HINGHAM CONSERVATION COMMISSION
August 10, 2009 at 7:00 PM Central Meeting Room North
MEETING MINUTES
Present: Eugene Babin, Chairman, Carolyn Nielsen, Vice-Chair, Daniel Coughlin, Robert Perry,
Charles Berry, Scott McIsaac and Cliff Prentiss, Conservation Officer
Absent: Doug Harvey
Old/New Business
1. Approve 7/13/09 draft minutes
Discussion: Edits were discussed and noted. A copy of edits will be provided to the Conservation staff to make necessary changes and redistribute.
Motion: Commissioner McIsaac motioned to approve the 7/13/09 minutes as amended.
Second: Commissioner Berry In Favor: All Opposed: None
2. 257 South Street – Gift of Land
Discussion: Barbara Shea is making the gift to the town. The Commission signed the acceptance letter.
3. 6 Winfield Road – Dorothy Levin, Trustee
Discussion: The Commission discussed the potential donation of land.
The Commission signed the acceptance letter.
4. 29 Bel Air Road – SE 34 0993 Request for Superseding OOC
Discussion: The DEP will be onsite 8/18/09 as will the Conservation Officer. Several of the members of the Conservation Commission will also attend the site walk with the DEP on 8/18/09.
5. 23 Bel Air Road – SE 34 0996 Request for Superseding OOC
Discussion: The DEP will be onsite 8/18/09 as will the Conservation Officer. Several of the members of the Conservation Commission will also attend the site walk with the DEP on 8/18/09.
6. Engineering Alternatives Analysis – Restoration of Foundry Pond
Discussion: The analysis is available electronically. The Conservation Commission will review the analysis. Once an alternative is chosen the permitting would begin.
7. 7 Howard Road – SE 34 0997
Discussion: Received a Superseding OOC for the pier. Currently there is an enforcement order in regards to the deck and stairs that was built without permit.
The possibility of an appeal was discussed. The Commission concluded that no appeal will be filed.
8. 15 Merrill Street – Currently with a standing enforcement order for the fence that impedes public access to the waterfront.
Discussion: The property is now on the market. The railings that were previously removed due to an enforcement order were reinstalled and is in violation of the standing enforcement. The Conservation staff is directed will to draft a letter to the owner and his attorney indicating that there is now the possibility of a fine for every day in violation. The letter will have a deadline for either removal or payment by 9/14/09. the fine will be imposed.
Requests for Determination of Applicability
1. 24 Coolidge Avenue – Applicant Kenneth Read-Brown
Discussion: Plans for a 7 x 16 foot deck on the back of the house. Plans and photos were reviewed. Per the applicant, the deck would require 3 footings. The deck would be approximately 4 feet above ground level with crushed stone underneath.
The Conservation Officer concurs with the wetlands line. There is no remediation proposed. The commission has previously approved similar proposals with a negative determination and conditions.
Motion: Commissioner Berry motioned to issue a negative order of applicability
Second: Commissioner Nielsen In Favor: All Opposed: None
2. 70 Lazell Street – Applicant Peter Zane / Representative: Brad Holmes, Environmental Consulting & Restoration, LLC
Discussion: Mr. Holmes provided plans to the commission regarding the proposed reconstruction of the existing stonewalls. There will be no new work within the 50’ buffer zone. There is a bordering vegetated wetland. There is a culvert under the driveway for storm water runoff. The existing stone will be used as much as possible in the construction of the new walls.
Commissioner Nielsen asked if Lazell Street is classified as a scenic road. Mr. Holmes will do the research to determine if that is the case.
The Conservation Officer indicated that he could not see where this proposal would have any impact on the wetlands.
Commissioner Nielsen asked if there would be any siltation barriers. Per Mr. Holmes, yes there would be.
Motion: Commissioner Nielsen motioned to issue a negative order of applicability.
Second: Commissioner Berry In Favor: All Opposed: None
Notice of Intent
1. 280 North Street – Town of Hingham Bylaw Notice of Intent dated June 28, 2007 (HCC 2007-1) Applicant: Michael Borgen / Representative: Paul Mirabito – Ross Engineering Company, Inc., Adam Brodsky, Esq.
Presentation: Attorney Brodsky reviewed project timeline beginning with the original NOI submitted in October of 2005 resulting in an Order of Conditions (OOC) denying the project. A subsequent Superseding OOC was issued by MA DEP and was received by the Hingham Conservation Commission March 24, 2007.
Mr. Mirabito presented the proposal for construction of a new single-family dwelling. The bordering vegetated wetlands and the 50 and 100-foot setbacks were identified on the plans. The property is in the FEMA flood zone. Mr. Mirabito described the proposed foundation and compensatory flood storage plans.
Discussion: The Conservation Officer informed the commission that this is the same as the filing received 2 years ago. But the intermittent stream on the property was not mentioned by Mr. Mirabito. In a 100-year event everything in this parcel is inundated. Additionally, the proposed flood storage plans can only be met by removing all vegetation.
The Conservation Officer advised that Mr. Chessia has been given the NOI and is present to provide his finding.
Per Mr. Mirabito, they are not including tree removal to reach their compensatory flood storage. He also stated that the DEP approved the project accordingly.
Mr. Chessia has reviewed the plans under the local by-laws only. Under the Hingham bylaw and regulations the following were noted as items of interest:
• The site is within the towns Watershed and Floodplain Protection Zone thus requiring a zoning permit. At the time of Mr. Chessia’s letter no such permit was requested or obtained
• The property currently does not have any wetland markers.
• There is no detail on the break out panels for the foundation
• How will the water and sewer service location be protected from flood waters and freezing
• The deck encroaches in the 50’ setback
• There is no gas line on the plan and oil is not allowed based on the proximity to the wetlands
• The wetland line indicated on the plans differs from the line as recommended by SITECitec in a letter dated 6/23/05.
• The proposal is for 12,000 sq ft of alteration, which more than doubles the 5,000 sq ft of Bordering Land Subject to Flooding that the commission may approve.
• Mr. Chessia would like details on the spots on the survey used to determine the graphs relative to the tree removal.
• During Mr. Chessia’s site visit he was able to find 2 woodcocks. The Wildlife evaluation does not include these or other burrows found on the property.
Atty. Brodsky offered his comments regarding the above items of interest. Atty. Brodsky will ask for a continuance to allow for the appropriate zoning permit(s). Atty. Brodsky indicated that the SITEC line that was approved by the superseding OOC is good for 3 years bringing them to the year 2010.
The proposed deck will be cantilevered although within the 50’ setback. The applicant/representative indicated that only 2,000 sq ft of alteration will be a result of this proposal. Commissioner Nielsen asked Mr. Chessia to comment on the discrepancy between that and his findings at the next hearing.
The Chairman opened the hearing to the public. One abutter, located behind the subject property, offered his concerns regarding flooding onto his property. He also feels that since no Zoning Permit has been obtained by the applicant the Conservation Commission should deny this request. A letter from his attorney, Galvin and Galvin, was given to the commission during this portion of the meeting. Another abutter was present and commented on the flooding that takes place, under current conditions, on this property and is concerned about the proposed removal of trees. Several other members of the public/abutters were present and voiced their concerns regarding this proposal and potential flooding and clear cutting. The Chairman closed the hearing to the public.
The applicant has requested a continuance to the September 28th meeting.
Motion: Commissioner Coughlin motioned to continue the hearing to 9/28/09.
Second: Commissioner Nielsen In Favor: All Opposed: None
2. Shipyard Drive – No DEP number or comments as of 8/5/09 – Applicant: Jed Lowry, Lennar Hingham Holdings / Representative: Heather Vaillant, BSC Group
Presentation: Scott Turner, BSC Group, presented the plans of Shipyard Drive and the redevelopment of the DCR area to a park. Currently there is concrete, storage and parking. There is currently no storm water management. It is located within 3 resource areas:
• 100’ flood zone /100’ resource area/200’ river front area
A two-phase redevelopment that includes a lighted park with an extension of the river walk, trees, lawn, and monument.
Discussion: The Conservation Officer is eager to see this project get underway.
Commissioner Coughlin inquired about the spill way going down to the water. Per Mr. Turner it will be built up approximately 6 feet. Commissioner Coughlin asked why this parcel is being developed separately from the larger Shipyard redevelopment. Per Mr. Turner, it is owned by DCR.
The Chairman opened the hearing to the public. None. The Chairman closed the hearing to the public.
The Applicant requests a continuance to 9/14/09 awaiting a DEP number and comments.
Motion: Commissioner Perry motioned to continue the hearing to 9/14/09
Second: Commissioner Coughlin In Favor: All Opposed: None
3. 12 Beach Lane – DEP SE 34 1008 – Reopen Public Hearing
Applicant: Vida Veitas / Representative: Rod Gaskell, SITECitec Group.
Commissioner Coughlin has recused himself from this hearing.
Presentation: The prior hearing was closed without giving the required 5-business days notification to abutters. Only new information will be reviewed at this hearing. A planting plan was provided on the new plans. In addition, the 50’ buffer line is now present on the plans as previously requested by the commission.
The Chairman opened the hearing to the public. An abutter from 16 Beach Lane was present and offered their support of the project. The Chairman closed the hearing to the public.
Mr. Gaskell authorizes waiving the 21-day turn around for a decision and will follow up with a written authorization from the applicant.
Motion: Commissioner Berry motioned to close the hearing and a vote will be taken at the 9/14 meeting
Second: Commissioner Nielsen In Favor: All Opposed: None
Commissioner Coughlin Dan rejoined the meeting.
Request for an Amendment to Orders of Conditions
1. 405 Lincoln Street – DEP SE 34 700. Applicants: G.B. New England 2, LLC / Representative: Chris Lucas, Lucas Environmental
Presentation: Amendment to the existing OOC. The property is 2.4 acres adjacent to the shipyard. The site is the former Webber Dodge site. There is existing drainage on the site but the plans are to improve the treatment of the wastewater. The 200’ waterfront boundary was noted on the plans. The proposal is for the demolition of the existing building. A new building is proposed that will be for a CVS. The building footprint is being reduced 38% and increasing the open space.
Discussion: The Conservation Officer reiterated that this is an amendment and feels it is an improvement to the current site conditions. Commissioner Nielsen asked about the possibility of toxins due to the nature of the prior use of the property. A phase I and phase II analysis has been done and will continue to be monitored and addressed during demolition. Because the car dealership was new (4 years old) the impact is likely to be minimal.
The Chairman opened the hearing to the public. None. The Chairman closed the hearing to the public.
The applicant authorizes the delay in issuing the OOC until the 9/14/09 hearing.
Motion: Commissioner Nielsen motioned to close the hearing
Second: Commissioner McIsaac In Favor: All Opposed: None
Order of Conditions
1. 11 Steamboat Lane – DEP SE 34 1006
Applicant: Don Devaney / Representative: Gregory Morse Mackenzie Engineering Group
Presentation: Demolition and reconstruction of a single-family dwelling.
Discussion: The applicant has requested the commission assist them in finding a suitable location for the dumpster. Per the Conservation Officer, because the property is bordered on 2 sides by water it is a reasonable request to have it located within the 50’ buffer. The Conservation Officer indicated that his staff will assist as the project gets underway.
Motion: Commissioner Perry motioned to reissue the OOC with the assistance of the Conservation staff to help place the dumpster(s).
Second: Commissioner Berry In Favor: All Opposed: None
Certificates of Compliance
1. 12 Fulling Mill Lane – DEP SE 34 0942 – Applicant: Gina Vita / Representative: Paul Shea, Independent Environmental Consultants
2. Presentation: Replanting completed
Motion: Commissioner McIsaac motioned to issue the Certificate of Compliance
Second: Commissioner Nielsen In Favor: All Opposed: None
2. 10 Parker Driveway – DEP 32 0823 Applicants: Stuart and Nancy Van Time
Presentation: Completed the repair of the sea wall
The Chairman opened the hearing to the public. None. The Chairman closed the hearing to the public
Motion: Commissioner McIsaac motioned to issue the Certificate of Compliance
Second: Commissioner Nielsen In Favor: All Opposed: None
General Discussion
1. The Chairman reiterated that details of any hearing can not be discussed via email.
2. Commissioner Babin is currently the Conservation Commission representative to the CPC and Waste Water Committee. At the next meeting he will request other members take over those positions.
3. $3500 for inspection of Trip Hammer Dam was approved to come from the Conservation Fund.
Request for Extension
None
Abbreviated Notice of Resource Area Delineation
None
Notice of Intent - Continuance
None
Order of Resource Area Delineation
None
Meeting Adjourned at 9:44 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
_________________________
Cliff Prentiss, Conservation Officer
Approved as amended on 9/14/09.