Present for the Conservation Commission and attending the meeting were: Pam Goff, Ray Kellman, Bruce Bartels, Helen Parker, PersonNameRusty Walton and PersonNameChuck Hodgkinson. Jimmy Morgan, Glenn Provost, PersonNameKris Horiuchi and PersonNameWendy Weldon also attended. David Flanders, Virginia Dyer, Richard Steves and Russell Maloney were absent.
Ms. Goff opened the meeting at 1:30 PM to announce a site visit to 15 Squibnocket Ridge;
AP 35-1.15.
RFD JIMMY MORGAN AP 27.1-127: Ms. Goff welcomed Mr. Morgan and appointed Ms. Parker as a voting member. Mr. Morgan summarized his plan to move the doorway of the retail shop on addressStreetBasin Road to the side of the building facing The Bite. A small, pressure-treated walkway will be placed in front of the new entrance. The work will take place in the buffer zone of a salt marsh. After brief discussion the Commission agreed the new door location will be safer for the patrons as it will be away from the addressStreetBasin Road automobile traffic and will not affect the resource as the footprint will not change. A subsequent motion was made for a negative determination. The motion was seconded and unanimously approved.
GLENN PROVOST FOR PACER NOMINEE TRUST; NOI SE 12 – 551; AP 35-1.15: Ms. Goff opened the hearing at 2:20 PM and appointed Ms. Parker as a voting member. Mr. Provost presented the site plan to develop a one-acre building envelope that is a part of the 27-acre parcel. He explained that the rest of the lot will be preserved as open space and pointed out the extensive amount of abutting land that is protected by a conservation restriction. He outlined that the subdivision covenants allow an adjustment to the building envelope with prior Planning Board and Homeowner Association approval but, his client has decided to work within the approved area.
He added that every lot in the subdivision had a well and septic system installed but, the current septic tanks will not be used because they are too close to a wetland and located on high ground. He outlined the new septic design and explained the Board of Health has not yet seen the plan. The new septic plan would require trenching within the 50-foot buffer zone and would be filled and re-vegetated. The leach field is approximately 1800 feet from the proposed tank.
The site plan had a driveway and part of the second house in the buffer zone of the drainage swale. Mr. Provost pointed out that the drainage swale is recognized as a wetland resource by the Town but is not considered a wetland by the Commonwealth because it does not drain into a body of water. Ms. Parker pointed out that the second house is within 30 feet of the drainage wetland. Ms. Goff asked if the second house could be moved farther away from the drainage swale. Mr. Provost thought it might be possible to site the second house 50 feet from the drainage swale which would put it in the second 50-foot segment of the buffer zone – as defined by the Commonwealth. Mr. Provost pointed out that all of the other structures have been moved out of the buffer zones as requested when the plan was first
presented and subsequently withdrawn without prejudice.
Ms. Horiuchi presented the landscape plan for the site. The Commission pointed out that if the proposal is approved the landscape plan will be a part of the approved permit. Ms. Weldon representing the Squibnocket Pond Advisory Committee commented that the area has a serious problem with nitrogen loading and asked that the natural wetlands be preserved a much as possible to help with nitrogen attenuation and pond protection.
After much discussion a motion was made to close the hearing at 3:00 PM. The motion was seconded and unanimously approved. The Commission than asked if the second house could be located 50 feet from the drainage swale while retaining the current “limit of work area” as shown on the site plan. The Commission discussed the pros and cons of the proposal and concluded that because the drainage swale is not recognized in the Commonwealth’s Wetland Protection Act as a wetland resource and there is such a large amount of property with superlative and continuing protection, the plan might be conditionally approved if the second house were re-sited as described earlier. A subsequent motion to approve the plan as amended was made with the following specific conditions: 1. Before beginning work
a specific landscape plan for all areas of the building envelope that are within the Commission’s jurisdiction out to the wetland edges will be provided and approved by the Commission or Conservation Officer. 2. The existing meadow on the northeast side and outside the “limit of work” running to and past the “drainage area” will be maintained in its current state as a rough meadow and mowed up to a maximum of twice per year. 3. A revised site plan with house # 2 located 50 feet from the drainage area will be signed by the Commissioners and will be the approved plan. This site plan will be mailed to the DEP by February 11, 2008. 4. The standard conditions will also apply. The motion was seconded. After brief discussion the motion passed with three in favor and one opposed (Ms. Parker).
RUSTY WALTON UPDATES: The Commission thanked Mr. Walton for his thorough reports and updates. They agreed to schedule a meeting with Mr. Berger when it is convenient for both parties.
ADMINISTRATION: The meeting minutes for December 19 were reviewed. A motion to approve the minutes as presented was made, seconded and approved with three in favor and one abstention (Ms. Parker).
The Commission reviewed and approved the Master Plan input and the Commission’s 2007 Annual Report.
The Determination of Applicability for AP 27.1-127 was signed.
With no further business to conduct the meeting adjourned at 4:10 PM.
Respectfully submitted by PersonNameChuck Hodgkinson, C.A.S.
| 
