HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOA 09/26/2022Town of Mansfield
Conservation Commission
September 26, 2022 Minutes
V /
RECEIVED
TOWN CLERKS OFFICE
1013 JAN 31 P 12: 13
MEETING HELD IN PERSON IN MEETING ROOM 3 A/B i ANSFIELD
AND VIRTUALLY USING GOTOWEBINARPLATFORMW" ASSACHIJSETTS
Present: Michael Healey, Chair; Dr. Aaron Roth, Vice Chair; Dr. Jeffrey Paten; Sarah Joynes; Katelyn
Gonyer, Conservation and Environmental Planner
1. The Chair opened the meeting at 6:08 pm.
2. Request for Determination of Applicability: Michael Masscotte, 22 Potash Road, Map 038, Parcel
169.
Mr. Healey opened the hearing for a Request for Determination of Applicability for Michael Masscotte
at 22 Potash Road, Map 038, Parcel 169, for the installation of an in -ground pool with patio, fencing and
grading within 100 feet of Bordering Vegetated Wetland.
Homeowner Michael Masscotte was present.
Ms. Gonyer said this is a single-family lot with an existing rock retaining wall and Mr. Masscotte is
proposing to do a terraced retaining wall, extending from the existing retaining wall to the left property
line and install a 36' swimming pool with pavers around the pool and another terraced area. She said she
noticed a small pile of lawn debris; the applicant will relocate it away from the wetland area. Erosion
control has been installed. Ms. Gonyer said this is a reasonable application and recommended the
standard pool conditions be applied to the Determination.
There were no Board comments.
There were no virtual or audience comments.
Dr. Roth made the motion to issue a Negative Determination, for reason #3, to Michael Masscotte at 22
Potash Road, Map 038, Parcel 169, for the installation of an in -ground pool with patio, fencing and grading
within 100 feet of Bordering Vegetated Wetland at 22 Potash Road, Map 038, Parcel 169 with the
following Special Conditions:
• Erosion control to be inspected by Agent prior to the start of work.
• Agent is to be notified when work is complete and all disturbed areas are stabilized.
• No dumping of lawn clippings within the 25-foot No Disturb Zone.
• Pool O&M Conditions:
1. All new in -ground pools shall use a cartridge filtration system or a filtration system where all
backwash is directed into a drywell on the same property.
2. At no point shall pool backwash be discharged into a wetland resource area.
3. All pool water is to be de -chlorinated before it is drained from the pool. All drained water is to be
drained over the land/lawn of the same property.
4. Frog Logs or a similar product are to be used in the pool.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Gallagher.
Motion passed 5-0-0 at 6:18 pm.
3. Request for Determination of Applicability: Geoffrey and Deborah Guild, 1819 West Street, Map
002, Parcel 003.
Mr. Healey opened the hearing for a Request for Determination of Applicability for Geoffrey and Deborah
Guild at 1819 West Street, Map 002, Parcel 003, for the removal of two sections of the existing house, to
be rebuilt within the same footprint with a new 5'x11' addition within 100 feet of Inland Bank of
Greenwood Lake.
Homeowners Geoffrey and Deborah Guild were present.
Ms. Gonyer said the homeowners would like to remove a portion of the existing house, add a cement slab
and rebuild within the same footprint, with a second story on a portion of the new section. She said
erosion control will be installed with additional erosion control for the left side of the property line toward
the street.
There were no Board Comments
There were no virtual or audience comments.
Dr. Roth made the motion to issue a Negative Determination for reason #3 to Geoffrey and Deborah Guild
at 1819 West Street, Map 002, Parcel 003, for the removal of two sections of the existing house, to be
rebuilt within the same footprint with a new 5'x11' addition within 100 feet of Inland Bank of Greenwood
Lake with the following Special Conditions:
• Erosion control to be inspected by Agent prior to the start of work.
• Agent is to be notified when work is complete and all disturbed areas are stabilized.
• No dumping of lawn clippings within the 25-foot No Disturb Zone.
• Stockpiling of any material/construction debris is to be located toward the street side of the
property.
The motion was seconded by Dr. Paten.
Motion passed 5-0-0 at 6:26 pm.
4. Notice of Intent: Mohammed Abdullah, 0 Allen Avenue, Map 021, Parcel 391.
Mr. Healey opened the hearing for a Notice of Intent for Mohammed Abdullah, 0 Allen Avenue, Map 021,
Parcel 391, for the construction of a single-family dwelling with a two -car garage and minimal clearing
within the 200-foot Riverfront Area of the Rumford River and the 100-year Flood Plain.
Attorney Edward Valanzola, Valanzola Law Group, and Craig Cygawnoski, RIM Engineering Co., Inc. were
present.
Ms. Gonyer noted a DEP number has not been issued for this project but said the Commission can listen
to a synopsis of the project and then poll the board for comments and concerns. The Commission can
then continue the hearing until the DEP number has been issued.
Attorney Valanzola explained this is a grandfathered lot, meaning it is a lot that is shown on a plan that is
recorded in Land Court at the Registry of Deeds. He explained a subdivision plan was recorded and
approved in 1944 by the land court showing the lot with Allen Avenue being the street that would access
this lot. Because this lot is protected under Chapter 40A, Section 6 of the General Laws, it has the
minimum of 5,000 square feet with 50 feet of frontage on Allen Avenue. He said there is a letter from
Robert Blackman, Inspector of Buildings and Zoning Enforcement Officer, agreeing that this is a
grandfathered, buildable lot. The only issue is where the frontage would be.
Attorney Valanzola said they went to the Zoning Board of Appeals earlier this year because they were
proposing the frontage on Chauncy Street; he said at 119 Chauncy Street, Parcel 12-322, there are two
easements that lead to 0 Allen Avenue, one for utilities, water, gas and sewer and the other is for access
for ingress and egress to Allen Avenue. He said they do not want to disturb Allen Avenue or be close to
the Rumford River if they can avoid doing so, so they asked for a Variance so the frontage would be on
Chauncy Street. He said there was some opposition from the abutters; he said he met with the abutters
but made it clear to the Zoning Board that if they deny the Variance, it does not mean the lot can't be
developed. He said they are now before the Conservation Commission because they need Allen Avenue
for frontage. He said he gave Mr. Blackman a number of documents and he agreed, as far as the law is
concerned, they are able to use Allen Avenue, which is a paper street. Attorney Valanzola said they will
put a small house on the lot and push it as far away from the river as possible.
Mr. Cygawnoski said if they have to use Allen Avenue there is a plan to bring the 12-foot gravel driveway
to the property from Morrow Street down the middle of the 40-foot right-of-way. He said this would
require tree clearing. He discussed the proposed Swale and berms, the infiltration trench and the
elevation of the driveway. He said a small area is shown on the plan for a turnaround for garbage and
delivery trucks. He said they are not filling or building in the Flood Plain and they would limit the clearing
of the lot to the 50-foot No Touch Zone. He said the lot is 20,000 square feet and they will be disturbing
16,000 square feet, with most of the disturbance within the 100-foot riparian zone. For the roof and
driveway runoff, Mr. Cygawnoski said they are proposing rain gardens and any runoff would infiltrate into
the ground. The driveway on Allen Avenue would be gravel and the driveway into the property would be
pavement.
Ms. Gonyer said there would be a lot of grading and clearing in an area really close to the Rumford River.
She said with the Riverfront Analysis you are limited to providing alternatives within the lot. She said
there really is no where else you could move the house. She noted Mr. Cygawnoski is using nature -based
solutions by incorporating rain gardens. She said the biggest impact would be the turnaround because in
order to stay out of the 25-foot No Touch Zone, they would have to do retaining walls; she noted they
could be blocking a wildlife corridor. She said if the Commission approved the plan, they would have to
look at a lot of buffer zone restoration enhancement to make sure they are not creating any blocked
corridors and not thickening the buffer between any activities. She said the Commission would have to
3
think about what type of maintenance there would be for the driveway. She asked if they could minimize
the turnaround.
Board Comment:
Mr. Gallagher asked what the depth of the ground water is. Mr. Cygawnoski said it is approximately eight
feet. Mr. Gallagher said he likes the rain gardens but over time they do not work well so he would prefer
something underground. He asked if they would be working in the Flood Plain. Mr. Cygawnoski said this
is correct. Mr. Gallagher asked if the stormwater had been reviewed by Mr. Richard Alves, the town
engineer. Ms. Gonyer said no because stormwater is not required for a single-family house but she would
like to get Mr. Alves' comments as well as comments from Mr. Blackman and Shaun Burke, the Planning
Director, to see if the environmental impacts can be minimized. Ms. Gonyer said this is the biggest area
of concern and asked if this area could be minimized as much as possible because the area is really close
to the 25-foot No Disturb Area. She suggested keeping this area gravel. Mr. Gallagher asked about access
in and out to the property. Mr. Cygawnoski said at 119 Chauncy Street there is an existing driveway on
the left side of the property that was created at the time of the lots. He said the lots were owned by one
person but, because one is considered registered land and the other is not, they are not considered one
lot.
Mr. Gallagher said he does not know why they would need the turnaround and said they could put the
gravel driveway in but stop at the property line. He said then they would not need the driveway around
the back of the house, which would allow the applicant to push the house back. Attorney Valanzola said
then they would not have the frontage and would have to show frontage along Allen Street. Mr. Gallagher
asked if they could use grass pavers for the driveway. Mr. Cygawnoski explained this is a grid filled with
gravel with grass or crushed stone. Dr. Paten said he did not know if you could totally get rid of the
turnaround because there would always be different vehicles that would need to go down the road and
turn around. Ms. Gonyer said her concern was the wildlife corridor and being able to maintain a 20-foot
area that would be kept natural because with the fence and the area being at the river bank, the wildlife
cannot get through. Dr. Roth said this area should be a contiguous and natural space. Ms. Gonyer said
she will talk with Mr. Blackman and Mr. Burke to see how to minimize the impacts because the plan has
a substantial amount of clearing within the inner riparian zone and the 25- and 50-foot areas.
Annie Lue, 135 A Chauncy Street, said there is a lot of wildlife in this area and said they do have the right
to do this but she is also concerned about traffic; she noted there is a school bus stop and traffic from
people going to the commuter rail.
Marguerite Fisher, 22 Highland Avenue, send a letter on March 3, 2022 in opposition of the application.
She said this is a very ecologically sensitive area and the river has already been compromised and needs
to be protected at all cost. She said in the 2020 Master Plan one of the goals is to help preserve natural
areas. Ms. Gonyer said unfortunately this is presumed to be a buildable lot, they are meeting the
performance standards and there is no case where we can deny the project. She said the Commission
can minimize the impacts and work with the developers. She said hopefully we can get a revised plan with
some of tonight's suggestions. Mr. Healey said the Commission has to balance people's rights to enjoy
El
their property while minimizing environmental impacts. She noted this project is the first of many that
will be coming to the Commission because there is less easily developed land in Mansfield.
Rick Foster attended the meeting virtually. He discussed his concerns with the grandfathering of the lot,
the Riverfront Area and the protection of the boundaries, the wildlife habitat and corridor and asked how
they would demonstrate there would be no significant adverse impacts. He talked about 310 CMR 10.58;
he said he does not believe they can do this work without significant impacts. About the grandfathering
of the lot, Ms. Gonyer said Attorney Valanzola was simply stating what was happening in Zoning. She said
as to whether this is a man-made or a natural river, it does not matter. This is an inland bank of a perennial
river and has a 200-foot buffer. Mr. Fisher said it is absolutely jurisdictional and the impacts would be
significant. Ms. Gonyer said as part of the riverfront analysis, an alternative analysis needs to be
conducted. She said the alternative analysis for a single-family lot in a riverfront area has different
performance standards and alternatives are limited to the lot. She said the reason the Commission has
not talked about the wildlife habitat is because this lot is not in a Natural Heritage Estimated/Priority
Habitat area so this application would not trigger a wildlife review. She said she would go over the
regulations for this specific site with Mr. Fisher.
Mr. Gallagher made the motion to continue this hearing to October 24, 2022.
The motion was seconded by Ms. Joynes.
Motion passed 5-0-0 at 7:35 pm.
5. Old Business:
• Discussion of fee schedule:
Ms. Gonyer said she looked at the fees for other towns and said it is now time to change the schedule to
bring in more revenue.
• Appointment for Land Sale Adhoc Committee:
Ms. Gonyer said there are a lot of foreclosed properties in Mansfield, with some abutting conservation
land, some that are wet or have no frontage. The conservation land would be transferred into the care
and control of the Conservation Commission. She said the Finance Committee wanted to have one
committee member from conservation for the adhoc committee to look at these properties once a year
and make suggestions as to whether they should go to auction or stay in with the town, either for
easements or conservation. Dr. Roth volunteered to be on the committee.
Ms. Joynes made the motion to appoint Dr. Roth to the Land Sale Adhoc Committee.
The motion was seconded by Dr. Paten.
Motion passed 5-0-0 at 7:41 pm.
• Conservation Department Updates:
Ms. Gonyer said she presented the Canoe River Aquifer Pilot Project to the town. She said the Organization
Capacity Assessment (OCA) is also looking at the town and how well the town is preparing for climate
change resiliency. She mentioned we are also looking into converting our MVP (Climate Resiliency Plan)
into a hazardous mitigation plan through grant money. She will also be applying for the internal non-profit
gift fund for either kiosks or improvements at Great Woods and Corporal Hardy Conservation areas. She
noted there are on -going scout projects.
Ms. Gonyer said the Open Space Committee is meeting regularly and they are starting to rewrite the Open
Space Plan because an update is due next year.
Dr. Paten asked about clearing invasive species along the Rumford River. Ms. Gonyer said this was called
out in the Canoe River Aquifer Pilot Project and will be the first project of three for Mansfield. She noted
EPA will now help with the funding.
• Approval of August 29, 2022 minutes:
Motion to approve the August 29, 2022 minutes (Gallagher/Joyner).
Motion passed 5-0-0 at 7:48 pm.
6. Adjourn:
Motion to adjourn at 8:02 pm (Joynes/Gallagher) Motion passed 4-0-0.
The next meeting will be October 24, 2022 at 6:00 pm in meeting room 3 A/B.
Michael Healey, Chair Date