The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal About092815fyibackup FYI ITEMS (MAIL) September 28, 2015 A. Notice of Hearing from ABCC for Woodshed B. Letter of resignation from Dave Bennett for Water Quality Review Committee C. Letter from Joyce Flynn, Cape Light Compact, to Board, re; update on CLC D. Press Release from Cape Light Compact, re; Revised Aggregation Plan E. July 21, 2015 Conservation Commission meeting minutes F. August 4, 2015 Conservation Commission meeting minutes G. Notice from Attorney General's office on Open Meeting Law Complaint H. Letter to Board of Selectmen from owners of Stone L'Oven Pizza, re; update on opening date 1. August 12, 2015 Orleans, Brewster, Eastham Groundwater Protection District Board of Managers meeting minutes J. August 2015 PRIM Board update K. August 2015 PRIM investment statement L. Copy of Notice from Bennett Environraental Associates to MA DEP, Bureau of Waste Site Cleanup, re; Downgradient Property Status for 1573 Main St. M. Copy of order of conditions for Ellis Landing project N. Management letter from Lynch, Malloy & Marini on Tri-Town financial statement O. Tri-Town financial statement for year ended June 30, 2013 P. Copy of Gloriae Dei Artes Foundation v. Planning Board complaint Q, CDM Smith's storm water management report for Underpass & Snow Roads project (Bard copy in office) FYI— September 28, 2015 Page 1 of 1 KG s.Cod The Conuttouwealth of Mtrssachrtsetts r w�a`' ryo Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission U: 0 239 Causmaj)Street Boston, IIIA 02114 oJtssgCVU Deborah B. Goldberg King 5, Gainsboro, Esq. Treasurer and Receiver General Chairman NOTICE OF HEARING 114 FIRS TCLASS 11A IL September 14 , 2015 BREWSTER INN INC. DBA WOODSHED 1993 MAIN ST. BREWSTER, MA 02631 LICENSE#: 013400005 You are hereby notified that a hearing will be held by the Alcoholic Beverages Control Commiss Tuesday, October 13, 2015 at 11:30 AM at 239 Causeway Street, 1 st floor, Boston, NIA to determine whether you have violated certain provisions of Massachusetts General Laws (M.G.L.) or Code of Massachusetts Regulations (CMR) as follows: M.G.L. Cb. 138, §34 Sale or delivery of an alcoholic beverage to a person under twenty- one (21) ,years of age (1 count), Date of Alleged Violation Friday, August 07, 2015 at approximately 10:30 PM Hearings are held pursuant to the Informal/Fair Ilearing Rules under M.G.L. Ch.138, C. 30A and 801 CMR §§ 1.02 and 1.03. Reports, if any, concerning the violations charged, and your license tile, may be examined and copied at the Commission's office with advance notice. Hearings are audio-recorded. Pursuant to M.G.L. C.30A, §I l six (6) written transcripts will be furnislied if requested in writing with tender of payment. You may arrange for your own stenographer. NOTE ft is imporlant that licemees and those interested in this matter attend the hearing to present evidence and Iesfimonj} The Commission, in some cases, has the aulhority to suspetttl, motli& revoke or caticel licenses, If YOU have any questions regarding the scheduling of this hearing please contact Patricia Hathaway at (617) 727-3010 x733 or phathawavtt,11'e.state.ma.us. REGEVU King S. Gainsboro {{ �f nr 1 Chaii-hart A 1 ti -r5W� N OF 61{Lvvs FE SEl_EGTMGN's c MCEi Phone: 617-727-3040 x Fu_r:617-727-3065 * Ojfice:239 Causewo,Street, Roston,3111 02114 1�11'eb:www.nta,ss.gov/ubee SCO BENNEn' ENVIRONMI-KNTALAssoCIATES, ') !NC*q:�\(" LICENSED SITE PROI+ESSIONALS I^ ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS ( GEOLOGISTS L' ENGINEERS i 1573 Main Street_P.O, Box 1743, Brewster, MA 02631 () 508-896-1706 L Fax 508-896-5109 C www.bennett-ea.com September 15, 2015 Mr. Doug Wilcox, Chairman Brewster Water Quality Review Committee Brewster Town Ball 2198 Main Street Brewster, MA 02631 Dear Mr. Wilcox, I regretfully submit my resignation as a Special Municipal Employee (SME) for the Brewster Water Quality Review Committee (BWCQR). Notwithstanding the findings of the General Counsel of the State Ethics Commission, I feel that any perception of impropriety or conflict of interest damages nay professional reputation and that of my company. I have enjoyed my time serving the BWQRC and our work together in the interest of groundwater protection and resource management in the Town of Brewster, Very truly yours, jETT E ONMENTAL ASSOCIATES, INC. RECEIVED , ett;- G, CGWP, LSP ,� RC'D t TOWN OF M-EWSTE: Cc. Charles Sumner, Town Administrator SELECTMEN'S OFFICE EMERGENCY SPILL RESPONSE (+ WASTE SITE CLEANUP l SITEASSESSMENT 6 PERMITTING i'. SEPTIC DESIGN&INSPECTION WATER SUPPLY DEVELOPMENT,OPERATION a MAINTENANCE I., WASTEWATER TREATMENT,OPERATION&MAINTENANCE Cape Light } Cape l..ight Compact Compact RO, Box'127, i m nstable, MA 02630 1.800.797.0)(193 1 Fax: 508,362.4136 1 capeligl►tcompact.org September 17, 2015 Re: Cape Light Compact Update Dear Mr. Ben deRuyter: T am writing today to share three pieces of good news. First, the audit firm of CliftonLarsonAllen has completed its independent audit of the Cape Light Compact for 2014 and reported its results to the Compact's Governing Board yesterday. i am happy to report that the audit found no instances of significant or material weakness nor did the audit make any findings on matters of governance. in short, the Cape Light Compact received an audit without qualification. And second, the Department of Public Utilities ("DPU") approved the Cape Light Compact's Aggregation Plan. We were very pleased to get the news and believe the new Aggregation Plan will protect electric consumers for years to come, The third item to report is that the Cape Light Compact and Attorney General Maura Healey met at the end of July to introduce out-selves and review our missions, i can report a very productive conversation that identified significant common ground. 1 have attached a copy of the Statement by the Attorney General's Office reviewing the meeting. The Attorney General congratulated the Compact on the approval of the new Aggregation Plan by the DPU and confirmed that the AG's office is not pursuing any inquiry related to the legality of the Compact's operational adder. This determination by the Attorney General affirms the Compact's position that the operation adder is a charge that complies with the law. The Attorney General was also satisfied with the Compact's report on our communications with the Massachusetts Department of Revenue on matters related to the operational adder. With these governance issues resolved, the conversation easily moved to issues where the office of the Attorney General and the Cape Light Compact can work together. We congratulated the Attorney General on her move to combine oversight of energy and environmental issues into a single division. The Compact pointed to the Attorney General's efforts on grid modernization strategies as well as her study on Natural Gas Capacity issues as key to the fixture of electric supply with both economic and environmental considerations. The Compact recognizes the fixture of the electric distribution system and the source of the generation of electricity are each important to consumers across the Cape and Vineyard. The Cape Light Compact is looking forward to collaborating with the Attorney General's office as it approaches these issues. iArjl;r1:1ai1 ',:1311 F:31i10 R 3 rIIS E�,1i iL'LGllftiy : ti':t.f11C v,sirt211 ant ( 1':1?i i i)al1 MAO',C 0!.Ml >7;01211T; F 1 H.1rSiCi1 ?v`:a;huF( :;;ak 83i,:`fs {)r�r:1n, F'm:€n,Pir,t;r; Cruli�s'tiifh Ti;ln.ry 11intl ;4'IfEEPf�t �'(st Ti517�31y Yrwiio3;t 1 Cape Light iJ Cape Light Compact Compact P.O. Box 427, Barnstable, MA 02630 1.800,797.6699 1 Fax: 508.362_,4136 1 capelightcompact.org At the end of a very positive and productive meeting we closed with a pledge to seek each other's advice when areas of mutual concern arise and to establish lines of open communications built on mutual respect. The Compact Board's work for fall 2015 includes wording revisions on several areas of the Intergovernmental Agreement ("IGA") to reflect updates in the approved revised Aggregation Alan (September and November meetings) and a final decision on the programming to be included in the 2016-2018 Energy Efficiency plan (October meeting), Please consider this letter an invitation from the Compact Board to join us as we do our work. Our next meeting is on Wednesday, October 14, and the details are at the Meeting Center portion of our website, www.catael it)-htconataact.orq. Sincerely, Joyce Flynn Cape Light Compact Governing Board Chair Yarmouth Representative Enclosure (fI/(),r°ClF IJ P;)('10 :tst't'rrt3��t3idd�., �.:.��;nna!� t'.:,rntan!' 1>„rrrst3i�l��:,unhP :,urn n�y>�ar ir;rti�3i,i C i�ih��:rr )c�nns :€.'kn_,County ;st�i jw Fr1q ac °>�r, rrs:i;?r PJa;lu'r,r 0,14: F113% Otic„+;; Piovin.(vlctwi f€tiro V20!I! z(-I, `'VWt lisl)rrry Y,trrr+mtfi Y MM le Downer Subject: FW: Massachusetts AGO/Cape Light Compact Importance: High From:"Barry-Smith,Chris (AGO)"<Chris.Barrv-Smith@MassMaii.State.MA.US<mailto:Chris.Barry- Smith@ Mass Mail.State.MA.US>> Date:Tuesday,September 15,2015 at 4:26 PM To: "Jeffrey M. Bernstein, Esq."<ibernsteinObck.com<mailto:ibernstein(Obck.com>> Cc: Melissa Hoffer<Melissa.Hoffer0state,ma.us<maiito:Melissa.Hoffer@state.ma.us>>, "nathan.forster@state.ma.us<malito:nathan.forster0state.ma.us>" <nathan.forster0state.ma.us<mailto:nathan.forsterC@state.ma.us>> Subject: Massachusetts AGO/Cape Light Compact Dear Jeff: This email follows the July 28thmeeting between Attorney General Healey and representatives of the Cape Light Compact(the"Compact"),as well as the discussions you have had in the interim with Melissa Hoffer,Chief of the Energy and Environment Bureau,and Assistant Attorney General Nathan Forster. At the July 28th meeting,the Compact explained that it sought a statement from the Attorney General's Office(AGO)that the Compact could share at a public board meeting to explain the AGO's perspective on past and current matters involving the AGO and the Compact. You, or the Executive Director or members of the Compact Board,should feel free to use this email at the Compact's September 16th board meeting to reflect our recent discussions. First,as you know, the Department of Public Utilities("DPU")approved the Compact's Petition for Approval of a Revised Municipal Aggregation Plan in D.P.U. 14-69 (May 1, 2015)and D.P.U. 14-69 A(May 18, 2015) (the"Proceeding"), The AGO has elected not to appeal or otherwise pursue claims with respect to the Proceeding, In which the prior AGO alleged that the Compact's assessment of an operational adder,which generated revenue to fund certain Cape& Vineyard Electric Cooperative, Inc., renewable energy projects and to cover the costs of the Compact's attorneys'fees, was unlawful. Beyond that development,the AGO is committed to developing a more direct,constructive relationship with the Compact to address any issues that may arise In the future with respect to the Compact's power supply rates, including in connection with the Inspector General's ongoing review of the Compact's records. In that vein, I understand that you and our Office have had productive discussions concerning the Compact making available publicly the terms of the Compact's Energy Supply Agreements. These are positive steps that will allow the Compact's customers to have a better understanding of their rates. We look forward to continuing our dialogue with you on these and other Issues that may arise. This email is designed to reflect the AGO's discussions with the Compact in recent months. Please feel free to share this email with the Compact's board members or make It part of the board's record as the Compact sees fit. And please feel free to call me with any questions. Sincerely, Chris Barry-Smith First Assistant Attorney General 617.963.2539 1 cis For More Information Contact: Cape Light Maggie Downey—(508)737-3774 Compact mdowney@barnstablecounty.org PRESS RELEASE For Immediate Release: September 17, 2015 Cape Light Compact Announces Progress with Revised Aggregation Plan Barnstable, MA-At its September 16th Governing Board meeting,the Cape Light Compact announced significant progress in the approval of its Revised Municipal Aggregation Plan. Not only did the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities (D,P,U.)approve the Compact's plan (D.P.U. 14-69 and 14-69A), a remaining issue with the Attorney General's Office has also now been resolved. Attorney General Maura Healey congratulated the Compact on the D.P.U. approval of the plan during a July meeting,and a recent communication from her office conveyed that it would not pursue a claim made by the prior Attorney General that the Compact's operational adder was unlawful. The Compact and Attorney General's Office also agreed to maintain on-going communications on issues of common concern, including public access to information about the Compact's power supply contracts, "All of this marks a great step forward for consumers on Cape Cod and Martha's Vineyard,"said Maggie Downey, Cape Light Compact Administrator. "We are very pleased with the frank dialogue and the resulting understanding that we've come to with the Attorney General's Office, and we look forward to continuing to work together for the benefit of the region," Downey said. ABOUT CAPE LIGHT COMPACT Cape Light Compact is an award-winning energy services organization operated by the 21 towns and two counties on Cape Cod and Martha's Vineyard. The Compact's mission is to serve its 200,000 customers through the delivery of proven energy efficiency programs, effective consumer advocacy, competitive electricity supply and green power options. For more information visit www.capelightcompact_ora, t Brewster Conservation Commission Minutes - Meeting Under MA General Laws Chapter 40, Section 8C, Massachusetts General Law Ch. 131, §40, Wetlands Protection Act (WPA), 310 CMR 10.00 Regulations R E C E I V E D Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MA DEP) And (M.G.L. C.131. § 40) SEP 17 REC'C Code of the Town of Brewster Chapter 172, T5wN F Fsfl l/�1ST R Brewster Wetlands Protection 6y-law (BWP 8y-law) SCLECTnnfrN�s 01-FICE Wetland Regulations 1.01 -9.15 —�- Call to Order Vice Chairman Michael Tobin convened the Tuesday, July 21, 2015 meeting of the Brewster Conservation Commission at 7:00 PM at the Brewster Town Offices, 2198 Main Street, Brewster, MA. Present Vice Chairman Michael Tobin, Commissioners Shana Brogan, Bruce Evans, William Klein, Stephen McKenna, Hayley Winfield, Alternate Member Virginia lannini, Conservation Administrator James Gallagher, Natural Resources Director Chris Miller, Department Assistant Carol Spade Vice Chairman Tobin read the following into the record: "As required by the Massachusetts Open Meeting Law, the Conservation Commission is informing the public that this meeting will be audio" and video* recorded. Anyone else intending to record is required to inform the Chairman prior to the meeting." Public Hearings Discussion: Brewster Conservation Trust Re: 53 Acre Property on 36 Red Top Road, Assessors' Map 14, Parcel 11 (formerly 21178): The Brewster Conservation Trust requests that the Conservation Commission find its proposed activities to be permissible and consistent with the intent of the 1980, 1999 and 2015 Conservation Restrictions. Rosemary Van Antwerp Brewster Conservation Trust, attended. Referencing a July 8, 2015 letter with accompanying documents and displaying a map of the area*, she explained that the property honors the legacy of former original owners of the land, John and Kristi Hay. John Hay was one of the United States' earliest environmental writers. The office of the Compact of Conservation Trusts is now housed in the Hay's former residence which sits on a portion of this property. The Brewster Conservation Trust is in the preliminary stages of planning for the 57 acre property, which it anticipates will be open to the public in the future for educational and passive recreational purposes and may include a wildlife sanctuary. The Trust plans to conduct research to determine if the existing trail system has a Native American history. Ms. Van Antwerp stated that proposed activities include creating new trails to connect points of ecological and historic importance to the existing trail system. Having reviewed the letter and documents*, Hayley Winfield moved, Bruce Evans seconded the motion to approve activities as permissible and consistent with the intent with the above Conservation Restrictions. The Commission unanimously approved the motion. Documents "July 8,2015 letter from Ha{Minis,President[Trustee,Brewster Conservation Trust to Mark H. Robinson, Executive Director,Compact of Cape Cod Conservation Trusts,Inc.and James Gallagher,Conservation Administrator;exhibits,maps Brewster Conservation Commission Minutes July 21, 2015 1 Public Hearings Notices of Intent (Continued Hearing) Town of Brewster proposes the managed retreat and restoration of Ellis Town Landing. Work includes removing an existing stone revetment extension on town property, removing an existing drainage culvert and galleys, removing the northern limit of the existing paved parking lot, planting native coastal plantings, and reconstructing a paved parking area directly south —on 0 Ellis Landing Road, Assessors' Map 91, Parcel 42 (formerly 7/16-1) and 51 Captain Dunbar Road, Assessors' Map 91, Parcel 41 (formerly 7116. Eligible voters:Shana Brogan,Bruce Evans,William Klein,Michael Tobin(Virginia lannini)Hearing opened June 16,2016(testimony taken). The project proponent submitted a written request to continue the above referenced hearing to August 4, 2015. Hayley Winfield moved, William Klein seconded the motion to continue the hearing to August 4, 2015. The motion was approved unanimously. (Continued Hearing) Peter J. and Carrie Ann Alto propose to construct a deck, stairway and patio adjacent to an existing dwelling and clear woody vegetation to enlarge an existing lawn; within 100 and 50 feet of inland resource areas, on 46 Deer Path Circle, Assessors' Map 137, Parcel 50 (formerly 31183). Eligible voters: Bruce Evans,William Klein,Stephen McKenna,Michael Tobin(Virginia lannini)Hearing opened June 16,2016(testimony taken),continued to June 30,2016(testimony taken) The Commission continued the hearing of June 30, 2015 to allow the Conservation Administrator to draft findings and special conditions for an Order of Conditions for the project. Following review of findings and special conditions under the WPA and BWP By-law, Hayley Winfield moved, Bruce Evans seconded the motion to close the hearing, approve the project with findings and special conditions as drafted, and issue an Order of Conditions.The motion was approved unanimously by Commissioners Bruce Evans, William Klein, Stephen McKenna and Michael Tobin. (Continued Hearing) Chris Miller, Town of Brewster Natural Resources Department, proposes to place sand on a coastal beach for nourishment and replace existing rip rap stone as needed for repairlreplacement of a footbridge over a creek to Freeman's Pond. Work is proposed to occur in wetland resource areas at Paine's Creek Beach on 0 Paine's Creek Road, Assessors' Map 38, Parcels 10 and 28 (formerly 116, 211). Eligible voters for all below listed Town of Brewster Notices of Intent: Bruce Evans,William Klein,Michael Tobin, Hayley Winfield(Virginia lannini)Hearing opened June 30,2016(testimony taken) The applicant and the Commission must await a response from the MA Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, MA Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program (NHESP) as to the project's occurrence in and potential effect on Priority Habitat for non-wetlands plant and wildlife under the MA Endangered Species Act(MESA), and Estimated Habitat Map of Rare Wildlife under the WPA. Following review of findings and special conditions under the WPA and BWP By-law, William Klein moved, Hayley Winfield seconded the motion to close the hearing, approve the project with findings and special conditions as drafted, and issue an Order of Conditions.The motion was approved unanimously by Commissioners Bruce Evans, William Klein, Michael Tobin and Hayley Winfield. (Continued Hearing) Chris Miller, Town of Brewster Natural Resources Department, proposes periodic beach and dune nourishment and pruning of vegetation, off Robbins Hill Road at 0 Saint's Landing, Assessors' Map 50, Parcel 4 (formerly 312). Following review of findings and special conditions under the WPA and BWP By-law, William Klein moved, Hayley Winfield seconded the motion to close the hearing, approve the project with findings and special conditions as drafted, and issue an Order of Conditions.The motion was Brewster Conservation Commission Minutes July 21, 2015 2 approved unanimously by Commissioners Bruce Evans,William Klein, Michael Tobin and Hayley Winfield. (Continued Hearing) Chris Miller, Town of Brewster Natural Resources Department, proposes to maintain the coastal beach and existing timber stairway as needed, including placing sand on the beach to match existing sand, and pruning vegetation, on Little Breakwater Landing, Breakwater Road, Assessors' Map 58, Parcel 31 (formerly 4/55-1). Following review of findings and special conditions under the WPA and BWP By-law, Hayley Winfield moved, William Klein seconded the motion to close the hearing, approve the project with findings and special conditions as drafted, and issue an Order of Conditions.The motion was approved unanimously by Commissioners Bruce Evans, William Klein, Michael Tobin and Hayley Winfield. (Continued Hearing) Chris Miller, Town of Brewster Natural Resources Department proposes periodic beach nourishment using compatible sand on Point of Rocks Beach, Point of Rocks Road, Assessors' Map 79, Parcel 24 (formerly 6/7-1). Following review of findings and special conditions under the WPA and BWP By-law, Bruce Evans moved, Hayley Winfield seconded the motion to close the hearing, approve the project with findings and special conditions as drafted, and issue an Order of Conditions.The motion was approved unanimously by Commissioners Bruce Evans, William Klein, Michael Tobin and Hayley Winfield. (Continued Hearing) Chris Miller, Town of Brewster Natural Resources Department proposes to maintain the coastal beach and beach access by periodic sand nourishment and repair of an existing stairway, at Spruce Hill Conservation Area of Route 6A, Assessors' Map 102, Parcel 17 (formerly 8/9). Following review of findings and special conditions under the WPA and BWP By-law, Hayley Winfield moved, William Klein seconded the motion to close the hearing, approve the project with findings and special conditions as drafted, and issue an Order of Conditions.The motion was approved unanimously by Commissioners Bruce Evans,William Klein, Michael Tobin and Hayley Winfield. (Continued Hearing) Chris Miller,Town of Brewster Natural Resources Department proposes to maintain Crosby Landing by periodic relocation of sand from the beach boardwalk access, and to remove invasive vegetation, at Crosby Landing on 0 Crosby Lane, Assessors' Map 115, Parcel 8 (formerly 9/16-1). The applicant and the Commission must await a response from the MA Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, MA Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program (NHESP) as to the project's occurrence in and potential effect on Priority Habitat for non-wetlands plant and wildlife under the MA Endangered Species Act (MESA), and Estimated Habitat Map of Rare Wildlife under the WPA. Following review of findings and special conditions under the WPA and BWP By-law, Hayley Winfield moved, William Klein seconded the motion to close the hearing, approve the project with findings and special conditions as drafted, and issue an Order of Conditions.The motion was approved unanimously by Commissioners Bruce Evans,William Klein, Michael Tobin and Hayley Winfield. (Continued Hearing) George Egan proposes to grade to create a yard area within 75 feet of an inland wetland to accommodate a single family dwelling proposed to be outside of jurisdictional areas, and plant native vegetation within 50+-feet of a wetland ("working cranberry bog") on 0 Deer Path Circle, Assessors' Map 137, Parcel 66 (formerly 31/96). Eligible voters:Bruce Evans,William Klein,Michael Tobin,Hayley Winfield (Virginia lannini)Hearing opened June 30,2015(testimony taken) The Conservation Commission continued the public hearing of June 30, 2015 to allow the Conservation Administrator to draft findings and special conditions for an Order of Conditions for the project. Brewster Conservation Commission Minutes July 21, 2015 3 Following review of findings and special conditions under the WPA and BWP By-law, Hayley Winfield moved, William Klein seconded the motion to close the hearing, approve the project with findings and special conditions as drafted, and issue an Order of Conditions.The motion was approved unanimously by Commissioners Bruce Evans,William Klein, Michael Tobin and Hayley Winfield. Elizabeth W. J. Rice Cottage Nominee Trust proposes to construct rows of coir envelope engineering and construct a sand drift fence on a coastal dune andlor other coastal wetland resource areas, on 67 Carver Road, Assessors' Map 50, Parcel 43 (formerly 3120). The project is not located on the MA Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Map* as an area of rare plant and wildlife habitat and rare wetlands wildlife. Summary of Applicant Testimony Catherine Ricks, PE, Coastal Engineering, Inc., represented the applicants. She described her assessment of the resource areas and site conditions and the project as contained in the Notice of Intent, narrative, variance request with displayed photos and site plan*. She stressed the applicants' concern that their beachfront property is threatened by coastal erosion. Summary of Staff/Conservation Commission Comments The Conservation Commission did not confirm resource area accuracy as shown on the site plan*. The Commissioners again** stressed that the owners have yet to experience the results of the recently applied beach nourishment under their existing Order of Conditions, and requested that they explore sand drift fencing and appropriate coastal plantings, which do not adversely impact coastal wetland interests before considering the coir fiber roll engineering which can severely constrain the natural movement and sediment supply of the coastal dune. The Commission suggested that the applicant retain an independent coastal geologist to review and submit an official report on the resource areas and the submitted proposal. Summary of Public Comments Unidentified abutters expressed concern that the coastal bank is eroding. Hayley Winfield moved, William Klein seconded the motion to continue the hearing to August 4, 2015, to allow the applicant to consider the Commission's requests. The motion was approved unanimously. *List of documents submitted for the Notice of Intent and discussed at this hearing: 1. Site Plan, Coastal Engineering...67 Carver Road,6116/15,Narrative,Variance Request 2. Rare Species,310 CMR 10.59 Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Map as Priority Habitat under the MA Endangered Species Act(MESA)and Estimated Habitat under MA Wetlands Protection Act (WPA)regarding the existence of rare plant and wildlife habitat and rare wetlands wildlife 3. "May 20,2015 Conservation Commission Minutes; Brewster Park discussion on future plans to ensure compliance with performance standards of MA DEP and BWP By-law(Existing Orders of Condition SE 9-1605,1606,1607, 1608,1609,1610,1611,1612 permitting beach nourishment and planting native coastal vegetation within coastal resources at 0 Sunhouse Path and adjoining coastal areas,) Craig F. Pfannenstiehl and Christy A. Bergstrom, Trustees 91 Carver Road Nominee Trust, propose to rebuild and enlarge an existing hard engineering rock revetment coastal engineering structure and further extend structure by adding rows of coir envelope engineering, on coastal wetland resource areas on 91 Carver Road, Assessors' Map 50, Parcel 92 (formerly 31154-3). Brewster Conservation Commission Minutes July 21, 2015 4 The project is not located on the MA Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Map*as an area of rare plant and wildlife habitat and rare wetlands wildlife. Summary of Applicant Testimony Catherine Ricks, PE, Coastal Engineering, Inc., represented the applicants. She described her assessment of the resource areas and site conditions and the project as contained in the Notice of Intent, narrative, variance request with displayed photos and site plan*. She stressed the applicants' concern that their beachfront property is threatened by coastal erosion. During discussion Ms. Ricks confirmed that more boulders will be added to the revetment(as contained in the Notice of Intent narrative). Summary of Staff/Conservation Commission Comments The Conservation Commission did not confirm resource area accuracy as shown on the site plan*. Commission discussion centered on the site conditions; i.e.; erosion/accretion of the resource areas, consideration that the applicant reconstruct the revetment further landward to preclude the necessity of the proposed "returns" at each end, and questions and discussion on the proposed materials; i.e., additional boulders and filter fabric. The Commission agreed to retain an independent coastal geologist to review and submit an official report on the resource areas and the submitted proposal. Summary of Public Comments There was no public comment. Hayley Winfield moved, William Klein seconded the motion to continue the hearing to August 4, 2015, to allow the applicant to consider the Commission's comments and the Conservation Commission to retain a coastal geologist. The motion was approved unanimously. *List of documents submitted for the Notice of Intent and discussed at this hearing; 1. Site Plan Showing Proposed Shorefront Protection 91 Carver Road,6118!15,Narrative,Variance Request 2. Rare Species,310 CMR 10.59 Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Map as Priority Habitat under the MA Endangered Species Act(MESA)and Estimated Habitat under MA Wetlands Protection Act (WPA)regarding the existence of rare plant and wildlife habitat and rare wetlands wildlife Citizens' Forum There was no public comment at this time. Discussions 1. Conservation Commission Reorganization Following discussion, Stephen McKenna moved, Hayley Winfield seconded the motion to appoint Commissioner Michael Tobin to the position of Chairman of the Conservation Commission. Following discussion, Stephen McKenna moved, William Klein seconded the motion to appoint Commissioner Hayley Winfield to the position of Vice Chairman of the Conservation Commission. Following discussion, Stephen McKenna moved, William Klein seconded the motion to appoint Commissioner Bruce Evans to the position of Secretary of the Conservation Commission. Report of the Natural Resources Director 1. Anticipated Special Town Meeting, Citizens' Petition • Natural Resources Director Miller apprised the Commission that the town Brewster Conservation Commission Minutes July 21, 2015 5 anticipates a Town Meeting petition, requesting citizens vote to direct the Board of Selectmen to implement a moratorium on the commencement of certain Town waterfront projects. Mr. Miller believes that a number of projects the Commission has permitted or planned may not go forth, at least as soon as planned, should the town vote in favor if the article. One focus of this is the 0 Breakwater Landing Order of Conditions SE 9-1649 Coastal Resiliency project. Report of the Conservation Administrator 1. 19 Muskrat Road, 103/9 (913)—status of structure removal; request for compliance letter Following discussion, Hayley Winfield moved, Stephen McKenna seconded the motion to issue a compliance letter to the owners of the above referenced property. The motion was approved unanimously. 2. Spruce Hill Conservation Area, 3171 Main Street, 102117 (819) request for tree removal under power lines Following discussion, Stephen McKenna moved, Hayley Winfield seconded the motion to allow approximately 112 trees to be removed as potentially hazardous to electricity transmission, as recommended by Conservation Administrator Gallagher. The motion was approved unanimously. 3. Waquoit Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve Coastal Resiliency Workshop, Wednesday, July 29, from 12:00—4: PM, Brewster Town Offices Interested Commissioners may attend this workshop at which coastal resiliency experts are to speak. Conservation Administrator Gallagher will attend. Show Cause Hear!ngsNiolations 1. Water's Edge Homeowners' Association, Inc., etc. 51180,84,90 (4915-73-79)topping and pruning of trees Enforcement Order(s) Ratification The Homeowners' Association has retained an engineering firm to submit a professionally surveyed plan as directed by the Conservation Commission on June 30, 2015, Stephen McKenna moved, Hayley Winfield seconded the motion to ratify the above referenced enforcement orders, the second of which grants an extension for a continued Show Cause Hearing to the public meeting of August 18, 2015. The motion was approved unanimously. Requests for Extensions to Orders of Condition 1. Cobbs Pond Condominium Trust, Order of Conditions SE 9-1466, 5715 (1711) 2. Cobbs Pond Condominium Trust, Order of Conditions SE 9-1467, 5715 (1711) Following the recommendation of the Conservation Administrator, Hayley Winfield moved, Stephen McKenna seconded the motion to approve the above referenced requests for extensions, under the MA ACT and BWP By-law for one year. The motion was approved unanimously. Requests for Certificates of Compliance 1. Chris Smith Masonry, 29 Cranview Road, 10/57 (38171) Order of Conditions SE 9- 1599 patio, stairs, etc. 2. David Rogers, 97 Fiddlers' Lane, Order of Conditions SE 9-1651,48131 (18/43) septic system 3. Dan Murphy, 216 Sheep Pond Drive, 7414 Order of Conditions SE 9-1559 7414 (34179) stairs, platform, float Following discussion and the recommendation of the Conservation Administrator that the projects comply with the respective Orders of Condition, Hayley Winfield moved, Stephen McKenna seconded the motion to approve the above referenced Certificates of Brewster Conservation Commission Minutes July 21, 2015 6 Compliance under the MA ACT and BWP By-law. The motion was approved unanimously. 4. Steve Backus, 236 Cranview Road, 20111 (51/8-8) Order of Conditions SE 9-1279 confirmatory release; no work begun The Conservation Administrator confirmed that the project did not commence and jurisdictional areas remain undisturbed. Hayley Winfield moved, Stephen McKenna seconded the motion to approve the above referenced Certificate of Compliance under the MA ACT and BWP By-law. The motion was approved unanimously. Request for Release of Performance Bond 1. Order of Conditions SE 9-1453, 8 Nelson Path 91/8 (7/8) and 0 Bay Path Cartway, 91/6 (7/6) Following the recommendation of the Conservation Administrator, Hayley Winfield moved, Stephen McKenna seconded the motion to approve release of the above referenced Performance Bond. The motion was approved unanimously. Requests for Administrative Review 1. Mark Pellegrini and Ellen O'Donnell, 1139 Stony Brook Road, 47/2 (23/38), access and grading for construction of addition 2. Barbara Reis, 165 The Channel Way, 58/11 (4/30),tree removal, four trees As contained in his Administrative Report and accompanying photos, the Conservation Administrator believed the above referenced projects meet parameters for activities under the Commission's Administrative Review process. William Klein moved, Stephen McKenna seconded the motion to approve the projects. The motion was approved unanimously. At 8:25 PM, Stephen McKenna moved, Hayley Winfield seconded the motion to adjourn the meeting. The motion was approved unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 8:25 PM, Carol Spade `Note: The words, "wetland"and"resource area"are synonymous. The 100 and 50 foot buffer zone is the protective upland area located within 100 and 50 feet of a wetland. Among the list of documents*for this meeting is the following: 1. Conservation Commission Approved Planting List,Cape Cod Cooperative Extension Service (www.capecodextension.org),list of native woody plants for coastal inland wetiand buffer zones depicting the species,size and natural spacing of plants Z (Brewster Conservation Commission)Acceptable Plantings for Buffers to Resource Areas 3. Administrative Report of the Conservation Administrator 4. Meeting audio recording,and video recording, Town of Brewster Website h0p:11(own.brewster.ma.us Brewster Conservation Commission Minutes July 21, 2015 7 � �Ls Brewster Conservation Commission Minutes — Meeting Under MA General Laws Chapter 40, Section 8C, Massachusetts General Law Ch. 139, §40, R E C E I V E D Wetlands Protection Act(WPA), 310 CMR 10.00 Regulations - Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MA DEP) (M.G.L. C.131. § 40) SEI' 1 7 RECD And Code of the Town of Brewster Chapter 172, TOWN OF TREWsTER Brewster Wetlands Protection By-law (BWP By-law) :i_l_rGTMEN'S OFFICE Wetland Regulations 1.01 —9.15 Call to Order Vice Chairman Hayley Winfield convened the Tuesday, August 4, 2015 meeting of the Brewster Conservation Commission at 7:00 PM at the Brewster Town Offices, 2198 Main Street, Brewster, MA. Present Vice Chairman Hayley Winfield, Commissioners Shana Brogan, Bruce Evans, newly appointed member Virginia lannini, William Klein, Conservation Administrator James Gallagher, Natural Resources Director Chris Miller, Department Assistant Carol Spade Not Present Chairman Michael Tobin, Commissioner Stephen McKenna Vice Chairman Winfield read the following into the record: "As required by the Massachusetts Open Meeting Law, the Conservation Commission is informing the public that this meeting will be audio* and video* recorded. Anyone else intending to record is required to inform the Chairman prior to the meeting." Conservation Restriction (CR) 0 Long Pond Road, Assessors' Map 75, Parcel 16 (formerly 33195-3) 2.48 acre parcel on No Bottom Pond Request for Conservation Commission review and approval of CR, and signatures of Acceptance of Grant and Municipal Certification Form Following discussion and having reviewed the Conservation Restriction for the above referenced property, Bruce Evans moved, William Klein seconded the motion to approve the Conservation Restriction, accept the grant and sign the Municipal Certification Form. The Commission unanimously approved the motion. Public Hearings Notices of Intent (Continued Hearing) Town of Brewster proposes the managed retreat and restoration of Ellis Town Landing. Work includes removing an existing stone revetment extension on town property, removing an existing drainage culvert and galleys, removing the northern limit of the existing paved parking lot, planting native coastal plantings, and reconstructing a paved parking area directly south —on 0 Ellis Landing Road, Assessors' Map 91, Parcel 42 (formerly 7116-1) and 51 Captain Dunbar Road, Assessors' Map 91, Parcel 41 (formerly 7116). Eligible voters:5hana Brogan,Bruce Evans,William Klein,Michael Tobin(Virginia lannini)Hearing opened June 16,2015(testimony taken)continued to July 21 (no testimony). The project proponent submitted a written request to continue the above referenced hearing to August 18, 2015. Bruce Evans moved, William Klein seconded the motion to continue the hearing to August 18, 2015. The motion was approved unanimously. (Continued Hearing) Elizabeth W. J. Rice Cottage Nominee Trust proposes to construct rows of coir envelope engineering and construct a sand drift fence on a coastal dune Brewster Conservation Commission Minutes August 4, 2015 1 and/or other coastal wetland resource areas, on 67 Carver Road, Assessors' Map 50, Parcel 43 (formerly 3/20). Eligible voters:Shana Brogan,Bruce Evans,William Klein,Stephen McKenna,Michael Tobin,Hayley Winfield (Virginia lannini)Hearing opened July 21,2015(testimony taken) The project proponent submitted a written request to continue the above referenced hearing indefinitely to allow the applicant to review applicable coastal resource areas and erosion rates. Bruce Evans moved, William Klein seconded the motion to continue the hearing indefinitely. The Commission unanimously approved the motion. (Continued Hearing) Craig F. Pfannenstiehl and Christy A. Bergstrom, Trustees 91 Carver Road Nominee Trust, propose to rebuild and enlarge an existing hard engineering rock revetment coastal engineering structure and further extend structure by adding rows of coir envelope engineering, on coastal wetland resource areas on 91 Carver Road, Assessors' Map 50, Parcel 92 (formerly 31154-3). Eligible voters:Shana Brogan,Bruce Evans,William Klein,Stephen McKenna,Michael Tobin,Hayley Winfield (Virginia lannini)Hearing opened July 21,2015(testimony taken) The Conservation Commission continued the July 21, 2015 to this time to allow the applicant to consider the Commission's comments and the Conservation Commission to retain a coastal geologist. Summary of Applicant Testimony Catherine Ricks, PE, Coastal Engineering, Inc., represented the applicants. She described the plan as revised as discussed, and maintained that reconstructing the proposed revetment design further landward as the Commission asked the applicant to consider, would remove vegetated wildlife habitat on the stable upper bank, lead to an unstable bank slope and render the dwelling closer to the top of the bank. Having requested proposals from three coastal experts, the Commission consensually agreed to retain Jim O'Connell Coastal Process Specialist, Coastal Advisory Services as an independent coastal geologist to review and submit an official report on the resource areas and the submitted proposal. William Klein moved, Virginia lannina seconded the motion to continue the public hearing to August 18, 2015, to allow receipt of the official report. The Commission unanimously approved the motion. "List of documents submitted for the Notice of Intent and discussed at this hearing: 1. Site Plan Showing Proposed Shorefront Protection 91 Carver Road rev.7/28115, Narrative,Variance Request Scott and Kathleen McQueen propose to construct rows of coir envelope engineering, plant coastal vegetation and construct a sand drift fence on coastal dune and coastal beach wetland resource areas, on 71 Carver Road, Assessors' Map 50, Parcel 44 (formerly 3121). The project proponent submitted a written request to continue the above referenced hearing indefinitely to allow the applicant to review applicable coastal resource areas and erosion rates. William Klein moved, Virginia lannini seconded the motion to continue the hearing indefinitely. Citizens' Forum There was no public comment at this time. Requests for Certificates of Compliance 1. Denis and Cheryl Williams, Order of Conditions SE 9-1614, 42 Turning Mill Road 33133 (3916-43), , elevated stairway, dock 2. Benjamin deRuyter, Order of Conditions SE 9-1521, 315 Cranview Road, 20126 (51/20) driveway Brewster Conservation Commission Minutes August 4, 2015 2 Following the recommendation of the Conservation Administrator that the projects comply with the respective Orders of Condition, Virginia lannini moved, William Klein seconded the motion to approve the above referenced Certificates of Compliance under the MA ACT and BWP By-law. The Commission unanimously approved the motion. Request for Administrative Review 1. Tyndall, 208 Canoe Pond Drive, 23/54(361221)stairway removal and replacement The Conservation Administrator believed the above referenced project meets parameters for an activity under the Commission's Administrative Review process. Following discussion, Virginia lannini moved, William Klein seconded the motion to approve the project. The Commission unanimously approved the motion. Review and Approval of Minutes 1, June 16, 2015 Having reviewed the above referenced minutes, Bruce Evans moved, Virginia lannini seconded the motion to approve them as written. The Commission approved the motion. Hayley Winfield abstained. Any Topics not reasonably anticipated by the Conservation Commission Chairman Report of the Natural Resources Director The Natural Resources Director reported that he has received no reports as yet this summer season of algal blooms in the Brewster ponds from the Barnstable County Health Department. He described an active summer season for the Natural Resources/ Conservation Department. The Natural Resources Department and Board of Selectmen are preparing pertinent warrant articles for an early Special Town Meeting on September 2, 2015. Report of the Conservation Administrator The Conservation Administrator had no report at this time. At 7:20 PM, Bruce Evans moved, Virginia lannini seconded the motion to adjourn the meeting. The motion was approved unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 7:20 PM. Carol Spade 'Note: The words, "wetland"and"resource area"are synonymous. The 100 and 50 foot buffer zone is the protective upland area located within 100 and 50 feet of a wetland. Among the list of documents`for this meeting is the following: 1. Conservation Commission Approved Planting List,Cape Cod Cooperative Extension Service (www.capecodextenslon.org),list of native woody plants for coastallinland wetland buffer zones depicting the species,size and natural spacing of plants 2. Administrative Report of the Conservation Administrator 3. Meeting audio recording,and video recording, Town of Brewster Website http:lltown.brewster.ma.us Brewster Conservation Commission Minutes August 4, 2015 3 Gr C- 5 Fr f- -f_7 THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS r k a OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL N R OAC ASt(QURTUN P(,ACL y�L'" 5`Fv�uq BUS(UN, MASSACHUSETTS 02108 MAURA H1.ALLY Th,L; (617) 727-22(10 ATTURAE),GUNFR%A- September 17, 2015 OML 2015 — 137 Benjamin deRuyter, Chair R E C E I V E D Brewster Board of Selectmen 2198 Main St. SE-P 2 1 REC'Q Brewster, MA 02631 TOWN OF t35'EWSTE: RE: Oven Meetine Law Complaint SELECTMEN'S OFFICE Dear Mr, deRuyter, This office received a complaint from Ronald Beaty on July 30, alleging that the Brewster Board of Selectmen (the"Board") violated the Open Meeting Law, G.L. c. 30A, §§ 18- 25,1 Specifically, the complaint alleges that the Board failed to list "open session" in the notice for its July 6 meeting, and failed to provide sufficient detail for its executive session topics in the notice for that same meeting. The complaint was originally filed with the Board on July 8. The Board responded by letter dated July 27. Following our review, we resolve this complaint by informal action in accordance with . 940 CMR 29,07(2)(a), and find that the Board did not violate the Open Meeting Law with respect to the allegation that the Board failed to list"open session" in the notice for its July 6 meeting. The Board did, however, violate the Open Meeting Law by failing to provide sufficient detail as to the nature of one of its executive session topics in the notice for its July 6 meeting. However, we note that the Board acknowledged the violation in response to the complaint, discussed the violation in a subsequent meeting, and pledged to review the Attorney General's training video regarding meeting notices. We commend the Board's efforts and find this to be appropriate remedial action. As we have noted in prior determinations resolving complaints filed by Mr. Beaty, a public body does not need to list"open session" in its meeting notice, unless an executive session is the only topic for discussion. See OML 2015-110; OML 2015-105.2 Here, the notice included 19 open session topics, thus it was clear that an open session meeting would occur. The E All elates refer to the year 2015. 2 Open Meeting Law determinations may be found at the A(torney General's website, www.mass.gov/ago/opemneeting. t; Board, therefore, did not violate the Open Meeting Law by failing to list open session as a distinct topic. One of the executive session topics in the notice for the Board's July 6 meeting was not entirely clear, however. This topic was listed as, "Executive Session— To Conduct Strategy in Preparation for Negotiation with Nonunion Personnel." The Board acknowledges that the notice should have identified the specific nonunion personnel with whom it was negotiating, namely the Town Administrator. See OML 2013-195; OML 2013-140. The additional executive session topics listed in the notice were not discussed during the Board's July 6 meeting, thus there is no need to consider their sufficiency. See OML 2015-113 (finding that where a public body does not actually engage in discussion of the noticed topic, the Open Meeting Law is not violated with respect to the sufficiency of the meeting notice). We find that the actions taken by the Board in response to the complaint constituted sufficient relief, We therefore order no additional remedial action. We now consider this matter closed, Please be advised that this letter does not resolve any other complaints that may be pending with this office or with the Board. Please feel free to Contact our office at 617-963-2540 if you have any questions regarding this letter. Sincerely, Jonathan Sclarsic Assistant Attorney General Division of Open Government cc: Ronald Beaty Sarah A. Turano-Flores, Esq. This determination was issued pursuant to G.L. c. 30A, §23(c). A public body or any member of a body aggrieved by a final order of the Attorney General may obtain judicial review through an action filed in Superior Court pursuant to G.L. e. 30A, § 23(d). The complaint must be filed in Superior Court within twenty-one days of receipt of a final order. 2 Stone L'oven Pizza Co. Alexandra &Athanasios LLC, 280 Underpass Road Brewster, MA. 02631 Town of Brewster 2198 Main Street (Route 6a) Brewster, MA. 02631 171h September 2015 Dear Board of Selectmen, We are writing to inform you of our status at 280 Underpass Road, Brewster. It started as a small project as we anticipated opening this fall. But, it turned out becoming a larger project than expected. After the grace period of getting approved for the new kitchen addition, we were in the process of codes for the new enlarged kitchen, equipment, new hood, electrical, and plumbing, also planning to change floors, windows, upgrade bar, and bar equipment, painting walls, new light fixtures, custom booths, etc. We are including a floor plan and list of the work we are planning of doing to this location. The addition and renovations have not started due to the extensive amount of planning, drawing, and mechanical engineering that needs to be done. Our contractor Rick Roy is working very hard to meet the right specifications and codes for the town of Brewster, the building permits were just submitted on 09110115. We are eager opening as soon as possible, as the restaurant will have a fresh new look. And, we now anticipate on opening spring 2016. We appreciate your time and understanding and please ask not to revoke our liquor license, as it is crucial to our restaurant. We look forward serving Brewster customers. Thank you very much. Yours Sincerely, �9 UI �f/i� Periklis Christou & Christine Kalogirou (owners) ORLEANS, BREWSTER, EASTHAM GROUNDWATER PROTECTION DISTRICT BOARD OF MANAGERS MEETING AUGUST 12, 2015 Board Present: John Kelly,Chairman, Orleans;Charlie Sumner, Brewster; Martin McDonald, Eastham. Others: Jay Burgess,Chief Operator; Beverly Carney, Orleans resident. 1. Meeting called to order at 9:00 a.m.. 2. A motion was made by Martin McDonald to approve the Board of Managers Minutes dated July 15, 2015.This motion was seconded by Charlie Sumner and unanimously voted and approved. Vote:3-0 3. Citizen's Forum: • Beverly Carney asked what towns are included in the "Other" column on the year-to date flow sheet? • Jay stated those towns Could be Yarmouth, Barnstable, Falmouth,or any other outside town that is not listed on the sheet. 4. Chief Operator Updates—Jay Burgess: • Process- All processes are in the single digits,with the exception of nitrate,which is 13 mg/I. • Maintenance-We had a power surge over the weekend.The main PLC that controls all of the computers in the plant was down during the power surge. We were able to bypass and it is back up and running. • No. 2 Filter Press- The No. 2 Filter Press is in need of new light curtains,which are located on each side of the press for safety. if during the course of the dangerous part of the operation an operator were to accidentally fall, the light beam automatically shuts down the equipment so that nobody can get hurt.The company that made the curtains is still in business and I have a request form out for pricing. Woodard & Curran said they would be able to install them. • Ad for Operator position- I have received interest from two people who are interested in the Operator position, but neither one of them have a Class B license,which is the main thing I need, or a Wastewater license. I do have one driver lined up who had previously worked for Paul Daniels. 1 • Sludge Disposal—I finally made contact with WeCare Organics and sent them our dimensions for drop off containers.There is the possibility that we can have them drop off two containers that would slide underneath the presses,which would hold four to five presses each. When the containers are full,they would come to the plant and haul them away. This would eliminate our need for another truck driver and free up our current driver for maintenance work at the plant. • John Kelly asked if there is still the issue of leveling off the sludge once it is dropped into the container. • Jay stated he talked about that with WeCare and there are two things that we can do. We can use our front end loader to scoop and spread it,or they have equipment that they could leave here that we would rent as part of the price. • John Kelly stated the only issue we would have is DEP's approval and the odor control. • Jay stated he doesn't think there is going to be a big odor control issue.We open that area all the time when we do our presses to rake for about 15 minutes.We would be doing the same thing, and then it would be covered right back up for them to haul it away. • John Kelly stated on the issue of sludge, did you get anything more from Yarmouth- Dennis regarding a letter I had sent them? • Jay stated he has been corresponding with Eduard at the Yarmouth Plant almost daily, as we are now sharing our delinquent haulers, He seems pretty satisfied with the way things are going. He sent me an email that WeCare paid them. Eduard got in touch with Falmouth, Provincetown,and Barnstable because they haul off Cape and got them interested in meeting with us, DEP,and the Cape Cod Commission to see if there might be a facility for everybody. I've been in touch with the Cranston, Rhode Island facility and they are not looking for more flow right now and they are not being real cooperative. • Martin McDonald asked if there are any other companies in competition with WeCare? • Jay stated there is not any competition that is close by.Yarmouth is going to find that out shortly because they want to fire up their compost facility again.They asked WeCare to give them a price and found out the price is more than they thought it would be,so now they are going to have to advertise and go out to bid, which will tell how many other companies there are. 2 • Disposal Rates- Jay stated he is not suggesting any rate changes but wanted to bring the current rates to the Board's attention.The in-District rate is one cent lower than Yarmouth's rate for septage,so we could raise that rate by one cent and not worry about losing any flow. Our in-District rate for grease is two cents lower than Yarmouth. They charge a flat rate of 19 cents a gallon for grease from any town. We charge 20 cents a gallon for out-of-District and 15 cents in-District. My latest calculations for what it will cost to run this facility is 11.6 cents,which is what we earn on average, and it is exactly 11.6 cent on average to run the facility, so we are at break even. However,when haulers don't pay us, it is actually lower. • John Kelly stated when Eduard wants to set up another meeting, we will just add it to our Agenda and ask Brian Dudley to attend. is Eduard interested in a Regional facility in Yarmouth? • Jay stated he seemed to be interested in some of my correspondence with him. • Martin McDonald asked if the variations in the nitrate numbers are due to the process or the material that is being pressed. • Jay stated probably a little bit of both.We have set up a denitrification zone in one of our distribution boxes. It Is a box that feeds the biological process,which in the past,we have routinely cleaned out because it gets full of sludge.We had a monthly work order for a hauler to come to the plant to pump it out and haul it back to receiving. Mike Giggey, pointed out that is an anaerobic zone and why don't we try using that as a denitrification zone.So we set up some plumbing so that we could regulate a portion of the effluent back to that box and all the way to the bottom so it has to run back up. Normally what goes through is ammonia nitrogen. Once the ammonia nitrogen goes through our process, it is converted entirely to nitrate nitrogen. Nitrate nitrogen comes back and goes up through that muck and starts creating the bacterias that will eat nitrate. As long as we can keep that there in the zone we created,the better nitrogen numbers we get. Right now that filtrate box is just about full. Sooner or later I will have to clean it out because it will create operational problems.When I clean it,you will see the nitrate numbers come back up again, so it is doing something. 3 • Reminder to Pump Letters--Jay stated Eastham sends out their own letters. I have not received the status from Orleans or Brewster. • John Kelly stated he will talk with Bob Canning again. • Tri-Bono Services Invoice- Jay stated he previously asked the three towns to pay a third of the price quote from Tri-Boro Services, which was$16,656.00. The actual bill was $20,448.70.The District will pay the balance. • Weekend Operation—We are down to two operators.We are open for receiving on the the weekends and process on both days. We are the only plant on the Cape that is open on Sunday. All we receive on Sundays is out-of-District portable waste which is creating some problems for us. I am asking that the plant be closed on Sundays for receiving. By law,we need an operator to come in on Sunday for plant rounds. S. A motion was made by John Kelly to close receiving on Sundays effective immediately.This motion was seconded by Martin McDonald and unanimously voted and approved, Vote,3-0 • John Kelly asked Jay if he has been in contact with Mike Domenica to fine tune equipment needs that are needed if we are to extend the permit for five years. • Jay stated he has not been in contact with him, • John Kelly stated the Orleans Selectmen are meeting with Mike Domenica tonight at our monthly work session and he will have Mike contact you to set up a meeting. He also stated the next three joint Board of Selectmens meeting would be the last week of October. 6. The Board reviewed the District's bank balances. • John Kelly asked if there are any delinquent accounts. • Jay stated the original delinquent account with Neighborhood Wastewater Services has been 75%paid. Before the new company took over,they cleared their debt to the collection agency and then ran up another delinquent amount of$8,000 over the past three months.A company called Cape Cod Septic Services bought the remainder of the equipment from Neighborhood and they started a business and then ran into trouble with the Auction Companies who auctioned off Neighborhood's equipment.They have since straightened that out and have paid all of their debt to us. 4 7. A motion was made by Martin McDonald to approve Treasury Warrant No. 2 for payment. This motion was seconded by Charlie Sumner and unanimously approved and passed. Vote: 3-0 8. Items for future Agendas: • September Agenda: • Review list of plant equipment needs and cost estimates. • Tentative meeting date for three Board of Selectmen. 9. A motion was made by Martin McDonald to adjourn the meeting at 10:30 a.m. .This motion was seconded by Charlie Sumner and unanimously approved and passed.Vote: 3-0 Respectfully submitted, Cyndi Bachman District Secretary 5 August 2015 PRIM Board Update NIANA(iF%IINI B(010) Massachusetts Pension Reserves Investment Management Board Market Snapshot for August 2015 1 U.S.Gross Domestic Product ("GDP")was revised to 3.7%, Emerging markets debt ("EMD") U.S. Dollar denominated up from the previous estimate of 2.3% in 2Q15 Commerce fell 1.1%in August,and EMD local currency returned-5.4%. Department's second assessment. Unemployment remained Bond prices fell 1.5%, while the EM FX (foreign currency level at 5.3%, while the labor market experienced historically exchange) returned -4.5%, Russia, Malaysia, Turkey, and low jobless claims throughout August. U.S. manufacturing Colombia were the worst performing countries. expanded at a slower pace in August, as the US Purchasing I Managers Index("PMi"),fell to 51.1 from 52.7 in July. The U.S. 2015 PRIM Investors'Conference Dollar Index depreciated 1.3%, as minutes from the last We hope you will be able to join us on Thursday, a Federal Reserve Bank ("the Fed") meeting showed a dovish November 5, 2015 at the College of the Holy Cross in tone from some officials. Analysts contend that the current Worcester, MA for the 2015 PRIM Investors' Conference. The selloff in U.S. equities will diminish any chance of a September conference will be held in the Hogan Center Ballroom. rate hike(the Federal Reserve Open Market Committee chose Registration begins at 8:15 a.m.; the formal program will to hold off on an interest rate hike at its September 17, 2015 convene at 9:00 a.m. Among our speakers will be State meeting). Oil prices rallied in August, rising to $49.2 a barrel Treasurer& Receiver-General,and PRIM Board Chair, Deborah P (up 4.4%) after U.S. oil production showed output was falling, B. Goldberg, and Stuart Schiff, Chief Executive Officer of and OPEC announced it was ready to talk with other producers DivcoWest Real Estate Investments. We will also feature about low prices. PRIM's highly talented investment and finance staff. U.S. equities fell in August, as the Chinese slowdown increased concerns about global growth. Large cap stocks 1PRIT FUND ASSETS: $59,509,393,0001 returned -6.0%, and small caps stocks fared no better, returning-6.3%in August. PRIT Core Fund Recap-August 31,2015 International equities also fell, returning -7.45'o in August. European equities declined 7.1% as China's economic growth PRIT Core Total -3.48% -0.47% -0.07% I woes triggered a global markets selloff. Japanese equities U.S.Equity -6.00% -2.72% -0.030/., were also down, returning -5.8%, after Toshiba announced international Equity -6.47% 0.84% -6.357., j new accounting issues. Emerging Markets Equity -8.71% 12.69% -21.89% Emerging markets equities were down 9.0% in August. Core Fixed Income -0.29% -1.87% 3.53% Russian equities extended losses, returning-5.6%as the Ruble Public Value Added Fl* -2.42% -2.26% -7.50% depreciated 8.5% and fighting resumed in Eastern Ukraine, Total Value Added FI** -1.76% 1.57% 4.62% , Chinese shares plunged 11.7% in August, as manufacturing Private Equity 0.18% 8.95% 16.34% weakened and the People's Bank of China lowered its Core Real Estate -0.88% 5.28% 10.69% benchmark interest rates and let the Yuan devalue. Brazil Timber/!Natural Resources -0.74% -3.63% -3.42% markets fell 14.2%, as the Real depreciated 6.3% and Hedge Funds(net of fees) -2,53% 0.45% 1.471Y, economic data showed that the region's largest economy was Portfolio Completion Strategies 1.57% 3.37% N/A in a deeper recession than previously thought. Frontier Markets declined 5.5%in August. Returns are gross of fees unless otherwise noted,Timber/Natural The 20+year STRIPS index rose 0.1% in August, and is up Resources, Total Value-Added Fixed Income, and Portfolio 6.3% for the trailing one-year period. 30-year yields were 5 Completion Strategies sleeves+are currently not available through basis points ("bps")higher in August, at 2.96%versus 2.91% in Segmentation; however, the Public Value Added Fixed Income sleeve Is available as of April 1, 2013. Total Value-Added FI July. STRIPS were the best performing asset class in the PRIT Includes returns of Public Value-Added Fl and Private Debt, Fund during the month. Importantly, the correlation between Private Equity is available to Segmented Systems through the STRIPS and the S&P 500 remains negative. The Barclays Vintage Year Program, Aggregate Index fell 0.1%in August,as yields rose 7 bps on the month. (Prices and yields move inversely.) Credit spreads j widened in August,as high yield bonds returned-1.8%, I 3 PRIT Core Fund as of 8/31/2015 ' ( M PRIT Core(gross of fees) OTotal Core Benchmark r Mont 1-Yea 116.03% 2,88% 0,48% 10.0% 9.3% 9.7% 111 -7.58% 0.91% 5.11% 111 -4.91% -6.83% -4.95% 8.0% 11 r -7.01% 1.71% 4.53% 8.0% 74 11 -5,92% -1.58% -0,32% 6.4% 6.0% 5.9% r r r r � +- 3 I r , -6.89% -1.20% -8.95% 4.0% -9.10% -12.50% -22.15% M% , -0.14% 0.459/o 1.56% 0.0y. 1 0.12% -4,16% 6.33% 0 OF -1.77% 0.06% -3.08% 0.7% -1.4% -1,08% 1.08% -2.989'o -2.0% r -5138% -12,30% -21.54% -4.OYa 3.5%-3.6%0%3.2% 0.00% 6.72% 12.72% -5,91% -5.45% -4.15% •6.0% I y4 p4 y -1,99% 0.87% 1.63% Senior Client Service Officer Paul Todisco-(617)946-8423 ptodisco@mapension,com Pension Reserves Investment Management Board 84 State Street,Suite 250 Deborah B.Goldberg,Treasurer and Receiver General,Chair Boston,Massachusetts 02109 Michaef G.Trotsky,CFA,Executive Director Town of Brewster State Retirees Benefits Trust Fund August 01,2015 to August 31,2015 Month To Date Fiscal Year To Date Calendar Year To Date Your beginning net asset value for the period was: 1,232,070.18 1,226,255.15 1,197,768.66 Your change in investment value for the period was: (44,997.73) (39,182.75) (10,696.26) Your exchanges from(to)the Cash Fund for the period were: 50,000.00 50,000.00 50,000.00 Your ending,net asset value for the period was: 1,237,072.40 1,237,072.40 1,237,072.40 Net Change in Investment Value represents the net change through investment activities as follows: Gross Investment Income: 2,480.44 4,538.64 21,539.34 Less Management Fees: (156.97) (343.17) (3,681.97) Net Investment Income: 2,323.47 4,195.47 17,857.37 Net Fund Unrealized Gains/Losses: (50,3ss.99) (48,880.03) (62,761.54) Net Fund Realized Gains/Losses: 3,067.74 5,501.81 34,207.91 Net Change in Investment Value as Above: (44,997.78) (39,I82.75) (10,696.26) As of August 31,2015 the net asset value of your investment in the SRBT Fund was: $1.237.072.40 If you have any questions regarding your statement,please contact your Senior Client Services Officer Paul Todisco(617)946-8423. A detailed statement of your account is attached to this summary sheet. Pension Reserves Investment Management Board 84 State Street,Suite 250 Deborah B.Goldberg,Treasurer and Receiver General,Chair Boston, Massachusetts 02109 Michael G.Trotsky,CFA,Executive Director Town of Brewster Cash Investment August 01,2015 to August 31,2015 Month To Date Fiscal Year To Date Calendar Year To Date Your beginning net asset value for the period was: 0.00 0.00 0.00 Your investment income for the period was: 0.00 0.00 0.00 Your total contributions for the period were: 50,000.00 50,000.00 50,000.00 Your total redemptions for the period were: 0.00 0,00 0.00 Your total exchanges for the period were: (50,000.00) (50,000.00) (50,000.00) Your state appropriations for the period were: 0.00 0.00 0.00 Your ending net asset value for the period was: 0.00 0.00 0.00 As of August 31,2015 the net asset value of your investment in the Cash Fund was: 50.00 If you have any questions regarding your statement,please contact your Senior Client Services Officer Paul Todisco(617)946-8423. A detailed statement of your account is attached to this summary sheet. Pension Reserves Investment Management Board 84 State Street,Suite 250 Deborah B.Goldberg,Treasurer and Receiver General,Chair Boston,Massachusetts 02109 Michaet G.Trotsky,CFA,Executive Director Town of Brewster PHTF90200002 Investment Detail Commonwealth Of Massachusetts SRBT-BREWSTER 08/31/2015 Investments Units Of Participation Cost Price Market Value Unrealized Gain/Loss 8,699.721 HOST OPER MASTER TRUST 1,299,612.27 142.1968 1,237,072.40 -62,539.87 Total Investment: 1,299,612.27 1,237,072.40 -62,539.87 Pension Reserves Investment Management Board 84 State Street,Suite 250 Deborah B.Goldberg,Treasurer and Receiver General,Chair Boston,Massachusetts 02109 Michael G.Trotsky,GFA,Executive Director Town of Brewster PHTF90200002 Statement of Chante In Net Assets Commonwealth Of Massachusetts SRBT-BREWSTER 08/31/2015 Current Period Fiscal Year Year To bate 08101/2015 08/3112015 07/01/2015 08131!2015 01/01/2015 08/31/2015 NET ASSETS-BEGINNING OF PERIOD 1,232,070.18 1,226,255.15 1,197,768.66 DISBURSEMENTS= CASH FUND EXCHANGES 50,000.00 50,000.00 50,000.00 RECEIPTS: CONTRIBUTIONS: PARTICIPANTS 50,000.00 50,000.00 50,000.00 INVESTMENT INCOME: UNREALIZED GAIN/LOSS-INVESTMENT -50,388.99 -48,880.03 -62,761.54 MASTER TRUST ALLOCATED EXPENSES -61.85 -138.23 -654.68 MASTER TRUST CHANGE IN REALIZED GIL 3,067.74 5,501.81 34,207.91 MASTER TRUST INVESTMENT INCOME 2,480.44 4,538.64 21,539.34 MT ALL INVESTMENT MANAGER FEES -95.12 -204.94 -3,027.29 UNIT EXCHANGES 50,000.00 50,000.00 50,000.00 Total Receipts 55,002.22 60,817.25 89,303.74 Total Disbursements: 50,000.00 50,000.00 50,000.00 Net Assets-End of Period: 1,237,072.40 1,237,072.40 1,237,072.40 STATEMENT EXPLANATION Below you will find a description of each item posted to your statement. CAPITAL ACCOUNT Summary of Account Activity: A summary statement produced for your investment in the State Retiree Benefits Trust Fund(SRBTF)includes both month-to- date and fiscal year-to-date information.This statement is also furnished to the Public Employee Retirement Administration Commission(PERAC). Your beginning net asset value for the period: The total balance of your investment as of the opening date of the statement period. Your change in investment value for the period: The total increase or decrease in your investment includes net investment income,realized gains or losses,and unrealized gains or losses. Your total exchanges from(to)cash fund: Movement of funds occurring on the first business day of each month between your Cash Fund and Capital Account(SRBTF). Your ending net asset value for the period: The total balance of your investment as of the closing date of the statement period. Gross investment income: Represents your allocable share of the SRBTF's income associated with securities and other investments(i.e.real estate),except for realized and unrealized tains or losses.It is principally interest,dividends,real estate income,and private equity income. Management fees: Represents your allocable share of the SRBTF's expenses related to PRIM's investment advisors,consultants.custodian and operations expenses. Net investment income: Represents your allocable share of the SRBTF's gross investment income,less Management Fees. Net fund unrealized gains/losses: Represents your allocable share of the SRBTF's increase or decrease in value.attributed to a change in value of securities or other investments held in the PRIT Fund,relative to original cost.These gains or losses are'�rnrealized"because the investments have not yet been sold. Net fund realized gains/losses: Represents your allocable share of the SRBTF's increase or decrease in value attributed to the PR1T Fund's sale of securities or other investments(i.e.real estate property).Whether you"realize"a gain or loss depends upon the price at which the investment was sold in relation to its original purchase price. CASH FUND Your beginnin f;net asset value for the period: The total balance of your investment as of the opening date of the statement period_ Your investment income for the period: Interest earned for the period. Your total contributions for the period: Sum of all funds(i.e.wires and/or checks)sent into your SRBTF account during,the statement period.Cash contributed any day during the month except the first business day will remain in your Cash Fund until the first business day o£the following, month,when it will then be exchanged into the General Allocation Account(SRBTF). Your total redemptions for the period: Sum of all funds sent by wire from the PRIT Fund's custodian bank:to your government entity during the statement period_A redemption made be made at any time throughout the month as long,as your Cash Fund balance equals or exceeds the amount you wish to redeem. Your ending net asset value for the period: The total balance of your investment as of the closing date of the statement period. if you have any questions about this statement,please call your Senior Client Service Officer,Paul Todisco(617) 446-8423. L 6 BENNETT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATES, INC.�4__�- LICENSED SITE PROFESSIONALS 6 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS 6 GEOLOGISTS IJ ENGINEERS 1573 Main Street-P.O. Box 1743, Brewster, MA 02631 6 508-896-1706 6; Fax 508-896-5109 G wwwbennett-ea.com B096-1186 September 2, 2015 Mr. Gerard Martin, Section Chief Brownl'ields, C&E and Risk Reduction Section MA DEP (SERO) - Bureau of Waste Site Cleanup 20 Riverside Drive Lakeville, MA 02347 RE: DOWNGRADIENT PROPERTY STATUS MODIFICATION RTN 4-1.3321 1573 Main Street [Parcel ID: 48-79-0] -Brewster, MA Dear Mr. Martin, On behalf Mr. Craig Borden of The Schoolhouse Limited Partnership, Bennett Environmental Associates, Inc. (BEA) has prepared this Downgradient Property Status (DPS) Modification in response to the Notice of Responsibility(NOR)issued to the Schoolhouse Limited Partnership on June 10, 2015. The NOR was issued based on the transfer of the property from Craig Borden personally to the entity of the Schoolhouse Limited Partnership wherein Craig Borden is the Manager, as considered a new owner and wherein a DPS Modification was not filed at the time of property transfer. The DPS Modification that accompanies this letter of opinion was prepared in accordance with 310 CMR 40.0187 to provide certification that neither Mr. Borden nor The Schoolhouse Limited Partnership has an affiliation with the southern abutting,hydrogeologic upgradient Turner Property located at 1574 Main Street. The Turner Property is listed in the current MA Department of Environmental Protection(MassDEP) Searchable Sites List as a Confirmed Disposal Site with a Tier 1 D default status as having previously been designated a Superfund Site wherein environmental assessment and cleanup activities where undertaken by the Region I, Environmental Protection Agency(US EPA)as the"Brewster Pesticide Site",and pre-dating 1993 major revisions to the MCP. BACKGROUND In May 1996, groundwater sampling being conducted under an ASTM Environmental Site Assessment at the subject 1573 Maid Street property reported dieldrin in monitoring well MW-3, located along Route 6A (Main Street),_just north of the Turner Property. A concentration of 2.6 ug/L, exceeding the applicable RCGW-1 Reportable Concentration of 0.1 ug/L, was reported and the property owner, Craig Borden,made notification of the release to the MassDEP. In 1997,Mr. Borden filed for assenting Downgradient Property Status (DPS) wherein the abutting, hydrogeologically upgradient Disposal Site known as the Turner Property at 1574 Main Street [RTN 4-12034] was a known and documented source of dieldrin. The location of MW-3 was between the corrunon roadway to the Turner Property and the building at 1573 Main Street. Based on the location of MW-3 relative to known pesticides impacts at the abutting property and upgradient of tine building, it was opined that 1573 Main Street was not a source and did not EMERGENCY SPILL RESPONSE L WASTE SITE CLEANUP i! SITE ASSESSMENT L' PERMITTING 6 SEPTIC DESIGN&INSPECTION WATER SUPPLY DEVELOPMENT,OPERATION&MAINTENANCE � WASTEWATER TREATMENT;OPERATION&MAINTENANCE SEPTEMBER 2,2015 THE SCHOOLHOUSE LIMITED PARTERSHIPIBEAI5-1 E86 PAGE 2 OF 5 DOWNGRADIENT PROPERTY STATUS MODIFICATION contribute to the pesticide impacts to groundwater noted at MW-3 as documented on the abutting property. UPGRADIENT DISPOSAL SITE HISTORY The Turner Property at 1574 Main Street ("Brewster Pesticide") is a documented Disposal Site [RTN 4-12034] for the release of pesticides to soils, groundwater and sediment as initially discovered in 1983. In 1995, soil testing at the property reported concentrations Of chlordane, dieldrin, endrin, and heptachlor in surface soils exceeded their respective S-1 Method 1 — Risk Characterization standards. In February 1996, some 4-6 cubic yards of impacted soils were excavated by Fugro East, Inc. Post-excavation soil sampling indicated that elevated concentrations of endrin, dieldrin, 4,4-DDT, and heptachlor remained in on-site soils above the prescribed Method 1 —Risk Characterization standards but that no imminent hazard existed. At that time, Fugro recommended additional sampling. On March 31, 1996 MassDEP assigned Release Tracking Number (RTN) 4-12034 to the Turner Property and requested the property be included under the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Time Critical Removal Program, hi October and November 1996, the EPA excavated and disposed of approximately 368 tons of pesticide-contaminated soil from an area encompassing much of the Turner Property. Post excavation soil samples were field screened with residual chlordane and dieldrin exceeding the aforementioned Method 1 - Risk Characterization standards. In May 1996,monitoring wells were installed at the down gradient subject property at 1573 Main Street as part of an ASTM Environmental Site Assessment for property transfer. Groundwater testing did not indicate the presence of any volatile organic compounds (VOCs) or total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) contaminants at that time as based on the applicable RCGW-1 standards. The pesticide dieldrin, however, was reported in monitoring well MW-3, noted as just north of the Turner Property, at a concentration of 2.6ugIL, exceeding the applicable RCGW-1 Reportable Concentration of O.lugIL. Notification was made to the MA DEP and in 1997 Bennett& O'Reilly, Inc. and Kaegael Environmental Inc., on behalf of Mr. Borden,filed for Downgradient Property Status (DPS)asserting that the Turner Property at 1574 Main Sheet [RTN 4-12034] was the sotuce of the contamination and that the subject property did not contribute to the groundwater impact noted nor worsen conditions, and that access onto the property was provided for ongoing investigations. PUBLIC RECORD REVIEW AND DPGS DOCUMENTATION As part of the NON response and Downgradient Property Status Modification, BEA conducted a review of the MA DEP records relative to additional work conducted at the abutting Turner Property Site relative to further substantiating that the property at 1573 Main Street satisfied the requirements to assert DPS status under the provisions 310 CMR 40.00180. SEPTEMBER 2,2015 TILE SCIIOOLIIOUSE LIMITED PARTERSMI MEA15-1186 PAGE 3 Or 5 DOWNGRADIENT PROPERTY STATUS MODIFICATION In June 1999, the MassDEP contracted with SAIC Engineering, Inc, to characterize groundwater quality and flow in the area of release. SAIC confirmed a northerly groundwater flow across the Turner Property toward the subject property at 1573 Main Street. Laboratory analysis reported dieldrin in groundwater at concentrations greater than the applicable GW-1 standard at several locations on the Turner Property including monitoring well BP-21) (0.15 ug/L)which was noted as at a similar depth as the abutting MW-3 location on the subject 1573 Main Street property. In MW-3, the dieldrin concentration was reported at 1.2 ug/L, as also exceeding the GW-1 Standard (0.1 ug/L). No pesticide impacts were reported in the testing of the MW-1 and MW-2 locations on the subject 1573 Main Street property in the 1999 testing by SAIL. On November G,2001, SAIC personnel installed and developed five well points adjacent to the wetland areas located north Of the subject property, These wells, as well as three existing micro well pairs on the Turner Property, and one monitoring well (MW-2) on the subject property were sampled on November 7, 2001. Monitoring wells MW-1 and MW-3 at the subject property were slated for sampling but were found to be dry. No pesticides were reported in the groundwater samples collected from monitoring well MW-2,which is located in the northwestern portion of the subject 1573 Main Street property. Furthermore, no pesticides were reported in shallow groundwater samples obtained from the newly installed well points located at the edge of the wetlands north of the subject property. However, in this testing, the micro well BP-2, intermediate to the 1574 Main Street dwelling and the MW-3 monitoring well at 1573 Main Street did report the pesticide heptachlor epoxide in groundwater at a low level concentration below the RCGW-1 and GW-1 standards. This work was documented in the Site Investigation Report prepared and filed with the MassDEP by SAIC in March 2003. The specific recommendations of this report were to test groundwater at the MW-3 location on the subject 1573 to determine if dieldrin persists at the abutting down gradient property towards supporting closure of the Turner Property with the benefit of an Activity Use Limitation and Method 3 investigation of residual pesticides impacts to sediments in the abutting pond. No further information is available through the MassDEP Searchable Database that would indicate if any such recommendations were ever undertaken. As part of this work, the Schoolhouse Limited Partnership was contacted relative to their interest in conducting this work independently in consideration of the Termination of the Do-w igradient Property Status through the installation and testing of a replacement well in the vicinity of MW-3 which has since been destroyed by snow removal activities. Mr. Borden, as the Manager for the Schoolhouse Limited Partnership, has chosen not to conduct such work at additional expense to him wherein he feels aggrieved by past cost associated with filing and maintaining DPS status associated with grotuldwater impacts migrating onto his property as the responsibility of others. SEPTE1MBER 2,2015 THE SCHOOLHOUSE LIMITED PARTERSIIIPBEA 15-11 SG PAGE 4 OF 5 DONVNGRADIENT PROPERTY STATUS MODIFICATION SOURCE OF CONTAMINA'T'ION The EPA cleanup objectives utilized at the Turner Property were substantially less stringent than those developed under the MA Contingency Plan (MCP). The stated EPA cleanup objective for dieldrin was set at<20 ppm in soils 2'below grade surface. Under the cufent MCP, a soil concentration of 0.08 ppm is the Method 1 -Risk Characterization standard that is developed for dieldrin as a conservative measure of potential leaching to groundwater. In June 1999, the SAIC as the SARS contractor for the MassDEP characterized groundwater flow across the Turner Property as northerly, toward the subject 1573 Main Street property. Given that pesticides are slightly soluble in groundwater, it is likely that dieldrin concentrations detected at MW-3 were the result of shall amounts of the contaminant that had become dissolved in groundwater from precipitation infiltrating through highly contaminated soils during remedial activities at the Turner Property. Dieldrin concentrations detected at the subject property in MW-3 ranged from 0.09ug/L in 1996,to a peak of 2.6ug/L in June 1997,to 1.2ug/L by 1999. As such, it appears that the source of pesticide contamination in groundwater at the subject property is attributed to the leaching of residual pesticide contamination in uncapped soils at the Turner Property and that such concentrations are attenuating as a result of source reduction and capping undertaken by the EPA Superfa nd Removal Actions. CONCLUSIONS The DPS Modification is being provided in response to the NON issued as a result of the change in ownership name in 2002 from Craig Borden personally to the Schoolhouse Limited Partnership wherein Craig Borden is the Manager. This transaction was merely a legal name transfer at the advice of counsel. There remains no affiliation between Mr. Borden and/or the Schoolhouse Limited Partnership with the upgradient property owner and/or operator that has been the owner/operator of the source of the documented release at 1574 Main Street noted as an open Tier ID Site under RTN4-12034 and former EPA Superfund Site for the presence of various pesticides documented in the soil, groundwater and sediments at the property. The most recent work conducted by SAIC under the SARS contract to the MassDEP has confirmed that groundwater is flowing towards the subject 1573 Main Street property and confirmed the source of dieldren at the MW-3 monitoring well as the Turner Property. This report notes that the soil removal and capping of residual pesticides at the Turner Property under the Superfimnd cleanup has resulted in reduced concentrations of pesticides in monitoring wells and the testing of MW-3 to confrn7n that the issue of significant groundwater impact and downgradient emigrations has been absolved is reconunended. BEA has further reviewed with original assertion of Downgradient Property Status prepared by Bennett & O'Reilly, Inc. and Kaegael Environmental Inc., dated September 5, 1997, and opines that the findings of such remain consistent with today's conditions, wherein dieldrin was not used, stored, generated, disposed of or released at the subject property and the historically impacted monitoring well at the subject property fMW-3] is hydrologically downgradient of the SEPTENIBER 2.2015 THE SCHOOLHOUSE LMUTED PARTFRSHWIBEA15-1186 PAGE 5 OF 5 D01VNGRADIENTPROPFICfY STATUS MODIFICATION Turner Property Site where such impacts are documented. These opinions ate framed in the LSP certifications on the attached BWSC-115 Transmittal Form that accompanies the DPS Modification. Under the Public Notice requirements, a copy of this letter is being provided to the named Town of Brewster representatives and abutters by registered mail. For any persons seeking more information on the status of the Downgradient Status opined for 1573 Main Street under RTN4-13342, or status of cleanup and suniniary of residual impacts and potential exposures risks at 1574 Main Street imder RTN4.-122034,they are directed to the Searchable Sites list at http://-Dublic.deu.state.nla.us/SearchableSites2/Search.aslth or the MassDEP Southeast Regional office at(508) 946-2700 to make arrangements for file review. If you have any questions, or require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact tie directly. Sincerely, VIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATES,INC. LD7aviennctt, LSP Cc. Craig Borden, Manager- Schoolhouse Limited Partnership Charles Stunner, Town Administrator—Town of Brewster(Narrative only) Chief Robert Moran—Brewster Fire Department(Narrative only) Nancy Ellis-Ice, Director—Brewster Health Department (Narrative only) Abutters (list enclosed) Encl. Abutters List with Notification Property Owner Certification Downgradient Property Status, 1573 Main Sheet, Brewster, MA by Kaegael Environmental Inc., September 5, 1997 Site Investigation Report, Brewster Pesticide Site, Brewster, MA by SAIC Engineering, Inc.,Mareh 2003 C..I err C (opy DECEIVED SEP 2fRin i•aWv 7- EiES c:Tf"E sr LEMERI's 0FFICE Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands 3E 9-1662 r WPA Form 5 — Order of Conditions MassDEPFile# Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 eDEP Transaction# Brewster City/Town A. General Information Please note: Brewster this form has i. From: been modified Conservation Commission with added 2. This issuance is for space to a. ®Order of Conditions b. ❑ Amended Order of Conditions accommodate (check one): the Registry of Deeds 3. To: Applicant: Requirements Town of Brewster Thomas and Carol Edmondson a. First Name b, Last Name Important: When filling See Attached Applicant/Owner Sheet out forms on c. Organization the computer, d. Mailing Address use only the tab key to move your e. CRylTown f.State g.Zip Code cursor-do not use the 4. Property Owner (if different from applicant): return key. Town of Brewster Thomas and Carol Edmondson VQ a. First Name b. Last Name More than ane property owner. See Attached Applicant/Owner Sheet c.Organization r'ua d. Mailing Address e. City/Town f.State g.Zip Code 5. Project Location: 0 Ellis Landing, 51 Captain Dunbar Road Brewster a. Street Address b, CitylTown 91 (formerly 7) 41, 42 (formerly 16, 16-1) c.Assessors Map/Plat Number d. ParceUl-ot Number Latitude and Longitude, if known: 70d3m18s 41d46m32s d. Latitude e. Longitude wpaformadcc- rev.4 12 212 0 1 5 Page 1 of 12 Order of Conditions, DEP File #SE 9-1662 Applicant/Owner Information Applicant/Owner - 0 Ellis Landing Road: Town of Brewster 2198 Main Street Brewster, MA 02631 Property recorded at the Registry of Deeds for: Barnstable County Book: 1073; Page: 427 Applicant/Owner -- 51 Captain Dunbar Road: Thomas & Carol Edmondson P.O. Box 2408 Brewster, MA 02631 Property Recorded at the Registry of Deeds for: Barnstable County Book: 21434; Page: 337 Order of Conditions SE 9-1662; 0 Ellis Landing/51 Captain Dunbar Road Page 1a of 12 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MsssDEP: � Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands SE 9-1662 WPA Form 5 -- Order of Conditions MassDEPFile# Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 eDEP Transaction# Brewster City/Town A. General Information (cont.) 6. Property recorded at the Registry of Deeds for(attach additional information if more than one parcel): See Attached Applicant/Owner Sheet a.County b.Certificate Number(if registered land) c. Book d. Page May 22, 2015 September 1, 2015 Sept. 21, 2015 7. Dates: a. Date Notice of Intent Filed b. Date Public Hearing Closed c. Date of Issuance a. Final Approved Plans and Other Documents (attach additional plan or document references as needed): Edmondson and Town of Brewster 51 Captain Dunbar Road and 0 Ellis Landing Proposed Shorefront Protection Coastal Engineering Company, Inc. Roger Paul Michniewicz, PE, Timothy J. b. Prepared By Brady, PLS July 27, 2015 1" = 10' d. Final Revision Date e.Scale Coastal Dune Mitigation/Enhancement Planting Plan Ellis Landing September 1, 2015 Prepared by LEC Envir. Cons. g.Date B. Findings i. Findings pursuant to the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act: Following the review of the above-referenced Notice of Intent and based on the information provided in this application and presented at the public hearing, this Commission finds that the areas in which work is proposed is significant to the following interests of the Wetlands Protection Act (the Act). Check all that apply: a. ❑ Public Water Supply b. ❑ Land Containing Shellfish c. ❑ Prevention of Pollution d. ❑ Private Water Supply o. ❑ Fisheries f. ® Protection of Wildlife Habitat s. ❑ Groundwater Supply h. ® Storm Damage Prevention I. ® Flood Control 2. This Commission hereby finds the project, as proposed, is: (check one of the following boxes) Approved subject to: a. ® the following conditions which are necessary in accordance with the performance standards set forth in the wetlands regulations. This Commission orders that all work shall be performed in accordance with the Notice of Intent referenced above, the following General Conditions, and any other special conditions attached to this Order. To the extent that the following conditions modify or differ from the plans, specifications, or other proposals submitted with the Notice of Intent, these conditions shall control. wparorm5.doc• rev.4/2212015 Page 2 of 12 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: � Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands SE 9-1662 L11, WPA Form 5 -- Order of Conditions MassDEP File# Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 eDEP Transaction ## Brewster CitylTown B. Findings (cant.) Denied because: b. ❑ the proposed work cannot be conditioned to meet the performance standards set forth in the wetland regulations. Therefore, work on this project may not go forward unless and until a new Notice of Intent is submitted which provides measures which are adequate to protect the interests of the Act, and a final Order of Conditions is issued. A description of the performance standards which the proposed work cannot meet is attached to this Order. c. ❑ the information submitted by the applicant is not sufficient to describe the site, the work, or the effect of the work on the interests identified in the Wetlands Protection Act. Therefore, work on this project may not go forward unless and until a revised Notice of Intent is submitted which provides sufficient information and includes measures which are adequate to protect the Act's interests, and a final Order of Conditions is issued. A description of the specific information which Is lacking and why it is necessary is attached to this Order as per 310 CMR 10.05(6)(c). 3. ❑ Buffer Zone Impacts: Shortest distance between limit of project disturbance and the wetland resource area specified in 310 CMR 10.02(1)(a) a.linear feet Inland Resource Area Impacts: Check ail that apply below. (For Approvals Only) Resource Area Proposed Permitted Proposed Permitted Alteration Alteration Replacement Replacement 4. ❑ Bank a.linear feet b. linear feet c.linear feet d. linear feet 5. ❑ Bordering Vegetated Wetland a.square feet b.square feet c.square feet d,square feet 6. ❑ Land Under Waterbodles and a.square feet b.square feet c.square feet d.square feet Waterways e.Gy dredged f.Gy dredged 7. ❑ Bordering Land Subject to Flooding a.square feet b.square feet c.square feet d.square feet Cubic Feet Flood Storage e.cubic feet f.cubic feet g.cubic feet h.cubic feet s, ❑ Isolated Land Subject to Flooding a.square feet b.square feet Cubic Feet Flood Storage c,cubic feet d.cubic feet e.cubic feet f.cubic feet s. ❑ Riverfront Area a.total sq.feet b,fatal sq.feet Sq ft within 100 ft c.square feet d.square feet e.square feet f,square feet Sq ft between 100- 200 ft g.square feet h.square feet i.square feet J.square feet wpaform5,ecc• rev.4122f2615 Page 3 of 12 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDER Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands SE 9-1662 WPA Form 5 -- Order of Conditions MassDEPFle# Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 eDEP Transaction# Brewster City/Town B. Findings (cont.) Coastal Resource Area Impacts; Check all that apply below. (For Approvals Only) Proposed Permitted Proposed Permitted Alteration Alteration Replacement Replacement 1o. ❑ Designated Port Indicate size under Land Under the Ocean, below Areas 11. ❑ Land Under the Ocean a.square feet b,square feet c.dy dredged d.Gy dredged 12. ❑ Barrier Beaches Indicate size under Coastal Beaches and/or Coastal Dunes below 13. ® Coastal Beaches cu yd cu yd a.square feet b.square feet c. nourishment d,nourishment 14. ® Coastal Dunes 700 700 —160 cu yd —160 cu yd a.square feet b.square feet c.nourishment d.nourishment 15, ❑ Coastal Banks a.linear feet b.linear feet 16. ❑ Rocky Intertidal Shores a.square feet b.square feet 17. ❑ Salt Marshes a.square feet b.square feet c.square feet d.square feet 18. ❑ Land Under Salt Ponds a.square feet b.square feet c.0 dredged d.Gy dredged 19. ❑ Land Containing Shellfish a.square feet b.square feet c.square feet d.square feet 20. ❑ Fish Runs Indicate size under Coastal Banks, Inland Bank, Land Under the Ocean, and/or inland Land Under Waterbodies and Waterways, above a.Gy dredged b.Gy dredged 21. ® Land Subject to 12750 12750 Coastal Storm a.square feet b.square feet Flowage' 22, ❑ Riverfront Area a.total sq.feet b,total sq.feet Sq ft within 100 ft c.square Feet d.square foot e.square feet f,square feet Sq ft between 100- 200 ft g.square feet h.square feet i.square feet }.square feet wpaform5.doc rev.4/228015 Page 4 of 12 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands SE 9-1662 WPA Form 5 — Order of Conditions MassDEPHe# Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, X40 eDEPTransaction# Brewster CitylTown B. Findings (cont.) *#23.Ifthe 23. ❑ Restoration/Enhancement project is for the purpose of restoring or a,square feet of BVW b,square feet of salt marsh enhancing a wetland resource area 24• ❑ Stream Crossing(s): in addition to the square footage that a.number of new stream crossings b.number of replacement stream crossings has been C. General Conditions Under Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act entered in Section B.5.c (B\W or The following conditions are only applicable to Approved projects. B.17.c(Salt Marsh)above, 1 Failure to comply with all conditions stated herein, and with all related statutes and other please enter regulatory measures, shall be deemed cause to revoke or modify this Order. the additional 9 Y Y amount here. 2. The Order does not grant any property rights or any exclusive privileges; it does not authorize any injury to private property or invasion of private rights. 3. This Order does not relieve the permittee or any other person of the necessity of complying with all other applicable federal, state, or local statutes, ordinances, bylaws, or regulations. 4. The work authorized hereunder shall be completed within three years from the date of this Order unless either of the following apply: a. The work is a maintenance dredging project as provided for in the Act; or b. The time for completion has been extended to a specified date more than three years, but less than five years, from the date of issuance. If this Order is intended to be valid for more than three years, the extension date and the special circumstances warranting the extended time period are set forth as a special condition in this Order. c. If the work is for a Test Project, this Order of Conditions shall be valid for no more than one year. 5. This Order may be extended by the issuing authority for one or more periods of up to three years each upon application to the issuing authority at least 30 days prior to the expiration date of the Order. An Order of Conditions for a Test Project may be extended for one additional year only upon written application by the applicant, subject to the provisions of 310 CMR 10.05(11)(f). 6. If this Order constitutes an Amended Order of Conditions, this Amended Order of Conditions does not extend the issuance date of the original Final Order of Conditions and the Order will expire on unless extended in writing by the Department. 7. Any fill used in connection with this project shall be clean fill. Any fill shall contain no trash, refuse, rubbish, or debris, including but not limited to lumber, bricks, plaster, wire, lath, paper, cardboard, pipe, tires, ashes, refrigerators, motor vehicles, or parts of any of the foregoing. vpaform5.doc• rev.4QV2015 Page 5 of 12 LMassachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands SE 9--1662 WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions MassDEP File# Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 eDEP Transaction# Brewster City/Town C. General Conditions Under Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act 8. This Order is not final until all administrative appeal periods from this Order have elapsed, or if such an appeal has been taken, until all proceedings before the Department have been completed. 9. No work shall be undertaken until the Order has become final and then has been recorded -in the Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located, within the chain of title of the affected property. In the case of recorded land, the Final Order shall also be noted in the Registry's Grantor Index under the name of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. In the case of the registered land, the Final Order shall also be noted on the Land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is done, The recording information shall be submitted to the Conservation Commission on the form at the end of this Order, which form must be stamped by the Registry of Deeds, prior to the commencement of work. 10. A sign shall be displayed at the site not less then two square feet or more than three square feet in size bearing the words, "Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection" [or, "MassDEP"] "File Number SE 9-1662 " 11. Where the Department of Environmental Protection is requested to issue a Superseding Order, the Conservation Commission shall be a party to all agency proceedings and hearings before MassDEP. 12. Upon completion of the work described herein, the applicant shall submit a Request for Certificate of Compliance (WPA Form 8A)to the Conservation Commission. 13. The work shall conform to the plans and special conditions referenced in this order. 14. Any change to the plans identified in Condition #13 above shall require the applicant to inquire of the Conservation Commission in writing whether the change is significant enough to require the filing of a new Notice of Intent. 15. The Agent or members of the Conservation Commission and the Department of Environmental Protection shall have the right to enter and inspect the area subject to this Order at reasonable hours to evaluate compliance with the conditions stated in this Order, and may require the submittal of any data deemed necessary by the Conservation Commission or Department for that evaluation. 16. This Order of Conditions shall apply to any successor in interest or successor in control of the property subject to this Order and to any contractor or other person performing work conditioned by this Order. wpaform5.doc- rev.4=015 Page 6 of 12 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: 1tlitl Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands SE 9-1662 WPA Form 5 — Order of Conditions MassDEP File# Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 eDEP Transaction# Brewster City/Town C. General Conditions Under Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act (cont.) 17. Prior to the start of work, and if the project involves work adjacent to a Bordering Vegetated Wetland, the boundary of the wetland in the vicinity of the proposed work area shall be marked by wooden stakes or Flagging, Once in place, the wetland boundary markers shall be maintained until a Certificate of Compliance has been issued by the Conservation Commission. 18. All sedimentation barriers shall be maintained in good repair until all disturbed areas have been fully stabilized with vegetation or other means. At no time shall sediments be deposited in a wetland or water body. During construction, the applicant or his/her designee shall inspect the erosion controls on a daily basis and shall remove accumulated sediments as needed. The applicant shall immediately control any erosion problems that occur at the site and shall also immediately notify the Conservation Commission, which reserves the right to require additional erosion and/or damage prevention controls it may deem necessary. Sedimentation barriers shall serve as the limit of work unless another limit of work line has been approved by this Order. 19. The work associated with this Order(the"Project") (1) ® is subject to the Massachusetts Stormwater Standards (2) ❑ is NOT subject to the Massachusetts Stormwater Standards If the work is subject to the Stormwater Standards, then the project is subject to the following conditions: a) All work, including site preparation, land disturbance, construction and redevelopment, shall be implemented in accordance with the construction period pollution prevention and erosion and sedimentation control plan and, if applicable, the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan required by the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Construction General Permit as required by Stormwater Condition 8. Construction period erosion, sedimentation and pollution control measures and best management practices (BMPs) shall remain in place until the site is fully stabilized. b) No stormwater runoff may be discharged to the post-construction stormwater BMPs unless and until a Registered Professional Engineer provides a Certification that: L all construction period BMPs have been removed or will be removed by a date certain specified in the Certification. For any construction period BMPs intended to be converted to post construction operation for stormwater attenuation, recharge, and/or treatment, the conversion is allowed by the MassDEP Stormwater Handbook BMP specifications and that the BMP has been properly cleaned or prepared for post construction operation, including removal of all construction period sediment trapped in inlet and outlet control structures; ii. as-built final construction BMP plans are included, signed and stamped by a Registered Professional Engineer, certifying the site is fully stabilized; ff. any illicit discharges to the Stormwater management system have been removed, as per the requirements of Stormwater Standard 10; wpaformS.doc- rev.4raM15 Page 7 of 12 Ll Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands SE 9-1662 WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions MassDEP File# Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 eDEPTransaction# Brewster CitylTown C. General Conditions Under Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act (cont.) iv. all post-construction stormwater BMPs are installed in accordance with the plans (including all planting plans) approved by the issuing authority, and have been inspected to ensure that they are not damaged and that they are in proper working condition; v. any vegetation associated with post-construction BMPs is suitably established to withstand erosion. c) The landowner is responsible for BMP maintenance until the issuing authority is notified that another party has legally assumed responsibility for BMP maintenance. Prior to requesting a Certificate of Compliance, or Partial Certificate of Compliance, the responsible party (defined in General Condition 18(e)) shall execute and submit to the issuing authority an Operation and Maintenance Compliance Statement ("O&M Statement) for the Stormwater BMPs identifying the party responsible for implementing the stormwater BMP Operation and Maintenance Plan ("O&M Plan") and certifying the following: i.) the O&M Plan is complete and will be implemented upon receipt of the Certificate of Compliance, and ii.) the future responsible parties shall be notified in writing of their ongoing legal responsibility to operate and maintain the stormwater management BMPs and implement the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. d) Post-construction pollution prevention and source control shall be implemented in accordance with the long-term pollution prevention plan section of the approved Stormwater Report and, if applicable, the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan required by the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Multi-Sector General Permit. e) Unless and until another party accepts responsibility, the landowner, or owner of any drainage easement, assumes responsibility for maintaining each BMP. To overcome this presumption, the landowner of the property must submit to the issuing authority a legally binding agreement of record, acceptable to the issuing authority, evidencing that another entity has accepted responsibility for maintaining the BMP, and that the proposed responsible party shall be treated as a permittee for purposes of implementing the requirements of Conditions 18(f) through 18(k) with respect to that BMP. Any failure of the proposed responsible party to implement the requirements of Conditions 18(0 through 18(k)with respect to that BMP shall be a violation of the Order of Conditions or Certificate of Compliance. In the case of stormwater BMPs that are serving more than one lot, the legally binding agreement shall also identify the lots that will be serviced by the stormwater BMPs. A plan and easement deed that grants the responsible party access to perform the required operation and maintenance must be submitted along with the legally binding agreement. f) The responsible party shall operate and maintain all stormwater BMPs in accordance with the design plans, the O&M Plan, and the requirements of the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook. wparorm5.doc• rev.4/2212015 Page a of 12 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP; Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands SE 9--1662 Ll WPA Form 5 — Order of Conditions MassDEP File# Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 eDEP Transaction# Brewster City/Town C. General Conditions Under Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act (cont.) g) The responsible party shall: 1. Maintain an operation and maintenance log for the last three (3)consecutive calendar years of inspections, repairs, maintenance and/or replacement of the stormwater management system or any part thereof, and disposal (for disposal the log shall indicate the type of material and the disposal location); 2. Make the maintenance log available to MassDEP and the Conservation Commission ("Commission") upon request; and 3. Allow members and agents of the MassDEP and the Commission to enter and inspect the site to evaluate and ensure that the responsible party is in compliance with the requirements for each BMP established in the O&M Plan approved by the issuing authority. h) All sediment or other contaminants removed from stormwater BMPs shall be disposed of in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations. i) Illicit discharges to the stormwater management system as defined in 310 CMR 10.04 are prohibited. j) The stormwater management system approved in the Order of Conditions shall not be changed without the prior written approval of the issuing authority. k) Areas designated as qualifying pervious areas for the purpose of the Low Impact Site Design Credit(as defined in the MassDEP Stormwater Handbook, Volume 3, Chapter 1, Low Impact Development Site Design Credits) shall not be altered without the prior written approval of the issuing authority. 1) Access for maintenance, repair, and/or replacement of BMPs shall not be withheld. Any fencing constructed around stormwater BMPs shall include access gates and shall be at least six inches above grade to allow for wildlife passage. Special Conditions (if you need more space for additional conditions, please attach a text document): See Addendum. 20. For Test Projects subject to 310 CMR 10,05(l 1), the applicant shall also implement the monitoring plan and the restoration plan submitted with the Notice of Intent. If the conservation commission or Department determines that the Test Project threatens the public health, safety or the environment, the applicant shall implement the removal pian submitted with the Notice of Intent or modify the project as directed by the conservation commission or the Department. wpaform5.doc• rev.4122r2015 Page 9 of 12 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands SE 9-1662 WPA Form 5 — Order of Conditions MassDEP File# Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 eDEPTransacVon# < # Brewster City/Town D. Findings Under Municipal Wetlands Bylaw or Ordinance 1. Is a municipal wetlands bylaw or ordinance applicable? ® Yes ❑ No 2. The Brewster hereby finds (check one that applies): Conservation Commission a. ❑ that the proposed work cannot be conditioned to meet the standards set forth in a municipal ordinance or bylaw, specifically: Code of the Town of Brewster 172 1. Municipal Ordinance or Bylaw 2.Citation Therefore,work on this project may not go forward unless and until a revised Notice of Intent is submitted which provides measures which are adequate to meet these standards, and a final Order of Conditions is issued. b. ® that the following additional conditions are necessary to comply with a municipal ordinance or bylaw: Code of the Town of Brewster 172 1. Municipal Ordinance or Bylaw 2.Citation 3. The Commission orders that all work shall be performed in accordance with the following conditions and with the Notice of Intent referenced above. To the extent that the following conditions modify or differ from the plans, specifications, or other proposals submitted with the Notice of Intent, the conditions shall control. The special conditions relating to municipal ordinance or bylaw are as follows(if you need more space for additional conditions, attach a text document): See Addendum. wpaform5.dI• rev.4/222015 Page 10 of 12 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands SE 9-1662 WPA Form 5 — Order of Conditions MassDEP File# Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 eDEP Transaction# Brewster City/Town E. Signatures This Order is valid for three years, unless otherwise specified as a special 3at x5condition pursuant to General Conditions#4,from the date of issuance. of issuance Please indicate the number of members who will sign this form. I This Order must be signed by a majority of the Conservation Commission. Number of Signers The Order must be mailed by certified mail(return receipt requested)or hand delivered to the applicant.A copy also must be mailed or hand delivered at the same time to the appropriate Department of Environmental Protection Regional Office, if not filing electronically, and the property owner, if different from applicant. Signatures: , 3g-�10 n `r�r � � rV✓'Y��"� `/V�./Y/� by hand delivery on ❑ by certified mail, return receipt requested, on V X1 IA" Brewster 0 Ellis Landing dale Date F. Appeals ' The applicant, the owner, any person aggrieved by this Order, any owner of land abutting the land subject to this Order, or any ten residents of the city or town in which such land is located, are hereby notified of their right to request the appropriate MassDEP Regional Office to issue a Superseding Order of Conditions. The request must be made by certified mail or hand delivery to the Department, with the appropriate filing fee and a completed Request for Departmental Action Fee Transmittal Form, as provided in 310 CMR 10.03(7)within ten business days from the date of issuance of this Order. A copy of the request shall at the same time be sent by certified mail or hand delivery to the Conservation Commission and to the applicant, if he/she is not the appellant. Any appellants seeking to appeal the Department's Superseding Order associated with this appeal will be required to demonstrate prior participation in the review of this project. Previous participation in the permit proceeding means the submission of written information to the Conservation Commission prior to the close of the public hearing, requesting a Superseding Order, or providing written information to the Department prior to issuance of a Superseding Order. The request shall state clearly and concisely the objections to the Order which is being appealed and how the Order does not contribute to the protection of the interests identified in the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act(M.G.L, c. 131, § 40), and is inconsistent with the wetlands regulations (310 CMR 10.00). To the extent that the Order is based on a municipal ordinance or bylaw, and not on the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act or regulations, the Department has no appellate jurisdiction. %Wferm5.doc rev.4822015 Page 11 of 12 L Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by IvassDEP: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands SE 9-1662 WPA Form 5 -- Order of Conditions MassDEP File# Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 eDEP Transaction# Brewster Cityrrown G. Recording Information Prior to commencement of work, this Order of Conditions must be recorded in the Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located, within the chain of title of the affected property. In the case of recorded land, the Final Order shall also be noted in the Registry's Grantor Index under the name of the owner of the land subject to the Order..In the case of registered land, this Order shall also be noted on the Land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land subject to the Order of Conditions. The recording information on this page shall be submitted to the Conservation Commission listed below. Brewster Conservation Commission Detach on dotted line, have stamped by the Registry of Deeds and submit to the Conservation Commission. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To: Brewster Conservation Commission Please be advised that the Order of Conditions for the Project at: 0 Ellis Landing, 51 Captain Dunbar Road, SE 9-1662 91142, 91141 (formerly 7116-1, 7/16) IvassDEP File Number Has been recorded at the Registry of Deeds of: Barnstable County Book Page for: Property Owner and has been noted in the chain of title of the affected property in: Book Page In accordance with the Order of Conditions issued on: September 21, 2015 Date If recorded land, the instrument number identifying this transaction is: Instrument Number If registered land, the document number identifying this transaction is: Document Number Signature of Applicant wpaform5.doc• rev.4n212015 Page 12 of 12 Addendum to WPA Form 5— Order of Conditions Town of Brewster Order of Conditions SE 9-1662, 0 Ellis Landing Road & 51 Captain Dunbar Road, Assessors' Map 91, Parcels 41 & 42(formerly Map 7, Parcels 16 & 16-1) Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection -Wetlands WPA Form 5— Order of Conditions Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act (M.G.L. C.131 S. 40) And Code of the Town of Brewster Chapter 172 Brewster Wetlands Protection By-law (BWP By-law) Project Description: The Notice of Intent proposes shorefront retreat and protection measures, including removing asphalt, removing a failed drainage structure, relocating existing stones, installing articulating concrete block mats, installing coir envelopes, and beach nourishment on a coastal dune and coastal beach at the Town Landing at 0 Ellis Landing Road and shorefront protection measures at 51 Captain Dunbar Road. Resource Area Identification: The Conservation Commission does not confirm the resource area boundaries as shown on the plan. Due to changing site conditions the resource area boundaries are not confirmed, however the resource areas are confirmed as Coastal Dune, Coastal Beach, and Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage, The Conservation Commission makes additional resource area findings below. The properties were the subject of an Abbreviated Notice of Resource Area Delineation, DEP file # SE 9-1531. The Brewster Conservation Commission issued an Order of Resource Area Delineation on September 27, 2011 indicating that the resource area under and behind the existing revetment at 51 Captain Dunbar Road is Coastal Dune. The Department of Environmental Protection issued a Superseding Order of Resource Area Delineation on April 6, 2012 also indicating that the landform under and behind the existing revetments is a Coastal Dune. Maintenance to the existing revetment at 51 Captain Dunbar Road was reviewed and approved by the Conservation Commission under DEP File# SE 9-1497. No work is proposed on the existing revetment under this filing. The affected resource areas under the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act(M.G.L. Ch.131 §. 40) are Coastal Beach (310 CMR 10.27), Coastal Dune (310 CMR 10.28), and Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage. The affected resource areas under the Brewster Wetlands Protection By-law (Chapter 172) are Coastal Beach (Brewster Wetland Regulations 2.02), Coastal Dune (Brewster Wetland Regulations 2.03), and Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage. Interests Protected Under the Brewster Wetlands Protection By-law: Following the review of the above-referenced Notice of Intent and based on the information provided in this application and presented at the public hearings, the Brewster Conservation Commission finds that the areas in which work is proposed is significant to the following interests of the Brewster Wetlands Protection Bylaw: Wildlife Storm Damage Prevention and Flood Control Marine Fisheries Land Containing Shellfish 0 Ellis Landing/51 Captain Dunbar Road Order of Conditions SE 9-1662 Findings/Special 1 Conditions Performance Standards Implicated by Proposed Project under Mass. Wetlands Protection Act and Wetland Regulations: Coastal Beach, 310 CMR 10.27(3),(4),&(5) Coastal Dune, 310 CMR 10.28(3),(4),&(5) Local Performance Standards Implicated by Proposed Project under Brewster Wetlands Protection Bylaw and Wetlands Regulations: Coastal Beach, 2.02(3) Coastal Dune, 2.03(3),(4)&(5) Findings under Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act and Wetland Regulations: The Brewster Conservation Commission finds that the project can be conditioned to meet the performance standards set forth in the wetland regulations. See Special Conditions below. Coastal Beach, 310 CMR 10.27(3): Portions of the proposed project occur on a Coastal Beach. The Brewster Conservation Commission finds that the coastal beach is significant to storm damage prevention, flood control, and protection of wildlife habitat. The portions of the project that occur on the Coastal Beach include relocating the existing stones and removing the existing non-functioning drainage structure. The Conservation Commission finds that the proposed project can be conditioned so it will not have an adverse effect by increasing erosion, decreasing the volume or changing the form of the coastal beach or an adjacent or downdrift coastal beach because the stones already exist on site and are being relocated in a way that will not increase erosion. Additionally, the Conservation Commission finds that the project can be conditioned with required beach nourishment so that the volume of the coastal beach will not decrease and the coastal beach form will not change. See Special Conditions below. 310 CMR 10.27(4): The proposed project involves relocating existing stone material and removing a non-functioning concrete drainage structure on a coastal beach. The Conservation Commission finds that the project can be conditioned so that the stones will interfere less with littoral drift. The existing stones are arranged as an extension of the existing revetment at 51 Captain Dunbar Road parallel to shore and extending towards the east(extending downdrift). The stones will be relocated to form a return for the existing revetment at 51 Captain Dunbar Road. The return will extend landward from the existing revetment so as to interfere less with littoral drift. The relocated stones will be arranged to the minimum length and height necessary. No additional armor stones or toe stones will be brought on site. See Special Conditions below. 310 CMR 10.27(5): The Brewster Conservation Commission finds that the project can be conditioned for beach nourishment with clean sediment of a grain size compatible with that on the existing beach. See Special Conditions below. Coastal Dune, 310 CMR 10.28(3): Portions of the proposed project occur on a Coastal Dune. The Brewster Conservation Commission finds that the coastal dune is significant to storm damage prevention, flood control, and the protection of wildlife habitat. Although the Conservation Commission finds that the Coastal Dune is significant to the identified interests, the Commission finds that the previous alterations of the Coastal Dune, including armoring and paving, has limited the function of the Coastal Dune. 310 CMR 10.28(3)(a): The Conservation Commission finds that the proposed project can be conditioned so that it will not have an adverse effect on the coastal dune by affecting the ability of waves to remove sand from the dune. The Coastal Dune at 51 Captain Dunbar Road has been previously armored by a stone revetment structure. The Coastal Dune at Ellis Town Landing has been previously paved by an asphalt parking lot. The proposed project would remove a portion of the asphalt paving and replace it with an articulating concrete block mat(ACBM). The proposed project would also install coir envelopes along the property line. Both the ACBM and coir envelopes would be covered with compatible beach sand. Additionally, the project will be 0 Ellis Landing/51 Captain Dunbar Road Order of Conditions SE 9-1662 Findings/Special 2 Conditions conditioned so that the ACBM and coir envelopes will remain covered with compatible beach sand. The project will also be conditioned so that additional beach nourishment is applied on an annual and as-needed basis. The beach nourishment will continually allow waves to remove sand from the dune. See Special Conditions below. 310 CMR 10.28(3)(b): The Conservation Commission finds that the proposed project can be conditioned so that it will not have an adverse effect on the coastal dune by disturbing vegetative cover so as to destabilize the dune. Portions of the proposed project occur on a coastal dune that is covered by an existing asphalt parking area. Other portions of the project occur on a coastal dune that has been altered by an existing dwelling and armored. The Commission finds that the project can be conditioned so that it will actually increase the vegetative cover with native coastal plantings. The ACBM will be covered with beach compatible sand and planted with coastal plantings including American Beach Grass, beach plum, and bayberry. The relocated stone return will also be planted with beach grass. See Special Conditions below. 310 CMR 10.28(3)(c): The Conservation Commission finds that the proposed project can be conditioned so that it will not have an adverse effect on the coastal dune by causing any modification of the dune form that would increase the potential for storm or flood damage. The Commission finds that the project is being proposed to decrease the potential for storm or flood damage. The coastal dune is covered by an asphalt parking area that has been eroding. The result is a steep slope from the parking area to the coastal beach below. The proposed project is designed with an ACBM at a 10% slope with a sand cover that will decrease storm and flood damage to the existing infrastructure. The relocated stone return and coir envelope return are designed to decrease storm and flood damage to the existing dwelling at 51 Captain Dunbar Road. See Special Conditions below. 310 CMR 10.28(3)(d): The Conservation Commission finds that the proposed project can be conditioned so that it will not have an adverse effect on the coastal dune by interfering with the landward or lateral movement of the dune. The Commission finds that the existing alterations to the coastal dune have already interfered with the landward or lateral movement of the dune. The Commission finds that the ACBM will allow the dune to move more freely landward and laterally than the existing asphalt pavement. See Special Conditions below. 310 CMR 10.28(3)(e): The Conservation Commission finds that the proposed project can be conditioned so that it will not have an adverse effect on the coastal dune by causing removal of sand from the dune artificially. Any disturbed compatible sand will be reused onsite in the coir envelope installation or used as sand cover. Additional beach nourishment will be brought in annually and as needed. See Special Conditions below. 310 CMR 10.28(3)(0: The Conservation Commission finds that the proposed project will not have an adverse effect on the coastal dune by interfering with mapped or otherwise identified bird nesting habitat. The proposed project occurs on an already altered and disturbed area occupied by an asphalt parking area. 310 CMR 10.28(4): The Conservation Commission finds that the dwelling already exists upon a coastal dune at 51 Captain Dunbar Road. The Commission finds that portions of the proposed project, including replacing or relocating the existing fence and replacing the existing stairs, are accessory to the existing building and may be permitted. 310 CMR 10.28(5): The Conservation Commission finds that portions of the project consist of pedestrian walkways, designed to minimize disturbance to the vegetative cover and traditional bird nesting habitat; fencing and other devices designed to increase dune development; and plantings compatible with natural vegetative cover. The Brewster Conservation Commission finds that the project can be conditioned to meet the performance standards set forth in the wetland regulations. See Special Conditions below. 0 His Landing/51 Captain Dunbar Road Order of Conditions SE 9-1662 Findings)Special 3 Conditions Findings under Brewster Wetlands Protection Bylaw and Wetlands Regulations: The Brewster Conservation Commission finds that the project can be conditioned to comply with the Brewster Wetlands Protection Bylaw and Regulations. See Special Conditions below. Sections 2.02 & 2.03 of the Brewster Wetlands Projection Bylaw Wetland Regulations require variances from the regulations granted pursuant to Section 5.01 of the regulations. A variance may be granted only for the following reasons and upon the following conditions: a) 1) mitigating measures are proposed that will allow the project to be conditioned so that it contributes to the protection of the resource values identified in the Wetlands Bylaw; and 2) the Conservation Commission finds no reasonable alternative for such a project within the proposed site; and 3) there will be no adverse impact from the proposed project; or b) that the project is necessary to accommodate an overriding public interest or that it is necessary to avoid a decision that so restricts the use of property that it constitutes an unconstitutional taking without compensation. After review of the project, the Brewster Conservation Commission finds that the proponent met the criteria for granting a variance to the regulations under Section 5.01. The Brewster Conservation Commission finds that mitigating measures have been proposed as indicated in the Notice of Intent and subsequent plan revisions that will allow the project to be conditioned so that it contributes to the protection of the resource values identified in the Wetlands Bylaw. The mitigating measures include beach nourishment and native coastal plantings. The Brewster Conservation Commission reviewed alternatives for the proposed project as indicated in the Notice of Intent and subsequent submittals. The Conservation Commission also reviewed several additional alternatives during the public hearing process. After reviewing the alternatives, the Commission found that there were no reasonable alternatives for the project because the chosen alternative had the least impact while most closely achieving the project objective. The Brewster Conservation Commission finds that the project can be conditioned so there are no adverse impacts from the proposed project to the interests protected by the Brewster Wetlands Protection By-law. The Conservation Commission finds that the project will enhance the interests protected by the Brewster Wetlands Protection By-law, The Brewster Conservation Commission also finds that the project is necessary to accommodate the overriding public interest of preservation of the public access to this important public land. Coastal Beach, 2,02(3): The Brewster Conservation Commission finds that the proposed project can be allowed under a variance from these regulations granted pursuant to Section 5.01. See variance justification above. Coastal Dune, 2,03(3): The Brewster Conservation Commission finds that the proposed project can be allowed under a variance from these regulations granted pursuant to Section 5.01. See variance justification above. 2.03(4)(x): The Conservation Commission finds that the proposed project can be conditioned so that it will not have an adverse effect on the coastal dune by affecting the ability of waves to remove sand from the dune. The Coastal Dune at 51 Captain Dunbar Road has been previously armored by a stone revetment structure. The Coastal Dune at Ellis Town Landing has been previously paved by an asphalt parking lot. The proposed project would remove a portion of the 0 Ellis Landing/51 Captain Dunbar Road Order of Conditions SE 9-1882 Findings/Special 4 Conditions asphalt paving and replace it with an articulating concrete block mat(ACBM). The proposed project would also install coir envelopes along the property line. Both the ACBM and coir envelopes would be covered with compatible beach sand. Additionally, the project will be conditioned so that the ACBM and coir envelopes will remain covered with compatible beach sand. The project will also be conditioned so that additional beach nourishment is applied on an annual and as-needed basis. The beach nourishment will continually allow waves to remove sand from the dune. See Special Conditions below. 2.03(4)(b): The Conservation Commission finds that the proposed project can be conditioned so that it will not have an adverse effect on the coastal dune by disturbing vegetative cover so as to destabilize the dune. Portions of the proposed project occur on a coastal dune that is covered by an existing asphalt parking area. Other portions of the project occur on a coastal dune that has been altered by an existing dwelling and armored. The Commission finds that the project can be conditioned so that it will actually increase the vegetative cover with native coastal plantings. The ACBM will be covered with beach compatible sand and planted with coastal plantings including American Beach Grass, beach plum, and bayberry. The relocated stone return will also be planted with beach grass. See Special Conditions below. 2.03(4)(c): The Conservation Commission finds that the proposed project can be conditioned so that it will not have an adverse effect on the coastal dune by causing any modification of the dune form that would increase the potential for storm or flood damage. The Commission finds that the project is being proposed to decrease potential for storm or flood damage. The coastal dune is covered by an asphalt parking area that has been eroding. The result is a steep slope from the parking area to the coastal beach below. The proposed project is designed with an ACBM at a 10% slope with a sand cover that will decrease storm and flood damage to the existing infrastructure. The relocated stone return and coir envelope return are designed to decrease storm and flood damage to the existing dwelling at 51 Captain Dunbar Road, See Special Conditions below. 2.03(4)(d): The Conservation Commission finds that the proposed project can be conditioned so that it will not have an adverse effect on the coastal dune by interfering with the landward or lateral movement of the dune. The Commission finds that the existing alterations to the coastal dune have already interfered with the landward or lateral movement of the dune. The Commission finds that the ACBM will allow the dune to move more freely landward and laterally than the existing asphalt pavement. See Special Conditions below. 2.03(4)(e): The Conservation Commission finds that the proposed project can be conditioned so that it will not have an adverse effect on the coastal dune by causing removal of sand from the dune artificially. Any disturbed compatible sand will be reused onsite in the coir envelope installation or used as sand cover. Additional beach nourishment will be brought in annually and as needed. See Special Conditions below. Special Conditions under the Mass. Wetlands Protection Act and Wetlands Regulations and under the Brewster Wetlands Protection Bylaw and Wetlands Regulations: The Brewster Conservation Commission hereby finds that the following additional conditions are necessary to comply with performance standards set forth in the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act and Wetland Regulations and the Brewster Wetlands Protection By-law. The Conservation Commission orders that all work shall be performed in accordance with said additional conditions and with the Notice of Intent referenced above. To the extent that the following conditions modify or differ from the plans, specifications, or other proposals submitted with the Notice of intent, the conditions shall control. 0 Ellis Landing/51 Captain Dunbar Road Order of Conditions SE 9-1662 Findings/Special 5 Conditions Al. All local, state and federal approvals shall be obtained for this project before work can commence. Copies of all approvals shall be forwarded to the Brewster Conservation Commission. A2. This permit is granted under Section 172-7 of the Brewster Wetlands Protection By-law, subject to the conditions imposed, for a period of three years from the issuance date of the original Order of Conditions. The Conservation Commission may issue one year extensions based on review of the site and other criteria. Requests for each extension shall be submitted in writing, no less than 30 days prior to the expiration date. This Order of Conditions shall expire on September 21, 2018. A3. The Agent or other employee, members of the Conservation Commission and officials of the Department of Environmental Protection shall have the right to enter and inspect the area subject to this Order, at reasonable hours, to evaluate compliance with the conditions stated in this Order. Said persons may require the submittal of any data deemed necessary by the Conservation Commission or Department for that evaluation. This right of entry shall remain until such time as a Certificate of Compliance has been issued, recorded in the Registry of Deeds or Land Court, Barnstable County, and returned to the Conservation Department, A4. This order shall apply to any successors and assigns in interest or control and any other person engaging in activity on the property identified in the Notice of Intent. A5. Violation of any of these Conditions shall subject the violator and the landowner to a fine (of not more than $300.00 per day) pursuant to Section 172-11 of the Town of Brewster Wetlands Protection By-law, until all violations have been corrected to the satisfaction of the Brewster Conservation Commission. A6. All work shall be in accordance with the approved plan(s) of record. If any changes are made in the above-described plan(s)which may or will alter an area subject to protection under the Wetlands Protection Act and the Town of Brewster Wetlands Protection By-law, or any changes in activity subject to regulations under G.L. c. 131 §40, or the Town of Brewster local regulations occurs, the applicant shall inquire from this Commission in writing, prior to implementation in the field, whether the change(s) is significant enough to require an Amended Order of Conditions or the filing of a new Notice of Intent. Any errors in the plans or information submitted by the applicant shall be considered changes and the above procedures shall be followed. A7. The owner shall notify the Conservation Department using the Owner affirmatlon of responsibility for work/request for site inspection... form, which shall be signed by the owner of the property as well as the contractor in charge of the work. The Commission's Agent will schedule an on-site meeting of the contractor(s) responsible, to ensure that the requirements of this Order are understood. No work shall begin until after the on-site meeting. During this on-site consultation, the Conservation Agent or Commissioner may require minor modifications to the approved site plan (relating to work/construction methodology) to the Order of Conditions. If so, said conditions will be provided in writing at the time of said on-site meeting. A8. The use of the Ellis Landing Town Landing requires approval from the Brewster Selectmen's Office. Prior to commencement of work, the project proponent shall contact the Selectmen's Office for approval. A9. Prior to commencement of construction or beach nourishment, the project proponent shall contact the Brewster Natural Resources Director and the Department of Public Works. A10. Also prior to commencement of maintenance, repairs, or sand nourishment, a series of 0 Ellis Landing/51 Captain Dunbar Road Order of Conditions SE 9-1662 Findings/Special 6 Conditions dated color photographs shall be taken of the entire resource area and buffer area, and siltation barrier, and shall include any bank erosion and revegetation area, A set of photographs shall be submitted to the Conservation Department for the applicant's permit file, with the notification form. These photos shall be labeled with the Assessor's Map and Parcel, and street address, date and general view description. Another series of dated color photographs shall be taken of the resource area and buffer area when the work is completed, and fully revegetated and stable. These photographs shall be submitted to the Conservation office at the time a Certificate of Compliance is requested, and shall remain in the applicant's permit file. The photos shall be labeled with the Assessor's Map and Parcel, and street address, date and general view description. A11. Any debris, fill or excavated material on site shall be stockpiled away from designated wetlands. Unsuitable or excess excavated material shall be properly stabilized or removed from the site. Al2. All structures, facilities and equipment, as part of this project, shall be continually operated and maintained so as to comply with this permit. This provision applies specifically to all heavy equipment used on this project. Any leakage of oil, hydraulic Fluid, fuel, or any other pollutant shall be cleaned up immediately, and the defective equipment responsible for said leakage shall be immediately repaired or taken off site. A13. A copy of this Order of Conditions/Permit shall be kept on site at all times during construction. This is the owner's responsibility. The owner shall see that all contractors and subcontractors retained during construction receive a copy of this Order. Workers shall be prepared to produce the Order and all plans and supporting documents referenced in the Order, upon request of the Conservation Agent or any member of the Conservation Commission. A14. Fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides and fungicides shall be prohibited within 100 feet of any wetlands. A15. Notwithstanding condition #A14 regarding fertilizers,when mitigation plantings are installed the soil may be amended in accordance with the mitigation plan and starter fertilization may be applied. A16. Any disturbed slopes on site shall be revegetated with appropriately sized and spaced approved plant species*and stabilized with 100% biodegradable erosion control netting, which shall stay in place after final grading. Other disturbed areas shall be covered with four to six inches of organic topsoil which is free of weed seeds and debris, and planted with appropriately sized and spaced approved plant species*. All disturbed areas shall be completely revegetated during the first growing season after the permitted work is complete. *Approved plant species, size and spacing are those on the list of acceptable plantings for coastal resource areas of the Cape Cod Cooperative Extension (www.caoecodextension.oro). Turf lawn is prohibited within the 100 foot buffer zone to wetlands. Conditions Specific to 51 Captain Dunbar Road Conditions A17 -A22 apply specifically to the proposed work on 51 Captain Dunbar Road, although some of the proposed work also occurs on the Town Landing property. Other than the proposed reconstruction to create a return, as shown on the approved plan, no work is proposed on the existing stone revetment at 51 Captain Dunbar Road. Maintenance to the existing stone revetment at 51 Captain Dunbar Road was reviewed under DEP File# SE 9- 1497. Relocated Stone/Stone Return A17. Only the existing stones on site shall be used to construct the stone return. No additional 0 Ellis Landing/51 Captain Dunbar Road Order of Conditions SE 9-1662 Findings/Special 7 Conditions toe stones or armor stones may be brought on site. Additional bedding stone (6-9" stone) and filter fabric may be brought on site to construct the stone portion of the return. Coir Envelope Return A18. As ongoing mitigation for this project, the coir envelopes shall remain covered with sand to protect from photo-degradation. Upon exposure of the coir envelopes, a 12"cover of compatible beach sand shall be applied over the coir envelopes. At no time shall the coir envelopes be uncovered for more than thirty days. Beach Nourishment shall be performed in accordance with the conditions below. The proponents shall apply beach nourishment over the coir envelopes uncovered by storm events in a timely manner. Failure to do so is a violation of the Order of Conditions. A19. Anchor posts for the coir envelopes shall be untreated wood. A20. All components of the coir envelopes, including Turf Reinforcement Mats, burlap, netting, and jute shall be 100% biodegradable. Required Mitigation A21. As additional ongoing mitigation for this project, annual beach nourishment shall be required. Annual volume of beach nourishment shall be at least 22.5 cubic yards of clean sand per year upon construction. Required beach nourishment shall be completed by April 15, annually. Beach Nourishment shall be performed in accordance with the conditions below. A22. Annual beach nourishment of 22.5 cubic yards per year shall be required for a minimum of three years. Monitoring shall be conducted on a yearly basis to acquire data that will be interpreted to understand the actual erosion rates. Subsequent to the 3`d year, the project proponents shall return to the Brewster Conservation Commission to reassess their nourishment contribution. Data shall be presented to the Commission to further justify the calculated erosion rate for that 3 year period. Furthermore, this process shall repeat itself every 3 years, so the amount of sand being replenished on the beach correlates to actual erosion processes. Conditions Specific to Ellis Town Landing Conditions A23—A24 apply specifically to the proposed work on Ellis Town Landing. Articulating Concrete Block Mats (ACBM) A23. As ongoing mitigation for this project, the ACBM shall remain covered with 18 to 24 inches (18-24") of clean compatible beach sand. At any time if the sand cover is reduced to 12 inches or less, the sand cover shall be nourished to a 24 inch cover. At no time shall the ACBM be uncovered for more than thirty days, Beach Nourishment shall be performed in accordance with the conditions below. The proponents shall apply beach nourishment over the ACBM uncovered by storm events in a timely manner. Failure to do so is a violation of the Order of Conditions. Notwithstanding Condition #A23 above, it is expected that the ACBM may become exposed in the transition zone from the paved parking area at the top of the slope. Minor exposures of the ACBM within ten (10) feet of the edge of pavement do not require a full renourishment. A24. As additional ongoing mitigation for this project, additional beach nourishment material shall be applied to fill any scoured areas between the north east corner of the ACBM and the property line to the east. This additional sand mitigation shall be applied any time the ACBM is nourished in accordance with Condition A23 above. Beach Nourishment A25. The limit of work line shall be clearly marked with high visibility fencing before commencement of any work in the area. High visibility fencing shall be removed within 5 days of the completion of work. 0 Ellis Landing/51 Captain Dunbar Road Order of Conditions SE 9-1662 Findings/Special 8 Conditions A26. Sand used for beach nourishment shall be compatible in size, color, and texture with existing sand in the area. The proponent shall provide a grain size sieve analysis of both the native beach at the project location and the sand to be used for nourishment. The sieve analysis shall also include the Munsell Soil Color of both the native beach and the sand to be used for nourishment. A27. Sand for nourishment shall be screened through a one quarter inch (114") screen and shall contain less than 10% fines or be washed. Fines shall be defined as material passing a#200 Sieve. The sand must be coarse and free from clay, silty loam (as described above)and other undesirable materials. A28. Receipts of sand delivery showing amount(s) and source(s) of the material shall be submitted to the Conservation Commission upon completion of each beach nourishment activity. Revegetation A29. Mitigation plantings shall be installed in accordance with the approved Coastal Dune Mitigation/Enhancement Planting Plan for Ellis Landing, Brewster, prepared by LEC Environmental Consultants, Inc. as revised September 1, 2015, A30. Mitigation plantings shall be installed within the planting season immediately following construction. For example, if the project was constructed in winter or spring, the mitigation shall be installed that spring. If the project was constructed in summer or fall, the mitigation shall be installed that fall. A31. All new plantings shall be tagged in the field for monitoring purposes. The tags shall remain on the planted species for easy inspection by the Conservation Administrator and/or Conservation Commission, through the required monitoring period. A32. All new plantings shall survive three full growing seasons or be replaced in kind by the applicant and/or property owner. Monitoring A33. A detailed monitoring report shall be submitted to the Conservation Commission prior to May 15, annually, outlining the condition of the shoreline protection measures, beach system and site conditions. The monitoring report shall include a detailed summary of any maintenance activities and beach nourishment activities. Annual monitoring reports shall include beach profiles of the beach and dune at a location just to the east of the existing parking lot. Monitoring reports shall document any effects downdrift of the shoreline stabilization measures. A34. Additional monitoring reports and beach profiles shall be submitted to the Conservation Commission within 14 days of any major storm event, including hurricanes, tropical storms, nor'easters, or blizzards. A35. The Conservation Commission shall require one to three full growing seasons for mitigation plantings before issuing a Certificate of Compliance. Any Certificate of Compliance granted before plant viability shall be conditional on prior submittal of a performance bond, to be held until the Conservation Commission/Agent determines plantings are mature enough to insure survivability and full enough to protect the wetland. A36. On completion of the entire project, the applicant or representative shall submit a written request for a Certificate of Compliance on WPA Form 8A- Request for Certificate of Compliance 0 Ellis Landing/51 Captain Dunbar Road Order of Conditions SE 9-1662 Findings/Special 9 Conditions MA WP ACT. The plan of record contains the stamp of a Professional Engineer (PE)/Professional Land Surveyor. It is further required that if the revetment is reconstructed under this Order of Conditions, a written statement by a PE/PLS certifying substantial compliance with the plan and a new"as-built/as constructed" plan be included. If the "as built/as constructed" plan shows any deviation from the approved plan, the PE/PLS, etc. shall describe said deviation in the statement. This form shall be accompanied by payment of a non-refundable fee to the Town of Brewster. Without a Certificate of Compliance which has been recorded (at the Registry of Deeds or Land Court, whichever applies), an encumbrance shall remain on the property, and your filing will not be closed. If necessary, a partial Certificate of Compliance may be issued for work on an individual property. 0 Ellis Landing/51 Captain Dunbar Road Order of Conditions SE 9-1662 Findings/Special 10 Conditions Lynch, Malloy, Marva, LLP 2.f. Certified Public-Accountants cC AdWsors } To the Honorable Board of Managers Orleans,Brewster, Eastham Groundwater Protection District a In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements of the Orleans, Brewster, Eastham Groundwater Protection District (the District) as of and for the y&ir ended June 30, 2013, in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, we considered the District's internal accounting control over financial reporting (internal control) as a basis for designing our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial statements, but not for the purpose of expressing.an opinion on the effectiveness of the fit District's internal control. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the District's internal control. A deficiency in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent or detect and correct misstatements on a timely basis. A material weakness is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the entity's financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and corrected on a timely basis. Our consideration of internal control over financial reporting was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph of this section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in the-internal control that night be deficiencies, significant deficiencies or material weaknesses. We did not identify any deficiencies in internal control over financial reporting that we consider to be material weaknesses, as defined above. We are also submitting for your consideration comments and recommendations which are not considered to be significant deficiencies but are intended to improve operations and internal accounting control. The comments and recommendations presented herewith in are intended to improve the system of internal accounting control or result in other operating efficiencies. The factual accuracy of our comments has been k discussed with management to obtain their concurrence before the development of our recommendations for improvement. Matters commented on represent findings during the audit and have not been reviewed subsequent to January 14, 2015. A management letter is critical by nature because its purpose is to identify areas where improvements can be made. Accordingly, we have not commented on many positive attributes of the District's financial management systems. It is also important to understand that it is generally not practical to achieve ideal internal control in the complex governmental accounting environment and we recognize that practical considerations are an important factor in changing administrative practices and internal control. The district should weigh the advantages and disadvantages of the suggested changes over the present practices and procedures. We would like to acknowledge the courtesy and assistance extended to us by district personnel during our audit. This communication is intended solely for the information and use of management, the Board of Managers, others within the organization, and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified l parties. � J s January 14, 2015 ® 99 Longwater Circle,Suite 200 ® 913aystate Court ® 411ffest Central Street Norwell,NIA 02061 Brewster,i4tA 02631 Natick,,MA 01760 781-871-5850 508-255-2240 508-650-0018 r. STATUS OF PRIOR YEAR COMMENTS K As part of our audit of the District's financial statements for the year ended June 30,2012, we had several continents and suggestions.The District has acted on some of these suffaestions. The status of our prior year comments is as follows. V� Internal Policies and Procedures Ln prior years, we recommended that the District review and document its financial policies, procedures, and practices, The District has created a binder that outlines policies and procedures; however, we continue to reeonunend that the District enhance its described policies to include key internal controls, 'Management should continue efforts to evaluate internal controls and formally document risk assessments on a routine basis. Chancre in Capital Assets In prior years, per audit work performed, we noted that current year and prior years' depreciation was not recorded for several assets. In order to maintain accurate financial statements accumulated depreciation must be recorded at fiscal year end. In the current year, the District recorded prior years' accumulated depreciation. We have proposed an adjusting entry to record the current year's depreciation. We continue to recommend that the District record depreciation entries. Implementation of GASB Statement 45 The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) has adopted financial reporting requirements for governments that require governments to calculate, and report on, its liability for Other Past-employment Benefiis (OPEB). In order to properly calculate the OPEB liability the standards will require the utilization of an actuary, or actuarial methods. Not reporting this liability would result in either a qualified or an adverse audit opirrion in the years in which the standard is applicable. The size of the District qualifies it for the use of an alternative valuation method. We have used an alternative valuation method to estimate the OPEB liability. We recommend that the District utilize the actuarial reports prepared for the Towns of Brewster, Eastham, and Orleans to see if the calculated liability can be apportioned to the District. We continue to recommend that the District utilize the actuarial reports of the member towns to estimate their OPEB liability. CURRENT YEAR COMMENTS Review of District Ernolo_vee Bond Coverage ivlGL establishes minimum bond amounts for certain municipal officials, The District's revenue for fiscal 7 year 2013 was 5927,992 which would require minimum bond coverage of$65,000 for a treasurer's position, The 1, District's Chief Operator was bonded for $49,000, We recommended management consider coverage for positions as outlined in I,iGL. Maintenance of Files t During the current year, we were unable to review certain invoices for several of the disbursements and t receipts recorded by the District. We recommend the District implement procedures to maintain supporting documentation for all disbursements and receipts. Lynch, `alloy,Marini,LLP 2 Certilfed Public Accountants&Advisors www3mmepas.¢om r.l ErnDloyee Pavroll and Benefit Files, The District is required to maintain employee benefit files in order to comply with labor, industry, r retirement and insurance laws and to monitor compliance with personnel by-laws or union contracts. We a recommend the District undertake a thorough review of the payroll files to determine all employees have all the ` appropriate and accurate paperwork (i.e.: W-4, I-9, benefit enrollment forms, county retirement forms, rate and/or step and grade notifications, etc.)on file. Procurement. During the current year, documented quotes and bids for certain vendors were not available for review. While the District selected these vendors based on limited vendor options and verbal negotiations, we recommend that the District obtain written documentation evidencing the reasoning for selectins these vendors. r Procedures for Processing Cash Disbursements, 'While reviewing checks at year end, we noticed several checks that had already been cleared prior to warrant approval. Although the aggregate amount of these checks was immateriat (SSOS.89), in our opinion hIGL (Chapter 41, Section 56) states that no disbursements should be made without approval. We recommend that payments should not be made prior to the District's warrants being approved. Flo 1� i� a iJ fuy a! �s Lynch,Malloy,Marini,LLP 3 Certified Puh&dccotmtants&Advisors www1mmepas.com ORLEANS,BRE`VSTER,AND EASTHAI I GROUNDWATER PROTECTION DISTRICT FNANCIAL STATEMENTS AND MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS WITH INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2013 i ORLEANS, BRE«'STER, MIND EASTHAM GROUNDWATER PROTECTION DISTRICT FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS WITH INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT ON: Financial Statements i Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed iii Accordance with Government Auditing,Stanthir7 by rn MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS v FINANCIAL STATEMENTS: Statement of Net Position Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Net Position 2 Statement of Cash Flows 3 Notes to Financial Statements 4 Lpich, Malloy, Marini, LLP Certified PrrUllcr 11cr�r�n�xt�ta�ts cL�ldi��vr�� INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT To the Honorable Board of Managers Orleans, Brewster, and Eastham Groundwater Protection District Report on the Financial Statements We have audited the accompanying financial statements of Orleans, Brewster, and Eastham Groundwater Protection District (the District) as of and for the year ended ,tune 30, 2013, and the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise the District's basic financial statements as listed in the table of contents. Managente►ft's Responsibility for the Financial Statements Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in [lie United States of America; this includes the design, implementation, and maintenance of internal control relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error. Auditors'Responsibility Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government 4uditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free from material misstatement. An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. The procedures selected depend on the auditor's judgment, including the assessment of the risks of material tnnisstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error. In making those risk assessments, the auditor considers internal control relevant to the entity's preparation and fair presentation of the Financial statements in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the entity's internal control. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of significant accounting estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opinion. Opinion In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the respective financial position of(lie District as of June 30, 2013, and the respective changes in financial position, and cash flows thereof for the year then ended in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. i ® 99 Longwater Circle,Suite 200 ■ 9 Baystate Court M 41 west Central Street Norwell,MA 02061 Brewster,NIA 02631 Natick,NIA 01760 731-371-5850 508-255-2240 509-650-0018 Other Altrlters Required Supplenrentury Information Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require that the management's discussion on pages v-vi supplement the basic financial statements. SLICK information, although not a part of the basic financial statements, is required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board, who considers it to be an essential part of financial reporting for placing the basic financial statements in an appropriate operational, economic, or historical context. We have applied certain limited procedures to the required supplementary information in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, which consisted of inquiries of management about the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with management's responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic financial statements, We do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the infonnation because the limited procedures do not provide us with sufficient evidence to express an opinion or provide any assurance. Other Reporting Required by Gnvervunent rl udifing Standards bi accordance with Goverunient rluditin;Standards, we have also issued our report dated January 14, 2015, on our consideration of the District's internal control over financial reporting and on our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements and other nnatters. The purpose of that report is to describe the scope of our testing of internal control over financial reporting and connpliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on internal control over financial reporting or on compliance. That report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Gotyerunteut Auditing Stantitwdt v in considering the District's internal control over financial reporting and compliance. Norwell, ;Massachusetts January 14, 201 Lynch, Malloy, Ahirini, LLP Cortilied Prlldir Arrou+llants it-Advisors WI%w ukia<-pa5,uam Lynch, MmIloy, Marini, LLP Cez tW ed Prdilic A ccomita-uts ct Ad visol.s INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING AND ON COLMPLIANCE AND OTHER MATTERS BASED ON AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERtVAMYT A UDITING STAiVDARDS To the Honorable Board of'Managers Orleans, Brewster,and Eastham Groundwater Protection District We have audited, in accordance with the auditing standards generally accepted in the United States or America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Govermneut Audilin.-Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, the financial statements of the Orleans, Brewster, and Eastham Groundwater Protection District (the District) as of and for the year ended June 30, 2013, and the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise the District's basic financial statements and have issued our report thereon dated January 14, 2015. Internal Control over Financial Reporting In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements, we considered the District's internal control over financial reporting (internal control) to determine the audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the financial statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the District's internal control. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the District's internal control. A diffliciencv in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow mana'ement or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned ftunctions, to prevent, or detect and correct, misstatennents on a timely basis, A nuater'ial weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control such than there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the entity's financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and corrected on a timely basis. A si,gnificanl deficiency is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control that is less severe than a material weakness, yet important enough to merit attention by those charged with governance. Our consideration of internal control was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph of this section and was not designed to identity all deficiencies in internal control that miLlht be material weaknesses or significant deficiencies and therefore, material weaknesses or significant deficiencies may exist that were not identified. Given these limitations, during our audit we did not identify any deficiencies in internal control that we consider to be material weaknesses. However, material weaknesses may exist that have not been identified. We did identify certain deficiencies in internal control, described in the paragraph below, that we consider to be significant deficiencies, The District receives waste from septic tank haulers and bills the haulers based upon the weight of the trick loads. One of the D'istrict's scales, used to receive and weigh hauler trucks, is broken and cannot weigh the trucks. As a result of the broken scale, truck load weight and the related revenue billings are estimates. These estimates are based on the capacity of the hauler tanks and may be inaccurate, District Resvonse: The District has been in contact with the scale compardes to repair the scale. iii M 99 Longvater Circle,Suite 200 M 9 Baystate Court M 41 West Central Street Norwell,MA 02061 Brmster,MA 02631 Natick,MA 01760 � 781-871-5850 508-255-2240 505-650-0018 Compliance and Other Matters As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the District's financial statements are free from material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination of financial statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not an objective of our audit, and accordingly, we do not express such in opinion. Orleans,Brewster, and Eastham Groundwater Protection District's Response to l+indiugs The District's response to the findings identified in our audit is described in the paragraph above. Tine District's response was not subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the financial statements and, accordingly, we express no opinion on it. Purpose of this Report The purpose of this report is solely to describe the scope of our testing of internal control and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the effectiveness of the entity's internal control or on compliance. This report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Anditalr- Standards in considering the entity's internal control and compliance. Accordinaly, this conniminnication is not suitable for any other purpose. Norwell, Massachusetts January 14, 2015 Lpich, Malloy, Marini, ITP iv L'r�rtiffvd Piddir AITIJI11t Mt`u&Arivisors �pt,�ram�ucpau.row I i i MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS i i ORLEANS, BREWSTER, AND EASTHAlI GROUNDWATER PROTECTION DISTRICT Mana0ement's Discussion and Analysis June 30, 2013 As management of the Orleans, Brewster, and Eastham Groundwater Protection District (the District), the offer readers of the District's financial statements this narrative overview and analysis of the financial activities of the District for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2013. Basic Financial Statements The basic financial statements are prepared using the accrual basis of accounting. Revenue is recorded when earned, and expenses are recorded when incurred. The basic financial statements include a statement of net position, a statement of revenues, expenses, and changes in net position; a statement of cash flows and notes to the financial statements. The statement of net position presents information on the assets and liabilities of the District, with the difference beim reported as net position. The statement of revenues, expenses, and changes in net position report the operating and non-operating revenues and expenses of the District for the fiscal year. The net result of these activities combined with the beginning of the year net position reconciles to the net position at the end of the current fiscal year. The statement of cash flows reports the changcs in cash for the year resulting from operating and investing activities. The net result of the changes in cash for the year, when added to the balance of cash at the beginning of the year, equals cash at the end of the year. The notes to the financial statements provide additional information that is essential to a full understanding of the data provided in the financial statements. The notes to the financial statements follow the basic financial statements described above. Financial Hiahliahts • The assets of the District exceeded its liabilities at the close of the most recent fiscal year by approximately$1.45 million(net position). This amount was primarily comprised of net investment in capital assets. The District's unrestricted net position, which may be used to meet the District's ongoing obligations to citizens and creditors, was in a deficit balance of $11,249. • The total cost of all District services for fiscal year 2013 was approximately S 1.26 million. • Overall, net position of the District decreased by S334,425. This is after providing for $302,261 of depreciation in fiscal year 2013. V ORLEANS,BRE«'sTER,AND EASTH:VNI GROUNDWATER PROTECTION DISTRICT ;Matt-ement's Discussion and Analysis June 30, 20t3 Condensed Financial Information A comparative summary of financial information is presented below: 2013 2912 Cash and cash equivalents S 177,076 S 164,365 Other current assets 94,120 85,t03 Capital as5cts,net of accumulated depreciation 1,459,344 L761.605 Total assets 1,730,540 2,01 1,075 Current liabilities 56,319 45,815 Longi-tenn obligations 225.636 183.743 Total liabilities 252,445 723,553 Net investment in capital assets 1,159,344 1,761,605 Unrestricted f 11.249) 20,915 Total net position 5 [.443 099 S 1.733.53() Operating revenues S 927,992 S 954,792 Operating expenses (L262.572) (1?59 278) Operating income (334,550) (304,486) Investment income 155 222 Chanue in net position _ 334-12 ) S 1304264) Capital Assets The District's investment in capital assets as of June 30, 2013 and 2012 amounted to 51,46 million and 51.76 million, respectively, which is net of accumulated depreciation of SIMS million and $18. 17 million, respectively. The investment in capital assets includes the plant facility and improvements, including machinery and equipment. Requests for Information This financial report is designed to provide a general overview of the District's finances for all those with an interest in the District's finances. Questions concerning any of the information provided in this report or requests for additional financial information should be addressed to the Orleans, Brewster, and Eastham Groundwater Protection District, Attn: James Burgess, Chief Operator, P.O. Box 2773, Orleans, NIA 02653-6773. vi BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS. ORLEANS, BREWSTER, AMD EASTHAM GROUNDWATER PROTECTION DISTRICT Statement of Net Position June 30, 2013 i ASSETS Totals Current assets: Cash and cash equivalents 112,651 Investments 64,395 User charges receivable 93,019 Prepaid expense 1,101 Total current assets 271,196 Capital assets, net of accumulated depreciation 1,459,344 Total assets S 1,730,540 LIABILITIES Current liabilities: Accounts payable $ 56,519 Total cut-rent liabilities 56,519 Other post-employment benefits 155,539 Compensated absences, due in more than one year 40,057 Total liabilities 252,445 NET POSITION Net investment in capital assets 1,459,344 Unrestricted (11,249) Total net position 1,445,095 Total liabilities and net position S 1,730,540 The accompanying notes are an integral pail of these financial statements. 1 ORLEANS, BREWSTER, AND EASTIIAM GROUNDWATER PROTECTION DISTRICT Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Clianues in Net Assets Year Ended June 30, 2013 i Totals Operating revenues: User chanes S 926,197 Finance charges 1,495 Total operating revenues 927,992 Operating expenses: Payroll, fringTe benefits, and related costs 547,491 Chemicals 25,280 1 Utilities 99,706 Lab testing 14,787 Uniform service 3,845 Maintenance, repairs, and supplies 73,455 Sludge/compost disposal 136,012 Professional fees 9,663 Insurance 21,325 Office expense and supplies 6,281 Office equipment 1,755 Postage and freight 5,297 Velucle maintenance and fuel 9,170 Nliscellalteous 6,244 Depreciation 302,261 Total operating expenditures 1,262,572 Operatin, loss (334,580) Nonoperating revenues: Interest income 155 Changes in net position (334,425) Net position at beg==inning=of year 1,752,520 Net position at end of year 1,445,095 The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. 2 i ORLEANS, BREWSTER, AND EASTHAXI GROUNDWATER PROTECTION DISTRICT Statement of Cash Flows Year Ended June 30, 2013 Totals Cash flows from operating activities: Cash received from users S 885,361 Cash paid to employees and for employee benefits (501,299) Cash paid to vendors (371,506) Net cash provided by operating activities 12,556 Cash flows from investing activities: Cash received for interest 155 Net cash used by investing activities 155 Net increase (decrease) in cash 12,711 Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year 164,365 Cash and cash equivalents, end of year S 177,076 Reconciliation of operating income to net cash provided by operating activities: Operating loss S (334,580) Depreciation expense 302,261 Changes in operating assets and liabilities: Accounts receivable (42,631) Prepaid expense 33,615 Accounts payable 11,008 Other post-employment benefits 61,437 Compensated absence payable (18,554) Net cash provided by operating activities S 12,556 The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. 3 i 'r i, I I NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATRIMENTS �I i ORLEANS, BRENNISTER, AND EASTHAM GROUNDWATER PROTECTION DISTRICT Notes to the Financial Statements June 30, 2013 Note 1. Organization and Revortinu Entit), A. Organization Orleans, Brewster, and Eastham GConndwater Protection District (the District), Orleans, Massachusetts, was established under Chapter 327 of the Acts of 1988 of the ivlassachusetts General Laws for the purpose of treating and disposing of sewage and offal, including septic tank pumpings. The District commenced full operations on March 19, 1990, with plant and facilities used exclusively by the District €order an inter-municipal agreement with member towns of Orleans, Brewster, and Eastham. The plant and facilities were developed, constructed, and financed by member towns ivith federal and state grants and member contributions. The District is governed by a three-member Board of ylanagers appointed by the Chairman of the Board of Selectmen of each member town. The District does not have the authority to borrow money. Its members are responsible for funding deficits of the District. B. Reportina Entit`, Genei-ol The accompanying financial statements present the District (the primary government) and its component units. Component units are included in the reporting entity if their operational and financial relationships with the District are significant. Pursuant to these criteria, the District did not identify any cotliponent units requiring inclusion in the accompanying financial statements. Joini Venttn•es The District has entered into a joint venture with other municipalities to pool resources and share the costs, risks, and rewards of providing goods or set-vices to venture participants directly, or for the benefit of the general public or specific recipients. The following is the District's joint venture, its purpose, and the annual assessment paid by the District. Financial statements may be obtained from the joint venture by contacting them directly. The District does not have an equity interest in the joint venture. Joint venture and address Purpose FY 2013 Assessment Cape Cod ivlunicipal Health Group To provide employce health berietits S 60,542 c/o Group Benefit Strategies 27 iMidstate Office Park, Suite 204 Auburn,NIA 01 501 Barnstable Comity Retirement Assoc. Employee pension S 68,300 The health care assessment consists of the total amounts billed to the District for all plans and is paid by a 75% and 25% primary care premium form€Ela by the District and employees, respectively. Tile District budgets annually for its estimated share of contributions. 4 ORLEANS,BREWSTER, AND EASTHAA1 GROUNDWATER PROTECTION DISTRICT Notes to the Financial Statements June 30, 2013 Notc 2. Sunnmary of Significant Accounting Policies A. Basis of Presentation The accounting policies of the District conform to generally accepted accounting principles applicable to governmental units and the financial statements conform to the reporting presentation set forth in "Governmental AccOlinting and Financial Reporting Standards" issued by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB). Accordingly, the District uses the accrual basis of accounting, which recognizes revenue when earned and liabilities when incurred, regardless of the timing of the related cash flows. The District has elected to apply accounting standards applicable to the private sector issued on or before November 30, 1959 sinless those standards conflict with or contradict pronouncement of the GASB. B. Ooeratina and Non-otneratina Revenue and Expense Operating revenues and expenses are distinguished from non-operating items. Operating revenues and expenses are principally derived from user charges billed to property owners, and haulers on the basis of weight and gallons of sewage discharged for treatment. Operating revenues are recognized when sewage is discharged and are considered fully collectible. The District does not provide for an allowance for uncollectible accounts. Operating expenses include salaries and benefits for District personnel, sewage treatment and monitoring costs, as well as general administrative expenses and depreciation On the plant facility. All revenues and expenses not meeting this definition are reported as non-operating revenues and expenses. C. Cash and Cash Equivalents For the purposes of the statement of cash flows, the District considers all highly liquid investments purchased with a maturity of three months or less and units of Massachusetts Municipal Depository Trust (1v2ADT) to be cash equivalents. Investments are carried at fair value except for short-term U.S. Treasury obligations with a remaining maturity at the tine of purchase of one year or less. Those investments are reported at amortized cost. Fair value is based on quoted market prices. D. Capital Assets Capital assets or leasehold improvements, if any, over the District's capitalization threshold, are stated at cost. Depreciation its computed on a straight-lime basis over economic useful lives of the assets. E. Equity Classifications Equity is classified as net position and displayed in three components: Net investment in caoital assets — Consist of capital assets, net Of accsimulated depreciation and reduced by the outstanding balances Of any bonds, mortgages, notes, or other borrowings that are attributable to the acquisition, construction or improvement of those assets. 5 ORLEANS,BREWSTER, AND EASTHMYI GROUNDWATER PROTECTION DISTRICT Notes to the Financial Statements June 30, 2013 Restricted net position — Consist of net position with constraints placed on the use either by 1) external groups, such as creditors, grantors, contributors, or laws or reg€►lations of other governments; or 2) law through constitutional provisions or enabling legislation. Unrestricted net position — Consist of all other net position that do not meet the definition of "restricted" or"invested in capital assets, net of related debt." i F. Use of Estimates The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amo€u% of revenues and expenditures during the reporting period. Actual results will differ from those estimates. Note 3. Budgets The District does not have a requirement for a legally adopted budget however an annual operating budget is adopted by the Board of Managers after January first of each year for the next fiscal year. Budgeted items lapse at the end of the fiscal year unless otherwise voted by the Board of;•Managers. The operating budget includes amounts for operation and maintenance costs of the facility. The Board of Managers also adopts a multi-year capital plan. Capital costs not funded from operating revenues are shared equally by the member Towns of the District as provided for in the Intermunicipal Agreement. Note 4. Cash and Cash Equivalents Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 44, Sections 54 and 55, place certain limitations on cash deposits and investments available to the District. Authorized deposits include demand deposits, term deposits, and certificates of deposit in trust companies, national banks, savings banks, and certain other financial institutions. Deposits may not exceed certain levels without collateralization of the excess by the financial institution involved. The District maintains deposits in an authorized financial institution. In case of deposits, custodial credit risk is the risk that in the event of a bank failure, the District's deposits may not be returned. The District does not have a formal deposit policy for c€Istodial risk. At year-end, deposits totaled $184,034 and had a carrying amount of$176,588, which included deposits in MMDT of$64,395. Of the deposit amounts, $119,639 was covered by federal depository insurance. The difference between deposit amounts and ins€u•ed amounts consists of the deposits in MiVIDT. The difference between bank deposits and carrying amounts consists primarily of outstanding checks and deposits in transit. The District does not have a formal investment policy; however, the District's only investments consist of units of Massachusetts Municipal Depository Trust (MIVIDT), a pooled investment account which qualifies as an external investment pool. The MMDT is managed on behalf of the Treasurer of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, who acts as trustee. 6 ORLEANS, BREWSTER,AND EASTHAAI GROUNDWATER PROTECTION DISTRICT Notes to the Financial Statements June 30, 20 Financial reports of the MiMDT are publicly available and may be obtained by contacting the MNMDT directly. This account is valued at fair value, which is also its cost. The balance invested in TMIADT at June 30, 2013 is$64,395. Note 5. Capital Assets Capital assets consist of costs of constructing and equipping the District's plant and facilities and for- continuing design and construction, These assets have an estimated useful life of twenty years. Changes in the Districts capital assets are as follows: Balance Balance June 30,2012 Additions Disposals Jane 30,2013 Facility construction and improvements S 20,234,353 S - S S 20,231,358 Accumulated depreciation 13.472.753 302.261 18.775.014 E Total capital assets,net of depreciation S 1.761.605 S - ._._.._.._.___ Si.4.22,344 Note 6. Employee Benefits A. Retirement Benefits Plan Description The District contributes for eligible employees to the Barnstable County Retirement Association (Association), a cost-sharing multiple-employer defined benefit pension plan administered by the Barnstable County Retirement Association. The Association provides retirement and disability benefits, aututal cost-of-livitlg adjttstRients, and death benefits to plan members and beneficiaries. The Association is governed by the applicable provisions of Chapter 32 of the Massachusetts General Law (M.G.L.) and other applicable statutes. Oversight is provided by a five member board. The Association issues an annual report which is available to the public all(] may be obtained by contacting the Commonwealth of it1lassachusetts, Public Employee Retirement Administration Commission(PERAC), One Ashburton Place, Boston, iV1A 02105. Fundimz Policv Plan members are required to contribute 5-11% of their annual covered salary and the District is required to contribute at an actuarially determined rate. The District's current year contribution is $63,300, which was equal to its required contribution. The contribution requirements of plan tlnembers and the District are established and may be amended by M.G.L. The District's contributions to the Association for the years ending June 30, 2012 and 2011 were $63,530 and $58,231 respectively, which were equal to the required contributions for each year. B. Compensated Absences Employees are granted vacation leave tinder the terms of the District's personnel by-laws. Vacation days may be accumulated up to 20 days depending on years of service. Upon termination, through no fault or delinquency on the part of the employee or by retirement, resignation, or entrance into the military, the employee is entitled to be compensated for 100% of accttIII ufated vacation days at the then employee's regular rate of pay. 7 ORLEANS, BRE WSTER, AND EASTHAM GROUNDWATER PROTECTION DISTRICT Notes to the Financial Statements Rine 30, 2013 Employees are entitled mider the District personnel by-laws to accumulate sick leave at the rate of one day per month for each month actually worked, up to a maxiirttint of 12 clays per year. Sick leave may be accrmtulated from year to year tip to a maximum of 150 days. Upon retirement, employees are eligible for payment of ten percent of the dollar value of unused sick leave. Payment shall be based on the %nage or salary the employee is earning at time of retirement. At June 30, 2013, the District estimated the liability for vacation leave to be $23,310 and sick leave liability to be $16,776 both at current rates of pay, times unused vacation and sick leave. Accrued vacation and sick leave payables are included in the accompanying Statement of Net Position. C. Other Post Employment Benefits In addition to the pension benefits described above, the District provicles postretirement health, dental and life insurance benefits to all retirees and their dependents in accordance with Chapter 32B of Massachusetts General Laws under various contributory plans. Specific benefit provisions and contribution rates are established by collective-bargaining agreements, state law and District ordinances. Currently, the District does not have any retirees or related costs, Fundinff Policv The contribution rates of retirees are established by collective-bargaining agreements, employment policy or contract and Massachusetts General Law. The required contribution is based on pay as you go financing requirements. For fiscal year 2013 the District diel not contribute to health and life insurance programs on behalf of retirees. All benefits are provided through a third-party insurance carrier that administers, assumes, and pays all claims. The District contributes 75% of insurance premiums with the remainder funded through pension benefit deductions. Plan Description The District administers a single employer defined benefit plan which provides health and prescription drug benefits to substantially all retired employees and their spouses (plan members). Eligibility to retire under the District's plan is based upon meeting one of the following conditions: i. At least 10 years of creditable service are eligible at age 55; ii. At least 20 years of creditable serve are eligible at any age. The number of participants as of lune 30, 2013, the effective (late of the OPEB valuation was 0, which inclucles retirees, beneficiaries, and dependents. Benefits are provided for and intended under various provisions of Massachusetts General Law, terms of collective bargaining agreements and Town ordinances. Ftmdina Policv The contribution rates of retirees are established by collective-bargaining agreements, Massachusetts General Lav, and District ordinances. The required contribution is based on pay as you go financing requirements. For Fiscal year 2013, the District contributed approximately $0 to health, and life insurance programs on behalf of retirees, beneficiaries and spouses. All benefits are provided through a third-party iltsurance carrier that administers, assumes, and pays all claims. The District contributes at least 75% of the insurance premiums with the remainder funded through retiree contributions. s ORLEANS, BREWSTER, AND EASTHANT GROUNDWATER PROTECTION DISTRICT Notes to the Financial Statements June 30, 2013 Annual OPEB Cost and Net OPEB Obliwition The District's annual other past-employment benefit (OPEB) cost (expense) is calculated based on the annutal required contribution of the employer (ARC), an amount actuarially determined in accordance with the provisions of GASB Statement No. 45, Under GASB No. 45, employers with fewer than one hundred plan members are permitted the use of an alternative measurement method. The District has elected to utilize this method in estimating their OPEB liability. The ARC represents a level of funding that if paid on an ongoin; basis, is projected to cover normal cost each year an([ amortize any unfunded actuarial liabilities (or funding excess) over a period not to exceed thirty years. The following table shows the components of the District's annual OPEB cost for the Fiscal year, the amount actually contributed to the plan, and changes in the District's net OPEB obligation. Annual required contribution(ARC) S 61,437 Interest on net OPEB obligation 0 ARC adjustment Annual OPEB cost 61,4.37 Contributions made 0 Increase in net OPEB obligation 61,437 Net OPEB obligation,beginning of year 124,102 Net OPEB obligation,end of year S 185.539 Funding Status and Schedule ofPundinu Progress The unfunded actuarial liability was determined using the level dollar thirty year open amortization basis. (a) (b) (b)—(a) M (a) (0 l(b)-(a)11(e) Alternative URAL as a Alternative Accrued Unfunded Percentage Valuation Value of Liability AAL Funded Covered of Covered Date Assets (AAL) U{ AAL} Ratio Payroll Payroll 6130113 S S 494,325 $ 494,325 Uo% NIA NIA 6130111 $ S 475,822 $ 478,822 0.00% NIA NIA Alternative valuations of an ongoing plan involve estimates of the value of reported amounts and assumptions about the probability of occurrence of events far into the future. Examples include ass«mptions about future employment, mortality, and the healthcare cost trend. Amounts determined regarding the funded status of the plan and the aminal required contributions of the employer are subject to continual revision as actual results are compared with past expectations an([ new estimates are made about the future. 9 ORLEANS, BREWSTER, AND EASTHAiM GROUNDWATER PROTECTION DISTRICT Notes to the Financial Statements June 30, 2013 Alternative Nlethod and Assumotions Projections of the benefits for financial reporting purposes are based on the substantive plan (the plan as understood by the employer and the plan members) and include the types of benefits provided at the time of each valuation and the historical pattern of sharing of benefit costs between employer and plan members to that point. The alternative method and assumptions used include techniques that are designed to reduce the effects of short-term volatility in estimated accrued liabilities and the estimated value of assets, consistent with the long-term perspective of the calculations. Tile following methods and assumptions were utilized in the June 30, 2013: i ■ Amortization Period: 30 years ope1; ■ Asset Valuation Method: Market value ■ Investment Rate of Return: 5.00% ■ Inflation Rate: 3.30% ■ Discount Rate: 5.50% ■ Dental: None ■ Healthcare Trend Rates: 5.6% for 2014, 5.4% for 2015, 2016+ 5% I Note 7. Risk l'Ianaaement The District is exposed to various risks of loss related to general liability, medical claims, property and casualty, workers' compensation, and unemployment compensation claims. Buildings and property are insured against fire, theft, and natural disaster. District vehicles are insured for losses. The District is insured for general liability tip to $3,000,000 per claim to a maximum of$1,000,000 per occurrence. As discussed in Note 1, the District participates iii the Cape Cod Municipal Health Group (Group) a 111Eulicipal joint-purchase group consisting of 51 governmental units, formed pursuant to Massachusetts General Law Chapter 32B to provide employee insurance benefits. Employees and the District both contribute to the Group based upon a 75% (District) and 25% (Employee) primary care premium formula. The District budgets, annually, for its estimated share of contributions. At June 30, 2013, the Group had net position of$24,332,256. The District is insured for workers' compensation for District personnel to a limit of$1,000,000 per occurrence for each employce. 10 ORLEANS, BRENNISTER,AND BASTHAII GROUNDWATER PROTECTION DISTRICT Notes to the Financial Statements June 30, 2013 Note S. Implementation of New GASB Pronouncements CLlrl'ent 1)ronOullcements Time GASB issued Statement #60, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Service Concession AI•rangements, which was required to be implemented in fiscal year 2013. This pronouncement's objective is to improve financial reporting by addressing issues related to service concession arrangements (SCA), which are types of public-private or public-public partnerships through the use of infrastructure of- another ranother public asset in exchange for significant consideration. The standards in this statement currently do not apply to time District and therefore(lid not impact the District's financial statements. The GASB issued Statement#61. The Financial Repol'lingEnfll),: 011llllbus-all amenchnent of GASB Statements Mo. 14 and No. 34, which was required to be implemented in fiscal year 2013. This pronouncement modifies requirements for the inclusion of component units in the financial reporting entity. The standards in this statement currently do not apply to the District and therefore did not impact the District's financial statements. The GASB issued Statement #62, Coclicatlon of Accounfing and Financial Repol'ting Guidance Confainecl in Pre-November 30, 1989 FASB curd AICPA Pi,onouncements, which was required to be implemented in fiscal year 2013. This pronouncement will continue the codification of all generally accepted accotmting principles for state and local governments into a single source. Tile GASB issued Statement 463, Financial Reporting of Defel•red Outflows of Resow-ces, Defel•I•ed Inflows of Resow,ces, and Net Posilion, which was required to be implemented in fiscal year 2013. This pronouncement will standardize the financial reporting relating to the elements of a government's consumption of net position, and an acquisition of net position that is applicable to a filture reporting period. The requirements of this pronouncement have been Implemented in the District's financial statements. The GASB issued Statement 465. Items PI'evlously Reported as Assets and Liabilities, which Was required to be implemented in fiscal year 2013. This pronouncement will clarify the appropriate use of time financial statement elements deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources to ensure consistency in financial reporting. The requirements of this pronouncement have been implemented in time District's financial statements. The GASB issued Statement #66, Technical Corrections - 2012, which was required to be implemented in fiscal year 2013. This pronouncement will resolve conflicting accounting and financial reporting guidance that could diminish the consistency of financial reporting and thereby enhance the usefulness of the financial reports. Time requirements of this pronouncement have been implemented in the District's financial statements. Future nrolIOLlncements Tire GASB issued Statement 467, Financial Repol•ting for Pension Plains, which is required to be implemented in fiscal year 2011. This pronouncement will improve financial reporting primarily through enhanced note disclosures and schedules of required supplementary information that will be presented by the pension plans that are within its scope. The District expects this pronouncement will require additional disclosure and impact the District's financial statements. ll ORLEANS,BREWSTER,AND EASTHAM GROUNDWATER PROTECTION DISTRICT Notes to the Financial Statements Juste 30, 2013 The GASB issued Statement 468, Accounting aml Financial Reporting j6r Pensions, which is required to be implemented in fiscal year 2015. This pronouncement will improve the decision-usefulness of information to employer and governmental nonemployee contributing entity financial reports and will enhance its value for assessing accountability and interperiod equity by requiring recognition of the entire net pension liability and a more comprehensive measure of pension expense. The District expects this pronouncement will require additional disclosure and impact the District's financial statements. The GASB issued Statement #69, Government Combiturlions rind Disposals of Govei-nment Opuctliom, which is required to be implemented in fiscal year 2015. This pronouncement pl•Ovides specific accOEEnting and financial reporting guidance for combinations in the governmental environment. This Statement also improves the decision usefulness of financial reporting by requiring that disclOSu['es be made by governments about combination arrangements in which they engage and for disposals of governnteEtt operations. The District expects this pronouncement will require additional disclosure and impact the District's financial statements. The GASB issued Statement #70, Accounting and Financial Repoi-fing for Mouexchmige Fimll7cial Guarantees, which is required to be implemented in fiscal year 2014. This pronouncement requires consistent reporting by those governments that extend nonexchange financial guarantees. The District does not expect this pronouncement will impact the District's financial statements. 12 CP COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS BARNSTABLE, ss LAND COURT DEPARTMENT OF THE TRIAL COURT CIVIL ACTION NO. GLORIAE DEI ARTES FOUNDATION, INC,, ) Plaintiff, ) ) V. ) ) RICHARD JUDD; WILLIAM HOAG; SCOTT ) COLLUM; NICHOLAS deRUYTER; ) ELIZABETH TAYLOR; and KARI HOFFMANN, ) as they are Members of the Planning Board of the ) Town of Brewster, } Defendants. ) } COMPLAINT This is an action by Gloriae Dei Artes Foundation, Inc. ("the Foundation"), a non-profit educational foundation, to annul a decision of the Planning Board of the Town of Brewster ("the Planning Board") that denied, for want of a super-majority, the Foundation's application for site plan approval. The Foundation seeks to annul the decision because the Planning Board's decision was arbitrary, capricious, in excess of the Planning Board's authority and violative of the so-called "Dover Amendment." I. PARTIES, JURISDICTION AND VENUE, 1. The Foundation is a not-for-profit corporation organized and existing under the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and has a usual place of business at 129 Rock Harbor Road, Orleans, Barnstable County, Massachusetts. 2. The Defendant, Richard Judd, is a member of the Planning Board of the Town of Brewster, and has an usual please of business at 2198 Main Street, Brewster, Massachusetts, 3. The Defendant, William Hoag, is a member of the Planning Board of the Town of Brewster, and has an usual please of business at 2198 Main Street, Brewster, Massachusetts. 4. The Defendant, Scott Collum, is a member of the Planning Board of the Town of Brewster, and has an usual please of business at 2198 Main Street, Brewster, Massachusetts, 5. The Defendant, Nicholas deRuyter, is a member of the Planning Board of the Town of Brewster, and has an usual please of business at 2198 Main Street, Brewster, Massachusetts. 6. The Defendant, Elizabeth Taylor, is a member of the Planning Board of the Town of Brewster, and has an usual please of business at 2198 Main Street, Brewster, Massachusetts. 7. The Defendant, Kari Hoffmann, is a member of the Planning Board of the Town of Brewster, and has an usual please of business at 2198 Main Street, Brewster, Massachusetts. 8. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to General Laws Chapter 40A, Section 17 as this case seeks review of an application for a special permit under Chapter 40A, § 11. II. THE FOUNDATION'S CLAIM A. The Foundation 9. The Foundation was established in 1988 "exclusively to study, educate, perforin, and promote excellence and interest in music, including classic choral music, and for other such charitable and educational purposes as are set forth in, and permitted by, Section 501(c)(3) of the United States Internal Revenue Code . . .". Copies of the Articles of Organization and Articles of Amendment are annexed hereto as Exhibit A. 2 10. The Foundation is affiliated with a religious organization known as the Community of Jesus based in Orleans, Massachusetts. The Foundation is a separate educational foundation managed by officers and directors related to that religious organization. The Foundation supports the Spirit of America Marching Band, the Gloriae Dei Cantores, a renowned choral ensemble, the Winter Percussion Ensemble and other musical endeavors. 11. The Foundation has been a tenant at the property located at 36 Southern Eagle Cartway in Brewster ("the Property") since 1988. The Foundation rents an existing steel building in the rear of the Property in which it stores equipment, vehicles and other items related to the Spirt of America Band, The Planning Board previously (in 2008) granted a site plan special permit for the Foundation's structure and use on the Property. The primary and dominant purpose of the Foundation is to provide support for the practice, training, rehearsal and musical education for the musical performances it promotes. 12. The Foundation's existing and proposed use of the Property is protected under the provisions of Chapter 40A, §3 and the so-called Dover Amendment and the Town of Brewster's Town Counsel has so concluded. See Exhibit B. B. The Apiplieation 13. In November of 2014, the Foundation applied for a site plan special permit under the provisions of the Brewster Zoning Bylaws for the construction of a 8,000 square foot engineered steel building plus a full basement to be used for non-profit arts education, and equipment storage and repair. A copy of the application is annexed hereto as Exhibit C. A plan depicting the site is annexed hereto as Exhibit D. 14. The Foundation proposed to remove two existing greenhouse structures and a portion of another existing building at the rear of the Property, together about 7,263 square feet, and to replace them with a new engineered steel building located in the center of the 15-acre site. The application, if granted, would have eliminated certain non-conforming structures on the site. 15. Subsequent to the submission of the original application, the Foundation amended its application to move the proposed new structure even farther away from the northerly boundary of the site (to over 550 feet from any residence) and to change the structure from a two-story building with a full basement to a two-story building of approximately 17,000 square feet without a basement. 16. The proposed building on the Property would meet all dimensional and set back requirements of the zoning bylaws of the Town and the use is permitted as a matter of right under Chapter 40A, §3. C. The Planning Board Proceedings 17. The Planning Board, consisting of seven members, held public hearings on the application commencing on March 25, 2015 and closed the public hearing on August 12, 2015. Only five of the members participated. At a public meeting on August 26, 2015, the Board voted, three to two in favor, to grant the site plan special permit. The majority determined that the proposed site plan design conforms to all of the requirements of the Zoning Bylaws and concluded that the proposed use is exempt as a not-for-profit educational facility under Chapter 40A, §3. 18. The application did not pass as five affirmative votes were required. 19. The members of the Planning Board who voted in opposition to the application did not articulate any ground for their opposition during the many public hearings held before the Board.. Other than voicing questions or concerns about other activities on the Property, the members voting in opposition to the motion to approve the application did not explain in any 4 detail how the structure and the proposed use failed to comply with the Zoning Bylaws of the Town. 20. The decision of the Planning Board was filed with the Town Clerk on September 3, 2015 and a certified copy of the decision is annexed hereto as Exhibit E. 21. The decision of the Planning Board was arbitrary, capricious, in excess of the Board's authority, and violative of the protections set forth in Chapter 40A, §3. In addition, the Board failed to adequately explain the reasons for the denial of the application as required under Chapter 40A, §9. 22. By virtue of the forgoing, the decision of the Planning Board should be annulled and this Court should order the Planning Board to approve the application for a site plan special permit. III. RELIEF REOUESTED For the foregoing reasons, the decision of the Planning Board dated September 2, 2015 and filed with the Town Clerk on September 3, 2015 should be annulled. GLORIAE DEI ARTES FOUNDATION, INC., By its attorneys, Peter'S Brooks (BBO No.. 058980) SAUL EWING LLP 131 Dartmouth Street, Suite 501 Boston, MA 02116 Dated: September 18, 2015 (617) 723-3300 5 - r f F013 N1 CD 180 Re%%4-84.20M-869221 Examiner Qlonunonirralt4 of �fflassar4usetts Office of the Secretary of State One Ashburton Place, Boston, MA 02108 Michael Joseph Connolly, Secretary ARTICLES OF ORGANIZATION (Under G.L. Ch. I80) Incorporators NAME RESIDENCE Include given name in full in case of natural persons: in case of a corporation, give state of incorporation. f Paula P. McCarthy Goldstein & Manello 265 Franklin Street Boston, Massachusetts 02110 The above-named incorporator(s) do hereby associate (themselves) with the intention of forming a corporation under the provisions of General Laws, Chapter 180 and hereby state(s): 1. The name by which the corporation shall be known is: Na ' App17'�f�9S Opus Dei Gantori Foundation, Inc. $� 2. The purposes for which the corporation is formed is as follows: The corporation is organized exclusively to study, educate, perform, and promote excellence and interest in music, including classic choral music, and for such other charitable and educational purposes as are set forth in, and permitted by, section 501(c) (3) of the United States Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and applicable regulations promulgated under such Code (or any corresponding provisions of any future United States internal revenue laws or regulations) and chapter 180 of the General Laws of The Commonwealth of Massachusetts (or any corresponding provisions of any future not-for-profit corporation laws of said Commonwealth) , as each of the foregoing may be amended from time to time, and to exercise all powers permitted by, and consistent with, said laws and regulations and only such C r�—,y purposes, P LJU ` M ❑ R.A. ❑ 1 3. If the corporation has more than one class of members,.the designation of such classes, the manner of election or appointment,the duration of membership and the gnalificatiorrand'rights,including voting rights,of the members of each class, are as follows:- The corporation shall have voting members, nonvoting members, and honorary members, who shall be elected 'or appointed by the board of directors of the corporation. Nonvoting and honorary members shall have no right to vote or any other right, except as the board of directors of the corporation may, in'it:s sole discretion, from time to time determine. *4. Other lawful provisions, if'any, for the�conduct and'regul'atibn,of the.business and affairs of the corporation, For its voluntary dissolution,or For limiting,defining;or regulating the powers of the corporation,or of its directors ormembers, or of any class of members, are as follows:- -t r . See pages 1 to 5 of Continuation Sheet 4A. CONTINUATION SHEET 4A TO ARTICLES OF ORGANIZATION OF OPUS DEI CANTORI FOUNDATION, INC . A . Except to the extent permitted to organizations exempt from federal taxation pursuant to section 501( c) ( 3 ) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and applicable regulations promulgated under such Code ( or any corresponding provisions of any future United States internal revenue laws or regulations) and chapter 180 of The General Laws of The Commonwealth of Massachusetts ( or any corresponding provisions of any future not-for-profit corporation laws of said Commonwealth) , as each of the foregoing may be amended from time to time, no substantial part of the activities of the corporation shall consist of carrying on of propaganda, or otherwise attempting to influence legislation ; and the corpo- ration shall not participate or intervene in any political cam- paign on behalf of any candidate for public office ( including publishing or distribution of statements) ; nor shall the corpora- tion, except to an insubstantial degree, engage in any activi- ties, or exercise any powers, that are not in furtherance of the purposes of the corporation. No part of the net earnings of the corporation shall inure to the benefit of, or be distributable to, its members, trust-ees, directors , governors , officers, or any other individuals, except that the corporation is authorized and empowered to pay reason- able compensation for services rendered and to make payments and distributions in furtherance of the purposes set forth in these Articles of Organization. The corporation shall not discriminate on the basis of race, religion, or gender in administration of any of its policies , programs, facilities or activities, provided that it may favor members of racial minority groups and women when the purpose and effect of such action is to promote establishment and maintenance of the nondiscriminatory policies of the corporation, and pro- vided further that nothing in these Articles of Organization shall be construed to prohibit the corporation from implementing any lawful affirmative action plan, policy, or program. Any dissolution of the corporation shall be in accordance with section 501 ( c) ( 3 ) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and appli- cable regulations promulgated under such section ( or correspond- ing provisions of any future United States internal revenue laws and regulations) and chapter 180 of the General Laws of The Commonwealth of Massachusetts ( or any corresponding provisions of any future not-for-profit corporation laws of said Common- wealth) , as each of the foregoing may be amended from time to l CONTINUATION SHEET 4A TO ARTICLES OF ORGANIZATION OF OPUS DEI CANTORI FOUNDATION, INC . �E time. The petition to the court for dissolution of the corpora- tion shall include a request that , upon dissolution, the assets of the corporation shall, after paying or making provision for payment of all liabilities of the corporation, be distributed to such organization or organizations organized and operated exclu- sively for charitable and educational purposes as shall at the time qualify as an exempt organization or organizations under section 501( c) ( 3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and appli- cable regulations promulgated under such Code ( or any correspond- ing provisions of any future United States internal revenue laws and regulations ) , as each of the foregoing may be amended from time to time, as the court may determine. If the corporation shall be dissolved other than by petition to a court, the board of directors shall , after paying or making provision for payment of all liabilities of the corporation, distribute the assets of the corporation to such organization or organizations organized and operated exclusively for charitable and educational purposes as shall at the time qualify as an exempt organization or organi- zations under section 501 ( c) ( 3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and applicable regulations promulgated under such Code (or any corresponding provisions of any future United States internal revenue laws and regulations) , as each of the foregoing may be amended from time to time , as the board of directors of the cor- poration may determine. Without limiting the generality of , and consistent with, the foregoing and Article 2 of these Articles of Organization, the corporation may exercise the following powers in furtherance of its corporate purposes , provided that the corporation shall exer- cise no power in a manner inconsistent with section 501( c) ( 3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and applicable regulations promulgated under such Code (or any corresponding provisions of any future United States internal revenue laws and regulations) and chapter 180 of the General Laws of The Commonwealth of Mass- achusetts ( or any corresponding provisions of any future not-for- profit corporation laws of said Commonwealth) , as each of the foregoing may be amended from time to time: The power to convey land to which it has legal title. The power to be a partner in any enterprise that the corpo- ration would have the power to conduct by itself , kf r f CONTINUATION SHEET 4A TO ARTICLES OF ORGANIZATION OF OPUS DEI CANTORI FOUNDATION, INC. The power to have perpetual succession in its corporate name . The power to sue and be sued . The power to have a corporate seal and to alter the same. The power to purchase;- receive; take by grant, gift, devise, bequest or otherwise; lease or otherwise acquire, own, and hold; improve; employ; use; and otherwise deal in and with, real and/or personal property, wherever situated, and/or any interest in such property. The power to sell , convey, exchange, transfer or otherwise dispose of; lease; and/or mortgage, pledge, or otherwise encumber or create a security interest in, all or any of its property, wherever situated, and/or any interest in such property. The power to purchase , take, receive, subscribe for, or otherwise acquire; own; hold; vote; employ; sell, lend, exchange , transfer , or otherwise dispose of ; lease; mortgage; pledge; use; and otherwise deal in and with, bonds and other obligations , shares, or other securities or interests issued by others, whether engaged in similar or different business, governmental , or other activities . The power to make contracts; give guarantees and incur other liabilities; borrow money at such rates of interest as the corpo- ration may determine; issue its notes, bonds and other obliga- tions; and secure any of its obligations by mortgage, pledge or encumbrance of , or security interest in, all or any of its prop- erty wherever situated; and/or any interest in such property. The power to lend money, invest and reinvest its funds, and take and hold real and personal property as security for payment of funds so loaned or invested . The power to make donations , irrespective of corporate benefit, for the public welfare or for community fund, hospital , charitable, religious , educational , scientific, civic or similar purposes. CONTINUATION SHEET 4A TO ARTICLES OF ORGANIZATION OF OPUS DEI CANTORI FOUNDATION, INC . The Power to pay pensions , establish and carry out pension, profit-sharing, savings, thrift and other retirement, incentive and benefit plans , trusts and provisions for any or all of its directors , officers and employees, and for any and all of the directors , officers and employees of any corporation, fifty per- cent or more of the shares of which outstanding and entitled to vote on election of directors are owned , directly ' or indirectly, by the corporation . The power to participate as a subscriber in exchanging of insurance contracts specified in section 94( B) of chapter 175 of the General Laws of The Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The power to be an incorporator of other corporations of any type or kind. The power to make contracts of guarantee and suretyship, whether or not such contracts are in furtherance of the purposes of the corporation; provided , however , that (1 ) such contracts are necessary or convenient to the conduct, promotion or attain- ment of (a) a corporation of which this corporation directly or indirectly owns all of the outstanding stock ; (b) a corporation that directly or indirectly owns all of the outstanding stock of this corporation; or (c) a corporation that directly or indirectly owns all of the outstanding stock of a corporation that directly or indirectly owns all of the stock of this corpo- ration; and (2) the board of directors of this corporation has determined that such contracts are necessary or convenient to the conduct , promotion or attainment of the business of this corporation. The power to have and exercise all powers necessary or con- venient to effect any or all of the purposes for which the corpo- ration is formed . The power to do business, carry on its operations , have offices and exercise the powers granted by or lawful under chap- ter 180 of the General Laws of The Commonwealth of Massachusetts in any jurisdiction within or without the United States. B. Meetings of the members of the corporation may be held any- where in the United States , unless otherwise provided in the bylaws of the corporation . CONTINUATION SHEET 4A TO ARTICLES OF ORGANIZATION OF OPUS DEI CANTORI FOUNDATION, INC . C. The board of directors , or the board of trustees , or the board of governors , or any other body having powers similar to the board of directors may make, amend or repeal the bylaws in whole or in part, except to the extent that action of the members is required by law or by the bylaws of the corporation . D. No director, trustee or person having similar powers ( "director" ) or officer shall be personally liable to the corpo- ration or its members for monetary damages for breach of fiduci- ary duty as a director or officer , notwithstanding any provision of law imposing such liability; provided, however , that, to the extent required by applicable law, this provision shall not eliminate or limit the liability of a director or an officer ( i ) for any breach of the duty of loyalty to the corporation or its members , ( ii ) for acts or omissions not in good faith or that involve intentional misconduct or a knowing violation of law, or ( iii ) for any transaction from which the director or officer derived any improper personal benefit. This provision shall not eliminate or limit the liability of a director or an officer for any act or omission occurring prior to the effective date of this provision.ision. No amendment to, or repeal of, this provision shall apply to or have any effect upon the liability or alleged lia- bility of any director or officer for, or with respect to, any acts or omissions of such director or officer occurring prior to such amendment or repeal . The fiscal year of the corporation shall end on December 31. 45981 E ' � 5. 8y-laws of the corporation have been duly adopted and the initial directors, president, treasurer and clerk or other presiding, financial or recording officers wchpse names are set out below, have been duly elected. 6. The effective date of organization of the corporation shall be the date of filing with the Secretary ofthe Cornmonwealth r t t€ e+ st�isrtfe�ired-apccifydate,�ncmnara�lrazr3G-days-zftrrdate•af-FrlirV. 1 7. The following information shall not for any purpose be treated as a permanent part of the Articles of Organization of they corporation, i a. The post office address of the initial principal office of the corporation in Massachusetts is: ! 129 Rock Harbor Road, Orleans, MA 02653 b. The name,residence,and post office address of each of the initial directors and following officers of the corporation are as follows: NAME RESIDENCE POST OFFICE ADDRESS I President: William S. Kanaga 20 Anchor Drive same Orleans, MA 02653 Treasurer: Sarah R. Kanaga 20 Anchor Drive same Orleans, MA 02653 Clerk: Sarah R. Kanaga 20 Anchor Drive same Orleans, MA 02653 Directors: (or officers having the powers of directors) Rev. Charles Farnsworth Brockville, Ontario P.O. Box 610, Brockville, Canada K6V' 5V8 Ontario, Canada K6V 5V8 .John P. French 5239 E. Palo Verde Pl. , Paradise Valley, AZ 85253 (same) Sarah R. Kanaga 20 Anchor-Drive, Orleans, MA 02653 (same) William S. Kanaga • 20 Anchor Drive, Orleans, MA 02653 (same) Fr. John Randall St. Charles Rectory 178 Dexter St. , Providence, RI 02907 (same) c. The date initially adopted on which the corporation's fiscal year ends is: December 31 I d. The date initially fixed in the by-laws for the annual meeting of members of the corporation is: The third Monday in April or, if that day shall be a legal holiday, the next succeeding business day. e. The name and business address of the resident agent. if any, of the corporation is: N/A IN WITNESS WHEREOF, and under the penalties of persury the INCORPORATOR(S) sign(s) these Articles of Organization this 21st day of June ,1988. IOW¢the below signed INCORPORATORS do hereby certify under the pains and penalties of perjury that[/-We have not been convicted of any crimes relating to alcohol or gaming within the past ten years-,I/We do hereby furthercertify that to the best i of myfeor knowledge the above named principal officers have not been similarly convicted. If so convicted, explain. '111. . ..... .. ......... . . . . . ...... . . .... ... .. � . [� t f 975440 THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS _ARTICLES OF ORGANIZATION ' GENERAL LAWS, CHAPTER 180 I hereby certify that,upon an examination of the within-written articles of organization,duly submitted to me, it appears that the provisions of the General Laws relative to the organization of corporations have been complied with,and I hereby approve said articles; and the filing fee in the amount of$30.00 having been paid,said articles are deemed,to have been filed with me this q f st— day of !' , 19g Effective date { MICHAEL JOJH CON},V, LY Secretary of State TO BE FILLED IN BY CORPORATION PHOTO COPY OF ARTICLES OF ORGANIZATION TO BE SENT T0: Rosemarie Sbaratta, P.C. ..... . ..Gqj.pte.in, •&. Manello.... .... ... ... . . . ... . ... . .. 255 FranklinStreet .. _._ . . .Boston,..MA.. 021,10... . ..... ...... . .. ......... .... Telephone. . ..... .(617) 439-8900 Filing Fee 530.00 Copy Mailed (T4P 6'=- Manwram of Ifia.0garhuatt$ MICHAEL J. 'CONNOLLY FEDERAL IDENT1FICATIO .xar fined Secauaryof Slate NO 04-3017097 r ONE ASHBURTON PLACE, BOSTON. MASS. 02108 i' ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT r General Laws,Chapter 180,Section 7 :j This certificate must be submitted to the Secretary of the Commonwealth within sixty days after the date of the vote of members or stockholders adopting the amendment,The lee for tiling this certificate is 510.00 as prescribed by General Laws, Chapter 180, Section 11C(b), Make check payable-to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. We, William S. Kanaga PresidentMeeV'rU , and Sarah R. Kanaga ,Clerk�4iid9d xDdvk of !" O us Dei Cantori Foundation, Inc. ;ami' ...... .............,................_...._. ................ .tlWrt+eof Gcrp..ra.i.... ...............................................,.............................. ►pp!<ovcd • • located at ...129.Rock Harbor Road, Orleans, Massachusetts do hereby certify that the following amendment to the articles of organization of the corporation was duly adopted at a meeting held on April 24, . 19 89 , by vote of,.......five (5} „ mernbers� ,..... RKXef%WA, being at least two thirds of its members legally qualified to vote in meetings of the corporation (or,in the case of a corporation having capital stock, by the holders of at least two thirds of the capital stock having the right to vote thereon): Article 1 of the Articles of Organization shall be deleted in its entirety, and the following is hereby inserted in lieu therdof: 1. The name by which the corporation shall be known is: Gloriae Dei Cantores Foundation, Inc. Note: If the space provided under any article or item on this form is insufficient.additions shall be sct forth on separate sheets of paper leaving a left band margin of at least I inch Cor binding. Additions to more than one article mai-be continued on a single sheet so long as each article requiring each such addition is clearly indicated, i t . I� r The foregoing amendment will become effective when these articles of amendment are filed in accordance with Chapter 180, Section 7 of the General-Laws unless these articles specify, in accordance with the rote adopting the amendment, a later effective date not more than thirty days after such filing, in whish event the amendment"will be— came effective on such later date. i. IN WITNESS WHEREOF AND UNDER THE PENALTIES OF PERJURY, we have hereto signed our names t " C7T day of ,�� , in the year 19c- .... .......................... ........... .................................................................. President/Wi=Pxmiz�= 1�li tam S. Kanaga r � .. � Clerkl7453XULtic � a� rah R. Kana a A' 114 30"Z A _ THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT (General Lsws,Chapter 180, Section 7) I hereby approve the within articles of amendment and, the filing fee in the amount of 3/'5- ,;O having been paid, said articles are deemed to have been filed with me this lal* day of ' F MICHAELell ONN€ty 5eavary of Stare TO BE FILLED IN BY CORPORATION PHOTO COPY OF AMENDMENT TO BE SENT TO: Christopher IV. Kanaga, Fsn. Laraja, Kanaga A Batt, P.C. 46 South Orleans Read L.O..13ox 236........... ...................... _. Orleans, 11A 02653.... ..'.... ............... Telephone A5 ) 255-550,0_„.......... .......„ `r copy Marled F FEDERAL IDEN MCAnON No. 04-3017097 Fee: S 15 DO �� C�a�t�ta�t�e��t�j of agga��us'ett� Examine/ William Francis Galvin. f Secretary of the Commonwealth / One Ashburton Place, Boston, Massachusetts 02108~1512 AMCLES OF AMENDMENT' (General Laws, Chapter 180, Section 7 P ) Ir Name Approved We, Barbara B. Manuel , 'President/TdmxRnxkkmt, and Sarah R. Kanaga , 'Clerk/' + Jerk, of Gloriae Dei Cantores Foundation, Inc. (Exact name of corporation) located at 129 Rock Harbor Road, Orleans, MA 02653 (Address of corporation in Massacbusetts) do hereby certify that these Articles of Amendment affecting articles numbered: 1 . (Number those articles I, 2,3, and/or 4 being amended) of the Articles of Organization were duly adopted at a meeting held on May 15, 19.!6 , by vote of; SIX members, directors, or =R.l.OI.A R9PMf being at least two-thirds of its members/directors legally qualified to vote in meetings of the corporation (or, in the case of•a corporation having capital stock, by the holders of at least two thirds of the capital stock having the right to vote therein): Article 1 of the Articles of Organization shall be deleted in its entirety, and the following is hereby inserted in.lieu thereof: 1. The name by which the corporation shall be known is: C ❑ P ❑ Gloriae Dei Artes Foundation, Inc. M ❑ RA. 0 i4 t The foregoing amendment(s)will become effective when these Articles of Amendment are filed in accordance with General laws,Chapter 180, Section 7 unless These articles specify, in accordance with the vote adopting the amendment,a later effec- tive date not more than thirty days after such filing, in which event the amendment will become effective on such later date. Later effective date: SIGNED UNDER THE PENALTIES OF PERJURY, this r day of 19 96 12A I�/-q I T I I k. 0 , 'President/ Bar ara B. Manuel n /1 nfE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSMS eM YV6 ��` _3 ASS 41: 09 ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT 9 (General Laws, Chapter 180, Section 7) I hereby approve the within Articles of Amendment and,the fling fee in the amount of$ having been paid, said articles are deemed to have been filed with me this, day of 19� . Effective date. WILUAM FRANCIS GALVIN Secretary of the Commonulealtb 4 , TO BE-FM ED IN BY CORPORATION Photocopy of document to be sent to; Christopher W. Kanaga, Esq. Laraja, Ranaga and Batt, P.C. tib South Orleans Road P.O. Boa 236 Orleans. MA 076SI E E Nutter Sarah A.Turano-Flores Direct Line: 505-790-5977 Fax: 508-771-8079 F-mail: sturan o-r`lores@narter.casn February 20, 2015 111544-18 Mr, Victor Staley r Buildi_na Commissioner Brewster Totivn Offices 2198 Main street Brewster, MA 0263 i Re. 34 Southern Eagle Carhvay, Gloriae Dei Artes Foundation, Inc. Dear Nlr. Staley: You requested our opinion regarding Gloriae Dei Artes Foundation, Inc.'s (hereinafter, "Gloriae Dei Artes") Special Permit Application,which seeks a Site Plan Review Special permit and a Dimensional Special Permit in accordance v%dth Section 179-25(B) 1 of the Brewster Toning Bylaw. Specifically, you asked for our opinion regarding whether a Variance was necessary to alloy more than one principal structure on the property leased by GIoriae Dei Artes at 36 Southern Eagle Cartway in Brewster (the"Property"). As detailed below, because Gloriae Dei Artes is a protected, nonprofit educational use, it is our opinion that the form of relief required (i.e., special permit or variance), depends on whether the second structure is necessary to effectuate the protected; nonprofit educational use on this lot. If the second structure is needed in order to carry out the educational purposes of rhe use;then a Variance cannot be required, although the Site Plan Review and Dimensional Special Per-mit standards may be applied, Provided fey do not preclude the ability to construct the second structure. If the second structure is not needed to carry out the protected, nonprofit educational use on this lot, then a Variance can be required for construction of the second buildino. We understand that the Property is located within the Residential Medium Density (RM) Zoning District, which allows only one principal structure on a lot. According to a December 30, 2014 email and January, 6, 2015 Ictter from counsel for GIoriae Dei Artes, Andrew L. Singer, tine Property is preexisting ton-conforming in nature due to the fact that there are several principal Srrl cubes In use at the Property. ��Ie understand that tlleseexisting uses include, among other things; a for-profit, comrnercial printing shop and greenhouses. According to Nair. Singer, Gloriae Dei Ares now seeks to demolish the greenhouses in order to build a new structure that will be E St.;tion 179-25B states that other pre-existing, nonconferrn_ng structures or uses may bA changed, cxucnded or altered on special pe�=,it from the Board of Appeals, if the Board of Appeals finds tha:such charge, extension or al_erat on vxi 11 not'oe substantially 7_ore de:rrlental to the ne ghborhood rha!1 tf:e existir.a nonconforming use. FISH UP ATTORINIFYS AT LA'-'vV i .1rrZf: . C1 -�7. �, ✓25Gv1 :5L5 %' Mr. Staley Building Commissioner February 20, 2015 Page 2 used as part of Gloriae Dei Artes' educational music program and for storage of cquipnatm and possibly vehicles in connection with that program. Based upon the materials provided by Dati°id S. Reid, counsel for an abutter to the Property, the current commercial u,e on.site was authorized through a Use Variance issued in 1984. He furher contends that the variance was valid for three years, and was required to be extended, however, there is no information provided in the materials that suggest this extension was ever Granted. Furthermore, the materials provided to our office suggest that there was never a Dimensional Variance granted for the additional structures (greenhouses) on site. In light of the fore2oi_n-g, therefore: and as a preliminary matter, -we do not Necessarily agree with k1r. Singer's conclusion that the existing suructures on site are lawfully preexisting,nonconforming. Additionai information would be needed to confirm the status of these structures. In any event, in your letter of Januar, 6, 2015 to Mr. Singer, you opined that Gloria-, Dei Artes required zoning relief from the Bre4vster Zoning Bylaw to allow for more than one principal structure at the Property within the RM Zoning District. As a result, you concluded that the iTloriae Dei Artes must petition the Brewster Board of Appeals for a Dimensional Variance in order to construct the second structure on the lot, or appeal your determination to the Board of Appeals. As noted above, having reviewed the matter, and on the facts presented,the question of whether a Dimensional Variance is required for the second structure in this instance deper_ds on«$ether the second building is necessary in order to effectuate the protected, nonprofit, educational use on this property. Our reasoning is set forth below. As you know, G.L. c. 40A, §3 states that no municipal zoning bylaw shall: "prohibit_regulate or restr=ict the use of land or structures for..,educational purposes on land oti med or leased by...a nor=,profit educational corporation; provided. however, that such land o, stnuctures may be subject to reasonable regulations concerning the bulk and height of structures and determining yard sizes, lot area, setbacks, open space, parking and building, coverage requirerntmts." The origin of this language comes from the Dover Amendment. which provided: No bylaw or ordinance which prohibits or limits the use of land for any church or other religious purpose or-which prohibits or limits the use of land for any religious, sectarian or denorr_inational educational put_rpose shall be valid." 1950 Mass.Acts 325. Case law makes clear that a nonprofit educational corporation within the meaning of O.L. c. 40A, §3, includes a corporation whose Articles of Organization permit it to engage in educational activities. Gardner-Atrol Area tdemal Health Ass"n v. Zoning Board of peals a;Gardner-401 Nass. IZ, 15-16 (lois';. The educational activities must be stated in the corporate purpose of the nonprofit, but need not be the primary purpose. 161 Here, the Articles of Organization Lor Gloriae De= Artes obtained from. the Corporations Division of Zhe Office of 4 Mr. Staley Building Commissioner February 20, 2015 Page 3 the Secretary of the Commonwealth state that the or anization was frnmed exclusively far charitable and educational purposes, including. to "studv, educate, perfo_rim, and promote excellence acid intFrest in-rnusic." Gloriae Dei Artes, therefore, fits within the non-profit educational use exemption provisions of G.L. c. 40A, §3. 'd- Although an organization_ may qualify for the educational use exemption under G.L. c. -TCA, §3, it is still subject to "reasonable regulations concerning the bulk and height of structures and determining yard sizes, lot area, setbacks, open space,parking and building coverage requirer-nents." G,L, c. 40A, §3. The Supreme Judicial Court has interpreted this language to mean that the "Leorislature contemplated that a municipality could permissibly adopt zoning restrictions specifically tailored to the protected use." Rogers v. Totbn of Norfolk, 432 Nass. 374, 379 (2000) (where the SJC held the municipality's 2.500 s.f building coverage limitation for child care facilities was facially valid). However, a municipality may not adopt regulations that facially discriminate against the use of the land for educational purposes (i.e., by requiring zoning, relief which, if denied; could preclude the use), or'ay applying ot'_nerwise nondiscriminatory dimensional or parking requirements that "have the practical effect of nullif5dil-the use exemption permitted to an educational institution." Trustees of Tufts College V_ City o,f.1Iedford, 33 _Mass. App.Ct. 580, 481-502 (1992) (citations omitted). Here. Gloria; Dei Artes is proposing to change the use on the lot from one permitted as of right in the ISM Zoning District (agricultural use) to another permitted as of right (nonprofit educational use). See Brewster Zoning Bylaw, Table 1, Use Regulations. Thus; the change of use itself is not dictating the need for zoning relief rather, the zoning relief is needed because the lot is in a zoning district that does not permit more than one principal structure. As vve know from the Rogers and Tu_f"s cases; the town cannot apply a facially valid dimensional requirement to a lot leased or owned by a nonprofit educational organization in a manner so as to render the nonprofit educational use impossible. Therefore, it application of the requirement that the Property have no more than one principal structure precludes the ability of Gloriae Dei Ares to utilize the property for nonprofit educational purposes, its application would run afoul of the Dover Amendment because it would have the practical effect of nullifying the use exemption permitted to an educational institution. Tufts College, supra. at 581-582. Accordingly, the first inquiry must be whether the second structure is needed to effectuate the intended nonprofit educational use on this property. if the answer is no, the second structure is not needed to effectuate the intended nonprofit educational use on the site, then a Variance can be lawfully required (because its denial would not preclude the protected use on the lot). However, if the answer is yes, the second structure is necessary to effectuate the intended educational use, than a Variance cannot be required. In that event, however, a Special Permit fm6ir_g can be required; so long as the conditions imposed do not also preclude the use of the sit-- 'or itefor its intended educational purposes. 3. f Mr. Staley Building Commissioner February 20, 2015 Page 4 Specifically, and as noted in our previous opinion regarding the Pleasant Bay Community Boating ("PBCB") application, a party cannot be compelled to seek a variance in order to have their exempt educational use on dimensionally ins-Lfficient lot. Campbell,v. City Council of Lynn: 415 Mass. 772, 776-778, n. 5, n. 7 (1993). However, dimensional and bulk requirements can be applied to an exempt educational- use, provided such application does not preclude the protected use. Trustees of Tufts College v. City of Alledford, 33 Mass. App-Ct. 580, 581-582 (1992) (citations omitted). As such,in this instance, if it is determined that the second structure is necessary to effectuate the intended nonprofit educational use on the property,t'aen the 3rojeet may be reviewed under the Site Plan Special Permit and/or Dimensional_ Special Permit provisions of the Bylaw, provided that the provisions are applied in a manner that does not preclude the protected, nonprofit educational use. Id.; G.L. c. 40A, §3. Presently, we understand there has not yet been a finding as to whether t'he second building is required for the nonprofit educational use. As Zoning Enforcement Officer, you are the proper authority to first make that determination. The Applicant's counsel should submit information to you to enable you to make that determination. After reviewing those materials,if you determine that the second si_rueture is not required to effectuate the nonprofit use, Then the Applicant must apply for and receive a Dimensional Variance before constructing the second structure; and/or, in the alternative, appeal your finding to the Board of Appeals. On the other hand, if you determine that a second structure is required to effectuate the nonprofit use,then the Applicant may proceed with its current Special Permit applications to the Planning Board3, This concludes my review of the issues raised in your request for Legal Opinion. Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you and I remain, Verb 4rL31N- 4'OLUS, FF % Serail A, Turano-Flores j cc: Charles L. Sumner, Towri Administrator i Sue Leven, Town Planner Andrew L, Singer, Esq. David S. Reid, Esq. We have not been asked to detennhie whether Section 179-25B applies only to lawfully preexisting,nonconforming uses or to all other preexisting,nonconforming uses. For purposes of this opinion,we sss:ime the Tarter, Generally,a special permit ender Section 179-25B would be issued by the Board of Appeals, however,ender Section 179-51,an applicant seeking Site Plan Review may consclida?e ocher forms of relief which are under the authority of the Board of.`appeals in one filing with the Planning Board. Nutter Sarah A.Turano-Flores Direct Line: 505-790-5477 Fax: 508-771-8079 E-mail: stidreao-17oresvnuftncom February 24, 2015 111544-18 Mr. Victor Staley Building Commissioner Brewster Town Offices 2198 Mair_Street Brewster,NIA 02631 Re, 36 Southern Eagle Cart-way, C loriae Dei Artes Foundation, Iue. Dear Mr. Staley; After receiving my earlier opinion letter regarding the above-referenced property and the applications for zoning relief presently pending before the Brewster Planning Board, you fOnvarded ir_e additional materials pertaining to this property. The fact that there are two different structures being utilized for two different purposes on this single property lends some complexity to the review process. This information was not clear to me when I wrote my earlier opinion. After reviewing these additional materials, I understand the factual background a bit better. While the substance of my original opinion does not change; I believe this additional I letter will serve to clarify that opinion further in light of the new information I've learned. when I wrote the original opinion last week, I did not u-iderstand that the first structure on the property (the printing press structure)was going to remain unchanged, and that only the second structure would be utilized for educational purposes on the site. At the time, I thought that both buildings were going to be utilized for educational purposes. Yesterday,I learned that the first building will not be altered as part of this project and will continue to be utilized as a printing press operated by Paracl_ete Press, Inc., a domestic,for-profit Massachusetts corporation. Only the proposed second structure will be utilized for educational purposes, and those purposes will be. carried out by a different entity,the Gloriae Dei Artes Foundatior► Inc., a nonprofit educational organization, fo_rzred (according to its Arricles of Organization)to "study,educate, perforn-A, and promote excellence and interest in music." Thus,we are lei`with a situation whcrein there will be two principal structures (in a zoning district that only allows for one), utilized for two d.iflerent purposes, by two different entities (one for profit, a-nd die other nonprofit). In rny opinion letter of last wick. I concluded that because the Gloriae Dei Artes Foundation, Inc. was a nonprofit; educational organization, it could avail itself of the educational use exe_nption provisions ofthe Dover Amendment only if the proposed second structure was nacessarre to effectuate,the educational uses of the proposed site. At the thane,believing both NUTTER Mcg-L::NNN N '& =!S-? LL.= ATTORNEYS A7 _AY1 :yannaugn Poadd Y.0. Sc. 1630 H1 -n�s, i��ass ChG5�i�5 '2a�'-r�3� 5� 79J-S fog =aC. 506-7711-2079 '1wvvv.nuttercoti1 NLr. Staley Building Commissioner February 20, 2015 Page 2 structures would be used for educational purposes, I recommended that the Applicant's counsel should submit additional information to enable you (as Zoning Enforcement Officer)to make the determination as to whether the second building is required to effectuate the nonprofit educational use. Since writing that opinion, I've learned that the educational use will be entirely housed in the second building, and that the first building will continue to house the printing press. Consequently; there is no need to determine whether the second building is necessary to conduct the educational use on the site. Obviously, since the second structure is the only structure housing the proposed use, it is necessary to ceffectuate that uses Thus,the only question for you to determine is whether the use being proposed is an "educational use"within the meaning of the Dover Amendment. Case law in Massachusetts has defined "educational use" within the meaning of the Dover Amendment in the broadest sense. It has been held to constitute"the process of developing and training the powers and capabilities of human beings." Commissioner of Code Inspection of PVorcesrer v, TForcester Dynamy, 11 Mass.Apn.Ct. 97, 99 (1980), citing�,Vt. Herrnan Boys'Sch v. Gill, 145 Mass. 139, 146 (1887). The Appeals Court has also relied on the Webster's Dictionary Definition defining education as, "the act or process of providing with knowledge, skill, competence or usujally] desirable Qualities of behavior or character or of being so provided esp[ecially] by a formal course of study, instruction,or training." Harbor Schs, Y Boord ofAppeals of Haverill, 5 Mass.App.Ct, 0600, 605 (1.977) (quoting Webster's Third New Int'l Dictionary), As I understand it,the new second building(which tiNU replace the existing greenhouse structures on the site)will be utilized for musical education, rehearsal, training and practice for perfo_ri-nances by the Gloriae Dei Artes Foundation musical groups,including the Spirit of America Marching Band. Given the defihstion of`-educational uses"provided by the Appeals Court decisions above, on the preliminary information 1 have received, it appears the proposed uses fall within the exemption. Id. Nonetheless, if Applicant's counsel can provide additional information to further illustrate the educational aspect of the proposed use of these facilities, it would confirm that the proposed use is,in fact, educational within the meaning of rhe Dover Amendment exemption under the case law outlined above. In addition, the fact that the first structure on site will not be pari of the educational use, and will continue to be operated as a printing press by Paraclete Press, Inc., does not change my opinion above. The relevant provisions of G.L, c. 40A, §3 state that no zoning bylaw shall "prohibit, regulate or restrict the use of land or structures for religious purposes or for educational pLuposes on land owned or Ieased by the commonwealth or any of its agencies, subdivisions or bodies politic or by a religious sect or denomination; or by a nonprofit educational corporation.._" In this instance, as I understand it, a nonprofit educational Corporation—the rloriae Dei _rtes Foundation— intends to lease the portion of the land on Mr. Staley Building Commissioner February 20, 2015 Page 3 which the .second building will be located from the current owner of the lot, the HK--N Trust. As such, by the express language of the statute, the second structure appears to qualify for the exemption, irrespective of the fact that the first structure on the remaini ng portion of the lot will not be used for educational purposest. This concludes my review of the issues raised in your request for Legal Opinion. Should you have any further questions;please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you and 1 remain, Very truly yours, Sarah A. T urano-Flores cc_ Charles L. Sumner, Town Administrator Sue Leven, Town_Planner Andrew L. Singer, Esq_, David S. Reid, Esq. 2747400.1 The inquiry here is made somewhat easier by the fact that Paraclety Press lr;c, is the eft%cial publishing House of the Community of Jesus,a religious organization. According to the Paraclete Press website, its mission is "to publish books,mi.,sic and videos which remind us, `>4�ever lase hope fn ihernercy of God.' The website further idenziftes Paraclete as a publisher of=cumenical books,music and videos intended to `present works that unite us and enrich our understanding as C=hristians,whether Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox or Evangelical." As such, althoaah the printing press currently exists by virtue of an extensive history of prior zoninP relief(including several Use variances), Faraelctc's use of the first building(the printing press) may also qualify for an exemption under The Dover Amendmen=. Arguably,the building is being utilized for"religious purposes"by a"religious sect or denomination." 1d Massachusetts decisions which help in defining the types of religious uses which qualify for the exemption have broadly concluded that"what is religious requires a system of belief. concerning more than the early and temporal,to which the adherent is faithful." !ve_dham Pastoral Counseling Cir_ v.Board of Appeals of IV2edham: 29 Mass. App.Ct. 31, 35-36(?990). Moreover,religious use has been held to invo':ve more rPan prayer and worship, and a variety of accessory uses have beer,he'd to be encompassed by tate religious purpose exemption, including activities such as public affairs, an and music, recreation,and drug rehabilitation programs, where members of*he relicicus organization are involved in the activity. !d. at 37(citations ornitted). Ce;Fainly,here, where the use involves crew:intr publications which process to spread the word of God, the religious context is clear. Thus, the cornpexity added to this situa.ion by -virtue of fhe tact that there are two different structares on the sate. I eased by two di_ferent entities for two different purposes—one fer profit and one nonprofit—is eased by tl e Fact that both uses appear ably to udlize the exemptlmP. provisions under the Dover Amerdrnent. Planning Board ,\N'o +Rv�s,o,::. 2198 Main Street h Brewster, Massachusetts 02631-1898 YOU (508) 896-3701 x 1233 i =# FAX(508) 896-8089 °�;nnnmur e3,ni;ma`°° brewplan@t o v ii.brew ster.ina.us Special Permit Avlolication X Site Plan Review Use Waiver Date November ,2014 Application ## Y i Filinq Fees: for change of use or up to 1,000 square foot addition = $400.00 For over 1,000 square feet addition or a new proposal (i.e.: Structure) = $1,000.00 plus one hundred dollars ($100.00) per structure, Total Filing Fee $ Checklist: Please see attached checklist for required submissions. Checklist must be completed j and turned in with application. Also include a narrative of the findings pursuant to 179-51(A, 5) { and 179-66 (A-H) of the Brewster Zoning By-law. i Staff Review: Uses requiring a Special Permit under Site Plan Review may also be required to apply for Staff Review as set forth in the Code of the Town of Brewster, Massachusetts i Chapter 83. If the proposal requires Staff Review, it is required that an application be filed for Staff Review, prior to an application for Site Plan Review, and that Staff Review be completed before the Planning Board begins Site Plan Review. Filed for Staff Review (check) Yes X Date No F Date of Staff Review April 17, 2014 r F Property Address 36 Southern Eagle Cartway I i Town of Brewster Assessors Map(s) 138 and Parcel(S) 43 Old Map(s) 30 and Parcel(s) 1s F Deed of property recorded in Barnstable County Registry of Deeds Book 2921 Page 284 e Or Land Court Certificate of Title No. Zoning District(s) vs Site Plan Applicafior..doc 'Review the Brewster Zoning by--law at htto:/lwww.town.brewster.ma.us/,choose Planning Dept orPlanaingBoard I W;l€lam S. Kanaga and Name of Applicant Chrlstoper W. Kanaga, Trustees Owner, it different Address P.O. Box 235, Orleans MA 02653 Address Prone 508-255-5500 Phone Email cwk@c4,net Email Name of Representative Andrew L. Singer, Esq, Phone 508-398-2221 Email alsinger@singer-law.cam Company Name. Law Office of&nger&Singer, LLC Address: P.O. Box 67, Dern[sport, MA 02639 Project Description: Construction of an 8,000 sq.ft. engineered steel building for non-profit arts education,storage and repair and maintenance of materials. William S. Kanaga and Chrlstoper W. Kanaga,Trustees Signature of Owner or Authorized Representative: by Andrew L. Singer,Atty for representative, please attach authorization signed by owner Please fill out attached checklist and submit with application materials, For full text of requirements, please consult Section 179-51 and 179-66 of the Brewster Zoning By-laws. j f 1 ' F t i i Site Plan Application_doc 'Review Me Brewster Zoning by-lavrathtto.11v"nv,fown.brewster.ma.us/,choose Planning Dept.or Planning Board 1 � I+ J At =Fdl 11 � i •�• .:•f. it fl PaF2CEL dJ q�} 11- Y t ,:t t .�` s aha 1,'� �� t 'tt,a •, I,t tl, tK I 1 I - ( 1 .I 71 i SITE PLAN j I I R 36 SOU-r-4ffRN F-AGLE GARYLJAY BREWSTER, MA GLORSP Rv R• I / GLORIAE DEI ARTES FOUNDATION I "a � O%+M1.J 3r ,.: n 5 caNnGa.CuR S'LPu_R:v KayaG<,>RyST__5 Ga uKu I —AL / I J tides V1.1 S_D A711 1T1 / � aEF <S59SSPR5 �-'<P '99 P<RcSL a� / I/ .w"z ai v G�-ORiaE O- T_5 FGJhGaOh / 2 Ycu NG Ci5YRiCY- REAR EAST Ce PE ENGfNE=RING INC. _ _ GE caLc�LaYch I r C N� `e~_ �\ v � PRCPry3=P GP<�<RT5/�Gl4G<TiGV dUi4P�hG � ,500 Sn,P �/\"4} TPT<. P4CPrl5�`G B.:Ya�hG GNERaG.. 99,PG> o.G: Cxi TIN LOr All 05>,53i Sa F- c g 1 �./.1 �� PR33C9_P C> CCV=RoG£i 33.PG> Sost i 65>,53� 9G,Pt - 5P3 +�,� } Tj"k.�� cxiSY�n-G u Laub anE.a, ?5a,2oG (s.�6RoxinvYC) PR'»CSE'.� 11 I 6 s.RE< OF Exi57'i n:G V =�FaR�� i ,yCo sq t y � =R=e CF PR'.JnCS_D v�V=vaR7a�2,i70 SyFt a.xn O`o aB=..c lq�� I ` � .yu EEL 9YpP5 Yp a_ �4Ov�D2n Yo b�l'u'c<YE P<RciVG SPaC3s A TRUE COPY TEST: -ut t.MWO i Qlv, TOWN CLERK SPECIAL PERMIT DECISION #2015-1 APPLICANVOWNER: Gloriae Dei Artes Foundation APPLICATION FILED: November 25, 2014 PUBLIC HEARING: January14, 2015 DATE OF DECISION: August 26 2015- APPLICATION: Site Plan Review and Dimensional Special Permits: #2015-01 —Applicant: Gloriae Dei Artes Foundation, Inc. Owner: William S. Kanaga and Christopher W. Kanaga, Trustees, Representative: Andrew L. Singer, Esq., for property located at 36 Southern Eagle Cartway, Assessors' Map 138, Lot 43 (formerly Map 30, Lot 18) in the RM and RR Zoning Districts. The applicant is proposing to replace two.existing greenhouses and one existing building in the rear of the property with a new 8,000 sq. ft. engineered steel building with basement for non-profit arts education, storage, and repair and maintenance of materials. A site plan special permit is being requested and, in addition and as necessary, a special permit in accordance with Section 179-25(B) of the Brewster Zoning By-Law to change, alter or extend a pre-existing nonconforming condition (multiple principal buildings on a mixed-use site) to allow the replacement building for nonprofit educational use. JURISDICTION: Pursuant to the Town of Brewster Zoning By-law, Section 179-20.1 J, the Brewster Planning Board is the permit granting authority. INFORMATION SUBMITTED: The following information was submitted to the Planning Board by the applicant: 1. Application form and checklist 2. Site Plan Showing a Proposed Steel Building at 36 Southern Eagle Carfway, Brewster, MA, prepared for Gloraie Dei Artes Foundation, prepared by East Cape Engineering, Inc., dated November 24, 2014, scope V = 30'. 3. Sketch Plan for Driveway Widening, prepared for HKN Trust, prepared by East Cape Engineering, Inc., dated January 15, 2015, scope 1" = 40'- 4. Arts Education Building, First Floor Plan, prepared by Architectural Design Incorporated, dated January 6, 2015, revised March 2, 12015, scale 1116" = 1'. 5. Arts Education Building, Basement Plan, prepared by Architectural Design Incorporated, dated January 6, 2015, revised March 2, 12015, scale 1116" = 1'. S. Arts Education Building, Building Elevations, prepared by Architectural Design Incorporated, dated January 6, 2015, revised March 2, 12015, scale 1116" = 1'. 7. Arts Education Building, Walf Section, prepared by Architectural Design fncorporated, dated January 6, 2015, revised March 2, 12015, scale 1/" = 1'. Gloriae Dei Artes Foundation, Map 30,Lot 18,Decision Page 1 of 6 8. Arts Education Building, Sketch Site Plan, prepared by Architectural Design Incorporated, ` dated January 6, 2015, revised March 18, 2015, scale V = 30'. 9. Mitigation/Planting Plan 1, prepared for Gloriae Dei Artes Foundation, prepared by Blueflax Design, dated February 24, 2015, revised March 19, 2015, scale V = 20'. 10.Site Plan Showing Existing Conditions, prepared for Gloriae Dei Artes Foundation, prepared by East Cape Engineering, Inc., dated May 22, 2015, scale V = 60'. 11.Site Plan showing proposed building, prepared for Gloriae Dei Artes Foundation, prepared by East Cape Engineering, Inc., dated May 22, 2015, scale 1" = 60'. 12.Aerial and ground level photographs of the site. 13, Summary of Reasoning, prepared by Law Office of Singer & Singer, LLC, no date. 14. Revised Summary of Reasoning, prepared by Law Office of Singer & Singer, LLC, no d ate. 15.Acoustical Features, Arts Education Building, prepared by Architectural Design Incorporated, dated June 1, 2015. 16. Lighting Specification Sheets, no date. 17.Analysis Letter: Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A Section 3, prepared by Law Office of Singer & Singer, LLC, dated June 2, 2015. 18. Building Square Footage Summary, prepared by Law Office of Singer & Singer, LLC, dated June 2, 2015, 19. Permitting History, prepared by Law Office of Singer & Singer, LLC, no date. 20. Mitigation/Planting Plan 1, prepared for Gloriae Del Artes Foundation, prepared by Blueflax Design, dated August 2, 2015, scale 1" = 30'. 21 .Site Plan showing proposed building, prepared for Gloriae Dei Artes Foundation, prepared by East Cape Engineering, Inc., dated May 22, 2015, Revised August 3, 2015, scale 1" _ 60', 22.Aerial photograph showing Distance from Surrounding Homes, prepared by Architectural Design Inc., no date. PUBLIC HEJARING: Pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40A, the Brewster Planning Board - scheduled a public hearing on January 14, 2015, at 7:00 p.m., to address the application for a Special Permit-#2015-1. Notice of the public hearing was published in THE CAPE CODDER on December 26, 2014, and January 2, 2015. The notice was posted on the bulletin board in Town Hall and on the Town's website and was mailed to all parties in interest. Sitting on the Planning Board were members Rick Judd, Elizabeth Taylor, Scott Collum, William Hoag and Nick deRuyter, John Leaning and Jason Klump (Note: Mr. Leaning's term expired in May of 2015, and Mr. Klump resigned from the Board in June of 2015, leaving Mr. Judd, Ms. Taylor, Mr. Collum, Mr. Hoag and Mr. deRuyter as voting members on this application). Chairman Judd opened the hearing by reading the legal advertisement. January 14, 2015 Attorney Andrew Singer requested a continuance to February 11, 2015, to allow for the advertising of an additional request for a special permit pursuant to Brewster Zoning By-laws Section 179-25B, February 11, 2015 Attorney Singer requested a continuance to March 11, 2015. Gloriae Dei-Artes Foundation,Map 30,Lot 18,Decision Page 2 cf 6 March 11, 2015 Attorney Singer requested a continuance to March 25, 2015. March 25, 2015 Attorney Singer and Christopher Kanaga presented the project. Attorney Singer also discussed the MGL Chapter 40A Section 3 educational exemption, and many other aspects of the project including landscaping, lighting, the design of the new building, and referenced other site plan review standards. The Planning Board asked questions concerning hours for rehearsal, soundproofing for the proposed building, and the overall height of the proposed structure. The attorney for an abutter who is opposed to the project cited many areas in which he believed the project was not in compliance with zoning, required Cape Cod Commission approval and had outstanding violations, The Board outlined additional information they required from the applicant. Attorney Singer requested a continuance to April 8, 2015. April 8, 2015 Attorney Singer requested a continuance to May 13, 2015. May 13, 2015 Attorney Singer requested a continuance to June 10, 2015. June 10, 2015 Due to a lack of a quorum to vote on the issue, Attorney Singer requested a continuance to June 24, 2015. June 24, 2015 The Applicant presented a revised plan showing the following changes: 1. The proposed building moved from the north end of the site to an area west of the existing Paraclete Press building, 330- 1- feet south of the original proposal. 2. The square footage of the proposed building changed from 8,000 square feet (not including the basement area) to 17,170 square feet on two floors. 3. The relocated building is 2 stories compared to the original building at 1 story with a basement. 4. The greenhouses at the north end of the property will be replaced by grapevines that are currently located at the revised site of the proposed building. 5. Addition of 11 parking spaces to the existing parking lot and the reconfiguration of circulation between the new parking and existing parking associated with Paraclete Press. There was further discussion between the Board and Attorney Singer regarding the zoning exemption under MGL Chapter 40A Section 3, Cape Cod Commission referral, and requests for additional information from the prior meeting. Attorney Singer wished for the Board to go over the Site Plan criteria to determine if the application meets those requirements. Gloriae Dei Artrs Foundation,Map 30,Lot 18,Decision Page 3 of 6 The Board asked for staff to speak with the Cape Cod Commission and ascertain if the application trips one of the thresholds requiring mandatory referral as a Development of Regional Impact. Attorney Singer requested a continuance to July 8, 2015. July 8, 2015 Attorney Singer requested a continuance to July 22, 2015. July 22, 2015 There were not enough members present to vote on the application, but Attorney Singer asked the Board to take up the issue of referral to the Cape Cod Commission since there were enough members present for a vote for a mandatory or discretionary referral. The Board discussed the issue and decided not to refer the application to the Commission. Several other issues were discussed before Attorney Singer requested a continuance to August 12, 2015, August 12, 2015 The Board had a final discussion with the applicant on details of the application, and heard comment from the public for the last time. The Board voted to close the public hearing and began deliberations with a discussion of proposed conditions of approval. DECISIONICONDITION On the basis of the evidence submitted to the Planning Board; including the supporting plans and application, and the written reports of the Town officials, the Planning Board of the Town of Brewster put forward the following conditions: FINDINGS OF FACT Based on the information presented, the Planning Board made the following findings of fact: 1. The proposed site plan design conforms to the requirements of the Brewster Zoning By- Laws Section §179-51 and §179-66 of the Town of Brewster. 2. The Planning Board considers the proposed use to be exempt as a not-for-profit educational facility pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A Section 3. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Rehearsal times to be as follows: Fridays no later than 9:30pm in October, November and December, and Saturdays from 8:00am to 7:00pm in October, November, December, January, February, March and April. 2. . The building of sets within the proposed building can take place no later than 9:30pm. 3. This approval is contingent on approval by the Conservation Commission. 4. Except for emergencies, no noise is to occur before 8:00 a.m. from the agricultural portion of the property. 5. The barbed wire is to be removed from the top of the chain link fence. Gloriae Dei Artn Foundation,Map 30,Lot I8,Decision Page 4 of 6 6. There will be a one year review from the date of occupancy to review any noise issues. 7. All doors, windows, skylights, and truck bay doors are to remain closed during rehearsals. 8. The proposed building shall not be used by non-educational organizations or for non- educational programs. 9. The proposed building shall be restricted in perpetuity to a use qualifying for exemption under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A §3. 10. The Planning Board will not support further commercial growth on this property, specifically in the form of additions to existingbuildings or construction of new buildings, 9 11. The applicant may be required to provide a sound consultant if there is a verified noise complaint by the Brewster Police. APPROVAL OF THE SPECIAL PERMIT VOTE: At the Planning Board meeting on August 26, 2015, a motion was made by deRuyter and seconded by Hoag to withdraw the request for a special permit pursuant to Brewster Zoning By- laws Section 179-258 and a finding that the structure is a Community Facility and therefore able to exceed height limits pursuant to Table 3, Height and Bulk Regulations, Note 1 in the Brewster Zoning By-laws without prejudice. The Board voted as follows.- Mr. ollows:Mr. Judd Yes Ms. Taylor Yes Mr. Collum Yes Mr. Hoag Yes Mr. DeRuyter Yes The motion carried. Based on the information provided in the public hearing and the information provided in this decision, at the Planning Board meeting on August 26, 2015, a motion was made by deRuyter and seconded by Collum to grant the Special Permit for#2015-1, Gloriae Dei Artes Foundation. The Board voted as follows: Mr. Judd Yes Ms, Taylor No Mr. Collum No Mr. Hoag Yes Mr. DeRuyter Yes The motion did not carry. The Planning Board certifies that copies of this Decision and all plans referred to in it have been fled with the Planning Board and the Town Clerk, Gloriae Dei Artes Foundation,Map 30,Lot 18,Decision Page 5of6 Signed: /� �s�t�� 1 �Z—j5- Rick Jud?;thalr Date Appeal from this decision may be made pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A Section 17, within 20 days of the filing with the Town Clerk. Filed: DATE RECEIVED: c1� TOWN CLERK: � DATE: I hereby certify that the 20 day appeal period has lapsed, and o no appeal OR ❑ an appeal was taken on Application 2015-1 Applicant: Gloriae Dei Artes Foundation, Inc. Town Clerk This permit is not valid until recorded in the Barnstable County Registry of Deeds and proof of the filing is received by the Town Clerk of Brewster, Massachusetts. GIodae Dei Antes Foundation,Map 30,Lot IS,Decision Page 6 of 6