The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2018-01-10 Conservation Commission Minutes Approved 01/24/2018 North Andover Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes January 10, 2018 Members Present: Louis A. Napoli, Chairman, Albert P. Manzi, Jr. Vice Chairman, John T. Mahon, Jr., Deborah A. Feltovic and Douglas W. Saal. Members Absent: Sean F. McDonough and Joseph W. Lynch, Jr. Staff Member Present: Jennifer A. Hughes, Conservation Administrator Meeting came to Order at: 7:06 pm Quorum Present. Pledge of Allegiance Acceptance of Minutes  A motion to approve the December 13, 2017 minutes is made by Mr. Manzi and seconded by Ms. Feltovic  Vote unanimous NACC #205, 311 Stevens Street,  The Administrator gives a brief description of the project which consists of tree removal within the buffer zone to BVW. Only one of the four trees that the applicant is asking to be removed is outside the 100 foot buffer zone from a plan filed when the home was constructed. The swale at the front of the home was considered jurisdictional at the time the home was built, it drains down to the Wetlands which is between 311 Stevens Street and 271 Stevens Street. Two of the trees are sapling sized and within the 25’ No-Disturbance Zone on the edge of the swale. They are growing in to the utility lines but are not eligible for a small project approval due to their location in the sub zone. The trees have already been tagged- marked.  Mr. Napoli clarifies which trees are included in the small project request and if the trees are being stumped.  The Administrator states that 6 trees would be removed under the small project ‘L” but trees B & E would be removed under a hazard tree approval letter by the Commission.  Tolga Yazicioglu and Jennifer Bluff, 311 Stevens Street owners, state that the tree company will leave the stumps and grind the stumps as close to the ground as possible.  A motion is made by Mr. Manzi to accept this as a Small Project “L” with a hazard tree letter to approve additional tree removal. Second by Ms. Feltovic.  Vote unanimous  A Motion is made by Mr. Manzi to approve the small project “L” as requested with a second by Ms. Feltovic with special conditions for a post construction inspection and stumping only.  Vote unanimous Documents  Small Project checklist  Letter, dated 12/29/2017, prepared by Tolga Yazicioglu  Quote, dated 11/28/2018, prepared by Bartlett Tree Experts  Approximate Locations of Proposed Trees Approved 01/24/2018  Bartlett Proposal “B” Photo  Bartlett Proposal “A” Photo  Bartlett Proposal “C” Photo  Bartlett Proposal “D” Photo  Bartlett Proposal “E” Photo  Bartlett Proposal “F” Photo  Bartlett Proposal “G & H” Photo  Bartlett Proposal “I” Photo  Bartlett Proposal “J” Photo Notice of Intent (NOI) 242-1719, Massachusetts Ave. @ Chickering Rd. (MassDOT) (Green International Affiliates) (cont. to 01/24/2018)  A motion to continue until January 24, 2018 meeting is made by Ms. Feltovic and seconded by Mr. Manzi.  Vote: unanimous Documents  Email requesting a continuance until the January 24, 2018 meeting, dated 11/08/2017, prepared by Kristen Hayden 242-1721, 562 Boxford Street (Sirius Development, LLC) (Christiansen & Sergi, Inc.)(Cont. to 1/24/18)  A motion to continue until January 24, 2018 meeting is made by Ms. Feltovic and seconded by Mr. Manzi.  Vote: unanimous Documents  Email requesting to continue until January 24, 2018 meeting, dated 01/09/2018, prepared by T.J. Melvin. 242-1724, 21 High Street (RCG) (Civil Design) (cont. from 10/17/2017)  The Administrator summarizes the information from the previous meeting on December 13, 2017, making note of the change to the fire access way, and that the outfall to the existing pipe has been moved back and that change is now reflected on the plan.  Tania Hartford, RCG, speaks to the changes made to the plan with the addition of a fire safety lane after meeting with the Planning Board and the Fire Department. Ms. Hartford also states that they have received comments from TEC and will be going over those with the Commission tonight.  Mr. Manzi would like a summary of disparities referenced in the peer review of the plans. In addition overview of the changes made to address the waiver requests.  Phil Henry, Civil Design Group, states that largely the comments have been addressed. TEC has responded with a second round of comments the majority of them are addressed although there are a few items, most noticeably two being addressed tonight.  Mr. Henry asks if the Commission has received the request for 2 waivers dated January 05, 2018.  The Administrator confirms that the Commission is in receipt of letter.  Mr. Manzi asks if this area is what is being called the isolated parking lot. Approved 01/24/2018  Mr. Henry confirms that yes this is what is being referred to as the isolated lot.  The first waiver request is related to the land use with more than a 1000 visits a day, which this site does have as a whole. However this site does have a section of the parking lot which would not be subject to 1000 vehicles per day due to its location on the site. This location which has approximately 35 parking spots is at a high point which allows it to drain east, whereas the rest of the lot drains toward High Street. The isolated parking area would drain toward a stormwater swale with a fore bay. That would be connected and will directly discharge to the pond. It will not be subject to the high intensity use that other portions of the site are currently subject to and which are currently designed for.  Mr. Henry states that the second waiver is for exemption from the Stormwater standard for no infiltration in the 50 No-Build Zone, Mr. Henry asks the Administrator if this is accurate.  The Administrator referred to the Wetlands Protection Regulations under section “3.4 Buffer Zone 50-foot No-Build Zone: Construction of any kind is prohibited within 50-feet of the edge of the wetland resource areas identified in Section 1.3. Structures include but are not limited to foundations and footings associated with single family dwellings, multi-family dwellings, commercial and/or industrial buildings, porches, patios, decks, house additions, building additions, pools, septic systems and sheds. Driveways, roadways, retaining walls and landscape boulder walls may be allowed in the 50-foot No-Build Zone when no other feasible location or alternative means of access exists. Stormwater structures and/or discharge may be allowed in the 50-foot No-Build Zone when no other feasible location exists or when it is necessary to maintain the hydrology of the resource. An alternatives analysis showing the net benefit of locating the structure in the No-Build Zone is required.”  The Administrator discusses with the Commission the Waiver request and the Alternatives Analysis with regard to the voting procedures.  Mr. Henry gives the Commission an overview of what the proposed system is comprised of explaining that the drainage proposal is for the site per the DEP guidelines. Most of the drainage is at the 50 foot buffer however there are sections that are at 42 feet which would put those sections 8 feet within the 50 foot buffer zone. The alternatives to this design would require the site to be raised.  Mr. Manzi asks the Administrator the procedural requirements for these two waiver requests.  The Administrator details what requirements are needed in order to process the request. Mr. Mabon has arrived at the meeting 7:26pm  Julie Vondrak, Wetland Permitting Consultant speaks to the proposed project and the need to have the waivers in order to work within the riverfront on this proposed project. Ms. Vondrak speaks about the current drainage pipe that leads to the property from Walker Road.  Mr. Henry states that the proposal is to capture this pipe and tie into it underground and have it drain into the wetlands.  Mr. Napoli is asking about the stormwater management and the subsurface controls that is being put in place. He is concerned about the roof runoff eroding the walkway. Mr. Napoli would like to see some stone incorporated into the stone dust on the walkway plan.  Mr. Henry is asking for clarification on the size stone he is requesting.  Mr. Napoli states it is ⅜” size. Approved 01/24/2018  The Administrator has concerns and would like to see a subsection plan for the porous paver sub-base.  The Chairman asks if any abutters are present.  Linda Fucca 24 East Water Street is at the podium. Ms. Fucca would like information on the path that is located on the proposed site. Ms. Fucca would like to see the permits or other documents on when the path was established on the property.  The Administrator and Mr. Manzi state that the Mills and path predate the bylaw and the Wetlands Protection Act.  A motion is made by Mr. Manzi to accept paragraph 7.0 and 7.1 of the Alternatives A letter dated January 5, 2018. Seconded by Ms. Feltovic.  Vote unanimous  A motion to continue until the January 24, 2018 meeting was made by Mr. Manzi seconded by Ms. Feltovic.  Vote unanimous Documents  Attachment A – Project Narrative, revised 01/08/18  Permeable Clay Pavers, product description  Letter, prepared by Philip R Henry, P.E. Civil Design Group, LLC. dated 01/05/2018  Stormwater Report, prepared by Civil Design Group, dated 10/27/17 revs.12/19/17  East Mill Plan Set, prepared by Civil Design Group, dated 10/30/17 revs, 11/02/17, 12/19/17  Letter, prepared by TEC, dated 01/04/18 242-xxxx, 16 Beaver Brook (Christian & Sergi)  Scott Cameron, Morin Cameron Group, states the home was built in 1998 and the entire home is within the 75 foot No-Build Zone to BVW and parts of it are within the 50 foot No- Disturb Zone to BWV. This proposed project is to construct an addition for a 1st floor master bedroom (addition of 13x42’), there will not be any trees removed. There is a vernal pool located within the Wetlands.  Mr. Mabon has a question on the delineation at closed point (38 feet). Mr. Mabon would like to see a monumentation along the tree line to protect the 50 foot no disturb zone.  Mr. Napoli would like to know how long the owner has lived in the home. Mr. Napoli would like to know when the deck was built and that no permits have been filed for this deck.  The Administrator states that there are no permits for the deck.  Mr. Patel states that no permit was pulled for the deck.  The Commission discusses having Mr. Patel apply for an after the fact permit for the deck.  A motion to continue until the January 24, 2018 meeting is made by Ms. Feltovic and seconded by Mr. Manzi  Vote unanimous. Documents  Letter, prepared by Philip Christiansen, Christiansen & Sergi, dated 12/21/2017  Application checklist Notice of Intent  Project Description  Alternatives Analysis  WPA Form 3 – Notice of Intent, prepared by James Melvin, Christiansen & Sergi  NOI Wetland Fee Transmittal Form  Notification to Abutters Approved 01/24/2018  Arial map of property  MassGIS topographic map  Copy of checks to the Town of North Andover and Commonwealth of Mass.  Notification to abutters  Town of North Andover Abutter listing  Notice of Intent Plan, prepared by Philip Christiansen, Christiansen & Sergi, dated 12/18/17 242-1692, Amendment of OOC Request, 1210 Osgood Street  Jeff Brown Princeton Properties, speaks to the request for an amendment to the Order of Conditions issued by the Town of North Andover Conservation Commission and permits issued by the Planning Board. The project will be retail, commercial and residential space on the site. During the development of this project the topography of the site would requires the applicant to bring in large amounts of fill and upon speaking to Contractors it was realized that this was impractical, so the project has been redesigned to lower the buildings by two to three feet across the entire site. The size, locations, number of units and the amount of impervious area of the buildings remain the same. There has been some concern regarding traffic and the redesign has accounted for some of these concerns. This project will allow for 900 feet of sidewalk to be installed along Osgood Street.  Mr. Brown states that the Town has been awarded a 2.7 million dollar grant to improve the roadway along with a sidewalk.  Joe Peznola Hancock associates, the genesis of the change is the need to redesign the original project and find a different product for the underground infiltration system due to the high ground water of the site and the low elevation. Mr. Peznola is giving a brief description of the new proposed infiltration system. He presents plans showing where the original systems were located and where the new ones will be.  Mr. Peznola states that the changes are currently being reviewed by Lisa Eggleston and that the preliminary conservations are centered on the maintenance of this product. Mr. Peznola states that the retaining walls that were permitted by the Conservation Commission are there on the site just smaller than the original design.  Mr. Mabon is asking if test pits have been done on the site to see if the rain water infiltration and the new system will work.  Mr. Peznola states that yes there are test pits on the site but that ability to quantify the numbers is hard to quantify.  The Administrator is clarifying wording of the Bylaw.  Mr. Mabon would like to see more infiltration on the front section of the site. He states that Stormwater Management of the site is of the utmost importance for this site.  Mr. Mabon is also asking about the maintenance of the proposed infiltration system  Mr. Peznola states that it is a concern of Lisa Eggleston also.  Mr. Manzi is asking for clarification on the infiltration system being proposed for the site and clarification on what changes are being made from the original proposed system.  Mr. Napoli would like to wait until the Commission received Lisa Eggleston's final report and recommendations.  Mr. Peznola speaks to the changes to the design of the project and the size of the retaining walls.  Mike Howard, Epsilon Associates, states that the applicant is not looking for relief from the conditions just the requested changes. Approved 01/24/2018  A Motion is made to continue until the January 24, 2018 meeting is made by Mr. Manzi and seconded by Ms. Feltovic.  Vote is unanimous Documents  Copy of check for North Andover Conservation Filing fees  Notification to Abutters  Town of North Andover Abutters Listing  Copies of Certified Mailings  Letter, prepared by Hancock Assoc. Dated 12/21/2017  Letter, prepared by Hancock Assoc. Dated 12/18/2017  Letter Stormwater Review Update, prepared by Eggleston Enviromental, dated 12/15/2017  Letter Stormwater Review, prepared by Eggleston Enviromental, dated 11/29/2017  Stormwater Report, prepared by Hancock Assoc, revised dated 12/21/2017 General Business 242-1117, COC Request 213 Berry Street (25 Hesper St LLC) (Casey)  The Administrator gives some background on this request and the project.  Kyle Lally, Hancock speaks to the discrepancy on the construction of retaining walls and the fact that they were built of wood instead of a cement.  The Commission is concerned that the wall was not constructed as specified on the plan. The Commission would like Mr. Lally to do more research on the Original request and Order of Conditions to see it the wall design was part of the project.  A Motion is made to continue until the January 24, 2018 meeting is made by Mr. Manzi and seconded by Ms. Feltovic.  Vote is unanimous Documents  WPA Form 8a – Request for Certificate of Compliance  North Andover Conservation Commission Order of Conditions Compliance Certification Form, prepared by Kyle Lally, dated 12-26/2017  Certification Request Letter, prepared by Vaclav Talacko, Hancock Assoc. Dated 12-26/2017  Photo #1: Leaching Field in front yard, prepared by Hancock Assoc.  Photo #2: North Andover Conservation Commission Protected Wetland Sign, prepared by Hancock Assoc.  Photo #3: Well in Backyard, prepared by Hancock Assoc.  Photo #4: Septic Tank area, prepared by Hancock Assoc.  As-Built Plan, prepared by Hancock Assoc., dated 01/06/2005  Copy of check for North Andover Conservation Filing fees Enforcement Order/Violation 440 Great Pond Road (cont. to 01/10/2018)  The Administrator states that a restoration plan has been submitted to the Commission for their review. She asks why the consultant chose Sycamore trees for the restoration.  Robert Prokop, Wetland Consulting Services, states the reason for the Sycamore trees is to improve wildlife habitat. Approved 01/24/2018  Mr. Prokop gives the Commission a brief overview of his Restoration Plan letter, dated January 4, 2018 and the request not to replant the buckthorn and river birch due to the fact that they are an aggressive invasive species and the roots were left intact. In regard to the slash and abandoned structure on the site as a place for a wildlife habitat.  Mr. Prokop references the photos that were provided along with the letter.  Mr. Mabon would like to see some mitigation of the site.  Mr. Prokop would like the Commission to allow him to monitor the site over the spring and summer to monitor the buckthorn.  The Administrator would like to see the slash and the structure removed.  Mr. Manzi would like the plan revised and revisited when the snow melts.  Mr. Napoli would like to see the structure and the slash removed and the plan to be revisited once the snow melts.  Mr. Prokop asks if it is the suggestion of this Commission to have the slash and structure removed and come back to the Commission for a revised site plan.  The Administrator would like the EO revised to allow for the removal of the slash and structure before the June 2018 meeting.  Ms. Feltovic would like the removal of the buckthorn to be revisited.  A motion to revise the Enforcement Order and continue to the June 2018 meeting is made by Ms. Feltovic and seconded by Mr. Manzi.  vote unanimous Documents  Letter, prepared by Robert Prokop, Wetland Consulting Services, dated 01/04/2017  Restoration Plan, Figure 1 : Preliminary buffer zone planting plan, prepared by Robert Prokop, Wetland Consulting Services  Photo A Saplings and shrubs, provided by Jennifer Hughes, prepared by Robert Prokop, Wetland Consulting Services  Photo B Slash left within the 100 foot buffer, provided by Jennifer Hughes, prepared by Robert Prokop, Wetland Consulting Services  Photo C Slash left within the wetland area, prepared by Robert Prokop, Wetland Consulting Services  Photo D Slash left within the wetland area, prepared by Robert Prokop, Wetland Consulting Services  Photo E Part of the area proposed for planting, prepared by Robert Prokop, Wetland Consulting Services  Photo F Sapling and shrub planting area within the 100 foot buffer, prepared by Robert Prokop, Wetland Consulting Services 25 Hollow Tree Lane (Fixler) (Trinity Logging) (Varney Logging)  Mr. Napoli steps aside as chair for this hearing.  Mr. Manzi will chair this hearing.  Attorney Egan is before the Commission in regard to the EO / Violation for removal of trees on the property at 25 Hollow Tree Lane  Mr. Manzi reads a police report taken by Officer Eric Sewade was read into the record at the request of Attorney Egan.  Mr. Manzi states that Officer Sewade contacted the Conservation Administrator Jennifer Hughes that the cutting may have occurred on, in or by Wetlands. The Conservation Approved 01/24/2018 Administrator then contacted Mr. Manzi in order to conduct a site visit. Upon arrival to 25 Hollow Tree Lane it was apparent that a large section of the property was cleared of both hard wood and soft wood trees of varying sizes. Mr. Fixler owner of the property at 25 Hollow Tree Lane states that this cutting was done without his permission or consent.  Mr. Manzi states that they then went down to 46 Hollow Tree Lane and met with the owner Mr. Lally who confirmed that he had hired Trinity Logging to cut the trees on his property, and for Varney Logging to haul the tree away.  Eastman Varney, Varney Logging states that Varney was subcontracted to haul the lumber only.  Mr. Manzi asks if anyone from either Trinity Logging or Varney Logging is present tonight.  Mr. Varney, Varney Logging is in attendance.  James Lally 46 Hollow Tree Lane is also in attendance.  The Administrator summarizes the Violations and issued Enforcement Orders. A restoration plan was required.  Mr. Manzi states that Officer Sewade has taken out criminal complaints on this matter.  The Administrator states that there is a possibility that some of the work done at 25 Hollow Tree was actually done on the property of 487 Winter Street.  Mr. Varney, Varney Logging, is asking for clarification on how he is responsible.  The Administrator is looking for the Commission to ratify and amend 25 Hollow Tree Lane to include Mr. Fixler and confirm the Enforcement order and the Cease and desist.  Attorney would like to record to reflect he opposes naming Mr. Fixler on the Enforcement Order  Attorney Varney would like the record to reflect for the record that they also object to Mr. Varney being listed on the Enforcement Order.  The Administrator states that Mr. Varney is not listed on the Summons report.  Mr. Varney is asking what if any responsibility he has to the restoration.  Mr. Manzi is clarifying the regulations and the need for restoration.  Mr. Saal states that the courts will clarify who is responsible for the restoration.  A motion to amend the Enforcement Order for 25 Hollow Tree Lane to include Mr. Fixler is made by Ms. Feltovic and seconded by Mr. Saal.  Vote unanimous  A motion to ratify the enforcement order as amended to include a survey and delineation plan by the February 21, 2018 (correction: February 28, 2018) meeting for compliance is made by Ms. Feltovic seconded by Mr. Mabon.  Ratify the Cease and Desist on Varney made by Ms. Feltovic and seconded by Mr. Saal.  Documents  Letter, prepared by Jenifer Hughes, dated 12/20/2017  WPA Form 9 – Enforcement Order, prepared by Jenifer Hughes  Letter – Cease and Desist: Violation, prepared by Jenifer Hughes 46 Hollow Tree Lane (Lally) (Trinity Logging) (Varney Logging)  A motion to ratify the enforcement order as amended to include a survey and delineation plan by the February 21, 2018 meeting for compliance is made by Mr. Mabon seconded by Ms. Feltovic.  Mr. Lally, 46 Hollow Tree Lane, is at the podium to give a brief explanation of the removal of the trees. Approved 01/24/2018  Mr. Manzi confirms that the agreement to cut trees was with Trinity Logging  Mr. Lally explains to the Commission as to the series of events that led up to the dispute.  Mr. Manzi is asking if any Wetland delineation of the property was ever done.  Mr. Lally states that no a delineation was ever done the next steps are to get erosion controls in place and work with Hancock to have a restoration plan in place.  Attorney Egan would like the Commission to know that an Engineer has been retained by Mr. Fixler.  The Administrator states that Varney complied with the order to appear at the hearing but Trinity did not. Documents  Letter, prepared by Jenifer Hughes, dated 12/20/2017  WPA Form 9 – Enforcement Order, prepared by Jenifer Hughes  Letter – Cease and Desist: Violation, prepared by Jenifer Hughes Adjournment  A motion to adjourn is made by Ms. Feltovic and seconded by Mr. Mabon  Vote unanimous