Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCONSERVATION 10212013_201311191511MANSFIELD CONSERVATION MINUTES OCTOBER 21, 2013 Present: Michael Healey, Vice Chairman; Ryan Maxwell; Christopher Marcheselli; lames Turnbull; Carole Matthew; Katelyn Merrill, Conservation and Environmental Planner. 1. Meeting opened at 6:30 pm. 2. Request for a Certificate of Compliance: New England Power Company — National Grid, Bird Road. DEP SE 211 -0841 Andrea Kendall, Senior Environmental Scientist from LEC Environmental Consultants, Inc., was present and requested a final Certificate of Compliance be issued for the E1 Line Extension Project located within the existing transmission line right -of -way from the Easton town line and Bird Road in Mansfield, MA. An Order of Conditions was approved for this project on January 2010 for the construction of the line extension. Ms. Kendall explained a partial Certificate of Compliance was issued on December 17, 2012 to allow for additional monitoring and reporting of the wetland and riverfront restoration areas. Ms. Kendall conducted a site walk with Magdalena Lofstedt of CDM Smith in the spring of 2013 and again in September 2013 with Conservation Agent Katelyn Merrill to review the health of the restoration areas. Ms. Merrill said she walked the extent of the wetland and riverfront replication areas on September 9, 2013 and the areas are thriving with a 75% survival rate. She said she did not see any issues or die back and no further action is required. She recommended that the full Certificate of Compliance be issued. Mr. Turnbull made a motion to issue a full Certificate of Compliance to New England Power Company, National Grid, for the Bird Road El Line Extension Project, DEP SE 211 -0841. Ms. Matthew seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Hearing ended at 6:40 pm. 3. Request for a Certificate of Compliance: Robin Devine, 119 York Road. DEP SE 211 -0893 Ralph Maloon, RIM Engineering Co., Inc., representing the homeowner, was present. The Notice of Intent was filed for an- ground pool, apron, patio, 12'x18' pool house, retaining wall, fence, gates, raised fire pit and related grading within the 100 -foot buffer zone and within the 200 -foot outer riparian zone. Mr. Maloon said all work has been satisfactorily completed in compliance with the design plan. The lawn areas have been loamed and seeded, but the lawn is not established at this time. Mr. Maloon said an As Built Plan was not required. Ms. Merrill said the Order of Conditions was approved in December 2012 for a proposed pool and patio area. As part of the Order of Conditions, the batting cage, located within the 25' No Disturb Zone, was to be removed; the batting cage was removed and the area has been re- established. The area beyond the fence has been allowed to naturalize. She explained the only deviation from the proposed plan is the retaining wall located around the fire pit was actually constructed in front of the fire pit instead of the approved location behind the pit. She said this deviation does not pose any additional impacts to the resource area. An As Built Plan was not included in the Orders and because Ms. Merrill did not observe any substantial changes from the approved plan, one is not needed at this time. The limit of work and the approved fence were placed within the approved locations. She recommends the Certificate of Compliance be issued. Mr. Turnbull made a motion to issue a Certificate of Compliance to Robin Devine for 119 York Road, DEP SE 211- 0893. Ms. Matthew seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Hearing ended at 6:42 pm. 4. Request for a Certificate of Compliance: Cross Tie Construction, 4 Buckskin Drive. DEP SE 211 -0874 The original Order of Conditions was approved for the construction of a house, driveway, septic, utilities and grading within the 100 ft. buffer of Bordering Vegetated Wetlands. Michael Trowbridge of Hutchins - Trowbridge Associates, Inc. was present. He said a partial Certificate of Compliance was issued December 19, 2011 for the house and driveway only. An As Built Plan showing final elevations of the lot needed to be submitted and the vegetation needed to be stable before a full Certificate of Compliance could be issued. Ms. Merrill said an Order of Conditions was issued on August 15, 2011 under DEP SE 211 -0874. Construction was completed in the fall of 2011 and the Applicant applied for a Certificate of Compliance and received a partial Certificate of Compliance in December 2011. When conducting a site review on October 7, 2013, she observed portions of the lawn had not yet germinated. She contacted Mr. Trowbridge and a representative from Cross Tie Construction and both confirmed that the lawn area had been completely seeded but because there was no irrigation system, there was a lot of die off over the summer. Ms. Merrill said the lawn area has been established enough for siltation issues but asked that the area be re- established as soon as possible. All special conditions of the Order have been met and Ms. Merrill recommends a full Certificate of Compliance be issued. Mr. Marcheselli made a motion to issue a full Certificate of Compliance to Cross Tie Construction for 4 Buckskin Drive, DEP SE 211 -0874. Plan "As Built 4 Buckskin Drive, Lot 1 ", dated October 27, 2011, revised September 30, 2013. Ms. Matthew seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Hearing ended at 6:45 pm. 5. Request for Determination of Applicability: Mansfield Public Schools, 250 East Street, Map 25, Parcel 30. The Request for Determination of Applicability was filed for selective trimming of branches that have grown in and obstructed the view of the playing field. No trees will be cut. The work will be within the 50- and 100 -foot buffer of Bordering Vegetated Wetlands. Request is to trim and maintain for the length of the permit. Michael Trowbridge of Hutchins - Trowbridge Associates, Inc. and a member of the School Committee was present. Mr. Trowbridge said since the track and bleachers were installed, the branches have started to hang down and over the track, obstructing the view. The branches that will be trimmed are on the north side of the track. He said the submitted plan shows the wetland line that was established for a Notice of Intent filed in 2012 when the track was redone. He said only the branches will be trim, no trees will be cut and the agent will be notified as the trimming is done over the next 3 years. Ms. Merrill said an on -going special condition should be added to the Determination that the applicant will contact the Agent before and after the trimming is done. Mr. Trowbridge explained it is important that the trimming be done as soon as possible because Mansfield is in the play -offs and are the number one team in the state. Mr. Turnbull made a motion to issue a Negative Determination for Reason #3 — work will not alter an Area Subject to Protection; a Notice of Intent is not required —for 250 East Street with the following special condition that the applicant contact the Agent to inspect the area after trimming has occurred. Plan "Conservation Plan ", dated September 27, 2013; B USGS; C Firm Flood. Mr. Marcheselli seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Hearing ended at 6:50 pm. 6. Request for Determination of Applicability: Jeff and Jordana Weiner, 9 DiMascio Drive, Map 37, Parcel 277. The Request for Determination of Applicability was filed for the expansion of an existing deck to allow for the construct a 16'x12' sunroom. Three (3) additional footings will be necessary within 100 feet of Bordering Vegetated Wetlands. Homeowner Jeff Weiner was present. Mr. Weiner said the existing deck will be modified to build a 16'x12' sunroom off the back of the house. Ms. Matthew reminded Ms. Merrill that when the house was permitted, the project was held to the 50 -foot No Touch Zone. Ms. Merrill said the work will still be outside the 50 ft., on a pre - developed lawn, approximately 55 feet from the edge of a Bordering Vegetated Wetland. She does not see any potential impact and recommended a Negative Determination for Reason #3 be issued. Mr. Healey asked if any of the existing footings will be replaced and how the new footings would be excavated. Mr. Weiner said the three new footings will be dug by hand using an auger. One of the existing footings might have to be replaced because it was not placed far enough into the ground. Mr. Marcheselli made a motion to issue a Negative Determination for Reason #3 - work will not alter an Area Subject to Protection; a Notice of Intent is not required — for Jeff Weiner, 9 DiMascio Drive, Map 37, Parcel 277. Plan "Certified Plot Plan of Land in Mansfield, MA" dated October 30, 2007, RIM Engineering Co., Inc. Mr. Maxwell seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Hearing ended at 6:55 pm. 7. Request for Determination of Applicability: Steve K. and Eileen A. Gordon, 118 Lawndale Road, Map 40, Parcel 71. The Request for Determination of Applicability was filed for the installation of a distribution box and two leaching trenches within 100 feet of Bordering Vegetated Wetland. Michael Trowbridge of Hutchins - Trowbridge Associates, Inc. represented the applicants for Ralph Maloon, RIM Engineering Co., Inc., who could not be at the meeting because of a commitment in Norton. Mr. Trowbridge explained this is a new septic system to be installed in the rear yard and all work will be done on previously developed lawn. He said the Bordering Vegetated Wetlands have been flagged and the work will be approximately 63 feet away from the wetland located to the west of the property. He said the state, under Title 5, requires the system to be at least 50 feet away from a resource area. Grading will remain the same and the area will be loamed and seeded. Siltation controls are shown on the plan. Ms. Merrill said a test pit has been done so the area has already been disturbed. She said the proposed siltation controls should be inspected prior to the start of work. She recommends a Negative Determination for Reason #3 be issued. Ms. Matthew asked if the capacity of the system will remain the same. Mr. Trowbridge said the existing system was designed for three bedrooms and the new system will not be expanded. Mr. Turnbull made a motion to issue a Negative Determination for Reason #3 - work will not alter an Area Subject to Protection; a Notice of Intent is not required - for Steve and Eileen Gordon, 118 Lawndale Road, for the installation of a septic system with the special condition that the siltation controls be staked in place and inspected by the Agent prior to any disturbances. Plan "Sewage Disposal Plan for Lot 71, 118 Lawndale Road in Mansfield, MA ", dated October 2, 2013, RIM Engineering Co., Inc. Ms. Matthew seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Hearing ended at 6:56 pm. 8. Request for Determination of Applicability: Columbia Gas of MA, Willow Street, Map 12, Parcel 82. The Request for Determination of Applicability was filed for the installation of a new gas main within the Willow Street Layout, within the inland bank of Cabot Pond and the Rumford River. Brad Holmes of ECR (Environmental Consulting and Restoration LLC) was present, representing Merrill Associates, Inc. Mr. Holmes said the application is for a proposed extension of a gas main within a portion of Willow Street starting in front of 199 Willow Street and extending to 207 Willow Street. Also included is a proposed gas service connection along the edge of the driveway /landscaped area of 207 Willow Street, in order to connect to the existing house. The proposed gas main is within the 100 -foot buffer zone of Bordering Vegetated Wetlands and the 200 -foot Riverfront Area of the Rumford River. Mr. Holmes said this is a typical open trench utility installation project and because the proposed project will occur within the existing paved roadway, there will be no impact to the wetland resource areas. Erosion controls will be installed along the project route, no soil piles will be left overnight, and work will not be conducted during rain events. Ms. Merrill said the project is not within a Natural Heritage area and a revised plan dated October 15, 2013 was submitted. Ms. Merrill reviewed the project with Richard Alves, Town Engineer, and he has no issues with the project. She said there are a few crossing of culverts but she does not see any reason for a further filing and recommended a Negative Determination, Reason #3, be issued for the project. Erosion controls are shown on the plan and should be inspected prior to the start of work. Ms. Matthew commented that the narrative was very well written. Mr. Marcheselli made a motion to issue a Negative Determination Reason #3 - work will not alter an Area Subject to Protection; a Notice of Intent is not required - for the extension of a new gas line, to extend from 199 Willow Street to the existing house at 207 Willow Street within the existing roadway layout with the condition that the applicant or representative contact the Agent to inspect the siltation controls prior to the start of work. Plan "Columbia Project Plan Layout Sheet L -1 "; USGS Site Locus Map, FEMA Map 25005C0038F, Priority Habitats of Rare Species, Estimated Habitat of Rare Wildlife & Certified Vernal Pools Map, Wetland Delineation Overlay Plan, Merrill Associates, Inc. Mr. Turnbull seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Hearing ended at 7:02 pm. 9. Notice of Intent: Brian and Leeann Fallon, 20 Winslow Way, Map 41, Parcel 446. DEP SE 211 -0909. The Notice of Intent was filed for an addition to the existing house within 100 feet of Bordering Vegetated Wetlands, ACEC, Canoe River, and Natural Heritage Estimated and Priority Habitats. Michael Trowbridge of Hutchins - Trowbridge Associates, Inc. was present Mr. Trowbridge said an Order of Conditions was issued in February 2011 for an addition, patio, and hot tub. The project was completed and issued a Certificate of Compliance in August 2011. He said this application was submitted for the construction of a 243 square -foot addition on a full foundation to the existing single - family dwelling. The addition will be located behind the garage, 26 feet from the resource area. He said this is a very tight area but the only disturbance will be for the foundation. Mr. Trowbridge has submitted a construction schedule because Ms. Merrill had some concerns about where the materials would be stored. He said nothing will be stored any closer to the 25 -foot No Touch Zone, which is the top of the banking and any material removed would be placed within the driveway area or the front yard, further away from the wetlands. He said this is a minor project but the work falls within a Natural Heritage area. When the first addition was done, a letter from NHESP stated that the proposed addition would not adversely impact the wildlife habitat onsite. Mr. Trowbridge re -filed with Natural Heritage and received the same conclusion that this project will not adversely impact the habitat. The project is exempt from MESA review. Ms. Merrill conducted a site visit and agreed with the wetland line. The work is located within an Estimated Habitat and the Canoe River ACEC and within 26 feet of the wetland. There is a slope that leads up to the lawn area from the wetland and the proposed limit of work will be located on the 25' No Disturb Zone line which is at the top of the slope. She said she is not concerned with the end product, just the construction within a tight area; the project would have to stay within the construction protocol that Mr. Trowbridge has proposed. Ms. Merrill should be notified to inspect the erosion controls and when the work starts so she can monitor the construction process. She recommends the Order of Conditions be issued. Ms. Matthew noted the house was built before the By -law was adopted, before the 25 -foot No Touch Zone was established. Mr. Turnbull made a motion to issue the Order of Conditions for 20 Winslow Way, Map 41, Parcel 446, for Brian and Leeann Fallon, DEP SE 211 -0909, with the following special conditions: 1) No work can be started until the Order of Conditions has been recorded with the Bristol County Registry of Deeds and the receipt of the Order is returned to the Commission filled in by the Registry; 2) All work must conform to the plans referenced in this Order; 3) All mitigation and erosion control devices and measures (hay bales, wattles, siltation fences, etc.) shall be installed, per plan, prior to any construction, clearing, or excavation. The applicant shall notify the Commission's agent when any such devices or measures are installed so that a site visit can be made prior to the commencement of work; 4) The Commission reserves the right to require additional mitigation or erosion control devices or measures if mitigation or erosion control devices are not adequately installed or maintained in the field; 5) The applicant shall ensure that all erosion control devices or measures shall remain in place and be maintained throughout the construction process and until all disturbed areas are stabilized. Stabilization can be achieved by a variety of techniques including, but not limited to, sodding, seeding, or mulching. If seeding is used, stabilization shall be considered achieved once a complete vegetative cover is reached. Seeded areas shall be covered with hay or other suitable protective cover to allow the seed time to take hold; 6) The Conservation Commission or its agent is to be notified of the starting date of the work prior to its commencement; 7) The applicant shall retain the Order of Conditions and all plans on site during the construction; these shall be made available to all contractors; 8) Wetland flagging must remain in place until the project has been completed and the Certificate of Compliance issued; 9) The Certificate of Compliance shall be requested in writing upon completion of the project. At the same time, the applicant or any successor shall, upon completion of the project, submit an as -built plan and letter signed by a professional engineer, certifying that the work has been done in accordance with the approved plan; 10) Any modifications or revisions to the plan(s) referenced in this Order must be submitted to the Commission for review. If, after review, the Commission finds that the changes are not significant enough (minor modifications) to warrant an Amended Order or new Notice of Intent, then the revised plans shall be considered the new plan of record. If the changes are significant enough to warrant an Amended Order or new Notice of Intent, then the applicant is required to file accordingly; 11) Construction Protocol, Hutchins - Trowbridge Associates, Inc., dated October 9, 2013, to be included in this Order. Plan "Conservation Plan 20 Winslow Way, dated September 27, 2013, Hutchins - Trowbridge Associates, Inc. Mr. Marcheselli seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Hearing ended at 7:10 pm. 9. After - the -Fact Notice of Intent: Edward and Mary Ann Verrochi, 27 Lakeview Avenue, Map 4, Parcel 63. Retaining wall repair, front step, landing and patio, deck, fence, drywells, raised garden, shed and tree removal within the buffer zone and resource of the inland bank of Greenwood Lake. The applicant was not present for the hearing. Ms. Merrill explained an Enforcement Order was issued by Elizabeth Leidhold, the former agent, in June 2011. She said there has been some issues with compliance at this site and the Enforcement order was never satisfied. Ms. Matthew said there was a letter dated September 30, 2013, submitted by Edward and Mary Ann Verrochi, the homeowners, with the Notice of Intent filing asking that their hearing be continued to the November meeting because they were unable to attend tonight's meeting. 10. Request for Certificate of Compliance: Jon Cowell, 19 Mary Dee Lane, Map 39, Parcel 97. DEP SE 211- 0884. Mr. Cowell and Dave Hobiaca of Easton Pool and Spa were present. This hearing was continued from the September meeting. Ms. Merrill requested an As -Built Plan be done and certain signs be removed and placed in the original location. Ms. Merrill looked into the history of this site. When the limit of work was initially installed, there was an issue is an irrigation line. In order to repair the irrigation line the limit of work had to be moved. At that point, the former Agent did not approve the limit of work on site. The Applicant had the irrigation line repair and had the silt fence re- installed. The former Agent then went out and approved the relocated limit of work. When the silt fence was finally approved, it was in the wrong location, thus the work area had expanded. There were some deviations to the original plan: The fence was extended to the limit of the erosion controls on the southwest side of the pool - the approved plan shows the fence ending at the corner of the addition; a retaining wall with steps was installed on the northeast portion of the pool patio - Ms. Merrill said the Assistant Building Inspector, Lee Day, has reviewed and approved the wall; the gravel that surrounds the pool area was expanded — Ms. Merrill said she is not concerned about the gravel area because it is not an increase in impervious surface; signage was not placed in previously approved locations — Ms. Merrill received pictures from Mrs. Cowell today showing the signs have been re- located in accordance with the Order of Conditions; an As -Built Plan has been submitted as the plan of record. Ms. Merrill recommends the Certificate of Compliance be issued pending her site visit to approve the signs. At Mr. Cowell's request, Ms. Merrill reviewed the pictures taken of the signs. Ms. Merrill confirmed the signs have been re- located to the position approved by the Commission and recommended a full Certificate of Compliance be issued. Ms. Matthew asked about the edge of disturbed earth within the 25 -foot No Disturb Zone that was shown on the plan of record. Due to grading at the site when the house was built (as shown on the 2012 plan), a berm was created at the edge of the lawn area. Work was not recently conducted in this area under this Order. Mr. Marcheselli made a motion to accept the As -Built Plan as the plan of record and issue a Certificate of Compliance to Jon Cowell, 19 Mary Dee Lane, DEP SE 211 -0884. Plan "As -Built Location Plan at Hse. No. 19 Mary Dee Lane in Mansfield, MA ", dated September 23, 2013. Mr. Turnbull seconded the motion. Motion passed 4- 0-1. Mr. Maxwell abstained. Hearing ended at 7:23 pm. 11. Notice of Intent: Steven and Marybeth Olsen, 16 Kybren Circle, Map 15, Parcel 283. Installation of an 18'x36' in- ground pool with apron and fencing around the pool within 100 feet of bordering vegetated wetlands. DEP SE 211 -0908 Michael Trowbridge of Hutchins - Trowbridge Associates, Inc. represented the applicants for Ralph Maloon, RIM Engineering Co., Inc., who could not attend tonight's meeting because of a commitment in Norton. Mr. Olsen was present. This hearing was continued at the September meeting. The board requested more information on the proposed in- ground pool, patios and retaining walls as well as the landscaping on the association land adjacent to 16 Kybren Circle. Additional plans have been submitted showing details of the steps, patios and retaining walls associated with the proposed pool as well as the existing landscape structures on the lot. The lawn debris has been removed from the 25' No Disturb Zone and the Applicant will dispose of any debris in another location outside the 25 -foot buffer. Ms. Merrill said she does not see any additional impacts with the new plans submitted and recommended an Order of Conditions be issued. Mr. Healey confirmed that the pool would be a saltwater filtration system which does not require any discharge. Because of the proximity of the wetlands, Mr. Healey was concerned if it was ever necessary to drain the pool, where the water would be pumped to. Mr. Olsen said the water would be discharged to the street drainage system. Ms. Merrill said this should be added as a special condition. Mr. Turnbull made a motion to issue an Order of Conditions for 16 Kybren Circle, DEP SE 211 -0908, with the following conditions: 1) No work can be started until the Order of Conditions has been recorded with the Bristol County Registry of Deeds and the receipt of the Order is returned to the Commission filled in by the Registry; 2) All work must conform to the plans referenced in this Order; 3) All mitigation and erosion control devices and measures (hay bales, wattles, siltation fences, etc.) shall be installed, per plan, prior to any construction, clearing, or excavation. The applicant shall notify the Commission's agent when any such devices or measures are installed so that a site visit can be made prior to the commencement of work; 4) The Commission reserves the right to require additional mitigation or erosion control devices or measures if mitigation or erosion control devices are not adequately installed or maintained in the field; 5) The applicant shall ensure that all erosion control devices or measures shall remain in place and be maintained throughout the construction process and until all disturbed areas are stabilized. Stabilization can be achieved by a variety of techniques including, but not limited to, sodding, seeding, or mulching. If seeding is used, stabilization shall be considered achieved once a complete vegetative cover is reached. Seeded areas shall be covered with hay or other suitable protective cover to allow the seed time to take hold; 6) The Conservation Commission or its agent is to be notified of the starting date of the work prior to its commencement; 7) The applicant shall retain the Order of Conditions and all plans on site during the construction; these shall be made available to all contractors; 8) Wetland flagging must remain in place until the project has been completed and the Certificate of Compliance issued; 9) The Certificate of Compliance shall be requested in writing upon completion of the project. At the same time, the applicant or any successor shall, upon completion of the project, submit an as -built plan and letter signed by a professional engineer, certifying that the work has been done in accordance with the approved plan; 10) Any modifications or revisions to the plan(s) referenced in this Order must be submitted to the Commission for review. If, after review, the Commission finds that the changes are not significant enough (minor modifications) to warrant an Amended Order or new Notice of Intent, then the revised plans shall be considered the new plan of record. If the changes are significant enough to warrant an Amended Order or new Notice of Intent, then the applicant is required to file accordingly; 11) Three (3) permanent metal or plastic signs will be placed along the tree line adjacent to the wetland line on metal posts (not on trees) to read "Environmentally Sensitive Area -Do Not Disturb ". Signs shall be no less than five (5) feet in height and a minimum of 12 "x18 in size; 12) Remove lawn cuttings and debris from the 25 -foot No Disturb Zone. Future dumping of debris in the 25 -foot No Disturb Zone is prohibited; 13) Pool discharge is to be pumped into drainage system; not into the wetlands. Plan "Proposed In- ground Pool at Hse. No. 16 Kybren Circle in Mansfield, MA" dated August 27, 2013 and revised September 27, 2013, RIM Engineering Co., Inc. Ms. Matthew seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Hearing ended at 7:30 pm. 13. Notice of Intent: Sean McGuire, McGuire Landscape Company, 493 West Street, Map 8, Parcel 20. DEP SE 211 -0907. Mr. Marcheselli and Mr. Maxwell recused themselves. The Notice of Intent has been withdrawn. The Commission could not vote on this request because there was not a quorum present at the hearing. This hearing was tabled to the November meeting. 15. Correspondence: 16. New Business: Ratify the Enforcement order for 17 Goose Lane: Ms. Merrill responded to a report of a violation at 17 Goose Lane. While inspecting the site, she observed a significant amount of re- grading within the buffer zone of a Bordering Vegetated Wetland and a Perennial Stream. She contacted the homeowner and explained that he had done work within Conservation jurisdiction and he needed to file a Notice of Intent for the work performed. Mr. Donovan stated he thought by putting up siltation controls along the edge of the disturbance to make sure nothing would enter the resource areas was all he needed to do as a homeowner. Mr. Donovan was issued an Enforcement Order on September 23, 2013. Ms. Merrill said Mr. Donovan was extremely cooperative, stopped work immediately and contacted an engineer to have the property surveyed. Ms. Merrill requested that the disturbed areas be seeded as soon as possible to avoid any erosion or siltation problems. Mr. Donovan immediately had the disturbed areas seeded and installed another line of siltation control along the disturbed areas. Ms. Merrill said the work was well within the 25' No Disturb Zone and it was difficult to delineate the wetland line due to previous disturbance. Mr. Donovan hired RIM Engineering to survey the lot and prepare the Notice of Intent. Ms. Merrill said when the lot was created and the house built, the wetlands were filled. She told the Commission they should only be concerned about the new violation and not the 1996 violation. She said to establish where the pre- disturbed wetland line was would be difficult. She will meet Mr. Maloon on site to determine the appropriate wetland line, probably at the toe of the first line of siltation controls, and will be looking at contours, run -off and drainage to see what can become wetlands, be restored as wetland and what cannot. An After - the -Fact Notice of Intent with a restoration plan will be submitted for the November meeting. Ms. Merrill said the area Mr. Donovan re- graded was a lawn; no additional area was claimed as lawn. Mr. Donovan said the area was re- graded because this was a low area and water would pool whenever it rained. Ms. Merrill said the area that was disturbed in 1997 can also be restored and Mr. Donovan will get the end results he would like and the Commission can see some improvements to the resource area as well. She noted that Mr. Donovan had also removed a Maple tree within the landscaped area and he has already purchased a sapling to replace the tree. Ms. Matthew thanked Mr. Donovan for his cooperation. Mr. Turnbull made the motion to ratify the Enforcement Order for 17 Goose Lane and have the homeowner file an After- the -Fact Notice of Intent for the November 18, 2013 meeting. Mr. Marcheselli seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Discussion ended at 7:45 pm. 17. Old Business: Change in plans -1779 West Street: An Order of Conditions was issued to the Applicant, Colleen Wade, on June 17, 2013 for the removal of the existing dwelling and the reconstruction of a new dwelling within a similar footprint. The new dwelling was to be pulled back away from the resource area by 15 feet and a portion of the existing dwelling within the footprint of the new dwelling was to be retained in order to build within the 50 -foot Buffer Zone. Michael Trowbridge of Hutchins - Trowbridge Associates, Inc., filled in for Ralph Maloon, RIM Engineering Co., Inc. Mr. Trowbridge explained a small section of the existing house was to be incorporated into the new dwelling and the applicant would like to revise the original plan, eliminating the portion to the left of the existing house because it is no longer required by the building inspector or the Zoning Board of Appeals. Mr. Healey said in the past the Commission has taken the approach that if a portion of an existing building was saved, the application would not be considered new construction, requiring the project to be held to the 50 -foot No Touch Zone. Ms. Merrill said after discussing this issued with the building inspector, Nick Riccio, it was decided that a section of wall does not need to remain; the Applicant can removed the existing house entirely and construct a new house. She said the original proposal was to remove a house that was 13.5 feet from the top of bank and construct a new house that would be pulled back 28 feet, resulting in an increase of 15 feet from the resource area. When the Order of Conditions was issued, the minutes referenced a discussion with Mr. Riccio regarding whether the project would be considered re- development or new construction. Ms. Merrill asked Mr. Riccio to write the letter to clarify the issue. Ms. Matthew said Elizabeth Leidhold, the former agent, contacted Town Counsel for an opinion on this issued. Ms. Merrill believes this was a misinterpretation of Town Counsel's advice and has requested that Town Counsel clarify issue this for the Commission. Ms. Merrill said the question was if the house would be considered new construction and would be held to the 50 -foot No Touch. She said Town Counsel's comment was this project does not fall under Section 2.2 of the By -law, normal maintenance and repair, and therefore is not exempt from the By -law but the Commission can apply Section 2.4 of the By -law and may prohibit or significantly condition the project. Ms. Merrill said she agreed with Magdalena Lofstedt of CDM Smith that the lot was developed prior to the By -law; the majority of the area to be re- developed has been previously disturbed, therefore the footprint itself has been disturbed, and it would be considered re- development under the Wetland Protection Act. Ms. Merrill stated that Ms. Wade had the proposed house designed with a portion of the existing house within the footprint of the new house, but she was advised by her contractors to not retain any portion of the existing dwelling for safety reasons because the existing dwelling's foundation is old and would not support the new dwelling. Ms. Merrill said Mr. Riccio did not want the letter to be perceived as any type of jurisdiction over Conservation; he just wanted to clarify his position because at previous hearings he was mentioned regarding this issue. He said it would be cost prohibited and counter - productive to retain a portion of the existing house. Ms. Merrill recommended that the Commission accept the change in plans to allow the existing house to be demolished and the new house built and held to the 25 -foot No Touch. She said the Commission might want to define what new construction is, what is re- development and what should be held to the 25 -foot No Disturb Zone and 50 -foot Buffer Zone. This would help engineers, developers and residents in the design process of their projects. This policy is not outlined in the Rules and Regulations or the By -law and the Commission should consider defining the policy in the Rules and Regulations when public meetings are held next month with the regulation revisions. Ms. Merrill said the Commission could work on a case by case basis and there could be a definition stating if you are putting in a whole new foundation, you have to place it as far away as feasibly possible from the resource areas. Mr. Trowbridge said the Commission would not be giving up the power between the 25 -foot and 50 -foot, they are conditioning through an Order. He said this is a case where the new house will be located further away from the resource area. Mr. Marcheselli said there are parameters in the Riverfront Act that could be used. He noted that Ms. Wade would have every right to replace the house in the exact footprint if the house had been destroyed in a fire. Ms. Merrill said the Commission can easily make some performance standards, parameters and guidelines for people to follow to meet one criteria or the other. She said this can be worked out with Town Counsel. Mr. Healey said the change would be a benefit to the environment because the propose house will be located further away from the resource area then the original structure. He asked if there would be roof drains and dry wells. Ms. Wade said gutters and dry wells are proposed. Ms. Merrill said the area previous developed will be left in a natural state; currently there are pine trees and the soils are acidic. There will be some pervious pavers that are approved on the plan of record. Mr. Turnbull made a motion to accept the change to the plan for 1779 West Street. Plan "Proposed House Location at Hse. No. 1779 West Street in Mansfield, MA ", dated March 15, 2013, revised May 2, 2013, May 28, 2013, June 18, 2013 and September 27, 2013., RIM Engineering Co., Inc. Mr. Marcheselli seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Hearing ended at 7:57 pm. Status of 57 Williams Street (DEP SE 211 -719) Homeowner Kim Mulkern was present. A letter was issued to the Owner on September 10, 2013 requesting further information regarding the Order of Conditions that was issued in April 2011. The letter requested that a monitoring report be submitted for a Bordering Vegetated Wetlands restoration area and the hydrologic connections; there were two (2) connections over Bordering Vegetated Wetlands. The letter requested that an As -Built Plan be submitted for the crossings to show details of the devices that were installed. The letter also requested that the expired Order be recorded at the registry of Deeds. Once the As -Built Plan and the monitoring report have been submitted and the Order recorded, a Request for a Certificate of Compliance should be submitted to the Conservation Department. Ms. Merrill has been in contact with Seth Dufort from Outback Engineering and a comprehensive review of the proposed restoration areas and the hydrologic connections has been submitted. The restoration area is doing great with over 75% survival rate. In the report, Mr. Dufort commented on the hydrology between the two connections. The hydrologic connections for the Bordering Vegetated Wetland crossings for Lots 1 and 2 consists of two 12 -inch pipes at each crossing. However, the Order of Conditions called for one open bottom box culvert for Lot 1 and one 24 -inch pipe for Lot 2. In a letter dated December 2, 2005, Michele Grenier, a former agent, approved the substitution of the two 12 -inch pipes instead of the one 24 -inch pipe at Lot 2. Ms. Merrill believes the substitution of the open bottom box culvert with two 12 -inch pipes for Lot 1 was never approved. However, looking at the site seven (7) years later, the connections and wetland systems are thriving. It does not appear that there is a lot of flow going through this system. She said she is not sure the box culvert was necessary; both sides of the wetland areas are functioning fine. She said replacing the existing devices with the approved culvert would be more detrimental to the resource area. Mr. Marcheselli said a box culvert was approved for 57 Williams Street, but it appears that it was not necessary. This Commission has required other applicants to install box culverts. The board should look at performance standards and if all the standards have been met, then the board should not over - burden the applicant to provide a box culvert. The cost of a box culvert compared to two 12 -inch pipes is a substantial amount. Ms. Merrill said she understood and agreed with Mr. Marcheselli; the Commission has to look not only at what they are asking of a property owner or developer but the cost versus what benefit is gained. She said Ms. Grenier asked that the proposed drainage pipe on Lot 1 be replaced with a box culvert because she did not feel the pipe would be sufficient for the amount of water on the lot. No further discussion or explanation was noted. Ms. Merrill noted that all of the requests have been satisfied and the monitoring report has been submitted and states the health of the wetland and crossings are doing very well. She recommended that the After - the -Fact Amended Order be filed to reflect what is on the site, and once this has been done, the applicant should file a request for a Certificate of Compliance. Mr. Turnbull made a motion to accept the monitoring report and the As -Built Plan as the plan of record and the applicant file an After- the -Fact Amended Order to document the changes and then request a Certificate of Compliance for 57 Williams Street, now known as 75 Williams Street, DEP SE 211 -719. Ms. Matthew seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Hearing ended at 8:10 pm. 12. Discussion: Sign for Corporal Robert Francis Hardy Conservation Area: Ms. Merrill said the entrance sign and the "No Hunting" signs need to be replaced because of vandalism. The Commission should allocate a "not to exceed $400.00" to pay for the signs. The NRT will arrange the procurement of the materials and provide the labor. Conservation Commission to review illegal hunting at Corporal Robert Francis Hardy Conservation Area and address proper hunting signage for Great Woods, Marie Streese, and Sweet Conservation Areas: Ms. Merrill said it has come to the Department's attention that illegal hunting activities have been taking place in the Corporal Robert Francis Hardy Conservation Area. She said here have been confrontations in the past between hunters and residents and she has been working with Lou Andrews from NRT and Chief Ron Sellon of the Mansfield Police Department to investigate this matter. Surveillance cameras were installed and a report from Officer Martel was submitted reviewing his findings on site. Officer Martel discovered evidence of hunting activities including hunting paraphernalia and tree stands and cameras in the woods. Ms. Merrill said Chief Sellon has been updating her on any progress and the police now have names and some leads. She said even though this parcel is under the ownership of the Conservation Commission, this issue should be dealt with through the police department because it is a serious situation. She feels it is the Commission's responsibility to allocate the funds to pursue the investigation of this matter, i.e., the cost of the signs and the surveillance cameras. Ms. Matthew made a motion to procure the funds for the surveillance cameras used for the Corporal Robert Francis Hardy Conservation Area and the signage for this area. Mr. Turnbull seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Mr. Turnbull said the land is not within a legal area to discharge a firearm; you must be 500 feet from any dwelling or building. Minutes: Ms. Matthew made the motion to approve the August 19, 2013 and September 16, 2013 minutes as written. Mr. Marcheselli seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Last meeting, Ms. Merrill passed out the new MACC Handbooks and a copy of the Wetland Protection Act. $432.60 needs to be allocated to cover the cost. Mr. Turnbull made a motion to release $432.60 from the general funds for the reference material. Mr. Marcheselli seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Mr. Merrill will meet with Town Counsel one more time to review the Rules and Regulations of the Town of Mansfield Wetland Protection By -law. After the Commission members have reviewed the draft, a public meeting will be held where the public can observe but not comment. Once the Commission is satisfied with the document, a public hearing will be posted and held allowing for public comment to adopt the Rules and Regulations of the Town of Mansfield Wetland Protection By -law. Mr. Healey asked if any of the members would be interested in meeting on site to review the new applications before the next hearing. Ms. Merrill said if the members want to do this, a public meeting notice would have to be posted 48 hours in advance; the members would be able to ask questions of the applicant but cannot deliberate in the field or discuss the issues amongst themselves. Environmentally Sensitive Signs: Ms. Merrill asked if the Commission would prefer to give applicants the option of signage or a fence. She said she has served on boards and as an agent where split rail fences have been installed along buffer zones. She said this was stipulated in the By -law; however, it would have to be clarified that the fence does not mark a property line. It is to be installed to mark out a buffer zone line to a resource area. 18. Adjournment: Motion to adjourn at 8:35 pm: Turnbull /Marcheselli. Passed. Next meeting will be November 18, 2013 at 7:00 pm. Michael Healey, Vice Chairman Date