2009-02-10
CITY OF BEVERLY
PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES
Date:
Board:
Members Present
February 10, 2009
Conservation Commission
David Lang, Tony Paluzzi, Ian Hayes, Mary Reilly, Bill Squibb, Dr.
Mayo Johnson, and Gregg Cademartori
Members Absent:
None
Others Present:
Amy Maxner - Environmental Planner
Recorder:
Eileen Sacco
Certificate of Compliance
Cont: 150 Sam Fonzo Drive. DEP File #5-844 - Fonzo Realtv. LLC
Peter Ogren of Hayes Engineering is present on behalf of the applicant.
Maxner explains that this Order and the Amended Order issued in 2005 governed the construction
of an industrial manufacturing building with associated parking, access drive, utilities and
stormwater management areas within 100-Foot Buffer Zone to BVW and within the 100-NDZ ofa
vernal pool located within the IVW.
Peter Ogren of Hayes Engineering addresses the Commission and states that he was unaware of the
Amended Order of Conditions. He notes that he has submitted two sets of as built plans. He also
explains the dual sump pumps were installed on the site per the special condition in the Amended
Order.
Ogren also notes that the applicant never recorded the conservation easement and explains that he
talked with Marshall Handley who will be working to finalize the language for approval by the
Commission. Maxner recalls that she provided Atty. Handley with MACC boilerplate language
for the conservation easement but never heard back.
Maxner states that she visited the site with Libby Wallis but it was difficult to see anything because
of the snow cover. She also notes that special condition # 14 requires that a planting plan for the
area mentioned in Special Condition #12 be submitted to the Commission for review and approval
but it was never submitted. She states that evergreens were planted that did not survive and
replaced with 6 red oak trees along the path.
Maxner also explains that Special Condition # 1 0 required that a gravel infiltration trench be installed along
the southerly edge of the interior parking garage. She also notes that this trench may not be necessary, as it
appears that the parking area is contained by curbing to direct stormwater flow to the metal grate drain.
Discussion ensues regarding Special Condition #12, which requires that the area south of the far
westerly parking lot and west of the detention basin be included within the area of the Conservation
Easement and the as-built plan does not reflect this change. Maxner notes that there are two small
Beverly Conservation Commission
Meeting Minutes - February 10, 2009
Page 2 of 12
areas of encroachment in to the wetland as described in Mr. Ogren's letter that should be reviewed
after the snow melts.
Hayes notes that there is a potential vernal pool on the site and there was to be an investigation.
Ogren explains that Maxner and Wallis looked at that and did not note any distinguishing
characteristics but they indicated in their response to the Commission that they would look at it
again in April or May. Maxner clarifies that the IVW does have a documented vernal pool and a
special condition required post-construction monitoring of this pool, and that there was a separate
small depression within the conservation easement to the north that the Commission wanted
investigated for vernal pool function.
Cademartori notes that the project was done in 2004, and the Commission at the time imposed the
conditions because they felt that they were important and he feels that the conditions should be
adhered to.
Lang suggests that the Commission continue the matter to the end of April so that the area can be
looked at again when the snow melts and the applicant's attorney can finalize the easement
language for recording.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, Paluzzi moved to continue the
matter to the May 12, 2009 meeting. Hayes seconds the motion. The motion carries 7-0.
Cont: Sam Fonzo Drive. DEP File #5-643 - Fonzo Realtv. LLC
Peter Ogren of Hayes Engineering is present on behalf of the applicant.
Ogren addresses the Commission and states that this project is ten years old and the as built plans
have been submitted. He states that there is a deficiency in the detention basin on the site because it
has not been maintained and built smaller that originally proposed. He explains that they will be
filing soon for a project on a parcel recently purchased at the Beverly Airport site immediately
adjacent to the subject site as part of that expansion project of the existing building they will address
the basin in that new NO!.
Maxner states that there was 190 s.f. of wetland disturbance detailed in the engineers report but she
was unable to view that because of the snow cover. She also notes that restorative plantings were
required as a special condition along the bank that had experienced ATV traffic before the
development, and they were never planted.
Ogren states that the applicant needs to refinance to do the proposed expansion on the property and
requested that the Commission issue an enforcement order to remove the material from the basin
and complete the plantings, and issue the Certificate of Compliance tonight.
Hayes states that it is important to the Commission to have the area restored. Cademartori states
that is seemed important enough for the Commission to apply a special condition to this area and
Beverly Conservation Commission
Meeting Minutes - February 10, 2009
Page 3 of 12
believes that the Certificate should not be issued until the non-compliance is adequately addressed.
Discussion ensues regarding these issues.
Reilly states that she feels that the request if premature as they should have to comply with the
Order of Conditions before the Commission issues a Certificate of Compliance. Members agree.
Lang states that if the ground conditions allow between now and the next meeting he is inclined to
have Maxner view the area and report back her findings. Members agree.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, Paluzzi moves to continue the
matter to March 10, 2009. Hayes seconds the motion. The motion carries 7-0.
NOTICE OF INTENT
Cont: 4 Fosters Point - Andrew St. Pierre - Demolition of Existin2 House/Construct New
Sin2le Familv House and Construct Pier. Gan2Wav and Float
Lang recused himself from discussion of this matter. Paluzzi assumes the Chair.
David Ottenheimer is present for the applicant. The applicant Andrew St. Pierre is also present.
Mary Rimmer is also present.
Ottenheimer reviews the proposal to raze the existing house and replace it. He notes that the
Commission had a favorable response to the last proposal to build on the site that was governed by
an old Order of Conditions that had expired. He reports that they got information from the
manufacturer on the fiberglass pilings as requested by the Commission. He explains that it is a
durable material. He also notes that the plantings have been shown on the plan.
Mary Rimmer addresses the Commission and explains the planting plan. She notes that they have
chosen salt tolerant plantings, a coastal grass seed mix and sweet pepper bush and bay berry which
will first involve removing the lawn and stripped and 3-4 inches of new topsoil will be brought in to
mimic surrounding grades and amend the soil for plant propagation.
Ottenheimer notes that once they receive the approval of the Commission they will apply for a
Chapter 91 license.
Ottenheimer explains that the deck will be mounted on the concrete wall. Reilly asks how high that
will be. Ottenheimer states that it will be 2 1Iz feet.
Reilly asks if they have made any decisions regarding the tree on the site that they are proposing to
cut down, and the neighbors are opposed to and it is within the 25-Foot No Disturb Zone.
Ottenheimer states that Mr. St. Pierre feels that the tree would be impacted by the project and poses
a safety hazard to the newly built house. He explains that they have requested indemnification from
the abutter for any damage that may occur but that they have not heard back.
Beverly Conservation Commission
Meeting Minutes - February 10, 2009
Page 4 of 12
Hayes notes that in a previous Order of Conditions issued for the property, the Commission
specified that the tree remain and only be selectively trimmed and that he visited the site last week
and thinks the tree looks healthy. He notes that the Commission has a history of protecting trees
whenever possible. Cademartori agreed, noting that it is a Riverfront Area standard to protect trees
and any naturally occurring vegetation to the greatest extent possible and does not think they meet
this standard by removing it.
Maxner reads a letter from abutters David and Eileen Lang of2 Fosters Point, Beverly, MA.
Paluzzi questions if they have considered moving the location of the house on the site. Ottenheimer
states that they have concerns about the tree potentially falling during a storm.
Johnson notes that the Commission normally denies permits for further building in the NDZ and he
would not be in favor of that.
Ottenheimer explains the location of the house states that there are a number of benefits to having
the deck in the proposed location. Squibb notes that the Commission denied the expansion of a
deck on the river on South Terrace and agrees that the Commission needs to be consistent in this
case. Squibb suggests that they move the house toward the street, which would minimize impact to
the tree roots and take care of the deck issue at the same time.
Reilly asks if there is any opportunity to improve the salt marsh. Rimmer shows photos of mud
flats and states that it is an active tidal area and explains her observations that lead her to believe
that planting salt marsh grass may not be effective.
Ottenheimer states that Mr. St. Pierre is concerned with safety and requests that at the very least, the
Commission allow him to do selective trimming of the tree. He also notes that the ZBA has
approved the project and he is not sure if moving the location of the house is a viable option.
Paluzzi opens the hearing up for public comment at this time.
David Lang of2 Fosters Point addresses the Commission and expressed his concern about the
impact of the project on the tree. He requested that the Commission have the applicant move the
house back in the direction of the street, 10 feet at a minimum, and notes that 15 feet of buffer from
the tree base would be safe to protect the tree's roots. He explains that he has had an arborist
inspect the tree as his letter details and the tree would need to be pruned by a professional to
safeguard its viability.
Paluzzi asks how far the house is from the edge of the street. Ottenheimer estimates that it is about
25 feet.
Scott Houseman, former chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeal addresses the Commission and
recalled that when the matter was before the ZBA they spent a fair amount of time on the tree and
protecting it was part of the Board's decision in allowing the zoning variance approval.
Beverly Conservation Commission
Meeting Minutes - February 10, 2009
Page 5 of 12
Jane Brusca, current member of the Zoning Board of Appeals addresses the Commission noted that
she was on the Board for both decisions on this property and she is of the opinion that the Board
relied on the previous decision although the tree was not explicitly discussed and believes that
previously recorded ZBA decisions carry with the land and agrees with Houseman that the tree was
to be protected and it was assumed so in the most recent ZBA decision.
Maxner notes that it appears that there is room to move the house forward toward the road if the
front yard set back is only 10 feet and this would help remove activity outside the 25' NDZ.
Reilly asks if there are any comments from DEP. Maxner notes that there is nothing specific.
Johnson suggests that the matter be continued and allow the applicant to confer with his engineers
to see if a solution can be found. Hayes agreed and notes that he would like further information on
the zoning setbacks and ZBA decision.
Ottenheimer asks for the Commission to allow him to confer with his client and they will return
later in the meeting to discuss this further. The Commission agreed.
Cont: 53 Lothrop Street - Lisa & Robert Hubbard - Construct Pier. Gan2wav. and Dock
Bob Griffin is present for the applicant. Lisa and Robert Hubbard are also present.
Griffin addresses the Commission and explains that the Commission held a site walk on January 24,
2009. He reviews the plans and the location of the deck and notes that they have revised the plans
slightly involving the proposed stairway on the bank. He notes that a concern of the Commission
was the dust and debris from the construction getting into the water. He explains that they looked at
that and are proposing to vacuum up the cuttings which seems to be the most practical and workable
solution.
Griffin explains that the placement of the concrete will be done with a concrete pumping truck
parked on the driveway with a hose leading down to the bank to pour the cement.
Griffin noted that a concern of the Commission regarding the use of CCA treated piles and notes
that a report by the EP A last year regarding the use of it says that there are no changes to the use of
it in a marine environment. He also explains that there may be certain instances when it should not
be used in fresh water, but this is not the case and explains the most recent report by the EP A.
Cademartori states that he thinks that the Army Corps of Engineers requires two feet of water for a
vessel resting next to the dock. Griffin states that the applicant does not intend to park his boat at
this dock, explaining that they will use it for kayaks and smaller recreational water craft and he
believes that the ACOE wishes to prevent floating docks from resting on the mud flats or sand at
low tide.
Beverly Conservation Commission
Meeting Minutes - February 10, 2009
Page 6 of 12
Reilly asks if the deck material will be treated wood. Griffin explains that the pilings will be treated
and the deck will be a different material, as dermal contact will necessitate non-treated materials,
probably Trex or equivalent.
Lang asks how they will remove the existing pilings within the bank. Griffin explains that all work
on the bank will be manual and he suspects that break the piles apart and pull them out piece by
pIece.
Brief discussion ensues regarding the methods of pier installation and access for machinery to
execute the borings. Griffin notes that a barge will be floated up and the piles will be vibrated in
and suspects that it will only take a day to install the piles, noting that the barge will be jacked up on
spuds to sit on the beach. He notes that a small rubber track tire machine will access the area from
Quincy park to do the borings.
Lang opens the hearing up for public comment at this time.
Resident of 52 Lothrop Street addresses the Commission and expresses her concern about the size
of the pier noting that it will be125 feet in length and that only other pier in the area is much smaller
at 40 feet. She asks the Commission if they know of any other piers so long in the harbor. Lang
notes that he knows of no other piers in the Beverly harbor that area quite that long. She also
questions how we can be sure that no powerboats will be used in the area, noting that she swims in
the area and worries about safety. Lang states that other agencies will have to review that as well
and they may have a mechanism to enforce that in the Order of Conditions.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, Johnson moves to close the
public hearing. Paluzzi seconds the motion. The motion carries 7-0.
Cont: 4 Fosters Point - Andrew St. Pierre - Demolition of Existin2 House/Construct New
Sin2le Familv House and Construct Pier. Gan2Wav and Float
Lang recuses himself from discussion of this matter. Paluzzi assumes the Chair.
Ottenheimer addresses the Commission and states that he had a discussion with his client and they
would like to withdraw the request to remove the tree. He also stated that the house will be 10 feet
away from the tree and will be further than what it is now.
Paluzzi opens the hearing up again for public comment at this time.
David Lang addresses the Commission and states that we are not at all sure of the dimensions of
this and suggests that the Commission continue the matter and get the dimensions on paper. He
notes that we need to make sure that they don't do any damage to the existing roots of the tree. He
also suggests that the Commission condition approval that the equipment used for construction
remain in the footprint of house.
Beverly Conservation Commission
Meeting Minutes - February 10, 2009
Page 7 of 12
Maxner recommends that the Commission keep the hearing open so that the new location of the
house can be reflected on the plan. Ottenheimer states that they are not moving the house, but that
the new proposed foundation will be farther away from the tree than the existing. Reilly states that
she is confused as she thought they were offering to move the house further away towards the street.
Discussion ensues regarding setbacks, which need to be verified.
Paluzzi suggests that the Commission continue the matter to the next meeting to get a better handle
on the setback requirements from the street for the location of the house. Ottenheimer agrees to
look into this with his client.
Reilly moves to continue the public hearing to March 10, 2009. Hayes seconds the motion. The
motion carries 6-0.
New: Site Plan Review - Subsidized Elderly Housin2 Facility. 15 Conant Street - ReQuest for
Comments from Plannin2 Board
Maxner explains that this proposed project, a subsidized elderly housing complex, is a corner lot on
Conant Street and Cherry Hill Drive and that the plans show construction is outside of the buffer
zone, but the grading is up to the edge of the buffer zone.
Cademartori states that it looks like the discharge point is in the buffer zone. He notes that is looks
like roof runoff and the stormwater are being commingled which may not meet the current
stormwater standards. He also notes that it looks like the system is a series of in-line catch basin
with only one drain manhole and questions if they can meet the TSS removal requirement with this
sort of design.
Maxner suggests that the Commission request that the Planning Board send them to the
Commission for at least a Request for Determination of Applicability.
Cademartori suggests that they should start with an ANRAD, noting that the resource areas have not
been verified for the site.
Lang agrees that an ANRAD should be done. He notes that another site on Cherry Hill Drive
experienced steep slope failure, which slumped right into the wetland. He notes that the proposed
grading on site is significant by as much as 10 to 12 feet in some locations and he would be
concerned about the stability of that slope even though it seems to be outside the buffer zone.
Hayes agrees that an ANRAD is appropriate at the very least and wonders if it is appropriate for the
Planning Board to conduct an independent drainage review for this project.
Maxner agrees to write a letter to the Planning Board regarding the suggestions of the Commission.
Lang requests that the letter be circulated to Commission members via email for comments to make
sure it reflects this discussion accurately.
New: ReQuest for Extension - 675 Hale Street. DEP File #5-838 -Vo2el Pond
Beverly Conservation Commission
Meeting Minutes - February 10, 2009
Page 8 of 12
Maxner explains that the Commission has received a request for a 2-year extension for the Vogel
Pond aquatic nuisance vegetation management program. She notes that they requested a three-year
extension but the Beverly Ordinance only allows a two year extension.
Paluzzi moves to issue a two-year extension for 675 Hale Street, DEP File #5-838. Hayes seconds
the motion. The motion carries 7-0.
Approval of Minutes
The minutes of the Conservation Commission meeting held on September 30,2008 were presented
for approval. Paluzzi moves to approve the minutes of the Conservation Commission meeting held
on September 30,2008 as amended. Hayes seconds the motion. The motion carries 6-0. Johnson
abstains.
The minutes of the Conservation Commission meeting held on October 21,2008 were presented for
approval. Johnson moves to approve the minutes of the Conservation Commission meeting held on
October 21,2008. Paluzzi seconds the motion. The motion carries 5-0. Reilly and Cademartori
abstain.
The minutes of the Conservation Commission meeting held on November 18, 2008 were presented
for approval. Paluzzi moves to approve the minutes of the Conservation Commission meeting held
on November 18, 2008. Johnson seconds the motion. The motion carries 6-0. Reilly abstains.
The minutes of the Conservation Commission meeting held on December 9,2008 were presented
for approval. Paluzzi moves to approve the minutes of the Conservation Commission meeting held
on December 9,2008 as amended. Johnson seconds the motion. The motion carries 7-0.
The minutes of the Conservation Commission meeting held on January 13, 2009 were presented for
approval. Paluzzi moves to approve the minutes of the Conservation Commission meeting held on
January 13, 2008. Hayes seconds the motion. The motion carries 5-0. Cademartori and Johnson
abstain.
Hayes leaves the meeting at this time.
OLD/NEW BUSINESS
New: Discussion with Beverly Conservation Land Trust RE: Chapman's Corner CR
Jane Brusca, President of the Beverly Conservation Land Trust, and Scott Houseman their counsel,
are present at the meeting to discuss the mechanics of carrying out this Conservation Restriction for
Chapman's Corner Subdivision.
Jane Brusca addresses the Commission and explains that they would like to know what expectations
the Commission has in terms of how the two parties holding the CR will work together to monitor
Beverly Conservation Commission
Meeting Minutes - February 10, 2009
Page 9 of 12
and enforce it. She explains the history of the Beverly Conservation Land Trust noting that it was
established in 1999. She explains the mission of the BCL T and their accomplishments.
Scott Houseman, Counsel for the BCL T addresses the Commission and reviews the mission
statement. He explains that they have met twice on this matter and have considered the ambiguities
of the CR. He states that there are four bottom line requirements that need to be established in order
for the BCL T to accept this CR. He explains that they are concerned that the Land Trust not be
liable for anything that happens on the property and they have consulted with Ed Becker of Essex
County Greenbelt who has also provided guidance in this process. He notes that ECGB
recommends that they get a baseline existing conditions inventory and Robert Griffin, the
developer's engineer, has agreed to provide them with multiple sets of plans for the site.
Houseman also explains that when ECGB accepts a CR they usually require an endowment to pay
for ongoing process of monitoring and stewardship, and the BCL T is thinking that it may be
appropriate for the developer to provide some sort of endowment, but are unsure of how much and
if it would be a deal breaker if they weren't able to get one.
Houseman reviews the main issues that they have outlined. He notes that they feel that the land
should be subject to public access in the form of trails and that is of the utmost importance. He also
states that it might be helpful to have some sort ofletter of understanding between the Land Trust
and the Commission as to the mechanics of monitoring and enforcement.
Johnson states that trails are nice but they may be too easy for bikes and motorized vehicles to
access. Houseman agrees and they are not suggesting large fire roads for paths, just small
footpaths. Houseman also states that a management plan would address the Conservation
Restriction specifics regarding foot traffic. He stated that he would like an indication from the
Commission if public access is appropriate. Lang stated that he felt that was the intention of the
Commission. Members agree that they assumed public access would be an element of the CR.
Houseman states that the management plan for the CR would provide for management of the Land
Trust with the consultation of the Commission. He also stated that they would welcome the
participation ofMaxner in developing the plan if she is available. Lang states that he feels that a
management plan is in order.
Houseman explains that enforcement of the Conservation Restriction would be spelled out and it
would identify responsibility. Lang suggests that they review that matter with the City Solicitor.
Houseman states that another issue is who would be responsible to monitor the conditions of the
site. Houseman states that he feels that it would be the responsibility of the BCL T. Cademartori
suggests that the Land Trust issue an annual report to the Conservation Commission as he assumed
that the BCL T would be the primary entity for monitoring and enforcement. Brusca questions if the
Land Trust would have to come to the Commission for the construction of the trails on the site.
Houseman explains that he hopes that they could maintain them and not have to come to the
Commission every time maintenance would need to be done.
Beverly Conservation Commission
Meeting Minutes - February 10, 2009
Page 10 of 12
Houseman states that the CR does not spell out the rights and limitations between the Land Trust
and the Commission regarding the construction of the trails. Lang suggests that they come to the
Commission for a Determination of Applicability.
Houseman states that he does not think that this will be completed by March. He notes that they are
very active on this and are doing their due diligence to be sure that it is done correctly but they need
more time to iron out these issues and wonders if the Commission would be amenable to extending
the deadline for CR execution.
Maxner notes that the Order of Conditions specified that this should be done by February 1, 2009,
but she thinks that was in order to keep this process moving along and for the developer to honor
this obligation. Griffin states that his client is anxious to get this completed noting that there are
cost factors but they are willing to work with the Land Trust on getting it right the first time.
Houseman states that they a moving as quickly as they can and have scheduled weekly meetings on
this.
Lang states that he would like to entirely defer this to the Land Trust as the Commission is
overwhelmed as it is.
Discussion ensues regarding the possibility of the City of Beverly contributing funds on an annual
basis for this. Lang notes that the Commission has funds and they could look into that.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, Lang thanks Houseman and
Brusca for attending the meeting and sharing this helpful information. Houseman states they will
be in close contact with Maxner and the developer's team to get this completed as soon as possible.
Cademartori leaves the meeting at this time.
New: 90 & 92 Boyles Street. DEP File #5-972 & 5-974 - Loosestrife Mana2ement Plan-
Discussion
Brian Butler is present for the applicant. Carl and Susan Dumas are also present.
Butler addresses the Commission and explains the process they intend to use for the Loosestrife
Management. Maxner asks if they looked at the use of beetles as has been done in other areas.
Butler noted that the permitting for that is problematic in that you have to have 1-2 acres minimum
for that process, and this site is too small. He refers to the handout he supplied detailing the
USDA's policy on this issue. He explains that there is a very large investment in the beetle release
program and CZM and USDA wish to ensure long-term viability of sustained populations in any
given location and the size of the area needs to be sufficient.
He explains that they are proposing to us an herbicide Glycophosphate, or more commonly known
as Round Up, and explains the application process. He notes that they will do two applications and
spray during the dry season.
Beverly Conservation Commission
Meeting Minutes - February 10, 2009
Page 11 of 12
Discussion ensues regarding loosestrife management options. Lang asks if they will hire a licensed
herbicide professional. Butler states that private property owners can apply Round Up without a
license. Carl Dumas states that he will be doing the application but will have Butler present on site
to provide guidance throughout the process.
Members discuss this proposal and agree that this is an acceptable approach to managing the
loosestrife but indicate that a formal protocol is needed for the file. Butler will submit a formal
proposal for the next meeting and it will include a photo schedule of before, during and after photo
documentation.
Order of Conditions
53 Lothrop Street - Lisa and Robert Hubbard
Discussion ensues as to potential conditions for the project. Paluzzi moves to issue Standard
Conditions and the following Special Conditions:
1. Special Conditions as suggested and detailed in Griffin Engineering February 9, 2009 letter
shall be adhered to as follows:
a. That the manufacturer of the CCA-treated lumber provide written confirmation that
their manufacturing process allowed EP A-recommended Best Management Practices
regarding the use and fixation of CCA.
b. That all the shavings and cuttings of CCA-treated lumber be collected, using vacuum
means wherever possible, during construction of the pier and float. No lumber,
cuttings or scrap shall be permitted to fall into the water, beach or coastal bank
during construction.
c. That the pier deck and float surfaces may not be constructed of CCA-treated lumber.
2. All work on the Coastal Bank shall be done manually, by hand and no heavy equipment
shall be allowed on the bank at any time.
3. As described by the applicant's engineer during the February 10, 2009 hearing, the concrete
for the stairway footings and concrete anchor block shall be pumped by way of a hose from
the delivering truck that will be parked on the driveway.
4. The barge shall be floated in during high tide and may sit and be elevated on spuds on the
beach at low tide and shall not be allowed to bottom out on the beach.
5. As described by the applicant's engineer, a small rubber-track vehicle may access the beach
to perform the test borings and access may be from Quincy Park.
Reilly seconds the motion. Motion carries 5-0.
Adjournment
There being no further business to come before the Commission this evening, Paluzzi moves to
adjourn the meeting. Johnson seconds the motion. The motion carries 5-0.
Beverly Conservation Commission
Meeting Minutes - February 10, 2009
Page 12 of 12
The meeting adjourns at 10:30 p.m.