Conservation Commission

TAUNTON CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes March 15, 2021 Zoom Meeting Present: Steve Turner, Chair, Debra Botellio, Co-Chair; Commissioners Joshua Borden, Richard Enos, Luis Freitas, Matthew Haggerty, Jan Rego, Michele Restino, Conservation Agent Absent: Courtney White, Recording Secretary 6:00pm ST opened meeting. Motion to approve February 8, 2021 minutes. JR, second DB. Cont. Public Meeting: Winthrop Street. Applicant requested a continuance in order to revise plan. DB, second RE to continue to April 12, 2021. So moved. Public Meeting: Crystal Lane Lot 5 (portion of 21-60). Greg Bunavicz, Engineer, Borderland Engineer, Inc. DB motion to open. Lot 5 is at the end of cul-de-sac. About 19 acres which has the detention basin for the whole subdivision and has an easement. Lot slopes down toward the basin and then wetland. Erosion control line approved for the subdivision and did not change. The house and septic system are outside the buffer zone. Within the buffer zone is minor grading. DB, second MH issue Negative Determination with Special Conditions 1-4, 6, 14, 15, 18, 19, 21 – deed stating responsible party to maintain the detention basin. So moved. Amendment: 82 Ingell Street. James Dorsey, owner, Rick Charon, Engineer, Charon Associates, Inc. The Applicant has moved the proposed building closer to the street, revised the parking area and compensatory storage, requiring an Amendment. The proposed building has been moved closer to Ingell Street and the parking area has been revised. There are 5 proposed compensatory flood storage areas to recoup the fill needed for the construction of the new building that will be placed in the flood zone. This will result in a net increase in flood storage capacity on the site. There is also a reduction in parking spaces and revision of the parking area that results in a decrease in total paved parking area of 7.6%. LF, second DB issue Amendment. So moved. Extension: 82 Ingell St. James Dorsey, owner, Rick Charon, Engineer, Charon Associates, Inc. The Applicant has moved the building closer to the street, decreased parking, and added compensatory storage and as this filing expires on March 27, 2021, the Applicant has requested a 3-year Extension recommended by DEP, even though we are in a Tolling period due to the pandemic. This Extension to the Order of Conditions will expire on March 27, 2024. JB, second JR, issue 3-year Extension. So moved. Continued Public Hearing: 16 Park Street. Scott Carter, owner, Stevie Carvalho, Engineer, Farland Corp. NOI. This is for the construction of a 3-story, 23,000 self-storage building with 60 parking spaces. All work is outside the 25-foot WPZ. This is a redevelopment project with decrease in impervious area. On the revised plan they provided information on the proposed retaining walls. Not much area for snow storage, especially with the owner’ plan to enclose the entire area with chainlink fencing at the edge of pavement. The parking area can provide temporary storage but the owner plans to have the snow removed from the paved surfaces. ST asked about snow removal – Scarvalho: In large storm events he will truck it out, in small events he can place on the landscape areas and a few parking spaces. DB asked about chemicals? SCarter: Environmentally friendly. DB – anything being stored outside? SCarter: No, that’s a condition from Planning Board. DB – what about policing trash? SCarter: Will have on-site employees every day. We don’t want a dumpster on site. DB - Gated? SCarter: Yes fully gated with cameras and alarms and restriction on times to enter – not a 24 hr. facility. ST: What are the times? SCarter: Either 7-9 or 7-7. DB - 7 days a week? SCarter: Yes. We won’t have employees on site 7 days, probably not Sundays. DB concerned with people throwing trash in the river. SCarter agrees. Will have it monitored. They will know what units were used to narrow down any offenders. Could hire someone to monitor the facility. DB asked MR if she could add as a condition that someone monitors the trash. LF – familiar with the area. Neighborhood in disrepair and glad something is going there. Who did the cleanup here? Have you reached out and talked to the neighbors? SCarter: I’ve been there a number of times and talked with people that have asked questions about it. People are happy to see something going there. LF- Did you have to do any cleanup? SCarter: Yes, we’ve cleaned up the whole site. Environmental? Oh yes. Put riprap along the river. Have an AUL filed. Went thru all that before buying property. ST- 21E done? SCarter: I believe so, I think we went above and beyond a 21E. MR: can I add in? A 21E was done a number of years ago under a filing Resource Controls did, and Lopes took the product. The AUL is on file with DEP. ST: I think this will be a site for sore eyes. A good project and you will be a good neighbor. MH – Will the fence be along the edge of the river? SCarter: carried all the way around. Scarvalho: will be a tall fence and trash will be contained within the site. MR: Clarification – the fence will be around the perimeter of the parking area, not along the edge of the river, correct? Scarvalho: that is right. Along the perimeter of the pavement. JB: Regarding the Special Conditions – SC30 should state that snow storage is to be removed from site for large storm events, 3” or more. Only environmentally friendly chemicals to be used on parking areas. Field Report read. And add a Special Condition to have area policed for trash. DB, motion to approve with additional Special Conditions #30, #31, and #32, second MH. So moved. Public Hearing: Tremont St. (Assessor’s Lot 60-37). Bruce Webb, Ecosystem Solutions, Inc. (Peer Reviewer); Bob & Kathy Jacques, owner; John DeSousa, Engineer. ANRAD. BW: Reviewed delineation on March 4, 5, & 8. Found quite a few issues throughout. Reviewed the lines and found that numerous flags were atop hydric soils, questions with flag locations and wondered if these were fresh delineations or attempt to refresh previous delineations. Numerous flags were 10+ feet apart and saw remnants of older flags nearby. There were no wetland data forms in the filing, and there were no soil cores done. Many flags had one location on the plan but an entirely different location on the plan. Accuracy of the delineation is called into question. I put up many revised flags which were over 30 feet from their flags. Seems as if other wetland indicators were not used. Recommend that a fresh delineation be performed to make sure the wetlands are accurately indicated. This is a very high value wetland that borders on the Segreganset River which is a cold water fishery. There is Estimated Habitat, Priority Habitat, Riverfront Area, and there are Potential Vernal Pools. JD: We had requested that when they went out we would have walked the line with him. I knew there would be questions. The original delineation was done by Pare Engineering, a few years ago. We tried to keep the flags in the original locations. Used GPS used to locate the flags. Did an instrument survey to locate flags. Shared screen. JB can we get a copy of the report. MR: I sent it out this morning, JB not seeing it, found it. Back to JD: A1 is short of the property, we did extend the line to the property line. Continues talking about the delineation. I’m certain the flags are positioned where they should be. BW: May I interject? A1- A5 to cartpath, but in the field they are in the woods and A8 is at the cartpath. Not exactly accurate. JD: Confident where we have the flags is where the wetland is. BW: I respectfully disagree. What methodology was used to extend the line? JD: Looking at E21, we just extended it to the property line- I disagree with you as to where it should go. Talks about the knoll in the field and then gave it up to wetland. ST: Let me interrupt. John are you thinking you need to go back out there? JD: well, I know we’ll have to go back out there. I haven’t seen the relocation of the flags. I wish I had been notified when he was out there. I never got the report until earlier today. BW: I apologize that the report was late – we had a really busy week and I finished this up on the weekend. ST: Mr. DeSousa should have been notified when you were out there and that the report should have been delivered sooner. Why wasn’t the applicant asked to go out there with you. ST recommends that this be continued for a month and that John and Brandon meet at the site to review the line. JB I was okay with the 7 day response with such a detailed letter is acceptable. I would like limits of NHESP put on plan. Motion to continue to 4.12.2021 DB, second JB, so voted. Crystal Lane Lot 6. Greg Bunavicz. Construct SFH within the 100-foot buffer of a BVW. GB discussed plan – 30k sf with 22.8k upland. Septic will be in front. All work outside the 50-foot buffer. Erosion control just beyond 50 foot buffer. The septic and driveway are outside the buffer zone. DB: no work/grading within the 50 feet. GB: that’s correct. ST read Field Report. Motion to issue an Order of Conditions w/ Special Conditions 1-5, 7, 9, 17, 19, 21, 24-27, JR, second JB. Cameron Ave. (ANRAD). Tony DeFrias, Koska Eng. SFH lot on corner of Cameron Ave. and Arnold St. Proposing a SFH with septic in the front with City water. There was an ILSF flagged for Katherine Drive back in 2007. When they were out there they have not seen any evidence of an ILSF on this property. Drainage patterns may have changed since the construction of Katherine Dr. We are showing the limits of the ILSF. Only doing lawn within 25 feet. JB: Michele, will they need to come back to us with an RDA? MR: No, and this will be addressed in my Field Report. Only jurisdictional under our By-Law – protected but not protected by a buffer zone. Can the septic field be turned? Waiting to go before BOH until after this hearing. If the Commission wants us to turn the system it is not an impossible task. ST: Michele your thoughts on that? MR: Either way is fine, Steve. MR reads Field Report. TD: we can probably turn the system. JB: if you could rotate the system just 90 degrees you’d b able to gain some distance. TD: I can take a look at turning it. PUBLIC IMPUT: Jim Donovan, 24 Cameron Ave. They are talking about changing the septic system. Is it a raised system? TD: It will be higher than the road and the house will also be at the same level so it won’t look like a raised system. JD: Will it face Cameron? TD: the house will face Arnold St. and it will be between the house and Arnold St. T: Michele, can you put that up on the screen? Plan shown on screen and ST explains what he is seeing. JD: worried about runoff. Would they put a drain in the street? ST: Any runoff into the street? TD: There will be runoff onto Arnold but not a significant amount going to either street. JD: if major runoff will the City put a drain in the street. ST: Call Michele and we would see that the builder put in a drain. Don LaPointe, 11 Cameron Ave. Concerned about runoff. When they put in Katherine Dr. there was more runoff and everyone is using sump pumps all the time. Will there be more runoff. JB: This will be reviewed by City Eng. They cannot create more runoff than what comes there now. City Eng. May say that the roof may need to go into drywell. Doesn’t see any of that happening. Didn’t find any groundwater down to 144 inches. DP: I’m putting in a new septic – mine failed because of Katherine Dr. I’m being forced to put in a new system. Concerned about additional water. No catch basin at end of the street. ST recommends that this be continued for a month. Michel to get in touch with City Eng. And visit the site again. TD: the City Eng. Did go out there with Michele. Can empathize with what the neighbors and this is an old neighborhood with older rules. Now the codes have changed and systems are now raised. ST: I want to make sure I spoke to every neighbor. It seems that these neighbors have not been met. That’s my recommendation. I recommend that you talk to these people. JB would like plan to go the Eng. for his approval. DB: Motion to continue this filing to April 12th and to have MR and City Eng. visit site and that plan gets sent to Eng. 2 & 8 Galleria Mall Drive. (ANRAD) Todd Moray, Beals Assoc., Mike Wurtsbaugh, Portman Ind’l, Matthew Costa, Beals Assoc. TM: discussed the project – got the original plan of the mall with the wetlands. We delineated the wetlands in between snowstorms. Went out to delineate and found that it was already done but we do not know by whom. We walked the entire flagged area and added flags to correct some areas we felt should have been included. About a 3.5 mile delineation. Wetlands are at the toe of slope with many steep slopes. Showed his screen and discussed the various wetland systems. We are not going beyond the existing pavement/footprint. ST: read Field Report. ST: excited about this project. This applicant has been very professional and did research on the Portman Group – they do a lot of community activities. JB: Echoes ST’s comments. Looks forward to the PB presentation. Motion to issue ORAD by JR, second by DB. So voted. 66 Foxhill Dr. Evan Watson, Joe Marques. EW: shares screen and discusses project. Add addition to home, no additional clearing or grading on site. Erosion control is shown and all work is outside 25 feet. No file number as of yet. ST: I think I would approve this, and make a motion to approve this pending the receipt of the number. Approve pending the DEP# and continue to the May 17th hearing. LF makes motion to include the Special Conditions 1-5, 19, 21, 25-27, MH seconds. 5:1 (D. Botellio) So moved. CONTINUED VIOLATION 41 Godfrey St. Brian Whicher, Property Manager, John Griffin, Owner. JG: Address was incorrect, just got the letter this past week. Not sure exactly what is going on. Nothing immediately jumped out at us. Fenced in and very step on the other side. Would be helpful if we could go out there and work with them to rectify the situation. MR: when I was out there at 24 Knight St. there were small chunks of asphalt, 5 gallon tubs, and much had fallen into the stream. It is hard to see from your property. JG: is 24 Knight St on the other side? MR: It is to the rear of your property and there is quite a bit of land. You won’t see the house, Cobb Brook and the pond are immediately behind your property, the house is further to the south. ST: there is a lot of trash in the area not just from your site. It is an important resource area. JG: willing to work with the commission. ST: let your tenants know not to dump. MR would you like to go out with John and Brian? MR: Yes and I would like to get in touch with the owner at 24 Knight St. so that we could actually see the issues. LF: How long has this been going on? MR: I was made aware of it this year when I did the violation – late January. ST: saw some pictures today and it looks like this has been happening for a long time. Lilah Medeiros, 24 Knight St. ST: would like to meet with you to go out and see the issues. LM: A lot of people can’t see down there. It’s been a big problem to me. Not sure how we can take care of this – it is expensive to clean this up. ST: Not heard any specifics regarding the issues here. LM: Mentioned this at Planning Board and ZBA when the new houses were put in. I have a lot of strange things happening out here. (goes into detail). Talks about the otters and other wildlife. I would be happy to meet with them. Motion to continue to May 17th DB, second JB. So voted. Other Business: 4 Couch St. This was approved a month ago for an addition. They had to place a deck and stairs for 2nd means of egress and a minor change but closer to the wetlands. The deck will be on sona tubes. Just wanted to bring this by the Commission – you have given me the authority to approve minor changes, but this seemed a bit special for you to approve this second means of egress. Motion to approve JB, second LF. So voted. Request for 2 desks. Made a motion to buy new desks for new office. ST signed off on it. All okay with expenditure. Access to Snake River by TRWA. JB: there should be some spaces. ST. Would like to see a plan. DB: Whose property is it? MR: City property. DPW will help with clearing area Adjourn DB, JR 9:07pm.