Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutmin of conservation com 10/27/2003 '1 ~.. (' Conservation Commission Meeting October 27,2003 Present: Paul Hoyden, Chair; Carole Matthew, Jack Smith, Chris f'lass, DIane Ready, Jerry St. Hilaire " Richard Lewis, Conservation and Environmental Planner ~.,.~ '-',". .,,/ '''''. "',: ..') ! !:, . I.! ,,J - I",.' ~, ,~ I J 11. M~",,, .......7:31.... 2. Notice ofResouree Area DeIineatioa - S.....e Mary Develop__t - :East & EastJuD Streets (Assessor's Map 41, PareeIs 44-46) The chair read the public hearing notice for the review and delineation of wetland boundaries as shown on the submitted plan. Ralph Maloon, RIM Engineering, explained the plan showing vernal pools and wetlands. He said he has flagged the wetlands, is only before the commission for wetland line determination and is not proposing construction at this time. Mr. Lewis said he has visited the site and looked specifically at the following areas: vernal pool with flags Bl~20, Dl~DlO and wetland flags A95-l59. He said the flags were mostly accurate, and the vernal pools and the wetland lines are well defined. Mr. Maloon said the site is a rare species area; Mr. Lewis is he didn't believe any of the vernal pools are certified. r' Mr. Lewis suggested the members may want to visit the site. He said the vernal pool closest to East Street is easily accessible, with a short walk to vernal pool Dl-I0. Mr. Maloon said all the wetland areas are shown on the plan, but because of the vernal pool in the middle of the site, he wouldn't be able to go beyond it for construction, so he hadn't asked for it to be reviewed. Mr. Lewis said he had not looked at flags AI~35 or at the vernal pool abutting Eastman Street. Consensus of the board was to continue the public hearing to November 17,2003 3.\ld do a site walk. . Public Comment Joe Donovan, 986 East Street, asked if abutters could do their own site walk. Mr. Boyden explained that would be up to the landowner. Mr. Donovan asked how vernal pools are defined; Mr. Maloon said they had Carr Research lab flag the pools. Mr. Donovan said he was concerned that some small vernal pools could have been missed. Mr. Lewis explained he didn't see any signs of other vernal pools on the site, and explained they tend to be pools or depressions used by wetland species to breed. He said vernal pools can be of varying sizes. Mr. Maloon said the smallest vernal pool shown on ,,-- ConComm Minutes Page I of 10 ~ . his plan is about 30 feet in diameter. Mr. Boyden said the rest of the site wouldn't (' support vernal pools because of the topography. Ms. Matthew asked if the whole site is in the estimated habitat; Mr. Lewis said most of it is, except for a small portion near East Street. Chris Split, 912 East Street, asked if the abutters would be allowed to go on the site walk. Mr. Lewis said the commission wouldn't mind, but it would be up to the owner. Mark Steele, 14 Chilson Avenue, asked the difference between a certified vernal pool and a vernal pool. Ms. Matthew explained Fish & Wildlife certifies vernal pools, and a certified pool has more protection. The local bylaw requires work to stay 100 feet from a certified vernal pool, and 50 feet from a non-certified pool. Motion: To continue the public hearing to November 17,2003 at 7:35 pm (Smith-Flass) All in favor. PASSES [Ms. Ready arrived at this time.] 3. Request for Determination of Applicability -Jeffrey & Cara Zacks - 33 Donald ADen Drive The chair read the public hearing notice for the construction of an addition, with grading and associated work within 100 feet of a wetland resource area. r Mr. Zacks explained his plan for a 10'x9' mud room on the side of the house. Mr. Lewis said the work is on the far side of the house, away from the wetlands. The addition will be on sonotubes and the excess material will be relocated to the foundation to maintain positive grading. Mr. Lewis recommended a Negative Three determination. Motion: To issue a Negative Three determination (Flass-Smith) All in favor. PASSES 4. Request for Determination of Applicability - Richard B. Wan Trust - 1777 West Street The chair read the public hearing notice for the installation of a new septic system with grading and associated work within 100 feet of a wetland resource area. Michael Trowbridge, Hutchins-Trowbridge Associates, explained the plan to replace a cesspool with a septic system. The proposal is to pump everything away from the lake, with little work done near the lake. The Board of Health has approved the plan. Mr. Lewis said he has visited the site and the area is well stabilized. Mr. St. Hillaire asked if the site perced. Mr. Trowbridge said it did, and was witnessed by the Health Agent. Motion: To issue a Negative Three determination with Mr. Lewis being notified at the r time of the installation of the hay bales (Smith-Flass) All in favor. PASSES Co",Co--- ~,\___.......~l.4 10) tJ/oJ r~ L ~'\) r I 5. Notice of Intent Hearing - Town of Mansfield - Behind DPW Garage, East Street The chair read the public hearing notice for the construction of a water treatment plant and associated facility, with grading and drainage work within 100 feet of a wetland resource area. Mr. Lewis said he has received a DEP file number, SE 211-692, with no comments. He said the site is outside the estimated habitat area, but the applicant sent a copy to Natural Heritage, which has responded they have no problems with the project as currently proposed. He said much of the site is already disturbed, and there will be minimal disturbance of new areas. Bob Chappelle, Woodard & Curran, presented the revised site plan. He said there had been concerns at the last meeting about work within the 25-foot setback, so he has revised the grading to keep the work out of the setback. Mr. Sullivan had some comments about the drainage, which has resulted in the basin being raised and enlarged. Mr. Boyden asked for a memo from Mr. Chappelle indicating he has complied with Mr. Sullivan's comments. Mr. Lewis suggested he could make that a finding in the Order of Conditions. Motion: To accept the revised plans and comment memo (Flass-Smith) All in favor. PASSES Motion: To close the public hearing (Ready-Smith) All in favor. PASSES ( Motion: To accept the draft Order of Conditions with reference to the date of the latest plans, revised to meet the 25-foot no-disturb zone (Flass-Smith) All in favor. PASSES [Mr. Boyden left the meeting at this time.] 6. Notice of Intent Hearings - Rosewood Realty Trust - Inteneetion of Routes 106 and 140, and Copeland Drive Motion: To appoint Ms. Flass acting chair (Smith-Ready) All in favor. PASSES The chair read a memo from Mr. Sullivan indicating the revised plans have been reviewed and satisfactorily address his comments. He concurred the permeability rates in the hydraulic study are conservative, and therefore the drainage calculations are satisfactory . Mr. Lewis said this project has gone through the Zoning Board of Appeals, which closed it's hearing and issued its permit. He said the commission had been waiting for a signoff from the Town Engineer. The latest plans are dated September 7,2003. Mr. Lewis explained there are two notices; for the small sewer project and for the construction of the roadway, drainage and buildings. r c...c...... '--0'\1\_ ""',,'" v~V) I d )"2.-)) 0 ) pc) 3 ~fO Motion: To close the public hearing (St. Hillaire-Smith) All in favor. PASSES r Mr. Lewis presented draft orders for both projects. Motion: To approve the draft Order of Conditions for SE 211-686, the sewer project and to approve the draft Order of Conditions for SE 211-687, the roadway, drainage and buildings with special conditions regarding the replication work (Smith-St. Hillaire) All in favor. PASSES [Mr. Boyden returned to the meeting at this time.] 7. Request for Determination of Applicability - Mansfield School Dept. - 250 East Street - Adjacent to High School Track and Field area The chair read the public hearing notice for the excavation of footings for installation of new bleachers, and grading of slope, with work within 100- feet of a wetland resource area. Walter Parker, School Department, explained the plan for new bleachers. Jim Murphy, TGG Consulting, explained the foundation work is outside the wetland buffer zones, with four footings installed within 100 feet of the wetland line. Hay bales have been placed at the top of slope about 70 feet from the wetland line and stake lines have been placed with another row of hay bales as a no work line. The first four deep (" footings have been installed on the other side of the no work zone. Mr. Lewis said he has walked the site, and several footings are within the 100-foot buffer. He said there is a footpath between the work and the wetland area. The footings are 48 inches and a fair amount of material will come out of the hole, but there seems to be adequate protection for the wetland resources. Ms. Flass asked how far the footings are from the wetlands; Mr. Parker said they have installed stakes at 105 feet, and four footings are within 75-80 feet of the wetland. Ms. Flass asked what would be between the 75-80 feet and the wetland; Mr. Parker explained there is a gravel walkway and a gate into the athletic field. He explained there would also be a concrete slab within the 100 feet for the stair footings. Ms. Flass asked if there would be any trash receptacles at the wetland side of the bleachers; Mr. Parker said there would not be, and the area would be cleaned up daily. Mr. Murphy said there may be excess soil at the end of the project, and they would replace it along the basketball side of the walkway. Motion: To close the public hearing (Smith-Ready) All in favor. PASSES r Motion: To issue a Negative Three Determination with the condition the hay bales are placed (Matthew-Flass) All in favor. PASSES LCMLv_"", ~\\""~~ r~ VI o( }O 8. Notice of Intent Hearing - Fairfield Green at Mansfield, LLP -Fairfield Green r complex, m & 840 West Street Removal of existing buildings and construction of eleven buildings with parking area, with the proposed alteration of certain wetland resources for a driveway crossing, with replication included, and the installation of utilities, drainage and stormwater systems, with work within 100 feet of wetland resource areas. Attorney Charles Mulcahy introduced the representatives of this project. Andy Montelli, Fairfield Residential, explained the plan for an apartment site at the Parente Farm on West Street. He explained the site has good highway access and is close to employment sites. There are two upland areas upon which 11 buildings will be constructed; 10 with residential units. The eleventh building will be an office and clubhouse. The proposal is for 256 residential units on 30 acres. Mr. Montelli said they are aware of Hodges Brook running through this site, and came before the commission in March 2002 for an Order of Resource Area Delineation, confirming Hodges Brook was an intermittent stream. Mr. Montelli said they have been before the Zoning Board of Appeals several times; as a result of those discussions and discussions with abutters, they have acquired additional land. There had been a concern about the proposed access onto West Street. An additional 4.5 acres have been added to the plan, which allows more open space and r relocation of the entrance to the west, where West Street is flatter. That is being added the plans and will be submitted. Sterling Wall, Daylor Engineering, said he has worked as a consultant for DEQE. He said the site is approximately 25 acres, with about half being upland. No work is proposed, in the wetlands. A DEP file number has been assigned, SE 211-691. Approximately 4.5 acres are jurisdictional. He said there are two well-developed upland areas, a result of the farming activities on the site. The north upland includes two existing residences. There has been significant disturbance within the 100- foot buffer of the wetland and an existing farm path crossing the wetlands, with a stone box culvert 36 inches deep and 24 inches wide. Mr. Wall said the wetland delineation was done in February 2002, confirming the wetland delineations, and confirming that Hodges Brook and a drainage channel to the east were intermittent streams in this location, that wildlife habitat was not an issue, and flooding was restricted to the southern portion of the site. He said there has been a question about whether Hodges Brook is an intermittent stream, and he believes it is. He said in December 2002, DEP revised the wetland regulations to provide guidance on intermittent and perennial streams. He said they revisited the site in August, September, October in light of the new regulations and found Hodges Brook is still an intermittent stream. He said the new regulations say for a stream to be intermittent, it must be dry for four days during a 12-month period; Mr. Wall has documented at least 12 days this year. r Lu--. '-.U",,",,", "v"nV \.VoI r~! 1 JV Mr. Wall explained the proposal to use the north and south uplands and demolish the r existing buildings. 256 units will be constructed within 10 buildings with one central building. Water and sewer will be brought to the site, flooding and stormwater management will be constructed, landscape improvements within the site and along the edge of the previously disturbed Hodges Brook wetland will be completed. There will be improvements within the 25-foot buffer zone, where it has been previously disturbed. The work will be conducted within 4.2 acres of buffer zone, with less than 5,000 feet of bordering vegetative wetland. There will be temporary impacts for utility crossings in the area of the bridge. The limits of work will be as shown on Sheet 3 and 4. Hay bales and silt fences will be installed. The limits of work will serve to keep the construction vehicles out of the buffer zone. In areas where work has previously been performed within the 25-foot buffer, they will be working up to the edge of the wetland. Temporary silt basins will be constructed, and all work will be done in accordance with a stormwater management plan. Retaining walls will be installed, with grading in areas previously altered. The mitigation will be done as early as possible. Catch basins with deep sumps, a water quality treatment unit, and a basin to regulate stormwater control will be installed. ,,- I Mr. Wall explained the north upland will have 97 percent total suspended solids removal through the stormwater system. Upon completion of construction, they will move to work on south upland. The wetland crossing will involve water and sewer installation, and will be replaced following the installation. Once the north upland is substantially completed, the silt basin will revert back to a stormwater basin, any accumulated silt will be removed and the north upland will be a fully functioning site with appropriate sediment and erosion control discharging to the basin designed for the 2, 10, 25 year storms. There will be no increase in downstream flow. The wetland crossing for the driveway has been located to make use of the existing farm path to link the north and south uplands. The driveway will have an arched crossing to maintain flow and species travel. Vegetative enhancement will be provided along the edge of the brook, which has had the topsoil removed, to restore the buffer area and provide for wetland mitigation area C, 2,300 square feet of new wetland creation. In the south upland, construction is proposed to commence as work on the north ends, with new grading and filling to restore the 25-foot buffer, as well as substantial wetland mitigation in Areas A and B, 3,700 square feet. Total mitigation will be 6,022 square feet. There will be significant creation of vegetative edges previously disturbed. The south upland will have a subsurface infiltration and detention basin, which will collect the majority of runoff from the south upland and discharge it through a headwall and riprap pad. The very southerly portion of the south upland will be a parking area and stormwater swale. There will be no filling in the Zone A, and they will provide full r CO'\.(.U""""- ~'''''oJ~.-;) r ~ & 1 Iu control to avoid increased flooding downstream. Stormwater pollution prevention will r include measures for groundwater recharge and improvement of quality of runoff. Board Comment Mr. Boyden asked if the new land has been acquired; Mr. Montelli said the new properties are under contract pending the plan's approval. Deborah Horowitz, Goulston & Storrs, said they have binding contracts on all of the land shown on the plans, including the Parente site, and they will not purchase any of the land before the plans have been approved. Ms. Ready said with new construction, the commission prefers a 50-foot buffer for new construction. Mr. Wall said he has attempted to meet the 25-foot restriction even though this type of project has only to meet the state regulations. He said work is being done up to the 25-foot line, and where necessary to provide a stormwater outlet, a limited crossing, or restoration of disturbed area, there will be work within the 25- foot zone. He said the closest building to the buffer would be building 5, the first building on the south upland, and is about 40 feet from the buffer. He said there would be lawn up to the 25~ foot buffer. Ms. Matthew asked about the wildlife study. Mr. Wall said the wildlife was checked by going to Mass GIS and the Mass Endangered Species Program database, which show no vernal pools, no special habitat areas and no special wetland habitat areas; he said at no time during the work have they seen any species that would qualify as threatened or (' endangered. Ms. Flass asked about the roof runoff; Mr. Wall said it would go to the retention and infiltration basins. Glen Doherty, Daylor, said the roof runoff for the south would be collected subsurface. The north upland basin would accept roof runoff to gain recharge. Ms. Flass asked about treatment during snow removal. Mr. Doherty said there are snow storage areas, and they would use sand on the site but not salt. Mr. Wall said a drainage operations and maintenance plan is included within the Notice of Intent. .... Mr. Smith asked where the sewer tie-in would be. Mr. Wall said the sewer connection would come from West Street. Mr. Doherty said they are working with Engineering to look into directional drilling under Route 495, with an on-site lift station. Mr. Smith suggested boring under the wetlands rather than digging it up to the crossing for utilities. Mr. Doherty said they would consider it. Mr. Boyden asked about the dry days vs. how many days the stream was running. Mr. Wall said during the period of survey, he has not seen continuous flow through this stretch of Hodges Brook, but he has seen pooling and ponding; the area is a dense cattail swamp with no definable channel. (' CD'" Lv ""'"" .-;, - "" ~ NJ r ~ ) ~ J U Ms. Matthew asked what changes have been made since the commission received the r Notice ofIntent; Mr. Wall said only the additional land and possible driveway relocation had changed. He said the number of buildings or units had not changed. Ms. Ready asked if there would be a second entrance. Mr. Montelli said they had discussed making the originally proposed West Street entrance an emergency entrance. Mr. Lewis asked for a chart showing the historic alteration within the 25-foot no disturb zone and the BVW, and for more detailed plans on the bridge crossing. He asked for specific figures about the disturbance of the bank and land under water. He asked if any test pits had been done in the area of the proposed wetland mitigation. Mr. Wall said he hasn't run into problematic material, but rather gravelly sands. Mr. Doherty said the results of the permeability tests had been submitted, and are delineated on Sheet 4 and in the engineering report. Mr. Lewis said the plan has to conform to DEP stormwater regulations; Mr. Doherty said he is working on those issues with the Engineering Department Public Comment Mark Clarissi, 861 West Street, said Hodges Brook goes through his property and it is always running. He said where it goes through the Fernandes property, he has seen it running in a wide path. He said the property is a good location for species. r Leonard Flynn, NRT, said the abutters were not notified of this hearing. He said the NRT is concerned about the impact of this project on conservation land, specifically with runoff from a site this dense. He said he is concerned about pollution and downstream flooding, and asked if the new study is a continuance of the 2002 study. He said he thought the new study has information that was not made available during the 2002 hearings. Mr. Flynn asked if the runoff from the highway, interchange or bridge was considered in these calculations. He said it appeared the project would require as much as 8 feet of fill in some places, which could result in runoff to adjacent properties. He said the density is too high, with no land set aside for recreation. There are a number of culverts downstream, which weren't sized for an intermittent stream. He said flow from this site will exacerbate an existing drainage problem; Hodges Brook has a long history of flooding and the detention facilities will not be adequate given the density and amount of impervious surface. He said the Wetland Protection Act addresses flooding and the commission should consider that. He said part of this site is within the 100-year flood zone. He suggested the commission hire a hydrologist at the applicant's expense. He asked that the NRT be notified of any subsequent meetings. Linda Corpo, West Street, asked that the commission hire its own wetland expert to study the species on this site. Mr. Lewis said he would meet with Mr. Sullivan regarding the stormwater and drainage Issues. r LA" L \\""'- ~'Y\l~ I? r ~ (' 1 J 6 . . Motion: To continue the public hearing to November 17, 2003 at 8:30 p.m. (Smith- r Flass) All in favor. PASSES 19. Correspendenee 1. Request for Certificate of Compliance for Hansen Associates, Karen's Way, East Street SE 211-663. Mr. Lewis said he has visited the site and everything is completed. He said there are several perpetual issues in the order, including no work to be done within 50 feet of the BVW; no salt or chemicals for snow; maintenance of storm ceptor; box culvert kept clear of obstructions; no lawn chemicals shall be used within 100 feet of wetland;, signage; within one year of order, materials for the certification of the vernal pool shall be submitted. Natural Heritage asked for additional info, including photographs, which Mr. Lewis will provide. He has noted on the certificate that that condition will remain in place until pool is certified. Mr. Hansen said the Order of Conditions is part of the deeds for the two new houses, so the new owners are aware of the above issues. Motion: To issue a Certificate of Compliance (Flass-Smith) All in favor. PASSES 2. Order of Conditions - Fontanini - East Street. Mike Trowbridge said he didn't have any new information on this plan. The commission discussed issues regarding the application of the by-law. Mr. Lewis said the commission should have a policy about how this will be handled. Ms. Ready said the commission has been interpreting the bylaw to the best of its ability up to this point, and said she isn't sure the bylaw says r what the commission intended it to say. Mr. Boyden said the commission voted to close the hearing based on the information it had, a decision made in good faith at the time, and the engineer amended the plans according to what the commission wanted. Ms. Matthew said she was concerned about setting a precedent with this decision. Mr. Lewis said the point being debated was whether the actual or estimated habitat areas were in question. Ms. Flass said she now believes Section 2.6 applies to the whole area, not just the estimated area. Mr. Lewis said he had spoken with Jim Starr about focusing the bylaw on the "actual" rather than the "estimated" habitat areas. Mr. Boyden asked Kyla Bennett if the corrected bylaw meets the intent of the drafting. She said "estimated" was taken out is because there is a lag time between identifying the species and when it gets put onto the habitat map. She said the estimated habitat is the legal way the state identifies species habitats. She said most of the species in question are only out part of the year, and are rare and hard to find. She said it would be impossible for the state to visit the site of each application. She said Jim Starr attended town meeting to explain the use of the estimated habitat map. Mr. Boyden said Natural Heritage can take a long time to respond, and the commission may have to act before that time. He asked what would become of the applications that have already been approved; Ms. Bennett said any project with the (' LDrv. LIl"",- "'-,....;~.... r~ Ii t Jo .. . r Order of Conditions already issued would be difficult to appeal; however, she said it was possible that an abutter could appeal. Mr. St. Hillaire asked if the correct bylaw was voted at town meeting and approved by the attorney general, but what was printed and distributed was incorrect. Mr. Boyden said that was correct. Mr. Boyden said the commission voted in good faith. Ms. Ready said she didn't believe condition "F" could be left in. Motion: To remove item "F" from the proposed Order of Conditions on SE 211-683 (Ready-St. Hillaire) All in favor. PASSES Ms. Matthew said the revision to the plan was resubmitted to Natural Heritage, which didn't respond. Mr. Trowbridge said the small wetland isn't jurisdictional. Ms. Matthew said it is jurisdictional because it is within an estimated habitat. Mr. Lewis suggested taking F out would give the commission more flexibility to apply the bylaw to subsequent applications. Motion: To approve the Order of Conditions as drafted with the exclusion of"F" (Ready-Smith) Five in favor. Matthew opposed. PASSES r Motion: To reconsider the motion (Flass-ReadY) Motion: To add a finding there is no impact to the wetland because of the use of an existing roadway (Flass-Smith) All in favor. PASSES The commission discussed that from this point on, the corrected bylaw will be applied to all applications. 110. Adjournment Motion: To adjourn at 11 :00 p.m. (Smith-Ready) All in favor. PASSES D of Next Meeting: November 3,2003 at 7:30 p.m. 1IL)../OY Datef of Afpproval r Lll......L\l____ ""","',,-v\-h r~ JO 1> 10