Minutes of August 16, 2001

[Approved 9/6/01]

Present: Bill Dailey (Acting Chariman); Paul Locke, Peter Mortimer, Nancy Naslas, Bruce Rider

Minutes

Voted: to accept the minutes of July 19, 2001 with changes at noted. A summary was read from the Conservation Secretary, Nancy Pritchard, stating there was no quorum on August 2, 2001 and therefore no official business was conducted.

Voted: to pay the secretary for services dated July 2001 in the amount of $130.99

Correspondence:

Letter from Martha Podren dated 8/6/01 to Mr. Boisselle and members of the commission. She is working with Janet Carvener at the Mystic River Watershed Association this summer on the Blueways and Greenways Mystic Connections Made Public Project. She listed the goals of the project. If anyone has any information about green spaces in your location whether in printed form, maps or from your own knowledge, Martha would enjoy speaking to you by phone, Email, etc. in the next 2-3 weeks. Bruce will send her our web site address.

Pamphlet notice of the 2^nd Annual Regional Sustainable Development Forum, The Greening of Community Development sent by New Ecology, Inc. about an upcoming forum on Monday, September 17 for those interested in participating.

Notice from MACC for the 2001 Fall Conference, Fundamentals for Conservation Commissioners - the Fall Schedule and Registration Form, Locations are at Burlington, October 13 and at Lenox on November 3.

A memorandum was read to all Departments from the City of Melrose, dated 8/14/01, Auditors Office. The cover sheet asks us to verify the balances for our special revenue account as of 6/30/01 and notify them if we do not agree. We will refer this to Bob's attention when he returns.

A memo has been received addressed to all Municipal Conservation Commissions, Boards of Health, Public Water Suppliers, and Public Works Department from Glenn Haas, Acting Assistant Commissioner of Department of Environmental Protection. The subject is West Nile Virus, Application of Pesticides, etc. It has to do with mosquito control application for pesticides. Attached is a sample copy of WPA Emergency Certification Form and apparently may have to be used in certain situations where mosquito source reduction measures are involved, and that is addressed in the memo.

MACC Newsletter was passed around for the commissioners information.

MassWildlife News - covers trapping, notices to veterinarians and biodiversity initiative's upland program on the web, and conservation camp seeks counselors.

Riverways Newsletter for Summer 2001 was available for review.

Association of Massachusetts Wetland Scientists presents: a Coastal Wetland Dilineation Workshop to be held Friday, Sept. 7 North Shore-Gloucester Area, and also an Inland Wetland Delineation Workshop on Friday, September 14 at Mt. Wachusett Community College in Gardner, MA.

Received: A report from The Blue Ribbon Committee on Lakes and Ponds, entitled The MA Lakes & Ponds Watershed Action Strategy.

Received: Letter dated 7/25/01, from Peter C. Webber, Commissioner, Dept. of Environmental Management, presenting us with a copy of Celebrate the Legacy: 20 Years of Landscape Preservation in MA, and it describes the brochure. However, the brochure was missing at this meeting.

36 Slayton Road
Paul: I received a call from a representative from Slayton Road who was scheduled to be here. The 1^st deferred scheduled meeting for July was deferred again until August. A meeting was held with Joe Lynch, but Joe needed to talk to the Fire Chief and that hasn't come together yet, so they are asking for a continuance until September 20.

Ell Pond Knoll Soccer Field
Nancy Naslas: Two weeks ago at our meeting, we did not have a quorum, so David, Bruce and I went down to look at the soccer fields next to the knoll, and there was work being done there on the soccer field on the east side of the knoll beside Crystal Street and the wetlands. There had been a little bit of dumping of some rock rubble in the wetlands at the end of that field. The next morning I spoke with Ray Blanchard, Acting Supt of the Park Department and I went out there and they cleaned up the rock within a couple of hours. The rocks had been brought to Ray Blanchard's attention just that morning, so they cleaned them up, they added some hay bales where I asked them to, and he let me know that they were working off of the Order of Conditions that they had previously obtained from us a couple of years back. Bob Boisselle told Ray Blanchard that we realize he wasn't a part of the process back then. This is all second hand from Ray, not from Bob.

Paul: I talked to Bob immediately after I received your Email and asked him if he said that work could continue under that previous Order of Conditions, and his response was that he was probably ambiguous about it unintentionally, but the reason he brought up that OOC was to let Mr. Blanchard know we have information about what the field elevations should be, and Bob was not saying this work could continue under that OOC, but that Bob expects that the final field elevations be consistent with the ones that are in that OOC.

Nancy: No one had an OOC at the site.

Paul: And they are still doing work out there.

Nancy: Yes, they are finishing up now. They did finish that one field right next to the wetland, and they finished that on the day I went out there, the Friday after our meeting, the day my letter is dated.

Paul: They had scraped the sod back off, at least some portion of that, and I believe they are going to be doing work to change the elevations. I think we need to follow up with Mr. Blanchard to let them know if there is any further work that needs to be done there, it has to come for an OOC in hand before they proceed with any further work.

Nancy: I had pointed out to him too, after they had inadvertently had this dumping in the wetlands, if they had been following the appropriate procedures that would not have happened. This is one of the reasons why they needed to come before us. I think that they are little unclear of the necessity of coming before us so we need to be more emphatic on that point.

Paul: Could you contact Mr. Blanchard again?

Nancy: I can call him first thing in the morning, but I am going out of town tomorrow morning so I won't be able to go on site and follow up until Monday. If the rest of the commission thinks that is acceptable, then I am happy to follow through with it. The rest of you are probably all at work tomorrow.

Paul: What is likely to be happening is that they found out in survey that the field exceeds the previous elevations, so they are going to go back and change the elevations.

Nancy: I don't think that is what they are doing. I think they had some puddles that didn't get cleared up and I think they are going to fill those in.

Paul: Then we need to know that too.

Nancy: Incidentally, last Friday on August 3, when I went out there, it was the Clerk of the Works from Mt. Hood who was down to survey in the elevations. I had a little difficulty speaking with that gentleman. He was the one who really did not think that any OOC was necessary. I am happy to make some phone calls tomorrow and to follow up in person on Monday. In my letter I just clarified that no net increase in fill should occur. We need them to have an OOC in their hand while they are doing work on the site and that has not happened.

Paul: They may be under the impression that Bob gave his okay to do it, and from my discussion with Bob that is not true.

Bill Dailey (Acting Chairman): For the record, Nancy Naslas of the Commission wrote a letter to Ray Blanchard, Acting Superintendent, dated 8-03-01, which included what she has just been discussing regarding her site visit. This letter will be placed on file.

Pine Banks Park Multi-Use Athletic Field
Legal Notice Public Hearing City of Melrose Conservation Commission. In accordance with the provision of M.G.L., Chapter 39, Section 23B, the Melrose Conservation Commission will hold a public hearing Thursday, August 16, 2001, at 7:45 p.m., in the Mayor's Conference Room, 2nd floor, City Hall. The purpose of the hearing is to discuss the Request for Determination of Applicability submitted by C. Henry Kezer for Pine Banks Park for construction of a multi-use athletic field at Pine Banks Park. Any interested persons wishing to be heard in this discussion should appear at that time and place designated. Is someone here for the petitioner?

Stephen J. O'Neill, P.E.: Yes, I am representing Mr. Kezer.

Bill: We will open up the hearing at this time for the purpose of the public hearing, and we will have you make whatever presentation you would like first, and then following any questions or comments from the members, and follow that with comments, questions or remarks from the public.

Mr. O'Neill: I am Steve O'Neill, a Vice President of Fay, Spofford & Thorndike, Inc., consulting engineers representing the Pine Banks Park Trustees. The project that we had submitted the request for Determination of Applicability is the construction of a multi-use athletic field at Pine Banks Park. We were before the commission at your July 19 meeting to brief you on the project, so I will give you a brief overview of the project, what is proposed. It is basically to construct this multi-use athletic field in the area of Pine Banks Park, which presently is undeveloped. For orientation purposes, we have got Woodside Road, Main St., and Sylvan St. to the north, Main St., to the west. This is currently the undeveloped portion of the park. It is adjacent to the 90 ft. baseball diamond where they recently constructed the high mast lighting within the last couple of years, just to get you familiar with the area of the field. The project has been in the planning stages since about 1997 when we started to talk about it. At that time the wetlands were flagged and the field was laid out. We briefed the commission at that stage just to keep you advised of the potential project as it began to develop. The project will be a multi-use field that is sized to accommodate a rugby field. It is approximately 500 ft. x 300 ft. in rough terms. It will include a new turf field; we will be bringing approximately on average about 4 - 5 ft. of fill over the site to get it to grade. The runoff will be graded in two directions, centerline crown will run to either side, runoff will be collected in swales and just run naturally to the wetland area. Any water that comes up this way will go to a natural low depression in this area here. We have been able to lay out the field such that all activities of this project will be upland of the 100 ft. buffer zone. We have maintained actually to our limit of work, it is approximately 115 ft. from the wetland. We are proposing for our construction a row of hay bales and silt fence along the entire border of the project, basically coming from this area all around in the interest of protecting the wetland area. We feel the project has been designed such that it is really non-jurisdictional activity, that it is outside the 100 ft. buffer, and we bring the project before you in the hope that you will issue a negative determination.

Nancy: Is this the final design?

Mr. O'Neill: Yes

Nancy: Are these the designed documents that are going to be constructed and the drainage has been reviewed by a professional engineer, and are there plans to that affect somewhere?

Mr. O'Neill: No

Nancy: I am just concerned that if it is being changed, you will need to come back to us.

Mr. O'Neill: What we are doing it is being constructed as part of a design build contract, so we have begun discussions with W. L. French and Greenwood Construction. They are kind of teaming up on this project or we are approaching kind of a design build approach to it and the major issue that probably would be a concern to you would be the design of our field under drain system. We are in the process of laying that out and what will happen with that is basically it will be a system of pipes or a crushed stone bed that will collect under the limits of the field. It probably will wind up coming to daylight down in this area and the natural wooded area which we are going to retain will run through here, the pipe culvert under the proposed access to the lot, so certainly as the plans evolve, we will keep you advised of any changes.

Nancy: Will you have to excavate to put the under drain system in?

Mr. O'Neill: For the under drain system, we probably will not, given the amount of fill we will bringing into the site.

Nancy: Actually, you might want to try to avoid any excavation that is there.

Mr. O'Neill: We have done extensive environmental studies up there given the fact it was a former burning dump, and the only area where we may possibly begin to do some excavation is up at the northern border. Basically, we go from proposed finished grading at or about existing grade here, and when you come down to this area, we are probably about 6 - 7 ft. above existing grade, so it will be really the extremities, and we are being mindful of the trash layer, and we'll stick to the proposed grade.

Paul: If you excavate from that section, will that material just be reused.

Mr. O'Neill: Yes, it will just be shifted to be moved on site.

Peter: Do you have to pull a building permit from the City of Melrose for this?

Mr. O'Neill: No

Peter: Do you have to go before the Malden Conservation with this?

Mr. O'Neill: We feel it is non-jurisdictional to Malden. We have not been before Malden. The project is entirely in the City of Melrose, so we have not been before the Malden Commission.

Nancy: Who will be in charge of maintenance in the event we have any issues regarding fertilizer?

Mr. O'Neill: It will be Pine Banks Park. The field is going to be a sand-based field which does become somewhat more maintenance intensive. We are going to prepare a turf management plan for the park that will describe fertilization.

Nancy: Will there be a sprinkler system?

Mr. O'Neill: Yes, it will be irrigated.

Peter: You don't need a building permit, is that because there is no structure?

Mr. O'Neill: That is correct.

Peter: So what other city departments did you have to talk to besides us?

Mr. O'Neill: We have had discussions with the Public Works Department relative to the project. During the early stages, the Mayor's Office and the Planning Office was involved in discussions relative to the project. We have not been before them for any formal approvals, but representatives from both cities have been involved in the design development aspect of the project.

Peter: But no other city agency except for this one has to make an official determination? No building inspector to determine that it meets any qualifications? Only this agency is the one who makes a regulatory determination?

Mr. O'Neill: Yes.

Bill: Any other questions or comments from commission members?…… We will open it up then to the public if anyone has any comments, before you speak please sign in.

Dana M. Jewell, 100 Lynn Fells Parkway, Melrose: I have a couple of questions and maybe you can't answer these. The City, Malden and Melrose I believe, use this for a snow dump in the winter. Where are they going to dump the snow now?

Mr. O'Neill: The City of Melrose has an agreement with the trustees of the park. Right now there are no plans to replicate that under this project. It is the trustee's position that if the City of Melrose was interested in replicating snow dump that they would allow the city to clear a comparable area out in this location here. At one point, when we looked at the project, it was an overall site development with the prospect of some future improvements done along the water front area, so the Trustee's position is that that would be an element that the project would have to be coordinated with the public works.

Mr. Jewell: Believe it or not, as trashy a hole as it, and I am sure if you have been over you realize it is a big trash hole and a dump filled wetlands, this is well, I can't say impotent, but it is kind of almost a bird sanctuary. During the winter this is loaded with sparrows in there, over-wintering sparrows, and several other birds. We have even had some uncommon birds in there, and it would be a shame in the name of improvement, which I agree it would be an improvement to some degree, but it would be a shame if all these brush and woods, etc. is taken out of here because migrating birds use the area, as well as all Pine Banks Park in the summer is involved. Over here 4 or 5 years ago they dug a great big hole and they used this for a dump area once again, dumping fence in there, steel posts, etc. and I went and mentioned that the birds are down there and it was kind of fluffed off, and they also use this for trees and stumps that they cut at Pine Banks, which really should be chopped up, although the brush pile is good for the bird life and wildlife there.

Mr. O'Neill: We have tried to remain sensitive to minimize the amount of clearing that is going to be required for the project.

Mr. Jewell: We do regular bird surveys over here, especially in the fall, winter and early spring, not formal bird surveys.

Mr. O'Neill: Basically, the tree line on this side of the field will remain unaffected. The tree line on this side of the field comes in from here, you can see the light cloud. Even from the prospective of laying out the park, originally the concept of the parking lot was much closer to Pine Bank's road and was actually a little bit further this way. We actually went out there and there were two pretty substantial pines here. We relocated those to try to get the road between the two pines and pushed it back into more of the open unapproved area to try to maintain some green space and tree buffer. So we feel that we have considered some of those issues.

Mr. Jewell: It would be nice if you could save as much as possible. People look at it and see a brushy mess, but in those brushy messes, believe it or not, birds are quite unforgiven as my wife and I have found, and many other people. I guess that is all I have to say. I just hope it won't turn into one of these places where all the trash that is generated would not end up circling the field with mountains of trash as you get in some ball fields.

Mr. O'Neill: That is my experience with the park. I find they tend to do a fairly good job.

Mr. Jewell: The trouble is that sometimes they use that for a dump area, whether it is intentional or unintentional. You can go in there and among the branches there will be bags of trash, old clothes, etc.

Mr. O'Neill: I hope that with this improvement that would actually discourage some of that activity.

Mr. Jewell: I would hope so. Homeless people have lived in there at times too.

Nancy: Have you had any bids on what you think the construction of the field looks like?

Mr. O'Neill: Right now, we are looking at it not to exceed about $600,000. The Trustess of the park are pursuing additional grant moneys that will allow that price to go up. $600,000 would fund the construction of the parking lot, playing field, irrigation for the playing field would not fund the sports field lighting component of the project, but there is hope additional funds will be available. We have those components in there. If they build what they truly want, the whole building will probably approach maybe $900,000.

Nancy: But they are not going to construct these field until they have the funding in place so they can complete the job?

Mr. O'Neill: Right now the intent is to begin the field and pursue the additional funding, the lighting can be segregated out as a separate system and could be put in the future, so right now the intent is as soon as the fine approval is obtained and the contract is consummated with the contractor, the hope is to start construction as soon as possible with the goal of the turf being put down this fall planting season.

Nancy: Big time other experience in Melrose, we don't want this field to get cleared and then not constructed before winter.

Mr. O'Neill: Right. Looking at that issue, we agree with that. We don't want a dirt field there for our selfish reasons, and it is coupled with your concerns that we have no run-off.

Nancy: As you said it is non-jurisdictional, but if you leave a bare field it becomes jurisdictional if your run-off come into our wetlands.

Mr. O'Neill: So what we are doing right now from prospective of the design we would like to do seeding. If we get into the late season and it looks like seed wouldn't germinate, there is a possibility of switching to sod here.

Nancy: My other comment was I don't know if you are familiar of aerial photographs of the park, but they were all assembled and collected by Fidelity for the work they are proposing on the other side of Main Street. They brought them here and showed them to us. I guess that makes them part of the public record and if you are ever curious about where stuff was dumped during the dumping in that area the photographs would be helpful.

Mr. O'Neill: Nangle Consulting Associates, Trustee's environmental consultant, has done extensive research in the history of the park. It is my understanding that the dumping actually extended to these currently developed areas of the park as well, so I am quite sure they have probably seen the photographs.

Peter: The parking lot with the 32 spaces as I see it, at the far end from the wetland the wetland would be at the other end of the field?

Mr. O'Neill: The wetland actually is what is seen as the red loop?

Peter: So it is close to it? What is the timetable on that?

Mr. O'Neill: It would be in the same time frame. We are seeing the project being completed by probably the end of October, middle of November.

Peter: How many yards is that parking lot from the wetland?

Mr. O'Neill: It is more than 100 ft.

Peter: Is that going to be paved ?

Mr. O'Neill: Yes, with bituminous concrete.

Peter: Curb?

Mr. O'Neill: No curb.

Peter: So it is going to be macadam?

Mr. O'Neill: Bituminous concrete, blacktop, and asphalt.

Paul: And the area between the parking lot and wetlands, there is going to be no further improvement?

Mr. O'Neill: No

Paul: What is the condition of that area right now?

Mr. O'Neill: It is pretty much unmaintained meadow. We have some photos.

Paul: So it is roughly vegetated.

Peter: What is the elevation at the parking spaces and what is the elevation of the wetland?

Mr. O'Neill: Roughly the elevation of the parking is 53 I believe and the elevation of the wetland is probably 0 - 5 ft. below the parking lot. We do have the topo at the office.

Peter: During construction and after construction even cars have been parked, what is the potential for the run-off during the construction, the run-off of chemicals of petroleum products down to the wetland, and even after the project as Dana was starting to point out, just the debris would run down to the extent that it does. Which way is the wind coming? The compass is north here, so the wind is going to be coming out of the southwest mostly, so it should be blowing it by the wetland. Northwest it would blow it into a little bit in the fall, blowing in Dunkin Donuts, wrappers, etc. When everybody goes to see the games they are going to bring their coffee, etc, candy bars, popcorn. The Trustees will decide, but it might be worthwhile to put in a chain link fence to catch it.

Mr. O'Neill: We actually talked about fencing. One consideration we did have is to provide a fence along this edge of the field, the concern being the fact it is used heavily as a dog walk area, so it would try to discourage dogs from getting up on the field.

Nancy: Is that who uses that existing path down into the buffer zone?

Mr. O'Neill: It is a big dog walk here. What you find they get out into this area because it is open, and then a lot of people will take the path that winds up actually almost at Forestdale Cemetery in Malden. There is some consideration being given to fencing. It might be a good suggestion and I will bring it up to the trustees about fencing along that edge of the parking lot.

Paul: Actually, uncurbed and only 32 parking spaces are in an undeveloped kind of sparsely vegetated area. Is that encouraging parking out into the buffer zone?

Mr. O'Neill: You have raised a good point. I think that if it were to stay, currently that area is unmowed and not maintained. It is up pretty high. Certainly it is not the intent for that, but certainly I understand your concern. What we could look at is the option of curbing or potentially berming it. Berm is mountable, but at least it gives a cleaner definition that is the limit of the parking area.

Voted: That we find a negative determination of applicability based on the fact that the work is not proposed in any jurisdictional areas.

Bill: We will forward the paperwork to you.

In the Determination of Applicability form, #4 is acceptable and reads as follows: "The area described in the request is not within an area subject to protection under the act including the buffer zone, therefore said work does not require the filing of a Notice of Intent unless and until said work alters an area subject to protection under the act."

12 Fairway, Mt. Hood

Nancy Naslas: I wanted to mention regarding the 12th Fairway at Mt. Hood, the Alderman approved the budget for the redesign work and they are going to want to come to us with an entirely new Notice of Intent presentation, and since they are on a tight schedule to get that regraded and seeded before the winter, there might be a chance they will ask us to have a special meeting of our commission. Since it is going to be 3 weeks before our next meeting, would the rest of the commissioners be available or amenable, could you meet on the 30th of August? If not, we would have to wait until September 6. Does anyone have an objection to a special meeting on August 30 if we are asked?

There was no objection if they can assure the commission that they can get their materials together and notification done in order to have the hearing. We will not hold even an informational meeting without the notice.

Voted: to close the public hearing.

Terry Waugh, 357 Porter Street, Melrose: I wondered if you people read in last week's paper about the dumping that was in Woburn and all the cancer cases that were found when they were digging out for the MBTA? This is yet another case. I know that the fill at Mt. Hood has to go on and has to get moving, but I think to prevent anything in 20 or 30 years, they really have to be careful and test it properly so that this isn't going to come back and haunt you in 20 years from people in the area or if they start building there and they all start coming down with cancer. This is a second incident in Woburn. I think it is important that you follow through and test on this in Melrose. We were told first of all it was going to be clean dirt. There is no clean dirt up there. It is clay and it stinks. You know that.

Paul: Just for the record, it is not proven that the cancer is associated with the fill.

Terry: It is not proved, but it is kind of a funny situation that in this whole area, all these people got cancer. I don't want to live up there in 20 years. Check to be sure this doesn't happen in 20 years.

Priscilla Hook, Elmcrest Circle: I thought tonight was going to be a meeting for Slayton Road.

Paul: We talked about that earlier in the meeting. They requested a delay in June or July because they needed to talk to Joe Lynch in the Engineering Dept. about the road going up to the back lot and that meeting didn't occur until Tuesday. Part of the results of that meeting Joe Lynch had to consult with the Fire Marshall to see what requirements that had, and apparently all of that wasn't going to come together to have information for a presentation at a meeting today, so they asked for a delay until September.

Priscilla: Has anyone been up there lately?

Paul: Bob was up there and said it was up over the road.

Priscilla: That is where you should fine people, and then you could buy that property. Other towns do it.

Peter: The Alderman would have to give us the bylaws to give fines, and then it has to be approved. Just as a point of information, what would happen with the fine money that we would collect? Do you know that as a statue?

Nancy: There are a lot of sample bylaws in our handbook and I am sure there is discussion with the money that you have involved. I haven't gotten that far in the book.

Peter: Leave any potential suggestions for the next meeting.

Voted: To adjourn at 8:25 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Nancy Pritchard
Secretary