HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-06-26 Conservation Commission Minutes North Andover Conservation Commission
June 26, 1996
7:30 P.M.
Senior Citizens' Center
PRESENT: Joseph W. Lynch, Jr. Albert P. Manzi, Jr.
George L. Reich Robert L. Mansour
Deborah Feltovic Joseph Mottola
Scott Masse
STAFF: Michael D. Howard Julie A. Parrino
Chairman Lynch called the meeting to Order at 7:30 P.M.
Mr. Lynch stated the guidelines for this meeting*
1. Applicant's presentation;
2. Administrator's comments; and
3. Abutter comments. The applicant is not obliged to respond to all
inquiries / questions tonight.
242---- Joanne Drive / Donna Drive, Campbell Forest
Steven Stapinski of Merrimack Engineering made a presentation. He stated
the project was approved by the Planning Board. He gave a brief overview
of the history of the site. G. Reich noted that Mr. Stapinski's rendition of
history regarding the history of this project is not accurate. DEP issued a
Superseding Order of Conditions. All litigation under the Bylaw has been
dropped. The applicant is still appealing the Superseding Order of
Conditions in adjudicatory. The applicant is awaiting action under this filing
prior to dealing with the Superseding Order of Conditions matter.
This is a 32-lot subdivision. Joanne Drive was historically scheduled to
enter and exit off of Campbell Road. DEP believes Donna Drive is a Limited
Project, as directed by the Planning Board, in lieu of an exit from Joanne
Drive. There are 25 lots subject to the commission's jurisdiction, all will
meet the 25750 . All septics are 1 00' from wetlands. M. Howard believes a
spanned crossing is justified for a project this large. Attachment #3
summarizes total alteration proposed. 1 ,900 s.f. alteration, 4,800' wetland
North Andover Conservation Commission
June 26,1996 2
replication, 396 s.f. land under water. Mr. Stapinski stated that wetlands
have been delineated and for the most part they have increased.
Curtis R. Young of Wetlands Preservation, Inc. spoke about the wetland
resource areas; buffer plantings to serve as bank replication; planting plan
for basins.
Scott Masse arrived at 8:00 P M
M. Howard made presentation:
1. discussed wetland delineation;
2. discussed wetland violations;
3. suggested span;
4. DEP comments read aloud.
Rebuttal by Stephen Stapinski. Mr. Stapinski stated DPW does not want a
span! DEP will not have a problem with a span if DPW does not want it.
Zero increase in peak runoff. The intent is to meet the commissions
comments. Wetland violations: operator on-site from Merrimack Engineers.
William Dufresne.
Mr. Stapinski believes limited project is justified and drainage calculations
address flooding issues raised,by DEP. Hydrocalcs look at comments by
previous town's consultants. J. Lynch stated that calcs followed an 1983
analytical model. J. Lynch repeatedly pressed Mr. Stapinski as to whether
the 1983 model is the current version used for performing hydrologic
calculations. Mr. Stapinski maintains that it is and J. Lynch stated that a
third party review of the drainage calculations will confirm the validity of the
analytical model.
Recommendations from commission-
1. Assess damage to wetlands from septic testing / fine accordingly
submit restoration plan / survey those areas on a plan / evaluate
square feet;
2. Drainage review, calculations will be sent out for review.
3. The commission will schedule a site visit when the delineation is
finalized.
North Andover Conservation Comnussion
June 26,1996 3
Abutters comments:
Susan Meyer, 1 Campbell Road addressed the commission.
Requested the commission to review entire drainage calculations. She
does not believe a zero increase rate was proven. Asked what recourse the
abutters have if property is flooded because of the commission's decision.
She asked how previous plan differs.
Mrs. Goodwin, 10 Campbell Road addressed the commission. She is
concerned with culverts on her property. She is concerned with drainage.
Wants to know what recourse she will have. Mrs. Goodwin submitted a
video tape of April 1987 flood (100-year flood) into evidence.
Mary LaChapelle of Salem Street is upset at the developers. She
wants to know who will take the responsibility for future drainage and
flooding problems. The taxpayers have to be protected
A. Manzi noted bond money issues. J. Lynch rebutted with support for the
commission, citing the public hearing process must be specific to the filing.
J. Lynch further stated that monetary bonds are established through the
Order of Conditions to assure compliance.
Guy Richards of 2000 Salem Street asked if clearing was done for a
perc tests today. M. Howard responded in the affirmative.
Richard Moran of Salem Street stated his concerns for the historic
flooding associated with Salem Street. He is upset with the commission.
Arthur Findeklian of 121 Campbell Road concerned with estimated
Habitat Natural Heritage program. Mr. Stapinski responded that the site is
not mapped. M. Howard confirmed Mr. Stapinski's statement.
Simon Dix of 4818 Salem Street stated that there is no legal
responsibility of the town or developer to abutters He does not feel the
bond is satisfactory assurance.
John Seven of 1809 Salem Street stated his concerns with the culvert
issues. M. Howard,stated the plans were signed and received by the
North Andover Conservation Commission
June 26,1996 4
Planning Board in 1995/1996. Mr. Stapinski discussed the detention basins.
July 17 as the deadline on Enforcement Order.
The floodplain elevation was questioned and will be addressed at the next
meeting.
J. Lynch noted that the Notice of Intent appears to be simply a re-packaging
of old information from the former filings J. Lynch further noted that the
design changes now proposed differ significantly from that under the prior
filings and as such"should constitute more current information being
included in the Notice of Intent. Accordingly, J. Lynch wants an affidavit
from Andover Consultants authorizing use of drainage calcs. G. Reich
asked if the TR-20 statistical 1 00-year changed in past five years. Mr.
Stapinski stated the model has not changed. M. Howard will verify with the
town's consultant. G. Reich stated the issues with the DPW will not affect
the type of crossings.
Restore wetlands through an Enforcement Order, Continue to July 24, 1996.
Motion by G. Reich, to Issue an Enforcement Order to instruct the applicant
to submit a plan depicting all disturbed areas complete with a restoration
plan, second A. Manzi. Vote: 7-0-0.
Motion by G. Reich to Assign a deadline of 7/17/96 to comply with
Enforcement Order, second by R. Mansour. Vote: 7-0-0.
Motion by G. Reich to Continue to July 24, 1996, second by A. Manzi. Vote:
7-0-0.
14
o epliW. flynch, Jr., Chairman