Loading...
2005-05-24 CITY OF BEVERLY PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES Date: May 24, 2005 Board: Conservation Commission Subcommittee: Members Present David Lang (Chair), Tony Paluzzi (Vice-Chair), Linda Goodenough, Mayo Johnson, Gregg Cademartori, and Bill Squibb (arrives 7:10 p. m.) Members Absent: Ian Hayes Others Present: Amy Maxner – Environmental Planner Recorder: Robin Levesque Lang calls meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. CERTIFICATE OF COMPLICANCE New: 44 Prince Street – DEP #5-652 – Francis Burr Maxner reminds the Commission that an Order of Conditions where issued February of 1999, for a septic system repair for the main residence and a carriage house. Maxner states the applicant is requesting a Certificate of Compliance. Maxner stated she spoke to Joe Reale, Health Inspector, and he stated that the repair and as- built met with his approval and the work was done as proposed. Maxner stated upon her site visit she found the area stable and the work was done a few years ago. Maxner stated the applicant is in the process of selling and has a Title 5 certificate. Paluzzi motions to issue Certificate of Compliance. Seconded by Johnson. All in favor. Motion carries. 5-0 MINOR MODIFICATION Cont: 76 Paine Avenue – DEP#5-867 – Jack Swansburg Maxner reminds the Commission that the applicant submitted a request for a Minor Modification to extend grading past elevation 9 into the A2 Coastal Zone. Maxner states Beverly Conservation Commission May 24, 2005 Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 10 that during the site inspection, the Commission requested that compensatory flood storage be provided and required the applicant to have an engineered plan drawn up to show how the proposed compensator storage area would be provided. She states she has received no new information. th Paluzzi motions to continue the discussion on this item to the June 12 meeting. All members are in favor. Motion carries 5-0. Squibb arrives. Recess for Public Hearing Paluzzi moves to recess for public hearings. Seconded by Johnson. All members are in favor. Motion carries 6-0. NOTICE OF INTENT Cont: - 2 Boyles Street – DEP#5-862 – Manor Homes at Whitehall, LLC William Manuel, Wetlands & Land Management, states the Commission’s wildlife expert, Dr. Windmiller, has submitted its report, which he thinks is consistent with the applicant’s position that the 100-Foot No-Disturb Zone does not include the upland area contiguous to it, nor the BVW that extends beyond that upland area. Manuel states the word “encompass” seems to be self-explanatory; it means to envelope or encircle. He states the Regulations references the word No Disturb Zone 12 times, he states encompass means around the vernal pool. He states the Performance Standards in Section III.A.5. have been met and there is no need to request waiver to the No Disturb Zone. Manuel states the Regulations do not protect a particular species but rather habitat area. Manuel presents a revised plan the area of 100 feet from McAulliffe property to the vernal pool and around the vernal pool. He states there is significant upland habitat beyond the 100 ft. zone. He explains the applicant is proposing conditions for Lot 37 demarcating a No Disturb Zone, which provides a greater area of protection for upland habitat. Lang asks if there are any questions from the Commission. Lang asks if there are any questions from the public. Tom Harrington, attorney for the Friends of Chapman’s Corner asks if this No Disturb area is actual habitat that is utilized. Manuel states all the upland area is suitable habitat. Harrington states that Dr. Windmiller’s report indicates that no actual data has been collected to evaluate or quantify actual habitat usage. Manuel states there is no need to document actual usage as it is all suitable habitat and is more than likely utilized. Beverly Conservation Commission May 24, 2005 Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 10 Lang states he believes that the Regulations require documentation on actual usage and pathways as well. Michael DeRosa, wetland consultant for the Friends of Chapman’s Corner, states that it is very easy to collect information where the salamander are spending there non-breeding time and migrating to and from. He thinks that Manuell’s point that the whole upland area is suitable habitat is probably correct, but there is no quantification and the Ordinance and Regulations are clear on the requirement of actual migratory pathway and habitat usage. Harrington encourages the Commission to follow what the Ordinance and Regulations dictate. He states the applicant has not provided any rational for protecting a portion of Lot # 37, how does the Commission know if this is appropriate without quantitative data. Lang asks if there are any other questions from members or the public. There are none. Johnson motions to close the hearing. Seconded by Paluzzi. All members are in favor. Motion carries 6-0. Cont: 2 Boyles St – DEP#5-816 – Manor Homes at Whitehall, LLC Robert Griffin, Griffin Engineering states he would like to talk about any outstanding questions or issues with the conventional plan. He reviews the layout of the design, he states the critter tunnel is 11 feet high, the base is 4 feet wide; he describes the drainage, the wetland areas, and the flow from the wetlands. Griffin states that Dr. Chiang’s letters of October and November stated he was satisfied with the drainage calculations and plan. He states he believes he has answered all questions regarding drainage. He states he identified the wetland replication areas, the footprints for three homes, he states it’s similar to the cluster plan with a homeowners association to maintain the drainage. Manuel hands out a draft Order of Conditions to the members for their consideration. Goodenough asks about the vernal pool in Wetland B and the associated 100 foot No Disturb Zone. Griffin states they have restricted a large area of protection by removing Spinnaker Court. Goodenough states she thinks the Commission must apply the standards established by the Regulations despite the technicality of filing them with the City Clerk. She thinks it would seem arbitrary if the Commission deviated from its Regulations as they have been intending to adopt these standards and did so practically simultaneous with this Notice of Intent filing. Maxner reminds the Commission and the applicant’s representative that allowing any filling of wetland is discretionary on the Commission’s part, the Commission is not bound by law to allow it. Beverly Conservation Commission May 24, 2005 Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 10 Griffin states there are no waivers requested from Planning Board, and believes that this plan is approvable by the Commission. Johnson states that he could not approve the plan as proposed, particularly all the structures and roads adjacent to the vernal pool in Wetland B, as he feels that there is far too much encroachment into habitat and it will prove detrimental to the pool and surrounding upland. Lang asks if there are any questions from the public. Resident of 5 Morrison Ave states he thinks this is a new plan. Griffin states that there was a 92 unit senior project, with access off Hale St., but that was never submitted to the Conservation Commission. Joan Murphy, 36 Longmeadow Road, states they should try an avoid filling and replicating of wetland resource area. Tom Harrington, attorney for the Friends of Chapman’s Corner, states the Ordinance is in place to regulate vernal pools and their surrounding habitat, and states that relying on the Ordinance provides the Commission with regulatory power to protect this area and the Regulations do not go beyond that authority. He agrees that the standards of the Regulations are applicable to this project. Joanne Avallon, 17 Boyles Street, asks how close Eisenhower Extension road is to the Cove School. Griffin reviews distances in this area. Avallon states that subdivision control law does not require 3 access points to a development and believes that the filling of Wetland D accommodates a third unnecessary access point to the property. Lang asks about the impact to the Wetlands. Mike DeRosa, wetland consultant for the Friends of Chapman Corner, states he agrees that the filling of Wetland D should not be approved and if a denial is appealed the DEP would most likely uphold that denial. Renee Mary, 274 Hale Street, states she still disputes with Mr. Griffin, she states there is no drainage at Chapman’s Corner and it always flows to her property. Cademartori asks why the detention pond at the Boyles Street entrance is so much farther away from the resource area than on the cluster plan. Griffin states the applicant does not own that property, and the owner, Matt Kavanaugh is co-applicant for the cluster plan and that property could be incorporated into the cluster plan. Beverly Conservation Commission May 24, 2005 Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 10 Resident of Morrison Avenue asks what the water flow will be from Wetland A. Griffin replies they are not sending any additional water down to Wetland A. Amy Murphy, 15 Eisenhower Avenue, asks Griffin if he can explain the flow of water down Eisenhower Avenue. Griffin explains the flow. Murphy asks if there will be more volume of water in some areas than there is now. Griffin replies yes, there will be some increase. Cademartori asks about the pre and post volume calculations. Griffin states the Planning Board has required, as part of their approval, that the pre and post volume flows be equal. This will require some minor changes to the plan but he does not think that it will have a great impact in terms of what the Commission is looking at now. Resident of Eisenhower Avenue asks who will maintain the ponds and if there will be fences around them. Griffin states the homeowner association will maintain the ponds, and yes they will have fences. Steve Gonzalez, 11 Birch Woods Avenue, asks about the grading of the detention ponds. Griffin refers to the plans the areas of grading. Joanne Avallon, 17 Boyles Street, goes to the plan and asks about the elevations, the concrete walls and referring to the detention ponds ask what does this look like to the neighbors. Griffin states grass, rock, flared end, rip rap, he states it’s a dry pond and the rock is three inches or smaller. Gonzalez asks what the elevation is at his house. Griffin states the elevation is 8 feet. Maxner asks what is the slope. Griffin replies the slope is 2 to 1. Griffin asks the Commission for a continuance. Joan Murphy, 36 Longmeadow Road, asks the Commission if they will be submitting the same plans to the Planning Board. Lang states they would have to come back to the Conservation Commission with a modification if changes are made. There being no further questions or comments from members or the public, Paluzzi th motions to continue until June 14. Seconded by Johnson. All in favor. Motion carries 6-0. Cont: 43 Paine Avenue, DEP#5-857 – Barn Hill, LLC Maxner states she spoke earlier with the applicant and he has withdrawn this Notice of Intent. She explains the applicant has received a new building permit for the original plan that was approved by the DEP with all of the work outside the 100ft. buffer zone and they have started clearing activities on site pursuant to that plan. Beverly Conservation Commission May 24, 2005 Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 10 Cont: 23 Oak Street – DEP#5-876 – Ledyard McFadden Stacey Carpenter of Hancock Associates, represents the applicant. Carpenter reviews the plans with the members, explaining the elevations, the retaining wall, she refers to the plans and speaks of the mudroom are stating it’s broken down in zones. She explains that at the site visit, the Commission asked for additional plantings along the eastern corner of the lot and that has been added to the plan, and the applicant wanted to keep the plantings along the rest of the edge of the brook as originally proposed. She also states there is a full basement and asks if there are any questions. Cademartori asks if the plan shows the plantings. Carpenter states the plan doesn’t show any specific species, but that they would be happy to provide that information. Maxner asks about the red area on the house plans. Carpenter states the red area shows the retaining wall. Lang asks about the patio, he states where there’s a cut, 16 is existing, and a proposed cut to 13.6 the difference of 2.4 ft. and the other side a difference of 0.4 ft .if you average those you get 1.4 or 1.3. Carpenter states she’s not seeing where that fits in. Lang states 3 to 4 feet of material that you would have to fit into your calculations. Cademartori asks Carpenter to explain the calculations to the members. Lang asks if there are any other questions. Maxner asks about the erosion control. Carpenter states that an erosion control sock is proposed as the site is very flat and the sock would be sufficient. Cademartori asks about the problem with drainage, he states it collects water now and the catch basin under the footbridge is clogged with silt and sand and asks what the applicant is going to do with it. Carpenter states that it was not discussed with the client and she is not sure. Squibb asks where the drainage is going from that catch basin. Carpenter states that it most likely outlets into the brook. Cademartori suggests that the catch basin be decommissioned. There being no further questions from the members or the public, Goodenough motions to close the hearing. Seconded by Cademartori. Paluzzi abstains. All in favor. Motion carries 5-0-1 (five in favor, none opposed, one abstention) Beverly Conservation Commission May 24, 2005 Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 10 OLD/NEW BUSINESS New: Vitale Site – Discussion with Recreation Department re; Playing Fields Bruce Doig, Director of Parks & Recreation states he would like to present the latest plans for ball fields at the Vitale Site for the Commission’s review and approval. He explains that there will be two full size fields as opposed to three. The engineering firm working on the project indicated that three fields would not fit on the site due to grading constraints. He also explains that irrigation will be provided and plans for that system are being worked on now with New England Power and a contractor. Goodenough states she thinks the Commission should get some sort of compensation for releasing this site to active recreation, and remembers that the Mayor promised a land swap when the hockey rink was being discussed. She believes the Commission should be careful about this, as transferring the property out of conservation is precedent setting. She recognizes the very unusual nature of the Vitale Site property, but is of the opinion that the Commission should expect compensation in return. Paluzzi states he agrees with Goodenough and suggests that approval should be contingent on a swap of comparable land for open space and conservation purposes. Squibb states there is a proposed concession stand on the plan, and would not be in favor of approving any plan with any structures on the site. Doig states that according to New England Power, the cap could be constructed to accommodate a structure such as the concession stand, but that it could be moved to the area at the intersection of Cabot Street and L.P. Henderson Road and doesn’t think it will be a problem to do so. Lang states he doesn’t have a problem with the concession stand as this use would have to be approved by the resident LSP and DEP. Restroom facilities are also briefly discussed. Some discussion ensues regarding the final grading of the site. Doig states that Phil Klimowicz, Public Services Department Tree Warden, and Michael Collins, Director of Public Services are comfortable with the grades. He states the exterior fencing is to keep the balls from rolling out of the field. Renee Mary, 274 Hale Street, states New England power has other set of plans that the public has not seen and she has concerns about the water supply. Lang states he also has concerns about the water supply, but thinks this is a very reasonable use for this site and thinks it does not pose a risk to the water supply. Mary reads from her notes, and explains she has been going to these meetings held by New England Power, and one can see through the green wall surrounding the site now, she states she wants testing to see if toxic waste is in this area. She states there should be a public hearing with New England Power regarding how much fly ash will be removed. She states she wants more detail of what’s going on. Beverly Conservation Commission May 24, 2005 Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 10 Lang states this site has been tested and is being monitored to protect Wenham Lake and thinks that New England Power has been doing a good job in keeping the public informed and educated on the project. Maxner asks Lang when an AUL will be developed. Lang states there will be an AUL to restrict access and/or certain uses by DEP, which is then recorded at the Registry. Hexplains the AUL has a long list of restrictions for most sites, but is tailored for each specific situation. Squibb asks if any other sports can be played there. Doig replies it is specifically designed for soccer. James Latter, 145 Park Street, states many towns and cities are looking for opportunities to develop as many fields as possible, too many kids are inside playing videos and we need to get them out playing sports. He believes that the City needs to invest in the youth sports and this proposal is a great step towards that goal. Maxner asks if the parking lot is going to be paved. Doig replies it will remain gravel and there are no plans for paving it. There being no further questions or comments from members or the public, Goodenough motions to approve this conceptual plan for the Vitale Site ball fields contingent upon the Commission receiving compensation in the form of a comparable land swap for open space and conservation purposes, and allowing restrooms and concession stands that is consistent with the final AUL. Seconded by Paluzzi. Cademartori abstains. Motion carries 5-0-1 (five in favor, none opposed, one abstention). ORDER OF CONDITIONS 2 Boyles ST. – DEP # 5-862 Lang states that the Commission should schedule a separate special meeting to discuss and vote on a final Order of Conditions, but some discussion could take place now. A short discussion ensues regarding the 100-Foot No-Disturb Zone for the vernal pool at Wetland C. Members agree to review the plan and material further prior to the special meeting and be prepared to discuss specifics of the plan at that time. Lang asks the members when they could schedule a meeting. Maxner states the issuance th deadline is June 14. Members agree to schedule a special meeting for Thursday, June 2, 2005, at 7:30 p.m. 23 Oak St. – DEP # 5-876 Paluzzi moves to issue the following conditions: Beverly Conservation Commission May 24, 2005 Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 10 ?? Standard Conditions Discussion ensues regarding Special Conditions. Squibb motions to issue the following the following Special Conditions: 1. Prior to construction, a detailed planting plan for the proposed 5-foot wide native landscape buffer areas shall be submitted to the Conservation Administrator for review and approval. 2. The existing catch basin drain located underneath the footbridge shall be permanently decommissioned and retired from future use. 3. All debris, compost and other yard waste located behind and around the wood shed shall be removed and disposed of properly. Dumping in this area shall be discontinued. Seconded by Goodenough. All in favor. Motion carries 6-0. OLD BUSINESS 58 Dunham Road – Maestranzi Lang states he drove by the Maestranzi property viewing it from Route 128 and observed work being performed within the buffer zone, he observed stockpiling of large amounts of fill and excavated material in this area. He states that this property has been subject to previous cease and desist orders for clear cutting within the buffer to a vernal pool and BVW. He thinks that a cease and desist order should be issued for this new activity and a site visit should be conducted. Goodenough motions to issue a cease and desist order requiring the owner to immediately install erosion control, file a Notice of Intent in time for the next meeting, and contact the Commission to schedule a site inspection ASAP, she also moves to add language that reserves the Commission’s right to assess fines. Seconded by Paluzzi. All in favor. Motion carries 6-0. OTHER 35 Doty Avenue/ End of Melvin Avenue DEP File # 5-812 Maxner states she received a letter Ed Doherty at 35 Doty Avenue, she states Mr. Doherty would like to remove some of the trees in the 25-Foot No-Disturb Zone and replant and also plant a hedge row along the edge of the road. Maxner shows photographs provided by the applicant, which shows one tree that got struck by lightening and needed to be taken down, as it was a hazard. She explains that the other trees are showing distress and disease. Beverly Conservation Commission May 24, 2005 Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 10 Goodenough states that as long at Mr. Doherty replants as many trees as he takes down and they are native species, she would be amenable to approving the request. Paluzzi agrees that an equal number of trees need to be replanted and suggests that Maxner provide Mr. Doherty with a list of native trees suitable for that area and that he provide information on exactly how many trees are being taken and which species he will be replanting. Members are in agreement with this suggestion and Maxner states she will put these instructions in writing and forward a list of native tree species for Mr. Doherty to consider. 0 West Street – Chubb Brook City project replanting Maxner states that John Dick explained that some re-planting is going to be done by the City after the sewer work is complete, he would like to suggest that conservation grade plants and shrubs be planted to ensure their survival and also suggested that a hyrdo-seed wetland mix be used to encourage herbaceous growth within the 25-Foot No-Disturb Zone. Paluzzi motions to approve the proposal and agree with John Dick’s recommendation of using conservation grade plants, along with a review of the final planting plan for the areas of the site south of the 25-Foot No-Disturbance Zone prior to the construction of the house. Seconded by Goodenough. All in favor. Motion carries 6-0. Approval of Expenditure – ACOE Stream Crossing Workshop Maxner states that she and Paluzzi would like to attend a workshop offered by the Army Corps of Engineers reviewing the new stream crossing standards. The cost is $35.00 per person for municipal/governmental representatives. She asks if the Commission would approve this expenditure from the Ordinance NOI account. Goodenough moves to approve expending $70.00 for Maxner’s and Paluzzi’s attendances. Seconded by Johnson. All in favor. Motion carries 6-0. Adjournment Goodenough moves to adjourn. Seconded by Johnson. All members are in favor. Motion carries 6-0. Meeting is adjourned at 10:00 p.m.