Environmental Impact Commission

Posted in City of Danbury Town Clerk’s office on January 23, 2025 at 1:20 p.m. CITY OF DANBURY 155 DEER HILL AVENUE DANBURY, CONNECTICUT 06810 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT COMMISSION (203) 797-4525 www.danbury-ct.gov (203) 797-4586 (FAX) REGULAR MEETING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT COMMISSION MINUTES CITY HALL – 155 DEER HILL AVENUE City Council Chambers Wednesday, January 8, 2025 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: Chairman Matthew Rose called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present by roll call: Gary Dufel, Cristina Britton, Michael Flanagan, John Schwartz, and Elizabeth Falk. Staff present was Melissa Llera, Secretary, and Larry Liebman, Environmental Compliance Inspector. Chairman Rose seated alternate Gary Dufel for Geoff Herald. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Elizabeth Falk. ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES: December 18, 2024 Motion to accept the minutes of December 18, 2024 as presented was made by Elizabeth Falk; seconded by John Schwartz. No remarks. All in favor with Ayes of those eligible to vote: Gary Dufel, Cristina Britton, Michael Flanagan, John Schwartz, Elizabeth Falk, and Matthew Rose. Next regular meeting is scheduled for January 22, 2025. OLD BUSINESS: #1106R 7B Judith Drive, Gontijo, Alaor & Vasquez, Saul, (D08082), RA-40 Zone, Construction of single family dwelling, septic, and well No one present for the application. Motion to table No. 1106R, 7B Judith Drive, until the next regularly scheduled meeting was made by Elizabeth Falk; seconded by John Schwartz. All in favor with Ayes: Gary Dufel, Cristina Britton, Michael Flanagan, John Schwartz, Elizabeth Falk, and Matthew Rose. EIC Minutes – January 8, 2025 Page 2 #1228 2 Great Pasture Road, 2 GPS Owner LP, Benjamin V. Doto III, P.E., Agent, (K15109), IL-40 Zone, Expand outdoor storage, drive aisles and parking at existing industrial warehouse site Benjamin Doto, professional engineer, was present to represent the application. He is joined by James McManus, soil scientist, and Barbara Constable, landscape architect. Mr. Doto said they are here to continue with the application that was introduced on December 18th. The limits were staked on the property as requested. He is aware of site walks that were performed, and received some feedback through Mr. Liebman. He then provided an environmental summary to the Commissioners that was completed by a LEP. The property has a 115,000 sq. ft building on 15.6 acres. There is currently about 15,000 sq. ft. of outdoor storage. They are proposing to add 66,000 sq. ft. of outdoor storage, along with a driveway on the left which would link to the other in the rear. With the proposal, they would be removing 2,900 sq. ft. of wetlands and filling about 160 cubic yards of floodplain. They would be adding about 11,000 sq. ft. of wetlands, and there would be a net gain of floodplain storage after the work. Other improvements would include landscaping, drainage, stormwater quality, sidewalks, etc. Mr. Doto then clarified some errors that had been listed in a recent article in the newspaper. The property owner lives in New York, not Greenwich as the newspaper stated. The property management company is located in Greenwich. The newspaper also brought up a lot of debris on the site which would be cleaned up as part of the project. In addition, the property was purchased in 2022, and was not simply acquired. The site is currently listed for sale or lease, but that is a result of a current tenant having a lease that will be expiring. In regards to the environmental summary, their LEP, Paul Tanner, went through the records and compiled a summary and map for the Commission. The contaminants that were found were hydraulic oils with PCBs. The site was cleaned between 1995-2006, and then the ELUR was done. There are no residential uses permitted on the site. The LEP overlayed the ELUR on the site plan. Mr. Doto reviews some of the areas specified on the map with their restrictions. There was also groundwater monitoring on site, and did not find a reason for remediation. He then directs the Commission to page 3 of the report for a summary on the environmental conditions and reads a portion of it. The construction would reduce the potential for erosion and infiltration due to the increase in paving. It is important that the work be done with a soil management plan in place. There are details listed in the LEP’s report. DEEP would have input on the soil management plan. It would ensure that any soil is either reused in the same area or tested before being taken off-site or moved. Mr. Doto then addresses comments received after the site walks. The surface debris will be removed. There is currently about 15,000 sq. ft of outdoor storage which is mostly the fenced in area by the roofing company. They are proposing adding 66,000 sq. ft. There would be about 650 linear feet of new driveway. The area behind the trailers in front will be stabilized, and will be shown on the revised plans that will be forthcoming. The detention system shown on the plans is a tight system which means is it not perforated and does not sit on gravel. This is to prevent any contamination. A construction sequencing plan will also be done and provided to the Commission. There was also a question about whether the 24” culvert they walked over was sized properly; Mr. Doto said it is not, but due to the sizing of other culverts on the neighbor’s property, increasing the size would not make a difference. They will be decreasing the flows with the proposed project though. The Commission also asked if they could flip the restoration EIC Minutes – January 8, 2025 Page 3 area with another area on the plans; Mr. Doto said this would result in more wetland disturbance and fill. Ms. Falk asks if there is a calculation of the change in impervious surface. Mr. Doto said with the buildings and pavement, it is currently about 31%/ 4.8 acres. With the proposed project, they would increase by 2.25 acres for a total of 7.1 acres/ 45%. The building itself is about 17% coverage. James McManus, certified professional soil scientist, then spoke on the application. He was on site first in July 2023 to delinate wetlands in the NE corner. He recently revisited the site. He will provide a full report next meeting. The NE corner that he flagged is an isolated pocket that seems to have been cut off from a larger system when they put in the sewer easements. It is pretty disturbed and has invasive species. The southern part of the site and the NW corner also have wetlands. They are all wooded swamps and seasonally saturated. The NW corner is more disturbed with the existing railroad spur and previous tracks. There are seven principle functions in the wetlands which will be outlined in his report. There is a fair amount of invasive species on the property. The ones they can get to will be removed, and some will be taken with the construction itself. Almost all of the wetlands follow along the fill boundary. Mr. Liebman states that the wetlands were flagged 24 years ago by Mr. Muller. The Commissioners felt the site should be revisited because they could change in size. They would like an updated flagging and report of all the wetlands on site. Mr. McManus doesn’t feel there has been a changed. Mr. Doto acknowledges the request, and said any changes can be flagged. Mr. Liebman said that the Commission feels this could warrant a public hearing for a significant activity, so they would like the wetlands reflagged to hopefully avoid that process. Mr. Schwartz request copies of the correspondence with DEEP for the ELUR release when it is done. Mr. Doto agrees, and said a copy of the soil management plan would also be provided. Mr. Schwartz states he did some research on previous testing, etc. on the site. It appears there was more testing on the site, and he requests that the LEP add to the plan any sample locations from the past. Mr. Doto agrees to that. Mr. Schwartz also asks if any testing was done for Cronium which was shown on hazardous waste manifests for the site when Fuel Cell was there. Mr. Doto said he will look into it. Mr. Schwartz also asks if DEEP will require an ecological assessment due to the significant disturbance to the wetlands. Mr. McManus responds that his report will show the functions and values for the wetlands. Mr. Schwartz requests the reflagging of wetlands with an updated survey. Mr. Flanagan asks if the railroad ties will be removed. Mr. Doto said they would be disposed of properly off site once they are removed. Barbara Constable, landscape architect, then spoke on the application. She noted multiple invasive species on the site. They will be providing a mitigation plan to address the ones in the work area and a removal plan specific to each species. Mr. Liebman then summarizes the requests from the Commission. They want the plan revisions for the area behind the trailer, a report from Mr. McManus with a functional value assessment, an invasive removal plan, sample locations for the property, and the soil management plan through DEEP. Mr. Doto replies that the wetland confirmation flagging will be first in case there are any changes. The soil management plan will come at the end before construction, but we will be included in that and the ELUR release information. Mr. Doto will provide updates to staff throughout the process. EIC Minutes – January 8, 2025 Page 4 Motion to table No. 1228, 2 Great Pasture Road, until the next regularly scheduled meeting was made by Elizabeth Falk; seconded by John Schwartz. All in favor with Ayes: Gary Dufel, Cristina Britton, Michael Flanagan, John Schwartz, Elizabeth Falk, and Matthew Rose. #1229 160-162 Deer Hill Avenue, First Congregational Church & Ecclesiatical Society, Virbickas, Dainius, Agent; (I14104 & I14105), RH-3 Zone, Construction of apartment building, along with parking, walkways, landscaping, and storm drainage system Dainius Virbickas, professional engineer with Artel Engineering, was present to represent the application. He is following up from last meeting, and he is aware staff and the Commission members performed site walks. Staff had asked for an updated drawing adding the cut fill calculations which he has provided. He also received the Project Impact Report, and accepts the proposed conditions of approval. Mr. Flanagan asks if the discharge for the roof runoff from the Church had been determined. Mr. Liebman responded that he did receive that information after they had opened the manhole and located any connections. Mr. Flanagan also noticed the remanents of an old fence by the Blind Brook on the property, and wondered if that fence would be restored and a gate added for access. Mr. Botelho, current property owner, said they had not planned to because they didn’t want the area used as a cut thru. He would certainly take any advisement from the City if they feel access would be needed to that area. Motion to approve No. 1229, 160-162 Deer Hill Avenue, with the 7 conditions noted in the staff report was made by Elizabeth Falk; seconded by Michael Flanagan. All in favor with Ayes: Gary Dufel, Cristina Britton, Michael Flanagan, John Schwartz, Elizabeth Falk, and Matthew Rose. #1231 18 Christopher Columbus Avenue, City of Danbury Public Utilities Dept., Tata & Howard Inc., Agent; (D15022), IL-40 Zone, Kenosia Wellfield PCE and PFAS Treatment Upgrades including construction of new treatment building David Day, Superintendent of Public Utilities for the City of Danbury, was present to represent the application. It is a very important water project to be completed. There is an existing Kenosia wellfield. However, they have discovered low levels of VOCs and PFAS in it. That is the reason why they need a treatment system. The City of Danbury is required by Department of Public Health to maintain a margin of safety greater than 1.15. The margin of safety is the ratio of available water to demand. The project would be essential to maintain this margin of safety. Matt Morganelli from Tata & Howard, the design consultant for the project, then spoke on the application. The treatment facility would have a 44’ x 57’ building that would be 30’ tall. It would house treatment equipment for the wellfield. Inside there will be carbon treatment for PFAS removal. Outside there will be two towers for VOC removal. The existing site is at 18 Christopher Columbus Avenue (Lake Kenosia Park). The building would be at the southwest corner of the site. Currently there is a water department building and a flood skimming station that takes the surface water from Lake Kenosia and transfers it to the West Lake Reservoir. The groundwater wells are currently active, but haven’t been used in awhile due to the levels of VOCs. There are wetlands on the south and west corner of the parcel. They are about 90 ft. away on the west side and closest to the building is about 30 ft. There would be erosion controls EIC Minutes – January 8, 2025 Page 5 in place for the duration of construction. There are also stormwater controls installed to treat water from the building roof leaders which will go to an infiltration basin; infiltration basin is sized for the 25 and 100 year storm. There is an overflow for the infiltration basin that would discharge to a rip rap swale heading toward the wetlands. The project is within the 100 year floodplain. They would lose about 280 cubic yards of flood storage with the project, but would add 294 cubic yards for a net gain of 14 cubic yards. They would be excavating to install the building foundation, along with utility work for a water main and electrical work for updates. The wells would also be rehabilitated. The wells would be surged and pumped, and discharged to a sedimentation basin. Any sediment would be removed, and it would then be released at a low volume to prevent any scouring. Mr. Schwartz asks about the process of redeveloping the wells. He expresses his concerns about the treatment of the discharge during the process. Mr. Morganelli and Mr. Schwartz have a discussion about testing that was done and treatment possibilities during the process. Mr. Liebman asks if a detention basin may be appropriate during the surge and purge to capture material and ensure volitiles are not redistributed. Mr. Day then provided clarification on the phasing of the project. The treatment system would be built and operational first. They are looking to redevelop the wells to maximize the diversion. The have a permit for 2.5 million gallons per day, but are currently only getting 1.8 mgd. When it comes time to redevelop the wells, they will work with the consultant to ensure the process doesn’t put anything with high concentrations on the ground whether they use a tank or run it through the system. Mr. Dufel asks if this will be a temporary treatment system. Mr. Day says they are using the Kenosia floodskimming, but DPH wants that to stop. They took the wellfields offline voluntarily because of the VOCs, but need to get them going now. They plan to keep them in operation in the future. Mr. Dufel asked where the VOCs may have come from. Mr. Day said they haven’t pinpointed it, but believe it could be from the Mill Plain Road area. There is a groundwater monitoring plan in place, and determined it is not from the Kenosia site. This would be a first phase treatment, and then pumped to the West Lake Reservoir. Mr. Liebman informs the Commission that with this happening, they may need to come up with a program regarding the boat docks on Lake Kenosia. Motion to table No. 1231, 18 Christopher Columbus Avenue, until the next regularly scheduled meeting was made by Elizabeth Falk; seconded by John Schwartz. All in favor with Ayes: Gary Dufel, Cristina Britton, Michael Flanagan, John Schwartz, Elizabeth Falk, and Matthew Rose. #1232 16 Sage Road, Swergold, Gary, Hadaya, Eedeet, Agent; (H22109), RA-20 Zone, Construction of addition and temporary access for construction Chairman Rose informed the Commission that the applicant requested the matter be tabled. Mr. Liebman informed the Commission that new information was received Tuesday afternoon, and he hadn’t had a chance to do his full review. Motion to table No. 1232, 16 Sage Road, until the next regularly scheduled meeting was made by Elizabeth Falk; seconded by John Schwartz. All in favor with Ayes: Gary Dufel, Cristina Britton, Michael Flanagan, John Schwartz, Elizabeth Falk, and Matthew Rose.  EIC Minutes – January 8, 2025 Page 6 APPLICATION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL: #1233 6 Marion Street, Caetano Construction; (H22124), RA-20 Zone, Construction of addition Mr. Liebman informed the Commission that the project is for a second floor addition by Lake Waubeeka. The only disturbance would from the hand excavation to install the 10 piers for the base of the addition. Motion to grant Administrative Approval for No. 1233, 6 Marion Street, with the 6 conditions noted in the staff report was made by Elizabeth Falk; seconded by John Schwartz. All in favor with Ayes: Gary Dufel, Cristina Britton, Michael Flanagan, John Schwartz, Elizabeth Falk, and Matthew Rose. VIOLATIONS: 1. Halas, Barnum Road, Danbury, CT- Cease & Desist Chairman Rose informed the Commission that they are just waiting for the executed copy of the “draft agreement” the Commission has been provided. Motion to table Halas violation was made by Elizabeth Falk; seconded by John Schwartz. All in favor with Ayes: Gary Dufel, Cristina Britton, Michael Flanagan, John Schwartz, Elizabeth Falk, and Matthew Rose. 2. Show Cause Hearing- Cease & Desist: 196-200 Franklin Street Extension Mr. Liebman informed the Commission that the homeowner is present. He then read the “Matter of Record” which is as follows: MATTER OF RECORD, 196-200 Franklin Street Extension Prepared by Lawrence Liebman, Environmental Compliance Inspector 1/6/2024 10/30/2024 -Complaint received from property owner of 212 Franklin Street Extension stating that his property was experiencing additional amounts of water and that there has been “noise of heavy equipment” all summer long. L. Liebman walked to the rear of the property and followed watercourse to 196 -200 Franklin Street Extension where it was observed that the pond was recently dredged, weirs and walls reconstructed. Returned to car and drove to 196-200 Franklin Streety extension Left white and yellow tag. Returned to office and reviewed air photos on GIS which reviled extensive work being done. Reviewed w R. Boggan Associate Director of Environmental Health. Instructed to send notice to inspect. 10/31/2024 -Sent Notice to inspect both regular mail and certified mail. Property owner Ruby Rodriquez called office and scheduled site walk for 11/4/24 11/4/2024-Researched land records, R. Rodriquez closed on property 6/6//2024 L. Liebman & R. Boggan inspected property w Property owner Rodriquez was present.  EIC Minutes – January 8, 2025 Page 7 OBSERVATIONS • Pond has been dredged • A dam has been constructed at the inlet side which is backwatering onto adjacent properties • A stone groin has been constructed, possible connection to island that was created during dredge • Active irrigation and aeration system installed • Pond spoils pushed onto southern banks of pond against trees • Main dam has been reworked • Photos taken Retrieved EIC permit #1072 for pond dredging issued 1/10/2018 ** NO CONDITIONS OF PERMIT WERE EXECUTED 11/05/2024 L. Liebman called M. Mazzucco engineer of record, he was unaware of any activity 11/6/2024-Liebman inspected property w/EIC Commissioner Herald, His recollection was that additional clearing and grading was preformed 11/14/2024-Liebman sent draft Cease and desist to Corporation Counsel. 12/30/2024-Cease and Desist sent certified 1/6/2025-Liebman spoke w Ruby Rodriquez and informed re show cause hearing on 1/8/2024 @7:00 pm POSSIBLE ACTIONS *The Commission shall consider the facts presented at the hearing and within ten (10) days of the completion of the hearing notify the person by certified mail that the original order remains in effect, that a revised order is in effect, or that the order has been withdrawn. The Commission shall publish notice of its decision in a newspaper having a general circulation in the municipality. The original order shall be effective upon issuance and shall remain in effect until the Commission affirms, revises or withdraws the order. *Suspend or revoke a permit if it finds that the permittee has not complied with the terms, conditions or limitations set forth in the permit or has exceeded the scope of the work as set forth in the application including application plans. Prior to revoking or suspending any permit, the Commission shall issue notice to the permittee, personally or by certified mail, return receipt requested, setting forth the facts or conduct which warrants the intended action. *Issue a notice of violation to such person conducting such activity or maintaining such facility or condition, stating the nature of the violation, the jurisdiction of the Commission, and prescribing the necessary action and steps to correct the violation including, without limitation, halting work in wetlands or watercourses. Failure to carry out the action(s) directed in a notice of violation may result in issuance of the order provided in Section 13.3.a or other enforcement proceedings as provided by law. If the commission decides to issue a notice of violation the following is the actions are recommended; *A CT Licensed Professional Engineer evaluate and certify that the work performed is in accordance with sound engineering practices and if any remedial actions are required to eliminate/minimize impacts to adjoining properties. The engineer shall evaluate what was constructed versus what was proposed. *Prepare a revised survey indicating the current existing conditions to include wetland limits. depth of spoil, irrigation/aeriation systems, heights and flow lines of weirs, walls etc. *Test the spoil for any possible contaminates, ie heavy metals, TPH, pesticides etc. * Prepare an ecological report on the current and future conditions of the watercourse.  EIC Minutes – January 8, 2025 Page 8 *Prepare a restoration plan to include planting and enhancement. *Any other information that the DEIC deems necessary. Mr. Liebman informs the Commission that the spoils that were spread had not been tested to see if they were contaminated; therefore the whole area could be contaminated. The work that was performed was not done with the benefit of an engineer. Upstream neighbors are now getting more water. He then provides aerial pictures from multiple years that show the Commissioners the changes of the area. Mr. Liebman says the homeowner states he bought the property like this. He has not provided the contractor information who did the work with no permits. Ms. Britton asks for clarification about Mr. Liebman stating no conditions of the permit were met. My. Liebman states an EIC permit was issued in 2018 with multiple conditions of approval. They were not completed. The property is not visible in this area from the road, so they were unaware of the work until they received a complaint. Mr. Rodriguez, homeowner, was present. He is a resident and business owner of Danbury. He was on site during Mr. Liebman’s November 4th site visit. He said the work was already completed with the exception of the stone walls which is something he was having done. The work on the pond was done 8-12 months ago according to Mr. Rodriguez. Mr. Liebman shows Mr. Rodriguez the 2023 aerial photo which shows the area in question to be vegetated and not a pond. He also states that an engineering review is needed because of the potential impacts on the neighbors, especially if the dam fails. The sediment that was spread should have been tested before dredging, so it could have been handled properly if it was contaminated instead of spread throughout the property. Mr. Dufel feels that impacting neighbors with water is a big deal that can have lasting effects. It is especially wrong to do without the proper permits. He also states that by doing this they have changed the whole biology of the system, and things have been changed, disturbed, and destroyed. Mr. Liebman says that Dr. Sacchi applied for the permit in 2018, which was granted, for the pond dredging. It permits were pulled and staff notified, there would have been weekly monitoring of the progress by City staff or outside professional. Mr. Liebman recommends a Notice of Violation is issued. Mr. Rose asks if Mr. Liebman if the homeowner has seen the recommendations. Mr. Liebman stated that Mr. Rodriguez has received the Cease & Desist order. He will issue or proceed with whatever action the Commission chooses. The Commission can choose to revoke the 2018 permit, issue a Notice of Violation, go to court to have fines implemented, or add whatever else they may feel required. Ms. Britton asks when the complaints were received; Mr. Liebman responds 2024. Ms. Britton feels it is likely that the work was done recently then. Mr. Dufel feels revoking the permit doesn’t mean much since the work is basically completed. Mr. Liebman said a judge could issue fines. Mr. Schwartz asks if they could impose fines and issue something or revoke the permit; Mr. Liebman says they could. Mr. Liebman feels potential actions could be based on the willingness of Mr. Rodriguez to rectify the situation. The three options he provided were from the enforcement section of the Regulations. He reiterates his recommendation to issue a Notice of Violation, and they could always assess fines later. The forensic and engineering work that is required will be costly. If it is all contaminated it could be classified as a brownfield. EIC Minutes – January 8, 2025 Page 9 Multiple Commission members would like the name of the engineer Mr. Rodriguez plans to hire submitted to City staff for approval. Mr. Rodriguez states he is willing to cooperate with rectifying the situation. He would like to hire a lawyer as well; Mr. Rose agrees that would be his right. Motion to issue Notice of Violation with conditions was made by Elizabeth Falk; seconded by Michael Flanagan. The conditions were specified as follows: *A CT Licensed Professional Engineer evaluate and certify that the work performed is in accordance with sound engineering practices and if any remedial actions are required to eliminate/minimize impacts to adjoining properties. The engineer shall evaluate what was constructed versus what was proposed. *Prepare a revised survey indicating the current existing conditions to include wetland limits. depth of spoil, irrigation/aeriation systems, heights and flow lines of weirs, walls etc. *Test the spoil for any possible contaminates, ie heavy metals, TPH, pesticides etc. * Prepare an ecological report on the current and future conditions of the watercourse. *Prepare a restoration plan to include planting and enhancement. *Retain a professional engineer, and submit name for approval *Reserve the right to impose fines in the future *Any other information or activities that the DEIC deems necessary in the future. All in favor with Ayes: Gary Dufel, Cristina Britton, Michael Flanagan, John Schwartz, Elizabeth Falk, and Matthew Rose. ADJOURNMENT: Motion to adjourn was made by Elizabeth Falk; seconded by Michael Flanagan. All in favor with Ayes: Gary Dufel, Cristina Britton, Michael Flanagan, John Schwartz, Elizabeth Falk, and Matthew Rose. Meeting adjourned at 8:47 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Melissa Llera Recording Secretary