Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-03-21-CONCOM-min TOWN OF LEXINGTON, MASSACHUSETTS CONSERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES Tuesday March 21, 2017 6:30 P.M. Hudson Room, Cary Hall 1605 Massachusetts Ave Chair Philip Hamilton opened the meeting at 6:33pm in the Hudson Room of Cary Hall Commissioners Present: Phil Hamilton, Duke Bitsko, Alex Dohan, David Langseth, Kevin Beuttell Others present: Karen Mullins, Conservation Administrator and Casey Hagerty, Conservation Department Assistant 6:33pm Request for Insignificant Plan Change at 91 Woburn Street DET 16-26 Ms. Mullins explained that the owner of this property wants to add a small retaining wall to the side of the property to create more level land directly next to the house. The commission explained that they were concerned about how this would affect the trees in that area and would like to do a site visit before they make a decision. Request for Insignificant Plan Change at 29 Fairlawn Lane, DEP 201-1016, BL 973 This will be discussed at the next meeting. Request for Insignificant Plan Change at 10 Norton Road, DEP 201-1033, BL 991 Ms. Mullins explained that the applicant want to add a small retaining wall where there is an existing cut in the grade. The commission asked Ms. Mullins what the purpose of the project is. She explained that the applicant wishes to correct the grading without bringing in any fill. She stated that they will loam and seed both above and below the wall. Motion to approve the insignificant plan change made by Mr. Bitsko and seconded by Mr. Beuttell. Vote: 5-0 in favor. Request for Insignificant Plan Change at 85 Ward St, DEP 201-1040, BL 997 This will be discussed at the next meeting. 6:48pm Issue Certificates of Compliance at 6 Bryant Road, DEP 201-1019, BL 976 Tom Ryder, Project Engineer Ms. Mullins explained that this project has followed up with the necessary analysis and the Town Engineer has approved the project. The only outstanding issue is that the down spouts have not been installed. The commission decided they will issue the Certificate of Compliance, but not release it until the down spouts have been installed. Motion to issue the Certificate of Compliance made by Mrs. Dohan and seconded by Mr. Beuttell. Vote: 5-0 in favor. Issue Certificates of Compliance at 279 Emerson Road, DEP 201-923, BL 883 This will be discussed at the next meeting. 6:50pm Issue Order of Conditions at DEP 201-1049, BL 1006, 99 Hancock Street, the Diamond School Motion to issue an Order of Conditions made by Mrs. Dohan and seconded by Mr. Beuttell. Vote: 5-0 in favor. Issue Order of Conditions at DEP 201-1046, BL 1003, 52 Turning Mill Road Mrs. Dohan recused herself from this discussion. The commission discussed the alternatives that were presented to them. The commission expressed concern with how close the proposed addition is to the wetlands. The commission also discussed the possibility of approving another alternative proposed by the applicant. However, they did not feel they had sufficient information to accept another proposal. Motion to deny the Order of Conditions made by Mr. Beuttell and seconded by Mr. Bitsko. Vote: 3:1 with Mr. Langseth voting against. 7:04pm Request to extend Order of Conditions for one year at 18 Constitution Road, DEP 201-884, BL 843 Ms. Mullins explained that the applicant is requesting a one year extension for their permit. They have already received a one year extension. Some work has begun, but the project is not complete. Motion to extend the Order of Conditions for one year made by Mr. Langseth and seconded by Mr. Beuttell. Vote: 5-0 in favor. 7:06pm Motion to approve minutes of 1/31/2017 made by Mr. Langseth and seconded by Mrs. Dohan. Vote: 5-0 in favor. Motion to approve minutes of 3/6/2017 made by Mr. Langseth and seconded by Mrs. Dohan. Vote: 5-0 in favor. 7:07pm NEW MEETINGS/HEARINGS DET 16-8 RDA, 90 Grant Street Owner/applicant: J and N Design and Build Project: Request to amend approve drainage plan Motion to continue the hearing to 4/4/2017 at the applicant’s request made by Mr. Langseth and seconded by Mrs. Dohan. Vote: 5-0 in favor. 7:08pm DEP 201-XXXX, BL XXXX NOI, 758 Marrett Road Owner/Applicant: Minuteman Vocational Regional and Technical High School Project: Raze and rebuild of existing school building and associated site work Stephen Garvin, Samiotes Consultants This site straddles the Town of Line of Lexington and Lincoln. Mr. Garvin explained that in 2014, the Conservation Commission issued an ORAD for the site. They are designing this project around the wetlands confirmed in that ORAD. In Lexington, the scope of this project is the reworking of the entrance road, the demolition of the existing school building, and the creation of athletic fields. The new school will be built in Lincoln. In terms of phasing, the first step would be to construct the new school in Lincoln which will be completed in the fall of 2019. Following the completion of the new school, the existing school would be demolished, and then the fields would be constructed. The existing drain lines will be extended to the new school. Erosion controls have been proposed for the entire site. A SWIPP for the entire site will be submitted as well. Some trees are proposed to be removed, but are trying to keep as many trees as possible. They have run the stormwater calculations and the project will meeting the Lexington by-law in both Lexington and Lincoln. Mr. Hamilton entered the Planning Board Comments into the record. Questions and comments from the Commission: The Commission asked if they explored the option of pulling the road back from the areas in which it is already encroaching within the wetlands. Mr. Garvin explained that they are going to leave the existing road in the same location to minimize disturbance. The commission asked if it was possible to relocate the field access road away from the wetlands. Mr. Garvin stated that they will look into this option, but they are somewhat limited because of shape of the fields. The commission asked if the stormwater analysis was just for the Lexington side of the project. Mr. Garvin stated that it was just for the Lexington side, but there will be a peer reviewer who will look at both sides of the project. The commission asked Ms. Mullins for more details regarding the peer reviewer. She stated that they will be using the same peer reviewer as Lincoln, CEI, for continuity in the project. The Commission has used CEI for peer reviewing in the past. The commission asked if they are using any green infrastructure on the site. Mr. Garvin stated that most of the BMPs are in Lincoln, but they are proposing several to be green infrastructure. The commission stated that they noticed several invasive species were proposed to be planted. Mr. Garvin stated they will work with the Town of Lincoln, the School environmental programs, and the National Park service to revise this list. They added that they will look at the Lexington List of Native Species. The commission asked to see a copy of the snow management plan. The applicant stated that they will provide the commission with the plan. The commission asked if invasive species management was proposed as part of this plan. Mr. Garvin stated that the school environmental program will be implementing a program. Samiotes will work with the school and the National Park service to create the plan. The commission asked what road construction traffic will use. The applicant explained that the construction vehicles will use the existing road and they will resurface the road after. Motion to continue the hearing to 4/18/17 at the applicant’s request made by Mrs. Dohan and seconded by Mr. Beuttell. Vote: 5-0 in favor. 7:54pm DEP 201-XXXX, BL XXXX NOI, 24 Constitution Road Owner/applicant: Tracy Kemp Project: Home addition Markus Pinney, Environmental Consultant and Peter Gammie, Project Engineer Mr. Pinney explained that the applicant is proposing to two build two additions to their existing home. In the rear of the property, there is a steep slope that drops off to a wetland. The proposed additions would be no closer to the wetlands than the existing home. Mr. Gammie stated that because of shallow ground water, they were limited as to what stormwater mitigation options they had. They have chose to propose a rain garden in the rear of the property. All of the roof run off from the existing house will make its way to the rain garden. There is an existing stormwater system that is no longer functioning and will be taken off line. Pervious pavers will be used for the driveway and patio. Mr. Hamilton entered the engineering report into the record. Questions and comments from the Commission: The commission asked why the wetlands line has changed since it was last reviewed in 2012. Mr. Pinney explained that the change is very obvious on site and he wants to schedule a site visit. The Commission agreed to visit the site on 4/1/17. The commission asked if the back patio was approved under the initial Order of Conditions. Mr. Pinney explained that it was not. The commission requested that the stormwater calculations be rerun to not include the patio in the existing conditions. The applicant agreed. The commission asked for some clarifying details regarding the rain garden. The commission asked the applicant to come with more details regarding what type of vegetation they are proposing for the rain garden. The commission stated that they were concerned because the condition of the rain garden will vary from wet to dry frequently. Mr. Pinney stated that he will do more research into appropriate vegetation. The commission asked that downspout overflows be added to the plans. The applicant agreed. Motion to continue the hearing to 4/4/17 at the applicant’s request made by Mr. Beuttell and seconded by Mr. Langseth. Vote: 5-0 in favor. CONTINUED MEETINGS/HEARINGS 8:21 pm DEP 201-1050, BL 1007 NOI, Route 2 Applicant/owner: Mass Department of Transportation Project: Stormwater management improvements Motion to continue the hearing to 4/4/17 at the applicant’s request made by Mr. Beuttell and seconded by Mrs. Dohan. Vote: 5-0 in favor. 8:21pm DEP 201-1048, BL 1005 NOI, 85 Kendall Road Owner/applicant: Feng Gao Project: Home addition Motion to continue the hearing to 4/4/17 at the applicant’s request made by Mr. Beuttell and seconded by Mrs. Dohan. Vote: 5-0 in favor. 8:22pm DEP 201-939, BL 898 30 Oakmount Circle, Amendment to Order of Conditions Applicant/owner: Copley Design Modification to the house footprint and watershed areas and realign drainage systems Request to extend Order of Conditions, DEP File # 201-939, BL 898, Oakmount Circle due to expire on September 8, 2017 for one year to September 8, 2018 Scott Kenton, owner and Dan Orwig- project engineer Motion to extend the Order of Conditions for one year made by Mr. Langseth and seconded by Mr. Beuttell. Vote: 5-0 Mr. Orwig explained that some changes have been made to the plan since they last were in front of the commission to appease some of the abutters. A small wall with some plantings have been added to the side of the house to create a buffer between properties. The drainage system has been slightly modified to replace the infiltration system in the driveway with a retention area that will discharge to the infiltration system in the street. Mike Julian of EagleBrook Engineering, who is the peer reviewer engineer, explained that the neighbors are supportive of the changes in the project. Questions and comments from the commission: The commission asked for details regarding the wall between properties. Mr. Orwig explained that it is a small one foot decorative wall with plantings on top. The commission requested that the geotextile fabric be removed from the bottom of the infiltration system. Mr. Orwig agreed. Motion to close the hearing made by Mr. Beuttell and seconded by Mr. Langseth. Vote: 5-0 in favor. 8:37pm DEP 201-1051, BL 1008 NOI, 85 Grant Street Applicant/owner: Wilson Project: Home addition Markus Pinney- wetlands scientist and Peter Gammie- project engineer Mr. Gammie explained that since the last time they have been to the commission they have revised the plans to show that there will be no expansion of the existing driveway. He also recalculated the whole site as one watershed and is able to account for all existing and proposed impervious area. Mr. Gammie stated that they are now proposing two smaller infiltration units rather than the originally proposed one large one that was within the drainage easement. Mr. Hamilton entered the engineering report into the record. Questions and comments from the Commission: The commission asked if the proposed addition has a basement. Mr. Gammie explained that the majority of the addition will have a crawl space. He stated that they have pushed the infiltrators as far from the basement as possible. Motion to close the hearing made by Mr. Beuttell and seconded by Mr. Langseth. Vote: 5-0 in favor. 8:49pm Schedule Site Visits for the 4/4/2017 Meeting Site visits were scheduled for Saturday 4/1/17 at 9:30am. Reports Mr. Langseth asked for clarification regarding how many dogs are allowed per person on Conservation Land. Ms. Mullins answered that two dogs per person are allowed. The commission asked Ms. Mullins when the Conservation Area parking lots would be plowed. Ms. Mullins says that she has been in contact with the DPW to get this addressed. Mr. Bitsko asked for more details regarding a report he read in the newspaper about trees being cut down on Conservation Land. Ms. Mullins explained that this cutting was done on school property, but they are aware of the problem as well as the police. Mrs. Dohan reported that the GCC has been working with the developers of the Grove Street project about trail access. 8:56pm Discussion of support for Annual Town Meeting Warrant Articles Mr. Hamilton reported that there are three articles that may be of interest to the Conservation Commission: some changes to the tree by-law, addition of new scenic roads, and provisions to blasting permits. After some discussion, the Commission decided that just the tree article is within their purview and they support the article. 9:23pm Steep Slope Regulations The commission discussed some of the edits that have been made to the proposed regulation. They decided that they want to tighten up with description, change the example calculations, and change the way one would measure the distance between contour lines. The commission decided that they need to look into past scenarios where this regulation would have been implemented and examine how it would have been used. Mr. Bitsko decided to explore some examples. The commission discussed what the goals of this regulation would be and when it should be implemented. 9:43pm Motion to adjourn made by Mr. Langseth and seconded by Mr. Beuttell. Vote: 5-0 in favor.