Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-05-27 Conservation Commission Minutes Conservation Commission Minutes 27-50-2020 Page 1 of 5 Approved 06/24/2020 North Andover Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes May 27, 2020 Members Present: The following identified themselves as present on the call: John T. Mabon, Joseph W. Lynch, Albert P. Manzi, Jr., Vice Chairman, Louis A. Napoli, Chairman, Deborah A. Feltovic and Sean F. McDonough Members Absent: Douglas W. Saal Staff Members Present: The following identified themselves as present on the call: Amy Maxner, Conservation Administrator Meeting came to Order at: 7:05 p.m. Quorum Present. The Administrator Amy Maxner reads the following statement: Pursuant to Governor Baker’s March 12, 2020 Order Suspending Certain Provisions of the Open Meeting Law, G.L. c. 30A, §18, and the Governor’s March 15, 2020 Order imposing strict limitations on the number of people that may gather in one place, this meeting of the North Andover Conservation Commission will be conducted via remote participation by conference call to the greatest extent possible. Specific information and general guidelines for the remote participation by members of the public and or parties' right and or requirement to attend this meeting can be found on the town’s website. For this meeting members of the public who wish to watch the meeting may do so on their television by tuning to the Comcast Channel 8 or Verizon Channel 26 or online at www.northandovercam.org. No in-person attendance or members of the public will be permitted, but every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the proceedings in real time via technological means. In the event that we are unable to do so despite our best efforts we will post on the North Andover website an audio, recording, transcript of this meeting. If the public would like to participate in the public hearing please email your questions or comments prior to or during the meeting to the Conservation Administrator, Amy Maxner at amaxner@northandoverma.gov. The question or comment will be read during the process and responded to accordingly. Acceptance of Minutes  A motion to accept the minutes of the April 22, 2020 & May 13, 2020 as reviewed and amended is made by Mrs. Feltovic, seconded by Mr. Mabon.  Vote 6-0, Unanimous. Minor Modification 242-1692, 1210 Osgood Street (Princeton Development)  Mr. Napoli recuses himself from the discussion due to a conflict of interest, Mr. Manzi steps in as Chair.  The Administrator states the applicant is requesting a Modification to allow for construction of a swale to correct for an inaccurate topographic survey. The swale is needed to create a preferential flow channel for stormwater discharging behind the clubhouse to feed wetland A. A post construction survey discovered that existing topography was not allowing flow to reach this design point and therefore not in compliance with the Stormwater Regulations. All work to construct the swale will remain outside the 25- foot NDZ. Landscaping revisions are also proposed which include the removal of ornamental trees at the base of the retaining wall behind the clubhouse, to an upland area on site and reseed the base of the wall with a native seed mix, eliminating the need for future landscaping maintenance at the base of the wall.  Joe Peznola, Hancock Associates presents on behalf of the applicant. He states some of the evergreens died due to the wet soil conditions. During a site investigation it was noted that water was getting trapped coming out of the drainage system outlet located between the clubhouse and the garage building. The post development water is not reaching wetland area A. In order to allow the water to reach the wetland they will need to redirect the topography and re-install the riprap to point in that direction to break the velocity proper direction. They propose to temporarily move the erosion control to correct the grading, add a jute Conservation Commission Minutes 27-50-2020 Page 2 of 5 Approved 06/24/2020 mat to the swale area and loam and seed with a native plant seed mix. Vegetation will be impacted, some of it is the buckthorn, which is an invasive species. The approved Planting Plan calls for ornamental trees at the base of the retaining wall. They have been given approval to relocate the ornamental trees to the development plane by the Planning Director. After the grading has been completed, they will only require access to the area for routine inspections.  Mr. Mabon expresses concern there is no riprap where the swale meets the NDZ to prevent erosion.  Mr. Peznola states they have taken into account flows and velocities and the jute matting has been proposed to handle any erosion until the seed has germinated. If needed they will repair or supplement the area with riprap in the future.  Mr. Lynch would like to see double the amount of riprap installed along the length of the swale than what has been proposed. He questions if the 14-inch pvc pipe noted on the plan is a drafting error.  Mr. Peznola states this is a surveying error: the pipe is 12-inch in diameter.  Mr. Manzi would like to know if the flow is treated or untreated. He was under the impression that all the water on site was being captured and treated by the interceptor trench system.  Mr. Peznola states the water is treated before entering the rainstore system and therefore it is clean. The active outfalls are not captured by the interceptor system because they are overflows from the stormwater system. The overflow system should not encounter the RCA as RCA was removed from under and within 10 feet of the rainstore units. He describes how the overflow system works. He will verify with the consultant that the outfalls are being tested.  The Administrator states during a past site visit with Paul McManus the water at one of this outfall had a fog in it so it was tested. At that point in time the results indicated normal pH levels. She would like to know at what amount of rainfall the overflows are engaged.  Mr. Peznola states the overflow of each discharge varies. He will look back at each discharge and report back to the Commission when a theoretical overflow might occur.  Mr. McDonough confirms the site conditions are not in accordance with the plans submitted for stormwater review. He proposes to have the new Survey Plan sent out for stormwater review.  Mr. Peznola describes why he believes the water not reaching the wetland is an anomaly. He does not believe that a peer review is necessary and that they do not have access to the existing conditions outside of the survey that was submitted.  Mr. Lynch does not feel there is a need for a third-party review since the land has already been disturbed.  The Commission discusses the need for a third-party review of the stormwater.  7:42 p.m., Mr. Lynch experiences technical difficulties and loses connection from the remote conference call. He is unable to rejoin the meeting for a brief period but is then able to listen to the discussion but not be heard.  Manzi states the scope of work for the peer review is to consist of reviewing the old and new surveys, to find out if what the consultant has proposed will fix the issue. The stormwater review of the specific location is required to be completed by a qualified individual. The candidate is required to inform the Commission if the proposed swale will comply with the stormwater regulations, handle expected flow and not negatively impact the stormwater design. The NACC requires baseline water testing of the stormwater overflow discharge points when the opportunity presents itself.  Bill Trump, NRP Group would like to know if they can submit previous baseline testing information.  The Commission agrees they will not require additional baseline testing if it has already been completed. They require any previous test results to be provided to the Administrator.  A motion to engage in a third-party review as proposed and escrow funds in the amount of $1,500 is made by Mr. McDonough, seconded by Mr. Mabon.  Vote 4-1-0, (In Favor: Mabon, Manzi, Feltovic, McDonough, Recused: Napoli).  A motion to continue to June 10, 2020 is made by Mr. McDonough, seconded by Mrs. Feltovic.  Vote 4-1-0, (In Favor: Mabon, Manzi, Feltovic, McDonough, Recused: Napoli). Documents Conservation Commission Minutes 27-50-2020 Page 3 of 5 Approved 06/24/2020 20731 Minor Mod letter - clubhouse grading, landscaping, Sketch 16 Clubhouse Swale, Stormwater Report Excerpts Small Project NACC #251, 234 Brentwood Circle (Hannum)  The Administrator states the applicant i s seeking approval to create a landscaping planted area with an interior area of lawn within the former footprint of an in-ground pool. The in-ground pool was backfilled under an RDA in November 2018. A native plant list was included with the narrative. The planting list has been reviewed and approved by the Administrator. All work is proposed to be done by hand; no heavy equipment will be used. All the proposed activity is outside the 25-foot NDZ.  Mr. Mabon expresses concern that the plan does not clearly depict the limit of work to be entirely outside of the 25-foot NDZ.  7:57 p.m., Mr. Napoli experiences technical difficulties and loses connection from the remote conference call.  Mr. Manzi steps in as chairman.  A motion to accept this as a Small Project G is made by Mr. McDonough, seconded by Mrs. Feltovic.  Vote 4-0, Unanimous (Mr. Napoli & Mr. Lynch are not present due to technical difficulties).  A motion to approve the Small Project as amended (preconstruction meeting and marking of the 25-foot NDZ) is made by Mr. McDonough, seconded by Mrs. Feltovic.  Vote 4-0, Unanimous (Mr. Napoli & Mr. Lynch are not present due to technical difficulties). Documents Hannum SP checklist, IMG_1306, NAnd Cons Comm ltr+ PL. Hannum, pp color copy, Scan_end0354-01 copy NACC #252, 246 Candlestick Road (Chalone)  8:02 p.m., Mr. Napoli rejoins the conference call and resumes the role as chairman.  The Administrator states the applicant i s seeking to replace the existing deck in-kind at the rear of the house. A small corner of the deck is located inside the 50-foot NBZ but was previously reviewed and allowed by the Commission under an OOC for an in-ground pool.  Richard Chalone, Lowes Home Centers is present for questions.  A motion to approve the waiver for the small corner of the deck to remain as proposed is made by Mr. Manzi, seconded by Mr. Mabon.  Vote 5-0, Unanimous (Mr. Lynch is not present due to technical difficulties).  A motion to accept this as a Small Project B is made by Mr. McDonough, seconded by Mrs. Feltovic.  Vote 5-0, Unanimous (Mr. Lynch is not present due to technical difficulties).  A motion to approve the Small Project as proposed (post construction meeting) is made by Mr. McDonough, seconded by Mr. Manzi.  Vote 5-0, Unanimous (Mr. Lynch is not present due to technical difficulties). Documents SMALL PROJECT APPLICATION SIGNED Request for Determination of Applicability 206 Olympic Lane (Sidell)  The Administrator states the applicant is seeking the removal of nine large white pine trees. All the trees are located within the 2nd 100 feet of the Riverfront Area and seven of the trees are within the 25-foot NDZ. All the trees are located within the NHESP Priority Habitat. An arborist report has been provided indicating the trees are declining and are a hazard to the home. A crane operated from the driveway will be used to remove the trees. She notes that she recommended a re-planting plan be submitted but the arborist did not advocate for that.  Mr. Mabon feels the project might be better suited as an NOI. Conservation Commission Minutes 27-50-2020 Page 4 of 5 Approved 06/24/2020  Mr. Napoli expresses concerns that the trees are located within Natural Heritage.  Mr. Manzi proposes to allow the applicant to convert the wetland from a shaded wetland to a direct light wetland. He believes the arborist report is thorough and requests a Replanting Plan for a low growing shrub layer.  Gary Sidell, the applicant and homeowner, states his primary concern is the safety of his family and home. They are only looking to remove the trees that pose a risk, the area is heavily wooded.  The Administrator agrees there is room for replanting and suggests contacting Natural Heritage for a Planting Plan.  8:31 p.m., Mr. McDonough and Mr. Napoli rejoin the conference call after a very brief disconnection issue.  Mr. Mabon would like the applicant to address the Remediation Plan more thoroughly.  The Commission discusses the proposal and how to proceed.  A motion to continue pending the receipt of an NOI is made by Mr. Manzi, seconded by Mrs. Feltovic.  Vote 5-0, Unanimous (Mr. Lynch is not present due to technical difficulties). Documents 206 Olympic Lane NHESP Map, 206 Olympic Lane North Andover MA RDA Application 2020, 2020-05- 12_134049, Abutter Notification Form - Remote Meeting, Application Checklist - Request for Determination of Applicability, Fee Calculation Worksheet A, Legal Notice 05 18 20 - Public Notices, Legal Notice 05 18 20 - Tribune, NA Con Comm Abutter Receipts1 206 Olympic Ln, NA Con Comm Abutter Receipts2 206 Olympic Ln, NA Con Comm Abutter Receipts3 206 Olympic Ln, NHESP Estimated Habitats of Rare Wildlife, North Andover Wetlands Regulations Riverfront Area Map - USGS (1), Sidell Property Remediation Report 05 01 2020 C, Sidell Property Remediation Report 05 01 2020 C Notice of Intent (NOI) Barker Street Culvert Replacement (North Andover DPW)  This item was not discussed as the applicant requested a continuance. Documents No new materials received Email from rjp@envpartners.com requesting a continuance until 6/10/20 Enforcement Order/Violation 190 Farnum Street (Smirnov)  The Administrator states around April 7th, the Building Inspector observed loam imported to the site into the wetland and advised the homeowner to stop work and contact the Conservation Department. The homeowner was directed by the Administrator to cease and desist, install erosion controls and engage a wetland consultant to delineate the wetland and propose restoration of the impacted wetland. The homeowner has complied with all the requests.  Mr. Napoli expresses concerns that there are two sheds on the property located in the 25-foot NBZ. He proposes a permanent barrier be installed.  8:50 p.m., Mr. Napoli experiences technical difficulties and loses connection from the remote conference call.  8:52 p.m., Mr. Napoli rejoins the conference call.  The Commission discusses the EO and how to proceed.  The Administrator states there is a 2002 As-built Plan depicting the shed to the west. She believes the location of the shed was approved by the NACC when a COC was granted for a prior project.  Mr. Manzi directs the Administrator to identify the approved shed and relocate the other shed.  Sergey Smirnov, the homeowner, states he was unaware of the wetland restrictions. Per the recommendation of the Wetland Consultant he has spread the native seed mix. He states the shed located in the rear of the house was installed when the house was built in 1968. The second shed was installed by a previous homeowner in the foundation of an existing shed built in the 1970’s. Both sheds were existing Conservation Commission Minutes 27-50-2020 Page 5 of 5 Approved 06/24/2020 when the property was purchased in 2015/2016. Due to the condition of the shed he does not think they would be able to relocate it.  The Administrator states she reviewed historical aerials and the shed not located on the As-built Plan is difficult to see. She believes it was installed in 2011.  Mr. Napoli expresses concerns that if the NACC allows the grandfathered shed to remain the required permanent barrier will separate the shed from the house.  Mr. Smirnov requests clarification on the proposed stonewall and the location of the 25-foot NDZ.  Mr. Manzi directs the Administrator to provide a picture of the type of stonewall the Commission requires. He does not object to a small opening in the stonewall to allow access to the grandfathered shed.  The Administrator states she will measure the 25-foot NDZ off the wetland flags placed by the Wetland Scientist. Once the line is determined this is the location the permanent barrier would be placed.  Mr. McDonough directs the Administrator to review historic aerials to see how long the yard has been mowed within the 25-foot NDZ.  Mr. Smirnov expresses concern with the location and the cost associated with the installation of the stonewall. He states the Wetland Consultant reviewed historic aerials from 1990 showing the area was mowed lawn.  A motion to continue to June 10, 2020 to allow for further investigation is made by Mr. Manzi, seconded by Mr. Mabon.  Vote 5-0, Unanimous. Documents EO - 190 Farnum Street, Farnum.Rd.rpt.05.22.20, IMG_118, IMG_119, IMG_120, IMG_121, IMG_122, IMG_123, IMG_124 410 Summer Street (Loughran)  This item was not discussed Documents 12-11-2019 Meeting Materials Signature Authorization - Permits/Decisions Issued at the 3/25/2020, 4/08/2020 & 4/22/2020 Meetings  The Administrator states a vote needs to be taken authorizing her to sign decisions, permits and forms on behalf of the Commission for the March 25, 2020, April 8, 2020 and April 22, 2020 meetings.  A motion to allow the Administrator to sign the permits as proposed is made by Mr. Manzi, seconded by Mrs. Feltovic.  Vote 5-0, Unanimous. Decision 242-1785, 221 Blue Ridge Road (McNamara)  The Administrator reviews the drafted Order of Conditions with the Commission.  The bond will be set in the amount of $1,000.00. A waiver was voted on at the previous meeting allowing a sliver of the retaining wall to remain in the 50-foot NBZ.  A motion to approve the Order of Conditions as drafted is made by Mr. Manzi, seconded by Mrs. Feltovic.  Vote 5-0, Unanimous. Adjournment  A motion to adjourn at 9:15 p.m. is made by Mrs. Feltovic, seconded by Mr. Manzi.  Vote 6-0 Unanimous.