HomeMy WebLinkAboutCONSERVATION04222013_201307171000Town of Mansfield
Conservation Minutes
April 22, 2013
Present: Joseph Mulkern, Chairman; Christopher Marcheselli; James Turnbull; Jack Smith; Carole Matthew;
Michael Healey.
1. Meeting called to order at 7:00 pm
2. Request for Determination of Applicability: Town of Mansfield, Bird Road, town- right -of-
way, Assessors Map 39.
The Request for Determination of Applicability was filed for full depth construction on Bird Road from the
intersection of Maple Street to the Mansfield /Sharon Town line.
Richard C. Alves, Town Engineer, was present.
Mr. Alves said the Department of Public Works is proposing improvements on Bird Road and explained the project
area consists of Bird Road, north from the intersection of Maple Street to the Mansfield /Sharon Town line,
approximately 4,350 linear feet. The project was initiated because the existing town -owned roadway has
deteriorated. The intent of the project is to provide full depth construction and clean the existing drainage
system, prevent contamination from entering the wetlands, leaving a consistent roadway surface.
The wetlands were flagged by Elizabeth in January 2013 and field located by the Engineering Division. Mr. Alves
said the wetland system at the beginning of the intersection of Maple Street and Bird Road on the left station was
not flagged and is not shown on the plan. Mr. Alves said the wetland system is not shown on GIS and was missed
due to the heavy snow. Silt sock will be installed at this location from the utility pole southerly toward Maple
Street to protect the resource area.
Mr. Alves said the Mansfield Department of Public Works is in the process of hiring a contractor. The construction
period for this project has been estimated at approximately two months and the work will be scheduled once
school is out, during the dry months. During construction, there will be minor increases in dust and noise but pre -
project levels will be restored once construction has been completed. The project will not impact existing
wetland resources that are present in the project corridor.
From the intersection of Maple Street and Bird Road, Mr. Alves said the roadway will be widened to two twelve -
foot lanes, to station 2800 (Sheet 3), for a total of twenty -four feet, approximate. The outlet to a wetland system
in this area needs to be cleaned. Silt socks will be provided around this resource area and the outlet cleaned as
needed. At station 2600, there is an existing catch basin with an existing drain pipe going through the resource
area; this pipe was not located in the field. This resource area will be protected with silt sock.
There are several subdivisions on Bird Road and vertical granite curbing will be used in this area.
Mr. Alves said two utility poles at the intersection of Fram Drive and Bird Road will have to be relocated due to
the widening of the pavement. He said there is an encroachment of the pavement at the intersection of Bird
Road and Fram Drive on to private property, and to avoid easements, deed restrictions or land takings, the
1
roadway in this area has been push easterly, making it necessary to remove some trees; the trees are out of
jurisdiction.
Because Bird Road has been designated as a scenic road and trees will have to be removed, Mr. Alves will walk the
site with Mark Cook of DPW and then apply for a Scenic Road Permit from the Planning Board.
Mr. Alves said the area is within an ACEC area and a Natural Heritage Estimated and Priority Habitat. The existing
easements within Bird Road will be maintained in the same location. The drainage structures in this area will not
be impacted by the proposed work. Silt sock will be provided for this area as needed.
Ms. Matthew noted the project is exempt from a MESA review and 2.2 of the Mansfield Wetland Protection By-
law.
Mr. Alves said there were no comments from the Fire Department. The Electric Department's only comment was
that the tree had to be taken down because of the relocation of the utility poles.
Agent's comments: the erosion controls should be placed just outside the limit of work and be inspected prior to
the start of work; the resource area at the intersection of Maple Street and Bird Road should be flagged.
Mr. Healey made the motion to approve the Town of Mansfield RDA for full depth construction on Bird Road from
the intersection of Maple Street to the Mansfield /Sharon Town line and issue a Negative 3 Determination. The
erosion controls, as shown on the plan, "Plan & Profile, Bird Road, Mansfield, Massachusetts" Sheets 1 thru 5,
prepared by the Town of Mansfield Engineering Division and dated March 25, 2013, are to be reviewed by the
Conservation Commission prior to the start of work. Additional erosion controls will be added at the intersection
of Bird Road and Maple Street. Ms. Matthew seconded the motion. Motion passed 6 -0 -0.
Hearing ended at 7:20 pm.
3. Notice of Intent: Colleen Wade, 1779 West Street, Map 2, Parcel 363. DEP #211 -0901
Ralph Maloon, RIM Engineering Co, Inc., and Colleen Wade, the homeowner, were present.
Mr. Maloon explained the existing dwelling will be razed and a new 42'x45' dwelling will be constructed, including
a wrap- around deck, driveway, retaining wall and related grading. The work is within 100 feet of bordering
vegetated wetlands and Greenwood Lake. Mr. Maloon said there is a still- functioning septic system located at the
rear of the property but the tank and the pump chamber will be replaced.
Mr. Mulkern said this project is similar to a project on Mill Street and asked if this would be considered a new
home or would a portion of the existing home be incorporated into the new home. Mr. Maloon said the new
home is larger but is basically on the same footprint as the existing home.
Mr. Healey said the distance from the corner of the existing home is eight feet from the top of bank. Mr. Maloon
disagreed; he said the distance is 25 feet to the high water line. Mr. Healey explained that if the existing house is
razed and a new house built, it would be considered new construction.
For the Mill Street project, Mr. Healey said the Commission asked for clarification from Town Counsel as to
whether work proposed in a Notice of Intent constitutes new or existing construction for the purposes of
application of the Town's Wetland Protection By -law and the Wetland Regulations. Mr. Healey read the
F1
comments from Town Counsel: "You have informed me that the NO1 involves the razing of an existing single -
family residence and construction of a new single - family residence on the property and that the new residence
will not use any part of the existing residence. In my opinion, the complete razing of an existing single - family
residence and construction of a new single - family residence that will not use any part of the existing residence
does not constitute normal maintenance, repair, replacement, or improvement to an existing private residential
property or component.
Mr. Mulkern recommended that a portion of the existing house be used in the construction of the new house. He
explained if the existing house is completely torn down and a new house built, it would be considered new
construction and would be held to the 50 -foot no touch. Ms. Matthew said, depending on the resource area,
Section 2.4 of the By -law allows the Commission to prohibit or condition work between 25 -50 feet away from any
resource area.
Mr. Healey said Town Counsel's opinion is that Section 2.5 of the By -law authorizes but does not require the
Commission to allow "grading work associated with additions to existing single - family homes" within 25 feet of a
resource area; this provision of Section 2.5 authorizes the Commission to allow only grading work in conjunction
with an addition to an existing single family home, not a driveway or the home addition itself. Town Counsel said
the Commission may apply Section 2.4 of the Bylaw and "may prohibit, or significantly condition, other work such
as the home addition between 25 -50 feet away from a resource area."
Mr. Marcheselli said because of the By -law, if this is new construction, the house would have to be moved back 50
feet. He said there is still the discrepancy between Elizabeth's and Mr. Maloon's high water line.
Mr. Turnbull agreed with Town Counsel's ruling and noted the footprint of the new house has been expanded.
Mr. Healey made the motion to continue the hearing for the Notice of Intent for 1779 West Street, DER #211-
0901, to May 20, 2013. Mr. Smith seconded the motion. Motion passed 6 -0 -0.
Hearing ended at 7:35 pm.
4. Notice of Intent: Susan McArthur, Massachusetts Department of Transportation, Highway Division, 1.495 @
Route 140, South Main Street,
Exit 11, Highway Right -of -Way.
The Notice of Intent was filed for an impaired waters remediation project for the Rumford River, located west of
the intersection of Interstate 495 (1 -495) and Route 140, South Main Street.
Alex Murray, Stormwater Program Manager, MassDOT, and Joseph Freeman of Tetra Tech were present.
Mr. Murray said this is a straight- forward stormwater retro fit project to intercept existing drainage, to allow for
surface treatment with new BMPs at 1 -495 and Route 140.
Mr. Freeman said there will be four new BMPs. BMP 1 and 2 are located on the northbound lane in the median
and outside jurisdiction. BMP 3 and 4 are within jurisdiction and shown on Sheets 9 and 10 of the plan set. He
said all of BMP 4, located south of the 1 -495 ramp and South Main Street, is within the 100 -foot buffer of
bordering vegetated wetlands. Only a small portion of BMP 3 is within jurisdiction. There will be no impact to the
wetland resource areas and all work is outside the Riverfront Area.
3
Mr. Freeman said these are infiltration basins. He said test pits have been done and the soils are very good and
he is confident the basins will function as intended.
Mr. Murray said during small storm events, the stormwater enters the BMPs but remains in the outfall, settling in
the bottom of the basin. The pollutants that would normally be conveyed down to the Rumford River will stay in
the basin. Under normal events, the water goes into the groundwater table and not over land to the river,
resulting in less impervious cover going to the river. He said during extreme events, the stormwater will spill over
the top of the infiltration swale into an existing marsh prior to being discharged into the Rumford River.
Agent' comments: 1) this project is to improve water quality prior to entering an impaired resource area. 2)
there are wetlands associated with the Rumford River to the south near the Comcast Center for the performing
arts - what will be provided to protect this area during construction? Mr. Murray said compost filter tubes will be
placed at the limit of work to prevent any run -off from entering the wetland areas. He said the contractor will
develop the erosion control plan. 3) Does the Commission wish to have the Town Engineer look at this for
stormwater issues? Currently he is not reviewing this project. Ms. Matthew said Mr. Alves should review the
filing for stormwater issues. Mass Highway should send a copy of the filing and plan for review.
Mr. Healey made a motion to approve the Notice of Intent as proposed by MassDOT, for the impaired waters
remediation project for the Rumford River, located west of the intersection of Interstate 495 (1 -495) and Route
140, South Main Street, as per plan, "Impaired Waters Remediation, Rumford River, Mansfield, Massachusetts,
dated April 1, 2013, prepared by Tetra Tech and issue an Order of Conditions with the following special
conditions: Erosion controls are to be placed at BMP 4; a Stormwater Management Construction Plan be
prepared for BMP 4 and reviewed by the Commission. Mr. Turnbull seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -1.
Hearing ended at 7:50 pm.
S. Notice of Intent: Tim Bobola, Lincoln Place, Map 34, Parcel 58. DEP #211 -0900
The Notice of Intent was filed for the construction of a 10 -lot residential subdivision and grading on lots 5, 6 and7
falling within the 100 -foot buffer zone.
Ralph Maloon, RIM Engineering Co., Inc. and Allen Lappas were present.
Mr. Maloon said the owners are proposing a 10 -lot subdivision with 650 feet of roadway and reconstruction of
Branch Street. He said there is approximately 30 acres; 17 acres of the land to the south of the property will not
be used.
Regarding the Back Bay Brook, Mr. Maloon explained a portion of the U.S.G.S Map shows a much finer blue line
through the site which changes to dark blue just before it gets to Fruit Street. He also referenced U.S.G.S. Mass
Stream Stats; the drainage area to the downhill area of the site is .48 square miles. He said 310 CMR 10.58 (2) (a)
1.c states that the stream is considered to be intermittent unless the stream has a watershed size of at least 0.50
square miles. Mr. Maloon said both the U.S.G.S Map and the Stream Stats show Back Bay Brook to be a seasonal
stream where is crosses Lincoln Place.
Mr. Maloon said the project has been through the Planning Board. Richard Alves, the Town Engineer, has
approved the drainage. Memorandum dated April 10, 2013 — Four waivers were requested for: Section 5.3.7.2:
Retention Basins — to allow a retention basin to be used for drainage outside of the water protection district — the
request for a Retention Basin to be used for drainage outside of the Water protection District is acceptable with
4
the explanation provided. Section 5.3.2.7.10: Cover over pipe — to allow the use of ductile iron concrete lined
pipe for drainage due to minimum cover over pipes — the request to allow the use of ductile iron concrete lined
pipe for drainage due to minimum cover over pipes is acceptable with the explanation provided. Section 5.4:
Sidewalks — to allow a sidewalk on the east side of Lincoln Road only extending to Lot 6 - the request to allow a
sidewalk on the east side of Lincoln Road extending to Lot 6 is acceptable but the plans must reflect this request.
Sheet 3 shows the sidewalk all around — to allow the sewer main to extend across a portion of the Nicodemus
property in place of one -half way across said lot. Section 5.5.1: Cape Cod Berm in place of Vertical — the request
for Cape Cod Berm instead of Vertical Granite is not acceptable. These revised plans and calculations now
satisfactorily address all of my comments from previous memorandum dated June 6, 2012. Please note the 100
year flood elevation shown on Sheet 3 of 7, it appears the 100 year flood elevation on Sheet 7 is reversed.
Mr. Maloon said the 50- and 100 -foot buffers and the erosion controls are shown on the plan. The erosion
controls will be placed at least 70 feet from the wetland area, at the limit of construction on Lots 5, 6 and 7.
Mr. Mulkern asked how close the houses on Lots 5, 6 & 7 would be to the wetlands. Mr. Maloon said Lot 7 is 120
feet, Lot 6 is 110 feet and Lot 5 is 140 feet from the wetlands. He said all the other lots, with the exception of a
small portion of Lot 8, are out of jurisdiction.
Mr. Healey explained when an Order of Conditions was issued in 1998, Back Bay Brook was considered an
intermittent stream. In 2006, as part of an ORAD (DEP #211 -0766) for Willow Crossing, the stream was listed as a
perennial stream and the agent at this time said the boundary lines were inaccurate.
Mr. Healey said there is an existing house and barn on the property and the area is heavily wooded with dirt
roadways. Mr. Healey said when he and Elizabeth walked the site, many of the flags from 2006 were missing and
that only one flag remained with a full identifier on it. He said the wetlands that are marked extend beyond the
actual flags.
Mr. Healey said the stream appears to be groundwater -fed, allowing it to flow without rainwater, which would
indicate it is a perennial stream. Mr. Maloon said this stream was machine -dug in the 1970s, and the soils are
clean, well- drained material.
Mr. Marcheselli asked if Elizabeth had determined the Back Bay Brook to be a perennial or intermittent stream.
Ms. Matthew said when the plan was approved in 2008 for a subdivision for "Willow Crossing ", it was determined
to be a perennial stream. When the ORAD was issued in June 2006, the previous agent checked off Modified:
Wetland flag 11B moved and a potential vernal pool in the D series and added the 200 -foot riverfront for Back Bay
Brook — and Inaccurate: the boundaries described on the referenced plan and in the ANRAD were found to be
inaccurate and cannot be confirmed. Elizabeth said a new ANRAD should be submitted to verify the wetland
delineation. Ms. Matthew said numerous memorandums were sent to the previous owner by Elizabeth and
Richard Alves, suggesting a new ANRAD be filed because the 2006 delineation was no longer valid but the owner
did not respond. The 2012 plan referring to the Back Bay Brook as an intermittent stream and approved by the
Planning Board, was never given to the Conservation Commission for approval.
Ms. Matthew also noted that one of the conditions in the Planning Board Certificate of Action, dated July 12,
2012, was that the outstanding comments in the June 6, 2012 memorandum from Richard C. Alves, Jr., Town
Engineer and the May 1, 2012 memorandum from Elizabeth Leidhold, Conservation Department, must be fully
and satisfactorily addressed. Because some of the wetland area delineations were questionable, Ms. Matthew
said Elizabeth suggested a wetland consultant be hired under 53 G to confirm the line.
5
Mr. Mulkern said the wetlands should be re- flagged and agreed a consultant should be hire to determine the
accuracy of the line. Mr. Marcheselli asked if the wetlands would be re- flagged back to the original GRAD. Mr.
Maloon said there is over 4,000 feet of line on this property. He explained Lots 5, 6 and 7 are the only areas that
will be impacted by the project and the resource areas closest to these lots have already been delineated. Mr.
Maloon said he thought the GRAD was complete because the corrections the previous agent requested were
made and noted on the plan. Mr. Healey said the Commission never received or approved the revised plan.
Lenore White of Wetland Strategies, Inc. explained the GRAD issued in 2006 was valid for three years but under
the Permit Extension Act, would be extended for an additional four years, expiring in June 2013. The ORAD would
still be valid for the Riverfront Area. Ms. Matthew asked if Ms. White was referring to the plan showing the Back
Bay Brook as perennial. Ms. White said, because of the Permit Extension Act, this plan would be the plan of
record. Ms. White said the original request to determine the wetland line should be reviewed to see if it was
specific to the bordering vegetated wetlands or the Riverfront, or both, and what was determined to be
inaccurate.
Mr. James Wilkinson of 63 Marshall Avenue, an abutter to the property, asked what the difference was between a
stream, brook and a river. He said there are some areas of the Back Bay Brook that either go dry or puddle in the
summer months but other areas remain wet throughout the year. He was told an intermittent stream must be
shown not to be flowing for four consecutive days in a 12 month period. A designated perennial stream that is
significantly affected by periods of extended drought is considered to be perennial. A stream can be intermittent
in one area but a portion of the same stream that flows throughout the year, can be treated as a perennial
stream. Ms. White said if it is determined to be a perennial stream, different setbacks apply; a perennial stream
requires a 200 -foot setback, an intermittent stream, a 100 -foot setback.
Mr. Maloon said there are only two wetland areas that will impacted by this project. He explained the wetlands in
the southern portion of the property do not need to be delineated because this area will be a Common Area and
never be built on. He said this project will not be impacted if the Commission were to designate the stream as a
perennial or a river. He said he has the 200 feet plus an additional 110 -140 feet for Lots 5, 6 and 7, but if it is
determined to be a river, this could impact the abutter. Mr. Healey agreed the classification of the stream,
whether it is determined to be a river or perennial stream, will affect the abutters.
Mr. Lappas explained when they purchased the property they were unaware there were any issues with the
property, that they had received confirmation from the previous owner of the property that the comments of
2012 were accurate. At a meeting with Elizabeth, they were told the property issues had never been addressed.
Mr. Lappas said they would work with the Commission to address these issues but told the Commission there are
safety concerns because of the condition of the existing house and barn. He would like permission to start the
road work as soon as possible because the two month delay has cause considerable economic hardship.
Mr. Maloon said he will re- establish the wetland boundary where it impacts Lots 5, 6 and 7. Because the
roadway is over 300 feet from the resource areas, Mr. Maloon suggested the Commission allow the applicant to
start the roadway and re -file for Lots 5, 6 and 7.
For future reference, Mr. Mulkern said it should be determined if the stream is intermittent, perennial or a river.
Mr. Healey made a motion to accept the 10 -lot subdivision, Lincoln Place, at 253 Branch Street, Map 34, Parcel 58,
DEP #211 -0900, as per the plan, "USGS Plan" (portion) and "FIRM Map" (portion) and "Definitive Topsheet of
Lincoln Place, a Convential Subdivision in Mansfield, MA, Sheets 1 -7 ", dated January 30, 2012, RIM Engineering
Co., Inc., with th exception that the wetland system impacting Lots 5 and 6 will be delineated to the property line
on
and the larger wetland system behind Lots 6 and 7 also will be delineated further, before the Order of Conditions
is issued. Mr. Smith seconded the motion. Motion passed 6 -0 -0.
The applicant will return May 20, 2013 to discuss the new delineations and an Order of Conditions will be issued
for the project.
Hearing ended at 8:30 pm.
6. Abbreviated Notice of Resource Area Delineation: Robert Vann, Bismarck Real Estate Partners, Inc., 229
and 243 School Street, Map 11,
Lots 3 and 5. DEP #211 -0897
Lenore White of Wetland Strategies, Inc. and Jeffrey Peterson, Senior Soil and Wetland Scientist of Vanasse
Hangen Brustlin, Inc., were present.
The ANRAD was filed in November 2012. At the December meeting the Commission asked that an outside
consultant be hired to review the delineation. Ms. White was retained as the peer review agent for this project.
On April 2, 2013, Ms. White and Mr. Peterson, reviewed the delineation in the field and some of the flags were re-
located. The revisions have been incorporated into a new plan, revision date April 10, 2013.
Ms. White said there are three different areas where flags were moved further upgradient. The following changes
were made to the original delineation submitted on a plan dated November 30, 2012: Flag BVW 2 -127 was
eliminated and the revised BVW limit is now delineated by connecting flag BVW 2 -126 directly to flag 2 -128. Flags
BVW 2 -112 and 2 -113 were eliminated and the revised BVW delineation is completed by connecting flag BVW 2-
111 directly to flag BVW 2 -114. Flag BVW 2 -102.5 was added between flags 2 -102 and 2 -103 (note that the ".5"
did not plot in CAD). Revisions were made to the location of the Town of Mansfield Wetland Protection
Regulation 25 -foot No- Disturb Zone and 100 -foot Buffer Zone to accurately account for the Vernal Pool limits.
She said the ORAD confirms the edge of the BVW and the boundaries of the three vernal pools that are located on
the site. Ms. Matthew asked if they are potential vernal pools. Ms. White said they have been identified as
potential vernal pools but under the By -law, they are considered protected to the maximum extent feasible. She
said the By -law does not differentiate between certified and potential vernal pools; the protection measures are
the same.
Ms. White said she has reviewed the revised plan and recommends an GRAD be issued. Mr. Peterson said he is
satisfied with the outcome of the delineation.
Mr. Healey made a motion to accept the ANRAD for 229 and 243 School Street, Map 11, Lots 3 and 5, as per the
revised plan, "ANRAD Submission, Resource Location Map" dated April 10, 2013, submitted by Vanasse Hangen
Brustlin, Inc. for Bismarck Real Estate Partners, Inc., DEP #211 -0897. Mr. Marcheselli seconded the motion.
Motion passed 6 -0 -0.
Hearing ended at 8:40 pm.
7. New Business:
MassDOT — proposed herbicide applications along the state's roadway edging and guardrail sections between
June 3`d& July 19`h, 2013 and select locations along state highway as appropriate to address Invasive /Knotweed
between August 15`h and October 1, 2013.
7
AMTRAK National Railroad Passenger Corporation, 2013 Yearly Operational Plan, prepared in accordance with the
Massachusetts Rights -of -Way Management Regulations (333 CMR 11.00) The herbicide application as proposed
in the 2013 Yearly Operational Plan is scheduled as follows:
Rights -of -Way, May 11 —June 2, 2013
Touch -up Application, August 10 -30, 2013
Brush Application (non- sensitive areas), August 10 -30, 2013
National Grid — letter dated April 13, 2013 and received April 16, 2013; will carry out late winter - spring mechanical
control, cut surface (CRT) or basal treatment; a summer selective foliage treatment; and, as necessary, summer
and fall CRT and basal treatments on rights -of -way, in Mansfield. The schedule is as follows:
January 7, 2013 —June 3, 2013 — CST and basil treatment
June 3, 2013 - October 11, 2013 — Foliar, CST and basal treatment.
October 11, 2013 — December 21, 2013 — CST and basal treatment.
Memorandum from Planning Board — South Coast Rail Priority Development /Priority Protection Areas, inviting the
Commission to a workshop on Monday, May 15, 2013 at 7:30 pm with representatives of SRPEDD. A meeting
notice will be posted so all members can attend.
Colin Cauldwell has resigned from the Commission. Mr. Mulkern thanked Mr. Cauldwell for his years of service.
Mr. Mulkern thanked Elizabeth Leidhold. He said she will be missed.
Mr. Healey made a motion to approve the March 18, 2013 minutes. Mr. Marcheselli seconded the motion.
Motion passed 6 -0 -0. The September 2012 minutes were signed.
Mr. Mulkern asked for nominations for Vice Chairman and a Recording Secretary.
Ms. Matthew nominated Mr. Healey for Vice Chairman and Mr. Mulkern nominated Ms. Matthew for Recording
Secretary. Mr. Smith seconded the nominations. Motion passed 6 -0 -0.
8. Old Business:
Edward Tartufo: A letter, dated March 14, 2013, was received from Sam Patel requesting an extension of the
Order of Conditions issued for 282, 292 & 296 Chauncy Street, Map 20, Lots 183 -185. DEP #211 -789. The Order
of Conditions will expire April 12, 2013, and the applicant is seeking a three year continuance.
Mr. Tartufo said the parcel has been cleared and a preliminary site plan is presently being prepared for
submission to the building inspector. Once this has been approved, Mr. Patel will have a building designed for the
site and return to all necessary departments for approval. Agent's comment: Erosion controls have been
inspected; one of the conditions was to place a permanent fence at the 25 -foot buffer zone to protect the
wetlands — now that the trash has been cleaned out of the wetlands, when will the fence be installed? Mr.
Tartufo said there is a snow fence in place now and the permanent chain -link fence will be installed prior to the
issuance of the Certificate of Compliance.
E3
Mr. Healey made a motion to grant the request for an extension of the Order of Conditions issued to Sam Patel
for 282, 292 and 296 Chauncy Street, Map 20, Lots 183 and 185, DEP 211 -0789. The extension will expire April 12,
2016. Ms. Matthew seconded the motion. Motion passed 6 -0 -0.
Update on the Rules and Regulations: Mr. Healey, Ms. Matthew and Mr. Turnbull met to review and edit the
Rules and Regulations and a copy was sent to Town Counsel. Mr. Healey and Ms. Matthew met with Attorney
Richard Hucksam, Town Counsel, about two weeks ago; the meeting went well. Mr. Hucksam will review the
Rules and Regulations as they pertain to other laws as well as the Wetland Protection Act and his comments will
be incorporated into the document and a draft will be sent to the Commission members for review and
discussion.
A public meeting will then be held as part of the approval process.
Attorney Edward Valanzola — Discuss modifications to the 321 -339 School Street plan. DEP #211 -0860. Attorney
Valanzola requested the hearing be continued to May 20, 2013.
9. Adjournment:
Motion to adjourn at 9:00 pm. Mulkern /Matthew. Passed.
Next meeting will be May 20, 2013 at 7:00 pm.
r�
Joseph (kern, Chairman Date
9