2002-10-01
CITY OF BEVERLY
Public Meeting Minutes
BOARD: Conservation Commission
SUBCOMMITTEE:
DATE: October 1, 2002
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman David Lang, Anthony Paluzzi, Dr. Mayo Johnson,
Linda Goodenough, Jon Mazuy
BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT:
OTHERS PRESENT: Debra Hurlburt, Planning Director/Conservation Agent
Amy Ellert-Maxner-Environmental Planner
RECORDER: Jeannine Dion (by tape)
Lang calls the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Request for Determination of Applicability
2 Fosters Point – replace roof and enlarge rear deck - Lang
Lang recuses himself from the meeting. Vice-Chairman Tony Paluzzi presides over the meeting.
Hurlburt reads the legal notice.
The applicant Eileen Lang states that the house is an old house and she is proposing to remove
the existing roof and replace it with a steeper pitched roof and enlarge the deck.
Dr. Johnson states he visited the site and he sees no problem. He asks a clarifying question
regarding storm surge. Lang responds that she has been told that in a rain storm in the winter the
water will come right up the driveway. The house is built up about 3 to 3 ½ feet above grade.
The home inspector said while the water has been under the house it hasn’t gotten into the house.
She states she has been told that there has been some water but no damage.
Paluzzi asks if there are any questions from members of the public. There are none.
Mazuy moves to issue a Negative #3 Determination of Applicability, seconded by Johnson. All
members are in favor. Motion carries 4-0.
Paluzzi moves to recess for public hearing, seconded by Mazuy. All members in favor. Motion
carries.
Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes
October 1, 2002
Page 2
Abbreviated Notice of Resource Area Delineation
New: off Boulder Lane – Resource Area Delineation – Miles Group, Inc.
Hurlburt reads the legal notice.
Kevin Gainey from the Miles Group, Inc. introduces himself. He states the site is being evaluated
to develop for residential use. The site was being evaluated for industrial use, which utilizes 50%
of the site. Residential use would utilize only 20% of the site.
The wetlands specialist, Bill Manuell provides a brief overview of the site.
Lang states the developer offered to pay a small sum of money to have the Commission hire an
independent consultant to review the lines.
Hurlburt states that Mary Rimmer would be one of several people she will request a quote from.
Lang recommends scheduling a site visit and a site visit is scheduled to take place on Saturday,
October 26, 2002 at 8:30 a.m.
There is discussion regarding vernal pools. Hurlburt states that at 2 Boyle Street was that there
were two areas in question. The ordinance now allows for protection of uncertified vernal pools.
How it was handled on the previous 2 Boyle Street was that the Conservation Commission
determined that these areas were considered resource areas and the applicant could investigate in
the spring with supporting documentation and information to prove otherwise.
Lang explains to members of the public that the hearing is for the wetlands delineation portion of
the debate and after that is decided the applicant will come back with plans and there will be more
discussion.
Lang asks if members of the public have any questions.
Renee Mary, 274 Hale Street asks if members of the public are welcome to attend the site walk.
Lang responds that it is up to the applicant and members of the public may be required to sign a
waiver.
A resident of Kennell Hill Drive, an abutter to the parcel, states that he is speaking for a group of
abutters. He states the group is very pleased to hear that the Commission is going to hire an
independent scientist to confirm the wetland boundaries. One of the concerns is that the
th
delineation, if it takes place on October 26, unless there is significant rainfall between now and
then, it might have an affect on how the intermittent streams or vernal pools are classified. He
also wants to state for the record that the wetland resource areas are within the watershed
protection overlay district and points out a technical deficiency on the application itself. The
owner’s signature is not on the plan and the concern is if the applications which have to be filed
Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes
October 1, 2002
Page 3
with the DEP at the same time that they were filed with the Commission, would be judged to be
deficient by DEP.
Mazuy moves to continue the hearing until the first meeting after October 26, 2002, seconded by
Paluzzi. All members in favor. Motion carries.
Old/New Business
Modification to DEP file #665 – 240-250 Elliott Street
Richard Waitt from Meridian Engineering appears on behalf of the applicant. He states that back
in 1999 he was before the board and then again for an amendment for the development. The
proposed work reduces the amount of work on the site’s buffer zone and will include removal of
6 trailers with a new storage facility and minor realignment to the parking areas.
Lang asks about the walkway that went around the property. He asks if it has been taken off the
table and is there any chance to open that area up. Waitt responds they had all of the approvals
from the Planning Board, Police Department, Fire Department, Conservation Commission and
everything was going well and at the last minute CZM stepped in. CZM’s requirements for the
project were overwhelming. At this point the walkway is pulled out of the proposal.
Lang asks if the walkway is Chapter 91 and asks what CZM has to require or if it has something
to do with the fill that was there historically. Waitt responds he is not exactly sure. He thinks
perhaps they contracted CZM for their advice or their review.
Lang asks why CZM would not get involved again. Waitt responds the proposed building is well
outside the Chapter 91 line.
Lang states there is nothing similar about this project than what the applicant came in with before.
On the essence of comparing the plans, this is a lot less offensive as far as run off, etc. but they are
different plans. He recommends that this perhaps be opened up to a RDA because he does not
see the similarities.
Waitt states he understands Lang’s position. He questions the timing of the process so he may be
able to get the asphalt down before winter.
Dr. Johnson moves to allow the Modification to DEP File #5-665 – 240-250 Elliott Street,
seconded by Paluzzi. 2 in favor, 3 opposed. The motion does not carry.
Hurlburt states she suggests that the Commission consider allowing the petitioner to withdraw
without prejudice.
Mazuy moves to allow the Modification to be withdrawn, seconded by Paluzzi. Motion carries.
Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes
October 1, 2002
Page 4
Hurlburt states she thinks an RDA would be appropriate.
Modification to DEP file #5-744 – 167 West Street
Hurlburt states the applicant is asking for a modification of an Order of Conditions that were
issued for an in-ground swimming pool to be located to the west of the property, approximately 4
feet (at the closest point) from the seawall (coastal bank). The modification is to move the pool
to the eastern portion of the property approximately 10 feet from the sea wall. The new location
moves the proposed pool further away from the resource area.
Mazuy moves to grant the Modification to DEP file #5-744 – 167 West Street, seconded by
Paluzzi. Motion carries. 4-0-1. Lang abstains.
Essex County Greenbelt Membership Renewal
Hurlburt states every year the Commission donates $50 and this year the Greenbelt is
recommending $75.
Paluzzi moves to donate $75, seconded by Mazuy. Motion carries. 4-1 (Lang abstains).
Discussion Regarding Watershed Commission
Hurlburt states she was asked by the Mayor’s Chief of Staff, Rob Valliere for the Commission’s
thoughts on starting a Watershed Commission in Beverly. Does the Commission think the idea
has merit?
Lang states he believes there is always a need for public awareness and discussion. It is important
for people to be aware of water conservation, watershed protection, and a whole slew of related
issues.
Algonquin
Hurlburt states Algonquin has submitted information as requested by the Commission. Copies
will be provided to members.
Lang states he spoke with Algonquin Gas and their consultant last week about different
provisions they were unsure of after they reading the Order of Conditions.
Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes
October 1, 2002
Page 5
Correspondence
Hurlburt states there was a letter submitted to the Commission from Patricia Caywood regarding
50 Hathaway Avenue. Caywood states she has a flooding problem in her backyard and provides
pictures.
Lang states the pictures provided are old pictures and he recommends that Ms. Caywood provide
recent pictures.
Letter Regarding Damaged Trees – 2 Chanticleer Drive
Hurlburt states someone has asked her from 2 Chanticleer Drive regarding trees, which need to be
removed. The issue is that one of the settlement agreements was that “the trust shall restrict in
perpetuity the no-build, no-cut zone and, in which the person or successor, shall not cut any tree
of greater than two inch caliper within the 20 foot strip.” The gentleman is saying that it is a
liability and is afraid someone might get hurt. She states the Commission could vote on it but it
would be contingent on the City Solicitor to say that it would be ok.
Mazuy states he does not think the tree is dead. Hurlburt states the person had a certified arborist
look at the trees. It says that the trunk has extensive decay and vertical cracking and could fail at
any time.
Lang states he has the very same trees in his backyard and they are still standing. Mazuy agrees.
The Commission agrees not to act on this item.
Letter Regarding 495 Cabot Street - Cabot Crossing Project
Hurlburt reads a letter from the Cabot Street Neighborhood Association. Hurlburt states the
Commission denied the Order of Conditions. DEP came back and superceded it and asked for the
Commission to review specific conditions regarding the replication area. Hurlburt states she met
with some of the members of the Cabot Street Neighborhood Association and what came out of
the meeting is they are looking to see if the Conservation Commission would take party in this
appeal and attend the adjudicatory hearings and state the concerns that are there.
Lang states some of the Commission members could prepare a letter prior to the pre-conference
hearing.
Lang moves to ask Hurlburt to speak with Peter Gilmore to determine if a staff member or
Conservation Commission member should attend a pre-conference hearing on October 24, 2002
as an assigned designee of the Commission, seconded by Paluzzi. All members in favor. Motion
carries.
Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes
October 1, 2002
Page 6
Certificate of Compliance
45 Enon Street – DEP File #5-775 – Enon Street LLC
Mazuy states he has visited the site and he noticed the pipe, which comes from the direction of the
street, is practically filled up with sediment. He saw deposits of what appeared to be fly ash.
Hurlburt states that the Planning Department left a message with the LSP, Luke Fabri, requesting
that he attend the meeting tonight. She recommends tabling this until some questions have been
answered.
Mazuy moves to table this until the next meeting, seconded by Paluzzi. All members in favor.
Motion carries.
40 Neptune Street – DEP File #5-584 – Susan Coolidge
Dennis Wolkoff states five years ago he and his wife sought approval to put in steps into a sea
wall, which was granted. The work was done exactly as described.
Mazuy asks about Condition #2. He asks if there was any clarification that applications were
necessary or not and did the applicant follow through.
Wolkoff responds that he did follow through at the time and contacted all of the necessary people.
He states he received some written statements back but the rest of them said that this was such a
minor thing that they had no procedure for responding to it.
Mazuy asks if there is something on record. Wolkoff responds that there should be an affidavit.
Hurlburt responds that she has a letter from Mr. Wolkoff talks about meeting the conditions but
there is nothing in writing specifically from the applicant saying that it was done.
Mazuy moves to grant the Certificate of Compliance providing that the applicant meet the
requirement of Condition #2, seconded by Paluzzi. All members in favor. Motion carries.
Adjournment
Mazuy moves to adjourn, seconded by Paluzzi. All members in favor. Motion carries.
The meeting is adjourned.