Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-07-11-CONCOM-min.pdf MINUTES - LEXINGTON CONSERVATION COMMISSION JULY 11, 2000 Commissioners present: Lisa Baci (8.25 pm), Duke Bitsko, Angela Frick, Philip Hamilton, Joyce Miller and Richard Wolk. Absent: Bebe Fallick. Others present: Marilyn Nordby and Linda Gaudet. Chairman Miller called the meeting to order at 7:50 p.m. in the Selectmen's Meeting Room, Town Office Building. Cont'd Hearing. 188 East Emerson Road. T &N. Colatosti, addition - 201-471 Mrs. Miller read a letter from the representative requesting that the hearing be continued in order to provide additional time for the redesign and review of the drainage system. It was moved, seconded and voted to continue the hearing to July 25, 2000, at 7.45 p.m. 132 Worthen Road. Landscape Plan—LSP#1-00 Mr. Hamilton reported that he and Mrs. Frick had inspected the site to discuss landscaping with the owners. They wished to landscape their back yard and remove some of the undergrowth in the natural area between their yard and the Upper Vine Brook which flows along the back property line. It was determined that the owners would not have to file with the Commission. However, a letter should be written specifying that no work is permitted within 50 feet of the brook; a hay bale line must be installed on the 50-foot line; removal of dead trees, brush and spreading top soil would be permitted on the house side of the hay bale line; a row of shrubs must be planted to protect the buffer zone; and a sign must be displayed denoting Conservation approval. Certificate of Compliance—58 Solomon Pierce Road—201 184 It was moved, seconded and voted to issue a Certificate of Compliance for lot 2, Pheasant Brook Estates, 58 Solomon Pierce Road. Conservation_RestrictionApproval - It_w_asmoved, seconded and voted to approve the Conservation Restriction for lot 1, Pheasant Brook Estates, 66 Solomon Pierce Road(201-211). Minutes - It was moved, seconded and voted to approve the minutes of the meeting held on June 6, 2000, as submitted. Maintenance - Conservation Areas - Ms.Nordby reported that in the absence of a summer crew this year, a young landscaper starting out in business has offered to clear trails, mow and rid areas of poison ivy in conservation areas at a reasonable charge. There is a possibility that the funds may come out of Town funds, otherwise funds may be used from the various Trust Funds available. It was moved, seconded and voted to approve the hiring of the landscaper to maintain the conservation areas this summer. He will be asked to start in Hayden Woods. MINUTES LEXINGTON CONSERVATION COMMISSION 7/11/00 PAGE 2 Warrant Article - It was decided that an Article should be submitted for next year's Town Meeting to allocate funds to hire a summer crew Lexington Christian Academy (201-428) - It was reported that a Prehearing Conference for the abutter's appeal of the Superseding Order issued by DEP for the school expansion will be held at the DEP Boston office next week. Lexington Guide to Conservation Land - Mrs. Frick reported that she has reviewed the new Guide and has some revisions before it is printed again. Mr. Bitsko offered assistance with map revisions. Site Visits - It was decided that Commissioners would do this on their own. (Ms. Baci arrived at 8.25 p.m.) Cont'd. Hearing, Reed's Brook cleaning, Town of Arlington - 201-470 8.30 pm Present: Kevin O'Brien and Alan McClennen, Town of Arlington; Gary Fallick, Commission representative, Jennifer Doyle-Breen and Tom Spearin, Metcalf& Eddy; Michael Lelyveld, William Toth, abutters. Others are listed in the file. Mr O'Brien gave an overview of the project to date and passed out information regarding the public wetlands hearing in Arlington on Thursday, July 20. Mr. O'Brien reported that on the last site visit he learned that Commissioner Bitsko works for Carol Johnson Architects and wanted everyone to be aware that this firm had done work on the landfill project during the early stages. One issue brought up at the site visit was that the Commission had not inspected the wetland flags for approval. He requested that the line be reviewed and certified as part of this project. Mrs. Miller said that if they are not approved, it can be so noted in the Order of Conditions. Mr. O'Brien said if it will not harm the project, this would be okay Jennifer Doyle-Breen reviewed the replication plan which was of concern to the Commission at the last meeting since it was taking place in Arlington to replicate for work done in Lexington. In addition to the discussion she noted that a description of this and the detention basin clan were included in the NOI. The replication area is a shelf at the end of the detention area, but will not be maintained as the detention area is. Reed's Brook will flow through the detention area and will continue to flow through it after the project is completed. The replication area will be planted with the prescribed wetlands plants. She passed out the requirements for the General Performance Standards and explained that because this is a limited project, the Commission may waive the General Performance Standards for such projects. Although they predict a loss of 7,000 s.f of wetland,this project meets the seven performance standard requirements listed on the sheet. She also distributed a letter clarifying minor revisions in the NOI. The area of state and federal vegetated wetland loss in Arlington was reevaluated and determined to be approximately 719 s.f. rather than 1,310 s.f. as stated on page A-29 of NOI. The size of the wetland replication area has been maintained at 10,400 s.f. in size. Therefore, there will be 30% more wetland created than lost, compared to the 20% buffer stated in the NOI. MINUTES LEXINGTON CONSERVATION COMMISSION 7/11/00 PAGE 3 In response to Commission questions, Ms. Doyle-Breen reiterated that the replication area is an additional component of the project and not counted in the detention area calculations. Although the wetlands area lost is in Lexington, the replication is limited to the project and the Town line should not be a separating factor. The performance standards require that it meets the seven conditions; it does not require that it be in the same Town. The elevation of the replication is similar, but not exactly the same as the area of loss. The vegetation along the bank is not being removed during the dredging. Mats will be placed over the banks for the equipment to travel on. Any vegetation impacted will be restored in that area. The contractor's work area will be confined to 10 feet on either side of the brook. Mr O'Brien asked what the problem is with the replication in Arlington. Mrs. Miller said she doesn't see any benefit to Lexington where 7,000 s.f. of wetland is being removed and we are limited to 5,000 s.f This number exceeds what is permitted in the Act. Only filling of very small areas has been permitted in Lexington. Commissioners told Mr O'Brien that the loss of wetland was the main objection to the project. Gary Fallick questioned whether the wetlands would be lost on the bank of the brook. In response to a question about water rising in the replication area, it was noted that it should exit within 48 hours. Attachment L shows the calculations of drawdown. There was discussion of the type of vegetation to plant on the banks after the work is completed. Mr. Bitsko said there may be alternatives to just an upland seed mix. Tom Spearin described the groundwater drawdown along the banks of the brook using intermittent plan sections of the brook channel to illustrate the process. These plan sections are shown on Sheet C9 of the project drawings. The level of the channel will be lowered by 2 to 3 feet with the removal of the sediment. Today the groundwater is almost topping the banks. The project engineers said their calculations of upland to be created are very conservative. There is currently muck on each side of the channel which extends to the edge of the wetland. The source of the groundwater and the wetlands is the watershed drainage into the area. Mr. O'Brien concluded the presentation with a summary They have been dealing with what should have been a simple project of cleaning out 400 feet of stream channel to return it to its former condition for a long time. Based on the extensive work done by their engineer, and confirmed by Lexington's reviewing engineer,the project will not create downstream flooding. The purpose of the larger project in Arlington is to build playgrounds and create conservation land. They are working hard to make the former landfill safe in all respects. These are improvements in a conservation sense. They believe they have complied with the law and the conservation issues. Everyone wants to have this brook cleaned out. He hopes that all the questions can be answered to everyone's satisfaction. He requested that the wetlands line be formally approved as part of the project because it is important to do so for the replication component. Mr. Lelyveld, abutter, stated some of his concerns. He had stated his concerns in a July 6 letter, in response to Mr O'Brien's letter, which is on file. He said the wetlands have been polluted and he believes the stream is totally dead. It used to be much healthier and alive. He wants the wetlands returned to life and the brook dredged. He is concerned about removing the toxic silt and destroying the wetlands to do the work. MINUTES LEXINGTON CONSERVATION COMMISSION 7/11/00 PAGE 4 Mrs. Miller summarized the letter from the Commission's engineer in which he concluded that he is confident that the project engineers have designed a stormwater management system that meets the General By-Law for Wetlands Protection, Section 5(2) and will not cause downstream flooding. Mr. Wolk said he was confused by some comments made and for clarification, he asked the following questions: Is dredging the stream to prevent flooding and is it an issue if nothing is done? Has flooding been a problem? What is the extent of the toxic silt and leachate in the area. Have samples been taken and is there evidence that the silt is toxic? Is there still toxic leachate coming from the former dump and does the dump need to be capped? Mr. O'Brien said the major project is in Arlington and will work if the brook is left full of sediment. Flooding has not been an issue in Lexington. The silt in the channel has been tested and there are some contaminants in it but not that much. They believe the water coming from the landfill will be clean water after the project is completed. Mr. Wolk asked Gary Fallick about how dirty the silt is. He said it is described in Section F of the NOI. There are some areas where acceptable levels have been exceeded, but for the most part it is not. Lisa Baci said that some of the abutters are concerned that the wetlands have intruded on their lots. Mr. Lelyveld said it is obvious that the brook is full to the top with silt. Flooding to him is a certainty because the excess water will flood their properties. The settlement agreement indicates that if there was no dredging, there would be no project. Mr Nordby asked for a clarification on reducing the size of the wetlands. It was confirmed that only the area on the banks of the brook would become upland with no change to the perimeter Only the gross surface wetlands area will decrease due to the change along the banks. Ms. Doyle-Breen said there should be little change to the supporting habitat. It was decided that if anyone attending the meeting has further questions, they should be submitted in writing so that they may be addressed at the next meeting. With the applicant's consent, it was moved, seconded and voted to continue the hearing to August 15 A site visit will be held on August 12. DET #00-6, LEXINGTON PARK, Halyard Builders, cluster development 9:30 p.m. Present: Gerard Moloney, applicant; John Noonan,Noonan& McDowell. Others are listed in the file. Mr. Moloney stated the project has been approved by the Planning Board. Mr. Noonan gave an overview of the project for a cluster development on a 9-acre parcel (Lexington Park) which is located off 52 Winter Street and Sullivan Street. An Order of Resource Area Delineation was issued by the Commission in December, 1999, for a portion of Cushing Park. The drainage system is designed to comply with the By-Law regulations described for subdivisions. The applicant has obtained permission from the Board of Selectmen to connect to the existing drainage system on Cushing Street. MINUTES - LEXINGTON CONSERVATION COMMISSION 7/11/00 PAGE 5 This subdivision was designed as a cluster plan in order to preserve as much open space as possible. The development incorporates two clusters of housing that are separated by a large area of open space. Access to one of the sections, with 13 housing units, is from Sullivan Street. The work for the detention pond for this section is approximately 60 feet from the edge of the wetlands previously delineated. The other cluster consists of a five-unit development with access from Winter Street. A detention pond has also been designed to mitigate stormwater for this section. The Planning Board has approved the project and issued the Special Permit which include a restriction that the owners of each property will be responsible for the maintenance of the proposed drainage system and roadway surfaces. The approved public benefit includes improvements to the Marvin Street and Cushing Street Playgrounds and traffic and utility improvements for Winter Street. Mrs. Miller read the Engineering Report which concurred with the Engineer's conclusions. It was noted that an Operation and Maintenance plan should be prepared, as a separate document, that can be referenced by the DPW in the future. In response to questions, the common open space will be owned by the homeowners' association and will be deeded to be open to the public in perpetuity The owners may eventually want to have activities in that area, maybe build a gazebo, but it cannot be developed. This is addressed in the Special Permit. The drainage system is considered a private system to be maintained by the owners. Snow will be plowed to the edge of the road and will drain to the catch basins and drainage system. It was moved, seconded and unanimously voted to issue a negative determination with conditions. Lexington High School - Ms. Baci reported that there are some construction activity problems at the High School which need attention. A meeting may be scheduled soon for those involved. Reed_sBrook - it wasthesonsensus_ofthe (commission thata_c_onsultant_shoilkLbehired to assess the wetlands and NOI submitted for the Reed's Brook project. This information would be very helpful in affirming the Commission's decision on this project. Ms. Nordby will pursue hiring a firm for this purpose. The meeting adjourned at 10.15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Linda A. Gaudet Secretary