Town of Wellesley, Massachusetts

Guests: Giles E. Mosher (73 Greylock Rd.); Susan Mosher; Joe Roberts; Aliana B. E. vonRichthofen; Alexander E. vonRichthofen; B. B. Goldkamp; Nancy Bagdasarian; Rose Marie Richardson; Michael Curley; Naomi Stonberg; Jeffrey Stonberg; Jerry Rossman (Essex Eng. & Survey); Ian Starr; Natalie Starr; Jonathan Adler; Derek Redgate (VHB); Steve Fessler; Gene Croach (VHB); Roy Ennacheril; Trustin Roy Ennacheril.

Joe Roberts asked the Committee to consider issuing a Certificate of Compliance as he has requested for his project at 55 Pine Plain Road. The approved plan included the restoration of a small area of the back lawn that extended into the adjoining Town woodland. The restoration is not yet done, but he is willing to put in whatever is required immediately. Peter Keenan said that a strip about 3-foot wide on Town land had been cleared of all vegetation rather than being restored. Committee members said that the planting plan would have to be approved and implemented before the Committee would issue a Certificate of Compliance.

Giles Mosher presented his plan for building a deck attached to his house at 73 Greylock Road. The deck would be located on existing lawn and about 60 feet from the bank of an intermittent stream, with no bordering vegetated wetland in the vicinity. The deck would be on a side of the house facing away from the brook.

Zachery Secrest had made an informal presentation at the last meeting, on March 30, of his proposal to place a footbridge over a small intermittent stream. The Committee raised no concerns for wetland protection in the proposal at that time, and Mr. Secrest then filed this formal Request for Determination. No further information or questions were raised at this meeting.

Robert Goldkamp presented his plan to build a 24- by 30-foot barn near his house at 17 Ridge Hill Farm Road. Approximately half of the barn's footprint would replace existing pavement at the edge of the driveway, and the remainder would be over a slope leading down to a bordering vegetated wetland. The back edge of the building's foundation would be about 3 feet from the edge of the wetland.

Mr. Goldkamp said he could find no other suitable location for a barn because a stream, extensive wetlands, and outcrops surround the comparatively small developed portion of this large lot. He has considered the possibility of wetland enhancement as mitigation, but can find no reasonable opportunity. Construction of the barn and its foundation would be approached from the front, not from the wetland, and the limit of work would be the erosion control line, at the wetland line, as shown on the plan. No mature trees would be removed.

Mary Jane O’Donnell said that a waiver would be needed for this project to be approved under the Bylaw, since it is in the 25-foot No-Disturbance Zone under the bylaw. There is no practical alternative location for a barn. Mitigation does not make sense since extending wetland or altering buffer areas on the property would require altering mature forest. Robert McDonnell said it is difficult to document as a waiver, but it seems fair to allow this project. It will have minimal impact on wetland and buffer zone.

Aliana vonRichthofen, the prospective buyer of the property at 7 Hampden Street, and surveyor Jerry Rossman presented the plan for building additions to the existing house in the riverfront area bordering Fuller Brook. Ms. vonRichthofen said that she sent notification by certified mail to absentee property owners and delivered notification by hand to the mailboxes of all on the abutters list. Whether the hand delivery fulfilled the requirements of the law for delivery by or to hand, was briefly discussed by the Committee.

Ms. vonRichthofen said her intention is to add a bedroom and bath on the first floor, and a garage attached to the house. The lot is narrow and oddly shaped, the house does not conform to current zoning limitations, and the proposed additions will require a waiver from the Zoning Board of Appeals. The addition on the back would extend the house toward the bank of the Brook by about 16 feet.

Mary Jane O’Donnell asked if the additions would be over areas now covered by lawn. Ms. vonRichthofen said it would replace lawn and a retaining wall. The existing slope would not be changed. Marc Taylor asked about the character of the land between the house and the Brook and pointed out that the survey plan shows the back fence to be a few feet inside the property line (leaving some private land on the town's side of the fence).

Ms. vonRichthofen said she would like to replace the fence. Committee members suggested a planting of low-maintenance native vegetation, such as shrubs, along the rear property line, as mitigation for the riverfront expansion. Ms. O'Donnell said that stormwater recharge should be considered for handling roof runoff.

Naomi Stonberg, of 31 Brook Street, said she opposed the proposal for several reasons. (1) The plan is insufficient in showing the extent of the project. (2) Contrary to her claim, Ms. vonRichthofen did not discuss the fence with Ms. Stonberg. (3) The garage is closer to Ms. Stonberg's house; the lot is nonconforming, and the proposal would result in too large a bulk of house on the lot. (4) This is not a Limited Disturbance in accordance with bylaw regulations. (5) Downspouts might send water toward 31 Brook Street.

Ms. O'Donnell said the affected area was already disturbed. Robert McDonnell asked how the project would harm the Brook, and said that he did not see how digging for the house would disturb either the Brook or the No-Disturbance Zone. Ms. O'Donnell agreed. Ms. Stonberg said she would like to find an expert to examine the question of disturbance. At the request of Ms. O'Donnell, Ms. vonRichthofen agreed to allow a continuation. Robert McDonnell moved to continue for three weeks to allow the neighbor to produce expert opinion, but soon withdrew the motion.

Mr. McDonnell moved to close the hearing and issue an Order of Conditions within three weeks, with two special conditions. (1) Only small construction vehicles would be used in the riverfront, and (2) a 15-foot wide border at the rear of the property would be planted with appropriate native plants, according to a planting plan to be approved by the Committee. Robert Lubker seconded the motion, which carried 5 – 0.

Gene Croach, Derek Redgate, and Steve Fessler represented the applicant and presented the proposal to replace the existing clubhouse, alter and enlarge the parking lot, improve the drainage, alter grading, and relandscape. The work will encompass about 9-1/4 acres of the 200-acre site. Mr. Croach showed an aerial photo of the site and survey plans of existing and proposed conditions. With the exception of a stormwater discharge pipe near the bank of an isolated pond on the golf course, the work area is outside the jurisdiction of the wetland laws. The pond has a surface area of about 11,000 square feet, qualifying it and its 100-foot buffer as jurisdictional areas under the Town Bylaw and the Wetlands Protection Act. The pond has no outlet or inlet.

Mr. Croach said that treated stormwater would discharge to a 12-inch riprap pad near the pond. Buffer zone alteration would cover 425 square feet. Erosion controls would be placed at the top of the slope leading down from the main work area to the pond and around the pond itself. A tracking pad would be placed at the exit from the worksite to Wellesley Avenue and silt sacks would be place in catchbasins to control silt runoff into the town's drainage system. Mr. Croach said that all the stormwater management standards are met. Engineer Derek Redgate said the plan includes water quality improvements such as frequent street sweeping, water quality units, and catchbasins. He said that the improvements to the drainage system would reduce the existing runoff crossing Wellesley Road from the parking lot by redirecting a substantial part of the runoff to the isolated pond on the golf course

Rosemary Richardson, a neighbor to the golf course, said she was concerned about Academy Brook. The Brook starts at Babson College, runs through the golf course in two places, and then joins Rosemary Brook, which is a source of the town’s drinking water. Pesticides and other chemicals used on the grounds of the golf course must get into the Brook and possibly from there to the drinking water. She said that the Brook has not flooded on her property for the last 12 years because of improved drainage facilities at Babson. She said the Country Club covered over a portion of the Brook two or three years ago.

Robert McDonnell asked Ms. Richardson if this project would increase pesticide use or worsen the pesticide problem. Ms. Richardson said she did not know the answer but felt that more impervious area would result in more runoff. Marc Taylor commented that an increase in impervious area might be accompanied by a decrease in lawn.

The applicant’s representatives said that the Natural Resources Commission had approached the Country Club for information on its use of pesticides, and that the Club was meeting with the NRC on April 25 to exchange information and concerns on this subject.

Neighbor Natalie Starr asked about the degree to which the town inspects a construction project to insure it adheres to the approved plan. Committee members said that there is inspection but not constant oversight. Neighbor Nancy Bagdasarian said the fauna in the pond might be drowned by excessive water discharge. Steve Fessler, a member of the Club, said he agreed that the water discharged to the pond is well treated before release.

Jonathan Adler presented his plan to build an addition to the back and extend the garage to the side of his house at 46 Earle Road. The entire site is within the riverfront of Boulder Brook, a perennial stream. The rear addition would be 13 by 18 feet and would cover an area now occupied by a wood deck and lawn. The garage extension would replace existing lawn. About half of the rear addition would be within the 100-year flood plain, but compensatory flood storage would be provided by excavation in two other portions of the backyard. The present house was built about two years ago and received a Certificate of Compliance upon completion.

Mary Jane O’Donnell asked if the roof runoff from the additions would be directed to recharge basins. Mr. Adler said he had not considered this, but would do what the Committee recommended. Peter Keenan asked if the driveway layout would be changed, and Mr. Adler said it would be rebuilt to meet the entrance to the expanded garage. Robert McDonnell said the driveway change should be shown on a revised drawing.

Roy Ennacheril and Trustin Roy Ennacheril, owners of 14 and 12 Willow Street, met with the Committee in response to an Enforcement Order requiring restoration for the removal of trees in a buffer zone. They presented a survey plan, dated 3/29/06, showing the property bounds, the bordering vegetated wetland as delineated by David W. Burke on 2/22/06, the tree line as it now exists, and the limits of the area recently cleared of trees. Part of the illegally cut area is inside the 25-foot buffer (Limited-Disturbance Zone), and most of the rest is in the outer part (Limited-Disturbance Zone) of the buffer. The recently demolished houses were outside the 100-foot buffer area.

Peter Keenan said he understood that the owners planned to rebuild on the lots. He suggested that they could produce a restoration plan for the buffer zone for approval by the Committee and leave future development plans to later, or they could file by a certain date a Notice of Intent with a final development plan incorporating acceptable restoration. Committee members discussed what might be needed for restoration and what development might be permitted in the buffer zone. All agreed that at least the 25-foot No-Disturbance Zone should be revegetated. Mary Jane O’Donnell said she favored leaving the house footprints outside the 100-foot buffer and requiring restoration up to the 100-foot line. Robert McDonnell said he might favor restoration to the 50-foot line, more or less, and did not know to what extent development would be allowed.

No one appeared to represent the applicant, and Peter Keenan had received no new information or notice from the applicant regarding this continued hearing. The Committee decided to assume that the applicant would want the hearing continued again. Robert McDonnell moved to continue the hearing to the next meeting, on May 11. Marc Taylor seconded, and the motion carried 5 – 0.

15 Winding River Circle, Reissue of Enforcement Order: At the request of the owner's consultant, the recent Enforcement (Restoration) Order was revised to clarify wording concerning the required removal of lighting.