Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-05-11 Conservation Commission Minutes�,pP orur� Town of Reading Meeting Minutes �9'IMLOPPOP't Board - Committee - Commission - Council: Conservation Commission Date: 2022-05-11 Building: Address: Purpose: Zoom Virtual Meeting - Conservation Commission Meeting Attendees: Members - Present: Time: 7:00 PM Location: Session: Open Session Version: Final IVED TOWNCLERKRIFADMG, MA. 2022 JUN -7 PM 3:24 Annika Scanlon, chair, Martha Moore vice chair, John Sullivan, Joe Carnahan, Brian Bowe, Andrew Drlbin, Members - Not Present: Carl Saccone Others Present: Chuck Tirone, Krista Moravec, Etain O'Dea, Scott and Kayley Harris, Maureen Herald, FMcGrane, Jack Sullivan, Bob Connor, Ralph Colorusso, Phil Peterson, Mad, Bill Johnson, Jake Romano Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Martha Moore Topics of Discussion: This meeting was held remotely via Zoom. Chair Annika Scanlon called the meeting to order at 7:0?pm. Presentation of the Oben Soace and Recreation Plan by Krista Moravec Ms. Moore asked how to tell that MeadowBrook Golf Course is not municipal land based on the color. Mr. Dribin asked if they have a map of undeveloped privately owned land. Mr. Carnahan asked about bike lanes and bike shelters. What are the next steps after letters of support by Conservation Commission and Select Board, what grants may we be eligible for? Public Hearings Scheduled: 22 Collins Ave Assessor's Map 51 Lot 124, DEP File No. 270-0758 Report of the site visit measuring the distance from the wetland line, discussing moving the toe of the slope to the 50 -foot line rather than the 35 -foot line. Mr. Peterson mentioned that he is able to keep the fill out of the 50 -foot line. Ms. Moore questioned the shape of the grading area and how to protect the red maple. How to make the shape blend into the landscape better. Mr. Bowe questioned the number of replacement trees compared to the trees to be removed. He was concerned about how much space had been cleared in the past, he feels better about Page I 1 keeping the fill further from the wetland line. He asked about the aquifer protection district and whether excavation is allowed. Mr. Peterson said that with the pool they would be over 15% for square footage of impervious area. Mr. Bowe questioned whether excavation is a prohibited action and whether Mr. Peterson has spoken to the right committee, perhaps the CPDC. 10.3.3.2L Mr. Peterson said that question did not come up when they built their addition. Mr. Tirone will look into that question. Mr. Sullivan asked what will keep the fill from washing down into the wetland area. He also asked whether all the fill will come from the pool or be brought in from off site. Mr. Dribin is not enthusiastic about the need to fill to accommodate the pool. Are there any alternatives to minimize the fill? Mr. Peterson said that they considered rotating the pool, but they want to keep the grass play area for the children. Mr. Carnahan asked about the north edge of the property and how this fill will interact with the neighbor to the north. Their fill area falls off steeply in that area. The north edge of the fill does not show a slope going in that direction. Mr. Peterson said that the plan should show a 3:1 slope on that side as well. Mr. Carnahan suggests that the slope would curve eastward along the edge of the property. Mr. Peterson agreed that the slope should continue closer to the shed. Ms. Moore commented that the plan should also show the final location for the shed. Mr. Bowe proposed that the homeowner should include some more plantings of native ground cover and shrubs as well as trees to replace the trees that have been lost. Ms. Scanlon echoes the concern about so much fill and about doing more native planting. She referred to historic filling and vegetation cutting in this property. She would like to see future work respect the former natural vegetation limits, while striking a balance with the homeowner's desire for a pool. Mr. Tirone asked about the area where the limit of work stopped, asking about the hill with the thicket on it, and tum the limit of work line to the east. He asked about the red maple tree that we want to save and how to limit the fill in the area beyond the tree. The homeowner has already paid for the pool, it is coming soon. He wants to know if this is an approvable project. Mr. Dribin thinks that it will be fine to install the pool, but the plan is too crude and minimizing the fill area would help. Mr. Carnahan thinks that the changes we discussed, if shown in the plan, would be ok. Mr. Tirone would like to see the locations of the new trees shown on the plan, and correct the plan to show the reduced fill south of the red maple, just the regraded slope. Ms. Scanlon pointed out that filling smothers existing vegetation and develops natural space, she would like to see the filling to be reduced as much as possible to make the plan approvable. Ms Moore moved to continue the hearing to May 25. Second by Mr. Bowe Roll call vote 6-0-0 1310 Main St Assessor's Map 41 Lot 75 & 84 DEP File No. 270-0746 Mr. Dribin asked about a site visit. Mr. Tirone suggested May 24 for this. The site visit is scheduled for May 25 at 8:30 am Ms Moore moved to continue the hearing to May 25. Second by Mr. Bowe Roll call vote 6-0-0 15 Carriage Lane Assessor's Map 48 Lot 53, RCC File No. 2022-3 Mr. Bowe moved to continue the hearing to May 25. Second by Mr. Dribin Mr. Dribin would like to do a site visit there because he has not seen it. Mr. Carnahan may join him for this visit, they will email Mr. Tirone with the date they choose. 0 Small Lane Assessor's Map 40 & 41 Lot 153,155 & 29 Dep File No. 270-0748 Maureen Herald and Jack Sullivan presented the project. Roadway construction for two single- family dwellings. The houses will be a separate NOI. The last meeting the commission asked to put it out to review. Mr. Tirone asked if anyone is here from LEC. No one spoke up. Mr. Tirone asked Ms. Herald to bring us up to date on the plans. The plan includes roadway extension, stream crossing, and wetland replication. The crossing included retaining walls and improved drainage. Plan has been revised. Drainage trenches have been changed to the pervious pavement. Mr. Sullivan said that 22 Small Lane has sold recently and the easement for the road was included. The cul de sac was relocated to reduce the filling required. Porous pavement Paye 1 2 can't be sanded. 3 -foot shoulders on each side of the private road for utilities. Reduced mature tree removal by 13 - 15 trees. For stream crossing, a large cul tec unit. Mr. Sullivan asked for the count of trees to be removed compared to the previous number. Mr. Sullivan said it is now 42 trees, previously about 55. Pervious pavement is built on a sub -base of different layers of crushed stone under the asphalt to allow the water to move through and allow for some storage. This road has a grade of about 1 %, all the water will be able to move into the stone and gravel, not run off. Ms. Moore asked about the excavation for the water and sewer lines and how to protect stream flow. She also asked about how roads will be treated in winter, it will be a no sand, no salt area. Mr. Bowe asked about making sure that DPW and the homeowners will know that they cannot sand or salt. Mr. Sullivan replied that the homeowners association would have an operation and maintenance plan included with their deed. Mr. Bowe asked about the stream crossing, 30 inches high, how much room is that above the water surface? Mr. Sullivan explained that there is 18 inches of clearance from the bottom of the channel to the top of the unit. Mr. Bowe asked if wildlife would need to pass through the water. Mr. Sullivan explained that the channel would be 50 inches wide. Mr. Dribin said that LEC says that this is a new roadway, the response was that the plan disagrees and says it is not a new roadway. Mr. Dribin asked about the stormwater standards. Why do they say it is not a new roadway? They need 120 feet of frontage for a lot, so they have to build a roadway even for one house. If you are constructing one to four lots, you are exempt from stormwater. If you have 5 - 9 lots, it is not a redevelopment project, they will meet the stormwater standards to the maximum extent feasible. Mr. Tirone asked whether the existing buildings really count in the project for the purpose of the wetlands protection act. LEC said they talked to DEP and said they are not exempt because they consider it one subdivision. Mr. Tirone asked what you would need to do to meet the stormwater standards. 80% suspended solids removal, would be required and some sort of detention pond. He would need to elevate the roadway and it would impact the wetlands more. Mr. Dribin asked if they really need the cul de sac, and could have only a driveway. Ms. Herald said that the town will not let them build a road without a full cul de sac. This development would be an improvement by providing a fully compliant turn around whereas Small Lane now dead ends. Mr. Dribin requested that they make North up on the drawings. Mr. Carnahan looked up a previous plan that showed removing 50 trees, but that may not have been correct. He is glad to see that the roadway was shifted northward. Mr. Tirone asked if they have to add the storm scepter, does that remove the pervious pavement, someday someone will repave it and Conservation will not be informed. He is concerned that the life of this project will be the life of the pavement. Why LEC did not come to tonight's meeting is unclear. Ms. Herald requested to continue to may 25. Mr. Bowe moved to continue to May 25 Seconded by Mr. Carnahan Roll call vote 6-0-0 572 Summer Ave. Assessor's Map 6 Lot 137, DEP File No. 270 Move to continue to May 25 by Mr. Carnahan Seconded by Mr. Bowe Roll call vote 6-0-0 Page 1 3 550 West St. Assessor's Map 25 Lot 2 DEP File Number 270-0759 Mr. Dribin, Bowe, and Sullivan did a site visit. Looked at the flags. Heavily forested site. Flags look like they do accurately mark the wetland. Wooden stakes mark the 25 foot line. Mr. Carnahan said that they are planning to take down a lot of red pine, some white pine, a few deciduous. Ms. Herald said the first phase of the project will be tree removal. The second phase will be construction of the addition. In the clouded area on the plan they propose to leave snags in other areas the trees will be removed. Ms. Scanlon pointed out that the tree policy is intended for a small number of trees, not to apply to such a large number of trees. Mr. Harris said that there are a total 50 live and 9 trees cut. 27 trees left as snags. Replant 32 trees. He wants to take the trees down because of a safety consideration for their family due to trees risk of falling. He has an arborist who said that pine trees are meant to be out in forests, not near a house. He decided to go for a full NOI rather than contacting an arborist. The trees average 85 - 90 feet tall. Ms. Scanlon asked whether there will be a basement. TBD based on cost Mr. Sullivan has not concerned about the addition other than what will happen to the soil that is removed. Is there a plan where the replacement trees will be planted? Will the dead trees be left as snags? Mr. Harris plans to do as little work in that area as possible. Ms. Moore asked about the color coding in the clouded area, are the green trees staying as is, the red will be left as snags? Yes. There are some plants in that area not shown on the plan, some tall yews. Will they be left? Yes. There are a few smaller deciduous trees in a big gap in the clouded area, are those going to remain? Correct. Ms. Moore noted that there is yard waste and invasive plants near the comer of the garage. It is past the 35 foot zone, so that is an ok place to put it. In the back in the red area, there is a mixture of buckthorn and cherry. Will they just be taking down the trees or planting? They will plant trees there, and also inside the circular driveway. Ms. Moore said that when they open up the area to sunlight by taking the trees out, the buckthorn may thrive, we may ask for buckthorn removal as mitigation for taking trees down. Ms. Moore asked about plans for the large Norway spruce at the back and some tall pines near the street outside the 200 foot line. Ms. Herald said that those trees will remain. Ms. Moore asked about the fenced play area and gate. Mr. Harris said they plan to move the fence back by one section. Ms. Moore said they should mark the new fence location on the plan. Ms. Moore asked about construction entrance and soil stockpile. Mr Harris said that excess soil will be removed from the site except for what will be needed for backfilling against the foundation. Ms. Moore asked what kind of erosion control will be used around the addition. Mr. Harris said straw bales or mulch socks as the commission prefers. Ms. Moore asked about the erosion control crossing the construction entrance driveway. She suggested moving the erosion control to be between the driveway and the river. Ms. Moore asked about the addition overlapping the existing patio. Mr. Harris replied that the addition would be cut back on that side to avoid impacting the patio. Ms. Moore asked about the vernal pool in the area. Ms. Scanlon pointed out that the VP is mapped on the plan behind 532 West St. Page 1 4 Mr. Bowe: Cutting within the 25 foot buffer, all but one are dead trees consider leaving the Ione live tree. Further back in the woods maybe keep those healthy trees. Maybe those trees are the ones you could have an arborist look at. Why are they leaving the trees near the play area? The stakes are not permanent, he wants them replaced with permanent markers. Have they envisioned what it will look like with a large number of snags? Mr. Harris wants to protect his family, while protecting the river. Garage roof was crushed by a falling tree. Several other trees have come down. Mr. Dribin notes that we are in the riverfront area, certain conditions should be followed. It is part of the Mystic River Watershed. "No significant adverse impact" within 200 feet of a riverfront area cannot alter more than 5000 square feet. Everything that is being proposed is not permitted within the wetland regulations. All those trees are altering the landscape significantly. It is not possible to move forward with this. Ms. Herald the house was constructed in 1915 which predates the regulations so it doesn't count as an alteration. The proposed addition is only 1500 square feet. How do you quantify a tree? DEP doesn't count existing buildings. Ms. Scanlon asked for the regulation that applies here. He says that the tree policy does not apply to this many trees. Ms Moore pointed out that the trees near the play area are Norway spruce not Pine. Mr. Carnahan asked if every tree being cut down is a very tall pine. Yes. He noted that there are a lot of fallen trees on the property. He identified a lot of red pines on the property, and would be willing to see a red pine that is about to die be replace with native hardwoods and coupled with invasive control. Though he usually does not like to see trees cut, this might lead to an improvement. He pointed out that the trees outside our jurisdictional area might be cut without being part of this project. If you are planning to take down red pines and replace them outside the jurisdictional area and tell us about that, it might make the project look better. Ms. Scanlon says that we are dealing with at least 3 resource area, BVW, Vernal pool habitat, and riverfront area. She agrees with Andrew from just the riverfront performance standards, how does the proposed work meet the performance standards? Please mark the 200 foot setback from the vernal pool, because it overlaps the property. She does not see the opportunity for subsequent replacement planting. What may be constructed in the backyard after the trees are taken down? A pool? A lawn? Open to public comment: Bob Connor Reading Open Land Trust treasurer Before the meeting, given the number of trees to be taken down, he is glad to see the number of replacement trees. ROLT would be willing to have them plant some of the trees on their land if they don't plant them all in their property. Are ALL the trees being cut down in danger of falling on the house? Mr. Carnahan suggests that FMCGRANE is Frederick McGrane at 16 Catherine and is an abutter. Kayla Harris emphasized how dangerous the trees are and her concern for the safety of her children. Fred McGrane echoed the concern for the safety of their children and expressed support for the project. Motion to continue to May 25 by Martha Moore, second by Joe Carnahan. Roll call vote 6-0-0 Page 1 5 What did we ask for? 200 -foot VP setback, species of trees that will be cut, health of trees that are not dead. Which trees are in striking distance of the house. How does the proposed project meet the riverfront performance standards? Planting plan? What will the finished area look like? Erosion control placement down gradient. Please cite the sections of the regulations that apply. Old/New Business: 5 Veterans Way Minor Plan Change for fence at lot 5 Veterans Way want to install a fence within the 100 foot buffer zone. Potential buyers are concerned about the busy road and high retaining wall at the back. 6 foot vinyl Fence will have 3.5 inch gap at the bottom. Mr. Carnahan mentioned that there is a sight and drain easement. Joe Carnahan moved to approve minor plan change, Mr. Bowe seconded Roll call vote 5 - 0-1 Town Forest Day May 1 was a success, April 30 Chuck helped Trails with boardwalk construction. They had enough people and got it done by 2 pm. Nike brought her dog and he went in the mud. It was busy, but not huge numbers. There were plenty of tables, but people wished that there were more attendees. Maybe ask people how they heard about it. Nike gave out Seedles, one pack per family. Nike has the table, postcards, etc. for Friends and Family Day. A resident was at our table talking about continued flooding in the Batchelder area. Another resident complained about some town land near Henzie St. that was loaded with invasives and asked what we plan to do about it. Do we have a gift account yet? No, so many other things being worked on. Possible dates for a goals setting meeting at Matters, 5:30 to 7 May 17 or May 31 suggested but didn't work. Settled on May 18 5 - 6:30 pm Veteran's Agent spoke to Chuck about paving the Matters Cabin parking lot to get rid of the potholes. He might have presented it to the ARPA meeting tonight. It is not a jurisdictional area. Nike asked if there are any restrictions at the time of the sale. Preferred to have it gravel but be maintained better. Chuck would like to spend the money offered by Fidel to get a nice quality high visibility sign for the entrance to Matters Cabin. It should be about $3000. Property survey next to 67 Sanborn Lane would be about $3000, but it abuts Water Department land and then Town Forest land. Why would the first money we get have to be spent on something that does not conned to other Conservation Commission land, rather than on land we own. The sign would be much more visible to more people. After July 1 there will be more money to ask for, perhaps the land survey could come from that. A volunteer group will stain Matters Cabin and the materials can come from the DPW budget. Mr. Carnahan suggested that we need to keep a list of the items we would like to spend. 1503 Main St. Mr. Carnahan spoke to the homeowner and hasn't heard back Ms Moore reported that there are some shrubs planted, but lawn mowed under the trees. General Way cutting. They will be invited to another meeting. We have to have evidence of the effort to contact them before a violation. Page 1 6 At Town Meeting, Ms. Scanlon submitted an amendment to the smart growth regulation changes to propose that any open space areas be planted with a minimum of 75% native species, and with shade trees. Ms. Scanlan was not still present, but Mary Ellen O'Neil presented it and it passed. Minutes: Motion to approve the meeting minutes of April 27, 2022 as amended, by Ms. Moore, seconded by Mr. Bowe. Roll call vote 6-0-0. Motion to adjourn by Ms. Moore, seconded by Mr. Carnahan. Roll call vote 6-0-0. Meeting adjourned at 11:13 pm. Page 1 7