Links to Hearings:
GCC MEETING MINUTES
December 14, 2006
Attending: Carl Shreder, Paul Nelson, John Bell, Tom Howland, Mike Birmingham, Steve Przyjemski, Laura Repplier
BUSINESS:
MINUTES
MOTION to approve minutes of October 19 with changes – Tom / John / Unam
MOTION to approve minutes of November 16 with changes – Tom / John / Unam
OPEN SPACE & RECREATION PLAN
Reps: Harry LaCortiglia, Open Space Committee
Harry LaCortiglia, Open Space Committee – I came before the commission in April to explain the Open Space & Recreation Plan & let you know that it needed revising. The Open Space Committee is now working on a new draft though it expired 3 months ago. The OSC voted to release the draft to the GCC. The new Open Space map is coming on Monday and we have asked Jerrard Whitten for a blank parcel map to start work on the Action Plan map. We asking the GCC to receive the OS&RP for review.
Carl Shreder, GCC – Have there been major changes?
Harry LaCortiglia, Open Space Committee – New goals were established at the visioning meeting in March. They aren’t that that different but there are some new goals as well. The GCC can change & modify it as you see fit. We have achieved all the objectives stated in the last plan so we’re starting now with a clean slate. You’ll notice that this time it is the Open Space & Recreation Plan. We didn’t have Park & Rec input last time but now we do. Some data from the “Pride in Georgetown” Gale study is included in the Park & Rec submissions. We are in the process of making new maps – Open Space, Action Plan, Cultural Resources, Historical, etc.
Carl Shreder, GCC – What are the differences between the GCC goals & the goals of Park & Rec?
Harry LaCortiglia, Open Space Committee – This presents a balanced approach between the two – between passive and active recreation needs. The OSC creates the plan, the GCC receives it, reviews it, holds a public hearing and puts it out for public comment. Sometimes it is released for internal comment first. The town can be eligible for EOEA grants when this is approved – but we are not eligible until approval. We’ll need 45 days for public review & comment. We can distribute copies at the library & post it on the website. Then we can review the public comments, modify it and send it on to the EOEA for approval.
Carl Shreder, GCC – This is our plan, if the EOEA wants to change it for grants that’s one thing but it’s our plan for our town purposes.
Harry LaCortiglia, Open Space Committee – The Master Plan is in progress. This plan is important for that process.
Carl Shreder, GCC – There will most likely also have been staff changes at the state level so there will be different people involved & different funds and grants.
Harry LaCortiglia, Open Space Committee – Will you receive the plan & release it for other offices in town for review?
Carl Shreder, GCC – Yes, let’s put it on the agenda for a point in the future so it’s not forgotten.
Harry LaCortiglia, Open Space Committee – Now the numbers can be released to the Planning Board for inclusion in the Master Plan so the committee doesn’t have to use a 6 year old plan.
HEARINGS
25 BAILEY LANE (GCC-2006-16; DEP 161-0651) NOI (Cont)
Reps: Bob Grasso, PLS; Mark Unger, Owner
Bob Grasso, PLS – At the last hearing the commission voted for an outside consultant to review the plan, for grading & driveway purposes.
Steve Przyjemski, GCC Agent – The last few points of his report were confusing but he’s trying to minimize the slope & grading to lower the chance of erosion.
Paul Nelson, GCC – This would actually increase the slope to nearly 1:1.
Bob Grasso, PLS – He says we can grade up to the buffer zone at 4:1.
Paul Nelson, GCC – Item 6 refers to the 92-94’ contours – that will take it to 7’ in about an 8’ span, that’s nearly 1:1. There’s no fill at the 93’ so from 100 to 98/93 it goes about 5’ in a 6’ area. It doesn’t look like he said it right.
Steve Przyjemski, GCC Agent – I think he was recommending 4:1 and not to work within the buffer.
Bob Grasso, PLS – We would work within the 100’ at some points & stay out at others.
Steve Przyjemski, GCC Agent – He also introduced the concept of a drywell where there clearly was water coming out of the hill.
Carl Shreder, GCC – He referred to a conduit but said he didn’t actually find it.
Bob Grasso, PLS – We designed the septic here – it was medium/coarse sand. The water table runs straight through the sand & gravel – it was a 5’ water table. The top of the existing grade is 100’, down to 90’. I think the water table is pushing out at that point, it’s not a pipe. It could be a stream.
Paul Nelson, GCC – He says it’s a sub drain pipe.
Carl Shreder, GCC – Yes, he is saying some sort of pipe.
Mark Unger, Owner – I offered to have a machine dig holes & look for the pipe. I asked you to tell them . There is no subdrain pipe.
Carl Shreder, GCC – We don’t want to dig the hill out looking for a pipe.
Paul Nelson, GCC – There will still be erosion components if you leave his point #3 out.
Bob Grasso, PLS – According to the original EO it was proposed that we eliminate the original driveway & reseed the area. It has reseeded already. We propose to move the driveway up the slope. There has already been activity there, like mowing, it’s not a prime, undisturbed area. It won’t disturb the wetland. It’s already disturbed there. Mark Unger said there was a road there when he bought the property. We want to stabilize the slope, fill it in & make less of a slope for vehicles. At the grass driveway we’ll put in a grass strip & crushed stone. We’re not paving it or causing more erosion. It won’t affect the wetland. There already is activity in the buffer zone.
Tom Howland, GCC – What about the DEP comments where they say “Project cannot be permitted as proposed. Need to show 100 year flood elevation on site plan and assess any potential alteration. How was Mean Annual High Water determined for Parker River?”
Steve Przyjemski, GCC Agent – They are just asking where the floodplain was.
Bob Grasso, PLS – There is a USGS benchmark on Trestle Way but it would be costly to follow it down to this area. We can address the DEP issues later.
Steve Przyjemski, GCC Agent – The state also said if it is in the flood zone you need to provide compensatory storage.
Paul Nelson, GCC – Most work is between the 50-75’ buffer lines.
Bob Grasso, PLS – Some is between the 75 – 100’ and some is outside the 100’.
Steve Przyjemski, GCC Agent – This is a Zone II Wellhead Protection Area so our Special Conditions apply. So it should be a solid 100’ No-Cut.
Mike Birmingham, GCC – Why can’t you put the driveway outside the 100’?
Bob Grasso, PLS – It’s heavy treeline, there’s a well & water shutoff, and a drywell in that area.
Mark Unger, Owner – The reason I need this drive is for landscapers bringing in leaves so they don’t come too close to the house where the kids are playing.
Carl Shreder, GCC – Is this driveway for your own use?
Mark Unger, Owner – Yes, but for 3 wks in the Fall landscapers come in with trucks of leaves & I don’t want them coming so close by the house where the kids are.
Paul Nelson, GCC – I can’t imagine the traffic will be that heavy – 10 trucks at the most?
Mark Unger, Owner – Yes, for 3 weeks in the Fall.
Paul Nelson, GCC – You want us to give you this waiver for your convenience for 3 weeks a year. You could pull the road off any of the points of the existing driveway.
Mark Unger, Owner – When I built the new house this was how I planned to use the property. It won’t harm the wetland. I moved the barn that was down the bottom. The wetlands are new from the beavers. I moved the barn to help the situation. The driveway will make the site work for what I planned for & that’s what I need the road for.
Tom Howland, GCC – That area at the top where you moved barn, didn’t that used to be all trees?
Mark Unger, Owner – Yes & no. There were several roads in that area.
Tom Howland, GCC – This entirely within a Natural Heritage area. I’m looking at the disturbance of tree cutting & grading that was done there before.
Mark Unger, Owner – In the last meetings you were concerned with what I might do in the future with the road – whether I might put houses back there. With the current drive I could get 2 septic systems back there now & I am not doing that. I just want to use driveway to access my lot.
Carl Shreder, GCC – We need a good reason why we should not follow our regulations.
Bob Grasso, PLS – If this was prime resource yes, but is already disturbed.
Paul Nelson, GCC – To get waiver we need to know there isn’t an alternative. You already indicated that there is a gravel drive around the back of the house and that there is a drive with a gate to a building in the back portion of the lot, why cannot this serve as your access? (Note that the applicant did not provide an answer to this question)
Mark Unger, Owner – I’m asking for a waiver because the board is supposed to work with people.
Bob Grasso, PLS – This is not prime resource & is already disturbed land. He wants to stabilize it.
Carl Shreder, GCC – Can you come up a little on that road?
Mark Unger, Owner – The drywell that drives the heating system is at the bend.
Steve Przyjemski, GCC Agent – It just has to come up 40’ to be out of the 100’. It’s a steep slope.
Mark Unger, Owner – That’s why I wanted to grade it.
Steve Przyjemski, GCC Agent – I’m less worried about the grading, this slope need to be stabilized.
Carl Shreder, GCC – We need to come to an understanding to see what each side can live with here. We need to come to a decision & a conclusion – you have to give a bit.
Paul Nelson, GCC – The alternative plan is not to do anything, stabilize the slope & use it as it is.
There is a discussion on the filling that the applicant proposes to do in the roadbed that runs to the rear of the property. I will make a cut on it:
Paul Nelson: Now turning to the rear roadbed; isn’t this where there will be significant filling with in the 100’ do not disturb area?
Bob Grasso: Yes, the amount of fill (655 cu.yds.) is indicated on the plan.
Mark Unger: the road will be filled to the level of the birm on the North side of the property. This should allow the runoff to sheet flow over the birm as well as down the road.
Paul Nelson: this is a change from the original plan which had the fill only part way up the birm. This will result in the loss of additional trees.
Steve Przyjemski/Mark Unger: the trees lost are mostly small saplings.
Paul Nelson: it appears that you will still see a lot of erosion down the road and simply the traffic will create ‘channels’ for this flow.
Bob Grasso/Mike Birmingham: the method of construction should keep the down hill flow of water in the road contained to the crushed rock channels which will be created.
GCC – Move the road within 75-100’ buffer, add No-Disturb Bounds with markers (TBD with Steve Przyjemski in the field - at 50’), add planting plans, add a drywell/geotex to contain/stabilize the underground water flow, move the drywell to the junction where the runoff from the road (running to the rear of the property) is meets the runoff flow area from the field.
MOTION to continue to January 25, 2007 at 7:30 – Tom / John / Unam
BAILEY LANE BRIDGE (GCC-2006-13; DEP 161-0643) NOI (Cont)
No reps.
MOTION to continue to March 22, 2007 at 8:00 – John / Mike / Unam
10 BARTLETT DRIVE (GCC-2006-31; DEP 161-0654) NOI (Cont)
Rep: Leonard Laing, Owner
Steve Przyjemski, GCC Agent – This hearing was continued waiting for Natural Heritage information & more detailed information about the retaining wall. We need to make sure the work is overseen as they will be working right in Pentucket Pond. We don’t want to leave this hanging over the winter, especially if it’s only done halfway – we don’t want it to cause erosion into the pond. We want it to be done soon & quickly.
Leonard Laing, Owner – It will take 4 days to complete – we’ll take the old one out & put the new one in. The preparation work is the most difficult. Once the footing is done it’ll go up quickly.
Carl Shreder, GCC – We can put the details in the OoC.
Steve Przyjemski, GCC Agent – Ther is no siltation shown on the plan so I’ll keep an eye on it while work is in progress.
MOTION to accept the plan, revision date 12/4/06, with comments added to the OoC – John / Tom / Unam
MOTION to close the hearing – John / Tom / Unam
PARISH ROAD – Map 20, Lot 1 (GCC-2006-23; DEP 161-0648) NOI (Cont)
No reps.
MOTION to continue to January 25, 2007 at 8:30 – John / Tom / Unam
541 NORTH STREET (GCC-2006-36) NOI (New)
Reps: Pam Margaritis, Owner; Jacob Murray, Apple Associates, Engineer; Matt Palis, Builder
Jacob Murray, Apple Associates – This NOI s for a 2-bedroom house on an existing lot. The BOH approved the septic system repair. All work is outside the 50’.
Steve Przyjemski, GCC Agent – This property is within a Zone II Wellhead Protection area so our Special Conditions apply.
Matt Palis, Builder – (Presents building plans)
Paul Nelson, GCC – There’s not a lot of grading, just notching it into the slope.
Jacob Murray, Apple Associates – We’ve also added an additional no-disturb area.
Carl Shreder, GCC – What material are you proposing for the driveway?
Matt Palis, Builder – Asphalt.
Carl Shreder, GCC – Would you consider making it out of a pervious material?
Matt Palis, Builder – It’s a 3% grade going towards the stream. Pervious would be no problem.
Steve Przyjemski, GCC Agent – Again, this is Zone II with Special Conditions. 99% is within the 100’ no cut zone. The stream is labeled here as intermittent but it could be perennial. It has not been accepted as intermittent. The whole project is within the 100’ No-Cut because of the Zone II.
GCC: Septic system is outside the 100’ buffer line.
Carl Shreder, GCC – How far is the house from the front of the lot?
Jacob Murray, Apple Associates – 53’.
Paul Nelson: if you move the house towards the rear of the lot, you could come very close to achieving a 75’ buffer.
Jacob Murray, Apple Associates: We can’t move it back because of zoning & the placement of the septic system.
Steve Przyjemski, GCC Agent – Would it be better to put the house closer to the road to decrease the disturbed area from the driveway?
Paul Nelson, GCC – Can you push the driveway closer to the 100’ DND line?
Steve Przyjemski, GCC Agent – Yes, put the driveway closer to the property line & the house closer to the back.
Jacob Murray, Apple Associates – It wouldn’t meet the grading if we moved it back.
Steve Przyjemski, GCC Agent – The bigger concept is that the whole project is a waiver. That’s the big picture. We need to address the issues of the stream and the Zone II. We can fix small details but have to look at the bigger picture.
Mike Birmingham, GCC – If we accept that this is an intermittent stream then everyone who lives on this stream has 100 more feet to build on.
Steve Przyjemski, GCC Agent – There’s a lot of flow through this stream.
Paul Nelson, GCC – It’s a second order stream, it has feeder streams with ponding, and it is on the USGS; so it must be considered a perennial stream.
Matt Palis, Builder – Does it matter that there was a house there before?
Carl Shreder, GCC – No, we have to work with the regulations that are in effect now.
Mike Birmingham, GCC – Is this a new septic or a repair?
Steve Przyjemski, GCC Agent – The BOH says it’s repair due to a technicality. They didn’t have a time limit on how long ago the house had been existing so they had to accept it. It was filed a few days before the new regulations came in with a time limit.
Carl Shreder, GCC – If it is a repair, does it have a reserve?
Jacob Murray, Apple Associates – No, it doesn’t. There was probably a cesspool there before.
Carl Shreder, GCC – It was sub-standard whatever it was.
Mike Birmingham: was there running water to the house?
Jacob Murray, Apple Associates: Yes, there are pipes indicating that there was running water. This would be an indicator of some kind of septic system.
Mr. Margaritis, Owner - We are willing to do anything you recommend to make this proposal acceptable to the Conservation Commission. Just let us know.
GCC – Pull everything out of the 75’, slant the house water slightly, move the driveway accordingly, make the driveway pervious, label the stream as perennial, add stone bounds.
MOTION to continue to January 11, 2007 at 8:30 – John / Paul / 4 Aye, 1 Nay
| 
