole. We got it.

This was taken on the Sunday after they had finished digging the full foundation. Yep. And it's a pan out of the whole area, and you can see that water was accumulating in the deepest excavations. Yep. Okay. Monday, they came in and pumped the water out twice, or tried to pump the water out twice through a pipe or a hose going to Brad's yard, the edge of Brad's yard. Brad's, water immediately turned into a flow across his lawn and my lawn. And, you know, that corroborates the drainage problem. Monday being yesterday or Monday being? 22nd, April 22nd. Got it, okay. Yep, yep. Okay, so we told them to stop. So then they dug a ditch and put a pipe and gravel around it and pumped water through it again. And it immediately turned into a flow across the lawn. So then we told them to stop. They did stop. We went to the town hall. They complained loudly, and work kept going. On the 23rd, the back home moved up to the top of the property and spent all day digging.

I don't mean to be disrespectful, but I want to know where we are today. I got it. We're dealing with existing conditions today.

I can tell you I have a photographic record of what happened. That's fine. By the 28th, water had built up to around.

Go to your next slide. It's in your next slide. No, it's not. I'm looking at it.

My next slide is, yeah. My next slide is yesterday.

Okay.

Okay. But in between, the measurement that the elevation that they gave us for this water is, what is it, 50. 51.2. 51.2, the deepest dig, the elevation of their bottom is 50.5, that is seven tenths of a foot or less than eight inches from the bottom, okay?

So now they're moving it up.

They measured it in July. I watched what the water did. I'm concerned about this. I watched what the water did. It went up until mid-May, went down through July, and then in August it did this. This is more than eight inches. bigger, and if we go to the next slide, you can see. They said it was a foot and a half of water. No, there's more than a foot. I can't measure it, and we asked to go on the site to measure it, and we're denied. So I've got to know what the water is.

They said tonight it's a foot and a half deep. Who did? The engineer, when they came up. The water tonight, as of today, the water's a foot and a half deep. So it would be an elevation.

Look at the, it's up to you. No, I understand. We can measure it too. We don't need to. Right, but they're raising it up two feet.

Pardon? They're raising up the slab that's going to be there two feet. They're raising it up. The new plan is to raise it up out of the flood area.

But they've established that the groundwater or flood area is at seven inches above what they dug to, eight inches above what they dug to. Right, so that's why they're eliminating. And I'm saying I don't think that's the case.

But they're going to put in 18 inches of trepro. On top of that dirt you're staring at, there's 18 inches of rock going in there. 18 inches up. Does that bring them above where the water is now?

Where is the water right now?

What we're caring about is the molting level, which is that rust line he's talking about. Right. Which is at like 53, I think, is the number. And that's where the foundation's going to be. So all the water, the goal is to have all the water that's going to be there underneath the basement slab foundation.

Right. And do you know, can you state that it's But the water in there right now is less than 53.

The water is irrelevant. It definitely is less. Right now it's deeper than 53. 100% yes it is. It is deeper. They're going to fill it in and raise it up.

And get rid of it.

I get what you're saying. It's also collecting rainwater. It's not just groundwater rising. Every time it rains. Every time it rains. And it's retaining it. Both of them are in there. So again, we care about the groundwater and how high that reaches without rainwater directly filling it.

And so you accept that the groundwater is down?

We are going to rely on the engineers.

It's the spot elevation we care about. Go ahead. I'm sorry.

We're going to rely on the experts and the engineers.

I agree.

They dug it deeper than it's going to be at the end of the day.

I know that, yeah, because they originally planned a deeper basin.

But then the problem is, is anybody who wants to build a house, that their basins automatically flood. That's not the smartest thing in the world. So I don't think that people that are building the house want to have two feet of water in their basement 365 days a year. There's one guy that did that. He lives up on Brookside. I have no idea why they did it, but they did it on purpose. It's either Brookside or Mansfield.

Yes. I hope the engineers can figure out how much of this is groundwater. Well, if I was the homeowner, I'd be pretty mad. Pardon?

If I was the homeowner, when I built a 5,000-square-foot house, if I had a foot of water in it from now for the rest of the duration of its life, I'd be pretty mad.

Right. But also, if you're downstream of that and they're pumping water out... well that's where the mitigation they're not pumping water from below the slab the sump pump isn't going to go eight feet down and pump water up from the depth i understand that yeah i just don't believe that the water is 18 inches below that the water will right but that's why you hired that's where you hired brian to talk about here we have to talk about springs And I'd like the engineers to apply on that as well. Thank you. Any questions?

No, we're good. Would anybody else like to speak to this application at this time? It's now 9 o'clock. We're going to leave this hearing open until another two weeks or something like that. Is it on the next week's document?

Yeah, I believe we can continue it to next week if that's going to work for the applicant.

And then everyone else can have another bite of the apple. I like your younger brother.

Thank you.

Bob, you good with that?

I'm sorry, what?

Can we continue this for a week? But you want two weeks?

No, one. Well, we have everything in, so. Joe Katz, do you need a week? It's not our turn to generate stuff.

Okay.

We've got to make sure Brian can do it in a week.

But you don't, I mean, no offense, you don't really have a say on when it's extended to?

I mean, next Tuesday is the day after Labor Day. Is there a way to push it two weeks just to...

You've got to recognize we had a very short period of preparedness.

There's no meeting in two weeks. Brian McMahon already wrote about it four days ago. We'd prefer to do it on the 8th if we can.

Okay, we'll do it on the 8th. You'll get ready. Brian's a great guy. All right, so this...

I will... I'll just make sure... The applicant's also spent a lot of money.

Whatever was done... We have to consider that. We can't steal it. The applicant needs a charge. All right, great. Great. Thank you, everybody. That's the end of the public hearing. Now we're going to go into the general meeting.

So I'm just going to note for the record that we're going to continue the hearing on this matter to September 8th at 7 p.m. here in room 206 of Town Hall.

Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Next item on the agenda is deliberation of possible decisions on the following. Business site plan number 288A is in Apple. Special permit number PL26-28. Standard Realty LLC backslash Valero. All right. 1927 Boston Post Road. Proposed to install a 20 by 26 canopy above the existing fuel dispensers on the site and to form leaded sites of activity. The hearing closed on July 28th, 2026. And in our packets, we got a draft resolution. We got a draft resolution dated today. Are there any questions, comments, typos, scriveners, errors on this one?

Nope.

Pretty straightforward. They're building a canopy. The two big items are they're going to do the standard block in the street, and I think we're requiring a performance bond.

Yeah, why are we doing the bond?

Because they're building the right-of-way.

Oh, because of the right-of-way? Yeah. If they weren't doing that, we would scrap it. Correct. Okay. We haven't done a bond in a while. That's the only reason I'm asking. Correct.

But they're building the right-of-way. Okay. The applicant, I don't know, the applicant may be surprised by it, but they'll get their money back real quick as soon as they get their seat up. Questions, comments, typos, scrimmages, errors on this one? Okay, looking for a motion to approve as submitted. John makes the motion, looking for a second. George makes a second. All in favor? 4-0. You got your new candidate.

All that sinning for two minutes.

He's not getting paid. You get paid for this. Good night, man. All right, next item up for bid is Coastal Site Plan Review Number 297B as in Boy, Flood Dam Prevention Application Number 337A as in Apple, Landfilling and Regarding Application Number 238 as in Apple, Special Permit Application Number 348PL, also known as PL26-27. Hay Island CT2 LLC at 157 Long Neck Point Road proposes to raid the existing pool house on the property and construct a raise as in demolish. And construct a replacement pool house in generally the same location, configure the driveway, terraces, and walkways, construction of the tennis court, and form raid site development activities within regulated areas, including the installation of a stormwater management. The hearing closed on July 28th, 2026. In our packets, we got a... um draft resolution on this one anybody see any questions comments typos scriveners on this one it's a huge piece of property with a relatively right-sized house on it um craig clarity presented it and there were no major issues that we saw 14 acres of land to build a new pool house Sounds good. Looking for a motion to approve as submitted. Adam makes a motion, looking for a second. George makes a second. All in favor? 4-0. Craig, clarity, you got your thing. Last item on the list, the next item on the agenda is deliberation on any public hearings closed tonight. We're not going to deliberate anything. Approval on minutes from 2028. July 28th. In your packets, we've got a set of minutes for July 28th. Questions, comments, typos, scribbles, errors on this one? It was mostly the lights of the high school light. And who was at that meeting? You were here for that meeting, but not for the whole shooting last year. You probably watched it on television. I've had four people on the whole thing.

No, it's fine. I didn't notice any errors.

Motion approved as submitted. I got a motion from Sini looking for a second. I got a second from Adam. All in favor? Four nothing. Minutes approved. Chairman's report. There is no chairman's report. Director's report. Any report from the director?

What do we got for 8 and 22? yeah we have uh our next meeting is september 8th we have a number of public hearings yeah a continuation of 800 post road the salon studios a couple regrading applications the commission is going to hear the conservation subdivision for 471 mansfield as well as a commercial application for the Corbin district.

Then we have this thing coming back.

Correct. And then we have this coming back on the 8th as well. And then the meeting after the 8th will be a meeting on the 22nd of September. Currently we have two regrading applications for Pools and patios. Okay. So nothing too major. And then, of course, the upcoming public hearing on the POCD is scheduled for October 6th. Okay. That's an opportunity.