Salem Conservation Commission
Minutes of Meeting
Date and Time: Thursday, May12, 2011, 6:00 p.m.
Meeting Location: Third Floor Conference Room, City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street
Members Present: Chairman David Chairman Pabich, Michael Blier, Amy Hamilton, Julia Knisel
Members Absent: Carole McCauley, Dan Ricciarelli
Others Present: Tom Devine, Conservation Agent
Recorder: Stacy Kilb
The meeting is called to order by Chairman David Chairman Pabich at 6:05 p.m.
Meeting Minutes—April 16, 2011
A motion to approve the minutes is made by Knisel, seconded by Hamilton, and passes unanimously.
Public Hearing—Notice of Intent— DEP #64-515—Bakers Island Wharf Co., 132 Nichols St., Wilmington, MA. The purpose of the hearing is to discuss the proposed replacement of 12 pilings on the Bakers Island Pier (map 46, lot 126) in Salem Sound, impacting land under the ocean.
Illustration: Bakers Island As-built Pier, 11-25-1993, with undated notes.
Here representing the company is Peter Golden. He outlines the situation; the work will be performed by JR Freitas Marine Construction, Demolition & Engineering; Mr. Freitas has done prior work on the pier. The pilings will be 40’ long, and pressure treated. The start date is July 18th. The footprint of the existing pier will not change.
Chairman Chairman Pabich clarifies that the pilings will be replaced in kind, with the same diameter. The applicant states that they will be replaced one at a time, from a barge, not the top of the pier. A diagram has been submitted – the northwest corner will be shored up; old pictures shows work from 2004. This is constant maintenance needed from erosion and collisions with boats.
Chairman Pabich asks about shoring up and how the supports are attached to the pier. They will be done one at a time, as not all need replacement.
Chairman Pabich says it sounds straightforward, and does not feel a site visit is needed. Pilings will be pulled out, not cut out. This will generally happen over a few days – a dozen is too many to do in one day. Blier asks what happens to the barge at night. Barges are pre-anchored and lift their own pilings – they temporarily drop a stationary anchor and stay in place. They will be at least 250’-300’ from the beach.
Chairman Pabich is concerned by debris landing in the water when drilling through the pressure treated pilings. A skirt may be placed under it to catch that. Devine says the DEP reviewed this and made no comments. Mr. Golden has photocopies of all paperwork. There is a Chapter 91 license.
Chairman Pabich opens to the public and Robert Leavens of 385 Magnolia Ave, Gloucester, comments that this would fall under regular maintenance of the pier, which is required under the chapter 91 license.
A motion to close the public hearing is made by Hamilton, seconded by Knisel and passes unanimously.
A motion to issue an Order of Conditions is made by Blier, seconded by Knisel, and all approve. The plans to contain materials generated by drilling must meet the approval of the conservation agent, but verbal approval is all that is needed. The decision is hereby made a part of these minutes.
Public Hearing—Request for Determination of Applicability—Salem Community Gardens, P.O. Box 82, Salem, MA. The purpose of the hearing is to discuss after-the-fact installation of 95 community garden plots and appurtenances within riverfront area and buffer zones to coastal bank, coastal beach and salt marsh at 20 Lincoln Rd. (Pickman Park).
Here for Community Gardens is Lisa Spence. She outlines the situation and their request. The Community Gardens are within a buffer zone and riverfront area, but they feel they will have negligible impact on it. Construction of gates and two fence sections were added; two more posts will be installed to finish the gates. Nine posts were put into the ground and that is all the soil disturbance in this case. The city contracted with sprinkler installer to put in a tap; they used a Ditch Witch that digs 6-12” below ground. This also caused minimal disturbance. They are all organic gardens. They do not monitor it all the time but there are 4 garden captains in place; they live nearby and do keep an eye on things. In the past water conservation guidelines have been posted and will be again.
Illustration: “Photos of Rainwater Runoff, the Spigot, and the Gates at the Pickman Park Community Garden”, undated
Normally they get a delivery of composted manure there; they understand if they cannot do that at this location. Although it could be delivered outside the buffer zone. She went out after a recent rainfall and presents pictures of how the water pools. They are open to taking additional steps toward mitigating the Commission’s concerns.
Chairman Pabich asks how individual plots in the center drain; they did not cut though the asphalt. Each is a non-pressure-treated pine box with 2” of gravel in the bottom, a permeable weed cloth barrier stapled to the box, then plant-based compost on top of that. She did not feel comfortable drilling into the asphalt due to potential contamination. There are some cracks in the tennis court. It is fairly flat but there is a gradual slope towards the water.
Chairman Pabich asks if there is any drainage on the site; water comes down and slows at the back bay of beds. Ms. Spence hopes they will not add to runoff if gardeners are using their resources properly; she hopes to actually absorb runoff from rain by putting the beds on the court surface.
Chairman Pabich says it is actually riverfront area, entirely within the resource, and he is concerned that there will be a fair amount of nutrients heading to the river. He wonders if steps could be taken along the perimeter in order to prevent that. If boxes fail or compost is left on the surface it may wash into the river.
Devine says that Barbara Warren of Salem Sound Coastwatch stated that, at a minimum, all compost should be at the far end of the site. Ms. Spence says they will not be getting additional compost (manure) since they cannot control what the people nearest the water do with it; what is there now is plant-based, so is low in nitrogen and will have a slower release. They do have a space behind the boxes where they could install a device to slow or stop the water, or to absorb it. They are considering a poly-grow tube; soil can fill it and plants can be grown in it. This would act as an additional sponge for the water runoff; slowing the water would also prevent the release of any sediments.
There are no plans to do any additional plantings; Ms. Spence states that they can do all mitigation within the fence, either in front of or behind the boxes. Chairman Pabich thinks vegetation along the perimeter strip to catch water coming off the site, along with any nutrients, would be desirable. Ms. Spence says the poly-grow would work like that but is somewhat different than a strip of sod. She thinks it should be able to be installed where the Commission would like.
Hamilton asks if the river floods in that area; Ms. Spence says she has not seen it but imagines that it does, and Devine comments that it is NOT in the 100-year flood zone. It is not land subject to flooding with regards to the Conservation Commission’s jurisdiction. This means it has a lower probability of a major flood. Knisel asks how close floods come to the site; Devine shows the Commission the flood map.
Chairman Pabich states that housekeeping is very important and says it could have no impact, or a large impact. Knisel asks about if they planned to build boxes along that side; Chairman Pabich says that if they had come to the Commission before building, he would have recommended that something be put there. He feels that having a continuous barrier there would be acceptable. Ms. Spence agrees they could build something vegetated; she bought 100’ of tube to go around the corner.
Chairman Pabich asks about the corners and the setup is described and discussed. He thinks they should give the water a number of avenues to get to the sock so that it will work as designed. Water should go through it rather than up and over it. He asks that it be planted on the outside – planted or excavated so that water leaving the site gets trapped. Ms. Spence states that it is fairly thickly vegetated right now.
Blier says a consideration is that this is going to be an ongoing issue; he questions who will maintain it in the coming years and wonders how it will be maintained and by whom; is there a plan in place for when the gardens are no longer there? Ms. Spence says that it would be maintained the same as at other locations; if plots are abandoned, they become donation plots until the next year, when they become available for rental again, as there is a waiting list. They also have an agreement with Parks and Recreation to maintain all community gardens. The raised beds last a long time and they can build new ones when need be. Even the Winter Island beds will be moved and those expenses are covered by fees charged.
Chairman Pabich opines that they should go for a site visit to understand the setup.
Advantages of having the gardens there are discussed, including replacing blacktop with surfaces that don’t heat up, and keeping teenagers and their glass-breaking out of the area. Blier says there may be unintended consequences, though, related to maintenance. Chairman Pabich requests submission of a maintenance plan, or establishing one. Housekeeping will be important.
Hamilton asks if it is subject to Commission jurisdiction, but Devine says there is some flexibility due to precedent; this is a similar situation as the dog park, which is also in a resource area but the Commission did review and approve that with conditions, using an RDA even though an NOI might actually be more appropriate. Even though boxes are being filled, they are temporary in nature. They may need to make a positive determination. But, it is felt that gardens are better than a tennis court; though now, on the other hand, more material may wash off of it than before.
Chairman Pabich opens to the public and there are no comments.
A formal site visit is not scheduled but Commissioners are asked to go individually instead. Devine mentions that the playground is also being replaced at Pickman Park, and they may also have to file. He will follow up.
A motion to continue to the next meeting is made by Knisel, seconded by Hamilton, and passes unanimously. Chairman Pabich asks to see a plan to address the Commission’s concerns at that time. Pabich states that no one will issue a cease and desist to stop the gardening while this is still under review.
Continuation of Public Hearing—Notice of Intent—DEP #64-509—Barbara Bowman, 8 Dearborn Lane, Salem, MA. The purpose of this hearing is to discuss the proposed removal of a concrete seawall and replacement with riprap within a portion of coastal beach, coastal bank, and land subject to coastal storm flowage at 8 Dearborn Lane.
Here for Ms. Bowman is Richard Brennan of 405 Mason St. Devine has an affidavit for Blier to sign as he was not here at the last meeting.
Illustration: Hobbs Endeavour Corporation; Bowman Residence, 8 Dearborn Lane, Salem; 5-11-2011, 7 pages
Mr. Brennan apologizes for missing the last meeting when he was on the agenda. He shows the Commission a copy of the plan, which he has not thoroughly reviewed yet. There was a site visit and at that time they had planned to do a riprap wall to match the existing wall. Now the plan is to replace the concrete wall with another concrete wall, this time with blocks. There is a drawing of the setup included.
He describes the blocks and the capstones on top. The existing riprap has moved out onto the beach and should be pulled back. That will happen in phase 1 since it is at the most difficult part to reach. The existing wall would then be removed and they will dig back to give room to put the new wall in. There will be three steps at the edge to get to the beach. He thought there was a 3’ public right of way, but it is a drainage easement, not public access. Chairman Pabich comments on the drainpipe which is on the neighbor’s property.
They discuss the setup and continuation of the new wall across a certain area to stabilize the bank. It is above high water, but is still subject to very high tides.
The applicant and Chairman Pabich also discuss a few other points:
- Eroded materials, a source of sediment, are being replaced with hard materials that will not provide sediment. While replacing the current wall with an in-kind one is understandable, the Chairman would like to see a “soft” solution.
- A more thorough, detailed plan is requested.
- There is some question as to DEP comments – the ones made so far pertain to the original plan, and this one is a radical departure. Revised plans should be re-submitted to the DEP and if they have further comments, these should be taken into account.
- The new setup is also discussed in more detail, in particular the length and height of the wall.
A motion to continue is made by Hamilton, seconded by Knisel, and passes unanimously.
Old/New Business
- Discussion of forthcoming election of Conservation Commission officers
A Chair and Vice Chair must be named; Chairman Pabich is willing to continue in his role if there are no other options. Devine clarifies that the Chair does not have to be an engineer. Knisel asks if they should wait until they have a final member; but, as voting is not on the agenda, they will not vote tonight. This is supposed to be done every year but Chairman Pabich has been chair for 2 or 3 years.
The Commission will continue this discussion at the next meeting.
- Discussion and vote regarding funding for removal of debris from 44 Intervale Rd., within the Forest River Conservation Area
Devine outlines the situation; a resident is volunteering to clean up the area as long as the Commission is willing to pay for a dumpster. Knisel worries that the neighborhood could use it for disposal of their own refuse. Chairman Pabich says that maybe they can ask this gentleman to put items on the side of the road, then a collection truck could be sent.
Devine only has quotes for a dumpster but Chairman Pabich says whoever we hire could do it in one fell swoop; a dumpster would draw attention. The site is where people would go to throw trash before the new house was there; now that it’s been improved they no longer do that. Devine does not want to lose another volunteer and Chairman Pabich agrees it would be counterproductive to make it cumbersome for him.
Knisel asks about the volume of material, which is enough to fill a dumpster. Chairman Pabich clarifies that you pay for volume with a dumpster. It costs $475 minimum no matter how full or not it is. Devine proposes moving forward with the dumpster and asking the volunteer to keep an eye on it; this would be a large dumpster with an open top. The area looks like it is his property since the road continues; it will not appear to be in a public area.
Chairman Pabich asks about the prices; they range from (for Northside Carting) $400 for 15 yards, with a 3 ton max and an $80/ton charge over that, with no tires. There is also a quote from BFI for a 15 cubic yard dumpster for $350, prepaying for 1 ton and a charge of $83/ton over that. Knisel comments that one ton may not be enough if there are a bunch of TV’s, and Devine opines that the 3 tons for $400 may be a better deal in this case.
Knisel asks what’s down there – car parts, wheels, appliances, tires, random trash. She also suggests he should sign a waiver in case he gets hurt.
A motion for approval of funding for the dumpster is made by Blier and seconded by Knisel. It passes unanimously with a $485 maximum charge allotted.
- Discussion and vote regarding funding for consultant services for development of the City of Salem stormwater ordinance
No vote is needed; Devine was going to ask for $5,000 to match the same amount coming from the Engineering Department, to finish development of this ordinance. However, Engineering has paid the full $10,000, so no additional funds are needed; there will be discussion at an uncoming meeting.
- DEP #64-321: 30 Cloverdale Ave., request for certificate of compliance for an invalid order of conditions
This expired before the work was done; work was completed under a new order and a certificate of compliance was issued for that. No inspection is required.
A motion to issue the Certificate of Compliance is made by Knisel, seconded by Hamilton, and passes unanimously.
- DEP #64-466: South River Harborwalk, request for certificate of compliance
Devine passes around photos. It has been done for a while but they were wrapping up some small details. A deviation was that the harbormaster asked for a safety ladder, which was installed.
A motion to issue the Harborwalk Certificate of Compliance is made by Hamilton, seconded by Knisel, and passes unanimously.
Devine announces that at Furlong Park they are taking some trees down and this requires public hearings with the Tree Warden. Chairman Pabich suggests replanting the removed trees. This is in a riverfront area, so they should be replaced.
A motion to adjourn the meeting is made by Hamilton, seconded by Knisel, and passes unanimously.
The meeting adjourns at 7:15PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Stacy Kilb
Clerk, Salem Conservation Commission
Approved by the Conservation Commission on September 8, 2011.
| 
