HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-08-28 Conservation Commission MinutesRE WING CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Minutes of August 28, 1991 Meeting No. 21
PRESENT: Chair Camille Anthon Vice-Chair Jennifer
Lachmayr, Harold Hulse, Ed Loschi (at 7:11), Joan
Nickerson, M. Clifton Proctor; Associate Members. James
Keigley, Leo Kenney and Jennifer Miksen; Conservation
Administrator Donald Nadeau
ABSENT: James Biller; Associate Member Elizabeth Fuller
(resigned in order to attend Graduate School).
7:05 Meeting called to order.
7:10 Minutes of may 22, 1991 : Motion made and seconded to
accept as corrected. VOTED 3-0-2
(Hulse and Lachmayr abstained)
7:11 Loschi arrived
7:15 Minutes of May 29, 1991: Motion made and seconded to
accept as corrected. VOTED 6-0-0
Motion made and seconded to reconsider vote on minutes
of May 22, 1991 VOTED 6-0-0
Motion made and seconded to accept min=utes of May 22,
as further corrected VOTED 6-0-0
720
C.Q..nt!.n.u.e.d.......P•ubl.i..c..•... lie.ax."'g G.a.z..zi.a_g.e . •..E..states ........Rha.s.•e.......11
DEP# 270-236, RGB# 1991-10. H. Hulse abstained from
discussion as a Conservation commission member. Ms.
McCartney for the applicant presented the drainage
analysis. Phases I and II are still before the CPDC.
Utility line is proposed to go under the stream at site
of earlier proposed road crossing; sewer line will be
in the same location as presented earlier, between
Phases I and II. Phase II will drain to a detention
pond, and will contain 20 lots, but lots 1 and 2 will
have frontage on Roma Lane (Phase I). Ms. McCartney
felt that Lots 1 Ind 2 did not invalidate the Roma Lane
design because one house had earlier been eliminated
from the initial Phase I Proposal, and the runoff would
not exceed the capacity of the detention basin for that
area.
Some land south of Dividence Road is included in the
Please II watershed, Detention basin is designed to
accommodate a 100-year storm event, A 25' setback from
resource area was kept in the subdivision, except for
work in the wetland area,
Questi-ons raised;
Will there be any impact on the wetland from a
reduction in rate of runoff from the detention basin
after a 100-year storm, McCartney felt a 14% reduction
was insignificant.
Will construstion of detention basin result in
loss of large trees? McCartney replied-"yes" in order.
to excavate to a depth of 3'-4'; trees to be preserved
are marked throughout the site as part of'the CPDC
requirements.
What would be the impact. of the loss of the trees?
Not known, but claimed alternative design not possible
due to town standards.
Other concerns reiterated as stated to Charles Arthur,
proponent representative, from prior portion of
hearing: what will be the impact of blasting?
Will water travel along the gravel under the
sewer line, acting as a French drain?
Later in the hearing, it was.pointed out
that a clay barrier for the sewer will be
built on the upland/wetland boundary to
prevent this potential drainage from
happening.
Other points made:
Conservation Commission has not had time to review
the latest submitted material.
DPW has not had opportunity to review drainage
analysis and render an opinion to the Conservation.
Commission.
when water line is installed, it will be done
during low or no-flow period; silt fence will be
installed.
Applicant will file.for., water quality
certification,
Impervious area per lot does riot include the
roadway, as that is not required under present
regulations. 20,000 sq, ft, lot is allowed to have
4000 sq. ft, of impervious area.
Mike McCaffrey for abutters: Pleased to see that there
are now proposed 2 cul-de-sacs, concern expressed
about. manhole being 1 1/2 feet above the wetland; would
water drain into the sewer from the wetland when
flooded?
Abutter Debra McCaffrey asked how the impervious area
i; calculated when lot contains wetlands, Concern was
expressed that present design calls for the maximum of
impervious area, leaving no room for any additional
increase. Suggestion was made that perhaps this
_ information should appear as_a deed restriction.
0.11)4-qI I r"!)
No report is yet available for the just completed
testing for hazardous materials; information is to be
received by the applicant by September 9th, and will be
presented to the ConCom at its Sept. 25, 1991 meeting.
H, Hulse sworn in as a private citizen. He reported
that he was at the excavation from 8:00 a.m. until
11:45 a.m. Many,of the test pits are dry; samples were
taken; he was satisfied that the testing seemed to be
complete. Discussion on only one test pit near the.
trailer which showed evidence of a clam shell.
Otherwise, brick, mortar and buried construction
material was evident. He did not observe any probable
toxic material. He was not present for excavation
toward the drop off area near lots 11 and 12. Drilling
rig broke down.
Abutter Bertlesen: Reported that team worked until
4:30; one 12' hole showed some gray clay material.
Lots of ledge on some lots; team drilled 21' at last
test hole; went to refusal in each hole.
Motion made and seconded to continue hearing to 7:40
p.m., September 25, 1991. VOTED 5--0-1
(Hulse abstained)
8:15 Vaughn: 562 Pearl Street. Enforcement order had been
issued. Don reported that lack of communication was
his fault; Vaughns were not ignoring the notification;
they were away on vacation. Vaughns reported that
previous owners used the area in question as a dump and
they were trying to clean it out. Don reported that
area is revegetating well now; it should be checked
again after two growing seasons. Don will send a
letter to the Vaughns stating that if the area fully
revegates on its own, no further planting will be
necessary; if the owners want to perform more clearing,
they should notify Don prior to any activity.
Motion made and seconded to send Vaughn letter.
VOTED 6-0-0
8:25 Break
8:30 Roll call vote to go into Executive Session to discuss
litigation (but not protocol as stated in the Agenda)
for DEP# 270-232, RGB 1991-03, Azalea Circle.
Commission will come back into open session after
Executive Session is completed.
VOTED 6-0-0
9:26 Rules and Regulations not discussed due to time
constraints
9 : 2 7 R.e..qu,e..g..t,.......f..A . . . ..t.........Q.f...,.., 1.1..~.,..,..Relm..A.nt
31....., DEP4270-235, RGB# 1991-08. Pointed out by Don
that the "as built" plan is not accurate; the 12'-wide
_ concrete slab is 7.5' longer than proposed. `Don will_
' e
review the file to see if the differences are a
problem. it was pointed out to the applicant, who was
present, that information needs to be in ConCom file as
to the changes made from the original submittal, and
whether or not the commission determines that the
difference is significant or acceptable.
No vote taken on certificate request. Later in the
evening, it was pointed out that mowing up to the BVW
flags is not supposed to be allowed; that area should
grow up with native vegetation and not be part of the
lawn,
9:45
..Q.n.t..n.t~.e.S......R.t~?1 .............e.e.t.i.z,g..,.,,........A......,.Y.,i,l...Q.W..,..,,.,.e. No
further activity reported since the last ConCom
meeting. Mr. Rindone, owner, offered to either build
walls to contain the fill, or to grade off gradually on
to the adjacent Conservation property. After much
discussion, motion made and seconded to close the
public meeting. VOTED 6-0-0
Motion made and seconded to issue a Negative
Determination with the following conditions:
1. All fill to be removed from Conservation
property by December 31, 1991.
2. No equipment will go on Conservation land;
work will be done from Rindone's land except to drive
on paved area with a light dump truck.
3. Area will be loamed and seeded.
4. Mr. Rindone will notify Cons. Administrator
when work is to be performed.
VOTED 6-0-0
10:30 Administrator's Report.
.
4.
MEPA letter for N. Reading Exxon on Rte. 28 near Ipswich
River: Don sent letter in opposition: near water
supply.
Fairchild Drive Lot 35. Applicant modified plans to conform
to conditions: driveway redesigned and garage put
underneath; project is now within impervious area
allowance.
Meeting protocol. Policy on administrator's role and ConCom
members' role. Procedures should be formalized;
discussions should go through the chair; members to
take notes and, ask questions at end of presentations.
Tree/limb removal policy by Don O.K.
___Falrwood- Acres detention area, Lot 17 No replication
evident. Don will look in file to review original
conditions and plans. Owner wants to build; wetlands
replacement should have been done prior to roadway
construction. D. McCartney may have plan to show what
was to be built for wetland replication. Don to send a
letter to homeowners to apprise them of this wetlands
replacement issue.
Minotti, 908 Main Street. Discussion as to best way to get
cooperation; may have to threaten legal action. Don to
investigate options for handling the situation.
10:50 Ed Loshi reported on Hingorani project in North
Reading. The N. Reading ZBA held a hearing on the proposal
and required a water loading test on the proposed leaching.-
field.
10:50 Minutes of June 12, 1991. Motion made and seconded to
accept minutes as corrected. VOTED 6-0-0
11:00 Motion made and seconded to adjourn.. VOTED 6-0-0
respectfully submitted;
Joan Nickerson
READING CONSERVATION COMMISSION
EXECUTIVE SESSION
_AU u` 28, 1991 8:35 p.m. - 9:25 p.m.
PRESENT: Chair C. Anthony, Vice-Chair, J. 1Lachmayr, H.
Hulse, E. Loschi, J. Nickerson, M. C. Proctor; Assoc.
Members J. Keigley, L. Kenney, and J. Miksen; Cons,
Administrator D. Nadeau. Town Counsel Ted Cohen.
Madlyn Fafard, Counsel Beatty Churchill, B. Chirco
Absent J. Biller
8:35 Meeting called to order.
35 Azalea Circle, DEP #270-232, RGB #1991-03
Ted Cohen gave introductory remarks. Meeting is held
on request of M. Fafard who expressed desire to present
new material to resolve the problems of building on 35
Azalea Circle. No proposal has been submitted to the
Conservation Commission. Cohen advised Commission not
to sit and brainstorm with the applicant,
Churchill: He had reviewed the filing and decision.
No new material was presented. Applicant informed that
application was already given much thought and discussion by
the commission; now is not the time or place to review the
decision. Ms. Fafard claimed the commission is prejudiced
against her because she is a woman; that she owns this lot
separately and that she wants a separate explanation as to
why, under the local by-law, she could not build as
proposed. Why is 25' buffer zone required when less than
that was required for Greenhouse Acres condominiums.
Cohen pointed out that local by-laws can be more
restrictive than the state law. It is up to the courts to
decide who is right or wrong.
Applicants want to settle out of court, but indicated.
that they will pursue with litigation if necessary.
9:05 M. Fafard, B. Churchill and B. Chirco left meeting.
9:07 Discussion continued re: Azalea circle. Pointed out
that 15' buffer zone was allowed for Greenhouse Acres
in order for the applicants to have enough units to
make affordable housing feasible. Cohen stated that
there will be a legal decision on the case. He
described deposition procedure, and possible scenarios
for litigation for Azalea Circle.
i
. -.--V-~/ * a.\
9: 15 Brook Street - DEN 270-233 RGB# 1991-06
Ted Cohen reported that a motion to dismiss on 3 counts
had been filed. Awaiting response from the applicant;
case has gone to the courts. Later, J. Lachmayr stated
that in her conversation with J. Gould (Tyler and
Reynolds), question was raised as to whether or not
fill was placed within the now-existing 25' buffer
zone. Pointed out that at that time (1973), there was
no 25' buffer required, that the fill was placed in the
wetland, and that fill is now the buffer zone.
9:20 Minotti . 908 Main Street.
Filling within 100' buffer zone of wetland. Violation
notice sent has been ignored; enforcement order
ignored; Manotti may sue. Don asked whether or not
ConCom should file a Request for Determination on
behalf of Manotti. _Ted recommended that we wait until
new regs are in place and then go for non-criminal
disposition under the local by-law. He cautioned the
Commission to pick cases with care; courts, etc,
crowded; does violation really exist?
9:25 Motion made and seconded to come out of Executive
Session. VOTED 6-0-0