Milford Inlands Wetlands Agency approves 53‑unit 34 Buick Ave project with inspection and monitoring conditions

The Milford Inlands Wetlands Agency voted Nov. 5 to approve application IW250036 for a proposed 53‑unit building at 34 Buick Avenue under Connecticut General Statute 8‑30g, contingent on several conditions aimed at ensuring the project’s stormwater measures and wetland mitigation are installed and maintained as designed.

The agency’s approval requires the permittee to submit construction plans, install erosion and sedimentation controls consistent with the Connecticut DEEP 2024 guidelines, and post construction and mitigation bonds. The approval also requires the project engineer to certify drainage and that the completed project meets the design intent prior to bond release. In addition, the agent reading the motion included conditions added during deliberation: independent compaction and permeability testing of underlying soils before paver installation, a site monitor approved by the agency to be on‑site during paver installation, weekly photo documentation of each cell and barrier, recording the operations and maintenance manual for the pervious paver system on the city land records, and submission of paver maintenance records during the mitigation monitoring period.

Why it mattered: Commissioners focused on whether the paver‑based infiltration system proposed by the applicant would adequately treat stormwater and remain operable long term. Several commissioners asked for explicit implementation safeguards — a precondition to approving a design that relies on porous pavers for treatment — citing the risk that improper installation or lack of maintenance could allow runoff to reach nearby wetlands and Stubby Brook.

Technical and policy details: Consultants and staff told the agency that the state stormwater quality manual recognizes infiltration through paver systems as an accepted approach when full stormwater quality volume is infiltrated. Rob Pryor of LandTech said the paver system functions as the treatment, and that because of the system’s porosity and bedding materials it is unlikely to freeze solid and plug. Nevertheless, commissioners pressed for: (1) compaction and permeability testing of the native soils prior to installation, (2) independent testing frequency acceptable to the design engineer, (3) third‑party site monitoring during installation, and (4) recorded operations and maintenance manuals and annual maintenance records to be kept with the property deed and submitted during mitigation monitoring.

Mitigation and bonds: The agency required a mitigation monitoring bond and professional monitoring by wetland scientists for a minimum of three years with biannual reports; if the planting criteria are not met at year three, the bond may be held for an additional period (commonly up to two additional years) until the site achieves required establishment thresholds. The mitigation area on sheet LP‑1 was required to be mowed once per year to maintain a meadow habitat unless an alternate planting plan is approved by staff.

Outstanding site issue: Commissioner Brian Black pressed the group about an existing drainage pipe from Sunny Court that discharges onto the site and currently conveys unfiltered flow to a headwall upstream of the project area. City staff and the public works director said the city does not maintain or have equipment for the type of manhole filtration device that would be needed at that pipe; the city’s easement terminates at the property line and does not extend across the private parcel, so responsibility for additional filtration on that pipe was not assumed by the city.

Vote and next steps: The motion, which incorporated the draft approval language and the supplemental conditions discussed at the meeting, passed by roll call with the commissioners present voting in favor; one commissioner (Daniel Beddicker) had earlier confirmed he had not reviewed all prior records and therefore did not vote on this item. The agency’s decision is memorialized with the listed conditions; staff will collect the required test results, certifications and bonds before releasing any bonds and before the permittee may proceed with final construction.