Agency approves Enfield’s West Shore Drive pump-station, seawall and site upgrades over one dissent

The Inland Wetlands & Watercourses Agency voted to approve IW 260158, a wetland permit for upgrades to the wastewater pump station, retaining wall and related site improvements at 58 West Shore Drive (Map 96, Lot 23), an Enfield Water Pollution Control project. The motion passed on a 5–1 roll call; Ian Collins recorded the lone no vote and asked for a fuller explanation of how the project would protect the watercourse.

Donald Nunes, Director of Public Works, introduced the project and said the town is advancing a needed upgrade to aging infrastructure. Engineer Nash Erickson (Weston & Sampson) presented the plans and described the site and the proposed work: the property is roughly 0.35 acres adjacent to Shaker Pond, includes flagged wetlands and a FEMA 100-year floodplain (elevation 184.6), and contains a failing sheet-pile retaining wall of about 280 linear feet. The existing pump station—installed in 1982—serves approximately 30 homes and will be replaced with a consolidated station, new above‑ground diesel generator and updated electrical service. The plan calls for most work to occur upland, use of compost filter tubes and silt fences, and timing construction to occur while the pond is drawn down for annual maintenance to limit waterside impacts.

Erickson said a Corps of Engineers pre-application review concluded the work falls under Nationwide Permit 3 (non-reporting) and a Connecticut DEEP Natural Diversity Database review found no anticipated negative impacts to state-listed species. Engineers also said filling at the site is minimal (about 2 cubic yards) and the design reduces impervious cover by nearly 200 square feet via crushed-stone access in place of pavement.

Ian Collins explained his no vote, saying the explanation provided at the meeting was insufficient: “I think it is going to affect the water course… and there’s a great deal more work that needs to be done to protect the lake,” and he asked that the record state which regulation the project might not match. The project’s motion carried despite the objection.

The approval includes a site-specific condition allowing soils to be brought onto the site as discussed at the hearing and standard E&S measures; staff will monitor compliance and inspect during construction.