FINAL
Present for the Conservation Commission and attending the meeting were: Pam Goff, Sandy Broyard, Dick Smith, Wesley Cottle and Chuck Hodgkinson. Chris Alley and George Sourati also attended. Caitlin Jones and Donald Poole were absent.
The meeting came to order at 12:30 PM. The Commission sadly accepted Dick Smith’s resignation from the Commission. The Commission thanked Mr. Smith for his hard work and said his leadership and candor will be missed. The site visits for the day’s agenda were made on May 21.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING; NOI SE 12 – 650; CHRIS ALLEY FOR RICHARD LOCHRIDGE; 2 Stone Ridge; AP 25-130: Eligible voters: Pam Goff, Sandy Broyard, Dick Smith, Wesley Cottle. Ms. Goff opened the continued public hearing at 12:34 PM. Mr. Alley summarized the past discussions on the application to construct a detached bedroom in the buffer zone of a Bordering Vegetated Wetland. The closest activity is 63 feet from the wetland edge.
Mr. Alley explained his client would not agree to a deed restriction that slightly expands the wetland buffer zone from 100 feet to 110 feet and prohibits further development within the buffer zone. The Commission summarized its concerns with the current buffer zone mowing that is very close to the wetland edge. It reiterated its concern that the detached bedroom will adversely impact the performance of the buffer zone and wetland resources and compromise wildlife habitat because of the excessive development of the buffer zone to date—tennis court, garage and shed. Additional living space in the buffer zone adds pressure to the resource’s performance and the ability to preserve its values.
As there is a possible location for the structure that is outside the buffer zone the Commission explained a denial of the application would be justified and not considered a taking of land because there is an alternative location for the structure outside the resource area.
Mr. Alley understood and declined an offer to withdraw the application. After further discussion a motion was made to close the hearing at 12:40 PM. The motion was seconded and unanimously approved. A subsequent motion was made to deny the application as proposed for the following reasons: 1. The cumulative impact of the excessive development to date within the 100-foot buffer zone of a Bordering Vegetated Wetland has compromised the values of the resources. 2. The addition of a habitable, detached bedroom in the buffer zone will place additional pressure on the future performance of the resources and does not satisfy the requirements as outlined in the Town’s Wetland Protection Bylaws and Regulations; Sections 1.02, 1.04, 3.02 and 5.01.
3. There is an acceptable alternative location for the proposed structure that is outside the protection of the 100-foot buffer zone resource of the Bordering Vegetated Wetland.
The motion was seconded and with no discussion passed unanimously with four in favor.
RFD PAULINE GROSE; 9 Quitsa Lane; AP 33-74: Chuck H. explained Commissioner Poole wanted a letter sent to the owner on March 28 about mowing that was done in a field and buffer zone to a wetland edge without a permit. The owner submitted the RFD as requested in the letter. The Commission discussed the site visit and understood the owner’s desire to keep the fields mowed and stone walls cleared. After discussion a motion was made for a negative determination with the following special conditions: The fields may be mowed to the stone walls as follows: 1. Only a hand-held weed whacker may be used for the portion of the field that is mowed within 35 feet of the stone wall and within the wetland buffer zone as shown on the site plan. 2. No mowing is allowed in sections
with standing water. The motion was seconded and unanimously approved with four in favor.
NOI SE 12 – 653 GEORGE SOURATO FOR SWB LTD. PARTNERSHIP; 8 Greenhouse Lane; AP 33-30: Ms. Goff opened the public hearing at 12:45 PM. Mr. Sourati summarized the plan to install a seasonal beach stairway down a coastal bank to the Atlantic Ocean. They would also like to install a stone wall in the buffer zone of a Bordering Vegetated Wetland. The stone wall is approximately 50 feet from the wetland edge.
The Commission discussed the site visit and suggested conducting the hearing in two parts – the proposed stone wall and then the proposed seasonal beach stairway. Mr. Sourati explained the stone wall’s location is approximately 10 feet farther away from the wetland edge than the previous wall that was built without a permit and subsequently removed as directed in the Enforcement Order. The size of the wetland to the north of the stone wall is approximately 15,000 sq. ft. Mr. Sourati added a small bobcat would be used to build the wall.
The Commission read four abutter letters for the record. The Commission commented that the stone wall may provide a beneficial hard scape barrier that would prevent further clearing and incursion in the buffer zone to the north and therefore help protect the wetland. With no comment from the public the Commission was ready for a vote on this segment of the application. A motion was made to approve the stone wall and location as proposed with the following special conditions—provided there is no significant comment from the NHESP: 1. The Commission would allow a 24-inch opening in the wall. 2. A snow fence with siltation barrier shall be installed on the north side of the wall and left in place until the wall’s construction is finished. 3. The Conservation Agent
shall inspect the installed snow fence and silt barrier before work begins. The motion was seconded and with no further discussion passed unanimously with four in favor.
Mr. Sourati then summarized the plan for the seasonal beach stairway. It would be an aluminum stairway with four pilings driven into the ground at the top of the coastal bank for a platform. Two additional pilings would be driven into the base of the coastal bank to secure the bottom of the stairway. They would be helix screw pilings and be about four feet deep. The Commission reviewed the photos from the site visit. It concluded the proposed location is in the middle of the most unstable section of the coastal bank. An erosion control beach grass planting was successfully installed about one year ago as shown in the photo. The stairway as proposed would be detrimental to the stability of the coastal bank. The Commission commented the existing walking path leads to a more
stable section of the coastal bank. A stairway in this location might be less invasive and could follow the natural slope to the east. The Commission added the cobble beach is unstable for walking. After much discussion Mr. Sourati asked for a continuance to June 20, 2012 @ 12:45 PM to discuss various options with the property owner. A motion was made to accept the request. The motion was seconded and unanimously approved with four in favor.
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLAINCE BOYD; SE 12 – 648; AP 30-6: Chuck H. explained this Order was for installing a new well, water line and septic system at 80 State Road. The request is for certification of the well installation only. After reviewing the photos of the new well a motion was made to approve the partial Certificate of Compliance – for the well only. The motion was seconded and unanimously approved with four in favor.
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE HANCOCK; SE 12 – 558; AP 27.1-120: Chuck H. explained this Order was to obtain a Chapter 91 license and maintain the existing pier, spiles and floats. He added the Commonwealth has issued the license. A motion was made to issue the Certificate of Compliance. The motion was seconded and unanimously approved with four in favor.
ADMINISTRATION:
The May 2, 2012 Meeting Minutes were approved as presented by consensus.
A motion was made to temporarily appoint Ms. Goff as the Commission’s representative on the Town’s Land Bank Advisory Committee. The motion was seconded. Ms. Goff suggested that this position should be offered to new Commissioners as they are appointed. The Commission agreed. The motion passed unanimously with four in favor.
The following documents were signed:
Order of Conditions Denial SE 12 – 650 Lochridge; AP 25-130.
Determination of Applicability Grose AP 33-74.
Partial Certificate of Compliance Boyd; SE 12 – 648; AP 30-6.
Certificate of Compliance Hancock; SE 12 – 558; AP 27.1-120.
With no further business to conduct the meeting adjourned at 1:35 PM.
Respectfully submitted by Chuck Hodgkinson, C.A.S.
| 
