Loading...
2001-05-01CITY OF BEVERLY Public Meeting Minutes BOARD: Conservation Commission SUBCOMMITTEE: DATE: May 1, 2001 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman David Lang, Anthony Paluzzi, Dr. Mayo Johnson, Jon Mazuy, Pat Grimes, Jay Donnelly, Richard Benevento BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Debra Hurlburt, Assistant Planning Director RECORDER: Jeannine Dion Chairman Lang calls the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Request for Determination of Applicability 376 Hale Street – library addition and associated work – Endicott College Joseph Orzel from the Gulf of Maine Research Center appears on behalf of the applicant. He provides a brief overview of the project. The applicant is proposing a two-story addition, a 20- foot wide fire lane (emergency use only) and associated grading. All work being proposed is outside the buffer zone. Lang asks about the storage of rock. Orzel responds that the applicant will use an area outside the buffer zone. Lang asks if there are any questions from the public. There are none. Mazuy moves to close, seconded by Paluzzi, all members in favor. Motion carries. Mazuy moves to issue a Negative Determination #1, seconded by Donnelly. All members in favor. Motion carries. Paluzzi moves to recess for public hearing, seconded by Benevento. All members in favor. Motion carries. Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes May 1, 2001 Page 2 Abbreviated Notice of Resource Area Delineation 7 Trask Street – Resource Area Delineation – Robert St. Pierre Mary Rimmer appears on behalf of the applicant. She states one public hearing and site walk were conducted. There were some questions raised at the site walk regarding avoiding ways of flooding at the site. She provides FEMA map, which indicates that the site is in Zone B (Between 100 year and 500-year flood plain). Lang asks what you do in cases where you know that the FEMA maps are wrong, either because they were done so long ago or from anecdotal evidence? Rimmer responds that the regulations presume that FEMA maps are accurate. Lang states the recent flood left debris marks. He asks if Rimmer went back and tried to figure out what the last storm event was categorized (i.e. 100-year event) and then go back and try to figure out the debris marks. Rimmer responded that it could be done, however, it has not been done. She states FEMA is a general study, which is not specific to the site and the burden of proof is on the Commission to prove that the map is inaccurate. Dr. Johnson states several of the Conservation Commission members visited the site a few days after the water went down and clearly saw the high water mark a considerable distance from the flags. He would consider it bordering land subject to flooding – since the high water mark was witnessed. Rimmer states in Resource Area Delineation a determination can be made on the bordering vegetated wetland and then subsequent, when a Notice of Intent is filed, the bordering land subject to flooding criteria can be addressed at that time. At this point the applicant would like to proceed to get the determination so that the property can be conveyed. She states that the Commission can be specific about what boundaries it is excluding in its Determination. Lang asks if there are questions from members of the Commission. Mazuy states the Commission has spent a lot of time in that area and it is very sensitive to flooding. His immediate reaction is to say it is mismarked or have another expert visit the site. Lang states what Rimmer marked was the wetland delineation. She did not mark the high water mark. She wants determination from the Commission indicating that the wetland line is ok. Hurlburt states that the Commission can define the BVW line only. Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes May 1, 2001 Page 3 Donnelly moves that the wetland have been delineated accurately with the comment that the bordering land subject to flooding needs to be defined more accurately when the Notice of Intent is filed, seconded by Paluzzi. Grimes and Donnelly in favor. Johnson, Mazuy and Lang are opposed. Benevento abstains. Motion fails. Donnelly moves to reconsider, seconded by Grimes. All members in favor. Lang states that he would be willing to continue this and reconsider the vote at the next meeting. Rimmer states that she was not at the original site walk, however, she asked if there was any concern about the boundary itself and was told there was no problem. She states this is representing a significant burden to the applicant. Lang apologizes and states the biggest problem is the high water mark. Benevento recommends the Commission consider approving specific flags only. It would allow the property to close and the other flags could be addressed at a later date. John O’Keefe, representative of Mr. St. Pierre on the sale of the lot asks a clarifying question. Rimmer states the applicant does not have a problem with changing the flags as requested by the Commission. Paluzzi moves to accept flag changes to 1 – 7, 10, 13, 14, 15 (eliminate flags 8, 9, 11 and 12) as shown on the plan, seconded by Mazuy. Benevento abstains. Motion carries (6-0-1). 376 Hale Street – Resource Area Delineation – Endicott College John Dick from Hancock Environmental Consultants appears on behalf of the applicant. He introduces Dennis Marco from Endicott College and Joe Orzel from the Gulf of Maine Research Center, Inc. The applicant is seeking review and approval of delineation of a Bordering Vegetated Wetland. Lang recommends scheduling a site visit. Benevento moves to continue the hearing to May 29, 2001 pending a site visit on May 19, 2001 at 8:30 a.m., seconded by Mazuy. All members in favor. Motion carries. Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes May 1, 2001 Page 4 Notice of Intent Route 128/Burger King Site – redevelopment of site – Rubin & Rudman Attorney Peter Feuerbach appears on behalf of the applicant, Boston and Beverly, Inc. He states the applicant has added an oil/water separator to the plan pursuant to the Commission’s request. The Commission also expressed concern about dripping from trucks. The applicant removed three truck spaces near the catch basins. He states the site is not a “truck stop.” Lang states that DEP said the plan did not meet the standards. Dave Johnson from PMP Associates responds that the discharge does not fall within the Conservation Commission’s jurisdiction. Johnson states all manholes were changed to deep sump manholes. Grimes states she thinks this is an area with a higher pollutant load. Feuerbach responds that the applicant submitted a storm water management plan and the project is a redevelopment project of a developed site. He states the applicant is meeting all the standards and the pollutant load has been addressed. Grimes states the applicant has not addressed a snow removal plan, pollution control plan, and pretreatment before going to deep sump. Johnson responds that the pollution control plan is the deep sump, oil/water separator and gasoline mitigation plan. He states this is the first he has heard about a snow removal plan. Lang asks how the oil/water separator will be maintained. Johnson responds that it will be maintained by a private contractor. The timeline is based on the manufacturer’s recommendations. Lang states he was satisfied with the delineation of the wetlands. Mazuy asks what will be done with the materials dumped all around the site and states he would like the area cleaned out before approval is granted. The applicant responds that he intends to remove the material and assures the Commission that it will be maintained better than it is now. Mazuy also expresses concern about a tank in the buffer zone with grease from the facility, much of which is on the bituminous pavement. Michael Wyman states the employees will be more careful than in the past. Benevento states the concern is that consistent spilling and then having a storm event would carry the oils and the Commission does not want anything infiltrating into the resource area. Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes May 1, 2001 Page 5 Mazuy states that he is not sure if the site qualifies as a truck stop, however he sees trucks parked in the lot quite late at night. Feuerbach responds there will be a place for trucks to park, however, the site has a play area and the design is one to attract tourists and people from the community to the facility. There will be a Burger King, Dunkin Donuts, Subway, etc. Hurlburt states the DEP commented that the storm water operational plan is not accurate. She requests the applicant provide pertinent information to the Commission in writing. Feuerbach states he spoke with the individual at DEP who wrote the letter and he retracted a lot of what he included in his letter. Hurlburt asks if the applicant has prepared a specific Operation and Maintenance Plan. Johnson responds that he has addressed all of the questions in accordance with the state regulations. Grimes reiterates that she believes the site is a land use with higher pollutant load and the applicant has not met the requirements. Lang asks if the applicant would be willing to clean up the material dumped in the buffer zone area prior to construction. Wyman responds he will have it cleaned up during construction, when there will be enough manpower. Benevento states he would prefer to have the area cleaned up as soon as possible and would like it to be a condition to do so prior to construction. The applicant responds that he would prefer to do it at the time of construction because it is a more practical time. Benevento states he would like to put some time limitation on when the resource area is cleaned up. If it is not cleaned up, he recommends the Commission consider issuing an Enforcement Order to the owner or operator. Lang asks if there are questions from the public. There are none. Lang asks if diesel fuel will be sold at the site. The applicant responds there will be a diesel pump. Benevento asks when the construction will be starting. Feuerbach responds they hope to start in September. Grimes states she does not believe that the applicant meets the storm water policy. Benevento moves to close the hearing, seconded by Paluzzi. All members in favor. Motion carries. 254 Essex Street – YMCA addition, et al – Beverly Regional YMCA Attorney Tom Alexander appears on behalf of the applicant. He states the applicant is requesting to expand the pool and access area, outdoor pool, basketball court and addition of a parking area. Slight changes have been made to the plan. He introduces Ken Knowls of Meridian Engineering. Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes May 1, 2001 Page 6 Knowles states pipes were labeled on the plan for clarification purposes. The site design did not change from the previous hearing. Lang asks if there are any questions from the public. There are none. Mazuy moves to close the hearing, seconded by Paluzzi. All members in favor. Motion carries. #34 Forty Five West Street – lawn restoration - Ammerman John Dick from Hancock Environmental appears on behalf of the applicant. He states the applicant is proposing to scarify, loam and reseed the existing lawn. The house is over 200 feet from the coastal bank. The coastal bank is a relatively low structure – a 5-6 foot high stone embankment with granite steps. There will no change in grade. Benevento moves to continue the hearing to May 29, 2001 pending a site walk on May 19, 2001, seconded by Mazuy. All members in favor. Motion carries. Order of Conditions Route 128/Burger King site – redevelopment of site – Rubin & Rudman Paluzzi moves to issue the follow conditions: 1. Standard conditions. 2. Applicant shall remove existing debris in the area prior to construction and no later than September 1, 2001. 3. Applicant shall extend an 8-foot stockade fence around the western corner of the site to the north. 4. Applicant shall submit and have approved by the Commission a Snow Removal Management Plan prior to commencement of construction. 5. Applicant shall submit a plan and detail for the vegetable shortening and rubbish containers with a maintenance plan locating the areas and the frequency of when the grease tub is to be emptied. 6. The oil/gas separator shall be maintained and cleaned quarterly. 7. The plan shall show the limit of wetlands line on the western boundary of the site. Seconded by Mazuy. Grimes opposed. Motion carries (6-1). Grimes states she is not satisfied that they have complied with pollution control and snow removal. Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes May 1, 2001 Page 7 254 Essex Street – YMCA addition, et al – Beverly Regional YMCA Benevento moves to issue the following conditions: 1. Standard conditions. 2. Applicant shall submit and receive approval by the Commission of a Snow Removal Plan. 3. Applicant shall monitor hay bale/silt fence line weekly. Seconded by Paluzzi. All members in favor. Motion carries. Certificates of Compliance 20 Foster’s Point – Barbara McNeil Dr. Johnson states he visited the site and it looks satisfactory. Benevento moves to approve the Certificate of Compliance, seconded by Mazuy. All members in favor. Motion carries. Old/New Business Cummings Center – 100 Cummings Center – Minor project modification – public access pathway – DEP #5-733 (Lang recuses himself from this portion of the meeting.) Bruce Oveson appears on behalf of the applicant, the Cummings Center. He states he is appearing before the Commission due to a planning issue with the original submittal. A group of documents were filed with 7 vista points identified in the project. Through negotiations with the Planning Department and the Harbor Management Authority, Cummings agreed to put a boardwalk along a section. The cost of the changes made to the plan outweighed the cost of putting in 7 vistas. Under Chapter 91 only 5 vistas are required. Cummings has agreed to 6 vistas. Hurlburt states at the last meeting Oveson stated that 5 vistas are required and the applicant is proposing 6 vistas. The plan on file showed 7 vistas. Mazuy moves to accept the plan showing 6 vista locations as presented at the last meeting, seconded by Donnelly. All members in favor. Motion carries. (Lang returns to the meeting.) Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes May 1, 2001 Page 8 Beaver Pond Road correspondence Lang reads a letter from Pam Kampersal dated April 12, 2001 into record. She expresses concern regarding work off Beaver Pond Road. Hurlburt states the new homes at this subdivision were before the Commission for an ANRAD and the work was outside of the Commission’s jurisdiction. She states she has been out there several times. Benevento moves to request the Conservation Commission Agent to visit the site and make a recommendation to the Commission, seconded by Mazuy. All members in favor. Motion carries. Lang asks Hurlburt to look at Sucker Brook. Other 9 Pineknoll Drive Alan and Jean Ansello appeared before the Commission earlier in the year regarding concern about an open stream, which runs through their property. They expressed concern about a foul odor and high levels of contaminants. Hurlburt informs the Commission members that testing is scheduled to take place. By Law The members discuss the need to work on the By Law. Hurlburt recommends reading By Laws from other communities. Lang recommends soliciting help from members of the community, perhaps on a Saturday to discuss a by-law. The members agree to meet on Saturday, June 2, 2001 at 9:00 a.m. ordinance.com Hurlburt states there is a website where you can purchase wetland bylaws, regulations, application forms, wetland maps, etc. at the cost of $59. Benevento moves to purchase the By Law CD-ROM, seconded by Mazuy. All members in favor. Motion carries. Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes May 1, 2001 Page 9 Water Test Lang states he is meeting with State Representative Cahill regarding a stream located at Tozer Road that is red from pollution (heavy metal, cyanide, etc.). He will suggest, however, if it is not decided to test the water, that the Commission consider some action. Mazuy moves to allow $250 to test the stream water, seconded by Paluzzi. All members in favor. Motion carries. Innovative Engineering Solutions Lang states near the Burger King site, someone put wells in the wetlands and is pumping groundwater and discharging it somewhere. He visited the site and a company called Innovative Engineering Solutions has a sign on the property. There was no appearance before the Commission prior to commencement of the work. He asks if the members want to ask that they submit a Request for Determination of Applicability. Benevento asks if the letter should go to the owner of the site or the District Highway Inspector. Mazuy recommends that the Commission send a letter to Innovative Engineering Solutions and Mass Highway to inquire about the activities at the site. Approval of Minutes Benevento moves to approve the minutes dated March 20, 2001 and April 10, 2001 as revised, seconded by Paluzzi. Lang, Benevento, Paluzzi and Donnelly in favor. Grimes, Mazuy and Johnson abstain. Motion carries. Donnelly moves to adjourn, seconded by Mazuy. All members in favor. Motion carries. The meeting adjourns at 9:55 p.m.