KENT, Conn.—The Inland Wetlands Commission last week formally received an application for an 80-unit development off Kent Green. The commission has 65 days to decide about the application, which included nearly 1,000 pages of documentation and was submitted by Kent Housing Development.
The IWC is concerned only with the impact of the development on wetlands—of which there is only one “resource,” a manmade watercourse that traverses the 12.5-acre site. The application included details about the layout of the 14 buildings proposed for the site, landscaping, and drainage as well as a plan to slightly modify the watercourse to provide better water flow and more opportunities for planting along its banks.
Commissioners quickly decided they needed expert guidance from an independent engineer to assess the plan’s impact. “I am not an engineer,” said IWC Chairman Lynn Werner. “I do not feel equipped to judge the design and feel the need to have our outside consultant look at everything you provided and help us to evaluate it in an objective way.”
Her colleagues on the commission agreed.
They also discussed whether a public hearing should be held to provide residents an opportunity to comment, and how a hearing might affect the timetable for approval. A hearing would lengthen the time the commission has to decide, but uncertainty about how quickly an engineering consultant prepare a report complicates the issue.
Zoning Enforcement Officer Tai Kern said Dec. 2 is the “drop dead date” for opening a public hearing and all commissioners agreed they want to see the consultant’s report before opening one.
The commission can call a hearing if it believes that a project will have a significant impact on wetlands or if it deems it appropriate to hear public comment. A third trigger for a hearing would be a petition signed by 25 or more residents. Bonnie Bevans, a vigorous opponent to the plan, has called for residents to sign a petition asking for just such a hearing.
The full scope of the development is large and complicated, but commissioners were unsure whether the impact would be significant for wetlands. “I could be persuaded that the impact is not significant,” said Werner, “but I have heard a lot of discourse for and against it in the community and it might be good for the community to discuss it.”
She cautioned, however, that the hearing would be held to gather information and would not be “an adversarial process.” Input would be confined to the items over which the IWC has purview.
Other commissioners questioned whether a hearing is needed at all if the consultant comes back with a positive review. “It makes sure the public has a full opportunity to hear the explanations and raise questions that would be captured in the hearing record,” said Werner.
Developer Jim Millstein said he understands the need for an independent consultant but mildly demurred about the necessity of a public hearing. He noted that iterations of the plan have now been presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission and Inland Wetlands Commission five times. All those meetings were open to the public. It will be presented to PZC yet again if IWC approves it. “That will be the sixth time for the public to express their views,” he said.
He said there is no question that lengthy permitting processes impede development in the U.S. creating a significant housing crunch. “You have an important but narrow function,” he said to the commissioners, expressing concern that a public hearing would introduce issues not under consideration by the IWC.
“As a commission we can separate the information we need to make a decision from what is not relevant,” said Werner.
The commission decided to wait until its next meeting to determine if a hearing is needed. Special meetings will be called as needed to move the application forward.
During the session presentations were made by the planning team. Soil scientist James McManus said the perennial watercourse is the only resource on the property and that no wetlands are associated with it. The ditch conveys groundwater drained from surrounding properties across the length of the meadow and discharges it through culverts located at the southern end.
He said the culverts are too small for the volume of water collected, so water periodically ponds at the south end but that the soils are generally well-drained and water is not retained long enough to create wetland conditions.
He predicted that, with “diligent monitoring,” there would no short- or long-term indirect effects on habitat or water quality. The site “should function better than it does today,” he concluded.
Dainius Virbickas of Artel Engineering reviewed the engineering plan. He noted that the development is some distance from the watercourse, which he said would be slightly modified to soften the slope of its banks and widen the bottom, thus allowing it to convey water more easily. This would also provide room for landscaping that will protect and preserve its current function and create a pollinator environment.
Sixteen subsurface stormwater infiltration units will be set into the existing grade and will collect runoff associated with the roofs. They are located close to the buildings, while a larger system located in the northeast portion of the site will infiltrate stormwater from the site as well as from the property located to its east.
The stormwater management systems are designed to handle any storm event from a one-year storm all the way on up to a 100-year event.
Werner questioned whether changing the channel would affect the birds and small aquatic creatures that exist there and was assured that their habitat would be preserved. Similarly, she was told that oils and other debris from the parking lots would be captured by the system and not discharged into the river.
A maintenance schedule is specified for cleaning the system.
The homes would be connected to the municipal sewer system and to Aquarion’s water mains.
Architect Jeremy Lake said the site plan “preserves quite a lot of green space in the development and even more to the south” where five of the 12 acres will be open space. Landscape architect Abigail Adams described the extensive plantings planned for the site, which includes 139 deciduous trees, 33 evergreens, 33 ornamental trees and 300 shrubs. “That’s not including the massive amount of shrubbery around the buildings,” she added.
Maple trees will be planted along a boulevard that will follow the watercourse through the housing development. A courtyard nestled between buildings on the west side will feature a large shade tree surrounded by benches and a pavilion, creating a gathering place for residents. Around the building foundations there will be typical landscape plants.
The open meadow to the south will be seeded with a New England wildflower mix on the west and the more ecologically sensitive soils on the east will receive a New England wetland flower mix. The intent is to have a mowed trail through the meadow to allow pedestrians to stroll among the flowers. Along the drainage basins, a rain garden mix will be planted.
Evergreens will be dotted through the landscape to create habitat for birds and wildlife. Adams estimated that at least 30 percent of the plantings would specifically attract pollinators. With rare exceptions, the vegetation will be native or native hybrids.
“There will be an extreme amount of four-season interest throughout the site,” Adams said. “We’re really proposing to extensively increase the ecological value of the site for animals and people.”
