CONSERVATION COMMISSION
TOWN OF GROVELAND
183 MAIN STREET
GROVELAND, MA 01834
(978) 374-1863 FAX (978) 372-6105
November 16, 2005
Present: M. Dempsey, T. Schaefer, J. Termini, S. Benanti, J. Stewart
Open 7:08 pm
ConCom Business - M. Dempsey made a motion to accept the minutes as submitted for November 2, 2005. T. Schaefer 2nd. 3 yeses - 1 abstain. Motion passes 3-1.
ConCom Business - M. Dempsey visited 94B Main Street at the request of Al Couillard. He had requested a 20 day waiver from seasonal restriction which ConCom granted. 90% of the work is done. He asked Al Couillard to remove the loam pile from the buffer zone, replace more hay bales and put more check dams in. M. Dempsey will review Marc Jacob’s letter in light of his site visit.
Chesterton/860 Salem St./(informal meeting)
Present: Linda Loreth, Neil Leonard. Opened 7:14 pm
M. Dempsey visited the site in September , 2005. They have been corresponding by email regarding work they want to do on the site. There is a question if filing is required. N. Leonard used a map and pictures to show a culvert drain that’s been there for 25-30 years. In 2000, they connected a roof drain from Building C, cutting a path down to Building B. They connected the roof drain to a manhole. Appx. 6’ back from the manhole, the last 3 years they have had freeze-ups in the winter. He believes the pipe has sunk-down, and is not level and created a pocket. He’d like to dig it up, lift up the pipe, or find out what the obstruction is.
Linda Loreth had the wetlands and buffer zone identified as well as under the Rivers Protection Act (shown on map). She said it’s within the River’s Protection Act as an existing structure. She wants to confirmation that they have accurately identified the regulatory responsibilities. M. Dempsey said the drain is within the 200’ of the brook, but outside of the 100’, so they’re only under the River’s Protection Act. S. Benanti asked if the wetlands are 100’ on either side of the brook. L. Loreth said they identified it by the vegetation. She said the experts only found that vegetation on one side.
J. Termini asked how long the work would take. N. Leonard said no more than 2 days. M. Dempsey asked how far the stand pipe is from brook? N. Leonard said the culvert is 79’. J. Stewart asked if the captured water is flowing toward the brook? L. Loreth toward the brook. M. Dempsey asked L. Loreth if their wetland scientist opinion was that there‘s no resource there even though the brook is there? L. Loreth said it wasn’t considered to be wetlands based on vegetation. M. Dempsey said with a brook, there is still a 100’ buffer zone. M. Dempsey requested that their wetland’s scientist write ConCom a letter why he explaining why he says that.
J. Termini asked them to photograph the work and pointed out where to put the hay bales. J. Termini made a motion to give Chesterton an Emergency Order for work in the culvert, that they will photograph and document the work for ConCom, use hay bales around the excavation area to prevent any erosion and put in erosion control measures in to prevent the potential wetland, and if necessary, if ConCom finds it‘s in our jurisdiction, they will file according to the Groveland Bylaws at a later date. Tom Schaefer 2nd. L. Loreth will provide from her wetland’s scientist, the above requested letter explaining why that’s not jurisdictional.
M. Dempsey will get an Emergency Order to Neil Leonard in the mail. If it’s found as jurisdictional, ConCom will require them to get a seasonal Restriction Order. All in favor. Unanimous.
Washington Street Continued
Hearing opened at 7:31 pm. Present: Bob Messina
Johnson Pond 8” water line. M. Dempsey said that at the site walk, they walked the length of the project. He noted that at the end of the Uptack Road, the project may be within the buffer zone. So, ConCom asked Mr. Messina to put hay bales there. He agreed. They also walked down the other end of Washington Street where the majority of the work would be within buffer zone and saw where there would be erosion controls on both sides of the road.
J. Termini asked for a copy of the letter from the state saying to remove the hay bales after the pavement was restored. M. Dempsey said the summer would be a better time to perform the work, ie, July, once turtle-movement time has passed. J. Termini asked B. Messina if he is posting bonds for the street work? B. Messina said yes. A bond of $5,000 will be put in the order. M. Dempsey made a motion that ConCom close the hearing and issue an Order of Conditions allowing the project to go forward with the stipulations that there will be hay bales end of Uptack Road. J. Termini 2nd. All in favor. Unanimous. Hearing closed 7:53 pm.
10 Wood Street
Hearing opened at 8:02 pm. Present: Brianna & Chris Kershaw; Taylor Turbide
Project is proposed 16’ wide roadway crossing wetlands. Copies of green cards and tear sheets submitted as well as the Financial form. Submitted fees.
T. Turbide submitted a report prepared by Marc Jacobs for wetlands impacts. He will forward a set to DEP. This is an existing property with one dwelling. The dwelling has a barn and septic in front of property. The property is 7.5 acres, primarily open field. Reason he is before is the Board is because there are wetlands at the front of the property, consisting primarily of very hydric soil, high ground water table, and a swale that runs along the property has filled up with sediment and soot. Because of that, the wetlands have grown up the bank, ie, Jewel weed. The only place to cross the property is where the wetland is. They filed a Limit of Project Crossing with DEP because there is no other alternative means of access. The development will create 2 new lots
on the property. They propose to build a 250’ long road, 18’ wide. The Planning Board has granted them a waiver. Turnaround area for fire truck for access to the area. They came before ConCom with an informal presentation to discuss the placement for the roadway.
1,500 square feet is already farm road and has been driven on by tractors. Construct over the existing road to minimize impact. They propose a retaining wall on both sides of the roadway. 12% grade on driveway. They will excavate 3-4 feet behind wall during construction. Proposed replication area has high ground water. Proposed 4,969 square feet of replication area along slope of septic system. To mitigate flows, they’ve added catch basins. Once roadway is constructed, 99% of the work will be outside of the buffer zone. Driveway would be the only thing. Bituminous curbing. Maintained as a private road.
Site walk scheduled for Saturday, November 19th, 8:00 am. T. Turbide will bring plans and will ask Marc Jacobs to come to the site walk. Continue hearing December 7th, 8:00 pm. Hearing closed 8:34 pm
166 Main St. NOI Continued
Hearing opened 8:37 pm. Present: James N. Decoulous, Atty for John McComiskie, Mary Clisbee, John McComiskie, Stephen C. Bazarian, Representing Barranco & Clisbee, Tom Keough, Hancock Associates
M. Dempsey reviewed the letter ConCom sent J. McComiskie dated October 6, 2005. James Decoulous submitted the delineation plan as well as copies of the field data done by Mr. Keough. J. Decoulous said J. McComiskie does not plan to do any work that he did not do within the 30 day period of the Emergency Order. M. Dempsey told him the Emergency Order ran out. J. Termini questioned a pipe easement shown on the map. Mr. McComiskie did not find the end of that pipe and may come back before the Board to try to relocate it.
Tom Keough said during his site visit, several feet landward of the fence that were undisturbed. There was crab grass and other invasive species. He said the BVW was to the rear of the fence. He said it was sparsely vegetative, invasive, upland species. He said the soils are consistent with Essex County Soil Survey. There was a Windsor hydric soils. He said there was a clear break in the hydric soils. He did several auger holes. Not enough to meet 3 parameters; hydrology, vegetation, and soils in that area. 1 parameter is hydric soils.
M. Dempsey asked for the plan for restoring 25’ no disturb zone. T. Keough said it’s the original plan submitted with a planting plan with seed spec, tree spec and shrub spec. All are border species. They are all currently planted. M. Dempsey told him the difference is what trees were chosen and their sizes. He said the abutters provided photos of large trees that were there and would not be happy with six 4’-5’ trees and 18 3‘-4‘ shrubs. Tom Keough said the intent to restore is to increase habitat value and protect the resource area. He said the area had a large fence which constituted a barrier to wildlife and provided no habitat value at all. He said it may have had large trees, but no shrub component at all, and that there was a lot of
junk there. He said a large tree won’t survive transplanting. He said the shrub component will spread, the wildflower mix, and the grass will grow 18’-24” high. 5 years from now it will be dense. He said putting in 2 large trees won’t protect the resource area. M. Dempsey pointed out under ConCom’s bylaw, you can’t cut more than 40% trees within the 100’ buffer zone and that‘s what the applicant did.
J. Termini said the trees can’t be replaced. Tom Keough said the soils are tough. T. Schaefer said what was out there is not nearly adequate. M. Dempsey said now that we know where the 25’ no-disturb zone is, be put back to what as much as what it was, within reason and restored. It’s impossible to put back 100’ trees, but he needs to offer some compensation other than six, 4’-5’ trees. J. McComiskie said they’re six 12’-15 trees, maples, etc. T. Schaefer said those trees aren’t adequate. J. McComiskie said the trees were diseased and dying. T. Schaefer told him he should have come before the Board and had a site walk.
M. Dempsey asked how many trees were cut down within 100’ buffer zone? J. McComiskie claims there were 4 trees that were 8”. He said the rest of the trees were not in the buffer zone. M. Dempsey said if he said there were 4 trees cut, ConCom would never have allowed 2 of them to be cut because that would have exceeded 40%. So, two large trees, the applicant should either pay to the Town of Groveland the value of two large trees, or should donate money to Open Space or a Conservation organization. M. Clisbee claims there were at least eight trees. They looked again at file photos of the trees. M. Dempsey suggests an average and that J. McComiskie cut three too-many trees and asked the applicant donate 3 x $500 = $1,500 to organization such as Essex County
Greenbelt Association. J. McComiskie requested to donate it “in town”. M. Dempsey told him Essex County Greenbelt is a non-profit open-space conservation trust. J. Decoulous said he wants to donate it to a specific to the town of Groveland, so that it’s guaranteed that the money stays in this town. M. Dempsey asked him if he’d like to donate it to the “Friends of Veasey Park”? Mr. McComiskie said “done”.
M. Dempsey asked M. Clisbee is she found that adequate? She said her issue is that the soil was pushed back and if the hand auger was scientific testing? Yes. T. Keough said the soil samples reflect the GIS mapping by the DEP, and reflect the Essex County clear break and a transition zone in the hydric and non-hydric. He said he is confident that that is the line of hydric soils.
M. Dempsey made a motion to close the hearing on 166 Main Street, 1) accepting the newly delineated wetlands boundaries provided, dated 10/18/05; 2) marking as adequate the plans submitted May 16, 2005 for restoring the 25’ no disturb zone; and 3) accepting a $1,500 donation to be made to the Friends of Veasey Park to compensate for violating the 40% no-tree cutting zone within the 100’ buffer. S. Benanti 2nd. J. Termini stated that he is adamantly opposed against the donation. All in favor. Unanimous.
M. Dempsey will issue an Order of Conditions on property within 3 weeks. Closed 9:20 pm.
S. Benanti made a motion close the meeting 9:30 pm. M. Dempsey 2nd. all in favor. Unanimous.
Respectfully submitted,
Lori Felch
Administrative Consultant
| 
