EASTHAM CONSERVATION COMMISSION
18 December 2008
MINUTES
PRESENT: Dennis Murley, Glenn Collins, David Hoerle, Steve Smith, Judith Williams, Leah Dower.
STAFF PRESENT: Deputy Natural Resources Officer Amy Usowski.
ALSO PRESENT: Doug Wallace, George Reilly, Katelyn Siddell of East Cape Engineering, Inc., Robert Ladutko, David Morris of WeatherFlow, Inc., Selectman Martin McDonald.
Mr. Murley called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. and the Commissioners took time to review the Minutes of 09 December 2008. Subsequently, Mr. Hoerle MOVED and Mr. Smith SECONDED the Motion to approve the Minutes of 09 December 2008 with a couple of minor changes.
THE VOTE WAS 5 IN FAVOR WITH ONE ABSTENTION.
MOTION CARRIED. MINUTES OF 09 DECEMBER 2008 APPROVED.
The signature sheet for the Nordlander Order of Conditions was signed.
Deputy Usowski updated the Commission on the project at the Eastham Library.
7:15 P.M. Notice of Intent filed by William Ladutko, 2705 State Highway, Map 15, Parcel 005.
Chairman Murley announced this hearing. Katelyn Siddell of East Cape Engineering, Inc. was present along with Mr. Ladutko. Ms. Siddell told the Commission there is a fresh water wetland located on the western portion of the property bordering the edge of the property. She said that the site is currently occupied by 6 buildings. She said there is a three-bedroom dwelling which is proposed to remain and a garage which is also proposed to remain. She said there are four additional cottages which the Applicant is proposing to remove and replace with 6 one-bedroom units.
She said that portions of the proposal are to re-design of the parking lot layout to provide for better parking and easier access. She said buildings currently cover 4,500 square feet. She said that 2,200 square feet of building is proposed to remain, being the three-bedroom house and the garage. 3,000 square feet of new building is proposed, so the additional square footage would be 689 square feet.
Ms. Siddell explained the plans to the Commission. She said the total count of bedrooms on the property now is nine and the total count of bedrooms proposed is nine. She said the septic system would remain. She said they will be requesting to pave some portions of the driveway and will be installing a catch basin and an infiltrator to catch runoff. She aid she has spoken with the Applicant regarding mitigation. She said that the Applicant is not looking to plant a big lawn area and is excited about naturalizing the area.
Deputy Usowski commented that there appears to be more of an encroachment into the 50' Buffer on the proposed plans than there is now, and asked if Ms. Siddell could tell her what the increase in the 50' Buffer would be and Ms. Siddell did not have that number.
Mr. Collins suggested stacking some of the units or moving them in some way so as not to have so much increase in the footprint coverage and thinks there must be some other options to paving portions of the driveway. Mr. Ladutko said that meeting the fire code would be much more difficult if they stacked any of the units. He said that he considers it to be a safety issue, especially in a town that does not have town water.
Mr. Hoerle voiced a concern about access to the wetland from the walk-out basement and Mr. Ladutko and Ms. Siddell said they could work with the Commission on that, installing some kind of fence or barrier to keep that from happening.
Ms. Dower wondered if there was any way to swing even one of the units to the North and get it out of the 50' Buffer. Mr. Ladutko said he would love to have been able to do that but they are restricted by the location of the septic tanks.
Chairman Murley said he was getting a feeling that there were some concerns and asked who flagged the wetland as he didn’t think it was correctly done. Ms. Siddell said she had flagged the wetland and asked if Mr. Murley if he thought it should be larger and he said he did. He said there are sensitive ferns and tussock grasses which are technically part of the wetland and the wetland on this site. He said that there is no discernable difference between what Ms. Siddell flagged, which is the shrub line and the wetland.
Mr. Murley said the emergent vegetation, particularly in the middle of the proposed development, shows sensitive ferns which don’t grow more than one-half inch away from a wetland. He said that in consideration of this, which he feels is a valid claim, the wetland on this property is approximately 10' closer which puts most of the proposed development that much closer. He said that this can be checked, perhaps on a site visit, but that he’s pretty sure that an independent person would put the wetland line pretty close to the mown lawn area.
Chairman Murley said that it appears that a new septic was put in some years ago and that an “As Built” had to be done. Ms. Siddell said that Bennett & O’Reilly did an “As Built” in 2003 and asked if Mr. Murley wanted to see it. Mr. Murley said he was interested to see if the wetland was marked differently when the septic system went in. Ms. Siddell said she would be more than happy to check at the boundaries and it’s definitely a valid point that if the wetland needs to be brought in closer she can do that on site. She said there is a lot of development in the 50' Buffer and if the wetland line needs to be brought in closer they can do that.
Mr. Murley said they have been speaking about remediating the Buffer Zone here and they are leaving nothing of the Buffer Zone. Ms. Siddell said that she didn’t think that the vegetation right at the edge of the lawn was wetland. Mr. Murley said to “poke around” a little bit and do some soil samples and actually look at the plants there. He said there’s no change in elevation there, it’s mucky the whole way, and there are a lot of invasives there but there are other things popping up just on the other side of that mown area there. Ms. Siddell said there are areas for improvement with the stormwater drainage, with plantings, with limited use of the area with a physical barrier that she thinks that would be an improvement to the resource.
Ms. Williams commented that it seems to her that the buildings are being pushed closer into the area which the Commission doesn’t want to see intrusion into for the sake of the parking lots and areas for cars to come and go etc. and asked if the parking areas could be moved to either side of the property and the buildings moved up farther toward the road. She said she would love to see this area in the Buffer Zone not sacrificed for the sake of parking spaces. Ms. Siddell replied that she thinks the Applicant has specific reasons for locating the proposed buildings where they are proposed, one being separation from Route 6. Ms. Williams said it just doesn’t justify “giving away” the Buffer Zone.
Mr. Smith commented that his concern is with the unified wall which they are proposing to create. He said that right now there are separate, very small, non-conforming cottages and this proposal would create a 100' wall which is impassable for any kind of animal traffic and they would have to go all the way around instead of through the yards. He said the proposal also has a hugely concentrated roof drainage. He said the square footage may not be that much but the concentration is greatly increased which would have to be addressed and obviously the units will all be bigger. The footprint may be the same but the units will be bigger. He also suggested checking the fire codes and seeing if there were any way to put in a large window instead of a door for egress. There was some discussion about constructing
one long deck with stairs on each end heading away from the wetland. Mr. Ladutko said he would check with the Building Department to see if that would work.
Mr. Hoerle said he would like to see some way to “limit the sprawl”. Mr. Ladutko asked how much farther away the Conservation Commission would like to see this proposal moved so he can go back to the designer and see if it’s feasible. He said if it’s not feasible then he’s going to have to withdraw the plan.
Chairman Murley said to try to get it to the same footprint there is now and try to figure as much mitigation as possible on the wetland side at a 2:1 ratio and to see how much lawn area can be reclaimed. He said the Commission is not looking for a landscaped look there and that in some cases it’s probably a matter of throwing away the lawn mower. He said this is a high quality wetland there and a fairly extensive one, not like some of the smaller “pocket” wetlands off Route 6. He said those would be some of the things the Commission would be looking at. Also, he said the Commission does not like to see contour changes within the Buffer Zone.
Ms. Siddell requested a continuation of the hearing. Ms. Williams MOVED and Mr. Hoerle SECONDED the Motion to continue.
SO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
8:15 P.M. Notice of Intent filed by Peter and Patty Maggiore, 115 Eldredge Drive, Map 01, Parcel 056A.
Chairman Murley announced this hearing. Doug Wallace, the builder, was present for the Maggiores. He said the proposed deck is an elevated deck because the house is an “upside down” house and the homeowner wishes to have second story access to the room above the garage which is studio space. He said he will be digging the footings for the sono tubes by hand and putting the sand in a wheelbarrow. He aid that whatever and is left he will spread around. He said that at that point he will set up 5' staging which he will also be using to hold the posts and from that time he will be off the ground constructing the deck.
Mr. Wallace said that in the working drawing of the deck there was a modification of the steps on the first floor deck. He explained what he intends to do with the stairs and the paths.
Deputy Usowski said the disturbance is about 60 - 65' away from the resource and it’s taking what would be ground traffic and putting it up, so in general she said the proposed work is less invasive that what is there now. She said that she was unable to track building permits or Conservation Commission approvals for the existing decks. She said she searched back to the 90s and there was nothing. She said she also noticed that there was minor pruning on the property so she would be making the owners aware that this activity needs to cease.
Mr. Wallace said he did make the owners aware that the property is in the Buffer Zone.
It was established that there is no plumbing at all and no bathroom in the garage building at all so there is no living space.
There were no further questions and Chairman Murley Mr. Collins MOVED and Mr. Hoerle SECONDED the Motion to approve with Order of Conditions 1-18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 27, 33, 35, 38 that the Applicant must return to the Commission for approval for any additional work not covered under this Order of Conditions.
SO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
8:40 P.M. Notice of Intent filed by David Morris, WeatherFlow, Inc., 1620 Samoset Road, Map 16, Parcel 025.
Chairman Murley announced this hearing. David Morris, Meteorologist, of WeatherFlow, Inc. was present and explained the proposal to install a 30' tall, all-concrete pole to mount a weather station. He said they are installing a network of hurricane weather stations around the coast from Houston/Galveston to the Florida Keys and the northernmost one will be in Scituate. He said that Eastham is one part of the network. He said that of this date Station #64 was installed on the Gulf Coast in Biloxi. He said they are looking to have stations all the way up the East coast including one in Eastham. He said he made a presentation to the Selectmen in September.
Deputy Usowski said the pole is approximately the size of a utility pole and it will have to go 13' into the ground. It is in a resource area and what they want to do is put a small split rail fence or stones to mark it off to keep people from running into it. She said the work access will be from the paved area and they will not have to go onto the resource at all.
Mr. Morris told the Commission the station monitors wind speed and direction. He said it’s very high quality data and it is measured every three seconds, recording the minimum, the outreach, and the maximum wind speed, as well as the barometric pressure and the air temperature. He said the whole thing is designed to survive hurricanes. He said they had their first test with Hurricane Ike in Galveston where they have seven weather stations. He said they all recorded perfect data sets while the National Weather Service sites failed before the system had made landfall; so it’s working.
Mr. Morris said that this system will be beneficial to the towns of Eastham, Orleans, and the nearby coastal communities. He said the data will be made freely available to the local Emergency Management groups, the U.S. Coast Guard Search & Rescue Operations, the Police Departments, the Fire Departments, and Rock Harbor. He said that all the National Weather Service offices get the data, including Taunton. He said it is useful for event decision making, HazMat spill response, and they use it to track airborne plumes. He said utility companies are using it in their research and the Nature Conservancy is using it for bird migration studies. He said that here it can possibly be used for dolphin stranding studies. In a nutshell, he said it is used for preserving life and property and highly
beneficial to coastal communities.
Mr. Morris showed photos of existing stations so the Commissioners could see what it will look like. He said it is right off the parking lot so it will not impact the dune or wetland at all. There was discussion about weather or not a Variance could be obtained so that the pole could be the desired 33' instead of 30'. He said that access is only necessary perhaps once a year for inspection purposes.
Chairman Murley said he feels there will be extremely little impact and thinks that as a matter of common sense if they can get it a little bit off the road, maybe as far as the first bit of vegetation, it would be a good idea. He told Mr. Morris that if he was satisfied with the 30' height that was fine, but if he wanted to apply for a Variance the Conservation Commission would back him.
There was no further discussion and Chairman Murley closed this hearing. Mr. Hoerle MOVED and Ms. Dower SECONDED the Motion to approve with Order of Conditions
1-18, 19, 20, 21, 22 3' away from pole, 27, 29, 35, 38 the pole will be protected from the roadway by stones or posts.
SO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
9:00 P.M. Continuation of Hearing on Notice of Intent filed by Kenneth Mitchell, 365 Shurtleff Road, Map 07, Parcel 164.
Chairman Murley announced this hearing. George Reilly of Land Design Associates, was once again representing for the Applicant. Mr. Reilly reviewed the proposal to demolish an existing house and construct a new house. He said that at the suggestion of the Commission they revised their plan and now there will be no work closer than 75' to the Top of the Coastal Bank and moved the work limit in 10' from the southern side of the proposed structure, so they have limited the amount of disturbance within the 100' Buffer. They also eliminated a pathway at the Commission’s suggestion.
Chairman Murley said the Commission asked them to tone down the revegetation plan and Mr. Reilly said that was done also.
Deputy Usowski said the Applicant pulled all the work greater than 75' from the resource and removed the walkway from the South side, and instead of a very manicured looking revegetation plan they came back with a plan to revegetate with what is existing at the site and she said they have a list of plants to work from. She said the issues the Commission had at the last hearing have been addressed.
The Commission thanked the Applicant for addressing their concerns. Mr Collins said they came a long way from what was originally presented.
There was short discussion about the use of fertilizer and the Limit of Work.
There was no further discussion and Chairman Murley closed this hearing. Ms. Dower MOVED and Mr. Collins SECONDED the Motion for approval with Order of Conditions 1-18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 26, 27, 28, 29 native species to match existing, 30, 33 construction debris shall be contained in a covered dumpster and removed daily, 35, 37, 38 mulch shall be used only immediately around plants, 39 construction protocol.
SO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEWS.
Thomas Micelli, 25 Cove Road, Map 18, Parcel 042.
Deputy Usowski presented this AR to the Commission. She said this is a request to remove invasives from around a Winterberry Bush and a Blue Spruce and to cut branches from a Maple which are growing over the shed. She said Mr. Micelli would also like to remove a standing dead Cedar.
Commissioner Collins recused himself from this hearing and left the hearing room.
Deputy Usowski said the brush piles will be dealt with at a later date. Mr. Hoerle suggested that Mr. Micelli hand pull the invasives.
Mr. Hoerle MOVED and Mr. Smith SECONDED the Motion to ratify this Administrative Review.
SO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
Commissioner Collins returned to the hearing room.
Town of Eastham, Salt Pond.
Deputy Usowski told the Commission that the Town wishes to rotate the
previously-approved building at Salt Pond 90E. She said that this would put the building farther back from the marsh. She said the area is currently cleared as that is where the tanks were in the past.
Mr. Hoerle MOVED and Mr. Smith SECONDED the Motion to ratify this Administrative Review.
SO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
Deputy Usowski told the Commission that she had intended to have a new policy statement drafted relative to the submission of revised materials and she would have it ready for the next meeting. She asked the Commissioners if they felt a weeks time would be acceptable.
Ms. Williams said she feels the Commission should closely monitor projects of firms where there have previously been violations of the Orders of Conditions. Discussion followed about how to remediate violations when the remediation would be more detrimental to the resource than what was done in violation of the Orders.
Mr. Smith initiated discussion relative to pre-1978 structures and whether they were still considered to be pre-1978 structures if they were demolished and a new house constructed. Deputy Usowski said she would check on this.
Deputy Usowski previewed a proposal for the Commission and told them that she and Chairman Murley thought it required the filing of a full Notice of Intent. It was the consensus of the other Commissioners that a Notice of Intent is required.
At approximately 9:30 P.M. Ms. Williams MOVED and Mr. Smith SECONDED the Motion to adjourn.
SO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
MEETING ADJOURNED.
Respectfully Submitted,
Kay Stewart-Greeley
cc: Town Administrator
Board of Selectmen
Town Clerk
Building
Health
Library
| 
