Loading...
2013-07-02CITY OF BEVERLY PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES BOARD: Conservation Commission SUBCOMMITTEE: DATE: July 2, 2013 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: David Lang, Chairman, Tony Paluzzi, Vice Chairman, BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: OTHERS PRESENT: RECORDER: Christine Bertoni, Robert Buchsbaum, Anne Grant, Stephanie Herbster, Bill Squibb arrives at 7:30 p.m. Amy Maxner, Environmental Planner Jane Dooley Lang calls the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. at Beverly City Hall, 3 rd Floor Council Chambers, 191 Cabot Street, Beverly, MA. Certificates of Compliance New: 47 Grover Street, DEP File #5 -1084 — request for partial Cert. of Comp. to release Lot A — Jack Hyland Maxner explains the Commission issued an Order of Conditions this time last summer for a lot split into two at 47 Grover Street with Lot A containing the original house and Lot B slated for a new house. She notes that in order to show the Planning Board that Lot A had sufficient access, the applicant had to come before the Commission to get approval for a wetland crossing over a section of stream and BVW to show that a driveway can be constructed and it is a valid lot through the ANR process. The Commission issued the Order allowing for the new house and construction of the driveway contingent upon the applicant making every effort to secure the ability to use the existing driveway as a shared common driveway between the two lots. Maxner explains that Mr. Hyland was able to use the existing gravel driveway for both lots so he will not have to build a driveway. He is asking for a partial Certificate of Compliance to release Lot A, since no work will be done on that property. Lang asks Mr. Hyland for a copy of easement that allows use of the driveway by property on Lot B. Maxner notes that she would make the partial Certificate of Compliance clear that the option to build a driveway is no longer viable under this Order and if that proves to be a requirement, Mr. Hyland would have to reapply with a new NOI. Paluzzi moves to issue Certificate of Compliance for 47 Grover Street with those contingencies. Seconded by Herbster. The motion carries 6 -0. Recess for Public Hearings Buchsbaum moves to recess for public hearings. Seconded by Herbster. The motion carries 7 -0. Conservation Commission July 2, 2013 Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 10 Abbreviated Notice of Resource Area Delineation Cont: Endicott College Northeast Campus Area, DEP #5 -1086 — Endicott College c/o Dennis Monaco Joe Orzel, representing the College, explains that he has submitted his report with final revisions and the Commission's peer review consultant Mary Rimmer has reviewed and submitted her comments in response. Rimmer notes that Orzel's report was very thorough and thoughtful. She notes that for the most part she agrees with Orzels' conclusions with the exception of the following when looking at the language of the local Ordinance and Regulations and presence of requisite species: ➢ Wetland CC may qualify as a vernal pool under the Ordinance due to the presence of wood frog; ➢ Wetland G may qualify as a vernal pool under the Ordinance due to the presence of adult wood frogs; ➢ Wetland H may qualify as a vernal pool under the Ordinance due to the presence of two facultative species, green frog and dragon fly larvae; ➢ Wetland J as Mr. Orzel notes may be permanently with water, however as the Commission ruled in a previous decision, the pool does not have to dry out to receive protection as a vernal pool under the Ordinance; ➢ Wetland K has more than 10,000 square feet of standing water and the Commission determined it was a pond, that may support fish, under a previously issued Order to Landmark School even though it meets the biological criteria under the state and local regulations. Orzel mentions that there is not much disagreement with Rimmer's report, but questions if one wood frog qualifies as sufficient to meet criteria of vernal pool according to the local bylaw. He adds that Wetlands G and E is a migratory area for species and is similar for Wetland H. Orzel suggests that the interpretation of Wetlands J and K since 2007 should not be changed. Also the areas with permanent bodies of water do not meet criteria for vernal pool. Maxner notes the Order of Conditions related to the Landmark School athletic field, and states that the Commission determined it was a pond due to its size and that determination rules as that Order is still outstanding. Orzel adds information on Wetland A related to calculations on ILSF and its capacity to hold a quarter acre of water. He explains his analysis as written in his final report and believes that this is an IVW under the local Ordinance but does not qualify as an ILSF. Squibb arrives. Buchsbaum questions the significance of a single frog observed in a wetland area and if this is sufficient to make a determination as to vernal pool habitat. Maxner says this is a new situation to apply the Ordinance. Lengthy discussion ensues as to the implication of one wood frog or one egg mass sited at one visit and if this constitutes a population and the language of the Ordinance relative to the "presence" of requisite species. Bertoni states she believes the intention of the Ordinance is to Conservation Commission July 2, 2013 Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 10 protect the migration pathways and over - wintering habitat relative to contiguous wetland areas and would therefore rule on the protective side. Rimmer states that protection is still provided whether or not a determination of vernal pool is made. Lang notes that some of the areas have overlap from the vernal pool no disturb zones and it would likely not have additional burden for the school. Orzel and Monaco agree with Lang. Orzel notes how wood frogs would be moving through the wetlands. Maxner summarizes that the Commission would be making two decisions characterizing the wetlands, one under the State Act and one under the local Ordinance and identifying the areas that are protected vernal pools under the Ordinance and possibly the State Act. Lang reviews the wetlands under the State Act as accurate and characterized as: 1. The A- Series from flags A -1 through A -42 does not qualify as Isolated Land Subject to Flooding as it does not hold the requisite volume. 2. The BB- Series wetland from flags BB 1 through 13133 is confirmed as Bordering Vegetated Wetland, and a portion of this wetland functions as a vernal pool (uncertified). 3. The CC- Series from flags CC -1 through CC -19 is confirmed as Bordering Vegetated Wetland. 4. The DD- Series from flags DD -1 through DD -13 is confirmed as Bordering Vegetated Wetland. 5. The F- Series from flags F -1 through F -7 is confirmed as Bordering Vegetated Wetland. 6. The G- Series from flags G -4 through G -22 is confirmed as Bordering Vegetated Wetland 7. The H- Series from flags H -1 through H -17 is confirmed as Bordering Vegetated Wetland. The J- Series from flags J -1 through J -40 is confirmed as Bordering Vegetated Wetland, and functions as a vernal pool (uncertified). 9. The K- Series from flags K -1 through K -6 is confirmed as Bordering Vegetated Wetland to a pond. The pond was characterized as such under a previous, still valid, Order of Conditions for Landmark School, DEP File #5 -909. 10. The L- Series from flags L -1 through L -11 does not qualify as Isolated Land Subject to Flooding as it is too small and does not hold the requisite volume. Paluzzi moves to accept the resource area delineation under the State Act and summarized by Lang. Seconded by Buchsbaum. Motion carries 6 -0 -1 with Squibb abstaining. Lang reviews the wetlands under the local Ordinance as accurate and characterized as: 1. The A- Series from flags A -1 through A -42 is confirmed as Isolated Vegetated Wetland. 2. The BB- Series wetland from flags BB 1 through 13133 is confirmed as Bordering Vegetated Wetland and functions as a vernal pool; Conservation Commission July 2, 2013 Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 10 3. The CC- Series from flags is confirmed CC -1 through CC -19 is confirmed as Bordering Vegetated Wetland and functions as a vernal pool; 4. The DD- Series from flags DD -1 through DD -13 is confirmed as Bordering Vegetated Wetland; 5. The F- Series from flags F -1 through F -7 is confirmed as Bordering Vegetated Wetland; 6. The G- Series from flags G -4 through G -22 is confirmed as Bordering Vegetated Wetland and functions as a vernal pool; 7. The H- Series from flags H -1 through H -17 is confirmed as Bordering Vegetated Wetland and functions as a vernal pool; 8. The J- Series from flags J -1 through J -40 is confirmed as Bordering Vegetated Wetland and functions as a vernal pool; 9. The K- Series from flags K -1 through K -6 is confirmed as Bordering Vegetated Wetland to a pond. The pond was characterized as such under a previous, still valid, Order of Conditions for Landmark School, DEP File #5 -909; 10. The L- Series from flags L -1 through L -11 does not qualify as Isolated Vegetated Wetland as it is too small. Orzel comments that green frog would be found in puddles any time it rains and they are no longer on the state's list of facultative species. Lengthy discussion ensues relative to the Commission's previous decision for the 50 Dunham Road ANRAD, which determined that the Ordinance is protective of any vernal pool regardless of its hydro - period, and members agree that this application should not be treated any differently. Paluzzi moves to accept the resource area delineations and characterizations as summarized by Lang above. Seconded by Bertoni. The motion carries 5 -1 -1, with Buchsbaum opposed only to vernal pool determinations but in favor of isolated and bordering vegetated wetland determinations, and Squibb abstaining. Since there were no questions from the audience, Bertoni moves to close the hearing. Seconded by Herbster. The motion carries 6 -0 -1, with Squibb abstaining. Cont: 108 West Street — Symes Development & Permitting c/o Jeff Rhuda Maxner notes the applicant has requested a continuance as representatives have a conflict this evening. Paluzzi moves to continue the hearing to the July 30 meeting. Seconded by Buchsbaum. The motion carries 6 -0. New: Grover Street, Map 95 Lot 8 (79 Dodges Row, Wenham) — 79 Dodges Row Trust c/o Angus West Conservation Commission July 2, 2013 Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 10 Maxner reads the legal notice. Michael Seekamp of Seekamp Environmental Consulting representing the applicant addresses the Commission. Seekamp notes that he delineated the wetlands and located intermittent streams on site that is located in both Wenham and Beverly. He mentions that most of the abutters who are from Beverly have been notified of meetings in Wenham and Beverly where they mostly attended the prior meeting in Wenham. Seekamp notes the wetland resources found in Beverly consist of bordering vegetated wetlands associated with intermittent streams. He notes that Salem Beverly Water Supply Board has been notified and they have hired a peer review relative to their jurisdiction with regard to drinking water supply, tributaries and Zones thereto. He explains that the ANRAD plan was reviewed and approved by the Wenham Conservation Commission but they did not close its hearing in favor of Beverly and the Water Board completing their respective reviews. Seekamp provides a general overview of the topography and site conditions and assumes that the Commission will want to walk to the line in the field. Members agree. There being no further questions from Commission members or the audience, Bertoni moves to continue the hearing to the July 30 meeting with a site visit scheduled for July 17 at 6:00 p.m. Seconded by Grant. The motion carries 7 -0. NOTICES OF INTENT Cont: 43 Water Street — install steel sheet pile bulkhead, fill land under ocean, install travel lift and floating docks — Beverly Port Marina Maxner explains that the applicant is still waiting for DEP Chapter 91 to submit comments and has asked that the hearing be continued to the July 30 meeting. Paluzzi moves to continue the hearing to the July 30 meeting. Seconded by Grant. The motion carries 7 -0. Cont: 32 Pickman Road — John Osbon Maxner notes the applicant has asked for a continuance to do plan revisions and gather supplemental information. Herbster moves to continue the hearing to the July 30the meeting. Seconded by Squibb. The motion carries 7 -0. Cont: 28 Paine Avenue — Rayna Lesser Hannaway Maxner notes the applicant has asked for a continuance to do plan revisions and gather supplemental information. Paluzzi moves to continue the hearing to the July 30the meeting. Seconded by Grant. The motion carries 7 -0. New: 183 West Street — Crystal Condakes Conservation Commission July 2, 2013 Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 10 Maxner reads legal notice. Jim Scanlon, Scanlon Engineering, is representing the applicant. He explains the applicant is proposing to abandon an existing subsurface septic system and connect to City force main sewer that had been installed a couple years ago for this entire stretch of West Street. Work to take place within the outer 200 -foot Riverfront Area and 100 -foot Buffer Zone to Coastal Bank. The proposal is to connect the existing dwelling and pool house that are connected to existing septic system to a 1,000 - gallon septic tank/pump chamber for storage for 7- bedroom house. All work is proposed in an existing lawn and gravel driveway. The septic tank would be crushed and filled, this and leach field would be abandoned. A siltation barrier is proposed and Scanlon notes brick and cement walls and train tracks in Buffer Zone. The pump chamber is outside of the Riverfront but is within the 100' wall and no work is proposed within 25' No Disturb Zone. Buchsbaum asks how long the work would take and the depth of the trench. Scanlon predicts that the work could be completed in five days or less. He adds that a 4' deep trench would be dug to accommodate 2 -inch pipe and 6- inches of crushed stone in the bottom of the pump chamber. A grinder pump would be used in pump chamber. Maxner notes that the line was covered by NOI up to 183 West Street and this NOI addresses the property. Bertoni asks the status of the cesspool. Scanlon states that they suspect there is something there, but won't know until they go to abandon the existing system. Lang asks if the Commission feels it should conduct a site visit. Members agree that this is straightforward and a visit is not necessary. Discussion ensues about use of 110 gallons of water per day expected by residence. Also, location of pump chamber relative to Chubb Brook and rough estimate in pre- disturbed area was addressed. There being no further questions from the Commission or comments from the public, Paluzzi moves to close the hearing. Seconded by Buchsbaum. The motion carries 7 -0. OLD/NEW BUSINESS New: Request to Install Radio Tower on Conservation Commission Land off Greenwood Avenue — Michael Collins, Commissioner Public Services & Engineering Discussion ensues about the City's DPW Director's request to install a 20 -foot tower at the top of the hill on Conservation Commission owned land. Maxner has asked Collins to submit a formal request but he is still trying to identify the exact location for tower that would be sited 180 feet above sea level to improve public safety communication in Ward 6. The Committee tabled the matter until it hears from Collins. New: Minor Proiect Permits Issued by Administrator — Maxner notes she has not issued any minor project permits since the Commission's last meeting. New: Expenditure Approvals Conservation Commission July 2, 2013 Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 10 ➢ $350 payable to Jeffrey Roelofs, the Commission's special counsel relative to 50 Dunham Road ANRAD appeal, for his services rendered in late March — this is an invoice that had an error that he had fixed and resent. Paluzzi moves to approve payment of $350. Seconded by Squibb. The motion carries 7 -0. OTHER BUSINESS: Route 128Brimbal Avenue Interchange ENF Maxner had emailed a PDF version of the ENF to members. She recommends discussion as to the Commission's findings in reviewing the ENF and determination as to whether or not comments are warranted. The comment letter will need to address both Phase 1 and Phase 2. The City is seeking a waiver from MEPA to avoid filing a full EIR for Phase 1. The comment period has been extended and will close on July 26, 2013. Herbster recused herself and left the room. Maxner describes the recent scoping session meeting with MEPA, DEP, and Jacobs Engineering, (design team for City) and Mass DOT to provide a public forum for questions on the EENF. She explains that City is asking for waiver at Brimbal Avenue and Sohier Road connector, which is referred to as Phase 1. Comments are due by Friday July 26, 2013 and a decision is scheduled to be issued on August 2, 2013. She adds that Holly Johnson, MEPA representative, asked for more specific detail that supports the claim that the project would improve safety and traffic flow and requested calculations for storm water management, BMP elevations and capacity. Maxner states that Jacobs should have this information submitted shortly. Discussion ensues about if there were test wells at the site relative to the environmental impact especially from past uses. Maxner notes that MEPA asked for supplemental information relative to footprint and closing of the landfill (re: DEP). Also requested was information on potential impact of peak traffic with North Shore Music Theater. Maxner adds that an RDA application would be submitted shortly for Phase 1 as it is strictly in the buffer zone with no direct wetland impacts. Maxner notes that there will be wetlands impact with Phase 2. In addition, she explains that portion of Dunham Road property would be used for part of round about. Discussion addresses amount of impervious area in Phase 1 resulting in an increase of 6 acres and 22 -acre increase after Phase 2. The Commission notes that swales and detention basins, as well as vegetative filters are proposed as part of the project. Discussion ensues about how coordinates could be provided by the Commission for Phase 1 identifying certifiable and potential vernal pools since drawings for project include work within 100 feet. Maxner explains that Phase 1 will be done by the City under an RFP, and full build -out Phase 2 that will be done by Mass. DOT will be subject to the Commission's review under Wetlands Protection Act. She notes that Jacobs' team has mentioned that Mass. DOT projects are not subject to local ordinances. She mentions that she has asked the team if there is exemption then the citation should be provided. Maxner notes that the City Solicitor would review and opine. Discussion ensues about certified and potential vernal pools located in Phase 1 and Phase 2. Conservation Commission July 2, 2013 Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 10 Lang recommends that a summary be compiled of the Commission's past findings in the area in addition to discussion this evening. Maxner mentions that Phase 2 is anticipated to have wetland impact on BVW, IVW, and regulated buffer zone pursuant to state regulations. Maxner and Bertoni will draft a letter containing comments from the Commission discussion this evening concentrating on Phase 2 rather than Phase 1 as 2 has more significant wetland impacts. New: 76 Paine Avenue — Enforcement Order Follow Up — John Swansbum c/o John Dick — Maxner reminds the Commission it issued an enforcement order requiring an NOI to be submitted for unauthorized work on the rip -rap seawall. The deadline for this has passed and John Dick has submitted a plan for NOI to Maxner. John Dick, representing the applicant, notes that he has been dealing with some health issues causing him to miss the deadline for this NOI. He shows a drawing to the Commission and mentions he is close to filing the NOI any day now. He notes that the rip -rap wall was expanded in 2005 as a measure to repair and shore up a failed section of the granite block seawall that collapsed during storms, which exposed a section of steel sheet pile installed by the previous owner under an Order issued by the Commission in 2002 or 2003. Dick explains detail of work and says subsequent to the Commission's enforcement order he had asked the contractor to remove rubble and remove any exposed soil in the buffer zone. These interim repairs included replacement of concrete slab that was busted up by wave action with stone. Dick presents photos of area to the Commission after storm that occurred last March. He explains that stone and rip -rap were re -laid and he verified that it does not extend further into the ocean or beach. Dick presents the detail plan and background including repair plans for shore protection from 2005 and surveying plans from 2008 when the tennis court was built. He notes that the old Order has a Certificate of Compliance and any new Order relative to this certificate requires Commission approval. Discussion ensues about if an Order and certificate were issued relative to sheet pile used in the area. Dick says the Order has expired so no more work could be done under that Order. Maxner agrees to look for the plans and search for meeting minutes. Dick states he will file an NOI in the next two days, and describes storm damage that occurred in 2011. Dick states that the work Mr. Swansburg wants to do consists of repairing the existing wall and suggests it could have been designed to break and says if he finds an engineer to opine on this he would notify the Commission. The NOI will be included on the Commission's next meeting agenda. End of Taft Avenue and 43 Taft Avenue — Site Inspection Report From Associate Planner Kirk Baker Maxner refers to site inspection report written by Associate Planner Kirk Baker who conducted a site visit on the afternoon of June 17, 2013 in response to an anonymous complaint about dumping of lawn grass debris at the western end of Taft Avenue by homeowner at 43 Taft Avenue. Baker witnessed the homeowner dumping a load of grass into the wetland area spoke to homeowner and notified him that he should stop the dumping and that this situation would be referred to the Commission. Conservation Commission July 2, 2013 Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 10 Discussion ensues as to the Commission issuing an Enforcement Order giving the homeowner a deadline to remove the grass debris from the site. The Commission addresses how this could be a communal dumping spot involving more than one homeowner. Paluzzi moves to issue an Enforcement Order to the owner at 43 Taft Avenue requiring removal of yard waste and debris from the wetland in time for the August 20 meeting for inspection by the Agent. Seconded by Buchsbaum. The motion carries 7 -0. Maxner states that she and /or Baker will follow up. Order of Conditions 183 West Street Discussion ensues as to possible conditions to issue with the Order. Paluzzi moves to issue Standard Conditions and the following Special Conditions as discussed: 1. In addition to filling and crushing the septic tank, the cesspool next to the pool house shall be properly abandoned. 2. Erosion control shall consist of staked straw wattle and only installed near the mouth of the driveway where the privacy wall ends. Seconded by Herbster. The motion carries 7 -0. Common Lane end of Greenwood and blocked culvert altering vernal pool /wetland Maxner describes that there is a certified vernal pool at the end of Greenwood Avenue on the Common Lane end. She explains there is a culvert under the access drive to AMG that drains the pool, but it was buried after the large snowstorms during the winter of 2011. She explains that the next door neighbor, Mr. Brusca, has tried to maintain it but it is in need of repair beyond what he can or should be expected to manage. She explains that Mr. Brusca believes it was modified by personnel from DPW so it is no longer flowing as well as it was. As a result there may be a direct alteration of resource area, the vernal pool due to rising water levels in the pool. Discussion ensues about having Maxner identify the owner of the culvert (i.e., AMG, City ?) to remediate the situation. The Commission agrees to conduct a site visit on July 17 at 6:45 p.m. Inquiry from Steve Drohosky re: proposed repaving at 50 Dunham Road Maxner reads inquiry from Mr. Steve Drohosky about proposed grinding of asphalt and repaving at 50 Dunham Road existing parking areas with no expansions that encroaches on buffer zone. Members review the site plan. Bertoni confirms that there will be no expansion of paved areas, Maxner states that is what Mr. Drohosky has indicated. Members agree that this activity does not need any formal review by the Commission contingent upon the following: Conservation Commission July 2, 2013 Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 10 ➢ The Commission is assuming that the existing paved surface is NOT going to be ground up - instead it will simply be paved over with a new layer of asphalt. If grinding is proposed the Commission would like to be consulted. ➢ The Commission requires that a stretch of silt fence be installed along the edge of repaving areas (to establish a visual limit of work in the field, and to ensure that no materials and /or debris from the work migrates beyond the existing paved surface). ➢ The Commission requires that Maxner inspect the silt fence to ensure proper installation. Planning Board request for comments 128 Park Street — Proposed Modification to Site Plan Review with Planning Board Maxner explains that there are a series of contractor building units that were part of a previous site plan reviewed by the Planning Board. She notes that the Commission determined the project did not fall within its jurisdiction. A request for a modification to this site plan has been filed with the Planning Board and the Board is asking for comments as is customary. She explains the request is for loading dock area at the very rear unit, and an easement to be provided over an existing strip of land at the rear of the property. She notes that easement is 195' at the nearest point to the river but existing conditions will not change as a result of this modification. Members review the plan, and agree there are no Conservation Commission jurisdictional issues with this plan. Approval of Minutes: April 30, 2013 Members provide Maxner with amendments to April 30, 2013 minutes. Grant moves to approve the minutes as amended. Seconded by Buchsbaum. The motion carries 6 -0 -1 with Paluzzi abstaining, as he was absent from that meeting. Adiournment There being no further business before the Commission, Paluzzi moves to adjourn at 9:40 p.m. Seconded by Buchsbaum. The motion carries 7 -0. The next regular meeting of the Conservation Commission is Tuesday, July 30, 2013 at Beverly City Hall, 191 Cabot Street.