The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutmin of conservation com 04/12/2004 r Conservation Commission Meeting April 12, 2004 Paul Boyden, Chair; Carole Matthew, Chris Flass, Jack Smith, Dianne Rea<b4 JUN 2 9 ~t1' ,: '5 Richard Lewis, Conservation and Environmental Planner '. _ .. 0 r\AN~F lE~TTS 11. Meeting called to order.at 7:30 p..... . . M~SS~CHUf t\ECEWEI \\f' CLERl-<:S OFFICE 2. Notice 01 Intent Public Hearing continued - Route 106 Mr. Lewis indicated he had received a letter from Natural Heritage, which stated there are no problems with identified species with the proposed work. Motion: To close the public hearing (Flass-Smith) All in favor. PASSES Motion: To issue the Order of Conditions as amended (Matthew-Flass) All in favor. PASSES 3. Notice of Intent Pub6e Hearing -18 Cavan Crossing - Carol MacDonald Mrs. MacDonald explained the work area is approximately 50 feet away Hom the wetland boundary and the yard is very flat. Mr. Lewis said he didn't think haybales would be necessary unless some unforeseen problem develops. Motion: To close the public hearing (Flass-Ready) All in favor. PASSES Motion: To issue a Negative Determination # 3 with the condition that the applicant notifies Mr. Lewis's office when the work begins. (Flass-Ready) AIl in favor. PASSES ~ 4. Notice of Intent Pub6e Hearing A.East Street - James Vaughn Michael Trowbridge, Hutchins-Trowbridge Associates, explained the existing garage will be taken down and a new garage constructed,... The majority of the work area is already disturbed. The garage will be placed to meet the sideyard setback for a detached garage. Motion: To close the public hearing (Smith-Flass) All in favor. PASSES Motion: To issue a Negative Determination # 3 with the conditions that silt controls be placed per the plan and the project engineer certify the installation of the controls prior to start of work (Smith-Ready) All in favor. PASSES '" -t~r-{kr ~ r<S"M. -t. kR. w~tLO-~. 5. Notice of Intent Pub6e Hearing - Douglas Drive - Steve Cunningham Mr. Trowbridge explained the plan has been slightly revised plan to more clearly show the stairs leading to the proposed patio. He stated the addition on the right side of the house and the small bump-out on the left side are both outside the 50-foot line from the wetland edge. The amount of work within 50-feet is limited. The patio will be built on the existing grade. Any excavated materials in the patio area will be moved away from the wetland line. Motion: To close the public hearing (Smith-Flass) All in favor. PASSES Motion: To issue a Negative Determination # 3 with the conditions that silt controls be placed per plan and the project engineer certify the installation of the controls prior to start of work (Ready-Flass) All in favor. PASSES 6. Request for Determination of App6eability - Strese Conservation Land _ Ware Street - Mansfield Conservation Commission r t'.. ,: ! I Scout Michael Bibby and his father Keith explained the brush cutting on the upland area beyond the bog bridge has already been done. The existing bog bridge is falling apart . bnd the proposal is to construct a new bridge. The platform will be constructed off-site and then placed on top of the "sleepers" that will support the platform. The sleepers will be natural ~ak that will not leach any preservatives into the wetland. The bridge is approximately 144 feet in length. The slope past the bridge that is somewhat eroding will be stabilized with wood check boards; this will prevent erosion into the wetland area. The new bridge will accommodate an electric wheelchair, but would discourage off-road vehicles. The Commission recognized Mr. Bibby's excellent work on this project. This is a real benefit to those who use this conservation area and the entire Canoe River greenbelt. No file number has been received. Motion: To continue the hearing until May 3rd at 7:45 pm (Ready-Flass) All in favor. PASSES " I 7. Notice of Intent Pub6e Hearing - Dean Street - Steve Passanisi Project Engineer Bill Snow explained the status of the project and the outcome of the Zoning Board of Appeals hearing on April 6, 2004. He presented a revised plan dated April 9, 2004. A comer of the propose4 house is within the 25-foot no disturb zone. The commissioners expressed concern with the work in this area. The local by-law does not permit this work, and the by-law does not contain any provision for a variance. Mr. Snow and Mr. Passanisi indicated the row of arborvitaes would act as a screen for the wetland area. These would be planted at the start of work on the site and would help protect the wetland during construction. Mr. Lewis said he and the wetland consultant walked the site the previous week and Mr. Lewis agreed with the wetland flagging. Soils samples were taken in a couple of areas to check the accuracy of the line. Mr. Snow explained the flood compensation component of the project; 1: 1 compensation will be provided. 1 Mr. Passanisi stated he had support from many of the neighbors, and with the existing trash and debris on the property, the proposed house will improve the area David Polutchko, Monahan Lane, said it sounds like the area needs to be cleaned up. Howard Fiske, Spring Street, said some portions of the property in question are filled with standing water during part of the year. He agreed the lot could stand to be cleaned up. The lot owner, Eleanor Holliday, said dumping has been a problem, as the open area attracts children. She said she has been paying taxes on the lot and does not understand why a single-family house can be constructed. Mr. Snow said this lot is one that calls out for some level of relief through a variance to the wetland by-law. Various Commissioners stated the problem is that the by-law does not permit any flexibility. Mr. Lewis will draft an order. Motion: To close the public hearing (Ready-Smith) All in favor. PASSES. I 8. Notice of Intent Pub6c Hearing - David Polutcllko - Monalum Lane .1 Mr. Polutchko explained he had been to see the commission twice for the same project, but was unable to begin construction within the necessary three-year time frame. The current proposal is for a mudroom and entranceway addition. The wetland line shown is ) from the original subdivision. Mr. Lewis said he has visited the site and a small valley starts on the adjacent lot and forms in a wetland area. Mr. Lewis said the inspection r showed some recent clearing work done by the owner clipped a comer of a wetland area. Mr. Lewis sent the owner a letter, who responded he would perform the necessary restoration work outlined, with the disturbed areas raked out and left to re-naturalize. Motion: To close the public hearing (Matthew-Ready) All in favor. PASSES Motion: To issue a Negative Determination # 3 with the conditions that the haybales be installed per plan, the project engineer certify the installation, and the disturbed areas be restored and left to naturalize per the discussion (Ready-Matthew) All in favor. PASSES I 9. Correspondence 1. Discussion of proposed work at 1791 West Street and whether the commission would require an application for expanding the second floor of the house. Consensus was that as long as there was no excavation work, then no application would be necessary. 2. Discussion of request by Mr. Yee, 292 Plain Street, to repair the retaining wall on this lot at the edge of Bungay Lake. The water level is down right now and he would be able to install a new wall to prevent erosion and the undermining of the shoreline trees, which is what is happening now. Consensus was to have him present a better plan and to do the work done prior to the water rising more and creating more of a problem. 3. Discussion of proposed installation of a floating dock at 97 Jewell St. The posts ,.- supporting the float would be pushed in through the muck on the pond bottom. A cinder block or a pounded stake would anchor the float on the shore. Consensus was that the work does not trigger the need for an application. Mr. Lewis said he would notify the owner. 4. Ms. Matthew asked about the work near the wetland area at the rear of 900 Maple Street. Mr. Lewis said he would send the landowner a letter. /10. Adjournment Motion: To adjourn at 10:00 p.m. (Flass-Ready) All in favor. PASSES Date of Next Meeting: May 3, 2004 at 7:30 p.m. 3Jr#t(<?'<. /dt@j! lSate Approval ,-.- .... .~ ') ~