2013-04-16Beverly Planning Board Minutes
April 16, 2013
CITY OF BEVERLY
PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES
Board: Joint Public Hearing of the Planning Board and the
Beverly City Council
Date: Tuesday, April 16, 2012
Location: Beverly City Hall, City Council Chambers
Members Present Chairman Richard Dinkin, Vice Chair John Thomson, Ellen
Flannery, John Mullady, Michael O'Brien
Councilors Present: Council President Paul Guanci, Vice President Wes Slate, James
Latter, Maureen Troubetaris, Don Martin, Scott Houseman, Jason
Silva, Scott Dullea, Brett Schetszle,
Members Absent: Charles Harris, David Mack, Ellen Hutchinson
Others Present: Mayor William Scanlon, City Planner Tina Cassidy, Assistant City
Planner Leah Zambernardi,
Recorder: Eileen Sacco
Guanci calls the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Dinkin joins the Council on the council podium.
Dinkin called the Planning Board to order.
Recess for Public Hearings
Thomson moves to recess for public hearings at this time. Hutchinson seconds the motion. The
motion carries (7 -0).
a. Continued Joint Public Hearings — City Council Order #169 — Zoning Text and
Map Amendments Relative to Water Supply Protection Overlay District, Article
XXXVHI, Section 38.31C. (Formerly Section 29 -31C of the Zoning Ordinance
b. City Council Order #170 — Zoning Amendments Relative to Article XXXVHI,
Section 28.28.C.1 and 38.28.C.2 ( Formerly Section 29- 28.C.1 an 29- 28.C.2. of the
Zoning Ordinance
Guanci calls the continued public hearing to order noting that the hearing was opened at the
September 4, 2012 meeting and continued again at the October 19, 2012 meeting. He recalls that
the hearing is relative to the proposed Zoning Text and Map Amendments Relative to Water
Supply Protection Overlay District, Article XXXVIII, Section 38.31C. (Formerly Section 29 -31C
of the Zoning Ordinance. Guanci calls on City Planner Tina Cassidy to address the City Council
Page 1 of 9
Beverly Planning Board Minutes
April 16, 2013
and the Planning Board on bringing them up to date on the work that has been done since the last
meeting on this matter.
Cassidy addresses the Council and Planning Board and reviews the history of the proposed zoning
amendment that is before them. She recalled that several meetings were held on the matter with a
committee that was comprised of representatives of the Planning Department, Conservation
Commission, Department of Public Services, the Open Space Committee, Councilor Don Martin,
Pam Kampersal, Mary Rodrick and Planning Board member James Matz. She explained that they
met over the course of 8 months a number of times and discussed comments and issues regarding
the proposed amendment.
Cassidy reported that at the last meeting the council requested that the Water Board take a look
at the proposal and the area of Wenham Lake and Longham Reservoir with regards to surface
water and ground water. She explained that the they hired CDM Smith to review it and they are
here this evening to make a presentation. She also noted that they have prepared a report which
has been distributed to City Councilors and Planning Board members.
John Gall, the VP of the resource protection division of CDM addressed the Council/Planning
Board and reviewed the existing and proposed overlay districts. He noted that they are focusing
on the area from Norwood Pond to Wenham Lake.
Gall described the data that they reviewed and their findings with the Council/Planning Board. He
noted the areas and that three areas in North Beverly were identified within the area between
Wenham Lake Reservoir and the Miles River, a Hess Gas Station on Enon Street and commercial
property at the former Commodore Plaza and a former residential property now known as
Dawsons Hardware. He reported that they reviewed several environmental reports prepared for
these properties and they are provided as part of their written report. He also reported that to
supplement this information they oversaw the installation of piezometers at the Lakeview Golf
Course in Wenham. He reported that they were drilled to a minimum of 20 feet below the ground
surface and continuous soil samples were collected. He reported that the soil samples were
submitted for geotechnical grain size analysis and reports are included in the written reports.
Gall reviewed the summary and conclusions on the report and stated that based on the evaluation
of the topography, local geology and hydrology, it is clear that the Wenham Lake Reservoir and
the Miles River are separated by groundwater divides such that waters in the proposed addition to
the WPOD do not allow flow to Wenham Lake Reservoir. He noted that this conclusion is based
on the following lines of evidence:
1. There is a topographic divide between the Miles River and Wenham Lake Reservoir that
precludes surface water from the Miles River from flowing toward Wenham Lake
Reservoir. This topographical divide will also support the present of a groundwater
divide.
2. Hydraulic heads measured at 38,44 and 45 Enon Street exceed the Miles River elevations
documenting the presence of a groundwater divide between the two water bodies. The
Page 2 of 9
Beverly Planning Board Minutes
April 16, 2013
measured heads provide data with which to calibrate hydraulic conductivity and infiltration
values using the Dupuit equation. The Frimpter method evaluation indicates that this
divide will continue to be present during the seasons of drought.
3. Analysis of the low lying area of the Lakeview Golf Course using the Dupuit equation
indicate a groundwater divide will be present west of the Miles River under both measured
and estimated hydraulic conductives.
4. Average annual hydraulic gradients in the low lying area of the Lakeview Golf Course are
towards the Miles River and therefore the net groundwater flow direction is toward the
Miles River.
5. The maximum potential movement of a particle of groundwater during extended low pool
situations assuming maximum hydraulic conductivity would not travel the distance from
the Miles River to Wenham Lake Reservoir.
6. The time required to drain the elevated groundwater north and south of the low lying area
of the Lakeview Golf Course is greater than the documented periods of drought.
Therefore, the stream on the golf course is expected to constitute a groundwater divide
throughout low pool periods.
President Guanci opened the hearing up from questions and comments at this time.
Bill Squibb of Centerville addressed the Council/Planning Board and asked if there was any
indication that the watershed bounds have changed. Gall explained that for a lot of the parcels it
is the location noting that some parcels by themselves are not in the water shed but are
surrounded by parcels that are in the watershed.
Councilor Troubetaris noted that excessive rainfall could fill the reservoir. Gall explained that a
lot of the rain that goes into the reservoir flows out and down the small stream through the golf
course and in fairly recent history that has not happened.
Councilor Slate thanked Mr. Knowlton and Mr. Collins for attending the meeting this evening.
He noted that the original proposal to the council was referred to a number of agencies for
comment and noted that the report presented by the SBWSB is consistent with what Mr. Collins
opinion has been. He also noted that this proposal will be referred to the City Council Legal
Affairs Committee for further review.
Mr. Knowlton addressed the Council/Planning Board and stated that this report from CDM has
been useful to take a new look at the groundwater flows in this area.
Councilor Troubetaris thanked CDM for their report as well and noted that the information
presented has added another layer of education toward understanding this.
Dinkin asked if members of the Planning Board have any questions regarding this matter.
Page 3 of 9
Beverly Planning Board Minutes
April 16, 2013
Matz addressed the Council/Planning Board as a member of the public and noted that he is a
member of the Committee that has been working on this. He noted that he has several questions
regarding the CDM report.
Matz asked what time of year the water is drawn down from the Ipswich River. Gall reported
that from December 1 to the end of May as long as 28 million gallons flow per day in Ipswich.
He also noted that it is important to note that the SBWSB is not relying on Ipswich exclusively.
Mr. Matz asked Mr. Collins if he agreed or disagrees that a portion of the blue line on the plan is
incorrect. Collins stated that he agrees that the watershed was never in dispute but whether the
aquifer is a potable source of water.
It was noted that the Massachusetts GIS website shows the west edge does not go under
Wenham Lake but does to Longham.
Matz stated that he does not disagree and noted that the springs recharge Wenham Lake.
Mike Collins stated that based on the information provided there is no scientific information
provided that this will benefit drinking water.
Matz stated that it is his opinion that it should be protected because it is hydrologically connected
to both watersheds.
Guanci asked if there was anyone present who had new questions or comments on this matter.
Pam Kampersal of 241 Dodge Street and a member of the Safe Drinking Water Alliance
addressed the Council/Board and stated that the group was a collaboration of several
representative of several groups who spent a lot of time on this matter. She explained that the
original proposal was a collaboration of all involved not just one person . She thanked Mr. Matz
for his comments and noted that the drinking water needs to be protected for the simple reason of
droughts. She questioned why the aquifer should not be protected if the Ipswich River is so
stressed. She urged the Council to take the simple steps suggested to protect this gift.
Ms. Kampersal also noted that along route 128 the Ipswich River watershed basin flows north and
flows toward the Wenham Lake and the Longham Reservoir. She also noted the aquifer, and
questioned how if the watershed is important to the Ipswich watershed basin there isn't a divide.
Councilor Martin asked what the downside is for protecting the aquifer. Mike Collins reported
that his main concern is that there is no scientific basis for it. He noted that it needs to be
accurate to be taken seriously and we need to focus resources on protecting the watershed
boundaries.
Pam Kampersal asked if Alliance for Safe Drinking Water could have a copy of the CDM Smith
report.
Page 4 of 9
Beverly Planning Board Minutes
April 16, 2013
Guanci opened the hearing up for additional public comment at this time.
Mary Rodrick of 14 Peabody Street addressed the Council/Planning Board and asked when the
second amendment to the proposal would be referred to the legal affairs committee. She also
referred to Section 9 and stated that she is concerned about an increase in impervious surface.
Rosemary Maglio of 30 Pleasant Street addressed the Council/Planning Board and stated that she
is also concerned about the amount of impervious surface and stated that it should be limited in
the Watershed Overlay Protection District. Mike Collins stated that they did not ask CDM to
address impervious surface.
Rene Mary of 274 Hale Street addressed the Council/Planning Board and expressed her concerns
about safe drinking water noting that it is a public health issue and our regional water system that
serves Salem and Beverly and part of Hamilton should be protected.
Mr. Marciano of 141 McKay Street addressed the Council/Planning Board and questioned the
groundwater storage in the watershed. He also asked who is legally responsible for the
Watershed Overlay Protection District. Guanci stated that the Salem Beverly Water Supply
Board is responsible for it. Mike Collins agreed noting that the Board has the authority.
Rose Maglio addressed the Council again and asked who would be legally responsible if anything
is disturbed in the area. Guanci stated that the person who caused the disturbance would be
responsible. Magio further noted that the city would be negligent if they do not protect the
watershed in a certain way.
Bill Squibb addressed the Council/Planning Board and stated that there is no reason to believe
that DEP will allow the access. Mike Collins stated that is correct noting that if there is a drought
everywhere it is not a viable source of water. He also noted that water usage in Salem and
Beverly is 3 million gallons less than it was 10 years ago.
Councilor Latter addressed Ms. Cassidy and questioned what the consequences are if we include
parcels not in the overlay district. Cassidy explained that it would be more restrictive for public
and private property owners.
Pam Kampersal addressed the Council and requested that a presentation be made to the legal
affairs committee by her consultant. Councilor Slate stated that he would be reluctant to turn a
Legal Affairs meeting into a public hearing noting that six months of meetings have been held and
there was plenty of time to bring in experts. Councilor Martin agreed noting that a lot of time has
been spent on this.
Cassidy noted that the nature and purpose of the public hearing process is to take public comment
and the City Council and the Planning Board have done that.
Page 5 of 9
Beverly Planning Board Minutes
April 16, 2013
Dinkin agreed noting that a meeting that is not posted as a public hearing ought not to look like
one.
There being no further questions or comments on this matter at this time Guanci declared the
public hearing closed at 9:20 p.m.
Dinkin asked for a motion to close the public hearing.
Thomson: motion to close the public hearing. Flannery seconded the motion. The motion
carried (8 -0).
Page 6 of 9
Beverly Planning Board Minutes
April 16, 2013
This Documents is Subject to Review and approval by the Planning Board
CITY OF BEVERLY
PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES
Board: Special Meeting of the Planning Board
Beverly City Council
Date: Tuesday, April 16, 2012
Location: Beverly City Hall, City Council Chambers
Members Present Chairman Richard Dinkin, Vice Chair John Thomson, Ellen
Flannery, James Matz, John Mullady, Michael O'Brien,
Members Absent: Charles Harris, David Mack, Ellen Hutchinson
City Planner Tina Cassidy, Assistant City Planner Leah
Zambernardi
Recorder: Eileen Sacco
Dinkin calls the meeting to order at 9:30 p.m.
Dinkin calls for a moment of silence in honor of the victims of the Boston Marathon bombing.
Planning Board Recommendation to City Council
a. Continued Joint Public Hearings — City Council Order #169 — Zoning Text and
Map Amendments Relative to Water Supply Protection Overlay District, Article
XXXVHI, Section 38.31C. (Formerly Section 29 -31C of the Zoning Ordinance
b. City Council Order #170 — Zoning Amendments Relative to Article XXXVHI,
Section 28.28.C.1 and 38.28.C.2 ( Formerly Section 29- 28.C.1 an 29- 28.C.2. of the
Zoning Ordinance
Dinkin noted that this is an important ordinance and we need to look forward for the long
term that it is not too restrictive. He noted that this is a complicated matter that has been
discussed on and off for a couple of years.
Dinkin questioned the time frame for the City Council to receive the recommendation
noting that he would like to take some time to review this and consider the uses that are
allowed and not allowed.
Page 7 of 9
Beverly Planning Board Minutes
April 16, 2013
Zambernardi reported that the Planning Board has 21 days from the close of the public
hearing to make a recommendation to the City Council and after the 21 days the Council
is free to act without Planning Board input.
Cassidy reviews the text changes that have been made to the original proposed ordinance.
She noted that she added significant definitions and delineated the watershed areas A,B,
and C as defined by DER
Cassidy explained that it calls for the overlay to include zone 1, 2 & 3 and the area around
the public supply well.
Cassidy noted that the provision that calls for a portion of a parcel falls in the overlay
district would make the entire parcel subject to the provision. She also noted that there is
a parcel at the airport that falls into this and would be subject to the provision. She further
explained that this provision would prohibit activities in these areas, noting that there has
been talk of use of a parcel for a cemetery that would be included in this as well.
Matz stated that it is written to protect the airport as long as they are in compliance with
state and federal regulations.
Cassidy explained that the proposal requires a special permit for uses that would increase
impervious surfaces by 15 %.
Dinkin stated that he has issues with some of this noting that we have existing rules that
deal with grandfathering. He noted that we have to be very conscious that there is a
rational basis for restricting property owners rights. He noted that he is not opposed to
adding new definitions but he sees no reason to include any set of definitions with the
ordinance. He noted that internal logic to the structure of the ordinance should not say
this one area is an exception.
Matz addressed the Board and summarized the Ad Hoc Committee's position on this and
noted that he agrees that the definitions need to be updated in accordance with the current
regulations. He stated that he is of a different opinion that science does not support the
aquifer. Thomson noted that the aquifer is shown on several maps dating back to 1987
and 1992.
Matz noted that since the ordinance was enacted in 1988 a number of materials have
ended up in the watershed. He also noted that underground storage tanks have been
installed at the airport and on Enon Street. He stressed that we should be considering
how to prevent material from getting into the watershed and how to enforce it.
Dinkin noted that the hour is getting late and suggested that the Board vote on one of the
matters this evening and schedule a special meeting to complete this.
Thomson stated that the two ordinances should be treated separately.
Page 8 of 9
Beverly Planning Board Minutes
April 16, 2013
Thomson stated that he would like to exclude the aquifer from the ordinance but consider
some other way to protect it.
Thomson: moved that the Planning Board recommend that the aquifer area between
the Wenham Lake Reservoir and the Longham Lake Reservoir be excluded
from being subject to the Ordinance, and that the City Council consider
other ways to protect the aquifer. Mullady seconded the motion. The
motion carried (5 -1) with Matz opposed.
Schedule Special Planning Board Meeting
The Planning Board scheduled a special meeting for the purpose of making a recommendation to
the City Council on City Council Order #170 — Zoning Amendments Relative to Article
XXXVIII, Section 28.28.C.1 and 38.28.C.2 ( Formerly Section 29- 28.C.1 an 29- 28.C.2. of the
Zoning Ordinance for Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 7:00 p.m. at a location to be determined.
Adjournment
There being no further business to come before the Planning Board this evening a motion was
made by Thomson to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Flannery. The motion carried (6 -0)
The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m.
Page 9 of 9