6/28/2018 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes

Home Browse Search

that no other trees along that bank would be taken down unless in the case of a hazardous circumstance. Mr. Costa then outlined the waiver requirements. He said the need for the pool is minimally compelling due to the size of the property and having other options for placing the pool in an upland area. He stated the two areas are within the front yard that create issues for practical use and safety. The degree of variance from the standards is minor because the proposed structure will be located in a legally previously disturbed areas and within existing limits of clearing. The degree of compensatory mitigating measures is major because the proposed long-term mitigating measures exceed the requirements. The proposed mitigation plantings will be located in existing cleared areas exceeding the required amount by more than 50%. The site improvements will result in a net environmental benefit by reducing nitrogen loading, managing storm water runoff, increasing natural vegetated buffers and increasing habitat values. He stated the proposed project has been balanced to meet the waiver requirements. He stated the project meets the performance standards. There was much discussion and some of the concerns were the condos abutting the property and Mr. Costa stated they would be planting cedar trees for privacy. The Agent said he didn’t agree with the location of the pool and patio. He noted the area on the plan of where the pool is proposed. He cited regulation 14 under the bylaw. He said given the size of the lot in this location you would be removing some natural vegetation. Having to do some significant grading will change the runoff patterns and the groundwater recharge, the hydrological regime, and change the soil structure. He said the mitigation is substantial but this involves ACEC. It is reasonable to search for another location and not disturb this area. He felt he hasn’t met the criteria for compelling need and it is a most sensitive area so he thinks another location should be considered. There was a lengthy discussion on where to locate the pool at an alternate site. The Agent also noted the addition of the patio near one of the cottages and suggested the mitigation should be closer to the resource area. Mr. Costa requested a continuance on behalf of the applicants. Motion: Mr. Sweet moved to continue the hearing to July 12 at 6:03 p.m., seconded by Mr. Smith. Vote unanimous 4-0 Mr. O’Neill returned to the Board 6:15 Edward J. Maher, 39 Uncatena Road. Proposed planting of native shrubs and herbaceous perennials. RDA The Agent noted no plan was submitted and the applicant requested a continuance. Motion: Mr. Smith moved at the request of the applicant to continue the hearing to July 12 @ 6:06 p.m., seconded by Mr. Sweet. Vote unanimous 4-0 6:18 Richard T. Norton & Ellen B. O’Loughlin, 47 Bearse Road. Proposed septic system upgrade. RDA Resource Area: LSCSF