TOWN OF PLYMOUTH
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
508-747-1620 x139
MINUTES OF THE MEETING
January 26, 2009
The Plymouth Conservation Commission held its regularly scheduled meeting on Monday, January 26, 2009 at the Plymouth Town Hall, 11 Lincoln Street, Plymouth, MA 02360. Present were Evelyn Strawn, Chairperson, Gerre Hooker, Vice-Chairman and Commissioners David Foster, Brooke Monroe. John Scagliarini and Paul Withington. The Conservation Planner, Elizabeth Sullivan and the secretary, Michelle Turner, were also present.
Christopher Brink was absent.
7:20 PM John Carr, 173 Taylor Avenue, Parcel ID No. 045B-161A-002-003. A Request for Determination of Applicability to enlarge the existing deck in the buffer zone of the top of a coastal bank of White Horse Beach.
Elizabeth Sullivan explained the project.
Paul Withington motioned to issue a positive determination.
The motion was approved unanimously.
7:30 PM Jeffrey Fischer, 176 Sandwich Street, Parcel ID Nos. 024-000-010C-000, 024-000-010D-000. A Notice of Intent to construct a total of five residential buildings, (2 duplex-buildings and 3 single- family buildings for a total of 7 residential condominium homes). Project also includes construction of utilities and amenities. Work is proposed within the riverfront area and buffer zone of Wellingsley Brook, within the buffer zone of Bordering Vegetated Wetlands and within the buffer zone of the top of a coastal bank. Mitigation for the project will include the recording of a Conservation Restriction that will allow the Town of Plymouth access rights and rights to make restoration/mitigation improvements within Wellingsley Brook (to be permitted separately).
John Scagliarini abstained from the hearing – based on past working association with the applicant.
Chair Evelyn Strawn briefed all those in attendance on the procedure of the hearing and announced that the Commission retained Beals and Thomas, Inc. to complete the peer review on this project.
Attorney Jeffrey Angley of Phillips & Angley represented the applicant. Other representatives included Greg Morse, PE of McKenzie Engineering Group of Norwell and Debbie Hill of Wetland Strategies, Inc., of Plymouth.
Atty. Angley gave some brief history of the past project for 6 buildings/total 9 units. He noted that the zoning for that use was in place. He also recapped the conservation appeal status of that original filing. The new filing was made retaining a new team of consultants. New surveys of the site were done, new delineation of the wetlands, scaled the project down to 5 buildings/total 7 units. The project is considered Riverfront redevelopment under the Wetlands Protection Act; new calculations of riverfront area were also done.
Atty. Angley noted that the Town’s wetland consultant, Beals and Thomas went on site that morning (Monday, January 26, 2009) and he referenced the letter for the record from B & T that confirmed the wetland delineation done by Wetland Strategies. Mr. Angley apologized that McKenzie was not able to get a comment letter submitted in response to the report completed by B & T. Elizabeth Sullivan, Planner, agreed that the late submission by B & T did not allow for a proper review and response from McKenzie in time for the hearing. McKenzie will submit a response this week in time for the future continued hearing.
Atty. Angley also spoke briefly about the Conservation Restriction (CR) that is proposed as mitigation for the project. He noted a conference call between the parties and Town staff the past week which brought to light other ideas and recommendations for mitigation of the stream, as proposed by staff. A new CR would be drafted for the next meeting and, therefore, Mr. Angley asked for no discussion on the CR at this time and to reserve that discussion for the next meeting. The consensus of the Commission was in agreement with that request and the chair, Evelyn Strawn, recognized and stated to all that subsequent hearing(s) would follow.
The presentation was turned over to Greg Morse, PE from McKenzie Engineering.
Existing site is shown on Assessors Map 24, Lots 10C and 10D, 176 Sandwich Street. Portions of the site are previously developed with buildings on site (dwelling on the street, warehouse type building, shed), associated paved parking areas. Reference to Fig. 1 in the NOI – the USGS map, Fig. 2, Fema Map. On the ground field survey, 1 ft. contour intervals were completed. Fig. 3, NHESP maps show no endangered species habitat, no certified vernal pools, and no MESA involvement.
Wetlands were originally delineated in Sept. 2008 and were field located by the survey crew.
Resources noted are the BVW line (noted in blue) extending off Wellingsley Brook and BVW line along the eastern portion of the site (BVW flag 1 to 23), delineating fresh water BVW. 100 ft. buffer zone of the BVW is shown. FEMA flood zone el. 11 designates zone AE and the zone X (no flooding) as well as the Land Subject to Coastal Storm flowage. Coastal bank is delineated in orange and was reviewed with both the state DEP policy and local guidelines. Inland bank associated with Wellingsley Brook was shown in green. Top of bank flags are present along both sides of the southern brook and the northern brook. Wellingsley Brook is also known as Hobb’s Hole. Both delineations were determined as perennial and no claims are being made to them as intermittent. The inner riparian zone (100 ft.) and
the riverfront protection area (200 ft.) were shown in purple on the site plans. Mr. Morse noted the local 25 ft. no disturb zone and this was delineated in red (taken from the Top of Coastal Bank) which is the most upland resource area.
Proposed conditions: 5 building layout, 7 units in total with approx. 216 ft. of roadways, driveways servicing each of the units, landscaping around the units. Subsurface utilities consist of electrical and light poles, sewer service within the roadway; existing cesspool on the site will be upgraded by tying into the municipal sewer system. Drainage system will be located in the road to collect all roadway runoff prior to discharge. The project is proposed as redevelopment under 310 CMR the riverfront standards 10.58 (5) – because of existing degraded areas. Shown on a plan was how the 100 and 200 ft. existing degraded areas on site. No work is being proposed on any degraded area beyond what is paved on the site.
Building layout, roads and grades were reviewed next: Buildings have concrete foundations with full basements. Four of the buildings comply with the 25 ft. no disturb zone – unit 3 is within the 25 ft. no disturb zone. They did increase the setbacks and reduced the impervious surface in the 25 ft. zone. Unit 3 building was pulled 6.1 ft. further back from Top of Bank than current conditions. Currently buildings exist at 22.8 ft. from the river and this proposal will place that unit at 29 ft. The impervious surface was also reduced in the 25 ft. buffer. Currently there is 2,985 sq. ft. of impervious surface (parking lot and buildings) in the 25 ft. buffer. With the proposed Unit 3 configuration, 640 sq. ft. falls within the no-disturb area and all of the stormwater will be collected and
treated. All of the buildings will be collected within 7 (1000-gal) drywells to increase ground water recharge. Minimal amts of pavement within the road layout will be used to adequately & safely service the neighborhood. DEP stormwater policy guidelines were met.
The existing site has no stormwater facilities, runoff is sheet-flowing with no treatment, no mitigation into the wetlands.
Minimal amount of fill will be used by utilizing walkout basements where they can be thus minimizing the amount of fill around houses, drainage system adjusted to discharge above the flood plain elevation – but not causing any fill in that area, adjusted slabs in the basement also to be above the flood plain and ground water tables. Maximum slopes on the site at 3:1, all disturbed area are proposed as grass. Drainage design is all per DEP standards utilizing deep-sump hooded catch basins, storm septor particle separator that treats water and renovates it prior to discharge at the flared-end section.
There is a reduction of impervious area on the entire site: 20,832 sq. ft. impervious area currently exists, the proposed conditions will show a total reduction of 74 sq. feet of impervious area. Peak rates of runoff and volume can also be reduced. Soil surveys show Class A – required to provide 1044 cubic ft. of groundwater recharge and the project will exceed that number at 1259 cubic ft. because of using drywells. A long-term maintenance plan has also been provided.
During construction phase: limit of work will be defined with haybales and silt fence (shown on the plan). Temporary sediment traps will be in place for runoff. Soil stockpile locations will be in place.
No alteration of: BVW lines, inland top of bank lines, land subject to coastal storm flowage.
Briefly, Mr. Morse touched on Beals and Thomas’ comment letter, noting many of them minor in nature and said that they would be addressed on the next set of revised plans.
End of the professional presentation.
Discussion turned back to the Commission.
Ms. Strawn once again stated that the language of the CR must be worked out prior to a final resolution on this project. She further noted the 25 ft. set back policy that the Board holds stead-fast but recognized the grandfathering of the existing structures and existing pavement in this area. Ms. Strawn asked Stacy Minihan of Beals and Thomas to confirm her report issued that day regarding the delineation of the wetland lines. Stacy confirmed that the flags were appropriate as placed and also confirmed that the top of bank line was contiguous with the mean annual high water line for use in establishing the riverfront area, BVW, and inland bank. She would still like clarification on coastal bank vs. inland bank along Wellingsley Brook along elevation 11.
Paul Withington confirmed full basements in all of the units and unit 3 has a walk-out basement. Mr. Morse confirmed this.
Gerre Hooker asked if any part of the project was proposed as “green”, rain gardens, etc. Mr. Morse said the particle separators and drywells would be used. Gerre confirmed that Bldg. 3 was 16 feet into the 25 ft. buffer zone.
Brooke Monroe asked what type of material is between the buildings and Mr. Morse confirmed those areas to be lawn.
Evelyn Strawn asked if the footprints shown on the plans also included amenities such as decks and Mr. Morse confirmed the footprints to be foundation and decks would extend beyond the sides.
Discussion on the degraded riverfront area compared to the 25 ft. buffer zone
Public Comment:
Nancy Jolly, Brookside Road confirmed the materials that were submitted: 1) petition signed by all neighbors interested in this hearing and becoming parties, 2) letter from representative Diane Boretos. She addressed several points from the Boretos letter. It was noted that many of the points made in the Boretos letter were based upon an old set of plans and not the revised plans. One point was also an additional spring fed stream to the south of the property. Atty. Angley said they would look at that stream and make a determination.
Ms. Jolly read points of the letter discussing the mitigation proposal.
Atty. Angley said the full disclosure of the CR would be reviewed at the continue hearing.
John Lebeka, 9 Whiting Street – concern with the population of sea-run brook trout in Wellingsley Brook. He had spoken with reps from Mass Wildlife and those reps confirmed to him that the Town was very interested in restoration of the brook and he looks forward to reviewing the CR and the mitigation of the Brook. He noted the improvement of the brook since the weir boards were removed cooperatively between Mr. Fischer and the Town.
Public Comment was closed.
Chairwoman Strawn recapped the need for the resolution of the mitigation and the opportunity to respond to the questions raised by Beals and Thomas.
Continued hearing dates were discussed.
Gerre motioned to continue to February 23, 2009 at 7:30 PM.
The motion was approved unanimously.
Other Business:
The Commission read a letter from Marc Garrett of The Garrett Group, LTD regarding the status of unlicensed structures at the Plymouth Boat Yard (aka Jesse Boat Yard) off of Hedge Road.
Staff, Elizabeth Sullivan gave an explanation of the subject of the letter. Ms. Sullivan went on to say that the “finger pier” has been in existence for 30+ years and that no work was proposed. Ms. Sullivan recommended the Commission acknowledge the pier through a motion not requiring a Notice of Intent. John Scagliarini so motioned with a condition that a NOI would be required for any repairs/modifications to the pier. The motion was approved unanimously.
The calendar was reviewed for the month of February.
February 2 – No Meeting
February 9 – Public Hearings
February 16 – HOLIDAY
February 23 – Public Hearings
The meeting adjourned at 8:45 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Michelle A. Turner
Michelle A. Turner
Administrative Secretary
Minutes Approved on: February 9, 2009
| 
