HANSON CONSERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF THE PUBLIC MEETING OF AUGUST 28, 2012
TOWN HALL, 542 LIBERTY STREET, HANSON, MA
Called to Order at 7:00 PM under M.G.L. c 131, §40 and the Hanson By-Law 3-13, §5 and Rules and Regulations by John Kemmett, Chairman, in Meeting Room A at the Town Hall.
Present: John Kemmett, Chairman
Frank Schellenger, Vice Chairman
John Murray, Clerk
Phil Clemons, Associate Member
Absent: David Harris, Member
Also Present: Mary Guiney, Interim Agent
Rebecca Nehiley, Administrative Assistant
Minutes
The minutes of August 14, 2012 were tabled to allow the Commission time to review.
Public Hearings
7:00 PM Notice of Intent for a proposal to repair/replace a failed septic system within 50 feet of a Bordering Vegetated Wetland at 153 Union Park Street, Map 2, Lot 329 for John & Myrtle Cairney represented by Webby Engineering Inc., 180 County Road, Plympton, MA (DEP #SE175-0623) (New Hearing)
John Murray read the Public Hearing Notice and the abutters were verified. Mr. Joe Webby made the presentation for a septic repair and submitted a plan dated 7/23/12 (revised 8/20/12 per Board of Health review). He was accompanied by Jim Sullivan, a Title 5 Inspector and septic installer. Dr. Walter Hewitson delineated the wetlands on 6/12/12 which were depicted on the Plan. The existing cesspool is to be pumped and filled. Mr. Schellenger asked what changes were requested by the BOH. Mr. Webby answered that it was minor (a D-box vent) and the Plan was on the next BOH agenda for approval. Mr. Kemmett asked if abutters had comments. Those present were:
Ms. Janice Fleury, 152 Upton Street – had a question about the offset of the system from the property line. Mr. Webby answered that the offset was 10’ from the property line and a variance was requested to BOH to go beyond that because of the constraints of the lot.
Ms. Guiney had no comments other than that the perc tests were conducted under a Blanket Permit and she presented pictures of the existing lawn.
Motion to approve a variance to work within the 50’ buffer zone: Frank Schellenger
Second: John Murray
Vote: 3-0-0
Motion to approve an Order of Conditions subject to BOH approval:
Frank Schellenger
Second: John Murray
Vote: 3-0-0
Request for Certificate of Compliance
Request for a Certificate of Compliance for Deer Hill Road Extension Subdivision for A. W. Perry, Inc. (DEP #SE175-0452)
Mr. Murray read a memo into the record (attached) asking if Conservation had any outstanding issues with Deer Hill Road Extension as it is on the warrant for acceptance at Special Town Meeting. Mr. Schellenger said that his issue is with the maintenance of the detention ponds. He had been told there was a
Homeowners Association that was recorded at the Registry of Deeds, but it is not known who had been assigned the task.
Motion to table until the meeting of 9/11/12: Frank Schellenger
Second: John Murray
Vote: 3-0-0
7:15 PM Continued Notice of Intent for the construction of a driveway, single family home, intermittent stream crossing and utility service connections within the 100 foot buffer zone to a bordering vegetated wetland as well as alteration of approx. 3,785 s.f. of vegetated wetland at Whitman Street, Map 109, Lot 4 (builders Lot 1) for Thomas Hastings of Thomas J. Hastings Co., LLC, represented by McKenzie Engineering Group, Inc., 150 Longwater Dr., Suite 101, Norwell, MA (DEP #SE175-0616)
7:15 PM Continued Notice of Intent for the construction of a driveway, single family home, intermittent stream crossing and utility service connections within the 100 ft. buffer zone to a bordering vegetated wetland at Whitman Street, Map 109, Lot 4 (Builders Lot 2) for Thomas Hastings of Thomas J. Hastings Co., Inc. represented by McKenzie Engineering Group, Inc., 150 Longwater Dr., Suite 101, Norwell, MA (DEP #SE175-0617)
This hearing was continued from 7/24/12. Mr. Brad M. McKenzie, P.E., representing the applicant, made the presentation. Also present on behalf of the applicant were Mr. Brad Holmes, P.W.S. for Environmental Consulting and Restoration, LLC and James O’Brien, Agent. Mr. McKenzie submitted a letter dated 8/28/12 that summarized the supplemental information that was talked about at the previous meeting and incorporated a Functions and Characteristics Statement requested by the Commission. Drainage calculations and a watershed plan were included to justify the 12” culvert. The second packet, dated 8/28/12, contained photographic evidence of the dry streambed as witnessed by Mary Guiney and Frank Schellenger in Aug/2012. The pictures were taken at the staked
location of the crossing. Mr. McKenzie also submitted an excerpt from the Zoning Bylaw to provide evidence that a variance is not permitted for a common driveway in Hanson. In addition, a USGS maps from 1917 does not depict a stream and a USGS map from 1941 resembles the current map and seems to confirm that it was excavated back in the 1930’s to catch street drainage. A Request for a Certificate of Compliance was submitted for the previous Order of Conditions that allowed a temporary crossing (DEP #SE175-0510).
Mr. McKenzie maintained that the project meets the Performance Standards for the Wetlands Protection Act (WPA) and the Local By-law which closely resembles the WPA except for the 1½ to 1 wetland replication for the BVW alteration which was provided. He stipulated that the applicant will supply a performance bond to insure compliance. Mr. McKenzie agreed that the 100’ buffer zone is considered a resource area, but couldn’t find any performance standards in the By-law. However, as requested, he submitted information on the square footage of disturbance as well as a report that broke down the numbers by lot and percentage of alteration.
In Part II of the first letter, Mr. McKenzie explained how the project sought to avoid, minimize and mitigate impacts to all the resource areas: Since a common driveway is not allowed, a 2-lot subdivision was created for which the BVW was avoided as much as possible. The crossing was proposed at the narrowest width of the stream and the box culvert met the Massachusetts Stream Crossing Standards. The mitigation complied with the Performance Standards with 1 ½ to 1 replacement value. The project also met the Limited Crossing provision under the WPA regulations where no other reasonable alternative means of access to upland is available.
Mr. Brad Holmes walked the site on 8/15/12 to get a feel for his proposal and submitted a “Mitigation Narrative”, dated 8/21/12. He said that the report was broken down into classifying 5 separate areas for which he identified the invasive species and a method for their removal and control. In areas #2 and #3, he proposed inter-planting a minimum of at least 51 native shrubs, the type of which to be determined when removal activities are completed. Mr. Holmes went on to say that an herbicidal application may be necessary and all cut shrubs are to be removed offsite. He maintained that the purpose is to let the native shrubs colonize and take over, improving the existing conditions. He summarized by saying that the total area was 14,000
sq. ft. which, he was of the opinion, was quite a bit of mitigation for work in the 50’ bz.
Mr. Kemmett asked about the 20’ span bridge that was recommended by John W. DeLano, review consultant for the Commission that would minimize disturbance to the stream bank. Mr. McKenzie was of the opinion that a bridge of that size wasn’t necessary for an intermittent stream and that the proposed crossing, which was increased to an 8’ culvert, met the MA Stream Crossing Standards. He maintained that after analyzing existing conditions using watershed calculations, the box culvert would not restrict the flow of water in an annual event. Mr. McKenzie reiterated that it met the criteria of an intermittent stream in July of 2008 and again in 2012 having had 4 non-consecutive days of a documented dry stream bed in a year. He added
that there was a cost consideration for a 20-foot bridge as it would approach $100,000.00. Mr. McKenzie said that Mr. Delano’s review letter, dated 8/22/12, questioned the calculations and he was incorporating Mr. Delano’s comments into a hydrologic model which would he would provide at a later date.
Mr. Schellenger asked about the design of the culvert and if it would support construction equipment. Mr. McKenzie answered “yes” and that a design sheet for the culvert had been submitted. Mr. Schellenger questioned the amount of bank that would be disturbed and maintained that 800 sq.ft. had not been accounted for. Mr. McKenzie replied that an “Inland Bank” is associated with an intermittent stream and there’s no need to mitigate “Land Under a Water Resource.” Mr. Schellenger disagreed in that “if it’s not a stream, then it’s a wetland.” Mr. McKenzie said that if additional mitigation is required, the 50’ buffer zone could be enhanced. He added that the bank is “really down below the Mean Annual Highwater Mark.” Mr. Schellenger remarked that Mr. Delano’s observation in the field clearly showed scouring and argued that it’s either BVW or bank. Mr. Holmes said that there was no “BVW alteration at the crossing, it’s all bank.”
Mr. Schellenger commented that when Route 58 was reconstructed in the 1980’s, almost all the drainage for nearby roads was designed to flow into one pipe that runs across the road where Spring and Whitman Streets intersect. The pipe leads out to a headwall behind the parking lot at Damien’s. He asked Mr. McKenzie if, in his Stormwater models, he’d taken into account that all the water concentrates there “in a hurry?” Mr. McKenzie said you have to look at the individual catchments and that there were natural wetlands that essentially absorb a lot of the water before it gets to the roads. In addition, the “entire, 25 acre watershed is not going to contribute a drop of water to the roadway point at the same time.” However, he said that they were “very conservative” in assuming that all the roadway runoff in the area’s tributaries to the roadway would get there in a hurry with their models. Mr. Schellenger wanted clarification that that total volume that reaches that point
is only a foot high for a one year storm and a little bit higher for a 100-year storm. If that is the case, he asked, “then how did the banks get scoured?” Mr. McKenzie answered that “we didn’t observe scouring that was higher than a foot or 15 inches at the location of the crossing.”
Mr. Schellenger was concerned that all the drainage goes into an 18” pipe and a 100 year storm event will put 18” of water all at once into the stream. Mr. McKenzie answered that that doesn’t mean that the stream will be 18” high because the stream is about 8’ wide. He added that their analysis demonstrates that “55 cubic feet per second flows through that stream in a 100 year storm” and an 18” pipe could not contain that amount of water. It’s “hydraulically impossible.” The way it’s modeled is that water will flow overland and over the curbing, some will make it’s way into the catch basins and will bypass and go downstream further. Mr. McKenzie said that they provided
calculations for a 12” culvert and the rest of the water gets there overland. Mr. Schellenger is concerned that the water will back up. Mr. McKenzie maintained that according to their calculations, “that is not the case.” In addition, Mr. DeLano had some suggestions to make their hydrologic calculations much more conservative. Mr. McKenzie just got the letter this afternoon, so he hasn’t provided those yet.
Mr. Schellenger asked if Mr. McKenzie had increased the width of the driveways. Mr. McKenzie explained that the driveways are designed to be 12’ wide.
Mr. Clemons asked that Mr. McKenzie explain the blue marked areas on the plan. Mr. McKenzie said the GIS information was gleaned from the Town’s topographic mapping and those areas were identified as wet with standing water. Mr. Clemons commented that there is an adjacent 3 acre lot he is familiar with that is not shown on the plan and asserted that “in virtually any year, even dry ones, during certain seasons, there is more standing water in more areas than that one blue area” that is depicted. Mr. Kemmett asked for comments from abutters. Those present were:
Mark Reale, 751 Whitman Street - commented that the stream has been there for years and his backyard is in the wetlands. He is concerned with flooding. He mentioned that he was fined for extending his backyard. How can they run a road back there? Ms. Guiney said that the delineation they have shows that it’s not wet back there. Also, he had concerns with the dangerous corner. Mr. Kemmett said that it’s a Planning Board issue. Mr. Reale also asked about the bridge that Mr. DeLano recommended. Mr. Schellenger said that Mr. DeLano is a consultant providing advice and counsel, but he does not have a vote.
Mr. Schellenger wished to address Mr. Reale’s point about the wetland. He said that the wetland line for this project was flagged in 2008 and put before the Commission in the form of an Abbreviated Notice of Resource Area Delineation (ANRAD). He added that the line was “perhaps done well, perhaps not,” but it was approved by the Conservation Commission at the time. In 2010, the State Government allowed that any application approved in a certain time frame would be extended until 2013. That means that the wetland line, whether it was good or bad, is approved until then and the applicant doesn’t want to change it. In addition, Mr. Schellenger believes that another extension has been approved by the State until 2015. “So whether
they’re wetlands or not, we can’t do anything about it.” We’re “handcuffed by the State”, otherwise, we would have already re-delineated the wetland line.
Motion to approve a Certificate of Compliance for the previous Order of Conditions (DEP #SE175-0510): Frank Schellenger
Second: John Murray
Vote: 3-0-0
Motion to continue hearing until 9/11/12 at 8 PM pending review of the new submittals: Frank Schellenger
Second: John Murray
Vote: 3-0-0
Mr. Schellenger noted that he was in favor of Mr. McKenzie making direct contact with Mr. DeLano and the Fire Chief. Mr. James O’Brien, who represents Thomas Hastings, commented that he was frustrated by the delays as well.
Orders of Conditions
Order of Conditions for the installation of a shed at 549 E. Washington Street, Map 114, Lot 6B for Richard W. Sonier and William & Doris Mutzenard (DEP #SE175-0622) - signed
Order of Conditions for the construction of an assisted living facility at West Washington Street, Map 67, Lot 6A (Hanson) and Map 104, Lot 1 (East Bridgewater) for Senior Housing Development (DEP #SE175-0612) - signed
Discussions
Auger/Shovel purchase – postponed
Letter from concerned citizen regarding condition of shoreline at the Town Hall shoreline
Ms. Guiney had looked up the old Order of Conditions for the Town Hall reconstruction. She said that it didn’t have any information on the shoreline. Mr. Read wants specific suggestions for stabilizing the
bank. Mr. Clemons suggested that there could be other models and proposed that the Department of Conservation & Recreation or the Department of Environmental Protection might have some information about appropriate methods. Mr. Murray said that the author of the original letter wanted an exact response and we shouldn’t ignore someone that has taken an interest, even if it’s a negative answer. Mr. Clemons said that it’s not the Commission’s responsibility to design a municipal property, but he would put together a few thoughts as a basis for a memo to the Selectmen.
Memo from Kopelman & Paige regarding ADA – Trail Accessibility Requirements – take home and review
Factory Pond Dam
Mr. Schellenger commented that an Article was approved at Town Meeting to put aside money for engineering for the flume. He asked Becky to contact Amory Engineering, Inc. to have them reconfirm their bid to do the work.
Article to transfer a parcel of land at the Plymouth County Hospital property to the care and custody of the Conservation Commission
Mr. Clemons described the property as three meadows, a portion of which are wetlands and two streams that drain into Wampatuck Pond. It is one of the last upland, Early Successional habitats. Mr. Clemons suggested that it was a “glimpse in to the past of an old, agricultural landscape that hadn’t been touched in 100 years.” Mr. Clemons added that many types of birds, such as Warblers, prefer the type of shrubbery that grows there. Another advantage is that the property would provide a connection to the easement at Bonney Hill Lane and takes the Bay Circuit Trail off of High Street.
Motion to approve submittal of Article for inclusion on the warrant for Special Town Meeting on 10/1/12: Frank Schellenger
Second: John Murray
Vote: 3-0-0
Letter from Lucas Environmental on behalf of the Hanson Water Dept. regarding an update of the restoration area on East Washington Street - reviewed
Edgewood Bogs Update
Mr. Clemons updated the Commission with the latest information. Presently, Alex Hackman and Nick Wildman of the Department of Ecological Restoration (DER) are reviewing the Restoration Plan negotiated with Natural Resources Conservation Services (NRCS). Mr. Clemons related the meeting held last week with members of the Commission, Irene Winkler of NRCS, Amanda Freitas, Wetlands Reserve Program Planner for MACD, Mr. Rene Read, Town Administrator, as well as Samantha Woods of the North and South Rivers Watershed Assoc. to review the Plan and an updated map. He mentioned that the Program Contract allows us to go forward with a Schedule of Operations. The total amount granted over the life of the project to complete the restoration is
$119,090. $57,000 is allotted in the first year (2013) for phragmite control. Mr. Clemons said he is looking forward to DER’s comments.
Mr. Kemmett commented that Camp Kiwanee must be involved in the discussion of phragmite control. Mr. Clemons said that is part of the Plan to have conversations with the Recreation Commission. Also, if more than 5,000 sq.ft. are disturbed, the Army Corp. of Engineers must be contacted.
Mr. Clemons was pleased that we will have access to over 100 Atlantic White Cedar trees and that $6,510 has been set aside to hire a contractor to help with the transporting and planting. He suggested that a local landscaper might have an interest in donating their time. Mr. Clemons said that the trees are growing successfully in a nursery in Freetown right now and the farmer was donating them. He added that he was pleasantly surprised that NRCS has provided fencing to protect the trees to ensure their survival.
Mr. Murray asked if the removal of the water control structures would have any effect on the level of Maquan Pond, which is upstream. Mr. Clemons was of the opinion that it would not because too many factors were involved. He suggested that this would prevent any large outflows of water from Maquan Pond and the water might spread out more before reaching Indian Head Pond.
Old Business/New Business
Reimbursement/bill – signed
Adjournment
Motion to adjourn at 9:10 PM: Frank Schellenger
Second: John Murray
Vote: 3-0-0
| 
