Concerns over the removal of a detention flood pond on private property located at 2 West Silvershell Avenue consumed the lion’s share of the January 24 Mattapoisett Conservation Commission meeting.
Property owner Donald Middleton submitted a Request for Determination of Applicability, which if favorably granted, would permit the filling in of a large flood detention pond that he said was mandated when he built his home some 25 years ago.
Middleton said that while attending public meetings held for a Notice of Intent filed by his neighbor Karl Pothier for the construction of a single-family home at 2 Holmes Street, he was surprised to learn that Pothier’s project would include a large amount of fill, something Middleton said had been denied during the planning of his home. Middleton said that in order to level off his property for a lawn, some fill was needed but that he was instructed to remove an equal amount of material elsewhere on his property, hence a flood detention pond was created.
During Pothier’s hearings, Middleton learned that possibly a regulatory error had been made decades earlier and thus filed a RDA to fill in the pond that he said has been a breeding ground for mosquitos.
Pothier questioned why Middleton was not required to file a site plan as he had been required to do prior to construction of his home. Chairman Mike King believes that Middleton’s RDA did not rise to the level of requiring a site plan just to fill in a hole.
Other abutters located at 8 Prospect Drive and 3 Prospect Road added their voices, saying that removing the detention pond would mean both groundwater and stormwater would flood other parts of the beach community.
Conservation Agent Brandon Faneuf, along with King, explained that filling in the pond would not create more flooding in the area and that because Middleton’s property is a large lawned parcel, there would be sufficient opportunity for water to recharge below ground. It was also pointed out that a nearby saltmarsh was not creating flooding conditions that were being mitigated by the detention flood pond because, as King said, “Water doesn’t flow uphill.”
The filing received a negative-three determination. King cautioned Middleton, saying, “Wait for the 10-day appeal (period) to expire; I have a feeling this (decision) will be appealed.”
Later in the proceedings, commissioner Trevor Francis produced photographic evidence that the Brandt Point Village subdivision is “a mess.” While pointing out various violations, he described crushed erosion-control features, lack of turtle fencing and trash littering woodlands, calling it “a disaster.” Francis said that the new owner of the subdivision, Christian Farland, had agreed to meet on site.
Francis also brought to the attention of the commission possible unpermitted activity along jurisdictional riverfront property at the intersection of Crystal Spring and Acushnet Road. A two-lot subdivision had been permitted, but Francis said it appears that some clearing has taken place deeper into a large parcel behind the residential construction area. All matters of concern would be followed up, it was noted.
Earlier in the meeting, Christopher Neill of Woodwell Climate Research Center received a negative decision to his filed RDA for the installation of a 2-inch-diameter pipe and gauge planned for Tripp Mill Brook, instrumentation used to study nitrogen levels from streams that empty into Buzzards Bay. Neill said this is part of a larger research project covering streams from Westport to Wareham.
A Notice of Intent filing by Mark Cannon, 65 Mattapoisett Neck Road, for the construction of a 4-foot by 185-foot private residential pier was continued to February 14.
Faneuf reported that an Enforcement Order issued to property owners for 13 Industrial Drive was being acted upon, including the development of remediation planning.
The next meeting of the Mattapoisett Conservation Commission is scheduled for Monday, February 14, at 6:30 pm.
Mattapoisett Conservation Commission
By Marilou Newell