SUMMARY OF
GCC MEETING MINUTES
August 10, 2006
Attending: Mike Birmingham, Paul Nelson, Carl Shreder, Charles Waters, Steve Przyjemski, Laura Repplier
BUSINESS
WEST STREET FIELDS
The NHESP, GAA, Park & Rec, Atherton Landscaping and GCC (Steve P, Agent) all met at the West St soccer fields to communicate & determine how to maintain the fields and protect the endangered turtle habitat. Agreement was reached regarding the types of work that would be done in the short and long term and when they could be done without harming the turtles. The GCC and all parties will prepare a written management plan to be reviewed annually.
HEARINGS
31-33 EAST MAIN STREET (GCC-2006-15; DEP 161-0644) NOI (Cont)
Notice of Intent to repair an existing septic system. GCC asked the engineer to prepare a plan showing an alternative septic design, hoping to gain some further distance from the wetland resource. The engineer returned with the same plan, saying that he had examined the alternatives and judged that there was no benefit in installing them. Discussion centered on the specifics of the septic system and runoff from the park & ride lot next door. Hearing continued asking the engineer for a new plan including the drainage features.
86 LAKESHORE DRIVE (GCC-2006-18) NOI (New)
Notice of Intent to repair an existing septic system within 75’ of a stream. An alternative septic design might result in a 40% reduction in size, potentially putting the system 8’ farther from the resource. Hearing continued asking the applicant to look into an alternative design.
GCC MEETING MINUTES
August 10, 2006
Attending: Mike Birmingham, Paul Nelson, Carl Shreder, Charles Waters, Steve Przyjemski, Laura Repplier
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Meeting with town counsel regarding pending litigation.
Roll call to enter Executive Session:
Carl - Aye
Paul - Aye
Charles- Aye
Mike- Aye
Roll call to leave:
Carl - Aye
Paul - Aye
Charles- Aye
Mike- Aye
GENERAL BUSINESS
MINUTES
MOTION to approve the minutes of June 29 as amended – Paul / Mike / Unam
WEST STREET FIELDS
Rep: Brad Shores, GAA
Steve P, GCC Agent – The NHESP, GAA, Park & Rec, Atherton Landscaping and I all met at the West St soccer fields to communicate & see what they want to do to maintain the fields. We needed more communication. Last Spring mowing was done that damaged the flags the NHESP team put out to mark the endangered turtle nests. Our intentions were to understand what they proposed, talk to the turtle people & find out where everyone needs. The GAA needs to get the field to a condition where they can play safely – there have been injuries out there due to rough conditions. They need to clean up the area that was disturbed when the Water Dept put in the new pipe. They need to do that now so it will be ready in time for the start of the season in Sept. It’s not as
tough as we might have thought though, as the turtles are not in the areas where they are playing.
Carl S, GCC – Was the Water Dept at the meeting?
Steve P, GCC Agent – No, we have good communications with them. They have said they will do whatever we think can be recommended. The GAA needs to do this to get another field.
Carl S, GCC – We need to clearly define how the fields are cared for, reviewed each spring, and train the landscapers.
Steve P, GCC Agent – We can look at it afresh each season. The plan has to be flexible so it works for everyone. We will leave the long grass areas to entice the turtles to nest there away from the fields. It is critical for them to work on this now to get the fields ready for this year.
Carl S, GCC – We need a baseline plan & a management plan.
Brad Shores, GAA – We’re absolutely willing to work with you & the Natural Heritage program.
Steve P, GCC Agent – We do need a long-term plan – and close communications like we have with Camp Denison.
Carl S, GCC – Who co-ordinates the mowing?
Brad Shores, GAA – Park &Rec, it’s done about every 10 days or as needed.
Steve P, GCC Agent – All parties at the meeting were comfortable with the work they want to do.
Brad Shores, GAA – We’ve already tested the soil. We want to lime the soil – the Water Dept and P&R said that’s OK. We need to work on the light blue area on the plan – it needs some aerating, remove small stones to facilitate loaming, and slice seeding.
Steve P, GCC Agent – This is the only activity that will take place at this time – all other maintenance activities will only be outside the season, after Nov. I recommend just this one site to be done now – they can do the liming after Nov.
Carl S, GCC – Let’s limit the current activity to this.
Steve P, GCC Agent – We have to come up with a written plan to be reviewed annually, and establish communications between all interested parties.
Brad Shores, GAA – To fix this area we have to pull some dirt out of a pile at back which has a nest at corner. The NHESP said we could do that as long as we avoided the nest & used the same path across the center of the fields for each trip.
Carl S, GCC – That’s fine as long as the work is supervised by someone who knows exactly what can and can’t be done.
GCC – That plan is fine, Steve will issue the paperwork to get that part of the project going.
HEARINGS
STONE ROW (GCC-2005-031; DEP 161-0635) ANRAD (Cont)
Reps: None
MOTION to continue to Sept 21 at 8:30 – Mike / Paul / Unam
31-33 EAST MAIN STREET (GCC-2006-15; DEP 161-0644) NOI (Cont)
Reps: Jim Scanlon, Scanlon Engineering
Jim Scanlon, Scanlon Engineering – At the last meeting we were requested to look at alternatives to the traditional septic design we proposed. We reviewed many options, considering issues like reconfiguring the system, relocation, & reduction of the leaching area. I discussed it with Deb Rogers at BOH to see what they might approve. The plan we have proposed is the best option for the site. We are going back to the original Title 5 system, as approved by the BOH, who agree that it protects public health, safety & the environment. It needs minimum maintenance and is an improvement over the existing system which is a cesspool.
Carl S, GCC – Is this the same as your original proposal?
Jim Scanlon, Scanlon Engineering – Yes. We converted the house from a 7 bedroom property to a 4 bedroom which was a considerable reduction. The BOH approved it providing it did not include a garbage grinder (that gave us a 33% reduction). I have tried to reconfigure it but gained only 1 foot.
Carl S, GCC – An alternative system wouldn’t gain anything?
Jim Scanlon, Scanlon Engineering – The code requires us to meet maximum feasible compliance – as much of area as possible on the lot. With an alternative system there wouldn’t be a benefit.
Carl S, GCC – Yes but, it helps you comply with our regulations if it could be farther away from the resource areas. That’s why we asked you to look at it to see if you could get it out of the buffer.
Jim Scanlon, Scanlon Engineering – We wouldn’t benefit from an alternative system – an alternative would be significant cost, perpetual maintenance, and is also unproven so we could have to come back here at some point.
Carl S, GCC – That could also be the case with a normal system
Mike B, GCC – We could put stipulation in the CoC that the tank be pumped regularly.
Steve P, GCC Agent – When the BOH gives the engineer a stated area they can’t reduce that area. But the Presby system reduces the footprint. With this BOH option it says you request a variance to put it closer to the parking lot with a barrier to direct the sheet flow downwards.
Jim Scanlon, Scanlon Engineering –We have that. We need to provide an area for drainage for the driveway, so we have a swale near the drive.
Steve P, GCC Agent – Are you anticipating a lot of water?
Jim Scanlon, Scanlon Engineering – Some from the parking area.
Carl S, GCC – You requested variances from the BOH?
Jim Scanlon, Scanlon Engineering – Yes, and have been approved. We were granted a reduction from the regulations on daily flow down to 110 gal/day. We also did soil analysis and got a reduction in the setback from the wetland.
Steve P, GCC Agent – Would another technology reduce the footprint?
Jim Scanlon, Scanlon Engineering – My concern is the life expectancy – it is designed to fail & be replaced which would mean more work in the resource area. They give 20–25 years for a conventional system, but I don’t know about alternatives. Generally the effluent comes out of the pipes & is treated there so they could clog & have to be replaced. That is understood about this system – it would be additional work in the buffer zone. I don’t see the benefit. Once the system is in the ground it shouldn’t be an issue. This is a conventional raised system – partially above ground.
Charles W, GCC – Have you done analysis re how many feet away from the wetland you would be if you did an alternative system? As it could be a reduced size.
Jim Scanlon, Scanlon Engineering – You would get a max of 5’ farther away.
Paul N, GCC – A Presby system would fit next to the house, by the paved area.
Jim Scanlon, Scanlon Engineering – We can’t make the setback from the foundation if we do that.
Carl S, GCC – How close to foundation?
Jim Scanlon, Scanlon Engineering – It would be 10’ from the foundation and 33’ from the wetland. We can’t put the system right up to the foundation as it is a slab- we have to maintain a 4’ drainage space from a slab.
Steve P, GCC Agent – I want to see filtering of the runoff from the parking area – can you add a rip rap spreader?
Paul N, GCC –If the BOH gave a waiver re gal/day … this is 440 gals/day based on a 4 bedroom. The town requires 165 gal/day – this is a waiver to 110.
Mike B, GCC – Can the field take that much?
Jim Scanlon, Scanlon Engineering – This can take 440 gal/day.
Paul N, GCC – What about heavy rain, etc?
Jim Scanlon, Scanlon Engineering – That’s why we are directing overland flow away from the system & towards the wetlands.
Carl S, GCC – Aren’t we stressing this system?
Jim Scanlon, Scanlon Engineering – 440 is the most this field could take – so that’s why we needed a variance. That’s why we made it this size.
Carl S, GCC – What type of building will this be? How do we make sure the system is pumped? Is there a condo association?
Jim Scanlon, Scanlon Engineering – This is a 2 family, 1 owner / 1 deed. So that addresses concerns re. how it would be controlled.
Paul N, GCC – If money wasn’t a consideration what kind of system would you put in?
Jim Scanlon, Scanlon Engineering – This system. An alternative wouldn’t get farther away from the wetland. This one has a life expectancy that would be 20-25 yrs.
Mike B, GCC – Is there a reserve system?
Jim Scanlon, Scanlon Engineering – None, if it failed it would be a case of just replacing it entirely.
Paul N, GCC – Is there a swale coming between the system & the parking lot?
Jim Scanlon, Scanlon Engineering – Yes, we’re grading to capture what might come off the driveway & the lot. And there is a 40mm plastic liner to direct it away.
Mike B, GCC – Is there some way to encourage the water to flow away? To catch it & let it infiltrate.
Jim Scanlon, Scanlon Engineering – A rip-rap deflector? We could do that.
Steve P, GCC Agent – That would be more digging closer to the wetland.
Carl S, GCC – Is an additional drainage note something you could put on the plan? Did you include the flooding potential in your engineering calculations?
Jim Scanlon, Scanlon Engineering – Yes, we put a wall on the downgrade side to keep the water away from the system.
Carl S, GCC – That should be on the plan to make sure it goes in.
Jim Scanlon, Scanlon Engineering – It’s OK to continue to the next time for a new plan to include a drainage feature. We propose the lawn to be grass – we would want to put in a grass swale in the depression to allow for collection of water & settling of materials.
GCC – Just want a grassy swale for retention. Look at topology with Steve to decide how to position it.
Jim Scanlon, Scanlon Engineering – Will put it around the 99’ elevation line. How big?
Paul N, GCC – So it looks natural but extends along the whole border with the parking lot.
Steve P, GCC Agent – Can we change the parking area to be pervious to reduce runoff? You could use recycled asphalt which would be pervious.
Carl S, GCC – Can your client do that?
Jim Scanlon, Scanlon Engineering – Certainly. I’ll change that on the plan as well.
MOTION to continue to Aug 24 at 7:14 – Mike / Paul / Unam
86 LAKESHORE DRIVE (GCC-2006-18) NOI (New)
Reps: Tim Jellow, Owner
Tim Jellow, Owner – I bought the house in Dec 2005, the BOH had approved the plan then. I need to put in a new system and fill or move the old one.
Paul N, GCC – Where was the old system located?
Tim Jellow, Owner – It was under the driveway. I’m bringing it farther away from the stream. This plan has been approved by the BOH.
Steve P, GCC Agent – We could maybe look at pushing it away with an alternative system but he still couldn’t meet the 100’.
Tim Jellow, Owner – I talked to Tom Carbone about alternative systems. He didn’t think it would fit on the lot as it’s so small.
Paul N, GCC – It looks like you’re constricted by setbacks & the wetland.
Tim Jellow, Owner – I didn’t need variances from the BOH – they said it looked like it was what would fit.
Steve P, GCC Agent – The nearest point is the septic tank at 43’, the rest is at about 50’.
Charles W, GCC – This letter from Tom Carbone says an alternative system would cost $1k to design – if we could gain 10 more ft away from the resource that could be worth it.
Steve P, GCC Agent – Do we want a re-design to get away from the resource?
Mike B, GCC – I thought the system would be reduced in size.
Steve P, GCC Agent – It would be the same surface area but smaller footprint. They say there could be a 40% reduction. The BOH says this is the technology that will be used in the future.
Paul N, GCC – If we get a 40% reduction - 240 sf area – that would get get 8 more feet from the wetland and could maybe get up to 20’. Do we have information re the costs of alternative systems?
Steve P, GCC Agent – No, but I will talk to the BOH.
Carl S, GCC – If we could reduce the footprint significantly it could be worth it but otherwise maybe not.
Steve P, GCC Agent – I will do some research into this myself. We need to know what the actual percentage reduction would be.
Paul N, GCC – What were the perc rates here? Why did they do so many tests?
Tim Jellow, Owner – They were looking for somewhere to put it.
Mike B, GCC – They also had a variance for the number of gals/day so it probably doesn’t perc so well.
Steve P, GCC Agent – Is the system functioning now?
Tim Jellow, Owner – Yes.
Paul N, GCC – We need to be more informed about the differences between the conventional & new systems.
Carl S, GCC – Let’s talk to the BOH first.
Charles W, GCC – If another system would give a 40% reduction there is enough space to really gain a significant distance.
Carl S, GCC – We’d like to have a discussion with your engineer & find out what he really thinks about placing the 2 alternatives.
GCC – Have yr engineer look at this other system & be ready to discuss it. We have some questions. We have to look at ways to minimize impact to the resource areas – if it’s reasonable we’d like to do that.
MOTION to continue to Sept 21 at 9:00 – Mike / Paul / Unam
| 
