Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-02-19 Conservation Commission Minutes 2020 Conservation Commission Minutes 19-02- Page 1 of 6 Approved 03/11/2020 North Andover Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes February 19, 2020 Members Present: Louis A. Napoli, Chairman, Albert P. Manzi, Jr., Vice Chairman, Joseph W. Lynch, Deborah A. Feltovic, and Douglas W. Saal Members Absent: John T. Mabon and Sean F. McDonough Staff Members Present: Amy Maxner, Conservation Administrator Meeting came to Order at: 7:03 p.m. Quorum Present. Pledge of Allegiance Acceptance of Minutes  A motion to accept the minutes of the January 22, 2020 & February 5, 2020 as reviewed and amended is made by Mrs. Feltovic, seconded by Mr. Manzi.  Vote 5-0, Unanimous. Notice of Intent 242-1780, 1230 Salem Street (Saraceno Construction)  The Administrator reviews the proposal for the construction of a single-family house, associated septic system, driveway and appurtenances on a vacant wooded lot. A revised plan was received depicting changes requested by the Commission. Revisions include the cart path labeled as abandoned, construction fence added at limit of work, foundation drain discharge point has been moved outside 50-foot NBZ and wetland flag D5 has been accurately depicted.  No public comment.  A motion to close and issue in 21 days is made by Mrs. Feltovic, seconded by Mr. Manzi.  Vote 5-0, Unanimous. Documents 02-05-2020 Meeting Materials, Final Site Plan Enforcement Order/Violation 410 Summer Street (Loughran)  The Administrator states the homeowner was ordered to file an After-The-Fact NOI for a pool rehab. The wetlands were flagged. The homeowner has been traveling for work and has not coordinated with the consultant on the NOI. If the NOI is not received in time for the March 11th meeting, she recommends amending the Enforcement Order to set a date certain for a submission deadline.  The Commission discusses the Enforcement Order.  A motion to continue to March 11, 2020 is made by Mr. Manzi, seconded by Mrs. Feltovic.  Vote 5-0, Unanimous. Documents 12-11-2019 Meeting Materials 644 Salem Street (Monahan)  The Administrator states an Enforcement Letter was issued for the removal of two Willow trees in close proximity to the brook and BVW, cut trunks dumped into wetland and possible cutting of trees in BVW. The Administrator is unsure if there was any cutting performed within the BVW; staff was not allowed access to the site. 2020 Conservation Commission Minutes 19-02- Page 2 of 6 Approved 03/11/2020  Mr. Lynch refers to what appears to be a scrivener's error on the Enforcement Letter and confirms the letter was addressed to the proper party.  The Administrator confirms the letter was mailed to the correct party.  Joseph & Christine Monahan the homeowners are present. Mr. Monahan states they removed the trees because they were rotted and leaning. They were not aware they needed to seek permission to have them removed.  Mr. Napoli questions what appears to be a structure and bridge in the aerial photography.  Mr. Monahan states the bridge was there when the house was purchased. The structure shown in the aerial is no longer there. There is a fort built by their son which is located approximately 200-feet behind the brook.  Mr. Lynch would like to know what the homeowner proposes to do with the tree stumps.  Mr. Monahan states they intend to allow the stump to rot and pull them out. He would like to know how much of his property is considered wetland.  The Commission provides the homeowners with information as to how wetlands are determined. They direct the Administrator to provide written information on the Act & Bylaw to the homeowner. They stress the importance of knowing where the boundaries are and recommend calling Conservation Staff prior to the start of any work within 100-feet of the brook. If there is a need to repair the bridge, it will require permitting.  The Administrator states anything located on the other side of the brook is considered a wetland and should remain untouched.  The Commission agrees the stumps cannot be ground, but can be flush cut and no further disposal of any material will be allowed on the other side of the brook.  A motion to issue a Modified Enforcement Letter is made by Mr. Manzi, seconded by Mrs. Feltovic.  Vote 5-0, Unanimous. Documents Violation Letter 02 03 20 242-1689, 1995 Salem Street (Lot 3) (Hogson)  The Administrator states an Order of Conditions was issued in April 2017 for the construction of three house lots. The houses and the majority of the work is outside of Commissions jurisdiction. Work within the 200-foot Riverfront and 100-foot Buffer Zone consisted of construction of driveways, a detention pond and associated clearing. The approved total disturbance/clearing in 200-foot Riverfront was 4,890 s.f. for all three lots listed in the OOC. There was an additional clearing of 5,792 s.f. on lot 1. The Administrator presents an overlay of LOW vs. pre-construction aerial. The project engineer estimates approximately 5 large trees were removed in the Riverfront. An affidavit has been signed by the new owner a copy of the OOC was provided.  T.J. Melvin, Morin Cameron clarifies they are seeking an Occupancy Permit. A Stop Work Order was issued by the Building Department in October 2019 due to a change in the house configuration. Additional work is required before a Certificate of Compliance is requested.  Mr. Lynch states it is not unusual for a home to transfer ownership with an outstanding OOC. The NACC has no standing in issuing a Certificate of Occupancy.  The Administrator states the OOC is current and is due to expire on April 24, 2020. The issue lies with the limit of clearing beyond what was approved under the OOC.  Mr. Melvin states they are willing to provide a replication to restore portions along Salem Street within the 100-foot Buffer Zone.  Mr. Lynch states the applicant needs to show how they intend to rectify the over clearing. He states they have the right to inspect the other lots for any discrepancies given they are covered by an OOC.  Mr. Melvin states they have not looked at the other lots for discrepancies at this time. 2020 Conservation Commission Minutes 19-02- Page 3 of 6 Approved 03/11/2020  The Administrator would like to know if the NACC requires a 1:1 replanting with specified caliper size. There has been no violation of the 25-foot NDZ. The violation involved the inner Riverfront, inner Buffer Zone and the outer Riparian.  Mr. Manzi states they typically require a 3:1 replanting restoration but would let the Administrator specify based on site conditions.  The Commission discusses the violation. They direct the Administrator to work with the representative to prepare a Replanting/Restoration Plan for all three lots. The Replanting/Restoration Plan will be approved administratively along with a letter of agreement to be entered into the record. The Violation letter will remain in place. Documents 4-7-17 NOI Site Plan, 242-1689, Non Compliance with and Pending Expiration of IIC 02 06 20, Colored - Interim As Built Plan 10 29 19, Planning Cert Lot 3, Tree Exhibit 1806 Salem Street (Diamond)  The Administrator states staff was notified of activity at the site by the Inspector of Buildings. The Field Inspector conducted a site inspection and observed excavation in preparation for gravel driveway construction within 25-feet of an Intermittent Stream. The contractor was directed to level out the excavated piles of soil, install erosion control and cease work. The site was checked today and the directives continue to be complied with.  Scott Diamond the homeowner states there was an existing compact asphalt driveway in place when the home was purchased 7-months ago. The existing driveway is approximately 35-feet from the Intermittent Stream. He proposes to expand the existing driveway footprint, placing the driveway 13-feet from the Intermittent Stream.  Mr. Napoli states expanding the existing driveway would require permitting. Expanding the width of the driveway will require a street opening permit as well as additional Conservation permitting. He urges the homeowner to speak with Conservation Staff prior to the start of any work.  Mr. Lynch states after reviewing the project he does not feel the expansion of the driveway would be permissible.  Mr. Diamond requests to be allowed to keep the existing driveway as two thirds of it is still in place.  Mr. Lynch states if aerial photos depict a driveway existed then it is possible it can go back to its existing condition.  The Commission directs the Administrator to review historic aerial photographs along with plans from the Board of Health to prove an existing driveway was present.  A motion to continue to March 11, 2020 is made by Mrs. Feltovic, seconded by Mr. Lynch.  Vote 5-0, Unanimous. Documents Enforcement Order 02 06 20, 1806 Salem Aerial with Stormwater Info. 242-1692, 1210 Osgood Street (Princeton Development, LLC) & 242-1692, Commercial Site at 1210 Osgood Street (a.k.a 1274 Osgood Street) (Forgetta)  Atty. Jeff Brown, Princeton Properties and John Henry, LTR are present. Atty. Brown will be acting as the point of contact for the project and has provided his contact information to the Administrator. He has been involved with the project since the original permitting in 2015.  Mr. Manzi and Mr. Lynch read an email dated February 18, 2020 from Atty. Brown.  Mr. Lynch states there will be no segregation of the parcel (commercial vs. residential). The Order of Condition applies to the entire property. Outside Influences outside the Commission’s jurisdiction have caused impacts making the entire site jurisdictional.  Atty. Brown states the purpose of the email was to make the distinction if an operational issue were to arise at the commercial site he is not the general contractor. 2020 Conservation Commission Minutes 19-02- Page 4 of 6 Approved 03/11/2020  The Administrator states the Erosion Control Monitor found that a material is depositing downstream of the permanent treatment discharge point. The material was tested by LTR and preliminary test results were received. The Administrator states the material is somewhat gelatinous, no odor and beige in color.  Mr. Henry states they collected samples of the material from the site on February 10th. A letter was provided summarizing what they analyzed for and the test results. The tests concluded the material is a type of mold, not algae. They analyzed pH; alkalinity, total dissolved solids and several nutrients were analyzed to find the cause of the mold. He provides a summary of the test results for the Commission. The interceptor trench is being treated by the system housed in the garage; the only addition made to the captured water is the pH adjustment.  Mr. Manzi questions if they have seen this type of mold before and if calcium carbonate/RCA could be involved. He would like to know what type of impacts the mold might have on the Resource Area. He feels the mold must be related to the site activities.  Mr. Henry states he has not seen this type of mold before. At first glance, it appeared to be a growth vs. a deposit. Growth was observed near organics where the water discharges. There is very little calcium carbonate in the water that is discharged therefore he does not feel it is related. The lab that analyzed the mold specializes in chemistry vs. biological analysis. They were only able to confirm the material was mold.  The Administrator states the mold is in the wetland and seems to dissipate further downstream.  Mr. Lynch would like to know if they have installed erosion controls to try to contain the mold.  Mr. Henry states the mold is localized and goes approximately 25-50 feet along the flow path beyond the discharge point. There is approximately 200-300 s.f. of mold. No mold has been seen in the other discharge locations. He does not believe the mold is related to a temperature change from the water entering the garage treatment system prior to being discharged.  Atty. Brown suggests consulting with a biologist regarding wetland impacts the mold may have.  The Commission agrees consulting with a biologist is the right place to start, perhaps Paul McManus of EcoTech.  Mr. Mazni confirms there has been no changes to the pH levels prior to treatment since last August/September.  Mr. Henry states the pH level is stable at this time but still requires being capturing and treating. According to the lab, the pH level was 12.1 on February 10, 2020.  The Commission discusses additional escrow funds, which will be needed for continued consultant fees.  Atty. Brown states they have not received an accounting for how the funds have been used.  The Administrator offers to provide updated accounting information to the applicant. She recommends requesting additional escrow funds in the amount of $20,000. There is no overlap between the Environmental Monitor and Peer Reviewer.  Mr. Manzi states the reports indicate the presence of RCA in the soil samples collected from three of the five soil borings. The results indicate soil borings MW #4 & #5 had pH readings of 10 and 8.6. Five of the ten soil borings were not tested. He feels they have adequate information to conclude there is RCA widespread throughout the parcel, making the entire site jurisdictional.  Mr. Lynch states a month ago the applicant was ordered to test the soil boring. He expresses concerns that only half of the soil borings were tested.  The Commission discusses the project, how RCA has affected the wetlands, and the response from the applicant providing only partial testing.  Atty. Brown states he cannot answer why requested items were not delivered to the NACC. He states there are agreements of record stating the residential and commercial developments share the stormwater management system. They are obligated to treat the surface stormwater regardless of where it comes from. The interceptor trench was designed to accommodate the potential that there could be calcite on the residential site. He states the recent three boring samples indicate a light presence of calcite and are nowhere near, what was reported in the original samples from April 2019. Atty. Brown objects to 2020 Conservation Commission Minutes 19-02- Page 5 of 6 Approved 03/11/2020 reopening the public hearing. He requests they be allowed to continue operating under the Enforcement Orders, which can be amended if necessary. He goes on to describe the terms of the agreement when the RCA was required to be removed from the jurisdictional areas.  Mr. Manzi states when the discovery was first made they did not realize the correlation between the RCA and increased pH levels of the water coming off the site. He states the Commission did not realize how dangerous RCA is to the environment, surface water and groundwater until an experienced expert was brought on. He feels that since no construction has occurred on the commercial site they have a chance to correct the issue.  Mr. Lynch states reopening the public hearing will allow the Commission to Amend the OOC to properly condition the residential area of the parcel. The Amended OOC will become comprehensive and will become part of the permanent record.  Atty. Brown states they have complied with the BMP’s required in the Enforcement Order.  The Commission agrees to reopen the public hearing on March 11, 2020 to amend the Order of Conditions. The Commission is looking to understand what the fill material is, where it is located, how it will be cleaned up while defining the Commission's jurisdiction across the site. They direct the Administrator to serve notice to the parties involved and notify the abutters.  Atty. Brown confirms they are allowed to continue to finalize stormwater management during this process.  Mr. Lynch states his intentions are not to stop construction for what has already been permitted, under the OOC and the collective Enforcement Orders.  The Commission discusses the stormwater management system located within the existing driveway. They agree that completing any peripheral work to the stormwater management system built in compliance with the EO can continue to be allowed.  Atty. Brown states they will continue to operate the interceptor trench as long as necessary and to the Commissions satisfaction. A series of cross easements were created and recorded at the Registry of Deeds. This allows future owners to understand there is a shared responsibility relative to the stormwater management system and groundwater treatment and discharge.  Mr. Lynch recommends the applicant get the results for the untested borings on the undeveloped portion of the site to present at the next meeting.  A motion to approve additional escrow funds in the amount of $20,000 for continued peer review is made by Mrs. Feltovic, seconded by Mr. Lynch.  Vote 4-1-0, (In Favor: Lynch, Manzi, Feltovic, Saal, Recused: Napoli) A motion to reopen the public hearing to amend the Order of Conditions is made by Mr. Lynch, seconded by Mrs. Feltovic.  Vote 3-1-1 (In Favor: Lynch, Feltovic, Saal, Abstained: Manzi, Recused: Napoli)  A motion to continue to March 11, 2020 is made by Mr. Lynch, seconded by Mrs. Feltovic.  Vote 4-1-0, (In Favor: Lynch, Manzi, Feltovic, Saal, Recused: Napoli) Documents, 242-1692, 1210 Osgood Street (Princeton Development, LLC); 02-05-2020 Meeting Material, 1210 Osgood Photos 02-12-20 Deposits at tx Discharge, 1210 Osgood St - WTS Sampling Results Documents, 242-1692, Commercial Site at 1210 Osgood Street (a.k.a 1274 Osgood Street) (Forgetta); 02-05-2020 Meeting Material, 1210 Osgood 02-19-20 Photos, 1210 Commercial EC Plan - MW & SB with pH and RCA Results Annotated, 13534 Forgetta Development Report, Low Flow Data Sheets_2.10.2020 General/New/Old Business 242-1689, Extension Request, 1995 Salem Street (Hodgson)  This item was taken out of order and discussed along with the Violation.  The applicant has requested a one-year extension. 2020 Conservation Commission Minutes 19-02- Page 6 of 6 Approved 03/11/2020  A motion to grant a one-year extension is made by Mrs. Feltovic, seconded by Mr. Manzi.  Vote 5-0, Unanimous. Documents OOC Extension Decisions 242-1762, 95 Lyons Way (O’Neill)  The Administrator reviews the drafted Order of Conditions with the Commission.  The Commission requests additional language be added making the homeowners/successors responsible in perpetuity for the Operation & Maintenance Plan. A plan to handle the flow of stormwater unimpeded during construction is required. The plan must be amended prior to construction to depict a construction access and stockpiling location. The bond will be set in the amount of $2,000.  A motion to approve the Order of Conditions as drafted and amended is made by Mr. Lynch, seconded by Mrs. Feltovic.  Vote 5-0, Unanimous. 242-1779, 0 Stevens Street (TTOR)  The Administrator reviews the drafted Order of Conditions with the Commission.  The Commission discusses Condition #27. The authorized work shall be completed within five years from the date of the OOC. The OOC will not be eligible for an extension after five years. Condition #52 requires the applicant to notify abutters annually via first class mail prior to performing activities. The applicant shall notify the Conservation and Planning Departments by telephone 72 hours prior to activities. The bond will be set in the amount of $1,000.  A motion to approve the Order of Conditions as drafted and amended is made by Mr. Manzi, seconded by Mrs. Feltovic.  Vote 5-0, Unanimous. 242-1780, 1230 Salem Street (Saraceno Construction)  The Administrator reviews the drafted Order of Conditions with the Commission.  The Commission discusses Condition #62; tracking pads will be required prior to construction. The bond will be set in the amount of $3,000.  A motion to approve the Order of Conditions as drafted and amended is made by Mr. Manzi, seconded by Mrs. Feltovic.  Vote 5-0, Unanimous. Adjournment  A motion to adjourn at 9:28 p.m. is made by Mr. Manzi, seconded by Mrs. Feltovic.  Vote 5-0 Unanimous.