Monson Conservation Commission
Wednesday June 7, 2006
Members present: Leslie Duthie, chair, Don Lambert Jim Zieger
Members absent: Glenn Colburn, Sarah Miller
Others present: Tom Faulkner, Davis Johnson
7:15pm: Northtree LLC
Mike Parson, representative of Northtree, LLC presented the plan for Lot 14. He attended the site visit on Tuesday with members of the Commission. At this visit the Commission and Mr. Parsons agreed to move flag G-9 out 10’, flag G-10 moved out 28’ on the front line. When examining the line at the back of the lot, flag F5 moved out 3’. That was the only change to the back line. Mr. Parson brought the Commission a new plan at a scale of 1”-40’ that reflected these changes
Mr. Parson said that none of the work would be in the wetlands, all the proposed work for the driveway was in the buffer zone. There will be 1095 sq. ft. of buffer zone altered with 605 sq. ft. of that being within 50’ of the wetland. Silt fence will be installed prior to construction and will be allowed to remain in place until completion of the project including seeding and mulching of the site. The silt fence will also act as a limit of work.
Dave Johnson asked why the culvert was needed at the roadside. Mike explained there is a swale that carried road run-off past the driveway and the culvert would be used to continue to convey this water to the culvert that runs under the road and across the street.
Leslie Duthie stated that she returned to the site on Wednesday afternoon to observe the flow in the roadside swale. The water does come off the road, but the main purpose of the culvert that conveys water from the lot 14 side of the street is the movement of water out of the wetland indicated by the G series of flags. She also stated that there is some skunk cabbage within this swale and sensitive fern. Because of this flow from the wetland under the street into an intermittent stream on lot 6, Leslie felt this wetland was indeed jurisdictional and not isolated. Because the work indicated on the plan is within 15’ of the wetland line she feels a NOI is a more appropriate filing.
Leslie moves to issue a Positive determination That the area delineated on the plan and the work described under the RFD are both subject to protection under the jurisdiction of the wetlands protection act and that the boundaries as depicted on the plan are not confirmed by this decision. She stated that the wetlands that go under the stone wall and connect wetland G to the culvert need to be indicated on a plan. There was no further discussion. Jim seconded the motion. All in favor.
Leslie then moved to issue a Negative determination on section D of the RFD. There is no wetland bylaw in Monson; therefore the work is not subject to additional conditions as a result of a town bylaw. Don seconded that motion. All in favor.
Mike Parson asked whether the Commission would review another RFD for this project if it was possible for Northtree LLC to move the driveway more than 50’ away from the resource area. This would be less costly for his client. Leslie asked if this was possible since the sale of the lots has taken place? Mike Parson said that perhaps his client could get an easement for a driveway across the other property. Ms. Duthie says that she believes this is not allowed under the current Monson zoning by-laws and that question might need to be resolved by the Building Inspector. Mr. Parson asked if the lot lines were redrawn would this be acceptable? Ms. Duthie said that she felt that the work was quite limited. That although it seems excessive to require a Notice of Intent for such a
small project that Monson has a history of problematic driveways. She felt the Notice of Intent was important for the Commission so that we might have some control and assurances of how the work would proceed. Mr. Parsons said his client would not be doing the work. Ms. Duthie said that in her mind that made this NOI more important. However, if Northtree LLC were able to reconfigure the lots so that the driveway was outside of the 50’ buffer zone that the Commission would consider that work under an RFD.
7:35: Lot 45 McCray Circle – CIL Realty of MA.
Leslie notes that the Commission received a letter from the Division of Fisheries and Wildlife and the Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program stating that “the work for this project, as currently proposed, would not result in a prohibited “take” of state listed rare species.”
Mr. Norm Thibeault did a quick review of the project for the Commission to refresh our memories. The Commission noted the rainwater garden which will handle any storm run-off for the double driveway and the parking area that will be installed at the site. Leslie questioned maintenance of this garden during periods of low rainfall. She felt that it was important to maintain the appearance of the property for the neighborhood and wondered if the garden would be able to be maintained. Norm stated that there is an annual budget for maintenance of the property and that would include the outside area. Mr. Thibeault said that it was important to the state and his client that this be a nice residence for the occupants and that they too, were interested in maintaining the look of the property.
An anti tracking pad will be installed. The contractor was interested in knowing how the commission felt about the hay bales AND silt fence. Leslie said that either one would be sufficient, as this was a very level site, however, she would like to see hay bales installed around the catch basin in the road to prevent any sediment from running into that.
No further discussion. Leslie moved to close the hearing and issue an Order of Conditions. Don seconded the motion, All in favor.
7:50 Dan Nietsche of Bay State Environmental asked to meet with the Commission for an informal hearing on his client’s property. Mr. Vincent Falkowski recently purchased a 29 – 30 acre parcel on Brimfield Road. Mike Weeks was the representative of the seller of the property. Mr. Falkowski is interested in building one single family home on this site. It is a wooded, sloping area just above Crest Drive on the east side of Brimfield Road.
There are two intermittent streams that become perennial as they cross the power line that is on this property. The lot has been logged and there is a logging road that crosses the perennial stream and accesses some of the upper terrain on the site. Dan stated that there seem to be a number of wetlands along the front of the property and he was not sure whether it was possible to, in fact, build along Brimfield Road.
Mr. Falkowski stated that it was important to him to find this piece of property. It was an investment and although he was able to get it for a good price, he was not really interested in building along the road. He likes the woods and wanted to build his house where he could not see the road and the house would not be visible from the road. The leach system would actually be located on the back side of the hill and would drain away from the perennial streams.
Dan Nietsche stated that his client would like to install an arched bridge across the stream. This would reduce the impact of the crossing on the stream. He stated there are big cobbles on either side of the stream so that should reduce the impact at the site. The arched culvert could be anchored to these cobbles, reducing the work needed to be done along the stream edge.
Leslie asked how much fill would be necessary to bring the existing grade up to the top of the arched culvert. Mr. Nietsche said he was not sure, he would look into it. Is this project possible?
Leslie Duthie stated that the Commission is not eager to permit stream crossings. They like work that avoids this kind of activity. However, it seems that Mr. Falkowski likes his woodland and is eager to protect the land from additional development. Would Mr. Falkowski be interested in some kind of permanent conservation easement put on the bulk of the property and the frontage?
Discussion ensued on the advantages of a permanent Conservation easement including, protection of habitat, and most importantly, reducing the number of homes that could be build to just one. The Commission would like to see the frontage put under easement to restrict the number of lots.
Mr. Falkowski said he did not want any other houses on the property. Ms. Duthie said she understood, however, once he sold the land or moved on, that any subsequent owners might feel differently and a permanent easement would allow the Commission to be assured that further development would not occur.
Ms. Duthie also explained some of the tax incentives of the Chapter 61 programs to Mr. Falkowski. He was more interested in permanent conservation. Mr. Weeks stated that this could reduce the value of the property down the line. Ms. Duthie stated that should Mr. Falkowski wish to sell his property in the future that there is also the possibility that the larger acreage with only one house could be more desirable rather than less valuable.
Dan Nietsche asked if the Commission knew what DEPs response to such a suggestion might be. Leslie said she would call and ask hypothetical questions to get a feeling for how they might view this.
8:30 Mail
Letter from Dan Cassidy requesting the removal of the NOI they filed for replacement of the bridge. This is no longer necessary since the state rebuilt the bridges last fall.
Are they entitled to a refund?
Northtree LLC received their ORAD
Jerry Talbot received his Order of Conditions for Bumstead Road
Sean Finnegan received his extension of the Order of Conditions for Crow Hill Road along with a letter asking for repair of the silt fence.
Maedlun Asso. Received their Order of Conditions for Palmer Road
Commission received a Notice of Intent for 36 Munn Road
And a Request for Determination on 109 Lakeshore Drive
Letter from Lycott informing the Commission of planned treatment of Paradise Lake. Linda left a note saying she had contacted the Paradise Lake Association and asked them to record the extension of their Orders of Condition and we have not received confirmation on that. Leslie will write a letter to the Association.
Information on the steps to file the Conservation Restriction for Boulder Hill Estates – it needs to be signed and notarized by the Selectmen.
Information on grants available for Smart Growth Planning
Mass Wildlife News
MACC Newsletter
Trust for Public Land newsletter
Various building permits –
It is noted that Cliff Holt is filing for removal of the addition on the front of the barn. Leslie wonders if the Commission had actually asked that this be removed through filing of a Notice of Intent??? She will call Mr. Holt.
9:25: Meeting adjourned
Respectfully submitted: Leslie Duthie
| 
