Loading...
2006-06-13 CITY OF BEVERLY PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES Date: June 13, 2006 Board: Conservation Commission Members Present David Lang (Chair), Tony Paluzzi (Vice-Chair), Dr. Mayo Johnson, Gregg Cademartori, Ian Hayes, Mary Reilly, and Bill Squibb Members Absent: None Others Present: Amy Maxner – Environmental Planner Recorder: Eileen Sacco Chairman Lang called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall, 191 Cabot Street. Discussion with Mayor William Scanlon – Former Vitale Site Hayes asks Maxner if she has sent the documents to a MACC lawyer yet. Maxner reports that she has not sent them yet but has a call into MACC to inquire of who would be most suited to review and hopes to hear from the Executive Director, Ken Pruitt shortly. Hayes notes that these draft procedures would provide a benefit for all other Commissions if they prove to be reasonable. He also outlines an action time line to move forward on this process, and asks Maxner if Commission members have offered any feedback. Maxner states no. Hayes notes that when comments are received from both the Commission and the independent MACC counsel, the Commission will be in a better position to vote the procedures in as policy, if not into the Regulations. He briefly reviews the process for the Vitale Site. Lang notes that Hayes has spent a lot of time on this and has done a good job and he thinks will serve the Commission in the future in handling any disposition situations. Cademartori notes that if the Commission is to invest so much time and energy in a disposition, there also has to be a unanimous vote of the Council and suggests that maybe there should be a litmus vote to gauge Council support on any disposition, that way if the Council is not in favor the Commission will not waste time and energy. He notes that they are setting up a process that may to take a lot of time and he would hate to get to that point and find that one Councilor is opposed. Beverly Conservation Commission June 13, 2006 Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 15 Hayes explained that once the Commission votes to consider this, then they could go on to the Council for a vote as well. He explains that once the Commission has established its position, it can report to the Council on the public benefits which may aid in their decision making process. Lang notes that over the years there has been overwhelming support for ball field use on the Vitale Site, and there are also those that are opposed to it, and thinks that nothing has changed in that sentiment. Hayes states that the Article 97 path would give greater protection for the water supply and explained the process. Lang notes that an AUL cannot be changed and explained the scenarios. Hayes notes that they have looked at the options that will be in the best interest of the City. Maxner noted that a two-thirds vote would be required from the City Council to approve a disposition rather than a unanimous vote, but regardless thinks that it would be a good idea to see if the Council is in favor during the process. Lang cautioned that a vote so early in the process might not mean anything, as the Council only tends to seriously consider an issue when it is directly petitioned to them, but agreed that it would be good to keep the Council informed along the way. Maxner informed the Commission that she talked to Tina Cassidy and NEPCO representative Mike Lotti, and they indicated a draft AUL is in the works, which may be presented at the July 11, 2006 meeting. Paluzzi asked if there has been any kind of formal vote that the City is in favor of using the site for soccer fields. Maxner stated that there was a vote taken in April of 2002 and while it was not unanimous it was a 5-2 vote. Squibb recalled that the Commission voted to consider ball fields on the site and it has been stretched to a full approval. Hayes explains that it might make sense to put into place for guidelines and management and is something that should be looked at in the future. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter Cademartori moves to continue the matter to July 11, 2006, seconded by Johnson. The motion carries (7-0). Certificate of Compliance Continuation:8A Beaver Pond Road – DEP File #5-795 – Michel Reichert Maxner notes that the Commission requested additional information and asked that the Board of Health be consulted as to whether the discharge from the driveway drainpipe is allowable directly over the leeching field of the septic system. She notes that she spoke with the Board of Health agent and he has been in touch with the owner and is waiting for Beverly Conservation Commission June 13, 2006 Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 15 plans to determine if it is within the setback. She recommends that the matter be continued to July 11, 2006. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter Cademartori moves to continue the matter to July 11, 2006, seconded by Johnson. The motion carries (7-0). Continuation: 208 Hart Street – DEP File #5-795 – Michael DiGuiseppe Maxner explains that the Commission will recall discussing this at the last meeting with th the applicant’s landscape architect and conducted a site inspection on Saturday, June 10. Lang asked how big the vegetated wetland was. Mr. DiGuiseppe stated that was approximately within the limits of the present pond banks. Maxner provides an aerial photo of the area for review. Lang asks how long he has owned the property. DiGuiseppe states that he built the house and has lived there ever since. He explains that he maintained the slopes around it to try and keep the weeds down. He also noted that the pond almost dries out in August. Lang notes that a neighbor up the street from the applicant’s property came in a few years ago to reclaim a pond and it was an extensive permitting process. Maxner states that during the site inspection, it was suggested that a habitat analysis be done on the present functions of the pond and a plan prepared for enhancing these functions as part of an NOI for the addition. Reilly states that she wants to make sure that the enhancements are carried through and would be in favor of conditioning it through a NOI. Maxner states it may be advisable for the applicant to consult with DEP to see if they would allow this pond to remain. She states that if DEP doesn’t want it to be a pond they can step in and require restoration of a bordering vegetated wetland. Maxner states that the Commission could issue a partial certificate of compliance for the house. She notes that when the Commission takes up the Determination of Applicability they could issue a positive determination and require an NOI. Mr. DiGuiseppe expresses concern about going through an extensive Notice of Intent process and missing this construction season. Lang explains that the Commission is very concerned with the alteration of resource area on site, and if an NOI is required it may delay his construction into the fall. Mr. DiGuiseppe asked if there could be an accommodation to allow him to go forward with the addition rather than wait for the fall. It was noted that the deadline for the next meeting is June 28, 2006 at noon. Cademartori noted that it would be an aggressive Beverly Conservation Commission June 13, 2006 Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 15 timetable to get it done by the July meeting, but that is what he would be inclined to require. Hayes notes that if the Commission is looking for mitigation it should be included as part of the NOI. He notes that a wetland scientist or wildlife biologist would be needed to prepare an analysis and enhancement plan. Squibb states that the analysis should include a comparison as to what a BVW provides and what an open pond system provides in terms of wetlands protection functions and wildlife values. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter a motion was made by Paluzzi to continue this item to July 11, 2006. Squibb seconds motion. The motion carries (7-0). New: 77 Paine Avenue – DEP File #5-884 – Oliver Wadsworth David Smith of Vine Associates explained the seawall rehab project, which started in September of last year. He notes that they seeded the site this spring and they are complete except for a couple patches of grass that have yet to establish. He states that the project went according to plan except for the condition to work with the neighbor on a common access and they ended up creating their own access, as the neighbor did not cooperate. The other issue was when they reconstructed the wall they raised up the footing a little bit with a steel sheeting and he goes on to explained the process. He notes that other than that it was constructed as planned. He shows the Commission photos of the site and construction photos. He explains that the return where the two walls meet, the contractor ended up constructing a tiered step formation that, in his opinion is working well. Maxner notes that she held a site inspection this morning and agrees that it was the best solution for the problem noting that it was more of a tiered design which could function to dissipate wave energy to some extent. Lang asked if it has been tested with any significant storms yet. Smith states that there have been a few good nor’easters, but so far so good. There being no further questions from the Commission, Cademartori moves to issue a Certificate of Compliance for 77 Paine Avenue. Paluzzi seconds the motion. The motion carries (7-0) Request for Determination of Applicability New: 19 Bayview Avenue – Reconstruct Concrete Wall – Geraldine Cathcart Beverly Conservation Commission June 13, 2006 Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 15 Maxner reads legal notice. Ms. Cathcart explained that she is proposing to reconstruct a concrete wall that was toppled by a snowplow this past winter. She notes that she is going to construct it in the same footprint noting that it will be a little bit shorter in height that before. She notes that the wall is for privacy and noise reduction from the public parking area adjacent to her property at Hospital Point. Maxner asked if the existing left over blocks would be removed. Ms. Cathcart states that they will have to be removed to make it level. Maxner notes that the wall does meet the seawall at a right angle and is very close to the top of coastal bank and provide photos from her site inspection earlier today. Lang asks if the wall will be increased in width at all. Cathcart states it will remain a single block width, and that is what her contractor bid it as. There being no further questions or comments Paluzzi moves to issue a Negative # 2 Determination. Hayes seconds the motion. The motion carries (7-0) New: 208 Hart Street – Construct Addition and Porch – Michael DeGuissuppe Maxner reads legal notice. Lang notes that the Commission has asked the applicant to come back and file a Notice of Intent and provide a full habitat evaluation and proposed enhancement/mitigation package. Paluzzi moved to issue a positive #1 Determination. Reilly seconds the motion. The motion carries (7-0) Recess for Public Hearings Paluzzi moves to recess for public hearings. Cademartori seconds the motion. The motion carries (7-0). Notice of Intent Cont: 573 Hale Street – DEP File #5-906 – Replace Existing Stone Pier – Jonathan Loring Maxner recalls that the Commission visited the site in late April and requested comments from CZM and they have responded that the applicant needs to inquire with Chapter 91 Varoujan Hagopian, engineer for the applicant, states he met with David Slagel of DEP to determine what is required. He explains that he is going to proceed with a filing with Beverly Conservation Commission June 13, 2006 Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 15 DEP, but no ENF is required, and he is providing additional narrative to the Commission on his resource areas and impacts thereto. He explains the coastal bank as an adjacent resource that will not be affected but it is described in the narrative. He also notes that the proposed rip-rap are described in the narrative as well as the volume of the stone. He also notes that they believe that the performance standards of DEP will be met and they will minimize work by doing it from a barge. Lang asks if the Commission has any questions. Cademartori notes that it seems to be a reasonable design, which will probably avoid repetitive maintenance in the future, and the impact of the additional riprap seems to be negligible and as long as it is not grouted additional rocky intertidal habitat will no doubt be created. Maxner asks to have the construction methods reviewed. Hagopian explains that granite blocks will be lifted up and they will put two re-bars in to give them a little more strength. He states that the slope will be a 1:1 and the boulders will be chinked in place one by one to ensure a stable design. Maxner asks if he will be onsite during construction. Hagopian states that as soon as the permits are granted they will get prices from contractors and he will be there weekly to oversee the construction and will make himself available for immediate on-call situations. Cademartori asked what other permits are required. Hagopian notes that he needs BRP WWW 01 and will be forwarding a letter of intention to the Army Corps of Engineers, but needs the Order of Conditions before he can obtain either of these. Squibb asks how far along up the structure will they be placing the re-bar. Hagopian states that the will be addressing any blocks that are loose. He goes on to explain epoxy suited for such an environment will be used to secure the re-bar. . There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter Paluzzi moves to close the public hearing. Squibb seconds the motion. The motion carries (7-0). Continued: 412 Hale Street – DEP File #5-909 – Landmark School – Construction of Athletic Complex with Parking and Athletic Field Maxner explains that the applicant has requested a continuance to the July 11, 2006 meeting noting that they continue to monitor the pond for fish. Maxner notes that she visited the site last week and the pond was way too deep to consider a net and they are waiting for the level to recede. Paluzzi moves to continue the public hearing to July 11, 2006. Squibb seconds motion. The motion carries (7-0). Beverly Conservation Commission June 13, 2006 Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 15 Continuation: 44 Prince Street – Reconstruct Single Family House and Guest House - David Carnevale Maxner notes that she received a request from the applicants engineer for a continuance to the July 11, 2006 meeting. Paluzzi moves to continue the public hearing to July 11, 2006. Squibb seconds motion. The motion carries (7-0). Cont: Brookwood Road – Pond Restoration – Brookwood School Mr. Chute explains that they had a habitat analysis done and they emailed it to Maxner. He explains that the cattails will not be disturbed in this project. Maxner states that she reviewed the analysis briefly this afternoon and notes that there will be no impact of habitat as keystone habitat features were not found on the site. She asks that the habitat review be forwarded to the DEP. Lang asks what they are going to do with the material that they remove from the pond. Mr. Chute stated that it will be hauled by Northeast Nursery for their use. He states that they will start work when the school year ends. Cademartori asks the current depth of the pond and depth of expected excavation. Chute states the pond is about 18” to 2’ deep and they hope to excavate a maximum of 8 feet. Maxner states there is a note indicating an area of the soccer field that is ponding at the moment and asks if they are planning to grade it. Chute explains that they will be allowing this area to sheet flow toward pond. Maxner asks what kind of maintenance they do on the field. Chute explains that they apply granular nitrogen two times a year and do not use any insecticides or herbicides what so ever, and they slice seed the field. Lang asks how they will be handling dewatering of the material removed from the pond. Chute explains that it will be placed along side the pond to allow it to naturally dewater. Chute notes that he is having ongoing discussion with Brad Chase on a management and maintenance plan for the pond and as soon as that is established he will provide it to the Commission. Lang asked if fish could live in the pond when they are done. Chute explains that there are fish in the pond now so it will probably be enhanced for fish habitat. Beverly Conservation Commission June 13, 2006 Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 15 There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter Paluzzi moves to close the public hearing. Hayes seconds the motion. The motion carries (7-0) Continued : 74 Hart Street – Construct 15,300 S.F. and 11,900 S.F. Buildings – Glen Urquhart School Maxner recommends that the hearing be continued to July 11, 2006. Paluzzi moves to continue the public hearing to July 11, 2006. Cademartori seconds the motion. The motion carries (7-0). Cont: 5 & 15 Roosevelt Avenue – Turner & Ballentine Squibb recused himself and leaves the room. Maxner states the Commission will recall conducting a site inspection this past Saturday in the rain. She notes that they observed the subject properties and the neighboring development next door. Hayes notes that he does not think that it is feasible for the development next door to put the drainage pipe and suggested a sump pump might help to lower the level of the water. Mr. Turner states that he thinks this would be a maintenance issue. Hayes notes that there is obvious negative impact has resulted from the development. Mr. Turner states that he is only looking to retain what he usable lawn he had before the development was constructed. Maxner asks if the vegetation along the fence is something they plan on keeping. She notes that the existing shrubs are native red osier dogwood which is a wetland plant the Commission would like to see stay. Mr. Turner states that he wants to plant something that is appropriate but maybe trim up the area and remove some other shrubs that have encroached. He explains that he is planning a gradual taper to approximately 33 feet along the back of the property. He also notes that he will install erosion control measures on the site at the back of the property. Maxner states that she wants the Commission to note that this is within the 25-Foot No Disturb Zone (NDZ) and the waiver should be discussed and included in the Order of Conditions. Lang opens the hearing up for public comment at this time. Loreli Azarian, 509 Cabot Street, addresses the Commission regarding the replication that was to have taken place in the development. Lang notes that they have to get a certificate of compliance and she should send a letter to DEP on this issue. Maxner also suggests that they request that DEP notify the Commission when they schedule an inspection of the site for the issuance of a Certificate of Compliance. Beverly Conservation Commission June 13, 2006 Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 15 Mrs. Turner addresses the Commission and explains how they came to use the same engineer for their application that the developer used. She explains that they were trying to keep all of the numbers the same. Cademartori notes that the Commission reviews projects under the Act and also the local Ordinance and asked when the development project was filed. Lang explains that the application was filed prior to the local Ordinance and the Commission denied the project only under the Act and that decision was appealed to DEP. Maxner reviews the regulations for issuing a waiver in the 25’ NDZ. She suggests that the applicant formulate a landscape plan and submit it to the Commission for approval as a condition of approval. A brief discussion ensues regarding waiver criteria from the NDZ. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter Paluzzi moves to close the public hearing. Hayes seconds the motion. The motion carries (6-0-1) with Squibb recused. Squibb returns to the meeting. OLD/NEW BUSINESS 18-20 Longmeadow Road – Sebastian Barcelar – EO Action Update Maxner explains that Mr. Barcelar has completed the work required and removed the soil from his property and recommended that the Commission lift the Enforcement Order on the property. She states the Commission conducted a site inspection on Saturday, June th 10 to observe the area and seemed to think that members were satisfied with the results. Barcelar explains that he was able to rent a bobcat last week to remove the soil and has cleaned up all the piles of debris on both properties. Members agree that the requirements of the enforcement order were indeed met. The Commission advised Barcelar to file a formal application before he does any more work on either property. Hayes moves to lift the enforcement order for 18-20 Longmeadow Road, seconded by Paluzzi and approved (7-0). New: 43 Breckenbury Lane – Morse, Purtell, Leonard – EO Discussion th Maxner notes that a site visit was held on Saturday June 10 and the Commission observed existing conditions of the beach. She notes that the neighbors provided photos Beverly Conservation Commission June 13, 2006 Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 15 of what the beach looked like last summer. She also notes that she has received the trucking slips from the contractor. Maxner states that she spoke with a representative of CZM who recommended a number of things that should be required as follows: 1. A coastal geologist should be secured to prepare the plans. Maxner recommends that the firm be chosen from the CZM list of approved consultants; 2. Any submittals to the Conservation Commission be forwarded to DEP and CZM; 3. Grain particle analysis suggests that a more precise detailed plan of the beach be submitted. Elevation and location of 100 year flood plain and velocity zone and the owners lawn and house are important to determine; 4. Elevation and location of MHW; 5. Existing and proposed elevation profiles determine wave energy; 6. Exact location and relative volumes of sand and methodology of placement of the sand; Maxner notes that it is clear to her as well as others that there has been yearly maintenance conducted on the beach without the benefit of the Commission or any other regulatory process. She suggests that a long-term maintenance plan should be developed so that properties are protected. Maxner recommended that the Commission vote to amend the enforcement order to include the recommendations of CZM. Joe Purtell of 17 Brackenbury Lane addresses the Commission and referred to the information from CZM and asked if they are claiming jurisdiction. Cademartori notes that CZM is an agency that provides technical assistance and ensures permitting consistency. Purtell states that he wants to put some more sand on the beach and get this behind them. He notes that the sand is readily available and is used on the beaches at the Cape. Squibb asks where the sand will be coming from. Purtell explains that there are 6 locations in Massachusetts that they could get it noting that it is used at the Cape. Lane states that if they have a sieve analysis and they can get the sand it would be quicker and easier to get a letter from the company that the sand matches up to the sieve. Purtell reviews the trucking slips and explains that five truckloads were taken between about 9:00 a.m. – 2:00 p.m. He explained the process they used to remove the sand. He also shows the Commission a photograph of the beach that was taken last year. Lang states that he is having trouble with the amount of 75 yards that were removed. He refers to the photos and explains his findings. He states that he want to make sure that we have all the right volumes here. Maxner states that the trucking slip shows 5 loads of Beverly Conservation Commission June 13, 2006 Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 15 sand and if the potential capacity for each truck is 21 cubic yards that would be 100. Lang questions if that is the only slip, noting that he is just supposing and the trucker could have two or three slips a day. Squibb notes that the coastal geologist should be able to determine that. Purcell states that he does not think that we can determine how much was removed give or take and suggested that they come up with a reasonable assumption that it was a little bit more than 75 yards noting that it is going to be redistributed by nature. He suggests that the engineering department take a look at it to validate it. Lang states that he would go along with that and he suggests that a beach restoration plan, prepared with the guidance of a qualified professional, detailing sieve analysis, replacing 150 c.y. of compatable sand, source of replacement sand, methods and equipment used for placement and location and relative volumes proposed. He suggests that the 150 c.y. could be verified by Mike Collins. Reilly states that she did water quality testing down there a few years ago and the pipe noted in the picture was covered. A neighbor offered photos that were taken the night that the sand was removed which show the scraping and how far down it went. She notes that there are a lot of kids on the beach and the pipe is dangerous. Maxner notes that when she visited the site the morning after it only looked like they did also work within the confines of the public beach. Hayes states that he would like someone from engineering to review the numbers. Paluzzi moves to amend the Enforcement Order to include the recommendations of the Commission. Reilly seconds the motion. The motion carries (7-0) There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter Hayes moved to continue the matter to July 11, 2006. Reilly seconds the motion. The motion carries (7-0) 12 Arbella Drive – James and Elizabeth Hering Maxner explains that she was conducting a site inspection next door at 14 Arbella Drive and she inspected the erosion control and she observed an area of dumping within the wetland on the neighboring property. She notes that she observed grass clipping and other yard waste within the wetland and in the Buffer Zone. She reports that she sent the owner a letter requesting that the material be removed and that they appear before the Commission this evening. Mr. Hering addresses the Commission and reports that he removed the clippings from the site as requested. Maxner notes that is all that the Commission wanted and thanked him Beverly Conservation Commission June 13, 2006 Meeting Minutes Page 12 of 15 for attending the meeting. She also notes that she will do a follow up site visit at some point. 41R Williams Street – Enforcement Order – Frederick Smuckler – Dana DeStafano Maxner reports that she received a complaint that there was wetlands violations taking place in the rear of 41R Williams. She notes that she visited the site and found grass clippings and other yard waste and debri in the wetland at the edge of the driveway. She explains that Mr. Smuckler is the landlord and the tenant is Dana DeStafano who is a landscaping contractor. She also notes that she contacted the landlord and he was going to have the tenant remove the material. Maxner notes that she will follow up on it when the material is removed. She explains the area where the property is located. 425 Hale Street – Request for Extension of Order of Conditions Maxner notes that the Commission has received a request for an extension of the Order of Conditions issued for 425 Hale Street. She explains the progress of the project and noted that they are requesting a one-year extension. Paluzzi moved to extend the Order for one year. Squibb seconds the motion. The motion carries (7-0). 13 Cherry Road – Request for Extension of Order of Conditions - Bernard Maxner states the Commission received a request for a two-year extension for an Order of Conditions for house renovations, driveway reconfiguration and other site work. She states the applicant’s father is doing the work himself so it is taking a bit longer otherwise. Paluzzi moves to extend the Order of Conditions for two years. Hayes seconds the motion. The motion carries (7-0). Orders of Conditions 573 Hale Street – Repair Existing Stone Pier Paluzzi moves to issue Standard Conditions with the following Special Condition: 1. As indicated by the applicant and consulting engineer at the June 13, 2006 hearing, a qualified licensed engineer shall be on site to supervise the construction. 2. As indicated by the applicant and consulting engineer at the June 13, 2006 hearing, boulders to form rip-rap revetment shall be at least 1 to 1 ½ ton is size. Beverly Conservation Commission June 13, 2006 Meeting Minutes Page 13 of 15 3. Work shall be accomplished from the water-side, if any work is proposed on the land side, a construction sequence and methods outline shall be submitted to the Commission for review and approval. 4. No mortar shall be used on any portion of the pier or revetment. 5. Additional doubled re-bar shall be installed into the existing structure where appropriate. Paluzzi seconds the motion. The motion carries (5-0-2) with Lang and Reilly abstaining. Brookwood Drive – Pond Restoration – Brookwood School Paluzzi moves to issue Standard Conditions and the following Special Conditions: 1. To the greatest extent possible, any wildlife (i.e. fish, amphibians, reptiles etc.) within the pond shall be saved from being destroyed by construction activities and relocated within suitable areas within the adjacent systems. 2. A letter from Division of Fisheries & Wildlife or Division of Marine Fisheries (whichever is the most appropriate review agency) indicating that the proposed split in flow will not have an adverse impact on fish, particularly during low flow/base flow conditions; if a negative impact is determined, the applicant shall inquire with the Conservation Commission as to whether an amended Order is required. 3. During dewatering, there shall be no discharge of colloidal or suspended sediment to the resource areas and appropriate filtering system shall be employed (i.e. filter bags or equivalent). 4. Area of cattail growth adjacent to the pond shall be maintained throughout construction activities to the greatest extent practicable. 5. The long-term maintenance and monitoring plan shall be submitted to the Conservation Commission as soon as it is available. Squibb seconds the motion. The motion carries (6-0-1) with Reilly abstaining. 5 & 15 Roosevelt Avenue – Turner & Ballentine Paluzzi moves to issue Standard Conditions with the following Special Condition: ??A landscaping plan shall be submitted to the Conservation Administrator for review and approval. The landscape plantings shall be for the Buffer Zone and at wetland edge, and shall be comprised of native plant species suitable for existing growing conditions found on both properties. Johnson seconds the motion. The motion carries (5-0-2) with Lang and Squibb abstaining. Beverly Conservation Commission June 13, 2006 Meeting Minutes Page 14 of 15 Approval of Minutes The minutes of the Beverly Conservation Commission meeting held on April 11, 2006 and May 2, 2006 were presented for approval. Paluzzi moves approval of the minutes of April 11, 2006 as amended. Johnson seconds the motion. The motion carries (6-0-1) with Reilly abstaining. Hayes moves approval of the minutes of May 2, 2006 as presented. Palulzzi seconds the motion. Reilly abstains. Motion carries (6-0-1). Site Visits There are no site visits to be scheduled before the next meeting. Approval of Expenditure Maxner reports that the MACC dues are up for renewal for $321.00 which includes $40.00 for her membership as the staff person. Paluzzi moves to approve the expenditure of $321.00 for MACC dues. Hayes seconds the motion. The motion carries (7-0) Northeast Gateway LNG Public Hearing Maxner reminds the Commission that the Northeast LNG Public Hearing will be held this week and reviewed the dates with the Commission. Lang states he sat in on a meeting with Northeast Gateway representatives, the Mayor and Maxner and explains the technology that they will be proposing. Maxner notes that they will be filing a Notice of Intent for the project soon. Comments Re: Vitale Maxner reports that she received comments from Pam Kampersal on the Vitale Site disposition and potential land swap and gave copies to the Commission. She notes that she informed Kampersal that the Commission has not held a public hearing yet but she would pass her comments along. Violation Maxner reports that while she was out at 77 Paine Avenue she observed an asphalt basketball court in the field installed at 76 Paine Avenue without approval by the Beverly Conservation Commission June 13, 2006 Meeting Minutes Page 15 of 15 Commission. She explained the area where it is located. Lang suggests that the Commission issue an Enforcement Order requiring removal of the asphalt and proof of such provided in time for the next meeting. Paluzzi moved to issue an Enforcement Order for 76 Paine Avenue. Squibb seconds the motion. The motion carries (7-0) Adjournment There being no further business to come before the Beverly Conservation Commission this evening. Paluzzi moves to adjourn the meeting. Hayes seconds the motion. The motion carried (7-0). The meeting was adjourned at 9:50 p.m.