Georgetown Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes
Second Floor Meeting Room
June 17, 2010, 7:00 p.m.
Present: Carl Shreder; Paul Nelson; Charles Waters; Tom Howland; John Lopez; Steve Przyjemski, Conservation Agent; Carol Fitzpatrick, Minutes Recorder
Vouchers: MOTION to pay the bills. Howland/Lopez; 4-0; All/Unam
Signings: 7 Corinthian Way CoC Re-issue
Reappointments to Camp Denison: Robert Morehouse, Robert Apprich and Robert Gorton. Reappointment of Peter Burns to the CPC.
MOTION to appoint Robert Morehouse, Robert Apprich and Robert Gorton to the Camp Denison Committee and Peter Burns to the CPC. Nelson/Howland; 4-0; All/Unam
Mr. Waters joined the meeting at 7:15 pm.
Public Hearings:
2 Brook Meadow Drive (GCC-2010-14) – new NOI
Chuck Freeman, Applicant; Vaclav Talacko, Hancock Associates
Mr. Talacko presents plans from 2008. The entire footprint of house is in the 100. John Lopez asks for a recent delineation. The delineation was done in April. Mr. Freeman wants to construct a retaining wall (7 feet from the wetlands) at grade with a metal fence on top that will enclose the yard for their young children. A swing set and shed will be put up at the end of the driveway (15 ft from the wetland). He also wants to put in a screened in porch attached to the house. There is an existing deck and it is reachable from the inside. Mr. Freeman also proposes to remove 4 trees. The closest tree is 10 feet from the wetlands. Mr. Freeman states that there are too many trees at high risk of falling. Mr. Talacko adds that they will plant understory plants, witch hazels and other native trees. It
is a thick, wooded area.
Mr. Shreder proposes a site walk. Paul Nelson wants the trees that are to be taken down tagged. John Lopez states that it is illegal to cut within the 25’ “no disturb” zone. Mr. Talacko adds that the wetland area is very clear. Mr. Shreder commented that this is a classic Georgetown problem. The developers built right up to the wetlands, leaving very little back yard. Mr. Nelson adds that they should really have a waiver request list. Mr. Przyjemski adds they originally met last November regarding the erosion and the retaining wall.
MOTION to have a site walk on Monday, June 21st at 7:00pm. Waters/Howland; 5-0; All/Unam
MOTION to continue the NOI for 2 Brook Meadow Lane to July 15th at 7:30pm. Waters/Lopez; 5-0; All/Unam
23 Prospect Street (GCC-2010-11) – new NOI
Janice Thompson, Applicant; Jim Benito, Son-in-law of applicant
Mr. Benito states that the existing barn is now constructed on cinder blocks and they plan to move it over. They want to be able to put 2 cars in the garage. They are putting it in the only place they can, in line with the driveway.
Mr. Nelson adds that the house is an L shape and the driveway is almost straight. It looks like there is an elevation drop there also. You are building the elevation up flush with the driveway?
Mr. Benito adds that the septic system will go under the driveway, outside the 100. It will be a Presby system. The system will have a maintenance plan. Mr. Przyjemski adds that this project has a few good things going for it. They can create a line on their property where no work would be done in the future. They would be creating a “no disturb” area. Everything would be native plantings.
Ms. Thompson mentions that they plan to put spouts and rain barrels off the garage to help with the runoff. One of the sources for water will be the water overflow from storms. Carl Shreder adds that this property doesn’t show up on the floodplains. Mr. Przyjemski said that the area was too small. This is a replacement situation on an 8000 SF lot, a pretty tight area. Mr. Waters added that this is a case about mitigation regarding what plantings we can do. Mr. Nelson added that he would like to see heavy mitigation planting on this site. Mr. Waters added that he would like to see Mr. Przyjemski come up with a detailed planting plan.
Actions Items:
Mr. Przyjemski to put together a detailed planting plan.
MOTION to have a site walk on Tuesday, June 22 at 7 pm Nelson/Lopez; 5-0; All/Unam
MOTION to continue the hearing for 23 Prospect Street to July 15th at 7:45 pm. Waters/Lopez; 5-0; All/Unam
551 North Street Culvert Replacement (GCC-2010-12) – new NOI
Steven Tyler, Bayside Engineering; Peter Durkee, Georgetown Highway Department
Mr. Tyler states that the culvert is severely eroded and is in need of replacement. In the next storm it may fail. Mr. Durkee adds that the job can be done in 3 days or less. Mr. Przyjemski adds that they will build it out so it is built up so it doesn’t freefall like it has in the past. National Heritage has okayed this.
Mr. Durkee adds that he will use an excavator and we will have to add some fill. We are going to do it in a low flow area. I am going to sleeve the pipe. There is a 6 inch gas line going through the pipe. Mr. Tyler adds that there is no substructure under the pipe, there is a lot of undermining. Mr. Nelson asks if they are going to fill in on the east side and will the elevation change? Mr. Durkee adds that they are going to build a head wall. It is now like a big crater. It is on a corner and is dangerous so we will add a guard rail.
Mr. Przyjemski states that he would like it to flow without a drop. Mr. Shreder and Mr. Przyjemski think they need to add a silt fence. Mr. Przyjemski adds that he will work with Mr. Durkee on the project. Mr. Tyler adds that they will need a porous substructure so we will use gravel and rocks and other material.
Mr. Shreder states that this work needs to be done. There are limits to the work we have issued. You estimate this will be a 3-day job? Mr. Durkee answers that they will try to keep the road open. It is hard to have a detour in this area.
Action Items:
Mr. Przyjemski to work with Mr. Durkee throughout this project.
MOTION to approve the NOI for 551 North Street Culvert Waters/Lopez; 5-0; All/Unam
Amendment to add sedimentation control by the Commission. Nelson/Waters; 5-0; All/Unam
MOTION to close the 551 North Street Culvert. Waters/Howland; 5-0; All/Unam
Discussion with Peter Durkee:
Mr. Przyjemski explains what recently happened on Ordway Street. That Mr. Durkee was cited by Mr. Lopez for digging in a wetland with an excavator. Mr. Lopez states that he saw another area by the Boxford line where this happened. Mr. Przyjemski states that Mr. Durkee has been proactive in repairing the roadways. Mr. Shreder comments that if there is any question of how far you should go, please call us. I can’t turn a blind eye to serious violations. We can work as a team. We don’t want to get burned either. Mr. Przyjemski mentions that Pam Rogers got a call from the DEP on this case because of the town activities in the wetland.
10 Rock Pond Avenue (GCC-2010-13) – new NOI
Bob Grasso, Professional Land Services; John and Deanna Maglio, Applicants
Mr. Grasso explains that they have no DEP # and haven’t heard from National Heritage at this time. This is the 2nd revision of a earlier plan. The 14000 SF lot is on a peninsula on the pond. It is serviced by town water. They are in the flood plain, the 100 year at 85’. The septic is probably not working properly. In the last storm the water went right through the house. We propose to get the house out of the flood plain. We are planning a Title 5 system. We plan to build a 2 bedroom house. The proposed septic system will meet Title 5 but will not meet the local bylaw. The BOH is reviewing it. Mr. Maglio adds that they need to get out of the flood plain. The house is totally destroyed. Mr. Przyjemski asks what is the minimum setback between the setback & the house? Mr.
Grasso answers 20 feet. The driveway will be a paved driveway. The footprint of the house is smaller than before. It will be a walkout with a full basement.
Mr. Shreder adds that they will still have water problems. He asks if it will be a conventional septic? Mr. Grasso answers he hopes there will not be water problems after this. We will be at 86.5’. The septic is conventional. Mr. Lopez asks that this is 50 feet BVW? The state has 50 feet Do Not Disturb. That is not negotiable. Mr. Waters states that that is not correct. Mr. Shreder adds that he doesn’t think that the applicant can get a permit to build as it exists. This is a unique circumstance. Mr. Maglio adds that it is a small lot. We have a high and dry area for the house. It is a one story house now. Mr. Shreder requests they schedule a site walk. Mr. Howland adds he would like to see something other than native seed in this area, something to create a buffer. Mr. Nelson
comments that there are going to be a lot of waivers to get this thing to fly. There will be a lot of mitigation. Mr. Lopez requests that the applicant stake the proposed footprint for the site walk.
Mr. Gerry Nadeau, 174 West Main Street, an abutter, asks if there is a 28 inch oak that may be removed? He would like to see the tree stay. They have removed many trees around the Richardson Lane Rock Pond development.
MOTION for a site walk for 10 Rock Pond Ave on Monday, June 21st at 7:30 pm. Waters/Nelson; 5-0; All/Unam
Thomas McGrane, 8 Rock Pond Ave, abutter: I hope that John can do what he wants. But, I have a neighbor who did the same thing went through the Zoning Board and ended up building a monster of a house. That house should have never been built. I will keep an eye on this.
MOTION to continue 10 Rock Pond Ave to July 15th at 8 pm Waters/Lopez; 5-0; All/Unam
Charles Waters left the meeting at 9:00 pm.
Discussions:
102 Pond Street Enforcement Order (EO):
Jeffrey McMath, Developer and Applicant
Mr. McMath states that he would like to get the Commission’s permission for a NOI to proceed. There is a certified vernal pool on the site, one of the 2 in town. Mr. Lopez asks what did the EO require?
Mr. Przyjemski explains that this is an ILSF (Isolated Land Subject to Flooding). The plan is to make a proper mitigation plan to address this. We may ask them to move the road etc. In the past, we sent 8 memos to the Planning Board regarding the ILSF. It was an outstanding EO and it was largely ignored. They need to change this plan. The ILSF is not even mentioned. They will need many waivers on this project. The house, road and there are many other waiver issues. We will have a lot of mitigation on this project. We will never resolve this EO. We are looking to allow this gentleman to file a NOI tonight. He has been working with us with regard to plantings, etc. He can open a hearing and continue it. He wants to work with us. Mr. Lopez states that this is a large scale project. Why do we not have a
third party involved? Mr. McMath states that he went over this last meeting. He paid an administrative fee.
Mr. Shreder explains that this project started in 2002. The original plan was to build a large-scale, condo development. There was a filling issue from the start. Each developer has filled in the land. Mr. McMath adds that he is willing to work with the Commission. I have paid a fee and done the plantings.
Mr. Shreder comments that there was a deed on this property, a deed restriction, that stated that only one house could be built on this property. I would like to bring this back to the original state of the land, before the dump trucks come. Mr. McMath comments that he is willing to work with the Commission 100%. I want to move forward. Mr. Lopez comments that having a third party review is a legal and political buffer. We would hire a third party thoughout the life of the project. Mr. McMath adds that a third party can be swayed one way or the other. You say you want to go back pre-Scott. Mr. Shreder adds that the earlier developer was Mr. Casoletto.
Mr. Nelson asks if the EO roughly satisfied now? Mr. Przyjemski explains that the dirt needs to be dealt with. I don’t care if it is now or 6 months from now. Mr. Przyjemski asks the Commission is they are okay accepting the NOI. Mr. Nelson adds the ILSF can only be protected under the NOI. Mr. Shreder comments that the Planning Board apparently ignored the whole issue in the past. The ZBA should have rich file on this project. It will give us the original topographic plan. Mr. Shreder adds that the certified vernal pool needs to be protected. That area was essentially a bowl. I don’t know where that water is going.
Mr. Przyjemski asks: We are okay with accepting his NOI, right? Mr. McMath answers that he will have it in on this Wednesday/Thursday this coming week.
Rock Pond, Jim Bussing, Lot 3, Richardson Lane
James Bussing, Developer and Applicant, Rock Pond Estates
Mr. Bussing comments that this is the last lot in the subdivision. It was originally my project and it changed hands a few times. This is modification to an existing OoC. Mr. Nelson states that if it is a significant change then he needs to file a new NOI. Mr. Waters asks what are the standards that we have to go by? Mr. Shreder explains that the footprint of the proposal is smaller. The deck and the driveway are in our jurisdiction. We need to find out about the septic setback from the house (20 or 10 feet). Mr. Przyjemski adds that he will check with the Board of Health on Monday on that setback. If we can move the house over it would be out of our jurisdiction. I will also check the bylaw for this information, Mr. Nelson said. He also stated that the deck should be as back out as far as
possible. Mr. Shreder added that we need to find the information and get the building out of the resource area. Mr. Nelson asks Mr. Przyjemski if he can send out an email with his opinion and how we gather all of the information needed.
Action Items:
Mr. Przyjemski is to check on the BOH septic setback and will also check the Bylaw. He will also send out an email with his opinion on how all the information will be gathered for this project.
MOTION to close the meeting at 9:41 pm. Howland/Lopez; 4-0; All/Unam.
| 
