HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-09-12 Conservation Commission Minutes
North Andover Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes
September 12, 2018
Members Present: Albert P. Manzi, Jr., Vice Chairman, Joseph W. Lynch, Jr., Deborah A. Feltovic,
Douglas W. Saal and Sean F. McDonough
Members Absent: Louis A Napoli, Chairman, John T. Mabon
Staff Member Present: Jennifer A. Hughes, Conservation Administrator
Meeting came to Order at: 7:02 Quorum Present.
Pledge of Allegiance
Acceptance of Minutes
A motion to accept the minutes of August 8, 2018 and August 22, 2018 as reviewed and amended
is made by Ms. Feltovic, seconded by Mr. Manzi.
Vote 5-0 Unanimous.
Request for Determination of Applicability
730 Massachusetts Avenue (B.P Logue)
The Administrator and the Commission discuss the project.
A motion to continue until October 10, 2018 is made by Ms. Feltovic, seconded by Mr.
McDonough.
Vote 0-5 Unanimous.
Documents
Email from bryan@bplogue.com requesting a continuance until 10/10/2018
730 Massachusetts Avenue (Columbia Gas)
730 Massachusetts Avenue project is open and the reading of the meeting notice is waived.
A motion to continue until September 26, 2018 is made by Mr. Lynch, seconded by Ms. Feltovic.
Vote 0-5 Unanimous.
Documents
Email from cdicarlo@merrillinc.com requesting a continuance until 09/26/2018
Stiles Street (Lots #33, 34 & 37)
Mr. Willis, applicant and property owner gives background on the project. He is requesting an
agricultural exemption to maintain the access road between two black walnut fields and continue
to maintain the fields.
The Administrator states the requirements that need to be met under the forestry regulations. Mr.
Willis referred to the agricultural regulations in his application. She states the commission needs
more detail on the project, including the size of the existing culvert and BMPs for culvert
replacement. The culverts may not be replaced any larger unless to conform to the requirement
for passing the 25 year storm.
Mr. Manzi states replacement should be in kind.
Mr. Willis asks if there is a difference between and agricultural regulations and those for forest
management.
Mr. Lynch states these are two different activities and that they do differ.
Mr. Willis states he is looking to apply for an agricultural exemption, which is what he initially
came to the Commission for in the 90’s.
1
The Administrator states the work is being applied for as part of a forest management plan.
Mr. Lynch states the harvesting trees is the end project but an interim product is the walnuts.
The Administrator doesn’t believe that harvesting this amount of walnuts would qualify for an
agricultural exemption. The harvesting must be for substantial commercial profit.
Mr. Willis states he planted over a thousand trees and currently has over five hundred trees in
three different locations.
Mr. Lynch states the access is considered an ancient way. The forest is established, growing and
under the forest management process.
Mr. Willis states the walnuts are to be harvested in the next few years and timber possibly to be
harvested by his grandchildren down the road. Mr. Willis is looking to make access repairs and
understands they must be done now in the low flow time.
Mr. Manzi states the Commission put Mr. Willis in business back in the 90’s and applicant is
looking to make in-kind repairs. He believes that under forestry and agricultural plans applicant
has the right to make repairs because the land is in current forestry use.
The Administrator states there is a requirement to replace the culverts in-kind and the original
sizes are unknown. They also need to know the best management practices to be used for removal
and replacement of the culvert. The Administrator requests the applicant provide practices that
will be used to do the work as well as the diameter and size of what is currently on site. The
Administrator states the creation of new access is required to be done under frozen ground, no
flow.
Mr. Willis states he is willing to make repairs in frozen conditions.
Mr. Manzi asks if the applicant can comply with Administrators requests for dimensions,
procedures and timing for in-kind repairs.
Mr. Lynch questions the type of stream, perennial or intermittent or is the culvert just an equalizer
for wetland on both sides.
The Administrator states there has been no assessment on the resource areas.
Mr. Willis states culvert has been dry at times but that there is flow through the culvert.
Mr. Willis would like to use corrugated plastic pipe with corrugated flared ends so that the ends
of the pipe may be covered with stone.
Mr. Lynch states that there can be no fill involved, culvert will not be any wider.
Mr. Willis states they are looking to use 1 ½ inch stone, no loom, gravel or fill.
Mr. Saal states his concerns with plastic pipe being able to support weight capacity of vehicles
crossing culvert.
Applicant is to supply Administrator with requested information and project is to be done in
frozen conditions.
A motion to continue to October 10, 2018 is made by Mr. Lynch and seconded by Ms. Feltovic.
Vote 0-5 Unanimous.
Documents
Application Checklist
Notification to Abutters dated September 12, 2018
WPA Form 1 (Request for Determination of Applicability) dated August 16, 2018
209 Johnson Street (Fritts)
The Administrator states the project is not an in-kind deck replacement and is larger than
permittable under a small project. The project is outside 50 foot no build zone, photos show
existing patio that applicants would like to restore at some point.
Christine Fritts, applicant and property owner, states the RDA is being submitted to replace the
existing deck, expand and add staircase to patio below. The previous deck was unsafe and was
removed about 1 year ago. The applicants are looking to add staircase as a means of egress off the
back of the house. They have already spoken with the Building Department and contractor with
regards to helical piles to have minimal impact on the land. They have also spoken with the
2
Planning Department and will place a filtration sock along the 50-foot buffer zone resource area
to prevent any runoff to the pond.
Mr. Manzi questions if the original deck was only a second level deck, no ground level deck.
Mr. Fritts points out the original existing concrete footings in photo.
The Administrator states applicants have a building permit on file to remove the deck and replace
siding.
Mr. Fritts states the property is in watershed and that they have received a waiver from the
Planning Board for a special permit.
Mr. Lynch states the structures are well outside of the 50 foot no build, making this a permittable
project.
The Administrator states that there are lot of hydric soils in the backyard however not much
vegetation up-gradient of the pond. The Administrator suspect’s hydric soils might be a form of
wicking action out of the pond.
Mr. Fritts believes the pond to be man-made by the Sutton Hill Development.
Mr. Manzi agrees this might be true.
Mr. McDonough refers to notes as to whether a no disturb buffer zone is to be established around
the pond and monumented.
The Administrator presents photos which show a wide open area around the pond, generally
Commissions practice is for a minimal buffer. Administrator considers keeping a path or portion
open since applicants enjoy access to the pond for activities.
Mr. McDonough asks applicants when they bought the property and the conditions of the
property when purchased.
Mr. Fritts states the property was purchased in July of 2013. The previous owner had owned the
property for six months and had updated the interior of the home. The prior owner purchased the
property from a bank whom had owned the property for over 3 ½ years. The property was very
overgrown and unmaintained, the established backyard was as-is with no major tree removals.
The Administrator shows the Commission an aerial photo of property which was taken in 2012.
The Administration suggests a 10 foot buffer zone to help reduce the vegetation growth in the
pond.
Discussion on a low growing natural shrub buffer zone (50-60 feet long), that won’t block view
of the pond but allows a buffer of shrubs to take up nutrients of lawn/plant material.
Applicant questions what types of bushes and if digging would be disturbing the land.
The Administrator states the purpose of the plantings would be to take in run off, stabilize the
shoreline by establishing a root system, preventing erosion.
Mr. Saal and Ms. Feltovic state pesticide/nitrogen prohibition would be sufficient and are in favor
of not imposing a no-disturbance zone and monumentation.
Mr. McDonough and Mr. Lynch feel monumentation and a buffer zone are necessary.
Mr. Saal questions current monumentation at the edge of the pond.
Mr. Fritts states monumentation are solar lights installed for nighttime safety.
A motion is made to issue a Negative Determination #3 with special conditions for no pesticide
/herbicide language and low nitrogen phosphorus free fertilizer, erosion control and pre and post
inspections is made by Ms. Feltovic, and seconded by Mr. Saal.
Vote 2-2 Tie.
Mr. McDonough and Mr. Lynch oppose.
Mr. Manzi votes for motion.
Vote 3-2 in favor.
Documents
WPA Form 1 (Request for Determination of Applicability) and supporting documents,
dated August 10, 2018
Deck Plan w/Wetland Line dated August 10, 2018 prepared by PFS Land Surveying, Inc.
3
Notice of Intent (NOI)
242-1739, Rea Street Subdivision (Messina Development) (Christiansen & Sergi)
A motion to continue until September 26, 2018 is made by Mr. Lynch second Ms. Feltovic
Vote 0-5 Unanimous.
Documents
Email from messinanewhomes@gmail.com requesting a continuance until 09/26/2018
242-1740, 1160 Great Pond Road (North Andover Solar, LLC) (Sanborn Head & Assoc.)
The Administrator states per the Commission's request the wetlands have been reflagged and
reviewed. The Administrator states not much has changed and the field has recently been hayed.
The Administrator questions if field will still be used for haying once the solar equipment has
been placed.
Applicant states that once solar field is in place their will be less room to hay, however they
would like to leave the door open for this. The field will be mowed at minimum for maintenance
and will still have access point for equipment.
Mr. Lynch asks if hay harvesting decision is necessary for the hearing.
The Administrator states the prior order required monumentation of the 25 foot no disturb around
the wetland. When hay harvesting is done, it would be done right up to the edge of the wetlands.
The Commission discuss harvesting field vs. field maintenance and monumentation.
The Administrator states the language in the order can state if field is continuously harvested for
hay that monumentation could be placed in such a way that it wouldn't impede the harvest.
Mr. Manzi and Mr. Lynch state order cannot be left open, Commission would need to know if it’s
going to be a maintenance operation to identify a no disturb zone.
The Administrator states Commission can impose the 25 foot no disturb zone with
monumentation as applicant currently has an agricultural exemption if they decide to harvest the
field.
Motion to close and issue is made by Mr. McDonough, seconded by Mr. Lynch
Vote 0-5 Unanimous.
Documents
Brooks School Solar Farm Final NOI, dated July 2018
Existing Conditions Plan, dated June 2017
242-1720 Amendment to OOC, 33 Regency Place (Norse Environmental)
The Administrator provides photos and reviews the project proposal with the Commission.
Mr. Melvin, of Christiansen & Sergi, states the applicant would like to expand the rear yard,
pushing the retaining wall towards the 50 foot no build zone. The wall is outside the 50 foot no
build zone however a portion of the grading would fall in the 50 foot no build zone. The new
proposal is nine feet closer to the wetlands than the previously approved wall. The modified plan
would result in an additional 770 square feet of disturbance in the buffer zone. Mr. Melvin
addresses the Administrators concerns about a stockpile area and access drive. He states the area
along the back of driveway will be used for stockpile and access drive would be through Lot 6.
Mr. Lynch questions if the wall has been pushed out closer to the wetlands and if it’s within the
50 feet no disturb zone.
Mr. Melvin states the wall is within a couple feet of the 50 no disturb zone.
Mr. Lynch states with the height of the wall it now becomes a structure.
Ms. Feltovic questions how many trees will be removed.
The Administrator states she doesn’t have concerns the dead pines that are to be removed.
However there are several larger trees behind the wall within the 50-25 as well as a multi-trunk
maple tree. The trees are inside the 50 but outside the no disturb, and are outside the limit of
work.
4
The Commission discuss the trees to be removed and removal process. They request minimal
ground disturbance, stumps are to be left, trees to be craned out and vines removed. There will be
no machinery beyond the limit of work shown on the plan.
The Administrator recommends backing the erosion controls with silt fence and discuss new
access point.
Motion to close and issue is made by Mr. Lynch, seconded by Mr. McDonough.
Vote 0-5 Unanimous.
Documents
Grading and Retaining Wall Plan dated September 12, 2018 prepared by Christiansen &
Sergi
Request to Amend Order of conditions dated August 29, 2018 prepared by Maureen
Herald
Grading and Retaining Wall Plan dated August 29, 2018 prepared by Christiansen &
Sergi
Request to Revise NOI dated September 12, 2018 prepared by James Melvin
General Business
242-1631, COC Request, 294 Chestnut Street (William & Sparages)
A motion to continue until September 26, 2018 is made by Ms. Feltovic, second Mr. Lynch.
Vote 0-5 Unanimous.
Documents
Request for Certificate of Compliance dated August 21, 2018 prepared by Christ
Sparages
WPA Form 8B (Certificate of Compliance)
Monitoring Report dated August 21, 2018 prepared by Greg Hochmuth
Existing Conditions Plan dated August 21, 2018 prepared by William Sparages
242-1624, COC Request, 56 Monteiro Way (DeRosa Environmental)
Ms. Guvendiren, of DeRosa Environmental, gives some background on the project. The
mitigation area and rain garden have been planted and conservation monuments (3 square and 7
round) have been installed.
The Field Inspector has reviewed the project and stated less of the project was done than
originally proposed.
Mr. Lynch questions if the applicant understands once the Commission has issued the compliance
the order will be terminated and no additions can be made.
Ms. Guvendiren states this is understood by the applicant.
A motion is made to grant a full and final Certificate of Compliance by Ms. Feltovic, and
seconded by Mr. Saal.
Vote 0-5 Unanimous.
Documents
As-Built Plan dated August 24, 2018 prepared by Meridian Associates
COC Update dated September 5, 2018 prepared by Michael DeRosa
Request for Final Certificate of Compliance dated August 29, 2018 prepared by DeRosa
Environmental
242-1656, Extension Request, 95 Old Cart Way (Tom Murtha)
The Administrator states conservation has been receiving monitoring reports on the site and that
construction is ongoing. The project did have some setbacks in the beginning with a change in
contractor.
A motion is made to grant a one year extension by Ms. Feltovic, and seconded by Mr. Lynch.
Vote 0-5 Unanimous.
5
Documents
WPA Form 7 (Extension Permit for Orders of Conditions)
NOI Site Plan dated August 10, 2018 prepared by Markey Land Development Consulting
242-1662, Extension Request, 0 High Street (Wetlands Preservation Inc.)
Mr. Orzo, of Wetlands Preservation Inc., requests a one year ORAD extension and gives
background on the project.
The Administrator states a site visit has been done and no changes have occurred. The
Administrator states that an ORAD extension form doesn't exists, but that an extension can be
done similar to an OOC.
A motion is made to grant a one year extension by Ms. Feltovic, and seconded by Mr. Lynch.
Vote 0-5 Unanimous.
Documents
ANRAD Plan dated September 9, 2015 prepared by S.E.C. Associates
WPA Form 4B (Order of Resource Area Delineation)
Hunting Dates
The Administrator states that bow hunting season opening dates have changed this year, official
start date is October 1, 2018.
Mr. Manzi states regulations need to be amended to match the MGL.
A motion is made to amend hunting season dates is made by Mr. Lynch, and seconded by Mr.
McDonough.
Vote 0-5 Unanimous.
Enforcement Order/Violation
148 Main Street, Fines
Mr. Saal has recused himself from this discussion due to a conflict of interest.
The Administrator gives back ground on the violation order.
The Commission discuss violation order and fine amounts.
Mr. Manzi asks who authorized the work.
The Administrator states the work was authorized by the Sutton Pond Condominium Board of
Directors.
Mr. Lynch states the road is a structural dam and that no changes should be made and that fines
should not extended to the condo owners.
The Administrator states the fine was issued to the Sutton Pond Condominium Trust.
The Commission discuss cease and desist order.
Doug Saal resident at Sutton Pond states the work was cosmetic improvements, concrete
replacement due to salt erosion.
The Commission discusses issuing a letter regarding any future activity.
The Administrator will follow up with phone call and letter to the Sutton Pond Condominium
Board of Directors.
A motion is made to ratify action taken by the North Andover Conservation staff is made by Mr.
McDonough, and seconded by Ms. Feltovic.
Vote 0-4 Unanimous.
Decision
242-1740, 1160 Great Pond Road (North Andover Solar, LLC) (Sanborn Head & Assoc.)
The Commission discuss baling and harvesting hay vs. mowing for maintenance purposes and
how this affects monumentation.
6
A motion to adopt the Order of Conditions as drafted and amended is made by Mr. Lynch,
seconded by Ms. Feltovic.
Vote 5-0 Unanimous.
Adjournment
A motion to adjourn at 8:37 p.m. is made by Mr. McDonough, and seconded by Mr. Lynch.
Vote 0-5 Unanimous.
7