Printer friendly
TOWN OF OTIS
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
08/20/2019 MEETING MINUTES
Location: Otis Town Hall, One North Main Road, Otis
Conservation Commission Members present: Dave Sarnacki; Jeff Laramy; Roger Meyer; and Bruce Wall.
Conservation Commission Members absent: Domenic Battista
Staff and others present: Kristen Brown OCC Admin Secretary; Bob Mason with MA DCR; Kathy Couch; James Fink; Peter Geller; Chris Tryon with Berkshire Geo-Technology; Matt Puntin with SK Design Group; Jeanne and Dave Donahue with DJ Development; Emily Stockman with Stockman & Associates; Mark DiGrigoli with Fox Homes; Robert Tutnauer; Mark Stinson with MA DEP; Mitchell Chambers.
Opening items/Introduction of Commission members and staff. Dave Sarnacki opened the meeting at 6:00 p.m. He noted that the meeting is being recorded. The deadline for applications for the September 17, 2019 meeting is on Wednesday September 4, 2019 @ 6:00 PM. The next office hours, for the September 17, 2019 meeting, is Wednesday September 4th, from 6:00 –9:00 PM. Dave introduced the members of the commission, Bob Mason with MA DCR, and Mark Stinson with MA DEP, and asked everyone to turn off/down their cell phones for the duration of the meeting.
Minutes: Dave made a motion to approve the minutes from the July 16, 2019 meeting; RM 2nd the motion and the Commission voted unanimously to approve the minutes from the July 16, 2019.
- Public Hearing – RDA – Submitted by Katherine Couch, on behalf of James Fink, 1319 Reservoir Road, map 15 lot 14, regarding the removal of 3 dead trees, replanting of deciduous tree(s); repair & rebuild existing seawall to stop erosion; add 4 stone steps; remove existing boardwalk & replace with stone steps; add a 12’ x 25’ gravel area for grill/tables; level area & replanting of grass, all in the BZ of OR. Dave opened this hearing and made a motion to change the order of business, so that this hearing is heard just prior to the abutting property owners/project; BW 2nd the motion and the Commission voted unanimously to change the order of business for this hearing. Dave reopened this hearing and invited applicants to address the Commission, and overview their project. Mark made some comments about the work being done in the bank area should be an NOI, and the fact that their Chapter 91 license does not currently include the existing seawall. Therefore, when the amnesty license was issued, it should include the seawall, which it currently does not, and will have to be revised and added if they are going to move forward with the boardwalk, stairs and seawall work. Dave took over and clarified that the overall requirement for the type of work requested in the bank area for this project, specifically the boardwalk/steps and the crumbling seawall that will be removed and rebuilt, extending existing footprint, will require the filing of a Notice of Intent (WPA Form 3 NOI). Applicant should get a wetlands consultant to advise them on how to move forward, including getting a survey completed. Mark explained in a brief overview the process of filing an RDA, simply to get the retaining wall added to the Chapter 91 license, as well as filing an NOI to request permission to do the proposed work. Mark detailed the process of replication of wetlands as well.
Dave recommended that applicant withdraw this RDA, so that applicant can figure out what they want to do, and file one application to cover everything. Therefore, the boardwalk, stairs and seawall are being removed from this filing, so that all that is being requested for this RDA is the part I of the filing: removal of dead trees, replanting of deciduous trees, Dave made a motion for a -3 determination with the following conditions: the 2 hemlocks on the water’s edge to be cut with stump flush with the ground, and the maple tree stump will be ground and removed; bio-oil in chainsaw(s) only; debris removed immediately; no heavy equipment in the resource area; OCC reserves the right to inspect the property for 3 years from date of approval. RM 2nd the motion and the Commission voted unanimously to issue a -3 determination with the above conditions.
- Public Hearing – RDA – Submitted by Chris Tryon with BGT, on behalf of Jill Lerner, 7 Chestnut Lane, map 16 lot 4, regarding the removal of trees within the BZ of OR. Dave opened this hearing and invited applicant to address the Commission. Chris Tryon with BGT was in attendance on behalf of applicant. Dave asked the Commission if any questions stemming from the site inspection and per RM, the trees slated for removal were not marked for identification when doing their site inspection. Therefore, Chris Asked for a continuance until our next meeting, to allow for the tree removal piece to be inspected; RM 2nd the motion and the Commission voted unanimously to approve the continuance until the September 17, 2019 meeting.
- Public Hearing – RDA – Submitted by Chris Tryon with BGT, on behalf of Peter Allan, 10 S. Lake Ave., map 18 lot 45, regarding installation of a subsurface disposal system within the BZ of OR. Dave opened this hearing and invited applicants to address the Commission. Chris Tryon with BGT was in attendance on behalf of applicant. Dave indicated that the only question stemming from the site inspection is the location of the erosion controls and/or silt fence will be located. Per Chris, currently a shared well, and since they do not have a deeded right to the well, the abutter is making the new owner dig their own well. Therefore, since this RDA was filed, they have now added a well down closer to the reservoir. Per Dave, we cannot add the well to this filing at this time, as it will need to be inspected, so Dave asked if Chris wanted to withdraw this RDA, and Chris indicated he would rather get the septic on this RDA approved, and they will put in a 2nd RDA for the well. Chris added the erosion control placement to the file plans, and signed the plans for accuracy, per requirement of the Commission. Dave then made a motion for a -3 determination with the following conditions: EC to be installed and inspected prior to work start; no heavy equipment in the resource area; debris to be removed or covered daily; OCC reserves the right to inspect property for 3 years from date of approval. JL 2nd the motion and the Commission voted unanimously to issue a -3 determination with the above conditions.
- Public Hearing – RDA – Submitted by Chris Tryon with BGT, on behalf of Charles Haynes, 1801 S. Main Rd., map 17 lot 29, regarding the installation of a subsurface disposal system within the riverfront area of the Farmington River. Dave opened this hearing and invited applicant to address the Commission. Chris Tryon with BGT was in attendance on behalf of applicant. Dave asked if any question from the site inspection – none. Dave asked Mark Stinson if he had any comments or concerns, and per Mark, since only a tiny corner of this project falls within the 100’, of the 200’ riverfront buffer zone, and that is the only jurisdiction of this Commission, in this hearing. Septic replacements that are outside the 100’, but within the 200’ riverfront buffer, are exempt under the MA DEP WPA. Therefore, and since no issues with this project, Dave made a motion for a -3 determination with the following conditions: Any EC to be installed and inspected prior to work start; All debris to be removed immediately, and not stored on site; No heavy equipment in the resource area; OCC reserves the right to inspect property for 3 years from date of approval. RM 2nd the motion and the Commission voted unanimously to issue a -3 determination with the above conditions.
- Public Hearing – RDA – Submitted by Mitchell S. Chambers, 45 Pine Grove Ridge, map 15D lot 97, regarding the replacement of a laminated support beam due to rot, attached deck and sliding glass doors, all within the BZ of OR. Dave opened this hearing and invited applicant to address the Commission. Mitchell Chambers was in attendance as the property owner. Dave commented that the project is straight forward and there were no questions stemming from the site inspection, in fact, project is borderline on requiring filing. That being said, Dave made a motion for a -3 determination with the following conditions: all cutting and staging to be done outside the BZ and resource area; all debris removed immediately; OCC reserves the right to inspect property for 3 years from date of approval. RM 2nd the motion and the Commission voted unanimously to issue a -3 determination with the above conditions.
- Public Hearing – Request for Amendment of OOC – Submitted by Marc DiGrigoli, on behalf of Sally Laufer, 20 Soucie Lane, map 6 lot 116, regarding the removal of select trees located within close proximity to the proposed (approved) new home, that are diseased or dying and present safety concerns for structure; within the 200’ riverfront area of the west branch of the FR in Otis. Dave opened this hearing and invited applicant to address the Commission. Marc DiGrigoli with Fox Homes was in attendance on behalf of applicant. Marc had explained the amendment required for this OOC/project to the Commission at the July 16, 2019 meeting, where it was agreed upon that applicant should request an amendment to the issued Order of Conditions, in order to add the tree removal requirements to the OOC. With that being done, we now have to wait for MESA to come back with their decision on this amendment. Previously, the project was exempt from MESA review; now that they want to remove trees, they are no longer exempt from MESA review. Therefore, Dave made a motion to continue this hearing until the September 17, 2019 meeting, in order to allow for MESA to provide their response. RM 2nd the motion and the Commission voted unanimously to continue this hearing until the September 17, 2019 meeting.
- Public Hearing – NOI – Continuance from July – Submitted by Sarah Gapinski with SK Design Group, Inc., on behalf of David Donahue with D & J Development LLC, Reservoir Rd., maps 16B/15/16 lots 1 & 3/76-1 & 77/43, regarding the construction of a townhouse development in the BZ of OR, and surrounding BVW. Dave opened this hearing and invited applicants to address the Commission. Dave indicated that he was aware that both the 3rd party reviewers have completed their reviews and that Emily has submit a draft of special conditions. Matt Puntin stepped up and proceeded to overview the last meeting, and the outstanding items in front of the Commission at this time. The first issue is the lack of response from Hill Engineers, who are the 3rd party reviewer on behalf of Otis Concom for the Stormwater Engineering piece of this project, which per Matt has since been resolved, as Hill has submit their recommendations and responses to the project engineers, as required as a 3rd party peer reviewer. Matt stated that the several items that Hill outlined and recommended, SK Design incorporated into their plans/project. One remaining item open with Hill was the need to replace a culvert at discharge point DP3, which SK Design has now also incorporated into their development plan and will replace this culvert as recommended by the 3rd party Stormwater Engineering review. Matt proceeded to explain the exact positioning of the culvert, where it runs, where it daylights and how large it is; in addition, Matt gave a few examples of what happens when we have a storm, and how that stormwater makes it into the lake. The Commission is satisfied with the replacement of the culvert as outlined and recommended. Matt indicated that there is a 2nd culvert that will not be replaced, as it is in good repair. Bruce questioned if in fact these culverts are large enough to handle the increased output in the event of a heavy storm, and after project, when a large disturbance of land will increase output. Bruce admits he is no expert on engineering this piece, he simply looks at the culvert in question as wonders if the pipe is large enough to handle the potential heavy stormwater. Matt stated that he is happy to go over the actual engineering if the Commission would like, but he feels that we already touched on this last meeting in his overview, and Hill Engineers has already stated that they recommend the replacement of the culvert, not the increase of the pipe, and this is their business and our representative, who have followed the guidelines and requirements for this engineering. Dave stated that he does not feel we need to revisit the actual engineering, since Hill is indeed the Commission’s rep, and they are OK with the plans as recommended. Moving forward, Matt outlined Emily’s special conditions, which are very many, so we will only outline the ones in which there are issues. Matt started with the ones with which they are concerned: number 31, SWIP Plan (Stormwater Prevention Improvement Plan) to be reviewed and approved by the Commission – goes through the EPA for approval; the Commission would like to have a copy of this for their file, and Emily agreed that this should be a condition. Moving on, Matt addressed conditions 42, 43 and 44, and as they pertain to buffer zone work – he clarified that these conditions have to do with slopes, identified as moderate, steep or extremely steep, and within the 25’ boundary of the bank or BVW. What they did is focus on what work is within 25’ of the wetlands, and they highlighted an area in yellow that is the 25’ BZ. He noted that some areas are flat and some are steeper, and he said that they could make some tweaks and maintain that 25’ BZ for the consideration of the slopes, however he would like further clarification on this with the Commission, via Emily, to make sure it is fully understood before agreed upon/implemented. Per Emily, she explained the regulation 10:53:1 (steepness and proximity), with regard to steeper slopes, and with work within 25’. With some back and forth discussion, and clarification (since there was some misunderstanding as to whether the Commission was going to require this 25’ boundary in the stepper areas, or not), it was ultimately agreed that the Commission would require applicant to observe the 25’ boundary. Matt states he is fairly confident that they will be able to observe the 25’ boundary in proximity of the steep slope area, which is really just areas with grades above 20% in steepness. Bottom line, Matt believes that they can meet conditions 42, 43 and 44. Therefore, Dave made a motion to set the standard at 25’, in the slope areas over 10% grade; RM 2nd the motion and the Commission voted 4 to 1 in favor to accept 25’ for the boundary for special conditions 42, 43 and 44. The Commission took a 5 minute break, and will move on upon return. Moving on, Matt noted that with regard to special condition 45, they are suggesting a slight modification with regard to the monitoring, that they change it to at least 10 days prior to start of work, compliance monitor be provided to the Commission – similar to condition 46 (at least 10 days of work start). In asking Emily if she is OK with that, she does not see any issue. Dave made a motion to modify these conditions as outlined; BW 2nd the motion and the Commission voted unanimously to modify the special conditions 45 & 46 as outlined above. Next question is on (45) the frequency of compliance monitoring to the Commission, and the standard is currently set at daily; applicant recommends weekly. Dave made a motion to make the standard for compliance monitoring reports to weekly instead of daily; BW 2nd the motion and the Commission voted unanimously to change the reporting from daily to weekly. The wetlands scientist reports are for when you are doing replication, and these reports should also be copied to the Commission. Applicant accepts the remaining conditions, and modified conditions as outlined above. Since everything has been addressed and fine-tuned, Dave made a motion to approve and issue an Order of Conditions with the standard conditions and the special conditions as outlined and submit; BW 2nd the motion and the Commission voted unanimously to approve and issue an Order of Conditions with standard and special conditions as outlined above.
OTHER BUSINESS:
Enforcement Orders/Letters:
- 408 Hayes Pond Road – Observation by a Commissioner, of extensive, unauthorized cutting, done in the BZ of Hayes Pond in Otis. Dave opened this hearing and invited property owner to address the Commission. No one was in attendance, so Dave made a motion to first ratify the Enforcement Order, and second to continue this hearing until the next meeting in September 2019; RM 2nd the motion and the Commission voted unanimously to ratify the EO, and to continue this hearing until the next meeting in September 2019. Dave also noted that KB will follow up with property owner to make sure that they are aware of the need to attend the next meeting.
- 61/67 North Gate Island Road – A fire pit, which was removed by applicant per demand by MA DCR in 2017, has shown up yet again, in the BZ of Otis Reservoir, and on MA DCR state land, as observed by a commissioner and MA DCR agent. Dave opened this hearing and invited applicant to address the Commission. Per KBB, property owner has abided by the Enforcement Order, and has removed the fire-pit from within the buffer zone of Otis Reservoir, and on state land. Bob Mason inspected the property and concurs that the fire-pit was removed. Applicant emailed to state that she was unable to attend the meeting this evening, but hoped that by removing the fire-pit, she is back in compliance. Dave made a motion to ratify this Enforcement Order; RM 2nd the motion and the Commission voted unanimously to ratify the Enforcement Order. Per Dave, the ratified EO will be added to the property file for future reference, since this was a repeated offense.
Emergency Certifications:
Forest Cutting Plan
Certificate of Compliance Requests:
- Public Hearing – Request for COC – Submitted by SK Design, on behalf of D & J Development LLC, Reservoir Road, map 15/15/16B/16/16/16 lot 76/77/1/38/40/43, regarding closing out the previously issued OOC, so that the new NOI hearing can be closed and OOC can be issued, when approved. Old OOC is under DEP file 254-0287. Dave first made a motion to change the order of business to hear this filing prior to the NOI submitted by the same. Dave proceeded to open this hearing and since applicants are here for another matter, they are here for this hearing as well. Dave made a motion to issue a complete COC for this project, with a note to *see Attached letter from SK Design, in order to get this open OOC closed out, so that the new Order of Conditions can be issued for the same property, different project, delineation and boundaries. RM 2nd the motion and the Commission voted unanimously to issue a complete COC to close this previous OOC completely.
- Public Hearing – Request for COC – Submitted by Alicia & Gary Belanger, 20 Pine Road Ext., map 17C lot 94, regarding the repair to seawall, stairs and dock area, condition under approved OOC 254-0406. Dave recused himself from this hearing as an abutter to the property. Jeff opened this hearing and invited applicants to address the Commissions. No one in attendance for this hearing and there was one question stemming from the site inspection, on the location of the original seawall. Therefore, since applicant not here to answer, Jeff made a motion to continue this hearing until the September 17, 2019 meeting. RM 2nd the motion and the Commission voted unanimously to continue this hearing until the September 17, 2019 meeting.
- Public Hearing – Request for COC – Submitted by Alicia & Gary Belanger, 20 Pine Road Ext., map 17C lot 94, regarding the return of resource area to original condition by removing an installed secondary stone wall, condition under approved OOC 254-0415. Dave recused himself from this hearing as the abutter to the applicant. Jeff opened this hearing and invited applicant to address the Commission. Non one in attendance, however, there were no questions stemming from the site inspection for this project, therefore, Jeff made a motion to approve and issue a COC for this project. BW 2nd the motion and the Commission voted unanimously to approve and issue a COC for this project.
Unanticipated Business:
- Robert Tutnauer, 57 Hayes Pond Road, regarding discussion of natural vegetation clogging the beach at Hayes Pond. Applicant had to leave early, so he will reach back out to the Commission when he has time.
- Request for review with Otis Concom: Peter Geller, new VP Otis Woodlands Club, Inc., regarding preventative maintenance work on steel dam, Owl Lake. Peter Geller was in attendance to speak with the Commission with regard to the adjustment to annual the draw down schedule, to allow for maintenance work to be done on the dam, allowed by OCC in the winter of 2018/2019. However, due to the weather, they were unable to get the required maintenance done before the draw down ended, and Owl Lake began to refill. Therefore, Peter would like permission from this Commission to do the dam maintenance this year when draw down commences on October 15th, instead of November 15th, so that they can get the required work done before the snow flies. Dave asked the Commission if they had any issues with this – none being stated, Dave made a motion to allow OWL Lake to do their dam maintenance repairs when draw down commences this year on October 15th, instead of November 15th; BW 2nd the motion and the Commission voted unanimously to allow OWL Lake to commence draw-down this year on October 15th, instead of November 15th, to allow for maintenance on the dam prior to winter setting in.
Next office hours: Wednesday, September 4, 2019 from 6-9 p.m. at Otis Town Hall.
Next meeting: Tuesday, September 17, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. at Otis Town Hall. Meeting adjourned at 8:32 PM.