Lenox Conservation Commission
November 15, 2012
Minutes
Town Hall
Members present: Chair Neal Carpenter, NC; Joe Strauch, JS; Vince Ammendola, VA; Tim Flanagan, TF; David Lane, DL; Dick Ferren, DF; Rose Fitzgerald Casey, RFC
Staff present: Peggy Ammendola, PA
Request for Determination of Applicability filed by MassDOT for the removal of non-compliant wheelchair ramps and installation of new ADA compliant wheelchair ramps to be located in the town of Lenox on State Route 7/20.
Making the presentation were Justin Daigle and Keith Bond of MassDOT. Mr. Daigle said that ADA regulations have been upgraded with regards to grade and width. The grade of the new ramps will be improved and they will be wider. The ramps will also have an addition of detectable panels, which serve to alert a visually impaired person of approaching hazardous vehicular areas. It is expected that the project will be done in the spring of 2013.
DL made a motion to issue a Negative 3 Determination. TF seconded the motion and the Commission voted to agree 7-0.
Edward Merritt, Lime Kiln Rd., Map 27 and portion of Parcel 18-Review of progress being made relative to the Enforcement Orders issued on August 3, 2012 for MA DEP file numbers 198-0234 “House Lot” and 198-0219 “Studio Lot”.
Present was Rob Akroyd of Greylock Design and Ed Merritt.
Mr. Akroyd said that in December he will be providing a vegetation plan for the area along the BVW as well as documentation with regards to the fence along West Mountain Road with its impact in the buffer zone and flood plain. He has sent a letter to Natural Heritage requesting feedback on the fence. He also said that the leaves requested have been put into place.
The applicant asked the Commission to temporarily permit him to put up a construction fence at the studio lot in place of the post and rail fence that the Commission and he had agreed upon. Mr. Merritt plans on demolishing the existing structure in the beginning of 2013 and rebuild at that location. He is concerned that if he should put the permanent fence in place, it could be damaged during construction. The Commission was told that Mr. Merritt expects that it would take approximately 3 years to complete the new building. Mr. Merritt stated that his goal is to start a year from now on building. The Commissioners were not agreeable to having a construction fence up for that length of time, but were amenable to having a construction fence in place only until the new foundation is
complete as they understand that the fence would create a tight space for pouring concrete. It was stressed to Mr. Merritt that the idea of the fence is to keep any activity out of the restricted area and that includes construction equipment. Discussion ensued and it was agreed that Mr. Merritt could install the temporary construction fence, but they wanted him to have the components of the proposed post and rail fence in the spring of 2013 and have it stored on site so that when the foundation is in, the temporary fence will be removed, and the permanent fence will be available and ready to be constructed. The purpose of this is to assure the Commission that there will not be any further delay by citing later there are no funds for the fencing material. Mr. Merritt restated that he will have the permanent fence materials delivered in the spring of 2013, and as soon as foundation is in, he will have the permanent fence installed. The temporary fence is
to be installed when any work commences, i.e., the demolition of the existing structure in preparation for rebuilding.
Regarding the planting of the trees that was agreed upon, Mr. Merritt said that all trees specified have been planted which met the November 15th deadline, but there is an issue with the red maple, red oak and sugar maple as they are smaller than what was agreed upon. Mr. Akroyd explained that the supplier, New England Wetlands, sells trees by height, not caliper, and when the landscaper purchased it was thought that the caliper would be close if not the same as what had been agreed upon. After some discussion there was agreement that this was not a significant issue as the smaller trees (4-5 foot saplings) had higher survival rate than larger trees of the same species and that if planted correctly would grow quickly.
It was agreed that Mr. Merritt will attend the December 6, 2012 meeting in Mr. Akroyd’s absence. At that time the Commission will be provided with the new plans and a letter from Natural Heritage regarding the placement of the existing fence.
Mr. Akroyd will return on December 20, 2012 at 7:00 pm anticipating that all details will be in place and agreed upon so that both Enforcement Orders can be lifted and the Order of Condition can be amended.
Other Business: As of April 1, 2012 the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection-Wetlands Program (MassDEP-WP) instituted new procedures for the review and processing of Notices of Intent (NOIs) per its responsibility at 310 CMR 10.05(4)(c) and 310 CMR 4.10(8)(n)3.a.~ Commissions were advised that the new procedure is to assign File numbers “rapidly”. For NOIs which have been assigned a file number but are still under review they will have “Under Review” written in the “Comments” field.~ Commissions were advised that when DEP has finished its review, either the phrase “No Comment” or specific written comments will appear in the “Comments” field.
These new procedures have created alarm among Conservation Commissions as they look to the comments as a guide and clarification in interpreting the regulations. The Lenox Conservation Commission relies upon the expertise of DEP, in particular the Circuit Rider for the Western Regional Office, Mark Stinson, for his unparalleled professional outreach work.
Tonight the Commission signed a letter to be sent to MassDEP which voices their concerns regarding the institution of the new procedures.
Approve Minutes:
Oct. 4, 2012-JS made a motion to approve the minutes of October 4 as amended. RFC seconded the motion. The Commission voted to approve 5-0-2 with DL and DF abstaining as they were not at that meeting.
November 1, 2012- DF made a motion to approve the minutes with minor edits. JS seconded the motion. The Commission voted to approve 6-0-1 with RFC abstaining as she was not at that meeting.
RFC made a motion to adjourn and VA seconded the motion. The Commission voted to adjourn 7-0 at 8:35 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Peggy Ammendola
| 
