Plympton commission approves 55 Crescent house with conservation conditions and recording deadline

Chair Rick Burnet and the Plympton Conservation Commission on May 5 voted unanimously to approve a single‑family house at 55 Crescent Street with conditions designed to protect nearby wetland resources.

The commission approved the project under the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act and the Plympton Wetlands Protection Bylaw, granting waivers for 1,080 square feet of disturbance in an inland vegetated wetland (IVW) and 2,250 square feet within the bordering vegetated wetland (BVW) inner buffer. Commissioner Molly Hutt moved the approval, citing mitigation measures that include a replication area, split‑rail fencing and conservation posts; the voting record shows a unanimous roll‑call approval (Rick Burnet: Aye; Amy Cronin: Aye; Tim Ferraro: Aye; Molly Hutt: Aye; Mike Matern: Aye).

Why it matters: Commissioners and the applicant team said the revised plan moves the structure farther from the BVW and focuses disturbance in an area the commission described as low‑value IVW created by road runoff and dominated by invasive plants. As an additional public‑interest protection, the applicant agreed to expand the previously offered conservation restriction (CR) to protect 4.47 acres of the parcel outside the house and yard area.

Details and conditions: Conservation Agent Brian Vasa read draft special conditions that the commission added to the Order of Conditions. The conditions require the applicant to submit draft CR language to the Commission office before commencing any work. The applicant must diligently pursue execution of the CR with the Massachusetts Division of Conservation Services (DCS) and submit final CR paperwork to DCS within 90 days of the commencement of work unless the commission grants an extension. Proof of recording the CR at the Plymouth County Registry of Deeds must be provided before any Certificate of Compliance (COC) will be issued for the site, the commission said. Agent Vasa noted that, while not a legal requirement, the Building Department may also require proof of CR submission, recording, or a COC before issuing a Certificate of Occupancy.

Abutter concerns: Abutter Jessica Kinsman raised questions about the proposed well’s proximity to her leaching field and said she worried a future move of her leaching field could be affected; Attorney Adam Brodsky stated those issues fall under the Board of Health’s jurisdiction. Kinsman also asked about plan details she said differed from prior submissions and flagged a line on the plans listing “800 cubic feet” of fill; Brad Holmes of Environmental Consulting and Restoration said he had no recalculation for that number, and Agent Vasa said the 800‑cubic‑feet figure was likely carried over erroneously from prior plans.

Site work and mitigation: At a site visit on April 28 attendees observed grading and proposed use of suitable excavated foundation material for fill; Holmes said organic soil from the IVW would be stockpiled and used in the BVW replication area. The applicants told the commission they would install the replication area and protective fencing and posts prior to construction so future owners would not have to complete those steps.

Next steps: The commission authorized the agent to prepare and issue a written decision incorporating the special conditions. The CR execution and recording are prerequisites for any future COC; the commission emphasized the 90‑day target for submitting final CR paperwork to DCS unless an extension is granted.