Loading...
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.