With multiple jurisdictional authorities between two different towns to contend with, it appeared on August 12 that the Clean Energy Collective solar farm slated for the Clemishaw Property off Tucker Lane might have satisfied the Marion Conservation Commission’s concerns, and will now wait for final ConCom approval once the project clears the Planning Board.
During their July 19 meeting, the commission requested some minor specifications on the plan and a written vegetation management plan for the wetlands at the site. Since then, environmental consultant for the project Mark Arnold devised the management plan and also indicated on the plan the 15-foot “no touch” zone as well as the 30-foot “no build” zone as requested.
Taller trees within the area of wetlands will be lopped down to 10 feet in height, with the trunk and roots left intact. Since the last meeting, the project went before the Rochester Planning Board again, which resulted in the shrinking of the impact area, minimizing grading in that area. Also, a line of shrubs has been added on the Rochester side to aid in screening the Mary’s Pond direction.
As for a vegetation management plan, mowing will occur every six weeks, careful to avoid rainy weather so mower wheels will not disturb the earth at the site. The field, overall, will be left as-is, with selective tree pruning around the perimeter to keep the length of the trees low enough to prevent shadowing on the solar arrays.
“We want to minimize effort to have to get in there and keep it clear,” said Bob Rogers of G.A.F. Engineering.
The applicant requested a continuation until August 26, hoping to secure Marion Planning Board approval by that date.
In other matters, the commission was reluctant to issue a full Certificate of Compliance to Bill Langone of 35 Holly Road after a site visit revealed the existing timber walkway exceeded the scope of its original plan from decades ago with about 15 to 20 additional feet of walkway extending out over the water on a float. Conservation Commission Chairman Norman Hills said the float required a Chapter 91 license from the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection.
The next problem, Hills said, was improper and unapproved storage of the float during the offseason, as reflected on overhead satellite imagery photos. Also, there is a tennis court on the site that Hills suspects is located within the wetlands. The age of the tennis court is unknown, although the commission deduced that it must be around 30 years old.
The family that built the tennis court, said Hills, now wants to sell the property but cannot until the Certificate of Compliance is issued.
Hills argued that although there might have been beach erosion over time since initial approval of the timber walkway, the floating walkway would still require a Chapter 91 license.
After further discussion on the tennis court, commission member Stephen Gonsalves suggested the board refrain from “holding their (the property owners’) feet to the fire” over the tennis court.
“It was so long ago,” said Gonsalves. “Thirty years is a long time. Things have changed.” It may have even been built before the Wetlands Protection Act took effect, added Gonsalves.
The commission did determine that any future improvements or repairs to the tennis court would require a filing with the ConCom.
“These gray and sticky areas really frustrate me. They’ve really done nothing wrong. Rules and regulations have changed since then,” said Gonsalves. “But the float … Let’s give them a chance to let them rectify that.” Gonsalves said he would hate to see the sale of the property fall through over a complete denial of the certificate.
The commission decided to issue a partial Certificate of Compliance for the timber walkway only, excluding the float, and plans to send the property owner a letter informing him that any future work done on the tennis court would require Conservation Commission approval.
Also during the meeting, the commission issued a negative determination for the eradication of three isolated areas of phragmites on Planting Island. The commission plans to use this action to destroy phragmites as a data point to determine effective measures to combat phragmites in the future.
Lisa and Benjamin Procter of 69 East Avenue received a negative determination for the demolition of the rear portion of the existing single-family house and the addition of a second story, as well as a front entry porch all within 100 feet of a coastal bank.
Roger Tenglin of 88 Indian Cove Road received a negative determination for the razing of 900 feet of an existing 14,000-square-foot structure, but a positive determination was added since the wetlands lines were not confirmed.
The commission held off on issuing a Certificate of Compliance to Heidi Kostin of 167 Cross Neck Road until the vegetation in the restoration area reestablished itself, possibly next spring.
The Notice of Intent for the Town of Marion to reconstruct a 337-foot long, 4-foot high seawall at Sprague’s Cove was continued until December 9.
The Request for Determination of Applicability for Chuong Pham of 22 Bass Creek Road was continued until September 9.
The next scheduled meeting of the Marion Conservation Commission is September 9 at 7:00 pm at the Marion Town House.
By Jean Perry
