04/04/2024 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes

Home Browse Search

to the potential for a flood-causing storm. Ms. LeBlanc, a professional landscape designer, addresses Mr. McManus's concerns regarding the fence. She explains that the intended fence is similar to the present one, black aluminum with about 4” spaces between each vertical picket, which she believes will hold up just as well as a chain-link fence. Regarding wildlife passage, she assures that there is about a 4 to 6-inch clearing below the fence. Ms. LeBlanc suggests installing posts into concrete footings during the installation process, as there are vendors offering posts with extra footing below the post. COMMISSIONERS COMMENTS Ms. Thornbrugh requests the total footage of the increased footprint for comparison with the 650 sqft of mitigation plantings proposed. Raul responds that within the 150 ft buffer zone, there is a 560 ft increase in development, and they are compensating with 650 sqft of native mitigation plantings. He clarifies that sections located outside the buffer zone were not included in the mitigation. A portion of the 150 ft buffer zone is in the flood zone, while part is out. Ms. Thornbrugh's second concern regards the maintenance of the putting green and potential harm to the wetlands. Mr. Lizardi-Rivera explains that the plan is for a synthetic lawn for the putting green, which will require no maintenance. Ms. Zollo also expresses concerns about the putting green, particularly regarding the potential impact of affixing artificial material to the ground, given its location entirely in a flood zone. She notes the absence of specific dimensions for the putting green on the plan. Ms. LeBlanc states that it is about 800 ft in overall dimensions. Mr. Lizardi-Rivera informs the commissioners of a previous conversation with the applicant regarding the putting green, resulting in the understanding that if it becomes a setback for approval, the applicant is willing to remove it entirely from the project. Ms. Zollo further expresses concerns about the mitigation calculations appearing too low per the commission's 2:1 ratio. Mr. Lizardi-Rivera explains that the calculations on the proposed plan are based on a 1:1 ratio, as per the regulations at the time of drafting the proposal. To address this, Mr. Lizardi-Rivera suggests adding more plantings to reach 1,032 sqft, which will be non- ornamental, within close proximity to the wetland resource area and does not include existing vegetation. Mr. Kent asks if the applicant would consider removing the larger Japanese honeysuckle located within the mitigation plan. Ms. LeBlanc confirms that there is no issue with this suggestion and will include it in the proposed mitigation plan. An abutter letter was submitted to the commissioners outlining objections to the project, citing laws, bylaws, and regulations they believe are being violated. Following the hearing discussion, it was decided to remove the putting green from the project, addressing the majority of the complaints in the letter. No further discussion is warranted as all remaining topics within the letter pertain to other departments/commissions. There are no comments from commissioners or the public.