Minutes of July 19, 2001

[Approved 8/16/01]

Present: Robert Boisselle, Paul Locke, Peter Mortimer, Bruce Rider, David Valade

Pine Banks Presentation Stephen O'Neill, Vice President of the consulting firm, Fay, Spofford & Thorndike: We have been engaged by the Trustees of Pine Banks in order to develop some conceptual designs and take it hopefully through a construction project. A couple of my colleagues, actually one of the members of the trustees and also an environmental consultant, who is working with us will be at this meeting shortly. One of the gentleman who is going to be here tonight has been before the commission previously approximately two years ago to brief you with some of the thoughts that are going on up in this area of the park, and since that time we have advanced it to the point where the trustees are planning to go forward with the construction of the new multi use athletic field and presently undeveloped area of the park. To orientate you, Main St. would be off the sheet in this direction to the west, Sylvan St. would be off the sheet to the north. If you come in off of Main Street, this is the 90 ft. baseball diamond, which was rehabilitated probably within the last year or so, and they have installed the lighting system.

David: Is Woodside Road the road that comes out right directly across the entrance to Oak Grove?

Mr. O'Neill: Yes, and this is the road that you see peeling off here comes out to Sylvan St. The area that is being proposed for development is currently an undeveloped portion of the park. It has been used for a variety of uses I believe. It is a prominent place for dog walking. It has been used by the city for snow storage during winter months. There has been some construction material, some fill material that has been stored, there are some stock piles that are pretty evident when you go out there. It is a pretty much undeveloped area of the park. The proposal is to construct a multi use athletic field which has been designed to the size that would accommodate rugby. It is also intended to accommodate multi use - soccer, lacrosse, football, uses such as that. When we began the preliminary planning of the project (our firm has been involved actually since 1997) we went out and did some survey mapping. At that time we flagged the wetland line down along the wetland system that is to the south end of the property, and we started to plan around that trying to weigh out the field such that we could either avoid or minimize buffer activity and potential adverse impact to the wetland. As the project advanced, having the three years that lapsed where the line that was flagged in 1997, we recently reflagged and remapped the line in June of this year. You will see the solid red line on your sheet that is just on the border of the dark blue. We then came in and looked at where the 100 ft. buffer would lay out. It is a thin dash red line that comes across, it's the other 100 ft. offset. We then looked at laying out the field such that we could avoid any buffer activity to layout. We have been successful in doing that where the field will be constructed, will be graded out, and we are proposing that during the construction we, of course would have siltation controls, we would have a row of hay bales and silt fence along the entire limit of the project. The project will require fill material to be imported to the site. The reason for that is two fold. Given the environmental conditions on the site, I think we are aware that it was formerly used as a burning dump, so we have to cover the material that is there. We have achieved that by coming up with a 3 ft. layer of clean material. Sensitive to some issues that we are aware that are going on in town, all of this will be imported, ordinary burrow, that will conform to MA standard specs. There was some consideration given to alternate sources of material, but just from the prospective of the comfort knowing we will bring in material that meets our specification criteria, and it is clean good fill. It will be approximately 15,000 cubic yards of material that will be imported. We will actually be winding up with the grading of the site in order to achieve that 3 ft. of clean cover material over the existing, and that is since we are winding up putting the field back to existing grade up in the northeast corner of the field, that will go back up almost to existing grade, and then given proper grading for the sports field, which will basically be a center line crown. It will sheet off at 1% slope to the edge lines, and holding the field level from end to end, by the time you come out to this area of the field, we are actually into probably anywhere between a 5 to a 6 ft. fill section. What you see here and on the sections that are accompanying your package, you can see basically we have the proposed grade, which is the green line. What you see shaded in brown is basically the depth of the fill that will be brought on site, so that is represented on the sections. Drainage of the field will be overland, much similar to the drainage patterns that currently exist on the site today. It will sheet from the field off and find its way out to the wetlands system, going through the stand of trees that will remain untouched by this project on the easterly side of the park. On the westerly edge of the field, there will be clearing required. There is a faint line through the field, which represents the canopy of the existing tree line. We are going to maintain some semblance of buffer between the 90 ft. diamond and the proposed field for this project. Together with the project, we are proposing a parking lot that will be able to accommodate 30 spaces. The parking lot is not proposed to have any curbing, again we are looking towards sheet flow and following natural gap out, eventually either to the wetland or would perk into the ground. That pretty much is an overview of what is being proposed. The reason we felt it was important to come before the commissioners, is given the fact that we believe it is an activity that is not subject, given it is outside of any jurisdictional resource areas, we felt that it is a courtesy given the fact that there is a proximity to the wetland, the fact that we had been before you and at that time was unsure what the final project would wind up looking like. We had opened your eyes to it, and we just wanted to keep you involved in the process. We hope we would get your endorsement of the project. I think it is going to be a tremendous betterment to the park, so with that I would open it to any general questions that you may have.

Paul: In the upper corner, there is indication of a swale that would be constructed?

Mr. O'Neill: Yes, what you will have is a constructed swale, gets out and it will actually get into a natural swale that begins to occur just about at this point here, probably about 60 ft. outside of the buffer and then it will just go through the swale to the wetland system. What that will be doing is picking up sheet flow that would come off the slope.

Most of it is going to come this way, just running over land, eventually getting out to the stand of trees. Thee is one prominent tree on the site. The big kind of circle that you see there is just another feature that we did work to try to preserve, and looking at the grading we think that is an achievable goal to preserve that tree as well.

David Valade: What is the surface like now in the area that is not tees?

Mr. O'Neill: The surface right now is a hodgepodge. There is some down this area. You have an area of broken bituminous concrete pavement. You have an area over here that is kind of an unmowed natural vegetation, a lot of weeds, meadow type grass. Looking at what we could say if it was stripping, we are not planning on any loam coming out of there. It is pretty hard packed.

David: So by in large what you are doing isn't going to change the velocity flow of the water?

Mr. O'Neill: No, if anything, quite honestly I think what we will see is a result in a decrease of runoff from the site. The field will be designed with a sand loam mix, sand cushion, permeable. We think a lot of the rain-falled land would be drawn into the soil, plus we think that just the fact that it is going to be a good turf surface, you are going to get less run than you will over the existing condition today.

David: Should we be concerned that putting other stuff on top of the landfill would cause the compression to force stuff to leach?

Jeff Nagle, from Nagle Consulting Associates and an Environmental Consultant on the project: Some of you folks may remember I was here probably two years ago when we had first found out what was going on out there. These are a test pit and test point of locations we put out there and the information has already gone in to the solid waste folks at DEP about one week year back. With the respect to the question on compression, this was a burning dump, so the material is fairly well compressed to begin with. There is not a lot of foot traffic and vehicle traffic coming back over in this way where the DPW yard drives back and through there, so I don't think this is going to be any kind of a problem. Ground water quality is not a problem. You don't see any leach ate or indicators like that. It is all residual.

David: I am mostly asking because I know this has to be old enough they didn't clay line it among other things.

Jeff: No, but it was a burning dump so most of the organic fraction is gone.

David: The only other question I have is it sounds like you are extending and adding water to a swale up at the top part?

Bob:; There is a drain swale in the lower part portion too.

Mr. O'Neill: Yes, we have a swale in this area that is a natural occurring condition. It gets out into this wooded area. This wooded area will be preserved. It will run, will provide pipe culvert, and there is a low natural kettle hole here that is where we will direct that runoff to.

David: And being this is non-jurisdictional, all I can only do is ask, but however you do the swales, if you could do it so the velocity of the water isn't high enough that it damages the wetland or causes erosion into it.

Bob: I would recommend at this time is this, to present us with a Determination of Applicability, and from that it will be almost an official stamp at that time, instead of requesting tonight to make a decision. With a Determination of Applicability, we can give it to you right off the bat. It doesn't involve our jurisdiction at all and it will give you clearance with us at that time.

David: The only other question to ask which we haven't addressed is I assume you have looked and found this not to be in a flood plain.

Mr. O'Neill: Yes

David: Then it is pretty straightforward.

Bob: It will cover all the documentation that you will need.

Mr. O'Neill: If I could ask in terms of the timing on the commission's action on an RDA. If we were to get that to you post days could that be at your next meeting?

Bob: Yes, it could be determined at that meeting.

Mr. O'Neill: Because where we are just for our information, we are in the process of trying to find wise negotiations with the contractor that will be constructing the facility. The hope is that we would wrap that up by the end of July and look towards an early August.

David: Do we want to do a site walk?

Bob: I have been out there. I have no problems with what is going on. You are going to find a big demand for this field, let me tell you. If you have some extra copies why don't you leave them for some of the other commissioners.

Voted: to open the meeting for public participation.

Maryellen Marino, 73 Greenwood St. , tele: 781-662-8210: My neighbors and I refer to our area as the forgotten area of Melrose. We are on the Wakefield/Stoneham edge of Melrose. Across the street from our house is a large piece of land, which has been a dumping ground from what I hear for about 30-50 years. I have only lived in this area for about 3 ½ years. The neighborhood got together this past spring. We contacted the Chamber of Commerce, the DPW, and we spoke with Margaret Lloyd. We decided to clean up the area, not really understanding at the time that it was conservation land, but wanting to adopt it as a neighborhood project. We began to clean out old clotheslines, a former swing set, roof shingles that we believe many of the houses up above this piece of land have been dumping building products probably for years because there was just literally two trailer load sizes that the DPW had to come down and collect, as well as over 60 bags of junk that had been thrown there. Basically, our intent was to clean up this site, to try to dissuade people that drive by and walk by from continuing to dump their trash and to try to restore some of the greenery in the area, which is indeed what we have done. Then it came to our attention afterwards when they were trying to put the sign up that "oops, that is conservation land". So that is why I am here tonight. I had a conversation with Bob concerning it and wanted to come down to explain our intent to the committee. It is a narrow piece of land. My understanding is that at one time it was privately owned, taxes were not paid on it and then it reverted to the city. I don't know how true that is.

Bob: The commission has received a lot of tax lien type copies where the owners had bought land or a different type of zoning has occurred now that they cannot build on the property and owners have abandoned it in the past. Some of this land has been moved over into the "conservation commission jurisdiction area".

Maryellen Marino: I can't imagine actually building on it. It is very ledge like, extraordinary high, I don't know if any of you are familiar with the piece. But nonetheless, we have cleaned it up, the sign is now there and our intention to keep it clean, to allow the myrtle that is currently there, the day lilies that are struggling to grow to continue, and we did put wood chips down from a company that needed to get rid of some wood chips. We spread those down on the ground, again in an effort to clean up. Basically, those are our current intentions. I don't know if this is controversial or not, but I am in the process of preparing a letter to the city, requesting that an additional sidewalk be put in on that side of the street. Within one block there are fifteen children, the oldest of which is 12 and under. A couple of the children attend the charter school and wait for a bus. There are other children that make a great attempt trying to walk down Greenwood Street to school, as well as the many commuters, and currently there is only one sidewalk on the street. It is a heavily traveled street and my understanding, which may not be accurate, is that on a busy street two sidewalks are allowed and the city Will pick up the cost for the additional sidewalk. I don't know whether indeed this will happen, but if it did get passed, we would cut into a piece of the land.

Paul: That wouldn't be controversial.

David: If you don't get a positive response, it might be worth showing up at candidate forums for the Mayor, outlining it and asking about it.

Maryellen Marino: There is another concern that I have that I mentioned to you, Bob, on the phone, and I don't know if you have had time to address it. Further down on Greenwood Street, heading towards Franklin St., nestled between the back of the hardware store and an apartment building, so if you are coming down Greenwood St. with Franklin behind you on your right hand side, just after you have turned onto the street, behind the hardware store there is parking for the hardware store, whatever that arrangement is. Then there is a lot of land, and then there is an apartment building, and another person told me that was conservation land, and indeed it is. That has been determined. It has been dumped on and parked on at least as long s I have lived there, and according to other neighbors for years longer, snow plows, construction equipment has been parked on it. I have walked past and have found used needles, diapers, and all kinds of things. I called the city and spoke with Joe Lynch, who was very kind and helpful, and made a site visit. We were told by someone that whoever it is that is doing this parking on land has some kind of connection with the city and this is why this has been allowed and not to pursue it for that very reason. I do not know who this person is. Supposedly, a letter was sent from Joe Lynch's department back late fall, telling that person to no longer park and to no longer continue to use this area. It has made no different. I remain very confused as a resident as to what is happening with this particular piece of land. Again, we are on the edge of Melrose, we feel very neglected, and I really would like the energy of people that know what they are talking about, know how to work whatever it is they have to work, to figure out what we can do to resolve this issue because we feel it brings the neighborhood down. We are doing our part as a neighborhood to clean up, to try to take control, and we need help, and I really don't know where to go from here because I tried the appropriate channels, and again I know Joe Lynch was helpful in trying to write the letter.

Bob: Did he respond back to you concerning the letter?

Maryellen Marino: No, I did make a few phone calls after. I don't know if it was to Margaret at that point or not, and then I didn't hear anything further. At one point I did hear from someone that well maybe they would have to fence off the piece of property to prevent them from doing that. It seems like the access mainly happens from the apartment building. They drive in behind and they park towards the rear. You have the train station asphalt area, and then you have this piece of land and it is a dump site. We need help as a neighborhood, somehow in having someone that has some kind of authority to help us look into this, at least to be able to direct our energies.

Bob: We appreciate you and your neighbors for cleaning up the area that you have been working on, and the aspects of the sidewalk will probably be approved because it is probably within the 15 ft. buffer.

Paul: The city owns that.

David: There is a certain right of way that they have on a road, but you can't make the assumption that the road is 15 ft. on either side. It could be put all the way on one side.

Maryellen Marino: Well, in my view there is actually a piece of one of the neighbors diagonally across from our house that has a buried sidewalk that the city should have dug out probably 10 years ago. It is sand, etc. WE have called to have them clean that up and that hasn't happened either. This house is right next to the piece that we have cleaned up.

Bob: Why don't you give me some time and I will get a hold of Joe Lynch and see what the results are from that letter and from what you are saying, I think it has occurred, so I will see what he is saying about it.

Voted: To close public participation.

Voted: To accept the conservation minutes of June 7, 2001.

Correspondence:

Friends of the Middlesex Reservation for the summer of July to October, which includes nature walks, programs, for our information.

The Mt. Hood Daily Inspection Report, dated June 8 through July 19, was passed around. It talks about the installation of hay and silt fences around the first ILSF. Pictures were displayed from Mt. Hood, including the ILSF 1 & 3 near the haul road and further up. Wetlands 2 and 3 were also included. There is a great deal of wildlife (frogs, birds, herrings) in this area now and grass is sprouting to approx. 1 ft. tall in some areas.

David: So if they keep up too long waiting on this, a good chunk of the 12th Fairway might be jurisdictional and newly formed wetland.

Bob: That is correct. I was invited to be on the Mt. Hood Advisory Committee, which was supposed to be involved with deciding what to do with Mt. Hood. When I got there, I was asked to step down to be on the committee because of my involvement with the upcoming election. David Valade was there at that time and he stepped in. David presented himself very well, defending our goals and views at Mt. Hood and it all came down to two points, no ball field on Mt. Hood, finish up the 12th tee and stabilize and begin restoration of the Mt. Hood area.

David: That was assuming there were funds to do it and that the funds should be spent first to rebuild and take care of the 12th fairway, take care of the wetlands and stabilize the hill and the soil on the ball field, and if there is enough money to do it, do the ball field last. Someone did say "this could be controversial, is it okay if we put more fill in?" My response was come up with a plan first. Don't put in fill and find out you don't have enough money to do what you want to do. Linda Benezra reminded them that where they want to fill is not Parks land, it is actually DPW land and it is under contract through 2010, so they are going to have trouble putting it there anyway, and fortunately no one said "well what if we put it on the old pine tree dump" when I would have said "excuse me, there is a vernal pool there. You haven't shown a good enough history of being able to protect resources and it isn't going to happen". I was ready to say that.

David: Can I read something that is quite interesting from the Daily Reports from Mt. Hood Inspection: "Monday, 7/9/01 - material pile has increased over the weekend. No information was passed on to Mt. Hood that this was going to take place. See 7/6 report" (which said he tried to call and ask what they were going to do). That is quite auming isn't it? 7/10 - 50 loads truck in from the Big Dig, 50 x 26 tons equals 1300 tons. 7/11 - after being told no hauling would be done last night by Gator Hood, 8 truckloads, 26 tons each, were hauled in last night.

The advisory committee meeting regarding Mt. Hood will be the first Wednesday, the next meeting August 1 at 7:30 p.m.

Bob: WE received from the City of Melrose, 7/2/01, an invitation to a Special Meeting of the Melrose School Committee, on Wednesday, 7/11/01 at 7 p.m. at the MMTV Television studios to present to the School Committee the revised Middle School design. At the meeting the school committee accepted a design and was then brought before the alderman this past Thursday, and it was shot down. The Middle School is now dead in the water literally.

Lower Spot Pond Canal, Malden
City of Malden. The Malden Conservation Commission will hold a meeting on August 7, 2001 at 7 p.m. at Malden Government Center, 200 Pleasant St., Room 421, Malden on Request for Determination of Applicability for property located at 1036 - 1064 Main St., along Lower Spot Pond Canal, Malden.

David: Is anyone going to go and participate and let them know what our conclusion was?

Bob: Probably.

36 Slayton Road: The following Email to Bob Boisselle from Theodore Regnante was received: "This is hereby requested by the applicant that the hearing scheduled for tonight, July 19, 2001, regarding the above property be continued until August 16, 2001 meeting of the Conservation Commission. This will allow us time to work with Mr. Lynch in addressing the drainage and related issues raised by the commission. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter."

Bob: By the way, there is water on Slayton Road property up to the pink flags now, in the middle of July.

A memorandum was read from the Dept. of Public Works, City of Melrose regarding City Yard Re-Paving, which is nearing completion. All of the construction activity that has been undertaken is significantly outside of the jurisdictional buffer zone to Ell Pond.

Correspondence received from Commonwealth of MA regarding a fiscal year 2001 request for responses for the MA Office of Coastal Zone Management. CPR Grant money can be used by municipalities for construction of storm water irrigation system, assessments to identify the sources of pollution and design remediation systems and installation of marine pump-out facilities. Subsequent to the release of the RFR, CZM held two public information sessions on 6/28 and 6/29 to answer specific questions pertaining to the RFR and the application process and technical inquiries. All questions and answers from the information sessions in the fiscal year 02 CPR RFR are available on the CZM website at httpwww.state.MA.US/CZM/CPRGP.HDM

News Release from the MA Audubon Society was passed around highlighting a statewide launch initiative aim in protecting threatened habitat birds.

DEP - Massachusetts Wetlands Restoration News Bulletin - discussing the wetlands restoration progress, how restoration projects get funded, erosion control, reports from various areas in the north shore, and 3 regional coastal tidal restriction atlases are in process.

Middlesex Conservation District Fall 2001 Bulb Sale & newsletters. If you want to buy your bulbs and specialty irises, daffodils and tulips, fill out the form and send it in with your check.

Ipswich River Wildlife Sanctuary for Summer 2001. There will be two days on Mill Pond and invasive plant workshops on July 28. If any conservation members are interested in going, they can be financed for this one day workshop 10 a.m. - 3 p.m.

Mass Wildlife News. This is a proposed 2002 deer regulation change, and also the American Chestnut Foundation has an article in the booklet, among other items of interest.

Towners Pond and Swains Pond Recreational Area, Melrose. A report was received which was put together by the MA Audubon Society listing the current conditions, the litter on the trails, the confusion of signs, inconsistent trail maintenance, confusion trail network, informal trail beats into sensitive vegetation, erosion, invasive species. Major proposal/recommendations include: identification, mapping, clear sign posts, close unwanted informal trails, remove litter and fire pits, improve signage and parking, post regulations to direct visitors to viewpoints, etc. Also is included an inventory of what we have out there, trail system, description of the invasive species, recommendations for regulations in fishing, various maps that are on the internet. They are going to put together a small brochure for us and we will have to select the map that they want to put in.

Mt. Hood - Continued

Bob has been requested by the president of the Board of Alderman to show up Monday night, July 23, with the following individuals, Supt. Of Parks, Chairman of the Parks, the City Engineer, the legal counsel and the Chairman of the Conservation Commission for a discussion concerning Mt. Hood, first agenda item. The second agenda item is basically recommendation to acquire counsel for the alderman for the Mt. Hood situation. It should be covered on Channel 3. Bob has to go through all of the minutes over this past year to review the status. David Valade is also on the Mt. Hood Advisory Board. Bob is also sitting in on a meeting Tuesday, July 24, concerning Mt. Hood and how to fix the problem.

Public Comments

Priscilla Hook, 10 Elmcrest Circle: At the alderman meeting, who is going to say something about them dumping again?

Bob: I will bring it up at the meeting Tuesday morning if the City Engineer doesn't bring it up.

Priscilla Hook: If the last prerogative at Mt. Hood is the ball field….

Bob: There is no ball field.

Priscilla Hook: There is no money?

Bob: That is correct. Te bid that they opened for the ball field was for $737,000, and there is no money.

Priscilla Hook: What about reforesting?

Bob: The stabilization and restoration is part of the closing of this project. The priorities are basically this way: the12th tee, get it up and working, stabilization of the slopes so they can maintain the field, and restoration.

Priscilla: Is that going to be there forever?

David: To stabilize it, they are going to have to put some kind of vegetation on it, or it won't last.

Priscilla: What a waste.

David: At some point I suspect they will fund putting the ball field in, but at least what the people on this committee were suggesting is that is the lowest priority.

Bob: What will probably happen is it become similar to what you saw here, a multi purpose field with no ball field, soccer, lacrosse, football, toilets.

David: They have a number of issues they have to deal with regarding parking. The fact that the 11th green is so close to the corner of the field, putting some kind of barrier in, so the difference between making it a multi purposes field and baseball field, it can't even be as much as the difference between a $600,000 and $700,000 project I imagine. There still is not going to be the money to do it.

Paul: People may use it. You may have pick-up games, but you won't have schools busing the children in there.

Bob: There is no parking, no toilets. It will be level, big grass.

David: Well, there aren't going to be toilets anyway under the plan they have right now.

Bob: The basic fear that came out of Tuesday's meeting is the stabilization of the slope itself. In other words that whole hill coming down onto the 12th Fairway, or even work crews that are out there, or one of us out there, what if that comes down?

Bruce: David is our official representative. Shouldn't we tell him our views on Mt. Hood?

Bob: Sure

Bruce: My view is that given their past performance, they cannot be trusted. Any action within 100% of a wetland or resource area will be denied.

David: I am taking a much broader view than that. We have upland jurisdiction after the fact that they do something wrong, which they have, and my view at this point and time, anything that they do related to this project, anywhere on Mt. Hood, we have jurisdiction over that would affect the wetlands and runoff.

Bob: I was at Mt. Hood Friday with the Clerk of the Works, Parks Commissioners, and the Park Superintendent, and we walked the site, made recommendations at that time for Wetlands 2 and 3. At Wetlands 2, the dike has to be increased basically because the water is going around it and they hay bale the area where the water is seeping out and heading towards Wetlands 3 that is being hay baled and silt fenced. I haven't seen it since, but recommendations were made at that time and from what David is saying, they have been initiating.

David: To follow up, I haven't said anything about the vernal pool and the Christmas tree dump, but that is 100% off limits as far as I am concerned. There is no credibility that they could protect those no matter what they do, and the reason I agree that the work on the 12th Fairway needs to be done first is because that will stabilize the boundary around the wetlands and then we can have them restore the wetlands, and that was literally what I said that has to be part of the 12th Fairway proposal.

Priscilla Hook: What is the last date they dumped dirt at Mr. Hood?

David: The last date we have is the 19th, today, 77 loads x 26 tons, 2,002 tons.

Bob: The last load is scheduled for July 27, and then the city has stated no more dirt.

Cliff Road

Bob: I received a couple of calls about cutting trees on conservation land on Cliff Road, which is off Beacon St. David lives near this area and I would like to ask him to review the site.

Voted: to adjourn at 8:20 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Nancy Pritchard
Commission Secretary