HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-05-30 Conservation Commission Minutes- ~j
Minutes of the Conservation Commission
A S S.
Town of Reading
2: 3 Selectmen's Meeting Room
Wednesday, May 30, 2001 - 7:00 pm
Present: Chair Nancy Eaton; Thad Berry, Will Finch, Doug Greene, Pat Lloyd,
Commissioners; Fran Fink, Administrator, and Harold Hulse, Consultant.
Absent: Mark Gillis, Vincent Falcione, Commissioners and Leo Kenney, Consultant
7:00 p.m. Continued Public Hearing for DEP #270-xxx, RGB#2001-17, 16 Margaret
Road. Chair read procedure; commission was introduced; attendance sheet was
circulated; and witnesses were sworn. Alan Blomerth present as applicant.
As a result of a site visit, the Chair noted the wetland line is off the property. The pool
and deck are outside the 100-foot jurisdiction and the proposed retaining wall 50 feet off
wetland line. Applicant received notes from Monday site visit.
Pat Lloyd moved and Will Finch seconded a motion to close the Public Hearing. Vote:
5-0 in favor. Changes in wording to the draft Order of Conditions were discussed and
revisions made. Thad Berry moved and Doug Greene seconded a motion to approve and
issue the draft Order of Conditions as amended. Vote: 5-0 in favor.
7:15 p.m. Discussion - DEP 270-331, RGB #2000-04 -101 Willow Street. The Chair
reported a representative from Austin Prep called and wanted to know how to proceed.
There is an open Order of Conditions and they are now proposing two additional
activities: resurfacing the existing tennis and remove old chain link and install new fence
in same location. Due to proximity of vernal pool, the administrator can't approve as a
minor project. Our consensus is to proceed as a plan change rather than a new filing.
7:20 p.m. Continued Public Hearing DEP 270-352, RGB 2001-14 Walker's Brook
Drive - landfill closure and redevelopment. Chair read hearing procedure; an
attendance sheet was circulated; the commission introduced themselves; and witnesses
were sworn.
Applicant's team consisted of Paul Ozarowski of Haley & Aldrich, Mark Nogueira,
Mark Dickinson and Ann Zebrowski, environmental attorney. Local counsel Brad
Latham said the objective of the hearing was to receive public input and respond to
comments from commission. Most responses will be in writing. Repeated waiver request
relating to Reading wetland bylaw as outlined in a letter from him dated May 30, 2001.
In response to a request for evaluation of fill materials, Latham said the contract requires
using some material from water treatment plant to cap site. Copy of that report was
provided. Hydrology reports dated May 1 and May 29 will be included in the record....
with landfill closure sequencing details.
f}~ /1~1 J ~o,Z_UO( Z
Mark Nogueira of VHB identified certain significant issues:
1) The town has an obligation to close landfill;
2) To close landfill requires removal of some vegetation.. They are not removing
trash but capping it. Requested we evaluate project as redeveloping a barren site.
He read a couple of sections from the NOI and section 310 CMR 10.53(3), which
lie maintained give the Conservation Commission the authority to allow it to
happen. Riverfront protection has landfill closure sections as well.
The Chair asked for timetable for producing capping documents.
New Documents: The Commission's site visit notes of Monday, May 21, 2000, and the
administrator's site notes of the same date were entered into the record. Division of
Fisheries and Wildlife, Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program letter said the
project will not adversely affect Mystic Valley amphipod. Eaton also entered the
standard list of documents on the importance of buffer zones and riparian areas.
Mark Nogueira - Dave Pickart is unable to be here tonight. This is a very important
process. They are tailoring the presentation to make process. He gave certified mail
notices to abutters to administrator. They received and reviewed comments from the
Chair dated May 25 and Administrator of May 16 and others and are in the process of
formulating responses to comments. He's trying to address grouping or categorizing of
comments and suggested the following:
1) Clarifications and corrections - minor and major discrepancies to fix.
2) More details - wetland impact, plan scales, and additional details.
They're putting together 40-scale plans to make the wetland impacts more clear.
Another 40-scale will be wetland mitigation areas.
Plan scales - because of size of site, 20- and 10-scale plans not feasible, but will bring
in certain areas blown up. Some of the details need to be enhanced, i.e., anchor
trench and plunge pool.
3) Comments they will anticipate seeing in the Order as conditions - e.g.
maintenance, erosion controls, construction sequencing, which will come at the end
of the design and approval stage.
4) Questions and clarifications. Asked for permission to meet with administrator and
clarify questions.
5) Information not yet put together - A lot of design documents are still being
developed. Enormous expenditure of resources needed to get there. Don't expect to
get to final construction plans until end of year. Expect there will be a condition that
any plan changes need to be brought before Commission. Will need final
construction plans after project goes out to bid. Contractor will develop phasing plan
at end of year. Will be beefing up phasing plan to show typical steps, subject to
change. Also need stamped structural drawings for components, such as. retaining
walls. Believes structures feasible and limits of work OK, but will provide any
/),I /ll >/3G1 266
changes to Conservation Commission. Structural drawings won't be done until end of
year.
6) Timing issues: (a) Expect to submit CAAA by middle of July - alternatives
analysis limited by DEP and what they want to see, which is gas management system
(state of the art enclosed structure) and sediments in Walkers Brook. Preliminary
recommendations are that brook sediments should remain in place and DEP will look
at that. Set of plans for local approvals also included.
(b) MEPA Notice of Project change - geared towards traffic impacts.
(c) Walkers' Brook Drive widening NOI.
7) Wetlands restoration waivers. Seeking waiver of 2 to 1 restoration under local
bylaw. Discussed difficulty of reestablishing wetlands on top of the cap on the slope.
State does allow permanent alterations that are result of capping. No place else to
reestablish. Capping pretty much everything on site. Can't pull waste back because
need to put it somewhere. Would require steeper slopes to move waste back.
However, this is bad section to use retaining walls. Couldn't withstand earthquake.
Process - will provide written responses as early as June 13 for June 20 meeting. Will
give answers where possible or say what will still be doing.
Eaton emphasized she is not looking for them to respond point by point to the items in
her memo. The intent was to show areas where the filing needed clarification or to correct
inconsistencies. Just make sure to take care of them.
Brad said they would appreciate if commission would be willing to issue OOC prior to
submittal of CAAA.
Paul Ozarowski, H&A, said the CAAA is comprised of:
l) Evaluation of alternatives for landfill gas mitigation. They have collected
additional gas data to refine gas generation model and make more accurate
predictions. Approach to collecting gas, which will be flared in an enclosed flue
near the eastern property line. Expect enclosed flare will be selected approach.
2) Evaluation of Walkers' Brook sediments and whether mitigation necessary. CDM
report may exist, but doesn't know how far along it is.
3) Final portion of CAAA is a summary of proposed landfill closure and
redevelopment scheme.
Mr. Latham offered to have Paul Ozarowksi produce a written version of his remarks and
include the CDM reports.
How is collection of gas done? Below the liner, there will be a general gas collection
layer, a zone of sand leading to crushed stone. Trenches with perforated pipes are placed
here to collect the gas and convey them to the flare. Layout will be determined under
CAAA. How zones will be constructed. Anticipate all to be within piping; gas flow
induced by negative pressure, i.e., pumping. Flow of gas would not be impacted if there
IJ) n% =13q `41-i y
is settling of pipes? They are planning for low points to collect condensation. At this
point they do not plan any venting around perimeter but everything will be piped to a
flare station.
With regard to waiver requests on side slopes, asked for location of other landfill closures
where 2:1 vegetated side slopes were used, so we can visit and evaluate success.
Applicant said they would provide that information.
Eaton asked how they could maintain vegetation by cutting on slopes that are that steep
and asked whether a grass layer was appropriate and suggested they consider a ground
cover to provide stabilization and minimize maintenance required to control woody
growth.
Will Finch said he was inclined to grant waivers within the 25-foot ZNV and slope
waivers because handpicking trash in wetlands will improve wetlands that are there.
Eaton asked applicant to quantify ZNV gain and loss issues. As far as wetlands
replication, proper hydrology is the key. Other areas may revegetate on their own. Off
site mitigation should be looked at. She said she hasn't seen proposal for mitigation of
Walkers Brook Drive expansion impacts. Number of factual findings needed -
effectively deals with most of decisions due to capping. Administrator requested
applicant submit a list of changes to plan so we can see what is different on new plans.
Doug asked questions on water treatment report. Does it include sludge from plant?
Paul Ozarowski said the sludge is predominantly iron and the metals taken out of water
and is the flocculent that settles out at the basins. Material will be placed under the cap.
After reviewing future meeting agendas, it was decided to schedule an additional meeting
for this project on June 20 meeting at 7 p.m. Pat Lloyd moved and Doug Greene
seconded a motion to continue the Public Hearing until June 20 at 7:00 pm. Vote: 5-0 in
favor.
8:45 pm. 5-minute recess.
8:50 pm. Order of Conditions - DEP 270-350, RGB 2001-12 - Land between 51 and
67 Sanborn Lane. Reviewed draft order of conditions and amended it. Pat Lloyd moved
and Will Finch seconded a motion to approve and issue the draft Order of Conditions as
amended. Vote: 4-0 in favor.
9:50 pm. Request for Partial Certificate of Compliance, DEP #270-303, RGB#1998-
13, 24 Harold Avenue, Arthur Giangrande. Discussed that applicant shouldn't have dug
foundation before got partial Certificate of Compliance. The berm in back is higher than
it is supposed to be. They did plant 9 shrubs. There may have been seed in swale area,
but nothing is growing there and it is covered with wood chips, which were not
authorized. Berm itself was supposed to be seeded. We will be meeting again next
Wednesday if he wants to finish required work and ask again.
/l'J /iv ~3c'12-~~ S
Miscellaneous:
Discussed possible violation next to 38 Cross Street. Administrator will do site visit.
School appeal. Applicant needs to modify local order to confonn to DEP Superceding
Order of Conditions.
The Board of Selectmen have received a request from N. Reading Auto & Recon., Inc.
d/b/a Gray's Towing, at 4 Minot St., class 3 motor vehicle license. Administrator will
see what wetlands issues there may be and send memo to Selectmen. Also will contact
owner for site visit.
Adjournment. There being no further business, Patricia Lloyd moved and Doug Greene
seconded a motion to adjourn at 10:00 pm. Vote 4-0.
Respectfully submitted,
Nancy L. Eaton, Chair, from notes taken by Patricia Lloyd, Commissioner