The URL can be used to link to this page

100-114 SWAMPSCOTT ROAD - ZBA (4) loo —»tel �v„aMcc — 14 77 �k CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL °f 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 TELEPHONE: 978-745-9595 FAX: 978-740-9846 2000 JUN N P 153 KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL MAYOR ' FILA fit CITY CLERK, SALEM. MASS. June 24, 2008 Decision City of Salem Zoning Board of Appeals Petition of DANA DILISIO and DAVID DILISIO, Trustees of D & D Realty Trust, requesting a Special Permit to add a nonconforming use to allow for an electric go cart track at 110-114 SWAMPSCOTT ROAD [BPD]. A public hearing on the above Petition was opened on June 18, 2008 pursuant to Mass General Law Ch. 40A, §§ 11. The public hearing was closed on June 18, 2008 with the following Zoning Board members present: Elizabeth Debski(Vice Chair), Rebecca Curran, Richard Dionne, Annie Hams and Bonnie Belair(Alternate). Petitioner seeks a Special.Permit pursuant to the following sections of the Salem Zoning Ordinance: Sec. 5-30)Extension of nonconformity. Statements of fact: 1. The petitioner;, David DiLisio and Dana DiLisio, own 110-114 Swampscott Road, a property located in the Business Park Development [BPD] Zoning District. 2. The petitioner is represented by Attorney Brian LeClair who presented the petition. 3. The application,which is the subject of this decision evolved from the following: a. A Petition was submitted to the Board of Appeals on March 26,2008 requesting a Special Permit to add a nonconforming use to allow for a go cart track at 110-114 Swampscott Road. The petition was accompanied by eight(8)enclosures: 1. A plan referred to as the"Existing-Site"entitled"Proposed Site Plan Swampscott Road, Salem, MA'', dated June 2, 1998,prepared by Parsons and FAIA, Inc. 2. A plan entitled"Proposed Site Plan Swampscott Road, Salem,MA", dated October 22,2007,prepared by Parsons and FAIR, Inc. r ; 2 3. September 7, 1999 Noise Control Engineering, Inc. Noise Assessment Study. 4. October 31, 1996 Board of Appeal Decision Granting Variance 5. June 28, 1998 Board of Appeal Decision Denying Special Permit 6. November 1, 1999 Board of Appeal Decision Denying Special Permit 7. 2007 Notice of Intent filed with the Conservation Commission 8. January 16, 1997 North Shore Tennis Parking Agreement b. The following additional materials where submitted on April 10,2008: 1. March 27, 2008 Noise Study Update 2. March 24, 2008 Letter from Daniel Harrington 3. J&J Amusements Go Cart Information 4. Photos of trees which will be planted three feet on center along Robinson Road and the adjacent rear lot corner as a sound barrier. c. The original application was opened at the Board of Appeals on April 16, 2008 and continued to May 21, 2008. On May 21,2008 the Board voted to grant the applicants request to allow for the application to be withdrawn without prejudice because of the inability to have a full board of five members eligible to vote. A new application was submitted on May 28, 2008, which requested a Special Permit to add a nonconforming use to allow for an electric go cart track at 110-114 Swampscott Road. This application was opened at the Board of Appeals on June 18, 2008. d. It is important to note that all written materials, information, studies, and any and all other correspondence involved in these applications were accepted as part of the record for the application for which this decision is issued. 4. The petitioner is seeking a Special Permit to add the nonconforming use of an electric go cart track to the left side of the lot adjacent to Robinson Road. There would also be a small canopy and building where riders start and end their rides. The utility building is where the carts would be stored. 5. The cucrent'use of the property is a miniature golf course,which is a nonconforming use in the BPD District. 6. There are currently two handicapped, and thirty three(33)other parking spaces on the property. Additionally, the applicants have an agreement with the North Shore Tennis Club to share parking which provides twenty(26)additional spaces. 7. At the public hearing on April 16, 2008 the following residents spoke in opposition to the proposal: Jim Hacker(4 Mayflower Lane),Russ Austin(6 Captains Lane),David Jacobson(12 Brittania Circle),David Dextrom(96 Swampscott Road Unit 7),Alizabeth Mercy(73 Whalers Lane), and Ted Stolls(4 Britannia Circle). Many said they were concerned about the noise that would be generated by the go carts. z 3 8. Letters of opposition were submitted by: Sandra Burke and David Cawthron, 55 Brittania Circle(April 10, 2008) and Alizabeth Marcy, 73 Whalers Lane(April 17, 2008). 9. Forty-three(43)petitions signed by(55)residents of the Mariner Village and Green Dolphin Condominium Trusts were submitted opposing three facilities along Swampscott Road: the proposed expansion of the Transfer Station(a project not before the Board of Appeals),the proposed rock crushing facility, and go-cart racing. The dates on the petitions range from May 1, 2008 to May 10, 2008. 10. A letter to the Board of Appeals from Attorney Brian LeClair dated May 14, 2008, states that the applicants have taken expressed noise concerns into consideration and seek instead to have only electric go carts operating at the proposed track. Enclosed was a statement from Marvin Foster of J&J Amusements that a sound study has not been done for J&J Electric Go Karts and that the sounds are comparable to that of an electric golf cart. 11. A letter of opposition was submitted by David Jacobson, 12 Brittania Circle(May 15,2008). 12. A neighborhood meeting was held on May 17, 2008,parties on the certified abutters list were invited by the applicant by mail. 13. A letter of opposition was submitted by Frank Morrill, 2 Mayflower Lane(June 11, 2008). 14. At the public hearing on June 18, 2008,Ms. Yeung(86 Cavendish Circle) said she would not want there to be a PA or music. Dan Garberr(7 Queensberry Drive) said he is concerned about the cumulative noise affect of carts. Tony Lena of the North Shore Tennis Club spoke in support of the petitioner's request. 15. A the public hearing on June 18, 2008,the applicant submitted a petition signed by forty-one(41)residents in support of the special permit request to for electric co-karts. Several of these residents had previously signed petitions in opposition before the proposal was changed to electric. The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the public hearing, and after thorough review of the plans and petition submitted,makes the following findings: 1. Electric go carts will be essentially noiseless and therefore will not be disruptive to the neighborhood, like the proposed gas go carts were anticipated to be by abutters. 2. Allowing the use would expand the amount of recreational activities for families and children in the area. i 4 3. The proposed additional nonconforming use is consistent with other nearby recreational uses and would not be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming use to the mixed neighborhood. On the basis of the above findings of fact and all evidence presented at the public hearing including,but not limited to,the Plans,Documents and testimony,the Zoning Board of Appeals concludes: 1. A special permit for the addition of a nonconforming use is granted to allow for an electric go-cart track at 110-114 Swampscott Road. 2. In permitting such change,the Board of Appeals requires certain appropriate conditions and safeguards as noted below. In consideration of the above,the Salem Board of Appeals voted, five (5)in favor (Dionne, Belair, Curran, Hams, and Debski) and none(0)opposed,to grant petitioner's requests for variances subject to the following terms, conditions, and safeguards: 1. Petitioner shall comply with all City and State statues, ordinances, codes, and regulations. 2. All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions submitted to and approved by the Building Commissioner. 3. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. 4. Petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning any construction. 5. A Certificate of Inspection is to be obtained, as well as regular inspections as required by the Massachusetts Department to Public Safety. 6. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City or State Board or Commission having jurisdiction including,but not limited to,the Planning Board. 7. Hours of operation shall be no earlier than 9:00 am and no later than 10:00 pm. 8. No public address('TA!) system or music shall be allowed at anytime. 9. There shall be no more than eight(8) go carts running at any time. 10. This special permit decision is intended to allow for the operation of electric go carts only; go carts requiring gasoline are prohibited. 11. The duration of this special permit shall be limited to use by one or both applicants; the transfer of ownership to a non-applicant party would require a waiver of this condition from the Board of Appeals or a new special permit a , 5 application. Any amendments to the proposed site plan or expansion to the nonconforming uses on the property shall require review by the Board of Appeals. Elizabeth Debski, Vice Chair Salem Zoning Board of Appeals A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CrrY CLERK Appeal from this decision,if any,shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of the Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A,and shall be filed within 20 days of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to the Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A,Section 11,the Variance or Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the certificate of the City Clerk has been filed with the Essex South Registry of Deeds. A CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF APPEAL 7 'e 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS O 1970 TELEPHONE: 978-745-9595 KIMBERL�EY EDRISCOLL FAX: 978-740-9846 ZQ ��. IV 23 MAYOR CW1 u; May 22, 2008 D&D Realty Trust C/o Brian LeClair,Esq. 12 Fox Run Lane Marblehead,MA 01945 RE: 110-114 Swampscott Road Dear Mr. LeClair The Salem Zoning Board of Appeals met on Wednesday,May 21, 2008 to discuss you request for Withdrawal Without Prejudice for the special permit petition for 110-114 Swampscott Road. The Board decided by a unanimous vote (4-0) to approve the request for Withdrawal Without Prejudice. If you intend to file another petition,please do so by May 28`h so this matter can be placed on the June 18`h agenda. If you have any questions or require further information,please feel free to contact me in the Department of Planning &Community Development at (978) 619-5685. Sincere{ly, � 0 Amy-J. Lash Staff Planner Cc: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk RECEIVED MAY 2 1 2008 Brian W. LeClair GEPT.OF PLANNING& Attorney-At-Law Phone 781-631-9981 COMMtIh!TY DEVELOPMENT 12 Fox Run Lane Facsimile 781-639-8032 Marblehead, MA 01945 Email bwleclairkcomcast.net May 21, 2008 Amy Lash, Board Clerk Salem Zoning Board of Appeal 120 Washington Street, Third Floor Salem, MA 01970 Re: D &D Realty Trust. Special Permit Application Dear Ms. Lash: As we discussed yesterday, the petitioners are withdrawing their petitioW becaugp of the inability to have five voting members of the commission at the hearing Today side there was a problem with the tape of the April hearing. We intend to re-file shortly in order to have a hearing with five voting bold 'Ij members. ;7 Thank you for your assistance. q� rlan W. LAC air Petition of Neighbors: I am in favor of the proposal submitted by D&D Reality Trust (Castle Creek Adventureland) seeking a special permit for electric go-karts located at 100-114 Swampscott road Name to _ / Addresses 7 G'c�,�•� QG� PW- 17 lg 1J��ef5 1 ane 6//7 r VA ,VCol a` Petition of Neighbors: I am in favor of the proposal submitted by D&D Reality Trust (Castle Creek Adventureland) seeking a s tial permit for electric go-karts located at 100.114 Swampscott road 7 0� ICk C&C-- 1,/( 7/ C)g zo � � CASTLE CREEK ADVENLA14D--------NEICIIDORIIOOD ME TING -------------MAY 17,2008 =, SIGN IN SHEET NAME ADDRESS go a,� V z 17 Civb:.� s ` S rv�' axloSr�L, Aye 4Ln �.'�2 / VsS 5i int L C ,7i�%/? 15 G4AIC- May 15 2008 12:55PM David Jacobson 19787455943 P. 1 DAVID M.JACOBSON 12 Brittania Circle Salem MA 01970 Tel:978-744-5484 Fax: 978-745-5943 E-Mail:davidjac@comcastmet May 15,2008 TO: Board of Appeals I cannot attend the 5/21/08 meeting to discuss the go-kart proposal,rock-crushing proposal and the proposed expansion of the transfer station. Therefore,I am writing to you concerning these 3 matters. Anyone arguing for any of these proposals or the Board as it considers and votes on these matters should evaluate the combined impact that these 3 activities will make upon both the residents of nearby housing and the safety issues related to then proposals. First,as to the safety issue. Swampscott Road is a disaster as of now. Large dump trucks continually traverse the road at excessive speeds,the lack of traffic lights at the intersection of First Street forces long waits to those attempting to pull out onto Swampscott Road,dust from the Sand and Gravel plant already create a dangerous hazard on the roadbed,people walking on the road ignore the sidewalk placing themselves and drivers at tisk,the poor lighting,increasing traffic,and narrow windy nature all contribute to creating this safety hazard. No further development should be allowed on this road until and unless adequate changes are made that will allow for safe increased use including that of large trucks and young inexperienced drivers attracted to the area. Second,as to the location near our homes.I accept that some development will take place along the road.No one should be excluded from using their property as they deem necessary unless that use has some adverse impact on other landowners. Such is the case here. I am most concerned about the element of noise although the issues of safety and dust control are important as well. As for noise,I ask all of you to consider whether you would want to hear 8 go karts with loud engines,squealing tires,brakes,2040 screaming people every day from April through October 9 AM to I 1 PM,weekends and holidays. I can already hear people at the mini-golf course speaking in normal tones in my home. Think about never being able to use your deck or yard for any activity.Think about never being able to keep your windows open. Think about needing to use air conditioning almost every day. Think about the decline in value to your home. May 15 2008 12:55PM David Jacobson 19787455943 p. 2 Only then should you vote in favor of this proposal for a go-kart track. You should also only vote after listening to the sounds(all 8 engines simultaneously on moving vehicles that will travel up from the track,at night when the air is still and sounds carry further). I cannot believe that if you do the above,you can or will vote in favor. As for the rock-cnrshing operation,there will be the noise from many more large trucks causing increasing safety issues on the road.The trucks will be dumping their heavy loads in piles;bulldozers will be working the sight moving the rubble around, front-end loaders will be scraping the ground to lift the rocks and then dropping them into metal crushers.All of this noise, pollution,and dust will arise even before the actual crushing operation begins. It will create an unacceptable environment for all of the neighbors in the area causing a decline in our standard of living,a reduction real estate values with the concomitant decrease in tax values and taxes for the city.. Finally,as to the transfer station I believe that any increase in truck tmvel on this road must wait for improvements to the road itself. I personally have been the victim of speeding trucks bearing down behind me as they attempt to intimidate those bold or foolish enough to enter the road way. This is especially true between Highland Ave and First Street. Go there and see for yourselves this situation before you vote. Thank you for your consideration. Yours, David M Jacobson yv a� TECHNICAL MEMO 99-012 MAIONG \\�j UUIEW NOISE GO-CART NOISE ASSESSMENT STUDY Michael Bahtiarian September 7, 1999 NCE JOB No. 99-038 Prepared for: CASTLE CREEK ADVENTURELAND 100 Swampscott Road Salem, MA 01970 Am.: Mr. Dana Dilisio Prepared by: NOISE CONTROL ENGINEERING, Inc. 799 Middlesex Turnpike Billerica, MA 01821 978-670-5339 978-667-7047 (fax) noise@tiac.net (Email) TM 99-012 Go-Cart Noise Study Noise Control Engineering, Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS 0.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..................................................................:................................3 1.0 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................4 2.0 NOISE REGULATIONS......................................................................................................4 3.0 MEASURED NOISE............................................................................................................4 3.1 Noise Monitoring.........................................................................................................5 3.2 Octave Band Measurements.........................................................................................5 4.0 NOISE ASSESSMENT.........................................................................................................6 4.1 Vendor Noise Data.......................................................................................................6 4.2 Prediction of Go-Cart Noise.........................................................................................6 5.0 CONCLUSIONS...................................................................................................................7 REFERENCES ...........................................................................................................................7 APPENDIX A: Instrumentation, Calibration &Noise Units APPENDIX B: Acoustical Calculations and Worksheets - 2 TM 99-012 Go-Cart Noise Study Noise Control Engineering, Inc. 0.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY An acoustic assessment of a Go-Cart track operation was performed. Castle Creek Adventureland proposes such an operation at its location on 100 Swampscott Road in Salem Massachusetts. Noise Control Engineering (Billerica, MA) conducted a site noise survey. Measurements of ambient noise and frequency based octave band noise measurements were conducted from August 20 to 24, 1999. The measurements provide information on existing noise levels in and around the Castle Creek business. Noise data from two Go-Cart manufacturers was used to calculate expected noise levels at two locations adjacent to the business. The assessment showed that the expected noise level for both carts would be-below the State limit. The louder cart would produce noise levels above the ambient noise. Noise from the quieter cart would not exceed existing ambient noise levels. C,, - 3 - TM 99-012 Go-Cart Noise Study r Noise Control Engineering,Inc. 1.0 INTRODUCTION Noise Control Engineering (NCE) has been contracted by Castle Creek Adventureland to perform an assessment of noise from a proposed "Go-Cart" operation. The proposed Go- Cart operation will be located adjacent to current miniature golf operation at 100 Swampscott Road in Salem Massachusetts. This report discusses appropriate noise regulations in section 2. Measured noise data at the existing facility is presented in section 3. Noise data from the Go-Cart manufacturers is discussed in section 4 along with a computation of expected noise at the adjacent properties. Section 5 presents the conclusions. 2.0 NOISE REGULATIONS A noise ordinance does exist in the Town of Salem, but it does not include any technical requirements for assessing impact. The appropriate regulation for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts is 310 CMR 7.10. The technical requirements for this CMR citation are given in the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs (EOEA) policy letter dated February t, 1990, reference [1]. The EOEA policy letter states that source of sound will be considered to be violating if the source: • Increases the broadband sound level by more than 10 dB(A) above the ambient, or • Produces a"pure tone" condition—when any octave band center frequency sound pressure level exceeds the two adjacent center frequency sound pressure levels by 3 dB or more. According to the EOEA policy letter, "Ambient noise is defined as the background A- weighted sound level that is exceed 90% of the time measured during equipment operating hours without the facility operating". This level is referred to as the Lvo value and is capable of being measured by the Rion Sound Level meter listed in Appendix A. 3.0 MEASURED NOISE A site noise survey has been conducted in order to assess potential for compliance with the state regulations cited in section 2. This required two types of noise measurements: (1)Noise monitoring of ambient overall dB(A) noise levels, and (2) measurements of octave band noise levels'. The locations and type of measurement taken are summarized in Table 1. Figure 1 shows approximate locations of the three measurement sites. A brief discussion of the measurements is presented below. Octave band noise levels describe the coarse frequency components of noise. This allows the determination of noise character and tonal requirements for state regulations. - 4 - TM 99-012 Go-Cart Noise Study / Noise Control Engineering,Inc. V TABLE 1: Noise Measurement Locations Octave Noise Band Id# Location See Figure 1 for Graphic Presentation Monitor Noise 1 Telephone Pole on Castle Creek Property, 65ft from YES YES Swampscott Road. 2 Across Street between telephone pole and pumping YES YES station, loft from Swampscott Road 3 Whaler Lane in Front of Closest House NO YES 3.1 Noise Monitoring All noise monitoring was conducted with a Rion NL-06 Sound Level Meter(SLM), listed in Appendix A. The Lvo (background), L10 (sustained maximum) noise levels were recorded on an hourly basis. The SLM was set to slow response and A-Weighting. The instrument was field calibrated using the acoustic calibrator listed in Appendix A. 3.1.1 Location#1: The measurements within the property were taken to understand the noise levels currently generated by Castle Creek. The noise levels were measured from 6pm on Friday August 20, 1999 through 7pm on Sunday August 22, 1999. The weekend was selected as a heavy business time for the Castle Creek. Figure 2 is a graph of the maximum and ambient3(minimum) noise levels. This data shows that the noise levels are very constant and range from 63 to 66 dB(A)when the business is open. The noise levels during operating hours are very constant and attributable to three (???) water fountains on the property. 3.1.2 Location#2: The measurements across the street from Castle Creek were taken to determine the ambient (or background) noise levels in the adjacent areas. Noise monitoring were conducted from 8pm on Sunday August 22, 1999 through 9am Tuesday, August 24, 1999. Figure 3 also shows the maximum (Llo) and minimum or ambient (Lgo) noise levels. This location has greater variation in noise levels due to greater affect from street traffic. During business operation hours of 9am to l 1pm the ambient noise varied from 49 to 54 dB(A). 3.2 Octave Band Measurements Octave band measurements were taken with a Larson Davis 2900 acoustic analyzer, which was field calibrated with the calibrator listed in Appendix A. The purpose of these measurements is to record the frequency character of the noise around the proposed 2 The maximum sustained noise level is defined as the'110"level which is the noise level that is exceeded 10%of the time tested. 3 The minimum or ambient(also called background)noise level is defined as the"190"level which is the noise level that is exceeded 90%of the time tested. - 5 - TM 99-012 Go-Cart Noise Study Noise Control Engineering, Inc. Cproject site. Octave band measurements were averaged for a period of 15 minutes at the locations#1, #2 & #3. This data will be discussed further in section 5. 4.0 NOISE ASSESSMENT An assessment of the Go-Cart operation has been performed by taking noise levels of the proposed go-carts, adjusting for various factors discussed below and comparing these to existing levels discussed in section 3. 4.1 Vendor Noise Data NCE reviewed noise data supplied to Castle Creek by the Go-Cart manufacturers. Overall, A-weighted noise levels were reduced from data provided in two acoustical studies, references [2] & [3], to result in noise levels for a single cart at a distance of 50 feet. In addition, reference [3] provided frequency based, 1/3 octave band sound levels, which NCE adjusted to match the overall sound pressure levels. This data is summarized in Table 2. The effectiveness of exhaust mufflers are not included in this data, since only anecdotal effectiveness of exhaust mufflers were available. TABLE 2: Go-Cart Noise Levels at 50 feet for Single Vehicle, o Exhaust Mufflers Cart T e 31.5 63 125 250 500 lk 2k 4k 8k dB A Ref J&J Amusements 71 67 67 57 58 55 52 49 41 61 2 Formula K 63 59 59 49 50 47 44 41 33 53 3 It should be noted that neither of these Go-Cart noise sources contain a pure tone condition as described in the reference [1] noise policy. 4.2 Prediction of Go-Cart Noise The Go-Cart source levels presented in Table 2 were used to evaluate the potential for compliance with of state noise regulations. The prediction of expected noise was conducted by adjusting the noise levels in Table 2 by two factors. First, is a factor to account for distance from the edge of the proposed Go-Cart track to measurement locations#2 & #3 from Table 1. The second factor is an adjustment for multiple numbers of Go-Carts operating at the same time. No other adjustments were possible or used, except for reduction due to use of exhaust mufflers. As mentioned above since only anecdotal information regarding exhaust mufflers were available this attenuation factor was not used. The calculations were performed for both the overall noise (dBA) and octave band noise. These calculations are described in Appendix B on the calculation worksheets. The overall noise level at the two locations for the two types of carts is summarized in Table 3. The noise levels predicted are for operational tracks with 10 carts operating at one time. Figure 4 plots the noise values for location#2 against the measured - 6 - T'M 99-012 Go-Cart Noise Study Noise Control Engineering,Inc. background noise data for one day. Figures 5 & 6 compare the measured octave band levels at location#2 &#3 against the predicted octave band noise levels. TABLE 3: Predicted Noise from Track Operation with 10 Carts at Locations#2 &#3. Predicted Noise Level, dB(A) Cart Mfg. Location#2 Location#3 J&J Amusements 55 51 Formula K 47 43 5.0 CONCLUSIONS • The assessment of Go-Cart noise shows that both cart models would be far below the State requirements for overall noise. • An examination of the octave band source data for a typical cart does not show tonal condition as described in reference [1]. • The J&J Amusements cart is expected to produce noise levels below the state limits, but just above the current ambient noise levels. • The Formula K cart is expected to produce noise levels below the current ambient noise levels (and thus below state limits). It is difficult to discern a source whose noise levels are below the ambient noise. • The analysis was conducted without taking into account use of exhaust mufflers. However, these devices are intended to be used, which would only reduce noise further. REFERENCES 1. Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, Department of Environmental Quality Engineering, Division of Air Quality Control, DAQC Policy 90-001, dated February 1, 1990. 2. Acoustech Consultants Report, "Noise Assessment Study Go-Cart Activity at Proposed Recreation Centers", Report No. 791-A9, dated July 10, 1991. 3. Emanuelle Garcia Consulting Engineer in Acoustics, "Noise Assessment Study Go- Kart Activity at Proposed Recreational Centers", Report#674-721, dated August 14, 1978. - 7 - TM 99-012 Go-Cart Noise Study Noise Control Engineering, Inc. C FIGURE 1: Site Map with Measurement Locations.(See Table 1 for descriptions). Location 3A was used for noise measurements and location 3B was used for noise computations �k p 8 S f 33uu t� ' ......orm ....da23S r � €i x •� � E •�'< w � ;Y x -.��.,�`t �� f - 8 Noise Control Enginering Inc. (Billerica, MA) FIGURE 2: Location #1 (On Property) Existing Noise Levels 80 70 60 a Q a a N 50 m a J a ur 40 mum(00) 30 Maximum(L10) - 20 6pm IOpm 2am Gam 1Oam 2pm 6pm lopm 2am 6am 10am 2pm 6pm Time of Day 09/07/1999 Graphs Chart 1 Noise Control Engineering, Inc. (Billerica, MA) FIGURE 3: Location #2, (Across Street) Existing Noise Levels 80 06050 70 - 60 - 50 a m a J a. m 40 Minimum(1-90) 30 0—Maximum(L10) 20 �Qa if �P� �a� if �Qa Time of Day 09/07/1999 Graphs Chart 2 Noise Control Engineering Inc. (Billerica, MA) FIGURE 4: Predicted Cart Noise vs. Ambient. 70 60 50 a Qa s waw ww wr aaw ww ww ww ww ww wxx waw ww rw w ',I m a ti 40 Ambient —Ambeint+10 JJA Carts 30 ® ® FK Carts 20 A&M 10 11 12mmn 1 2 3 4 5 B 7 a 9 10 11pm Time of Day 09/07/1999 Graphs Chart 3 �1 f� Noise Control Engineering, Inc(Billerica, MA), FIGURE 5: Location #2 Measured vs. Predicted Noise 60 s 70 so • a 0 0 N i V 50 m J e a N 40 9—Measured —0 Calc.JJA Cart —� Calc. FK Cart 30 20 31.5 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 6000 dB(A) Octave Band Center Frequency,Hz 09/07/1999 Graphs Chart 4 / NoiseControl Engineering, Inc. (Billerica, MA) FIGURE 6: Location #3 Measured vs. Predicted Noise 70 so a � e m 40 a J a y 30 Measured �—Calc.JJA Cart 20 — Calc. FK Cart 10 31.5 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 dB(A) Octave Band Center Frequency,Hz 09/07/1999 Graphs Chart 7 TM 99-012 Go-Cart Noise Study Noise Control Engineering,Inc. APPENDIX A Instrumentation, Calibration Certificates &Noise Units TM 99-012 Go-Cart Noise Study Noise Control Engineering,Inc. INSTRUMENTATION Noise levels were measured using two different Sound Level Meters (SLM). Table A-1 lists all instrumentation used. The calibration data refers to the most recent laboratory calibration to National Institute of Standards and Technology(]`HST)traceable standards. Wind screens were installed on all microphones. All SLM's were field calibrated by an acoustic calibrator at 94& 114 dB (re//20 µPa) at 1,000 Hz. Calibration certificates are given at the end of this appendix. TABLE A-1: Instrumentation mary Calibration Instrument Manufacturer&Model Serial No. Date* LOGGiNG.S'OI1ND Rion,NL-06 01270251 01/13/98 LEVEL METER Acoustic Analyzer Larson-Davis, 2900 0725 03/08/99 Acoustic Calibrator Larson Davis,CAL200 0101 03/08/99 *(Calibration to NIST Traceable Standards) NOISE UNITS All noise levels are presented as Sound Pressure Levels (SPL) in decibels (dB) relative to 20 micro Pascal's (dBHre 20 µPa). All overall Sound Pressure Levels are presented as A- Weighted noise levels. SPL as a function of frequency was measured in octave bands from 31.5 Hz to 10,000 Hz. The A-weighted noise levels represents the sound level perceived by the ear. A SPL of 45 dB(A)would be considered quiet, whereas a SPL's over 90 dB(A)would be hazardous under prolonged exposure. Table A-2 lists common noise levels in dB(A). TABLE A-2: Common Noise Levels in dB(A). Noise Level, dB(A) Apparent Loudness T ical Sources 130 Deafening Jet Plane Take-off 110 Very Loud Thunder, Artillery 90 Moderately Loud Truck, Bus 70 Loud Automobile, Radio/TV 60 Moderate/Comfortable Average Office 50 Low/Comfortable Average Home 30 Faint Typical Rural Area Night 10 Very Faint Rustle of Leaves 0 Threshold of Hearing Audiometric Booth as i hili r hPl::•4.'4v.xy.,,,.,.9`',..vl.,, ° I\ , (\I Certificate of Calibration and Conformance Certificate Number 1999-18999 Instrument Model 2900, Serial Number 0725, was calibrated on 03-08-1999. The instrument meets factory specifications according to Larson • Davis Test Procedure TP-1016, ISO 10012, ANSI S1.11 1986, ANSI S1.4 1983, IEC 651-Type 1 1979, and IEC 804-Type 1 1985. zl i; Instrument found to be in calibration as received: YES Date Calibrated: 03-08-1999 ,II E I Calibration due: 03-08-2000 Calibration Standards Used MANUFACTURER MODEL SERIAL NUMBER INTERVAL CAL. DUE TRACEABILITY NO. ' Larson•DavisI LDSigUn/2209 0617/0104 12 Months I 02/09/2IXx7 1 1999-18497 .rel i Certified Reference Standards are traceable to the National Institute of Standards and Technology(NIST) I $ I Calibration Environmental Conditions Temperature: 22 ° Centigrade Relative Humidity:22 ,G Affirmations This Certificate attests that this instrument has been calibrated under the stated conditions with Measurement and Test ��. Equipment(M&TE)Standards traceable to the National Institute of Standards and Technology(NIST). All of the Measurement Standards have been calibrated to their manufacturers'specified accuracy/uncertainty. Evidence of traceability and accuracy �ll�lly. Is on file at Larson•Davis Corporate Headquarters. An acceptable accuracy ratio between the Standard(s) andthe Item calibrated has been maintained. This instrument meets or exceeds the manufacturers published specification unless noted. ri +,1 This calibration complies with ISO 10012. The collective uncertainty of the Measurement Standard used does not exceed 25% of the applicable tolerance for each characteristic calibrated unless otherwise noted. ti I'II;IDue to state-of-the-art limitations, 4:1 calibration ratios are riot possible on pressure measurement standards, microphones r , lI and acoustic calibrators. Calibration ratios for these types of devices are limited to 1:1. The results documented in this certificate relate only to the item(s) calibrated or tested. Calibration interval assignment and adjustment are the responsibility of the end user. This certificate may not be reproduced, except in full, without the written II approval of Larson•Davis.Laboratories. i r � V�/•�ssi(j I - V Technician: Brent Heaton iii�Ill'Ili11 Service Center:Larson•Davis Laboratories, Utah Signed. Zo. ai LARSON • DAVIS LABORATORIES 1681 West BYO North Provo,Utah 84601 Ph-n,,(801)375-0177 SII Jt/°t5f("T IR+t'fr�l n1,1 R6m.., ly...i•� �.�,'-.,''..:_t... ' 4 Lu., 1 1,�,sr.Wd�ww.n:,i 1 =w1ti�y� .�('� ii�� '1 'i��! ,, e�At II Certificate of Calibration and Conformance Certificate Number 1999-18969 ;. Instrument Model CAL200, Serial Number 0101, was calibrated on 03-05-1999. q` The instrument meets factory specifications according to Larson • Davis Test ) Procedure TP-1027, ISO 10012. Instrument found to be in calibration as received: YES In r Date Calibrated: 03-05-1999 Calibration due: 03-05-2000 r<a. Calibration Standards Used MANUFACTURER MODEL SERIAL NUMBER INTERVAL CAL. DUE TRACEABILITY NO. I'II(lt`Y Hewlett Packard HP-34401AUS36015276 12 Months 07/31/1999 1135AC3 I\' Larson•Davis 2900 0276 1250.5 Months OB/17/1999 1998-15718 �'} Larson-Davis 2559 212 Months 09/30/1999 7291 (j�i�il Larson•Davis - PRM915 0107 1121vionths 12!15/1999 1V_48-17760 Larson•Davis I MTS1000 12201 1004/0102 1 12 Months 12/15/1999 12152-1998 pIII{li i'` Certified Reference Standards are traceable to the National Institute of Standards and Technology(NIST) ) 1„ Calibration Environmental Conditions Temperature: 22 ° Centigrade Relative Humidity: 19 °b ''files ll`I'j �.= Affirmations This Certificate attests that this instrument has been calibrated under the stated conditions with Measurement and Test Equipment(M&TE)Standards traceable to the National Institutteof Standards and Technology(NIST). All of the Measurement Standards have been calibrated to their manufacturers'specified accuracy/uncertainty. Evidence of traceability and accuracy J'�'I11 is on file at Larson•Davis Corporate Headquarters. An acceptable accuracy ratio between the Standard(s) and the Item 1 calibrated has been maintained. This instrument meets or exceeds the manufacturer's published specification unless noted. IiI This calibration complies with ISO 10072. The collective uncertainty of the Measurement Standard used does not exceed 25% of the applicable tolerance for each characteristic calibrated unless otherwise noted. III'(Ij '• Due to state-of-the-art limitations, 4:1 calibration ratios are not possible on pressure measurement standards, microphones \' and acoustic calibrators. Calibration ratios for these types of devices are limited to 1:1. I� The results documented in this certificate relate only to the item(s) calibrated or tested. Calibration interval assignment and adjustment are the responsibility of the end user. This certificate may not be reproduced, except in full,without the written 'q approval of Larson•Davis Laboratories. 1, In: 113.99 dB,94.01 d8,1000.06 Hz Q 1013 mBar. a Out: Refer to Certificate of Measured Output. (hili Technician: Scott Montgomery 9 Y �r�t Ill�ll it Service Center: Larson•Davis Laboratories, Utah Signed:< N LARSON - DAVIS LABORATORIES 1681 west 620 North Provo,Utah 84601 Phone(801)3750177 l��Il t $ s�PF'p�y'� PbiY(`,'0�"rt '�+4 d ^n tS'm,�7dtr77W,u�1II:lyi Noisy COMM r RION CO., LT®. - 3-20-41 Higashimotomachi Kokubunji Tokyo 185-8533 Phone:042(359)7888,Pacsimife:042(359)7442 Certificate of Calibratio 11 Name : Integrating sound level meter Model : NL-06 S/No. : 01270251 Date of Calibration : January, 13, 1998 We hereby certify that the above product was tested and calibrated according to the prescribed Rion procedures,and that it fulfills specification requirements. The measuring equipment and reference devices used for testing and calibratinE this unit are managed under the Rion traceability system and are traceable according to official JapanA se standards and official standards of countries belonging to the International Committee of Wei hts and Measures. RION CO., LTD. Manage , lnspech�ttment f TM 99-012 Go-Cart Noise Study Noise Control Engineering, Inc. f APPENDIX B Acoustical Calculations and Worksheets �l Noise Control Engineering, Inc. (Billerica MA) Castle Creek,Go Cart Operation ' Calculation of Received Noise Levels For J&J Amusments UJA) Go-Cart Input Calculation to Location#2. Across Street Data 31.5 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 dB(A) A Lp, JJA Engine Noise Only @ 10ft 70 66 66 56 57 54 51 48 40 60 Adjustment Factor for 50ft 50 ft -14 B Lp, JJA, Engine Noise Only @ 50ft 56 52 52 42 43 40 37 34 26 46 Track Adjustment for Overall Noise @ 61 dB 15 C Lp, JJA, Engine&Track Noise @ 50ft 71 67 67 57 59 56 52 49 42 61 Distance Attenuation Factor 300 (ft). -16 Multiple Source Adjustment 10 #Carts 10 E Lp, Location #2 for Multiple Carts on Track 66 62 62 51 53 50 46 44 36 55 F Lp, Measured 67 73 73 69 66 67 64 60 54 71 1 Difference, Predicted-Measured -2 -11 -11 -18 -13 -17 -18 -16 -18 -16 Input Calculation to Location#3. Whalers Lane Data 31.5 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 dB(A) A Lp, JJA Engine Noise Only @ 10ft 70 66 66 56 57 54 51 48 40 60 Adjustment Factor for 50ft 50 It -14 8 Lp, JJA, Engine Noise Only @ 50ft 56 52 52 42 43 40 37 34 26 46 Track Adjustment for Overall Noise @ 61 dB 15 C Lp, JJA, Engine&Track Noise @ 50ft 71 67 67 57 59 56 52 49 42 61 Distance Attenuation Factor 520 (ft). -20 Multiple Source Adjustment 10 #Carts 10 D Lp, Location #3 for Multiple Carts on Track 61 57 57 47 48 45 42 39 31 51 E Lp, Measured 60 61 54 48 43 43 40 42 33 49 F Difference, Predicted -Measured 0 -4 3 -1 5 2 1 -3 -2 2 NOTES: (A)Vendor Source Data, Engine Noise only provided by Castle Creek, Converted from 1/3 Octave Band. (B) Noise Levels adjusted from 10 to 50 feet per 20xLOG(10/50). (C) Noise Levels adjusted to give 61 dB(A)at 50 feet as measured on real track. (D)Computation for noise at locations with adjustments as follows: Multiple Source Adjustment= 10 x LOG(N),where N = number of carts, & Distance Adjustment=20 x LOG (d/50ft), where d= distance (E) Data Measured by NCE for 15 minutes (F) Difference between Predicted less Measured 09/09/1999 CastleCreek Calc.xls Noise Control Engineering, Inc. (Billerica MA) Castle Creek, Go Cart Operation Calculation of Received Noise Levels For Formula K(FK) Go-carts Input Calculation to Location#2.Across Street Data 31.5 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 dB(A) A Lp, FK, Engine Noise Only @ 1Oft 70 66 66 56 57 54 51 48 40 60 Adjustment Factor for 501t 50 ft -14 B Lp, FK, Engine Noise Only @ 50ft 56 52 52 42 43 40 37 34 26 46 Track Adjustment for Overall Noise @ 53 dB 7 C Lp, FK, Engine&Track Noise @ 50ft 63 59 59 49 51 48 44 41 34 53 Distance Attenuation Factor 300 (ft). -16 Multiple Source Adjustment 10 #Carts 10 E Lp, Location #2 for Multiple Carts on Track 58 54 54 43 45 42 38 36 28 47 F Lp, Measured 67 73 73 69 66 67 64 60 54 71 1 Difference, Predicted- Measured -10 -19 -19 -26 -21 -25 -26 -24 -26 -24 Input Calculation to Location 0. Whalers Lane Data 31.5 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 dB(A) A Lp, FK, Engine Noise Only @ 10ft 70 66 66 56 57 54 51 48 40 60 Adjustment Factor for 50ft 50 ft -14 B Lp, FK, Engine Noise Only @ 50ft 56 52 52 42 43 40 37 34 26 46 Track Adjustment for Overall Noise @ 53 dB 7 C Lp, FK, Engine&Track Noise @ 50ft 63 59 59 49 51 48 44 41 34 53 Distance Attenuation Factor 520 (ft). -20 Multiple Source Adjustment 10 #Carts 10 D Lp, Location #3 for Multiple Carts on Track 53 49 49 39 40 37 34 31 23 43 E Lp, Measured 60 61 54 48 43 43 40 42 33 49 F Difference, Predicted-Measured -8 -12 -5 -9 -3 -6 -7 -11 -10 -6 NOTES: (A)Vendor Source Data, Engine Noise only provided by Castle Creek, Converted from 1/3 Octave Band. (B) Noise Levels adjusted from 10 to 50 feet per 20xLOG(10/50). (C) Noise Levels adjusted to give 61 dB(A) at 50 feet as measured on real track. (D)Computation for noise at locations with adjustments as follows: Multiple Source Adjustment= 10 x LOG(N), where N= number of carts, & Distance Adjustment=20 x LOG(d/50ft),where d =distance (E)Data Measured by NCE for 15 minutes (F)Difference between Predicted less Measured 09/09/1999 CastleCreek CaIc.XIS NOV-19-96 TUE 16:60 PURCHASH[NG DEPT. FAX NO. 5087445918 P. 02 fits of �lem, cttssrztlusetts �_ aarb of �AvVe�1 F Ewa 3a, a , DECISION Or THE PETITION OF DANA & DAVID DILISO REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 98-100 SWAMPSCCTi ROAD (BPD) A hearing on this petition was held October 16, 1996 with the following Board members present: Nina Cohen, Richard Dionne, Joseph Ywuc, Albert Hill, and Paul Valaskatgis. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and others and notices of the hearing were properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. 'Petitioner, requests a Variance for a Change of Use to allow a miniature golf course for the property located at 98-100 Swampscott Road (BPD) . The Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding of this Board that: I . Special conditions and circumstances. exist which especially affect the land, building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting other '_and, buildings, or structures in the same district. 2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner. 3. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogation from the _intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance. The Board of appeal, after careful considerations the evidence presented at Che hearing, ;Hakes the following findings of fact: I . Petitioner was represented by Attorney Joseph Correnti of Serifini, Serifini and Darling. Z. Mr. Fred Hutchinson express concerns of using Robinson Road as an entrance into the golf course. Mr. Correniti assured Mr. Hutchinson that Robinson Road would not be used as an entrance or exit. On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented at the hearings, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows: I . Special conditions exist which especially affect the subject property and not the district in general. Z. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substation hardship to the petitioner. 3. Desirable relief can be granted without substantial detriment to public good and without nullifying and substantially derogating from the intent of the district or purpose of the Ordinance. On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented ^� at the hearing, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted uuanimoUS1V, 5-0 to grant the variance requested, subject to the following conditions: NOV-19-96 TUE 16:51 PURCHASHING DEPT, FAX NO, 5087445918 P, 03 A DECISION OF THE PETITION OF DANA & DAVID DILISO REQUESTED A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 98-100 SWAMPSCOTT ROAD (BPD) page two Petitioner shaL1 comply with all city and state statures, ordinances, codes and regulations, ' 2. All Construction shall be done as per plans and dimensions, dated June 24, 1996 which are to be certified, submitted to and approved tv the Building inspector. s. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. 4 . A Certificate of inspection is to be obtained. 5. Petitioner shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning any construction. 7. Petitioner is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission particularly with respect to the Conservation Commission. Variance Granted October 16,1996 A Joseph Ywuc,y�ber Board of Appeal. A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK Appeal from this decision, if any, shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of the Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk, Pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, Section the Variance or Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the certification of the City Clerk that 20 days have elapsed and no appeal has been filed, or that, if such appeal has been filed, that it has been dismissed or denied :s recorded in the South . Essex Registry of Deeds and indexed under the name of the owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owner's Certificate of Title. Board of Appeal ofttlpm, ttssttcljuse##s �ntzra of �+p rnl d as AN V ,wvr:Or SA;Lrf'A.MASS EI.E,RK'S SUrF1G DECISION ON THE PETITION OF DANA DILISO REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 100-114 SWAMPSCOTT ROAD BPD A hearing on this petition was held July 15, 1998 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Richard Dionne, Paul Valaskagis, Michael Ward and Stephen Buczko. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and others and notices of the hearing were properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. Petitioner was requesting a Special Permit for an ice cream stand with hours not always the same with golf facility and a Variance from the required number of parking spaces for the property located at 100-114 Swampscott Road. The provision of the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to this request for a Special Permit is. Section 5-3(j ) , which provides as follows: Notwithstanding anything to the contrary appearing in this Ordinance, the Board of Appeal may, in accordance with the procedure and conditions set forth in Sections 8-6 and 9-4, grant Special Permits for alterations and reconstruction of nonponforming structures, and for changes, enlargement, extension or expansion of nonconforming lots, land, structures, and uses, provided, however, that such change, extension, enlargement or expansion shall not be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming use to the neighborhood. In more general terms, this Board is, when reviewing Special Permit requests, guided by the rule that a Special Permit request may be granted upon a finding by the Board that the grant of the Special Permit will promote the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants. The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. Petitioner, Dana DiLiso, Trustee of D & D Realty Trust, was represented at the hearing by John R. Keilty, Esquire, of Peabody, Mass. 2. The petitioner's request had been continued from the June 17, 1998 hearing. 3. The lot is currently used as an outdoor miniature golf course, and soft serve ice cream is sold in conjunction with this operation. 4 . Petitioner made a motion to remove the request for a variance from parking space requirements as the lot is in compliance. Motion was approved. DECISION OF THE PETITION OF DANA DILISO REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 100-114 SWAMPSCOTT ROAD BPD page two 5. No construction is necessary. N 1105 Ah 9986. John R. Keilty presented a memorandum, which summarized the neighborhood meeting held on June 30, 1998. CITY OF SALEH. MASS CLERK'S OFFICE 7. In the memorandum, the Petitioner represented that the hours of the ice cream stand may not always be in concert with the hours of the miniature.golf course. In addition, the proposed signs for the property would be internally lit vinyl, which would be turned off at 11:00 p.m. 8. Councillor Joan Lovely, who attended the June 30, 19998 neighborhood meeting, did not present any neighborhood opposition and only requested that "loud" music would not be permitted on the premises. 9. There was no opposition to the petition. On the basis of the above findings of fact, and the evidence presented, the Board of Appeal concludes as follows: 1. The Special Permit requested can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good or without nullifying and substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the ordinance. 2. The granting of the Special Permit requested will promote the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants and may be granted in harmony with the neighborhood. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously, 5-0 to grant the Special Permit requested, subject to the following conditions; 1 . Petitioner shall comply with all city and state statutes, ordinances, codes and regulations. 2. All requirements of the Salem Fire Department relative to smoke and fire safety shall be strictly adhered to. 3. A Certificate of Inspection shall be obtained. 4. Petitioner shall obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having jurisdiction including, but not limited to, the Conservation Commission. Special Permit Granted July 15, 1998 Michael Ward, MMemmb�err(N(QC Board of Appeal DECISION OF THE PETITION OF DANA DILISO REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 100-114 SWAMPSCOTT ROAD BPD page three A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BJxltANDI1 05 A6 ,J{1 � THE CITY CLERK CITCY Of SALI"M, MASS Appeal from this decision, if any, shall be made pursuant to Section OFFICE 17 of MGL Chapter 40A and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 11, the Variance or Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision, bearing the certification of the City Clerk that 20 days have elapsed and no appeal has been filed, or that, if such appeal has been filed, that it has been dismissed or denied is recorded in the South Essex Registry or Deeds and indexed under the name of the owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owner's Certificate of Title Board of Appeal ofttlPm, HttssttrljusPfts e Pnura of upeal JULY 28, 1998 YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT AS OF JULY 28, 1998 THE DECISION OF THE BOARD OF APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK TO GRANT THE PETITION OF DANA DILISO REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 100-114 SWAMPSCOTT ROAD. PETITION GRANTED JULY 15, 1998 BOARD/7APPEAL SALLY C.971URTAGH CLERK OF THE BOARD A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK. Appeal from this decision, if any, shall be made pursuant to Section 17, of MGL Chapter 40A, and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to MCL Chapter 40A. , Section 11, the Variance/Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the certification of the City Clerk that 20 days have elapsed and no appeal has been filed, or that, if such appeal has been filed, that it has been dismissed or denied is recorded in the South Essex Registry of Deeds and indexed under the name of the owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owner's Certificate of title. Board of Appeal �. f111#v IIfttlem, ttssttrfjuspfts Puura of Appeal don lopt a i, v m C]r=- �rn C:) m� DECISION ON THE PETITION OF DANA DILISION, TRUSTEE OF D & D °- D REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMITNARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 114 SWAMPSCOTT ROAD BPD A hearing on this petition was held on October 20, 1999 with the following Board Members present: Nina Cohen, Chairman, Richard Dionne, Michael Ward, Stephen Buczko and Stephen Harris. Notice of the hearing was sent to abutters and others and notices of the hearing were properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. Petitioner is requesting a Special Permit to allow additional recreational use and a Variance to allow parking for the property located at 114 Swampscott Road located in a BPD zone. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary appearing in this Ordinance, the Board of Appeal may, in accordance with the procedure and conditions set forth in Section 8-6 and 9-4, grant Special Permits for alterations and reconstruction of nonconforming structures, and for changes, enlargement, extension or expansion of nonconforming lots, land structures, and used, provided, however, that such change, extension, enlargement or expansion shall not be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming use to the neighborhood. In more general terms, this Board is, when reviewing Special Permit requests, guided by the rule that a Special Permit request may be granted upon a finding by the Board that the grant of the Special Permit will promote the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants The Variance which has been requested may be granted upon a finding of the Board that: a. Special conditions and circumstances exist which especially affect the land, building or structure involved and which are not generally affecting the lands, buildings or structures in the same district. b. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner. c. Desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance. DECISION ON THE PETITION OF DANA DILISIO REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT/VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT114 SWAMPSCOTT ROAD BPD page two The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the hearing and after reviewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact: 1. The petitioner was represented by Attorney John R. Keilty of 50 Lowell Street Peabody, Ma 2. Michael Bahtiarian of Noise Control Engineering, made a presentation showing his findings on Swampscott Road. 3. Many abutters voiced opposition to the plans because of increased noise levels and hours of operation. 4. A petition was presented with names opposed to the petition from the residents of Mariner Village. 5. Letters in opposition from Mayor Usocivz and Councillor Harvey were read. On the basis of the above findings of fact, and on the evidence presented, the Board Of Appeal concludes as follows: 1. Special conditions do not exist which especially affect the subject property and . not the district in general. 2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would not involve substantial hardship to the petitioner. 3. The Special Permit requested cannot be granted without substantial detriment to the public good or without nullifying and substantially derogating from the intent of the district or the purpose of the ordinance. 4. The granting of the Special Permit requested will not be in harmony with the neighborhood and will not promote the public health, safety, convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants. Therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeal voted unanimously 0 in favor and 5 in opposition to the motion to grant the relief requested. Having failed to garner the four affirmative votes required to pass, the motion to grant fails and the petition for a Special Permit and Variance is denied. Variance & Special Permit Denied _ October 20, 1999 (/ Richard E. Dionne Board of Appeal DECISION OF THE PETITION OF DANA DILISIO EQUESTING A VARIANCE/SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 114 SWAMPSCOTT ROAD BPD page four A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK Appeal from this decision, is any shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of MGL Chapter 40A and shall be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of this decision in the office of the City Clerk. Pursuant to MGL Chapter 40A, Section 11, the variance or Special Permit granted herein shall not take effect until a copy of the de(ision, bearing the certification of the City Clerk that 20 days have elapsed and no appeal has been filed, or that, if such appeal have been filed, that is has been dismissed or denied is recorded in the South Essex Registry of Deeds and indexed under the name of the owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owner's Certificate of Title. F r Nales�r� Castle Creek Adventureland Notice of Intent Wetlands Protection Act and Salem General Wetlands Ordinance D & D Realty Trust David & Dana Dilisio 100 to 114 Swampscott Road (Map 7, Lots 61 & 85) Salem, MA November 2007 Wetlands & Land Management, Inc. 100 Conifer Hill Drive-Suite 516 \' Danvers, MA 01923 Table of Contents Section 1---------------------------Cover Letter Section 2---------------------------Notice of Intent (WPA Form 3) Section 3---------------------------Notice of Intent Fee Transmittal Form (WPA Appendix B) Section 4---------------------------Abutter Information Section 5---------------------------Wetland Resource Inventory Section 6---------------------------project Description/Proposed Work Section 7---------------------------Evaluation of Wetland Resource Area Impacts Section 8---------------------------Wetland Replication Methodology Section 9---------------------------Wildlife Habitat Evaluation i n > 1 * Wetlands & Land Management, Inc. November 29, 2007 Carey R.Duques Conservation Agent/Staff Planner Department of Planning and Community Development 120 Washington Street Salem,MA 01970 RE: Notice of Intent Application Castle Creek Adventure Land D&D Realty Trust 100 to 114 Swampscott Road, (Map 7, Lots 61 & 85) Dear Ms.Duques and Conservation Commission Members: On behalf of the applicant Wetlands and Land Management Inc. is submitting this Notice of Intent application for construction of a paved go-cart track,as well as the expansion of the existing parking lot at Castle Creek Adventure Land. The site is currently developed with a crushed stone parking area,a small one story building, and a miniature golf course. The site is located in a commercial area bounded by a fitness club to the north, Swampscott Road to the east,and a forested wetland area to the west. A junkyard is located on the opposite side of the wetlands to the southeast. The wetlands on this site are currently degraded and filled with various trash/debris typical in an urbanized area. The proposed work impacts approximately 850 square feet of bordering vegetated wetland and 180 linear feet of bank resource area. Mitigation has been provided for the impacts and a complete assessment of the project and the proposed mitigation is included in this application. Would you please schedule this for your December 13,2007 meeting? Please call with any questions before that time. Sincerely, Wetlands&Land Management,Inc. I J shwa A.Johnson William J.Manuell Environmental Analyst Wetland Scientist 100 Conifer Hill Drive, #516, Danvers, Massachusetts 01923 Tel 978-777-0004 • Fax 978-539-0005 Castle Creek Adventureland Notice of Intent Wetlands Protection Act and Salem General Wetlands Ordinance D & D Realty Trust David & Dana Dilisio 100 to 114 Swampscott Road (Map 7; Lots 61 & 85) Salem, MA November 2007 Wetlands & Land Management, Inc. Notice of Intent Application (WPA Form 3) Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by DEP ;„ Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands ; ¢ DEPnFrle Number�+ WPA Form 3 - Notice of Intent � �',`�Tlocument Transaction>Number; Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 � Salem Salem General Wetlands Ordinance City/Town When filling A. General Information When filling out fortes on the computer, use 1. Project Location (Note: electronic filers will click on button for GIS locator): only the tab key to move your 100 to 114 Swampscott Road Salem 01970 use cursor ret not a.Street Address b.City/Town a Zip Code use the return key. N42-35 W70-32 Latitude and Longitude: d.Latitude e.Longitude 7 61 &85 f.Assessors Map/Plat Number - g.Parcel/Lot Number 2. Applicant: Dana Dilisio D& D Realty Trust a.First Name b.Last Name c.Company Note: 100 Swampscott Road Before d.Mailing Address completing this Salem MA 01970 form consult your local e.City/town - f.State g.Zip Code Conservation 781-581-1478 Commission h.Phone Number i.Fax Number j.Email address regarding any municipal bylaw 3. Property owner(if different from applicant): ❑ Check if more than one owner or ordinance. SAME a.First Name b. Last Name c.Company d.Mailing Address e.Cityrrown f.State g.Zip Code h.Phone Number i. Fax Number j.Email address 4. Representative (if any): Wetlands and Land Management Inc. a.Firm William Manuell b.Contact Person First Name c.Contact Person Last Name 106 Conifer Hill Drive Suite#516 d.Mailing Address _ Danvers MA 01923 e.City/Town f.State g.Zip Code 978-777-0004 978-539-0005 bill.wetlands@att.biz h.Phone Number i. Fax Number j.Email address 5. Total WPA Fee Paid (from NOI Wetland Fee Transmittal Form): $1000.00 $487.50 512.50 a.Total Fee Paid b.State Fee Paid c.City/Town Fee Paid 6. General Project Description: Construction of a paved go-cart track, as well as parking lot expansion. Work occurs in buffer zone, isolated vegetated wetlands as well as within bank resource area. wpaform3.doc•rev. 11/30/06 Page 1 of 9 c Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provrdea by oPS t _ xt AF -.i AzG „" Bureau of Resource Protection -Wetlands it.F ile,Number;;,,� `>, S WPA Form 3 - Notice of Intent r y F Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 pocumeniz neact(o�Nunn€; Salem Salem General Wetlands Ordinance City/Town A. General Information (continued) 7. Project Type Checklist: a. ❑ Single Family Home b. ❑ Residential Subdivision c. ❑ Limited Project Driveway Crossing d. ❑ Commercial/Industrial e. ❑ Dock/Pier f. ❑ Utilities g. ❑ Coastal Engineering Structure h. ❑ Agriculture—cranberries, forestry i. ❑ Transportation j. ® Other 8. Property recorded at the Registry of Deeds for: Essex South 253 a.County b.Page Number_ 13936 c.Book d.Certificate#(if registered land) 9. Has work been performed on the property under an Order of Resource Area Delineation involving Simplified Review within 3 years of the date of this application? a. ❑Yes b. ® No If yes, no Notice of Intent or Request for Determination of Applicability may be filed for work within the 50-foot-wide area in the Buffer Zone along the resource area during the three-year term of an Order of Resource Area Delineation, or any Extended Order, or until the applicant receives a Certificate of Compliance, whichever is later. 10. Buffer Zone Only- Is the project located only in the Buffer Zone of a bordering vegetated wetland, inland bank, or coastal resource area? a. ❑Yes-answer 11 below, then skip to Section C. b..® No-skip to Section B. 11. Buffer Zone Setback—For projects that involve work only in the buffer zone, select the applicable adjacent resource area (check one): a. ❑ BVW b. ❑ inland bank c. ❑ coastal resource area The distance between the closest project disturbance and the associated resource area is: d. linear feet wpaform3.doc•rev. 11/30/06 Page 2 of 9 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection -Wetlands3 x DEP,FflNumtierg ' WPA Form 3 -Notice of Intent #� 117,N Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 Salem Salem General.Wetlands Ordinance cHy/rown B. Resource Area Effects 1. Inland Resource Areas Check all that apply below.Attach narrative and any supporting documentation describing how the project will meet all performance standards for each of the resource areas altered, including standards requiring consideration of alternative project design or location. Online Users: Include.your Resource Area Size of Proposed Afteration Proposed Replacement(if any) document transaction ®. 180+/- No loss of significant habitat number a. Bank 1.linear feet value - (provided on - b. ® ISOLATEDVegetated 850+/- 1,250 your receipt page)with all Wetland—LOCAL 1.square feet _ 2.square feet supplementary information you c.❑ Land Under 1.square feet 2.square feet submit to the Waterbodies and Department. Waterways 3.cubic yards dredged d. ❑ Bordering Land Subject to Flooding 1.square feet 2.square feet 3.cubic feet of flood storage lost 4.cubic feet of flood storage replaced e. ❑ Isolated Land Subject to Flooding 1.square feet 2.cubic feet of flood storage lost 3.cubic feet of flood storage replaced f. ❑ Riverfront area 1.Name of Waterway(if available) ❑For projects 1.Width of Riverfront Area (check one): impacted by the riverfrom area ❑ 25 ft.- Designated Densely Developed Areas only and a buffer zone of another resource area, ❑ 100 ft.- New agricultural projects only add 50%to the total fee. ❑ 200 ft.-All other projects 2.Total area of Riverfront Area on the site of the proposed project: Square Feet 3. Proposed alteration of the Riverfront Area: a.Total Square Feet b.Square Feet within 100 ft. c.Square Feet between 100 ft.and 200 ft. 4. Has an alternatives analysis been done and is it attached to this NOI? ❑ Yes El No 5.Was the lot where the activity is proposed created prior to August 1, 1996? ❑ Yes❑ No wpaform3.doc•rev. 1 W0106 Page 3 of 9 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection ?49§��v D_?' -M Bureau of Resource Protection -Wetlands � 1 - WPA Form 3 Notice of Intent P-M �ocumentiTi`aril;acbo tNum6ert Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 Salem } Salem Salem General Wetlands Ordinance Cityrrown B. Resource Area Effects 2. Coastal Resource Areas: Check all that apply below. Attach narrative and supporting documentation describing how the project will meet all performance standards for each of the resource areas altered, including standards requiring consideration of alternative project design or location. Online users:. Include your Resource Area Size of Proposed Alteration Pr000sed Replacement(if any) document transaction number a. E] Designated Port Areas Indicate size under Land Under the Ocean, below (provided on your receipt b. ❑ Land Underthe Ocean 1.Square feet page)with all supplementary information you 2.Cubic yards dredged submit to the Indicate size under Coastal Beaches and/or Coastal Dunes Department. c. F1 Barrier Beach below d. ❑ Coastal Beaches 1.Square feet 2.Cubic yards beach nourishment e. ❑ Coastal Dunes 1.Square feet 2.Cubic yards dune nourishment f. ❑ Coastal Banks 1.Linear feet g. ❑ Rocky Intertidal Shores 1,square feet h. ❑ Salt Marshes 1.Square feet 2.Sq ft restoration,rehab.,or creation I. ❑ Land Under Salt Ponds 1 Square feet 2.Cubic yards dredged j. ❑ Land Containing Shellfish 1.Square feet - 2.Square feet restoration,rehab. k. ❑ Fish Runs Indicate size under Coastal Banks, inland Bank,Land Under the Ocean, and/or inland Land Under Waterbodies and Waterways, above 1.Cubic yards dredged I. ❑ Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage 1.Square feet 3. Limited Project: Is any portion of the proposed activity eligible to be treated as a limited project subject to 310 CMR 10.24 or 310 CMR 10.53? a. ❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, describe which limited project applies to this project: b.Limited Project wpaform3.doc•rev. 11!30106 - Page 4 of 9 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by DEP 'M- Bureau of Resource Protection -Wetlands ti 4 iPD€R FOe NumtieF � �� WPA Form 3 - Notice of intent Document hahsachon Number:; Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. C. 131, §40 Salem 1 a Salem General Wetlands Ordinance cityrrown C. Bordering Vegetated Wetland Delineation Methodology Check all methods used to delineate the Bordering Vegetated Wetland (BVW) boundary: Online users: 1. ❑ Final Order of Resource Area Delineation issued by Conservation Commission or DEP Include your document (attached) transaction 2. ❑ DEP BVW Field Data Form (attached) number (provided on your receipt 3. ❑ Final Determination of Applicability issued by Conservation Commission or DEP (attached) page)with all supplementary 4.® Other Methods for Determining the BVW Boundary information you g (attach documentation): submit to the - - Department. a. ® 50% or more wetland indicator plants b.® Saturated/inundated conditions exist For an projects c. ❑ Groundwater indicators affecting other Resource Areas, d. E] Direct observation please attach a e. ® Hydric soil indicators narrative f. ❑ Credible evidence of conditions prior to disturbance explaining how Bank Resource Area the resource 5. Other resource areas delineated: area was delineated. D. Other Applicable Standards and Requirements Streamlined Massachusetts Endangered Species Act/Wetlands Protection Act Review 1. Is any portion of the proposed project located in Estimated Habitat of Rare Wildlife as indicated on the most recent Estimated Habitat Map of State-Listed Rare Wetland Wildlife published by the Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program (NHESP)?To view habitat maps, see the Massachusetts Natural Heritage Atlas or go to http://www.mass.gov/dfwele/dfw/nhesp/nhregmap.htm. a. ❑ Yes ® No If yes, include proof of mailing or hand delivery of NOI to: Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program Division of Fisheries and Wildlife October 2006 Route 135, North Drive b'.Date of map Westborough, MA 01581 - If yes,the project is subject to Massachusetts Endangered Species Act(MESA) review(321 CMR 10.18).To qualify for a streamlined, 30-day, MESANVetlands Protection Act review, please complete Section D.1.A, and include requested materials with this Notice of Intent(NOI); OR complete Section D.1.B, if applicable. If MESA supplemental information is not included with the NOI, by completing Section 1 of this fomt, the NHESP will require a separate MESA filing which may take up to 90 days to review(unless noted exceptions in Section 2 ap ok see below). A. Submit Supplemental Information for Endangered Species Review ❑ Percentage/acreage of property to be altered: (1)within wetland Resource Area percentage/acreage (2) outside Resource Area percentage/acreage ❑ Assessor's Map or right-of-way plan of site wpaform3.doc•rev.11!30!06 Page 5 of 9 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Prowdedpy DEPS 0$0' Bureau of Resource Protection -Wetlands WPA Form 3 - Notice of Intent '� Doc�meM,TrarSsachon Nu. bei' Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 RSalem Salem General Wetlands Ordinance cityrrown D. Other Applicable Standards and Requirements (cont.) ❑ Project plans for entire project site,including wetland Resource Areas and areas outside of wetlands jurisdiction, showing existing and proposed conditions, existing and proposed tree/vegetation Gearing line, and clearly demarcated limits of work•• ❑ Project description (including description of impacts outside of wetland Resource Area & Buffer Zone) ❑ Photographs representative of the site ❑ MESA filing fee (fee information available at: hftp://www.mass.gov/dfwele/dfw/nhesp/nhenvmesa.htm Make check payable to "Natural Heritage& Endangered Species Fund" and mail to NHESP at above address Projects altering 10 or more acres of land, also submit., ❑ Vegetation cover type map of site ❑ Project plans showing Priority&Estimated Habitat boundaries B. OR Check One of the Following ❑ Project is exempt from MESA review. Attach applicant letter indicating which MESA exemption applies. (See 321 CMR 10.14, http://www.mass.qov/dfwele/dfwlnhesp/nhenvexemptions.htm) ❑ I Separate MESA review ongoing. NHESP Tracking Number Date submitted to NHESP _ ❑ Separate MESA review completed. Include copy of NHESP "no Take"determination or valid Conservation &Management Permit with approved plan. Some projects not in Estimated Habitat may be located in Priority Habitat, and require NHESP review(see www.nhesi).org regulatory review tab). Priority Habitat includes habitat for state- listed plants and strictly upland species not protected by the Wetlands Protection Act. ** MESA projects may not be segmented (321 CMR 10.16),The applicant must disclose full development plans even if such plans are not required as part of the Notice of Intent process. 2. For coastal projects only, is any portion of the proposed project located.below the mean high water . line or in a fish run? a.❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, include proof of mailing or hand delivery of NOI to either: South Shore-Cohasset to Rhode North Shore-Hull to New Hampshire: Island, and the Cape&Islands: _ Division of Marine Fisheries- Division of Marine Fisheries- North Shore Office Southeast Marine Fisheries Station Attn: Environmental Reviewer Attn: Environmental Reviewer 30 Emerson Avenue 838 South Rodney French Blvd. Gloucester, MA 01930 New Bedford, MA 02744 b. ® Not applicable—project is in inland resource area only wpaform3.doc-rev.11/30/06 Page 6 of 9 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Prowded by DEP y x wit Bureau of Resource Protection -Wetlands Y` c DEP Rle Nur�ber�r '�x��?!! J WPA Form 3 Notice of intentw� r ' D cement Ttansacon N3mbe" Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 Salem �'} Salem General Wetlands Ordinance Cayrrown D. Other Applicable Standards and Requirements (cont.) 3. Is any portion of the proposed project within an Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC)? a. ❑ Yes ® No If yes, provide name of ACEC (see instructions to WPA Form 3 or DEP Website for ACEC locations): Note: electronic filers click on Website. b.ACEC Online Users: 4. Is any portion of the site subject to a Wetlands Restriction Order under the Inland Wetlands Include your Restriction Act(M.G.L. c. 131, §40A) or the Coastal Wetlands Restriction Act (M.G.L. c. 130, § 105)? document transaction a. ❑ Yes ® No number .(provided on 5. . Is any activity within any Resource Area or Buffer Zone exempt from performance standards of the your recet page)wan all wetlands regulations, 310 CMR 10.00. supplementary information you a. ❑ Yes ® No If yes, describe which exemption applies to this project: 'submit to the Department. _ b.Exemption 6. Is this project subject to the DEP Stormwater Policy? a. ® Yes ❑ No If yes, stormwater management measures are required.Applicants should complete the Stormwater Management Form and submit it with this form. b. If no, explain why the project is exempt: E. Additional Information Applicants must include the following with this Notice of Intent(NOI). See instructions for details. Online Users: Attach the document transaction number(provided on your receipt page)for any of the following information you submit to the Department. _ 1. 0 USGS or other map of the area (along with a narrative description, if necessary)containing sufficient information for the Conservation Commission and the Department to locate the site. (Electronic filers may omit this item.) 2. 0 Plans identifying the location of proposed activities{including activities proposed to serve as a Bordering Vegetated Wetland (BVWj replication area or other mitigating measure)relative to the boundaries of each affected resource area. 3. ❑ Other material identifying and explaining the determination of resource area boundaries shown on plans (e.g., a DEP BVW Field Data Form). 4. ® List the titles and dates for all plans and other materials submitted with this NOI. 5. ❑ If there is more than one property owner, please attach a list of these property owners not listed on this form. 6.❑ Attach proof of mailing for Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program, if needed. 7. ❑ Attach proof of mailing for Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, if needed. wpaform3.doc•rev.11/30/06 Page 7 of 9 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Prowaea by{DEP R Bureau of Resourcerotection -Wetlands r >{ DEQ*Fde Num "Ih ': WPA Form 3 - Notice of Intent �` Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 s Salem Salem of rransao�Numbe Salem General Wetlands Ordinance City/rown E. Additional Information (cont.) 819 Attach NOI Wetland Fee Transmittal Form 9.0 Attach Stormwater Management Form, if needed. F. Fees The fees for work proposed under each Notice of Intent must be calculated and submitted to the Conservation Commission and the Department(see Instructions and NOI Wetland Fee Transmittal Form). No filing fee shall be assessed for projects of any city,town, county, or district of the Commonwealth, federally recognized Indian tribe housing authority, municipal housing authority, or the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority. Applicants must submit the following information (n addition to pages 1 and 2 of the NOI Wetland Fee Transmittal Forth)to confirm fee payment: 4749 11-15-07 1.Municipal Check Number 2.Check date 4750 11-15-07 3.State Check Number 4.Check date Hawthorne Brook Spring Water Co. S.Payor name on check:First Name 6.Payor name on check:Last Name G. Signatures and Submittal Requirements I hereby certify under the penalties of perjury that the foregoing Notice of Intent and accompanying plans, documents, and supporting data are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the Conservation Commission will place notification of this Notice in a local newspaper at the expense of the applicant in accordance with the wetlands regulations, 310 CMR 10.05(5)(a). I further Certify under penalties of perjury that all abutters were notified of this application, pursuant to the requirements of M.G.L.c. 131,§40. Notice must be made in writing by hand delivery or certified mail (return receipt requested)to all abutters within 100 feet of the property line of the project location. Signature of Applicant Date �lgnature of Pro rty Owner(if ppifferent) Date ft Si re of Representative any) ' Date For Conservation Commission: Two copies of the completed Notice of Intent(Form 3),including supporting plans and documents; two copies of pages 1 and 2 of the NOI Wetland Fee Transmittal Form; and the city/town fee payment must be sent to the Conservation Commission by certified mail or hand delivery. For DEP: One copy of the completed Notice of Intent(Form 3),including supporting plans and documents;one copy of pages 1 and 2 of the Not Wetland Fee Transmittal Form;and a copy of the state fee payment must be sent to the DEP Regional Office(see Instructions)by certified mail or hand delivery. (E-filers may submit these electronically.) wpaform3.doc•rev_11/30/06 - Page 8 of 9 Notice of Intent Fee Transmittal Form (WPA Appendix B) Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection -Wetlands NOI Wetland Fee Transmittal Form Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 Important: A. Applicant Information When filling out forms on the 1. Applicant: computer, use only the tab Dana Dilisio D & D Realty Trust key to move a.First Name b.Last Name c.Company your cursor- 100 Swampscott Road do not use the d.Mailing Address return key. Salem MA 01970 e.City/Tom f.State g.Zip Code m 781-581-1478 h.Phone Number n 2. Property Owner(if different): SAME a.First Name b. Last Name - c.Company d.Mailing Address e.City/Town f.State g.Zip Code h.Phone Number 3. Project Location: 100 to 114 Swampscott Road Salem a.Street Address b.City/Town To calculate B. Fees filing fees, refer to the category Notice of Intent(Form 3)or Abbreviated Notice of Intent(Form 4): fee list and examples in the The fee should be calculated using the following six-step instructions for 9 9 p process and worksheet. Please see filling out WPA Instructions before filling out worksheet. Form 3(Notice of Intent). Step II/Type of Activity: Describe each type of activity that will occur in wetland resource area and bufferone. Step 2/Number of Activities: Identify the number of each type of activity. Step 3/Individual Activity Fee: Identify each activity fee from the six project categories listed in the instructions. Step 4/Subtotal Activity Fee: Multiply the number of activities(identified in Step 2)times the fee per category (identified in Step 3)to reach a subtotal fee amount. Note: If any of these activities are in a Riverfront Area in addition to another Resource Area or the Buffer Zone,the fee per activity should be multiplied by 1.5 and then added to the subtotal amount. Step 5/1rotal Project Fge: Determine the total project fee by adding the subtotal amounts from Step 4. Step 6/Feq Payments:To calculate the state share of the fee, divide the total fee in half and subtract $12.50. To calculate the cityttown share of the fee, divide the total fee in half and add $12.50. Wpaf.m3 d.•NOI Wetland Fee Tmnsmifti F.•.WM Page 1&2 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection -Wetlands NOI Wetland Fee Transmittal Form Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 B. Fees (continued) Step 1/Type of Activity Step 2/Number Step Step 4/Subtotal Activity of Activities 3/Individual Fee Activity Fee Category 2(a) Parking Lot One $500.60 $500.00 Category 20) Other One $500.00 $500.00 Step 5/Total Project Fee: $1,000.00 Step 6/Fee Payments: Total Project Fee: $1,000.00 a.Total fee from Step 5 State share of filing fee: $487.50 b. 1/2 total fee less$72.50 City/Town share of filling fee: $512.50 c.1/2 total fee plus$1250 C. Submittal Requirements a.) Complete pages 1 and 2 and send with a check or money order for the state share of the fee, payable to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Department of Environmental Protection Box 4062 Boston, MA 02211 b.) To the Conservation Commission: Send the Notice of Intent or Abbreviated Notice of Intent; a copy of this form; and the cityflown fee payment. c.) To DEP Regional Office (see Instructions): Send a copy of the Notice of Intent or Abbreviated Notice of Intent; a copy of this forth; and a copy of the state fee payment. (E-filers of Notices of Intent may submit these electronically) Wpafom3.doc•NO[Wetland.Fee TmnsmAW Fa -rev.311105 Page2012 GATE INVOICE AMOUNT 53 79/1,13 ah HAWTHORNE BROOK-SPRING-VATER CO x1j ON 443 ESSEX STREET C SWAMPSCOTT MA.: 616_67' , r 4 Zt l�ax1 (617) 581-1478 PAY' ' :. , (, GHEGK NO �" x`+ry y}{E ORDER OF C'd �QLR` 2 Ji?1 5F DATE 1 [ '?�{+,OESCRIPTIOIJ-�. y .#" aE19ECI�QAIO+UI .• . Jig gp, - ! i h " ill.' /tea �F< � �� t < r law r , �� 004750ii°;' �'0 i i3'01g798a:�1� 3 ' 00 i��• � � f��F� �,. 0472 F M.; 'i GATE dNVOICE HAWTHORNE BRUOK'SPRING WATER CO. AMouNT ✓ 53�179JL73 ' 443 ESSEX=STREET ` �WAMPSCOTT NIA 01907 (817)581 1478. e r 4 `I fA � F SD TME ORDEIF OFA}y } .�� DOLLAR$ ...... VE - 2 `1lry�dE3a". `j is 't- h�y" a a x a t? ECHECIt+AMgY1�va- 3 4 '' 'k" �. yy s i I I i �kn V r ( ki ��'004749n■r;r0i13Qi79�8`�: 53 '',000472 in■. _ §G1F ,� fil ru Abutter Information mo wa OR J ParcelID Location Owner Co-Owner Mallinq Address Citv State Zip 07-0043-801 7 U139A ADMIRALS LANE U139A MILENDORF MAX MILENDORF OLGA 7 ADMIRALS LANE Ul 39-A SALEM MA 01970 07-0043-802 5 U139B ADMIRALS LANE U139B 5 ADMIRALS LANE NOMINEE TR DIGRANDE[SALINA TR 5 ADMIRALS LANE 139B SALEM MA 01970 07-0043-803 3 U139C ADMIRALS LANE U139C CURRIE RENATE L 3 ADMIRALS LANE U139C SALEM MA 01970 07-0043-804 1 U139D ADMIRALS LANE U139D KORFF FAVID L KORFF CATHY L 1 ADMIRALS LANE U139D SALEM MA 01WO 07-0043-805 2 U140A ADMIRALS LANE U140A JCL NOMINEE TRUST LACK SANFORD L/LACK JA� 2 ADMIRALS LANE U140A SALEM MA 01970 07-0043-806 4 U140B ADMIRALS LANE U140B FREELOVE ANTHONY E FREELOVE DEBRA 4 ADMIRALS LANE U140-B SALEM MA 01970 07-0043-807 6 U140C ADMIRALS LANE U140C GAETA RICHARD C GAETA MARILYN R 6 ADMIRALS LANE U1400 SALEM MA 01970 07-0043-808 8 U140D ADMIRALS LANE U140D BLASKOVICH PHILIP D BLASKOVICH DIANE M 8 ADMIRALS LANE 140D SALEM MA 01970 07-0043-809 IOU141A ADMIRALS LANE U141A HARB GEORGE ISSA RANDA A 10 ADMIRALS LANE U141A SALEM MA 01970 07-0043-810 12 U141B ADMIRALS LANE U141B DIONNEAU LAURENT D DIONNEAU LAUREN L 12 ADMIRALS LANE U141B SALEM MA 01970 07-0043-811 14 U141C ADMIRALS LANE U141C BLAISDELL CHARLES A 47 FEDERAL STREET SALEM MA 01970 07-0043-812 16 U141D ADMIRALS LANE U141D CLYNES WILLIAM H CLYNES MARYANN 16 ADMIRALS LANE U141D SALEM MA 01970 71 U142A WHALERS LANE U142A MUNROE STEPHEN J 71 WHALERS LANE U142A SALEM MA 01970 07-0043-814 73 U142B WHALERS LANE U142B MARCYALIZABETH 73 WHALERS LANE U142B SALEM MA 01970 07-0043-815 3 U142C BRITTANIA CIRCLE U142C SMITH DEBRA M 3 BRITTANIA CIRCLE Ul 42C SALEM MA 01970 07-0043-816 1 U142D BRI[TTANIA CIRCLE U142D TERBAN ELAYNE R I BRITTANIA CIR Ul 42D SALEM MA 01970 07-0043-817 7 U143A BRrrTANIA CIRCLE U143A SHERMAN ADAM H 7 BRITTANIA CIRCLE U 143A SALEM MA 01970 07-0043-818 5 U143B BR17FANIA CIRCLE U1438 HARRINGTON DANIEL M HARRINGTON ANGELINA 6 BRITTANIA CIR U143B SALEM MA 01970 � 07-0043'820 91J143D8R|lTAN|A C|nCLsU143D EMM0N8xATmsA 98KDlAwmS|nV'143D SALEM MA 01970 � 0/-0043-821 2U144A BRU7AN|8CIRCLE U144A EBERTKONALn VRRACCiAMARiANNE 2BR|TlANu\CIRCLE U144A SALEM MA 01970 � 07'0043^022 4U144BBR|T7AN|ACIRCLE U144B STOLZTHEODORE V KOVVAL8n|JOANNC 4BR|TlAN|xCIRCLE U1448SALEM MA 01870 � 07'0043'823 GU144C8R|77AN|ACIRCLE U144C TAYLOR MARILYN M 6RR|TTAN|ACIRCLE U144CSALEM MA 01970 07'0043`824 VV144DRR|TTAN|ACIRCLE U14*D L0TT| EDWARD T LOTT|CLAUDIA H 8RR|T7AN|ACIRCLE V144oSALEM MA 01070 � 07^0043'825 15U145ABR|TTAN|ACIRCLE U1*5A1SBR|777\N|ACIRCLE TRUST SAX0N|VDONw/VENGUSH/ 158R|77AN|AC|HU145A SALEM MA 01970 07'0043'826 13U145BBR|7TAN|ACIRCLE U145BCHEUNGTERESAVV i3Bm77AN|ACIRCLE U146ESALEM MA 01970 07'0043'827 1VU14SCBR|7TAN|8CIRCLE U14SCAPPiEMAmLORI E 198K|TlAN|xC|RU145C SALEM M\ 01870 07'0043'828 17U14SDBR|7TAN|8CIRCLE U14SDDAVIS PHILIP DAVIS HEATHER 178mTnxN|AC|RU'145D SALEM MA 01870 07'00*3'829 10U146ABR|T77\N|ACIRCLE Vi4VA8URRELLSTEPHEN M 1OBR|TTAN|ACIRCLE U146ASALEM MA 01070 07'0043'030 12U14GB8R|777\N|ACIRCLE U1468JACOBSON HELEN 12BR|T}AW|AC|R SALEM MA 01970 07'0043`831 14 U146 BR|Tl7\N|ACIRCLE V140C HOFFMANJONAH TV8Y HOFFMAN JOSEPH 14BR|l7AN|ACIRCLE V146( SALEM Mx 01970 07'0043'832 16U146DBR|7TAN|ACIRCLE U146OHORV|TZ8HERR|LH )68R|TTxw|ACIRCLE U146[ SALEM MA 01970 07'0043'833 23U147A8R|77AN|ACIRCLE U147ASZVKARCBERNARD M 23BR|TTAN|AC|RU147A SALEM MA 01970 07'0043'834 21U14TBRR|77AN|ACIRCLE U147nSZPUKMICHAEL 218R|T7AN|AC|RV147B SALEM MA 01870 07'0043'836 27Ui*7CnR|[nAN|ACIRCLE U147CSTONE ELAINE E uToR|T7AN|ACIRCLE U,47( SALEM mn\ 01970 07'0043'836 25U14TDRR|TTAm|ACIRCLE U1^7oGOULD/CAND|CEm G0ULDJOSHUA K 25BR|T7AN|AC|RU147D SALEM MA 01970 07^0043'837 1VVi48AUR|TTAN|ACIRCLE V1488MARQUIS LINDA E 188R|TTAN|ACIRCLE U148A SALEM MA 01970 07'0043'838 20U148BBR|77AN|ACIRCLE U148BROGALSK|JOHN p nVGAiSmANGELA J eoan|Tn\wmCIRCLE U14nESALEM MA 01970 0/`0043'83022U148C8R|T7A |ACIRCLE u140CYOUNG STEPHEN YOUNG SARAH M zcan|r7AwmCIRCLE o14o/ SALEM MA 01070 07^0043'040 24U14VD8R|lTA NIA CIRCLE U148DPARKER AwTmwsTTE 24RR|T7AN|AC|RU148D SALEM MA 01970 07'0043'841 31 U149 BR|TTAm|ACIRCLE U148A ASRiTvTR KxANDRACCH|xCHAnLES 21CUSHMxwTERRACE REVERE MA 02151 87'0043'842 29V1*9BBR|TTAN|ACIRCLE V{^98MANN WILLIAM J MANN DIANE M 29BR|TlxN|AC|RU1498 SALEM MA 01970 07'0043'043 35U149CBR|T7AN|ACIRCLE U143CHENDERVVN(ORRA|NE 358R|T7AN|AC|RU149C VA|Exx MA 01970 07'0043'844 33V149DBR|Tl7\M|ACIRCLE U14gDULKVXCTIMOTHY J MAHARAJ'HLAVACCAUSTA338R|TT8N|ACIRCLE V149SALEM MA 01970 07'0043'845 26U1SUA8R|777\w|ACIRCLE U150AHENSVNJOSEPH E HENSUNLEE M 26BR|TTAN|AS|RU150A SALEM MA 01970 ' rl ' PanceD0 Location Owner Co-Owner N1ai|iwa Address CiKV State ZiD ' 07'0043'846 20U15O8BR|TTAmmCIRCLE o1S0oS|EGELALAN S|EGELL|N8A 288R|T\AN|xCIRCLE Vl 50E SALEM MA 01970 07'0043'847 3VVi5VCgR|77AN|ACIRCLE U150CN1CCONATHYSANDRA VV 30nmTn\m|AC|RU150C SALEM Mx 01970 07'0043'048 32U15ODBR|TT8N|ACIRCLE U150DSTAPLETONROBERT F STAPLETONNANCY Kx 32BR|7TAN|AC|RV150'D SALEM MA 01970 07`0043`849 39V1niAgH|T7AN|ACIRCLE U1s1AoY8TRYAK|LYA 8Y8TRYAKOLGA 3VBR|TTAN|ACIRCLE V1511SALEM MA 01970 07'0043'850 37V151BBK|TlANLACIRCLE Vi5`183ALVSTR|AWGELO SALUSTR|S|LVA 37BR|TTAN|AC|RU151'U SALEM MA 01070 07'0043'851 43U15iCBR|TrAN|ACIRCLE Vi5iCLOVELANDDONALD H LOVELANDANN M 438R|TTAN|AC|RV151'C SALEM MA 019/0 07`0043'852 41U151DBR|TTAN|AC|RCLEU151DFULLER WAIN F FULLER ANNIE m 11an|l7AN|AC|RU151D SALEM MA 01870 07`0043'853 34U152ABR|TlAN|ACIRCLE U152ACAPLANHARRY CAPLANDIANE G 34RR|TTAN|AC|RU152A SALEM MA 01870 07'0043'854 36Vi52BBR|7TAN|ACIRCLE U162BTVYVmSENnMARY L 36BR|77AN|AC|RV152B SALEM M8 01970 07'0043'855 z8Ui*2C8R|77AN|ACIRCLE U1ezCuoAwANxAwCATHY xx 3uBR|TTAN|ACIRCLE u1sz( SALEM MA 01970 07'0043'856 4oU152DBR|T7AN|ACIRCLE U152DRR|CKLEYGAIL W 4V8R|TTAN|ACIRCLE U152[ SALEM MA 01970 07'0043'857 4TV153ARR|TTAN|xCIRCLE V15uxFU8EGN| LEWIS J FUSEGEN|FRANCES E 47oH|TTAw|ACIRCLE V1soASALEM MA 01970 � 07'0043'858 45U1638RR|77AN|ACIRCLE V153RMANRYSTEVEN vV STRINGER GERTRUDEHAN458R|T77\N|AC|RV1s36 SALEM MA 01970 07^0043^059 51U153CBR|TTAN|ACIRCLE U153CF8LANGARICHARD A FAU\N8AMARILYN VV 51RR|T7AN|AC|RU153C SALEM MA 01970 � 07'0043'060 49U153 BR|77AN|ACIRCLE UiS3D BERGSTK8mRICHARD o oEn8VTnowPATRICIA n ^yan|7TAw|ACIRCLE U153 8xisM MA 01970 07^0043^801 42V154ABR|77AN|8CIRCLE Vi54AMUNROROBERT M MUNRO CONSTANCE A 42BR|TTAN|ACIRCLE U1541 SALEM MA 01970 07'0043'062 44V1548BR|T[Aw|A CIRCLE U1548MGM8iiEPHILIP 8 448R|77AN|ACIRCLE U154ESALEM M8 01970 07'0043'863 40U154CBR|T7AN|ACIRCLE U154CDUS3EAULTPETER A OVSSEAULTBARBARA R 488R|TTAN|ACIRCLE V154[ SALEM MA 01970 07'0043'864 48 U1540 BR|7TAN|AC|RCLE HEAPHYWILLIAM F HEAPHYSANDRA M *8BR|TTAN|ACIRCLE U154LSALEM MA 01970 07'0043'865 55U155 8R|7TAN}AC|RCLE CAVVTHRONDAVID A 8URKESANDRA K 558R|T7AN|AC|RU155'A SALEM MA 01870 07'0043'866 53V1558 9R|l7A |AC|RCLE ANDERSON JOHN A ANDERSON MAUREEN 53BR|T7AN|AC|RU156B SALEM MA 01970 07'00*3'867 59U15SCBR|TTA |ACIRCLE KxONTM|NYMATTHEW o MONTm|wYSTEPHANIE x 59nmTTAw|ACIRCLE V155[ SALEM MA 01870 07'0043'868 s7U1asV8R|T7A*mCIRCLE TA|NERxxEoAN 5T8R|TTAN|ACIRCLE U1so[ SALEM xxx 01970 07'0043'869 71U15GA8R|77xm|ACIRCLE TRVVELBR|AN TRUDELSY[V|A 718R|TTAN|AC|RU156A SALEM MA 01970 0/`0043'870 69V156BBR| /AC|RCLE WARD PAUL xv WARD GLORIA 698R|TTAN|AC|RU156R SALEM MA 01970 07'0043'871 3U156 GOOD HOPE LANE RABINOVICH GREGORY TOLOKUNSKY|NETTA 3GOOD HOPE LANE U150C SAiFKo MA 01970 07'0043'072 1U156 GOOD HOPE LxmF HxR8 ^R|SJOHN JJR 8AR8ER|SCHRISTINE 8 1GOOD HOPE LANE U1s6D SALEM MA 01970 07-0043-873 57U157 BR|T7ANiAC|RCLE oAManORENEE L HAMBR0JACK G 678R|T7AN|AC|RU157A SALEM mm 01970 07'0043'874 osU157o8R|TTAw|ACIRCLE QUIRK BRIAN; QUIRK SEAN 6eUH|TlAN|AC|H157o SALEM MA 01970 07'0043'875 TV157CGOOD HOPE LANE 8HnAGERPAUL SHRAGER NANCY M 7GOOD HOPE LANE V15TS SALEM MA 0/070 07'0043'878 5V157DGOOD HOPE LANE DR0KERJOELS 0KOKERBiEEN 5GVODHVpFLANE U157D SALEM MA 01970 07'0043'077 63U158ARR|TlAN|ACIRCLE RODR|GVEZCHn|ST|NE 03BR|TTAN|AC|RU150A SALEM MA 01970 07'0043'878 61U158BBR|TTAN|8CIRCLE MYSUNS,K| LEONARo MY8UwoK|E. 618R|T7AN|An|RU150B SALEM M8 01970 07'0043`879 11 U158C GOOD HOPE LANE SHREGTUAYALEENA 11G0ODHOPELANE U158CSALEM MA 01070 07'0043'880 9Ui58DGOOD HOPE LANE SULLIVAN JOHN F SULLIVAN BARBARA L 0GOOD HOPE LANE U158D SALEM MA 01970 07'0043'881 2GOOD HOPE LANE DEAN ELAINE S 2 GOODHOP5LANE U158ASALEM MA 01970 07'0043'882 0V159BGOOD HOPE LANE RVSS0PAUL 6GOOD HOPE LANE SALEM NA 01970 07'0043'883 8V159CGOOD HOPE LANE 8GOOD HOPE LANE nLTvTRUST CROCKER MARTHA H TR 8GOODHVPE LANEU159n SALEM MA 01070 07'0043'804 4V159D GOOD HOPE LANE vV8VowVKToDAVID w VVOVDNORTHKAOR| IDA 4 GOOD HOPE LANE U1SVD SALEM MA 01970 07'00*3'885 10 GOOD HOPE LANE DANTERKEJAMES VvJe oAwTsnnsMARILYN G ,o8OnDHOpsLANE u1su^ SALEM Mx 01*70 07'00*3'886 14V1Vo'nGOOD HOPE LANE uALswTEJACOUEUwE ,4GOOD HOPE LANE U1ooeSALEM mx 01970 07'0043`887 16U160CGOOD HOPE LANE 16GOOD HOPE LANE REALTY TRI CAROL AK&NE i6GOOD HOPE LANE U160CSALEM MA 01870 07'0043'888 12U160D GOOD HOPE LANE ZH|TOM|RSKYEU8ENE 12G00DHOPELANE V160'[ SALEM MA 01970 " ... F..a .-':I ,..Jtf - Fu h��p, ��?'.p.._ t +-=:a 'i Y '.;L-r s Y'. tFF r� }z i I"u`':i 1 rw r 7 w. �, �. + ,:.�+: as u .^'d:^" `,aPi r ai ' I:' T,f 'iu"' ' "rr,7`sp : -.+n r:",' '".' . .ka w.r r-.,, W r:,*r +, ' sa I.n` :F ,,,.:4 .a I P m "iy..i a e 3 c" w "fl i i^ it. ,b i ax^" i,_+ .r?..,. �Ml rx'., a lr ::,;fiY i. .. i;. .-„p1Y, ei. .&�, :F.:7 .. .r i_.,; , ., ak �fi...pra`Iz' a l�ki L E .:. aJln 'a rv,a:d:r 11 ” :fR " i1e 5i,`.. " a ._ a ,';�..; M Va. F f,,,p� r . . :,e, ir.rm«�.Sl.,v.t€ce 11° .�;a '1 : a9klMal .,;_ ,fi ,d, rarlN;;a.r�� ra l'i.: x �'hu,.,:JL a..'V '.:N,.:t { ". sr a f..":., w `s 11." r ,H1J alt n jl'r� .'! ;: 20aa;iii�d.ts y, .i�' IrPi r �"Sal� l� +r i::r,z4 ar;, w . ar e,� xu'W!f .'..}.+, F ;'' Y,, '� - ..I�.,, r I'"+ np. rt �� k^z` rrCi tld�i "•S'� Yw�l i�' k,d1 f i� P29;E3i1 pf 1 's d�tw,;�r. :.nis.kli ti° a aal;n. ]�....a d Sle:.. rri ,t. i,t. uil,°,awk•W,'any„-k d; € ;,r " �!..5':.1.6 wi. ,�..:. 4d ::«i 9 .:ni I:i:': nP :Y«:� k�P t'.M .K' +w� iLS .;F.s ". kfr'".I a e w',Ik".1,. *i ys,rsal.wa I...;,,..Ib ru�s:..;:✓r 9, n,:;, , . rel,hf t.r.._ S w a k� aM n .i nihFJipJ#tiF?.,.I.fi i ,4, rM I..:.s::�k�r rna,Ti'Yl� I, Ix'=� ... •:' uAma PAX .W .DNPF'.i w`. - R eh... rvS0.'Mina qt/Aix_Ov#c:WPontYivr"avn..'.2v YaNiw�s a v .a va.emwsx:MGi x:ti.. a bb.[M..Mv'ayei...5.,%n i`YYe156�+U'YtF+'Cn uFLYN.s.Ym r3 ParcellD Location Owner Co-Owner Mailing Address City State Zip 06-0013-0 15 ROBINSON ROAD MOUNTAIN REALTY TRUST HUTCHINSON SHIRLEYA TF P O BOX 403 SALEM MA 01970 06-0014-0 120 SWAMPSCOTT ROAD MONGIELLO CARMINE MONGIELLO ANGELO 55 EASTMAN AV SWAMPSCOTT MA 01907 06-0020-0 116 SWAMPSCOTT ROAD 15 ROBINSON ROAD REALTY TRU HUTCHINSON FREDERICK T P 0 BOX 403 SALEM MA 01970 07-0061-0 100 SWAMPSCOTT ROAD D&D REALTY TRUST DILISIO DANA/DILISIO DAVIE 100 SWAMPSCOTT ROAD SALEM MA 01970 07.0062-0 98 SWAMPSCOTT ROAD NORTH SHORE TENNIS& SQUASH CLUB INC 98 SWAMPSCOTT ROAD SALEM MA 01970 07-0074-0 101 SWAMPSCOTT ROAD SALEM CITY OF 11-0002-0 115 SWAMPSCOTT ROAD LYNN SAND&STONE CO - ATTN: REAL ESTATE TAX 7529 STANDISH PLACE STE ROCKVILLE MD 20855 End of Report LI r:..,,.. e.., yr.m ,�: .,...,��:.. v a",z: ti fi .r:,x d s ..w.ww r k ro.FNy i a rm-^+= r . {" s .. �."•-i fix r. itlmrti .Maa.:,N 9e „ :Pw T'.. ;€,.v•rm u. ., �. R u Cx. ix 'IFc ryl. ,Rr i:,.,ik S$ .v.,_:.s €"r 4. . ':h _ � .gip r,.E ,�� krt .Y." . ,.:Pro �i sJ bhf y;G x, tr '.rvl ANu , .Y41 h!'�4' �';i A! 357 :.:; p.,::.:"I"tr�Ia�� C" :�rrar ,p,.:rs.M7 m, sera}" d :urr i .i. FI ..,5 t ,l;€ ,P3" `sff• mi.?: :•�,a 'C �. a �wi'dfi �r, ;s::9 " .:: .• �`i G all. :e;. ',fkn'fsa..r. a;3 i , ,:H 1 ;, k a,,,.?. , e d SM1 a P b �.. .: K'a "!.,r�: I•�,4 ` F.. iYia "ne ... SJm 'h. r: hm ini "4i's'.. 4..:a,.it IJr•-""v Yati�s: ,� ..':.:...'° a .at`efs IX ."a ry +�>t:in Y r , e ilk •.,. 4 �� fl. ! '. .4. a '',Irrk�,,rpN a w. .,f $a�� iV^; rr.,r:.i N ,+.... .rl a .,kv ; r . �. ta+ ,:,.� $'pY, `'u' :i.� xd :� Ifi.�:. y y 5 sF "�u.R: N.. �'ff"r.fl,MR S. if Y •''' ,�! ,�^ A z J .,+ ity .tt Y' ...:�. q �° 'S-� e � , y .{;,, :�..�Ij..I. u�P�' ..:{q .: .• s��: a ,.i is ntl ...",, v. ri.!,;,F i :_„.iw �J ,.•�t�; 7 ay:i..i,."h°,NW�,,� - ��e °''�'�rJNI i 5kg .ly.'�..1} .: .r .hqi ,�• 0. �. x n ,...ro:a.L•,�`. 4 d�ik � A1::k: "' „ ;•ik rilo ':.r4 wAaA ,�.�:: n ” nr,;r�'vro,l I'p*•. �is ktPniN�ae,9i�;NL, rxF€s „,:P.:1��{ih'J. . ,i, rF M1hiTp:f.,k,nh r �:.; i46'ih�'7LMtiFi.,,�,�. ;kre§ ' •TJ�'"ly rIZ ,�,4�,'tk av p3"r., k�7 ...i� '� €i a 'N w urA IbaiW �kis �< I "Ru Parcell!) Location Owner Co-Owner Mailina Address Citv State Zip End of Report CITY OF SALEM CONSERVATION COMMISSION NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION TO ABUTTERS Under the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act &the City of Salem Wetlands Protection Ordinance A Public Hearing will be held at the City Hall Annex 120 Washington Street, Salem,MA 01970 at: 61)m on December 13, 2007 To consider a Notice of Intent Of D&D Realty Trust—Castle Creek Adventure Land For the property located at 100 to 114 Swampscott Road Map 7 Lots 61&85 For constructing a motorized go cart track and building a new parking lot. The work is in buffer zone, and also impacts a portion of isolated vegetated wetland. The parking area impacts bank resource area. Mitigation is provided for all resource area impacts. This is a joint hearing under the requirements of G.L. Ch 131 Section 40, as amended, and the Salem Wetlands Protection Ordinance and Regulations. Plans are available at the Department of Planning and Community Development at the City Hall Annex 120 Washington Street Salem, MA from 8 am- 4 pm Monday — Wednesday, 8 am -7 pm on Thursday, and 8 am- 12 pm on Friday. For information call the Conservation Agent at 978-619-5685. Note: Notice of the public hearing, including its date,time and place, will be published at least a week prior to the meeting date in The Salem News. Note: Notice of the public hearing,including its date,time,place,will be posted on the Public Meetings Bulletin Board in Salem City Hall not less than 48-hours in advance. Note: You also may contact the Salem Conservation Commission or the nearest Department of Environmental Protection Regional Office for more information about this application or the Wetlands Protection Act. To contact DEP call: Central Region: (508)792-7650 Northeast Region: (978)694-3200 Southeast Region: (508) 946-2714 Western Region: (413)784-1100 Wetland Resource Inventory iwi 40 r NC V dP RON f �. E� '�° A ° .�► � �l la. � 1 � w mat, i � � �i3rrv�. NWX "eCr /��,.:��,u I MON, VA � e- g�aa ��Pr'��1 £ 8-� F�" , lrpp ',=.✓ S@�\t �y � ` `� `.v-a- I"•AMIE xr'=a� Y ;. �� Wetland Resource Inventory Discussion of Wetland Resource Areas Intmduction The subject property is located at 100 to 114 Swampscott Road, the Castle Creek Adventure Land in Salem. The site is developed with a miniature golf course, parking area, and a small single story building to support the miniature golf and to sell ice cream. The site is bounded by a fitness club to the north, Swampscott Road to the east, and a wetland in the western most portion of the site. The existing gravel parking area is on the northerly side of the lot and the miniature golf area is in the southerly side of the lot. An intermittent stream bisects the site separating the existing parking area from the miniature golf portion of the site. The intermittent stream is within a steep sided gully, the sides of which appear to have been created during the initial development of the property. The two areas are connected by a foot bridge across the intermittent stream gully. The vegetated wetlands on the site were reportedly created in the past by the removal of gravel material from a portion of the site. Indeed, the vegetation within the wetland area is dominated by uniform size willow and red maple saplings. The area also exhibits typical historic disturbance in the form of random fill piles within or along the wetlands, steep side slopes approaching the wetlands, general lack of topsoil in the buffer zone and the usual accumulation of urban debris_ Because of the proximity to the road and the gully shape of the intermittent stream, this particular resource area tends to accumulate a significant amount of blowing or thrown trash, and is impacted with.phragmites and purple loosestrife vegetation—both indicators of a disturbed or distressed site. Wetland Resources at the Site Bordering and Isolated Vegetated Wetlands The limits of wetlands on the project site were delineated by Wetlands &Land Management Inc. Wetlands were delineated in accordance with local, Federal and State criteria for delineating jurisdictional wetlands using methodology established in the 1987 Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual, and methodology outlined in the Mass. DEP manual"Delineating Bordering Vegetated Wetlands" (1995). These methods incorporate the evaluation of hydric soils, predominance of wetland vegetation and evidence of wetland hydrology. The wetlands on this site were delineated in the field using alphanumeric blue surveyors flagging. Bordering Vegetated Wetlands—A and B Series(AI to A24, BI to BII d The A and B series wetlands is a bordering wetland area separated from the remaining wetlands on the site by a distinct linear filled area. Given the age of the trees and shrubs growing on the fill, we surmised in the field that the ground disturbance likely predated current regulations and flagged the area separately. Flag Al begins at the bottom slope of the fill near the foot bridge and trends along the northerly side of the existing fill. The flags continue around additional piles of fill near flags A13 to Flag A24. The B series is the opposing wetland boundary of this system and is located at the bottom of a historically filled slope,most likely during the adjacent tennis club construction Isolated Vegetated Wetlands-C Series(C1 to C42) The C series is an isolated wetland area separated from the remaining wetlands on the site by a distinct linear filled area. Given the age of the trees and shrubs growing on the fill, we surmised in the field that the ground disturbance likely predated current regulations and flagged the area separately. Flag Cl begins at the bottom slope of the fill. The flags continue clockwise around the circular depression, following a distinct bottom of slope of the surrounding topography. Flag C42 connects to flag Cl completing the wetland boundary. The C series was characterized as an isolated vegetated wetland, and would be not be jurisdictional under the Wetlands Protection Act, because it does not border on a stream or pond. Notwithstanding, the applicant has opted to mitigate for the loss of any wetland and will provide equal or greater wetland replication for any impacts. Inland Bank(Bank Flags 100 to 117, 200 to 215) A bank is defined as the portion of the land surface, which normally abuts and confines a water body. It will occur between a water body and a vegetated bordering wetland and adjacent flood plain, or in absence of these, it occurs between a water body and an upland. On this site, the bank is associated with a drainage ditch, which bisects the property from west to east. The drainage ditch is approximately fifteen feet wide and ten feet deep however;the actual stream channel is only four feet wide and very shallow, reflecting the intermittent nature of the flow path. Other portions of bank were apparently . 2 created by the historic disturbance at the site by the placement of fill in the vicinity of the C series wetland. In the field the limits of bank resource area were delineated using blue surveyors flagging labeled 100 to 117, and 200 to 215 down gradient of the foot bridge. These flags represent each side of the drainage channel. Flags 100 and 200 begin at a culvert which facilitates water flow under Swampscott Road. The line then continues on each side of the drainage channel west across the site following a break in slope. Throughout most of the drainage channel the banks are lined with large boulders that were apparently placed there for landscaping purposes. No Riverfront Area The intermittent stream on this site is depicted on the USGS map to originate about a half mile westerly from the site. The portion of the stream relevant to this site is approximately 220 feet in length and conveys surface water from the west across the site to the east and exits the site via a culvert under Swampscott Road. Wetlands and Land Management Inc. evaluated the watercourse using the USGS StreamStats software and determined that the watershed contributing to the intermittent stream ug gradient of the site is less than one half square mile. The predicted flow rate in the 99 percentile is less than 0.01 feet per second. Accordingly, from a regulatory presumption this steam would be considered intermittent. The property owner reports that this steam dries seasonally. According to the information presented above there is no riverfront area present on this site. Rare Species According to the October 2006 edition of the Massachusetts Natural Heritage Atlas of Estimated Habitats of Rare Wetlands Wildlife and Certified Vernal Pools, no estimated habitat of rare wetlands wildlife or certified vernal pools are shown to exist on or near the subject parcel. 3 �c Attachment A Project Description Proposed Work Discussion of Proposed Work Property Located at: 100 to 114 Swampscott Road, Salem Introduction The proposed work associated with this application involves the construction of a paved go-cart track, construction of a small building to store the carts, and the expansion of the existing crushed stone parking lot. Portions of the proposed work will result in alteration of vegetated wetlands, as well as bank resource area. A wetland replication plan is included with this application. Discussion of Proposed Work The proposed work will consist of three components: construction of the go-cart track, construction of the storage building, and parking lot expansion. Each component will be discussed in detail below. Go-Cart Track The proposed track will be located in the southernmost portion of the site. This area is currently overgrown with various opportunistic shrubs and grasses. Installation of the proposed erosion controls will be the first step in the construction process. The erosion control barrier will not only limit the migration of sediment into adjacent resource areas,but also provide a visual reminder of the limit of work The location of the erosion controls is indicated on the site plan. The Commission may also want to stipulate the use of plastic orange construction fencing as a secondary demarcation of the allowed work area. The orange fencing will not only serve as an easily identifiable limit of work,,but,also will further minimize the potential for construction debris to blow from.ihe work area. Once the erosion controlsAre installed the nextstep in the construction process will be to clear and grub theares. vegetation and other debris will be cleared and lokyd into dumpsters for dispol off site. A portion of the track construction will require filling in approximately 850 square feet of the adjacent wetland resource area in order to construct a retaining wall and bring the surrounding area to a uniform grade. (A replication plan has been included in this application). Once the site has been cleared, underground utilities will be installed and the area will be rough graded. A layer of crushed stone and gravel will then be placed as a base for the track prior to paving. All equipment will be parked outside of the buffer zone overnight. The next step in track construction will be to apply a layer of bituminous concrete over the base layer followed by a top coat of pavement. Following construction, any disturbed areas will be loamed and seeded or landscaped. Storage Building The storage building will be constructed in the location depicted on the site plan. This structure will be used to store the go-carts when not in use. Excavating equipment is used for construction of the new building. During the initial excavation, soil will be carefully excavated to pour foundation walls and associated footings. Soil will be side cast into the interior of the foundation area instead of along the outer perimeter of the trench. In this manner, the foundation trenches function as sediment traps between the wetlands and the excavated soils. Careful excavation and oversight is intended to avoid any unintended discharge or fall back of material into the adjacent resource area. Any excess or additional soil that cannot be stockpiled within the interior of the foundation walls will be stored away from the excavation, away from the buffer zone slope above the wetlands, and returned as necessary to backfill. This building will be constructed on a slab on grade instead of a typical foundation. The goal of utilizing a slab on grade for this project was to minimize the amount of material that was to be excavated. Forms are set up and the footings and walls are poured with concrete. After a short period to allow the concrete to cure,the forms are stripped off and the walls are backfilled. Material for the building construction will be dropped in the existing crushed stone drive. A small bobcat type machine may be used to deliver building materials to the immediate work site. Dumpsters should be on site for rubbish control during construction. Once the construction is complete, final site landscaping will occur. Disturbed areas will be loamed and seeded or landscaped. ParkingLotlDrainage Pipe Installation The proposed parking lot expansion will take place over an area that is currently a drainage ditch. The ditch is approximately fifteen feet deep and twenty feet wide. There 2 is an intermittent steam located at the bottom of the ditch with seasonal surface water now. The first step prior to parking lot construction will be to install a concrete pipe which will provide an uninterrupted flow path for the intermittent stream. The pipe will extend approximately 220 feet from the wooded area west of the foot bridge across the site,and discharge into an existing culvert which flows under Swampscott Road. Installation of the drainage pipe will require either work in the dry condition or a temporary pump- around of the intermittent stream. Sand bag dams will.prevent the stream from flowing into the work zone. The work will commence in the lowest portion of the site and progress up slope. In this manner,the sand bag dams can be removed at the end of each work day and the stream can continue to flow through the newly installed pipe until the next work day. Following construction,the stream will be redirected back into the newly installed drainage pipe Following installation of the pipe,the site will be graded to match the existing grades on the site and gravel parking area will be constructed as shown on the site plan. After the area has been brought to a uniform grade, a layer of crushed stone will be spread over the proposed parking area. Following all construction any disturbed areas will be loamed and seeded or landscaped. Stormwater Management This project is subject to the DEP Stormwater Management Policy. The stormwater management on this site will attenuate the difference between the predevelopment and post development stormwater flow rates using an exfiltration system. (See attached Stormwater Management Report by Scott Patrowicz P.E.) 3 Evaluation of Wetland Resource Area Impacts Evaluation of Wetland Resource Area Impacts Discussion of Wetland Resource Areas and Potential Impacts Property Located at: 100 to 114 Swampscott Road, Salem Introduction The following is intended to address the planned as well as potential impacts to the wetland resource areas associated with the proposed work at Castle Creek Adventure Land. Isolated Vegetated Wetlands Portions of the proposed work on this site will result in a loss of approximately 850 square feet of vegetated wetlands. The majority of the work will be in buffer zone only. For the work which will be in buffer zone only the appropriate erosion controls will be installed as indicated on the permit plan. The erosion controls shall serve to arrest overland travel of sediment during rain events, and also serve as a visual barrier and physical determination of the limit of work. The siltation barriers will remain in place until the proposed lawn and landscaping is well established. The following will address the proposed work that will directly affect the vegetated wetlands on the site. For the purpose of this evaluation, the performance standards of bordering vegetated wetlands at 310 CMR 10.55 are applied to this project to evaluate tho potential.work in relation to Wetlands Protection Act performance standards. PerformanGe Standards Regarding Bordering Vegetated Wetlands Alteration According to 310 CMR 10:55.section 4(b);the issuing authority may issue an Order of ,Conditions permitting work.which results in a loss of up to 5000 square feet of Bordering Vggetated Wetland when said area is replaced with the following general conditions and any additional,specific conditions the issuing authority deems necessary to ensure that the replacement area will function in a manner similar to the area that will be lost. t . This project has been designed to reduce the impact to the wetland resource areas to the greatest extent possible; however the scope of the proposed work requires minor wetland alteration to be performed. 10:55 (4)(b)(1) Per regulations, the surface of the replacement area to be created shall be equal to that of the area that will be lost. The proposed work will result in 850 square feet of wetland loss. The proposed replication area will be approximately 1,250 square feet. The replication will result in an increase of approximately 400 square feet of surface area. 10:55 (4)(b)(2) Per regulations, the groundwater and surface elevation of the replacement area shall be equivalent to that of the lost area. The proposed replication area will be located approximately 150 feet from the altered area; however the replication area will be at the same general elevation as the lost area. 10:55 (4)(b)(3) Per regulations, the overall horizontal configuration and location of the replacement area with respect to the bank will be similar to that of the lost area. The configuration and location of the replacement area will be located on the same body of water, as well as the same relative position in the landscape. Both areas are located on the edge of the wetland boundary; as such they will remain similar with respect to horizontal configuration. 10:55 (4)(b)(4) Per regulations, the replacement area shall have an unrestricted hydraulic connection to the same water body or waterway associated with the lost area. The replication area will provide an unrestricted hydraulic connection to the surrounding wetland area. 10:55 (4)(b)(5) Per regulations, the replacement area shall be located within the same general area of the water body or reach of the water body as the lost area. 2 The permanent wetland replication area is approximately 150 feet from the potential permanent impact area. The location of the proposed replication area will be within the same reach of lost area. 10:55 (4)(b)(6) Per regulations at least 75% of the surface of the replacement areas shall be reestablished with indigenous wetland plant species within two growing seasons, and prior to said vegetation reestablishment any exposed soil in the replacement area shall be stabilized to prevent erosion in accordance with standard U.S. Conservation Service methods. The Wetland Replication Plan attached to this application states that all vegetation will be replaced with indigenous vegetation. The permanent replication area will also provide 75%coverage within the second growing season. The foregoing is intended to address the Regulatory Performance Standards and the expressed interests of the Wetlands Protection Act by mitigating impacted wetland resource area followed by active re-vegetation in the same location, thereby providing a function similar to the lost area. Inland Bank The bank resource area on this site consists of the sides of a man-made drainage ditch. The ditch carries seasonal surface water flow through the site to a larger wetland system on the opposite side of Swampscott Road. The proposed work will involve replacing the existing drainage channel with a concrete pipe, and installing fill over the pipe. The proposed work will result in a loss of approximately 180 linear feet of bank resource area. The proposed work is part of a larger site maintenance project. Because the site is located in an urbanized area, trash annually accumulates in the drainage ditch and flows into a larger wetland on the opposite side of Swampscott Road. One of the projects objectives was to eliminate the accumulation of trash in the ditch which will result in an overall cleaner site, as well as improve the water quality in the down gradient wetland. Below is a discussion of the performance standards relevant to the proposed work and bank resource area. Performance Standards Regarding Work On or In Close Proximity to a Bank According to 310 CMR 10:54 section(4), any proposed work on a bank shall not impair the following: 3 10:54 (4)(a)(])Physical Stability of the Bank The bank on this site will be replaced by a reinforced concrete pipe; as such the stability of the bank will not be adversely affected. 10:54 (4)(a)(2) The Water Carrying Capacity of the Existing Channel Within the Bank The current pipe size under Swampscott Road will be extended upgradient..As such the water carrying capacity of the channel will remain the same. 10:54 (4)(a)(3) Ground Water and Surface Water Quality The ground water and surface water quality could be construed to be an improvement over the present conditions. By constructing a "closed pipe system" there is less chance for contaminants such as trash and other debris to enter the channel and eventually enter the wetland down gradient of the site. 10:54 (4)(a)(4) The Capacity of the Bank to Provide Breeding Habitat, Escape, Cover and Food for Fisheries The present bank provides little wildlife habitat value (See the attached Bank Wildlife Habitat Evaluation) 10:54 (4)(a)(5) ne Capacity of the Bank to Provide Important Wildlife Functions Per regulations a project or projects on a single lot, for which Notice(s) of Intent is filed on or after November 1, 1987,that(cumulatively) alter(s)up to 10%or 50 feet (whichever is less) of the length of the bank found to be significant to the protection of wildlife habitat, shall not be deemed to impair its capacity to provide important wildlife functions. The proposed work exceeds the threshold of wildlife habitat value, however an evaluation of the impacted banks reveals that portions of these banks are armored, or are poorly defined or non-existent. Wetlands and Land Management Inc has performed a wildlife habitat evaluation for the bank resource area on this site (included.in this report). The study determined that the bank resource area on this site does not provide the above mentioned functions as discussed in the attached wildlife habitat evaluation. As this bank is associated with an intermittent drainage ditch, fisheries habitat does not apply. 4 Wetland Replication Methodology Wetland Replication Plan Castle Creek Adventure Land 100 to 114 Swampscott Road Salem, Massachusetts November 2007 Wetlands & Land Management, Inc. 100 Conifer Hill Drive-Suite 516 Danvers, MA 01923 Wetland Replication Plan 100 Swampscott Road, Salem Introduction and Site Description The proposed work associated with this application involves the construction of a paved go-cart track, construction of a small building to store the carts, and the expansion of the existing crushed stone parking lot. The intent of the replication plan will be to create 1,250 square feet of shrub swamp wetland to mitigate for the loss of 850+/- square feet of wetland affected by proposed construction at the Swampscott Road property. The performance standards at 310(CMR 10.55(4))are applied to this project despite the fact that the impacted wetland area is isolated and non jurisdictional pursuant to the above regulations. Notwithstanding, other regulatory agencies would require replication of isolated wetlands in order to comply with the terms and conditions of appropriate general permits such as the ACOE Programmatic General Permit. The following methodology is proposed to fulfill wetland replication requirements for the proposed wetland impact area at the 100 to 114 Swampscott Road property. The limits of vegetated wetlands on the project site were delineated by Wetlands &Land Management Inc. Wetlands were delineated in accordance with local, Federal and State criteria for delineating jurisdictional wetlands using methodology established in the 1987 Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual, and methodology outlined in the Mass. DEP manual "Delineating.Bordering Vegetated Wetlands" (1995). These methods incorporate the evaluation of hydric soils, predominance of wetland vegetation and evidence of wetland hydrology. Proposed Construction, Wetland Impacts and Replication Construction of the retaining wall and go-cart track will impact wetlands at flags C23 to C29. Replicatipp was selected in the vicinity of flags C8 to C15. Wetland replication will provide approximately 1,250 square feet of replication to mitigate of the loss of approximately 850 square feat. The replication area was selected to provide a single suitable wetland restoration site for the entire impacted area. The selected site meets the performance standards established under 310 CMR 10.54. Specifically,the surface of the replacement area will be at least equal (and exceeds) the lost area; the groundwater or surface water of the replacement area shall be approximately equal to the lost area;the overall configuration and location of the replacement area with respect to the wetlands is similar to the lost area;the replacement area will have an unrestricted connection to the same waterway as the lost area,the replacement area will be located in the same general area as the lost area and the planting schedule will provide for 75% coverage with wetland vegetations within two growing seasons or less. The replication area should be constructed and monitored in accordance with the following. • The areas to be disturbed shall be isolated from adjacent wetlands by a staked erosion control barrier. When installing erosion controls, cut interfering vegetation at grade, leaving the root system intact. Upon removal of the erosion controls, this type of cutting encourages prolific shoots from the pruned vegetation and should provide for rapid restoration of the temporarily disturbed area. Further, existing herbaceous seed and rootstock should regenerate the herbaceous cover within a growing season or less. • Stake the limits of the grading and the wetland replication grading. Clear and grub the area for wetland replication first. The wetland replication area subgrade should be prepared and ready to receive organic soils and plants from the impacted area prior to disturbance of the existing wetland areas. Material shall be grubbed from the replication area to a depth twelve inches below proposed finish grade and stockpiled. The subgrade of the replication area should be inspected by a wetland scientist for proper interface with the seasonal groundwater table prior to installing any topsoil or vegetation. • To the extent possible, organic soils and plant stock shall be removed from the resource areas to be filled and transferred directly'to the replication area. To transplant woody shrubs,the preferred method is to excavate the shrub, roots and surrounding soil with an excavator and move the entire mass to the replication area in one large segment. • Fill gaps in the replication area first with salvaged stockpiled topsoil and organic material and secondly with quality topsoil either from on site or brought from off site sources. Imported topsoil should be augmented with leaf compost so the final content is 50%leaf mulch and 50%mineral soil. • The final surface of the replication area should be augmented with 2-5% coverage of coarse woody debris such as logs in various states of decomposition. Monitoring Monitoring the progress of the replication area is integral to the success of the replication effort. The following construction oversight and monitoring schedule is recommended. A wetland professional should oversee the construction and future inspections. Schedule Objective Pre-Construction: Meet with contractor to establish timing, objective and methods. Re-establish wetland flags as necessary. During Construction: Oversee replication area preparation including establishment of the sub-grade elevation, preparation of suitable depth of subsoil; transfer of soils and vegetation from the impacted area to the restoration area, creation of micro topography, installation of nursery stock and final grading, mulching and site clean-up. Post Construction: One month after installation to assess transplant and nursery stock plant survivability. Provide written report to the Conservation Commission. Establish photo stations to be used during future evaluations. On-Going monitoring End of the first growing season. Report on progress of the re-vegetation, area coverage of wetland species, apparent hydrology, provide photos, assess plant volunteering from the adjacent wetland, assess invasive species within replication area. Provide assessment of the likelihood of achieving 75%wetland plant coverage within one additional growing season. Institute a contingency plan that could include additional nursery stock installation to achieve regulatory compliance. September of the second growing season to provide similar assessment as in the first growing season. Assess the likelihood of obtaining a Certificate of Compliance; institute a contingency plan to achieve regulatory compliance by the end of the second growing season. Siltation Control and Final Cleanup The siltation barrier between the replication area and the adjacent wetland shall remain in place only until new growth is sufficient to stabilize the surface. The barrier between wetland and replication area shall then be remove in order to allow free passage of surface water between the newly graded and the adjacent wetland The siltation barrier between the replicated wetland and the adjacent upland shall remain in place until the cessation of construction and the approval of the Conservation Commission. The foregoing is intended to address the Regulatory Performance Standards and the expressed interests of the Wetlands Protection Act by direct transfer of impacted resource area soils to a replication area followed by active re-vegetation in a replication area with similar topography and hydrology, within the same wetlands reach and providing a function similar to the lost area. Wetland Restoration Methodology for unintended Temporary Wetland Impacts The project does not intend to intentionally alter more wetland resources than accounted for above, however, the work is in close proximity to the resource area near flags C 19 to C21. During excavation, some unintended excavated material fail back may occur, or a grubbed root mass may disturb soil under the silt fence. During the construction process, construction personnel will need to stage ladders on the westerly side of the building. As foot traffic and/or inadvertent spilling of material would be considered"alteration" the application includes a wetland restoration plan to address any potential alteration. The project anticipates the extent of alteration could be approximately 160 square feet+/-in this area. To prevent or immediately mitigate for any impacted wetland resource area,the application proposes the following work protocol. The following protocol provides for an on-site monitor during the excavation portion of the project and periodic visits during construction. The protocol stipulates a procedure to immediately restore any wetlands, and provides reporting and follow-up requirements to ensure any unintended wetland impacts are immediately mitigated. The application provides for 160 square feet of wetland replication in place near flags C19 to C21. The applicant is confident that the project can be completed with zero additional impacts or minor temporary wetland impacts however if the Commission should warrant, a methodology is included for restoration of any unintended wetland impacts in this limited area. Consider the following: 1�. Provide an On Site Monitor During Excavation During clearing and excavation, an erosion control monitor will be on site. The site monitor will oversee the excavation process and direct repairs of erosion controls as necessary. 2. Immediately Remove Any Material That falls into the Resource Area Any material inadvertently spilled into the resource area will be removed immediately by hand tools. 3. Notify Conservation Agent In the event that the resource area is adversely affected,the Conservation Commission agent will be notified immediately to consult, and/or coordinate restoration efforts. 4. Initiate Contingency Plan If resource area alteration occurs, the applicant shall replace any vegetation that has been damaged, and/or removed during the construction process. Any damaged species will be replaced with the same plant species in a 1:1 ratio. 5. Monitor Replication Area for Two Growing Seasons All of the species that have been replaced will be monitored for two growing seasons. To ensure success of the replaced vegetation, qualified personnel will visit the site at regular intervals to monitor the progress of the replication area. Appendix A—Planting Schedule Wetland Replication Summary and Plantint! Schedule 100 Swampscott Road Wetland Impacts Wetland Impact Miti anon 850+/- square feet of permanent wetland impact from road Create 1,250 square feet of new forested wetland (in excess of construction 1:1 ratio of the impacted area Area Square Feet Plants Size Spacing Replication Area— Provide 1,250 square 15 each of red maple 2-3 feet Evenly throughout the Final grade of feet (Acer rubrum), grey replication area replication area will be birch (Betula determined in the field. populifolia) and willow Roughly elevation 53 (Salix sp) 2-3 feet Evenly throughout the 15 each of arrowwood replication area (Viburnam dentatum), and high bush blueberry (Vaccinum co mbosum Per suppliers New England WetMix specifications (or approved equal)** ** -New England Wetlands Plants, Amherst, MA 413-548-8000 Wildlife Habitat Evaluation Wildlife Habitat Evaluation Prepared for: D & D Realty Trust For Property at 100 to 114 Swampscott Road, Salem November 2007 Wetlands & Land Management, Inc. # 100 Conifer Hill Drive — Suite 516 `\ Danvers, MA 01923 Wildlife Habitat Evaluation 100 to 114 Swampscott Road, Salem,MA D&D Realty Trust has filed a Notice of Intent to construct a new parking area over an area that contains intermittent stream bank resource area. The proposed road work impacts approximately 180 linear feet of intermittent stream bank. Wetlands&Land Management, Inc. has prepared a wildlife habitat evaluation in accordance with 310 CMR 10.60. The wildlife habitat evaluation will evaluate the impacts to the site bank habitat and evaluate whether the exceedence of thresholds established at 310 CMR 10.54(4)(a)(5) substantially reduce the site capacity to provide important wildlife habitat functions listed in 310 CMR 10.60(2)(a). Introduction The subject property is located at 100 to 114 Swampscott Road,the Castle Creek Adventure Land in Salem. The site is developed with a miniature golf course, parking area, and a small single story building to support the miniature golf and to sell ice cream. The site is bounded by a fitness club to the north, Swampscott Road to the east, and a wetland in the western most portion of the site. The existing gravel parking area is on the northerly side of the lot and the miniature golf area is in the southerly side of the lot. An intermittent stream bisects the site separating the existing parking area from the miniature golf portion of the site. The intermittent stream is within a steep sided gully, the sides of which appear to have been created during the initial development of the property. The two areas are connected by a foot bridge across the intermittent stream Sully. Wetlands &Land Management, Inc. has previously visited the site and performed a delineation of the vegetated wetland and bank resource areas at the site_ Five series of wetland flags were placed on the ground to delineate wetland resource areas including intermittent stream bank systems at or adjacent to the property. The vegetated wetlands on the site can be generally described as an isolated depression wetland system that were apparently created by historic gravel removal or earth moving activity on the site. Gullies on the site within which the intermittent stream flows has also been reportedly created or enhanced through the development of the site. A complete description of the existing wetland and intermittent stream systems are included in the Wetland-Resource Inventory section of this application. 2 Y I Site Vegetation Most of the site is developed with the miniature golf course and parking area for the business. An upland buffer zone area is found on the southerly extreme of the site. This is the area of the proposed go-cart track and support building. The vegetated wetlands are located on the westerly extreme of the site in a depression area. The vegetated wetlands on the site were reportedly created in the past by the removal of gravel material from a portion of the site. Wetland vegetation was primarily scrub/shrub wetlands dominated by uniform size willow and red maple saplings, willow and glossy buckthorn shrubs and common herbaceous wetland plants including various ferns and sedges. The area also exhibits typical historic disturbance in the form of random fill piles within or along the wetlands, steep side slopes approaching the wetlands, general lack of topsoil in the buffer zone and the usual accumulation of urban debris. Vegetation within the steep gully bisecting the property is primarily planted juniper bushes along the buffer area side slopes. Closer to Swampscott Road, we noted the growth of phragmites and purple loosestrife, both indicators of degraded water quality, most likely from the proximity to the road. Topography and Soils Topography across the site is variable owing to past and recent site development. The parking area to the north is level or sloping towards Swampscott Road. The southerly side of the site is the highest areas on the site and is variable due to the presence of the multi-level playing surface of the miniature golf course. The intermittent stream gully is approximately 10 to 15 feet lower than the adjacent parking area and miniature golf course. The Natural Resource Conservation Service has mapped the soils on the site and the general region as Chatfield-Hollis Rock Outcrop Complex in the upland areas. These soils are derived from glacial till over granitic bedrock. The till layers can be thick in places throughout this unit, but bedrock outcrops are common. The soils are generally sandy texture with moderate permeability. The on-site evaluations concur with NRCS mapping. The smaller interior wetland systems are inclusions in the Chatfield—Hollis system that were too small to be mapped as a separate unit. (Typically, the smallest mapping unit is five acres for NRCS mapping.) Intermittent Stream Bank and Vegetated Wetlands Intermittent stream bank is found essentially bisecting the site. Stream bank is located within the A and B wetlands and at the down gradient end of the A and B wetland systems, identified in the field with flags 100 to 117 and 200 to 215. The area of intermittent stream impact is associated with the 100 and 200 series intermittent stream flags down gradient of the foot bridge over the stream. 3 The total length of bank resource area on the property is determined to be 340 linear feet. The proposed parking lot improvements will impact approximately 180 linear feet of bank. The alteration of 180 linear feet of bank resource area exceeds the 10% or 50 linear feet(which ever is less) impact threshold established under 310 CMR 10.54. Accordingly this wildlife habitat evaluation is prepared to determine if the project as proposed has an impact on the ability of the site to provide important bank wildlife habitat functions. Wildlife Habitat Assessment With respect to potential bank wildlife habitat functions, I conclude the portion of lost bank provides limited, if any, important wildlife habitat functions. I conclude this based on my original characterization and delineation of this resource area, subsequent visits to the site, observations and measurements of the bank characteristics and professional judgment. Description of Bank Conditions The area of study begins at the topographic low point of the bank system at,flags 100 and 200. The entire length of this intermittent stream is found within an excavated gully. At this point,the intermittent stream enters a culvert under Swampscott Road. Here,the intermittent stream appears to be a historically excavated channel or at least enhanced. The channel has a variable flow path over most of the length the intermittent stream in this area. The flow path at any instance is apparently dependant on any debris or accumulated vegetation within the channel. The flow path appears to "meander" across the bottom of the gully in several locations and the delineation reflects the widest extent of historical flow observed based on scouring, debris and leaf dams, etc. The entire northerly side of the flow path was armored with large boulders. The southerly side of the bank had occasional boulders Where not reinforced with boulders, the actual banks were poorly formed, very shallow features perhaps only a few inches high. Vegetation within the flow path of the intermittent stream consisted primarily of phragmites and purple loosestrife, with a few opportunistic shrubs along the length of the study area. Adjacent buffer zone vegetation was almost entirely planted landscaping junipers. The intermittent stream system begins on the upgradient side at flag 117/215 at approximately elevation 51. The terminus of the system at flag 100 is at approximately 41.6. The gradient of the stream is steepest between flags 112 and 117, dropping nearly six feet in elevation over roughly 55 linear feet or a roughly 11% slope. The stream gradient flattens along the remaining portion of the resource area, with stream gradient flattening to roughly 2% slope. The change in gradient is proportional to the width of the flow path. The steeper gradient has the most narrow flow path. The lower gradient has the widest flow path, but poorly formed or non-existent banks- 4 Soils observed directly within the channel consisted or a friable to firm fine sandy loam with a stony substrate. I noted a lack of accumulation of organic material within the stream channel, likely owing to the relatively steep gradient in the initial reach of the stream. The portion of bank area to be lost is 180 linear feet, extending from flag 1 to roughly flag 114 (flags 200 to 211 on the opposite side of the stream. This area would include the area impacted by phragmites and loosestrife growth, the lowest gradient and area of poorly formed bank and the area that accumulates the most trash due to the proximity to the adjacent road. Approximately 160 linear feet of bank in this system remains .undisturbed. Assessment of Bank Characteristics 310 CMR 10.54(1)establishes that banks because of their topography, plant community composition, soil composition and structure may provide wildlife habitat functions. After evaluation of the nature and physical features of this bank resource area, I conclude the area of bank impact does not adversely affect any of these wildlife habitat functions because of the poorly formed or non-existent bank structure. Much of the bank resource area is a shallow channel, only a few inches deep, lacking any distinct topographic features. No portions of the bank provide entrenchedvertical sides that may offer burrowing or hibernation opportunities: The soil profile in the bank resource area lacked significant accumulation of detritus and organic material, which is necessary to provide a food source, shelter, or over wintering habitat for amphibians and invertebrates. The lack of sustained hydrology in the bank resource area does not provide the sustained aquatic habitat, cover and nesting areas required by water dependant amphibians, mammals and reptiles. Accordingly, it is reasonable to conclude the lost bank does not provide any significant food, cover or breeding functions for wetlands wildlife. Summary of the Bank Habitat Evaluation The project involves construction of a new parking area that will impact 180 linear feet of intermittent stream bank. The project exceeded the threshold for which a habitat evaluation was required. This evaluation concludes that the impacted area does not provide important bank wildlife habitat functions such as shelter, over wintering, burrowing and breeding and nesting in a significant manner. 5 r Castle Creek Adventureland Notice of Intent Wetlands Protection Act and Salem General Wetlands Ordinance D & D Realty Trust David & Dana Dilisio 100 to 114 Swampscott Road (Map 7, Lots 61 & 85) Salem, MA November 2007 Wetlands & Land Management, Inc. 100 Conifer Hill Drive-Suite 516 Danvers, MA 01923 Table of Contents Section 1---------------------------Cover Letter Section 2---------------------------Notice of Intent (WPA Form 3) Section 3---------------------------Notice of Intent Fee Transmittal Form (WPA Appendix B) Section 4---------------------------Abutter Information Section 5---------------------------Wetland Resource Inventory Section 6- --------------------------Project Description/Proposed Work Section 7---------------------------Evaluation of Wetland Resource Area Impacts Section 8---------------------------Wetland Replication Methodology Section 9---------------------------Wildlife Habitat Evaluation t Wetlands & Land Management, Inc. November 29, 2007 Carey R.Duques Conservation Agent/Staff Planner Department of Planning and Community Development 120 Washington Street Salem,MA 01970 RE: Notice of Intent Application Castle Creek Adventure Land D&D Realty Trust 100 to 114 Swampscott Road, (Map 7,Lots 61 & 85) Dear Ms. Duques and Conservation Commission Members: On behalf of the applicant Wetlands and Land Management Inc. is submitting this Notice of Intent application for construction of a paved go-cart track,as well as the expansion of the existing parking lot at Castle Creek Adventure Land. The site is currently developed with a crushed stone parking area,a small one story building, and a miniature golf course. The site is located in a commercial area bounded by a fitness club to the north, Swampscott Road to the east, and a forested wetland area to the west. A junkyard is located on the opposite side of the wetlands to the southeast. The wetlands on this site are currently degraded and filled with various trash/debris typical in an urbanized area. The proposed work impacts approximately 850 square feet of bordering vegetated wetland and 180 linear feet of bank resource area. Mitigation has been provided for the impacts and a . complete assessment of the project and the proposed mitigation is included in this application. Would you please schedule this for your December 13,2007 meeting? Please call with any questions before that time. Sincerely, Wetlands&Land Management, Inc. JbshjA.Johnson William J.Manuell Environmental Analyst Wetland Scientist 100 Conifer Hill Drive, #516, Danvers, Massachusetts 01923 Tel 978-777-0004 • Fax 978-539-0005 r^ ; Oros e*iSa a A('REEMENT The parties to this Agreement are DANA DILISIO and DAVID DILISIO, TRUSTEES OF D &D REALTY TRUST, under a Declaration of Trust dated January 16, 1997, and recorded with Essex South District Registry of Deeds in Book 13936, Page 247(hereinafter "DILISIO") and NORTH SHORE TENNIS AND SQUASH CLUB, INC., a Massachusetts corporation having a usual place of business at Swampscott Road, Salem,Essex County, Massachusetts (hereinafter "CLUB"). . WHEREAS, DILISIO and the CLUB separately own adjacent lots to each other along said Swampscott Road; and WHEREAS, the CLUB owns Lots 2 and 569 and DILISIO owns Lot I as shown on a plan entitled, "Division of Land Owned by North Shore Tennis& Squash Club, Inc., Salem, MA", dated June 5, 1996, Raymond C. Pressey, Inc., 156 Broad Street, Lynn, MA, which Plan is recorded at the Essex South District Registry of Deeds in Plan Book 313 as Plan 74; and WHEREAS, both the CLUB and DILISIO have developed areas dedicated to parking upon their respective parcels; and WHEREAS, the parties acknowledge that their respective businesses are seasonal in nature and that it is to the benefit of each patty to allow the other to have access to and the use of both parking lots on their respective lots during the peak seasons of each business; NOW, THEREFORE,the parties agree as follows: DILISIO will have access and use of the CLUB parking lot for its customers during the months of March through September for overflow parking, as needed; and The CLUB will have access and use of the DILISIO parking lot for its members and guests during the months of September through March for overflow parking, as needed; and During the months of October through March, the CLUB will be responsible for the contracting and expenses of snow.removal from the DILISIO parking lot should the CLUB so desire the use of the DILISIO lot; Each party will maintain general liability insurance with combined limits of not less than one-half million per person and one-half million per occurrence and one million in the aggregate, insuring against bodily injury and/or property damage arising from operation of the parking areas. The policies will be written on responsible companies qualified to write insurance in Massachusetts. Each party will exhibit a certificate of insurance to the other showing such coverage upon reasonable request therefor. y{ IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have set our hands and seals this__Zday of /JAY 1999. D & D REALTY TRUST i By: 10LeA (l Dana DiLisio, atee By:�a� d ,c0 David DiLisio, Trustee NORTH SHORE TENNIS AND SQUASH CLUB, INC. By: '��---- Myles lazer, President By; 2 G'�� -►t� -- Max Potash, Treasurer COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Essex, ss. _5� 1999 The personally appeared the above-natned, Dana DiLisio and David DiLisio, Trustees of D & D Realty Trust, and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be their free act iind deed, before tne. ary Public y conunission expires: Angt L Nuiur<R N"y tubk MY comminlon 5"May is,7A01 COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Essex, ss. s~ ' 1999 The personally appeared the above-named, Myles Glazer and Max Potash, President and Treasurer of North Shore Tennis and Squash Club, Inc., respectively, and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be their free act and deed, before me. No Public ommission expires: _ p,nyt,Nudwk — _ Nwy Nbk , MyCnnmlrlonEx�nK►hyt�•� ". i 7 i M1 i REC pt V Ed APR 1 4 2008 DEPT. OF PLANNING& COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Edi adD� 7�. O rx/� o/o 00 Zf0 Cin C'e&Aof (5, rati — cl� o0 /G�?�, pr 9�U April 17,2008 Opposed to go cart track at 110-114 Swampscott Road. Would reduce the quality of life and therefore cause property values to depreciate. Would disturb the peace by adding noise to a residential neighborhood. Can already hear the clinking of golf balls being collected on driving range and conversa- tions from guests at the miniature golf course.Sound travels remarkably well over the wet- lands.I often hear people across the ravine from me thinking they are in my driveway. Would further pollute the air that is already caused by Aggregate Industries blasting and higher traffic volumes on Swampscott Road (due to more businesses being built along road,ie.Irving,Ice Cream Stand,Miniature Golf Course,Commercial storage building, Aggregate Industries access). Paid a premium to live next to wetlands for the peace and tranquility. The wetlands are a refuge for both people and wildlife alike.There are many birds that gather in the trees near my condominium morning to night and I'm concerned they will also be disturbed by the noise and pollution. How ironic it would be if we were to have a go-cart track next to this sanctuary.Knowing that Swampscott Road is shared by businesses and residents,I supported the golf course and ice-cream stand but having a go-cart track is non-negotiable for the reasons stated above and there is no question that it would cause property values to plummet. In addition,my association,through its condo fees,contributes to maintain the landscap- ing to help beautify Swampscott Road.We also pay a substantial amount of property tax in which we receive very few services from the City.I believe the City has the obligation to reciprocate by protecting the residents and not allow this go-cart track to go forward. Alizabeth Marcy 73 Whalers Lane Salem,MA RECEIVED MAY 0 9 2008 DEPT.OF PLANNING& COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Dear Board of Appeals I live at aM 0" 11-112 �irc% located in the Mariner Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed to the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the cormnunity through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this request Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I am opposed to this proposal due to the constant and continuous noise this facility will produce. Lee_ /y2�'/soh -S��Li Name Name Aa y 7 2,e209' /t-/a y 7 oZ00 Date Date ' RECEIVED MAY 2 0 2008 DEPT.OF PLANNING& COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Dear Board of Appeals I live at 153 W 4U 6'rS Lane, located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly j across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. V. 4 6 V,A-rv� //nlae'f�✓ Name Name Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at2t�Lr.� located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concern g pp ed with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. �f ami' Name 1)1 zoo / Date J Date�`� Dear Board of Appeals I live at 111144- Cif G4,,u._ located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts A(C the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility �V will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to th&existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include VV c eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. Name Name Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at 3S ✓en As' Ci s-s[e- located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directlyi across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. �u�V Vv�c �i2G ame Name Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at 3 C14VEAZI4 UZ S)9 & KI located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. Name Name C)"5-1to t /co Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at L4 E_!l o e an e- located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trrust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes'are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. Name wine Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at/ a/,5�� located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. Name —� Name Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at 9 C e-CIPS&_ 4A), located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. Name Name Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at dZ/ i� "I cated in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am oppas—eZI or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a(significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. Name Name Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live ata� located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. Name YAme Dat6 Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at 12- CCky60cY.'5 Cir located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming £rom this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. Name Name Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at 3 � a-d-L-C located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. Name Name s12- p Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at rc-vµ 16 h 1.�2 ^ located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trus and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. /-� Lvn l2Z Z,,14J law C , Name Dame Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at V.9 located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road.: These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by, our proximity to the existing sand!and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly I covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. ,� �O Name Name Date Da e Dear Board of Appeals I live at 1r -✓:Or . Wau located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I a opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand)and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a I health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. Name Name 1 aAA I t ZffQK U -7 1 ? � Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at 3b Ot&UU1& h 0,4,� located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is,already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. Name Name 5 Br/08' Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at („G (? je"l7lS'H located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our'homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. �� aZ�� z Name Name Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at .51 (al/emJSA �je located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a i health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. Name Name Date T Date I_ Dear Board of Appeals I live at �-5 av?y�u— ;Seze`' 'ocated in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. Name Name 4�Zl Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at 13 EGh 1 eS E LA-.AJE_ located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck'traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly I across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. T; Name Name 5/ I / 0B Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at / O&uv&u located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I a opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. Name 'rei^eSa eT. Lee. Name Date Date Dear Board of Appeals Kiflive at 00 ��1C/�C FSS„ l ,l t located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the.Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. 4ame leL7 V6 n/er Name Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at Z/Z r'4"n'k S (,i/L ' located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. Name e Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at /(f�- rEkDIS171 e I/ X - located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. Name Name Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes afe constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. Name V VfNa t5 Date �— Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at 2.41 located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust comingi from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. Name Name Date Date L_ Dear Board of Appeals I live at jL EU k located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. Name Name Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at &-3 Alaf oGiv' (, lP&49�located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. ame N'axn �r-- J Ga Y-� L_C�f Lz / o K, Date d Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at a3 CA-ve"�'t�tSK- G2 located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are!constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. Name Name :2 Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at J 7 6Tt'iy & located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I askithat you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. �IUet7id_z_ Affwy 7z Name Name Date Date / Dear Board of Appeals I live at c (�� l /� ��L_� located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. 14tu Name I j ^ Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at o k Cj),/Qg)6,,\5\ CCXR, located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt ,and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. 5j - A.4 My' 619 Date ate Dear Board of Appeals I live at c�'/ V/4l1L1V_D16,y 61 CL located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes 'are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise oming from this facility. Ap N Name 7o 1 7 Dat Date Dear Board of Appeals / I live atz�� 5� rlocated in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts (iowil/lh community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility ave a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by o proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly overed by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include Punderstanding tgas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. -� ef i � Name Name Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at Jy C( UCt4, N.S 2C.-(C- located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station:._This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart.Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. O CA' G Name Name s�tilo � Date Date Dear Board of Appeals o tJ O I live at �$ ��.p ._Q� �►,a,�(p located in the Green Dolphin m Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed.along Swampscott These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise,trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by ourpmximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 pm. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. Name ame b O / O - 07 Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of theTransfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trashland truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would Have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. `? Name Name . G67 Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at b 6L11ise Le _ located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the,existing sand and gravel facility. Our,homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. ' To add Ianother facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective.would, that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would iiiclude eight gas powered go-carts operating Z days a week as late.,as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position., I believe that this proposal warrants.additional investigation including ' the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant.and continuous noise coming from this facility. /ame N . c Date - to L_ Dear Board of Appeals I live at J7 Wit(+ Z CA, S 1 R located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. , Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. E}Q4 L FAIE 0 S Name Name MAY a, a �� Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at 4 located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly ! covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. 4ae Name _ I6 6� e Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at Lj I QUA(Ickisin umwe_ located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximitylto the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. Name . Name 51 ti, I' a8 Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at'^2 Ec, lj::;k n C, located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. Name �— Name Date a Date Dear Board of Appeals I live aty` �'�° �/J� ��ilocated in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly ! across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. Name RPh / C. / r z2-' Name Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at 13 Ca.ye d f-s le located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the!existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. tZ�7nc� Name (-. Mc tZ kk f Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at 2 Ok/ElUb )'s ,N "/& located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and'truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by I our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. Name I Name ds—A Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at 1�V6 K)DIS C I Kc LE located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. c kameTTocpnC . Pi}kt S /,/ Name Tg�-,esa4,¢ v Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at ��Cr'7Vc 40ed in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. PIJAR4 k mlnski afi ole 14 Name Name Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at sq located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trist and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. Name�� sc� Name��o ' �1 •� jco�: sl$I�� Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at '� located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. , Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is,already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. /Name Name Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at c i2«� located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility,(directly across the street from our Aomes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. Name Name Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at ',—I (:�+q.V< S i.f Circ C_e located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our Homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. -Cart Racing:Racing: It i nderstanding that this facility would include j'Seght gas powere go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. Name Name Date Date t 1� 17d rP Dear Board of Appeals I live at �A�O (MC-, 'D 61� located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. V'— 1�7-W(;n krCLL--h W D Name Name fo Oslo Date DatC Dear Board of Appeals I live at �O u_eJ located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Tr st and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly; . covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would have a significant negative impact from ! health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. --- ameii� ��ca ��d Name' Ge4-fe f{glc�v�rv�. Date Date Dear Board of Appeals I live at �j3��o on� Q located in the Green Dolphin Village Condominium Trust and I am opposed or concerned with the following facilities proposed along Swampscott Road. These facilities would adversely impact my property by the nature of their operations. Proposed expansion.of the Transfer Station: This facility already impacts the community through noise, trash and truck traffic. An expansion of this facility will have a significant negative impact and I request that you deny this proposal. Proposed Rock Crushing Facility: The community is already impacted by our proximity to the existing sand and gravel facility. Our homes are constantly covered by dirt and dust coming from this facility. To add another facility, directly across the street from our homes would lave a significant negative impact from a health and quality of life perspective. I ask that you deny this request. Go-Cart Racing: It is my understanding that this facility would include eight gas powered go-carts operating 7 days a week as late as 10:00 p.m. It is my understanding that the noise test was done using a single go-cart in a stationary position. I believe that this proposal warrants additional investigation including the use of electric go-carts. I am concerned with this proposal due to the potential for constant and continuous noise coming from this facility. i` ame Name Date Date Zoning Board Proiect Status Sheet Project Address: Applicant: Date of Application: Date Opened at Meeting: Date of Continued Meetings: Extension Form Signed? ❑ Yes, date: ❑No / n/a Legal Notice Sent: Publication Dates: Abutters List Requested: Abutters Notice Sent: Notice of Decision Sent: Decision Filed: Appeal Period Over: F � y rc LT TRV ST k AL Y p M U �}- k 1p1 oS eo �-L1n� M"y`" S f'Uy�►7 C) �� (a,'k C�. ' [,� C �j .-r.•.4 � \� �'7� � � � GSA 60 o1L w rpA\ Fwjcre.P \ — Gay 5�} •s�+��K' J .L�1 �— v �\ S,'.I"e° I � kl'L I I' OSS e b O r . ' n° ° r� 1 lu L�Gdfi 'J a\� It : '� l�o.� 1 r 1013x1 1.00 C'tiv Gti\ �`' a\i S cE "T�►+� \moi c� r l�l o a �'x kd U M,9� ( Z 3 �� ' \ �^w \ LSA5�7 ,U l'" T3T A-Jjo �Sv P�s�1 c Com'= 3 h QI • `A L Q � � � / �•GD'S c, � � \ 3� • �,� � U a L .. �--. 5��`' '' S g�v l � ►^t' � f I U `p . p� `}� \ .. $fir 3 (�\ ' ° ?1 �•�.�\ S��f . O �LGo l 1fCl o J OLE 'T�T 1'i"�'4v -k urc II J +��w � / 5 `� �� \ Sego o e Cn {gd�fA., io l�SCE S 2 s n/�J�kU� r�ec" �. . / St 4 ��o �J.d$ " G \ CP \ a t \ 3 � Sti 0-1 X13/ .57� � I t> f5 3 J i- p 2 2 L3 �/ / .V r � , p�'' c o ��u•.�) , 'fz" ,�,�,s1� '� �`• ( (, IPJ' 1 ^ l ,/l -• � �x 'u s "3 :�•S� 'r-�• � � 2 .v �---._. w 01 C \�`�� (�i`'pCl• OS , p� � � .` � � � OS'�' _ � � ', . r _ � - „ . . ,_ � •,`lL ,r3+�'.5E �`;5�4°� �f ` 10 CASTLE CREEK ' D JJ I 6 ��.� \\r, ,s,1 a, MINIATURE GOLF COURSE + s C3 D !`\ � c- TYPICAL CROSS SECT/ON eac t So S � uo a \C0� /� > \ o V7, lb l.' J (c 4-0 f 0 F7 r� SS u � ti op oQ3 ;� �6�' �p Grp' — — \ } © �\ �j. ,6'1 / / I JYP ' � Pi Z7: WD ok - t, V, U. J3.3o cy r. Dr t" / '• JLoL �` Ci� �(� S N''1� off— • .� �,. � \ \., � � �S/+O T \ L 'lf !� � � � 1 L x � � '• / U �� LEGEND �k �r PROPOSED Sl TE PLAIV _ '" �l — , �� .m, - _ „ 4.<,• SWAMPSCOT T ROAD 6 EX/ST/NG CONTOUR r 4�'3 3 C�o -- s��— cer��K l aM �� '7J \ S� <<. , rj,—� �-. ,�r r ; «< -, ,r� - arc "s '`► �'�`/ SALEM MASSACHUSETTS PROPOSED CONTOUR �Ro aSem S J ' 4-I • o Z _ N R� � � 5�� L EX/Sr/NG SPOT ELEVAT/ON OtL �sizoe Wku- S��' 44.0 7 J } P �°sE�° CA-IZ�( � �srn1 — \ _�( L I ` L q�_� /z q� a W _ _ SCALE.' / = 20 OCTOBER 22, 2007 Seo -r0 0 W.ku. = S o ,�, PARSONS AND FA/A INC. PROPOSED SPOT EL EVAT/ON 4 ¢ 1 b �t�roLay� 4$ -4 (,, .. . ,. . EX/ST/NG BUILDING LINE tjt� c� �Q v 60 LEWIS STREET 'QD LYNN , MASS. --mm •r► EDGE OF CRUSHED STONE �Lo ora' CE��H I"'b M,�N►}p EDGE OFB/TUM/NOUS IZ"` ` 53 '� � ` '� - O 20 40 60 80 /00 WETLANDS FLAG B NUMBER REP!ICA PL AN AND -- ... WETLANDS WETLANDS FL46GEDBY .' DRA/NAGE DESIGN, DETA/LSANDCALCULAr/ONS BY PATROW/CZ LAND DEVELOPMENT ENG/NEER/NG. ( \ <� '��rEs yN 1T WETLANDS B LAND MANAGEMENT /NC. TREE B SIZE i ✓ IL /00 CONIFER HILL DR/VE 5/6 � ��` 3 (AWSg d y —,�- FENCE LiANVERS , MASS. 0/923 `SSO -�- �SUR b� BOULDERS ELL c-0 ��►G/� sore ' 4 63 C ((�� ' FAFh1eD K�ST� �,xn nEVELo�MFIT �RP.. 70 L J� 1� 13 14 co ATPLLEO Ord �\\ •' • °I � � m � � �Q '(E�KNo�-'¢SES -ipi 0 62 +S \ s0� /ti r. y 0 \ \ A Tj ` \ 61 \ . i 1119 W 0P Qom. 74 yi b M CIT of .Shy / — LOCUS MAP ASSESSORS MAP 6 &7 LOT 61 SCALE : 1 = 200' o \ \ '''+ •• _ _ / JSP � 'A \ paQp,sem b G02 flu+1 1 LOT \\\ I \\ Ces ,� Sc�vksK u '' , a \\ ` l 9 �o 411 9 551 \ ` tip \9 2 2 Y ao EXIT e [Z 4E S�aF \� I l VE � \ �Gc� � 2a �•y,sH�, �S •v AILHPto �sgJl YS) 214 15 16 1� PROPOSED SITE PLAN 7 12 13 1 s 9 10 ` 1 SWAMPSCOTT ROAD SALEM BOARD OF APPEALS APPROVAL t+tc SALEM , MASSACHUSETTS t-=A SCALE : I ° = 201 JUNE 211998 PARSONS AND FAIA INC. SINA"pSCO 60 LEWIS STREET rT LYNN , MASS. ROAD 0 -20 40 60 80 100 OOF / CHARLE ----''iC DATE : f �hala5at� � � . �. ', - - - - -- _., -_ _ --