Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-02-27 Conservation Commission Minutes 1 North Andover Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes February 27, 2019 Members Present: Louis A Napoli, Chairman, Joseph W. Lynch, Deborah A. Feltovic and Douglas W. Saal Members Absent: John T. Mabon, Albert P. Manzi, Jr., Vice Chairman and Sean F. McDonough Staff Members Present: Jennifer A. Hughes, Conservation Administrator and Benjamin Curell, Field Inspector Meeting came to Order at: 7:00 pm Quorum Present. Pledge of Allegiance Acceptance of Minutes  A motion to accept the minutes of February 13, 2019 as reviewed and amended is made by Mrs. Feltovic, seconded by Mr. Lynch.  Vote 4-0 Unanimous. Request for Determination of Applicability 422 Waverly Road (Jensen)  The Administrator states the matter came before the Commission as an Enforcement Order. This is an After the Fact RDA filing for the installation of a generator just inside the 50-foot No-Build Zone. The applicant provided an Alternatives Analysis and a site visit was made to review the possible locations. The current location of the generator is 1-foot inside the No-Build Zone. After the Fact mitigation will include monumentation of the existing fence, installation of 1 post with a wetland marker and the addition of 3-4 shrubs to enhance the Buffer Zone.  Mr. Napoli would like to know if the generator can be placed near the a/c unit.  The Applicant states there is a gas vent on the house and according to generator regulations it must be 5-feet away from a window or gas vent.  Mrs. Feltovic questions the placement of the shrubs.  The applicant states he will contact the Administrator in the spring to find out what kind of shrubs will be required and the placement of them.  A motion to grant the waiver request of the 50-foot No-Build Zone is made by Mrs. Feltovic, seconded by Mr. Saal  Vote 4-0 Unanimous.  A motion to issue a Negative Determination #3 as recommended (approving the installed generator location after the fact requiring mitigation including monumentation of the existing fence and installation of (1) pressure treated post with wetland marker and the addition of 3-4 shrubs) is made by Mrs. Feltovic, seconded by Mr. Lynch.  Vote 4-0 Unanimous. Documents  Buffer Zone Restoration Aerial and Site Plan  RDA Application Checklist  Supporting Documents  WPA Form-1 Request for Determination of Applicability Abbreviated Notice of Resource Area Delineation 242-1741, ANRAD Request, 0 Turnpike Street (Map 9, Parcel 20) (Bay Development, LLC)  Greg Hochmuth, Williams & Sparages presents on behalf of the applicant. The filled channel on the property as well as a source stream that originates from a culvert is a non-jurisdictional stream. Results indicate there is 2 an obstruction in the pipe or that the pipe has been compromised. After some research they found a nest of boulders that were not working properly at the end of a pipe that traced back to the area drain acting as a dry well. There is evidence to support blasting on the site is the source of hydrology for the C-Series BVW. Water quality testing of the stream was conducted by Luke Fabbri of Geological Field Services. The water was tested for volatile organic compounds, extractable petroleum hydrocarbons with target compounds and total RCRA metals. Results from the testing concluded the water discoloration is from iron and manganese oxide and is not indicative of a reportable release of oil and or hazardous materials. The report states this is very common for land that has been filled and disturbed.  The Administrator states there were some compounds found in the water testing.  Mr. Hochmuth states the report submitted by GPS stated that toluene was detected at one part per-billion below the applicable reportable concentration for toluene. Naphthalene was detected at four parts per-billion below its reportable threshold. Arsenic was detected below the reportable threshold and some barium was also detected. A site visit was made by Commissioner Manzi on Friday, February 22, 2019. Commissioner Manzi found the evidence a reasonable explanation of the Commission’s concerns.  Mr. Lynch states the Commission had some good suspicions they felt were worth exploring and they have done a good job. He states there is no hydraulic connection to any other resource area large enough to make this an actual resource area and nothing upgradiant feeding it. The highway drain easement is there legally and the Commission will not act on it. Commissioner Lynch would like to confirm the other elements found in the water sampling were below reporting level.  The Administrator states the analysis report results indicate they were above reporting level. She states this information doesn’t affect the ORAD.  Mr. Lynch states there are reportable levels and then there are action levels under DEP 21E. Mr. Fabbri has a responsibility to report them if the levels are above. Remediation in a wetland can be done if DEP requires it.  Mr. Hochmuth states the report seems to contradict some of the tables. He will ensure that his client is aware of this.  Mr. Napoli states he does not know what the plans are to develop the property but the Commission will be more stringent with the NOI.  A motion to approve the delineation as shown on the plan dated February 27, 2019 is made by Mrs. Feltovic, seconded by Mr. Lynch.  Vote 4-0 Unanimous. Documents  Drain System Memo, dated February 22, 2019 prepared by Williams & Sparages  ANRAD Plan, revised February 22, 2019 prepared by Williams & Sparages  Easement Pan, dated March 25, 1970 prepared by Department of Public Works  Essex County Highway Layout, dated 1946  Drain Line Inspection, dated October 17, 2018 prepared by EST Associated, Inc.  Analysis, dated October 19, 2018 prepared by Geological Field Services, Inc.  Site Plan, dated January 2003, prepared by GZA  Letter, dated February 11, 2019 prepared by Williams & Sparages  ANRAD Plan, revised February 11 ,2019 prepared by Williams & Sparages  Inspection Report, dated October 17, 2018 prepared by Williams & Sparages Notice of Intent (NOI) 242-1746, 495 Main Street, Recreation Complex (Town of North Andover)  Jacob Murray, Waterfield Design Group presents on behalf of the applicant. He recaps the recreation complex project for the Commission. The project has undergone several rounds of peer review since the last meeting. The new plans include the addition of tree box filters in the parking area. A standalone Operation Maintenance Plan has been created. The plan will be handed off at the end of the project to whomever will be maintaining the stormwater and other elements of the site. An Alternatives Analysis was provided explaining why the parking lot cannot be pulled out of the 25’ No-Disturbance Zone. 3  Mr. Lynch confirms the limits of the parking lot will not be extended any further. He questions the additional testing for the Mounding Analysis and when the project will go out for bid.  Mr. Murray states they will be adding more parking outside of the Buffer Zone. The project is expected to go out to bid in mid-April with construction starting the end of the school year.  Mr. Lynch would like to know the process of having the additional Mounding Analysis information review after the fact. He would like to know what happens if the analysis is compromised by a soil condition.  Mr. Murray states additional test pits within the infiltration areas were requested. When the original testing was done they were unable to get access to the infiltration areas. The test pits in the infiltration areas will be performed prior to construction. They are confident even with higher ground water there will be no issues.  Mr. Lynch states the water table needs to be verified and that he does have concerns with the system working. He would like to know why the borings can’t be done with the frozen ground conditions and while the fields are not in use.  Mr. Murray explains the reasoning behind using test pits vs. borings.  Mr. Lynch states his concerns with how the issue would be handled after the fact. He states this is a great project but that he would be more comfortable if he had the data showing the drainage system working.  The Administrator states confirmatory test pits have been required on other projects permitted by the Commission.  Mr. Napoli states his biggest concern at the prior meeting was that no groundwater was to leave the site. The area is wet and has a very high water table. He would like to know if the walkway at the wetland edge will be eliminated to make space for parking spots.  Mr. Murray states the walkway will remain and a curb will be placed with parking spaces perpendicular to it.  The Administrator states a permanent barrier is a good idea due to the proximately of the parking area and sidewalk.  Mr. Napoli states he spoke with the Conservation Administrator and the Assistant Director of the DPW in regards to the placement of a wooden guardrail.  Mr. Lynch states his concerns with snow removal and the possibility of snow being dumped in the wetland.  Mr. Murray states the snow stockpile is shown on the plan to the west.  The Administrator states No-Snow Stockpiling Signs will be required along the No-Disturbance Zone.  The Commission discusses the current snow removal process.  Mr. Lynch states there maybe times the OOC will require the snow to be trucked away.  Mr. Napoli states he spoke with the Assistant Director of the DPW regarding dumping in the wetland on the other side. The Commission would like this cleaned up and boulders put in place to protect the wetland.  The Administrator states this will be addressed with a separate Enforcement Order.  Mrs. Feltovic would like to know how long it will take to get the additional test pit information required to close the project.  Mr. Murray states this can be done pretty quickly with a contractor and a soil evaluator.  Mr. Lynch would like to know if Horsley Witten Group is willing to do one more peer review on the test pit data after Conservation and Planning have closed the project.  The Administrator states review of the test pit data can be a written in to the Order of Conditions. Other conditions will include a permanent barrier along the walkway, signage, No-Snow Stockpiling along the No- Disturbance Zone and notations in the O&M Plan. The OOC will be drafted and issued simultaneously with the Planning Decision.  A motion to continue until March 13, 2019 is made by Mrs. Feltovic, seconded by Mr. Lynch.  Vote 4-0 Unanimous. Documents  Second Peer Review, dated February 19, 2019 prepared by Horsley Witten Group  Conservation Presentation Plans, dated January 9, 2019  Email Approval, dated February 19, 2019 prepared by Jacob Murray  Third Peer Review, dated February 22, 2019 prepared by Horsley Witten Group  Mounding Analysis, dated February 19, 2019  Operation and Maintenance Plan, dated February 2019, prepared by Waterfield Design Group 4  Recreation Complex Permitting Plans, revised February 22, 2019 prepared by Waterfield Design Group  Revised Alternative Analysis, dated February 22, 2019  Water Quality Calculations, dated February 20, 2019 242-1750, 1 Oak Avenue (Held)  The Administrator states there are a lot of photos and documentation of the existing site conditions.  Mary Rimmer, Rimmer Environmental Consulting and Thad Berry, ASB Design Group present on behalf of the applicant. The property is located at the corner of Oak Avenue (private way) and Andover Street near the meadow owned by the Trustees of Reservation. The filing is to conduct drainage improvements including the cleaning of the culvert under Oak Avenue. Due to lack of maintenance the stream overtops the culvert and flows on to the roadway and the applicant’s property. The proposal includes the cleaning of the culvert, adding flared sections to the inlet and outlet ends, rebuilding the headwall and re-grading the area at the outlet to improve the flow into the meadow. To maintain positive flow requires lowering the outlet elevation. This will also require the temporary alteration of 672-feet of Bordering Vegetative Wetland made up of herbaceous vegetation which will be restored upon completion of the project. Some grading is proposed in the backyard with in the 25-foot No-Disturbance Zone to prevent flooding in the basement. The area will be restored after the work is completed. The work will require the temporary removal and resetting of a stone wall along the property line. The proposal also includes the removal and installation of a new storage shed in the rear of the yard, outside the No-Build Zone. Drainage improvements and a pervious walkway is proposed at the front of the house and improvements to improve the flow of water along Oak Avenue to bypass the front yard and steps.  Mr. Lynch confirms all the alterations are temporary and the location of the temporary disturbance.  Ms. Rimmer states erosion controls will be placed and once full vegetative cover is re-established the erosion controls will be removed.  Mr. Lynch confirms they are only improving the inlet and outlet at the 8” culvert. He questions if there are concerns with the roadway overtopping.  Mr. Berry states the inlet does tend to get clogged up. If maintained in the spring and fall it won’t clog.  Mr. Napoli confirms the pipe under the Oak Avenue hasn’t collapsed and that they have permission from the Trustees for the areas they will be working on.  Ms. Rimmer states the Trustees are in favor of the project.  Ms. Dorothy Held, applicant and property owner states she hopes the project will improve the property.  Mr. Rimmer states the applicant would also like to conduct invasive species management and replant with native plantings. This area is along the west side of Oak Avenue within approximately 10-feet of the road.  The Commission discusses the invasive species management proposal.  Mary Dussault, 5 Oak Avenue questions who will be in charge of the yearly maintenance of the culvert. She would like clarification on the location of the invasive plants and requests abutters have some input on the invasive species management proposal.  Ms. Held states the flooding is causing erosion and is deteriorating the value of her home. She states the cleanup of the invasive plants is not an aesthetic request. The plants are growing around the inlet of the culvert.  Mr. Berry states if cleanup is done in the spring and fall the maintenance process will be very simple.  Ms. Rimmer states there are invasive plants all the way down to Andover Street along the west side.  Ms. Held states she has expressed interest in doing what she can to help restore the area. She fears this will be a recurring problem if it's not dealt with.  Mr. Lynch states this will be a big burden to take on if required of the homeowner.  The Commission agrees if the invasive species management proposal is to be conducted it will be done under the guidance of the Conservation Administrator.  Ms. Dussault asks for clarification of the location that is to be lowered and in which direction they are trying to get the water to flow.  Ms. Rimmer indicates the shaded area on the plan directly at the outlet end of the culvert. 5  The Administrator states the water will flow from the proposed shed and into the wetland.  The Commission discusses the size of the pipe running under Oak Avenue.  Ms. Dussault states the condition in the photos are rare. She feels this has happened because the inlet and outlets are clogged.  Ms. Held states she has documented rain and snowstorms and feels the problem is not irregular.  A motion to approve the waivers is made by Mrs. Feltovic, seconded by Mr. Lynch.  Vote 4-0 Unanimous.  A motion to close and issue in 21 days is made by Mrs. Feltovic, seconded by Mr. Lynch.  Vote 4-0 Unanimous. Documents  Existing Conditions Plans, dated February 11, 2019 prepared by ASB Design Group  Conservation Commission Waiver Request Form  WPA Form 3-Notice of Intent w/Supporting Documentation  Trustees Authorization Letter, dated February 13, 2019 242-1751, 2051 Salem Street (Richards)  Ben Osgood Jr., Ranger Engineering & Design LLC presents on behalf of the applicant. The filing is to cross the Riverfront Zone for access to the back portion of the lot. There are no wetland resource areas on the property. The proposal is for a septic system, well and a house with the driveway crossing the Riverfront Zone (Boston Brook). There is approximately 8,550 square feet in the Riverfront Zone with 4,000 square feet proposed to be disturbed. Erosion controls and a construction entrance are proposed and they have received a Notice of No-Take from Natural Heritage.  Mr. Cleon Richards and Mr. Lee Richards the property owners are present for questions.  The Administrator states she received a copy of the letter from Natural Heritage stating no segmenting of the project or doing work on different parts of the former lot. The No-Take letter also states there should be no extension beyond the limit of clearing without notifying them. A copy of the Enforcement Order has been sent to Natural Heritage.  Mr. Lynch states he believes Natural Heritage wants to keep the forest intact for the Blanding’s Turtle.  Mr. Osgood states there are no Vernal Pools. There is a large wetland system behind the lot that drains through the adjacent property crossing the street. A comment was received from the Town Engineer regarding the driveway and minor revisions will be made to the plan for the Board of Health. He requests a continuance to submit revised plans to the Board of Health and the Conservation Commission.  The Administrator states the Commission would also like erosion controls and a stockpile area on the plan.  Mr. Lynch states the driveway entrance may require a driveway culvert.  Mr. Osgood states there is a condition that the driveway must slope down 4 inches from the road and then slope back up. He has concerns the end of the driveway will fill with water causing icing conditions in the winter. There will be adjustments made to the driveway on the plan.  The Administrator suggests the driveway be pitched into a swale that runs down and into the edge of the roadway.  A motion to continue to March 13, 2019 is made by Mrs. Feltovic, seconded by Mr. Lynch.  Vote 4-0 Unanimous. Documents  Plans, dated February 6, 2019 prepared by Benjamin C. Osgood PE  WPA Form 3-Notice of Intent w/Supporting Documents General Business 242-1382, COC Request, 1820 Turnpike Street (GFM General Contracting)  The applicant requested a continuance via email.  A motion to continue until March 13, 2019 is made by Mr. Saal, seconded by Mrs. Feltovic.  Vote 4-0 Unanimous. Documents 6  Email from BVaughan@smolakvaughan.com requesting a continuance until 3/13/2019 242-1655, COC Request, Wellington Way (Messina Development)  The applicant requested a continuance via email.  A motion to continue until March 13, 2019 is made by Mr. Saal, seconded by Mrs. Feltovic.  Vote 4-0 Unanimous. Documents  Email from TJ@csi-engr.com requesting a continuance until 3/13/2019 242-1672, OOC Extension Request, 492 Sutton Street (Lawrence Municipal Airport)  Mr. Napoli abstains from the discussion due to a conflict of interest, Mr. Lynch steps in as chair.  The Administrator states the applicant has requested a one year extension.  A motion to grant a one year extension is made by Mrs. Feltovic, seconded by Mr. Saal.  Vote 3-0 Unanimous, Abstention; Mr. Napoli. Documents  Extension Request Letter, dated February 8, 2019 prepared by Stantec 242-1672, Request for Partial Bond Release (Lawrence Municipal Airport)  Mr. Napoli abstains from the discussion due to a conflict of interest, Mr. Lynch steps in as chair.  The applicant requested a continuance via email.  A motion to continue until March 13, 2019 is made by Mrs. Feltovic, seconded by Mr. Saal.  Vote 3-0 Unanimous, Abstention; Mr. Napoli. Documents  Email from randy.christensen@stantec.com requesting a continuance until 3/13/2019 242-1632, COC Request, Interstate 495 (MassDOT)  Amy Lynch, MassDOT presents updated plans to the Commission. She states she was able to get GPS spot grades to confirm the project was built to design. The grades have been added to the plans and there are some discrepancies by approximately six inches. The depth of the basin and general grading match. The inlets and outlets were existing and they should function the same.  The Administrator states while conducting the site visit all the check dams were in the swale, no scouring, erosion control were removed and everything was permanently stabilized.  The Commission discusses the location of the project.  A motion to issue a Full and Final Certificate of Compliance is made by Mrs. Feltovic, seconded by Mr. Lynch.  Vote 4-0 Unanimous. Documents  Stamped Drainage Plans, prepared by MassDOT 242-0639, COC Request, Osgood Street at Holt Road (MassDOT)  Amy Lynch, MassDOT presents updated plans to the Commission. She states she was able to get GPS spot grades to confirm the project was built to design. The culvert location, length and slope match the design which are shown on an aerial photograph. There are other points of reference in the correct location shown on the plan.  The Administrator would like to know if there were any discrepancies between the invert and the outlet elevations.  Ms. Lynch states the elevations are off by approximately a foot and a half.  Mr. Lynch would like to know if there is any ponding of water.  Ms. Lynch states the water is flowing well. 7  The Administrator states they were unable to find the drain manhole detail on the proposed plan. They confirmed the foot and a half, two feet is consistent on both ends. They have reviewed photos and there is no bank scour or concerns of flooding.  A motion to issue a Full and Final Certificate of Compliance is made by Mr. Lynch, seconded by Mrs. Feltovic.  Vote 4-0 Unanimous. Documents  Stamped Drainage Plans, dated February 13, 2019 prepared by the MassDOT Enforcement Order/Violation 422 Waverly Road (Jensen) (Logue)  The Commission discusses the Enforcement Order.  A motion to continue to June 26, 2019 is made by Mrs. Feltovic, seconded by Mr. Lynch.  Vote 4-0 Unanimous. Documents  WPA Form 9-Enforcement Order  Violation Letter, dated November 28, 2018  Violation Letter, dated November 6, 2018 2053 Salem Street (Richards)  The Enforcement Order was discussed with the Notice of Intent.  The Administrator states the area which the work occurred is partially on 2051/2053 Salem Street. The property was previously flagged making it apparent the work was done right up to the BVW and within 100- feet of the Riverfront Area.  Mr. Cleon Richards and Mr. Lee Richards the property owners are present for questions.  Ben Osgood Jr., Ranger Engineering & Design LLC states the wetlands were flagged in association with the Form A Plan by Andover Consulting. The recorded plan does not include the name of who flagged the property. He will do more research to find out. There is a small wetland ditch that comes next to the driveway that services the house. This area was not included in the survey and is not shown on the plan for the work proposed on 2051 Salem Street. These plans were submitted before the work was done. There are several large pines on 2051 Salem Street and several oak trees on 2053 Salem Street the owners would like removed. The owners went forward with the tree removal without permission from the Commission. A small portion (50-100 square feet) of the wetland next to the driveway may have been disturbed.  The Administrator states the area of disturbance also includes the 25-foot No-Disturb Zone and questions if the wetland is isolated or if it connects to another wetland.  Mr. Osgood states the wetland connects to a larger wetland in the back and it comes down along the driveway near 2053 Salem Street. A ditch then brings the drainage down along the driveway to a culvert under the road. They plan to survey the area and catalog what’s been cut to come up with a restoration plan for the spring.  Mr. Lynch would like to know if any stumping was done on site.  Mr. Osgood states only cutting was done, no stumping. The plan is to install erosion controls around the edge of the disturbance area and remove what has been cut.  The Administrator recommends a Restoration Plan to be submitted by May 1, 2019, erosion controls placed and logs removed under frozen conditions. The restoration work is to be completed by June 30, 2019  Mr. Lynch questions if Natural Heritage has been notified and if the loggers were local.  The Administrator states she has been in contact with Natural Heritage, the reviewer will be notified. The logger is from New Hampshire and reached out to her to ask for an explanation on why the work was stopped.  Mr. Lee Richards would like to know if it will be possible to cut the remainder of the trees with a permit.  The Administrator states they will need to file for any additional work.  A motion to amend the Enforcement Order as recommended (restoration plan, erosion controls, log removal under frozen conditions) is made by Mr. Lynch, seconded by Mrs. Feltovic.  Vote 4-0 Unanimous. 8 Documents  Violation Letter, dated February 21, 2019 Decision 242-1749, 430 Osgood Street (Town of North Andover)  The Administrator reviews the drafted Order of Conditions with the Commission.  There will be no bond on the project and the Field Inspector will act as the project monitor.  The Commission discusses if the project should require an As-Built.  The project will require an As-Built for the trail location.  A motion to approve as amended is made by Mr. Lynch, seconded by Mrs. Feltovic.  Vote 4-0 Unanimous. Adjournment  A motion to adjourn at 9:00 pm is made by Mr. Lynch, seconded by Mrs. Feltovic.  Vote 4-0 Unanimous.