HomeMy WebLinkAboutCONSERVATIONminutes07202009
Conservation Meeting
July 20, 2009
Present: Joseph Mulkern, Chairman; Paul Boyden, Vice Chairman; Michele White; Carole
Matthew; Derek House.
11. Meeting called to order at7:05 pm.
I 2. Enforcement Order: Catherine Memory, 23 Lakeview Avenue. #211-0780
Michael Trowbridge of Hutchins-Trowbridge Associates, Inc. was present.
Mrs. Memory had applied for a Certificate of Compliance to close out her project. The Notice of Intent
was filed for a new septic system along with an addition to the existing house, within 100 ft, of
Greenwood Lake, The proposed addition was 10x15 ft. with a 5x5 ft. triangular shaped section. All
work was to be outside the 25 ft. no touch area of Greenwood Lake from the high water mark of the
lake, The 25 ft. area appears on the plan dated 8/28/2006, titled "Sewage Disposal System, 23
Lakeview Avenue".
When an inspection was done for the COC, it was discovered that Mrs. Memory had bricked and
landscaped the entire 25 ft. no touch area, down to the lake. This activity violates the valid Order of
Conditions as per the plan dated 8/28/2006,
An Enforcement Order was issued on July 7, 2009 asking that no further work be done and that Mrs.
Memory attend the next hearing of July 20, 2009. Pictures have been taken of the violation.
Paul Boyden said the applicant was told to observe the 25 ft. no touch zone. He said no concessions
by this board have ever been made on any activities to be performed in this area.
Michael Trowbridge: "What is in question is the brick patio that was constructed and the stairs off the
triangular section of the addition."
Michael Trowbridge told the board it was his understanding there originally had been a small patio over
in the area of the existing dock. He said if you look at an aerial view before the addition was added,
you can see the patio. He told the board after many phone calls and numerous site visits by the agent,
Mrs. Memory was granted approval for the patio. He said this was not something she did on her own;
she thought she had the permission of the board via the agent.
Michael Trowbridge asked the board to look at 2.2, paragraph #4 of the by-law. [Normal maintenance,
repair, replacement, or improvement to any existing private residential property or components,
including, but not limited to: fences, hedges, gardens, lawns, retaining or stone walls, patios, lamp
posts, flag posts, or mailboxes. Project proponents must thoroughly check with the Commission or its
agent for applicability].He felt this applied to this project.
Derek House asked if Mrs. Memory had anything in writing as per her conversation with Michele
Grenier, the agent. Michael Trowbridge said absolutely not; there is nothing in writing. He said Mrs.
Memory thought she was having it approved by an agent of the Commission.
Paul Boyden read the minutes of 8/28/2006; there is nothing stated in the minutes about patios or
anything else. The patio was not included with the filing. That should have been shown on the drawing
given to the Commission. This was not what was approved by the Commission.
Carole Matthew discussed 2.5 of the by-law concerning the activities that may be permitted within 25 ft.
of a resource area: [the creation of wetland replacement or mitigation areas, installation of drainage
outfalls, grading work associated with additions to existing single-family homes, the maintenance and
construction of trails, resource improvements projects, such as cleaning of streams or the creation of
park areas]. The grading work applies but there is nothing about the creation of a patio.
Derek House asked if at any point Mrs. Memory submitted an updated drawing showing the
patio/landscaping. Michael Trowbridge said no. Derek said on a revised plan, dated November 17,
2006, the patio was not there.
Michael Trowbridge again read 2.2 #4. Carole Matthew said this part of the by-law was considered
emergency work. Michael Trowbridge asked her if #2, 3 & 4 applied to an emergency project. Carole
Matthew: "No. Are you saying it was a replacement?" Michael: "Either a replacement or
improvement."
Paul Boyden reminded Mr. Trowbridge the board has never allowed any work in the 25 ft. area.
Michael Trowbridge: "Unfortunately, the board has to realize you had an agent that was making
decisions that people thought were on behalf of the board. Really, we are talking a brick patio that is
probably more porous than what was there originally, meaning grass or loam, which is providing more
recharge into the ground. If you look at the patio, it was not a substantial change in grade at all."
Joe Mulkern told Mr. Trowbridge the board does not want to see this happen all around the lake. The
board agreed 2.2 of the by-law does not apply here; it is stretching it to say the patio is a replacement
or an improvement. Carole Matthew said #4 of 2.2 does not allow for new work; only the maintenance
or repair of an area.
Mary Ann Verrochi of 27 Lakeview Avenue said she has lived there for 3 years and does not remember
any patio. She is an abutter to Mrs. Memory. Michael Trowbridge said Catherine Memory might be
able to find more pictures as proof a small patio previously existed.
Paul Boyden asked it there were any non-conservation issues such as ZBA. Michael Trowbridge said
he had heard this project had gone outside of the ZBA permit. He reviewed the permit and spoke with
Nick Riccio, Inspector of Buildings and Zoning Enforcement Officer; Nick agreed it had followed the
ZBA permit. The ZBA decision has been filed at the Registry of Deeds. The plans for ZBA and building
are the same. The only difference is the back steps which are in the 25 ft. but are a requirement of the
Building Code.
Michael Trowbridge asked where we go from here. Paul Boyden suggested the hearing be tabled until
the next hearing.
Carole Matthew made the motion to table the hearing for the Enforcement Order for 23 Lakeview
Avenue, DEP #211-0780, until August 10, 2009.
Derek House seconded.
Passed 5-0.
Hearing ended at 7:42 pm
2
13. Enforcement Order: Fidelity Joint Ventures, Inc., 69 King Street - #211-0834
Ralph Maloon of RIM Engineering and Michael Donovan of Fidelity Joint Ventures, Inc. were present.
An Enforcement Order was issued to Michael Donovan for 69 King Street on July 17, 2009 for violating
the 50 ft. no touch zone.
In a letter dated June 22, 2009, Mr. Donovan was asked to submit a drawing showing the 50 ft. setback
from the wetland; submit an as built with the current elevations of the site, certified and stamped by an
engineer; and an overlay of the existing elevations as compared to the original drawing, dated January
7, 1008. In addition, it was noted in the letter that the final grading did not appear to be finished since
the concrete pad for the back step was about 6" above the existing grade. The applicant was asked to
provide information on additional fill for grading, landscaping or lawn work and provide specific location,
thickness and volume of such material.
Ralph Maloon told the board he had run the topography and found the area is higher than before. He
said this could be the result of the contractor spreading the existing pile of fill and the excavation of the
foundation.
In the memorandum dated July 14, 2009 from Richard Alves, Senior Engineer, the following comments
were made. The plan, "As-Built Conservation Plan, dated July 6, 2009, does not show the 50 ft. set
back from the wetland line and a final as built as not been submitted. Ralph Maloon felt the as built
should not be submitted until the grade is down to where it is supposed to be.
Richard Alves noted that the calculations provided show existing fill of approximately 60 cubic yards
within the flood plain. He noted that since fill in the flood plain is not allowed without compensation, the
60 cubic yards would have to be removed. He noted that an additional 108 cubic yards would have to
be removed according to Ralph Maloon's calculations of the 88 ft. (in width) by 100 ft. (in length) area
so 4 inches of loam can be spread for the seeding of the lawn. The total volume of fill to be removed
would be approximately 168 cubic yards.
Richard Alves also made mention of the 2/14/08 & 2/26/08 memorandums. It was noted, if the house
was built as proposed, the first floor of the house would be the only thing above the 1 OO-year flood
elevation. The entire lot, including the garage area, would be flooded, except for the house footprint.
John Sullivan recommended an as-built, with certification of elevations, signed and stamped by a
Professional Land Surveyor be required before an occupancy permit or certificate of compliance be
issued. John Sullivan also said flood insurance would be required. A deed restriction to include the
following comments: based on a FEMA 1 OO-year flood elevation of 172.7 feet, only the first floor of the
house would be above the 100-year flood elevation; the entire lot would be flooded except for the
house footprint if the 1 OO-year flood elevation is reached; no space below the 1 OO-year flood elevation
can be converted to living space; no equipment, appliances or storage is to be maintained below the
100-year flood elevation; no outside structures, above-ground pools or items that would decrease the
available flood storage volume would be allowed.
Speaking for the board, Paul Boyden said if the 2 memos from engineering had been given to the board,
"along with the board knowing the house had been moved when it should not have been, that upon re-
examination, the house, where it was going, what the elevations were, that the chances are pretty good
this project would not have been approved. The board will try to incorporate into the Order of
Conditions what will be translated into the deed restriction, the recommendations from the engineering
department that seem to be very acceptable to this board."
3
Derek House asked that 1 of the conditions should be that the trash/debris from the old house (behind
the siltation fencing) be removed from the wetland area and the lawn re-established.
Derek House: "In the back right hand corner, is it possible that we could do a little mitigation right along
the fence line? Can we drop the grade by the fence?" Ralph suggested the loam be spread to within 2
or 3 ft. of the fence. Joe Mulkern said the loam should go to the fence.
Paul Boyden wanted the applicant to know the 25 ft. no touch would have been applied in a situation
like this had the house been rebuilt on its original foundation. However, since a brand new home exists,
moved from the location it was previously at to the middle of the lot, which was probably the better
decision or the best one made so far, the 50 ft. no touch applies, because it is now considered new
construction.
Michele White was asked what type of seed should be used; should it be a mixture of wetland mix
beyond the fencing and regular seed mix for the rest of the area. She feels the yard should be seeded
with regular turf seed up to the silt fencing right along the 25 ft, no touch area.
Ralph Maloon asked how far the loam should be spread; should it go right up to the fence? Are we
going to put the grades back to the original grades or would you prefer a swale along the right hand
side of the property? The property will be put back to its original grades. Michael Donovan told the
board that the right hand side of the property was needed to compensate for the pile of fill.
Paul Boyden told Ralph Maloon and Michael Donovan the board needed to know when work would
start so the Enforcement Order can be vacated. Michael Donovan said he can get someone to begin
next week.
Joe Mulkern: "Why don't we strip it, shoot the grades and then have John Sullivan go out and check
the site.
Ralph Maloon suggested the stripping be done, mark where the loam is going so we can come to an
agreement before a lot of money is spent spreading loam that might have to be placed elsewhere.
Derek House made the motion to lift the Enforcement Order. Passed 5-0.
Paul Boyden asked Ralph Maloon about DEP asking him to provide data on the alternatives analysis
required by the 200 ft. Riverfront regulations in 310 CMR 10.58. Ralph is to get in touch with Chris
Ross.
Paul Boyden said the board would work on the Order of Conditions. He told the applicant the OC will
not be written or issued until the property is back to the original condition.
Derek House was concerned that once the house is sold the new owner will do more than allowed.
Michael Donovan said the house is under agreement and the buyer knows of the restrictions.
Hearing ended at 8:05 pm
4. Extension Permit for Order of Conditions: John Sullivan, Brown Avenue & Brown Terrace - #211-
0769
4
Paul told the board Conservation received a letter from the engineering department that precluded and
preceded the expiration date of the Order of Conditions for Brown Avenue and Brown Terrace. He
explained that when you have an OC, if you go beyond the 3 years and the work is not completed and
you don't come back for an extension within the 3 years, you have to re-file the NO!. He told the board
the town got a memo out to us dated within the 3 years so the extension should be granted.
Derek House made the motion to accept the request for the extension of the Order of Conditions (DEP
#211-0769) for Brown Avenue and Brown Terrace starting June 22, 2009 and to be extended to June
22, 2012.
Carole Matthew seconded.
Passed 5-0.
Hearing ended at 8:15 pm.
15. Extension Permit for Order of Conditions: James & Stacie Hooper, 73 Campbell Street - #211-0721. I
The OC expired December 1, 2008
Because the garage was part of the original filing, the OC is incomplete. No work can continue on an
expired Order. Therefore the Hoopers can not be granted an extension of the Order. They will have to
re-file the Notice of Intent. The board decided to waive any fees. The Hoopers will be called.
Derek House made the motion to table the hearing.
Passed 5-0.
Hearing ended at 8:20 pm.
16. Requestfor Certificate of Compliance: Catherine Memory, 23 Lakeview Avenue - #211-0780
The board will table the hearing for the Certificate of Compliance for 23 Lakeview Avenue until the
enforcement issues are corrected.
Derek House made the motion to table the hearing until August 10, 2009.
Carole seconded.
Passed 5-0.
Hearing ended at 8:25 pm.
17. Notice of Intent: Mariner Tower II, LLC, 615 School Street - #211-0835
Glenn Krevosky of EBT Environmental Consultants, Inc., Christopher Ciolfi, Chief Development Officer
and Jacqueline Murray of Omnipoint Communications were present.
The Notice of Intent was filed for a proposed cell tower within a 50' x 50' crushed stone fenced
compound to be located on the edge of an existing paved parking area on a previously disturbed
property. The structure will be located within the 100 ft. buffer of bordering vegetated wetlands and the
100 ft. Riverfront of Hodges Brook, a perennial stream. The actual work will be outside the 50 ft. no
disturb area.
5
A portion of the proposed 50'x50' compound containing the cellular tower and a 15' x 15' concrete pad
is presently composed of 22.5' x 50' of impervious asphalt. Approximately 1,100 sq. ft. of asphalt will
be remove, which will result in a decrease of 36% impervious.
Glenn Krevosky addressed comments made by Richard Keller of DEP involving this project:
1.) The project is not a buffer zone only project if Riverfront is involved; Glenn told the board this
was not checked off or stated anywhere in the Notice of Intent. Only box 2 "Inland Resource
Areas" was checked.
2.) A detailed alternatives analysis is required in accordance with 310 CMR 10.58 (4) whether it is
considered redevelopment or not. After a discussion with Mr. Keller concerning the regulations,
Mr. Keller concluded that 10.58 (5) does state Notwithstanding the Provisions of 10.58 (4) @ and
(d). Glenn Krevosky told the board that in order for 10.58 (5) to apply, the degraded area must
have been degraded prior to August 7, 1996. The land was purchased in early 1996. Pictures of
the site at the time of the purchase are included with the filing, showing the gravel degraded area
where the tower would be located.
Glenn Krevosky told the board you have to show that improvements are being made to the
Riverfront area under 10.58 (5). In the Notice of Intent, pictures show the RFA with concrete piles,
a desk, steel products such as guardrails and a large steel box in the river. He told the board
some of this debris will be removed by an excavator, back hoe or by hand. The fill pile in the
woods will be removed.
3.) Compliance with the stormwater management regulations is required. Glenn Krevosky explained
that because of the small area needed for cell tower sites and the small impervious areas required
for the equipment pads, they have shown there is no net increase in runoff from sites using 1 ft.
thick crushed stone surface areas within the leased areas. For this reason the engineers had not
submitted the Checklist for Stormwater for the Notice of Intent filing.
Glenn Krevosky explained under Massachusetts regulations for commercial lots, you have to show
that you have done stormwater. The document submitted today shows this site does not need
stormwater; there is a net decrease in runoff.
Erosion control will be hay bales with silt fence and will be placed prior to any work being done, to
remain in place until the entire area has been graded, loamed, seeded and stabilized.
Joe Mulkern asked how high the tower would be. The height of the tower will not exceed 90 ft as per
zoning regulations. The 50'x50' area will be fenced in.
Derek House asked if the wetland line needed to be delineated. Glenn Krevosky said he had met with
Michele on site and she agreed with the flagging.
Paul Boyden wanted to know who selected the location for the tower; is it a critical location? Can the
cell tower be moved? Chris Ciolfi said the location is critical because of the other activities on the lot.
The owner has his primary business on the front part of the lot and he has leases on the remaining
portions of the lot. It is either that area or there is no project. Paul Boyden told the applicant he had
been queried by NRT about the location.
6
Chris Ciolfi: "One of the issues brought up in the planning process, the further we go to the east on the
property, we are getting closer to the fire department. One of the lieutenants had expressed concern
about potential interference for the signal from our tower and their tower. We have demonstrated that
there is not going to be any interference and so we are trying to keep it over as far to the west side of
the lot as we can. This is a ZBA concern also. The town has actually hired a radio frequency
consultant to review this application to review the frequencies and the potential interference."
Another issue is the ZBA requirement of a 500 ft. set back from the nearest residential site. The project
is only 300 ft away from the residential area across the street. Moving the project the 200 ft. to the
north would put the project in the woods and the river. The applicant will be before ZBA tomorrow night.
Glenn Krevosky discussed the flood plain: "We are not increasing the elevations of the site; we take
out the material, we put it back in; it stays the same elevation.
Derek House asked if the engineering department has been involved. Chris CHolfi told the board they
were involved in the planning process. In a letter dated May 6, 2009, comments concerning easements,
location of leaching facilities, underground utilities, water and gas lines, and the height of the tower
were mentioned; these must be shown on the plan. Richard Alves, senior engineer, also said drainage
calculations were not submitted but it appears that there is no net increase in impervious area; there
should be no increase in stormwater runoff.
Paul Boyden asked if anything can be added to the cell tower; can other companies be added to the
tower. Chris Ciolfi said yes there is room on the tower for other companies; Mariner Tower is also
willing to provide space at no cost on the tower and within the compound area to the Town of Mansfield
as long as it does not interfere with an area already designated for commercial equipment.
Paul Boyden asked how often the tower would need to be visited for maintenance or repairs. Chris
Ciolfi said once a month, maybe twice for visual inspection. Trucks and other vehicles will not have to
enter the area.
Snow removal will be the responsibility of the landowner.
Paul Boyden would like a letter of verification from Richard Keller that an alternatives analysis is not
necessary.
Derek House asked who would inspect the hay bales and silt fencing. Paul Boyden said an engineer
would be required for the inspection. The engineer would be required to submit a letter stating the
erosion control has been properly placed.
Colin Cauldwell, a member of the audience: given that there is a lot of dumping on the site, he
recommended that signage be place in the back of the property to discourage any further dumping.
Paul wanted the motion to state that the 50'x50' (2,500 sq. ft.) parcel within the 100'x100' parcel is the
only authorized portion for construction discussed in this hearing. No other activity will be allowed other
than power lines as shown on the drawing in this area.
Derek House made the motion to accept DEP file #211-0835 for 615 School Street, applicant being
Mariner Tower LLC, plan dated 6/23/2009 - revision #10, for the construction of a 90 ft. tall cell tower
on a 50 ft. x 50 ft. piece of their 100 ft. x 100 ft. leased portion of land with a 15 ft. x15 ft. concrete pad
for electronic equipment and issue an Order of Conditions with the following conditions: signage
reading "Environmentally Sensitive Area-Do Not Disturb" will be placed along the back at the 50 ft.
7
buffer line every 50 ft., on metal posts not on trees; a letter of verification from Richard Keller at DEP
that an alternatives analysis is not necessary; the 50'x50' (2,500 sq. ft.) parcel within the 100'x100'
parcel is the only authorized portion for construction discussed in this hearing. No other activity in this
area will be allowed other than the power lines as shown on the drawing; hay bales and silt fencing
must be inspected by a qualified engineer, with a letter stating the erosion control has been properly
installed, before any work begins and will remain in place until all work is complete, the area has been
stabilized and a Certificate of Compliance has been issued;
Carole Matthew seconded.
Passed 5-0.
Hearing ended at 9:20 pm.
18. Request for Certificate of Compliance: Daniel Faasse, 47 Marshall Avenue - #211-0696.
Continued from June 15, 2009
Mr. Faasse had requested a Certificate of Compliance. At the June 151h meeting it was discovered that
the Order of Conditions had expired.
The board continued the hearing until additional information could be obtained.
Mr. Faasse brought pictures showing the house and where the area to be restored was. Mr. Faasse
explained the contractor had placed the wood chips in the wetland area and small shrubs had been
removed. The area was then made into a play area. Because of the alteration of approximately 1,640
sq. ft., Mr. Faasse was required to restore the area. The wood chips were removed and Mr. Faasse
planted high bush blueberry, cinnamon ferns and swamp azaleas. The area was seeded with a
wetland mix.
Through a ruling from Chris Ross at DEP, because the work is complete, even though the OC has
expired, we can issue the Certificate of Compliance.
Michele White made the motion to issue a Certificate of Compliance for 47 Marshall Avenue - #211-696.
Derek House seconded.
Passed 5-0.
Hearing ended at 9:30 pm.
I 9. New Business:
Verizon - Conduit Installation in Mansfield.
Paul Boyden spoke with Julie Freshman of Resource Controls who is representing Verizon.
Verizon plans to install underground conduit (FIOS) as an upgrade/repair to existing underground
telephone utilities.
The proposed work will be in existing easements and rights-of-way, within existing road shoulders.
Some of the work will need to be done within the buffer zones of wetlands, rivers, perennial and
intermittent streams.
8
Excavations will be done with a "Ditch Witch" or by hand where necessary. Any damage done to
resource areas will be repaired. Erosion control will be used where the board deems necessary. All
excavated areas will be backfilled on the same day. Excavated asphalt will be recycled offsite.
Over 100 streets will be done, with 10 being done this year. Julie thought a filing of an RDA would be
sufficient for most of the areas but would file an NOI where necessary.
Kingman Pond Dam has requested a Certificate of Compliance.
110. Old Business:
A letter from Lisa and George Chalifoux of 49 Jake's Way was received on July 3, 2009. They had
received verbal permission from Michele to remove the hay bales that were in front of the silt fence
because they were infested with carpenter ants. The ants were coming into the house. All that
remains to be done on the outside is landscaping work. There is still work on the inside unfinished.
Paul Boyden gave permission to remove the hay bales so the grading can be done and the landscaping
started. The silt fence will remain in place.
Maple Street Certified Vernal Pool #1968, Map 40, Parcel 92.
Conservation is in receipt of a letter dated July 9, 2009 postponing the pretrial conference for Town of
Mansfield v. Lester S. Epstein - Civil Action No. BRCV2008-00090.
In an Enforcement Order issued on October 10, 2007, Mr. Epstein was to hire a PWS to design and
construct a new vernal pool twice the size as the original, approved by the Mansfield Conservation
Commission, Natural Heritage and the Department of Environmental Protection.
Restoration of the pool was started April 29. 2009. To date, a PWS was never hired to design the
vernal pool nor was one on site when the restoration was done. The board repeatedly asked Michele
for a designed plan. A plan was given to the board but was unsigned after the restoration of the vernal
pool was done.
Bird Road: A letter was received by the Mansfield Municipal Electric Department dated June 23, 2009
from the Division of Fisheries & Wildlife. The letter states there are Eastern Box Turtles and Marbled
Salamanders on site along with a "Sensitive Species" The board requested Natural Heritage be called
to see if they would come out to investigate.
Paul Boyden mentioned the building expansion of Mansfield Pediatrics at 454 Chauncy Street. The
parking area will also be expanded. There are no conservation issues.
Derek House made the motion to approve the minutes of May 18, 2009.
Paul Boyden seconded.
Passed 5-0.
Paul made the motion to approve the minutes of June 3, 2009 as published.
9
Carole Matthew seconded.
Passed 5-0.
Paul Boyden made the motion to approve the minutes of June 15, 2009.
Derek House seconded.
Passed 5-0.
Little League Contract: The contract has not been returned. Joe will call Peter Smith.
9:45 pm: Jimmy Epstein arrived to discuss the vernal pool on the Maple Street property owned by
Lester Epstein.
Jimmy Epstein was told by the board that he had to abide by the Enforcement Order. He was told the
matter was back in the attorneys hands - Brandon Moss will contact his attorney. Paul Boyden told Mr.
Epstein the board does not have a plan, nothing from a PWS.
Mr. Epstein told the board there was a plan submitted by his lawyer to town council and that town
council had approved it. Paul Boyden asked when this happen; a plan was never given to the board.
Jimmy Epstein: "Well, your officer was out there during the process."
Paul Boyden: "Jimmy that was a 2 page piece of paper that was given. Brandon Moss has been told
that it is not a plan. That's why you got an extension until October on the court case."
Jimmy Epstein: "There was a plan submitted; what I proposed to do and it was ok by your guys or by
town council."
Paul Boyden: "Plan proposed by you?"
Jimmy Epstein: "There was a plan that we submitted between myself, my lawyer, my father and an
excavator." He told Paul he presented it to town council and it was approved. The only stipulation was
when it would be done. He said they wanted it done in early fall provided there wasn't too much
standing water on the property. They did not want to create too much of a problem bringing a machine
in there. He said Michele contacted him several times regarding when it was going to be done.
Because it was so wet in the area, he asked Michele to come out to take a look. He said he would start
then but felt it would create more of a problem then existed at this point. Michele told him to keep her
informed. He said he called her with an approximate date in April. He said she told him the board
wanted her to be there during the restoration, basically to oversee the whole thing; she was there at
8:00. The whole process probably took 5 or 6 hours. He told the board the original plan was to remove
between 15 and 17 yards of soil; 45 to 50 yards were eventually removed. The excavator dug down
until water started to shoot up. "It is bigger than what was originally there. So what's the problem?'
Paul Boyden: "The problem is the plan was supposed to be done by a PWS. The plan that was given
to the board was a 2 page piece of paper." Jimmy: "You accepted it." Paul Boyden and Derek House
told Mr. Epstein it was not signed by anyone and was not approved by the board.
Jimmy Epstein: "Does it matter who it's signed by? Did you accept it?"
Paul Boyden: "No, of course we didn't. Why do you think we are here?"
10
Jimmy Epstein: "Come on, will you please. This happened 2 years ago regarding my side of the road.
You told me I had a 25, 30, 50 ft. set back, ok. Several meetings later, come to find out there is no set
back. You wanted me to hire engineers, lawyers. You wanted me to hire wetland biologists, scientists.
You guys dropped the ball. You had no idea there was no set back. You guys are judges and jury. Do
you vote on anything or just talk and they accept. Seriously, you like costing people money don't you,
don't you? You should be ashamed of yourself, all right, all of you, you should be ashamed."
Paul Boyden: "You got an order. You've got an Enforcement Order. That's all we asked you to do is
that."
Jimmy Epstein: "There is no order. There is no order."
Paul Boyden: "There is an order, ok? Hear from your attorney, that's alii can tell you."
Jimmy Epstein: "Cost me more money, right Paul?"
Paul Boyden: "I am not trying to do that. If you had done what you were supposed to do in the first
place, you wouldn't be sitting here."
Jimmy Epstein: "Last year you told me I had to hire a biologist; you got to do this, you got to do that. I
came back a week later and said hey listen I did nothing because I don't have to do anything. Ok. Ok.
All right. You put the burden of proof on me."
Paul Boyden: "Of course it is on you. It's not on us. Why is it on us?"
Jimmy Epstein: "So I have to spend money to prove you're wrong again? Again. Again is the key word
to prove you wrong again. First of all you guys created the vernal pool, ok. The town did. It's all
documented right here. You guys created it, you dumped the water on my property, ok? The head of
the highway said we'll fix that. Unfortunately, he passed away and never fixed it. You trespassed on
my property to classify it as a vernal pool with a handful of eggs. Whoever did it did 3 or 4 in that same
week."
Paul Boyden: "I don't know about that."
Jimmy Epstein: "Oh, I do know, I do know about it, ok? 1968,1969,1970. Those are the vernal pools
that she classified. Whoever it was. Some do-gooder, going to save the world, ok, all right. She
probably used the same picture for all 3 vernal pools. So, she trespassed, we were never given any
notice whatsoever it was a vernal pool. So if I did fill a vernal pool, which I didn't, ok, I had no idea it
was a vernal pool. So you guys just sit there and make these decisions. It just costs me money that's
all. Let me ask you another question, you want a wetland engineer there, is Michele a wetland
scientist? Is she an engineer? She was there the whole time. Paul Boyden: "She is a PWS." Carole
Matthew: "But she better not have written it." Jimmy told her Michele did not write it. Carole Matthew:
"The plan needed to be written by a PWS; it should not have been done by Michele because she was
working for us."
Derek House: "I'll save you money right now. That 2 page report you got, whoever did that report, just
have them sign and date it."
Jimmy Epstein: "I'll be honest, I had no wetland scientist write that. It was in layman's terms." Carole
Matthew: "Well then, who wrote it?" Jimmy told Carole, "I wrote it."
11
Derek House told Mr. Epstein he needed to sign it and say he submitted it. Mr. Epstein said he would
sign it. Carole Matthew: "No, he will not. Mr. Epstein is not a PWS."
Mr. Epstein said the EO never said he had to hire a PWS and asked to see the document. After
reading the EO, he told the board he was not going to hire anyone, he was done, that he was not going
to spend another nickel and told the board to take him to court.
Mr. Epstein again asked why the board approved the 2 page document and Paul Boyden told him the
board did not approve anything. The board never saw the document until well after the vernal pool had
been restored. Mr. Epstein wanted to know why Michele was on site. Carole Matthew: "Good
question. Why wasn't the scientist who drew up the plan there?"
Jimmy Epstein: "Basically, she's gone now so she's not responsible. Same with Dick Lewis. When
Dick Lewis wrote things on my property, the minute he was no longer employed, he doesn't count. He
doesn't work for us anymore. Now whatever Michele.did while she was employed doesn't count."
Paul Boyden: "Don't go that way." Derek House: "Basically, you just need somebody, a PWS to go
out and certify, take 30 to 45 minutes." Jimmy Epstein: "And that will be the end of my problem. You
saw it, did you see the vernal pool (asked Paul). What did you think of it?"
Paul Boyden: "I don't know because I had nothing in front of me to judge. How can I judge anything,
Jimmy. I saw a hole dug in the ground. I don't know the slopes, I don't know how deep it is, and I don't
know how big it is. What else you want to tell me?" Jimmy Epstein: "Do what you got to do."
111. Adjournment:
Meeting adjourned at 10:30 pm
Next Meeting will be August 10, 2009.
JOs:7~
'3- -/0 -OJ
Date
12