Salem Conservation Commission
Minutes of Meeting
Date and Time: Date and time: Thursday, June 14, 2012, 6:00 p.m.
Meeting Location: Location: Third Floor Conference Room, City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street
Members Present: Members Present: Acting Chair Bart Hoskins, Dan Ricciarelli, Amy Hamilton, Michael Blier
Members Absent: Members absent: Julia Knisel, David Pabich, Gavin McAuliffe
Others Present: Staff: Tom Devine, Conservation Agent
Recorder: Stacy Kilb, Recording Clerk
Acting Chair Hoskins calls the meeting to order at 6:05PM.
Meeting Minutes—May 24, 2012
A motion to table the minutes to the June 28 meeting is made by Hamilton, seconded by Ricciarelli and passes unanimously.
Continuation of Public Hearing—Request for Determination of Applicability—Pan Am Railways—1700 Iron Horse Park, Billerica, MA. The purpose of this hearing is to discuss verification of wetlands boundaries to determine sensitive areas in planning for the application of herbicides on the Pan Am right of way parallel roughly to the North River between the Peabody line and Leslie’s Retreat Park.
Here for the applicant is Keith Morris, consultant for Pan Am Railways. Every 5 years as part of vegetation management plan, the program must file an RDA with the local Conservation Commission for verification of no spray zones for the right of way. They will use the same markings as before, which he describes. There is a no-spray zone within 10’ of marked areas. Blier asks if he represented a similar case on the other side of the bridge in Salem, which he did. The setback of 10’ from wetlands, vernal pools etc. was agreed on by the Mass. Dept. of Agricultural Resources (MDAR). The riverfront area does not pertain to this but is built in elsewhere. This is an old plan but has been updated. The YOP (yearly operational plan) is updated every year. This Commission must approve the no spray zones.
This request was set to be heard at the last meeting so is not in the current packet.
Hoskins asks if it is Japanese Knotweed, but Mr. Morris is not sure. Devine points out the different types of limitations as outlined on the plan, and Mr. Morris explains the types of herbicides and where they may be used. There are only two no spray zones. They will not spray if it is raining hard or too windy. There are also some other minor restrictions. Blier asks if a full plan was submitted to the City a while ago; there is a website with the YOP but Devine reminds the Commission that its job is just to approve the no spray zones. Devine opines that the resource area is very clear, and notes that the commission confirmed in its ORAD for the Salem Oil & Grease property that there is no BVW present, and that is a fair portion of the area in question for this matter. Another large portion of the
river is channelized with concrete banks. He describes the setup further. He feels the no spray zones are placed correctly. Acting Chair Hoskins asks if there are alternatives to spraying. Nothing gets done in the no-spray zones since no herbicides may be used.
Acting Chair Hoskins states that the Commission must determine if this is an appropriate delineation of the boundaries of the resource area. The transition of wetland to upland is usually abrupt along the North River since the banks are steep. This is not a full delineation, but rather just shows what is relevant to the spraying area. They would mark areas as wetlands if it looked like they were, even if they were not sure. They treat wet areas that were previously dry, if it rains, as wetlands too. Devine points out that there was a similar filing a and a half before for spraying by the MBTA that went through Thompson’s Meadow, where the wetland areas are also very apparent.
There are no members of the public, so no public comments.
A motion to close the public hearing is made by Ricciarelli, seconded by Hamilton, and passes unanimously.
Devine reads the definition of Determination 2a, which reads that boundary delineations are confirmed as accurate, and that boundaries are binding as to all decisions pursuant to the Wetlands Protection Act.
A motion to issue a 2A Determination is made by Hamilton, seconded by Ricciarelli, and passes unanimously. This decision is hereby made a part of these minutes.
Public Hearing—Request for Determination of Applicability—Dominion Resource Services, Inc.— 5000 Dominion Blvd., Glen Allen, VA. The purpose of this hearing is to discuss the proposed in-kind replacement of existing timber piles within land under the ocean at 24 Fort Ave. (Salem Harbor Power Station).
Nicole Wilkerson represents Dominion Resource Services, Inc.
The existing pier requires maintenance due to storm damage this past winter. Some floating portions have been removed and stored, and one piece is still there, but the piles are leaning and the dock has been shut down, as it is not safe. They have removed what was left of four piles and will be floating a barge and replacing in kind the 12” piles that are 50’ long. They will be driven into the sea bed, then they will reattach the floating dock.
They will put a turbidity curtain in the water during work to prevent sediment movement. They have been before this Commission before for this type of work and would use the same means of sediment control. Timber pile pieces removed will be disposed of upland.
Included is a Chapter 91 license that shows that portion of the dock, and Ms. Wilkerson also spoke with someone at the DEP and described the work. They do not need to file for a Chapter 91 minor modification as this is an in-kind replacement, maintaining current dock. Piles will be replaced in the exact same location as the old ones.
If there is any question, Dominion comes before the Conservation Commission as they are a high profile applicant. They do a yearly inspection of docks as needed and piles seem to need to be replaced every few years due to storm damage. Acting Chair Hoskins clarifies that they are determining whether the Wetlands Protection Act applies and local ordinances apply. Devine took a course and found out about an exemption that comes from case law – maintenance and repair activities are generally exempt from Wetlands Protection Act but the Commission can determine what qualifies as maintenance and repair. In this case, replacing four piles, in Devine’s opinion, does not necessarily require an order of conditions. The case mentioned was about the repair of a seawall; even though they had to install
scaffolding to do the work and expanded the wall by a few inches, it did not trigger the Wetlands Protection Act.
Devine appreciates their decision to use a turbidity curtain. Ms. Wilkerson says the work cannot cause any adverse effects, so they use the curtain. Hoskins is not sure if the turbidity curtain would be required or under which regulations.
There are no members of the public present, so there are no public comments.
A motion to close the public hearing is made by Ricciarelli, seconded by Hamilton, and passes unanimously.
The work is being completed in a jurisdictional area, but the activity is not subject to the Wetlands protection act. Devine will note the case law, previously mentioned, in a cover letter.
A motion to issue a Negative 2 Determination is made by Hamilton, seconded by Blier, and passes unanimously. This decision is hereby made a part of these minutes.
Public Hearing—Request for Determination of Applicability— MassDOT - Highway Division—519 Appleton Street, Arlington, MA. The purpose of this hearing is to discuss the proposed removal of debris from a culvert outlet within the MassDOT drainage easement at 455 Highland Ave.
No one is present for the applicant.
A motion to continue to July 12 is made by Blier, seconded by Ricciarelli, and passes unanimously.
Old/New Business
- Discussion and vote regarding funding for GIS software annual maintenance
Devine requests $400 to renew and maintain the license for the GIS software on his computer.
A motion to authorize $400 for this purpose is made by Ricciarelli, seconded by Hamilton, and passes unanimously.
Other updates:
Acquisition of the former Chadwick Lead Mills
If the City acquires the site, it will most likely be Parks and Recreation Commission rather than Conservation Commission land, given what the City Solicitor’s recommended course of action. The site has already been remediated. Plans with the permits expired for private development and the has agreed to sell at a bargain price for the purpose of preserving the property as open space.
121 Leach Street, possible land donation
The person who wants to donate the small area at 121 Leech Street set up consultation with an environmental engineer, paid for by an EPA grant, to see if the land is contaminated. The City wants to ensure it isn’t taking on excessive liability by accepting a donation of contaminated land.
DEP #64-516: 60, 64 Grove St., 3 Harmony Grove Road (Salem Oil & Grease): Update on DEP’s Superseding Order of Resource Area Delineation (SORAD)
After the developer appealed the DEP’s superseding order and requested an adjudicatory hearing, the DEP and the developer reached a settlement agreement. It confirms the SORAD’s determination that the flood zone is coastal, not inland, and the commission’s 10.8 flood elevation. It expanded the area the SORAD determined is subject to the historic mill complex exemption from the riverfront regulations. The settlement also agrees that most areas not subject to the exemption qualify as degraded and do not need to fully meet the riverfront area regulations. The settlement requires final approval by the DEP commissioner.
A motion to adjourn is made by Hamilton, seconded by Ricciarelli and passes unanimously.
The meeting ends at 6:45PM.
Respectfully Submitted,
Stacy Kilb
Clerk, Salem Conservation Commission
Approved by the Conservation Commission on July 14, 2012
| 
