Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Mitigation And Compliance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Conservation commission pauses decision on 311 Dedham Avenue after mitigation shortfall and DEP involvement
Summary
Commissioners asked for more documentation and a site review after staff flagged a 682-square-foot shortfall in required mitigation at 311 Dedham Avenue; DEP previously appealed the project under riverfront regulations and later returned jurisdiction to the commission.
At the May 22, 2025 meeting, the Needham Conservation Commission discussed a request for a Certificate of Compliance for work at 311 Dedham Avenue but did not vote and asked for more documentation and a possible site visit.
Staff told the commission that DEP had appealed the project under the state’s riverfront regulations but, after meetings and revised plans, DEP returned jurisdiction to the commission. As part of the original filing, the applicant was required to create 1,100 square feet of mitigation area. Staff reported the as-built condition reduces the mitigation by roughly 682 square feet because the approved lawn limits were extended on multiple sides of the house.
The owner who joined the meeting said he had reduced some impervious surfaces (he cited an improvement of roughly 252 square feet) and asked the commission to inspect the site. He stated, “At this point, with the improvement of 250 square feet, right, I will I will request the conservation commission to come to the site and have a look.”
Commissioners and staff agreed the engineer’s certification must clearly document any deviations from the approved plan. Commissioner Paulina and others requested a clearer as‑built plan showing what restoration and plantings were actually installed. Commissioner Reid noted that species lists included with the submission appeared to contain non‑native species; staff said wetlands consultant Karen Catrone would re‑visit the site and discuss planting and monitoring with the owner.
No motion or vote was taken. The commission indicated it would continue the item and seek an as‑built plan, clearer monitoring/planting documentation, and possibly an on‑site review before acting.
