Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes 8/21/19

Meeting Time: 6:00 pm

Meeting Place: Town Hall Meeting Room

Members Present:  Mark Little, Jeremy Rawitz Chair, Kimberly Wetherell

Meeting Opened at 6:01 pm

New Hearings & Meetings (First Come First Served):

Notice of Intent filed by Feinman of 11 Lime Rock Lane for the proposed associated site work for the construction of a single-family home within the mapped area of the Scenic Mountain Act.

Shannon Boosma (SB) representing the applicant briefed the commission on the project.  JR and KW conducted a site visit prior to the hearing.  There is an existing house which is going to be de-constructed and a proposed new house will be constructed. Some of the proposed work lies within the 15% slope of the SMA.  Rich Hoben will be designing the house and the house color will blend into the woods.  Any trees proposed to be removed will not disrupt the current view and the stumps are to remain.  Stone aprons will be installed and any storm run-off will infiltrate back into the ground water.  ML questioned what species of trees are being removed and the health of the trees.  SB wasn’t sure of the species, they are deciduous, and are either dead or in poor health.  KW noted that at the site visit there was an apple tree near the home that SB pointed out that applicant would like to add to the plan to remove.   KW questioned the elevation of the new house.  SB answered that the first floor is at 103’ and the second floor will not be greater than 30’ above the first floor.  The hearing was opened for public comment.  Mr. and Mrs. Mielke of Lime Rock and abutters were in attendance. RM asked SB to clarify on what trees are to be removed.  SB stated that all the trees in green on the plan will be removed and the trees in gray will remain.  RM commented and noted to the Commission that the trees that are depicted on the submitted plan, most notably on the abutting lot below, are no longer there and that it was the applicant who removed those trees prior to the application being submitted to Conservation Commission.  Mr. Mielke commented that the trees have been removed and was concerned about the trees proposed to remove would negatively impact the lower lot.  JR assured RM that the unpermitted removal of the trees on the lot below was going to be addressed later in the meeting.  RM stated that the plan does not accurately reflect the existing conditions.  The commission agreed and assured RM his comment would be part of the record. JR made a recommendation that before making a determination and/or an approval to remove any trees that the applicant retain a certified arborist to make a determination on the health of the trees. KW advised that the work can be approved with the condition that the trees in question are to remain, the applicant is to retain a certified arborist to evaluate the condition of the trees, and a determination on removing the trees can be done at a later time. Discussion followed regarding removing the crab apple tree.  The project was approved with general conditions and the special condition that the trees in question are to remain, the applicant is to retain a certified arborist to evaluate the condition of the trees, and a determination on removing the trees can be done at a later time.  The crab-apple tree is approved to be removed.  KW/JR MSV.

Request for Determination filed by Sullivan of M309/ L12.1, Beartown Mt. Rd for the proposed associated site work for the construction of a single-family home within the mapped area of the Scenic Mountain Act.

Chris Tyron representing the applicant briefed the commission on the proposed project.  KW conducted a site visit prior to the meeting.  ML asked for clarification on what trees to be removed and what trees are to be cut. CT that there will be minimal trees to be removed and there would not be any impact on the SMA.   The SMA RDA was approved with a negative determination as depicted on the plan and the application.  KW/JR MSV

Request for Determination filed by Frankel of 559 Main Rd. for the proposed associated site work to improve drainage within the buffer zone of Lake Garfield.

Tom Ingersoll representing the applicant briefed the commission on the project.  KW conducted a site visit prior to the meeting.  Mr. Ingersoll wants to improve species diversity, minimize runoff, aid in percolation, combat invasive species, promote wildlife and native species habitat and allow safe access for normal care and use of property.  The RDA was approved with a N1 KW/JR MSV

Request for Determination filed by Abromowitz of 146 Main Rd, for the proposed removal of a decaying tree within the buffer zone of Stevens Lake.

KW conducted a site visit prior to the meeting and confirmed that the tree is dead and that it was in the buffer zone.  The applicant could not attend.  The RDA was approved with a N3 with special conditions was approved MS/ML MSV.

Continued Hearings & Meetings:

62 Worth Lane – Lombardo – Abbreviated Notice of Intent - proposed construction and related site work of a new addition 30’ X 30’ to the north side of existing home within Lake Garfield.

The applicant was not into attendance.  KW briefed the members on the ANOI and difficulties including the representative not responding to questions, scheduling a site visit, an outstanding and expired OOC, and the lack of a detailed plan. KW motioned to deny the NOI for lack of information.  KW/JR MSV

0 Lime Rock Lane – EO- unpermitted activity- ratify

Enforcement and Emergency Orders:

KW briefed the members on the Enforcement Orders for 0 and 11 Lime Rock Lane.  Jan Feinman of 11 Lime Rock Lane was in attendance. Ms. Fineman briefed the members on the reasonings for removing the trees on the association’s lot including the health of the trees and the lack of liability insurance.  Ms. Fineman stated that she informed K. Kastle, representative of the association of her concerns.  Ms. Feinman admitted that she went forward and removed the trees without the association’s approval and unaware of the WPA regulations with intentions of replanting.  Ms. Feinman confirmed that she is aware that she was wrong in removing the trees without approval from the Commission. Ms. Feinman noted that she is part owner of the property.  ML asked about the height of the trees that were taken down.  Feinman says about 30 or 40 feet. JR asked what made her think that the trees were dangerous.  Feinman answered that they were straggly and almost dead.  JR asked if she was an expert in tree health.  Feinman answered that she completed a yearlong tree steward program at Cornell.  Discussion followed on the steward program.  Feinman wanted the commission to be aware that she contacted everyone in the association with a letter explaining her reasons for removing the trees and seeking input for a planting plan.  JR asked if she sent a letter out before the trees were removed.  Feinman admitted that she did not and that was a mistake.  Feinman did not receive a response from the any of the property owners in the association.  ML asked if the association has any bylaws.  Feinman stated that there was not.  JR opened the discussion for comments from the public.  Mielke stated that he is an abutter and a member of the association.  Mielke commented that Feinman was aware that he maintained the property at his own expense and insurance. Mielke stated that the Commission gave a determination previously for him to maintain the property and that Feinman chose to remove the trees that were in her site of the view.  Mielke would like to see the trees replaced and if needed to remove the stumps to replant at Feinman’ s expense. Mielke feels that he has a lost his privacy due to the removal of the trees. Mielke claims that 10 trees were cut by Feinman in her sight line.  Feinman challenged that she only cut 6.  JR suggested that before making any determination on how to mitigate the EO, a site visit by all the members be conducted to determine the number of trees removed. ML states that a planting plan can be approved as long as it is in the interest of the WPA. Mrs. Mielke stated that a planting of blueberry shrubs is not acceptable as a replication planting plan.  A motion was made to continue the EO, conduct a site visit, and address the EO at the next meeting.  KW/JR MSV

Town of Monterey – Lake Garfield – Notice of Intent – proposed aquatic management program to control nuisance and non-native aquatic vegetation plant growth utilizing the techniques of Diver Assisted Suction harvesting (DASH) and Mechanical Harvesting for Lake Garfield.

Dennis Lynch was in attendance to represent the Lake Association.  The NOI was continued from the last meeting contingent on NHESP approval.  NHESP has approved the DASH.  NHESP has not approved the Mechanical Harvesting until a map and plan is approved by the Commission.  The members reviewed the special conditions drafted by KW.  Discussion followed and some conditions were edited, modified and/or deleted.  The NOI was approved with the revised special conditions as noted on the OOC. KW/JR MSV

18 Bidwell Rd- Frace – EO – unpermitted activity – update

No Update at this time.

Ratify Enforcement Orders/Emergency Certificates

Lime Rock Enforcement Orders were ratified.

Meeting was adjourned at 8:51 pm.

Misc.:

Review of Scenic Mountain Act Bylaw

KW would like to address the SMA and the confusion with a couple of the articles.  After some discussion, it was decided to address the confusion after new members are sworn in and are familiar with the SMA & WPA.

New/Resignation of Commissioners

Marion Simon has resigned from the Commission.  Margo Drohan of Monterey was in attendance and showed interest in joining the Commission.  The members welcomed Ms. Drohan and informed Ms. Drohan how to go about getting sworn in before the next meeting.

Gould Farm -Community Center – Minor revision to plans

A site visit was conducted with the contractor(s) and the property owner.  There is a request for a minor revision in the plan.  After some discussion among the members, the minor revision in the plan was approved under condition #13.  KW/JR MSV

Approve Prior Minutes

Prior Minutes were approved

Review Misc. Correspondence

Misc. Correspondence was reviewed

The meeting was adjourned at