Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-01-22-CONCOM-min TOWN OF LEXINGTON, MASSACHUSETTS CONSERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES Monday January 22, 2018 6:30 P.M. Parker Room, Town Office Building 1625 Massachusetts Ave Chair Philip Hamilton opened the meeting at 6:31pm in the Parker Room of the Town Office Building Commissioners Present: Phil Hamilton, David Langseth, Duke Bitsko, Alex Dohan, Kevin Beuttell, Dick Wolk, Ruth Ladd Others present: Karen Mullins, Conservation Administrator and Casey Hagerty, Conservation Department Assistant 6:31pm Discussion of Trust Funds with David Williams Mr. Williams provided the commission with an update of all the funds available in each trust fund. He emphasized that the commission should do more to advertise the trust funds and get more people to donate. Mr. Williams also mentioned that the commission should consider starting a new trust fund. The commission asked if all trust fund expenditures must be approved by them. Mr. Williams explained that they do. The commission stated that they would consider if they need another trust fund. 6:46pm Request to Amend Order of Conditions, 201-1058, BL 1015, 167, 173, 177 Cedar St, ROW and utility infrastructure construction Michael Novak, Meridian Associates, explained that he and his client are requesting the commission to consider amending the order of conditions. As the planning and construction have been moving along, there are a few changes to the limit of work line and drainage system they need to change. He stated that they also want to include the language of the restrictive covenants on lots 7, 8, and 9 in addition to lots 6 and 10 which may allow lots 7, 8, and 9 to be developed without separate Orders of Conditions. The commission stated that they would hear those changes as an amendment rather than a new notice of intent. 6:54pm Wright Farm Parcel 2 House Lot, Update on LexHAB revised lot line request and Town Meeting Warrant Article Proposal Ms. Mullins explained that a meeting was held with various town staff and officials, including Pat Nelson and Lester Savage representing LexHAB and Philip Hamilton and Alex Dohan representing Conservation Commission, to discuss the proposed changes to the rear lot line for the house parcel. The consensus of the group resulting from the meeting was to update the ANR Plan with the readjusted rear lot line for the house lot as requested by LexHAB and proceed with a warrant article request for Town Meeting approval at the 2018 Annual Town Meeting as tentatively scheduled. Ms. Mullins informed the Commission that the need assessment and spring open house plans could take place as planned via a memo request to the Selectmen with the details of the event for their official approval. Ms. Mullins further added that the process for the transferring of the lots was also laid out during the meeting. 6:59pm Review Draft Buffer Zone Performance Standard Section 5(5) Amendment Proposal This will be discussed at the next meeting on 2/5/2018. New Hearings 7:03pm DEP 201-1087, BL 1044 NOI, Off Marrett Road, Old Reservoir Owner/Applicant: Town of Lexington Project: Dam Restoration Mel Higgins- Weston and Sampson, Michael Sprague- Town of Lexington engineering Mr. Higgins explained that the Old Reservoir dam has been inspected and found to be in poor condition. Trees and shrubs are growing on all sides of the dam, rip rap is sporadic, and there is undercutting. They are proposing to restore the dam to bring it up to safety. As part of this process, they will remove all the trees and shrubs on the dam. In total 96 trees will be removed. Ten trees will be replanted on site. Regarding will take place on both slopes of the dam. Erosion controls are proposed and all storage will be outside of the 100 ft. buffer. He stated that the majority of the disturbance to the wetlands and land under water will be temporary, but there will be some permanent impacts as a result of the regarding of the slopes. They are proposing a 2:1 restoration on another part of the site. Mr. Hamilton entered the engineering report into the record. Questions and comments from the commission: The commission stated that they want more information regarding the wetland delineation. The commission asked if why the slope needs to be 3:1. The applicant explained that the slope has to be mowed and maintained. The commission asked the applicant to explore different option for the slope steepness in order to avoid permanent disturbance to the wetlands. The commission asked the applicant to look at different seedmix options that include more pollinator species. The commission asked if they will have to draw the reservoir down for construction. The applicant stated that they are not drawing it down because they would like to keep the beach open during construction. The commission asked if the applicant has considered any public feedback regarding construction. The commission stated it is a popular spot for fishing. The applicant stated that they will research this further. The commission stated that they were concerned about the amount of trees being taken down. They explained that they would like to see the same amount of trees replanted. The applicant stated that they will talk to the school department about some additional plantings on the adjoining school property. The commission asked the applicant to talk to the recreation department about potential impacts to the disc golf course. Motion to continue the hearing to 2/5/18 at the applicant's request made by Mr. Beuttell and seconded by Mr. Langseth. Vote: 7-0 in favor. 7:37pm DEP 201-1082, BL 1039 NOI, 20 Pelham Rd, Lexington Children's Place Owner/applicant: Town of Lexington Project: New school building and associated site work Fred King- Schofield Brother's Engineering, Rick Rice- DiNisco Associates, Bill Brown- landscape architect. Mr. King stated that since the last meeting, they have adjusted the plans to reflect the requested changes. A site place took place and one flag was changed. The commission also viewed the vernal pool and felt comfortable with the location. He stated that they are considering some sort of demarcation for the vernal pool which can be added in the future. They are also working out the details for an easement over the drain line from the neighboring property. Details were provided regarding the permeable play area cover as well as maintenance policies. More details were provided regarding the tees and contours were added to the planting plan. Questions and comments from the commission: The commission stated that they would like to see plugs planted in the bio retention basins in addition to only seed mixes. The applicant agreed. The commission asked for additional trees to be planted in the disturbed buffer zone on the down-gradient side of the circular emergency access drive to the rear of the new school and demarcation with labelled bounds or monuments to protect the do not disturb buffer zone to the wetlands and vernal pool from future encroachment. The applicant agreed. Motion to close the hearing made by Mr. Beuttell and seconded by Mr. Wolk. Vote: 6-0 in favor. 8:10pm DEP 201-1075, BL 1032 ANRAD, Dunham and Webb Street Owner: Lawrence Trebino Applicant: Angie Kavlakian Project: Confirmation of wetlands line Jim DeCoulas- DeCoulas and Associates Mr. DeCoulas stated that he has received the report from Peter Fletcher, the peer review consultant hired by the commission, and he agrees with the report regarding the wetland boundary delineation based on the hydric soil criteria. He stated that they do not agree with Lexington's Bylaw definition for wetlands based on the one parameter method of dominant wetland plants and submitted a letter dated January 22, 2018 to the Conservation Commission to that affect. Questions and comments from the commission: The commission stated that the bylaw definition defines how to delineate a wetlands boundary under the bylaw, which defines the boundary based on the more conservative parameter either where the soils are hydric or where the vegetation meets wetland plant species if the boundary differs. The Commission consistently reviews wetland boundaries in accordance with the bylaw definition. Questions and comments from the audience: Meryl Jane Epstien, Webb Street, asked what defines agricultural disturbance. Mr. Hamilton explained that the definition of agricultural disturbance would not factor into determining the wetlands boundary line. Motion to close the hearing made by Mr. Wolk and seconded by Mr. Beuttell. Vote: 7-0 in favor. 8:25pm DEP 201-1089, BL 1043 NOI, 45, 65, and 75 Hayden Ave Owner/applicant: King Street properties Project: New office building, garage, and associated site work Doug Hartnett- High Point Engineering, Rob Albrow- King Street Properties, John Rockwood- Echotech Mr. Hartnett explained that the project has been submitted for peer review and they expect to have comments prior to the next meeting. Since the last meeting, they have addressed some of the issues brought up by the commission. They are working on the design of the footbridges and will provide more details. They have addressed the concerns regarding shadowing of the wetland and have shown that there will only be 500 sq. ft. of shadowing in the wetlands throughout the day. They are going to be creating 1800 sq. ft. of additional wetland through the daylighting process. They also stated that they are going to be speaking with the Army Corps of Engineers regarding the stream channel work to determine if federal permit needed in the next days. Mr. Hartnett stated that under the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the town, they offered an additional Conservation Restriction to the town. They have revised the CR area and increased the size of the area to better reflect the sketch the Commission originally prepared for the initial MOU discussions. This CR will offer good opportunities for trail connections and wetland buffers. They are working with their attorney regarding the final language for reserved rights to maintain existing utilities and the sewer easement. Questions and comments from the commission: The commission asked what time of year the shadow study was done in. Mr. Hartnett stated that the study reflected the Summer Solstice in June. The commission asked that he look at other times of year as well. The commission asked if there is any discussion of putting new utilities in the CR. The applicant explained that they have no plans for new utilities, but want to have the option in case there is an issue in the future. They will work with their lawyer on this language. Motion to continue the hearing to 2/5/18 at the applicant's request made by Mr. Beuttell and seconded by Ms. Dohan. Vote: 7-0 in favor. 8:54pm DEP 201-1089, BL 1046 NOI, 20 Cooke Road Owner/applicant: 20 Cooke Road LLC Project: Raze and rebuild SFD Chi Man- Hardy Engineering Group Mr. Man stated that his client is proposing to raze and rebuild a single family dwelling. The house will be outside the 25 ft. buffer, but portions of the house will extend within the 50 ft. buffer. Mr. Hamilton entered the engineering report into the record. Questions and comments from the commission: The commission asked if he captured the driveway runoff in his calculations. Mr. Man stated he did not but will re-run the calculations with that information. The commission discussed their setback regulations. They stated they need to be convinced with a preponderance of evidence as to why they would approve this project because the new structure is closer than 50 feet. They are not convinced with the current level of mitigation provided. They suggested exploring the restoration of the 25-foot buffer zone to the wetlands that is presently disturbed or contains lawn grass. Motion to continue the hearing at the applicant's request made by Ms. Ladd and seconded by Mr. Beuttell. Vote: 7-0 in favor. 9:17pm DEP 201-1088, BL 0145 ANOI, 246 Worthen Road East Owner/applicant: Mukund Srinivasan Project: Home addition Chi Man- Hardy Engineering Mr. Man explained that is client wants to build an addition on the rear of the house. The house does not have any wetlands, but is within the 100 ft. buffer zone to bordering land subject to flooding as defined in the bylaw. The FEMA flood elevations were surveyed in the field. They are proposing a stormwater system to capture the roof run off Mr. Hamilton entered the engineering report dated 1/17/2018 into the record. Questions and comments from the commission: The commission stated that he will need to submit new stormwater calculations to satisfy engineering. The applicant agreed. Motion to continue the hearing at the applicant's request made by Ms. Ladd and seconded by Mr. Beuttell. Vote: 7-0 in favor. 9:24pm DEP 201-1080, BL 1037 NOI, 81 Westview St. Owner: Cheryle West Applicant: Nash Quadir, KUQ Construction Project: Raze and rebuild SFD and associated site work Motion to continue the hearing at the applicant's request made by Mr. Wolk and seconded by Mr. Beuttell. Vote: 7-0 in favor. 9:25pm DEP File 201-1083, BL 1040 NOI, 55 Cary Ave Owner/applicant: Stephen Strafford Project: Raze and rebuild SFD Rich Kirby- LEC Environmental, Al Gala- Gala Simon Associates, Stephen Strafford- homeowner Mr. Kirby explained that since the last meeting, he has met on site with Karen Mullins to review the wetlands line with no snow on the ground. She confirmed that the wetlands line reflects hydric soil conditions. They have reconfigured the infiltration system and retaining wall to avoid any disturbance within the 25. Ft. buffer. FENO markers have been added as well as a poly liner to protect the retaining wall. Mr. Hamilton entered the engineering report dated into the record. Questions and comments from the commission: The commission asked about the location of the poly sheeting and the detail may conflict with proper wall drainage. The applicant explained it was added to ease the commissions concerns about water affecting neighboring properties. He stated that he will relocate the poly sheet to create a greater separation between the retaining wall to ensure the integrity of the retaining wall and required proper drainage behind the retaining wall. Questions and comments from the audience: Marty Berliner, 57 Cary Ave, asked how the existing grades will tie into the retaining wall as he was having difficulty visualizing how it would look from his property. Mr. Kirby explained the grades in relation to the proposed wall. Motion to close the hearing made by Mr. Wolk and seconded by Ms. Dohan. Vote: 7-0 in favor. 9:54pm Issue Order of Conditions: DEP 201-1079, BL 1036,7 Crosby Dive, Hastings School Motion to issue the order of conditions made by Mr. Wolk and seconded by Mr. Beuttell. Vote: 6-0 in favor. Mr. Langseth did not vote per the Mullins Rule. Issue Order of Conditions: DEP 201-1085, BL 1042, NOI, 6 Hancock Ave Motion to issue the order of conditions made by Mr. Wolk and seconded by Mr. Beuttell. Vote: 6-0 in favor. Mr. Langseth did not vote per the Mullins Rule. Issue Order of Conditions: DEP File 201-1081, BL 1038, 160 Lincoln Street Motion to issue the order of conditions made by Ms. Ladd and seconded by Mr. Beuttell. Vote: 6-0 in favor. Mr. Langseth did not vote per the Mullins Rule. 9:56pm Schedule Site Visits for the 2/5/2018 Meeting Site visits were scheduled for 2/3/2018 at 9am. 9:59pm Reports The commission discussed scheduling their annual dinner gathering. 10:14pm Motion to adjourn made by Mr. Wolk and seconded by Mr. Langseth. Vote: 7-0 in favor. Respectfully Submitted, Casey Hagerty Conservation Department Assistant Approved 3/5/2018