 Conservation CommissionMinutes of Meeting—February 6, 2003
A meeting of the Hudson Conservation Commission was held in the Hudson Town Hall, 78 Main Street, Hudson, Massachusetts. At 7:00 p.m., Chairman Martin Moran called the assembly to order.
Present: Martin Moran, Jose Rodrigues, Minot Wood Judith Sabourin, John Sturgis, and William Brochu
Absent: David Esteves
Notice of Intent: 5 Worcester Avenue
Present: Steve Poole
Mr. Poole presented the proposal to the Commision. The applicant would like to repair the foundation on the existing house. The applicant is also considering squaring off the house. The deck will be extended with sono tubes.
Martin Moran, seconded by Minot Wood, made a motion to close the public hearing and issue an order of conditions for 5 Worcester Avenue in accordance with the plan entitled “Conservation Filing Plan 5 Worcester Avenue Hudson, Massachusetts” as drawn by Consolidated Deisgn Group and dated January 29, 2003.
Vote: 6-0-0 unanimous
Notice of Intent: 49 Forest Avenue (Hudson Light & Power)
Present: Steve Poole
Dave Carriere, Hudson Light & Power
Mr. Poole presented the plans to the Commission. Light. Power would like to construct a transformer storage area. After the visit on site Mr. Poole added a perforated leaching pit to control runoff. The entire site will be fenced with a chainlink fnec. This is for safety and to prevent theft.
Mr. Rodrigues would like an impermeable liner and a perforated pipe to be installed in the storage area that feeds into the catch basin. Light and Power is agreeable to that installation. All the transformers in the storage area will be new. Mr. Brochu expressed concern regarding water that contacts any oil being discharged into the wetland. Mr. Poole agreed to research impermeable liners for the next meeting.
Martin Moran, seconded by Bill Brochu, made a motion to continue the public for 49 Forest Avenue until February 20, 2003.
Vote: 6-0-0 unanimous
Notice of Intent: Cox Street (New Fire Station, continuance)
Present was: Dorian Bertram & John Maynard, Maguire Group
David Westcott, Maguire Group
Mr. Maynard reviewed the alternatives analysis with the Commission. Mr. Moran expressed that he still had concens regarding the riverfront area. He feels that all work needs to be kept out of the riverfront area. He argued that there is a viable option in moving the training area to the back of the site.
Mr. Westcott stated that he had recommended the curent plan to the designers. The isolated land subject to flooding serves many functions on the site incluing, treating and detaining storm water and groundwater recharge. The riverfront area has a depression that was once a gravel pit. In his professional opinion the ILSF was more important to be protected
Robert D’Amelio, chairman of the Planning Board, updated the Commission on the Board’s meeting.
There was much discussion regarding the reasons behind the current design and the benefits. Members of the Commission were divided during the discussion. Mrs. Sabourin indicated that she would be willing to support this design if the Commission protected the ILSF. Mr. Wood stated that there is precedent to approve a project with minimal work in the riverfront.
Minot Wood, seconded by Bill Brochu, made a motion to close the public hearing and issue and Order of Conditions for the new Hudson Fire Station on Cox Street in accordance with the plan entitled “Town of Hudson, Massachusetts Hudson Fire Headquarters” as drawn by Maguire Group of Foxborough, MA and dated December 27, 2002 with the following conditions:
18. Prior to the beginning of work, the applicant shall:
a. Properly install all siltation controls according to the plans approved by the Conservation Commission.
b. Provide the Board & Committee Coordinator with the name and telephone number in writing, of the person who will be immediately responsible for supervision of all work on the project site and compliance with this Order of Conditions. The Board & Committee Coordinator shall be notified in the event that the site supervisor or contractor is changed.
c. Clearly mark the limits of work in the field and instruct all workers not to work beyond the limits.
d. Notify Board & Committee Coordinator of the date upon which work will commence.
e. Hold a meeting on the project site with the Conservation Commission or a designated representative, the project site supervisor identified in Condition No. 18-b above and other relevant parties identified by the applicant or the Conservation Commission to review the project and this Order of Conditions. Siltation controls shall be inspected at this time.
f. Failure to comply with Condition Nos. 18A-E, as well as Nos. 8 &9, shall constitute sufficient grounds for the Conservation Commission to order all work to cease until compliance is achieved.
19. Accepted engineering and construction standards shall be followed in the conduct of all work.
20. All work shall conform to the Notice of Intent, all plans, and all other documents, records, correspondence and representations of the applicant as presented to and approved by Conservation Commission.
21. No excavated material shall be disposed of in violation of any local, state, or federal laws. All stumps must be removed from the site; no burying of stumps on site is permitted.
22. The Conservation Commission shall be notified in writing at the time of any transfer in the title to the property or any change in contractor/developers prior to issuance of the Certificate of Compliance. The name, address, and telephone number of the new owner shall be included in the notification as well as certification that the new owner has been provided with a copy of this Order of Conditions.
Site-Specific Conditions:
23. During the pre-construction meeting required in condition #18 above, the contractor shall provide a construction-sequencing plan to the Conservation Commission for review and approval. The plan shall show:
a. How construction will proceed and how silt will be controlled from leaving the site into the wetland or adjacent drainage structures.
b. A stone construction entrance pad, where access to the site is onto a public roadway to prevent the tracking of mud and silt into the public roadway.
c. Additional interim erosion controls, (i.e. temporary detention basins, dewatering basins, check dams) needed to control runoff once construction begins but before the site is stabilized.
24. During construction the applicant/developer shall submit to the Conservation Commission a monthly written status report prepared by a registered professional engineer or environmental consultant competent in such evaluation, summarizing the work that has been completed, compliance of the project with the Order of Conditions, and the status of the erosion controls.
25. Large piles of soil and other materials shall not be stockpiled closer than 50 feet to any wetland resource area without the approval of the Commission. All large stockpiles must be maintained in a stabilized condition with erosion control in place and approved by the Commission.
26. Fire apparatus shall only be washed inside the building
27. Miscellaneous debris in the river front area adjacent to the fire station shall be removed with minimal disturbance.
28. The Isolated Land Subject to Flooding adjacent to the Hockey rinks shall be left in its natural state in perpetuity.
Certificate of Compliance
29. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Compliance, the site shall be stabilized with vegetation or other measures approved by the Conservation Commission.
30. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Compliance and after the site has been stabilized, all erosion controls shall be removed from the site.
31. Prior to requesting a Certificate of Compliance, the applicant or its agent shall clean the drainage swales or drain pipes to ensure they are working properly.
32. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Compliance, the applicant shall submit to the Conservation Commission for review and approval an as-built plan and a letter of compliance stamped by a registered professional engineer. Said plan and letter shall show that all conditions of this Order have been complied with in a satisfactory manner.
Vote: 4-2-0 with Martin Moran and John Sturgis opposed
Minutes
Martin Moran, seconded by Minot Wood, made a motion to approve the minutes of the December 19, 2002 meeting.
Vote: 4-0-2 with William Brochu and John Sturgis abstaining
Martin Moran, seconded by Bill Brochu, made a motion to approve the minutes of the January 16, 2003 meeting as corrected.
Vote: 5-0-1 with John Sturgis abstaining
Minot Wood left the meeting.
Request for Determination of Applicability: 176 Lincoln Street
The Commission reviewed the plans as submitted by Mr. Wood. The Commisison feels there are no issues with the three phases.
Martin Moran, seconded by John Sturgis, made a motion to issue a negative determination for 176 Lincoln Street – Phase 1 in accordance with the plans submitted with the RDA dated January 3, 2003.
Vote: 5-0-0 unanimous
Martin Moran, seconded by John Sturgis, made a motion to issue a negative determination for 176 Lincoln Street – Phase 2 in accordance with the plans submitted with the RDA dated January 3, 2003.
Vote: 4-0-1 with Judy Sabourin abstaining
Martin Moran, seconded by John Sturgis, made a motion to issue a negative determination for 176 Lincoln Street – Phase 3 in accordance with the plans submitted with the RDA dated January 3, 2003.
Vote: 5-0-0 unanimous
Adjournment
At 8:45 p.m., John Sturgis, seconded by Joe Rodrigues, made a motion to adjourn the meeting.
Vote: 5-0-0 Unanimous
Respectfully submitted,
JLB
| 
