 |
Minutes of the Taunton Conservation Commission Meeting April 13, 2015
Present: Chair Steven Turner, Vice Chair Neil Kelly, Commissioners Debra Botellio, Marla Isaac, Ernest Enos, Luis Freitas, and Renwick Chapman.
Continued Certificate of Compliance
1. 155 Duffy Drive, Butterfield, (COC), SE73-2646 Request for a continuance. Motion to continue to June 15, 2015, DB, second RC, so voted.
Continued Public Meeting
1. 21 O’Connor Street, Bon Vivant, LLC/DaSilva, (RDA), DSE-1097 Field report states that this project is for the abandonment of an existing cesspool and tie-in to the city sewer system, with associated site grading. This work will fall within the 100 foot buffer zone of a BVW, which was delineated by Walter Hewitson on 12-16-14 and revised by Brad Fitzgerald on 4-1-15 as agreed with me at the site visit. A revised plan was submitted on 4-6 showing the new flag positions. The pump chamber was moved 8 feet closer to the house to keep it 50 feet from the wetland. A siltation barrier is depicted on the plan, will be the limit of work, and is at least 35 feet from the wetland. The existing cesspool is 45 feet from the BVW and grading falls within 47 feet of the wetland. All
disturbed areas will be loamed and seeded. The work as proposed will not negatively impact the BVW, therefore MR recommends that the TCC approve the work and issue a negative determination to include the attached special conditions. MR also recommends that the wetland delineation be approved as follows: flags 4-9, with flags 1-3 and 10 for reference purposes only. RC questioned the grading and would water puddle between street and front of house? Brad said no there is enough fill over tank, lot is very flat and water will naturally work its way to the right area. Motion to approve, issue a negative determination with special conditions 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 14, 18, and 19, RC, second NK, so voted.
Extensions
1. O’Connell Way, L & U, LLC, Mann, (EXT), SE73-2343 field report states that this is for the construction of a 52,800 square foot industrial building with associated parking, grading, drainage, and utilities on the east side of O’Connell Way and within 100 feet of a BVW. This filing received an Order of conditions on 7-30-08, was automatically extended to 7-30-15 due to the Commonwealth’s Tolling Period Extension. Development of the site has been postponed, at first, due to economic conditions, and then by uncertainty of the casino construction. As such the applicant requests a three year extension to the order of conditions to expire 7-30-18. MR recommends that the TCC issue a 3 year extension for this project. Motion to approve extension for 3 years, RC, second DB, so
voted.
2. 414 W. Water Street, COT EOCD, (EXT), SE73-2317 Field report states that the location of this project is along the Taunton River and on the property previously housing the FB Rogers Silver Company, once makers of silver plate articles. This area is within the city of Taunton Densely Developed Area and as such has a riverfront area of 25 feet. This project originally consisted on converting historic mill buildings into modern condos with parking and storm water management structures. The plan also consisted of razing two buildings and was approved under DEP file SE 73-2309. On March 2, 2015, an amendment to the order of conditions was issued to raze the remaining structures on the property as they are not safe and will not be converted to condos. The applicant wished to have a 1
year extension to the order of conditions issued on 5-15-08, and amended on 3-2-15 in order to complete demolition of the remaining buidlings. MR recommends that the TCC grant this request and issue a 1 year extension to the order of conditions to expire on 5-15-16. Kevin Shea present. Motion to approve 1 year extension, RC, second DB, so voted.
RC OUT
Continued Public Hearing
1. Pioneer Way, Martignetti Companies/Crandall, (NOI), SE73-2608 Request for a continuance. Motion to continue to May 11, 2015, DB, second NK, so voted.
RC IN
2. Short Street (Lot 1), Castro, (NOI), SE73-2606 Field report states a revised plan was submitted in response to concerns discussed at the 3-16-15 Conservation meeting. The changes include:
-Moving the water line farther away from flags 9-12
-Adding a drywell on the north side of the building for roof runoff and
-revising the limit of clearing on the south side thus reducing the tree clearing to approximately 6500 square feet
MR recommends that the TCC approve this project and issue an order of conditions to include the attached special conditions. Present Richard Castro owner, Todd Castro owner’s son, and Kevin Grady from Grady Consulting for the applicant. Motion to approve with conditions 2, 3, 4, 5, 15, 17, 19, 21, 24, 25, 26, and 27 RC, second NK. DB not voting was not present for original presentation.
Public Hearing
1. 201 Alfred Lord Blvd., Varsity Wireless, LLC/Kelleher, (NOI), SE73-2609 Field report states that this project is for the construction of a telecommunications facility and associated utilities. There will be no work done within the resource areas or the 25 foot WPZ, but will occur within the 100 foot buffer zone of those wetland areas delineated and approved by the commission on 11-20-14. The proposed facility will be compromised of panel antennas mounted on top of a 145 foot monopole near the existing buildings on the property. The associated telecommunications equipment will be located at the base of the pole and within a 75’ x 75’ lease area with a 60’ x 52’ compound area surrounded by an 8’ tall chain link fence topped by barbed wire. The access drive will extend from
the existing driveway to a 12’ wide gravel drive to the proposed tower location. The facility will be next to an existing path behind the two existing warehouse buildings. Of the proposed 16,500 square feet of disturbed area (14,820 square feet within the 100 foot buffer zone), 4,800 square feet will consist of gravel and drainage structures with the remaining 11,700 square feet loamed and seeded upon completion of the work. Stormwater from the facility will be directed to a sand filter for pretreatment and infiltration trench to the north of the facility. The storm water from the gravel drive will be directed to a grass swale along the southeast side of the road then to a sediment forebay and pocket wetland system. The pocket wetland will be seeded with a new England wetland mix and planted with swamp azalea and silky dogwood. Mark Slusarz City Engineer, reviewed the storm water plans and report and found that the plan was satisfactory.
His letter is enclosed in the file. Erosion controls are depicted on the plan (sheet EC-1) and are considered the limit of work. A concrete washout area is outside the 100 foot buffer zone and is also shown on the sheet EC-1. The work as proposed should not negatively impact the resource areas. If anything, it will improve conditions and enhance the drainage in the area. MR recommends that the TCC approve the project and issue an order of conditions to include the attached special conditions. Present Chris Lucas from Lucas environmental. Jessie Marino site design. DB asked will this be plowed in winter? Where will the snow go? There is room where the swale is , usually 50/50 they will even plow it. RC have they done reduced peak rates and runoff? Yes ½ acre drainage area. DEP had no comments. Motion to approve with conditions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 19, 21, 24, 25, 26, and 27, RC, second NK, so voted.
Abutters: (advised of Planning Board Meeting on May 7)
1. Stanley Johnson 235 Alfred Lord Blvd. does not want this in his backyard. It is infringing on the buffers, variance after variance, if it doesn’t fit don’t put it there. MR told him they have to file an ANRAD due to the WPA, they have to file the NOI, it’s all required and they are following exactly as they should. They needed to know where wetlands are first so they would stay away from that. Mr. Johnson is against it for the record.
2. Mike Hamey 239 Alfred Lord Blvd. will this affect our house values? ST said again it is within their right. What is the affect on animal life? MI said it is not going to affect them that much, they’ve ID’d the vernal pools, wildlife is already there. ST understands the abutters but the applicant has done all that is required of them. MR gave a better explanation- property values nobody can answer that., it will only be a few visitors per month to the tower for work etc. the frequencies have to operate under FAA rules of what is deemed safe so that is regulated. They have even had cases of birds nesting on the towers, so the frequency does not bother the wildlife. It is a pretty small tower, 155 feet from existing grade. DB asked how many carriers?
4-5, the top is not lit only a door at ground level. Mr. Hamey is also against this.
3. Catherine Trainor 210 Alfred Lord Blvd. She has water concerns. MR told her they cannot put anymore water on her property than is already there. She may end up with the same that she’s always had but less water is what is expected.
2. 24 Winthrop Street, Malloch Construction/Crespi, (NOI), SE73-2612 Nyles Zager present. Field report states that this property is the site of the old Baron Brothers Furniture site that was lost to a fire about 11 years ago. It is a .41 acre site with an existing curb on the west side (at the street) of the property and all that remains of the building is a portion of the foundation. The entire lot was previously developed with the building and parking lot, but is now considered degraded. An ORAD was issued on 3-4-15. The entire lot is within the riverfront area of the Mill River, and is just outside the DDA. This site is considered a redevelopment project under 310 CMR 10.58(5)(a) through (e): Redevelopment Within Previously Developed Riverfront Area;
Restoration and Mitigation Notwithstanding the provisions of 310 CMR 10.58(4) (c) and (d), the issuing authority may allow work to redevelop a previously developed riverfront area provided the proposed work improves existing conditions. Redevelopment means replacement, rehabilitation or expansion of existing structures, improvement of existing roads, or reuse of degraded or previously developed areas. A previously developed riverfront area contains areas degraded prior to August 7, 1996 by impervious surfaces from existing structures or pavement, absence of topsoil, junkyards, or abandoned dumping grounds. Work to redevelop previously developed riverfront areas shall conform to the following criteria: (a) At a minimum, proposed work shall result in an improvement over existing conditions of the capacity of the riverfront area to protect the interests identified in M. G. L. c. 131 40. When a lot is previously developed but no portion of the riverfront area is
degraded, the requirements of 310 CMR 10.58(4) shall be met. (b) Stormwater management is provided according to standards established by the Department. (c) within 200 foot riverfront areas, proposed work shall not be located closer to the river than existing conditions or 100 feet, whichever is less, or not closer than existing conditions within 25 foot riverfront areas, except in accordance with 310 CMR 10.58(5) (f) or (g). (d) Proposed work, including expansion of existing structures, shall be located outside the riverfront area or toward the riverfront area boundary and away from the river, except in accordance with 310 CMR 10.58(5)(f) or (g). (e) the area of proposed work shall not exceed the amount of degraded area, provided that the proposed work may alter up to 10% if the degraded area is less than 10% of the riverfront area, except in accordance with 310 CMR 10.58(5)(f) or (g).
Currently, all storm water sheets over the site and enters the Mill River without any treatment. The Applicant proposes to build a 60’ x 60’ 2.5 story office building with parking lot, landscaping, grading, storm water management, and utilities. The storm water management consists of a Stormceptor STC 450i. Mark Slusarz, City Engineer, and MR met to discuss the project as it pertains to storm water, and we had some concerns regarding compensatory storage. Mark spoke with Nyles Zager, Outback Engineering Engineer regarding the following concerns:
-Flood compensation. A majority of the site is within the floodplain and there was no compensatory storage. Nyles said that he will submit an analysis showing some flood compensation in the parking area
-Capacity of the Stormceptor. The Stormceptor is adequate for the design flows and the calcs were included in the report.
-Concern that a single grate is inadequate. Nyles said he will review the adequacy of the single CB grate.
A revised plan was submitted with changes discussed with the Engineering Department. The Stormceptor will collect roof runoff as well as storm water from the parking lot and treat it prior to release into the Mill River. TSS removal via the Stormceptor is calculated at 86%. All work falls within the riverfront area, with a majority within 100 feet of the Mill River. A siltation barrier is proposed running from the eastern property line, following along the river, and turning north along the western property line. For safety, once the property is developed, a guard rail is proposed along the edge of the pavement and the edge of the river. Snow will be stockpiled in the landscaped areas as shown on the plan. This project is a redevelopment and meets DEP’s standards pertaining to
redevelopments as outlined above. The work involved will result in an overall improvement to the site to include treatment of storm water prior to entering the Mill River. The parking area will be rehabbed and landscaping will be added. MR recommends that the TCC approve this project and issue an order of conditions to include the attached special conditions. DB asked what they would use in a snow storm to treat the parking lot? Sand or salt, whatever condition the TCC sets. MR sand is safest, salt is not great to use there. Nyles told TCC he has the planning board meeting soon, if any changes how would TCC work with that? MR can approve minor changes, major would have to come back before TCC. Nyles also said the grate that is there now is capable of handling the 10 yr storm. Motion to approve with special conditions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 25, 26, 27, 28-no chemicals or salt to be used for ice &
snow control, DB, second RC, so voted.
LF OUT
3. 67 Shore Drive (33 Sabbatia Drive), (NOI), SE73-2610 Field report states that this filing is for the proposed construction of a 20’ x 40’ in-ground pool and extension of an existing deck. The addition will be 10’ x 12’ plus stairs, leading to the pool apron. The pool will be located in an area previously occupied by an above ground pool and all excavation will be within the backyard area. The boulders depicted on the plan have been in place for quite a while. As shown in the plans, this property drops off quickly down to the lake where an existing stairway leads to the edge of the water. A small wetland along elevation 64 was delineated by John Delano on March 24 and 25, 2015 and MR is in agreement with the placement of the flags. Erosion control will be in place prior
to any work, and is depicted on the plan as the limit of work. Once work has been completed, all exposed disturbed areas will be loamed and seeded . A concrete washout area should be depicted on the plan and outside the 100 foot buffer zone. The work as presented should not negatively impact the lake or wetland area, as the boulders and erosion control barriers will limit any siltation downhill. MR recommends that the TCC approve the project and issue an order of conditions to include the attached special conditions. Lynn Hagen and Mike Conena present, homeowners. Motion to approve with conditions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 15, 19, 21, 24, 25, 26, & 27, DB, second RC, so voted.
LF BACK
4. 1094 Bay Street, (NOI), SE73-2611 Field report states that this project is an after-the-fact filing for parking lot extension and building renovation at the above address. The wetlands were re-flagged by Walter Hewitson on 9-9-14. MR reviewed the delineation on 4-1-15. Flags WF-5 and WF-6 were missing but it was clear where the wetland area is established. They were probably lost during the winter. The parking lot along the side of the building was plowed toward and in some cases, within a foot of the wetland. In addition, small cedars near flag 6 were broken, and some of them are in the pond. The pond needs to be cleared of all debris (by hand) and a snow retention area should be designated so that the wetland is not compromised. MR recommends that this area
be located along the northern boundary and as far away from the wetlands as possible. The newly paved parking are, except for a small triangle in the southwest, remains outside the 25 foot WPZ. In order to address additional storm run-off, a grass detention pond is proposed to the south. This detention pond should alleviate the additional untreated storm water created by the additional impervious surface. A siltation barrier is depicted on the plan and should be considered the limit of work. MR recommends that the TCC issue an order of conditions for this project to include the attached special conditions. MR would also recommend that the TCC approve the wetland delineation as follows: flags WF13 to WF17 and flags WF1 - WF12, and WF14 - WF27 for reference purposes only. John Desousa present SeaCoast consulting. Rob Anderson owner. RC detention/retention area built yet? No due to the snow. Hand cleared and put in
soon. RC concern with parking lot construction without an order of conditions. DB you don’t intend to pave anymore right, because you don’t own anymore. DB amazed at water on left of building. Does it come over? Hasn’t yet, once or twice it came over a foot or two but that’s it. MR said water flowing from south side of building and down to culvert but culvert has always been too low. MR will check on culvert. NK no fault of theirs, its been there for 200 years. DB snow? On north side will be storage, not on stream side. Motion to approve with conditions 1, 2, 3, 4, 19, 21, 25, 26, 27, 28-snow storage area to be located along north property line, 29-debris (damaged trees, trash, etc.) located in wetland to be removed and pipe area kept free of debris on a regular basis., DB, second RC, so voted.
Other Business
1. Approve funds for MSMCP annual meeting. Motion to approve $15 for MR to attend, DB, second MI, so voted.
2. Planning Board-zoning ordinance change. Motion for ST to sign, DB, second RC, so voted.
3. Boyden Bulletin
4. Issues at Boyden. Last Thursday the door was smashed, glass broken. Friends of Boyden and TRWA maybe they can get some insurance, perhaps pay some kind of a fee for heat? Should MR go by daily? Maybe not a good idea to go alone. MR keep TCC in the loop on this.
5. Ramp on Harris Street finished? ST was asking for info on this.
6. Don Greg June Bent Award.
Motion to adjourn, DB, second MI, so voted.
Meeting ended at 8:15pm
| |
