Top
GCC MINUTES SUMMARY
April 6, 2006
GENERAL BUSINESS
CAMP DENISON REVOLVING FUND
The Camp has a warrant for town meeting requesting an increase in their Revolving account expenditure from $5,000 to $7,000 pa. All their costs have gone up – utilities, building materials etc. They are now doing larger projects including new construction on the Environmental Learning Center. All the funds in this account are their own money from fundraising events.
PENTUCKET ACRES PARKING AREA
This conservation area is at the end of Old Jacobs Road. The Stewardship Committee is installing four parking spaces (including one handicapped space). Jack Moultrie is ready to start the work according to the ORAD issued by the GCC. Steve will oversee the work.
1 LULL STREET POND DREDGING
The homeowner came to the GCC with his wetland consultant to explore additional options for dredging the pond on his property. They propose wetland replication in another area to compensate for the destruction of the wetland feeding the pond. The GCC is examining the feasibility of a replication plan and looking at the qualitative value of the expanded pond vs original wetland resources.
25 BAILEY LANE ENFORCEMENT ORDER
The owner (Mark Unger) attended to ask for an extension to part of the re-planting schedule to allow him to file a Notice of Intent to install a road within 30’ of the wetland.
ROAD ACCEPTANCE MEMO
The developers of Acorn Way, Forest Street, Pillsbury Lane, Ilene Way, Bernay Way have asked the Planning Board to accept these roads – there is a warrant ready for Town Meeting. The GCC does not have a CoC on those 5 streets and has not accepted these roads as being complete.
COC TOPICS
We are finding significant changes / differences between as-built plans and the approved OoC plans. Applicants are claiming that these are not significant changes but the GCC does not agree. Discussion of options to enforce construction according to plans and dealing with existing non-conforming buildings.
FOREST ST FLOODPLAIN
The residents are looking for town buy-in to change the floodplain elevation. The houses there have to have flood insurance for now. According to zoning regulations the ZBA needs to make that judgement. GCC recommends the agent to write a memo to the ZBA to caution them against changing it.
HEARINGS
64 CENTRAL STREET
Owners of this property applied to move a retaining wall for the existing fire lane.
GCC MEETING MINUTES
April 6, 2006
Attending: Carl Shreder, Paul Nelson, Mike Birmingham, John Bell, Charles Waters, Tom Howland, Steve Przyjemski, Laura Repplier
GENERAL BUSINESS
MINUTES
MOTION to accept the minutes of February 23 & March 9 with changes - Tom / John / Unam
TRAIL MAP ART
Rep: Sarah Argenbright, Georgetown High School Art Student
Sarah Argenbright – I have designed layouts for the trail maps you are producing for the conservation areas in town. (Shows example) It gives information about the commission and the conservation area, including nature notes and directions to get there. The trail map is in the inside here. I also designed two logos for the commission that you can use on your publications – using native trees in one and a salamander in the other.
GCC – Thank you very much for your work. These are very useful & well done.
Laura R, GCC Admin – We want to help the public get out and enjoy our conservation areas. These aren’t intended to be extremely technical maps, just enough to get people out there & back without getting lost. We would like to get the work done by the end of the school year so we still have Sarah’s help.
CAMP DENISON REVOLVING FUND
Steve P, GCC Agent - This request is on the warrant for Town Meeting. An increase in this amount has to be approved at Town Meeting. All their costs have gone up – utilities, building materials etc. They are doing larger projects now, not just for maintenance but also new construction on the Environmental Learning Center. We need to determine what is routine expenditure & what is capital expenditure. Do they need it increased permanently? After the Environmental Center is finished spending will taper off somewhat. They are spending a lot on their projects now.
All the funds in this account are their own money – from fundraising events. The GCC did pitch in for their roadway repairs because they didn’t have enough but that was the only time. Otherwise they have funded everything themselves.
51 BAILEY LANE FIELD LICENSE
Laura R, GCC Admin - The abutters to the Bailey Lane Conservation Area would like to maintain the field.
GCC – That should be mentioned as part of the stewardship plan – for the Stewardship Committee to maintain the field under the direction of the GCC. The Stewardship Plan can define what the GCC wants to happen to that resource. Fields are in decline throughout the area so it is a valuable habitat to protect. Would that be a problem with the Conservation Restriction? Laura will do more investigating.
DOG PEN REMOVAL
MOTION to allow the Bailey Lane Stewardship Committee to remove the dog pen in the field adjacent to 51 Bailey Lane – John / Paul / Unam
PENTUCKET ACRES PARKING AREA
Steve P, GCC Agent– The Stewardship Committee of this area is working to improve area. The plan is to put timbers and gravel for the parking area (for about 4 cars, including 1 handicapped space). Jack Moultrie has extra materials that could be used. The overall cost would be about $300 if we could use those materials from Jack. He suggested using gravel & putting asphalt up to the edge, without the timbers. It would be easier to patch without the wood.
GCC – Steve will help the Stewardship Committee move forward with whatever solution is best.
1 LULL STREET POND DREDGING
Reps: Earl Martin, Owner; Michael Seekamp, Seekamp Environmental Consulting
Michael Seekamp, Seekamp Environmental – The owner’s driveway crosses a wetland next to a pond they have had for many years. They wanted to expand the pond & started the work. Some bordering wetlands were impacted. Mr. Martin feels that the pond was eutrophicated & thought he was doing something within the law. The he realized the project was bigger than he thought and contacted GCC & Seekamp. We look at it as resource enhancement – converting one type of wetland into another type - BVW into a pond. We could recreate the BVW 2:1 in another area. We have identified a stratified drift aquifer where we could excavate an area where we can predict seasonal drying out in the summer, depending on where put it. This could function as a vernal
pool. Then you could allow him to keep the pond expansion & allow him to dredge the pond so it doesn’t continue to fill in. He would like a larger pond. This could proceed as a Limited Project as resource enhancement.
Earl Martin, Owner – Some Commissioners have been out to visit the site. (Submits letter describing project)
Paul N, GCC – This isn’t just a pond it’s an actual drainage area running S-N. This is a swale that is generally wet & increases as it goes N. It’s not just an isolated pond.
Earl Martin, Owner – This are about 4-5 acres of wetland on the property. This is the drainage area for the whole section of North Street. We are not proposing to adjust drainage in any way.
Steve P, GCC Agent– This wetland area and stream also drains down to the Stone Row project.
Earl Martin, Owner – It will still be wetland.
Carl S, GCC– It’s a question of qualitative vs quantitative. You are asking us to authorize the destruction of one habitat for another.
Steve P, GCC Agent– This is absolutely not enhancement. The pond is lesser quality habitat – it’s very shallow– you would be completely destroying a wetland by dredging. There would be even less after dredging. If we allow this the pond won’t be as high quality a resource as the original wetland was.
Carl S, GCC– How deep is the pond?
Earl Martin, Owner – We are not destroying it, just changing it from one kind to another. The gain in wetland would be twice what is there now.
Mike B, GCC – But you are changing the habitat entirely.
Earl Martin – Yes, but I want a pond I can stock with fish. It doesn’t dry up in the summer.
Steve P, GCC Agent– I don’t share the opinion that this would be enhancing a resource. The pond that you propose to change this into has less environmental value than the wetland you bulldozed.
Mike B, GCC – Won’t you change the volume going out of the outlet if you do this? If there is deeper water it won’t flow downstream at the same rate.
Mike Seekamp, Seekamp Environmental – Once it reaches the outlet it will flow again.
Paul N, GCC – The original wetland was more like a vernal pool as it probably did dry up in the summer.
Carl S, GCC– It is clearly stated in our regulations that dredging is not allowed.
Earl Martin, Owner – Dredging is an ocean term.
Mike Seekamp, Seekamp Environmental – If you want to maintain a wet meadow and certain other types of habitat it requires human intervention.
Steve P, GCC Agent– Then we should be discussing only dredging the main pond rather than expanding it.
Carl S, GCC- Our bylaw specifically says no dredging of resource areas. This is a problem.
Mike Seekamp, Seekamp Environmental – Is there no benefit to maintaining a pond over time?
Carl S, GCC– The State would come down on us if we did this elsewhere. Maintenance is appropriate in certain circumstances. Do we even know what species we have out there now? Is replacing one for another good in this case?
Mike Seekamp, Seekamp Environmental – We haven’t studied that.
Steve P, GCC Agent– We also need to study how this would impact the flow downstream.
Earl Martin / Mike Seekamp – It won’t be any different after the pond fills.
Earl Martin, Owner – I’ll leave you the information & you decide. I was going to build a house and was extending the pond so it would be near the house. I picked the site & started work & then the contractor said I had to come here.
Charles W, GCC – You are putting the house as close to the wetland as possible?
Mike Seekamp, Seekamp Environmental – Mr. Martin likes the property & wants to stay there. They want to downsize to another house & sell the big one.
Steve P, GCC Agent– There is a large field with good meadow habitat out the back.
Earl Martin – It is percable for 3-4 houses. If I build one house it seals it off as a 1 house situation.
Mike B, GCC – What would be the wetland situation after your work is completed?
Mike Seekamp, Seekamp Environmental – It would be changed to the S of the pond & E of the wetland.
Carl S, GCC– We don’t want to get involved in a situation involving dredging wetlands.
Earl Martin, Owner – I dug the wetland out with my loader. If you have an issue with that I’ll bulldoze it back in.
Carl S, GCC– We need to digest this situation & come up with a solution.
Mike B, GCC – What is the size ratio of the new pond?
Mike Seekamp, Seekamp Environmental – We would calculate the area of disturbed wetland & put in a 2:1 wetland in another upland position.
Mike B, GCC – How are you going to create a wetland in an upland position?
Mike Seekamp, Seekamp Environmental – We found the underground aquifer that would feed it.
Earl Martin, Owner – The pond was 6’ deep in the middle but it’s less now. The weeds are growing on the sides.
Charles W, GCC – Why are you digging on the S side?
Earl Martin, Owner – I want to increase the size of the pond to move it towards a new house site. Let us know what you want to do.
Paul N, GCC – It would be interesting to see what the finished project would look like. However, the work done so far is not good.
Carl S, GCC– At a minimum we’ll have to deal with some sort of wetland restoration.
Mike Seekamp, Seekamp Environmental – We can look at compensation or restoration. Shall we arrange a site visit?
GCC – As this is not a hearing Commissioners are able to stop by to see the site at any time and should do so before the next meeting.
25 BAILEY LANE ENFORCEMENT ORDER
Reps: Mark Unger, Owner
Paul N, GCC – Didn’t we leave this as a due diligence item at the last meeting?
Steve P, GCC Agent– I called the engineer on the Zone II Wellhead issue, he said that notation was in narrative but I have asked him to put it right on the plan. That’s the only thing that was missing. Zone II carries a solid 100’ No Disturb buffer. The EO was satisfied within time – they submitted a site plan & restoration plan. Now we need execution of the planting plan to start by May 30.
Mark Unger, Owner – This is a new delineation done last month.
Mike B, GCC –When was it done last time?
Steve P, GCC Agent– This site is also part of the Georgetown wellfields area.
Mike B, GCC – There is a 100’ setback in Zone II?
Steve P, GCC Agent– Yes. The Zone II area covers the entire property, along with a Natural Heritage (endangered species) area. I wanted that marked on the plan – it will be later. The road was put in illegally and now that area needs restoring. I am also concerned with the large area of tree-felling & grading in the back of the site. The owner wants to put in a farm but he needs to address these issues first.
Carl S, GCC– Please explain your intention. We have to work out how to move forward from here.
Mark Unger, Owner – This was an old farm in early 1900s, it hasn’t been used in 30-40 yrs. I cut down a number of old pine trees to expose old farm fields. The Con Comm came out to see it at that time & they felt it was OK so I thought so too. In 2004 the agent signed off on a building permit to rebuild an old barn within the 25’ buffer zone but I used that permit to build another barn higher up the hill. I’ve been dealing with Con Comm over the years. The wetland flags were in here in 2003 from when I build my house. I assumed I had a 25’ buffer as an agricultural site but Steve P was informed by a neighbor that I had put in the road & carried out grading in the area. The road existed out to an old gravel pit. I had been using the road. In front of the house (where says existing well on the plan) I have been filling with local contractors – it was an old gravel pit – the existing tree line is where gravel pit was. It was my intention to fill & create a gradual slope there.
Carl S, GCC– When we get to the NOI stage you will have to file with Natural Heritage as well. They may tell you to conduct a species study.
Mark Unger, Owner – Steve P said that the Natural Heritage area had been enlarged since I did the work in that area. I accept the EO & have produced a plan, now I’m asking for exceptions. In the NOI I plan to file I will ask to use road I mowed out. If I follow the re-planting plan in the EO I’ll be planting trees & shrubs that I will later ask to mow when I put the road back in the other section with 25’ buffer in road. I also want to continue filling the gravel pit outside the 100’ buffer line from the wetland. I would be filling about 50-60’ farther away from that line.
Carl S, GCC– We would want to confer with Natural Heritage about that before you could go ahead.
Steve P, GCC Agent– The wetland line hasn’t been accepted so we don’t actually know where the buffer is.
Carl S, GCC– It is important that we define and accept the line legally.
Steve P, GCC Agent– The re-planting area is a wild area & will grow back well on its own but I recommend planting additional trees as well. I don’t recommend tilling it first as it will grow back anyway. Just dig small holes & put the trees in them. That will minimize the disturbance.
Carl S, GCC– You’re asking to not restore that road area?
Mike B- Because you’ll be asking later to cut it in your NOI?
Mark Unger, Owner – Yes.
Carl S, GCC– There has been damage to the resource area here and now. We don’t want to give approval to some later filing now.
Steve P, GCC Agent– We don’t have to accept an NOI until the EO has been taken care of. The re-planting has to be 80% successful after 2 years then you can open an NOI.
Mark Unger, Owner – I would be happy to give a bond.
Steve P, GCC Agent– There should be erosion control installed to stabilize the area to prevent erosion into the Parker River.
Tom H, GCC – That cutting would not be allowed under our regulations. Why should we assume we might give permission & hold off on this restoration?
Carl S, GCC– We have to keep these things separate – there are short term EO issues & long term NOI issues.
Steve P, GCC Agent– Let’s just address the re-planting plan for now.
Paul N, GCC – This is a problem. If we don’t have him do what the EO says we are tacitly accepting that the area is a road.
Carl S, GCC– This is also a precedence issue – if we back off on an EO it seems as if we are giving pre-approval of a NOI.
John B, GCC – Right now this is an EO, not an NOI.
Charles W, GCC – If an NOI comes before GCC 2 yrs from now, what’s to stop us saying No to the NOI & specifying that area needs to be re-planted at that point. It doesn’t seem like a precedent issue to me.
Carl S, GCC– We don’t want to be pre-determining our judgement at this point.
Mike B, GCC – We can leave the EO open until the NOI & say we will come back to it at NOI time. We could extend the expiration date and stay the fines.
Steve P, GCC Agent– Great damage has been done very near to the wetland.
Carl S, GCC– What other restoration activities need to be done?
Paul N, GCC – Fill erosion is going into the wetland – there are only haybales & no siltation there.
Carl S, GCC– It would be appropriate to put proper siltation to keep the silt out of the Parker River. We can leave an EO open if GCC accepts that.
Mark Unger, Owner – We are ready to go forward. We are using Seekamp Environmental & we’re ready to go.
Carl S, GCC– As far as the wetland lines go once you’re in the NOI process we can talk more about 3rd party delineation to confirm the actual wetland line.
MOTION to modify the EO for 25 Bailey Lane to extend the date for planting at the roadside & include additional siltation barriers to June 30, 2006 – Mike / John / 4 Aye, 2 Nay
ROAD ACCEPTANCE MEMO
Steve P, GCC Agent- The developers of Acorn Way, Forest Street, Pillsbury Lane, Ilene Way, Bernay Way have asked the Planning Board to accept these roads – there is a warrant ready for Town Meeting. I have written a memo documenting that we don’t have a CoC on those 5 streets. We have not accepted these roads as being complete. People are living there but these properties shouldn’t have been sold without a CoC. Now the applicants are asking for official acceptance but we need more information before we can sign them off legitimately. We still have outstanding issues with some of these areas that need to be resolved before the town can accepted them formally.
GCC – Steve will work with the Planning Board and applicants regarding the proposed acceptance of these roads.
COC TOPICS
Steve P, GCC Agent– I am finding significant changes / differences between as-built plans and the approved OoC plans. Applicants are claiming that these are not significant changes but I am not comfortable with that. For example, on Forest St one house was built 10-15’ closer to the resource than it was supposed to be and there’s another house on that street that was built at the wrong elevation. The applicants say these are not significant changes but I disagree.
Carl S, GCC– Whether a change is significant is up to the GCC to decide.
Paul N, GCC – How can they say a 4’ difference in elevation is not significant when the house was built in the flood plain?
Steve P, GCC Agent– I would like a 3rd party engineering review to pick up on these things at the CoC stage. It would be good to have an engineer examine the plans side-by-side.
Carl S- We are also seeing a lot of decks on houses that were not approved for a deck.
Steve P, GCC Agent– That’s happening all over all these new developments. The Building Inspector said that if it is within the building envelope it’s OK .
Carl S, GCC– It depends whether we’re looking at a difference of 3-5 ft or 20-30 ft… that makes a big difference. This is why we get everything on a plan & examine it.
Steve P, GCC Agent– We want to have a 3rd party engineering review for Forest St to compare the approved vs as-built plans. Symes pays for that or they don’t get a CoC. This is the only thing we have over them to finish the job. But if it’s wrong, what do we do – change the house, fix it somehow, make a donation? We need to make a point that things need to be done according to the plans.
Charles W, GCC – What are the options if they haven’t followed the plans?
Steve P, GCC Agent– In the OoC it says they can’t sell the property until they have a CoC & it mentions fines. So we could put a fine on the developer. We could always back-date them to when the OoC said. We are setting a precedent. We’re also seeing a number of properties being sold by the developers without a CoC.
Carl S, GCC– We really need to get these things to conform to the approved plan.
Steve P, GCC Agent– Going forward from here the Building Inspector will get a foundation sign-off before building work can start. I will work with the Building Department Inspector to try to prevent this from happening in the future. We will just have to work with the current issue properties.
FOREST ST FLOODPLAIN
Steve P, GCC Agent– The residents are looking for town buy-in to change the floodplain elevation. The houses there have to have flood insurance for now. According to zoning regulations the ZBA needs to make that judgement. My recommendation is to write a memo to the ZBA to caution them against changing it. The GCC is not responsible for passing it to FEMA. There is a house built on that street at the wrong elevation & without a retaining wall – it is 4’ lower than it should be & the retaining wall between it and the wetland is missing. If you stand in the wetland the house foundation is only 2’ higher.
MOTION to authorize Steve P to write the ZBA to advise that the GCC doesn’t agree with the technical assessment to change the floodplain for Forest St – Paul / Tom / Unam
102 POND ST EO
Steve P, GCC Agent– I gave them an extension of time and called this week for an update on the restoration plan. Fines will start in 3 weeks time.
74 JACKMAN EO
Steve P, GCC Agent– The EO date on this property is also coming up. I will call & send a letter to remind them that the fines are starting on certain date.
BILLS
MOTION to reimburse Laura Repplier for Pentucket Acres brush disposal with Valley Tree Services – Tom / John / Unam
MOTION to pay the outstanding bills – Tom / John / Unam
HEARINGS
64 CENTRAL STREET
Reps: James Rauseo, Arthur Rauseo, Owners
James Rauseo, Owner – We need to remove a wall that was placed on our property by our neighbor. We originally granted them an easement to build a Fire Lane for the Shopping Center but that agreement went wrong. This application is a result of that. We want the wall off our property, it is going closer to the Shopping Center. This retaining wall is a structural part of the fire lane, it’s a cement wall. The fire lane was not accepted by the town’s public safety officials so it is not used or needed. The fire dept is aware that we are applying to take it out. They wouldn’t accept it as a functioning fire lane anyway as it wasn’t built properly.
Arthur Rauseo, Owner – I started all this as a member of the fire dept. They couldn’t get through to the back of the building with a fire truck so I offered them room to expand for truck access. It was built to the wrong size and they didn’t use it.
Steve P, GCC Agent– The wetland is 80’ away and this will be going farther away from it. The surrounding area is all pavement. I recommend issuing a negative determination with conditions. There is a stream under the road. I couldn’t find it on any plans but the placement of the culvert suggests it is also 80’ away.
Mike B, GCC – They aren’t breaking the surface of the asphalt are they?
Steve P, GCC Agent– No, this project is similar to the grease trap for the hair salon at the Shopping Center. We can control this with conditions.
Paul N, GCC – If you remove this there won’t be access to back of the center?
James Rauseo, Owner – That’s right, they’d have to go another way. It was never accepted by the fire department as a fire lane because it wasn’t built properly.
John B, GCC – The fire department said that as long as they can reach 3 sides of the building it is OK.
Charles W, GCC – What is the status of the easement?
James Rauseo, Owner – This was an area granted so they could construct the fire lane. It didn’t work out – they didn’t record their part. The Planning Board was told it wasn’t built wide enough to meet the state regulations.
MOTION to issue a negative determination on 64 Central St (GCC-2006-07) with orders of conditions as stated by agent – Tom / Mike / Unam
MOTION to close the hearing – Mike / Tom / Unam
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Roll Call:
Carl Shreder – Aye
Paul Nelson – Aye
Mike Birmingham, Aye
John Bell – Aye
Charles Waters - Aye
| 
