MONSON CONSERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OCTOBER 29, 2014
MEMBERS PRESENT: Glenn Colburn and Leslie Duthie.
MEMBERS ABSENT: Davis Johnson
7:00 Donald Frydryk, Sherman & Frydryk, Land Surveying & Engineering met informally with the Commission to discuss the requirements for a Certificate of Compliance for Lot 8A Revised Longview Drive.
Donald Frydryk stated Patricia Fay owns a home a 16 Longview Drive (formally Lot 8A Revised) that she is selling and an Order of Conditions showed up in the title search. Longview Drive was extended by a developer who completed the road extension and associated drainage and a Certificate of Compliance was issued by the Conservation Commission on those two things. The Developer constructed the homes and individual Certificate of Compliances were required for each new home. Donald Frydryk submitted a plan showing a heavy dashed line that identified the permanent limit of work. An area has been landscaped out of the original work limit and Mr. Frydryk questioned how to proceed in order to receive a Certificate of Compliance? The house location is the same as originally proposed but there is
landscaping and gardens beyond the permanent work limit line.
Glenn Colburn questioned if Mr. Frydryk had looked at the area?
Donald Frydryk stated he sent out a survey crew and the work has extended into wetlands or at the very lease into the buffer zone.
Leslie Duthie stated she believed a site visit was required to determine exactly how much work has taken place beyond what was originally intended at the this site.
Glenn Colburn agreed with Leslie Duthie stating the Commission will not know until it does a site visit.
Leslie Duthie noted that the Commission has received a request for a Certificate of Compliance from two other residents of Longview Drive.
Karen King stated all of her neighbors are affected and are frustrated with the process why has it taken this long to find out that a Certificate of Compliance is necessary and how did the Building Department issue an Occupancy Permit?
Leslie Duthie stated they are two separate issues, the Commission has nothing to do with the building permit. The Commission does not go back on each Order of Conditions that is issued, it is up to the individual property owner to follow through with the conditions of the Order of Conditions.
Amy Johnson 14 Longview Drive stated she believed the Commission had to do a better job of informing the property owners of the process involved when a property has an Order of Conditions. It is remiss of the Commission to expect property owners to know what they have to do, the average homeowner does not know the conservation requirements.
Glenn Colburn stated when an individual buys a property a title search is performed and the Order of Conditions should be picked up at that time. Every Order of Conditions requires a Certificate of Compliance it is clearly written in the Order and most require an “as built” plan.
7:55 NOI Lot 39 Heritage Lane Assessors Map 114 Lot 81N, Sergey Savonin continued. DEP #228-365.
Peter Levesque, Pioneer Environmental, Inc. and Sergey Savonin were present.
Peter Levesque stated the Commission with the agreement of Sergey Savonin asked Donald Frydryk, to review the proposed slope stabilization on Lot 39 Heritage Lane. Mr. Frydryk completed the review and raised questions regarding the proposed plan in a letter dated September 13, 2014. Mr. Savonin hired Jeff N. LeBeau, P.E. to respond to the concerns regarding the slope.
Glenn Colburn stated Donald Frydryk made a thorough review and in a letter to the Commission dated October 26, 2014 has made his final recommendations.
- The slope occasionally receives significant overland flows from drainage run off, in order to determine if the proposed slope would be stable under these significant flows the applicant should submit drainage calculations to determine the amount and velocity of the flows expected along this slope. The size of the stone that would be required to remain stable would be based on the velocity.
Drainage calculations prepared by a professional engineer have been submitted recommending the rip rap size and gradation. This recommendation has been incorporated into the plans and is shown on the Typical Section on the plan.
- No erosion control netting was proposed under the stone. Based on recommendation in the Massachusetts Erosion & Sediment Control Guidelines rip rap should be placed on proper filter material of sand, gravel or fabric to prevent soil from piping through the stone.
Information was included with the drainage calculations showing the recommended geotextile to be used beneath the rip rap. The Typical Section on the plan indicates a non-woven geotextile placed below the rip rap. Donald Frydryk recommended that the Commission consider including a condition in the Order of Conditions that the fabric should meet the recommendations stated in the drainage calculations.
- The Commission questioned if the planting of shrubs or trees combined with the rock would provide more stability.
If planting is required an erosion control seed mix would be planted over the well graded rip rap after is it installed and backfilled. Planting with an erosion control seed mix is included as part of the Typical Section on the plan. Based on the submitted drainage calculations the rip rap will be stable without plantings.
- Comments are based on the rip rap section of the Massachusetts Erosion and Sediment Control Guidelines for Urban and Suburban Areas.
- For most applications, graded rip rap is preferred to uniform rip rap.
Graded rip rap has been recommended.
- Depth of rip rap slope should be 1.5 times the maximum stone diameter.
The Typical Section shows a minimum depth of rip rap of 22”, which is slightly less than 1.5 times the maximum stone size of 16”. 1.5 times the maximum stone size would be 24”.
- Subgrade should be cleared and grubbed to remove roots, vegetation and debris and prepared to lines and grades shown on the plans.
This is noted as part of the Typical Section.
- Excavate deep enough for both filter and rip rap. Compact fill material to the density of surrounding undisturbed soil.
Proposed grades are shown on the plan including the filter fabric, riprap and sand bedding.
- Excavate a keyway in stable material at base of slope to reinforce the toe. Keyway depth should be 1.5 times the design thickness of the riprap and should extend a horizontal distance equal to the design thickness.
Proposed riprap is keyed into the stone filled trench but does not show a keyway in areas outside the limit of the stone filled trench.
- Construction of the slope must be sequenced so that the riprap is put in place with the minimum possible delay. Disturbance of area where riprap is to be placed should be undertaken only when final preparation and placement of the riprap can follow immediately behind the initial disturbance.
This is noted as part of the Typical Section.
- Riprap should be checked at least annually and after every major storm for displaced stones, slumping and erosion at edges. If the riprap has been damaged it should be repaired immediately before further damage takes place.
This is noted as part of the Typical Section.
- There is no outlet for the stone filled trench shown in the detail. To “daylight” the pipe from this trench, work beyond the limit of work shown on the plans may be required. The Commission should request the outlet and grade of the pipe in this trench be shown on the plan.
The revised plan shows an outlet for the stone filled trench at the southwest corner of the lot, into a proposed 6” deep depression constructed up to approximately 5 feet westerly of the limit of wetlands shown on the plan.
- The limit of the rip rap slope is not clearly shown on the plans.
The proposed area of rip rap is shown on the revised plan.
Donald Frydryk stated the applicant had addressed all of his questions and concerns.
Glenn Colburn stated the Commission appreciated all the work that went into this project.
Leslie Duthie moved to close the hearing and issue an Order of Conditions for Lot 39 Heritage Lane.
Glenn Colburn seconded the motion.
It was so voted, unanimous.
8:40 241 Silver Street, Matthew Guthrie, Atty. Dean Goldblatt and Alec MacLeod met with the Commission to discuss a restoration plan for unpermitted work in wetlands.
Alec MacLeod, Northeast Land & Water, LLC stated Matthew Guthrie hired him to respond to the Enforcement Order that he received. He gave a brief description of his credentials and then described his findings.
Alec MacLeod stated he made a site visit to the property to delineate onsite resource areas and to investigate the issues raised in the Enforcement Order. The resource areas present on the property include Bordering Vegetated Wetland (BVW) and Bank in the form of a small intermittent stream flowing around the rear of the parcel. The area in question had been recently cut with a weed-whacker, most of the cut vegetation was blackberry canes. The cut vegetation has re-sprouted and shows vigorous re-growth. No evidence of herbicide use was observed, nor was any digging, dredging or excavation evident. Given the size of the canes it would seem they have been growing there for a long time. Mr. Guthrie has cut the brush in this area on an approximately annual basis. Alec MacLeod stated
the Enforcement Order identified a violation, the removal or destruction of vegetation. No vegetation was removed or destroyed and cutting the brush in the area identified is a normal periodic activity based on this it was the professional opinion of Mr. MacLeod there was no violation.
Glenn Colburn questioned if the methodology used to delineate the resource areas was soils, vegetation or both?
Alec MacLeod stated he did not use either soils or vegetation but observed a clear boundary. This is a small area of wetlands and it is difficult to do meaningful vegetation plots.
Glenn Colburn stated the Commissioners would like to meet with the Consultant on site to look at the soils.
Alec MacLeod stated because of the difficult relationship between the Commission and Mr. Guthrie there is not an open door to go on his property.
Atty. Goldblatt stated Mr. Guthrie filed a Request for Determination to remove hazardous trees on his property and the Commission did not act upon it.
Leslie Duthie stated that was not the case, the Commission had a Determination of Applicability ready to issue once Mr. Guthrie provided evidence to the Commission that a copy of the Request for Determination was mailed to the DEP.
Glenn Colburn stated Mr. Guthrie has been working in the buffer zone on a continual basis without filing a Request for Determination of Applicability with the Commission.
Alec MacLeod stated he believed Mr. Guthrie would agree to cease any work in the delineated area and place stones to permanently mark the boundary. Mr. Guthrie would be willing to place stones 5 – 6 feet off of the wetlands.
Leslie Duthie stated for clarity you are proposing five or six feet of permanent buffer zone.
Matthew Guthrie stated he did not want anyone coming on his property without requesting permission.
Leslie Duthie requested permission to walk the wetland line with Alec MacLeod.
Mr. Guthrie gave permission.
Alec MacLeod questioned if Mr. Guthrie could proceed with taking down three hazardous trees?
Leslie Duthie stated she would issue the Determination.
9:05 MAIL:
- Copy of Beaver permit for Nieske Road.
- William Jahn received the Order of Conditions for Lot 13 Zuell Road.
- Forest Stewardship plans for Carpenter Road property and Reimers Road property.
- Forest cutting plan 27 acres Butler Road, Berube.
Leslie Duthie stated she would write a letter to Robert & JoAnne Fortier asking them to attend another meeting of the Conservation Commission to discuss the pumping of water from a perennial stream.
Leslie Duthie stated she sent a letter to Joseph Dasco, Lower Hampden regarding the bike trail coming from his property onto the Conservation Land.
9:15 Leslie Duthie moved to adjourn.
Glenn Colburn seconded the motion.
It was so voted.
Respectfully submitted,
Linda A. Hull
| 
