MONSON CONSERVATION COMMISSION
MAY 7, 2008
MEMBERS PRESENT: Glenn Colburn, Leslie Duthie, Davis Johnson
MEMBERS ABSENT: Donald Lambert
7:15 NOI Old Wales Road, Howard & Theresa Hatch DEP 228-0314. Glenn Krevosky, EBT Environmental Consultants, Inc. and Richard Cook, Lewis & Cook, LLC were present representing the applicants.
Mr. Krevosky stated he was present at the site inspection the Commission made on May 2, 2008. The project proposes two driveways parallel to one another to access two building lots. The Monson Zoning Bylaw does not allow common driveways and also requires the driveway access to be across the legal frontage. The Wetland Protection Act requires that a wetland be crossed at its narrowest point. There is an existing cart path with a 12” corrugated metal pipe that will be removed by the applicant. The property has been cleared and no overland flow was apparent although brush has been left in the wetland. The discussion with the Commission at the on site was that the applicant would clean up the brush at the edge of the replication area and extra brush or stumpage outside of the
replication area shall be removed by the applicant from the wetland areas. The proposed wetland crossing with a 12” corrugated metal pipe and 2:1 side slopes over Bordering Vegetated Wetland has been designed to minimize wetland alteration and is proposed at the narrowest point. The wetland replication depicted on the plan shall be constructed under the supervision of a Wetland Replication Specialist. The second driveway is proposed in the buffer zone to BVW. The 2:1 side slopes on the wetland crossing will be stabilized with jute matting to minimize soil erosion.
Richard Cook stated the slopes are 2:1 in the area of the crossing to minimize impact to the wetlands and 3:1 along the driveway. The 3:1 slopes along the driveway would also have jute matting until the banks are stabilized and the vegetation established.
Mr. Krevosky stated west of Wetland Flags 11A through to 13A several tree stumps were noted the applicant proposes to plant red maple trees 1” in diameter adjacent to each tree stump 6” in diameter to replace the lost trees. Additionally up gradient/east of the proposed replication and east of the wetland delineation line and east of a point 45 feet north of Wetland Flag 11A the applicant shall plant a buffer zone 15 feet in width with 1” in diameter red maple trees. Mr. Krevosky stated he believed he had addressed those issues discussed with the Commission at the site visit:
1. Slope stabilization.
2. Replant red maple trees by stumps.
3. Buffer zone 15 feet in width.
4. Remove existing cart path and pipe.
Leslie Duthie stated the clean up of the brush at the edge of the replication area and other wetland areas should also be on the plan.
Mr. Krevosky stated he would address the DEP comments.
1.Use midpoints to delineate the BVW.
Mr. Krevosky stated Appendix G – Mass DEP BVW Data Forms have been revised to include midpoints. The revisions did not change the number of dominant or non-dominant wetland indicator plants.
Richard Cook questioned if there was any question regarding the delineation.
Leslie Duthie stated the Commission asked the applicant to look at the soils because there was no vegetation left to look at.
2. The applicant should sign the NOI.
Richard Cook stated he submitted a letter dated October 29, 2007 from Howard Hatch authorizing Richard L. Cook to act on his behalf.
Mr. Krevosky stated the applicant would sign the NOI.
3. Narrative relating to compliance with the General Performance Standards for each resource area impacted.
Mr. Krevosky stated the project impacts BVW. There is no bank in this head water red maple and eastern hemlock bordering vegetated wetland and the area is not shown on the map as a 100 year flood plain area. As stated before the Monson Zoning Bylaw requires a driveway access to be from the minimum legal frontage for the zoning district the land is located in. The applicant owns property in two zoning districts Residential Village and Rural Residential. The roadway frontage is located in the Residential Village zone that requires 125 square feet of frontage. The applicant owns 31 acres of land from which he proposes to create two lots one having 10 + acres and the other 21+ acres. Without a wetland crossing the applicant would not be able to utilize the 21 acre lot. The
applicant proposes to replicate the 1,560 square feet of wetland alteration in accordance with the General Performance Standards.
4. Granting Limited Project Status is at the discretion of the Conservation Commission. If the work can comply with the General Performance Standards then it must. The applicant should submit a narrative detailing compliance for work in BVW.
Mr. Krevosky stated he answered this question when he answered question 3 and has also included a copy of Policy 88-2 Access Roadways. He stated he believes the project is in compliance. The proposed plantings have changed from silky dogwood to high bush blueberries.
Leslie Duthie stated she would like to see a specific plant list and the density.
Glenn Colburn concurred stating the density key.
Leslie Duthie stated her concern that the applicant was not using a conservation mix because that would allow for a greater diversity.
5. An option that should be reviewed by the Commission is the use of a vertical wall at the crossing instead of the proposed 2:1 slope. A vertical wall would reduce BVW impact.
Glenn Krevosky stated he believed a 2:1 side slope was preferable, as it allows the opportunity for access as a travel corridor for wildlife and a vertical wall does not.
Leslie Duthie stated this was not a pristine wetland and she would be far more concerned if it was.
6. The DEP Replication guidelines state that monitoring is critical in wetland replication efforts. A qualified professional should be on site to monitor the excavation, grading and planting of the replication area. Monitoring plans and schedules should be provided. The Commission should require the submission of a replication check list and monitoring reports.
Mr. Krevosky stated the project description in the NOI details that the replication process shall be constructed under the supervision of a wetland replication specialist.
Glenn Colburn stated that would be a condition in the Order of Conditions.
Leslie Duthie stated the conditions would also include monitoring for 2-3 years.
Leslie Duthie questioned what the applicant proposed to address the stormwater run off from the driveways?.
Richard Cook stated the driveways are banked so that the run off comes down the driveway, there should not be any run off coming down the slopes.
Leslie Duthie stated the area would be bare and the potential for erosion is very real.
Davis Johnson questioned the stabilization of the slope given the potential for erosion?
Leslie Duthie stated the Commission wants the stormwater addressed and wants to see it on a plan so there is no question what is proposed and what the Commission is approving. She questioned if the applicant would consider an upland conservation mix of native grasses, and some shrubs to hold the slopes? The Commission did not want to see anything planted that requires regular mowing.
Glenn Krevosky stated a 30 x 30 temporary sump located between the two driveways would take care of the erosion. Additionally some water diversions could be added to the driveway.
Leslie Duthie reviewed those issues still to be addressed, stormwater, plant list and density, brush removal at edge of replication area and upland seed mix. Whatever is submitted for the stormwater management must be on a plan.
Glenn Colburn stated he believed there should be something more than a temporary sump to handle the run off. In some instances the Commission has asked for a rock swale along the side of the driveways with check dams that would certainly slow the water down and allow for more infiltration before the water gets to the bottom of the driveway. Additionally the Town does not want to see water coming off of the driveways onto the Town road.
Mr. Cook stated they would not have the stormwater plan until they had the driveway access.
Dan Beaudoin 88 Wales Road reviewed the plans submitted by the applicant.
Donald Ridz 84 Wales Road stated he had been concerned with the brush etc. that was pushed into the wetlands and was pleased the applicant was going to clean it out. He stated there is a driveway at the end of Old Wales Road where the drainage ditch along the road has been filled in and water accumulates there.
Mr. Krevosky stated they intend to remove the existing 12” pipe and reseed the area.
Mr. Cook stated the removal of the old crossing and the installation of a new crossing should remedy the water that is there now.
Donald Ridz stated for clarification whoever owns the lots also owns the driveways and is responsible for the maintenance.
Mr. Cook stated that was correct.
Donald Ridz questioned if the access on Wales Road owned by Mr. Hatch was an option?
Mr. Cook stated the access was only 50 feet wide and in order to use this access Mr. Hatch would have to apply to the Planning Board for a special permit for an Estate Lot. They had originally thought to go this route but the Zoning Bylaw does not allow estate lots in the Residential Village zone.
Leslie Duthie stated this was a doable project but there was a significant list of things still to be addressed and therefore would move to continue the hearing until May 21, 2008 at 7:15 P.M.
Glenn Colburn seconded the motion.
It was so voted unanimous.
8:40 MAIL
1. Copy of a memo from Chip Lapointe to the Monson Cemetery Commission relating to the expansion of the cemetery and disposition of stumps.
2. Return receipt Lakeside Drive, Richard Courchesne recorded the extension of his Order of Conditions.
3. Raymond Miller Hovey Road informed the Town of his intent to sell .55 acre of land that is in Chapter 61B for $14,000.00.
Glenn Colburn moved to recommend the Town waive its right of first refusal.
Leslie Duthie seconded the motion.
It was so voted unanimous.
Leslie Duthie stated she looked at 3 McCray Circle for CIL Realty in response to a request for a Certificate of Compliance. There is nothing growing in the rain garden, therefore the Commission will hold off on the Certificate of Compliance.
4. NOI for the replacement of an existing culvert on Bennett Road submitted by the Town of Monson, Highway Department.
5. NOI for an addition to an existing home at 13 Lakeshore Drive, Karen Frickenhaus.
Glenn Colburn stated he looked at the site and advised Ms. Frickenhaus to file a NOI because it is in the riverfront area and a certain amount of terracing and grading is proposed. The land slopes steeply down to the lake and erosion control is going to be important.
6. Various Building permits.
9:15 Leslie Duthie stated she had request from Robert Hutchinson for an on site meeting at 48 Old Reed Road to verify that he had planted the trees the Commission required as a part of his compliance with an Enforcement Order. Included in the compliance was the requirement for shrubs to be planted and that has not been done. Ms. Duthie stated she would speak with Mr. Hutchinson, as the plan clearly identifies 12 shrubs.
Ms. Duthie stated she received a telephone call from Jerry Gates regarding the validity of the Order of Conditions for Lot 3 Carpenter Road that was issued July 6, 2005 and he requested an extension.
Leslie Duthie stated she explained the Commission could not extend an Order of Conditions if work had not started on the project. Additionally she felt a new NOI was necessary because the Order of Conditions was issued before the property went through the endangered species review. Ms. Duthie stated Mr. Gates questioned if the Commission could amend the Order of Conditions?
The Commission was unanimous that the Order of Conditions could not be amended as no work has started.
Leslie Duthie stated she advised Mr. Gates to file a new NOI for Lot 3 Carpenter Road.
The Commission discussed the manner in which the advertising fees for a Notice of Intent are handled. Information provided by Mark Stinson, DEP states the Commission cannot use the wetland fees to pay for the legal notice. The cost of advertising the public hearing should be the responsibility of the applicant.
The Board voted unanimously that starting July 1, 2008 the applicant would be given a bill for the advertising and the Commission would not close the hearing until the fee was paid.
Leslie Duthie stated she spoke with Joe Petronino, the wetland consultant for David Mill, Wales Road and made it clear the Commission wanted the rest of the information submitted to Natural Heritage as soon as possible. This has been dragging on too long.
The Commission set a date and time for site visits to Bennett Road and 13 Lakeshore Drive, May 13, 2008 at 5:00 P.M. starting at Bennett Road.
9:35 Glenn Colburn moved to adjourn.
Leslie Duthie seconded the motion.
It was so voted unanimous.
Respectfully submitted,
Linda A. Hull
| 
