Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the RDA 60 Green topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission finds no filing required for small addition at 60 Green Street
Summary
Attorney Brian McGrail and engineer Rick Salvo presented an RDA for 60 Green Street; the commission concluded the project was de minimis, accepted erosion controls and a compost sock, and voted to issue a negative determination of applicability.
Get email alerts on the RDA 60 Green topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Attorney Brian McGrail and engineer Rick Salvo told the Wakefield Conservation Commission on July 21 that a proposed addition at 60 Green Street would remove roughly 240 square feet of bituminous driveway and place a 27.2‑foot addition that largely occupies existing paved area.
McGrail summarized the procedural background and said staff had asked for a delineation to determine whether the commission had jurisdiction. The consultant delineation placed the closest existing impervious surface about 73 feet from the wetland edge. McGrail described the work as de minimis and said the applicants had committed to erosion controls, including a compost sock, and to re‑loam and seed areas where bituminous paving is removed.
"Because of the de minimis aspect of the project," McGrail said, the applicants requested a determination that the commission’s wetland regulations do not apply. Commissioners questioned the plan for loam and seed, the location of the shed and fence, and the proposed erosion controls; the engineer confirmed a compost sock and limited grading in a relatively flat area. After discussion, the commission moved to issue a negative determination of applicability for the plan presented and approved the motion unanimously.
What this means: the negative determination means the commission found no further wetland filing is required for the work as shown on the submitted plan, subject to the erosion controls described in the record. Staff noted the plan will be part of the building‑permit record and that the applicant had the ZBA decision in hand.
Next steps: the file will be closed administratively unless the applicants revise plans in a way that changes the commission’s jurisdictional determination.

