Wetlands panel approves pond deck, driveway plans

Inland Wetlands · Meeting of September 16, 2026

Farmington's Inland Wetlands Commission approved two applications on unanimous voice votes, clearing a pond-deck and ramp rebuild at East Farm School and a new driveway at 10 Garden Street. Scott Miller, president of Bartlett Brainerd Products Company, said the East Farm School deck will get 50-year composite decking, aluminum railings and a ramp to remove an "8 to 10-inch step" blocking mobility access. Commissioner Mark Simpson pressed for measures to keep schoolchildren away from the work site.

Homeowner Jeanna Burkerman won approval for a 12-by-24-foot driveway at 10 Garden Street near Route 4, saying "there's a lot of traffic as it is," with hay-bale erosion control required while the surface stays unpaved. The commission also heard that the town's decennial Plan of Conservation and Development survey is set for release in the town newsletter next month.

In the full story:

• Who Was There
• Organizations And Documents Referenced
• The complete report — 2,102 words

Source: the Inland Wetlands meeting of September 16, 2026, reported from the official video recording and transcript.

Checked against the record: before publication this article was automatically compared with the meeting transcript.

The Full Article

Roll Call and Alternate Seating

The meeting opened with a roll call that found three of the commission's nine named seats unanswered: Robert Eisner, Dan Hopovic and Andre Simons were not recorded as present, while Ned Stachin, David Fox, Richard Berlandi, Mark Simpson, Elena Carvath and Francis Roth answered present. The presiding chair then directed that alternates be seated to fill out the voting body, referencing "Alana, Robert Eisner, and Frank for Dan Popper" — a passage made difficult to parse by audio quality, and one in which the name "Dan Popper" appears to be an alternate rendering of "Dan Hopovic" heard elsewhere in the roll call. The commission did not further explain the alternate assignments on the record, and this writeup does not attempt to resolve which alternate sat for which absent member beyond what the roll call itself established.

Bartlett Brainerd Products: East Farm School Pond Deck, 25 Wolfitt Road

Background and stakes: The item concerns an existing observation deck on the edge of the pond behind East Farm School, a town-owned facility. The deck has an 8-to-10-inch step at one access point that the applicant described as a mobility barrier. The commission had already conducted a site walk on September 9 and determined the project non-significant under its wetlands regulations, clearing it for a regular hearing rather than a full site-impact review.

The question before the body: whether to approve a wetlands permit for deck replacement, pile work and a new accessibility ramp within the regulated area around the pond.

Substantive content: Scott Miller, president of Bartlett Brainerd Products Company, which is based in Avon, described the scope in detail. Workers will remove the existing decking, inspect the concrete piles that extend into the pond's subsurface, and either reuse them or install helical piles — steel piles that screw into the ground — depending on what the inspection shows. Any compromised joists or beams will be replaced. The deck will be resurfaced with a composite decking material carrying a 50-year warranty, and aluminum railings will be installed on both sides of the observation deck as well as along the water's edge. A new ramp will eliminate the 8-to-10-inch step on the bridge approach closest to the pond. Miller said the project timeline depends on the town building inspector's permit approval: decking materials take about two weeks to order, and any underground pile work requires a mandatory three-day utility locate call before digging begins. He estimated the physical work itself would take only a few days unless the pile inspection required full helical pile installation, in which case the crew would need to mobilize specialized equipment.

The deliberation: Commissioners focused on construction safety given the deck's location on active school grounds. Commissioner Mark Simpson said children's curiosity about ongoing construction was his main concern: "So if it's somehow you can distract the kids, that'd be great." [00:05:46] Commissioner David Fox said he had reviewed a recording of the prior meeting and the application materials and had no additional questions. Commissioner Elena Carvath — addressed in the audio as "Alana" — raised the same concern about the site's popularity with children: "I concur with what others have said about blocking it off, just because it does seem a very popular area with kids." [00:06:23] Miller responded that the company had not planned temporary fencing but could install an orange, four-foot snow fence around any exposed, undecked sections overnight. The chair noted that the site is frequented even in poor weather, observing that visitors had been seen there "even in the rain, with all the turtles and other wildlife." Commissioner Francis Roth and Commissioner Richard Berlandi, the latter after the chair initially overlooked calling on him, both said they had no questions.

Procedural steps and outcome: A commissioner moved to approve the application; another seconded. The chair reiterated for the record that the commission had determined non-significance following the September 9 site walk. The motion passed on a voice vote with ayes and no recorded opposition or abstention.

Implications and what is next: Construction can proceed once Miller's firm secures the town building permit, with the applicant indicating readiness to mobilize within roughly two weeks of permit issuance, and possibly sooner if the pile inspection does not require helical pile replacement.

10 Garden Street: Driveway Addition

Background and stakes: Jeanna Burkerman, who lives in Avon and owns the two-unit property at 10 Garden Street, brought a request to add a second driveway because her existing narrow driveway holds only one vehicle. The commission had accepted the application at its September 2 meeting and determined it non-significant at that time, obviating the need for a site walk.

The question before the body: whether to approve a wetlands permit for a new 12-by-24-foot gravel driveway on the property's left side.

Substantive content: Burkerman said the property is a single-family house with a separate upstairs apartment, meaning two households rely on the single existing parking spot. The property sits three houses from the signalized intersection of Route 4 and Garden Street, an intersection she and the chair both described as carrying heavy queuing traffic. Burkerman said on-street parking by either household would narrow the road further at a point where traffic already backs up at the light.

The deliberation: The chair, noting familiarity with the intersection from a prior site visit, said the situation "could be a safety concern" and indicated support for the project pending commission input. Commissioners Berlandi, Fox, Simpson and Roth each said they had no questions. Commissioner Carvath asked whether the project would require removing trees. Burkerman answered that only one tree, a pear tree near the proposed driveway location, would be affected, and that she intends to relocate it to the back of the property rather than remove it outright.

"And there's a lot of traffic as it is." [00:08:50] — Jeanna Burkerman

The chair confirmed the commission would require hay-bale erosion control measures while the new driveway surface remains unpaved, a condition Burkerman agreed to.

Procedural steps and outcome: A commissioner moved to approve the application with the erosion-control condition attached; another seconded. The motion passed on a voice vote with ayes and no recorded opposition or abstention.

Implications and what is next: Burkerman can proceed with construction once she coordinates installation details, including the erosion-control measures, with town staff.

Planner's Report: Plan of Conservation and Development Survey

Background and stakes: Connecticut law requires municipalities to update their Plan of Conservation and Development roughly every 10 years, and the staff planner told the commission, identified in the transcript only as Bruce, that the state can withhold grant funding from towns whose plans lapse. Farmington's update process is beginning this fall.

The question before the body: no vote was requested; this was an informational update ahead of a public survey launch.

Substantive content: The planner said a resident survey will be publicized in the town newsletter around the middle of next month, collecting input on development, conservation and land use priorities. Representatives from each town board will be invited to a roundtable discussion with town staff and an outside consultant to raise board-specific concerns. The planner said the plan will address concrete proposals already under discussion in town, including a potential pedestrian bridge connecting town hall and the high school, as well as broader questions such as whether to rezone parcels, which open-space parcels to prioritize, and what areas merit conservation designation. He said the consultant will compile survey results, tentatively expected around November, before beginning interviews with town departments and land-use boards.

The deliberation: One commissioner volunteered to participate in the roundtable discussion, saying, "I'll participate if we've got a lot of time," prompting a brief exchange confirming ample scheduling flexibility. No commissioner raised objections to the process as described.

Implications and what is next: Residents should expect the survey announcement in the town newsletter around mid-October. The commission did not set a specific date for selecting its roundtable representative beyond the planner's general November timeline for compiling survey results.

Minutes Approvals and the Abstention Discussion

Background and stakes: Routine approval of minutes from the September 2 regular meeting and the September 9 site walk became a brief procedural discussion when two commissioners indicated they would abstain from the site-walk minutes vote because they had not attended that walk.

The question before the body: whether to approve both sets of minutes.

Substantive content and deliberation: Commissioner Fox abstained from approving the September 2 minutes. On the September 9 site-walk minutes, both Fox and Commissioner Berlandi indicated they would abstain, prompting a brief concern, raised informally, about whether enough members had been present at the original site walk to support a quorum. The chair and another member clarified that abstaining from a minutes vote reflects a member's absence from the underlying meeting, not a procedural defect, and that only three members — described as Carvath, Roth and the chair — had attended the site walk itself, which was sufficient at the time.

Procedural steps and outcome: Both minutes motions passed on voice votes with the noted abstentions and no recorded opposition.

Implications and what is next: No further action was required; the clarification resolves a process question that could otherwise recur with future site-walk minutes votes.

Conservation Commission Session

Background and stakes: Immediately after adjourning as the Inland Wetlands Commission at 7:20 p.m., the same members reconvened as the Conservation Commission, a recurring practice for this board.

The question before the body: whether to approve prior minutes and to receive a status update on wetlands regulation revisions.

Substantive content: Staff reported there was no planner's report for the Conservation Commission this session. Asked about the status of proposed regulation changes, staff said the revisions have not yet been forwarded to the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, referred to in the transcript as "deep," because coordination was still underway with an entity identified only as "the EPMO." No further detail on that entity's role was given on the record.

Procedural steps and outcome: The commission approved its September 2 Conservation Commission minutes on a voice vote, with Commissioner Fox again abstaining. The Conservation Commission then adjourned at 7:21 p.m.

Implications and what is next: The regulation revisions remain in staff coordination with no date given for submission to the state.

WHO WAS THERE

Ned Stachin, member, present per roll call, no further remarks recorded. David Fox, member, present; reviewed prior meeting recording; abstained on two minutes votes. Richard Berlandi, member, present; no questions on either application; abstained on September 9 site-walk minutes. Mark Simpson, member, present; raised school-safety concern on the East Farm School deck project. Elena Carvath, member, present; referred to in the audio as "Alana"; raised questions on both applications. Francis Roth, member, present; referred to in the audio as "Frank"; no questions on either application. Robert Eisner, member, not recorded as present at roll call; later referenced in connection with alternate seating. Dan Hopovic, member, not recorded as present at roll call; also referenced once as "Dan Popper." Andre Simons, member, not recorded as present at roll call. Chair, presiding officer, name not stated in the transcript or any supplied document. Bruce, staff planner or liaison who conducted the roll call and delivered the planner's report; surname not given in the transcript. Scott Miller, president of Bartlett Brainerd Products Company, Avon; applicant representative for the East Farm School deck project. Jeanna Burkerman, resident of Avon and owner of 10 Garden Street; applicant for the Garden Street driveway project.

ORGANIZATIONS AND DOCUMENTS REFERENCED

Bartlett Brainerd Products Company — contractor and applicant for the East Farm School pond deck replacement and ramp project. East Farm School — Farmington public school property where the pond observation deck is located. Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (referred to as "deep") — state agency to which the Conservation Commission's proposed regulation revisions have not yet been submitted. Entity referred to as "the EPMO" — cited by staff as a party the town is still coordinating with on regulation revisions; its full identity was not specified in the meeting. Plan of Conservation and Development (POCD) — statutory town planning document undergoing its decade update, discussed by the staff planner as the subject of an upcoming resident survey. September 2 meeting minutes (Inland Wetlands Commission) — approved this meeting with one abstention. September 9 site walk minutes — approved this meeting with two abstentions, following a non-significance determination for both pending applications. September 2 meeting minutes (Conservation Commission) — approved this meeting with one abstention.