2012-04-03CITY OF BEVERLY
PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES
Note: These minutes were reviewed by the Conservation Commission at its April 3, 2012 meeting.
The Commission voted 3 -0 -4 to approve these minutes as amended, with Paluzzi, Lang and Glidden
in favor, new members Bertoni, Buchsbaum and Grant in abstention due to not having been seated
when these matters were heard and for no other reason, and Squibb in abstention as he was not in
attendance at this meeting. Due to turnover in Commission membership, it was not possible to
achieve a full quorum of eligible members to vote on these minutes, resulting in a 3 -0 -4 vote.
Therefore these minutes have been approved by a majority of the members who were seated for the
matters in question.
Date: January 3, 2012
Board: Conservation Commission
Members Present Chair David Lang, Mary Reilly, Tony Paluzzi, Dr. Mayo Johnson,
Kate Glidden, Katelyn Merrill
Members Absent: Bill Squibb
Others Present: Amy Maxner — Environmental Planner
Recorder: Amy Maxner
Lang calls the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. at the Beverly Public Library 32 Essex Street, Beverly,
MA.
Certificate of Compliance
Cont: 1 Brookwood Road, DEP File #5 -914 — Brookwood School c/o Richard Chute
Rick Chute addresses the Commission and provides a restorative planting proposal, which consists
of approximately 4,200 square feet of mowed lawn areas on campus to be reclaimed by naturalized
vegetation with very low maintenance regimes. Chute explains that one area is along the Dan Wise
Way entrance to the school, of about 3,000 square feet, which will no longer be mowed and allowed
to re- vegetate naturally with invasive specie monitoring and removal. The second area is a 200 -foot
long by 3 -foot wide swath along Brookwood Road adjacent to the pond, mowing of which will be
reduced to once a year with invasive specie removal. The third area is located next to the two
culverts that lead to the pond, which will be planted with native shrubs. Finally a 150 -foot long by
4 -foot wide swath along the stream up- gradient of these culverts will not be mowed and left to
naturalize. Chute notes that the reduced mowing regime will begin immediately and the plantings
will be done in the spring as part of the turf field project.
The Commission reviews the materials. Lang suggests that these areas be inspected before a
Certificate if issued and suggests that the Commission revisit this request for Certificate of
Compliance in the late spring, perhaps in June. Members agree. Chute agrees. Paluzzi moves to
Beverly Conservation Commission
January 3, 2012 Meeting Minutes
Page 2 of 9
table this request to the first June meeting with an inspection of the areas in late spring prior to the
meeting. Seconded by Johnson. Motion carries 6 -0.
Cont: 208 Hart Street, DEP File #5 -923 — Michael DiGuiseppe
Michael DiGuiseppe addresses the Commission and apologizes for missing the last meeting. He
proceeds to explain the permitting history of his project noting that he emailed Maxner a
chronology. He notes that he has complied with all of the Commission's requirements and in fact
ended up planting many more plants than what was required. He feels that he has completed the
project in compliance and does not see the value in hiring a wetland scientist to confirm that the
plants have survived, and asks that the Commission issue a Certificate.
Discussion ensues as to the requirements of the Special Conditions, which included a qualified
wetland scientist monitoring the enhancement plantings at least once a year for two years after
plantings are installed and submit monitoring reports to the Commission for review, and that at least
75% survivorship of plant material shall be achieved, and if this survivorship is not met the
applicant must propose and implement corrective steps to be approved by the Commission. Merrill
notes that since this is a Special Condition, she does not see how the Commission can waive it, and
it appears that the applicant did not object to this condition and obligation. DiGuiseppe notes that
the consulting firm that he used has gone out of business and he believes that anyone can make the
determination that the plants have survived.
Reilly asks about the rip -rap installed along the bank. DiGuiseppe notes that the photos show rip
rap on the opposite side of the pond which has been removed, explaining that he kept the near bank
rip rapped because he wanted to make sure it was stable and he notes that he planted the top of the
area too. Discussion ensues and the Commission review pre and post application photos of the
pond.
Lang states that it seems there could be a compromise in this situation, but that plant survival
verification must be done during the growing season. He suggest that perhaps this item could be
continued to June contingent upon the Commission conducting a site visit in the late spring to
observe plant conditions. DiGuiseppe agrees with this approach.
Reilly moves to table this request to the first June meeting with an inspection of the areas in late
spring prior to the meeting. Seconded by Paluzzi. Motion carries 6 -0.
Cont: 400 Hale Street, DEP File #5463 — Endicott College
Charles Wear of Meridian Associates is present for the applicant.
Wear notes the Commission will recall this Order, issued in July 1994, governed the construction of
a natural baseball and soccer field, a.k.a. The North Field, which is now under a new NOI to be
replaced by a synthetic turf field. The Commission needed additional information to clarify
whether work permitted under this old Order was in compliance and how close construction
disturbance came to the edge of the wetland. He refers to his letter which indicates that the limit of
Beverly Conservation Commission
January 3, 2012 Meeting Minutes
Page 3 of 9
work (e.g. the tow of the rip rap slope, which went over an existing natural steep slope) did indeed
extend closer to the wetland than what was depicted on the approved plan, but he notes that it did
not go beyond the "approved limit of work ", meaning not beyond the erosion controls.
Discussion ensues as to the impact upon the wetland due to rip -rap creeping further toward the
wetland. Reilly asks how many square feet of area we are talking about. Wear notes that the "over-
worked" area is roughly 7,000 to 8,000 square feet in the Buffer Zone and it resulted in a shallower
slope than what naturally existed. Maxner notes that she is not sure if it is practical to require them
remove the rip -rap now as it might result in more impact. Lang suggests that this be tabled to
determine if any mitigation can be reached with the NOI for the turf field, which will be discussed a
little later.
Paluzzi moves to temporarily table this item. Merrill seconds the motion. The motion carries 6 -0.
New: 376 Hale Street, DEP File #5 -23 — Endicott College
Charles Wear of Meridian Associates is present for the applicant.
Wear explains, that the Order, issued 35 years ago in 1977, governed work involving
reconfiguration of the main entrance to the school, construction of new campus safety building and
expansion of the parking lot located just to the east of the entrance. Work took place within the
100 -foot buffer zone to the bank of the pond a.k.a. Endicott Lake. Meridian has prepared an as-
built plan, and Wear reviews his certification letter calling out the deviations, all of which resulted
in no significant impact and in some respects improved treatment to stormwater runoff He notes
that the original plan called for a concrete swale along the bank of the pond to catch runoff from the
parking lot, but that was changed to curbing along the paved access way and installation of catch
basins, which is a much better design from a water quality perspective. Discussion ensues as to
other specific changes to the design, with the Commission noting that installing hoods in the catch
basins would be preferable. Wear notes that will be done as a matter of course by the College.
Paluzzi moves to issue a Certificate of Compliance. Seconded by Johnson. Motion carries 6 -0.
Recess for Public Hearings
Paluzzi moves to recess for public hearings. Johnson seconds the motion. The motion carries 6 -0.
Notice of Intent
Cont: 400 Hale Street, DEP File #5 -1070 — athletic field improvements, install synthetic turf
field — Endicott College c/o Richard Wylie, President
Joe Orzel with Gulf of Maine, John Amato with JJA Sports, LLC and Dennis Monaco with Endicott
College are present on behalf the applicant.
Beverly Conservation Commission
January 3, 2012 Meeting Minutes
Page 4 of 9
Orzel addresses the Commission explaining the proposal involves upgrades to existing athletic
facilities and replacement of the existing North Field athletic field with a synthetic turf field. He
notes that at the last meeting the Commission requested additional information regarding:
➢ The leach - ability of zinc and other metals from the crumb rubber
infill material;
➢ A planting plan and plant schedule for two areas of potential
buffer zone restoration/enhancement;
➢ A draft set of conditions to be prepared by the Commission's staff
Orzel notes that a revised plan has been submitted showing areas of plantings, and reads off the
potential plant species for each area, all of which try to mimic existing species in the area.
John Amato notes that supplemental information was probably delivered late and apologizes. He
notes he earlier submitted a report conducted by McLoan and Broom for Connecticut fields which
found that the stormwater discharge at outlet pipes for zinc results with a peak of 36 ppb, but notes
that most were lower than that and that won't be the case with this field. He compared these to
several criteria focusing on the MCP being GW 1, 2 and 3. GW 1 has 5,000 ppb, GW 2 no criteria,
GW 3 has 900 ppb and the CT testing came up below that, at 10 to 15 ppb, even 36 ppb is still
significantly lower. He reviews other criteria including Federal Groundwater Secondary drinking
water supply, which is 5 ppm for zinc. He notes that the surface water for direct discharge criteria
is 110 ppb. He notes that they will be discharging 80 feet from the wetlands if you classified the
wetlands as surface water. The leaching field (which will capture the first flush) is at elevation 102,
and the wetlands are at 84 and the bottom of the leaching field is 17' above the wetland elevation.
He therefore believes that their system will not trigger any of these criteria. He reviewed the draft
condition package, but the based on this criteria testing in the conditions should not be required as
they are not within drinking water sources.
Lang notes that the information provided was based on the MCP and Drinking Water standards as
opposed to the National Ambient Water Quality Criteria, which is 120 ppb or 12 mgl for zinc, and
he did not see any reference to that. Amato notes that they are below that. Lang notes that the
Synthetic Leaching Tests show a concentration of 4,700 for zinc in field E and 1900 in field F, and
logically reasoning there is certainly potential for the crumb to leach out, and discharge of that to
the wetland. Amato notes that these tests are based on an actual field system. Lang notes that the
TCLP test showed that they were leaching a lot of metals and he asks for a description of the
methodology. Amato notes it is at the end of the report. Lang notes that the information before him
does not give him enough evidence that there will not be any water quality impact and asks if they
have any other information to the contrary he would be happy to review it, but as of this point he is
not in favor of approving the project. He notes that the CT tests are using a minor acid solution and
that needs to be reconciled.
Merrill notes that she agrees with Chairman Lang especially since the wetlands protection laws do
not have water quality criteria and therefore if there is a potential for leaching into the resource,
then the Commission must condition the project to guard against that. Amato agrees to review the
report previously submitted and actually do testing in the field if necessary to get more accurate
read of
Beverly Conservation Commission
January 3, 2012 Meeting Minutes
Page 5 of 9
Monaco asks if the levels of zinc as a direct by- product of the field is at issue. Lang confirms that
the leaching of zinc from the crumb is of concern. Discussion ensues regarding the information
provided to date comparative to what was submitted by the Brookwood School.
Maxner asks if the Commission has any other questions regarding the planting plans. Orzel
provides additional presentation of potential methods for planting on the rip -rap to ensure plant
survival and prevention of erosion. He notes that pocket areas might be established to retain soil
and choosing types of plants that are drought tolerant. Lang asks if pulling back some of the rip -rap
at base of slope to reestablish a plateau. Orzel notes that once the base of the slope is disturbed they
worry about the overall stability of entire slope. Discussion ensues as to areas of the slope that
could accept plantings and methods for installation and irrigating. Merrill asks for a plant schedule
with sizes. Orzel notes he wanted to get some feedback from the Commission prior to finalizing a
plant schedule.
Lang asks if there are any questions from the audience. There are none.
There being no further questions from the Commission, Johnson moves to continue to the January
31, 2012 meeting. Paluzzi seconds the motion. The motion carries 6 -0.
Cont: 32 Tozer Road, DEP File #5 -1071 — Cell Signaling, Inc. c/o Peter Muto
Bill Maher of Nitzch Engineering, Mark Manganello of Neve Morin Group, Andy Bennet with
Singer Harris Architects, Peter Muto and Suzanne Martin of CST are present for the applicant.
Maher recalls a site visit with members of the Commission a few weeks back and the first public
hearing was opened on November 29 and feedback by the Commission provided relative to plan
changes. He notes that originally, the applicant proposed a 1,200 s.f building to house a chiller
plant, which would have involved filling of bordering vegetated wetland and 755 s.f of wetland
replication, however they have reconfigured this plan and removed the building outside of the
wetland and shrunk work within the 25' NDZ relative to that structure, with the exception of
expansion of 61 square feet of an existing concrete pad partly in this zone. No increase, but actually
a decrease of impervious area will result and there is no longer any need for wetland replication
(originally 973 sf of new impervious was proposed, now there is a —192 decrease in overall
impervious area, resulting in increased infiltration). He explains other elements of the project
including the overflow drain and settling basin in front of the headwall and drain at the back of the
building. He gives an overall review of the drainage system, noting that catch basins will be
upgraded with deep hooded basins.
Lang states that this revised plan is an immense improvement and he is pleased to see that wetland
impacts have been avoided. He asks for more information on the check dams of the channel.
Maher explains all areas will be laid with stone, and the check dams will be located at an interval to
be determined and gives an overall review of the function and purpose of the swale.
Maxner asks if they received any further feedback from DEP relative to their comments. Maher
states he did not.
Beverly Conservation Commission
January 3, 2012 Meeting Minutes
Page 6 of 9
Merrill asks for more detail on the re- vegetated wetland notation and suggests that it should be more
specific for the contractor to read off the plan. Maher notes that the schedule is a separate document
submitted by LEC. Manganello notes that there is a specification for spacing and species. Maxner
asks if the spacing will dictate the number of plants. Manganello confirms.
Lang asks if the side slopes are susceptible to flashy stormwater events. Manganello notes that this
area is well vegetated and stable and should not be vulnerable to erosion.
Lang asks if there is a maintenance plan for the deep settling basin. Maher states that is part of the
O & M plan submitted. Merrill asks if there is a schedule for construction and when outside work
will begin. Muto notes that the drainage controls are of priority but they would leave that to the
discretion of the contractor. Merrill notes that the management of the site is of concern during
specific weather conditions. Maher notes that a game plan will need to be developed with the
contractor. Reilly suggests that a condition could be issued that requires a specific erosion control
and site management plan be submitted prior to work specific to the time of year the work will take
place. Maher agrees.
Lang asks if there are any other questions from the Commission or the audience. There are none.
Paluzzi moves to close the hearing. Seconded by Merrill. The motion carries 6 -0.
Old/New Business
675R Hale Street — Unauthorized Tree Removal — c/o Laura Gibson
Laura Gibson, representative of the owner, states that she and the landscape contractor, Joe
Pallazola, are here this evening to let the Commission know that two large trees were removed
within the Buffer Zone without the proper authorization. She notes that as her letter explains, she
will be submitting a NOI for a large phragmite removal effort, which will include buffer zone
restoration plantings and the subject trees were slated for removal as part of the project. She notes
that the willow was diseased but the pine was okay and both were in grass lawn area. She asks if
the Commission will require any mitigation separate from the NOI, which will be submitted soon.
Discussion ensues as to what type of mitigation would be required above and beyond the already
proposed restoration plan. Members agree that no special action needs to be taken for the removal
of these trees and they look forward to entertaining the restoration plan under the NOI. Members
thank Gibson and Pallazola for coming to the meeting.
New: Modification to Wellington Hills Definitive Subdivision Plan — Planning Board Request
for Comments
Maxner states the Planning Board is opening their first public hearing tonight for the modification
to a subdivision, which will improve and pave a roadway stub, but will serve a new subdivision
located in Wenham. She notes that based on her review of the old subdivision plan, GIS and
current development plans, it does not appear that the work on the stub is within a jurisdictional
area and therefore would not need any review or approval by this Commission.
Beverly Conservation Commission
January 3, 2012 Meeting Minutes
Page 7 of 9
Lang asks if this area drains to the Miles River. Maxner confirms that it does. Lang notes that he
does not necessarily agree that Beverly streets should serve as access to developments in Wenham,
but that is more of an overall City issue than a Commission issue. He notes that the Miles River
flows to the Longham and is part of the overall watershed protection area and suggests that the
Commission remind the Planning Board of this fact. He recalls the Johnson Tree Farm housing
development was a hot button item because it was so close to the Longham Reservoir, which is
backup water supply for Beverly. She notes that this development has been through permitting with
the Wenham Conservation Commission and Planning Board and that there is significant opposition
to this project from the City of Beverly, including the Mayor's office. She explains that the
Planning Board may very well determine that it has sufficient information and close it's hearing this
evening. Discussion ensues as to the Watershed Overlay District and this project's location therein.
Maxner notes that the can rule out that the work on the stub is outside its jurisdiction and it can
decide if it wants to comment on the more global level relative to the WPOD and water quality
issues she is happy to draft that for the Commission.
Johnson moves to approve that a draft discussing the importance of the locus to the WPOD. Reilly
second the motion. The motion carries 6 -0.
Walgreens Pharmacy — Dodge Street — Request for Comments from the Planning Board
Maxner notes that there is a Walgreens pharmacy proposed at the Appleseed's plaza, which will
involve demolition of at least part of the historic house on the corner of Conant and Dodge Streets.
She notes that this property does not contain wetlands and is well out of any Buffer Zones to speak
of, therefore no Commission jurisdiction is triggered. Members agree.
1 Lanthorn Lane — Unauthorized Work in the Buffer Zone
Maxner explains that she received a building permit for an addition, and based on GIS she saw that
there is BVW and beach adjacent to the lot. She went out to make measurements and discovered
that work had already been done relative to septic system abandonment. She caught up with the
builder (for the addition) and told him to cease outside work and get erosion controls installed
ASAP — which he complied with. She notes that the edge of disturbance from the septic system is
36 feet from stonewall which is in her conservative estimate to edge of wetland and that the new
addition would be 72 feet from the stonewall.
Discussion ensues as to required application for the work, Maxner notes that this work is all very
allowable but it is a matter of process. Merrill agrees because the Commission needs to be
consistent so that neighbors do not assume preferential treatment. Maxner asks if the Commission
wants to issue an Enforcement Order requiring the filing of an NOI. Members agree.
Expenditure Approvals
There are no expenditures presented this evening for approval.
Beverly Conservation Commission
January 3, 2012 Meeting Minutes
Page 8 of 9
Orders of Conditions
32 Tozer Road — Cell Si2nalin2, Inc. c/o Peter Muto
Discussion ensues as to possible conditions governing the project. Paluzzi moves to issue Standard
Conditions and the following Special Conditions as discussed:
1. Prior to any work commencing, the applicant shall submit to the Commission, for review
and approval, an erosion control plan and construction schedule that specifically addresses
and is considerate of the time of year during which the work will be taking place. Proposed
erosion controls shall be tailored to the various weather conditions that are expected during
the time of year work will be taking place.
2. Prior to any work commencing, language detailing the proposed restoration - planting plan
shall be added to the construction plans and a copy provided to the project contractor and a
copy submitted to the Commission for its file.
3. Any trees called for in the wetland and buffer zone restoration - planting plan shall not be less
than 1 '/z inches in caliper and any shrubs shall not be less than 5- gallons in size at the time
of planting.
4. The restoration plantings shall exhibit at least 75% survivorship after two (2) full growing
seasons post installation. Survivorship shall be verified by a professional wetland scientist
or equally qualified professional and a report detailing such shall be submitted to the
Commission as soon as it is available.
5. The property owner shall be responsible for executing and adhering to the Long Term
Pollution Prevention Plan and Stormwater Operation and Maintenance Plan. All
maintenance and inspection reports per the O & M Plan (O & M) shall be submitted to the
Conservation Agent on an annual basis no later than December 31 of each year. This
condition shall run in perpetuity beyond the issuance of a Certificate of Compliance.
Johnson seconds the motion. The motion carries 6 -0.
Approval of Minutes
No quorum was available to approve the August 8, 2011 or September 13, 2011 minutes.
Members review the August 30, 2011 minutes. Johnson moves to approve. Reilly seconds the
motion. The motion passes 5 -0 -1 with Merrill abstaining.
Adiournment
There being no further business to come before the Commission this evening, Glidden moves to
adjourn and not return to the regular meeting. Johnson seconds the motion. The motion carries 6 -0.
Vote to Enter into Executive Session
Beverly Conservation Commission
January 3, 2012 Meeting Minutes
Page 9 of 9
Paluzzi moves to enter executive session for the purpose of discussing ongoing litigation with
Commission's counsel regarding 44 -46 River Street, DEP File #5 -1048, National Grid. Johnson
seconds the motion. Lang calls for a roll call vote at this time:
Paluzzi
Yes
Johnson
Yes
Reilly
Yes
Glidden
Yes
Merrill
Yes
Lang
Yes The motion carries 6 -0.