HomeMy WebLinkAboutConservation Minutes 4/8/1991TOWN OF MANSFIELD, MASSACHUSETTS
50 West Street, Mansfield, MA 02048
MANSFIELD CONSERVATION COMMISSION
AGENDA
MONDAY, APRIL S. 1991
7:30 CALL TO ORDER
8:00 DISCUSSION — KARL CLEMMEY, RE WORK: ON SOUTH MAIN ST.
PROPERTY
8:30 WETLANDS PROTECTION ACT HEARING CONTINUATION -
Zola Family Realty Trust- -Lot 5, 416 Maple St. -- Single
family house, grading, septic system within wetlands
buffer zone
3245 WETLANDS PROTECTION ACT HEARING CONTINUATION - SE211 -347
East Coast Devt. - -23 Matthew Lane, Lot 37 -- Dwelling,
driveway, septic system, grading within 100 -ft. buffer
-one
9 :10 WETLANDS PROTECTION ACT HEARING CONTINUATION - SE211 -348
Harrington & Matte- -lot 13, River wood Drive -- Duelling,
septic system, grading within 100 -ft. buffer zone
9:30 WETLANDS Pf- ..:OTECTION ACT HEARING CONTINUATION - SE 11 -350
James Grant Company -- Forbes Boulevard (Drake's Bakery
building)--Removal of existing underground fuel storage
tank; installation of new above - ground tank:
AS TIME ALLOWS:
NEW BUSINESS
C:ERTIFIC:ATES OF COMPLIANCE
MINUTES
CORRESPONDENCE
DISCUSSION - KARL CLEMMEY, FE WORK ON SOUTH MAIN ST.'PFOPERTY ,
Dick wi'11 continue to monitor the.situation '.Jim Dunn, of Dunn Engineering
Co., and Mr.,Clemmey presented a plan showing the..resource; area affected and
additional potential alteration. One difficulty with the .attempt to mitigate
filling already done is that the other party (Great Woods) who will be working
in this area has not completed calculations /elevations necessary for Mr.
Ciemmey's replication to tie into "it. Mr. Clemmey, wants -to mitigate the filling
at the same time as Great Woods work is done; perhaps with a time restriction
for example, spring of 92, in case the Great Woods work is not done. .Comm.
Owens was interested in seeing replication now, especially 'since the area was
filled illegally and since the state's spending money on any such work is
uncertain. .While there is a violation which he feels should be addressed, Comm.
Cauldwell didn't have a problem waiting two months to get good figures from the
state and make it work with other replication areas which will be proposed,
rather than disturb the area twice. Chairman Powers asked why Mr. Clemmey had
filled wetlands. Mr. Clemmey stated he wanted to clean up "junk ", dead trees,
etc. on his property. He also maintained that the Commonwealth placed the dirt
from the sewer line project in the area and that he had simply leveled it off.
His opinion was that there were no wetlands until Great Woods came in and put a
( ditch there, promoting wetlands. It was explained to Mr. Clemmey that the
Wetlands.Protection Act applies to wetlands as they exist on the site,
regardless of.,.their origin. Comm. Rhoads agreed with Dick's suggestions in his
memo.to the,Commission: ordering Mr. Clemmey to restore the area no later than
7 -31 -92 if the Order of Conditions has not been obtained for work on Ft. 140 by. -
then. Comm. 'O'Neill felt that waiting for two months for additional information .
might be acceptable. Comm. Cauldwell suggested that perhaps the commission
should be ordering removal of fill by the par'tie's-'who put 'it there.'° Comm ' 'Owens
'
felt that the owner is the appropriate party to handle the remediation, and .
Chairman, Powers agreed that the issue of who does the, work -can be negotiated
between Mr. Clemmey and the construction company who did the sewer construction.
MOTION:,.To ask holder of sewer contract /Order -of Conditions to appear and
explain the extension of the sewer ;'following that<weeting,
request that -Mr; Clennvey to appear and- report -back in-two months - - --
time to update the commission (perhaps written correspondence
would he sufficient) regarding state calcs.
( Rhoads - 0INei11; O'Neill in favors ,Smith abstaining;'a1l others
against) MOTION FAILED `
Comm. Poholek considered it a dangerous precedent to'delay and- p ostpone.
remediation Gomm. Owens expressed resentment at the. ,fact :that the commission
now has this_ problem' to' deal with, and that this co ld go oh `too long:' He'feit
t is not the. commission's responsibility,to determine who did it, but to
protect the.interests,of :the Act. Chairman Powers also felt the commission
should not get bogged down in trying.to determine who is responsible: Mr.
Clemmey has 'recourse outside the commission. If the commission wants to bring
( the town of Norton and the sewer people to chastise them about extending the ;
sewer in ways not specified by the established .Order, that is a different issue.
Mr. Clemmey stated that he had -no plans for the filled area, no reason to,
fill it. Comm..Rhoads stated that Mr.,Clemmey could file a.Hotice'of Intent,
.t
-4lly`(t6 the
con I
Dv
VOTED
took place on I y 66 Mr. -C
InsIs s-
CT -HEARING 'CONTINUATION.— o a ami y ea y --Lot-- 5i-
WETLANDS PkDTECTION7AC
416 Maple St.--Single family house,_-grading*,��-se�tic system within buf - f..er
will check on this._Dick and Comm. Rhoads�agre6'-with the wetiand line'as-shown
on the revised plan (r6. date An - infiltration trench was requested
on easterly side of dri.veway. Everything is in order except for fiie.nUmber.
NOTION: To continue to 4-22-9.1 ?C9.jo.
(01&ill Phoads. all in favor)
VOTED
WETLANDS PROTECTION ACT HEARING'CONTINUATION SE211-347--East Coast Devt.--28
Matthew Lane,lLot,,37-7Dwelling,.driveway, septic t di within
Limit of clearing Ti'66:was -questioned at the last meeting; proposed lawn
has been pull iad_-�in`_�.'Kefiheth-,and Jean -Wright 'Currently have pUrchas-e.-,and sal 6
ye een approve,
by'Board :of
lot 13, grading t6ithin'buffer.-
ally OU
his project tl�
Else
`""s"'"^"""" "'``" house contingent upon -s""i"'".""'/ and proper replication .
MANSFIELD CONSERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES,
MONDAY,':APRIL,81 1991 -- PAGE 3
Comm. Rhoads: from quick review, aver - excavation done (about 1 foot into
{ groundwater, in fact). He suggests one of the special conditions in the order
for the previous hearing indicate that no Certificate of Compliance will be
issued until r'emediation of the problem is accomplished. A timetable should.be
set up in the order, requesting plans by developer showing how he intends to
bring re lication area up to performance standards (e.g., plans within 60 days,
planting his fall). He also suggested sending a letter to the developer re
debris Within buffer zone from'gravel access road.
MOTION: To send letter as suggested above.
(Rhoads - Cauldwell; all in favor) VOTER
DISCUSSION WITH BILL YETMAN -- STATUS OF FILE SE211 -180
Dick has discussed with Mr. Yetman and Attorney General's staff issues
revolving around the life span of original order SE211 -180. Comm. Owens, Dick,
and the AG's office are in agreement that the 3 -year time clock stopped when
the first injunction wa ,QQ aced, F's t nd is consistent with decisions on
zoning issues An on fC�e £P�Frop: ices requested the Certificate of Compliance,
the commission was not aware of the injunction; Dick feels Certificate was
issued in error. His recommendations are to rescind the Certificate of
Compliance and to reinstate the Order of Conditions for SE211 -180. Comm. Owens
agrees. (The order governs only remedial culvert work and related drainage work
and cleaning on Erick Rd.) Work is intended to balance rates of discharge for
the paving of Erick Rd. Comm. Owens stated that rescinding the order is not to
be interpreted as sanctioning a full three -year term for the Order once the
injunction is lifted; the commission retains the right to decide how long to
extend the order in these situations, on a case -by -case basis. Dick proposed
two construction seasons, or 18 months.
Mr. Brian Smith of Stearns Ave., abutter, asked whether the area of work
was proposed as replication work for previously filled wetlands. The commission
explained that there is no relationship between activity which took place on
lots 2 and 3 and the work proposed under this order. Mr. Smith informed the
commission that flooding in his back yard continues to be a problem and he
doesn't want that condition exacerbated. Connie Pietrafetta asked where the
replication area for the alleged filling of the pond will be placed. It was
explained that the commission has no jurisdiction over anything but the work
proposed in this order. The work in this order would not prevent a compensation
area (for the pond) from being created on lot 2.
MOTION: To rescind the Certificate of Compliance which had been issued
without complete information, in the fora? of a letter which is to
be recorded at the Registry of Deeds.
(Cauldwell OFNsilI; all in favor) - VOTED
Comm. Owens again made it clear that the issue is not in force for three -year
time.period, but at the commission's discretion; the commission is setting no
precedent with regard to time periods but would review on a case -by -case basis.
In this case, allowing the work to proceed under the original order once the
injunction is lifted seems a reasonable and consistent approach given that no
new information has been put forth to change the original_ order. Chairman
Powers suggested that :r a letter should
be sent to property owners involved stating that the Certificate of Compliance
has been rescinded. When the injunction has been lifted, the commission will
review the time frames involved and t ihll- dWse them accordingly. ,d� Cow r isrF//
MOTION: To send such Ietter NA;!�invunctinn has been lifted, and at-- 44.1t -w,
t.iwe irto review time frames for work under order of conditions
SE211 -190.
(Cauldwell - Rhoads; all in favor) VOTED
MANSFIELD CONSERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES
MONDAY, APRIL 8, 1991 -- PAGE '4
DISCUSSION WITH BRUCE TYSON -- PROPOSED WORK ON PLYMOUTH STREET
A'plan was presented showing wetlands delineated, About 35 acres, or about
25Y. "of 7the land under discussion, is uplands. There are`most'likely about J
areas suitable for development. Plymouth St, now dead -ends in the middle of a
potentially buildable site, so the developer would have to go to back to the
town to change road structure. A stream crossing is necessary to access area
"C" on the plan; a crossing is also necessary to access lot - "A ", as well as
for the construction of parking for area "B ". At least three'crossings,
potentially four, necessary. Mr. Tyson asked for the commission's opinion
on such crossings before going to the ZBA. Chairman Powers asked why one of the
crossings in area B could not be eliminated. Mr. Tyson answered that doing so
would mandate a much smaller building. Chairman Powers reminded Mr. Tyson that
the commission does not have to allow more than one crossing for the project.
Comm. Rhoads likes concept of doing one mitigation area as opposed to three
separate areas. The issue of crossings is troublesome to him as well, but he
suggested considering some extra compensation /mitigation. He also pointed out
that the applicant would have to consider wildlife area habitat issues for each
crossing area individually.
CERTIFICATES OF COMPLIANCE:
$E711 -771: (Giles Place) [Chaim »an Powers left the room for the duration
of this discussion and vote.J
MOTION: To issue the Certificate of Compliance.
(Rhoads - Owens; all in favor) VOTED
SE211 -142 (Fuller Estates ):
MOTION: To issue the Certificate of Compliance.
(Rhoads - C.auldwell; all in favor) VOTED
SE711 -742 (Prince St. /Morrow St. extension ):
MOTION: To issue the Certificate of Cowpliance.
(Canidwell - Rhoads; all in favor) VOTED
MEETING SCHEDULE: 4 -22, 4 -29; May schedule to be decided on the 29th.
CORRESPONDENCE:
-- Letter from Sciaba Construction Environmental re South Main St. pumping
station. Dick suggested sending letter back to Mr. Thurber, coordinating with
project engineer, a joint meeting on the site to walk them through and'showing
_ them what needs-to be done.
MOTION: To send letter,
(Rhoads - Cauldwell; all in favor, Owens abstaining) VOTED
Clemmey appeared again to request copies of the following commission
documentsf` 'Orders of Conditions and plans for the pump station, South Main St.,
the sewer.on_South'Main St. to Clemmey's, the Mason property on Reservoir St.,
the sewer line to Cobb St., and tonight's minutes after voted and approved.
The meeting adjourned at 11:35.
Approved _ by: m 1 � •rOW-e-3LI> Date to town clerk. -
/p f