Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-07-09-CONCOM-min TOWN OF LEXINGTON, MASSACHUSETTS CONSERVATION COMMISSION DRAFT MINUTES Monday July 9, 2018 6:30 P.M. Parker Room, Town Office Building 1625 Massachusetts Ave Acting chair Dick Wolk opened the meeting at 6:37 pm in the Parker Room of the Town Office Building. Commissioners Present: Alex Dohan, Ruth Ladd, Kevin Beuttell, Dick Wolk Others present: Karen Mullins, Conservation Administrator and Jordan McCarron, Conservation Stewardship Program Coordinator NEW BUSINESS/PENDING MATTERS 6:37pm Request for Insignificant Plan Change, Diamond School, DEP 201-1013, BL 970 and DEP 201- 1049, BL 1006 Present: Fred King, DGT Associates; Donna DiNisco, DiNisco Design; Michael Cronin, Lexington Facilities Department The Lexington School and Facilities Departments requested permission to add an additional five parking spaces to its current plan for the site; this would be done by converting 850 sq. ft. of existing grass to asphalt. Mr. King explained that the current parking design for the project calls for 151 parking spaces which is insufficient for the Diamond School's needs. Mr. King explained that the addition of five parking spaces to the site would not significantly impact the existing drainage and storm water design for the site and that no other vegetation except grass would need to be disturbed. Mr. King further explained that all other alternatives to this proposed change were either prohibitively expensive or would cause significant impact to the wetland resources on the property. Mr. Wolk directed Mrs. Mullins to condition the proposed change to include verification from Town engineering staff that the proposed change would indeed not impact the existing stormwater and drainage specifications for the project. Motion to approve the insignificant plan change with the above mentioned condition was made by Mrs. Ladd and seconded by Mr. Beuttell. Vote: 4-0 in favor. 6:45pm Update on Enforcement 32 Woodpark Circle Present: Fengru Huang and Bo Cui, Owners Mrs. Mullins reviewed the history of the wetland violation at 32 Woodpark Circle and updated the Commission on the owners' restoration activities per their enforcement order. Mrs. Mullins conducted a site visit on June 291h and verified that the owners had removed a shed and garden fencing from the resource area per the Commission's request. Additionally, the owners removed improvements to a back porch, including sonotubes and decking, that were unpermitted and have decided to forgo any additional improvements to their residence. Mrs. Mullins reminded the Commission that at a previous enforcement hearing, the Commission had requested a full wetland delineation and detailed restoration plan for the shed and garden site including native plantings. Mrs. Mullins, on behalf of the owners, explained that the areas in question had previously been lawn and that the owners had restored those areas to that original condition. Further, the owners verified for the Commission that they corrected the violations and do not have any intentions of conducting any additional activities at this point and are seeking relief from this additional delineation and restoration requirement required by the Conservation Commission. The owners stated that they would file with the Conservation Commission if they decided in future to pursue constructing a means of egress from the door leading from the rear room to the back yard. A motion that the Commission accept the corrective activities already undertaken by the owners as being in compliance with the Commission's request and that no further wetland delineation and wetland and buffer zone restoration work be required was made by Mr. Beuttell and seconded by Mrs. Dohan. Vote: 4-0 in favor. 6:55 pm Issue Order of Conditions for DEP 201-1098, BL 1055, NOI, 4 Grimes Road Mrs. Mullins verified that the Commission was not requesting any wetland buffer demarcation on the property and/or natural buffer area be maintained on the property. Mrs. Dohan confirmed that, due to the location of the property in the woods and without a traditional lawn and greater than 50 feet from the wetlands, there is little risk of encroachment on the wetland. Motion to issue order of conditions with standard conditions including stormwater management conditions, made by Mrs. Ladd and seconded by Mrs. Dohan. Vote: 4-0 in favor. 6:58 pm Issue Order of Conditions for DEP 201-1099, BL 1056, NOI, 473 Lowell Street The Commission reviewed an updated as-built plan for the project and verified that FENO markers would be installed 5' from the wetland boundary as requested; Mrs. Ladd confirmed with Mrs. Mullins that the applicant would be required to restore an area inside of the FENO markers with native plantings/seed mix. Mrs. Mullins confirmed that the Commission would require two years of monitoring for the native restoration area. Motion made to issue the order of conditions with the above mentioned restoration area and monitoring conditions by Mrs. Ladd and seconded by Mrs. Dohan. Vote: 4-0 in favor. 7:00 pm Approve minutes from 6/11/201/, 6/18/2018, and 6/25/2018 Motion made to approve all three minutes as amended by Mr. Wolk Vote: 4-0. 7:03 pm Planning Board Project Comments Mrs. Mullins recommended to the Commission that they submit the following comments to the Lexington Planning Board: - A conservation restriction with public access be placed on all open space as part of the National Development/Belmont Country Club redevelopment project. - A trail easement be granted as part of the redevelopment of 114 Wood Street as the parcel is vital to the West Lexington Greenway master plan and provides a link into the Battle Road/Minuteman National Historic Park site. Mrs. Dohan reported that the Belmont Country Club redevelopment project is being openly criticized on the Lexington List. Mrs. Mullins reminded the Commission that they had received a letter from a concerned resident imploring the Commission to do what it could to stop the project. The Commission agreed that Mrs. Mullins should author a response to this resident explaining that the Commission has no regulatory jurisdiction over the project but not to portray an opinion on the project. 7:05 pm Bufferzone Regulation discussion Mrs. Mullins reported on behalf of Phil Hamilton that he would appreciate comments back from the Commission on the draft regulations he has developed. 8:17 pm (*Taken up at end of meeting) Request for Insignificant Plan Change, Vine Brook Restoration Project, 201-974, BL 932 No representative for the project was present at the meeting. Mrs. Mullins provided an overview of the project and the requested plan change. A portion of the bank of the Vine Brook downstream from the main restoration work has collapsed. This appears to be a result of armoring that was installed as part of the original restoration project;the issue was identified as part of the applicant's long-term monitoring of the project. Mrs. Ladd expressed concern that the applicant's proposed fix for the problem, which includes armoring the collapsed section of bank, may not be a good long-term solution and that the issue sounds more complex than an insignificant plan change. Mr. Wolk agreed and requested that the applicant submit their request as an amendment at a future meeting. No vote was taken on this request. The Commission made plans to visit the site at its next round of site visits scheduled for August 4t'. NEW PUBLIC MEETINGS 7:07 pm DET 18-15 RDA, 28 Webb Street Owner/Applicant: Nancy Alloway Project: Deck replacement Present: Nancy Alloway, Owner. Mrs. Alloway explained that she would like to replace an existing deck at her home using the same footprint with no significant change to the size or type of materials used. The property falls within the 100' buffer to a wetland that was delineated and approved by the Commission through an ORAD as part of a previous project on an adjacent property. The Commission requested that Mrs. Alloway use larger footings and crushed stone underneath the new deck in compliance with their current standards decks. A motion was made to approve the project with standard conditions by Mr. Wolk. Vote: 4-0 in favor. 7:13pm DEP 201-1103, BL 1060 NOI, 1 Fulton Road Owner/applicant: Robert Salafia and Pamela Rice Project: Home, shed, deck additions Present: John Noonan, Noonan & McDowell, Inc.; Robert Salafia, Owner. Mr.Noonan provided an overview of the project which includes the conversion of a screened porch to a 4-season room, replacing an existing solarium with a deck, and adding a shed. Mr. Noonan explained that the deck would reduce the existing impervious square footage on the lot while the 4-season room would not change the impervious cover. The shed will be a pre-fabricated 14' x 24' structure that will sit on concrete blocks above a crushed-stone bed; grading and soil removal will be required to do this. The property contains bordering vegetated wetland and the existing house extends into the 25' buffer. Mr. Noonan explained that soil test pits were not dug and that USDA soil data was being used to determine drainage characteristics. Mr. Wolk expressed concern that the Town Engineering Department found the stormwater and drainage calculations done for the project to be inadequate to meet the Commission's stormwater performance standards. Additionally, no test pits were dug for the project and the plans on file do not demonstrate the required separation between seasonal high ground water and the infiltration system. Mr. Wolk explained that he would prefer a letter from the Town Engineer verifying compliance with Commission's stormwater regulations before the Commission would be comfortable approving the project; Mrs. Ladd and Mrs. Dohan agreed with this assessment. Mr. Beuttell requested that a limit of work line be demarcated in the field with orange construction fencing even if the erosion control line is the limit of the work line; this limit of work line should be indicated on the final plan to be referenced in the Order of Conditions. The Commission further discussed the requirement to conduct a soil test pit in response to Mr. Noonan's request that the test pit requirement be waived. Mrs. Mullins pointed out that the Commission's regular practice is to require drainage calculations and soil test pit data to demonstrate compliance with the performance standards of the stormwater regulations and would recommend the Commission maintain consistency with regular standard practice. The Commission concurred and requested that Mr. Noonan follow up with the Town Engineer on his comments. Mr. Noonan requested a continuation to August 6h, 2018. A motion was made to continue the hearing to August 6t'by Mrs. Ladd and seconded by Mrs. Dohan. Vote: 4-0 in favor. 7:26 pm BL 1061 NOI, 16 Cedar Street Owner/applicant: 16 Cedar Street LLC Project: Raze and rebuild SFD Present: John Shoester, Oxford Environmental Associates. Mr. Shoester provided an overview of the project which would raze and rebuild a single family home; three corners of the proposed structure would fall precisely on the 50' wetland buffer; the wetland in this case is an Isolated Land Subject to Flooding. The project would involve a 1,200 sq. ft. restoration area devoted to native plantings. Mr. Shoester reported that a Norway maple will be removed from this area and a juniper replaced with a witch hazel on the planting plan as requested by the Commission during their site visit. A wetland plant seed mix from the New England Wetland Plants will be used. FENO markers indicating a "No Disturb Area"will be installed along the 25' wetland buffer. The discussion then focused on the position of the house in relation to the 50' wetland buffer. All Commissioners expressed concern that three corners of the proposed structure would be precisely on the 50' buffer. Mr. Wolk pointed out that the Commission has become increasingly strict about requiring a 2' minimum setback from the 50' wetland buffer to ensure that the buffer is protected. Mr. Shoester argued in favor of the current design by pointing out that the current condition of the property would be improved by the proposed 1,200 sq. ft. restoration area; additionally, he explained that the builder would be able to guarantee that the 50' buffer would not be encroached upon. Mrs. Dohan and Mr. Beuttell expressed a willingness to permit the project as-is with extremely close supervision and verification checkpoints throughout the construction process; Mrs. Mullins reminded the Commission that an as-built plan is required to be submitted before any framing work commences. Initially, Mr. Wolk said that he would consider permitting the project as-is with an as-built required before any concrete is poured. However, after some discussion, Mr. Wolk concluded that permitting the project as-is without any separation between the house and the 50' buffer line would be a severe step backwards on the how the Commission has historically protected the 50' buffer. Mr. Wolk then gave the floor to several residents in attendance at the hearing. Giuseppe Taibi, 20 Cedar Street, asked for clarification from Mr. Shoester on the number of trees proposed for removal as part of the project. Mr. Shoester verified that only one native tree, a 9" white spruce, and two invasive Norway maples, would be removed. Katy Finkenzeller, 12 Cedar Street, expressed concern that the project would cause drainage and flooding issues on her property. Mr. Shoester explained that the drainage analysis for the project shows a net reduction in run-off post development. Mrs. Mullins suggested to the Commission that the erosion control logs as indicated on the plans be placed to the front of a group of hemlocks in the rear of the lot so that soil and debris is not piled on them. Mr. Wolk concluded the hearing by explaining to Mr. Shoester that the Commission was not comfortable with the current design and would require a 2' minimum setback from the 50' wetland buffer. In addition, the Commission had not yet reviewed comments on the project by Town engineering staff. Mr. Shoester requested a continuation to August 6t', 2018. A motion to continue the hearing to August 6t'was made by Mrs. Ladd and seconded by Mrs. Dohan. Vote: 4-0 in favor. 7:54 pm DEP 201-1104, BL 1062 NOI 0 Diana Lane Owner/applicant: Seaver Construction Project: New SFD Present: Scott Smyers, Oxbow Associates. Mr. Smyers provided an overview of the project for the Commission. The applicant is proposing a new 2,300 sq. ft. house with a 4,760 sq. ft. impervious driveway on an undeveloped lot; there is a small forested wetland in the north corner of the property. Two existing trees, a mulberry and an apple, are proposed to be removed; otherwise, all other trees on site will be retained. The applicant has agreed to selectively remove invasive buckthorn on site per the Commission's request at their site visit. In addition, a 1,350 sq. ft. native restoration area will be included. The structure will be located 50.2' from the wetland at its closest point. Mrs. Ladd voiced concern that the Commission should be consistent with its application of the Town's wetlands by-law, which requires no disturbance between 50'-100' on any un-built lot; Mrs. Dohan agreed. As in the previous hearing, Mrs. Ladd explained that the Commission likes to see at least a 2' buffer between any proposed structure and the 50' wetland buffer line. Mr. Smyers argued in favor of the existing plan by stating that designers and builders are directed by the language of the by-law which only denotes a"no-disturb" zone from 50' up to 100' from the wetland edge on undeveloped lots and does not specify any buffer between a new structure and the 50' line. Mr. Wolk explained that applicants should understand that the Commission will not permit a project without a modest buffer between a structure and the 50' wetland buffer line. Mr. Beuttell expressed concern that the groundwater at test pit 42 has an elevation of 98.7' while the basement is only at 98'. Mrs. Ladd requested an explanation of the planting process for the native restoration area. Mr. Smyers explained that a seed mix would not be used and that all proposed shrubs would be planted by hand. Mrs. Ladd requested a 2-year monitoring period for the restoration area. Mrs. Mullins suggested that the Commission require proposed erosion controls be placed on the inside of any trees on the property to avoid damage from construction debris and loose sediments. In addition, Mrs. Mullins reminded the Commission that they had not yet reviewed Town engineering staff comments on the project. The Commission agreed that the proposed house should be moved back from the 50' wetland buffer line a minimum of two feet and requested that Mr. Smyers ask for a continuation. Mr. Smyers requested a continuation to August 6t', 2018. A motion to continue the hearing to August 6t'was made by Mrs. Ladd and seconded by Mr. Beuttell. Vote: 4-0 in favor. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS 8:10 pm DEP 201-1092, BL 1049 NOI, 7 Ledgelawn Ave Owner/applicant: Jian Shao Project: Raze and rebuild SFD No representative for the project was present at the hearing. Mrs. Mullins explained that she was unable to make contact with the applicant regarding supplemental information previously requested by the Commission and did not receive a request by the applicant to continue the hearing. Mrs. Mullins then provided an overview of the project for the Commission by pointing out that the existing project was not in compliance with the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act's riverfront area performance standards for redevelopment by failing to meet the criteria and improve existing conditions, including maintaining the 100' undisturbed vegetative corridor, or the existing vegetative corridor if less, within the 200' riverfront area. Further, Mrs. Mullins explained that the new structure proposed for the property would be placed closer to the river than the existing structure and would increase the impervious square footage on the lot within the 100-foot inner riparian zone of the riverfront area. Based on Mrs. Mullins report on the project, Mr. Beuttell expressed concern that the project does not meet the Riverfront Area redevelopment performance standards and suggested the Commission deny the permit on these grounds; Mr. Wolk agreed. A motion to close the hearing was made by Mr. Beuttell and seconded by Mrs. Ladd. Vote: 4-0 in favor. Mr. Wolk summarized the consensus of the Commission to deny the permit based on Mr. Beuttell's statement that the applicant failed to improve existing conditions within the 200-foot riverfront area and meet the criteria defined in the redevelopment performance standard of the Riverfront Area regulations. A motion to deny the permit made by Mrs. Ladd and seconded by Mrs. Dohan. Vote: 4-0 in favor. 8:15 pm DEP 201-1102, BL 1059 NOI, 99 East Street Owner/applicant: 99 East Street LLC Project: Raze and rebuild SFD Mrs. Mullins reported that the applicant had requested a continuation to August 6t', 2018. A motion to continue the hearing to August 6t' was made by Mrs. Ladd and seconded by Mrs. Dohan. Vote: 4-0 in favor. 8:25 pm Mr. Wolk motioned to adjourn the meeting. The motion was moved by Mrs. Ladd and seconded by Mrs. Dohan. Vote: 4-0 in favor.