Loading...
2012-09-11CITY OF BEVERLY PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES BOARD: Conservation Commission SUBCOMMITTEE: DATE: September 11, 2012 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Tony Paluzzi Vice Chairman, Christine Bertoni, Stephanie Root, Bill Squibb and Anne Grant BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Chairman David Lang and Robert Buchsbaum STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Amy Maxner, Environmental Planner OTHERS PRESENT: RECORDER: Jane Dooley Paluzzi calls the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. at Beverly City Hall, 3 rd Floor Council Chambers, 191 Cabot Street, Beverly, MA. Request for Determination of Applicability New: 441 Hale Street — poison ivy control, demolish addition, house renovations — c/o Laura Gibson Maxner reads legal notice. Laura Gibson, the project landscape architect representing applicant explains this application is for initial work on the existing house including poison ivy control/elimination that has grown up around and on the house, demolition of an addition and installation of scaffolding for other house renovations. She explains the work is to take place within the outer reaches of the 200 -Foot Riverfront Area to an unnamed stream, and 100 -foot buffer zone to coastal bank but within areas that are already developed around the house. She notes that herbicides to control/eliminate poison ivy are proposed. Gibson notes that owner will be back to the Commission with an ANRAD and then later a Notice of Intent. She notes that Bill Manuel, wetland consultant and Len McGregor, site contractor, are present to answer Commission questions. In response to Maxner, Gibson said poison ivy is growing up the side of the house and is throughout area on one side of house. In response to Paluzzi, Gibson reiterates that the Request for Determination of Applicability was to remove poison ivy, put up scaffolding and demolish the addition. In response to Maxner, Gibson explains that there would be new access where there is a large ledge outcrop outside of buffer zone and top of coastal bank and riverfront that would require jack hammering to ledge. Discussion ensues about addition being added 40 years after house was built. Gibson explains that she would be coming back to Commission with a comprehensive site plan that addresses repair to cabana, removal of invasive species to be replaced with native plants. She notes that the house renovation would require a drainage plan that would be outlined in Notice of Intent. Gibson mentions driveway has to be completely redone and would be included in drainage plan and that the utilities are currently above ground. Conservation Commission September 11, 2012 Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 10 In response to Paluzzi, contractor explains that the addition would be demolished by machine, put in containers and hauled offsite. Narrow driveway would be used for access with jack hammering done to widen access. Gibson notes that there is a retaining wall and area is heavily vegetated with ledge outcropping that contains site without erosion controls. She also mentions that ledge is in the basement of the addition. Gibson adds that the ledge would not be removed as part of this process but that could change based on the site plan. Maxner states that she has visited the site and doesn't recommend the Commission do a site visit at this phase of work but instead would for the ANRAD to understand existing conditions. Maxner recommends the following Special Conditions: ➢ Removal of mature vegetation other than the target specie of poison ivy is prohibited without prior approval by the Commission. ➢ Construction and demolition debris must be properly contained if not immediately taken off site. Squibb moves for the Commission to issue a Negative # 2 and # 3 with special conditions as discussed. Seconded by Bertoni. Motion carries 5 -0. New: 89 Boyles Street, East Beverly Substation — Massachusetts Electric Co./National Grid Maxner reads legal notice. Mike Toohill, environmental engineer with Coneco, and Josh Holden of National Grid, representing applicant. Toohill explains the utility is proposing to install 1,000 feet of new conduit and three manholes in and around the East Beverly Substation on Boyles Street. Work will take place within 200 -foot Riverfront Area to Centerville Creek, 100 -foot buffer zone to BVW and 100 feet to a certified vernal pool located across the street. The proposal is for a 1 -foot to 2 -foot in diameter, 3- feet in depth trench for underground conduit. In response to Paluzzi, applicant describes connections and existing /proposed manhole covers at substation relative to riparian zone as well as location of vernal pool on site plan. They also note that the lines would be in PVC not cement but agree to check detail. Maxner notes the applicant is asking the Commission to verify the wetland delineation as well, since they checked B. l.b. on the RDA and asks if this was intentional because a wetland delineation would require a continuance and a group site visit.. Maxner was not made aware that this would be part of the application when she spoke with the consultant prior to application submission. Toohill notes that this was not necessarily part of the project and Holden states that that can be withdrawn. She notes that during her site visit, she reviewed a few wetland flags at site but could not locate all of them. Toohill states that they used GPS to locate all flags, and some may have come down between now and then. Maxner states that plan does not identify the driveway very well so she was unsure during her site visit today where the new trench would be in the paved driveway or off to the shoulder. Maxner expresses concern about whether the manholes and trench would impact any of the roots of small Conservation Commission September 11, 2012 Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 10 Spruce trees in area and if project may encroach into some drip lines of trees in the area since it appears that a couple of mature trees may have to be removed as they are in the direct route of the conduit. Applicant responds that work would be in paved entrance and gravel shoulder to accommodate conduit. He states if trees were damaged they would be replaced. Maxner notes that she observed landscape material that has been dumped, and staging /storage area where utility pole 3690 -5 is located and the material may be within the 25 -foot No Disturb Zone, which might need to be addressed and materials moved. Holden states that this material can be removed to another location on site. Maxner recommends the following Special Conditions: 1. Landscaping materials and dumped debris in the vicinity of Wetland Flags A -19 and A -20 and between Utility Pole #3690, #4382 and #5649 shall be immediately removed from the area and relocated to an upland portion of the site outside the 200 -Foot Riverfront Area. The area shall be returned to original grade. Once the area is cleaned, a site inspection shall be held no later than October 2, 2012 with the Conservation Administrator to observe conditions and establish restoration and erosion control plans. 2. Prior to work commencing, erosion controls shall be installed along the edge of pavement between the work and the wetland. 3. The Conservation Administrator shall inspect erosion controls prior to work commencing. 4. Soil spoils from trench/manhole excavation shall be immediately taken off site or stockpiled outside any resource areas or buffer zones at a location identified to the Conservation Agent. 5. Immediately after backfilling the excavated areas, the exposed soils shall be seeded with a native seed mix and covered with straw to protect seed and soil from washing or eroding during runoff events. 6. Erosion control devices shall remain in place and properly functioning until all exposed soils have been stabilized with final vegetative cover and the Commission and /or its Administrator has authorized their removal. In response to Renee Mary, Holden states there would be no changes in stormwater. Root moves to issue a Negative #2 and #3 Determination with Special Conditions as discussed. Seconded by Squibb. Motion carries 5 -0. New: 127 Water Street — remove and replace underground storage tanks and distribution lines — Jubilee Yacht Club c/o Linda Mallette, Commodore Root recuses herself and leaves the meeting room. Maxner reads legal notice. Steve Fleming of Vineyard Engineering and Environmental Services, representing applicant describes the proposal to remove and replace the existing underground storage tanks and associated distribution lines at the site, which fall within the 100 -foot buffer zone to coastal bank, land subject to coastal storm flowage. The plan depicts soil staging areas, erosion controls and limits of excavation areas. Flemming notes that in the RDA he provided a comprehensive narrative as to the Conservation Commission September 11, 2012 Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 10 site and proposed work, including a Contingency Plan should soil conditions are discovered that require an Immediate Response Action. Femming notes the tank replacement project of fiberglass tanks and piping to floating docks that is expected to take three weeks. He explains that double -wall fiberglass tanks will be used. Hay bales will be installed for erosion control. He notes that November 1 is tentative work start date to coincide with when most boats are already taken out of water for offseason storage. Fleming explains that top of existing tank will be taken off and rubble removed and taken off site same or following day. Tanks will be pumped, removed and excavated under supervision of Beverly Fire Department and taken from site same day. He adds that stockpiled soils would be put in storage areas with erosion controls and covered with polyvinyl sheeting. Fleming notes that when tanks are removed surrounding soil will be tested for release of oil or any hazardous materials. He adds if there are no issues, the new tank installation will occur with sheet pile around perimeter of proposed excavation. Fleming said additional material will be excavated to accommodate new tanks and it is expected that work will take three weeks from time hay bales are installed until new tanks are set. He adds that sheet piling at perimeter of tank hole that will be installed for about a week will be removed and piping installed two feet below grade and a transitional manhole will be removed. Fleming says a concrete pad that will be two to three feet wider than currently exists will be installed at the surface and ground surface will remain the same as it is today and the elevation of tank will not change. Discussion ensues about how the tanks are ballasted with water. In response to members, Fleming addresses placing the tanks in the existing resource area since it is already disturbed rather than moving away from resource area, also that no contamination is expected in the area but they are prepared to contact DEP if necessary and are working with environmental consultants if a spill occurs where a vacuum truck would be used. He reiterates that they don't expect an issue in area. Discussion ensues about how dewatering would be handled on site. Fleming explains that any dewatering will be contained in frac tanks, and the intent of project is general improvement using 6,000 - gallon double wall tank with new safety features since the existing tank is 30 years old and the warranty is expiring. Discussion ensues about piping and pumping in No Disturb Zone where fewer disturbances would occur at site if pump station is not moved and that outside area near yacht club has pavement, gravel and concrete. Discussion ensues about soil testing samples being screened ahead of time to determine if there is a reportable condition and to document what material is in area. Fleming explains if issues are identified then additional excavation would occur. He expects the area below the tank in the groundwater table to be clean. He adds that the existing impermeable surfaces will be matched with concrete pad extended a foot longer in either direction. Maxner recommends a special condition where she would inspect erosion control before work starts. Squibb moves for the Commission to issue a Negative # 2 and # 3 with Special Condition as recommended. Seconded by Grant. Motion carries 4 -0. Conservation Commission September 11, 2012 Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 10 Root returns to the meeting. Recess for Public Hearings Squibb moves to recess public hearings. Seconded by Bertoni. Motion carries 5 -0. Notices of Intent and /or Abbreviated Notices of Intent Cont: 43 Water Street, DEP #5 -1079 — install steel sheet pile bulkhead, fill land under ocean, install travel lift and floating docks — Beverly Port Marina Maxner updates Commission stating the applicant has decided to move forward with the project as proposed which necessitates the peer review. Maxner reminds the Commission that it voted to secure Apex Engineering to review the NOI and she will check with Apex as to their ability to respond for the next meeting. Squibb moves to continue the hearing to the October 2, 2012 meeting. Seconded by Root. Motion carries 5 -0. Abbreviated Notice of Resource Area Delineation Cont: Endicott College Northeast Campus Area — Endicott College c/o Dennis Monaco Maxner explains that applicant has agreed to continuance until the Commission's October 2nd meeting so members who could not review the entire line can catch up. Bertoni moves to continue the hearing to the October 2, 2012 meeting. Seconded by Squibb. Motion carries 5 -0. Old/New Business Cont: 62 South Terrace — Enforcement Order: Progress Update — Michael Burta Peter Gilmore representing Mr. Burta provides the Commission with update stating that all but a single float has been moored in the river and Beverly Harbormaster is aware of and permitted this action. He adds that Mr. Burta is seeking someone to take the last float or work with Harbormaster to move it. Gilmore notes that at the Commission's October 2nd meeting the plan is to notify the Commission that all of the floats are gone. Maxner explains that the Commission issued a ratified Enforcement Order that required Mr. Burta to take the following corrective actions: ➢ Continue to cease and desist from any maintenance or construction activities on the dock system; ➢ Remove, at the very least, the terminal T- section of the floats, all small water craft, canoes and debris from the area no later than September 11, 2012; Conservation Commission September 11, 2012 Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 10 ➢ Attend the September 11, 2012 Conservation Commission meeting and provide a written report that details your good faith efforts to secure storage facilities for the remaining sections of the dock system; ➢ At the September 11, 2012 meeting, the Commission will consider and establish an appropriate deadline for final removal of all remaining components of the dock system. Maxner reports that during her site inspection at 6:30 p.m. tonight that the floats were floating and Mr. Burta was getting them out to the mooring. She notes that at the very least this is what the Commission was looking for and that the Commission has never gotten involved in permitting moorings. Discussion ensues with Mr. Burta about his email regarding the difficulty of disposing of floats and vulnerability of moored floats. Gilmore refers to drawing of float location from Harbormaster and intent to seek information from DEP about floats. Mr. Burta notes that the expense of a pile- driven float as a solution and describes his misunderstanding of the permit's applicability regarding floats. He adds that he has made a sincere effort to dispose of the floats. Maxner mentions that Commission needs to address timeline for remaining float and gangway. She suggests that Enforcement Order could be amended to establish a new deadline. Also, Maxner recommends the Commission deal with what exists and allow Mr. Burta to come back at his own free will for what he decides to do in the future. Discussion ensues about whether floats can remain during the winter and needed instruction from Harbormaster. Maxner suggests that the remaining pieces should be removed by October 2nd and Mr. Burta will report about winter storage including confirmation from harbormaster that the floats can remain in place. Squibb moves to amend the Enforcement Order directing the following: ➢ Continue to cease and desist from any maintenance or construction activities on the dock system; ➢ Remove, the remaining float section and gangway from the area no later than October 2, 2012 at 3:00 p.m. to allow the Conservation Administrator sufficient time to verify compliance prior to that evening's meeting; ➢ Attend the October 2, 2012 Conservation Commission meeting and provide a report as to a solution for winter storage of all of the floats and system components. Seconded by Bertoni. Motion carries 5 -0. Cont: 1 Lake Shore Avenue — Enforcement Order: Progress Update — Robert & Michael Hubbard Maxner reminds the Commission it issued a ratified Enforcement Order at its August 21" meeting directing Mr. Hubbard to take the following corrective actions: ➢ Not less than twelve (12) native shrubs shall be planted within the disturbed area closest to the wetland between the hay bales and driveway; shrub installation shall be completed no later than Tuesday September 11, 2012 by 12:00 Noon for the Conservation Administrator's inspection ➢ Plant survival is a condition of this Enforcement Order; therefore newly planted shrubs must be watered regularly to ensure their health and vigor. Conservation Commission September 11, 2012 Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 10 ➢ The Conservation Administrator will conduct a site inspection on September 11, 2012 so as to report back to the Commission at it's meeting that evening. Maxner reports on her site inspection today to verify compliance, and provides the Commission with photographs of six, five - gallon winterberry and six, five - gallon sweet pepperbush that have been installed, are being diligently watered and appear in good condition. She met with Robert and Michael Hubbard at the site and they understand that survival of the shrubs is a requirement. The Hubbards are maintaining 100 -foot buffer zone stakes onsite, no further work has gone on in that zone and hay bales remain in place and are functioning. She notes that she spoke with the Hubbards about site plan where one house lot has buffer zone and if they plan to do any work they would have to come before Commission with a formal application, which might involve grading and tree removal. Maxner mentions that the Hubbards have complied with the latest Enforcement Order and she recommends the Commission keep it in place for follow up in 2014 since part of EO is plant survival and the Commission usually requires survival for two growing seasons after installation. Squibb moves leaving the Enforcement Order in place and requires follow up in fall 2014 Seconded by Root. Motion carries 5 -0. New: 10 Eleanor Avenue — Enforcement Order — existing dock — Joan Gallagher Maxner explains that she received information about a possible illegal dock at 10 Eleanor Avenue and she spoke with Commission Chairman David Lang who opined that the Commission should be consistent with how these matters are handled reflecting what it has done in the past. She notes that she issued an Enforcement Order and invited Ms. Gallagher to the Commission's September l Itn meeting for an opportunity to produce documentation on valid wetland permits for dock. Maxner adds that in her research of the City's records she could not find any documentation of valid wetland permits. Ms. Gallagher states that she has had permits from the Harbormaster since 1991. She explains that the wetland permit was initially received at a Beverly Harbor Management meeting with Corps of Engineers and Harbormaster in attendance. Ms. Gallagher notes that she is working with Councilor Troubetaris to get a written record of that meeting. She asks the Commission for more time to research the records and adds that when she moved into the house in 1991 her former husband followed protocol for the float where the Corps of Engineers oversaw the permitting not the Conservation Commission at that time. Ms. Gallagher states that she renews her permits for the mooring floats every year that are marked with green markers. Discussion ensues about derelict floats sitting next to beach in resource area and environmental impact that the Commission needs to address. Ms. Gallagher explains that she wants to replace the floats as they are in severe disrepair and currently not useable. Ms. Gallagher's husband responds that he could not remove the floats due to limited manpower availability before the next Commission meeting and that he is investigating if the Fire Department would provide a permit to Conservation Commission September 11, 2012 Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 10 burn the floats on the beach. Maxner states that she is not familiar with the use of burning as a solution for removal of floats. Bertoni recommends that disassembly of the floats should at least start as soon as possible and the owners could come back to the Commission's October 2nd meeting with a progress report and then a final deadline could be set. Gilmore notes that the process in 1991 for installing structures in resource area waterways has changed compared to today's procedure that falls under the Commission's jurisdiction and need for Commission to be consistent in the actions it takes when violations arise. Ms. Gallagher suggests she could get the floats off the beach by October 23 Bertoni moves to issue an amended Enforcement Order requiring the following: ➢ Immediately begin disassembly and removal of the floats. If float parts are not removed from site, they must be stored in an upland location so as not to negatively impact any resource areas or their function, burning of float parts on the beach is prohibited; ➢ Attend the October 2, 2012 Conservation Commission meeting and provide a written report that details your progress in removal efforts; ➢ All floats shall be removed from the beach no later than 3:00 p.m. on Tuesday October 23, 2012 to be verified by the Conservation Administrator who shall report to the Commission at that evening's meeting. Squibb seconds the motion. Motion carries 5 -0. New: Cabot Street /Cailin Road, May 90 Lots 12, 13, & 14 — Informal Discussion re: Proposed Proiect — Curt Young, representative, Cabot Beverly, LLC, owner Attorney Phillip Lake of Ipswich, owner's representative, initiates informal discussion regarding a potential 2- megawatt solar panel field project at the site off of Cabot Street (Rt. 97) north of the former Vitale Site that is in the industrial zone of watershed overlay district as it currently exists. He notes that the solar panels are above ground, pole- mounted and should not impact surrounding ground. Bill Manuel, Wetlands and Land Management, says he has worked on site and describes how the site's southern exposure is be conducive to solar array farm and he mentions that site was formerly a gravel pit mining area and that it has other disturbed area that has caused invasive species to become established in the buffer zone and wetlands. He describes limits of wetland delineation with 25 -foot No Disturb Zone and 100 -foot buffer zone He notes that the site is reverting and naturalizing along steep slope but there is riprap all along rerouted stream channel on the Vitale Site. Scott Patrowicz, project engineer, explains that there is no need to re -grade or terrace the land for the installation of high efficiency panels. He adds that four poles would be used for installation of solar panels. He reviews stormwater proposal that consists of vegetated swales and rain gardens, noting that there is a slight decrease in runoff. Conservation Commission September 11, 2012 Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 10 Curt Young, Wetland Preservation, Inc., explains the functional impact to wetland systems resulting from the transition of a forested canopy versus a shrub layer canopy. He explains the solar corridors and resulting trimming of trees. He explains that they inventoried the tree species, height and DBH in the solar corridor areas that would have to be topped or cut out completely especially in the 25 -foot No Disturb Zone. Young addresses impact of removing over story canopy on canopy underneath. He suggests the tree - trimming program could take from three to five years for the most benefit. Young lists invasive species and proposed removal, some to be done chemically to control, and that the site could be supplemented with native species. Discussion ensues about whether there is any other part of the site that would be better for proposed solar farm to reduce the amount of tree trimming required. Representatives address slope of property, steep hillside and 60 -foot differential in grade and the high cost of development of site if it were terraced. In response to Maxner, Patrowicz says the proposed project is fully quality engineered for 2- megawatt operable size and efficiency of panels. Manuel mentions that they do not want to work with soils in steep hillside area that is fully forested and this slope provides a good buffer for neighbors. In response to Maxner, Manuel explains that certain areas on site have been monitored for vernal pool function where wood frog egg masses were identified but the areas do not hold water to any depth as classic hillside wetlands. He notes that Notice of Intent narrative would address local No Disturb Zone analysis. Discussion ensues about comparison between solar array system at Beverly High School site and proposed project that uses newer technology and would not require concrete slabs on the slope to support the panels. Discussion addresses how proposed project site would be solely owned by purchaser, and one recipient of the power supplied by solar array would be the City. The Commission thanks representatives for presentation on project, and the presenters note that they have plans to submit application for NOI in time for Commission's October 2nd meeting. New: Review of Minor Proiect Permits Issued by Agent Since Last Meeting Maxner states she has not issued any Minor Permits since the Commission's last meeting. New: Expenditure Approvals Bertoni moves for the Commission to pay special counsel Chip Nylen's invoice of $950.00 for his services regarding the 44 -46 River Street National Grid appeal/litigation from May through June 2012. Seconded by Root. Motion carries 5 -0. Squibb moves to reimburse Maxner for 523 miles at .40 cents a mile for a total of $209.20 that she incurred while conducting the Commission's business from May through August 2012. Seconded by Grant. Motion carries 5 -0. Conservation Commission September 11, 2012 Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 10 Maxner recommends the Commission purchase nameplates for the members and staff She will investigate pricing and mentions that her department would create the inserts for the nameplates. Members agree this would be beneficial and suggests that the nameplates be made at the same time. Squib moves to authorize Maxner to order nameplates and stands for the members and staff Seconded by Bertoni. Motion carries 5 -0. Other... Minor Modifications, Extensions, Emergency Certifications, Enforcement Maxner describes request for a de minimis project change for 7 Tall Tree Drive for low voltage landscape lighting proposed to be located along gravel, main entrance driveway. She adds that a trench would be dug for wiring conduit to small light posts where one part of driveway is on edge of No Disturb Zone that has maintained lawn. Discussion ensues about whether wiring could be installed under gravel driveway rather than in NDZ. After reviewing the draft plan, the Commission members agree with that a formal application for a minor modification and presentation by the landscape architect would be beneficial to better understand the project and its impacts. Orders, Correspondence, etc... Received/Issued After Publication of Agenda Maxner explains that the Commission's decision on the ANRAD for 50 Dunham Road has been appealed to Superior Court, and she received a copy of the appeal on September 7, 2012. She explains that she is investigating a choice for special counsel the Commission could secure for representation in the matter, noting that Chip Nylen has a conflict of interest due to a partner in his firm that does taxes for Cummings. She adds that Nylen and consultant Mary Rimmer recommended attorney Jeffrey Roelofs, so she refers to his biography and fee schedule ($250 an hour), stating that his specialty is environmental and land use law where he has represented municipalities since 1993. Maxner says she has spoken to Roelofs who seems approachable and she believes she would feel comfortable working with him and notes that Commission needs to respond to summons in a timely manner. Grant offers to inquire with her colleagues as to their knowledge of Roelof s work. Bertoni moves to secure special counsel Jeffrey Roelofs to represent the Commission in the 50 Dunham Road appeal matter barring any report from Grant that suggests an alternative choice for counsel. Seconded by Root. Motion carries 5 -0. Adiournment Squibb moves to adjourn meeting at 10:20 p.m. Seconded by Root. Motion carries 5 -0. The next regular meeting of the Conservation Commission is Tuesday, October 2, 2012 at Beverly City Hall, 3 rd Floor Council Chambers.