Top
GCC MEETING OVERVIEW
March 9, 2006
GENERAL BUSINESS
PARK & RECREATION COMMISSION
Discussion on how to maintain the West St soccer fields in view of turtle nesting season. Parking concerns at West Street – possible extension of parking next to the fields.
WATER RESTRICTION BYLAW
Parker River Clean Water Association gave an overview of the proposed Water Restriction Bylaw they would like to bring to Town Meeting. The bylaw is intended to protect the Parker River. Discussion of the terms and encouragement to work with the Water Department when framing the terms.
25 BAILEY LANE EO
The property is under an Enforcement Order (EO). Discussions with the owner regarding submittal of a wetland restoration plan within 2 weeks, as specified in the EO.
HEARINGS
80 ANDOVER STREET
Application to remove an area of existing building and replace it with 2 building additions and a deck within 85’ of an Intermittent Stream. Motion passed to approve the plan and close the hearing.
5 ILENE CIRCLE
Application to remove an existing deck and replace it with a screened in porch within 50’ of a Bordering Vegetated Wetland. GCC questions focused on unpermitted additions to the house, including the deck in question. The hearing was continued, pending more information gathering. (The application was subsequently withdrawn without prejudice.)
GCC MEETING MINUTES
March 9, 2006
Attending: Carl Shreder, Paul Nelson, Mike Birmingham, John Bell, Mark Gauthier, Charles Waters, Steve Przyjemski, Laura Repplier
GENERAL BUSINESS
MOTION to request abatement of taxes on the Littles Hill conservation land - Paul / John / Unam
MOTION to pay MACC conference fees for Paul, Mark & Laura – John / Paul / Unam
MOTION to reimburse Laura Repplier for Home Depot purchases for conservation purposes – Mike / Mark / Unam
PARK & RECREATION COMMISSION
Rep: Jim Dimento
Jim Dimento, Park & Rec – The West St fields need work to make them usable in the coming season. I need to know what you want me to do & not do down there considering the sensitivity of the area. The good good news is, because of the spotted turtles, we have been requested to mow the back field behind the main soccer field. We could possibly hay it. High hay is apparently bad for the turtles. There are a couple of scrub trees back there. If they tell us it’s OK to do it at these times, we could get it hayed.
Steve P, Agent – This request came from Mark Ggurgovic. He would be the lead with us on defining an action plan on how to mow it. If the grass gets to be too tall we will lose the turtles’ breeding habitat.
Harry LaCortiglia, 144 Jewett St – Mark takes the blandings turtles & traps them with nets, then he records their information, attaches transponders to them and tracks them with GPS so he can locate them and show where their nests are. That information is privy only to GCC & NHESP. It is not to be revealed to anyone else. The incidence of egg laying by blandings is as predominate in the deep grass field as in the mowed playing fields at that site. The difference in their success comes from the increased difficulty predators have in shorter grass. Natural predation occurs more in the field with deeper grass where there is more cover for the predators.
Carl S, GCC – We do see nests in the paths in the field at the back – they’re not in the high grass as is too difficult for them. The timeline for mowing is critical.
Jim Dimento, Park & Rec – I just want to know the schedule and what dates I can do this. Also, what do you want me to do about the small trees out there. I need something in writing so the mowing operator can have then when he’s out there working. That would be a good safeguard for us too. We are also going to the Water Department on Monday regarding the parking lot at West St. The GAA requested Park & Rec to do something with it. The Water Dept are willing to help us.
Paul N, GCC – Can’t you use the fields on Littles Hill?
Jim Dimento, Park & Rec – Yes, and we’re trying to buy 7 more acres up in that area as well. The one field we have up there is a smaller 12 & under field. In such a tough situation we used to stagger the games by 30 minutes but the schedule is too crowded now. So we need more parking at the West St area. There are no wetland issues up by the road. On Saturday morning the traffic is unbelievable. These fields are getting more & more use.
Paul N, GCC – How much more access do you need?
Jim Dimento, Park & Rec – We’ll draw up a plan & give it to you. We’ll do whatever you think is best. People from out of town park on the street & then get ticketed. At any time there are probably 20 cars parked on the street.
Steve P, Agent – Shall I work with him on the plan & bring it to GCC?
Carl S, GCC – You will have to work both with us & the Water Department. Part of our decision depends on whether the town might get other fields in another area.
Jim Dimento, Park & Rec – There are so many kids playing so many sports now on very few fields. Now they have more games & more practices. We don’t have enough full-sized fields in town.
Carl S, GCC – Get a rough draft for the mowing & work with Steve and the Water Department.
Harry LaCortiglia, 144 Jewett St – The Open Space and Recreation Plan (OSRP) is being revised. We are having a visioning session for the public to share their ideas– this plan will have more information about active recreation & have numbers to support that case.
Jim Dimento, Park & Rec – We need something in writing & posted to confirm the rules about how to use the fields if there are turtles there. Maybe we could have the kids walk the field before a game.
Carl S, GCC – Work with Steve on that as part of your overall plan to go forward with.
WATER RESTRICTION BYLAW
Reps: George Comiskey, Parker River Clean Water Association (PRCWA)
Carl S, GCC – We have received a draft Water Restriction Bylaw based on the DEP’s recommendations and those from surrounding towns. We need to have consensus with many boards in town. What would the Water Dept have to say about this? We also need to talk to the Board of Health (BoH), and the Fire Dept. We all have the same desire not to use up that water resource. But it also needs to be done with the Water Dept.
Harry LaCortiglia, 144 Jewett St – I have noticed that the Water Dept doesn’t want to acknowledge that they are sucking the Parker River dry every summer. The Water Dept is a separate entity & makes money out of selling water. We need to get the information out there that there might not be that much water in the river.
Carl S, GCC – If we don’t get their buy in compliance will be a struggle. We need buy in from them.
Harry LaCortiglia, 144 Jewett St – The process is this –the Con Com or Planning Board or any 10 concerned citizens with a petition can get it onto the town warrant. Once it’s there the Planning Board, if falls under zoning, would have to have hearing. This is the same way the Open Space Residential Design bylaw was perfected - under debate before it came to town meeting. So this bylaw could be put into the warrant & worked on after that time. It needs to be submitted by Monday. A bylaw is sponsored by a board and looked at by town counsel.
Carl S, GCC – If we don’t get buy in from the enforcing parties it won’t work.
Paul N, GCC – How is a ban called?
Harry LaCortiglia, 144 Jewett St – It could be initiated by anyone who finds the river dry & brings it to the selectmen.
Carl S, GCC – It shouldn’t be driven by just anyone.
George Comiskey, PRCWA – This sample is close to the DEP sample. The UEA filed a watershed action plan, towns can adopt that bylaw. The force behind this is that it gives another board to go to in the vent of a shortage situation. The Water Dept said NO to water restrictions in the past even though we showed them that the river was dry.
Carl S, GCC – I attended a meeting where the Water Dept used their annual average usage figures to get around the fact that summer withdrawals drain the river dry.
Paul N, GCC – Who does the Water Dept answer to?
Harry LaCortiglia, 144 Jewett St – DEP.
Carl S, GCC – This is a good idea but it needs to be functional & enforceable & have buy in from all parties. Low flow conditions occur every year now.
George Comiskey, PRCWA – The DEP can call a state of water supply emergency & the town bylaw can have a less restrictive bylaw to control use but not shut water off entirely.
Mark G, GCC – We have had water restriction in town in the past where the police got involved. How is this different now? Who did that then? Warning & fines.
Steve P, Agent – The increasing rate of development makes this problem potentially worse & worse.
Mark G, GCC – The police will address violations. If we can get 80% compliance we can make progress. If we talk to the police chief they may say they can monitor it as they are on their rounds. It worked in past because of social pressure. We are going to be in big trouble very soon if we don’t bring this in. We should make every effort to go as far as we can go with it.
George Comiskey, PRCWA – That’s why the selectmen of the town are responsible for it.
Harry LaCortiglia, 144 Jewett St – This bylaw gives that authority to the selectmen. If GCC doesn’t submit this to the selecment on Monday then it will have to wait another year. Submit it & acknowledge that it still needs more work.
Paul N, GCC – I firmly believe that this is the right thing to do, I just wonder how to do it right.
Carl S – We could have a motion to move it forward.
MOTION to submit a draft copy of the Georgetown Water Restriction Bylaw to the selectmen on Monday, March 13. The draft is a vehicle for discussion vis-a-vis enforcement & to be submitted as a warrant to the town – Paul / John / Unam
Paul N, GCC – I still think in-ground sprinklers are OK.
Carl S, GCC – They are too easy & too automatic.
Harry LaCortiglia, 144 Jewett St – We can work forward & make sure the Planning Board says that all sprinklers need to have a rain sensor.
25 BAILEY LANE
Rep: Mark Unger, Owner
Mark Unger, Owner – I thank the commissioners who came out to the site today. It was enlightening & I now understand the nuances which I missed before. The delays have been my fault as I tried to do the NOI myself. Now I have hired Seekamp Environmental and PLS to re-flag the wetland on my property and work on the EO. I should’ve worked with a 50’ wetland buffer. PLS is on vacation this week & will do NOI for mewhen they return. I have asked for another extension on the EO until PLS is back, then I will get the whole packet to GCC.
Carl S, GCC – Have you officially contracted with PLS to handle this for you?
Mark Unger, Owner – Yes, I only slow progress down because it’s all so unfamiliar and technical so I’ve given it to them.
Steve P, Agent – The restoration plan for the road area has not been submitted. They put in an NOI as to what they want to do but we still have outstanding EO issues. We need a plan for the whole property & the whole wetland delineation. He is working on an NOI but we still have an incomplete site plan that only shows what his plan is & not the information required for our EO.
Carl S, GCC – How much extension do you need?
Steve P, Agent – We have already given him an additional week.
Paul N, GCC – This EO deals with things that have already happened?
Steve P, GCC – Yes. His company interpreted the EO a certain way & never contacted us for clarification. All the documentation we’ve received deals with the NOI rather than outstanding EO issues.
Paul N, GCC – Are they are dealing with the restoration first?
Mark Unger, Owner – Yes. I think I may have accidentally directed them to draw the plan up incompletely. I will contact them and re-direct them.
Carl S, GCC – We are willing to work with you but we need to see some forward momentum on the project.
Mark Unger, Owner – Seekamp can get it back in 1 week, PLS will take 2 weeks because of their vacation.
Steve P, Agent – Have them contact me so there is no confusion re. NOI vs EO. A two week extension is fair.
Mark G, GCC – I think Mr. Unger is serious & wants to get it done. Let’s extend the opportunity to comply.
John Bell, GCC – I’m OK with that as long as there is action.
Paul N, GCC – We need a restoration plan with the agent in 2 weeks.
Carl S, GCC – That 2 weeks is a real deadline.
Mark G, GCC – If we don’t get it in 2 weeks the fines will stay in place from the original date – March 8, 2006. This is absolutely the end.
Steve P, Agent – This site plan is only for part of the property, we need the whole property. We don’t know how close his work is to the river. That’s why the EO requests more information. An NOI is premature. We can’t go forward without more information. We need to know what’s out there.
Carl S, GCC – We can keep the EO open until those issues have been met.
Harry LaCortiglia, 144 Jewett Street – Is the box on the EO checked that orders the restoration of the affected area? He has to restore the area to its original condition. Then we would get a plan. If an NOI is filed GCC doesn’t have to accept it if EO issues are still unresolved.
Steve P, Agent – I am looking for an as-built as to what has been done out there.
Mark Unger, Owner – The fill you saw today was from a neighbor who deposited it 2 days ago without my knowledge. They came up my driveway to the site. I have informed everyone else. There will be no more activity.
Carl S, GCC – The restoration plan will be completed in 2 weeks. If the consultants have any more ideas about what the EO might mean they need to contact Steve P.
Mark Unger, Owner – When I do come back with an NOI it will be to put a road in.
Mark Gauthier – This area needs to be restored to go back to the way it was & then we can go forward.
MOTION to extend the EO for 25 Bailey Lane for 2 weeks, until March 22, 2006 – John / Mark / Unam
HEARINGS
80 ANDOVER STREET
Reps: George Zamboras, Atlantic Engineering; Charles & Darcy Norton, Owners
George Zamboras, Atlantic Engineering – We propose to remove the deck & install an 11’ x 18’ addition there. We are also tearing down another part of the building and replacing it with a 24’ x 6’ addition. Currently the closest portion of the building is 85’ from the wetland – after construction it will be 82’ away. We have reflagged the wetland, the line was previously approved in 1999. It is a distinct wetland edge. We will be putting in a silt barrier. There is a full foundation in these areas & a deck on concrete piles.
GCC – What kind of wetland is out there?
Darcy Norton, Owner – That is some of our neighbors’ lawn – it’s mowed – and the vernal stream.
Carl S, GCC – Is it lawn in the rear of your house?
Charles Norton, Owner – It is lawn & trees & more lawn.
Steve P, Agent – This resource we refer to is off-property.
Paul N, GCC – It is not in the 50’ No-Disturb area?
George Zamboras, Atlantic Engineering – No. The 50’ buffer is in the corner of the property. We’re nowhere near there. The corner of the porch is 82’ away. Most of the 50’ area is off the lot.
Steve P, Agent – The resource is more of a grassy swale. Seasonally it takes the run-off from Littles Hill. The wetland to the left is more typical, but this is just a grassy swale. This is a fairly solid plan, I just want to be able to write an OoC to control the work.
MOTION to approve / accept the NOI, revision 1 of the plan dated 2/14/06 noting that we are not approving the wetland delineation as shown on the plan – Paul / Mike / Unam
MOTION to close the hearing – Paul / John / Unam
5 ILENE CIRCLE
Reps: Paul Spadafore, Contractor
Paul Spadafore, Contractor – I got this plan from the BoH. There is an existing deck now, but it is not shown on the BoH plan. Somehow the deck is there. When I went to look at the job I found that the footings & support structure of the existing deck cannot support the structure, especially with additional snow & ice. We can’t put a sun porch on them either. I have given you a diagram of the Sono tube work I plan to do. I would go in with a Case 580 backhoe – there is a retaining wall 1’ above grade so it already protects the resource. It needs a Sono tube 12” wide with a larger base – it’ll be a 3’ width hole. We’re at a preliminary stage, I don’t know what to do with it. An unofficial deck is there.
Carl S, GCC – Where is the resource on this plan?
Paul Spadafore, Contractor – Where it says “Lot 5” on the plan. If you were standing on the retaining wall, going down gentle slope, you would start to see a little sogginess.
Mark G, GCC – 20’ beyond the retaining wall is the line.
Paul Spadafore, Contractor – This drawing was made in 2003 when the development was done. This is still what is there.
Steve P, Agent – Half the house is in the 75’ buffer zone.
Harry LaCortiglia, 144 Jewett St – You can’t change the delineation on that plan. If this came in on sub-div plan within the last 3 years, it stands.
Rich O’Connor, Abutter – The deck put in by Symes even though wasn’t on plan. It wasn’t put in by the Rios.
Paul Spadafore, Contractor – We discovered there was no building permit for this deck.
Carl S, GCC – We need to determine if a valid OoC exists & whether the line is still valid.
Steve P, Agent – We looked through all our files & it was not found. We should continue the hearing until the applicant returns.
Paul Spadafore, Contractor – Reads letter from the applicant.
Carl S, GCC – We need to go through the proper legal process. We probably will require you to file an NOI but if we can find a file with a valid delineation that’d streamline things.
Harry LaCortiglia, 144 Jewett Street – There are probably a number of other decks in this neighborhood that have not been permitted. If the footprint is the same, the intrusion is the same.
Steve P, Agent – It’s becoming impervious surface – from a deck to a roof.
Carl S, GCC – We need more information. It may not be a big issue but we have to determine what the resources are & where they are. We need to do background work. This was probably permitted before our current regulations were in place.
MOTION to continue to April 6, 8 pm – Tom / John / Unam
| 
