Loading...
2004-04-13 City of Beverly, Massachusetts Public Meeting Minutes Board: Conservation Commission Subcommittee: Date: April 13, 2004 Place: Beverly City Hall, 191 Cabot Street Board members present: ChairmanDavid Lang, Eileen Duff, Linda Goodenough, Anthony Paluzzi, William Squibb Board members absent: , Ian HayesDr. Mayo Johnson Others present: Amy Ellert-Maxner, Environmental Planner Recorder: Amy Ellert-Maxner Chairman Lang calls the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Request for Determination of Applicability New: 3 Birch Woods Drive – install fence around detention basin – Stephanie Jeppesen Maxner reads the legal notice. Mr. and Mrs. Jeppesen represent themselves. They are proposing to erect a 4-foot high wood fence around the perimeter of the detention basin located within their lot. Their lot is in the Buffer Zone and Riverfront Area of resources located across the street from their house. Maxner reminds the Commission detention basins are not considered resource areas, and they do not have Buffer Zone, and suggests the Commission consider requiring the fence to have a lockable gate large enough to allow for equipment to enter and exit the area to allow access to the basin for maintenance purposes. Lang asks if there are any more questions from the Commission. There are none. Lang asks if there are any questions from the public. There are none. Paluzzi moves to issue a Negative #3 Determination with the condition an entry gate shall be included along the street side of the basin to allow for equipment to access the basin for periodic maintenance. All in favor. Motion carries 5-0. Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes April 13, 2004 Page 2 of 11 New: 304, 312, 318 Elliott Street – repave access road and driveways – Joseph and Alaina Trevisani Maxner reads the legal notice. James Decoulos of Decoulos & Decoulos represents the applicant. He explains the applicant is proposing to resurface the driveway, which services three homes within the Buffer Zone to Bordering Vegetated Wetland and Riverfront Area to the Bass River. Maxner provides photographs for the commission members review. Maxner asks if they are planning to dig up the old surface. Decoulos states they are only placing a new layer of black top on to what exists. Paluzzi states that he is familiar with the area in question and believes this is a low impact project. Lang asks if there are any questions from the public. There are none. There being no further questions from the Commission, Paluzzi moves to issue a Negative #3 Determination, seconded by Duff. All in favor. Motion carries 5-0. Recess for Public Hearing Paluzzi moves to recess for public hearings. Seconded by Duff. All in favor. Motion carries 5-0. Notice of Intent Cont: 8 Wentworth Drive – DEP File #5-832 – construct in-ground pool and associated deck and shed – Holly and Steven Kalivas Steven Kalivas and his representative John Dick are present to discuss this project with the Commission. This project involves installation of an in-ground pool in the Buffer Zone to Bordering Vegetated Wetland. A revised plan showing the pool and associated patio located outside the 25-Foot No-Disturb Zone was given to the Commission. The Buffer Zone enhancement plantings have been incorporated into the plan. The plans meets the requests made by members to move activity out of the No-Disturb Zone. Dick explains that the deck has been reconfigured to accommodate the pool and patio. Lang states that this plan meets the Commission’s requirements and has addressed his concerns. Duff agrees that the plan has been revised to meet her expectations. Squibb asks if the swing set will be kept. The applicant states it will be removed. Lang asks if there are any questions from the public. There are none. Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes April 13, 2004 Page 3 of 11 There being no further questions from the Commission, Paluzzi moves to close the hearing. Seconded by Goodenough. All members are in favor. Motion carries 5-0. Cont: 245 Dodge Street – landscaping improvements – Henry and Donna Bertolon Bob Griffin, Griffin Engineering, represents the applicant. This project involves the construction of an addition and installation of an in-ground pool, along with landscaping activities. Revised plans were provided to members showing the fencing, pool shed repositioned, as well as proposed plantings and landscape details. The applicant is proposing to remove 8 mature trees in the Buffer zone, 3 of which are within the 25-Foot No-Disturb Zone. Maxner suggests that the new Order of Conditions makes a reference that it will superscede the existing Order and that both Orders will be eligible for a Certificate of Compliance when the project is finished. Maxner reads a letter addressed to the Commission from the Norwood Pond Association regarding their concerns about the project. Duff raises concern that was brought up at the site visit about the removal of the trees. There is some discussion regarding the trees within the 25-Foot No-Disturbance Zone. Lang states that the applicant seems to have provided an extensive detailed landscaping plan to mitigate for the removal of the trees which are shall rooted and pose a danger of falling over during a storm. He thinks that their removal now will help prevent additional disturbance in the Buffer Zone and to other trees should they fall during a storm. Lang asks if there are any questions from the public. There are none. There being no further questions from the Commission, Paluzzi moves to close the hearing. Goodenough seconds. All members are in favor. Motion carries 5-0. Cont: Essex Street, DEP File #5-837 – construct parking facilities and appurtenances – YMCA of the North Shore Mike DeRosa, DeRosa Environmental Consulting, and Charlie Wear, Meridian Engineering, represent the applicant. They explain this project involves the construction of parking facilities and associated appurtenances for the new teen center the YMCA is in the midst of building. A site visit was conducted on Saturday, April 3, 2004. The Isolated Vegetated Wetlands have been investigated for Vernal Pool function, but the season is not completely over and DeRosa states he is planning on observing the pool one more time. DeRosa explains changes made to the plan that incorporate an extended berm along the edge of the Hawk Hill subdivision to be planted with White Pine and other evergreen for a visual screen. He explains that the intermittent steam needs to be cleaned out and some snags removed as it is not handling the flows of storm events; the applicant Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes April 13, 2004 Page 4 of 11 is proposing to replant the edges of the stream with low growing native wetland species like highbush blueberry and winterberry. Paluzzi asks what distance of the stream will be cleaned and planted. DeRosa states that no more than 100 feet will be cleaned and replanted. th Maxner suggests the Commission continue this hearing to the May 4 meeting to make sure these pools are not breeding sites. Maxner explains that Mike Collins, DPW Director, observed the intermittent stream that st leaves the YMCA property and crosses under Essex Street. During the April 1 storm, the stream was completely overtopping the hay bales along the road, as the pipe was not able to handle the flow. Lang asks if there are any questions from the public. There are none. Paluzzi moves to continue the hearing until May 4, 2004 seconded by Duff. All members are in favor. Motion carries 5-0. Maxner states that the existing silt fence along the access road and parking lot needs to be refurbished and asks that to be done as soon as possible. Weir states he will alert the applicant about this. Cont: 2 Boyles Street – DEP File #5-816 – construct roads, site grading, drainage, and utilities for subdivision and construct five single family homes – Manor Homes at Whitehall Maxner reads a letter from the applicant’s representative requesting a continuance. Paluzzi moves to grant a continuance to the May 4, 2004 meeting. Seconded by Squibb. All in favor. Motion passes 5-0. New: 359 Hale Street – demolish and replace deck – David Staskin Maxner reads the legal notice. Michael DeRosa, DeRosa Environmental Consulting, represents the applicant. DeRosa explains the applicant is proposing to remove the existing timber deck located on the seaward side of the existing single-family home and construct new pressed concrete deck to be located within and expanding the footprint of the existing timber deck. Expansion of the deck will encroach into the 25-Foot No-Disturbance Zone in the Buffer Zone to Coastal Bank. He lists the resource areas found on the site, which include Rocky Intertidal Shore, Coastal Bank and Velocity Zone (2) at elevation 30. The applicant is proposing to convert approximately 787 square feet of existing lawn to native plantings Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes April 13, 2004 Page 5 of 11 to provide mitigation for the 295 square feet of encroachment by the new deck. DeRosa lists the plant species proposed for the mitigation area. Lang asks what the total new impervious area will be. DeRosa states it will be approximately 295 square feet of new impervious and explains that the deck includes a drip trench to divert runoff. Duff states considering how much activity is within the 25-Foot No-Disturb Zone, a site visit would be helpful. Lang asks if there are any questions from the public. There are none. Paluzzi motions to continue the hearing to the May 4, 2004 meeting, pending a site inspection scheduled for Saturday, April 24, 2004 at 8:30 a.m. Seconded by Duff. All in favor. Motion passes 5-0. New: 46 Neptune Street – construct in-ground pool, fencing and landscaping – Peter Lappin Maxner reads the legal notice. John Dick, Hancock Associates, represents the applicant. He explains the applicant is proposing to install an in-ground pool and associated patio within the Buffer Zone to Coastal Bank, installation of a fence along the edge of the seawall, as well as approximately 20 stabilization plantings within the Coastal Bank resource area with some soil enhancement. Activity is proposed within the resource area, albeit plantings aimed to enhance the Coastal Bank, and a fence, which also extends into the 25-Foot No- Disturb zone that would result in negligible impact. The 8-foot wide Ancient Highway is called out on the plan. Dick lists the plants proposed for the stabilization, and asks if the fence would be exempt from the No-Disturb Regulations. Maxner states that she has been under the impression that the Commission considers fences to be very minor in nature. Lang states that is generally true, making sure that they allow room for wildlife movement. Lang asks if there are any questions from the public. There are none. Goodenough states that she would like to observe the Coastal Bank before issuing an Order. Duff motions to continue the hearing to the May 4, 2004 meeting, pending a site inspection scheduled for Saturday, April 24, 2004 at 9:00 a.m. Seconded by Paluzzi. All members are in favor. Motion passes 5-0. Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes April 13, 2004 Page 6 of 11 New: 675 Hale Street – vegetation management for pond – Ralph Vogel Maxner reads the legal notice. Keith Gazaille, Biologist, Acquatic Control Technology Inc., represents the applicant. The applicant was before the Commission for this project in the summer of 2000, and the Commission denied the project based on insufficient information to determine the potential impact of the project to the resource area. The applicant appealed to DEP and was issued a Superseding Order or Conditions allowing the project. This NOI project involves a 3-year management plan for control of nuisance vegetation and algae for the pond to retard the eutrophication of the pond (plant species include watermeal, filamentous algae, purple loosestrife). The applicant has worked closely with Aquatic Control Technology for the past 3 years on the application of various methods of aquatic vegetation control and has provided a narrative explaining the project’s progress. Gazaille states that the project has gone very well but that it is not a one time application, continual management has proven necessary, hence this new Notice of Intent. Gazaille explains that the purple loosestrife has been treated on a plant-by-plant basis with the application of Rodeo, and is dealt with when dense conditions arise as dormant seeds from the seed bank germinate. He explains that Alum has been used in order to control in-pond nuisance vegetation and it works to bind with phosphorus that is the limiting nutrient in fresh water ecosystems. This method has been successful and has kept the algae at non-problematic levels. Sonar, an herbicide, has been applied only once in the past three years to control the floating plant watermeal, and again has been used when dense conditions arise. Lang asks if Sonar’s active ingredient is fluridone. Gazaille states that is correct. Lang asks if fluridone breaks down to additional constituents that are of concern. Gazaille states that it does not, and that essentially it is a carotene synthesis inhibitor; carotenes are the yellow pigments in plants and fluridone mimics an enzyme which is essential for carotene synthesis. Carotenes inhibit the solar break down of chlorophyll, and in the absence of chlorophyll the plants are unable to produce their own food and eventually die off. He states that this method is approved by the EPA and the drinking water limits of concentration are set at 150 parts per billion which is nearly double the rate of application for water bodies of less than 10 acres (90 pbb), and has very limited impacts to the surrounding ecosystem and wildlife. He explains that it is not necessarily the dosage but rather the time of contact with the plant, and this project has involved a contact time of approximately 45 days during which the concentrations are monitored and booster applications of lesser concentrations are applied when needed to maintain the required concentration. Lang asks what the dosage is for this pond. Gazaille states that it is approximately 45-50 pbb. Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes April 13, 2004 Page 7 of 11 Maxner asks how Sonar is applied and when. Gazaille states that it is a surface spray with a pump on a boat, and it was used during late May to early June duringflow- permitting periods and when the plants are actively growing. There has been no flow during any past treatments as the pond has a small watershed of 5 acres with no channelized inlet (sheet flow feeds it) and is less than an acre is size and is very shallow (1-1 ½ feet). The outlet has been sandbagged to further limit the outflow in case of precipitation events. Lang asks what testing regime is used. Gazaille states the outflow is tested two weeks after application, but that application is done during no-flow periods. Lang asks if mechanical removal of loosestrife has been done. Gazaille states that hand- pulling may be something that can be considered for this site. Maxner asks if the depth of the pond has any bearing on the control of these plants. Gazaille states that it does and it doesn’t in that there are definitely nutrient rich sediments at its bottom, but the plants targeted here are floating plants that draw their nutrients from the nutrient rich water column. Lang asks if there are any fish in this pond. Gazaille states that not his or the owner’s knowledge. Lang asks what the applicant’s primary goal is with this project. Gazaille states that the applicant wishes to maintain the pond as an open water body. Lang states that he is aware that Alum is fairly toxic to fish, and asks if there if there are any other species of pond wildlife that may be susceptible to it. Gazaille states that at the rates of application (less than 50 pounds per acre-foot) is not a significant amount of free aluminum in the water at any given time as it quickly binds to available phosphorus. The other concern with Alum is the acidity, and it will typically be applied with soda-ash to neutralize its acidity and stabilize the PH. He states that pre and post treatment PH testing is required by DEP. Lang asks if groundwater samples are required as well. Gazaille states no. Maxner asks if the Alum ends up accumulating in the sediments. Gazaille states yes, it precipitates out of solution and ends up in the sediment but continues to bind with any phosphorus released/leached from the sediments. Maxner asks the rate of application of Alum in the past 3 years and how it is applied. Gazaille states that typically it is applied at 2 applications of 45-50 pounds per acre-foot, with an average of 100 pounds per year, and is surface sprayed. Duff states that she would like to look at the site before closing the hearing. Goodenough agrees a site visit would be helpful. Lang asks if there are any questions from the public. Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes April 13, 2004 Page 8 of 11 Joan Johnson, 677 Hale Street, states she is a direct downstream abutter. She states that if the pond management is handled the way it was during the past 3 years, she cannot speak against it, although she and her husband are not in favor of the project. She hopes that there is an effort to decrease the amount of fertilizer that is used on the Vogel’s lawn. She hopes that the stream outlet will be sand bagged before any application and that she will be notified prior to any chemical applications, and hopes that the gate at the outlet be replaced. She states that there have been frogs and fish in that system as in very high flows she has had fish on her property which she submitted pictures of fish during the prior application process. She asks that they be notified prior to treatments as well. Maxner asks if the Vogel’s fertilize their lawn. Gazaille states he is not sure if they do or not, but points out that the surrounding watershed is a factor as well and thoughts to mitigate for other sources should be considered. Peter Johnson, 677 Hale Street, states that the only lawn that surrounds the pond is the Vogel’s which surrounds about a quarter of the pond’s perimeter and limiting any fertilizer used on it would be a positive step and reduce the need for the Alum. He asks that the notification be addressed to his wife or both of them, but making sure that it is addressed to his wife at the very least as she is home most of the time. Goodenough asks a question to be clear that it is a manmade pond that is starting to fill in with sediment and dense vegetation during the first Notice of Intent. Lang states that initially the application was to control the eutriphication process and now it looks to be a longer-term management proposal. Duff states she wonders why the pond shouldn’t be left to develop into a vegetated wetland, as it seems that natural course of things. Gazaille states that ponds provide an open aquatic system that does provide value. He explains that the Army Corps of Engineers constructed the pond sometime in the 1940’s for what purpose he does not know. Goodenough states that the eradication of invasive species within this pond is a positive thing and would be valuable for inhibiting spread to downstream systems. Lang explains that the Commission denied this project 3 years ago due to its concerns over the application of herbicides, but the DEP overturned their decision and approved the project. He thinks there should be a site visit. Paluzzi motions to continue the hearing to the May 4, 2004 meeting, pending a site inspection scheduled for Saturday, April 24, 2004 at 9:30 a.m. Seconded by Goodenough. All in favor. Motion passes 5-0. Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes April 13, 2004 Page 9 of 11 New: L.P. Henderson Road – extension of Runway, etc. – City of Beverly Municipal Airport Maxner reads the legal notice. Daniel Nitzsche, Baystate Environmental Consultants, Inc., represents the applicant. The applicant is proposing to extend the end of Runway 34, which will involve grading, removal of vegetation, filling and replacement of Isolated Vegetated Wetland. Taxiway realignment is also proposed for the end of Runway 27 within the Buffer Zone to Bordering Vegetated Wetland. Nitzsche explains the project in detail and the replication area and the activity proposed within the 25-Foot No-Disturbance Zone. Maxner suggests to Nitzsche he should look at the Beverly Wetlands Regulations for waiver criteria and wetland replication standards. Nitzsche states that he will look them over and address them directly. Lang opens to questions from the public. There are none. Paluzzi motions to continue the hearing to the May 4, 2004 meeting, pending a site inspection scheduled for Saturday, April 24, 2004 at 10:15 a.m. Seconded by Duff. All in favor. Motion passes 5-0. ORDERS OF CONDITIONS 245 Dodge Street Paluzzi moves to issue the following conditions: · Standard Conditions · This Order of Conditions shall supersede the previous Order of Conditions, DEP File #5-801, issued in June 2003, rendering it null and void. Both Orders shall be eligible for a Certificate of Compliance upon completion of the project. Seconded by Goodenough. All in favor. Motion carries 5-0. 8 Wentworth Drive Paluzzi moves to issue the following conditions: · Standard Conditions · The Buffer Zone enhancement plantings shall be adhered to as depicted on the approved plan references in this Order. Seconded by Goodenough. All in favor. Motion carries 5-0. Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes April 13, 2004 Page 10 of 11 OLD/NEW BUSINESS Cummings Center Gerry McSweeney, General Manager for Cummings Properties, attends the meeting at the Commission’s invitation. He states that there is a new bulkhead and pump installed along the Upper Shoe Pond for irrigation and tower cooling purposes related to the new 500 building. He explains that the Cummings property withdraws well below what they are permitted to and this new withdrawal point still keeps them well below that threshold and this is why they did not approach the DEP or the Commission about its installation. Lang states that this is still a new structure and both entities should have been notified or an application submitted. He suggests that at least an RDA should be submitted to the Commission. Paluzzi agrees, and states that the DEP should be notified of the withdrawal. Maxner states she has been in contact with Zach Peters with the DEP and let him know that the Commission asked Mr. McSweeny to come to this meeting. McSweeny states that Mr. Peters has been in contact with him and has asked for additional information and he has supplied him with the information. He states that he will submit an application to the Commission in time for the next meeting. Fee Assessment Policy Members agree this policy correctly explains how the Commission interprets its fee schedule. 25-Foot No Disturb Zone Policy Lang suggests the following changes: Add/list interests of Ordinance Clarify that 100 Foot No-Disturb Zone is for vernal pools Duff suggests that the Commission send a letter to all realtors or maybe the Board of Realtors alerting them of the wetlands Regulations. Squibb agrees and suggests waiting until the policies are finalized. Maxner states she will further revise the policy and bring it to the next meeting for further review. Conservation Commission Meeting Minutes April 13, 2004 Page 11 of 11 Hawk Hill - Sedimentation Goodenough moves to issue an Enforcement Order to Symes Associates for failure to comply with the Superseding Order of Conditions, DEP File #5-712 and to immediately repair and/or replace erosion control structures and stabilize exposed soil on site to prevent future erosion and sedimentation into resource areas located on and off site. Paluzzi seconds. All in favor. Motion carries 5-0. Mouth of Rivers Discussion Maxner states that in speaking with a DEP representative, the DEP is expecting the Conservation Commission of each town to verify the Mouth of River designations. She states that use of GPS may be a good way to approach it, but concerns from other Commission members and Administrators have been communicated to the DEP. 167 West Street – Drinkwater Maxner states that Wendy Drinkwater contacted her asking to make some changes within the wetland replication area adjacent to her driveway. Drinkwater is asking to change some of the grades within the wetland to prop up some of the bushes to get their roots out of the water to ensure their survival. Lang states that changing the grade is not advisable as it may cause flooding of neighboring properties. Paluzzi agrees and states that she may need to file for this activity. ADJOURNMENT Paluzzi moves to adjourn, seconded by Deff. All members in favor. Motion carries 5-0. The meeting is adjourned at 10:15 p.m.