2012-02-28CITY OF BEVERLY
PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES
BOARD: Conservation Commission
SUBCOMMITTEE:
DATE: February 28, 2012
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Tony Paluzzi, Vice Chairman, Robert Buchsbaum, Anne
Grant, Katelyn Merrill, and Bill Squibb
BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: David Lang, Chairman, and Kate Glidden
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Amy Maxner, Environmental Planner
OTHERS PRESENT:
RECORDER: Jane Dooley
Paluzzi calls the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. at the Beverly Public Library, 32 Essex Street,
Beverly.
New: Vicinity of Kennedy Drive, Proposed Wetland Management Activities — Discussion
w/Emily Sullivan — Northeast Mosquito Control District
Emily Sullivan addresses the Commission and explains that DPW Director Mike Collins has
contacted Mosquito Control regarding drainage issues in the vicinity of Kennedy Drive. This area
has been subject to Mosquito Control management in 1998 and has been monitored by technicians
regularly. There are connections to Virginia Avenue where there is a retention pond and rock berm.
Sullivan explains proposal is to mow Phragmites in area to establish better flow and create clear
visibility as to where the mosquitoes are. Larvicide has been done over the years for mosquito
control in the area but the Phragmites has made it difficult for the crews to get through the area.
In response to Paluzzi's question, Sullivan states the lower section on Bradstreet Avenue has to be
cleared where there is a waterway that is 10 -feet across and the 100 -feet of Phragmites would be
mowed in an 8 -foot swath with a flail mower that pulverizes material. Sullivan has spoken to
abutter on Virginia Avenue about any proposed Mosquito Control activity.
Discussion ensues about management work done by Mosquito Control in the late 1990s where there
was no aerial footage of area, regarding mowing or pruning of Phragmites and if herbicide
application would be considered as a more aggressive application/long -term control measure.
Sullivan explains that heavier impact maintenance is being proposed to allow for hand clearing in
next few years. Merrill suggests more comprehensive approach could be used in the future. Sullivan
agrees that spraying with mowing provides best opportunity to manage Phragmites but does not
eradicate it. She notes that there is a patchwork of ownership in area where lawns spill into the area.
Collins plans to work with Sullivan to identify appropriate residents to contact about Mosquito
Control entering the land and to educate them about the situation in the area.
Conservation Commission
February 28, 2012 Meeting Minutes
Page 2 of 11
Sullivan explains that along with mowing field mapping will be done in the lower areas, hand
maintenance will continue for next five years to assist follow -up annual larviciding efforts. She adds
that Mosquito Control helps with flood plans where the water does not move to promote resilient
wetlands and to allow catch basins to drain specially because mosquitoes that carry West Nile Virus
are found in them and for better predator access. She notes that there are always mosquitoes in that
area but this could improve the system.
Commission discusses with Sullivan how this work qualifies under the exemption to the Wetlands
Protection Act. Discussion ensues about if there is a need for a site visit to determine correlation to
WPA exemption. Sullivan offers to provide Commission with additional information in a second
letter that includes clauses and language. Maxner mentions that this is the first meeting with
Mosquito Control in nearly 10 years. Sullivan explains that her organization has not done any work
in Beverly for the last 15 to 20 years. She explains that hand clearing would be done along the
edges and pulled away from the area.
At the suggestion of Merrill, Maxner agrees to set up site walk where Commissioners can come take
a look at area where work is proposed.
Certificate of Compliance
Cont: 400 Hale Street, DEP File #5463 — construct baseball & soccer field — Endicott College
Maxner notes that this will need to be continued to the next meeting as there is no quorum for the
NOI on the synthetic turf field and that project will tie in mitigation for this Certificate of
Compliance.
Squibb moves to continue this item to the March 13, 2012 meeting. Seconded by Buchsbaum. The
motion carries 5 -0.
New: 254 Essex Street YMCA Sterling Center, DEP File #5 -1021— construct retaining wall,
pedestrian walkway and reconfigure parking spaces — YMCA of the North Shore c/o Jack
Meany
April Ferraro, with Meridian Associates, explains this Order governed a pathway. She notes that in
order to provide pedestrian public access along a 50 -foot City right of way blocked by a landscape
berm that the YMCA built without permission, work was done along paved parking area adjacent to
the Teen Center to reconfigure a 5 -foot walkway to connect to existing woodland paths within the
City right of way, and provide an 18 -foot wide fire access way. Work took place within the buffer
zone to BVW and IVW. Special Condition was issued for installation of 3' brake in the guardrail
and signage that invites the public to "please enjoy this public right of way."
Ferraro describes what was done to comply with a request from Open Space and Recreation
Committee to maintain five -foot wide pedestrian access pathway with a guardrail to provide 18 -foot
fire aisle around building. She notes that gravel path was constructed within 100 -foot buffer.
Conservation Commission
February 28, 2012 Meeting Minutes
Page 3 of 11
Maxner reports findings of her final site inspection stating that mostly pathway is fine and there was
a modification to plan that included plantings of hemlocks (that are not doing so well) and white
pines that abutter had requested as a visual screen. Along the pathway between the berm and
guardrail there are a couple of patches of pricker bushes that need to be cut down. The pathway
aisle is free of vegetation for the most part and the site is stable. Merrill suggests that the Certificate
require a long -term condition requiring vegetation pruning within the pathway. Members agree.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, Squibb moves to issue the
Certificate of Compliance with a condition requiring long -term vegetation management within the
path. Seconded by Merrill. The motion carries 5 -0.
Endicott College — Life Sciences Building, DEP File #5 -1072 — Modification to Site Plan
Charlie Wear from Meridian Associates describes changes to plan for walkway near entrance to
building near primary route that students travel, which necessitated a small area of new walkway,
which will fall within the no disturb zone. He notes that the changes to the plan reduces the amount
of impervious surface in the Buffer Zone overall. He notes that the existing walkway needs to be
re- graded to meet ADA requirements. Maxner mentions that walkway area is already disturbed with
pavement, but since changes were within the 25' NDZ she insisted that the Commission review this
to determine if a formal application is required or if these changes are deminimus.
Merrill moves that there is no significant change to the plan. Seconded by Squibb. The motion
carries 5 -0.
Recess for Public Hearings
Squibb moves to recess for public hearings. Seconded by Buchsbaum. The motion carries 5 -0.
Notices of Intent
Cont: 400 Hale Street, DEP File #5 -1070 — athletic field improvements, install synthetic turf
field — Endicott College c/o Richard Wylie, President
Maxner notes that the Commission does not have a legal quorum of eligible members to act on this
application and therefore this must be continued to the March 13 meeting.
Merrill moves to continue public hearing to March 13 Seconded by Grant. The motion carries 5 -0.
Cont: 675E Hale Street, DEP File #5 -1073 — remove and manage invasive species, perform
trail upgrades, buffer zone restoration — Christopher & Hillary Gabrieli c/o Laura Gibson,
ASLA
Laura Gibson, Landscape Architect, and John Dick of Hancock Associates are present for the
applicant.
Conservation Commission
February 28, 2012 Meeting Minutes
Page 4 of 11
Dick mentions that the Commission completed a site walk of property to view area where work is
proposed. He notes that Waterways says the vegetation management without dredging is not
jurisdictional pertaining to category 1 notification.
Merrill addresses jurisdictional resources regarding presence of riverfront and, and per the
Regulations using the USGS map as an indicator of perennial nature of stream. She notes that
absent of the documented evidence showing the stream dry for four days in a 12 -month period, she
believes the Commission must consider this a perennial stream and there for the 200 -Foot
Riverfront area is present on site. Dick notes that he provided an argument for intermittence during
the vista pruning RDA process but the Commission did not rule on it then. He notes that regardless
of whether Riverfront is there, the project still qualifies under the Limited Project provisions and
can be allowed. Gibson says it is not an issue for her clients declaring there is riverfront on site.
Maxner states it could be written into the findings that the Commission finds the stream to be
perennial but that the project meets the allowance under limited project. She suggests a special
condition that requires the cut Phragmites to be burned on site. Gibson mentions that removed
Phragmites could be burned on a nearby island of Phragmites during burning season and plans are
to remove Phragmites during summer. Merrill suggests they supply a disposal plan so that there is
assurances that the cut Phragmites do not pose a problem elsewhere. Buchsbaum notes that flower
heads of Phragmites are most dangerous. Gibson says they would be pulled out before they bloom.
Merrill asks if there are any deviations from the plan that define management versus landscaping
that Maxner should be notified. Gibson notes that she usually submits a phase schedule to Maxner
including compost disposal and that habitat garden would be done in June, but that removal will be
done in geographic phases. Merrill suggests that Maxner be notified and visit the site prior to each
geographic phase.
Maxner recommends additional special conditions: Should the use of herbicides be proposed, the
applicant shall return to the Commission to present a detailed plan as to the types of materials to be
used, methods of application and areas to receive the treatment; annual monitoring reports shall be
submitted to the Commission detailing invasive specie management efforts and progress in reaching
the project's goals. Reports shall cover no less than 5 years from the start of project activities.
Based on said reports, the Commission reserves the right to require additional monitoring and /or
modifications to the management plan. Gibson agrees that these are acceptable conditions.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, Buchsbaum moves to closed
the hearing. Seconded by Grant. The motion carries 5 -0.
New: 1 Lanthorn Lane — William & Margaret Monagle — abandon septic system and connect
to City sewer, construct deck and patio.
Maxner read legal notice.
Conservation Commission
February 28, 2012 Meeting Minutes
Page 5 of 11
Patrick Seekamp of Seekamp Environmental is present for the applicant. He explains the
Commission issued an Enforcement Order for unauthorized work in the Buffer Zone, the project
involves abandonment of the septic system and connection to City sewer, proposed deck and pool
patio. He notes the proposed addition falls outside of the buffer. He explains that there are a few
adjacent resources including BVW, coastal dune and coastal beach off site.
Seekamp notes the only jurisdiction on site is in the Buffer Zone and work is also outside of the 25'
NDZ. He has depicted dune on the plan and refers to aerial photo that illustrated healthy beach
grass, noting that the neighborhood should be commended for such good care of the dune and beach
grass vegetation. Erosion controls are presently installed and functioning properly and the plan
proposes additional controls to fully envelope the work area around the 36 -foot by 12 -foot deck
with 8 Sonotube footings under the posts and impervious block patio between elevated deck and
existing pool. Addition that is being proposed is on west side of house in outside of 100 -foot buffer
zone.
Discussion ensues as to handling of backfill from excavation in disturbed area that would be used
for Sonotubes and that crushed stone will be used along with current material under deck.
Consultant responds to Merrill's question regarding importance of draining pool to dry well to
sewer, not out back of property and timing of drain as well as chemical content.
Seekamp also describes vegetation in wetland area and that there is a system piped through the
neighborhood and daylight along the BVW. He notes when violation was found erosion control was
installed and will be maintained for future proposals. Merrill specifies that the hay bales need to be
removed when work is completed.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, Squibb moves to closed the
hearing. Seconded by Buchsbaum. The motion carries 5 -0.
Merrill leaves the meeting at this time, and does not return.
New: Bass River — City of Beverly — maintenance dredging of navigation channel — City of
Beverly
Maxner reads legal notice.
Ron Bourne of Bourne Engineering is present for the applicant, the City of Beverly. He explains
the area to be dredged to and elevation of 6 feet below mean low water falls between the Hall
Whitaker Bridge (north of Bridge Street) northerly to the Bass Haven Yacht Club. He notes that
this has been historically dredged since the early 1900s. The City has submitted applications to the
Army Corps of Engineers, DEP for Chapter 91 and DEP for 401 Water Quality. The EEA
Secretary's MEPA determination allows Phase 1 (this section of the river) to proceed while the
Final EIR is being prepared for the section of the river that contains contaminants from the adjacent
National Grid former MGP site.
Bourne explains that the dredged material will be taken by barge out of the river to an in -water
disposal site. He notes this does impact intertidal area due to the long period of time since it was
Conservation Commission
February 28, 2012 Meeting Minutes
Page 6 of 11
dredged and mitigation for shellfish is proposed by working with the Division of Marine Fisheries.
He explains that the dredge area cannot be reseeded but a basin approach involving reseeding in the
Pines River in Saugus is proposed via help from DMF.
Bourne explains that bottom soil samples were tested north and south of National Grid site but
Phase II is not part of this project until they go back to MEPA for EIR to determine how material
will be disposed of The whole south channel will be dredged to 9 -foot below mean sea level depth.
Maxner asks for clarification as to the actual square footage of dredge area as there are several
numbers quoted in the various materials provided in the NOI. Bourne responds that the project
planning began in 2007 and notes that the hydrographic survey has a five -year life span and has
been updated since with new square footages, outlining basins where dredging impact is expected
and where mean low waterline is established. He notes that the numbers contained in the NOI form
are the correct most up to date numbers.
Bourne notes there was discussion with MEPA regarding draft EIR so the City could move forward
without being held back by how the National Grid site is going to be handled. He mentions that
MEPA acknowledged all the proper investigation and documentation has been done to allow the
City to move ahead with dredging north of Bridge Street. South of Bridge Street has to come back
in front of MEPA. In response to Maxner, he says it is possible nothing could happen with problem
area of river by National Grid south of Bridge Street.
Bourne explains the sediment testing results that have been completed, which meet the ACOE's
criteria for in -water disposal.
Maxner reads the letter submitted by Mass. Division of Fisheries detailing their recommendations.
Bourne mentions that there will be removal of fill and catch basin cleanings in storm water system,
street sweeping and alternative deicing products have been employed by the City to help address
water quality and sedimentation issues. He notes that in regard to habitat improvement, the dredging
will result in better conditions at times of low water for fish passage. He agrees to provide
Commission with electronic copy of testing results that show it is acceptable to dispose of dredged
material in open water as well as draft EIR and total physical testing report that outlines chemical
composition that is within tolerance identifying grain size and if it holds metals or not. He states
that analysis met requirements. Maxner asks for details on how the City plans to manage the DPW
yard on Park Street since catch basins from this yard drain directly to the Bass River. Bourne
agrees to work with the City Engineer on that request.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, Squibb moves to continue the
hearing to the March 13 meeting. Seconded by Buchsbaum. The motion carries 4 -0.
Old/New Business
Conservation Commission
February 28, 2012 Meeting Minutes
Page 7 of 11
New: Thissell Street /Common Lane — Forest Management Plan — Samuel & Cecily Vaughan,
Joan Vaughan Ingraham — Review, Discussion /Comments
Maxner explains that she had written letter and spoken to resident about hemlocks removed in
Buffer Zone or wetland that were dead from Wooly Adelgid and some from storm damage. Owners
have been considering developing a forest management plan and promised to carbon copy
Commission/Administrator for review of any problem trees they would like to cut in the field.
Maxner suggests process for work in jurisdictional areas should include development of erosion
control and access plan. She notes that on state level this work would be exempt but the City has a
local bylaw /ordinance so asks the Commission if an RDA should be filed for formal review.
Paluzzi notes that if trees are cut in the wetland area, the owner should notify Commission.
Discussion ensues as to whether a formal application is needed. Members agree that each round of
cutting could be taken on a case -by -case basis with Maxner reviewing the field prior to work
starting. Maxner suggests writing a letter to Vaughan about keeping her informed about any
concentrated work planned in Buffer Zone and that forester should work with her to develop a plan
to protect resources and wetland. Members agree to this approach. Discussion ensues about 32
acres in total and that 9 acres are excluded from stewardship.
New Expenditure Approvals
Buchsbaum moves to approve expenditure of $1,001.05 to pay invoice of New England
Environmental (the Commission's peer review firm) for their review of the proposed settlement
terms for 44 -46 River Street reconsolidation and remediation project. Seconded by Squibb. The
motion carries 4 -0.
Squibb moves for Commission to pay $158.75 for legal advertisement for Open Space & Recreation
Committee's RDA, the Folger Avenue trail blazing project. Seconded by Squibb. The motion
carries 4 -0.
Order of Conditions
675 E Hale Street
Buchsbaum moves to issue Standard Conditions and the following Special Conditions as discussed
during this evening hearing:
1. Prior to work commencing on Phragmites management, a Phragmites cuttings disposal
management plan shall be submitted to the Conservation Agent for review. The plan should
strive to contain the cut Phragmites on site and /or render it non - viable at the time of final
disposal.
2. Prior to work commencing in any of the distinct geographic areas of management, a pre -
activity meeting shall be held with parties responsible for the project and the Conservation
Agent to review each phase of management.
Conservation Commission
February 28, 2012 Meeting Minutes
Page 8 of 11
3. Should the use of herbicides be proposed, the applicant shall return to the Commission to
present a detailed plan as to the types of materials to be used, methods of application and
areas to receive the treatment.
4. Annual monitoring reports shall be submitted to the Commission detailing invasive specie
management efforts and progress in reaching the project's goals. Reports shall cover no less
than 5 years from the start of project activities. Based on said reports, the Commission
reserves the right to require additional monitoring and /or modifications to the management
plan.
Seconded by Squibb. The motion carries 4 -0.
1 Lanthorn Lane
Discussion ensues as to possible conditions for the project. Buchsbaum moves to issue Standard
Conditions and the following Special Conditions as discussed:
1. In order to encourage infiltration of rainwater and snowmelt, crushed stone shall be installed
underneath the proposed deck at the back of the house.
2. The erosion control hay bales shall be maintained in good condition throughout the life of
the project, and shall not be removed until all disturbed ground surfaces are fully stabilized
with growing grass or vegetation.
3. Pool drawdown or backwash shall not be directly discharged to the wetlands or off the rear
yard stonewall, instead shall be directed to street catch basin drainage or over the upper
reaches of the lawn to allow for infiltration into the ground. Discharge shall not occur
within 2 weeks of chlorination. This condition shall survive in perpetuity beyond the
issuance of a Certificate of Compliance or for as long as a pool is maintained on site.
Seconded by Squibb. The motion carries 4 -0.
Approval of Minutes
Commission members gave Maxner amendments to January 31, 2012 regular session minutes.
Grant moves the Commission approve the January 31, 2012 regular session minute as amended.
Seconded by Buchsbaum. The motion carries 4 -0.
Maxner mentions that the January 31, 2012 executive session minutes were reviewed by the City
Solicitor. Buchsbaum moves the Commission approve the executive session minutes. Seconded by
Grant. The motion carries 4 -0. Maxner takes back copies of minutes from members.
Maxner notes that Commission will vote on other minutes requiring approval when other members
are in attendance to meet quorum requirement.
Conservation Commission
February 28, 2012 Meeting Minutes
Page 9 of 11
Adiournment
There being no further business to come before the Commission this evening, Grant moves to
adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Buchsbaum. The motion carries 4 -0.
The meeting adjourns at 9:23 p.m.