Conservation Commission
Meeting Minutes

MELROSE CONSERVATION COMMISSION

May 21 2002

Present:  Nancy Naslas, David Carpenter, Paul Locke, Susan Murphy, Bruce Rider, David Valade

10 Windsor St.

Paul Locke:  We have a Certificate of Compliance for 10 Windsor St. in Melrose.  I went out for a site visit today.  You may recall they had proposed two buildings on the lot.  They have gone ahead and built one on Lot F which is #12 Windsor St. now and the concern for the conservation commission was that they provide storage capacity in a flood zone, and they changed the grade providing a lit bit of storage capacity in this area here, and then cut out a large portion of Lot D or just taking it down about 2 ft. in front of location.  Additional storage capacity has been completed on both Lots D and F.  Only one building has been built on Lot F, but the complete storage capacity is there.   They want a Certificate of Compliance for the lot. We can do a partial certification on Section B for certification.  It is hereby certified that only the following portions of the work regulated by the above referenced Order of Conditions has been satisfactorily completed and specified in that section that all of the flood storage capacity has been completed, but that the work on the building has only been completed Lot F.  This would then be attached to the deed for Lot F.

David Valade:  They are going to run out of time anyway probably before they even  start work on this.

Paul:  I did a site visit this morning and talked with Mr. Frank Procopio, and as a matter of fact, he is probably not going to do that.  He actually built this house himself.  He is getting old, his knees are failing and he is just not up to that.  He has no plans right now and the time will run out on the OOC. 

Voted:  To approve the Certificate of Compliance and the partial certification specific to the work done on Lot F, indicating that all the flood storage capacity has been provided.

Voted:  To recess until the ioint meeting with the Malden Conservation Commission to follow.

Respectfully submitted,

Nancy Pritchard

Secretary

Joint Meeting of Melrose and Malden Conservation Commissions

Malden City Hall - May 21, 2002

Order of Conditions – 197 Olive Ave. Extension

For a single-family home on Olive Ave. Extension to include a driveway that serves both the proposed home and a one-story residence at 195 Olive Ave. Extension.  The proposed house is between the two resource areas with intermittent flow between the two areas.

David Valade:  Described as sheet flow, not a stream, having no channel, but at this point there is a channel but that, as far as we know, was created at excavation rather through normal natural advantage.  One of the concerns I talked about before was in the area here, that as a result of the channeling the velocity could be too high into the wetland of the water coming in, that is a result of the rip rap around where they are covering the culvert, and abandoned there it will slow the water down enough that I am not as concerned as I was when we first reviewed it.

Paul Locke:  Any other concerns before we proceed with the Order of Conditions?

David Carpenter:  This is the site where they said they were going to incorporate the stream channeling into the landscaping?

David V:  Yes.  They were going to grass it and try to make it nice enough that no one wants to fill it and clean up another mess.

Peter S. (Malden Commissioner): We are probably going to dovetail our conditions to the Melrose Conservation Commission.  We have a big concern that the driveway be tied to some conditions so that they can’t be split up in some way that some new property owner can come in and divide the property and create another driveway.    That is the only condition other than what you have got, so I guess we want to make sure that gets added.

George Laskey (Malden Commissioner):  Basically, what we want is a copy of the two deeds, stating in the deeds that are going to be recorded that this driveway is a common driveway and that the street would not be extended into the wetlands.

David V: Any change that you are talking about would require a subsequent filing, and at least we in Melrose would require replication, and there is no place they could do the replication.

Michelle Doherty (Malden Commissioner):  A copy of your deed would be fine, just saying that it is going to be a common driveway with the two houses. 

David V: We will now go through the options and review/edit it for this site.

The wording of the Order of Conditions was finalized.

George L.:  Last night when we were at the site, Heather Marion, the next door neighbor,  doesn’t want any water on to her property.

David V: I think the flow of the plans would stop that from happening.

Paul L.:  During construction there will be measures in place to ensure that the heavy equipment go back and forth.  We all agree the channel appears to be working now, and as long as the channel was being tamed during construction, the neighbor’s concerns of it backing up on her property should be okay.

David V: If we put a line of hay bales it would actually probably cause more problems because the problem of water that came out of her property would stay there.

Michelle Doherty:  When I was up there last week after the rain, there was a big puddle at the end of the street and I called Mr. Douglas at 9 a.m. and had him lift the hay bales up a little bit.  He went right down there and did that and what I did notice was that a lot of that puddle at the end of the street was coming from the neighbor’s side.  It was cutting across her driveway, hitting the low spot that she has been complaining about sitting there, and then actually creeping over to Mr. Douglas’ land.  I think once everything is graded off fine that would not be a problem at all.  Hay bales would actually hurt her more because right now she is the lowest.

Voted by the Melrose Conservation Commission: to approve the issuance of Order of Conditions.

Voted by the Malden Conservation Commission: to approve the issuance of Order of Conditions.

38A Crescent Lane

David V:  We would like to reopen the public hearing on 38A Crescent Lane. 

Paul Finnochio – PJF & Associates:  Following our last meeting two weeks ago, we came up with what the commissions wanted some information on, and I have done an updated plan that I can pass around.  There was a question that came up in regards to some berming on the site.  When I was up there yesterday and also Saturday and a couple of times during the week, what it is there is a bit berm that runs basically from the cellar, partly down the hill, runs past our site, past the abutting house and it runs to about house #24 on the left hand side, and then there is a driveway over there.  It looks like there was a berm there at one time, but it has been ripped out because there has been some recent activity on that site with an addition that I put on.  Basically, there is a berm that runs down Crescent Lane past at least another three houses down the street.  There was something that came up of water possibly coming down the street and running into our site and possibly going into the proposed driveways.  What I propose to do is that in front of the driveway that had the driveway apron, basically it would almost be like having a sidewalk in there, it would rise up 4 inches, go across about 4 ft., and then would be pitching back in toward the house.  That would allow the water to still flow the same way it is flowing now down the street.  We have put in a trench drain and across the driveway to pick up any surface water that may be running down from the driveway and also picking up some of the water that may be running down the slope from the right hand side towards the house.  We had done some soil logs that I passed out to you.  There were two tested out there.  Test #1 was basically about 15 ft. or so off the left front corner of the house, and Test #1 is done towards the rear portion of the house.  We worked out about 6 ft. and we hit no ground water and the soils are pretty good.  What we will be using is four dry wells.  I did some drainage calculations based on 100 yr. storm.

I reviewed the 100 yr. storm event on doing an analysis.  What I did was take the existing conditions of the site.  On the proposed site I took the impervious area of the house. 

Basically what we are doing is called a rationale formula for coming up with numbers.  The roof area, impervious area is .55%.  95% of it is running off.   .35% of the water is running off of the site .6 goes into the ground.  It could be higher because of the steepness of the ground, but I am taking if off as the average.  Then I came up with a dry well volume that I would work with and that would be 4 dry wells.  They would be standard 3 ft. x 6 ft. diameter.

The commissioners discussed the revised plan.

Voted:  to open the meeting up for public discussion.

Following public discussion, Paul Locke summarized the evening’s discussions as follows:  Capping the last meeting, large volumes in storm events would back up, so what you are responding to is our concerns to have the balance that runs off and soaks in the ground be the same or less after the building is put in as it is now.  What is in the street now is going to stay in the street.  The goals of the Wetlands Act are not to exacerbate and not to cause it to get worse.

David Carpenter:  In the final analysis the whole concern is taking more water off the street and putting it in the wetland.  There is no more volume of water that you will be ending up with.  All the rain is not going to exacerbate the amount of water that is coming from this particular parcel because of the proposal.

David V:  Ultimately the ground will have more water than before.

Michele Doherty:  By putting in this house, I don’t think you would get flooded any more than you already are because it is a slower pace.

David V:  Our job is that this doesn’t get worse.

Voted:  To close the public hearing.

Voted:  to approve this order pending an issuance of the Order of Conditions.

Voted:  to accept the Order of Conditions as reviewed and revised.

Voted:  To close the joint meeting of the Melrose/Malden Conservation Commissions at 9:45 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Nancy Pritchard

Conservation Commission