Loading...
2000-10-10 CITY OF BEVERLY Public Meeting Minutes BOARD: Conservation Commission SUBCOMMITTEE: DATE: October 10, 2000 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT:Chairman David Lang, Anthony Paluzzi, Patricia Grimes, Jon Mazuy, Richard Benevento, Dr. Mayo Johnson BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Jay Donnelly OTHERS PRESENT: Debra Hurlburt, Assistant Planning Director RECORDER: Karen Bradley Chairman Lang calls the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. Request for Determination of Applicability Cabot and Herrick Street – manhole excavation – Verizon New England Mr. Richard McCormick of Verizon New England, states that the proposed manhole to be excavated bypasses Beverly Hospital and Beverly High School. The excavation involves a 10 foot long by 2 foot long by 7 feet deep area approximately 35 feet from a brook. He proposes an enlargement of 3 feet around the manhole. Mazuy asks is there will be a truck on site for material removal. McCormick states that there will be a truck on site. Lang asks if there are any questions or comments. There are none. Mazuy moves to issue a negative Determination #3 for the request for the manhole excavation seconded by Paluzzi. All members in favor. Motion carries. 91 Grover Street – retaining wall construction – William Botte, Jr. Mrs. Botte explains to the Commission that they would like to construct a retaining wall approximately 85 feet from a resource area. She gives the members pictures to view of the area where the retaining wall will be. Mazuy states that he visited the site and would like to know how high the wall would be. Botte explains that they want to try to level out that area where there is a steep pitch and construct a 10-12 foot wall. Lang asks what the wall will be made of. Botte explains that they plan on using the ledge that has to be removed from the site where the wall it to be constructed. Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes October 10, 2000 Page 2 Mazuy asks if an engineer has viewed the site. Botte explains that she has not yet contacted an engineer, she decided to address the Conservation Commission first. Mazuy expresses some concern for the heaviness of the wall and would like to see a more formal plan. Lang asks what the slope is from the wetland. Botte states that proposed wall would be 85 ft. from the wetland. Lang states that he doesn’t foresee any problems with approving this proposal, however he would like to visit the site and see a more detailed plan of the proposed wall. A site visit is scheduled for October 28, 2000 and Lang asks for a sketch of the proposed retaining wall. Lang asks if there are any questions or comments. There are none. Paluzzi moves to continue the meeting until October 30, 2000 pending a site visit to be held on October 28, at 8:30 a.m., seconded by Johnson. All members in favor. Motion carries. Grimes moves to recess for public hearing, seconded by Mazuy. All members in favor. Motion carries. Abbreviated Notice of Resource Area Delineation – 254 Essex Street – Beverly YMCA Mike DeRosa from DeRosa Environmental appears on behalf of the Beverly YMCA Sterling Center seeking an abbreviated notice of resource area delineation. Also present is Davis Josslin of Meridian Engineering and Chris Lovasko and Peter Dane of the YMCA. DeRosa informs the Commission that he appended a copy of the DEP superceding order of conditions regarding the jurisdiction of the intermittent stream from a recent NOI across the street at 253 Essex Street. DeRosa explains the location of the wetland areas on a map and their proximity to the proposed construction. He explains that the BVW was delineated in April and consists of 200 wetland flags. The delineation area includes both sides of the steam, the pond, and the intermittent stream, the inland bank (the centerline of the stream) with 100-foot buffer zone on each side, and the isolated federal wetland. He explains that Meridian Engineering did some calculations on flooding of the isolated federal wetland to see if in 100 years it would fill to the crescending elevation. The findings were well below that level. He explains that the total square footage of this area is almost 3,500 square feet. Lang asks for clarification on the A and B line series. DeRosa explains the A and B flags. Lang asks where Hawk Hill is in relation to this site. DeRosa states that it is not on this map. Lang asks if there are any questions from the public. Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes October 10, 2000 Page 3 Renee Mary, 274 Hale Street asks the depth of the pond. DeRosa states that they have not conducted any sounding, but depth is probably 3 to 5 feet in depth. Larry Graham, 252 Essex Street expresses concern that additional runoff will go towards his home. Lang asks if there are any from the public. There are none. Paluzzi moves to continue to October 30,2000 pending a site visit to be held on October 28 at 9:00 a.m., seconded by Grimes. All member in favor. Motion carries. Notice of Intent Continuation: 290 Essex Street – single family homes construction - Symes Associates Johnson recuses himself from this portion of the meeting. Richard Williams from Hayes Engineering explains to the Commission that the Stormwater Management Policy has been revised with more specific information that was requested by the Commission. He explains the required changes made to the BVW replacement area. He also states that the elevation changes were made to the replication area lowering it another 2 feet. Jeff Rhuda of Symes Associates explains that the 32-foot width roadway requirement is a 30- year-old requirement. He is proposing to use 26-foot wide roadways with sidewalks on one side. He states that by using this new design, 23,000 square feet of pavement is saved. Symes Associates is offering to donate the money saved on the pavement to the Open Space and Recreation Committee. Rhuda asks the Commission to send a letter to the Planning Board is favor of the 26-foot roadway. Lang asks what the width of Essex Street is. Rich Williams from Hayes Engineering states that the width of Essex Street varies in locations from 24 to 28 feet. Benevento asks what the average traffic count is. Rhuda explains that the traffic is 10 vehicles per hour. Benevento makes reference to Grover Street and expresses concern of speed and emergency vehicle accessibility. Grimes asks what would change on the plan if the 26-foot roadway width were approved. Williams states that nothing would change as the Stormwater Management was designed based on the 32-foot roadway width with sidewalks on both sides. He states that the only thing that would change would be the inside right-of-way. That would change to 10 feet. Grimes states although less impervious material is more favorable, she is concerned with signing off on something that the Planning Board has not yet approved. She states that she is opposed to sending the Planning Board a letter. She explains that each Board has their set own regulations to abide by. Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes October 10, 2000 Page 4 Lang states that he is not opposed to sending the Planning Board a letter stating the Conservation Commission’s positive reasons for the 26-foot roadways. He states that the Conservation Commission’s opinion should be taken into consideration. Hurlburt states that the Commission must be very careful in their wording if they choose to send a letter. Benevento states that the town of Weston has recently changed their roadway requirement to 18 feet. He explains that it has caused a great deal of problems with speed, safety, and emergency access. He asks is sloped granite curbing will be used. Williams states that sloped granite curbing will be used on both sides. Lang asks Scott Houseman to address the Commission regarding Conservation Subdivisions. Houseman states that he on the Master Plan Steering Committee as well as part of the Green Neighborhoods Alliance. He explains that the Green Neighborhoods Alliance is coalition made up of the Massachusetts Audubon Society, Coastal Zone Management, and the Massachusetts Builders Association. He states that this Conservation Subdivision Ordinance has been approved in Gloucester and Georgetown and that it is designed to help the Planning Board and the Conservation Commission work together and in agreement toward the same goals. He states that the narrower roadway and sidewalk on one side is part of this Conservation Subdivision concept. Grimes asks if the narrower streets is such a good idea with a subdivision of this size. Houseman states that the roadway width would remain the same no matter how big the subdivision is. Mazuy asks what percentage of the trees will be cut down. Williams estimates 50-60%. Bruce Dallas makes reference to the Chapter 61A Forestry law which states that every 10 years this property has to be cut back. He states that in 1992 when it was last done, a great deal of the larger trees were removed. Mazuy asks what the cost savings would be for the 23,000 square feet of pavement that could be saved with the approval of the 26-foot width roadway. Benevento figures out that the cost savings would be roughly $30,000. Lang asks if there are any more questions from the members of the Commission. There are none. He asks if there are any questions from the public. Joan Murphy of 36 Longmeadow Road asks if a certain location, which she points out on the map, could be left as open space. Lang states that if the City adopts the Conservation Subdivision idea there could be room for this in the future. However, under the present subdivision regulations, the zoning has no allowance for that. Lang asks if there are any questions from the public. There are none. Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes October 10, 2000 Page 5 Mazuy moves to close the pubic hearing, seconded by Paluzzi. All members in favor. Motion carries. Johnson returns to the meeting. Continuation: adjacent to 38 E. Corning Street – single family home – Charles Harding Bill Manuell from Wetlands and Land Management appears on behalf of the applicant. He states on the revised plan, the proposed single family house has been moved from the existing wetland. He states that at the closest point, the house will be 14 feet away from the wetland. He states that at the last site walk, the Commission asked him to conduct a vegetative study in certain areas. The vegetative study findings confirmed wetland delineation with the exception of one isolated area. Manuell states that the City of Beverly has been doing some investigative reports on the drainage around this area. The City found a manhole and pipe that suggests that at some point in time drainage did come to this site from Oceanside Drive and East Corning Street. It was found that the pipe ends where the proposed garage will be located for the proposed house. Manuell states that the City tested the flow of the pipe and made the observation that it was probably blocked up. He explains that it should not effect the location of the house, but could potentially effect the location of the garage. Manuell suggests to the Commission the following conditions for approval: · Conduct either a smoke or die test and uncover the pipe to see where it goes. · Based on those findings, move the garage forward, eliminate the garage, or reroute the pipe if it is in the way of the garage location. In summary, he states that the revised plan is a significant improvement to the original footprint. Benevento asks if the delineation flags have changed from the original plan. Manuell states that the flags did not change and he conducted a wetland plot that covers a 30-foot vegetation radius. Lang asks if there are any questions from the public. Kevin Mahan, 40 East Corning Street asks for clarification on the wetland data plot. He asks if the isolated area was subject to flooding. Manuell states that it is not subject to flooding. He explains that under the Wetlands Protection Act, in order to have that criteria ¼ acre of water must be held to a minimum depth of six inches. He states that this area does not fall under these criteria. Tom Zampell, 22 East Corning Street states that the water level in this area has been known to rise as high as the 30-foot area. He states that as part of the Riverfront area this Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes October 10, 2000 Page 6 property would be considered a resource area that would require a 200-foot setback on the property. Zampell also states that based on the soil analysis on this property, this whole area should be considered a swamp. He asks the Commission not to grant this proposal based on the findings that this area is a riverfront area. Manuell states that at the site walk, the stream in question was dry. He states that he also has videotape of that stream under wet and dry conditions, which he concluded is an intermittent stream on the USGS map. He makes reference to the color chart and states that other indicators of wetness. Lang states that the wetland species are invasive and the hydrology show evidence that this is a wetland area. He also states that stream could in fact dry up, however the drainage area is too small to prove that this does not flow all year. Derek Wilson, 2 Tyler Road states that Manuell is not operating on the same map. He passes out information from Arcadia Associates of Manchester-by-the-sea. Lang asks the public if there are any more questions. There are none. Lang next reviews letters to the Commission. Lang reads a letter from Helen and Tom Zampell of 22 East Corning Street. This letter states that the property on 33 East Corning Street floods due to the stream on this property. The letter also states that Tyler Road has been subjected to heavy flooding due to drainage problems from 22 East Corning Street. The Zampell’s recommend no work approved for 22 East Corning Street. Lang reads another letter from Kevin Mahan, 40 East Corning Street which states there is no protection of the resource area with no prevention from pollution and flood control. Mahan also states that this area is in the stormwater jurisdiction. Lang asks if there are any other questions or comments from the public. Zampell states that his parents have no intentions to allow any work to be completed on Tyler Road and that they will not allow any pavement to cover the dirt road. Manuell submits to the Commission the Flood Insurance Rate Map for the area to clear up any misconceptions about the zoning of the property. He also makes the clarification that there are no plans to make any changes to Tyler Road other than the access for the driveway. Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes October 10, 2000 Page 7 Lang states that the order of conditions will be decided later in the meeting. Mazuy moves to close the hearing, seconded by Paluzzi. All members in favor. Motion carries. 431 Hale Street – conduit installation – Linda Horvitz Trust John Dick from Hancock Environmental appears on behalf of the applicant. He states that the house is at the end a long driveway off Hale Street near the Landmark School. He explains that this parcel shares the driveway is other property owners. The applicant is proposing to install a remote heat exchanger and run conduit to the far end of the site near the construction wall next to the driveway. This area would come into the buffer zone. He explains all proposed construction activity is in an area that contains no vegetation. The trenching area on the lawn for the heat exchanger lines will be regraded and revegitated. Paluzzi asks the length of the project. Dick answers the project should take a day. The heat exchanger could take up to two days. Paluzzi asks if they have checked for ledge. Dick states that he did not conduct an Auger test, but assumes that the lawn is covering ledge. He explains that the closest encroachment to the existing stone wall is 32 feet. Paluzzi asks is the conduit is for electrical lines. Dick states that it is 2-inch conduit for electrical lines to heat a pool. Lang asks the size of the existing pool. Dayton states that it is 20 X 40. Lang asks there are any questions from the public. There are none. Benevento moves to close the hearing, seconded by Paluzzi. All members in favor. Motion carries. 30 Kennel Hill Drive – pool installation and addition – Paul LaPointe Paul LaPointe explains to the Commission that the proposed pool installation and addition has been resited, which had been previously denied by the Commission. He explains the changes to the proposed site where he plans to install an 18’ X 36’ in ground pool. Mazuy asks what he plans to do in the area that goes right up against the wetland. LaPointe states that he plans to do nothing with that area. He states that is will be as conservative as possible. Mazuy asks his intent with the excavation earth. LaPointe explains that he will use some as fill or he will simply remove it. Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes October 10, 2000 Page 8 Benevento asks if the proposed project comes within 100 feet of the resource area on the back of the property. Lang states that it is. Benevento than asks if it is out of the buffer zone. Lang states that it is 50 –70 feet away from the buffer zone. Paluzzi asks is the area under the shed is open. LaPointe states that it is. LaPointe states that he plans to put haybales extending from each end of his property lines since he does not expect to complete this project until the spring. Mazuy asks Hurlburt for review on the pending appeal with the DEP. Hurlburt explains that the appeal has been dropped. LaPointe explains that this proposal is a better location, therefore he never submitted the additional information to the DEP and the appeal was dropped. Paluzzi moves to close the hearing, seconded by Benevento. All members in favor. Motion carries. Order of Conditions 290 Essex Street – single family homes construction – Symes Associates Benevento moves to issue the following conditions: 1. Standard Conditions; 2. A 20-ft. no cut buffer zone shall be established surrounding resource areas (excluding roadway crossings); 3. Weekly power sweeping during construction; 4. Upon application of topsoil, apply adequate amount of stabilizer material on top of topsoil to stabilize unvegetative areas on slopes greater than 5% until grass is established, Haybales must be maintained on site; 5. Elevation for largest replication areas at 78, elevation for small replication areas at 91; 6. Prior to start of construction, submit plan for replication including vegetation type, elevations of final replicated area, and a narrative of methodology and sequence incorporating suggestions for detaining Stormwater Management controls; 7. Refer to Camp Dresser & McKee letter and incorporate stormwater management issues; and 8. No trees larger than 12” in diameter can be removed without Conservation Commission approval. Seconded by Grimes. Johnson abstains. Motion carries 4-1-1. Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes October 10, 2000 Page 9 38 E. Corning Street – single family home – Charles Harding Paluzzi moves to issue the following order of conditions: 1. Standard conditions; 2. Performance soil standards must prove no wetland characteristics exist on proposed site. No wetland vegetation should be present. 3. Prove that back-up species are not invasive species. 4. Land elevation must deviate from that of the wetland flag marks. Seconded by Benevento. Motion denied 2-4. (Johnson and Paluzzi are in favor) Lang states that the following reasons should be identified for denial: 1. that the soil testing and chroma data show wetland characteristics and the soils is still consistently wet or moist; 2. that the site visits indicate that the vegetation present have wetland characteristics; 3. that the facultative species were all invasive species likely from previous dumping by the owner; 4. that the hydrology of the area was wet and debris lines were evident suggesting flooded conditions during wet times of the year; 5. that there was evidence of water on the land; 6. that the elevation of the land is the same elevation of the wetland flags indicating hydrology present; and 7. that the water table is almost to the ground surface level during wet times of the year. 431 Hale Street – conduit installation – Linda Horvitz Trust Mazuy moves to issue the following order of conditions: 1. Standard conditions; 2. All excavation equipment for heat exchanger installation be stored outside the buffer zone. 3. No haybales necessary if applicant is utilizing a ditchwitch. Seconded by Paluzzi. Motion carries 6-0. 30 Kennel Hill Drive – pool installation and addition – Paul LaPointe Mazuy moves to issue the following order of conditions: Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes October 10, 2000 Page 10 1. Standard conditions; 2. Haybales be placed in front of shed; 3. No additional cutting inside the buffer zone; 4. Prior to the start of construction on the addition, notify the Conservation Commission; 5. Excavated material can be stored on the grass area up to the haybales, after that two week period, any excavated material not used must be removed from the site. Seconded by Paluzzi. Motion carries 6-0. Extension Permits Congress Street – DEP File #5-644 – Philip Hansbury Mr. Hansbury is not present at the meeting. Hurlburt reads a letter from Mr. Hansbury asking for a two-year extension of the Order of Conditions. Mazuy asks if Mr. Hansbury’s time has expired. Hurlburt states that it has not, and he still has one year left. Lang asks what this situation at hand is. Hurlburt states that she was hoping Hansbury would be present to explain his situation. Benevento moves to table to next meeting to see if Mr. Hansbury wants to extend still with one year left on the Order, seconded by Mazuy. All members in favor. Motion carries. 28 Paine Avenue – DEP File #5-612 – Jonathan Ingram Laura Gibson is present on behalf of the applicant, Jonathan Ingram. She states that the reason for the extension is that the original extension was amended in 1997 and that landscaping and indoor swimming pool has not been completed. Gibson is requesting a three-year extension. Benevento moves to grant a one-year extension, seconded by Paluzzi. All members in favor. Motion carries. Old/New Business 130 Lothrop Street Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes October 10, 2000 Page 11 Hurlburt states that she has written a letter to the property owner, Mr. DeCoster on September 21, 2000 explaining that work is occurring in Land Subject to Coaster Storm Flowage. She asked him to attend this meeting so that he can be informed of the history of this site. She explains that Mr. DeCoster came to her office today at 4:20 p.m. and gave her a letter. She reads the letter to the Commission that explains the work that has been completed on his property. He states that he obtained a building permit to erect a wooden picket fence to replace an existing chain link fence that was on his property. He states that abutters of his property, Mark Desmond of 128 Lothrop Street and residents on 132 Woodbury Street are delighted with the installation of the wooden fence. Hurlburt explains that the DEP issued a Superceding Order of Conditions stating what can and cannot occur on this site. She then explains that in July, 1993 a Certificate of Compliance was issued also stating that some work had occurred on this property, and because this is a Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage, you must file before work any is completed on this property. Hurlburt explains that Mr. DeCoster has been given the file explaining the history of this site, therefore he is aware of the conditions that must be met prior to any work being completed on this site. Benevento suggest send DeCoster a letter from the Commission stating that although the work is already complete, he still must file with the DEP. At that point, if the proposal is denied, the work must be undone. Tony Musanti, 12 Willow Street states that DeCoster’s property is the Coastal Flood Basin and it has been filled which causes flooding on the adjacent and neighboring property. She explains that the house is on a floating foundation and the back porch was built directly over the stone wall that previously existed. She contends that DeCoster was not supposed to go past that stone wall according to the DEP. Musanti states that all this work was done without proper filing and that this area was supposed to be open for proper water flowage. This continuous filling is creating flooding problems for the neighbors. Benevento states DeCoster should be notified that he must submit his application to be on the agenda for the October 30, 2000 meeting. His failure to apply will result in an enforcement order that will order the area to be restored to its original state. Benevento moves to issue the determination, seconded by Grimes. All in favor. Motion carries. Varian letter/Comprehensive Site Assessment document Hurlburt states that she has the document for the members to review. Lang states that he will review the Comprehensive Site Assessment document for the Commission and update them at the next meeting. Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes October 10, 2000 Page 12 45 Beaver Pond Road/tree removal Tim Barry appears on behalf of the landowner, Michael Milson. He explains that the owner would like to remove eleven white pine trees. He submitted a letter from Bartlett Tree Experts that explains the trees to be removed. Barry also explains that in addition to removing those trees, Wilson would like to clean up the area near the pond removing some dead wood. Lang asks is any of the trees that are to be removed are healthy trees. Barry states that the letter from the Arborist details those trees. Milson explains that he purchased the property 3 ½ years ago. He states that the house was in serious disrepair and has made extensive improvements. He now wants to clean up the outside area of the property. He expresses concern that large white pines he is proposing to remove could fall into the pool area. Lang asks the members of the Commission if there are any questions. Mazuy asks if any of the members have seen the trees in question. Barry states that the letter explains the condition Lang states that this is a heavily wooded area and doesn’t see any major problem with their removal. Benevento states that white pine trees pose problems upon maturity due to their extreme height. Hurlburt asks for clarification on the vista pruning in the wetlands. Milson states that no vista pruning will occur. Benevento moves to approve the removal of the eleven white pine trees, seconded by Mazuy. Motion carries 5-1. Other Business - Hurlburt states that Dr. Mayo Johnson, Anthony Paluzzi and Jon Mazuy have been reappointed to the Conservation Commission until June 30, 2003. She further explains that Lang and Benevento continue on the Conservation Commission until June 30, 2002, Donnelly and Grimes continue on until June 30, 2001. - Lang explains that Kathleen McLaughlin, a reporter for the Salem Evening News, has expressed an interest in receiving staff reports from the Conservation Commission. Lang states that he feels it is important for her to know what information is pertinent to cover. Benevento states that the staff report contains some of Hurlburt’s own opinion on issues and that because it is her opinion it is not be thought that this is what the outcome of an issue may be. He does suggest that applications and plans that are made available to the Commission certainly be made available to anyone. Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes October 10, 2000 Page 13 The Commission stated that all agendas should be made available to Ms. McLaughlin and if she would like a copy of any other information she can contact the Planning Department and they will assist her. - Pam Kampersal of the Norwood Pond Association asks the Commission why they were not present at the site visit at the Norwood Pond on October 28, 2000. Lang states that there was some confusion at the last meeting and he schedules a site visit for October 28, 2000. Kampersal asks the Commission to view the dam located on Norwood Pond while at the site walk. She is concerned for the safety of this dam and is urging the Commission to bring this to the attention of the City Engineer, Frank Killilea. Renee Mary asks if there could be a recommendation made to Frank Killilea to attend this site walk. Lang states that they will visit the dam during the site walk. - Lang states that he would like to add to the order of conditions for 290 Essex Street. Paluzzi moves to add the following condition to the order of conditions for 290 Essex Street, that all trees larger than 12” in diameter must be reviewed by the Conservation Commission prior to their removal, seconded by Mazuy. Motion carries 5-0-1. Johnson abstains. Schedule of Next Meetings October 30, 2000 November 27, 2000 No meeting is scheduled in December 2000. Hurlburt suggests that Commission should take the month of August 2001 off. Approval of Minutes The minutes of the September 18, 2000 were presented. Jon Mazuy moved to accept the minutes of September 18, 2000 with amendments, seconded by Tony Paluzzi. All members in favor. Motion carries. Adjourn Paluzzi moves to adjourn, seconded by Grimes. All members in favor. Motion carries. The meeting is adjourns at 10:30 p.m.