Loading...
Public Services Committee Meeting Minutes 10-21-2024 Hannah L. Bowen-Chair Steven M. Crowley Danielle M. Spang ���' (� LY Public Services/Committee of the Whole Meeting 11![ine V Monday,October 21,2024, 6:30 PM C;T`; Within the Confines of the City Council Meeting Beverly City Hall,3rd Floor, 191 Cabot St. ZRI, 1 M 21 P LL' 2v Bowen called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM. Members present: Bowen, Spang, Crowley Members absent:None Also present: Todd Rotondo,Matthew St. Hilaire Order Date to Description Action Taken Number Committee Constituent Inquiries relating to Public Services Committee #226 08/19/2024 Work. Hold Appointment-John Hersey to serve on the Bike and Pedestrian #242 09/23/2024 Advisory Committee See below A petition to install a new Regular Station on Livingstone Ave #252 09/23f2024 to replace the existing on Hold Neighbors Greg Nowak (63 Livingstone Avenue)and Evan Perkins(62 Bridge Street)were also in attendance. Bowen mentioned Order#242 had already been voted out of Committee on October 7,2024. Responses from National Grid and a letter from George Gomez are attached below as requested by the Committee. Spang asked if the regulator station could be moved down, and National Grid representative Diana Cuddy explained there is another option to put it in front of the white picket fence,but it cannot go beyond that point. She stated the radius isn't a measure of footage but other factors restricting locations. National Grid does not want to place it in front of a house and there are underground obstructions therefore they are limited to four possible locations. Rotondo stated his concerns are strictly with safety relating to the proposed location due to prior events. At 6:37PM Bowen called Committee of the Whole when Matthew St. Hilaire joined the meeting. Greg Nowak asked Cuddy why the engineers were not at the meeting and Cuddy replied that she had them on standby virtually to answer questions. Evan Perkins asked about the type of smoke that will emit from the vent pole at the regulator station and Cuddy replied that nothing gets vented from the pole and the purpose of it is for pressure. Spang requested the neighbors be included in the decision on the location of the vent poles to the regulator box and Cuddy affirmed. Possible locations were discussed,and Bowen stated the conversation would continue during the Committee Meeting within the City Council Meeting later in the evening. A motion to adjourn Committee of the Whole was made at 6:55PM and seconded. A vote was taken,and motion carried (5-0). A motion to adjourn was made and seconded. A vote was taken, and motion carried(3-0). Meeting adjourned at 6:55PM. 10110124,4:55 PM City of Beverly Mail-Order 252-Proposed Relocation of Gas Infrastructure Lisa Kent alkent@beverlyma.gov> Order 252 - Proposed Relocation of Gas Infrastructure N �r'11�7 1 message George Gomes <georgegomes55@gmail.com> Thu;Oct 10, 2024 at 4:23 PM To: Hannah Bowen <hbowen@bevedyma.gov>, dspang@beverlyma.gov, scrowley@beverlyma.goG Cc: Ikent@beverlyma.gov, trotondo@beveriyma.gov -7 Members of the Public Service Subcommittee, Please accept this comment regarding Order#252, a proposal by National Grid to relocate an exisf& natural gas regulator station at the comer of Bridge Street and Livingstone Ave. My wife and I are the owners of 63 Bridge'Street and reside in Apt. 2.We are a direct abutter of the current regulator station and received notice of the proposal to move it,as we will be within 200 feet of the new location as well. One of the two hatches of the current system is in the corner of our driveway,while the other hatch immediately abuts the fence of our neighbors at 49 Livingstone Ave. I am writing to you as an admittedly biased observer, but specifically because I have some concerns about the way our property was described in relation to the extant regulator station, as well as the proposed relocated regulator station, during the public hearing before the full Council, as well as during the Subcommittee's meeting on October 7th.As you know, our neighbors at 62 Bridge Street and at 63 Livingstone Ave both spoke forcefully against the proposal on Monday night. I fully respect their right to oppose any proposal they don't like, but in the spirit of getting a fuller picture of the neighborhood and adding to the"human element", I would like to add my perspective to the record. I have lived at 63 Bridge Street for about ten years, and have often wondered what goes on under the metal doors of what I now know is a regulator vault. Please note that, despite testimony suggesting that the current vault is in a natural location for such a use,the existing vault and stand pipe do block a portion of our driveway and pose an obstacle to be aware of for cars, pedestrians, and cyclists alike as they traverse the area.As testimony has noted, Livingstone Ave is well-travelled by all road users, although I am eagerly awaiting the completion of the Bridge Street reconstruction project, which will reconfigure the geometry of this intersection, relocate the current traffic light, and hopefully improve safety for all road users. Despite the fact that the current location of the vault is mildly inconvenient for us, aside from a bit of finagling while shoveling off snow and the very occasional blockage of our driveway by National Grid crews adjusting the equipment, I want to stress that the existing equipment poses essentially no nuisance to me as a direct abutter. The current equipment is silent while in operation, maintenance is relatively infrequent, and as far as I can tell, the vent pipe poses no air quality issue(otherwise,as the parent of a small child like my neighbor who testified, I'd be very alarmed). I provide this perspective for the record and also to ease the concerns of neighbors regarding any replacement vault. In short, the existence of the current regulator does not overly trouble our family. I think that, living in a city, and particularly in an older, denser part of the city like Ryal Side,we have to live with the occasional nuisance, however big or small.These nuisances are far outweighed, in my view, by the immense benefits of living in such a neighborhood. What does trouble me,which 1 only learned on Monday, is that the existing regulator vault is nearly sixty years old and that replacement has been mandated by the Department of Public Utilities (DPU).To quote the National Grid rep: "It's a DPU requirement to make it a safer double-feed system (emphasis mine)... this regulator vault was initially installed in 1966,so it's time to update that from our perspective as well as a DPU compliance) issue." National Grid is admittedly not a company with a sterling reputation for proactive maintenance or strict attentiveness to regulatory compliance, so if the company says it's time to replace the equipment from their perspective, I am inclined to believe them. Gas regulators help maintain safe and adequate pressure in the system, and in the event of failure can result in property damage, and in extreme cases, explosions.A failing regulator valve caused the 2018 explosion in the Merrimack Valley that damaged nearly 100 homes and killed a local resident. In short,timely replacement and proper maintenance of this infrastructure is an obvious safety issue. I am well aware that the Council, and residents of the City at large,feel a great deal of animosity towards National Grid due to the 115KV project and other work underway in Beverly.As a Bridge Street resident whose desk is currently rumbling from the construction outside, I empathize with folks who have had enough.With that in mind, I appreciate the Council's skepticism of this request, and I think its important generally to interrogate the decision making and timing of the company in proposing projects. I don't know whether the proposed location is the"correct"location, lacking the requisite engineering background. However, I do recognize the psychology of how people generally respond to proposals like this. I am concerned that this process will become a game of"what-a-mole"where National Grid may protest the Council's scrutiny before begrudgingly proposing a new site.At that point, a new set of neighbors-will receive official notices in the mail, become alarmed, and make public comment.The Council will in turn try to respond to those concerns, and the entire https://mail.google.com/mall/u/0/?ik=494dc6de28&view=pt&search=all&pennthid=thread-f:1812559879652735973%7Cmsg4:1812559879652735973... 112 10/10124,4:55 PM City of Beverly Mail-Order 262-Proposed Relocation of Gas Infrastructure process will begin again.All the while, aging equipment will continue to sit under our street This cycle is predictable, and in my view, it is avoidable. As Councilors,the voters have entrusted you with the responsibility to make policy decisions in the interest of the community at large, while balancing concerns of abutters with a realistic perspective of what harm might be caused. I encourage such a realistic evaluation when considering this project, which in my view poses an extremely minor inconvenience, but that will improve the safety of aging gas infrastructure in Ryal Side. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, George Gomes 63 Bridge Street,#2 (978)473-1011 cc: Lisa Kent, City Clerk Todd Rotondo,Ward 1 City Councilor https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0nik=494dc6de28&view=pt&search=all&pennthid=thread-f:1812559879652735973%7Cmsg-t l 8l2559879652735973... 2/2 Responses to Beverly City Council Public Hearing for Regulator Station Replacement Livingstone @ Bridge Street - October 7, 2024 1, Was a site visit conducted and were there other locations evaluated? Several site visits were conducted and several other locations were evaluated in addition to evaluating the existing location. Alternative locations were either ruled out completely or deemed to be less desirable due to obstructions,feasibility, safety concerns, cost and aesthetics, 2. What were some of the parameters when selecting a site?In selecting the site for this relocation, other locations were ruled out due to underground obstructions or inadequate clearances to our own or other utilities, above ground utility obstructions and trees,ADA compliance issues, as well as customer centric consideration for houses with frontage directly abutting the sidewalk or wide driveways we did not want to block. a. We narrowed the feasible locations down to two. The preferred location is the Livingstone Ave side of 63 Bridge Street. An alternative location was in front of the white picket fence for 63 Livingstone Ave. We chose the Livingston Ave side of 63 Bridge Street because it was not directly along the frontage of the property. 3. Does the public come into play when selecting site? Yes, we do not want to put the equipment directly in front of a residence or block a portion of a driveway. 4. Why are we adding 2 Scada boxes now? The Scada boxes are being added because they have enhanced safety features to monitor and remotely control the regulator station as needs may arise. S. What are the sizes of the boxes and the vent pole? The cabinets are approximately 20"x 33"x 36" high. The vent poles are 5" in diameter and 48" high. 6. Can the vent poles be spread out across the back of the vault? Yes. There is some flexibility as to where the vent poles can be located. 7. This is a busy intersection what other option for this location is there? The other option is to locate the regulator station and equipment farther west down Livingstone Ave in front of the white picket fence at 63 Livingstone Ave. 8. Do the boxes make any noise? The boxes do not emit any noise. 9. Why are other jobs shown on the plans at the intersection of Bridge Street and Livingstone Ave for future work after Bridge Street has just been repaved? Those work orders shown are for jobs that have either been completed or are wrapping up now ahead of paving of that intersection--which has not yet been completed. Additionally,for this project,the contractor has replaced gas mains beyond of the area to be paved on Bridges Street so when the regulator vault is installed, it's piping will be done outside of the paved areas. 10. Will the new vault doors make noise when walking or riding a bicycle over them? No.the vault is prefabricated, and the doors are ADA compliant and seal the vault. In addition,the concrete sidewalk panels adjacent to the vault will be replaced so there will be a seamless transition between the two.