4/7/1994 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes

Home Browse Search

Conservation Commission April 7, 1994 _ Page 2. . Mr. Gordon stated they are very receptive . o any approach the Commission wants; they would remove the term along the entire length and vegetate it to get total sheet flow over the edge or to make two wider areas revegetated but leave the beans in the rest of the area; a .case could be made either war. Mr. Sherman stated he walked the entire area ith Mr. Grotzke and has been doing research in regards to the sensitive area near wading Place. He has been researching the regs trying to find a way to help these.people accomplish what .is definitely a justifiable project. He agreed that a ease can be made for the work in the most sensitive area, which in some places is maybe 10 or 15 feet from the wetland with- out having an impact. However, in doing research and rereading the regs, in 10.02, second. paragraph, "A Request for Determination of Applicability must be filed for all activities within the buffer zone„. The definition of activities, for con- struction or improvement of roads is listed as an activity. His suggestion is that they file a Request for Determination of Applicability, which would not hold them up for a long period, it could be done on the 21st, and present the evidence in a formal way that the law requires, he could recommend a Negative Determination which would allow then to go ahead. Any wore that involves changes to the road edge, the vegetation, or diverting new drainage in different places, could be done as an RDA tool because in all the other areas the wetlands are 30, 40, 50, 60, 7 feet away. This is the only particularly sensitive area. The work Ben described, as a. more permanent solution for wading Place would have to be a Notice of intent. Everything shown today is ,justifiable and a case can be made that they could put in this overlay without altering, but formally the law says that the determination should be done under the auspices of an RDA which Diana could schedule tomorrow for the 21st and they could have a permit on the 22nd,, Mr, Fit sirfnons asked if that is a problem, hawing it delayed that long? Nor. Gordon stated it is because they wish to start and have a contract with Lawrence Lynch to commence work a week from Friday, on the 15th. The problem is that it is going to take approximately six weeks to Finish the work and it is getting close to Memorial Darr. It is the buiest time of, the year for Lawrence Lynch. They did not realize that they would have any problem doing this wore if staying within the existing width of the road; they are not doing anything negative, it is a big improvement and it is getting rid of a major safety hazard. He felt the -overwhelming public good is served by the Board using a little discretion in allowing them to start a week from Friday. Mr, Sherman stated the Board does not have that discretion under the law. Mr. Desrosiers stated the project is going to take six weeks, if they were to file an PDA for that one area, they could go ahead and start the work in the rest of the area which is not in the wetland, Mr. Sherman stated no, there are still areas on Rock Landing Road and other places, portions of which are within the buffer zones of wetlands. The res state categor- ically that they have to file. The Commission cannot give variances, only the Comm- issioner can do so. He agrees that this is needed, that is Justifiable and beneficial but the Commission would be in opposition to what the law requires, if it was allowed without a filing. It would also be setting a precedent. Nor. Gordon stated they are doing the filing. Mr. Sherman stated the Commission cannot permit a project before a permit is issued. ' - r. Gordon stated his feeling is that logic dictates that they should go forward with this. There were several y T �