FINAL
Present for the Conservation Commission and attending the meeting were: Richard Steves, Chair, Bruce Bartels, Pam Goff, David Flanders, Pam White, Ray Kellman, Russell Maloney, Virginia Dyer, Rusty Walton, Conservation Officer and Chuck Hodgkinson. Also attending: Peter Wells, Chris Alley, Abutters Edward Sussman and Paula Josa-Jones (Lindaur/Finbury) and Doug Cooper (for Shea).
Mr. Steves opening the meeting at 1:00 PM and announced the Commission would make three site visits: Wolff AP 11-25.2, 26.2; Meyer AP 29-6; Lindaur/Finbury AP 271-26.
LINDAUR/FINBURY NOI SE 12 - ??, AP 271-26: Mr. Steves opened the public hearing at 2:18 PM. Commissioner Pam White recused herself, as she is an abutter. Mr. Steves summarized the earlier site visit and pointed out that this new construction is allowed in a shore zone according to zoning by-laws because the original structure was destroyed by a natural cause – fire. Mr. Alley summarized the site plan, the structure’s footprint, location and new septic proposal. It was pointed out there is a perennial stream, wetland resource area and coastal pond that is affected by the activity. It was added and the Commission agreed the slight rotation of the house’s footprint is advantageous because it reduces the new structure’s non-conformity versus the original
location. This new location will eliminate one of the original parking spaces. Raised piles will support the house and deck.
The specific square footage differences of living area, deck space and covered arbor area between the original and proposed structure were compared. The new structure has 237 more square feet of covered “living” space than the original house. Mr. Steves pointed out that the Commission cannot rule on the height but the additional living area is within its jurisdiction. The proposed structure has more habitable space in the wetland than the original house.
The discussion was opened to the audience. Mr. Walton added the perennial stream has been diverted several times over the years and it is possible to divert it again – away from the house.
Abutter Paula J-J mentioned when they renovated her house that is directly behind this lot they were not allowed to consider an in-ground septic system. Mr. Alley responded by stating the proposed septic is a “fast” de-nitrifying, above ground system and added it is hard to use a composting system without a basement. The Commission asked if the Commonwealth has approved the use of the proposed system. Mr. Alley said yes, it has been in use for ten years.
Mr. Steves summarized that the Commission would like more information from the Board of Health and recommended they send a letter to both the ZBA and Board of Health outlining its concerns with the pressure this activity will place on the pond and wetland. He added the Commission would not allow an expansion of habitable space on this lot – even if the original house were still standing. Therefore, the Commission should urge both boards to restrict the size of the new structure to match that of the original house.
The applicant requested a continuance to May 17, 2006 @ 2:30 PM to obtain more information. A motion to accept the request to continue the hearing to May 17 was made seconded and unanimously approved with one abstention (Ms. White).
WOLFF PUBLIC HEARING NOI SE 12 – 512; AP 11-25.1, 26.1: Mr. Steves opened the public hearing at 2:48 PM and read a letter from the Division of Marine Fisheries that outlined its concerns with the proposed dock. He then read the preamble to the Town’s Wetland Protection By-Law outlining the protection of salt-water ponds. He advised the applicant that he would have to convince the Commission this dock would not have any negative impacts.
Mr. Wells concluded that based upon the site visit and earlier comments he will need to meet with his client and work on an alternative proposal. He added it would be difficult to have a dock in deep enough water without affecting the pond’s bottom. Mr. Steves asked if the dock is for marine use or merely for on/off access among the owner association’s members. Mr. Wells said the dock is intended for small boats only. The neighborhood will use it on the community landing. Mr. Steves added the length is one of the problems.
Ms. Goff asked where the mean low water mark would be. If the residents are using small skiffs they do not need a floating suspended dock. This appears to be designed for larger boats. She added the Town’s by-law would not allow any activity where there are shellfish beds. The Commission suggested getting opinions from the Shellfish Constable and Greg Skomal to determine if the location is shellfish habitat.
The applicant requested the hearing be continued to as future date. He will determine the specific date after speaking with his client. A motion to accept the request for continuance to a future date was made seconded and unanimously approved.
MEYER PUBLIC HEARING NOI SE 12 - ??; AP 29-6: Mr. Steves opened the public hearing at 3:03 PM and summarized the observations made at the site visit. Mr. Alley reviewed the site plan and design for the beach stairway with platform bases and jog turns.
Mr. Flanders asked why the Meyers couldn’t use the Frankel’s beach stairway that is on the neighboring lot. Mr. Alley mentioned the Meyers would like their own stairway and added he suggested this option to his client and they informed him the neighbors do not want to share their stairway. Ms. Goff suggested the Commission consider referring this application to the MVC to determine the best location for a new stairway in the neighborhood. It is quite clear that the Frankel’s stairway has accelerated the erosion of the coastal bank.
After further discussion Mr. Alley requested a continuance to May 17 @ 2:45 PM. A motion to accept the request for a continuance was made seconded and unanimously approved.
DOUG COOPER DISCUSSION – SHEA; AP 8-43: Doug Cooper outlined the Shea’s revised proposal to build a smaller single-family residence in a location that is outside the buffer zone. He added the only activity in the buffer zone would be the driveway, well and some slight grading. He added the Shea’s plan to submit a Notice of Intent that will include a landscaping plan. Separately, there will be a new septic design that includes a micro-fast, denitrifying system. The Commission was pleased with the changes and would entertain a new application.
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE SE 12-498; AP 20-58,59: Mr. Walton outlined that he visited the site earlier in the day and said the stone fire pit has been relocated and the stone BBQ and seating area has been removed with the exception that three large rocks remain and look as if they belong there. He added the seeding and plantings (RFD) have not yet been done. He concluded that the work is in full compliance with the Order of Conditions and recommends approval. A motion to approve the Certificate of Compliance per the Conservation Officer’s recommendation was made seconded and unanimously approved.
RUSTY WALTON UPDATES: Mr. Walton reviewed the Iscol response to his Notice of Apparent Violation that indicated they would rectify the problem as soon as possible. He summarized a site visit to inspect the Goldberg beach stairway and said he is once again searching for an acceptable location for this seasonal stairway. The Commission thanked him and asked for any updates as they arise.
MINUTES: The meeting minutes for 4/26/06 were reviewed. A motion to approve the minutes as presented was made, seconded and unanimously approved.
ADMINISTRATION: The required signatures with notary were made for the Blum Trust Certificate of Compliance: SE 12 – 498; AP 20-58,59.
With no further business to conduct the meeting adjourned at 3:45 PM.
Respectfully submitted by Chuck Hodgkinson; C.A.S.
| 
