Salisbury Conservation Commission

Meeting Minutes

March 17, 2004

Members Present: Iora Alexander, Rick Whaley, Patricia Fowler, Jane Purinton and Kevin Avery

Members Absent: Thomas Hughes

No members present from 6:30 P.M. to 7:00 P.M. - no early meeting.

Meeting Opened at 7:10 P.M.

Building Permits:

Request to sign building permits for 111 Beach Road Estates

Motion by KA to sign building permits. Seconded by IA. Unanimous

Order of Conditions for the entire development must be verified before building permits can be given to applicant.

Representative Jim Babbin made request to have building permit signed for Ray Grasso, 25 Forest Road.

Motion by KA to have RW sign permit but hold until it is verified that MR is paid for consultant fees.

Public Hearing: NOI, Wayne Downs, 115-121 Bridge Road – Request by Jim Babbin to have public hearing continued to April 7, 2004. Reason for request is so the board could see planting plan. Motion by PF to continue to 4/7/2004 and have MR view plans for comments. Seconded by RW for discussion. Vote in favor – PF, JP, IA with KA abstaining.

Request by Ron Laffely to sign building permit for 21 Atlantic Avenue. Motion by KA to sign. Seconded by IA. Unanimous.

Public Hearing, NOI, Highfields Realty, 148 Lafayette Road

Status report by Jeff Roloffs

Conclusion by State – co adverse impact to public. Four samples taken included PAH above standard.

Pearson with respect to the grading plan – instead of more fill would like to just regrade what is out there. Submit revised grading plan at the next conservation Commission meeting- at the next hearing. PAH – DEP sets guideline on the results of testing. PAH is Parte Aromatic Hydro Carbons that are in the soil. Jeff Roloffs said town hired consultant to report back. RW asked looks as though you are trying to get feeling from the board about regrading. RW said MR has been out there and maybe this is good argument to have MR look at plan. KA still needs to bring fill to top dress there. KA seem so because there is so much concrete out there – there are pieces of concrete. IA said there was debris out there. JR said that has been proven to be not true. With respect to debris – there was one piece of debris with asbestos. Field investigation proved not to have building debris. KA we wouldn’t want to leave this totally up to MR? RW said no just need her input. KA said if there is a reason or you have inclination. RW said inclination to just go with what we originally decided. JR – said he would like to withdraw request. KA made a motion to continue to 4/7/2004 at 7:15 P.M. Seconded by IA. Pf do we want it sent to MR? RW – yes. Unanimous.

Public Hearing: NOI, Albert Johnson, 46 Toll Road Extension

Representative said that originally walked through where project sits. RW said that procedurally board needs to have you tell about project now we have enough members. Engineer revised plan. 1) Pulled back corner of parking spaces to stay out of 40 foot no build. 2) Removed retaining wall. Talked about running hard pipe during discussion but hard pipe cannot be done legally because of Title V no pipes within 10 feet of septic system. Swale is working. Swale is much better for wetland. JP asked why you are so sure the swale will work. Ans. Engineer sized it for 100 year storm. The temporary swale has continued to work fine. IA we had asked about a performance bond, trees and swale. Engineer said the concrete wall would minimize the planting of trees. Engineer said the position on this is we have responded to issues, J. Serwatka reviewed. Albert Johnson said he had good tenants – the existing building is not going away.

Abutter – D. Phillips presented pictures showing drainage on property. Explained where drainage had been before. Outlet pipe if over 10 year event – water on property that she never had before. Never had water draining on her property before. DP quoted Salisbury Wetland Bylaws – 1.04 and definitions B.E.H. Abutter M. Burgess said she was disturbed last week when Mr. Li said Con. Comm. did not have jurisdiction. RW said B is change, E is fill or removal of material, and H is trees.

DP said there is an alteration to the way water drains onto property. DP not sure if she is reading bylaw correctly. MB asked how are the construction trucks going to get onto her property line. RW asked are they doing this in the swale? MB said do not know how they can do this. AJ said doing work from up above. DP do not know how what Mr. Johnson is going to do about trash pick up. Have taken pictures. Mr. Johnson said he picked up two buckets of trash. DD has hired a maintenance man to pick up twice a week. AJ said the spot where water is draining onto her property is the lowest spot, Engineer – regarding alteration – what we have done is only a temp solution beause that is why we fikled NOI. DP asked when do you intend to file with MaHighway? Engineer said they have to wait for local permits. MB said spoke to Mr. Chandler and he said they are not working with MaHighway for detention basin area. AJ said AJH is going to bring in doctors and staff. RW said we do not want to go there. RW – ground water and recharge area and detention basins. Engineer said we need local approval before we can apply to MA Highway for detention basin – ground water recharge area. Swale if for 100 year event. RW said original plan – no effect on anyone – they have Title V issues – would make one think the overall plan was not thought through. JP said well designed swale will handle – water will flow to wetland – vegetation that now exists will not die. Engineer said historically water has flowed to wetland. IA decrease in water? IA said if we go through with this how are you going to say or know if water is increased or decreased? Engineer said just the shape of the wetlands and you can tell that water did historically drain onto property. JP said the project is done but we now have to deal with wetlands and drainage issues. DP said that she and MB were told repeatedly that they would get less water. Engineer said plan was designed to good engineering practices. KA said right fro the get=go something was different – neighbor is now up to calves in water. JP is impervious surface graded correctly? RW – dealing with concern about berm and recharging water – close to lot line – to what extent could we look at membrane around side of swale. Dig down and put in membrane. Season high water tables are high. RW said recharging water might it add more water to discharge? Engineer said no more water coming through now. RW – performance bond. AJ put that into the Order of Conditions. JP said to MB – your leaching field may already be permanently damaged. MB said she has had to hire someone to come in to check. JP being a good neighbor - Con. Comm. issues aside. AJ said your engineer said it would work. IA said yes but didn’t you have an engineer look at it? KA said go get the State approval for the berm and detention area. Engineer said they are trying to implement solution. KA if you do not get Mass Highway approval I do not think it will work. RW said more information is needed. JP said KA does not believe plan will work if you do not have their (State) approval. IA said that together with bond and trees and detention area. IA to KA do you have a problem with that? KA thinks before you come to board you should have approval. RW approve contingent upon approval of Mass Highway. JP do you have a problem with that? KA motion change – local board concern – approve plan contingent on Mass Highways approval of retention area and this must be in writing to the board from Mass Highway. Need bond and mature trees replaced. Performance bond with regards to whether or not draining effectively – and use bond to make draining effective.

(Original 12/5/2003) Vote JP, KA, and IA in favor. PF abstained.

Public Hearing: NOI, Robert Palmisano, 406 North End Boulevard

Represented by Ron Laffely of Fulcrum Engineering

Presented new revised plan for the file. Presented plan to the board. MR walked site and made suggested changes – retaining wall to grade. Leaving existing apron. Under parking area where cars will be parked – came up with solution – pea stone finish on top of parking area, membrane under. Regarding Building Code wants impervious so that you an see any oil leaks etc. Board walk being deleted from project – beach door moved to side. Proposed walkway deleted. Under special condition – MR recommended project approval. Post construction. IA as far as reporting – asked about renting – not rented on a weekly basis is it? Abutter asked that under condo agreement – is it going to be marketed as owner occupied. Abutter – maintenance issue? RL said you will see a great improvement. Abutter – water issues? RL said water from roof coming down in middle of building. Area will be grassed dune in a couple of years. Abutter – asked about north and south of building. Abutter asked if board addressed trash removal during construction? RL said any building for demolition has to be cleared first. They go in and poison building so that everything in building comes out. RW interjected that debris control fabric is called Maraffi. Abutter requested a copy of MR’s report and asked why the Public Hearing was continued form last meeting?

Motion by IA to approve plan fro 406 North End Blvd with special conditions from MR – taking into account MR issues. Seconded by JP. Unanimous. (Original 2/18/2004)

Public Hearing: NOI, Katherine Gagnon,291 North End Boulevard

Applicant not present.

Motion to continue by JP. Seconded by IA. Unanimous. (Original 1/7/204)

Public Hearing: ANRAD, Myrna Davis, 54 Beach Road Represented by Mr. Seekamp

Mr. Seekamp explained plan. Previously walked with some Conservation Commission members in 1998. Here to get approval of wetland delineation. Pictures presented – things have changed a lot – beavers have moved in – trees, shrubs very thick growth, some beavers have taken down to build dam. Beaver deceiver put in to prevent damming of water. Does not meet State criteria fro being perennial stream. IA when was this flagged? Mr. Seekamp said 12/2003 flagged once in 1998 and reflagged site in fall of 2003. IA fact the beavers have dam and made changes. IA said have driven by and property is pretty wet. JP said on page 2 – beaver activity has caused changes. PF said think maybe if pipe wasn’t in place – would there be more wetlands in that area? Mr. Seekamp said he understood in 1978 time frame Joe Fanaras got an Order of Conditions for that area. PF said it is very wet – go up to knees in mud. KA said obviously we need to have MR review property. Abutter – Mr. Presented letter from DEP dated 1989. Beavers joined residents in 1997. Mr. Seekamp - said I do not deny that beavers do alter hydrology. KA should a portion of the adjacent property be flagged for us to make decision. Mr. Seekamp said there is a buffer zone on each. KA asked how many acres are there? Mr. Seekamp said 10.7 acres. Abutter – you saying there is no water there? You must have missed spring of 2003. Abutter said it is a venial pool. Vernal pool. RW said something MR should look at. RW explained.

Abutter – Linda Tuxbury – drought – how can they say there will not be much water? PF said not necessarily the amount of water but the plants that grow in the area are indication of land being wetlands. KA said species of plants do not change much. RW said how about letting the wetland engineer address issue. Mr. Seekamp – said Wetlands Scientist. Beaver damming – Mr. Seekamp said we can go out there anytime. KA made motion to have MR look at and check wetland flagging – request applicant pay consultant – MR. Seconded by IA. Unanimous. Continued to 4/7/2004.

NEW BUSINESS

Dan Wilson, 82-84 Elm Street, Enforcement Order

Mr. Wilson came to Chairman prior to meeting saying that Mr. Serwatka had sent and e-mail to RW today. Mr. Wilson game letter from engineer. IA made a motion to give RW authority to lift Enforcement Order provided that Mr. Serwatka gets in touch with him saying everything is O.K.

Richard Monahan, 479 North End Boulevard, Enforcement Order

Request continuance.

Raymond E. Begin, Regarding 4 Forest Road

Mr. Begin said there are 400 to 500 greater than 6 inch trees. Part that is going back to Conservation Commission is wetland – part to develop. PF said she remembered it well and it is a sensitive area, do not want to see someone go in and cut it up. KA said not going to make Mr. Begin put back 400 trees provided he cuts with discretion.

Letter from Harold Nabhan requesting Immediate Emergence Repair. RW do we want to put a condition on request. RW put down some kind of track that would have to be removed when done. All debris removed and taken out of town.

IA motion to approve emergency repair.

Seconded by JP. Unanimous

Motion to adjourn meeting by IA.

Seconded by JP. Unanimous.

Respectfully,

L. Wood

Approved Date: