Chairman Lawrence Dorman admitted that the commission was probably responsible for the confusion, albeit unintentional, over who is required to inspect and report on the progress of a wetlands restoration project at 114 Allens Point Road.
Homeowner Matthew Baltz requested clarification from the Conservation Committee on the Order of Conditions which states that Baltz is required to submit a report confirming that the restored wetlands are firmly established after two growing seasons before the commission grants Baltz a Certificate of Compliance.
The issue was whether the inspection could be performed by a civil engineer rather than a botanist or wetlands specialist.
“Nobody wants to spend more money than they have to,” said ConCom Member Stephen Gonsalves, “but this is just part of the process to bring it to completion.”
ConCom was not certain if a certifiable specialist had to send in the report, but Dorman commented that the commission rarely makes decisions based solely on what the applicant reports to the commission.
Baltz stated that the confusion began when Engineer David Davignon of Schneider& Associates suggested Baltz needed an expert botanist to certify the wetlands.
“I was told [by ConCom] that we didn’t need a certified botanist to inspect the wetlands at that time,” said Baltz, referring back to an informal field visit attended by members of ConCom. Baltz added that Davignon said he did not feel he was qualified to determine whether the species growing inside the restoration area were in fact wetlands plant species.
“That’s the sticking point, I guess,” said Baltz. He said he asked other civil engineers about the issue, and they all told him they never hire any wetlands expert to do the report. “It was very surprising to me…that [Davignon] decided to draw a line in the sand,” said Baltz.
“There’s something else going on here,” said Dorman. “There is confusion.”
“It’s not us,” said Gonsalves. “It’s Schneider and Associates who have thrown in the monkey wrench.”
The commission determined that a botanist, per se, does not have to complete the report, and drafted a formal letter to send to Baltz to make it official.
In other matters, in response to a request for comment from the Zoning Board of Appeals, the commission voted to issue no specific comments regarding the conversion of an accessory building into a guest house at 16 Pitcher Street owned by Hawley Bigelow. ConCom members agreed, however, to send Member Joel Hartley to inspect the property to see if there are any other wetlands, in addition to the stream that abuts the property, outside of the 100-foot buffer zone.
“The concern is, we know there’s a wetland back there someplace,” stated Vice Chairman Norman Hills.
“I don’t really want to make a determination based on paper,” said Hartley. “There could be other wetlands there…”
The commission also voted to forward a letter to the town administrator recommending that the Town purchase a conservation restriction for a portion of Lot 23 Ridgewood Lane.
The conservation restriction will appear on the Town Meeting Warrant for Town Meeting approval.
Hills described the property as low-lying, marshy wetlands.
The next Conservation Commission meeting is scheduled for 7:00 pm on March 12 at the Marion Town House.
By Jean Perry