Loading...
1999-01-06CITY OF BEVERLY, MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES BOARD SUBCOMMITTEE DATE PLACE MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT OTHERS PRESENT RECORDER : Norwood Pond Commission : :January6, 1999 : Program Room, Beverly Public Library : Chairman Don Martin, Vice-Chairman Nelland Douglas William Frost, David langng, Joyre McMahon; J. Michael Lawlet, Virginia MeGlynn, Tina Cassidy, Bruce Nardella. : Kevin Burke, Todd Lampert : City Engineer Frank Killilea Chairman lvlartin calls the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. He asks to clarify a point made at the last Commission meeting. At that time, City Engineer Frank Killilea had provided the commissions with a plan of possible improvements to the area behind the North Beverly school that had beenprepared by someone else several years prior. The plan was not endorsed by the Commission, but was discused as one piece of information about past efforts to research this area McMahon informs members ofthe audience and the commission that several members of the City's Economic and Community Development Council ("ECDC") are present at the meeting this evening to hear the presentation of the City's transportation engineers. Next, Martin asks if there is any public oomment. One gentleman expresses displeasure that the proposed access road to the site may be constructed in wetlands. He states that there are enough alternative access points through existing residential roadways that could be used instead of destroying wetlands. With no other public comment at this point, Mania introduces Rich Beneveuto from the consulting finn of Highway Traffic and Signal Design, Inc. CHTSD"). That firm is the. one hired by the City to develop preliminary design information for transportation improvements to the Brimbal Avenue and Dunham Road area of Route 128. Benevento explains tlmt the conceptual plan on display is a very preliminary design plan that was conceived for discussion purposes. It is not based on actual traffic count information or other important information (i.e. wetlands locations), and asks that those reviewing and discussing it recognize that the plan is in fact very preliminary. A member of the audience asks why an access road to Norwood Pond is shown on the plan. Benevento responds that the City's need for a direct access road over Route 128 to the campus was gleaned from a review of previous Commission meeting minutes. Tom Bussone, President of the Little League, expresses a need for additional parks and playgrounds in the City. He states tint over 900 children participate in the Beverly Little League and form a total of 72 teams. Additional fields are needed for several youth Norwood Pond Commission Minutes January 6, 1999 meeting Page two Dan DeAngelis of Brimbal Avenue asks bow much the project will cost and whether it will be done by the state. Benevento responds that it is impossible to state at this point bow much the construction project might cost because it has not yet been designed. He explains the various research steps that will be taken by his firm as part of the study and also explains the various public meetings that will be required during the design phase. The State's Highway Department must approve the ultimate plan of roadway improvments Benevento introduces Mr. Bill Lyous, who also works for BTSD as a project manager and as manager of the firm's transportation department. He oxplainn the process of .conducting traffic counts at various intersections, the terminoiogy used in the profession, and states that both the Essex Street and Brimbal Avenue interchanges 'Tailing" under print conditions. Douglas asks Lyons to point those areas out on the map, which he does. Lang states that there are many intersections in the City which are at "failure", and asks if these are considered to be the worst. Lyous suggests that any intersection in "Failure" should be considered for improvement if possible, and states that the possibility o f installing signals at these imersections is one that must be studied as part of the design process. Lang expresses concern that proposed improvements to Brimbal Avenue should take into account existing difficulties on Sohier Road, which he attributes to traffic to and from the high school He states that the possibility of merely shifting traffic problems from one street to another is of concern to the City, especially due to the existence of residential neighborhoods at both ends of Brimbal Avenue. Lyons states that HTSD is attempting to design a project which will eliminate several ramps near Brimbal Avenue to improve the interchange to the greatest degree possible, eliminate the industrial traffic from the residential portion of Dunham Road, and provide for direct access to the City's propert3~ adjacent to Norwood Pond without detriment to the rest of the roadway network. Douglas reviews the history leading to the City's ownership of this property and states his opinion that the City should continue to use this parcel for open space purposes. He also states that the plan, even though preliminary, addresses some basic issues the neighbors have and solves several problems. Martin adds that he has heard rumors about the future use of the Norwood Pond site, and states that there are no plans to rezone any of the City's property from residential to industrial to facilitate industrial development on City- owned land. Lawler asks Lyons for clarification on which ramps on and off Route 128 might be eliminated. Lyons shows the areas of concern on the map. Lawler asks what the process Norwood Pond Minutes January 6, 1999 meeting Page three is for renumbering the exits if necessary. Lyons explains that the Massachusetts Highway Department will make that determination Douglas asks Lyons to explain how much information the firm had on the subject of wetlands as it prepared thin plan; Douglas states that it looks as though they dried an access road layout with at least some regard for wetlands locations. Lyons states that in fact they did have some very preliminary wetlands information which they used, but that it has not been field verified as of yet. A member of the audience asks if HTSD studied Enon Street as pan of this project. Lyons states the intersection of Brimbal Avenue and Enon Street is one that should be studied for potential irapact. Resident Larry Glass suggests it is important to be farsighted when planning improvements like this and to make decisions with other issues across the City in mind. Resident Phil Dunkelbarger expresses support forthe study to date and regards the preliminary design as a good positive step. He mentions possible locations for a public safety facility, which should be considered during the study. Renee Mary, a member of the audience, asks whether all southbound ramps from Route 128 to Brimbal Avenue are going to be eliminated. Lyons states that the proposal is not to eliminate ramps, but to relocate them. . ,.., McMahon states that the City has plans to site a public safety facility at Cummings Center, Dunkelbarger questions the availability of the Route 128 rest area and Burger King locations as a possible site. An audience member expresses concern about the number of trees that might need to be taken down with this project, since they act as insulators against noise from planes and. cars. Lawler asks if a sound barrier could be placed along Dunham Road to provide some relief to the residences there. Lyons states that that may be possible for the City to pursue. City Council President Peter Gilmore asks how long the access road to the Norwood Pond site would be and how much it would cost to design and construct it. Lyons answers that on this preliminary plan, the mad is approximately 1,300 feet long and might cost $150.00 per linear foot to build. Doughs expresses concem that the access road be located in such a way so as not to preclude Hasbro's ability to use its land. Paul Cusiak objects to playing fields behind the North Beverly Elementary School due to an increase in traffic and problems with parking that would result. He believes it is wise Norwood Pond Commission minutes January 6, 1999 meeting Page four to consider using the space on the former landfill for ballfields instead. Lyons states that his firm will not be the entry deciding future land uses for the school or the Norwood Pond site. Those decisions are the City's to make, and the design for roadway improvements will take these decisions into consideration Nardella comments on the subject of ballfields and active recreation uses for part oftlg Norwood Pond campus. He asks members ff it makes sense to consider investing public monies to improve access on and in the vicinity of Ronte 128 for safety improvements and improved quality of life. In his opinion, the question is not whether baHfields should be constructed on the former landfill or the North Beverly Elementary School, but whether fields should be built in beth locations to meet the needs identified by the Recreation Commission. Next on the agenda is a status report from City Engineer Frank Killflea on the Brimhal Avenue repavlng project. Killilea distributes maps of Brimbal Avenue showing which sections of Brimbal Avenue will be reconstructed, and to what, extent. While funding Inn been identified for thin project and remains available for that purpose, regulations have changed that now require the inclusion of bike paths in the redesign. He is in the process of designing a plan to incorporate such a path, but it may necessitate blasting. The reconstruction plan will require a public heating on the matter.Cassidy asks if there are any other components to the reconstruction plan besides pavement overlay. Killflea .mentions the potential for new sidewalks, vertical granite curbs, and possible drainage improvments. Lang asks what the time frame for the Brimbal Avenue work is, and Killflea answers they hope to have public meetings in March of this year to discuss the section from Colon Street to Hertick Street. The City hopes to complete work on this section of the road during 1999. Killilea also adds that with respect to the Ronte IA project, the City is still waiting for a Notice to Proceed from the State and that he is in firequent contact with the Massachusitts Highway Department regarding this project and the Elliott Street reconstruction. Next on the agenda is a discussion of the use of the former landfill for hall fields after capping is complete. Lang states that he has been researching this issue since November and speaking to communities pursuing ball field designs on similar sites. He submits a list of communities involved, and updates the members on specifics of projects in Milton, Natick, and Needham. Lang states that he has met with the Mayor and Mr. Killflea to discuss the matter and they remain committed to keeping future land use options open and to submitting a final grading plan to the Department of Environmental Protection CDEP"). Lang questions the cost estimates for active recreation designs provided by the City's consultant, Malcolm Pirnie. Norwood Pond Commission minutes January 6, 1999 Meeting Page five Douglas expresses concern about incun'ing additional development costs for hallfields on this site. Based on the information the Commission has, he recommends that the City not attempt to convert this site into a costly active recreation site. Lang disagrees that the cost difference would be significant, and in fact feels it could be designed and constructed without incurring additional costs if other changes to the design were made. He also states that active recreation uses would not necessarily require an active gas collection and flare system; the actual emissions from the landfilll and the timing of initiation of active use of the site will dictate whether flares are required. Lang suggests that other members of the Commition contact DEP to see if in fact it might be possible to redesign the closure plan and ask for an extension of the deadline for capping the landfilL Cassidy asks Lang if any of the communities be mentioned have in fact received approval from the DEP for active recreation uses. Lang states that he did not call all of the communities personally, but believes Topsfeild has approval Cassidy asks if any landfills closed during the last decade have been reused for active recreation. Lang answers there is one that he knows of. Lang refers to a letter he has from a fitat called Eireo Environmental, which is involved in soil disposal/management. They would pay the City to accept material for the capping, which would reduce the costs of closure. Cassidy states that involvement with that company would require more than a six or nine month extension of the deadline, since the City is unwilling to do the bulk of trash relocation during any season other than winter or early spring. Martin asks Lang for his suggested course of action on this matter. Lang suggests that the Commission should decide how to approach the Mayor with this information. By doing mere research and changing the final grade of the landfill from 5% to 3%, he thinks hundreds of thousands of dollars could be saved. The City would need to request an extension of the deadlines in the Consent Order and then submit revised closure plans. McMahon expresses concern that the onus for this study and decision should not he on this commission, since it is not a policy-making Board. She suggests that the subject b~ raised directly with the Mayor and City Council. Nardella expresses his opinion that the commission should research all aspects of the subject it can. Next, Martin asks if members have any suggested revisions to the draft minutes of the November 4, 1998 meeting. There are none. McMahon: motion to accept the minutes upon amendment to the third paragraph on page three (see file for written amendment), seconded by Nardella. All members in favor, motion carries. Martin asks if there is any additional public comment. Dunkelbarger asks if Lang can draft a letter to DEP on the Mayor's behalf asking for an extension from DEP. Lang Norwood Pond Commission minutes January 6, 1999 meeting Page six states he would be willing to do this but McMahon suggests be attend the public hearing being held on the rnatIer by the City Council in two weeks' time instead. Lang: motion to have David Lang work with the Mayor to draft a letter requesting an extension of time from DEP and develop a new ciosture plan to create hall fields on the landfill. Martin asks if there is a second to that motion. There is none. Prior to a second on the motion, McMahon suggests she would be in favor of ballfeilds on the !andfill ff it did not cost additional tax dollars to construct them and fithe DEP would permit the City to redesign the closure plan without penalty for mi.qsing the mandatory deadlines. Cassidy expresses concern about the Cornminion communicating directly with DEP because the commission is purely an advisory group to the Mayor, and does not formally represent the City with that agency. Lang states that be is not advocating sending a letter directly from the Commission to DEP, and that be has spoken with DEP on his own, not as a representitive 0f the City. Lang reiterates his suggestion that he would draft a letter to DEP forthe City's consideration. Cassidy expresses concern ahont injecting the commission hto the middle of the landfill design issue and the DEP. Doughs states that he has concerns about supportiog the motion because be feels it would require him to rely on second-hand information, and that he does not have enough first-hand information regarding the cost implications of the suggestion to support it. Lawler asks if the commission should consider inviting Malcolm Pirnie representatives to another meeting to discuss the subject. Nardella states that while he doesn't disagree with Lang, he believes there is an information gap at present. He stresses that the subject must be discussed in a public hearing before the City Council, and recommends that the commission attend that hearihg and work with elected officials to keep the process moving forward. Lampert states that he would be willing to work with Lang in drafting a letter; Nardella feels that the letter should come from the Mayor to the City Council and that it is not appropriate for the commission to send its own letter to the DEP. Martin suggests that there are two possible motions before the commission for consideration. The first is to draft a letter from the City to the DEP relative to atime extension of the Administrative Consent Order, and the second motion suggests the commission attend the City Council's public hearing on the matter prior to taking any votes on the subject. McMahon asks Lang if he would be willing to withdraw his motion until the commission has had an opportunity to attend the public hearing and gather additional first-hand information. Lang agrees to withdraw his motion. She concurs with Nardella that the process must continue to move forward. Norwood Pond Commission minutes January 6, 1999 meeting Page seven City Council President Peter Gilmore mates that the City needs to convince DEP that the City has the necessary amount of money available to cap the dump. If the City Council votes to authorize the bonding request, it allows the process to move forward in a timely fashion. General discussion is held on the details of the capping plan submitted by the City to DEP to date. Lang: motion that the members of the commission contact other communities listed on the handout he prepared to research their post-closure plans and designs, and to contact the DEP with respect to the possibility of obtaining an extension of time on the Administrative Consent Order, seconded by Lawler. Motion carries. ire suggests that if the commission intends to attend the public hearing, it not delay its next meeting since there are timing issues that must he observed. Lang: motion that the commission attend the City Council's public hearing on the subject of the landfill scheduled for January 19, 1999 at 7:30 p.m., and to post this date and time as a special commission meeting; and to convene a second special commission meeting the next evening to discuss the hearing if necessary. Motion seconded by McMahort, motion carries. Martin asks if there is any further discussion this evening. There is none. Douglas: motion to adjourn, seconded by Lawler. All members in favor, motion carries. The meeting is adjourned at 10:00 p.m.