Salem Conservation Commission
Minutes of Meeting
Date and Time: Thursday, March 11, 2010, 6:00 p.m.
Meeting Location: Third Floor Conference Room, City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street
Members Present: Amy Hamilton, Dan Ricciarelli, Rebecca Christie, Carole McCauley, and Julia Knisel,
Members Absent: David Pabich, Michael Blier
Others Present: Carey Duques, Conservation Agent
Recorder: Stacy Kilb
Christie calls the meeting to order.
Meeting Minutes— January 28, 2010
Knisel motions to approve and is seconded by Hamilton. Passes 5-0.
Continuation of a Public Hearing—Request for Determination of Applicability— City of Salem 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA 01970. The purpose of this hearing is to discuss the construction of a v-notch weir to monitor stream flow in the South River.
Will be continued to March 25th.
Continuation of a Public Hearing— Notice of Intent— DEP #64-495— Harmony Grove Cemetery 30 Grove Street Salem, MA 01970. The purpose of this hearing is to discuss the proposal for continued Cemetery leaf storage operations and install plantings within a Riverfront Area at Harmony Grove Cemetery 30 Grove Street.
Fran Mayo and John Reardon are present, as is Peter Ogren.
Mayo outlines progress so far with the DEP; although he and Mr. Ogren spoke to Mr. Lozzi, their official meeting was cancelled and it was a very brief conversation. Although they would like to proceed at present, they also do not want to be denied by the DEP and Mr. Lozzi did not expressly give his blessing on the project.
There is mention of the Riverfront Act and that the regulations allow for 10% or 5000 square feet of Riverfront area to be disturbed, which ever is greater; provided that 100’ of undisturbed vegetation is provided and the proposal does not impair the capacity of the riverfront area to provide habitat for wildlife.
Duques shows photos of the disturbed area to be restored taken at the site visit held at 5pm today; flags show the limit of the proposed composting area on the plan. She also shows a current plan. Peter Ogren, of Hayes Engineering, also shows a revised plan. Harmony Grove is asking for permission to disturb 12,000 sq feet of Riverfront Area. Ogren states this footage is a little more than 5% of the area, well under the 10% limit mentioned above. Hamilton asks about a drainage swale. Ogren mentions a gutter, catch basins and granite curb along the road.
Conversation continues regarding a red line on the revised plan across the corner of the proposed area; Ogren says that Mr. Lozzi suggested they cut that corner and get out of the tree line and also states that they are willing to plant more shrubs than originally planned, along with posting more signs reading “entering riverfront area” along the road at intervals to prevent further dumping, at the suggestion of Mr. Lozzi.
Christie agrees it’s prudent and reads comments from Pabich, who is not present, to the Commission.
In summary, Pabich outlines his concerns and agrees with the DEP, and feels that Harmony Grove has not addressed his concerns and cannot guarantee that runoff will NOT reach the river.
John Reardon states that there is NO grass in the area to be composted an also points out that the area is OUT of the 100 year flood zone (ie, an “extreme flood/rain event”).
Ogren discusses the tidal nature of this particular segment of the North River, and thinks the composting should not be a concern. Ogren explains that Mr. Lozzi has said that an area up to 10,000 square feet could be used, but asked if they could live with 5000 square feet, which they can’t. Ogren thinks Mr. Lozzi was not concerned about turbidity; he was more concerned with people dumping.
Duques points out that at her site visit today, debris is piled against tree trunks, so the focus should be on restoration and how that material will be scraped back. The composted material is several feet deep in some areas.
Ogren says that can be taken care of, as the material should be flattened; tire ruts should be filled in as well. The disturbed area will be seeded with a conservation mix.
Hamilton points out the need for a visual; Ogren says it’s hard to present topography as the landscape is rolling. He suggests adding a silt fence along the chain link fence if it’s important to Commission. Hamilton thinks it would be a good idea. Duques says to put the silt fence on the outside of the fence along Harmony Grove Rd.
Christie points out that she doesn’t want to anticipate Pabich’s concerns and suggests arranging a site visit with both Pabich and Lozzi; Mayo agrees it would be a good idea if it can be arranged.
McCauley states that if Mr. Lozzi’s concerns are not addressed, then the Commission’s actions are moot.
Mayo says their brief conversation only yielded mixed signals, nothing clear.
Discussion continues about another meeting with Lozzi, as the project needs his approval regardless of what the Commission decides; Reardon points out that the delays are costing money and each meeting during which nothing gets resolved eats into the Cemetery’s dwindling endowment. Duques says that the Commission will do its best to arrange a meeting at the Cemetery, within the next two weeks, with Pabich and Lozzi. It is agreed that Ogren and Mayo should also be present.
Christie opens to the public.
McCauley motions to continue until 25th, and is seconded by Ricciarelli; passes 5-0.
Old /New Business
- Update on Salem Suede Project 72 Flint Street DEP #64-492
Duques spoke with Scott Grover, and asked that he and the applicant update the Commission since there was a release reported on the property and articles in local newspapers. Scott Grover representing Salem Suede presents.
Butterworth presents the following; a release of old wastewater happened at the site; his clients acted promptly once they were aware of it and hired an environmental consultant to remediate. Jacob Butterworth a Licensed Site Professional of Alliance Environmental reports.
Butterworth explained that one of the waste water tanks cracked and leaked, and it was reported to the DEP. The liquid that leached is benign; They’ve pumped 70K gallons of liquid and sludge to date which is being stored onsite. A more fatty/oil tank has also been cleaned out. All tanks must be cleaned, decommissioned, then taken down, then assessed. The date of the release was Feb. 22nd. Butterworth isn’t sure how the damage occurred but states tank was just old and had been repaired in past, and the repairs didn’t hold.
The client has actually been denied by South Essex Sewerage District (SESD) to discharge material to SESD, as each plant has different capacities and requirements, so they are looking at the cost of using other disposal facilities. The problem that arises is that under the original order of conditions, they can’t move/disturb the foundations, but they have to in order to close out the tank areas – they must collect samples to submit to the state. They are fully prepared to move the slab, sample, and then put down a nonwoven textile with crushed stone on top.
Discussion ensues about the necessity of removing the slab and many of the Commission’s concerns voiced in previous meetings regarding this topic resurface (leaving ground exposed, etc.), as do Salem Suede’s reasons for wanting to remove it. Butterworth states that although they can drill and sample, it would be easier to remove the slab as that will need to happen eventually anyway. He reminds the Commission that his plan must pass DEP approval, and if it’s not adequate it will be rejected.
Ricciarelli asks if they can start with core samples; Butterworth says yes, but that he would rather use the machinery that’s already onsite. Hamilton questions the sampling plan. Butterworth counters that they already ran tests for a host of contaminants, and that the metals were at an acceptable level for discharge into the sewer system. Samples were taken from the bottom of the tank.
Some questions arise about a boom on the site, and Butterworth is reminded that the silt fence must be reinstalled. He wants to expedite getting the tanks decommissioned because they don’t want to leave open voids on site to be tampered with.
Duques asks if they have a sampling and demo plan for the DEP; Butterworth says they want to complete the items mandated by DEP as a result of the release and close out the release issue with DEP by submitting a RAO. Duques clarifies that closing out this issue with DEP does not resolve the other contamination issues on site. Butterworth agrees. Duques wants to see measures installed to protect the river during sampling and demolition. Butterworth says sampling in small locations under slab would do, without breaking it up.
Ricciarelli wants to know when they can find out what the DEP will accept; Butterworth says soon; they had to build roofs over the tanks since they’re not covered and rain is expected.
Hamilton asks if Chromium was found in the sludge or water. Butterworth explains that a TCLP analysis showed a level 4; the cutoff level is 5.
Butterworth agrees to do a less invasive sampling procedure, provided he has DEP approval. He explains they still need to take down the walls of the tanks, and he reminds the Commission that the Order of Conditions allows them to do that.
Duques voices concerns about cracks in the foundation allowing rainwater to deliver pollutants to the river; Butterworth feels the cracks are not bad and water will not percolate. He also wants the tanks taken down soon as if they fill with water, even though it will be technically clean, it would still have to be disposed of as contaminated.
It is clarified that the client is NOT asking for a revised Order of Conditions. Duques reads condition #47. She wants the Commission to vote to approve core sampling. The applicant will have to return to the Commission and present the sample results of the core samples for approval to fully remove the slabs.
Hamilton asks about the area of the tanks; the largest is 60’x20’, there is also a 40’x20’ and an above ground tank built into a foundation that is 40’x20’.
Hamilton wonders if they can cover area with poly sheeting. Butterworth expresses concerns that water would run off directly into river. If the commission won’t allow them to break up the slab, why put anything?
Christie opens to the public.
Jane Arlender, Friends of the North River, Federal St., asks how many sampling sites are planned for the 3 tanks. Butterworth outlines the plan to drill sample holes in 10’ grid fashion, taking groundwater samples at the same time.
Hamilton motions to close public discussion; Ricciarelli seconds. Passes 5-0.
Duques clarifies – the Commission is not amending the current conditions; slabs can be cored for sampling purposes but not removed.
The Commission would like to see copies of the reports submitted to the DEP, and if they do not approve of the current plan, Butterworth should come back to the Commission.
McCauley motions, is seconded by Knisel, and the motion passes 5-0.
Scott Grover clarifies that the walls above grade are going to come down to avoid any misunderstanding.
- Request for an Extension to an Existing Order of Conditions DEP #64-443— Mass. Electric/National Grid property, 20 Pierce Avenue.
An Order of Conditions was issued 3 years ago; National Grid can’t do the work yet, so is requesting a 3 year extension with the same conditions. Ricciarelli asks what happens if there are modifications; Duques answers they would come again before commission, which is now “grandfathering in” what they originally requested.
McCauley asks if regulations have changed since then; Duques says stormwater regs have changed. Ricciarelli wants a statement from Mass Electric stating that nothing has changed from original plans. Duques agrees. They need to submit a statement to the effect that their proposal will not have any more negative impact based on current regulations.
Duques says the decision will be postponed until they get the above statement. Ricciarelli asks if it (plans) should be updated every year but McCauley points out that they’d have to do it for all applicants.
- Request for an Extension to an Existing Order of Conditions DEP #64-450— 6 Dearborn Lane.
Applicant is asking for a 3 year extension of the current Order of Conditions that permitted him to build a pier and dock extending out into the North River, because he needs to complete installing railings. Duques has a copy of the Chapter 91 license, which was a special condition in the original order. The property owner is in compliance. Christie solicits concerns from Duques; she says there are none. He could request Certificate of Compliance right now but the Commission can extend the Order of Conditions; McCauley says it’s $75 either way for the recording fee so the applicant should be informed of that; Duques agrees.
Duques outlines the proposal; a 4’ wide walkway with railing, and the railing is all that he still needs to do.
McCauley motions to extend the Order of Conditions; Ricciarelli seconds - passes 5-0.
- Project status update on the construction of the Kernwood Boat Ramp 24 Kernwood St DEP #64-474.
Issued an Order of Conditions back in May ’08; this project is being done by the state, which will start construction soon. Some changes were made to the Order of Conditions; instead of haybales, they can use filtrex sock, and also Commission said that the contractor must complete a pollution and sedimentation control plan and should attend a Commission meeting; Duques would rather meet him onsite.
Ricciarelli asks how long the construction period would be; Duques answers several weeks since they need to install a cofferdam prior to constructing the new concrete ramp; she will meet them before that to address concerns. The Commission discusses the coffer dam and its set up.
Duques shows the plans and the Commission reviews them. They are the same, only the Commission agrees Duques can meet the contractor onsite rather than have the contractor come to the Con Com meeting. Ricciarelli asks if this is continuous or just pre-construction; Duques says just pre-construction.
- Last minute additional item not on the agenda:
A sewage leak occurred from a sewage line near Salem hospital into the wetlands adjacent to Dove Avenue on Tuesday. Salem Hospital sent a surveyor to figure out where the sewer lines are and discovered this. Apparently the blockage along the sewage was so severe that the raw materials backed up and erupted out of a manhole. Duques was notified and went to view the area on Wednesday as cleanup was in progress. She had no idea how much material was discharged, but it was at least 5 truckloads (vactor truck), as it had to be watered down as it included paper towels and rubber gloves. There was a lot of material that should not have been there.
Workers were cleaning up this morning (Thursday 3/11), raking up and putting lime down. Duques was notified this afternoon (Thursday 3/11) of another leak discovered at a manhole several yards from where the first leak was discovered; she was not sure when the leak happened, the material was reported as dry and probably had been there for a while. It was located along the same line. The City Engineer visited the site and requested that the septic line be TV’d in all directions. Christie asks if it’s sewer as in pre-treatment, material that was flushed down a toilet? It appears so. McCauley asks if there will be mitigation.
Ricciarelli asks if there’s a steep grade; there is. Duques says cleanup was straightforward in the area in the pictures, but in the second area it mixed more with water and they didn’t know if it was groundwater or water from the sewer, so she doesn’t know if lime is a good idea. The stream there was not affected. The DEP must be notified but has not been to the site yet. Pabich wanted Duques to talk about it and have the hospital do a maintenance plan once they know where the lines are. Part of the problem is that the size of one of the pipes is only 6”.
It is uncertain if that pipe is part of a main or the sewer; it could have been used by the original hospital building, and never upgraded as the hospital expanded. It is also unclear if it is a City line or if it belongs to the hospital.
Hamilton asks if lime is for the odor, and Duques says it’s to neutralize it.
The hospital and/or the City may need to come before the Commission and file an RDA to repair the manholes.
McCauley motions, and Hamilton seconds adjournment of the meeting; passes 5-0.
Meeting ends at 7:45 PM
| 
