HomeMy WebLinkAboutCONSERVATION 07272011
MANSFIELD CONSERVATION
MINUTES JULY 27, 2011
Present: Colin Cauldwell, Chairman; Michele White, Vice Chairman; Paul Boyden; Carole Matthew; Derek
House; Elizabeth Leidhold, Conservation and Environmental Planner.
The Notice of Intent was filed for an aquatic management program to controi nuisance aquatic vegetation in a
man-made pond. Maintenance practices will include a Hydro-raking project, aeration and prudent use of
USEPAjMADAR register aquatic herbicides.
Mr. House made the motion to continue the hearing to August 15, 2011.
Mr. Boyden seconded the motion.
Motion passed 5-0-0.
3. Request for a Certificate of Compliance: Anthony JodicefJodice & Sons, Inc., Brian Fallon, 20 Winslow
Way. #211-0864
No representative was present. Hearing continued to August 15, 2011.
14.R.eqllestforaCertifiCClte ()f COlT1pliance:Da\lid & Kathryillund,19 South White Pine Lane. #211-0840
Kathryn Lund, the homeowner, was present.
The Notice of Intent was filed in December 2009 and an Order of Conditions was issued in February 2010 for
the installation of a 20'x36' in-ground pool, with concrete decking and fencing to surround the pool area as
determined by local and state codes.
Special Conditions included #20 - additional plantings to be added between lawn and wetland flags 3-7 to
mitigate impact of fertilizers to resource areas and #22 - a Froglog is to be installed in the pool.
Mrs. Lund told the board a Critter Skimmer was used in place of the Froglog. She presented pictures of the
plantings.
Mr. Boyden made the motion to issue a Certificate of Compliance for 19 South White Pine Lane - DEP #211-
0840. (Certified Plot Plan of Land in Mansfield, MA, dated March 30, 2011)
Ms. White seconded the motion.
Motion passed 5-0-0.
15. Request for Determination Of Applicability: Rick Alves/Interim Town i:ngineer.
Richard Alves, Interim Town Engineer, was present.
The Request for Determination of Applicability was filed for the reconstruction of Franklin Street, 1,400 feet
northerly of the turn around on Franklin Street. The applicant is proposing to remove and replace the existing
1
pavement; the new pavement starts at 94-96 Franklin Street and ends at 112-114 Franklin Street with a small
portion on Pine Needle Lane.
Approximately 648 feet of roadway will be reconstructed. It will be super elevated, sloped toward the westerly
side of Franklin Street which joins the catch basins on the down slope on Pine Needle Lane. Construction
activities include grinding of the existing pavement, preparing the base material, repaving the roadway to the
same elevation with minor adjustments for proper drainage and width. The work is adjacent to an intermittent
stream from the Canoe River.
The wetland line was flagged by Elizabeth; field located by the Town of Mansfield Engineering Department.
The closest point of work is at 88-90 Franklin Street.
All proper erosion and sedimentation controls, including silt fencing will be installed upslope of all vegetative
areas to prevent any adverse impact to the resource area, the intermittent stream. No work is proposed
within 50 ft. of the intermittent stream.
Portions of the wetland line are across the street. Mr. Alves said they will stay more than 100 feet from the
resource area.
Ms. White asked if the portion of the road where the work will be done currently drains to the catch basin. Mr.
Alves said it drains to the basin but there will be no alteration to the drainage calculations.
Elizabeth will work with Mr. Alves regarding the erosion controls. The erosion controls are to be inspected by
Elizabeth prior to the start of work.
Mr. House made the motion to issue a Negative 3 Determination for the reconstruction of Franklin Street with
the stipulation that all siltation devices be in place and inspected before work begins. (Plan dated June 17,
2011. Plan & Profile for Reconstruction of Franklin Street and Pine Needle Lane in Mansfield, MA 02048)
Mr. Boyden seconded the motion.
Motion passed 5-0-0.
16. RequestforDeterminationofApplicability: Michael P. Heroux, 22 Wind Chime Drive,Map 35, Parcel 129.
Robin and Michael Heroux, the homeowners, were present.
The Request for Determination of Applicability was filed for the installation of a 20'x15' above-ground pool
within the 100 ft. buffer of bordering vegetated wetland. The pool will replace an 18'x15' pool.
Mr. Heroux told the board the pool will be located in the area of the existing pool that was damaged over the
winter and will be less than 100 ft. from the pond edge. No further grading will be necessary.
Mr. Heroux said a swale was installed on the property when the house was built 24 years ago. He said he has
never seen water crest the top of the swale. Mr. Heroux said he maintains the vegetation in this area to
insure that no water over-flow goes into the pond. Mr. Boyden asked Mr. Heroux if he owns the swale or if it
is an easement. Mr. Heroux said it is an easement that goes across all the properties in the sub-division, by-
passing the pond, and goes into the Canoe River basin. Ralph Maloon of RIM Engineering said it was part of
the sub-division.
Elizabeth had no comments.
2
Ms. Matthew asked about the pool filtration system. Mr. Heroux said it will be a sand filter, requiring back-
washing once a month. He said he does not back-wash towards the pond.
Ms. White made the motion to issue a Negative 3 Determination for 22 Wind Chime Drive. (Plan: GIS plan of
lot with 20' round pool hand drawn in, received June 22, 2011)
Ms. Matthew seconded the motion.
Motion passed 5-0-0.
17. RequestforDeterminationof Applicability: Mark D.DeGirolamo,19 Tracy Circle/ Map 34, rarcell07.
The Request for Determination of Applicability was filed for the construction of an above-ground pool within
100 ft. of bordering vegetated wetlands and within a stream.
Tara and Mark DeGirolamo, the homeowners, were present.
The 26'x15' above-ground pool will be installed on existing lawn and will be approximately 65 feet from a
designated wetland, a drainage area.
Elizabeth had no comments.
Mr. House asked about the drainage easement; is it jurisdictional? Elizabeth said in the past the board has
required an RDA be filed to determine jurisdiction. Ms. Matthew said a number of years ago a DEP Circuit
Writer determined that if the drainage system is functioning as a wetland, it does not matter how it got there,
it is jurisdictional. Elizabeth said this drainage system has wetland soils and vegetation. Mr. Cauldwell said if
it has an Operation and Maintenance Plan and has been maintained over time, then it is a drainage system; if
it has wetland soils and vegetation, it is a wetland area.
Mr. House asked Mr. DeGirolamo about the shed on the property. The shed is within the easement and the
wetland area. Mr. DeGirolamo said the shed was there when he purchased the house in 2006.
Mr. House made the motion to issue a Negative 3 Determination for 19 Tracy Circle for the installation of a
26'x15' above-ground pool on existing lawn; the permit is for the 26'x15' above-ground pool only. This project
takes no consideration for the shed that is within the wetland area. No erosion controls are necessary. (Plan:
Certified Plot Plan with had drawn pool location)
Ms. Matthew seconded the motion.
Motion passed 5-0-0.
Mr. DeGirolamo is a teacher at the Qualter Middle School. He is proposing to do a water quality project with
his students. The project will involve 4 of the school's science teachers and approximately 400 students.
He has asked Elizabeth about possible sites for the project; he does not want to trespass on private property
and there are safety concerns when dealing with students.
Mr. Cauldwell asked if the project could be presented at the Conservation Fair October 1, 2011. He offered to
look into other locations for Mr. DeGirolamo.
la.ReqUestfor Determination of Applicability; Richard Jablonski, 259 Otis Street/Map 3, Parcel 227,
The Request for Determination of Applicability was filed for the construction of a 14'x16' deck to replace an
existing 12'x16' deck. The existing deck is approximately 42 feet from wetlands.
3
The new deck will be moved 3 feet to the right, approximately 47 feet from the wetlands. The deck will be
constructed with pressure-treated lumber and wrapped with composite decking and cement footings with
sonotubes. The property borders the Sweet Conservation Area.
Elizabeth said the property is in a Natural Heritage area. She said the erosion controls will need to be
inspected prior to the start of the work. Mr. Jablonski said the silt fence is still up for the pool permitted at the
June 20, 2011 meeting.
Mr. Boyden asked that the distance to the wetlands from the new deck be measured after the work is
complete.
Mr. Boyden made the motion to accept the Determination and issue a Negative 3 Determination for 259 otis
Street, Map 3, Parcel 227, for the construction of a 14'x16'deck; the existing silt fence is to be re-inspected; a
measurement from the new deck to the wetlands is to be taken once the project is complete. (Plan:
Proposed new layout showing deck location, received July 1, 2011)
Ms. White seconded the motion.
Motion passed 5-0-0.
19.. Request forDeterminationof Applicability: James Lazzara, 120 Spring Street, Map 29, Parcel 157.
The Request for Determination of Applicability was filed to confirm the wetland line.
Paul DeSimone, Colonial Engineering, Inc. and James Lazzara, the property owner, were present.
Richard Alves, Interim Town Engineer, and Elizabeth went to the site to take measurements and look at the
soils. She suggested that flags 4 and 5 be moved approximately 13 feet up on the site. other than flags 4 and
5, she said she did not have a problem with the delineation. She told Mr. DeSimone she can meet with the
botanist to make the changes to the flags. A revised plan with the changes will have to be submitted.
Mr. DeSimone told the board the closest impediment to the 100 foot buffer will be approximately 30.7 feet.
Elizabeth asked if the applicant will be filing for any additional work within the 100 ft. buffer. Mr. DeSimone
said no work, including the clearing of vegetation, will be conducted in the 100 foot buffer
Mr. Boyden asked about the opposite side of the street from this lot. Mr. Lazzara said there are two
residences directly across from the site; one on the corner of Dean Street and one further to the west.
Mr. Boyden said the board had denied all action that Is across the street on Dean Street. Elizabeth said the
wetlands in question are across from 110 Spring Street not 120 Spring Street. She told the board these
wetlands have been flagged. She said the buffer zone is over 100 feet away from this wetland at the corner of
Dean Street.
Ms. Matthew asked if the wetland shown on the plan is part of the river. Elizabeth said it is part of the
intermittent stream.
Mr. Cauldwell asked Elizabeth if the project can be approved by the board tonight. She said approval would
be contingent upon the submittal of a revised plan showing the modifications to the flags. Flags 4 and 5 will
be moved in the field and verified by Elizabeth.
Mr. House asked if any work would be done in the 200 foot Riverfront area. Elizabeth said all the Riverfront
areas are on the next lot. Mr. House said there is Riverfront in the back left corner of the lot. He asked if
there will be any impact to this area. Should this area be flagged or staked at the 200 foot Riverfront line
4
from the other side? Mr. DeSimone said the line has not been delineated but the bank has been flagged. Mr.
House said the problem is the house will be built and these areas will not be touched. But when the house is
sold, the new owner may want to expand the back yard and because there are no markings designating the
Riverfront, the area could be cleared. We need to clarify both the back left corner and the right side of the
property are actually a wetland area. The board should require the 200 ft. line be staked - the 100 and 200
foot line is already shown on the plan. Elizabeth said by marking these areas, it will be easier to make sure all
the work is being done out of jurisdiction.
Mr. House made the motion to approve the RDA for 120 Spring Street and issue a Positive 2a Determination
[the boundary delineations of the following resource areas described on the referenced plan(s) are confirmed
as accurate. Therefore, the resource area boundaries confirmed in this Determination are binding as to all
decisions rendered pursuant to the Wetlands Protection Act and its regulations regarding such boundaries for
as long as this Determination is valid], contingent upon the submittal of a revised plan showing the
modifications to flags 4 and 5; the 200 ft. Riverfront area be flagged in the back left corner and the right side
of the property; Elizabeth will verify the flagging. (Plan: Piot Plan of Land in Mansfield, MA, dated May 16,
2011, with revision date of July 29, 2011)
Ms. Matthew seconded the motion.
Motion passed 5-0-0.
110...... Notice ofIntent: ...Grove Building Realty Trust,110 Spring ?treet, Map 28,.ParceI157. #211-0870
The Notice of Intent was filed for the construction of a single family dwelling and grading within the 200 ft.
Outer Riparian Zone and within the flood plain.
Paul DeSimone, Colonial Engineering, Inc. and James Lazzara were present.
Mr. DeSimone told the board Lot 2 will have some filling within the flood plain and the 200 foot Outer Riparian
Zone between the 100 foot and the 200 foot Riverfront. There will be approximately 3,060 square feet of
compensation of the flood plain.
Mr. DeSimone said there are piles of gravel from a previous owner on the site. He said Mr. Lazzara has
already started to remove the material. The area will be brought down to elevation 134, which is the flood
plain, removing 12,263 square feet, approximately 4 times the 3,060 square feet needed to be compensated.
Mr. Cauldwell said removing the material from the area will be a benefit to the river. Mr. DeSimone told the
board the applicant plans to do some mitigation by planting winterberry bushes on the 100 foot and Inner
Riparian line.
Mr. DeSimone said siltation controls are not shown on the pian because he did not know what the board would
require. Mr. Cauldwell suggested waddles or hay bales with silt fencing.
The house will be on town sewer and water.
Mr. DeSimone said the applicant was asked to flag the wetland areas directiy across the street from this
property which will bring the 100 foot buffer into the building area.
Given that this is a Riverfront project, Elizabeth asked the applicant to flag and pick up the top of bank which
they have done with flags 1-10 and show the 100 foot buffer zone on the lot. She also verified the wetiand
flags across the street.
If the lot was recorded before 1997, the issuing authority may allow the alteration of up to 5, 000 square feet
or 10% of the riverfront area of the lot, whichever is greater. In the NOl, the alteration of 4,082 square feet
5
of outer riparian zone is proposed - over 10% but under 5,000 square feet. Mr. Lazzara said the lot was
recorded in 2006. After reading the regulations, Elizabeth said even if the lot was recorded after 1997, you
still have to maintain the same criteria: 100 feet of undisturbed vegetation which the applicant is proposing;
stormwater management proposed work not to impair the capacity of the riverfront area, to provide wildlife
habitat functions and will not impair groundwater or surface water quality. It meets the 5,000 square feet or
greater.
Ms. Matthew asked about the area to be filled in the back yard from the deck and steps. What is the distance
between the green line, the limit of work, and the edge of the yard to the 100 foot Inner Riparian zone? Mr.
DeSimone said the distance is approximately 51 feet to the nearest point.
Ms. Matthew asked if the applicant would be submitting a replication plan for the areas where the gravel will
be removed; she would like to see something planted in this area. Mr. DeSimone told the board when the fill
is removed, they might encroach on the Inner Riparian Zone. He asked if the board would require only a
siltation barrier or would the applicant have to do a separate filing for this work. He said the area to be filled
contains shrubs but no mature trees. Elizabeth said the project would fall within another category when you
start getting into the Inner Riparian Zone.
Mr. DeSimone suggested a wetland mix for this area. Because the area is within the flood plain, Ms. White
wondered if a wetland mix would take in this area. Depending on the high water level, this area could be dry
for a long period of time and everything you have planted either won't grow or will die. Mr. DeSimone said if
you take a wetland area and clear the vegetation, the shrubs and weeds will eventually grow back. Ms. White
said this can be addressed in the Certificate of Compliance to see how the area has re-vegetated. Elizabeth
asked if the board wanted to make this a condition.
Ms. Matthew suggested permanent signage at the 100 foot line. Instead of signs, Mr. House asked if the board
could put on the deed that the property has conservation considerations. Mr. DeSimone suggested that a note
be put on the deed that the actual property is within the Inner and Outer Riparian Zones.
Mr. Boyden told the board there is an on-going study of Fulton's Pond. The way the study is written, in a
catastrophic failure of Fulton's Pond into Kingman Pond, this area would be flooded completely. He would like
the Town Engineer to come back and tell the board any houses that are being built downstream are not in the
catastrophic range. He said there are no control devices on Kingman Pond. Mr. Boyden suggested that the
applicant talk to the Town Engineer. Elizabeth said this can be added as a condition.
Elizabeth asked Mr. DeSimone if the limit of work is where the winterberry bushes are to be planted. He said
the bushes are going to be planted at the 134 contour. Because the vegetation in this area is very thick,
Elizabeth said by planting the winterberry bushes at the 100 foot line, there might be more damage done to
this area. She asked if the plantings could be moved to the limit of work. Mr. DeSimone suggested the
bushes be planted by hand to minimize any damage to the area. Elizabeth asked that the winterberry bushes
be shown at the 134 line and the limit of work be shown on the plan.
The lot is not in a Natural Heritage area and there are no comments from DEP.
Ms. White asked if the board addressed the issue of the cutting in the back where the little section is within
the 100 foot Inner Riparian line. Mr. Cauldwell said no. Elizabeth said according to the regulations, you can
not go into the Inner Riparian area. She said she needs more information regarding any work to be done in
the 100 foot Inner Riparian Zone and more time to review the project. She said this is not the same project
that was presented to DEP or to the Conservation Commission.
Mr. House said the removal of the gravel piles in the back, from an environmental stand point, is a good thing.
He asked if the board should make the removal of the material part of this Notice of Intent or should it have a
6
separate Notice of Intent or a Request for Determination of Applicability? A separate filing is not necessary
because it is the whole area in general. Mr. Boyden said when submitting a final plan, it needs to be noted
that this area can not be used for anything else. Elizabeth asked that this be added to the new plans.
Mr. House asked about the project on the other side of the river, the mill project. Are there going to be any
requirements where the applicant will need to use any of this property, 110 Spring Street, for compensatory
storage? Mr. Lazzara said everything is contained on the existing lot - the parking and building will fall within
the existing footprint.
Elizabeth asked Mr. DeSimone if he proposed work in the Inner Riparian Zone in this Notice of Intent.
Elizabeth suggested, because of the changing scope of the project that the hearing be continued and the
applicant come back with more information regarding the work in the Inner Riparian Zone. Mr. DeSimone
should also send a copy to DEP outlining the removal of the material in this area since this information was not
included in the original filing.
The applicant should get a copy of the Fulton's Pond report - he can get the report from the Town Engineer;
get more information regarding the work in the Inner Riparian corridor; get engineering comments regarding
the flood way; submit a revised plan and a course of action to Conservation; send additional information to
DEP regarding the removal of the gravel piles.
Mr. House made the motion to continue the hearing for the Notice of Intent for the construction of a single
family dwelling and grading within the 200 ft. Outer Riparian Zone and the flood plain for Grove Realty Trust,
110 Spring Street, DEP #211-0870, to August 15, 2011.
Ms. Matthew seconded the motion.
Motion passed 5-0-0.
IU.NoticeofIntent: ..Stephell & Christine Staples,1787WesfStreet,Map 2, Pilrcel 360. #211-0871.
The Notice of Intent was filed for the construction of a house, driveway, sewage disposal system, utilities with
related grading within the 100 ft. buffer of bordering vegetated wetlands.
Ralph Maloon, RIM Engineering Co., Inc. and Christine & Stephen Staples, the homeowners, were present.
Mr. Maloon told the board the lot is on Greenwood Lake. He said the project would be a great environmental
improvement because currently the existing house Is within the 25 ft. buffer and the cesspool is in the water
table. The cesspool will be replaced with a new septic system and the new house will be located further back
from the lake. The existing dwelling will be razed.
Elizabeth said the new house will be approximately 120 feet back from the water and the gravel driveway will
be approximately 65 feet from the resource area. She said the new house will be much larger than the
existing house; what is the size of the house? Mr. Maloon said the house measurements are noted on the
plan. He said there will be a two-car garage under the house in front and a one-car garage in the back of the
house.
Elizabeth asked if the existing shed would be removed; Mr. Maloon said no, just the existing house will be
removed. An existing garage will not be removed and will be used for storage.
Elizabeth asked what the applicant plans to do with the land the existing house and driveway are on. Once
the house has been taken down, Mr. Staples said the areas will be re-vegetated. Elizabeth recommended
buffer zone plantings. She said she would like a planting proposal submitted.
7
Mr. Maloon said he is proposing silt fencing. Elizabeth would like to see more than the silt fence; waddles or
hay bales with silt fencing. Erosion controls will need to be Inspected by Elizabeth prior to the start of work.
During the construction of the new house and the septic system, some trees will have to be removed.
Because some of the work will be within the 100 ft. buffer, Mr. House asked if the board could request a
proposal from an arborist or a tree removal company. The board would like to know the number of trees to
be removed. A copy of the estimated bill from the company can be submitted for the file.
A new retaining wall will be located further back from the existing retaining wall.
Ms. White made the motion to issue an Order of Conditions for 1787 West Street for the construction of a
house, driveway, sewage disposal system, utilities with related grading with the following conditions: double-
staked hay bales and silt fence to be installed at the limit of proposed activity and inspected by the
Conservation Agent prior to the start of work; the applicant is to submit a copy of the tree removal estimate
for the Conservation file; the applicant is to work with the Conservation Agent to develop a planting plan for
the area of the existing house after it is removed. (Plan of Record: Sewage Disposal Plan for #1787 West
Street in Mansfield, MA, dated June 7, 2011 and revised June 29, 2011: Add silt fence and buffer zone lines)
Mr. House seconded the motion.
Motion passed 5-0-0.
1.:t2.Noticeof Intent: .... HelenSauvageau/220plainStreet, Map 4/ Parcel 74. #211-0872
Ms. White recused herself from the hearing.
The Notice of Intent was submitted for the replacement of a deteriorating six foot fence, to be replaced with a
new six foot cedar fence in the location of the existing fence. A chain-link fence with a lockable gate will also
be installed along the existing lakeside wall.
The work is proposed within 100 feet of Greenwood Lake but outside the 25 foot no touch zone. There is an
existing Order of Conditions, DEP #211-0868, for a deck that will be attached to the rear of the house.
The yard to the rear of the house will be leveled. Leveling this area will require an 18-inch retaining wall at
the edge of the 25 foot no touch zone.
The concrete and flagstone walkways will be removed and part of the concrete in front of the basement and
shed doors will also be removed; permeable pavers are to be put in these areas. Grass will be removed and
replaced with plantings and re-grassed. The proposed retaining wall will be placed at the hay bale line to
maintain the new level of the yard; the area beyond the wall on the lake side will be 18" lower than the house
side of the wall. The retaining wall can be no higher than 18". Elizabeth asked that Mrs. Sauvageau put the
location of the retaining wall on the plan and initial the plan.
Elizabeth told the board the distance from the house foundation and the water is 49 feet. The distance from
the proposed deck to the 25 foot no touch line is 18 feet
Mr. House asked about the 50 foot deed line; the property is not deeded to the water edge. He asked how
the board can issue a permit for this portion of the property if Mrs. Sauvageau does not own the portion of the
property beyond the deed line.
Elizabeth said the issuance of the Order of Conditions can be contingent upon discovering whether or not
fences are allowable on the deed line. Since the fence is proposed on top of an existing retaining wall, it is not
considered new development.
8
Mr. Boyden said the area of occupancy has been used by previous owners. Mrs. Sauvageau said when she
purchased the property last October there was a dock in this area. Mr. Boyden said if Mrs. Sauvageau wants
to put a fence in this area, it is at her own risk. The chain-link fence should be placed on the deeded property
only and should be labeled on the plan. Mr. Boyden said whatever is approved under this filing is by deed only
and should be stated in the Order of Conditions.
Mr. Cauldweli said Mrs. Sauvageau should get a legal opinion as to the use of the land. She could contact the
Bungay Lake Association regarding the area of occupancy. The Association could issue a letter stating this
area can be used by the property owners. Mr. House suggested she check her deed; she might have exclusive
rights to this portion of the property.
Mr. Boyden made the motion to go forward with the project at 220 Plain Street with the foliowing conditions:
the fences are aliowed on Mrs. Sauvageau deeded property only, what ever is approved is by deed only and
should be stated in the Order of Conditions; the proposed retaining stones are not to be higher than 18" in
height; no more than 18" of loam is to be used in the proposed paver/gardening area; the two foot wide area
of plantings is to be planted along the inside of the retaining wali; since the silt fence/hay bales are already in
place from the previous deck project, additional erosion controls are not necessary; erosion controls are to be
re-inspected by the agent prior to the start of the work; ali work will be inside the hay bale line; actual square
footage of the pavers is to be confirmed on the drawing; Mrs. Sauvageau modified the plan - she initialed and
dated the plan; the chain-link fence should be placed on the deed line, not as shown on the plan.
Mr. Boyden suggested that the cedar fence be placed 6 to 8 inches onto Mrs. Sauvageau's property. Mrs.
Sauvageau told the board the existing fence is 2 feet on to her property. She said the cedar fence will be
placed where the existing fence is now.
Elizabeth asked if the board wants to require additional plantings to off-set the pavers beyond the retaining
wali.
Mr. House amended the motion, approval contingent upon the submittal of the amended plan
Ms. Matthew seconded the motion.
Motion passed 4-0-1.
113. Education and Outreach:
Ms. White reminded the board that at the May 16, 2011 meeting a vote was taken to purchase signs - "No
Hunting", "Motorized Vehicles Excluded by Order of Conservation" and property markers to mark the
boundaries of Conservation Land.
The Corporal Robert Hardy Conservation Area and the York Conservation Area (Strese property) are "no
hunting" areas.
An account has been set up for the purchase of the signs.
Ms. White would like to purchase 20 "No Hunting" signs, 10-15 "Motorized Vehicles Excluded" signs and 250
property markers.
Ms. White made the motion to purchase the number of signs previously mentioned, to be paid for out of the
trust funds.
Mr. Boyden seconded the motion.
Motion passed 5-0-0.
9
She hopes to start the boundary marking this fall. The markers are purchased in lots of 250; additional
markers will be ordered as necessary. She said the goal Is to eventually mark all conservation properties. It
was suggested that perhaps the marking of the boundaries can be done as an Eagle Scout project.
Ms. Matthew and Mr. Cauldwell thought it would be a good idea to add signage to the open spaces in sub-
divisions. Mr. House suggested that problem sites be identified first.
Vote to adopt a $2.00 copy charge for the Wetland By-law Regulations.
Mr. Boyden made the motion to adopt a $2.00 copy charge for the Wetland By-law Regulations.
Mr. House seconded the motion.
Motion passed 5-0-0.
Ms. Matthew made the motion to send a letter to engineers regarding the new regulations.
Mr. Boyden seconded the motion.
Motion passed 5-0-0.
Ms White asked that the By-law and the Regulations be put on the town's website.
Agent's Report:
Extension of DEP #211-0814, Stearns Avenue Landfill Ciosure - Given that the permit for DEP #211-
0814jTown of Mansfield, Hercules, Inc. was issued June 10, 2008 and was due to expire within the Permit
Extension Act time frame, Elizabeth told the board the permit would be valid for two more years from the
original expiration date. The permit would have an expiration date of June 10, 2013. The applicant should
send a letter for the file.
There have been delays in starting the project: regulatory decisions regarding the requirements of closure by
the Department of Environmental Protection; Changes in project staff personnel. The work is scheduled to
begin this calendar year.
Problems with Special Conditions for Orders of Conditions: Elizabeth presented a draft of suggested
conditions. She asked that the board review and make any changes or additions to the draft.
Richard Alves, Interim Town Engineer, has asked for an Emergency Certification for work on County Street.
Settlement has occurred on the north and south bound approach slabs of the County Street bridge. Work to
be allowed under the Emergency Certification: excavation within the Right-of-Way and temporary repair of
pavement of portions of roadway at the approach slabs of the bridge within the buffer zone and Riverfront
areas to the Rumford River. Site visit date: July 18, 2011. Emergency Certification start date: July 25, 2011.
End date: August 25, 2011.
A Notice of Intent will be submitted for more permanent repairs to the bridge; work to include the installation
of a box culvert.
Ratify the Emergency Certification: No motion was made.
72 Pratt Street: The owner has removed some of the material from the wetland area and has restored the
plants. Elizabeth feels more material should be removed and more plantings added but said the work looks
good. She will send a letter to the owner, requesting additional plantings and more material be removed from
the wetland area.
10
The owner will be asked to submit a letter asking to have the Enforcement Order lifted.
Mr. Boyden made the motion to grant the agent's request to increase the foliage and remove more of the fill
material from the wetland.
Ms. White seconded the motion.
Motion passed 5-0-0.
Landfill at 241 Francis Avenue: The owner is proposing to build a solar facility. There are wetlands on the
site. Elizabeth suggested a Request for Determination of Applicability be submitted to make sure the work is
out of Conservation's jurisdiction.
Elizabeth inspected Mass Highway with Karro Frost, the Environmental Monitor from New England
Environmental, Inc.: work is being done in the replication areas; there are issues with the erosion controls -
some were breached. Gary Dixon has ordered additional erosion controls to be added to the site. Elizabeth
told the board she will be doing a site visit tomorrow, July 28th at 7:00 am.
Maple Leaf Realty Trust, 557 Maple Street, Wetland Monitor Contract: The applicant would like to use LEC
Environmental Consultants, Inc. instead of Wetland Strategies Inc. Elizabeth told the board she has
contacted the Barnstable and Norton Conservation Departments regarding LEe. Both are very happy with
work done by the company.
Reit Management Pond, 44 Cabot Boulevard. Elizabeth told the board she had sent a list of consultants to
Aquatic Control Technology, Inc. and they picked Wetland Strategies, Inc. for their consultant for this project.
Elizabeth feels this would be a conflict of interest if Wetland Strategies, Inc. worked for the Town of Mansfield
as a consultant and then consulted on applications presented to the board. She does not think it is right that
someone acts on behalf of the Commission and then acts as a consultant for an applicant. She has been in
contact with someone at DEP; this person thinks this may be against the new state ethics regulations.
Elizabeth suggested that LEC come to the next meeting to meet and talk with the board.
Beaumont Pond Issues: Foxborough Conservation Commission has a Notice of Intent before them to control
invasive aquatic vegetation in Beaumont Pond. The pond is totally in Foxborough but the pond is within one-
half mile of four wells along the Canoe River.
Mr. Cauidwell attended the meeting but the hearing had been cancelled. He told the Foxborough board he did
not think it was a good idea to put herbicides in public drinking water. The next meeting is August 8, 2011.
Ms. White said she has started work on the forms for the Stormwater By-law to be implemented and put in
place. She will have drafts of the by-law and application for the August 15th meeting for everyone to look at
and discuss and comment on.
Vernal pool on Maple Street: At the last meeting, Ms Matthew asked about the restored vernal pool on Maple
Street. The restoration plan called for the vernal pool to be examined the following three (3) spring seasons -
2010, 2011 and 2012. She asked if the board had a legal right to inspect the vernal pool and if the inspection
should be done in the fall of this year or wait until the spring of 2012. The vernal pool has not been inspected
since it was restored.
Mr. Cauldwell asked that a registered letter be sent to the owner of the property to let him know when the
inspection will take place.
Discuss future on-site inspection for Stanley Village and Bird Road: At the last meeting, Ms. Matthew told the
board she had received an anonymous phone call about a potential violation on this property. The person was
11
walking the power lines on Bird Road and noticed work being done in the Stanley Village sub-division/ too
close to the wetlands. Mr. Cauldwell told her he will do a site visit with her.
A motion was made by Ms. Matthew regarding the Wetland By-law Regulations.
"In order to correct for the record a motion made and passed at the June 20, 2011 meeting but not seconded,
I hearby made a repeat motion under the authority of the Section 4.1 of the Mansfield Wetland Protection By-
law to adopt regulations. Let the record show that this motion is based on directive from Town Council by
electronic communication, dated June 13 and 14, 2011/ via the Town Manager/ that the following changes
satisfy in Town Council's opinion/ any legal requirements necessary. A copy of said opinion shall remain on file
with this motion."
Vote to strike the following:
Section 2: Jurisdiction - "all areas defined in the Massachusetts Wetland Protection Act which incorporates the
Rivers Protection Act" and "lands within 200 feet of any perennial river know as Riverfront Area".
Vote to replace the following:
Section 2: Jurisdiction - replace the word "any vernal pool" with "any certified vernal pool".
Replace the words "land within 100 feet of any vernal pool with "any land within 100 feet of any certified
vernal pool".
Vote to change the title of the regulations from "Wetland Protection Rules and Regulations of the Town of
Mansfield Wetland Protection By-law" to "Regulations adopted by the Mansfield Conservation Commission
pursuant to the Town of Mansfield General By-law/ Chapter 15".
Mr. Boyden seconded the motion.
Motion passed 5-0-0.
114. Adjournment:
Ms. White made the motion to adjourn.
Mr. Boyden seconded the motion.
Motion passed 5-0-0.
Next meeting will be August 15, 2011 at 7:00 pm
@tz~,,~I/ ({hi;)
Colin Cau dwell, Chairman
fjf5/;;
Date /
12