2011-01-11 CONCOM-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

MINUTES – LEXINGTON CONSERVATION COMMMISSION MEETING January 4, 2011 the Commission on permit system based on tonight’s comments and feedback from the Commission. Discussion: Wetland Protection Code (Bylaw) Regulation Amendments Documentation: Draft Regulations for Buffer Zone Performance Standards Section 5(2), 5(5)(B), 5(5)(C), and 5(6). Section 5(5)(B): Existing Structure Setback Performance Standard The Commission reviewed the draft language provided by Philip Hamilton. Comments from the Commission followed: Charlie Wyman is concerned that draft language is too prohibitive for difficult sites. The Commission referred to the recent drafted waiver section to address Charlie Wyman’s concern since the waiver section would be the default and next step if can’t comply with this section. David Langseth, as well as other commissioners, expressed support for the revised language and he provided edits for Philip Hamilton to incorporate and resend to the Commission for vote at a Public Hearing. Section 5(5)(C): Site Development and Landscaping Performance Standard The Commission reviewed the draft language provided by Charlie Wyman. Comments from the Commission followed: The Commission expressed support for the draft language amendments. Duke Bitsko expressed interest in incorporating standards to address wetland restoration in existing lawn areas. He would like to see standards regarding required plan details to submit and who should prepare the plan. The Commission discussed the two extremes of lawn restoration: less extreme is to stop mowing and allow reversion to wetlands over time and the most extreme is to require a professional signed and stamped plan with planting type, quantity and size to be implemented as part of the proposal. The Commission instructed Duke Bitsko to draft language to create a performance standard for requiring wetland restoration in lawn areas. Stewart Kennedy expressed a desire to incorporate demarcation of the critical edge/do not disturb limits, which the Commission agreed and requested Duke Bitsko incorporate language into his draft or into the existing commentary to address demarcation. Duke Bitsko will prepare draft as discussed and send to the Commission for further review at a future meeting before bringing to a vote at a public hearing. Section 5(2) and 5(6): Peak Rate and Pre-development Conditions Performance Standards The Commission reviewed updated draft language provided by David Langseth based on feedback from previous review meeting. Comments from the Commission followed: Charlie Wyman expressed his concern that draft language regarding pre-development conditions requiring treating impervious surfaces to be removed as open space in good condition under existing conditions is too prohibitive and may over reach the Commission’s authority. David Langseth responded that he disagreed with Charlie Wyman’s statement about the Commission not having authority and views it as a Policy decision of the Commission, which the other Commissioners agreed with David Langseth. 9:40 pm Motion to adjourn 6-0 in favor. Respectfully submitted by, Page 2 of 3