Salem Conservation Commission
Minutes of Meeting
Date and Time: Thursday, September 22, 2011, 6:00 p.m.
Meeting Location: Third Floor Conference Room, City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street
Members Present: Chairwoman Julia Knisel, Dan Ricciarelli, Carole McCauley, David Pabich, Amy Hamilton
Members Absent: Michael Blier
Others Present: Tom Devine, Conservation Agent
Recorder: Stacy Kilb
Chairwoman Knisel opens the meeting at 6:04PM.
Meeting Minutes—September 8, 2011
No minutes presented to 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.
The applicant was not present, so this Public Hearing is tabled until later in the meeting.
Rich Brennan presents later on in the meeting. Mrs. Bowman is also present. The Commission had requested a plan showing the existing wall; he presents several illustrations showing the existing and new walls. The existing wall is failing and is in an emergency state of disrepair. It has been surveyed and control points plotted in the yard so they can dismantle the existing wall and build a new one in the same spot, not encroaching on the beach. The new wall has two types of blocks, including precast concrete ones, which have been used in Salem before. They will be two full blocks high, topped by a capstone of a different type. The seawall at Osgood Park uses these types of blocks. This wall has no wash at all from the tides, unless above flood tide, unlike the one at Osgood Park.
He would like to fix the wall before it fails. He presents photos of the wall from Osgood Park. There is an unprotected section of coastal bank to which they were going to extend the wall, but the request was denied by the State. The only other alternative is to address that bank as a separate issue and submit a landscape plan for it. The area is only two feet high, to the left of the wall. The new wall will be in the same footprint as the existing.
Chair Knisel asks Mr. Brennan to describe any equipment that will be used on the beach. Equipment will only be used shoreside, not on the beach itself. Foot traffic only will be on the beach. Pabich still wonders what the plan is for the end of the wall to the property line. As of now it is an unprotected bank, so he will submit a landscaping plan at a later date. It is not as serious a concern as the wall itself. The wall has 5 feet of fill behind it; that area is only 18 inches. That area is not in the application; Pabich describes the original situation and clarifies that all Mr. Brennan is doing now is removing the existing seawall and replacing it in kind. Mr. Brennan says that the area he just mentioned does need to be addressed. Pabich would like to see something brought before the Commission; Mr. Brennan
understands that this permit would be good for a few years, but wants to address this before the season progresses. Pabich is still concerned about the detail of the small landscaped area. He would like to see a condition that such a plan must go through the Agent to the Commission before construction may be started. In the interest of moving ahead, he may want to figure that out. McCauley asks if riprap will be in that spot; nothing solid will be there; it is and must remain a vegetated bank. They cannot put in the granite steps as per the original plan, as he wanted to do. The state did not want solid bank retention where there is existing bank. Chair Knisel asks when the house was built; that was in 1977. Subdivision plans show drainage on this and the neighbor’s property, which is working properly.
The wall has moved and is split with a huge crack; the entire left side is moved out 2½ or 3” at the top, with the earth behind it pushing it. It is an exposed area, close to the junction of the North River and Danvers River.
Chair Knisel asks if there are questions regarding the design of the wall. The Commission has none. She opens to the public but there are no comments.
A motion to close the public hearing is made by Pabich, seconded by Ricciarelli, and passes unanimously.
Pabich motions to issue an Order of Conditions with a special condition that the Commission receives a planting plan before construction begins.
Chair Knisel says they should include the standard conditions as far as erosion controls; there is no erosion control plan. Pabich asks about the timeline; removal and replacement will take two days to remove the old wall and lay the first course of blocks. The applicant has planned on hay bales around machinery, and will bring a spill kit. Chair Knisel states that one of the conditions would be that the applicant submits those plans to the Agent. The Commission does not want loam or soil getting into the system and suffocating shellfish or other area wildlife. Pabich says at silt fence would be appropriate and proposes a setup; the applicant agrees.
Chair Knisel says they will condition a silt fence unless it becomes obvious that there is a better method. Pabich also requests that an attempt be made to schedule the work during a relatively dry period. Mr. Brennan will have the precast blocks onsite before breaking down, at least enough to lay the bottom course. They will use fabric and cut stone for drainage behind the wall. The process should only take two days; the bottom block will be toed in 6” below existing grade on the beach so there will be no underwash. There will be crushed stone footing. He will try to work in good weather. Leftover materials will be trucked offsite; Mr. Brennan estimates there will be one load. Pabich says there should be no piles in the buffer zone and the applicant agrees. Devine will add that as a condition if it is
not in the standard ones. Mr. Brennan says that topsoil may be stockpiled and covered if it will be used or hauled out soon afterward.
The motion to issue the Order of Conditions, originally made by Pabich, is seconded by McCauley and passes unanimously. This order is hereby made a part of these minutes.
Continuation of Public Hearing—Request for Determination of Applicability—City of Salem Department of Park, Recreation & Community Services, 5 Broad Street, Salem, MA. The purpose of this hearing is to discuss the proposed repainting of the Winter Island Lighthouse within rocky intertidal area at Winter Island Park, 50 Winter Island Road.
Bill Woolley of Parks and Recreation presents. The Commission had several questions from the previous meeting. How would paint and rust be removed? How would chips/waste be captured?
He got a reference from Jay Highland at the Lighthouse Preservation Society; David Campbell, owns Campbell Construction which has done more than 20 lighthouse preservation projects, some in conjunction with the Coastguard. He lists some of those projects. The lighthouse would be scaffolded, then encapsulated with netting and plastic for the work to be done. It would be sandblasted down to the metal. We don’t have certification that there is NOT lead paint on the lighthouse, or that it has been sealed, so we would pursue a lead paint inspection from a certified inspector to get that information. In any case, the lighthouse will be encapsulated. Material will be carried offsite.
The Commission has no further concerns. Chair Knisel opens to the public but there are no comments.
A motion to close the public hearing is made by McCauley, seconded by Pabich, and passes unanimously.
Devine recommends a Negative 2 determination, as work is in a resource area but will not remove, fill, alter or dredge the area, considering the steps being taken to protect the area.
Pabich motions to issue a Negative 2 Determination, McCauley seconds, and the motion passes unanimously. This determination is hereby made a part of these minutes.
Old/New Business
- DEP #64-418: Osborne Hills/Strongwater Crossing subdivision: Request for Approval of Minor Change
This was old new business, not a public hearing, so no motions were needed.
Paul DiBiase anticipated Chris Mello’s attendance, but he is running late. The Commission decides to cover other old/new business in the meantime.
A tentative date for volunteer Forest River Bridge work is Oct. 16th. He will let them know when it is official.
There is a letter from the DEP regarding the Salem Oil and Grease Site visit and appeal of Resource area Delineation in the packets.
The Army Corps is doing some borings in the vicinity of Salem Oil and Grease near the North River, but Devine determined they are exempt from the Wetlands Protection Act. He wanted to inform Commissioners. These boring are for the flood mitigation project that could involve this property.
There is a problem with the November 10 Commission meeting; the next day is Veteran’s Day, so the City shuts down at 4PM and the meeting room will not be available. The Commission feels that November 17th would be a good alternative date, and Devine will determine whether a room is available.
There has been a change of course in the development of the City’s stormwater ordinance. The EPA has audited the City for compliance with NPDES and the Clean Water Act, so there is pressure to make a stormwater ordinance final. The Mayor has asked to have something put before the Council that would satisfy the EPA’s minimum requirements that projects of an acre or more would have to be reviewed for stormwater. Thus far anything within the Conservation Commission’s jurisdiction would be covered. The Planning Board would attach additional stormwater standards to their review of subdivisions and site plan review; the City Engineer would cover anything not reviewed by the Conservation Commission or Planning Board.
Devine is reaching out to the Boy Scouts to resolve the alleged stream cut at Camp Lyon. There has been no response yet, but Devine has been in touch with Joe Correnti, who he feels will be able to make some contact.
Tuesday the 27th at 10:30AM is the walkthrough for Salem Oil and Grease.
Continued from Above: DEP #64-418: Osborne Hills/Strongwater Crossing subdivision: Request for Approval of Minor Change
The Commission returns to the 8 Dearborn Lane Public Hearing (see above) then continues with Old/New Business, Osborne Hills with Paul DiBiase. Mr. Mello is still not present but Mr. DiBiase would like to go on anyway.
Some Commissioners visited the site on their own. Pabich views the plans and appreciates the request as a minor change, but this must be viewed like a house construction – a whole house being moved would not qualify as “minor.” There will be a lot of disturbed land and the filing is extensive; he believes that this is a major enough change to require an amendment.
Mr. DiBiase says that it will be the same percentage of affected area, just a different shape, so should constitute a minor change. Devine asks if Pabich is asking with the new information in mind, which includes plans for remediation. Pabich feels there is a significant number of trees and open space will be impacted. He is not saying it is not permitable; but it is not a minor change. There is nothing inherently wrong with the plan, but it is not a minor change, in his opinion, especially after walking the site. He liked the impact of the first plan better.
McCauley asks for Mr. DiBiase to summarize what the changes are, from the last meeting. They are proposing a change in location to the original, approved plan for this phase of work. The original was not a good location due to topography and ledge, however the new plan will move the work into the buffer zone, beyond the current approval. It may lead to an amendment vs. a minor change. Pabich comments that significant trees would have to come down, not just underbrush. He does not want to set this as a precedent for a “minor change.” Mr. DiBiase asks how long a formal amendment would take. Devine comments that plans have been viewed and a site visit made, and asks if it is possible that it could be done in one meeting. Pabich thinks so but says each impact must be viewed as they would for any other application.
Mr. DiBiase says that Mr. Mello has addressed some issues of restoration in his notes; he thinks they will be replanting 50 trees that will be removed but is not certain of the types. Pabich describes them as shrubs rather than large trees, which are what will be removed. Again, it may be permitted, but is not a minor change. Mr. DiBiase asks if they are heading in the right direction re replication; if not, what changes need to be made before the next meeting?
Ricciarelli comments that the engineer felt it was not possible to raise or redesign the invert. There is a significant grade and contours are discussed, as is the preservation of trees. The questions that remain have to do with the number of trees to be taken out, and how to avoid their removal, especially of those near the wetland. Mr. DiBiase agrees that there can be some modifications.
The setup of storm scepters and grades are again discussed, referencing the plans. Mr. DiBasi states that they will have to do some blasting, with the goal of minimizing and limiting activity in the buffer zone, so a happy medium can hopefully be reached if he reconfigures the plans. Pabich still questions whether this should be an amendment or a minor change. Mr. DiBiase states that they are discussing redesign and submission for the next hearing.
The Commission has decided that this will need to come before them again as an amendment, with a public hearing. That could occur at the next meeting; if the board is satisfied and public hearing closed then, it will be the same timeline as a minor change. There are three weeks until the next meeting, allowing plenty of time to get it on the agenda. Plans would need to be done by Monday October 3rd, so they will aim for the Friday beforehand (9/30) in case there are issues.
No vote is required to change this not a public hearing.
Adjournment
Ricciarelli motions to adjourn, and Amy seconds; all approve.
The meeting adjourns at 6:52 pm.
Respectfully Submitted,
Stacy Kilb
Clerk, Salem Conservation Commission
Approved by the Conservation Commission on October 27, 2011.
| 
