TOWN OF BURLINGTON Conservation Commission

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "TOWN OF BURLINGTON Conservation Commission"

Elfrieda Kelly
5 years ago
Views:

TOWN OF BURLINGTON Conservation Commission MINUTES OF Approved October 13, 2016 Members Present: Members Absent: Also Present: Chair L. Cohen, Vice-Chair W. Boivin, K. Melanson, A. McNamara J.

1 TOWN OF BURLINGTON Conservation Commission MINUTES OF Approved October 13, 2016 Members Present: Members Absent: Also Present: Chair L. Cohen, Vice-Chair W. Boivin, K. Melanson, A. McNamara J. Lynch, G. Lima, I. Deb Conservation Administrator J. Keeley, Assistant Conservation Administrator H. Charles Lis 1. Call to Order L. Cohen called the meeting to order at 7:02 pm. 2. Citizens Time No one spoke. 3. Approval of Minutes June 23, 2016 Conservation Commission tabled the approval of minutes to the meeting of August 11, Informal Discussion Proposed Local Initiative Project (LIP) under M.G.L. Chapter 40B at the Center at Corporate Drive Robert Buckley Attorney Robert Buckley of Riemer and Braunstein, LLP and developer Christopher Chandor, Jr. of The Davis Company presented. Mr. Buckley explained next week this applicant would be filing a Notice of Intent for Corporate Drive. As part of the 40B process, the applicant will request some relief from the Conservation Commission regulations. The applicant plans to build multi-family housing targeted towards senior affordable housing. At the end of the project, there will be some protected areas with restricted access. The Conservation Commission discussed: Applicant must obey the regulations, even with a friendly 40B The local and state regulations the applicant will need a waiver from:

2 2 o There is no waiver of the state Wetlands Protection Act, which is administered by the Conservation Commission o Local waiver will come from the Zoning Board of Appeals; Conservation Commission will need to give a recommendation Reviewed the conditions for granting a waiver By the time the applicant files, the site will be staked On site, there is vernal pool, and wetlands In the future, the applicant will need to explain drainage, and structural discharge points Friendly vs. un-friendly 40B has to do in part with whether or not the town is also a proponent and their level of input 5a. Request for Certificate of Completion & Release of Surety Erosion & Sedimentation Control Permit 10 B Street 1C 10B Street Realty LLC No testimony was taken on this matter. This matter will continue at the August 11, 2016 Conservation Commission meeting. 5b. Request for Certificate of Completion & Release of Surety Erosion & Sedimentation Control Permit 16 Manhattan Drive Joe Blake Joe Blake homeowner represented the application. H. Charles Lis stated the site is stable and recommends approval/release of the bond. Conservation Commission recommended the applicant stop by the office for a list of native trees to plant in the back yard. A MOTION TO ISSUE THE CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE FOR THE PROJECT AT 16 MANHATTAN DRIVE, WAS MADE BY W. BOIVIN. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY A. MCNAMARA AND APPROVED (4-0-0). A MOTION TO RELEASE THE FULL AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE BOND, $5,000, FOR THE PROJECT AT 16 MANHATTAN DRIVE, WAS MADE BY K. MELANSON. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY W. BOIVIN AND APPROVED (4-0-0). 6. Request for Determination of Applicability 73 Mountain Road Brian & Judy Osborne Construct residential addition Homeowner Judy Osborne represented the application. A. McNamara recused herself from the discussion. Ms. Osborne explained her request to build a 720 square foot in-law apartment for her daughter and family to move in.

3 3 H. Charles Lis noted the site, in the rear of the property, has bordering vegetated wetlands associated with Little Brook and adjacent to the conservation area, flagged by Wetlands Scientist, Mary Trudeau. Staff has reviewed/agree with the delineation, and in some areas the delineation was based on the soil. There is a garden and tools in the wetlands area, and the lawn is relatively flat. The proposed addition is 38 feet from the wetlands, and no grading is proposed. This will require a waiver from the 40-foot no build set back. Conservation Commission discussed: Garden is decades old and likely pre-dates the Wetlands Protection Act o Garden can remain, but the area adjacent to the garden should be restored, which the applicant agreed to o Invasive species have been removed o No fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides should be used in the garden o If the garden is no longer used, allow it to restore itself H. Charles Lis reviewed the findings and conditions. A MOTION TO GRANT A WAIVER FROM THE 40-FOOT NO BUILD ZONE FOR THE PROJECT AT 73 MOUNTAIN ROAD WAS MADE BY W. BOIVIN. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY K. MELANSON AND APPROVED (3-0-1; A. MCNAMARA ABSTAIN). A MOTION TO ISSUE A CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE DETERMINATION OF APPLICABILITY FOR THE PROPOSED WORK AT 73 MOUNTAIN ROAD WAS MADE BY K. MELANSON. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY W. BOIVIN AND APPROVED (3-0-1; A. MCNAMARA ABSTAIN). 7. Public Hearing Notice of Intent 174 Middlesex Turnpike/2 & 4 Fourth Avenue Nordblom Development Company Construction of office building DEP #pending Developer Todd Fremont-Smith of Nordblom Company and engineers Frank DiPietro and Marissa Nesbit of BSC Group represented the request. Mr. Fremont-Smith explained their request build an office building. Mr. DiPietro explained it would be a 5-story office building along 4 th avenue with a parking garage. There was a Notice of Intent filed for underground utilities, which has since been abandoned, but that file had the FEMA floodplain mapped out. This proposal will have increased compensatory flood storage; increase impervious area and a new drainage system. There is a 200-foot setback from the road for the building. The applicant will try to save as many trees along Fourth Avenue as possible. Mr. DiPietro stated a more detailed drawing of the floodplain compensation would be presented at the next Conservation Commission meeting. Ms. Nesbit described the drainage, including the existing catch basins along Fourth Avenue. Mr. DiPietro noted the requirement to increase the groundwater recharge by 10% over what exists,

4 4 wherever possible. The infiltration was oversized in the park, in anticipation of this project. An infiltration system could not be used in the area near Middlesex Turnpike because of the high groundwater and ledge, so a detention system will be used to reduce flow rates. The LSP requires some dewatering because of contamination in the area. The contamination is 70 feet down and they only plan to dig down 6 feet. J. Keeley requested the exact location of cut and fill in the floodplain, and Vine Brook has a TMDL (Total Maximum Daily Load) so the discharge points need to be looked at for bacteria. Conservation Commission discussed: Pocket park could use LID Utilization of Stormceptors 1 foot by 1 foot compensation for the floodplain contours Building will be 2 feet above the floodplain Filled in the site to maintain the grades post demolition of the prior building Carpooling and MBTA stop Conservation Commission requested: Explore what the flood storage structures are going to look Gaining more green space in the lower parking lot, perhaps a swale Details on the Stormceptors and floodplain compensation Rendering of the site from Middlesex Turnpike H. Charles Lis requested the plants be native species in resource areas and buffer zones, and identify which trees are going to be saved. This hearing will continue at the August 11, 2016 Conservation Commission meeting. 8. Public Hearing Notice of Intent 186 Middlesex Turnpike LTF Real Estate Company, Inc. Commercial demolition and construction of new athletic facility DEP # Developer Todd Fremont-Smith of Nordblom Company, and engineer Conor Nagle of Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. represented the application. Mr. Fremont-Smith explained their request build a gym. There are plans of creating some jogging paths in association with the gym. Mr. Nagle noted DEP had no comment. He listed the resource areas: Front of the site is within the 100-foot buffer to bordering vegetated wetlands FEMA floodplain clips the lower left corner of the site about 30 feet Riverfront area that clips the lower right corner of the site. He noted: The site has some contamination on the southern portion of the site; LSP has

5 5 designated a small area for infiltration in front of the proposed building; this is considered a redevelopment. H. Charles Lis noted: Staff will confirm the culverts Staff will review the riverfront area, and explore improvements to that H. Charles Lis requested: Clarification on how the boundary of the floodplain was determined Exploring the use of detention Documentation from DEP in regards to the TMDL for Vine Brook Explanation on how the shallow catch basins work Clarification of how the pool and patio is discharged Clarification of the erosion controls and construction entrances used during this construction project and 174 Middlesex Turnpike/2 & 4 Fourth Avenue Conservation Commission discussed: Amount of pools on site 72% impervious area is proposed Targeting families, and office workers No fill will be used on site Shallow catch basins (2 foot cover) because of the elevation Infiltrator function while the water supply pumps are turned off LID features for the parking is not feasible Erosion controls during construction Conservation Commission requested: Staff give a summary at a future Conservation Commission about TMDL and how it will affect future applications Confirm whether the pool will be saline or chlorine De-chlorination process Summary of the infiltration process while the wells are turned off Explanation about the TSS removal This hearing will continue at the August 11, 2016 Conservation Commission meeting. 9. Continued Public Hearing Notice of Intent (Burlington Bylaw only) 36 Mill Street RKACO, LLC Demolition & construction of new residential dwelling Engineer Scott Smyers of Oxbow Associates represented the application. Mr. Smyers noted the changes: Spot elevations along the edge of the front house driveway Dividing the square footage of disturbance between the lots

6 6 Submitted a summary about how this site complies with the local riverfront area regulations J. Keeley noted the front house was pulled forward to reduce the impact to the riverfront area. Rear lot is slightly over 5,000 square feet of disturbance. The Conservation Commission may either agree the rear lot is grandfathered or grant a waiver or agree that the final amount of disturbance is under 5,000 square feet when the restored areas are excluded. J. Keeley added that staff reviewed the wetland delineation. The Conservation Commission discussed: Justification for approving the plans William Hyman, 38 Mill Street, is a neighbor, and has no issue with the project. J. Keeley reviewed the findings and conditions. A MOTION TO CLOSE THE HEARING FOR THE PROJECT AT 36 MILL STREET, WAS MADE BY W. BOIVIN. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY A. MCNAMARA AND APPROVED (4-0-0). A MOTION TO ALLOW ALTERATION OF THE RIVERFRONT AREA UNDER THE LOCAL BYLAW, BECAUSE THE APPLICANT IS RESTORING 1,400 SQUARE FEET BRINGING THE AMOUNT OF DISTURBANCE DOWN TO 4,520 SQUARE FEET, FOR THE PROJECT AT 36 MILL STREET WAS MADE BY A. MCNAMARA. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY K. MELANSON AND APPROVED (4-0-0). A MOTION TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS AND ISSUE THE ORDER OF CONDITIONS FOR THE PROJECT AT 36 MILL STREET, WAS MADE BY W. BOIVIN. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY A. MCNAMARA AND APPROVED (4-0-0). A MOTION TO REQUIRE A $3,000 PERFORMANCE BOND FOR THE PROJECT AT 36 MILL STREET, WAS MADE BY K. MELANSON. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY W. BOIVIN AND APPROVED (4-0- 0). 10. Continued Public Hearing Notice of Intent 1 & 10 Wall Street The Gutierrez Company Parking lot pavement rehabilitation DEP # Developer Israel Lopez of the Gutierrez Company, landscape architect Stephanie Weyer of Kyle Zick Landscape Architecture, and engineer William Park of Symmes Maini & McKee Associates represented the application. Mr. Lopez updated the Conservation Commission: Inspected the catch basins at 1 Wall Street for depth, oil absorbent pillows and protective hoods o All but two had protective hoods: the applicant agrees to add those and commit to a maintenance plan Pruning and vegetative plan o Remove invasive species, and replant with native species including near the brook H. Charles Lis noted the positive landscaping plan, which was added the plans. Drainage system information was submitted. The Conservation Commission needs to determine whether

7 7 additional improvements to the drainage system are necessary. This drains to an Outstanding Resource Water (Horn Pond, Woburn) and Zone II. She explained the possible options the Conservation Commission could require. J. Keeley encourages the Conservation Commission to require some drainage improvements; this site will likely not be redeveloped for decades. Conservation Commission options: Treat it as small project, that does not meet all the stormwater standards Require all catch basin be retrofitted with deep sumps Require only 24 and 30 inch deep catch basins be retrofitted with deep sumps 4 catch basins go to a retention pond, and 4 catch basins go directly to Little Brook: Require water quality unit(s) for the Little Brook catch basins Conservation Commission requested: Upgrade the pretreatment unit (Stormceptor or some other approved equal) for catch basin 1, 2, and 8 that discharges to Little Brook o Applicant agreed H. Charles Lis reviewed the findings and conditions. She added that the application is subject to the Erosion and Sedimentation Control Bylaw, and requested a snow management plan. A MOTION TO CLOSE THE HEARING FOR THE PROJECT AT 1 & 10 WALL STREET, DEP # , WAS MADE BY K. MELANSON. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY W. BOIVIN AND APPROVED (4-0-0). A MOTION TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS FOR THE PROJECT AT 1 & 10 WALL STREET, DEP # , WAS MADE BY W. BOIVIN. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY A. MCNAMARA AND APPROVED (4-0- 0). A MOTION TO ISSUE THE ORDER OF CONDITIONS FOR THE PROJECT AT 1 & 10 WALL STREET, DEP # , WAS MADE BY K. MELANSON. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY W. BOIVIN AND APPROVED (4-0-0). A MOTION TO REQUIRE A $10,000 PERFORMANCE BOND FOR THE PROJECT AT 1 & 10 WALL STREET, DEP # , WAS MADE BY W. BOIVIN. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY A. MCNAMARA AND APPROVED (4-0-0). 11. Continued Public Hearing Notice of Intent 225 Middlesex Turnpike EvoText Building renovation & addition with new parking lot & utilities DEP # No testimony was taken on this matter. This hearing will continue at the August 11, 2016 Conservation Commission meeting. 12. Continued Public Hearing Erosion & Sedimentation Control Permit 154, 156 & 160 Cambridge Street Heritage Trail, LLC Demolition & new commercial & multi-family housing construction Engineer Frank DiPietro and Marissa Nesbit of the BSC Group, and developer Kevin Duffy of

8 8 Duffy Properties represented this application. Mr. DiPierto highlighted the changes to the plan: Double row of hay bales/straw wattles Drainage plan: o Using Stormceptor 900 o Installing an isolator row in the infiltration structure H. Charles Lis requested the detail on the isolator row, and the applicant agreed to have that prior to construction. The Conservation Commission had no comment. Mr. Duffy plans to recycle as much construction material as possible. J. Keeley reviewed the findings and conditions. A MOTION TO CLOSE THE HEARING FOR THE PROJECT AT 154, 156 & 160 CAMBRIDGE STREET WAS MADE BY W. BOIVIN. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY A. MCNAMARA AND APPROVED (4-0-0). A MOTION TO ISSUE THE EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL PERMIT FOR THE PROJECT AT 154, 156 & 160 CAMBRIDGE STREET WAS MADE A. MCNAMARA. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY K. MELANSON AND APPROVED (4-0-0). A MOTION TO REQUIRE A $15,000 PERFORMANCE BOND FOR THE PROJECT AT 154, 156 & 160 CAMBRIDGE STREET WAS MADE BY K. MELANSON. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY W. BOIVIN AND APPROVED (4-0-0). 13. Administration a. Planning Board Comments: Staff will provide comments about the decision on 154, 156 & 160 Cambridge Street. b. Subcommittee & Staff Reports: None. c. Upcoming Meeting Schedule: August 11, 2016 and September 8, 2016 d. Other: None. A MOTION TO CLOSE THE JULY 14, 2016 CONSERVATION COMMISSION MEETING WAS MADE BY A. MCNAMARA AT 10:37 PM. THE MOTION WAS SECONDED BY W. BOIVIN AND APPROVED (4-0-0). Minutes respectfully submitted by: Noelle Judd, Recording Clerk

TOWN OF BURLINGTON Conservation Commission

TOWN OF BURLINGTON Conservation Commission MINUTES OF Approved May 26, 2016 Members Present: Members Absent: Also Present: Chair L. Cohen, K. Melanson, I. Deb, A. McNamara Vice-Chair W. Boivin, J. Lynch,