The June 13 meeting of the Mattapoisett Conservation Commission had a long two-page agenda. While there were hearings that moved along swiftly, there were others that came to a snail’s pace. One hearing, a seemingly simple Request for Determination of Applicability for a driveway paving project, was one such hearing.
Marcia Waldron, 7 Dexter Lane, came before the commission seeking a Negative determination for her RDA filing. Waldron plans to pave a 12.5- by 48-foot section of her driveway.
Before opening the hearing up to public comment, Rogers told the audience that the commission was only looking to determine if Waldron’s request was a RDA or if it should be a Notice of Intent.
Abutter Maryanne Brogan, 10 Dexter Lane, objected.
Brogan had submitted a letter requesting that Waldron file a costly NOI versus a RDA with accompanying engineered stormwater calculations. She contends that drainage issues will affect her property negatively if Waldron’s driveway is paved.
There ensued minutes of discussion with Brogan asserting that the original developer of the cul-de-sac development was not allowed to pave the driveway due to a ruling by DEP.
Rogers said of Waldron’s driveway, “There is very little difference between compacted stone dust and asphalt … runoff would not be impacted.”
Brogan pushed harder.
Brogan said that when Waldron’s house was built, truckloads of fill were brought in to raise it up and that, due to drainage concerns at that time, the developer had to put a retention pond on the property. She feared that a change from pervious to impervious surfaces would cause stormwater to drain onto her already very wet property. Brogan also said that she had called the DEP and had been told that any change to the driveway surface needed to be supported with engineering calculations.
Rogers didn’t agree.
“We are here to determine if the request rises to a NOI notification versus an RDA,” said Rogers. “We’ve never asked anyone to provide runoff calculations for a single driveway,” he told Brogan. He explained that even four new homes with driveways did not trigger the necessity of runoff calculations.
Brogan retorted, “It’s against the law to change your land and impact your neighbors.”
Rogers responded, “Even if we require an NOI, we wouldn’t be looking for calculations.”
Several other abutters spoke on behalf of Waldron’s application, saying they were not concerned with the paving plan, that stormwater runoff was not an issue at this location, and felt the paving project would have no impact on the area.
The commission voted to allow the RDA to be heard and rendered a Negative 2 determination.
As Brogan left the meeting, she told Conservation Agent Liz Leidhold she’d be filing an appeal in the morning.
Another RDA filing that seemed straightforward needed time to review. Dennis Arsenault, represented by David Davignon of N. Douglas Schneider and Associates, presented a request to have established wetland delineations accepted for the 10.3-acre site at the end of Snow Fields Road.
Mapping evidence supplied by Davignon showed a parcel with what he described as “two wetland systems” that dominated the drawing. He said that, in the past, Arsenault’s land had been primarily accessed via Interstate 195.
Davignon asked for a one-month continuation in order to give the commission and Leidhold sufficient time to study the request, noting that his client was not in a hurry.
Several abutters were in attendance, with one questioning the possibility of a stream running through the property, but not marked on Davignon’s map, and another questioning if the property could be developed for commercial use. The application was continued until July 11.
Other business included Negative determinations of RDA applications from Matt Hotte, 1 North Street, for the construction of a farmer’s porch; Michael Michaud, 3 Crooked Bow Path, to plant grass and build a 16- by 12-foot shed; Stuart LeGassick, 5 Beacon Street, for home improvements and the construction of an addition.
Rounding out the RDA filings, Daniel DaRosa received a Negative 3 ruling for the construction of a cantilevered addition to an existing porch.
In the NOI category of hearings, William Macropoulos, 12 Howard Beach, filed an ‘after-the-fact’ NOI for a jetty repair that included a protrusion into the water that had not been part of the approved plan. The commission discussed remediation with Davignon, who represented Macropoulos. Rogers concurred that remediation might be acceptable since “jackhammering it out” didn’t make sense.
Commission member Mike King suggested that Macropoulus might give the town shellfish seeds as worthy remediation, rather than simply paying money to the state for the error. Davignon said he would discuss that with his client as he asked for and received a two-week continuation.
Dennis Gallant, Brandt Island Road, received an Order of Conditions for the construction of a single-family home, as did Jane Finnerty, 19 Shore View Avenue, for repairs to a stone seawall.
William Farran, Angelica Avenue, sought an Order of Conditions for the construction of a new single-family home on a parcel previously deemed ‘unbuildable.’ The plans will include a home build to FEMA flood plain standards with the addition of fill to support the necessary pilings.
Rogers told Mark Manganello of LEC Environmental Consultants, “I want to confirm with the Building Department that FEMA allows for fill in a flood plain.” He continued, “I want to be ahead on this one,” he said while pointing out that construction taking place on another home, one adjacent to the town landing on Mattapoisett Neck Road has. “Everyone calling … I want guidance from our building inspector.” The hearing was continued until June 27.
The Town of Mattapoisett in the personages of Highway Superintendent Barry Denham and Jon Connell of Field Engineering received Orders of Conditions for three NOI filings for roadway projects. These projects are part of the ongoing updating of sewer and water systems throughout the village area. The streets affected will be portions of Barstow, Pearl, and Cannon. When asked by one resident living on Barstow if the pink granite curbstones that are historic to the streets would be conserved and reused, Denham assured her that was the intent of the Highway Department.
The next meeting of the Mattapoisett Conservation Commission is scheduled for 6:30 pm on June 27 in the Town Hall meeting room.
By Marilou Newell