Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-09-19-CONCOM-min TOWN OF LEXINGTON, MASSACHUSETTS CONSERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES Monday September 19, 2016 6:30 P.M. Parker Room, Town Office Building 1625 Massachusetts Ave Chair Phil Hamilton opened the meeting at 6:30pm in the Parker Room of the Town Office Building Commissioners Present: Kevin Beuttell, Dick Wolk, David Langseth, Phil Hamilton, Duke Bitsko Others present: Karen Mullins, Conservation Administrator and Casey Hagerty, Conservation Department Assistant 6:30pm Dunback Meadow Community Gardens Relocation Vote Mr. Hamilton explained that a few months ago, the Commission voted to relocate the Dunback Meadow Community Garden. He stated that they have been consulting with gardeners to find an alternative site for the garden. Mr. Hamilton told the commission that they are now considering expanding the Idylwilde Garden. Mr. Jordan McCarron presented to the Commission two plans with potential garden sites to demonstrate that there is plenty of room to expand the garden at Idylwilde. The commission asked Mr. McCarron if he was concerned about parking at the site because of the increase in gardeners. Mr. McCarron stated he does not believe that it will be a problem. It will be possible to expand parking if a problem arises. The commission asked for clarification regarding the schedule. Mr. Hamilton stated that next year, Dunback Meadow gardeners would be able to select a plot at the new garden. The Dunback Meadow garden will continue to stay open next year also but will be closed at the end of next season. Questions and comments from the audience: Ricky Pappo of Blossomcrest Road explained that she is confused about the timing. She asked what will happen if the new garden is not ready next year. Mr. Hamilton explained that the schedule is not set in stone. The plan is to adjust the move from the Dunback Meadow to coincide with the Idylwilde Garden expansion. He explained that for the 2017 season, it would be possible for gardeners to keep a plot at each garden so that they can have a successful growing season regardless of whether the Idylwilde expansion is ready at the beginning of the 2017 growing season. Gardeners in that position will pay the fee for only one plot. Ali Lawlor, a Dunback Meadow Gardener, asked about who will be doing the work and how much it will cost. Mr. McCarron stated that at this meeting, the commission is just voting to relocate the garden. The process will be similar to that employed in moving the Idylwilde Garden several years ago. Jessie Brandon, a Dunback gardener, explained that he is concerned about the amount of poison ivy at the site. He also asked that the commission considering keeping part of the new garden a no till garden. Paul Carter, an Idylwilde gardener, explained that he is not concerned with parking at the site because most people walk to the garden. He also stated that he would like to see a new fence installed around the existing garden as part of the project. Winifred McGowan, a Dunback gardener, stated that she is concerned about poison ivy at the site. Motion to approve Idylwilde as the destination of for the Dunback Meadow Garden relocation made by Mr. Langseth and seconded by Mr. Beuttell. Vote: 5-0 in favor. 6:58pm Enforcement Action at 476 Bedford Street Brian Holub, Lexington-Bedford Animal Hospital Ms. Mullins explained that last year, the commission issued a Negative Determination for work at this site. However, she recently noticed that there was clearing along the parking lot in the wetlands. Mr. Hobluc explained that he was under the impression that he has permission to do some landscaping work on the site. He explained that he has regularly trimmed the plants that block the exit of the facility. He stated that he plans to plant some perennial plants in the area. The commission asked what kind of plants he was planning on planting. He stated that he was working with a landscaper to create a plant list. The commission requested that the plants in the 25 ft. buffer be native species and the final planting list for the entire site be approved by them. 7:17pm DEP File No. 201-XXXX, BL XXX NOI, Shaker Glen Applicant: Jordan McCarron, Lexington Conservation Division Owner: Town of Lexington Project: Proposed trail improvements Documents: NOI package and plans Jordan McCarron- Lexington Conservation Division Mr. McCarron explained that he is presenting this project on behalf of the Conservation Stewards. He stated that this is a fairly simple project. They are planning to relocate a section of trail that goes straight down a bank and over an old bridge. They would create 57 feet of new trail and replace the bridge with an updated boardwalk. Mr. McCarron went on to explain that they would then renaturalize the old trail. Mr. McCarron told the commission that this project rose to the top of the priority list because a new ACROSS route will be crossing over that section of trail and there is an Eagle Scout who is interested in doing a boardwalk project in that area. Questions and comments from the commission: The commission asked who would supervise the Boy Scout. Mr. McCarron explained that one of the stewards would supervise. The commission stated that they were concerned about stabilizing the old trail. They suggested putting check dams along the trail to prevent erosion. The commission requested that the Stewards explore removing a concrete structure by the stream. Mr. McCarron explained that because the Eagle Scout will be funding the project, he is not sure there will be funds to do that. The commission suggested that he keep this in mind for a future project. Motion to close the hearing made by Mr. Langseth and seconded by Mr. Beuttell. Vote: 5-0 in favor. 7:30pm DET 16-36 RDA, 11 White Pine Lane Applicant/ Owner: Matthew and Sarah Daggett Project: Proposed geothermal installation Documents: RDA package 8/30/2016, updated sequencing plan 9/19/2016 Matthew Daggett: Homeowner Mr. Daggett explained that he wishes to install three geothermal wells in his front yard to provide energy for his home. All work will be done outside of the 50 ft. buffer and in front of the existing house. Mr. Daggett walked the commission through the phasing sequence of the project which included deck removal, some tree removal, erosion control installation, and drilling. Questions and comments from the commission: The commission stated that they are recommending additional erosion controls to extend around the deck. The commission recommend that the applicant check in with DPW regarding the sidewalks. The commission stated that they require erosion controls before any work begins. The commission explained that they were concerned about water that may be discovered while drilling. The commission explained that they want a plan in place rather than putting the water down the catch basin. The applicant agreed to stop the drilling if water was discovered and bring in a water truck. Motion to issue a Negative Determination with Conditions made by Mr. Wolk and seconded by Mr. Langseth. Vote: 5-0 in favor. 7:48pm DEP File No. 201-1005, BL 962 Amended Order of Conditions, 60 Hartwell Ave Applicant/owner: Town of Lexington Project: Amend approved plan Steve Weihe: Weston and Sampson Mr. Weihe went explained each of the questions that were raised at the last meeting. He clarified that questions that the commission had regarding the road grading. Mr. Weihe provided the commission with a plan with the final design dimensions as well as a plan showing the utility polls that were approved with the original filing. Questions and comments from the commission: The commission asked why the transformer pad has to be oriented in the orientation shown on the plan. Mr. Wiehe explained that there were some limitations has to how the overheard wires can be spread. The commission explained to the applicant that the 100 foot river front buffer is extremely important to them. If there are ways of relocating the pad outside of the 100 ft. buffer, they should be explored. The commission requested that the applicant consult with the electrical engineer to look at options regarding the transformer pad. Motion to continue the hearing to 10/14/2016 made by Mr. Wolk and seconded by Mr. Langseth. Vote: 5-0 in favor. 8:08pm DEP File No. 201-XXXX, BL XXX NOI, 118 Burlington Street Applicant: Scott Seaver, Seaver Construction Owner: Paul and Ellen B Perkins Project: Raze and rebuild of a Single Family Home Documents: updated planting plan Mary Trudeau: Wetlands scientist Ms. Trudeau explained that she has submitted an updated plan showing six oaks in the restoration area at the request of the Commission. Questions and comments from the commission: The commission asked Ms. Trudeau if she was able to find evidence of a shed closer to the wetlands than the existing shed. She explained that she was able to see evidence in some aerials, but the trees in the area prevented her from finding a good shot. The commission discussed whether or not to allow the shed to be kept. They were concerned with setting a precedent, but they also recognized that sometimes they allow an existing encroachment in return for mitigation. The commission stated that more research should be done into finding evidence of a former shed closer to the wetlands. Ms. Mullins explained that the DEP has not assigned this case a file number yet, so the hearing cannot be closed. Motion to continue the hearing to 10/14/2016 at the applicant’s request made by Mr. Beuttell. Vote: 5-0 in favor. 8:21pm DEP File No. 201-1033, BL 991 NOI, 10 Norton Road Applicant: Sramowicz Development Owner: Cash Homes LLC Project: Raze and rebuild of a Single Family Home and roadway improvements to Norton Road Documents: Correspondence from the Friends of the Arlington Great Meadow, Updated plan Nick Pauling- GPR Engineering Mr. Pauling provided the commission with an updated plan which shows the structures being moved two feet further from the Riverfront zone. He also has added an additional sump structure and a split rail fence down the property line. He explained that he has been in contact with the Town of Arlington about restoring the riverfront area on their Great Meadow property. Questions and comments from the commission: The commission explained they will need something in writing authorizing the applicant to do restoration work on the Arlington Great Meadow.. Ms. Mullins reported that she has been in contact with the Friends of the Arlington Great Meadow and they have requested that the house be outside of the 100 ft. buffer. They expressed that they were in favor of the restoration portion of the project. The commission was not sure if a split rail fence was enough to separate the properties. They discussed the option of a low stone wall. The commission stated that they are not getting the information with sufficient time to review it. The commission stated that they would like to see the entire house outside of the 100 ft. riverfront buffer. The commission requested that the applicant look at making architectural changes. Motion to continue the hearing to 10/4/2016 at the applicant’s request made by Mr. Langseth and seconded by Mr. Beuttell. Vote: 5-0 in favor. Pending Continued 8:47pm Enforcement Action at 58 Ivan Street Ms. Mullins explained that the commission approved a second story addition at this location through an RDA earlier in the year. She stated that now the applicant has demoed the porch and dug new footings. There were no erosion controls in place. The contractor, Mr. Mark Schulman stated that no new footings have been dug yet. He also explained that he misunderstood what the commission told him. He understood that he could do other work on the site as long as it stayed in the same location and same size. Mr. Schulman added that the erosion controls would be in place this week. Questions and comments from the commission: The commission discussed whether or not this would trigger the need for stormwater management. Because the covered porch is over 100 sq. feet it would. The commission instructed to get a wetland delineation done and then file an RDA or NOI based on the results. 9:04pm Release tri-partite agreement for Mulberry Lane (DEP File No 201-758, BL 716) Ms. Mullins explained that this project required a bond. The commission has released most of the bond and the applicant is now requesting that the last portion on it be released. Motion to release the tri-partite agreement made by Mr. Wolk and seconded by Mr. Beuttell. Vote: 5-0 in favor. Approve Minutes from 8/8/2016 Motion to approve minutes made by Mr. Wolk and seconded by Mr. Beuttell. Vote: 5-0 in favor. Approve Minutes from 8/25/2016 The commission decided to take this up at the next meeting. Issue Order of Resource Area Delineation, Grove Street, DEP File No. 201-1032, BL 990 Mr. Hamilton explained that he has watched the video from the last meeting and has signed the affidavit. Motion to issue the Order of Resource Delineation as modified made by Mr. Langseth and seconded by Mr. Bitsko. Vote: 5-0 in favor. Schedule Site Visits for the 10/4/2016 Meeting Site visits were scheduled for 10/4/2016. Issue Certificate of Compliance for 139 Grove Street, DEP File No. 201-1002, BL 959 The commission reported that there was a lot of new growth since it was last inspected and that there appeared to be no erosion during the recent rain. Motion to issue the Certificate of Compliance made by Mr. Bitsko and seconded by Mr. Langseth. Vote: 5-0 in favor. Issue Partial Certificate of Compliance for 230 Lincoln Street, DEP File No. 201-995, BL 952 The commission discussed what the ongoing conditions for this project should be. The decided on going monitoring reports for two years. Motion to issue the Partial Certificate of Compliance made by Mr. Beuttell and seconded by Mr. Bitsko. Vote: 5-0 in favor. 9:45pm Motion to adjourn made by Mr. Wolk and seconded by Mr. Beuttell. Vote: 5-0 in favor. Respectfully submitted, Casey Hagerty Conservation Department Assistant Approved 10/17/2016