Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutmin of conservation com 02/09/2004 r Conservation Commission Meeting February 9, 2004 Present: Paul Boyden, Chair; Carole Matthew, Chris Flass, Jerry St. Hilaire, Bob Bean Richard Lewis, Conservation and Environmental Planner :1'") ...~, "",I J 1..~""",,"'.'=-"'" 12. Corrapoadeaee 1. Self-Help Grant docwnents for King Property. Mr. Boyden signed the docwnents. 2. Discussion of potential warrant article for vehicles on conservation and town-owned land. The Town Meeting warrant will close March 1,2004. Mr. Lewis presented a copy of a Town of Foxboro warrant article regarding motorized vehicles on conservation property. Mr. Lewis said he would draft an article for Mansfield and submit it to town counsel and a nwnber of town departments for consideration. Mr. St. Hillaire asked how enforceable such a bylaw would be; Mr. Lewis said it would come under the Police Department, but it would allow the commission to warn people about the potential consequences. 3. Mr. Lewis said he had spoken with Michelle Grenier, who plans to investigate the land on Gilbert Street for possible vernal pools in the springtime. 4. Draft density memo to Zoning Board of Appeals - Fairfield Green. The ~ commission asked Mr. Lewis to send the memo for the next ZBA meeting. 5. Letter from AI Simonelli, Willowdale Golf Course regarding concerns about the impact of various developments on his property. 3. Notice ollateDt Publie Beariag - Village LudiDg, LLC - 631 East Street - SE 211-697 The chair read the public hearing notice for the removal of existing buildings and construction of thirteen buildings with parking areas and the installation of utilities and drainage and stormwater systems, with work within 100 feet of wetland resource areas. David Johnson, PMP Associates, explained the project on the current site of DeGirolamo Contracting on East Street. There are several existing buildings and a paved driveway. The land is high at the East Street side and slopes to the back of the site, toward the Canoe River. An abbreviated Notice of Intent for resource area delineation was submitted last year. The 200-foot riverfront area adjacent to the Canoe River, as well as the BVW and the 100-foot buffer associated with the river are shown on the plan. All work will be outside the IOO-foot riparian zone. Mr. Johnson explained building 6 and parts of 7, 8 and 9 are within the 100-foot buffer. Mr. Johnson said there are two oiVwater separators on site that will be removed. ,,- Stormwater will go to a groundwater recharge system. The stormwater management will 2/9/2004 Conservation Commission Minutes 1 include a sediment fore-bay and detention basin for the street and parking area drainage. (' A manhole/pipe system will take the runoff before it goes through the sediment fore-bay; the detention basin is sized for the tOO-year storm event. The limit of work is shown on the plan, along with the silt fence. They have maintained a 25-foot no disturb area, but parts of that area are already disturbed. Each catch basin has a hooded pipe, and each catch basin has a deep swnp. The first flush will be treated in the oiVwater separator and be discharged to the sediment fore-bay. Ms. Matthew asked if the riverfront area is shown on the estimated habitat map. Michael Perrault, PMP Associates, said the site is not within an estimated habitat. Ms. Flass said the brook at flags 55-53 had not been determined to be an intermittent stream during last year's notice of intent. She asked if that had been examined in further detail. Mr. Johnson said his firm had not done the engineering on the NOI, and they have not investigated that. Mr. Lewis said that would need to be field located and shown on the plan. He said it drains a section of East Street/106 that runs toward this area. Ms. Flass asked if anything would be done in the 200-foot buffer; Mr. Johnson said nothing would be. Mr. Johnson said there would be no work done within the 2S-foot buffer zone except for a small portion of pavement that will be removed. There will be work done within the 25-50 foot buffer for drainage. r Mr. Johnson presented an existing conditions plan. Mr. Perrault explained there is an existing shed and construction debris inside the 25-foot buffer, which will be removed for the construction of the detention basin. Mr. Johnson said the plan has been submitted to the Planning Board and that public hearing will be held on March 3, 2004. Mr. Boyden asked for a construction sequencing plan to show how the site would be cleaned up. Mr. Perrault said they would supply a plan. Mr. Lewis said regarding the 25 vs. 50 foot, he hadn't previously taken into account the fact this site is already disturbed. He suggested staking out the proposed limit of work between flags 36 to 66 and doing a site walk to see the staking and what has happened beyond the staking. He said there may need to be some restoration work in the previously disturbed areas within the buffer zone. Ms. Flass said she was concerned about building 6, the comer of which is within the 50. foot buffer, in the area of flags 7 and 8. ,,- Mr. Boyden asked if there will be excess material removed; Mr. Johnson said there would not, but there would be material brought in. He said they would bring in gravel for the roadway base, loam for the majority of the site, and material for the earthen berms. The detention basin will have a core of glacial material. Mr. Perrault said there would be some stockpiling during construction, but not within 100 feet of the wetlands. 2/9/2004 Conservation Commission Minutes 2 (' Ms. Matthew asked about open space. Mr. Johnson said there are 6.7 acres of open space shown on the plan. He said the development will be pedestrian-oriented, with a sidewalk system connecting the units. Ms. Matthew said she didn't consider the wetland area and riverfront area to be open space, since it isn't usable. Mr. Johnson said they have exceeded the open space requirements; 35% is required, and they have provided 59% open space. Mr. Perrault said they did not take credit for existing impervious surfaces when designing the drainage system. Mr. Boyden asked about underground recharge areas; Mr. Perrault said they were put on the plan following a site visit with the Engineering Department. Mr. Boyden asked about the test pits and other drainage information; Mr. Perrault said the drainage report was submitted to the Engineering Department. He said at test hole 2, groundwater was found at 47 inches. The system and foundations will be above that; Mr. Perrault explained there will be footings four feet down around the perimeter of the buildings, which will be slab on grade. Ms. Flass asked how the roof runoff would flow toward the drainage system; Mr. Johnson said it would be piped. Ms. Flass asked about trash; William Brown, Village Landing LLC, said it would be privately collected r Ms. Matthew asked about snow removal; Mr. Perrault said the snow will not be pushed into the detention basin area; he said he wouldn't mind a "no salt" condition in the Order of Conditions. Publi~ Comment Mrs. Cardinale, 665 East Street, asked what the impact would be to her property. Mr. Perrault explained there will be no additional water shed to her property. Ms. Flass explained the town engineer would be reviewing their stormwater plan before the next meeting. Gary Lillienthal, representing Dr. Sohn, asked about the detention area next to the Sohn property. Mr. Johnson said it is downgradient of the Sohn property and is underground. Mr. Lilienthal said Mr. Brown has been in touch with his clients and has been very cooperative. Steve Nolan, 625 East Street, said he has spoken with Mr. Brown and they are also working out some issues. Mr. Perrault suggested continuing the hearing until after the March 3 Planning Board meeting. March 22 will be the fIrst regular meeting after the Planning Board meeting. [Mr. Boyden left the meeting at this time. Mr. Bean took over the chair.] Mr. Perrault suggested continuing until March 22 so there will be time for a site walk. r 2/9/2004 Conservation Commission Minutes 3 Ms. Matthew noted the intermittent stream was discussed in the April 13, 2003 minutes r regarding the notice of Intent. RIM Engineering was to have put that on a plan, which was never done. The public hearing will be continued to March 22, 2004 at 7 :45 p.m. 12. CorrapoadeDee 6. Discussion of Sam Patel property on Route 106/140. The commission walked this site in November 2003 and the flagging around the isolated wetlands was revised. The engineer would like some feedback from the commission. The plan shows a proposed four-story hotel in the center of the site and a one-story restaurant at the comer of 140/Chauncy Street. There is a crossing over the stream, which would be a limited project. Access to the site would be from Chauncy Street. There is approximately 4,000 square feet of wetland filling proposed. To the right of the restaurant is a 3,300 square feet of replication. There will be a couple of small crossings on the interior of the project, with three wetland impacts totaling 380 square feet, which Mr. Lewis said could be eliminated or nearly so. Mr. Lewis said this site has been significantly disturbed over the years. He said the proposed replication area is probably a good location for it. Ms. Matthew suggested a 25-foot buffer zone be kept for the majority of the site and 50 feet at the comer of the hotel. Consensus of the commission was that the site is too dense and the buildings are too close to the 50- foot buffer. Mr. Bean said work around flag 162 appeared to be within the 25-foot wetland buffer. r" The commission had a number of issues with the plan as shown, including: public safety, snow removal, trash removal, utilities hook ups, fill, water table, test hole results, drainage system, construction plan and structures being right on top of the 25- foot buffer. Ms. Flass said there should be a 50-foot buffer from the intermittent stream. Ms. Matthew said if the commission decided the site needed a 50-foot buffer, it would be supported by the bylaw and precedent. Mr. Bean suggested the restaurant building could be shifted closer to the entryway and remain within the building setback. He suggested the hotel could be made smaller. Mr. Lewis said he hasn't received an update on the Carrigan case lately. At this time, there is nothing on the agenda for the February 23 meeting. If nothing comes in, that meeting will be cancelled. I 4. Adjo.......eat Motion: To adjourn at 9:30 p.m. (Matthew-Flass) All in favor. PASSES Date Next Meeting: March 8, 2004 at 7:30 p.m. dial ()V\ Date f Approval ,,-- ~ 1'1/~()o,^ ')/~ Conservation Commission Minutes 4