This was from the Globe last week. Could someone please let me know if 
they plan on attending?

-- 
-Time flies like the wind. Fruit flies like a banana. Stranger things have -
-happened but none stranger than this. Does your driver's license say Organ
-Donor?Black holes are where God divided by zero. Listen to me! We are all-
-individuals! What if this weren't a hypothetical question?
steveo at syslang.net

FUNDS RELEASED FOR WETLANDS FIGHT
Author(s):    Jenn Abelson, Globe Staff Correspondent Date: February 24,
2003 Page: B2 Section: Metro/Region 
The Framingham Board of Selectmen has released up to $10,000 in funding to
fortify the battle against a proposed subdivision that the town contends
would destroy wetlands far beyond state standards. 
Nearly four years ago, Framingham's Conservation Commission rejected the
application for the Preserve at Emerald Valley, a 49-acre project located
off Grove and Winch streets. The commissioners ruled that an access road for
the planned residential subdivision would alter the mature, forested
wetlands and have an impact on more than the 5,000-square-foot threshold set
by the state's Wetlands Protection Act. 
In turn, the Winch Pond Trust, which owns the land and has previously
violated the Wetlands Protection Act, appealed the town's decision to the
state Department of Environmental Protection. Last November, the agency
overruled the Conservation Commission and approved the project with special
conditions. 
"Based upon review of the entire record, consideration of the issues raised
through the appeal, and the aforementioned site inspection, the department
finds that, with adherence to the special conditions imposed by the
department, the project can be approved," according to a Nov. 18 letter from
James A. Sprague, section chief of the Wetlands and Waterways program. 
In light of this ruling, the Conservation Commission unanimously voted to
appeal the Department of Environmental Protection's decision. Now, the
commission is seeking up to $10,000 to hire an environmental lawyer who
could consult with town counsel on the appeal. 
On Thursday, the Board of Selectmen unanimously approved the commission's
request, and the money is being released from the town's Wetlands Protection
Act Fee Fund. 
This $52,000 account derives income from fees collected for applications
filed under the state Wetlands Protection Act. Money from the fund can be
used only for matters pertaining to this act. 
"Frankly, we can't understand the DEP's ruling," said William Merriam,
chairman of the Conservation Commission. 
Merriam said the commission rejected the application mainly because the plan
called for a 30-foot-wide, two-way bridge across the wetlands that would
cause significant devastation beyond the impact discussed in the
application. 
"Trees would be lost, the canopy would be lost," he said. "This would change
the amount of light, the temperature, the type of vegetation. The amount of
area to be permanently altered is significantly greater than the
5,000-square-[feet] allowed." 
Neither officials from the Winch Pond Trust, nor the attorney for the trust,
could be reached for comment. 
In 1997, the landowner, Howard Fafard, was reprimanded by the town for
spraying weed killer and putting filling in the wetland area, according to
Cindy Dionne, the conservation administrator. 
The town ordered Fafard to remove any filling and revegetate the area
affected by the spraying, Dionne said. 
According to the commission, there is much support for the town to fight the
subdivision, as two abutters of the site also have personally appealed the
department's decision. Moreover, when the project was originally before the
Conservation Commission, the surrounding neighborhood organ ized a public
hearing, where nearly 75 people attended to oppose the project. 
"I'm concerned this subdivision would lead to the continual decrease of
wetlands," said Joseph Deignan, who lives across from the proposed
subdivision and helped organize the neighborhood meeting in 1999. 
The Department of Environmental Protection is holding a pre-trial conference
to hear the matter on March 19.

Reply via email to