09/06/1990 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes

Home Browse Search

Conservation Commission September 6, 1990 Page 6. Mr. Pulsone stated there was never water on this lot and there is none now, for the last two months. The only time it accumulates is in the spring, going away by June or July. There was a drain-off that was allowed to continue and because the town has built that up 3 feet, there is no water run-off now. Ms Behrman stated it comes under the category of intermittent stream. She asked when the build-up of the road occurred and was told it was 4-5 years ago. She stated she looked at this far more recently, in the course of this other applic- ation and it was Bordering Vegetated Wetland - Intermittent stream, and to the best of her recollection, D.E.P. concurred. Mr. Cauley advised Bill Richardson went out there independently, without him, and he asked himself the same question. It was apparent to him there was a connection; he thought there might have been at one time. He tried to under- stand why that area was so wet. His first thought was that it is so close to the ground water table, but it is slightly higher than the 44 at Ashumet Pond so he does not think it is part of the ground water. He feels it is a collection point from the surrounding area and higher ground. He does not believe it is an intermittent stream; he does not see any vegetation to support this. Mr. Coffey stated the Commission would like to see the engineering calculations to declare it one way or the other but that it may or may not be exempt from protection under state law and fully covered under the town bylaw. He asked if Mr. Cauley was aware and he stated he was. Mr. Cauley stated they made every effort to file before the adoption of those regulations. It is his understanding if you file before adoption, it is grandfathered under the old regulations. Mr. Sherman asked when it was received and was told August 3rd; the regulations were adopted on August 1. Mr. Cauley stated he understood that and that is why they got them into the U.S. Mail. They followed the same standards D.E.P. does. Ms Behrman stated this can be referred to Town Counsel if necessary. A letter from Robert Sanecchiaro, an abutter, was read into the record. The question of the fee was resolved. Mr. Sherman requested the abutter notif- ication receipts and Mr. Cauley had only two. Mr. Sherman stated it would have to be determined whether the filing predates the adoption of the regs; he felt it may not. Regardless of it's status of Land Subject to Flooding under the town bylaw, under the old regulations and under the new, it would be a fresh- water wetland. There would be calculations required under the new regulations. Mr. Cauley stated he does not deny it has wetland plants, however, he feels this lot is exempted. Mrs. Ann Pulsone came forward and asked these regulations that go into effect mean you're subject to where you put a house, septic system and all that, if the town says they are wetlands and we're subject to where we place a house, whywere the houses permitted to be put up and the septic systems close to our house. Lot 18, *heir septic is very close to 17 and is very low; the town did not do anything to stop them. It's been filled in over there within the last few years. Mr. Coffey stated this is a question for the building inspector. Mrs. Pulsone stated she is assuming they had to come here, if the Commission is saying lot 17 is wetland.