GCC MEETING MINUTES
June 2, 2005
Attending: Carl Shreder, Harry LaCortiglia, Michael Birmingham, Tom Howland, Paul Nelson, Laura Repplier
GENERAL BUSINESS
MINUTES
MOTION to approve minutes of May 19 - Harry / Mike / Unam
MOTION to approve minutes of June 24, 2004 – Harry / Tom / Unam
CAMP DENISON MANAGEMENT PLAN
Harry L – The northern shore of Baldpate Pond and a portion of the Camp used to be part of Boxford. Selectboards and Conservation Commissions from both towns negotiated the conditions under which the Camp could be renovated. It was decided that both towns would swap 10 acres of land so that the land occupied by the Camp would be entirely within Georgetown
The 10 acre swap was done through the state as a Boxford bylaw prohibited the piping of water from one community into another. Piping water into the Camp Den Lodge would have meant moving Georgetown water into Boxford, so it was decided to change the boundary. The selectmen of both towns got together to sign the MOU and petitioned the State for a town boundary change.
The management plan went to the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs for Self-Help grant to get the $250k grant. The MOU is not in the management plan so far – it should be incorporated now to record what was agreed by Georgetown & Boxford selectboards. How OoCs should handled across both towns.
Eric Harper was GCC Chair at the time. Boxford was primarily concerned about loud parties across the pond from them.
Carl S – We need Boxford’s input as we revise the management plan. We don’t want them to think we did it without their approval.
Harry L – The current management plan is on the Camp Den website. We should ask Mike DeFeo to track the changes between the two documents.
Michael B – We need to see what is new & what was changed in one version with explanations as to why it was changed.
Carl S – As we do that we’ll incorporate any issues & concerns from Boxford in the draft of the new plan.
Harry L – The Stewardship Standards policy was approved after the Camp Den management plan was put together. Under the Stewardship Standards policy the GCC needs to hold hearing or general business meeting when the committees want to change their plans. There should be a hearing for changes to the Camp Den plan.
Michael B – We should get our proposal together before we go to Boxford.
Carl S – The plan has to be in an advanced state before it is brought to a hearing. It shouldn’t be in a building block state. We can shorten the hearing process if we bring it forward in a reasonably good state.
Harry L – We need everyone’s comments.
Carl S – We must control the revisions of all these documents or we’ll lose track.
Harry L – We can open the hearing one night, allow a comment period & gather the written comments.
Carl S – Changing the MOU is more complicated than changing the management plan.
Michael B – The MOU should be attached to the new management plan. We need to have a concrete document we can start from before we go forward.
Carl S – We’ll need 3 weeks or so for the comment period. Then we can discuss it in public forum & approve it.
MOTION to have a hearing on June 16, 2005, 7:00 – Harry / Tom / Unam
Action: Contact Camp Den Committee & Mike DeFeo to obtain the delta document defining the differences / changes between the two versions. Reasoning behind changes.
CAMP DENISON ROAD REPAIRS FUNDING
Action: Speak to Town Treasurer to see if can use bylaw fees for that. If not, can fall back to trails preservation & access funds.
EAST MAIN STREET TREE CUTTING – RESTORATION
Harry L – This area looks devastated. It would be nice to put up a sign that says what our intent is – to replant. The trees were taken down for sight view & will be re-planted.
Action: Laura look into a sign.
Harry – We need to follow-up after the restoration to make sure it is taking well.
Paul N – That also needs to be done for all restoration jobs. Paul & Steve went out to 197 Jewett to check it out. Steve knows it has to be done for everything.
Carl S – Went out to Parker River Landing. It is not as extensively planted as we had hoped.
Harry L – We should get a report from DeRosa who is our monitor for the restoration.
Action: Get DeRosa restoration planting evaluation at Parker River Landing.
Action: Get Leah to start invasive eradication now,
MOTION to authorize the agent to enter into a contract with Basbanes Associates for approx $1400, assuming we can have GHS students to assist – Paul / Tom / Unam
BIO-DIVERSITY DAY
Laura describes her long range plans for future BioDiversity day activities
47 WEST
Jim Luker has been questioning whether we have enough money to cover costs, especially if PCBs have been found.
Carl S – They can’t just stop the cleanup of something as serious as PCBs, but it can be slowed down. We need to find out if they can continue.
Paul N – We need to ask them for money. If they are reluctant we will know they are backing off. We’re not out of monitoring money yet.
Carl S – We still have an EO open.
Paul N – Jim Luker suggested we specify money requirements in the EO.
Harry L – We want to make sure the money is there for the LSP but word it so that the EO doesn’t stands in way of what needs to be done.
Action: Establish how much is left in monitoring fund account
MOTION to issue a new EO for 60 days including 15 day specific soil removal clause and the imminent hazard language – Harry / Paul / Unam
Michael B – Does the DEP have to be notified where PCBs are involved?
Carl S – The DEP needs a definitive plan as to how we are approaching a problem.
Paul N – Major monitoring accounts need to communicate with us every month.
Carl S – Especially as in this case where it is so close to the wells.
Harry L – The sire is far dirtier than it was originally thought.
Paul N – Jim Luker is good at maintaining the information flow to us. We need periodic status reports from the agent and consultants.
HEARINGS
541 NORTH STREET
The applicant requests a continuation until a later date
MOTION to continue to July 28, 2005 at 8:00 – Harry / Tom / Unam
54 POND STREET
Rep: Aimee Blouin, Owner
Applicant is seeking approval to replace a failed septic system within 60’ of Pentucket Pond.
Carl S – GCC’s concern that this system is getting closer to the resource rather than farther away.
Appl – Was told that time was not a problem & waited until he had more money. Abutter notification was done within 300’. BOH said it was designated as “Failed” because it is within 200’ of the pond.
Paul N – So the system failed due to “legalistics” rather than function. Originally it was outside 100’ buffer? The applicant is moving the septic because costs prohibit fixing where currently is.
Appl – The BOH did perk tests & approved it. Drainage is good there.
Harry L – The agent suggests that you should move the system back, farther away from the pond, change the shape &/or orientation of the system to keep it away from the pond.
Michael B – Your engineer gave you bad information.
Appl – The same engineer did other systems nearby. Don’t know what should have been done differently.
Carl S – Your engineer should have contacted the GCC for information on our bylaws to determine how it should have been done.
Appl – All the engineers from this firm have disappeared.
Harry L – A developer needs to work with the engineer before they can build it. You will need a new engineer.
Appl – Richie Nunan did the perk test.
Paul N – Who told him to perk it there?
Appl – Don’t know.
Carl S – Before you spend any money, please go get some costing information from another engineer to make a modification to the plan.
Paul N – The developer will still need to work with an engineer.
Harry L – You will need to do it quickly – the test pitting results run out in September 2005. It’s a septic system.
Paul N – Pentucket Pond has been closed a number of times from contaminants. We need this to be 25 – 30’ feet farther from the pond. You can get everything away from the pond if you get it close to the house.
Carl S – We can send a copy of our bylaws to your engineer.
MOTION to continue to July 14 at 8:45 – Harry / Tom / Unam
Carl S – Sir, we need this system outside the 100’. If the BOH has said it has failed we have no power to overrule them.
Action: Laura will communicate with the BOH to determine if this is a failed system.
AMERICAN LEGION PARK
Reps: Elizabeth Wade, Park & Rec; Jim Dimento, Park & Rec
Elizabeth –Park & Rec decided to go back to tennis courts and not pursue the skate park plan. They will tear up the tennis court area & replace it. Need to square off the corners of the plot to get the most pavement. It is the same plan as it was before.
Harry L – This is a new facility which is new tennis courts?
Carl S – Will it go outside the existing fence?
Elizabeth – There will be 2 regulation courts and a storage shed for the baseball teams. Need GCC to do site walk. It will mean digging out the old courts and replacing them. The engineer will do test pits to see what level of work needs to be done.
Carl S – What is your timeline?
Elizabeth – We need to re-apply to CPA so if there is a Town Meeting in the Fall could do it then otherwise will have to wait until Spring. The project needs CPA approval for funding
Jim – There is no change in the impervious area from the last plan to this one.
Elizabeth – The drawing will need to be modified if we can’t square off the corners. Can’t move it farther from water as that’s the baseball field & a rocky hill. The back corner to pave is within 50’ buffer zone.
Carl S – What is the square footage?
Elizabeth – About 17 sq ft.
MOTION to conduct site walk Sat Jun 11, 7:30 am – Harry / Tom / Unam
MOTION to continue to Aug 11, 8:00 – Harry / Tom / Unam
Jim – Will also need GCC’s advice on landscaping.
11 MARTEL WAY
The applicant requests a continuation
MOTION to continue to July 14 at 9:00 – Harry / Tom / Unam
Paul N – Why are they postponing?
Carl S – The Request says they are “waiting for engineering review from the town’s consultant.”
MOTION to adjourn Michael / Harry / UNAM
| 
