Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-09-16 Conservation Commission Minutes Conservation Commission Minutes DPW Conference Room September 16, 1998 Members Present: Albert P Manzi, Jr, Chairman, Scott Masse, Vice Chairman, Joseph Lynch and Deborah Feltovic John Mabon arrived at 8 50 p in Beth Wescott and Robert Mansour were absent Staff Present Michael D Howard, Conservation Administrator, Richelle L Martin, Conservation Associate and Karen A Fitzgibbons, Secretary The meeting was called to order at 7 00 p m Minutes: August 19, 1998 On a motion by Mr Lynch, seconded by Ms Feltovic, the Commission voted unanimously to approve, as amended, the minutes of August 19, 1998 General Business (7:00 p.m.) Eagle Scout Presentation/Brad Bate Brad is a resident of Town who is working toward his Eagle Scout Badge His proposed project is a platform leading to the pond at the Sargent School He distributed pictures to the Commission of the proposed site for the platform and he is looking for endorsement from the Commission Once the vegetation is cleared Brad will be able to take measurements and determine how large the platform can be Brad is proposing to use pressure treated wood if possible, or redwood if not It is hoped a contractor will donate the materials Wood chips, donated by DPW, will be spread around Mr Howard stated there will be no cutting of trees and there is a lot of poison ivy at the site The Commission praised Brad for his presentation and recommended he file a Notice of Intent for the project Mr Howard offered to help Brad through the NOI process when he is ready to file Deed Restriction—Right of First Refusal Form/Charles Foster The form was sent from the Town Manager's office for the Commission to sign this evening Upon review of the form, Mr Manzi noticed that certain language he asked for was omitted Mr Masse offered to draft the language the Commission wants added On a motion by Mr Lynch, seconded by Ms Feltovic,the Commission voted unanimously to extend the signature rights given to Mr Manzi at the last meeting to Mr Masse 242-056 PCOC Lot 2, 32 Paddock Lane (Richard O'Neill, Jr & Associates,P C ) An OOC was issued on May 2, 1979 for the construction of Paddock Estates which is located off of Boston Street There is a stream and BVW surrounding the property Ms Martin stated she inspected the site and observed a dumping violation of yard waste on the property She contacted Laurie Burzlaff who is representing the previous homeowners, made her aware of the violation and instructed her to have the area cleaned up Ms Martin stated as of today's date the area is not cleaned up, however, she is working with a landscaper to clean it up Ms Martin recommends the Commission deny the COC request On a motion by Ms Feltovic, seconded by Mr Lynch, the Commission voted unanimously to DENY the Certificate of Compliance request 242-847 PCOC Lot 9 Settlers Ridge (Tom Zahoruiko) An OOC was issued on February 6, 1997 authorizing construction of an 11 lot subdivision including roadway design and associated utilities and appurtenances 25/50' setbacks were mandated and met,the house is 5 F from the closest wetland point, the bond is $3,000, the site is stable and the office is in receipt of a stamped as-built and a letter from a P E certifying compliance Ms Martin stated she inspected the site, has no issues and recommends the Commission issue a PCOC On a motion by Ms Feltovic, seconded by Mr Lynch, the Commission voted unanimously to issue a PCOC for DEP #242-847 lot 9 Settlers Ridge 242-847 PCOC Lot 10 Settlers Ridge (Tom Zahoruiko) An OOC was issued on February 6, 1997 authorizing construction of an 11 lot subdivision including roadway design and associated utilities and appurtenances A small portion of the lot is in the 100' buffer zone, the entire house is outside the buffer zone The office is in receipt of a letter from a P E certifying compliance along with stamped as-builts The bond is $3,000, the site is stable and Ms Martin recommends issuing a PCOC On a motion by Mr Lynch, seconded by Ms Feltovic,the Commission voted unanimously to issue a PCOC for DEP #242-847 lot 10 Settlers Ridge 242-889 COC 427 Winter Street(John&Kristin Kirwin)New England En ing eering This OOC is for replacement of a failed septic system within the buffer zone of a BVW The system is exactly 50' from the BVW, the bond is $1500,the office is in receipt of a letter from a P E certifying compliance along with stamped as-builts The site is stable and Ms Martin recommends the Commission issue a COC On a motion by Ms Feltovic, seconded by Mr Masse, the Commission voted unanimously to issue a COC for DEP#242-889 427 Winter Street At this time the Commission discussed the possibility of dealing with violators at the end of the meetings It was generally thought to be a good idea and the Commission Office will look into implementing it Decisions: 242-926 Harold Parker State Forest, Middleton Rd Near Berry Pond Rd(Comm of MA) Mr Howard stated this filing is not subject to the Bylaw, therefore, the OOC is issued under the Act On a motion by Mr Masse, seconded by Ms Feltovic, the Commission voted unanimously to approve, as drafted by Mr Howard,the Order of Conditions for DEP#242-926 It is 7 40 p m and the Commission is taking a recess until 8 00 p in Public Hearings (8:00 p.m.) 2 242-784 Abbott Village Estates (North Andover Land Corp ) This case was remanded back to the Commission by Judge Kilbom Present this evening are Atty. Joel Bard, Town Counsel, Peter Ogren, engineer for the project, Ben Osgood, Jr and Sr , and Atty Howard Speicher There were also many abutters present Mr Masse read the legal notice and Mr Manzi stated that on August 19, 1998 the Commission office received information relative to a request for modification and is this a Request for a Modification to 242-784? Atty Speicher stated that we are here this evening for two reasons the remand of conditions 415 and 42 and while the matter was before Judge Kilborn, DEP was considering a superseding OOC The Request for Modification is with respect to the OOC under the bylaw Mr Manzi stated if the Commission is looking at a modification we need to know if it is minor or major Atty. Speicher stated that Peter Ogren will clear that up Mr Ogren stated that the project was approved in 1984, appealed by an abutter, who was successful in the appeal In 1987 the applicant changed the plan and appeared before the Planning Board and Conservation Commission The economy took a down turn and in 1994 the project was purchased by the present owner The plans were changed considerably to reflect the new regulations Several hearings over several months were held and the big issues were driveway crossings where the applicant got into trouble with the Planning Board The Conservation Commission also didn't like the crossing at Nutmeg Lane, insisted it be a through road Throughout the hearings it seemed that the Thistle Road crossing was not that important Mr Ogren read from the minutes of 1/96 stating that Nutmeg Lane was more important and when we got to trial we heard the Commission would like to see a span, which we thought wasn't necessary The judge agreed and here we are Mr Ogren stated his client would like to pick up and take a stab at addressing any concerns about a span We are here tonight in the spirit of trying to address the concerns of the Commission Mr Lynch asked Mr Bard if the Commission is supposed to look at this crossing on its own merit and he replied we need to look at two things tonight the whole picture and the modification Mr Manzi asked exclusive of the crossing, are we to make a determination on the modification9 Atty Bard stated we don't know that yet Mr Masse stated the letter from Mr Ogren is for a Request for a Modification, isn't it9 Atty Speicher stated it is confusing, the judge said if any new information is brought forward, it must be a public hearing, the remand is a public hearing Mr Ogren stated the applicant appealed to DEP and the appeal came at the same time of the stormwater management policy, it's not realistic to have the applicant conform totally so to that end we have made some changes A new hydraulic analysis was done and submitted to the Commission office An earthen dam was present causing a rather large wetland Additional mitigation is wanted in the form of partial bridging It seems more sensible to look at the Nutmeg crossing as far as bridging is concerned The crossing that has the most beneficial use should be done The Planning Board voted a roadway alignment change From Thistle Road there is an island area of upland in the middle and the crossing geometry becomes more constrained as you go down, it is a much more difficult area to cross engineering wise Routine maintenance would be necessary and all of those things say to put the crossing at Nutmeg Lane A 16' crossing at Nutmeg Lane is proposed using 4' x 5' pre-cast concrete placed repetitiously across the stream A 42" high safety rail will be installed The area will be able to handle a 16' concrete span with 3 minimal disturbance At the Thistle Road crossing there is no geometry to use a large span A partial span might be accommodated on the Thistle Road crossing A 12' span can be accommodated across the southerly area 400 sf of area to be filled will be eliminated Mr Ogren further stated that it is the hope of the applicant that the Commission would issue an Order under the local bylaw with this new information Mr Howard asked in regards to the alternatives analysis, does this document you are submitting justify why a partial span can be used9 Mr Ogren replied yes Mr Howard stated regarding a partial span vs a full span,that would need outside review Mr Howard stated 6,000 sf with 2 1 replication was proposed, does that change? Mr Lynch stated this seems outside the remand order and what is the total wetland alterations Mr Ogren stated the same 8,000 sf, we've just offered to span Nutmeg Lane (It is 8 50 pm and Mr Mabon just arrived) Mr Manzi stated the Commission conditioned 6240 sf of wetland alteration Mr Lynch stated we are looking at spans and crossings and we need to deal within the bounds of a modification This seems like a moderate size change Mr Masse stated we have to decide what type of modification it is, feels it is moderate at least and the public hearing should be opened and a site walk scheduled Also an outside consultant should be hired Ms Feltovic agrees with the moderate modification suggestion Mr Lynch stated to Atty Bard that the total alteration before the Commission 2 years ago is the same as today) Atty Bard replied that under th eremand the applicant could come back with the same plan and thejudge said to look at the Thistle Road crossing separate from the whole subdivision The applicant has revised the plan and the Commission is being asked to consider it Mr Manzi stated if the Commission considers it a modification it opens up the whole thing, an outside consultant will need to be hired and wouldn't that be in compliance with the remand order9 Atty Bard stated "yes " Mr Howard stated the engineering proposals are significant enough that this is a moderate modification Mr Masse read Section 8 c from the Bylaw. Atty Bard asked if there was any feedback from the applicant before the Commission goes to a motion and Atty Speicher stated that we understood that regardless what your bylaws say we take exception that would entitle the Commission to revisit the entire project and we've proposed changes that will only be beneficial The applicant is asking that the Commission not review the whole project 7180 sf included the driveway crossing, all the fill at Nutmeg Lane and 430' at Thistle Road not being filled To clarify, Atty Bard stated to Atty Speicher you have no problem with the changes being reviewed,but serious problems about revisiting the entire project,right? Atty Speicher stated that the modification should be reviewed under the bylaw only Mr Manzi agrees Mr Lynch made a motion that the modification presented in regards to three items span crossings, stormwater discharge and roof runoff be considered a moderate modification as stated under Section 8 3 c Mr Masse seconded the motion and before a vote was taken Atty Speicher stated that we're concerned that if this goes to a consultant it would give an opportunity to go into other areas we don't want to go into The remand told the Commission to look at the crossing the way it is The applicant asked for, and received a ten minute recess The recess is over and Atty Speicher stated the applicant appreciates the Commission's standings, wants the modification not to be considered moderate, the changes approved by DEP were not considered moderate however, we don't want to waive our rights They just want the consultant to review the three changes and further limit the consultant from reviewing any specific change except where the Bylaw is more 4 restrictive than the Act Mr Howard stated that according to the Bylaw the applicant can have three bids The vote on the motion was 4-0-1 (Mr Mabon abstained) Mr Manzi stated that for the purpose of the remand order it will be considered through the motion Atty Bard stated the applicant volunteered to bring the changes forward,not the Commission The applicant stated they want three estimates regarding a consultant and Mr Howard will do that Bill Sullivan, an Abbott Street abutter, asked if the meeting will be continued and Mr Manzi replied yes Joe Sasha, 61 Abbott Street, asked if there are impacts on his property, will the Commission review that and Mr Manzi replied it's not likely Art Duffy, 171 Abbott Street, asked if another notice will be given to the abutters and Atty Bard stated it is ajudgement call, if the applicant wants to be more conservative they could notify Joseph Monahan, 644 Salem Street, stated he has lived in the house two years and his yard frequently floods from Bear Hill Mr Manzi stated the laws have changed substantially since the construction of the Bear Hill subdivision An abutter at 46 Woodbury Lane asked if he had this straight it is his understanding that the Nutmeg Lane crossing was denied? Atty Speicher replied yes, but the judge remanded the Commission to look at it again An abutter at 185 Abbott Street asked regarding the Thistle Road crossing, is it 5 lots and Atty Speicher replied at least 5 lots, really 6 lots Bill Sullivan asked the Commission if they may still come up with a decision that Thistle Road is denied? Mr Manzi replied we can't say that Mr Howard recommends continuing the public hearing until 10/7/98 On a motion by Mr Lynch, seconded by Ms Feltovic,the Commission voted unanimously to continue the public hearing until 10/7/98 Request(s) for Determination of Applicability 437 Summer Street Joseph Scandore (New England Engineering) Proof of mailings was given to the Commission and the applicant is requesting a continuance until the October 7, 1998 public hearing On a motion by Mr Lynch, seconded by Ms Feltovic, the Commission voted unanimously to grant the continuance until the October 7, 1998 meeting Notice of Intent(s) 242-927#80 Campbell Road(Karen Hamill) Hancock Engineering cont fr 912198 Julie Parrino is present and stated that she met on site with some of the Commission members Some changes were made to the plan including a permanent barrier being installed Mr Howard recommends closing the public hearing and issuing a decision within 21 days On a motion by Ms Feltovic, seconded by Mr Mabon, the Commission voted unanimously to close the public hearing and issue a decision within 21 days 242-920 #79 Hillside Road Map 25/Parcel 79 (Mesita Development) cont fr 8119198 Mr. Howard stated he has received additional information from John Chessia and there are no outstanding issues left, therefore, he recommends closing the public hearing and issuing a decision within 21 days On a motion by Mr Masse, seconded by Ms Feltovic, 5 the Commission voted unanimously to close the public hearing and issue a decision within 21 days 242-921 Brook Farm Subdivision (M Antonelh) cont fr 8119198 Mr Howard stated he just received new information today and hasn't had time to respond. All issues are not cleared up yet The attorney for the project was present and stated time is of the essence and is asking the Commission if they can close the public hearing tonight The Commission stated they must wait for Mr Howard to review the information Mr Howard offered to try and have a decision ready for the next meeting The applicant is requesting a continuance until the 10/7/98 meeting On a motion by Ms Feltovic, seconded by Mr Masse, the Commission voted unanimously to continue the public hearing until the 10/7/98 meeting 242-925 33 Johnson Street, No Andover Youth Center (Christiansen &Sergi) cnt fr 8119198 Mr Howard stated that the last outstanding issue was minimizing the impacts to the wetland area from the new building The standard for the project to be considered a redevelopment project has been met Mr Howard recommends closing the public hearing and issuing a decision within 21 days On a motion by Mr Lynch, seconded by Ms Feltovic, the Commission voted unanimously to close the public hearing and issue a decision within 21 days 242-928 Lot IN Berry Street, east side, (One Hundred Fourteen Trust) and 242-929 Lot 2N Berry Street, east side, (One Hundred Fourteen Trust) and 242-930 Lot 3N Berry Street, east side, (One Hundred Fourteen Trust) Patrick Garner and Peter Hingoram were present and since there were no abutters, Mr Hingoram consented to the waiving of the reading of the legal notices Mr Hingoram requested a continuance of the above listed projects until the October 7, 1998 meeting 242-931 Lot 4N Rt 114, east of Berry Street (One Hundred Fourteen Trust) There were no abutters present and the applicant consented to the waiving of the reading of the legal notice The proposed project is for a 50,000 sf building The applicant waived the three bids for an outside consultant and would like to use Coler& Colantonio Mr Lynch made a motion, seconded by Mr Masse, to establish a$5,000 outside escrow account The vote of the Commission was unanimous The applicant requested a continuance until the 10/7/98 meeting On a motion by Mr Lynch, seconded by Ms Feltovic,the Commission voted unanimously to continue the public hearing at the 10/7/98 meeting 242-932 Waverly Rd from Andover Town Line (Wetlands Preservation, Inc) 6 Adele Fionello from Wetlands Preservation was present representing Bay State Gas John Nerden was also present There were no abutters present and Ms Fioriello consented to waive the reading of the legal notice The proposed work consists of installing erosion controls,plowing a utility trench, laying the gas line and restoring the trench to original grade and surface cover over a distance of 395 linear feet There will be no overnight stockpiling of soils or open trenches All proposed work is within the roadway or right-of-way/shoulder Mr Howard stated the wetland line was approved through the Den Rock project, and he has been working with Ms Fiorillo and John Nerden all along Mr Howard recommends closing the public hearing and issuing a decision within 21 days On a motion by Mr Masse, seconded by Ms Feltovic, the Commission voted unanimously to close the public hearing and issue a decision within 21 days 242-933 Campbell Road/Lyons Way Sub (West Environmental) MPG Realty Corp Mark West, West Environmental, was present and proof of mailing was given to the Commission The proposed project includes the construction of 7 single family homes and 1200 linear feet of roadway with associated drainage Mr West stated the wetlands are shown on the property and there is a fair amount of disturbance due to past work There is an intermittent stream in the back of the property There will be 700 sf of wetland crossing and there will be 2 houses located close to the 25' and 50' Mr Manzi asked if at the entrance at Campbell Road did you determine any hydrolic links through boulders and Mr West replied no Mr Lynch expressed concern regarding an old order and a violation Ms Martin stated a COC was issued on the old order It was discussed that an escrow account should be established The applicant waived the three bid process for an outside consultant and will use Coler&Colantomo On a motion by Mr Lynch, seconded by Ms Feltovic,the Commission voted unanimously to establish an escrow account in the amount of$5,000 Mr Howard recommended the applicant stake out the area for a site walk Debbie and Robert Acciacca, 168 Campbell Road, 681-6179 have owned and lived in the home for many years, however,they are not on the abutters list and never received notice of the meeting They were advised to contact the assessor's office to try and set the matter straight The Conservation Office will notify the Acciacca's of future meetings and when a site walk is scheduled Decisions: 242-927 80 Campbell Road(Karen Hamill) Hancock Environmental Mr Howard had a draft Order of Conditions prepared for the Commission's review On a motion by Ms Feltovic, seconded by Mr Lynch, the Commission voted unanimously to approve, as amended, the draft Order of Conditions for DEP 4242-927 80 Campbell Road Adjournment: On a motion by Mr Lynch, seconded by Mr Mabon, the Commission voted unanimously to adjourn the meeting