HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-11-14-CONCOM-min.pdf MINUTES - LEXINGTON CONSERVATION COMMISSION November 14, 2000
Present: Lisa Baci, Duke Bitsko, Angela Frick(8.20), 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 7.45 p.m. in Room G-15, Town Office Building.
6 Lake Street Landscape Plan - 201-466
The Commission inspected the lot on 11/11/00. Bill Herring, the applicant/builder, presented a
revised plan with the following change: the two-foot existing stone wall will be extended 10 feet
and will taper into the existing grade. It was moved, seconded and voted to accept the landscape
plan as revised.
Certificate of Compliance—25 Vine Brook Road—201-413
It was moved, seconded and voted to issue a Certificate of Compliance for 25 Vine Brook Road.
Certificate of Compliance—31 Peacock Farm Road - 201-455
It was moved, seconded and voted to issue a Certificate of Compliance for 31 Peacock Farm
1 Road.
Minutes - It was moved, seconded and unanimously voted to approve the minutes of 10/31/00
as submitted.
Site Visit for 11/28/00 meeting - In anticipation of a project to be coming in for the 12/12/00
meeting, it was decided to review the wetlands line at 359 North Emerson Road on the 11/18/00.
DEP Meeting - Ms. Nordby reported that the second regional meeting will be held on
November 28th from 9.15 to 11 15 a.m. at the Concord Town Building. Discussion will be held
on new beaver control regulations and Jim Sprague will discuss Wetland & Waterways.
Beaver Dam. Munroe Brook - Mrs. Miller said there is a beaver dam along Munroe Brook but it
does not appear to be flooding any neighborhood.
Hearing, 334 Waltham Street. K. Chan, single-familv house 8 p.m.
Present: Leah Basbanes, wetland consultant; Mr. and Mrs. Chan, applicants. Others are listed in
the file.
Leah Basbanes presented plans for the demolition of an existing house and the construction of a
new single-family dwelling and associated grading at 334 Waltham Street as described in the
Notice of Intent. A corner of the house, the 3-car garage and a portion of the driveway are
proposed in the buffer zone. Because of the steep dropoff and the pitch of the driveway, erosion
MINUTES LEXINGTON CONSERVATION COMMISSION 11/14/00 PAGE 2
controls will be placed along the limit-of-work line. A Cultec infiltration system is proposed to
collect all roof runoff. The driveway runoff will be directed into a 5-foot wide stone trench
along its length. Ms. Basbanes said that due to comments from the Town Engineer, the catch
basin will be eliminated.
Mrs. Miller read the Engineering report which is on file stating that more information is needed
regarding the drainage calculations,the infiltration system and connections, the catch basin in the
driveway and that a test pit and percolation test should be performed.
Comments and questions from the Commission followed. Concerns included the following:
erosion along the driveway; the removal of the catch basin which would have removed pollutants
from the driveway; the proximity of the drainage ditch to the property line; the pitch of the
driveway directing the water to drain toward the property line; water sheetoff when ground is
frozen; the house location which leaves little room for a backyard due to the steepness of the
slope and wetlands on site. This proposal has the potential for much more impact on the wetlands
than the existing conditions. It was decided that more information is needed from the applicant's
engineer regarding the above issues.
Comments from the audience followed. The owner of 342 Waltham Street expressed his
concern about runoff being directed to his abutting property
With the applicant's permission, it was voted to continue the hearing to November 28th at 8.10
p.m.
(Mrs. Frick arrived at 8.20 p.m.)
Commissioners Baci, Bitsko, Frick, Hamilton, Miller, and Wolk voted to go into Executive
Session for the purpose of discussing possible land acquisition.
The meeting resumed in open session.
DET #00-8. LEXINGTON CHRISTIAN ACADEMY Wetlands boundary 8:30 p.m.
Present: Gregg Moore, LEC Consultants; Dr. Barry Koops, Headmaster of LCA, others are
listed in the file.
Mr. Moore presented the plans showing the wetland as revised by the Commission on their site
visit last Saturday The area is a forested red maple swamp, consistent with the area that has
already been approved. Flags 52A and 56C were moved upgradient; flag 56AB was added
because of topography; and flag 62 was removed. Bank flags 1-10 denote the obvious channel.
At Bank flags 10-17 the stream area becomes more diffuse and it was treated as a wetland
stream. In this area they applied the regional curve which widens the area about 7 feet on each
side from the centerline of the stream, thereby determining that Riverfront area is 207 feet
instead of 200 feet.
MINUTES LEXINGTON CONSERVATION COMMISSION 11/14/00 PAGE 3
Comments from the Commission followed. Mr. Hamilton reported that during the site visit the
Commission asked for soil borings in several different areas. The changes have been reflected
on the revised plan and the Commission is confident that the line is accurate.
Comments from abutters followed. Dean Romano of 124 Lowell Street asked about the process
for a Request for Determination. Mrs. Miller explained the procedures taken to date for this
project. She stated that both vegetation and soils are used in the determination.
Paul Newman, representing abutter Joan Carmody, had several concerns regarding the
determination of the regional curve (Mean Annual High Water),the appeals process under the
Bylaw, and the depth of organic matter on the soil surface in the orchard area. Mr. Moore said
an auger was used and he can provide soils data for the site. Mr Romano said he can remember
(35-40 years ago) not being able to pass this area 6 months of the year on his horse because of
deep mud. He said that the area is very wet right up to the Strano's driveway Mr Hamilton
said the Commission walked 118 Lowell Street after a rainstorm last week and this area was not
wet. The area was confirmed to be upland. Mr. Moore said the 100-year floodplain is at 165.5
Ms. Baci said that an area that was once very wet may change after time because of
development, and that the wetlands line is only good for three years only
Ms. McKenna asked a procedural question regarding site visits. Mrs. Miller explained there is a
provision in the open meeting law that states that site visits are not considered public hearings.
It was decided that more information should be provided regarding Mr. Newman's questions
about the calculations for the mean high water mark; and more information is needed regarding
the vegetation; why that method was chosen; what alternatives might look like; and why the line
is drawn where it is. Mr. Moore asked that Mr.Newman submit his questions in writing to him.
With the applicant's approval, it was moved, seconded and voted to continue the meeting to
November 28, 2000 at 8.30 p.m.
9.05 p.m.
CONTINUED HEARING. WINNING FARM, 4-lot Subdivision/Roadwav - 201-441-4451
Present: Ingeborg Hegemann, BSC (Commission's consultant); Gary Ruping and Phyllis Etsell,
Winning Farm Trust; Gary Sanford, Sanford Ecological Services; Douglas Miller,
Commonwealth Engineering. Others are listed in the file.
Douglas Miller presented the landscape plans for the four lots in the subdivision. The limit of
the proposed lawn is shown with everything beyond the edge of lawn remaining undisturbed.
The proposed grading is shown. The wetlands are not shown. These plans correspond exactly to
the base plans, and the edge of lawn corresponds to the disturbed areas shown on the base plans.
The limit of work line is the limit of grading, but it is not a drawn line on the plan. Mr Ruping
said the edge of lawn would be the limit of work and all landscaping would be within that area.
To be able to write an Order of Conditions, the Commission needs a plan showing very clearly
where the limit-of-work line is. The context plan shows the entire subdivision but each lot was
MINUTES LEXINGTON CONSERVATION COMMISSION 11/14/00 PAGE 4
submitted individually The Commission is very concerned about the area between the driveway
and lot 4, the proximity of the roadway to the wetlands, and the wetlands filling. Mr Ruping
said that area is detailed on the plan near the braided channel and replication area. The road now
curves around the wetland. Ms. Baci said the edge of the disturbance would have to extend
beyond the edge of the pavement to do the construction work. She is interested in the final plan
and how the area between the edge of the roadway and the existing wetland will be treated. Mr
Miller said the area between pavement and the wetlands would be grassed with no structures.
The outfall for the drain was discussed. Mr Wolk asked what the elevation of the opening and
the elevation of the drain is for the pipe that goes under the cul-de-sac and drains out behind that
last house. Doug Miller said that the pipe collects two catch basins, runs the water through a
vortechnic unit and discharges it towards the wetlands at elevation 244 at the outlet. The inlet is
elevation 250 The 15-inch pipe is 750 feet long.
Mr. Hamilton read the Town Engineering report. Mr. Miller said he would be very
uncomfortable with such a flat slope for a 750-foot pipe because of the possibility of solids
settling out, building up and creating a maintenance problem. He considered putting the drain
outfall in a different area by following the 244 topo line but it would not be significantly further
from the wetlands, and with the introduction of angles and a potentially a longer strip of pipe, it
would be a diminishing return to gain a few feet of separation from the wetlands. He has not
found that they can get a significantly greater offset to the wetlands than this straight line
scenario knowing that the shortest distance between two points is a straight line, as opposed to
r I going further away and making bends and going around houses. They have used retaining walls
to change grades on the lots.
The Commission was concerned that a snow plan has not been addressed and noted that it was
not included in the operations and maintenance plan. It is of concern because all the area drains
towards the wetlands. Mr. Ruping said the roadway will be private and a Homeowners'
Association will be established. They will be agreeable to the prohibition of sodium chloride,
and the placing of restrictive signs. Mr. Ruping was confident that a snow storage plan could be
submitted complying with Commissioners' concerns.
Mrs. Miller readshe followingletters into the record T.etteLdated 10/13/00 from Sanford
Ecological Services, Inc. addressed to Ms. Etsell regarding compensatory wetlands, groundwater
monitoring program and wetland replacement and monitoring; letter dated 10/12/00 from Paul
Newman; letter dated 10/11/00 from Commonwealth Engineering; letter dated 9/17/00 from Mr.
and Mrs. Colosimo; 10/16/00 letter from Paul Newman(Mr.Newman said he refracted that
letter); letter dated 10/23/00 from Paul Newman with attachment dated 10/19/00 from David
Sperduto of Gunther Engineering; letter dated 11/6/00 from Paul Newman which included two
large maps; letter dated 11/9/00 from Commonwealth Engineering; fax dated 11/13/00 from
Sanford Ecological Services.
Ms. Baci asked about Dr Sanford's letter of October 10, and said she didn't see a reference to
the monitoring of the groundwater. Dr. Sanford said he understood that the Commission was
concerned with the location of the crossing of the road. At that point there is a discharge of
groundwater to the surface water and in his opinion a logical way of monitoring to make sure
MINUTES LEXINGTON CONSERVATION COMMISSION 11/14/00 PAGE 5
that discharge of groundwater to the surface water went unaffected would be to measure/monitor
the extent of flooding at that point. The quantity would be measured. The quality is an issue
associated with the stormwater management system. The concern is that the flow would be
maintained.
Ms. Baci asked about trash contained on the Lexington property and what would happen in those
areas during construction. Mr. Miller said those structures are abandoned and contain household
debris and uncontaminated trash. They will be removed from the site and are accessible from the
Woburn parcel. The structures are shown on the plans. The area that is subject to the Bureau of
Solid Waste action is in Winchester and Woburn. Ms. Etsell said a Corrective Action Design
plan has been submitted and the Bureau of Solid Waste has 120 days (mid-February)to issue a
permit. Ms. Etsell said they met with Bureau of Hazardous Waste, and they concurred that the
area should be cleaned under the Bureau of Solid Waste.
Mr Ruping said that the debris on the back of lot 3 can be removed by hand. A demolition
permit would be needed to demolish the structure. For financing purposes, they will need to do a
21E investigation of the site. They don't expect to find hazardous on the site.
Mr. Newman representing Nope 2000, stated that Nope 2000 had met with Bureau of Waste Site
cleanup and Bureau of Waste Prevention on October 13 and the BU School of Public Health was
in attendance as well as the Toxic Action Center. The applicants for development of the Woburn
parcel of Winning Farms submitted another comprehensive action design plan to the state which
is the identical plan that was rejected by the Board of Health last June at a Public Information
meeting in Woburn. Nope is scheduling a meeting with DEP to continue discussion about the
site with the people who are directly involved in the mediation of the site. He believes that
major dumping in the ravine is fill. There will be further discussion of the solid waste
regulations and management on the State level. Nope is doing everything responsible to get this
site characterized and remediated before anything happens out there.
Mr Ruping stated that no hazardous waste of any kind has been identified in the fill area; it is
solid waste. Stephan Voss, abutter, said the horse/stable area is lot 4 and located right next to his
property Ms. Baci recalls that she saw the wooden fence that serves as a boundary for the horse.
Thatpropertyls_in_Lexington andd&theend oflot 4. Lisa said there WAS come enneern about the
soil in that area when the Commission walked the site years ago. The soil there is not native soil.
Ms. Nordby said we have aerial photos of the area.
Justin Margolskee, direct abutter, said the proposed driveway is 5 feet from his lot line and he is
concerned that the flow of water would change in the immediate area because of the grading.
Doug Miller said the water will continue to flow downhill. The contours and plans were
reviewed. There will be a swale between the property line and the tennis court. Mr. Margolskee
said he submitted a study several months ago, which showed that the total amount of wetlands
was close to 7,000 s.f. This proposal indicates that the wetlands are less than 5,000 s.f He asked
if the amount of wetlands have been determined. Mrs. Miller said that the Commission revisited
the site with Ms. Hegemann, their consultant,to re-examine the wetlands line. Ms. Hegemann
explained that the wetlands were flagged to comply with the Town By-Law as well as the State
Act and on the second site walk, the wetlands were expanded. Mrs. Miller said the Commission
MINUTES LEXINGTON CONSERVATION COMMISSION 11/14/00 PAGE 6
is reluctant to allow any filling of wetlands, but the Commission has the discretion within the
allowed 5,000 s.f. This is a long-standing policy of the Commission. The applicant proposes to
alter about 5,000 s.f Mr. Margolskee thinks they are altering about 7,000 s.f. Doug Miller said
the total alteration under the State Act is 3,520 and under the local by-law is 1,353 additional,
making a total of 4,873 s.f. Ms. Hegemann agreed with these figures.
Joe Colosimo, abutter, stated his opposition to having two drainage areas discharging near his
property as outlined in his letter to the Commission. He noted that Mr. Hayes, the Town's
engineer, agreed with his comments in his Engineering memo. He realizes that it will be his
problem if the water is dumped on his land. He would much prefer mitigation of the water by
the existing wetland before it reaches his property
Mr. Voss expressed concern about the snow storage plan and hopes that there will be no impact
on the abutters. The abutters' property should be reflected on that plan. He also is concerned
about the landscape plan and the upkeep of the plants.
It was moved, seconded and unanimously voted to close the hearing.
Ms. Etsell and Mr. Ruping agreed to allow an extension for approving the decisions for the
filings. Ms. Etsell signed an agreement to this.
High School Proiect—201-438
Ms. Nordby reported that in the phasing plan they are going to pave an area and move the fence.
To compensate they will rip up pavement in another area. They have 10,000 s.f. already
compensated for, but they need an additional amount of pervious surface. The Commission was
agreeable to this. The detention area was finished today, but they are having a problem fitting
the orifice into the catch basin.
Lisa was concerned about the conditions around the detention basin which has been graded and
filled with gravel. The outer edges and the banks of the detention basin are still dirt and there is
a pile of fill close by She is concerned about it functioning properly if mud fills in the area that
has just-been_filied-with_gravel She does notwant the detention area
compromised. The area should be stabilized.
The meeting adjourned at 10:50 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Linda A Gaudet
Secretary