Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
IWWCC approves two‑lot subdivision at 245 Old Canterbury Turnpike with conditions
Loading...
Summary
The Inland Wetlands & Watercourse Commission found the proposed two‑lot split at 245 Old Canterbury Turnpike not a significant activity and approved it with conditions, including staff comments, an archaeological note and a swale maintenance requirement.
The Inland Wetlands & Watercourse Commission on a unanimous vote approved a two‑lot subdivision application for 245 Old Canterbury Turnpike, finding the proposal “not a significant activity” and attaching several conditions, including staff comments and a note requiring swale maintenance.
John Felice of Boundaries LLC, the consultant presenting the plan, described the 4.4‑acre parcel split into Parcel A (about 1.1 acres) and Parcel B (about 3.25 acres). Felice said the design locates houses and septic systems to minimize impacts on delineated wetlands and that work in upland review areas would be limited to roughly 0.3 acres for Parcel A and about 0.5 acres for Parcel B. He said the proposal includes a shallow swale sized to carry about twice the capacity of the discharge pipe and that the town engineer provided comments dated Jan. 6 that had not yet been incorporated into the plan set.
“Based on the sheet in front of you ... there are no direct impacts to inland wetlands associated with this application,” Felice said during the presentation.
Commissioners asked about distances from structures and leach fields to the wetland edge; Felice said the nearest house location is about 55 feet from the wetlands, and the primary leach fields are approximately 65–70 feet away. He also said the swale and long‑term erosion and sediment (E&S) controls would be the responsibility of the property owner and suggested including a deed caveat to make that obligation clear to future owners.
Before the approval vote, staff noted the site has moderate archaeological sensitivity and asked that a note be added to the plans requiring contact with the department if artifacts are uncovered. Commissioner Brandon moved the significance determination and later moved approval of IWWCC‑25‑14 “including staff’s comments and conditions as well as the note on the swale.” The motion passed unanimously.
The commission’s approval was conditioned on incorporating the town engineer’s comments, implementing the E&S controls shown in the plan set (sediment fence, straw bales backed by stakes, stone check dams and anti‑tracking pads), and the addition of the archaeological note and swale maintenance language in the legal description. The applicant also provided an Oncus Health District approval dated Feb. 5 certifying that the two new lots meet public health code requirements for sewage disposal; staff confirmed that document had been received.
The commission did not require additional mitigation beyond the listed conditions and closed the agenda item after recording the motion and vote.
