Applicant says driveway crossing will affect wetlands at 45 Saddle Rock Road; hearing continued to April 9

The Danbury City Environmental Impact Commission continued a public hearing on a proposal to build a single‑family home at 45 Saddle Rock Road after the applicant described a driveway crossing that the applicant estimates will permanently affect about 1,700 square feet of wetland.

Dines Vervicas, a professional engineer representing the applicant, told the commission the parcel is about 0.8 acres and that the current proposal reduces the previously approved footprint from roughly 1,800–1,830 square feet to about 1,350 square feet. He said the access will require crossing an on‑site wetland and that construction will include a box culvert under the driveway, an infiltration trench at the driveway edge and substantial plantings to restore wetland areas.

“The wetlands that we need to cross is located about … at the base of the slope down from the road,” Vervicas said, summarizing the site layout and mitigation steps. He described the permanent loss from the crossing as approximately 1,700 square feet and said temporary disturbance during construction could total about 2,200 square feet.

Why it matters: The parcel abuts Upper Cajanza Reservoir, and commissioners raised questions about hydrology, the community water system and protection of the nearby well. Commissioners asked whether the wetland boundaries have changed since the prior 2009 approval and whether routing of roof and driveway runoff could be managed to avoid sending extra flow onto neighboring properties.

Commissioner questions focused on alternatives to reduce wetland impact, including steeper riprap slopes, retaining walls or a narrower crossing, and on sequencing construction so the crossing is installed first to limit vehicle traffic across sensitive areas. Vervicas said the design team can evaluate tighter crossing footprints, retaining walls or riprap and can provide elevations and drainage details.

A nearby resident, Keegan Williamson of 43 Saddle Rock, said he had come to learn about the plan and expressed concern about loss of wetlands and the length of time disturbance would last. “Hearing that it would be removing wetlands, I would be very concerned about that,” Williamson said.

Staff member Larry read written correspondence from a neighbor and recounted prior review materials dating to 2009 and the 2014 extension. He noted outstanding items staff requires before the commission can act, including an updated drainage plan, a more detailed narrative, an increased planting/restoration plan, an alternatives analysis, engineered wall details (top and bottom walls shown), and explicit details on how the wetland crossing will be accomplished. Staff recommended continuing the hearing so the applicant can provide the materials and, at the commission’s request, reflag the wetlands in the field.

A commissioner moved to continue the public hearing to the commission’s next regular meeting on April 9; the motion carried. The commission also voted to add the prior EIC record for the same parcel (previous file EIC 84645) to the application file for reference.

Next steps: The commission asked the applicant to provide updated wetland delineation in the field, detailed drainage and roof runoff plans, engineered wall drawings (if proposed), and a conservation easement draft for legal review. The hearing will resume at the April 9 meeting. The motion to continue was made on the record; the transcript does not specify the seconder by name.