|
|
|
|
|
Minutes of September 21, 2000[Approved 10/5/00] Present: Bob Boisselle, Bill Dailey, Paul Locke, Nancy Naslas, Bruce Rider Voted: To accept the minutes of 9-7-00. 4 Hemenway Ave./William Rose Correspondence from George E. Richardson, Attorney at Law. This was addressed to Elizabeth Sabounjian at the Wetland & Waterways Program at the NE Regional Office in Wilmington. Re: Melrose File #217-107 and was written as follows:
Bob: The road is gone. It is just dirt at this point. There are no dams, buffers, etc. Paul: Are there any hay bales? Bob: I have not seen the site. This came in today. I am hoping that there is some protection somewhere along the line, especially at the far end where you get towards the wetlands area and the stream area. I will take a look over the weekend and see what is going on. Nancy: Are public works projects exempt? Bob: No public works projects are exempt. The project are exempt from fees. Nancy: So it sounds like the work that is being done is within buffer zones. Bob: Buffer zones towards the end of Hemenway Ave. I would say. At the upper portion we may be just at the edge of buffer zone. I have to pull some of the plans and have a look at it. Paul: Isn't the stream on the Rose property where the stream is? Bob: Yes, that is what I am saying, the other end of Hemenway. Nancy: What about in between the house across the street from the Rose's and the house they put the pool in where the swale was supposed to be. Is that one 100 ft.? Bob: That might be just at the edge of the buffer zone. Paul: When we did the pool, I think the buffer zone didn't quite make it to the street. Bob: But at the far end of Hemenway, definitely we have got the stream that goes right through it and the swamp is within 100 ft. of the waterway. Bruce: The little berm that they claim was in the road is in the buffer zone. Bob: The edge of the buffer zone comes to it at that point and that doesn't exist any more. I will give Joe Lynch a call tomorrow and find out what protection is going on. Nancy: They are bound to be within the buffer zone. Bob: Oh yes, part of the road is within the buffer zone. Nancy: Because they will be within 100 ft. of the stream just by being up the street from it. If that is the case and they have already started work.... Paul: Then we need a cease and desist order. Nancy: Isn't that what our course of action is required under the Wetlands Protection Act. Bob: My question comes up at this point do we have actual jurisdiction with the superceding orders from DEP. I am always assuming the locals have the jurisdiction in comparison with the state. Bill: It seems to me that is the first part of his letter where he was complaining about Mr. Senier. Paul: The city is doing work under that order of conditions. Bill: Right, on that score his complaint might be with the DEP. It sounds like the road work is going to subsume if Mr. Senier did, or has done, or will do anyway. They are going to include that portion in their repaving. The city's work would be as if a neighbor went in and undid what Senior did, it would be a whole new order of conditions necessary to review. Has there been any discussion from city or do they perhaps conclude they don't think they are in a buffer zone? Bob: I have no idea. Nancy: I remember their putting out a public notice on that a while back. I was expecting to get a notice from them before they proceeded with the work. I thought it was a bit presumptuous of them just to ask for bidders to do the work. Bob: There were some hearings concerning the street last year I believe. You always have to go through the aldermen. There is always a concern on who will pay for the improvements. Bill: There is surely no problem with them doing what they did up to that point. If they are in a buffer zone or might be, they just can't start any work there without coming to us. They can get all the business they want and they can have all the prior hearings.... Bob: By the time of the bidding operation, they have actually torn up the street, that is what I have been told. I will call the Engineering Dept. tomorrow. If the roadway is only up to the end of Rose's property and the individual is going to construct a road from his portion to the new portion.... Paul: The buffer zone would be 100 ft. down the road toward the intersection, so that takes up a large chunk of that site. Bob: I will have to get a better picture of what is going on. Nancy: If that is the case, if it looks like they are contingent on a buffer zone to that resource area, then we could issue a cease and desist for all work within that buffer zone, but at the same time they should take measures to protect that resource area with silt fences and hay bales until it has been torn up. Bob: Now if with the discussion with the Engineering Dept. tomorrow indicates that they do have hay bales and silt fences up there, do we still issue a cease and desist order. Bill: Yes, because they haven't had an order of conditions, we haven't approved where they have the bales. We have nothing by which to say that you complied with at the end. Bruce If we don't do anything now, we are going to set a precedent. Ecological InventoryMass Audubon Society
Ell Pond Restoration Citizens Committee: State funding allocation and action priorities for Ell Pond.
Bob: Did anyone read today's Free Press regarding Nikita, a German Shepherd which chases geese and the city is renting out this dog @ $700 once a week, for four weeks to chase geese away from the soccer field at Ell Pond and the Gazebo area. By the way, at our last meeting we discussed ways of controlling geese. Corresondence - 2000-2001 How We Live - A Civic Initiative for a Livable New England: This is a call for participation and proposals. Looking for new ideas to solve a difficult planning or designing in your community? The Civic Initiative for a Livable New England, organized by the Boston Society of Architects, Environmental Protection Agency and the Mass Chapter of the American Planning Association is looking for real life planning challenges. As an example for teams of citizens, planners advantaged to work on a reasonable planning charette to be held in April 2001. There will be a number of workshops in February and March of next year. Correspondence - MACC Newsletter - October 21 - Northeastern University in Burlington for the MACC Fall Conference. This is on guiding public projects. It was interesting on the front page where it says a quorum of commission should approve order of conditions. It involves a planning board rather than the conservation commission on a Nantucket case. The decision applies quite well to the Wetlands Protection Act. The court said that since the subdivision statutes, like the Wetlands Protection Act, requires that a majority of the board sign an approval and the legislature must have intended a majority of the board to vote in favor, not merely a majority of a quorum of the board. The statutes are distinguishable, but unless and until the appeals court or the SJC rules otherwise, MACC advises a valid vote must be carried by a majority of the commission when needed. This changes the advice they have previously given about the number of commissioners needed. We note, however, that the court acknowledged that in the absence of wording the governing statures, a majority of a quorum would have been adequate. Most disputes will ultimately be handled by an appeal to DEP which here is appealed to de novo thus sweeping away any procedural defects. When in doubt, therefore, MACC recommends that commissions go ahead and vote to make their views known. Bob: We have 7 members. A majority for a vote will have to be 4. Bob: We have a conference coming up on October 16, "Solving Human/Beaver Complex", a technical workshop in Ipswich. The workshop is specifically designed to provide conservation commissioners, local health boards and highway departments with the necessary information to successfully manage conflicts that arise between people and beavers due to road and property flooding and tree destruction. We will sponsor an individual that is interested in going. Correspondence - Storm Water and Erosion Control in Construction & Development - Randolph - November 1, a workshop and trade show, commencing 8 a.m. This is a new EPA face to storm water regulations and state's storm water guided through reaching out and covering expanding universal activities. Learn more about the new regulations and how they will effect your work, your presentations on water policy protection, tools and techniques with roadways, urbanized areas and construction sites and meet with the manufacturers and suppliers of storm water and control products which can help you meet these new mandates. We will sponsor anyone who is interested in attending. Notice of Intent for Mt. Hood Golf Course - projected project and what the filling area will look like and also tee 12. These improvements will include clearing, grading and filling to accommodate new sports field and relocate fairways on the golf course. The project will improve the existing access roads through the golf course and will also serve as a primary access route to the playing fields. The majority of the work is located in uplands, however 2,225 sq. ft. of the buffer zone will be altered to accommodate that this proposed work the term altered. These improvements will cover areas in the northeast region of the Mt. Hood Golf Course and these fields are scheduled to be constructed in the year 2000 and 2001. All work will be performed outside of the resource area, however some work will take place within 100 ft. buffer zone. Erosion and sedimentation control barriers will be placed at the limits of the work within 100 ft. resource area. The following sections address the existing site condition. Bob: I was out there and Nancy Naslas was out there. This is water hole 1, this is water hole 2. This is what water hole looks like now and this is the embankment of water hole 1. I have talked to the Engineering Office and to the Parks Dept. about the contamination and siltation in both water holes. The hay bales were there today and water hole 2 is well protected. A question of concern at the last meeting was the laying of the barriers on the property. From what I understand there were plastic rolls which are put on the roadway that you have here and there is silt and rocks and dirt put on top of that to solidify the road, so as the trucks are moving through the roadway, the road isn't shifting. Nancy: It is more of a fabric than plastic. It is permeable, coarse fabric that stabilizes the road bed in its lift and then when they take out their temporary road, they actually salvage that fabric. They scrape off the rocks and dirt and they pick it right up and use it again according to the foreman. Bob: If your are looking from the tower that we have up here, looking down here with the waterway on your left hand side, there is a road that goes around here and it spurs out into this area here, onto tee 12. There is a 200 ft. mountain of dirt sitting at the edge, and this is what it looks like from the top of that hill, and near the pathway at the bottom of the hill is one little row of hay bales, with probably 60 ft. to the base of this 200 ft. hill, it is just sitting there at the moment. Standing at the top of the ledge, the earth just sort of moves away from you. From what I understand there is going to be 14 ft. of dirt put onto the fairway that is there now. They are going to raise it 14 ft. Nancy: It looks like these are all their new contours line. Bob: That is possible, yes.
Nancy: So they have changed the contours. Bob: When we were supplied, this is the area of work that they were looking at. Nancy: That was originally proposed? Bob: Yes, but they have gone now. If you cross over the roadway, there is a hill there going up 219 ft., that is the peak. They are going to take that hill and bring it down to 201, they are going to take 19 ft. off that hill, flatten it, and extend the play area. I would say to the second spur, as you come up the roadway there is a spur up here where I guess the trucks were backing into to get out. From right now it looks as though the fill is right up to this point here and all the top of this hill is going to come out and be flat. Nancy: So this is 230 as proposed, and they are going to bring this up to 200. So meanwhile they have submitted a notice of intent to us? Would they like to present at our next meeting? Bob: If that is the wish of the group here, if I can get a majority for it. Nancy: Do we have enough time for public notice? Bob: Yes. Nancy: And are they currently doing anything close enough to be impinging on this buffer zone yet? Bob: They are doing nothing except dumping this particular area, and I think over here they are doing something too because right now the spur goes this way, and over here is sort of a side road they are starting to create, and they are dumping up in this area. Paul: What is this blue line?
Nancy: Is that their proposed drainage? Bob: It is a possibility. Nancy: You might want to suggest to them to provide us a clearer plan that shows all work areas relative to our concerns because this is kind of misleading. They are going to be grading right up to the edge of this wetland. Paul: Well that is what they are saying, that they are doing work in the buffer zone. Bob: They are going to be altering the buffer zone. Nancy: It looks like they have flags on these wetlands already. Bob: One of the aldermen mentioned tonight that we have orange flags up there. I said no, it is probably one of the contractors for this project. Bob: It looks as though they are going to start as soon as the golf season closes. Nancy: We will get a full presentation from them when we do hold a public hearing. Bob: Would anyone like to take a package home? Nancy and Bill took packages home. Roosevelt Elementary School - they submitted the plans to us and want to know if there is anything that we want them to put on the map. They write: "90% of completion of set of plans of the Roosevelt School are for your review. To acknowledge receipt of this plan would you please sign the attached copy to return to me for my records. In order to keep track with design bid schedule, I need to have your mark ups or written comments on the plans returned to the Office of Planning September 21, 2000." Bob: We had a negative determination with the recommendation towards the far end of of the plan a hay bale area to protect that lower portion where it crosses under the road. Nancy: And also to confirm that post project flood storage capacity is the same as pre-project flood storage capacity. Paul: Which is not clear from that. Bob: Also, it bothers me that they talked about the underground cisterns, which doesn't show at all on any of the maps, except for a new drainage area. Paul: It is an infiltration area, 3 or 4 in. of perforated pipe are set in crushed stone, bottomless stone at elevation 29.5. Bruce: It is basically infiltration fill. Bob: My question is: is that coming from these holding basins? It doesn't show where it is coming from. There is this black line that comes to this point over here to nowhere. If that is the catch basin for the parking lot, where are these underground basins. Paul: It doesn't look like they have them any more. Nancy: Why don't we send them back their memo with a letter, saying we are looking for hay bale locations as was stated when we provided them with a negative determination of applicability. Our concerns then still apply. The requirement was to show that the post project is the same as the pre-project, same as or better. Ask them to tell us that is the case or give us the numbers. Bill: If they changed from the original design in terms of flood storage capacity, what changes were made and how did they compensate? Bob: Is there a comment in the field area? Paul: Yes, it appears that they are replacing the water main. The reason that they had said they couldn't lower the fields before is where they encountered the water main. The note says that they are replacing this 20 in. main to provide a minimum of 4 ft. cover within this area. Just like we said, it appears that the field is lowered about 2 ft. They are replacing the water main and they are probably putting them deeper so they can maintain that 4 ft. Nancy: I think we should require some reassurance from the project engineer that the flood storage capacity has remained the same or improved. Our determination of applicability was based on a different set of plans. Rather than reapply with a new set of plans, if they could just provide those confirming engineering calculations and details. You will take care of that letter, Bob? Bob: Yes Bob: The middle school plans are coming along. There is a little wetlands next to the middle school. Paul: The wetlands that turn into the little stream by the football field. Bob: The building comes awful close, right at the edge of it. They redesigned the parking lot. There are two or three versions of it, but they haven't finalized it yet, but the circular or half moon has now shrunk in size and there is a new parking lot where the playing field is with a small field next to it. The lower basement is abandoned, except the new utilities will be installed there. It is coming along. I would expect something within the next three or four months, probably sometime in early January. Dunkin Donuts - Fellsway - they have no permits anywhere. They knocked down the building. They are ready to build and the building department will not issue them a permit until they get the flood plane issue out of the question. So they will be submitting a notice of intent at the next meeting for the construction of a Dunkin Donuts.
Bruce: Did anybody certify that area as being contaminated yet? Paul: I haven't looked at the file, but according to the data base it has been closed out. Nancy: So they will be giving us a notice of intent after which we will advertise as a public hearing. Voted: to close the meeting at 8:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Nancy Pritchard |
|
|
|