GCC MEETING MINUTES
May 19, 2005
Attending: Carl Shreder, Harry LaCortiglia, Michael Birmingham, Tom Howland, John Bell, Paul Nelson, Steven Przyjemski, Laura Repplier
GENERAL BUSINESS
MINUTES
MOTION to approve minutes of April 7, April 21, May 5 with corrections as noted – Harry / John / Unam
118 JEWETT
Site walk has been cancelled. Applicant does not want to pay for independent review at this time.
21 TENNEY ST
The back yard of this property has been massively leveled with heavy equipment 30’ from the wetland line. There is a large wetland pool behind. There has always been a pile of sand & gravel – they didn’t get rid of anything. Steven P asked them to put in a silt fence – they were very co-operative and the fence is already in. There is still a hill – 8’ down into the wetland. They have been told to leave everything as it is until GCC works with them to determine how fix it.
Paul N – The whole area behind there is very very wet.
Carl S – They are being very co-operative. We need to work out how to work with them.
Harry L – An EO can be a clean way for them to continue working.
Paul N – An EO goes against the person, not lot.
Carl S – An EO needs to be explained to them rather than just sent, especially if they are being co-operative. SP can issue the EO & GCC will vote on it at the next meeting.
Steven P – They are very willing to put in native plantings.
Paul N - There was still a decent sized mound of dirt/rocks on the property, but Steven indicated that they were not going to do any other grading other than remove some large rocks at the rear of the property.
Action: Steven will issue the EO and present it to the owners with an explanation.
AMERICAN LEGION PARK
We will schedule the site walk at the next continuation of the hearing.
BIO-DIVERSITY DAY
MOTION to give Laura authorization to proceed with plans & activities for Bio-D Day – Harry / Tom / Unam
PARKER RIVER LANDING IRRIGATION
Reps: Mark Mastrianni, Pulte; Jay Billings, NE GeoScience
Jay – They submitted a revised proposal for a longer test of the irrigation wells. They will duplicate the procedures of the 1st test to maybe see if the original problems are really there & to simulate irrigation of the whole project. The center cul-de-sac is now activated. Had to decide what do with extra water during the test. Have installed a discharge line at the center of the cul-de-sac going down the road with a pipe discharging into a catchbasin with exposed surface & into a detention pond at the NE of the site. They set up the system to simulate irrigation of the whole project though 2/3 will be discharged into the catchbasin.
The transducer is in the well – will get drawdowns but the water level may go below it & will lose data. It will still show irrigation cycle & fluctuations. Transducers are also in each of the 2 well points – all automated. They propose to run for 2 wks – then download the data & look at. If there are still questions they can prolong the test but if the data is reasonable they would like to leave it at that. The transducers are in place, the well points are in place, the only thing left to do is to get an irrigation contractor.
Carl S – Will you be pulling the same anticipated volume as would do in real, over 2 weeks?
Mike B – Would like to see it running for most of June.
Paul N – Could the detention pond overflow?
Jay – Yes, it’s planned to go into the Parker River at 100 gals / min. The surface of the site is as not fully impervious as it will be, so there will be more percolating surface during construction.
Carl S – Are you running this 24 / 7 or irrigating like you will for real?
Jay – Like real. Have programmed the system as though everything were finished. What is not used will go to waste.
Steven P – Are you already irrigating?
Jay – Yes, it started within the last couple of days. Impressed with skill of their irrigator. The data logger was in before it started so are already collecting data.
John B – Is landscaping going on?
Jay – Yes, some units are moving in & sod is being laid.
Harry L – When the pump runs, do you have a flow meter recording the gallons per minute rate?
Jay – There is a rotor totalizing flow meter with rain sensor.
Harry L – It could be good if the rain sensors were not in, to get regular withdrawals without precipitation interference – to mimic the maximum withdrawal periods of the summer.
Jay – Can disconnect them.
Carl S – How long shall we run this test for?
Paul N – We should do 2 weeks & see how it looks.
Jay – It takes a week to analyze the data.
Harry L – Why not keep collecting data while analyzing we’re analyzing the 1st 2 weeks. We might need it, might not but won’t have to re-start the testing all over again if we find we do need it.
Carl S – It should confirm what we talked about before.
Jay – The cost of the test is directly related to duration – renting loggers, etc. Data loggers aren’t infallible especially if there is lightning – if so, could lose one during the test. Have 2 well points so even if lose one will have the other. We expect to see the well points fluctuating but not correlating with the pumping well cycles.
Harry L – If you are dumping waste water close to the replication area could we use it to help the replication area?
Jay – We don’t want to discharge near the well points and have a problem with obtaining the length of pipe we’d need. The wastewater flow to the leach field will be only a fraction of what it will be in reality.
Carl S – It isn’t a closed loop system, gallon for gallon.
Harry L – We should speak to our replication expert to see if they want to use the wastewater for irrigation.
Jay – We will bypass the rain sensor and keep collecting data past the initial 2 weeks in case we need more data.
Steven P – Do not use anything that might use additional water and mess with the data.
Note: The testing was asked to be delayed by the applicant:
Mark Mastrianni & Paul Marchionda are planning to bring the new irrigation data to the June 30 GCC meeting.~ They have delayed until then because the rain is so heavy that it may interfere with the data they are collecting this week.~
Though we don’t know whether the data will lead the Commission to designate the irrigation as a significant change, they are going to carry on with the process as though it IS significant.~ That means, they are placing a legal ad and carrying out the abutter notification process for the June 30th meeting – just to make sure that that has already been done in case it is ruled as significant.~
EAST MAIN STREET TREE CUTTING
GCC discussed the acceptance of the planting plan for the `tree cutting’ area on East Main Street. Laura had an alternate plan to use high school kids to do the planting.
Paul N - Steve and Laura should work together to see if the plan from Brisbane could be executed using the kids. If not, we should just go with the presented plan. Put this item on the agenda for Thursday June 2.
HEARINGS
25 MARLBORO
Reps: Marty Halloran, T-Square Design; Frank Nejezchleba, Homeowner
Need to fix the septic system, submitting an RDA. Trying to abandon the old round 1000-gal septic system (concrete) & build a new one outside the buffer. The old system will be opened & filled with sand, left underground & not disturbed. Can’t use heavy equip back there as is too hilly.
Are installing a new state-of the-art infiltrator system with pressure dousing. Re-piping through the side of the house through a mini-manhole to the outside. System has been approved by the BOH. Have to move the water & gas lines. Are looking for permission to abandon the old system.
Harry L – We can’t approve the wetland line as haven’t seen it.
Carl S – We should have Steve go out & take a look.
Harry L – Steve might decide to add a silt sock or other siltation control.
MOTION to grant a negative determination without accepting the wetland line with the following conditions: Agent approves the plan after inspection & perceives no potential issue with the abandonment of the old system – Harry / John / Unam
MOTION to close the hearing – Mike / Harry / Unam
151 JEWETT
No representatives.
Harry LaCortiglia recused & left the room.
MOTION to continue the hearing to June 16, 8:00 – John / Mike / Unam
Harry LaCortiglia returned to the room.
77 LAKESHORE
Reps: Bob Grasso, Professional Land Services; Louis Giannopolis, Owner
Bob Grasso – GCC requested a silt fence and 5 monuments in addition to the wooden fence. The NHESP letter was received, no problems. Everything has been added.
MOTION to accept the plan (Revision Date 4/11/2005) and issue an OoC with special conditions to be determined by the agent with removal of vehicles from wetland and general cleanup of the wetland area – Harry / John / Unam
MOTION to close the hearing – Harry / John / Unam
11 MARTEL
MOTION to continue to June 2, 8:45 – John / Harry / Unam
PENTUCKET POND
Rep: Bill Dudley, Pentucket Pond Advisory Committee
Carl S- After a lot of dialogue & conversation the proposal is within budget & as best as we can get. NHESP are using us as a test case.
Harry L – Dan Nein said that if we issue an OoC mentioning the management plan being reviewed by NHESP every year they will be happy with that. We can modify the management plan as we go from year to year depending on results & needs – as approved by the NHESP each year.
Bill – So the changes we specify could be as drastic as a whole pond treatment?
Steven P – Dan Nein made conditions for that – big ones. The Bridle Shiner study MUST be done before a whole pond treatment could be done. We have to lay the foundation this year to go forward.
Carl S – This will always be revisited forever.
Steven P – This is a long, long term management situation.
Carl S – This is definitely progress. We have accomplished the ability to do SOMETHING, rather than nothing.
Paul N – The best thing was for Dan Nein to come meet people face to face. He had no good reason to recommend no action at all.
MOTION to approve the OoC as discussed this evening – Harry / John / Unam
MOTION to accept the Proposal / Agreement for Partial-Pond Management of Invasive Fanwort Growth in Pentucket Pond dated May 18, 2005 and modified by Harry LaCortiglia – Harry / John / Unam
Harry – From now on will deal with this via the management plan.
Bill – What about the bridle shiner survey? Joe Pelczarski works for the DEM and has experience with surveys.
Steven P – Dan Nein has defined the protocol. We just need to get it done.
MOTION to close the hearing – Harry / John / Unam
| 
