Loading...
1999-11-15City of Beverly, Massachusetts Public Meeting Minutes BOARD: SUBCOMMITTEE: DATE: PLACE: BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: OTHERS PRESENT: ABSENT: RECORDER: Conservation Commission November 15, 1999 Beverly City Hall Vice-Chairman Anthony Paluzzi, Dr. Mayo Johnson, Jay Donnelly, Jon Mazuy, Pat Grimes, Assistant City Planner Debbie Hurlburt, City Engineer Frank Killilea Chairman David Lang, Richard Benevento Jeannine Dion Acting Chairman Anthony Paluzzi called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Request for Determination of Applicability Otis Road Extension - roadway construction - Richard & Leo Maestranzi Richard Maestranzi stated he owns property on the southerly side of Route 128, near Burger King and the landfill. Maestranzi stated that up to about 10 years ago the city had deposited a lot of refuge on his property, thereby not allowing him to access the easternmost portion of his property. The city scraped back the landfill from Route 128 back 100 feet, removed the refuge and left him with a 60-foot fight-of-way from the state property in towards the landfill. Maestranzi stated that for him to access the eastern portion of the property, he would have to use the 60-foot strip of land that the city left him. A portion of the land goes through some wetlands that was created by the state when Route 128 was built (2,200 square feet on the state property and 2,400 square feet on Maestranzi's property). Maestranzi stated he has to build a road to city compliance, which is a 32 foot paved road, 5 feet shoulder on either side, which makes it 42 feet with curbstones. In order for Maestranzi to follow the 6% grade, the road will need to be elevated 10 feet above where it is currently located and ledge will have to be blasted as well. Maestranzi stated the wetland contains no water and he has provided pictures and letter from his engineer explaining same. Maestranzi stated he is requesting the Conservation Commission allow him to build the road in the desired location without replacing any wetlands because there is virtually no land to do so. Hurlburt stated that Maestranzi is before the Commission to find out if the wetlands are significant and if they are jurisdictional to the Commission. Hurlburt stated she has met with Mr. Maestranzi several times to discuss this and he initially proposed a Notice of Conservation Commission Minutes November 15, 1999 Page 2 Intent and she recommended that the Commission do a RDA because at that time she was almost convinced that it was an isolated land subject to flooding. Hurlburt stated she spoke with DEP because she had one outstanding question: if there is an outlet structure there, does that lend itself to he a different type of resource area. The DEP came back with a determination that if there is an outlet structure there, then it probably has a hydraulic connection and therefore it could he more than isolated land subject to flooding, perhaps a Bordering Vegetated Wetland. Maestranzi stated that the only hydraulic connection is the water running through that pipe, when it does run through the pipe and it only runs through it when it rains. Johnson asked if any soil will come off the landfill and cover the proposed road. Maestranzi responded 'no' because the road will he up five feet and he will put swales in with erosion controls down to the outlet that will take the water across. Grimes asked if the DEP determined the land isolated land subject to flooding. Hurlburt responded that there is a structure installed by Mass Highway and DEP is saying it "could be" a BVW (bordering vegetated wetland). Donnelly asked how the landfill project addressed this. Mazuy responded that it ignores this. Mazuy stated that there is erosion coming from the top of the landfill and from underneath the cover of the landfill. Mazuy stated he believes some of that has been cleaned. Killilea stated there is no erosion from underneath the cover - there has been no damage to the cover. Donnelly asked Mr. Killilea if he approves of the plan with respect to its relationship to the landfill project, and highway and city requirements. Killilea responds that he does approve it - there is sufficient protection to the landfill (30-foot from the edge of the plastic). Killilea states Maestranzi has to have a swale, collect the runoff and take it in a pipe. Donnelly asked Killilea if he is satisfied with the storm drainage design. Killilea responds that he is satisfied. Donnelly asked Killilea if the state needs to review this plan. Maestranzi responded that the state does not need to review the plan. Hurlburt stated she wants to make it clear that the Commission is just looking at a Request for Determination of Applicability to find out if it is jurisdictional. The Commission is not looking at engineering. Hurlburt stated the city hired a botanist when the delineation was done and Mary Rimmer reviewed the wetland delineations. This was identified as a BVW. Hurlbun stated that Mr. Maestranzi stated that he does not have the area to replicate so one question, is there any chance for movement of the road. Maestranzi responded "fine, if the city wants to give me some more property. We could build a road a lot cheaper." Conservation Commission Minutes November 15, 1999 Page 3 Maestranzi stated he would rather the city give him another 30 feet than go through this process. Grimes stated that it has been determined that the land is a BVW and if the road is going to be going through it, the BVW will be altered. Maestranzi responded that he has no room for a replication. Killilea stated the City did not take the 60-foot section, which remains Maestranzi's property. The City got a construction easement from Mr. Maestranzi to go on to the 60 feet and take the rubbish that has been deposited here, take it off and clean it. The property is Maestranzi's property. Killilea stated the City took the rest of Maestranzi's property, that is where the rubbish is and that is part of the landfill. Maestranzi stated if he has to replace the wetlands, he will just have to have the City give him hack the property. Mazuy stated this is not something for the Conservation Commission to decide. The only thing before the Commission is Negative or Positive Determination of Applicability. Paluzzi asked if there are any questions from the public. Joan Murphy stated that when Willow Road was built the former Commission was very interested in that wetland area where the pipes are being maintained. They were very concerned about drainage. Mazuy moved to issue a Positive Determination of Applicability #2, seconded by Donnelly. Motion carried. Mazuy moved to recess for Public Hearing, seconded by Johnson. All members in favor. Motion carried. Notice of Intent Cont.: LP Henderson Road storage facility/T Ford Company Hurlburt stated she had a conversation earlier this week with Tom Ford and he indicated that he was not ready to proceed for personal reasons. Killilea stated he received a letter dated November 9, 1999 from the LSP, Ransom Environmental, who is doing the work for the City. The letter addressed just the Gurnard property, in which Ransom states that the site can proceed with development subject to conditions. Hurlburt stated that Mr. Ford said he would follow-up with the Commission and give a new presentation. Hurlburt stated that Ford was under the impression that he would be Conservation Commission Minutes November 15, 1999 Page 4 receiving a letter from DEP. Killilea stated there will not be a letter from DEP. Hurlburt asked if it is not common practice for the DEP to write a letter stating that the site is clean, etc. Killilea stated that you would wait a long time for a letter and he believes that DEP will wait for the Phase II report, review it and comment on the Phase II report. Paluzzi asked if there were any questions from the public. Renee Mary, 274 Hale Street stated that she believes a letter is expected from the DEP on this matter. Hurlburt stated she will research it. Hurlburt recommended putting Mr. Ford on the January 4, 2000 agenda. Mazuy moved to continue the public hearing on January 4, 2000, seconded by Johnson. All members in favor. Motion carried. 9 Curtis Point Road - rip rap slope installation/Charles Jerabek Bill Manuell, Senior Wetland Scientist from Hancock Environmental Consultants appeared before the board on behalf of the applicant, Charles Jerabek. Manuell stated a site inspection took place on November 6, 1999. The site inspection took place at the high tide and the wave action was 10 feet below that very distinct and prominent ledge outcropping that formed a shelf, which is intended to be the toe of the proposed stabilization. There were several prominent Locust trees right on the precipice of the lawn and they talked about the proposed stabilization process. Manuell stated there was some question as to whether or not the regulations allow for this type of project. Manuell stated there are two types of coastal hanks outlined in the regulations. The first type of coastal bank, defined as a "significant sediment contributor," should not be stabilized for prevention of erosion in response to the wave action. The second type of coastal hank is one which serves as a vertical barrier to storm damage prevention. Manuell asserts that is clearly the case at this property. The wave action was primarily against exposed bedrock and broken ledge and boulders some ten feet below the high tide mark on the site. Manuell read excerpts from the regulations. Donnelly asked the landscaper how the rip rap and gravel will be installed to avoid damage to the hank. Talbot responded that he intends to lower larger boulders down with the excavators and backfill is put in as he graduates up the bank. Donnelly asked if this project will save all the Locust trees. Talbot responds 'yes'. Grimes asked Hurlburt if she spoke with DEP about this. Hurlbun responded that she spoke with Jim Sprague at DEP and she asked him his opinion. Sprague stated it depends Conservation Commission Minutes November 15, 1999 Page 5 on the situation. It depends on the erosion rate (and she would have to take a took at the shoreline survey). Hurlburt stated she contacted CZM and spoke with Rebecca Haney. Haney is of the opinion that this may not be the best structure situation for this location, but she did not say that it was out of question. Haney offered to look at the site and try to propose alternatives (as she did at a previous site), perhaps planting beach grass or some other vegetation that could hold on to the hank. Haney did not think that it was significant enough in its erosion - perhaps 1/2 foot per year, which is not considered significant. The regulations usually allow for this type of structure when there is imminent danger. Manuell stated that he spoke with Mr. Jerabek and brought up the fact CZM might get involved. Manuell stated 'there is more than one way to skin a cat' when it comes to stabilizing coastal banks and as long as he has been working along the coast and dealing with Rebecca Haney, she tends to have one solution and that is always the "soft solution." Manuell stated he spoke with Mr. Jerabek about that and he is looking for a more permanent solution to the problem and adding the vegetation is risky (difficult to maintain). Manuell stated the soft, natural type solution would not be appropriate in this case. Hurlburt responded that in all fairness to Ms. Haney, she is not present and she is not sure if that is what she will be recommending. Grimes stated that it is a good idea to obtain a second opinion. Donnelly stated that he believes this is an excellent design for this particular situation because the existing rock that they are going to use in the foundation is solid. Donnelly does not believe vegetation will hold. Manuell stated there are three ways to attack this issue: 1. Vertical mortared masonry wall, 2. Middle ground - what the applicant is proposing, 3. Soft solution. Manuell stated he believes they have struck the middle ground and if there is a compromise to be reached perhaps the applicant could put some type of salt tolerant vegetation within the interseces of the rip rap as it is being fitted. On the Hillier property the boulders weren't fit so tightly but there was vegetation that had become established. Mazuy asked if the engineer has drawn the conclusion that because this particular soil level (as opposed to the boulder level) is so far up above boulder level, it does not constitute the kind of condition that is going to contribute to sedimentation on the beaches. Manuell responded "yes." Manuell stated on the Cape and South Shore those are typically the type of coastal environments that act as sediment contributors. On the Conservation Commission Minutes November 15, 1999 Page 6 North Shore where there is bedrock outcrop all along the coast, we have the opposite of that (more vertical barrier). Mazuy stated there appeared to be topsoil that had something removed from it. If the applicant has a rainstorm before the boulders go in, you are going to lose a major portion of the topsoil and it will form sedimentation along the beach areas which, in Mazuy's opinion would support the finding that this was the kind of hank that should not be affected by this approach. Manuell responded that he does not agree with the conclusion that a rainstorm would cause a major removal of topsoil because what was still established in the turf was the root network. What was removed was up high. Manuell stated debris that was tossed over the bank was removed pursuant to his recommendation. Manuell read from the Preamble section of the regulations regarding the proximity of the wave action. He contends this property is not exposed to rigorous wave action at all. Johnson stated this is not a large supplier of sediment but would argue that it does supply some sediment. Manuell agreed but does not consider it a significant sediment contributor. Mazuy stated what is being discussed is proximity to the house. Even though 6 inches per year is lost, still could be a significant contribution to coastal buildup. Hurlburt stated Rebecca Haney could answer these questions. Hurlburt stated Rebecca Haney said she would make herself available in the next couple of weeks and evaluate the site. Mazuy stated he would feel better if the Commission obtained a second opinion Grimes and Paluzzi agreed. Paluzzi asked if there were any questions from the board. There were none. Paluzzi asked if there were any questions from the public. Jack Shay, 11 Meadow Road asked for clarification on this topic. Hurlbun responded that the mason the Commission is obtaining a second opinion is because this is very technical. Mazuy moved to continue the public hearing to January 4, 2000, seconded by Grimes. Donnelly was opposed. Motion carried (4-1). 57 Preston Place - Garage construction/Michael Kerr Bill Manuell from Hancock Environmental Consultants appeared on behalf of the applicant and introduced the architect, John Marigolds. Manuell stated he filed a Notice of Intent approximately 3 to 4 years ago to construct an addition and a deck in the back yard. The current proposal calls for creating a three-car garage, taking down a shed and existing concrete slab and then creating a paved service Conservation Commission Minutes November 15, 1999 Page 7 court/driveway. Manuell stated that although most of the project is in the buffer zone to a wetland, there is a watershed divide that nuts down the crown of Preston Place. Mazuy asked to what extent is the applicant increasing impervious cover. Manuell responded the service court, existing driveway and propose 3-car garage will now become impervious cover. Manuell stated water has to go over established lawn, the topography flat and he doubts there will be much surface flow at all. Mazuy asked if there are any drainage structures. Manuell did not believe there are any. Grimes stated she viewed the site and agreed that it is very flat and the wetland area is across the street. Grimes asked what will happen to the trees. Manuell responded the ones on the construction area will come down. Margolis responded that they will cut trees that impose on structures or have dropped limbs and would he inclined to keep trees along the perimeter. Margolis stated it is his intention to keep as many trees as possible. Johnson asked for clarification regarding where the water is going to go with roughly 10,000 square feet of additional impervious surface. Manuell responded that it will hit the grass and infiltrate. Grimes moved to close the public hearing, seconded by Mazuy. All members in favor. Motion carried. Clarification of Order of Conditions issued to 320 Essex Street Thomas Neve read a letter he composed to the Commission dated November 10, 1999 requesting clarification of the Order of Conditions. Neve needed clarification regarding the interpretation of the no cut zone. Neve stated he is in the process of modifying the plan and wants to be clear regarding the no cut zone and the location of the permanent barriers. He suggested using fencing versus boulders to act as permanent barriers. Neve stated fences are more aesthetically pleasing and boulders serve as places where wildlife corridors can not be established. He is concerned about taking what is now an uninterrupted corridor of buffer to the wetlands and now putting some permanent monuments in. Neve stated he has worked with cedar fencing. Mazuy stated that would be a modification because he recalls the Commission spoke about fences being temporary fences. Neve stated he is fine with both. He will put boulders but thought the fences had more beauty and are more natural. Donnelly asked about stone walls. Neve responded that stone walls become a physical barrier for amphibians and smaller animals. He stated you could build five foot stone wall with a five foot break, etc. to enable wildlife to move freely. Conservation Commission Minutes November 15, 1999 Page 8 Donnelly asked Neve if he understood the Cornmission's objective in recommending the physical barrier. Neve responded so that the barrier would prevent people fi'om migrating toward the wetland. Mazuy stated he believed the first question before the Commission is the no cut zone clarification. Neve agreed. Paluzzi stated he believed the intention was to have a no cut zone be around the entire development. Neve stated his partner, John Moran was at the previous Conservation Commission meeting and he was barred from having any conversation about tins topic because the hearing had been closed and the Commission asked him not to speak on the matter. Neve stated he waited until the Order was issued and the only alternative is to resubmit it for some consideration or clarification. Mazuy asked why the no cut zone shouM not be extended that distance from the wetland delineation all the way around the site? Neve stated ftrstly, it is upland and as far as the Wetland Protection Act is concerned, the buffer zone is not a resource area. If the resource area is being altered, any applicant should have the fight to alter within the edge of the wethnd. Neve stated he did not have a chance to discuss this with the Commission but if you look at the plan, you can see there was a big attempt to have a lot of the wetland buffer zone remain and not be altered. He believed he was very frugal in clearing of the buffer zone on this project. Mazuy stated the Commission is stating you can not cut a distance of 20 feet from the delineated wetland boundary. Neve responded that is not what the Condition says. Neve stated if it simply said that a no cut buffer zone should be established 20 feet upland from the delineated wetland boundary, then he would agree with the Commission. He stated that it does not say that. Neve stated his concern is that there are some homes that are in close proximity to wetland and there you are applying a certain standard. He contends that some lots don't need the condition and some of the lots do need that condition and he would like it clarified. Neve stated he will try to apply it to the homes that he feels do have that degree of sensitivity and he contends that every home that is in the buffer zone he is applying that standard to it. Mazuy stated his sense from the discussion is that this is a very sensitive location and the Commission wants to protect the wetland as much as it possible can. Mazuy stated he believed the condition was all the way around the site measured 20 feet from the wetland boundary. Neve stated he spoke with David Lang, Chairman on the telephone and he indicated he would certainly entertain a letter of this type - explaining what the proposal is and asked the Commission to reconsider the condition. Mazuy asked Neve if he would feel better if Conservation Commission Minutes November 15, 1999 Page 9 the Commission continued this until the next meeting so that all members are present. Grimes stated it would be a good idea to have Lang present at the meeting so he may clarify the true intent of the condition. Hurlburt stated she spoke with Lang. Lang stated he would let the condition stand as is because he thinks the 20-foot no cut from the resource areas is what the intention was. The Commission has done it on other projects, where they might not even be a resource area but they wanted a no cut zone to protect the neighbors, aesthetically, from noise, etc. It should be noted on each deed so that future homeowners could not cut and they could not do anything within that 20-foot area. Mazuy moved to continue this discussion regarding clarifying the Order of Conditions to the next meeting on January 4, 2000, seconded by Grimes. All members in favor. Motion carried. Modification to Order of Conditions - 342 Old Essex Road/Brian Boches Boches stated he wrote a letter to the Commission because he built a bridge without having it on the Order of Conditions. Hurlburt stated that the outstanding issue is that the structure was not on the Order of Conditions and the plan, so in order for receipt of a Certificate of Compliance, the plan needs to be modified to allow for the bridge to stay. Boches stated he has been there in the wettest conditions and the water has never come up anywhere near where the bridge is. Boches stated the buyer of the house keeps a little area where he keeps his dog. Hurlburt stated she has been by the area and there doesn't seem to be any clearing or anything on the other side of the bridge. It appears that he keeps his dog over there because the back of his yard is very small. Donnelly moved to approve the Modification to Order of Conditions, seconded by Johnson. All members in favor. Motion carried. Mazuy moved to issue a Certificate of Compliance, seconded by Grimes. All members in favor. Motion carried. Order of Conditions 57 Preston Place - Garage Construction Mazuy moved to issue Order of Conditions with the following conditions: 1. Standard conditions; 2. No run off shall affect abutting property; Conservation Commission Minutes November 15, 1999 Page 10 3. Tree removal shall be limited to only trees that absolutely need to be removed. The applicant shall contact Debbie Hurlburr prior to construction to inspect; Motion seconded by Johnson. All members in favor. Motion carried. City of Beverly - discussion re[ardinp StandIcy Street Compost Facility Frank Killilea stated that the Commission gave the facility permission to proceed to bring in stone. Twenty percent of the road is filled in and they are proceeding to fill in the other area. The objective is to be able to obtain the Commission's permission to stockpile the leaves in another location on the site. Sean Scully, the consultant has had discussions with Sumner Martensen and Sumner has suggested that the contractor combine the compost up there now, build it higher over the winter and when that is done they will be able to free up some area for more leaves. Killilea stated that on the walk through a comment was made regarding cleaning out the trash in the wetlands. That is an item that will be taken care of. Killilea stated that the effort is going to move the leaves up onto the platform to the maximum extent that they can. Mazuy asked if Killilea thinks there will be enough space. Killilea responded that the pile had almost doubled from his previous trip to the site and he thinks the leaves will need to go to another location on the site. Mazuy asked if there will be a stench in the spring. Killilea responded that if the material is in the water, there will be an odor. Mazuy asked if it correct to assume that if the leaves are located at a higher location, there will not be an odor. Killilea responded that assumption is correct. Paluzzi asked what the time frame is to move the piles of leaves. Killilea responded that the time frame is now. Mazuy asked how far from the wetlands will the leaves be deposited. Killilea responded that the leaves will be approximately 10 to 15 feet away from the wetlands. Hurlburt asked if DRL's negotiations with JRM to take oat some of the compost was successful. Killilea responded that they were not successful and as a result the material will be not removed until the spring, when there is a market for the material. Mazuy asked if JRM could be compelled to get the finished compost off the site in order to make more space available for the storage of new materials. Killilea responded that he has talked to JRM however, he has no space to take it. Killilea states when the state license is obtained, the city intends to write an amendment to the agreement with JRM and that will be one of the conditions in the amendment. Mazuy stated this situation is oblivion. There are 10 pounds of compost in a five-pound area. Mazuy asked how long will it be before it is declared that the compost facility just Conservation Commission Minutes November 15, 1999 Page 11 is not capable of meeting the needs of the City of Beverly. Killilea stated he is not sure that is a proper statement. Sean Scully pointed out at the site visit that the facility is designed in accordance with the DEP criteria for a city the size of Beverly. Mazuy stated it is not enough. Donnelly stated it is big enough to act as a compost facility but not a storage facility. So when the material becomes compost, it should be removed. Killilea responded that you can not move it in November through February, because there is no market. Killilea agreed that the City can define and limit the maximum amount of screened material allowed at the facility. Killilea stated the compost facility needs the Conservation Commission's Certificate of Compliance to get the state license. Grimes asked what changes were made. Killilea responded the first change was the road and the second change is the request to store the leaves in a different location. Paluzzi stated the compost facility is looking to modify the Order of Conditions for the road and stockpiling the leaves in a different area. Hurlbutt asked if the Special Conditions have been met. Killilea responded that they have. Killilea asked if he shouM prepare a plan showing the changes discussed. Hurlburt stated what is needed is a letter indicating the two changes and a revised plan before a Certificate of Compliance is issued. Mazuy asked Killilea if he would consider putting a second line of logs ten feet away from the first hatch at the wetland delineation as additional protection on the other side. Killilea agreed to do so. Hurlburt asked Killilea to call her when they are in so she may inspect the site. Killilea responded that he would. Hurlburr stated that the process is to issue the Modification to the Order of Conditions and then issue Certificate of Compliance, only contingent upon all the items discussed earlier be completed to the satisfaction of the Conservation Commission. Mazuy moved to accept the Modification to the Order of Conditions with the following conditions: 1. Fill area on the south side of site, 2. Westerly area of the site, beyond the platform be used for purposes of storage of the leaves, Conservation Commission Minutes November 15, 1999 Page 12 3. Second row of logs be placed at least 10 feet from the present mw of logs at the edge of the wetland on the westerly side as further protection from blowing of leaves and, 4. This is a temporary solution to the storage problem, 5. Screened compost shall be removed from the site so that the leaves will then be put up on the compost bench by June 1, 2000. Seconded by Grimes. All members in favor. Motion carried. Mazuy moved to issue a Certificate of Compliance held by the Planning Department pending the conclusion of the work, seconded by Grimes. All member in favor. Motion carried. Other Glen U~uhart Hurlburt stated the Conservation Commission issued a condition on the Order of Conditions regarding a sequencing schedule that states that a complete schedule of construction should be submitted to and approved by the Conservation Commission prior to commencement activities. The schedule shall include, but not limited to, when the activity will occur, how long the activity will take, the exact type of materials to be utilized, the width of the boardwalk and any other activities related to the installation of the boardwalk. Hurlburt stated Glen Urquhart is hoping to start that work on November 20th and shall be completed approximately November 30th weather permitting. Hurlburt read information provided by Glen Urquhart regarding the project. Mazuy moved for approval of Schedule of Operations, seconded by Grimes. All members in favor. Motion carried. Beverly Salem Water Supply Board Hurlburt stated the Commission asked her several meetings ago to officially hire a risk assessment company to evaluate Beverly Water Supply Board report to look at the environmental risks. Hurlburt stated money was appropriated. In the meantime, David Lang will conduct a second sampling himself. The next step is to ask an environment risk assessor to take the two reports and see what the enviroamental risks are associated with the findings. Hurlburt stated she contacted a company called Ensol and Menzie Cura & Associates, Environmental Consultants. David Lang is familiar with Menzie Cura & Associates and he said that they are very highly versed and appropriate to do this work. Hurlburt stated she faxed a copy of the proposal. The Commission appropriated $2,500 to do the work. Conservation Commission Minutes November 15, 1999 Page 13 Menzie Cura & Associates stated they would not exceed $3,000. Lang stated Menzie Cura & Associates specialize in this work and could be appropriate for this project and requested this be brought to the Commission for a vote. Hurlbun stated she contacted a third company, but they did not respond. Mazuy moved to accept the proposal ofMenzie Cura & Associates and increase the amount appropriated by $500, seconded by Donnelly. All members in favor. Motion carried. Endicott Colleee - Boundary Determination Hurlbun stated that the Commission approved the delineation as accurate pending the approval of Joe Orzel's opinion ~'om the Gulf of Maine. Joe gave Hurlbutt a report back and he did have a couple of concerns, not major, but Hurlbun will include them in the Order of Resource Area Delineation. Hurlbun stated that she useally identifies a plan, but because Joe Orzel's report is so long, and identifies several things, she thinks it is appropriate to be taken into consideration. ADDroval of Meetinl Minutes Mazuy moved to approve the September 1, 1999 meeting minutes, seconded by Johnson. All members in favor. Motion carried. Mazuy moved to adjourn, seconded by Johnson. All members in favor. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m.