Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-11-09 Conservation Commission Minutesp��prp 0 Town of Reading 'RECEIVED Meeting Minutes TOWN CLERK �r� READING. MA. pit - Board - committee - commission - Council: 2023 APR 18 PN 03 Conservation Commission Date: 2022-11-09 Time: 07:00 PM Building: Location: Address: Session: Open Session Purpose: Zoom Virtual Meeting - Version: Draft Conservation Commission Meeting Attendees: Members - Present: Martha Moore chair, John Sullivan, Carl Saccone, Andrew Dribin Members - Not Present: Brian Bowe, vice chair Others Present: Chuck Tirone, Conservation Administrator, Scott Harris, Maureen Herald, Alex Perry, Samantha Walker, Luke Yiang, Angela and Ed, Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Martha Moore Topics of Discussion: Topics of Discussion: This meeting was held remotely via Zoom. Chair Martha Moore called the meeting to order at 7:15 pm Hearinos Scheduled: 0 Small Lane Assessor's Mao 40 & 41 Lot 153,155 & 29 Deo File No. 270-0748 Has already been continued to December 14. 550 West Street Assessor's Mao 25 Lot 2 Dep File No. 270-0759 Ms. Herald discussed the revised plan which includes more mitigation. Now the proposal shows 44 trees and 90 shrubs planted. They are requesting an additional 22 trees to be cut, beyond the 20 trees approved so far. Mr. Sullivan asked for the total number of trees to be removed and planted. Requesting a total of 42 trees removed, proposing to plant 44 trees and 90 shrubs. Mr. Dribin asked for numbers related to the riverfront area and how they are addressed through mitigation. Ms. Herald said that they are proposing more than 1:1 tree replacement and planting 90 shrubs. How to quantify that for riverfront area? Ms. Moore asked what aspect of the mitigation is addressing impervious surface. Ms. Herald explained that they are providing rooftop infiltration and planting shrubs. Mr. Perry explained that in context of redevelopment of riverfront area the mitigation does not need to be in the same form as the impact. Impact does not need to be square footage. The roof top infiltration is an improvement, the new trees replace old and stressed trees, and the shrubs provide improved habitat value. The inner riparian zone Page 1 1 is being preserved, except for a few old, stressed trees. The other work is pushed as far as can be into the outer riparian zone. Although the total request is 42 trees, the bulk of that occurs in the outer riparian zone, they are only asking for 14 tree to be removed in the inner riparian zone. The row of blueberries provides a natural barrier against incursion into the inner riparian zone. Mr. Tirone asked about the note on the plan that says that all the trees in a marked area are cut to 8 — 15 feet tall. He is concerned that all the trees in that area will be cut. He also asked to clarify where the 100 foot line is. Ms. Moore commented that about half of the blueberries are inside the 100 foot line and about half of the blueberries are outside the 100 foot line. Mr. Sullivan commented that this is a pretty good planting plan. He said that newly planted trees are different from mature trees and do not provide as many ecosystem services as mature trees. However, the additional shrubs provide some of those services. He asked whether the infiltration from the proposed addition provides enough mitigation. Mr. Tirone replied that we don't usually see stone drywells, usually a more commercial product. As a single-family house, this project does not need to meet the stormwater standards. The stone drywells would be considered an improvement. Mr. Tirone said that 23 trees would be cut down in the riverfront area. The regulations ask us not to work in that area. He asked if there is a size planned for the trees to be planted. Mr. Perry said that the plan shows the size of the trees. Ms. Herald said that is the size of the existing trees. He said that they will cut only 15 trees. Mr. Tirone said that the note says all the trees will be cut to 8 — 15 feet, Mr. Perry clarified that the note applies ONLY to the trees marked to be cut. Ms. Moore clarified that the tree symbols colored red are proposed to be cut, the tree symbols in green are NOT to be removed. She said that her concerns with this area are habitat value and flood protection, and was concerned that cutting that many trees will reduce transpiration in that area and increase flood risk, and the roots will not be holding the soil anymore. She also was concerned about the habitat value, the red squirrels eating the pinecones will have less to eat. When they are cutting the trees that are cut to snags, what measures will be taken to preserve the understory and smaller trees? What is the forest cutting plan? Ms. Herald said that they will be selectively cutting. They will prevent damaging the other trees, trunks and root systems. Mr. Harris said that all the trees will be taken down with a crane. Mr. Saccone said that he has not seen as big a project as this is planned. He asked if there is any irrigation planned? Planting in the spring would give them a chance. He asked about any evergreen trees? There is no size caliper on the trees, he would suggest that planting into a heavily rooted existing forest, smaller root balls might fare better. There won't be much loose soil for the trees they are planting. Ms. Herald said that the plantings would occur in the spring. The client will make every effort to ensure that the shrubs survive. Maybe they would install bags around the trees and water the shrubs with a hose. She said a 6 foot tall tree needs a crane to plant it. She agrees with using a smaller size tree. Mr. Saccone said he understands the value of the habitat, but it will be a tough success rate, but a smaller root ball might have a better success rate in existing woodland. Ms. Moore suggested that the area where the Norway Spruces will be removed could have larger caliper trees planted there, and inside the woods could be smaller caliper trees. Mr. Dribin said that we are having a good planting plan discussion, but it does not address the 1500 sq ft addition, but it does address the tree removal. Mr. Perry said that the main concern with the addition is additional impervious area, and the regulations are concerned about runoff. The mitigation that is being provided is the infiltration. He does not know of any mitigation that addresses impervious area other than stormwater infiltration. Mr. Dribin said that the redevelopment regulations would be taking down some existing impervious surface, that is not happening here, they are just adding impervious surface, and they don't have the numbers he is looking for. He thinks they are over the square footage in the regulations. Ms. Herald says that this is a redevelopment and she submitted a letter addressing those standards. Ms. Moore asked what currently exists where the blueberries are proposed. Mr. Harris replied that most of that is lawn. Page 1 2 Mr. Tirone said that the town had misplaced 2 checks. Is Mr. Harris planning to replace those checks? Mr. Harris will replace them once he confirms that they were not deposited. Mr. Tirone said that he has the checks, but they are too old to deposit. Mr. Perry said that the redevelopment standard in section a mentions the 10%, but in section g they can propose mitigation notwithstanding section e. So, with onsite mitigation proposed they can override the 10%. Mr. Harris offered that in addition to the planting he could donate $1000 to the tree fund to increase the mitigation for the project. Mr. Tirone said that he has all along thought that the comment about cutting the snags referred to cutting ALL the trees. Ms. Moore asked for comments from the public. There were none. Mr. Tirone said that the significant amount of planting would be the reason for approving the projects and he would like a bond and a review with reports for at least 5 years. Ms. Herald suggested that 2 years would be sufficient, Ms. Moore said that she has seen 3 years on most projects she has seen. Ms. Harris agreed to meet in the middle with 3 years. Mr. Tirone said that the review would be needed for the first two years, and then one at the end. It allows us time to ensure that the trees are going to survive. He suggested that we could close tonight and take time to digest all this information, and Issue at the next meeting, or deny. Ms. Moore preferred to think it over and vote on Dec. 14. Mr. Dribin said that he does not think that the proposed mitigation addresses both the tree cutting and the addition. He is leaning towards No. Mr. Tirone said that the Mullen rule limits the number of meetings a member can miss. Mr. Perry suggested that Scott might prefer to continue to the next meeting to have 5 members of the commission eligible to vote. Mr. Perry suggested that tree caliper could be included if we don't close. 4 things they will ask for: sizes of trees in the three areas, bond, how to water, operation and maintenance plan for the infiltration, Mr. Dribin is looking for 2:1 mitigation for the additional impervious square footage. Move to continue to December 14 by Mr. Sullivan, second by Mr. Saccone 4-0-0 77 Walkers Brook Drive Assessor's Mao 12, Lot 130 DEP File No. 270-07562 Ms. Moore said that Mr. Tirone, Mr. Dribin, and herself visited the site with Aton and Ms. Walker. Samantha Walker from BSC explained that Boston Gas Company are proposing facility maintenance and improvement, vegetation removal, fence replacement, and a storage tank for mercaptan and inner security fence. There has been a history of public cutting of the fence and camping in the area. Mature trees pose a risk to underground gas lines. They propose planting 6 trees or shrubs along the access road. Mr. Dribin said that we visited the site Monday morning, walked along the fence line, Walker's Brook borders the site on the north side, goes to the train tracks in back. It used to house large storage tanks; it was decommissioned in 2010. It has grown up to birch and alder. He is fine with the fence. Since we are in the riverfront area he asked if enough mitigation has been provided. What does decommissioned mean in this context? Ms. Walker explained that the use of the site changed, rather than taking propane off trains and exporting it, it is transitioning more into a storage facility. Ms. Moore asked if the area that is currently gravel will stay gravel, and will not be covered with impervious surface except for where the tank will be. She asked Mr. Tirone to review what we have jurisdiction over as a commission. Mr. Tirone said that the commission has the ability to agree that Boston Gas has permission to use the exemption. It is up to the commission, but this is a fenced in area and has been used as a depot. The entire lot is gravel. Mr. Tirone shared a photo of the facility when it was cleared and had a second building and some tanks. He said that this is a good use for the exemption. Trees are saplings and volunteer growth that came up Page 1 3 through the rubble. We will get some planting along the access road, shrubs, and maybe a tree. Ms. Moore reports that MapGeo shows that it was all cleared in 1998. She said that there is a lot of area around it that can provide flood control, escape cover, etc. Ms. Walker proposed 6 small trees or shrubs, including speckled alder, silky dogwood, sweet pepperbush, and arrowwood that would survive in that environment. Mr. Tirone clarified that no cutting is happening along the entrance road. Ms. Moore pointed out that they will not be cutting outside the fence, leaving several feet of trees along the property boundary. Mr. Dribin is looking at 10.02.2 about the exemption, as long as it is being used lawfully and not substantially changing anything, they don't even need a Notice of Intent. Boston Gas can't just declare the exemption and do the work, it must be reviewed by the commission. Ms. Moore pointed out that they already have erosion control along the stream bank. She asked about the caliper of the trees. Ms. Walker said she thought it would be 1 inch caliper and dormant plantings. Mr. Sacoone said he thought 1 inch was not big enough. Mr. Tirone suggested 1 Y: in caliper. 2 inch is in burlap. Mr. Tirone said this area was previously disturbed, and asked about soil amendments. Suggested 2 inch caliper. Move to close by Mr. Dribin, second by Mr. Saccone 4-0-0 Conditions: 2 inch caliper trees, no clearing outside the fence line, any debris within the fence and within reach outside the fence will be removed, including 4 tires and some boards, try not to disturb the trees outside the fence during installation, because some are likely habitat trees. Move to issue with the conditions just discussed by Mr. Dribin, second by Mr. Sullivan 4-0-0 39 Lilah Lane Assessor's Mao 56 Lot 34, RCC File No. 2022-13 Move to continue to December 14 by Mr. Sullivan, second by Mr. Dribin 4 — 0 — 0 11 Veterans Wav Mao 51 Lot 165 RGB file No.RDA 2021 - 3 In 2021 Luke requested a fence, Ryan Percival has allowed that a fence could be built on the drain easement to connect to the existing fence, with a double gate at each end of the easement area. Luke says he now has permission from Engineering. Mr. Dribin what was previously agreed to. Mr. Tirone said that we had agreed to all the fencing shown in red, but Luke wants to extend his fence across the drain easement, he owns half of the drain easement, beyond the proposed fence. Mr. Dribin reminded the homeowner that the gate makes it tempting to throw things, such as leaves into the drain easement, and we ask him not to do so. Motion to issue a negative determination by Mr. Dribin, second by Mr. Saccone, 4-0-0 78 Whittier Road DEP File No. 270-0602 Angela and Ed are asking for a certificate of compliance. Mr. Tirone explained that the lot is triangular, the upper area is lawn, and the back area is wooded. There has been some planting. Mr. Tirone has met with them and pointed out where plantings were needed and not planted yet. Angela said that they planted Summersweet and Red Twig Dogwood. Ms. Moore proposed a site visit to see the plantings, and then they would come back on Dec. 14 to vote on the certificate of compliance. Angela pointed out that they have a swing set in the back as well, near the area labeled Lot A on the plan. Site visit scheduled for Wednesday, Page 1 4 11/16 at 3:30 pm. Mr. Tirone said that we should check for infiltration, erosion control, plantings, anything not on the plan (such as the swing set), yard waste in the wetland. Angela pointed out that the swing set is not permanent, it is a temporary structure. Mr. Tirone said that if it is on bark mulch, surrounded by landscape timber, etc. it should be looked at but swing sets are generally allowed without a permit because it is temporary. Mr. Tirone said that they put the swingset in the low spot. We will check out if the area is wet at the site visit. Move to continue to Dec. 14 by Mr. Sullivan, second by Mr. Dribin 4-0-0 Old/New Business: Next DPW meeting Tuesday Nov 6 at 1 pm Ms. Moore will attend. No bills to approve. RMLD taken care of, Mayer tree has a plan about cutting to submit a plan for approval before doing work. Give us options and allows us to be part of the discussion, such as limbing the tree or sleeving the wires. Commission will have to approve the draft. It is with RMLD now. Minutes for approval: We are waking for the September 28 minutes. Mr. Tirone said he will get them done by Dec. 14. October 26, 2022 minutes Ms. Moore asked Mr. Tirone to double check the file number for 39 Lilah Lane. Mr. Dribin moved to approve October 26th minutes, seconded by Mr. Saccone, voted 4-0-0. October 12, 2022 minutes Mr. Dribin moved to approve October 12th minutes, seconded by Mr. Saccone, voted 4-0-0. Ms. Moore agreed to do the November 9 minutes. Mr. Dribin suggested that the Commission make a site visit to Symonds Way before winter. Tentatively scheduled for Nov. 17 at 10:30 am. Mr. Tirone will send out a meeting invitation. Mr. Dribin is on the committee to figure out how the town may use the property. Ms. Moore asked lt a wetlands delineation has been done. Mr. Tirone says that Weston and Sampson has done one, so we will see nags out there. Mr. Tirone will get the latest map for us. Mr. Tirone said that we want to try to maintain the 25 foot and 35 foot area and limit trees that will be cut down. Mr. Tirone proposed that we park at the skating rink and walk over. Mr. Tirone said that the proposed Parcel A will eventually be given to the conservation commission. It is all wetland. Mr. Tirone said that the Lenetta Lane gift of land is now colored in green on MapGeo. Ms. Moore said that she and Mr. Tirone looked at that property with members of the trails committee to look at where to build a trail. Mr. Tirone said that the proposed trail would be about a halt mile. The beginning of the trail was constructed by the volunteers this summer, the developer put in the gravel, the volunteers put in wood chips and a bridge. Motion to adjourn at 9:31 pm by Mr. Saccone, seconded by Mr. Dribin, voted 4-0-0 Page 1 5