Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wetlands Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Stratford wetlands commission approves James Farm house with maintenance, pesticide restrictions
Summary
The Inland Wetlands Commission approved construction of a single-family home at 335 James Farm Road (Lot 8) after the applicant agreed to stronger stormwater treatment, a recorded maintenance plan for Coltec units, wetland boundary markers and a conservation-easement-style restriction prohibiting pesticides; commissioners added vegetation monitoring requirements.
The Town of Stratford Inland Wetlands Commission voted to approve an application to construct a single-family home on Lot 8 at 335 James Farm Road, subject to plan callouts, a recorded maintenance commitment for underground stormwater units, and a pesticide restriction recorded on the land record.
Barry Knott, attorney with Knott, Knott and Dunn, said he represents Calacar LLC and presented three exhibits showing the prior eight-lot subdivision approval and the current Lot 8 plan. He told the commission the previously demolished 1892 house had been adjacent to the wetland and the proposed new house will be sited farther forward toward the street, “about 55 feet from the wetlands,” increasing separation from the wetland edge.
Engineer Manny Silva of Rose Season Company explained stormwater controls and mitigation: the design calls for four underground Coltec units even though two would meet the requirement; Silva said the plan provides roughly 316 cubic feet of treatment versus the 79 cubic feet required. Silva also described planting mitigation (pin oak and other species), silt fences backed with hay bales, an anti-tracking pad at the driveway, protected topsoil storage and other erosion controls.
A commissioner proposed two conditions: a perpetual maintenance contract for the Coltec units and a recorded restriction barring pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers on the lot because “the back half of that lot drains … toward the wetlands.” Knott and Silva said maintenance scheduling and responsibilities can be added to the plans and an owner-signed maintenance letter can be filed with staff or the town clerk before Certificate of Occupancy; Silva noted the manufacturer’s maintenance schedule and an approved service provider (Stormwater Authority Connecticut) are identified on the plan.
Commissioners also required wetland boundary placards or posts to reduce the risk of future encroachment and agreed to a standard vegetation-monitoring condition for the wetland mitigation area (one year of monitoring with replacement as necessary, with discussion of a longer maintenance bond tied to grant timelines). Staff agreed to receive marked-up plans reflecting the maintenance details and pesticide restriction language.
Speaker 6 moved to approve the application; the motion was seconded and commissioners voted in favor. The commission directed staff to verify the plan callouts and that the conservation-easement-style restriction and maintenance agreement are recorded or filed as specified before final administrative closure.
The commission did not require an in-depth biological baseline for the wetland at this time, though commissioners asked staff to document the existing site with geotagged photos for future reference and enforcement.
