GCC Meeting Minutes
March 20, 2008
3rd Floor Meeting Room
Attendance: Carl Shreder, John Bell, John Lopez, Charles Waters, Tom Howland, Steve Przyjemski, and Sharon Munro.
SIGNING:
- Bills
MOTION to sign bills. Tom/John L. all/unam
-OoC Denial for 28 Mohawk Circle
-CoC for 6 Reynard Lane
-Ext. for OoC for Pentucket Pond
Camp Denison – WIW agreement signing/discussion
Carl Shreder, GCC - I would like this document in Word form.
Steve Przyjemski, Agent – I will send this out again.
Carl Shreder, GCC – We need to review this and comment on it.
Steve Przyjemski, Agent – Yes, because we keep bumping this when we get busy.
APPROVAL:
Meeting minutes for: 1/24, 2/7, and 3/7.
MOTION to approve minutes John L. /John B. /John L. / Charles W.
Tom H. Abstains on 2/7 minutes.
BUSINESS:
7:00 Discussion with Bill Dudley regarding sand for the beach.
Present: Bill Dudley and David Claveau President of the Pentucket Pines Association
David Claveau, App. – We are trying to get permission or find out what the proper route is to get the beach restoration done at a lot in the Pentucket Pond area. There hasn’t been any work done out there in long time but we want to get any recommendations from the commission as to what would be best to do here.
Carl Shreder, GCC – Do you have a source of sand at this point?
David Claveau, App. - Yes, we have some possibilities. Bill has done some looking around and we found a couple of places. The place from Bentley Warren or Tormel Sand and Gravel seems to have been used in the past on Salisbury Beach and Plum Island.
John Lopez, GCC – Typically, there is a standard to which there would be that you would try to match what is out there now. …something that would naturally be there.
Steve Przyjemski, Agent – Locally, there really isn’t a policy on this currently. However, I think this is a good opportunity to perhaps consider what we need to be aware of in the future.
Charles Waters, GCC – We should identify what types of sands should be used but in the future we need to apply a policy that would be clear in identifying what is best.
Carl Shreder, GCC – So, we need to establish what kind of sand and make sure how this is going to work.
Charles Waters, GCC – Later, we should discuss the question of rather there should be an NOI filing requirement for this type of activity.
Carl Shreder, GCC – An RDA filing seems to be the best way to handle this situation.
John Lopez, GCC – How much sand are we talking about?
Bill Dudley, App. – It will be about 20 – 30 yards.
Charles Waters, GCC – Between you (John Lopez) and Steve you can work out the types of sand and how this will be applied to the beach area. We will need to have notification when anyone will replenish sand in a beach area.
Steve Przyjemski, Agent – I am not 100% behind an NOI filing for replenishing a beach. Where it is not creating a new beach I don’t think we need to require a new NOI filing for each restoration. We could have a procedure to have to discuss these issues with the commission to establish what the concerns are and where this can be dealt with.
7:20 Discussion with Mr. Epstein regarding the property at 25 Spofford Ave.
Steven Epstein, Atty. – It’s actually 24 Spofford Ave. Mr. Chairman I like to first ask that the other commission members identify themselves.
(Con Com identified them selves for the record)
Carl Shreder, GCC – and for the members of the commission would you please identify yourself?
ALL COMMISSIONERS IDENTIFIED THEMSELVES
Steven Epstein, Atty. – I am Steven Epstein; I represent James DiSabintino of 24 Spofford Ave.
Steve Przyjemski, Agent – We currently have litigation on this case so, just to keep everyone informed.
Steven Epstein, Atty. – I am only here for a very small matter.
- Here Mr. Epstein questions rather Steve Przyjemski the Agent has been sworn into office.
Charles Waters, GCC – Steve is our agent that has been authorized to act on our behalf relating to specific items he does not need to be appointed, as he is the Con Com’s agent and has the authority to act only through us. I don’t know what your agenda is, but we are not here to discuss this non-issue.
Steven Epstein, Atty. – Mr. Chairman, I wrote you a letter back in November 20th…
Carl Shreder, GCC – Yes, I am aware of that…
Steven Epstein, Atty. - …and I wrote you again on November 30th after your secretary responded saying that my client would have to go through some great expense to move an erosion barrio and it is because of the litigation that we ask that since the driveway is in that we move the erosion barrier so that it surrounds his house, not the immediate frontage. That’s all we have asked and you have complete power under your Order of Conditions to do that as it was stated in my Nov. 30th letter.
Carl Shreder, GCC – This case is under litigation Mr. Epstein; I am more inclined to not do anything with the case.
Steven Epstein, Atty. – So, is the answer from the commission…no that he can not move the barrier at his time.
Carl Shreder, GCC – I will open the discussion to the commission.
Charles Waters, GCC – Steve, could you tell us a little bit about what you have observed down there?
Steve Przyjemski, Agent – Just to give you an idea about this property there have been three EO’s written up for this property already. The first one was written as a violation and the commission had to get involved and filed a NOI. The three areas of concern are; the deck, the driveway and the shed. The second EO was to allow the driveway and garage to be finished. Then NOI was filed to deny the deck. Currently, we have an EO to take down the deck. The work in one area is done but the property is violation. Technically, any work done could cause erosion. The deck is an example of such erosion. The silt fence is in place for erosion control when the deck is removed.
Carl Shreder, GCC - As I recall that area with the EO was to be re-seeded…
Steve Przyjemski, Agent – …it was re-seeded.
Carl Shreder, GCC – Is vegetation growing?
Steve Przyjemski, Agent – It is still early yet to tell.
Carl Shreder, GCC – Do you have a comment?
Steven Epstein, Atty. – I do have a comment. It has been one whole growing season that the lawn has growing.
Carl Shreder, GCC – I looking for verification, that’s all.
Steven Epstein, Atty. - …and I am telling you, Mr. Chairman that unless the person who comes to the property. And any of the commissioners are welcome as long as they come with a copy of their commission. He (Steve Przyjemski, Agent) is welcome to come to view the property as long as he comes with the copy of his commission.
Charles Waters, GCC – No, Steve is our agent and is authorized to act on our behalf. There will be no requirement that he bring anything. What is the proposed action order on behalf of the client?
Steven Epstein, Atty. – As you recall or maybe you don’t…. (Passing around plans) the purple is the current location of the silt barrier and we are asking to move it to where the blue is….curl it up in other words.
Charles Waters, GCC – What is the reason for….
Steven Epstein, Atty. – The reason is that the work if any will need to be done if and when the case is decided is in the area that is contained by the blue. It is the area where the deck is…the other is serving no practical purpose other than to serve as a barrier to get to the water.
Charles Waters, GCC – Steve P., when you’ve been out there have you made any observations where the silt fence is now where the silt fence is now….
Steve Przyjemski, Agent – It is stable.
Charles Waters, GCC – It’s stable?
Steve Przyjemski, Agent – I mean you could make the argument that there is no proposed activity up there and you could move the silt fence. It probably is a violation that’s why it’s under you guys. If it wasn’t for that deck side and the violations and fines accruing it would be a no-brainer. That part of the project’s work is for the most part done.
Steven Epstein, Atty. - Mr. Chairman…?
Carl Shreder, GCC – Yes, Mr. Epstein.
Steven Epstein, Atty. - …which is precisely why I have requested to make this alteration under this EO which as I set forth in my November 30th letter…ugh…erosion control will remain in place until the owner receives approval from con com. All we are doing is moving that barrier under the EO because your agent is requesting a CoC and there is nothing in the state or even your regulations that require this.
Carl Shreder. GCC – In one of your letters I believe you reference a CoC.
Steven Epstein, Atty. – No, Mr. Chairman. I used the words Certificate of Compliance, not capitalized.
Carl Shreder, GCC – You should not have used that terminology at all.
Steven Epstein, Atty. – I did not.
Carl Shreder, GCC – I think you did.
Steven Epstein, Atty. – That is why I did not capitalize it, sir. …if you read the first paragraph, Charles.
Charles Waters, GCC – You capitalized it.
Steven Epstein, Atty. – NO! I did not capitalize it
Charles Waters, GCC – I don’t see any issue with this modification however, I would want you (Steve) out there to make sure that the silt fence is installed properly. The applicant has already proven that he has a tendency to deviate from what the commission wants done.
Carl Shreder, GCC – When is your client wishing to get this done?
Steven Epstein, Atty. – I will consult the client and get back to you. However, I would think that he would like it done soon.
Charles Waters, GCC – I need from you Mr. Epstein, on behalf of your client, explicit permission for Steve Przyjemski to be present during the work.
Steven Epstein, Atty. – I agree to permit Steve Przyjemski to be on my client’s property to oversee the work.
HEARINGS:
7:20 Hearing regarding the proposed revision of the Fee Schedule Table in Section 17 of the Town of Georgetown Wetland Protection Regulations.
Carl Shreder, GCC – I feel that this is reasonable increase in fees since we haven’t raised them in…well, I don’t when.
Steve Przyjemski, Agent – I don’t think it was ever adjusted.
Charles Waters, GCC – What is the increase?
Steve Przyjemski, Agent – It would be an increase of 50% on some items and less on others.
Steve Przyjemski, Agent – We could address test pits that are in violation with fees, as well.
Charles Waters, GCC – We should address that at a case by case situation.
Steve Przyjemski, Agent – The CoC expiration fee should hold more weight in making sure the CoCs are being filed. This could be included in the document so that it is made clear.
Steve Przyjemski, Agent – Sharon had suggested that we make notation at the end of the fee schedule. We could include an explanation and example of the calculations for the fees. Sometimes it isn’t clear to the applicant how to calculate the fees.
Steve Przyjemski, Agent – There is also the River Protection Act surcharge for overlapping jurisdictional areas. It is a 50% surcharge for all overlapping areas. I will have to look into this more later because I don’t know how this would apply.
Carl Shreder, GCC – So, maybe we should make a motion to continue this discussion.
MOTION to cont. hearing regarding proposed revisions for the Bylaw fee Schedule to May 1st @ 9:00pm. Tom/ John B. all/unam
202 West Main Street
Owner/Appl.: Thomas LaValley; Rep.: Karen Westphalen of Atlantic Engineering
Present: Robert Lynch of Atlantic Engineering
Robert Lynch, Atlantic Engineering – We did two things: We got rid of the fill which eliminates amount of material brought in and by going in at a different slope I was able to take out more than what I will be bringing in.
Steve Przyjemski, Agent – Which is what the DEP was looking for…
Charles Waters, GCC – So, what were everybody’s thoughts on the site walk?
Tom Howland, GCC – It really wasn’t a large area to work with…
Steve Przyjemski, Agent – That was what made this very difficult to work with.
Carl Shreder, GCC – Is this the final plan?
Robert Lynch, Atlantic Engineering – Yes.
Carl Shreder, GCC – Is everything we talked about on the plan?
Charles Waters, GCC – Can you explain to me what the plan of replication is?
Robert Lynch, Atlantic Engineering – In general, we will be taking about six inches of soil out down by the water and here where the trees are, we will take out the trees and the wall, as well as, soil.
Carl Shreder, GCC – Are there any abutters here tonight?
(No response)
Robert Lynch, Atlantic Engineering – We will wait until the water table goes down to begin work.
John Lopez, GCC – Where there will be the removal of the spruce should there be some native plants put in as a replacement?
Robert Lynch, Atlantic Engineering – They are using a small footprint of the lot and if they want to plant a lawn or flowers they could.
John Lopez, GCC – Perhaps, we could consider some plantings.
MOTION to accept plan for 202 West Main Street with stipulations. Tom/John B. all/unam
MOTION to close the hearing for 202 West Main Street. Mike B. / John L. all/unam
1A Spaulding Road
Owner/Appl.: Barry Enos; Rep.: Michael Seekamp of Seekamp Environmental
Present: Heidi Gaffney & Michael Seekamp of Seekamp Environmental
Heidi Gaffney, Seekamp Environmental – We are requesting access to the property to conduct test pits.
Carl Shreder, GCC – Why are you filing an RDA.
Heidi Gaffney, Seekamp Environmental – An RDA was filed because the impacts are temporary.
Tom Howland, GCC – I’m sure we will want to have the lines accepted.
Heidi Gaffney, Seekamp Environmental – You mean for the test pits?
Tom Howland, GCC – Yes.
Charles Waters, GCC – Have you asked the abutters about the test pits?
Michael Seekamp, Seekamp Environmental – No.
Steve Przyjemski, Agent – My thought is that under an RDA we could request that a third party review this. An NOI would hold more insurance on how this is done.
Michael Seekamp, Seekamp Environmental – I don’t understand why an NOI has more insurance than RDA.
Charles Waters, GCC – Why does that paper street curve around at the end?
Michael Seekamp, Seekamp Environmental – I believe this was a zoning requirement. That route would be rerouted and if you want to have your agent come out and observe the test pits.
Charles Waters, GCC – Can you move those test pits in from the wetland line?
Michael Seekamp, Seekamp Environmental – Yes, we could bring any of those pits in further from the BVW line.
Charles Waters, GCC – I don’t see how else they could go in there. I am very uncomfortable with this unless Steve can go out there and assess what is out there. As long as they work with Steve and they move those test pits in from the BVW lines.
Michael Seekamp, Seekamp Environmental – Certainly, we can work with Steve on this.
Carl Shreder, GCC – We are not making any calls on the wetland lines until later. We will have to wait to do the delineation.
Janet Talbot, Resident – As to the question for the abutters regarding the crossing of another’s boundary; no they can not cross. There is a stream out there and it is almost entirely wet out there. There is a hill here, as well. I have concerns over the proposed driveway because there is a hill and a stream. I think it is important to go out and see it.
John Lopez, GCC – Is there wildlife out there?
Steve Przyjemski, Agent – It is not an NHESP area but, but if there are wetlands there is wildlife.
Carl Shreder, GCC – We need a date for a continuation and for Steve to go out to look at the site.
MOTION to cont. 1A Spaulding Road to April 17th @ 8:30pm. Tom/ John B. all/unam
10 Searle Street
Owner/Appl.: James Bussing; Rep.: William Paulitz of Apple Assoc., Inc.
Carl Shreder, GCC – The applicant has requested a continuation.
Steve Przyjemski, Agent – On the conservation land Mr. Bussing is proposing, I want to make sure that there will be public access to this area.
Carl Shreder, GCC – There should be some sort of agreement with Park of Recreation to ensure that there is public access.
Steve Przyjemski, Agent – I would like to work with the applicant in preparing for the next hearing in terms of a few issues that were brought up the last hearing and we were not able to finish those discussions on the access and all.
Charles Waters, GCC – We would certainly authorize that, Steve. We should have something included in the deed with Park and Rec. for the access to the open space (conservation land).
MOTION to cont. 10 Searle Street to May 1st @ 8:30pm. Tom/ John B. all/unam
| 
