Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-05-22-CONCOM-minMINUTES — LEXINGTON CONSERVATION COMMISSION May 22, 2007 Commissioners present: Joyce Miller, Phil Hamilton, David Langseth, Duke Bitsko, Angela Frick, Stew Kennedy, Dick Wolk Others present: Karen Mullins, Administrator, Adam Bossi, Administrative Assistant, and Louise Vinci, Department Clerk Joyce Miller, Commission Chair, opened the meeting at 7:30 p.m. in room G -15, Town Office Building. 7:30 p.m. Hearing: NOI, 21 Barberry Road, Present for the applicant: Guy Weinzapfel, President, Five Fields Inc. Guy Weinzapfel presented the proposed plan to control invasive aquatic vegetation (duckweed) through mechanical aeration and chemical treatment. David Langseth asked if the chemicals proposed were the same type used at the Old Reservoir, Mr. Wwinzapfel replies that they are the same. Mr. Wolk commented that some of the residents whose houses are close to the pond are mowing up to the edge of the pond. Mr. Wolk asked if any of these residents use fertilizer and suggested increasing the natural vegetated buffer zone along the pond bank to improve the water quality in the pond. Mr. Weinzapfel responded that a poll was taken and found that none of the residents inside of the watershed had used fertilizer in the last few years. Mr. Weinzapfel also said that plan could be amendable to increase the natural buffer zone. Mr. Kennedy asked if Mr. Weinzapfel is confident that proposed chemicals will not harm amphibians. Mr. Weinzapfel responded by staying that chemicals were approved by the state pesticide Bureau and safe to use for aquatic management. Ms. Frick commented that the buffer zone along the pond bank needs to be improved. Mr. Bitsko pointed out that buffers are important for aesthetics as well as storm water runoff treatment and infiltration. Mr. Bitsko also stated that the higher the temperature of the pond water the faster the duckweed would grow. He suggested planting more trees for shade. Mr. Weinzapfel replied that the pond was already shaded. Motion made and seconded to close the hearing, 7 -0 in favor. 7:45 p.m. Meeting: RDA Path between Middleby and Worthen Roads, Lisa Baci presented a proposal to remove Japanese Bittersweet along the Lincoln Park bike path between Middleby and Worthen Roads, and asked if the commission would allow for removal to continue through the autumn for management purposes. Ms. Baci explained that volunteers including some high school student would be participating, using hands, saws, weed wrenches and pruners. Mr. Kennedy was concerned that the high school kids would be supervised. Ms. Baci explained that Jim Williams, a high school teacher would be leading the students. Mr. Langseth asked which MINUTES — LEXINGTON CONSERVATION COMMISSION May 22, 2007 species bittersweet was, Ms. Baci described it, and Mr. Langseth agreed that bittersweet was a problem. Mr. Kennedy asked about protocol and training for removal. Ms. Baci informed the commission that another person familiar with protocols would be responsible for that process. Motion made and seconded to issue negative determination, for six months for the project, 7 -0 in favor. 8:00 p.m. Cont. Hearing: NOI, 177 Grove Street, Rayvon Realty Trust, 3 -lot cluster development (201 -705, BL 662) Motion made and seconded to continue the hearing to May 29, 2007 at applicant's representative's request, 7 -0 in favor. 8:10 p.m. Issue Amended Order: Shemin Nurseries • Add statement to maintain 12' buffer along stream bank. • Submit planting plan for 12' buffer for commission's approval. • Relocate birch tree and save other tree long bank. Motion made and seconded to issue an Amended Order with special conditions as discussed, 5 in favor and 2 opposed (Ms. Frick and Ms. Miller). 8:15 p.m. Issue Order of Conditions: 81 & 83 Hartwell Avenue Motion made and seconded to issue an Order of Conditions with conditions as discussed, 7 -0 in favor. 8:16 p.m. Discussion of Cotting School, 453 Concord Avenue, The Commission discussed incorporating the following conditions into the Order: Surety Bond Finalization of the amended conservation restriction prior to commencing any work Construct the replication area per the original proposed grading plan as recommended by Mr. Howard 8:17 p.m. Review Avalon Bay plan change. The commission decided to conduct a site visit before approving change. 8:18 p.m. Approve April 24 minutes. Motion made seconded to approve the minutes of April 24, 2007. 8:19 p.m. Project updates: Avalon Bay, Sheraton, and Pine Meadow Farms 8:21 p.m. Reports: Commission was awarded a Recreational Trails Grant for 2007 in the amount of $10,000. This has been awarded two previous times and was obtained through the great efforts of Mike Tabaczynski. Page 2 of 4 MINUTES — LEXINGTON CONSERVATION COMMISSION May 22, 2007 8:23 p,m. Board of Selectman goal setting: Commission will work with Land Stewarts to develop list of goals to forward to Board of Selectman by June 29th. 8:30 p.m. Cont. Hearing: NOI, 24 Ingleside Road, Present for the applicant: Scott Smyers - Wetland Specialist from Oxbow Associates, Walter Hatfield- Contractor, Tom Christopher- Resource Management Inc. Scott Smyers presented the revised site plan showing a reduction in driveway size, installation of a stone trench to infiltrate driveway runoff and installation of cultec chambers to infiltrate roof runoff. He also submitted the original letter dated May 22" that was previously faxed and emailed, for the record, responding to issues identified at the last continued hearing. Phil Hamilton read into record the Town Engineer's Memo of May 22 evaluating the stormwater management system design and drainage, calculations. Administrator Mullins pointed out Mr. Flamang's response that he could not adequately evaluate the peak rate standard because the engineer did not provide the calculations however Mr. Flamang strongly felt that the drainage as designed did meet the peak rate standard requirement on the merits that the proper volume of storage was being met. She informed the Commission that she had forwarded this response to Mr. Hatfield earlier today so that he was prepared to follow up at tonight's meeting. Mr. Hatfield responded that his engineer was not able to make it tonight to respond. Administrator Mullins also identified that she identified a discrepancy between the project engineer's cross section detail for the cultec chambers installation and the revised site plan, in that the revised site plan does not show grading per the cross section detail. The Commission noted that a revised site plan reflecting the proposed grading needed to be submitted and conditioned as a requirement in the Order. Comments from the Commission were as follows: Mr. Langseth stated that he had been persuaded by clear and convincing evidence the project will secure interests due to the numerous mitigation measures proposed. Tom Christopher, Resource Management Inc., was present to discuss the proposed soil amendment for the wetland restoration area, which he has been using for gravel reclamation sites for the last four years, and he has used for a wetland soils in Leominster. Mr. Christopher conveyed that the soils Ph level was at 7.2 -8.0 but suggests that ammonium sulfide could be added to the soil to help lower its ph level. Mr. Hamilton asked for some kind of security, such as a performance bond, in case the wetlands restoration fails. He would also like to see a more proven method of wetlands restoration used opposed to one less tested. He also appreciated that the project included removing the phragmites on abutting properties as well. Ms. Miller said that she was not convinced that phragmites removal is adequate mitigation for a project Page 3 of 4 MINUTES — LEXINGTON CONSERVATION COMMISSION May 22, 2007 that does not meet required performance standard setbacks. Mr. Bitsko stated that this project is not a wetland replication project, and involves removing current phragmites plant with root stock, replacing upper soil horizon, and replanting with noninvasive species to create a more diverse habitat. The issue is whether it will take and whether the homeowner is willing to ensure survivability for the next ten years. Mr. Smyers suggested that the commission have a condition of the Order be to require monitoring of the wetlands restoration area and enforce compliance instead of requiring posting of a bond. Mr. Wolk asked how this project, specifically stormwater management, is an improvement over existing condition because it appears that this is status quo. Mr. Smyers responds by saying that the amount of infiltration being proposed is beyond what is required on that 25 cf of the existing driveway will managed under the hundred year storm event. Mr. Smyers went on to state that the key part of this project is improving the function of the wetland, providing diversity, and improving wildlife habitat functions. Mr. Wolk replied that he is having a difficult time understanding the long term benefit of the replanting of a functioning wetland. No one has assured the commission that the phragmites will be completely removed, and thus, what is the benefit if they come back in ten years. Motion made and seconded to close the hearing, 7 -0 in favor. 9:17 p.m. Commission voted by roll call vote to go into executive session for the purpose of discussing land acquisition and agreed not reopen meeting to the public. 9:45 p.m. Meeting adjourned. Respectfully submitted by, Louise Vinci Department Clerk Page 4 of 4