The URL can be used to link to this page

64-482 - BLANEY STREET - CONSERVATION COMMISSION - — - G krv\`iLrn_ J �+ Bourne Consulting Engineering BCri—� 3 Bent Street Ronald R.Bourne,P.E. -President Franklin, MA 02038 February 15, 2011 Salem Conservation Commission City Hall Annex 120 Washington Street Ill Il (� I Ifl' Salem, MA 01970 <l ATTN: Tom Devine,Agent . RE: Salem Wharf Project -ConCom File DEP#64-482 Contract M-19–Site Development–Phase I Subj: -Construction Drawings and.Notice of Possible Project Change (BCE#29756-03) Dear Commissioners: The City of Salem is beginning construction on the Salem Wharf Project with the first project being construction of the upland portion of Salem Wharf which is to include the seawall, upland improvements as well as a terminal building. This is the first step in what is anticipated to be a multi-phase construction project with the remainder of the full build-out at the Blaney Street site to be addressed in future contract(s). Please find .enclosed the construction drawings associated with this first contract. Specific elements within this contract include: Utility installation including stormwater collection and treatment systems • Seawall installation and associated revetment upgrade–Partial • Site Grading • Base pavement Replacement of existing ferry terminal trailer Changes that have been included within this phase of construction that represent detailed changes from the original NOI filing include: • Connection to the Derby Street stormwater system • . Relocation of the stormwater treatment systems to minimize amount of excavation on site • Installation of a timber guard rail system along the new seawall for safety reasons. • Installation 4a smaller terminal building As required, we have included a set of construction drawings for the work currently being ' proposed. In addition;,minor changes have been made to the project as identified above. We see these changes as only inor technical revisions and seek confirmation from the Commission that the Salem Wharf Project can proceed without further review or notifications. We hope the enclosed is S4tisfactory for your needs. Should you have any questions or need additional information please do not hesitate to contact us. J,,. Very truly yours, .. - BOURNE CONSULTING ENGINEERING - onald Bo e, P Enclosure Tel. (508) 533-6666 • Fax (508) 533-0600 • e-mail: bce@boumece.com Salem Wharf Expansion Erosion Control Plan The City of Salem is proposing the following Erosion Control Plan for the Phase I permitting of the Salem Wharf Expansion project. Due to the large area and varying environments, construction is proposed in four phases. Dredging will be the fifth phase, Construction Phase E. Construction Phase A— Seawall /Revetment Reconstruction The first part of the proposed construction will be to clean up, repair and regrade the existing rip rap that currently surrounds the site. The proposed concrete retaining wall will be installed and fill will be added at this time as well. The repair and new construction will be completed in sections (Al —A5 on Sheet 1) to ensure proper erosion control is maintained. A siltation curtain floating barrier will be placed offshore of the section while a siltation fence will be place upland to surround the proposed work area. Construction Phase B—Harborwalk and Pier The next phase will be the construction of the marine elements of the harborwalk and pier including piles. The contractor will use a construction barge and a siltation curtain floating barrier to contain any potential disturbance due to the suspension of marine sediments. The barrier will act to contain the suspended material and allow it to settle in the same area from which it was disturbed. Construction Phase C —Upland Site Work To limit the potential for sediments to enter Salem Harbor or the surrounding areas the entire upland portion of the project area will be contained by a silt barrier fence. On the water side of the site, the fence will be placed along the inshore boundary of the concrete retaining wall and along the existing boundary fence along the upland side of the site. Construction Phase D—Building Construction To limit the potential for sediments to enter Salem Harbor or the surrounding areas the area surrounding the proposed building site will be contained by a silt barrier fence. On the water side of the site, the fence will be placed along the inshore boundary of the concrete retaining wall. Construction Phase E—Dredging Dredging will be conducted in conformance with any Time of Year restrictions as imposed by the Conservation Commission or MA DEP Water Quality Division. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection `y Bureau of Resource Protection -Wetlands MassDEP File Number: WPA Form 5 — Order of Conditions 64-462 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 A. General Information II IIIIIII�IINI�IIIII�IIIIIIIII�III� Important: Salem 2009012700259 Bk:28274 Pg:250 When filling 1. From: Conservation Commission 01/27/2009 01:06 CONUN pe 1/17 out forms on the computer, 2.This issuance is for(check one): a. ® Order of Conditions b. ❑ Amended Order of Conditions use only the tab key to 3.To: Applicant: move your cursor-do not Kathleen Winn use the return a.First Name b.Last Name keys. -- City of Salem c.Organization 120 Washington Street d.Mailing Address Salem MA 01970 e.City/Town f.State g.Zip Code 4. Property Owner(if different from applicant): a.First Name b.Last Nama Dominion Energy Salem Harbor LLC c.Organization 24 Fort Avenue d.Mailing Address Salem MA 01970 e.Qty/Town f.State g.Zip Code 5. Project Location: 10 Blaney Street Salem a.Street Address b.City/Town 41 278 a Assessors Map/Plat Number d.Parcel/Lot Number Latitude and Longitude, if known: 42.522398_ 70.882804 e..Latitude f. Longitude 6. Property recorded at the Registry of Deeds for(attach additional information if more than one parcel): Essex a.County b.Certificate Number(if registered land) 23825 116 c.Book d.Page 7. Dates: Setp ember 10, 2008 January 8 2009 January 16, 2009 a.Dale Notice of Intent Filed b.Date Public Hearing Closed c.Date of Issuance 8. Final Approved Plans and Other Documents (attach additional plan or document references as needed): Existing Conditions, Proposed Conditions, Site Drainage Plan, Proposed Pier, Proposed Dredge Plan, Proposed Building Terminal (Six total sheets Bourne Engineering Ronald Bourne b.Prepared By c.Signed and Stamped by December 11, 2008 various d.Final Revision Date e.Scale Stormwater Report Januaryfi,2009 f.Additional Plan or Document Title g.Date wpaform5.doc• rev.5108 Page 1 of 11 c r Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands MassDEP File Number: WPA Form 5 — Order of Conditions 64-482 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 A. General Information Important: Salem When filling 1. From: Conservation Commission out forms on the computer, 2. This issuance is for(check one): a. ® Order of Conditions b. ❑ Amended Order of Conditions use only the tab key to 3. To: Applicant: move your cursor-do not Kathleen Winn use the return a.First Name b. Last Name key. City of Salem mVQ c.Organization 120 Washington Street d. Mailing Address Salem MA 01970 e.Cityrrown f.State g.Zip Code 4. Property Owner(if different from applicant): a.First Name b.Last Name Dominion Energy Salem Harbor, LLC c.Organization 24 Fort Avenue d.Mailing Address Salem MA 01970 e. Cltylrown f.State g.Zip Code 5. Project Location: 10 Blaney Street Salem a.Street Address b.City/Town 41 278 c.Assessors Map/Plat Number d. Parcel/Lot Number Latitude and Longitude, if known: 42.522398 70.882804 e.Latitude f. Longitude 6. Property recorded at the Registry of Deeds for(attach additional information if more than one parcel): Essex a.County b.Certificate Number(if registered land) 23825 116 c. Book d. Page 7. Dates: September 10, 2008 January 8, 2009 January 16, 2009 a.Date Notice of Intent Filed b. Date Public Hearing Closed c.Date of Issuance e. Final Approved Plans and Other Documents (attach additional plan or document references as needed): Existing Conditions, Proposed Conditions, Site Drainage Plan, Proposed Pier, Proposed Dredge Plan, Proposed Building Terminal (Six total sheets) Bourne Engineering Ronald Bourne b. Prepared By c.Signed and Stamped by December 11, 2008 various d.Final Revision Date e.Scale Stormwater Report January 5, 2009 f.Additional Plan or Document Title g.Date w aform5.doe rev.5108 Page 1 of 11 Massachusetts Department of'Environmental Protection �:--- Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands MassDEP File Number: WPA Form 5 — Order of Conditions 64-482 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 B. Findings t. Findings pursuant to the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act: Following the review of the above-referenced Notice of Intent and based on the information provided in this application and presented at the public hearing, this Commission finds that the areas in which work is proposed is significant to the following interests of the Wetlands Protection Act. Check all that apply: a. ❑ Public Water Supply b. ® Land Containing Shellfish c. ® Prevention of Pollution d. ❑ Private Water Supply e. ® Fisheries f. ❑ Protection of Wildlife Habitat g. ❑ Groundwater Supply h. ® Storm Damage Prevention i. ® Flood Control 2. This Commission hereby finds the project, as proposed, is: (check one of the following boxes) Approved subject to: a. ® the following conditions which are necessary in accordance with the performance standards set forth in the wetlands regulations. This Commission orders that all work shall be performed in accordance with the Notice of Intent referenced above, the following General Conditions, and any other special conditions attached to this Order. To the extent that the following conditions modify or differ from the plans, specifications, or other proposals submitted with the Notice of Intent, these conditions shall control. Denied because: b. ❑ the proposed work cannot be conditioned to meet the performance standards set forth in the wetland regulations. Therefore, work on this project may not go forward unless and until a new Notice of Intent is submitted which provides measures which are adequate to protect these interests, and a final Order of Conditions is issued. A description of the performance standards which the proposed work cannot meet is attached to this Order. c. ❑ the information submitted by the applicant is not sufficient to describe the site, the work, or the effect of the work on the interests identified in the Wetlands Protection Act. Therefore, work on this project may not go forward unless and until a revised Notice of Intent is submitted which provides sufficient information and includes measures which are adequate to protect the Act's interests, and a final Order of Conditions is issued. A description of the specific information which is lacking and why it is necessary is attached to this Order as per 310 CMR 10.05(6)(c). Inland Resource Area Impacts: Check all that apply below. (For Approvals Only) 3. ❑ Buffer Zone Impacts: Shortest distance between limit of project disturbance and wetland boundary (if available) a. linear feet Resource Area Proposed Permitted Proposed Permitted Alteration Alteration Replacement Replacement 4. ❑ Bank a.linear feet b. linear feet c.linear feet d. linear feet 5. ❑ Bordering Vegetated Wetland a.square b feet .square feet c.square feet d.square feet 6. El Land Under Waterbodies a.square feet b.square feet c.square feet d.square feel and Waterways e.Gydredged t.Gy dredged wpafoer Sdoc• rev.5108 Page 2 of 11 • • I Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands MassDEP File Number: WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions 64-482 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 B. Findings (cont.) Resource Area Proposed Permitted Proposed Permitted Alteration Alteration Replacement Replacement 7. ❑ Bordering Land Subject to Flooding a.square feet b.square feet c.square feet d.square feet Cubic Feet Flood Storage e.cubic feet f.cubic feet g.cubic feet h.cubic feet 8. ❑ Isolated Land Subject to Flooding a.square feet b.square feet . d.cubic feet Cubic Feet Flood Storage ccubic feet e.cubic feet f.cubic feet 9. ❑ Riverfront area a.total sq.feet b.total sq.feet Sq ft within 100 ft c.square feet d. square feet e.square feel f.square feet Sq ft between 100-200 ft g,square feet h.square feel i.square feet j.square feet Coastal Resource Area Impacts: Check all that apply below. (For Approvals Only) 10. ® Designated PortAreas Indicate size under Land Under the Ocean, below 11. ® Land Under the Ocean 291,564 291,564 a.square feet b.square feet 115,117 115,117 c.cly dredged d.Gy dredged 12. ❑ Barrier Beaches Indicate size under Coastal Beaches and/or Coastal Dunes below 13. ® Coastal Beaches 0 0 0 0 a.square feet b.square feet c.cty nourishmt. d.Gy nourishmt. 14. El Coastal Dunes a.square feet b.square feet c.cly nourishmt. d.Gy nourishmt. 15. ® Coastal Banks 850 850 a. linear feet b. linear feet 16. ❑ Rocky Intertidal Shores a.square feet b.square feet 17. ❑ Salt Marshes a.square feet b.squarefeet c.square feet d.square feet 18. ❑ Land Under Salt Ponds a.square feet b.square feet c.cy dredged d.cly dredged 19. ❑ Land Containing Shellfish a.square feet b.square feet c.square feet d.square feet 20. ® Fish Runs Indicate size under Coastal Banks, inland Bank, Land Under the Ocean, and/or inland Land Under Waterbodies and Waterways, above 115,117 115,117 a.cty dredged b.cly dredged 21. ® Land Subject to Coastal 1.85 acres 1.85 acres Storm Flowage a. square feet b.square feet wpafomS doc• rev.5108 Page 3 of 11 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands MassDEP File Number: F WPA Form 5 — Order of Conditions 64-482 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 C. General Conditions Under Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act (only applicable to approved projects) 1. Failure to comply with all conditions stated herein, and with all related statutes and other regulatory measures, shall be deemed cause to revoke or modify this Order. 2. The Order does not grant any property rights or any exclusive privileges; it does not authorize any injury to private property or invasion of private rights. 3. This Order does not relieve the permittee or any other person of the necessity of complying with all other applicable federal, state, or local statutes, ordinances, bylaws, or regulations. 4. The work authorized hereunder shall be completed within three years from the date of this Order unless either of the following apply: a. the work is a maintenance dredging project as provided for in the Act; or b. the time for completion has been extended to a specified date more than three years, but less than five years, from the date of issuance. If this Order is intended to be valid for more than three years, the extension date and the special circumstances warranting the extended time period are set forth as a special condition in this Order. 5. This Order may be extended by the issuing authority for one or more periods of up to three years each upon application to the issuing authority at least 30 days prior to the expiration date of the Order. 6. Any fill used in connection with this project shall be clean fill. Any fill shall contain no trash, refuse, rubbish, or debris, including but not limited to lumber, bricks, plaster, wire, lath, paper, cardboard, pipe, tires, ashes, refrigerators, motor vehicles, or parts of any of the foregoing. 7. This Order is not final until all administrative appeal periods from this Order have elapsed, or if such an appeal has been taken, until all proceedings before the Department have been,completed. 8. No work shall be undertaken until the Order has become final and then has been recorded in the Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located, within the chain of title of the affected property. In the case of recorded land, the Final Order shall also be noted in the Registry's Grantor Index under the name of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. In the case of the registered land, the Final Order shall also be noted on the Land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is done. The recording information shall be submitted to this Conservation Commission on the form at the end of this Order, which form must be stamped by the Registry of Deeds, prior to the commencement of work. 9. A sign shall be displayed at the site not less then two square feet or more than three square feet in size bearing the words, "Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection" [or, "MassDEP"] "File Number 64-482 " wpaform&dcc• rev.5/0 Page 4 of 11 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands MassDEP File Number: WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions 64-482 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 C. General Conditions Under Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act 10. Where the Department of Environmental Protection is requested to issue a Superseding Order, the Conservation Commission shall be a party to all agency proceedings and hearings before MassDEP. 11. Upon completion of the work described herein, the applicant shall submit a Request for Certificate of Compliance (WPA Form 8A)to the Conservation Commission. 12. The work shall conform to the plans and special conditions referenced in this order. 13. Any change to the plans identified in Condition#12 above shall require the applicant to inquire of the Conservation Commission in writing whether the change is significant enough to require the filing of a new Notice of Intent. 14. The Agent or members of the Conservation Commission and the Department of Environmental Protection shall have the right to enter and inspect the area subject to this Order at reasonable hours to evaluate compliance with the conditions stated in this Order, and may require the submittal of any data deemed necessary by the Conservation Commission or Department for that evaluation. 15. This Order of Conditions shall apply to any successor in interest or successor in control of the property subject to this Order and to any contractor or other person performing work conditioned by this Order. 16. Prior to the start of work, and if the project involves work adjacent to a Bordering Vegetated Wetland, the boundary of the wetland in the vicinity of the proposed work area shall be marked by wooden stakes or flagging. Once in place, the wetland boundary markers shall be maintained until a Certificate of Compliance has been issued by the Conservation Commission. 17. All sedimentation barriers shall be maintained in good repair until all disturbed areas have been fully stabilized with vegetation or other means. At no time shall sediments be deposited in a wetland or water body. During construction, the applicant or his/her designee shall inspect the erosion controls on a daily basis and shall remove accumulated sediments as needed. The applicant shall immediately control any erosion problems that occur at the site and shall also immediately notify the Conservation Commission, which reserves the right to require additional erosion and/or damage prevention controls it may deem necessary. Sedimentation barriers shall serve as the limit of work unless another limit of work line has been approved by this Order. NOTICE OF STORMWATER CONTROL AND MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS 18. The work associated with this Order(the "Project') is (1)® is not(2)❑ subject to the Massachusetts Stormwater Standards. If the work is subject to the Stormwater Standards, then the project is subject to the following conditions: a) All work, including site preparation, land disturbance, construction and redevelopment, shall be implemented in accordance with the construction period pollution prevention and erosion and sedimentation control plan and, if applicable, the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan required by the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Construction General Permit as required by Stormwater Condition 8. Construction period erosion, sedimentation and pollution control measures and best management practices(BMPs) shall remain in place until the site is fully stabilized. wp&orm5.doc• rev.510e Page 5&11 I� Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands MassDEP File Number: WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions 64482 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 r C. General Conditions Under Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act (cont.) b) No stormwater runoff may be discharged to the post-construction stormwater BMPs unless and until a Registered Professional Engineer provides a Certification that: i. all construction period BMPs have been removed or will be removed by a date certain specified in the Certification. For any construction period BMPs intended to be converted to post construction operation for stormwater attenuation, recharge, and/or treatment, the conversion is allowed by the MassDEP Stormwater Handbook BMP specifications and that the BMP has been properly cleaned or prepared for post construction operation, including removal of all construction period sediment trapped in inlet and outlet control structures; ii. as-built final construction BMP plans are included, signed and stamped by a Registered Professional Engineer, certifying the site is fully stabilized; iii. any illicit discharges to the stormwater management system have been removed, as per the requirements of Stormwater Standard 10; iv. all post-construction stormwater BMPs are installed in accordance with the plans (including all planting plans) approved by the issuing authority, and have been inspected to ensure that they are not damaged and that they are in proper working condition; v. any vegetation associated with post-construction BMPs is suitably established to withstand erosion. c) The landowner is responsible for BMP maintenance until the issuing authority is notified that another party has legally assumed responsibility for BMP maintenance. Prior to requesting a Certificate of Compliance, or Partial Certificate of Compliance, the responsible party (defined in General Condition 18(e)) shall execute and submit to the issuing authority an Operation and Maintenance Compliance Statement("O&M Statement) for the Stormwater BMPs identifying the party responsible for implementing the stormwater BMPsOperation and Maintenance Plan ("O&M Plan") and certifying the following: i.)the O&M Plan is complete and will be implemented upon receipt of the Certificate of Compliance, and ii.) the future responsible parties shall be notified in writing of their ongoing legal responsibility to operate and maintain the stormwater management BMPs and implement the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. d) Post-construction pollution prevention and source control shall be implemented in accordance with the long-term pollution prevention plan section of the approved Stormwater Report and, if applicable, the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan required by the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Multi-Sector_General Permit. e) Unless and until another party accepts responsibility, the landowner, or owner of any drainage easement, assumes responsibility for maintaining each BMP. To overcome this presumption, the landowner of the property must submit to the issuing authority a legally binding agreement of record, and acceptable to the issuing authority, evidencing that another entity has accepted responsibility for maintaining the BMP, and that the proposed responsible party shall be treated as a permittee for purposes of implementing the requirements of Conditions 18(f)through 18(k)with respect to that BMP. Any failure of the proposed responsible party to implement the requirements of Conditions 18(f) through 18(k)with respect to that BMP shall be a violation of the Order of Conditions or Certificate of Compliance. In the case of stormwater BMPs that are serving more than one lot, the legally binding agreement shall also identify the lots that will be serviced by the stormwater BMPs. A plan and easement deed that grants the responsible party access to perform the required operation and maintenance must be submitted along with the legally binding agreement. f) The responsible party shall operate and maintain all stormwater BMPs in accordance with the design plans, the O&M Plan, and the requirements of the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook. w afci &doc• rev.5108 Page 6 of 11 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection v �`.--- MassDEP File Number: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands ' WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions 64-482 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 C. General Conditions Under Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act (cont.) g) The responsible party shall: 1. Maintain an operation and maintenance log for the last three (3)consecutive calendar years of inspections, repairs, maintenance and/or replacement of the stormwater management system or any part thereof, and disposal (for disposal the log shall indicate the type of material and the disposal location); 2. Make the maintenance log available to MassDEP and the Conservation Commission ("Commission") upon request; and 3. Allow members and agents of the MassDEP and the Commission to enter and inspect the site to evaluate and ensure that the responsible party is in compliance with the requirements for each BMP established in the O&M Plan approved by the issuing authority. h) All sediment or other contaminants removed from stormwater BMPs shall be disposed of in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations. i) Illicit discharges to the stormwater management system as defined in 310 CMR 10.04 are prohibited. j) The stormwater management system approved in the Order of Conditions shall not be changed without the prior written approval of the issuing authority. k) Areas designated as qualifying pervious areas for the purpose of the Low Impact Site Design Credit(as defined in the MassDEP Stormwater Handbook, Volume 3, Chapter 1, Low Impact Development Site Design Credits) shall not be altered without the prior written approval of the issuing authority. 1) Access for maintenance, repair, and/or replacement of BMPs shall not be withheld. Any fencing constructed around stormwater BMPs shall include access gates and shall be at least six inches above grade to allow for wildlife passage. Special Conditions (if you need more space for additional conditions, please attach a text document): see attached document D. Findings Under Municipal Wetlands Bylaw or Ordinance 1. Is a municipal wetlands bylaw or ordinance applicable? ® Yes ❑ No 2. The hereby finds (check one that applies): Conservation Commission a. ❑ that the proposed work cannot be conditioned to meet the standards set forth in a municipal ordinance or bylaw specifically: 1.Municipal Ordinance or Bylaw 2.Citation Therefore, work on this project may not go forward unless and until a revised Notice of Intent is submitted which provides measures which are adequate to meet these standards, and a final Order of Conditions is issued. wpaform5.doc• rev.5108 Page of 11 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands MassDEP File Number: WPA Form 5 Liot, — Order of Conditions 64-482 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 D. Findings Under Municipal Wetlands Bylaw or Ordinance (cont.) b. ❑ that the following additional conditions are necessary to comply with a municipal ordinance or . bylaw: 1.Municipal Ordinance or Bylaw 2.Citation 3. The Commission orders that all work shall be performed in accordance with the following conditions and with the Notice of Intent referenced above. To the extent that the following conditions modify or differ from the plans, specifications, or other proposals submitted with the Notice of Intent, the conditions shall control. The special conditions relating to municipal ordinance or bylaw are as follows(if you need more space for additional conditions, attach a text document): wpafom5.doc• rev.5108 Page 8 of 11 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection -Wetlands MassDEP File Number: 'WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions 64-482 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 E. Issuance This Order is valid for three years, unless otherwise specified as a special ftk a+l �� condition pursuant to General Conditions#4,from the date of issuance. f.Dada ce Please indicate the number of members who will sign this form: four (4) This Order must be signed by a majority of the Conservation Commission. 2.Number of signers The Order must be mailed by certified mail (return receipt requested)or hand delivered to the applicant. A copy also must be mailed or hand delivered at the same time to the appropriate Department of Environmental Protection Regional Of{ice, if not filing electronically, and the property owner, if different from applicant. Signatur o A Notary Acknowledgement Commonwealth of Massachusetts County of Essex On this 8 —of January 2009 Day Month Year Before me, the undersigned Notary Public, R.Christie, K.Glidden, M.Blier, and A. Hamilton Y personally appeared Name of Document Signer proved to me through satisfactory evidence of identification,which was/were personally known Description of evidence of identification to be the person whose name is signed on the preceding or attached document, and acknowledged to me that he/she signed it voluntarily for its stated purpose. As member of Salem City/rows Conservation Commission a�cu MyA" � M tME"" Caren 40r�i> ature Notary Public Care�R�Duques Printed Name of Notary Public ` Place notary seal and/or any stamp above August 16, 2013 My Commission Expires(Date) This Order is issued to the applicant as follows: ❑ by hand delivery on by certified mail,return receipt requested,on Date Date L wpalorrnSAoc• rev.WS Page9of ii Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands MassDEP File Number: WPA Form 5 — Order of Conditions 64-482 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 F. Appeals The applicant, the owner, any person aggrieved by this Order, any owner of land abutting the land subject to this Order, or any ten residents of the city or town in which such land is located, are hereby notified of their right to request the appropriate MassDEP Regional Office to issue a Superseding Order of Conditions. The request must be made by certified mail or hand delivery to the Department, with the appropriate filing fee and a completed Request of Departmental Action Fee Transmittal Form, as provided in 310 CMR 10.03(7)within ten business days from the date of issuance of this Order. A copy of the request shall at the same time be sent by certified mail or hand delivery to the Conservation Commission and to the applicant, if he/she is not the appellant. Any appellants seeking to appeal the Department's Superseding Order associated with this appeal will be required to demonstrate prior participation in the review of this project. Previous participation in the permit proceeding means the submission of written information to the Conservation Commission prior to the close of the public hearing, requesting a Superseding Order or Determination, or providing written information to the Department prior to issuance of a Superseding Order or Determination. The request shall state clearly and concisely the objections to the Order which is being appealed'and how the Order does not contribute to the protection of the interests identified in the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act(M.G.L. c. 131, §40), and is inconsistent with the wetlands regulations (310 CMR 10.00). To the extent that the Order is based on a municipal ordinance or bylaw, and not on the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act or regulations, the Department has no appellate jurisdiction. Section G, Recording Information is available on the following page. wpafcnn5.doc• rev.5/08 Page 10 a 11 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands MassDEP File Number: WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions 64-482 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 G. Recording Information This Order of Conditions must be recorded in the Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located, within the chain of title of the affected property. In the case of recorded land, the Final Order shall also be noted in the Registry's Grantor Index under the name of the owner of the land subject to the Order. In the case of registered land, this Order shall also be noted on the Land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land subject to the Order of Conditions. The recording information on this page shall be submitted to the Conservation Commission listed below. Salem Conservation Commission Detach on dotted line, have stamped by the Registry of Deeds and submit to the Conservation Commission. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To: Salem Conservation Commission Please be advised that the Order of Conditions for the Project at: 10 Blaney Street 64-482 Project Location MassDEP File Number Has been recorded at the Registry of Deeds of: esu 2 �'L 7 '( 2 y County Book Page for: ct � m �— S'k Property Own r and has been noted in the chain of title of the affected property in: Book Page In accordance with the Order of Conditions issued on: \ / « /o Date If recorded land, the instrument number identifying this transaction is: r�- S dl�, Instrument Number If registered land, the document number identifying this transaction is: Document Number Signature of Applicant w aform5.doc• rev.5/08 Page 11 of 11 f E vi e ,t h � d Essex Southern District Registry of Deeds 45 Congress Street Suite 4100 Salem, MA 01970 01/27/2009 01:05 PM Station: ESSX-REC09 Operator: Jvioiette Time:1:05 Type: CONDN Loc:, SALEM Inst 259 BK 28274-250 FEE 55.00 ENV FEE 20.00 i Check 5596 BOURNE 75,00 Attachment to Order of Conditions# 64-482 Page Iof 7 SALEM CONSERVATION COMMISSION DEP FILE #64-482 10 Blaney Street City of Salem, Massachusetts ADDITIONAL FINDINGS This parcel does not include habitat of rare wildlife, nor does it contain certified vernal pools, according to the June 1, 2003 Map of Estimated Habitats of Rare Wildlife and Certified Vernal Pools, published by the Massachusetts Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program. This Order is issued under the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act,M.G.L. Chapter 131, Section 40 and the City of Salem Wetlands Protection Ordinance, Salem Code Chapter 34, Section 34-1 —34-13. This Order permits the dredging, installation of piers and docks, and the development of a terminal building at 10 Blaney Street. The project area impacts the following coastal resource areas: designated port area, land under the ocean, coastal beach, coastal bank, fish runs, and land subject to coastal storm flowage. Designated port areas, permits waterfront development specifically,development that is water dependent. The project includes dredging approximately 115,117 cubic yards which requires a water quality permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The proposal includes off shore disposal of the dredged material, which has been reviewed and approved by appropriate EPA and USACE officials. A shellfish study was completed for the area to be dredged and yielded low numbers(a total of five soft shell clams)of shellfish within the dredge footprint. The presence of eel grass was also investigated and no eel grass was found within the dredge footprint. These studies show that dredging within the proposed footprint will not have a significant impact on the existing habitat. In order to minimize the impact dredging will have the Commission requests the following measures be taken (per Division of Marine Fisheries comments on the Chapter 91 license application in a memo dated November 14, 2008); No in-water, silt-producing activity is to take place between February 1 to June 30 for the protection of winter flounder spawning and juvenile development and bottom-weighed silt curtains shall be used to minimize siltation of adjacent resource areas during dredging. The Commission will allow pile driving during these winter months so long as proper erosion control measures are in place. The site stormwater will be treated prior to discharging into the harbor. The project contains a detailed stormwater management plan which includes an operations and maintenance plan, snow disposal, hazardous materials, and landscape guidance. The coastal beach resource area has been determined to be significant to storm damage prevention and flood control. The proposed project will not increase erosion, decrease volume or changing the form of any coastal beach. The proposed pier has been designed to not conflict with littoral drift. A Chapter 91 license has been applied for and once obtained shall be forwarded to the Conservation Commission. The coastal bank resource area has been determined to be significant to storm damage prevention for flood control because it is a vertical buffer to storm waters and therefore the project has been designed to have no adverse effect on the stability of the coastal bank. No specified habitat sites of rare vertebrate or invertebrate species exist within this resource area or within the footprint of this project. Although portions of this project will occur within a fish run, it will not impede or obstruct the migration of fish, change the volume or rate of flow of water within the fish run or impair the capacity of spawning or nursery habitats C UY OF SALEM CONSERVATION COMMISSION January 16, 2009 Kathleen Winn City of Salem 120 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 Re: Order of Conditions—DEP 1t 64-482 10 Blaney Street, Salem Wharf Expansion Project Dear Ms. Winn: Enclosed, please find the Order of Conditions for the above referenced project. Following the 10-day appeal period (as of January 30, 2009), this document and the attached Special Conditions must be recorded at the Essex County Registry of Deeds (Shetland Park 45 Congress Street, Suite 4100 Salem, Massachusetts). Once recorded, please return a copy of Page 9 of the Order, which will indicate to the Commission that the document has been recorded. As indicated in the Order, prior to any work commencing: 1. this Order must be recorded, 2. a sign shall be displayed showing DEP File# 64-482 within public view, and 3. contact me at least 48 hours prior to any activity to schedule a pre-construction meeting to review the Order with your hired contractor. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me 978-619-5685. Sincerely, Carey Du ues Conservation Agent/ Staff Planner Enclosures CC: DEP Northeast Regional Office Mike Fitzgerald, Dominion Energy Salem Harbor, LLC Nicole Wilkerson, Dominion Energy Salem Harbor, LLC Diane Leopold, Dominion Energy Salem Harbor, LLC r r Massachusetts Department artment of Environmental Protection On�— MassDEP File Number:, Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands WPA Form 5 — Order of Conditions 64-462 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 A. General Information Important: Salem When filling 1. From: Conservation Commission out forms on the computer, 2. This issuance is for(check one): a. ® Order of Conditions b. ❑ Amended Order of Conditions use only the tab key to 3. To: Applicant: move your cursor-do not Kathleen Winn use the return a. First Name b.Last Name key. City of Salem c.Organization m 120 Washington Street d. Mailing Address Salem MA 01970 e.City/Town f.State g.Zip Code 4. Property Owner (if different from applicant): a. First Name b. Last Name Dominion Energy Salem Harbor LLC c.Organization 24 Fort Avenue d. Mailing Address Salem MA 01970 e. Cityrrown f.State g.Zip Code s. Project Location: 10 Blaney Street Salem a.Street Address b.City/Town 41 278 c.Assessors Map/Plat Number d. Parcel/Lot Number Latitude and Longitude, if known: 42.522398 70.882804 e. Latitude f.Longitude s. Property recorded at the Registry of Deeds for(attach additional information if more than one parcel): Essex a.County - b. Certificate Number(if registered land) 23825 116 c.Book d. Page 7. Dates: September 10, 2008 January 8, 2009 January 16, 2009 a. Date Notice of Intent Filed b. Dale Public Hearing Closed c. Date of Issuance 8. Final Approved Plans and Other Documents (attach additional plan or document references as needed): Existing Conditions, Proposed Conditions, Site Drainage Plan, Proposed Pier, Proposed Dredge Plan, Proposed Building Terminal (Six total sheets) _Bourne Engineering _ Ronald Bourne b. Prepared By c. Signed and Stamped by December 11, 2008 various_ d. Final Revision Date e.Scale Stormwater Report _ January 5, 2009 I.Additional Plan or Document Title g.Date wpaform5 Goc• rev.5108 Page 1 of 11 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands MassDEP File Number: WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions 64-482 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 B. Findings f. Findings pursuant to the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act: Following the review of the above-referenced Notice of Intent and based on the information provided in this application and presented at the public hearing, this Commission finds that the areas in which work is proposed is significant to the following interests of the Wetlands Protection Act. Check all that apply: a. ❑ Public Water Supply b. ® Land Containing Shellfish c. ® Prevention of Pollution d. ❑ Private Water Supply e. ® Fisheries f. ❑ Protection of Wildlife Habitat g. ❑ Groundwater Supply h. ® Storm Damage Prevention i. ® Flood Control 2. This Commission hereby finds the project, as proposed, is: (check one of the following boxes) Approved subject to: a. ® the following conditions which are necessary in accordance with the performance standards set forth in the wetlands regulations. This Commission orders that all work shall be performed in accordance with the Notice of Intent referenced above, the following General Conditions, and any other special conditions attached to this Order. To the extent that the following conditions modify or differ from the plans, specifications, or other proposals submitted with the Notice of Intent, these conditions shall control. Denied because: b. ❑ the proposed work cannot be conditioned to meet the performance standards set forth in the wetland regulations. Therefore, work on this project may not go forward unless and until a new Notice of Intent is submitted which provides measures which are adequate to protect these interests, and a final Order of Conditions is issued. A description of the performance standards which the proposed work cannot meet is attached to this Order. c. ❑ the information submitted by the applicant is not sufficient to describe the site, the work, or the effect of the work on the interests identified in the Wetlands Protection Act. Therefore, work on this project may not go forward unless and until a revised Notice of Intent is submitted which provides sufficient information and includes measures which are adequate to protect the Act's interests, and a final Order of Conditions is issued. A description of the specific information which is lacking and why it is necessary is attached to this Order as per 310 CMR 10.05(6)(c). Inland Resource Area Impacts: Check all that apply below. (For Approvals Only) 3. ❑ Buffer Zone Impacts: Shortest distance between limit of project disturbance and wetland boundary(if available) a.linear feet Resource Area Proposed Permitted Proposed Permitted Alteration Alteration Replacement Replacement 4. ❑ Bank a. linear feet b. linear feet c.linear feet d. linear feet s. ❑ Bordering Vegetated Wetland a.square feet b.square feet c.square feet d.square feet 6. ❑ Land Under W aterbodies a.square feet b.square feet c.square feet d.square feet and Waterways e.Gy dredged f.c'y dredged wpaform9 eoc• rev.5/09 Page 2 of 11 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands MassDEP File Number: \\ WPA Form 5 — Order of Conditions 64-482 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 B. Findings (cont.) Resource Area Proposed Permitted Proposed Permitted Alteration Alteration Replacement Replacement 7. ❑ Bordering Land Subject to Flooding a.square feet b.square feet c.square feet d.square feet Cubic Feet Flood Storage e.cubic feet f.cubic feet g. cubic feet h.cubic feet 8. ❑ Isolated Land Subject to Flooding a.square feet b.square feet Cubic Feet Flood Storage c.cubic feet d.cubic feet e.cubic feet f.cubic feet s. ❑ Riverfront area a.total sq.feet In.total sq.feet Sq ft within 100 ft c.square feet d.square feet e.square feet f.square feet Sq ft between 100-200 ft g.square feet h.square feet i.square feet j.square feet Coastal Resource Area Impacts: Check all that apply below. (For Approvals Only) 1o. ® Designated Port Areas Indicate size under Land Under the Ocean, below 11. ® Land Under the Ocean 291.564 291,564 a.square feet b.square feet 115,117 115,117 a cly dredged d.Gy dredged 12. ❑ Barrier Beaches Indicate size under Coastal Beaches and/or Coastal Dunes below 0 0 0 0 13. ® Coastal Beaches a.square feet b.square feet c.Gy nourishmt. d.Gy nourishmt. 14. ❑ Coastal Dunes a.square feet b.square feet c.c/y nourishmt. d.Gy nourishmt. 15. ® Coastal Banks 850 850 a. linear feet b.linear feet 16. ❑ Rocky Intertidal Shores a.square feet b.square feet 17. ❑ Salt Marshes a.square feet b.square feet c.square feet d.square feet 18. ❑ Land Under Salt Ponds a.square feet b.square feet c.dy dredged d.Gy dredged 19. ❑ Land Containing Shellfish a.square feet b.square Teet c.square feet d.square feet 20. ® Fish Runs Indicate size under Coastal Banks, inland Bank, Land Under the Ocean, and/or inland Land Under Waterbodies and Waterways, above 115,117 115,117 a.Gy dredged b.Gy dredged 21. ® Land Subject to Coastal 1.85 acres 1.85 acres Storm Flowage a.square feet b.square feet wpaform5Acc- rev.5108 Page 3 of 11 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands MassDEP File Number: WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions 64-482 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 C. General Conditions Under Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act (only applicable to approved projects) 1. Failure to comply with all conditions stated herein, and with all related statutes and other regulatory measures, shall be deemed cause to revoke or modify this Order. 2. The Order does not grant any property rights or any exclusive privileges; it does not authorize any injury to private property or invasion of private rights. 3. This Order does not relieve the permittee or any other person of the necessity of complying with all other applicable federal, state, or local statutes, ordinances, bylaws, or regulations. 4. The work authorized hereunder shall be completed within three years from the date of this Order unless either of the following apply: a. the work is a maintenance dredging project as provided for in the Act; or b. the time for completion has been extended to a specified date more than three years, but less than five years, from the date of issuance. If this Order is intended to be valid for more than three years, the extension date and the special circumstances warranting the extended time period are set forth as a special condition in this Order. 5. This Order may be extended by the issuing authority for one or more periods of up to three years each upon application to the issuing authority at least 30 days prior to the expiration date of the Order. 6. Any fill used in connection with this project shall be clean fill. Any fill shall contain no trash, refuse, rubbish, or debris, including but not limited to lumber, bricks, plaster, wire, lath, paper, cardboard, pipe, tires, ashes, refrigerators, motor vehicles, or parts of any of the foregoing. 7. This Order is not final until all administrative appeal periods from this Order have elapsed, or if such an appeal has been taken, until all proceedings before the Department have been completed. 8. No work shall be undertaken until the Order has become final and then has been recorded in the Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located, within the chain of title of the affected property. In the case of recorded land, the Final Order shall also be noted in the Registry's Grantor Index under the name of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. In the case of the registered land, the Final Order shall also be noted on the Land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is done. The recording information shall be submitted to this Conservation Commission on the form at the end of this Order, which form must be stamped by the Registry of Deeds, prior to the commencement of work. 9. A sign shall be displayed at the site not less then two square feet or more than three square feet in size bearing the words, "Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection" [or, "MassDEP"] "File Number 64-482 wpaform5.doc• rev.5/09 Page 4 of 11 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection �- Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands MassDEP File Number: WPA Form 5 — Order of Conditions 64-482 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 C. General Conditions Under Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act 10. Where the Department of Environmental Protection is requested to issue a Superseding Order, the Conservation Commission shall be a party to all agency proceedings and hearings before MassDEP. 11. Upon completion of the work described herein, the applicant shall submit a Request for Certificate of Compliance (WPA Form 8A) to the Conservation Commission. 12. The work shall conform to the plans and special conditions referenced in this order. 13. Any change to the plans identified in Condition #12 above shall require the applicant to inquire of the Conservation Commission in writing whether the change is significant enough to require the filing of a new Notice of Intent. 14. The Agent or members of the Conservation Commission and the Department of Environmental Protection shall have the right to enter and inspect the area subject to this Order at reasonable hours to evaluate compliance with the conditions stated in this Order, and may require the submittal of any data deemed necessary by the Conservation Commission or Department for that evaluation. 15. This Order of Conditions shall apply to any successor in interest or successor in control of the property subject to this Order and to any contractor or other person performing work conditioned by this Order. 16. Prior to the start of work, and if the project involves work adjacent to a Bordering Vegetated Wetland, the boundary of the wetland in the vicinity of the proposed work area shall be marked by wooden stakes or flagging. Once in place, the wetland boundary markers shall be maintained until a Certificate of Compliance has been issued by the Conservation Commission. 17. All sedimentation barriers shall be maintained in good repair until all disturbed areas have been fully stabilized with vegetation or other means. At no time shall sediments be deposited in a wetland or water body. During construction, the applicant or his/her designee shall inspect the erosion controls on a daily basis and shall remove accumulated sediments as needed. The applicant shall immediately control any erosion problems that occur at the site and shall also immediately notify the Conservation Commission, which reserves the right to require additional erosion and/or damage prevention controls it may deem necessary. Sedimentation barriers shall serve as the limit of work unless another limit of work line has been approved by this Order. NOTICE OF STORMWATER CONTROL AND MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS 18. The work associated with this Order(the "Project') is (t)® is not (2)❑ subject to the Massachusetts Stormwater Standards. If the work is subject to the Stormwater Standards, then the project is subject to the following conditions: a) All work, including site preparation, land disturbance, construction and redevelopment, shall be implemented in accordance with the construction period pollution prevention and erosion and sedimentation control plan and, if applicable, the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan required by the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Construction General Permit as required by Stormwater Condition 8. Construction period erosion, sedimentation and pollution control measures and best management practices (BMPs) shall remain in place until the site is fully stabilized. wpaform5.doc• rev.5/08 Page 5 of 11 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection �-- MassDEP File Number: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands WPA Form 5 — Order of Conditions 64-482 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 C. General Conditions Under Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act (cont.) b) No stormwater runoff may be discharged to the post-construction stormwater BMPs unless and until a Registered Professional Engineer provides a Certification that: i. all construction period BMPs have been removed or will be removed by a date certain specified in the Certification. For any construction period BMPs intended to be converted to post construction operation for stormwater attenuation, recharge, and/or treatment, the conversion is allowed by the MassDEP Stormwater Handbook BMP specifications and that the BMP has been properly cleaned or prepared for post construction operation, including removal of all construction period sediment trapped in inlet and outlet control structures; ii. as-built final construction BMP plans are included, signed and stamped by a Registered Professional Engineer, certifying the site is fully stabilized; iii, any illicit discharges to the stormwater management system have been removed, as per the requirements of Stormwater Standard 10; iv. all post-construction stormwater BMPs are installed in accordance with the plans (including all planting plans)approved by the issuing authority, and have been inspected to ensure that they are not damaged and that they are in proper working condition; v. any vegetation associated with post-construction BMPs is suitably established to withstand erosion. c) The landowner is responsible for BMP maintenance until the issuing authority is notified that another party has legally assumed responsibility for BMP maintenance. Prior to requesting a Certificate of Compliance, or Partial Certificate of Compliance, the responsible party(defined in General Condition 18(e)) shall execute and submit to the issuing authority an Operation and Maintenance Compliance Statement("O&M Statement)for the Stormwater BMPs identifying the party responsible for implementing the stormwater BMPsOperation and Maintenance Plan ("O&M Plan") and certifying the following: i.)the O&M Plan is complete and will be implemented upon receipt of the Certificate of Compliance, and ii.)the future responsible parties shall be notified in writing of their ongoing legal responsibility to operate and maintain the stormwater management BMPs and implement the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. d) Post-construction pollution prevention and source control shall be implemented in accordance with the long-term pollution prevention plan section of the approved Stormwater Report and, if applicable, the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan required by the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Multi-Sector General Permit. e) Unless and until another party accepts responsibility, the landowner, or owner of any drainage easement, assumes responsibility for maintaining each BMP. To overcome this presumption, the landowner of the property must submit to the issuing authority a legally binding agreement of record, and acceptable to the issuing authority, evidencing that another entity has accepted responsibility for maintaining the BMP, and that the proposed responsible party shall be treated as a permittee for purposes of implementing the requirements of Conditions 18(f)through 18(k)with respect to that BMP. Any failure of the proposed responsible party to implement the requirements of Conditions 18(f) through 18(k)with respect to that BMP shall be a violation of the Order of Conditions or Certificate of Compliance. In the case of stormwater BMPs that are serving more than one lot, the legally binding agreement shall also identify the lots that will be serviced by the stormwater BMPs. A plan and easement deed that grants the responsible party access to perform the required operation and maintenance must be submitted along with the legally binding agreement. f) The responsible party shall operate and maintain all stormwater BMPs in accordance with the design plans, the O&M Plan, and the requirements of the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook. wpaform5.doc• rev.5/08 Page 6 of 11 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands MassDEP File Number: i' WPA Form 5 — Order of Conditions 64-482 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 C. General Conditions Under Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act (cont.) g) The responsible party shall: 1. Maintain an operation and maintenance log for the last three (3) consecutive calendar years of inspections, repairs, maintenance and/or replacement of the stormwater management system or any part thereof, and disposal (for disposal the log shall indicate the type of material and the disposal location); 2. Make the maintenance log available to MassDEP and the Conservation Commission ("Commission")upon request; and 3. Allow members and agents of the MassDEP and the Commission to enter and inspect the site to evaluate and ensure that the responsible party is in compliance with the requirements for each BMP established in the O&M Plan approved by the issuing authority. h) All sediment or other contaminants removed from stormwater BMPs shall be disposed of in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations. i) Illicit discharges to the stormwater management system as defined in 310 CMR 10.04 are prohibited. j) The stormwater management system approved in the Order of Conditions shall not be changed without the prior written approval of the issuing authority. k) Areas designated as qualifying pervious areas for the purpose of the Low Impact Site Design Credit(as defined in the MassDEP Stormwater Handbook, Volume 3, Chapter 1, Low Impact Development Site Design Credits)shall not be altered without the prior written approval of the issuing authority. 1) Access for maintenance, repair, and/or replacement of BMPs shall not be withheld. Any fencing constructed around stormwater BMPs shall include access gates and shall be at least six inches above grade to allow for wildlife passage. Special Conditions (if you need more space for additional conditions, please attach a text document): see attached document D. Findings Under Municipal Wetlands Bylaw or Ordinance 1. Is a municipal wetlands bylaw or ordinance applicable? M Yes ❑ No 2. The hereby finds (check one that applies): Conservation Commission a. ❑ that the proposed work cannot be conditioned to meet the standards set forth in a municipal ordinance or bylaw specifically: 1. Municipal Ordinance or Bylaw 2.Citation Therefore, work on this project may not go forward unless and until a revised Notice of Intent is submitted which provides measures which are adequate to meet these standards, and a final Order of Conditions is issued. wpa(orarsdoc• rev.5108 Page 7&11 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection �-- Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands MassDEP File Number: WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions 64-482 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 D. Findings Under Municipal Wetlands Bylaw or Ordinance (cont.) b. ❑ that the following additional conditions are necessary to comply with a municipal ordinance or bylaw: 1.Municipal Ordinance or Bylaw 2.Citation 3. The Commission orders that all work shall be performed in accordance with the following conditions and with the Notice of Intent referenced above. To the extent that the following conditions modify or differ from the plans, specifications, or other proposals submitted with the Notice of Intent, the conditions shall control. The special conditions relating to municipal ordinance or bylaw are as follows (if you need more space for additional conditions, attach a text document): wpaform8.aoc• rev.Slob Page 8 of 11 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands MassDEP File Number: WPA Form 5 — Order of Conditions 64-482 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 E. Issuance i This Order is valid for three years, unless otherwise specified as a special �QhuarN ale/ Zi}0� _ condition pursuant to General Conditions#4, from the date of issuance. t. Date of I suance Please indicate the number of members who will sign this form: four(4) This Order must be signed by a majority of the Conservation Commission. 2. Number of Signers The Order must be mailed by certified mail (return receipt requested) or hand delivered to the applicant. A copy also must be mailed or hand delivered at the same time to the appropriate Department of Environmental Protection Regional ice, if not filing electronically, and the property owner, if different from applicant. Signature Notary Acknowledgement Commonwealth of Massachusetts County of Essex 8 January 2009 On this Day °f Month Year Before me, the undersigned Notary Public, R.Christie, K.Glidden, M.Blier, and A. Hamilton personally appeared Name of Document Signer proved to me through satisfactory evidence of identification, which was/were personally known Description of evidence of identification to be the person whose name is signed on the preceding or attached document, and acknowledged to me that he/she signed it voluntarily for its stated purpose. As member of Salem City/Town Conservation Commission CAREY R.DUOE8 e� oorw My Co *mm EVNUm 14iy/1i 1�✓) 819datureNotary Public Carey R. Duques Printed Name of Notary Public Place notary seal and/or any stamp above August 16, 2013 My Commission Expires(Date) This Order is issued to the applicant as follows: ❑ by hand delivery on by certified mail, return receipt requested, on "�uAr 14 Zl� Date Date wpaforr 5 doc• rev.5/08 Page 9 of 11 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection - Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands MassDEP File Number: WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions 64-482 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 F. Appeals The applicant, the owner, any person aggrieved by this Order, any owner of land abutting the land subject to this Order, or any ten residents of the city or town in which such land is located, are hereby notified of their right to request the appropriate MassDEP Regional Office to issue a Superseding Order of Conditions. The request must be made by certified mail or hand delivery to the Department, with the appropriate filing fee and a completed Request of Departmental Action Fee Transmittal Form, as provided in 310 CMR 10.03(7)within ten business days from the date of issuance of this Order. A copy of the request shall at the same time be sent by certified mail or hand delivery to the Conservation Commission and to the applicant, if he/she is not the appellant. Any appellants seeking to appeal the Department's Superseding Order associated with this appeal will be required to demonstrate prior participation in the review of this project. Previous participation in the permit proceeding means the submission of written information to the Conservation Commission prior to the close of the public hearing, requesting a Superseding Order or Determination, or providing written information to the Department prior to issuance of a Superseding Order or Determination. The request shall state clearly and concisely the objections to the Order which is being appealed and how the Order does not contribute to the protection of the interests identified in the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act(M.G.L. c. 131, § 40), and is inconsistent with the wetlands regulations (310 CMR 10.00). To the extent that the Order is based on a municipal ordinance or bylaw, and not on the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act or regulations, the Department has no appellate jurisdiction. Section G, Recording Information is available on the following page. wpaforrti5.doc• rev.5/09 Page 10 of 11 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands MassDEP File Number: WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions 64-482 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 G. Recording Information This Order of Conditions must be recorded in the Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located, within the chain of title of the affected property. In the case of recorded land, the Final Order shall also be noted in the Registry's Grantor Index under the name of the owner of the land subject to the Order. In the case of registered land, this Order shall also be noted on the Land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land subject to the Order of Conditions. The recording information on this page shall be submitted to the Conservation Commission listed below. Salem Conservation Commission Detach on dotted line, have stamped by the Registry of Deeds and submit to the Conservation Commission. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To: Salem Conservation Commission Please be advised that the Order of Conditions for the Project at: 10 Blaney Street 64-482 Project Location MassDEP File Number Has been recorded at the Registry of Deeds of: County Book - Page for: Property Owner and has been noted in the chain of title of the affected property in: Book Page In accordance with the Order of Conditions issued on: Date If recorded land, the instrument number identifying this transaction is: Instrument Number If registered land, the document number identifying this transaction is: Document Number Signature of Applicant wpaform5.tloc• rev.5108 Page 11 of 11 Attachment to Order of Conditions#64-482 Page l of 7 SALEM CONSERVATION COMMISSION DEP FILE #64-482 10 Blaney Street City of Salem, Massachusetts ADDITIONAL FINDINGS This parcel does not include habitat of rare wildlife, nor does it contain certified vernal pools, according to the June 1, 2003 Map of Estimated Habitats of Rare Wildlife and Certified Vernal Pools, published by the Massachusetts Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program. This Order is issued under the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, M.G.L. Chapter 131, Section 40 and the City of Salem Wetlands Protection Ordinance, Salem Code Chapter 34, Section 34-1 —34-13. This Order permits the dredging, installation of piers and docks, and the development of a terminal building at 10 Blaney Street. The project area impacts the following coastal resource areas: designated port area, land under the ocean, coastal beach, coastal bank, fish runs, and land subject to coastal storm flowage. Designated port areas, permits waterfront development specifically,development that is water dependent. The project includes dredging approximately 115,117 cubic yards which requires a water quality permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The proposal includes off shore disposal of the dredged material, which has been reviewed and approved by appropriate EPA and USACE officials. A shellfish study was completed for the area to be dredged and yielded low numbers(a total of five soft shell clams) of shellfish within the dredge footprint. The presence of eel grass was also investigated and no eel grass was found within the dredge footprint. These studies show that dredging within the proposed footprint will not have a significant impact on the existing habitat. In order to minimize the impact dredging will have the Commission requests the following measures be taken (per Division of Marine Fisheries comments on the Chapter 91 license application in a memo dated November 14, 2008); No in-water, silt-producing activity is to take place between February 1 to June 30 for the protection of winter flounder spawning and juvenile development and bottom-weighed silt curtains shall be used to minimize siltation of adjacent resource areas during dredging. The Commission will allow pile driving during these winter months so long as proper erosion control measures are in place. The site stormwater will be treated prior to discharging into the harbor. The project contains a detailed stonnwater management plan which includes an operations and maintenance plan, snow disposal, hazardous materials, and landscape guidance. The coastal beach resource area has been determined to be significant to storm damage prevention and flood control. The proposed project will not increase erosion, decrease volume or changing the form of any coastal beach. The proposed pier has been designed to not conflict with littoral drift. A Chapter 91 license has been applied for and once obtained shall be forwarded to the Conservation Commission. The coastal bank resource area has been determined to be significant to storm damage prevention for flood control because it is a vertical buffer to stone waters and therefore the project has been designed to have no adverse effect on the stability of the coastal bank. No specified habitat sites of rare vertebrate or invertebrate species exist within this resource area or within the footprint of this project. Although portions of this project will occur within a fish run, it will not impede or obstruct the migration of fish, change the volume or rate of flow of water within the fish run or impair the capacity of spawning or nursery habitats Attachment to Order of Conditions #64482 Page 2of 7 necessary to sustain the various life stages of the fish. In order to ensure that the fish are protected during this project the Conservation Commission is requiring, as mentioned above, that no dredging occurring between February 1 to June 30 for the protection of winter flounder spawning andjuvenile development. The project is located within land subject to coastal storm flowage and is therefore seeking a waiver from the stormwater regulations. The project does implement best management practices (BMPs) throughout the site in an effort to improve the condition of the stormwater before it enters Salem Harbor. The site has a history of having environmental contamination and therefore the Conservation Commission is requiring that a Licensed Site Professional(LSP)be on-site during site construction. The Conservation Commission shall receive copies of the environmental reports which outline the appropriate measures for protecting the resource areas throughout the duration of this project. In order to prevent sediment from leaving the site the Commission is also requiring that a wheel wash be placed at the exit from the site. Details of the wheel wash shall be submitted to the Commission prior to construction, outlining the local grading information, run off control, location(s), disposal plan for material post construction, etc. The Commission shall also receive a plan detailing the construction access points into and out of the site as well as traffic patterns on the site to ensure that sediment is contained on the site and does not end up in a resource area. In order to ensure that the site's stormwater is properly treated before entering the resource area and that the stormwater structures are maintained,the Conservation Commission requires that an annual stormwater maintenance plan shall be submitted to the Conservation Agent or Conservation Commission by December 31 of each year. This report shall outline all maintenance activities that occurred on site. SPECIAL CONDITIONS 1. This Order of Conditions must be recorded in its entirety (ALL 7 PAGES) at the Essex Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located, within the chain of title of the affected property; and recording information(Registry book and page numbers or Land Court certificate number) must be submitted to the Salem Conservation Commission(`Commission' hereinafter) in writing, before any work approved in this Order commences. 2. Approval of this application does not constitute compliance with any law or regulation other than M.G.L Chapter 131, Section 40, Wetlands Regulations 310 CMR 10.00. 3. All work shall be performed in accordance with this Order of Conditions and approved site plan(s). No alteration of wetland resource areas or associated buffer zones, other than that approved in this Order, shall occur on this property without prior approval from the Commission. 4. Prior to any work commencing, a sign shall be displayed showing DEP File#64-482, and not placed on a living tree. 5. No work approved in this Order may commence until the ten(10) day appeal period has lapsed from the date of the issuance of this Order. 6. The term "Applicant" as used in this Order of Conditions shall refer to the owner, any successor in interest or successor in control of the property referenced in the Notice of intent, supporting documents and this Order of Conditions. The Commission shall be notified in writing within 30 days of all transfers of title of any portion of the property that takes place prior to issuance of the Certificate of Compliance. Attachment to Order of Conditions#64-482 Page 3of 7 7. It is the responsibility of the applicant to procure all other applicable federal, state and local permits and approvals associated with this project. These permits may include but are not necessarily limited to the following: (1) Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (P.L. 92-500, 86 stat. 816), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. (2) Water Quality Certification in accordance with the Federal Water Pollution Control under authority of sec. 27(5)of Chapter 21 of the Massachusetts General Laws as codified in 314 CMR 9.00. (3) The City of Salem Wetlands Protection Ordinance and its Regulations 8. If there are conflicting conditions within this Order, the stricter condition(s) shall rule. 9. All work shall beerformed so as to ensure that there will be no sedimentation tanon mto wetlands and surface waters during construction or after completion of the project. 10. The Commission and its Administrator shall have the discretion to modify the erosion/siltation control methods and boundary during construction if necessary. 11. The Commission or its Administrator,officers, or employees shall have the right to enter and inspect the property at any time for compliance with the conditions of this Order, the Wetlands Protection Act MGL Chapter 131, Section 40,the Wetlands Regulations 310 CMR 10.00, and shall have the right to require any data or documentation that it deems necessary for that evaluation. 12. The Commission or its Administrator shall have the discretion to modify the erosion/siltation control methods and boundary during construction if necessary. 13. The Commission reserves the right to impose additional conditions on portions of this project or this site to mitigate any actual or potential impacts resulting from the work herein permitted. 14. The work shall conform to the following attached plans and special conditions: Final Approved Plans Existing Conditions, Proposed Conditions, Site Drainage Plan, Proposed Pier, Proposed Dredge Plan, and Proposed Building Terminal Title August 2008 and Revised December 11, 2008 Dated Signed and Stanped by City of Salem Conservation Commission On file with 15. Any proposed changes in the approved plan(s) or any deviation in construction from the approved plan(s) shall require the applicant to file a Notice of Project Change with the Commission. The Notice shall be accompanied by a written inquiry prior to their implementation in the field, as to whether the change(s) is substantial enough to require filing a new Notice of Intent or a request to correct or amend Attachment to Order of Conditions# 64-482 Page 4of 7 this Order of Conditions. A copy of such request shall at the same time be sent to the Department of Environmental Protection. 16. In conjunction with the sale of this property or any portion thereof before a Certificate of Compliance has been issued, the applicant or current landowner shall submit to the Commission a statement signed by the buyer that he/she is aware of an outstanding Order of Conditions on the property and has received a copy of the Order of Conditions. 17. Condition Number 54 as indicated shall continue in force beyond the Certificate of Compliance,in perpetuity,and shall be referenced to in all future deeds to this property. PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION 18. Prior to the commencement of any activity on this site,the applicant or current landowner shall designate an "Environmental Professional",subject to the approval of the Commission, who shall be responsible for monitoring all activity within wetland resource areas and buffer zones to ensure compliance with this Order of Conditions. The Environmental Professional shall inspect and direct the maintenance of all erosion and sedimentation control measures on site and shall submit monthly progress/monitoring reports to the Commission. The Environmental Professional shall have the authority and responsibility to stop work at any time and/or to implement additional impact mitigation measures on site whenever necessary to prevent or halt existing or imminent violations of this Order. 19. Prior to the commencement of any activity on this site other than activities listed above, there shall be a PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING between the project supervisor, the contractor responsible for the work, and a member of the Conservation Commission or its Administrator to ensure that the requirements of the Order of Conditions are understood. The staked erosion control line shall be adjusted,if necessary,during the pre-construction meeting. Please contact the Conservation Commission Agent at(978) 745-9595 ext 311 at least forty-eight(48)hours prior to any activity to arrange for the pre-construction meeting. 20. Prior to the pre-construction meeting and commencement of any activity on this site, sedimentation and erosion control barriers shall be installed as shown on the approval plan(s)and detail drawings. The Commission and/or its Administrator shall inspect and approve such installation at the pre-construction meeting. 21. Prior to the pre-construction meeting and commencement of any activity on this site, the applicant or current landowner shall submit to the Commission in writing a construction schedule or sequence of work to complete this project. 22. No clearing of vegetation, including trees,or disturbance of soil shall occur prior to the pre-construction meeting. Minimal disturbance of shrubs and herbaceous plants shall be allowed prior to the pre- construction meeting if absolutely necessary in order to place erosion control stakes where required. 23. Prior to commencement of construction on site, the limits of wetland resource areas closest to construction activity shall be flagged with surveyor's tape and shall remain in place during construction. The limits of areas to be impacted and the limits of work in the replication area(s) shall be clearly flagged. 24. There shall be 25 hay bales and wooden stakes under cover on the site to be used only for emergency erosion control. Attachment to Order of Conditions#64-482 Page 5of 7 EROSION CONTROL 25. Appropriate erosion control devices shall be in place prior to the beginning of any phase of construction, and shall be maintained during construction in the wetland areas and buffer zones. The erosion control specifications provided in the Notice of Intent and the erosion control provision in the Order will be the minimum standards for this project; the Commission may require additional measures. 26. All debris, fill and excavated material shall be stockpiled a location far enough away from the wetland resource areas to prevent sediment form entering wetland resource areas. 27. Erosion and sedimentation control devices shall be inspected after each storm event and repaired or replaced as necessary. Any accumulated silt adjacent to the barriers shall be removed. 28. The area of construction shall remain in a stable condition at the close of each construction day. 29. Any de-watering of trenches or other excavation required during construction shall be conducted so as to prevent siltation of wetland resource areas. All discharge from de-watering activities shall be filtered through hay bale sediment traps, silt filter bags or other means approved by the Commission or its Administrator. 30. Within thirty(30) days of completion of construction on any given portion of the project,all disturbed areas in the completed portion of the site shall be permanently stabilized with rapidly growing vegetative cover, using sufficient top soil to assure long-term stabilization of disturbed areas. 31. If soils are to be disturbed for longer that two months, a temporary cover of rye or other grass should be established to prevent erosion and sedimentation. If the season is not appropriate for plant growth, exposed surface shall be stabilized by other appropriate erosion control measures, firmly anchored, to prevent soils from being washed by rain or flooding. DURING CONSTRUCTION 32. A copy of this Order of Conditions and the plan(s)approved in this Order shall be available on site at all times when work is in progress. 33. No alteration or activity shall occur beyond the limit of work as defined by the siltation barriers shown on the approved plan(s). 34. All waste products,grubbed stumps, slash;construction materials,etc. shall be deposited at least 100 feet from wetland resource areas and 200 feet from river. 35. Cement trucks shall not be washed out in any wetland resource or buffer zone area,nor into any drainage system. Any deposit of cement or concrete products into a buffer zone or wetland resource area shall be immediately removed. 36. All exposed sub-soils shall be covered by a minimum of three(3)inches of quality screened loam topsoil prior to seeding and final stabilization. 37. Immediately following drainage structure installation, all inlets shall be protected by silt fence, haybale barriers and/or silt bags to filter silt from stormwater before it enters the drainage system. 38. There shall be no pumping of water from wetland resource areas. 39. All equipment shall be inspected regularly for leaks. Any leaking hydraulic lines,cylinders or any other components shall be fixed immediately. Attachment to Order of Conditions #64482 Page 6of 7 40. During construction, all drainage structures shall be inspected regularly and cleaned as necessary. 41. The applicant is herby notified that failure to comply with all requirements herein may result in the issuance of enforcement actions by the Conservation Commission including,but not limited to,civil administrative penalties under M.G.L Chapter 21A, section 16. AFTER CONSTRUCTION 42. Upon completion of construction and final soil stabilization, the applicant shall submit the following to the Conservation Commission to request a Certificate of Compliance (COC): (1) A Completed Request for a Certificate of Compliance form(WPA Form 8A or other form if required by the Conservation Commission at the time of request). (2) A letter from a Registered Professional Engineer certifying compliance of the property with this Order of Conditions. (3) An"As-Built" plan signed and stamped by a Registered Professional Engineer or Land Surveyor showing post-construction conditions within all areas under the jurisdiction of the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act. This plan shall include at a minimum: (a) All wetland resource area boundaries with associated buffer zones and regulatory setback areas taken from the plan(s)approved in this Order of Conditions; (b) Locations and elevations of all stormwater management conveyances, structures and best management designs, including foundation drains,constructed under this Order within any wetland resource area or buffer zone; (c) Distances from any structures constructed under this Order to wetland resource areas- "structures"include,but are not limited to,all buildings,septic system components,wells, utility lines,fences,retaining walls,and roads/driveways; (d) A line delineating the limit of work-"work"includes any filling, excavating and/or disturbance of soils or vegetation approved under this Order; 43. When issued, the Certificate of Compliance must be recorded at the Essex County Registry of Deeds. 44. If the completed work differs from that in the original plans and conditions, the report must specify how the work differs; at which time the applicant shall first request a modification to the Order. Only upon review and approval by the Commission, may the applicant request in writing a Certificate of Compliance as described above. 45. Erosion control devices shall remain in place and properly functioning until all exposed soils have been stabilized with final vegetative cover and the Conservation Commission and/or its Administrator has authorized their removal. ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS 46. All final plans shall be submitted to the Conservation Agent or Conservation Commissioners and receive final approval before starting construction. Significant changes may require an amendment. 47. Contractor(s)to perform work on the site (including but not limited to general contractor, dredging contractor, etc) shall appear before the Conservation Commission and present work scope and timeline, prior to starting construction. Attachment to Order of Conditions #64-482 Page 7of 7 48. The Conservation Commission shall receive copies of environmental reports identifying actions taken to address any contamination that may be on the site. 49. No in-water, silt-producing activity is to take place between February I to June 30 for the protection of winter flounder spawning and juvenile development,with the exception of pile driving activity so long as proper erosion controls are in place. 50. Bottom-weighed silt/turbidity curtains shall be used to minimize siltation of adjacent resource areas during dredging. 51. All stockpiled soils are to be located outside of the buffer zone,covered with plastic,and secured with sandbags,tires,or other weight. 52. The applicant is to provide details of the wheel wash(including but not limited to the local grading information,run off control,location(s),disposal plan for material post construction,etc)to the Conservation Commission and/or the Conservation Agent prior to the start of construction. 53. The applicant shall provide a plan detailing the traffic pattern during construction including access points, routes,etc,prior to the start of construction. 54. Annual stormwater maintenance plan shall be submitted to the Conservation Agent or Conservation Commission by December 31 of each year outlining all maintenance activities that occurred on site. 2/17/111:54 PM To see all the details that are visible on the foe maps screen, use the "Print" link next to the map CsE,EtRvo�c.�lowtE� GA't�.o ENR�Aw�C£ Aw WI- a f rr 1>r. xc • � � �� •tit ..y . �•"� O� ' � ,+ yy mi'. v '.0 + reel z 1 �x �:;; y. ' � �7'•�i' i � hoz`� - Irl do R1 r � YI r ��77 /• w tONy'[�.t�1C� W OR11L, E,vw�oFF PAo G' 1-y' cwsv►�.o s�«�t 0041AM. tp;//maps.google.com/maps?client=safari&rls=en&q=10%20bfaney..:20ma&oe=UTF-8&um=1&hl=en&biw=1024&bih=609&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=il Page 1 of 1 au maney m.sale-,ma-Google Maps 21171112:44 PM ems-W tF To see all the details that are visible on the �7 [ maps screen, use the "Print" link next to the map. TRVC� �O'vTE N. .o 'i \,y X/ R. Hoe of 3`r O� + /r ,�.J q� !S f CaC'ms"'.a:+°+E r Pta �h m' yground Laf It 114 C} � y w` �k'yY ,_ 3 r,✓ g " o w. � o l i r�Fi 4� dt C Ip Nf -G°d` `Salem® t $241erti r�/ $BdeYP1 Wk'fGft # , 107 0 �I Commnn• r a 114 1 kiusewn Federal St is@v`Morrfew 1 !> '" L1^"s -,� Fiatet . River St, "� `Lynda,St^^rOPeakwdS' � � , -,,. �, {1�....-.-.1..4�C� t r . r'�tEssext�Mse�4�..� t" t � � CC Hot" ' -—rt__.L j Essen 51. to+ \\�. 1 � TheHwS In Gabiea� St� j �,rt 1 (i Ova"er.61..*. ref m % .l ea•Fron45l ( r' �. �� n _ „•' Neiman St Salem. 11 , H§ght SC I �d9e St t ,e arte1"..� m ! '., n - Peabody gt- X92 "Ns ti 11114 a= Ward SI ` t to Ir p}' �a '"'..-III— r�t� qy f �• .'-:-Harbor St t //8.�p aw° d'vcdt stt.m�,( W l � S k r r {ELynch st i ��i., ��,Mar9ln St r �+•.� -"1�.� - Nm� f a m -'� m t� r� +]_ � �t 6 palmei�Y r2N p2011 Google- Map data©2011 Google- p://maps.google.com/maps?client=safari&rls=en&q=10%20blaney...20ma&oe=UTF-8&um=1&hl=en&biw=1024&bih=609&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=il Page 1 of 1 Salem Wharf Expansion Erosion Control Plan The City of Salem is proposing the following Erosion Control Plan for the phase I Permitting of the Salem Wharf Expansion project. Due to the large area and varying environments, consjruction is proposed in four phases. Dredging will be the fifth phase, Construction Phase E. Construction Phase'A-Seawall/Revetment Reconstruction The first part of the proposed construction will be to clean up,repair and regrade the existing rip rap that currently surrounds the site. The proposed concrete retaining wail will be installed and fill will be added at this time as well. The repair and new construction will be completed in sections(Al —A5 on Sheet 1)to ensure proper erosion control is maintained. A siltation curtain floating barrier will be placed offshore of the section while a siltation fence will be place upland to surround the proposed work area. Construction Phase B—Harborwalk and Pier The next phase will be the construction of the marine elements of the harborwalk and pier including piles. The contractor will use a construction barge and a siltation curtain floating barrier to contain any potential disturbance due to the suspension of marine sediments. The barrier will act to contain the suspended material and allow it to settle in the same area from which it was disturbed. Construction Phase C—Upland Site Work To limit the potential for sediments to enter Salem Harbor or the surrounding areas the entire upland portion of the project area will be contained by a silt barrier fence. On the water side of the site,the fence will be placed along the inshore boundary of the concrete retaining wall and along the existing boundary fence along the upland side of the site. Construction Phase D—Building Construction To limit the potential for sediments to enter Salem Harbor or the surrounding areas the area surrounding the proposed building site will be contained by a silt barrier fence. On the waterside of the site, the fence will be placed along the inshore boundary of the concrete retaining wall. Construction Phase E—Dredging Dredging will be conducted in conformance with any Time of Year restrictions as imposed by the Conservation Commission or MA DEP Water Quality Division. Ali W -7], t A %e 31410 loop, FEZ!------- PHASE I DREDGINo IF RBOR rl w.r. ft- a a WOK R <<� UPLAND SITE , _ PHASE C��., { t 00 IQ _ — .. . ... .'..._ . . -. RgLN ' SIL TION FENCE LHARBORWAK MHW a HTL UNDER 1 L HARBOR'WALK PHASE D-BUILDING MHW g HTL AGAINST BULKHEAD - '_ J PERMEABLE PARKING AREA I [ le—,) PROPOSED CONDITIONS PLAN f 2 �.�AWA— sc"r ww NFT ahwx LT 1 FLIM FA� :�rm amn Ph'Ts r a mom OWN" c m�e aeTAawo rwL xAr sale :;::gyp:-;:< IcKsar Damm w w sw it m amWm \-Tam we IN on awd SILTATION FENCE MAL SECTION" /-c-\ WrM'IIAYBALES nn�,r : EgVi awn Sb•.ac SLOP'. IL"M614 C*ybTR Am* vu.vww. 0116 EA►tal►�1 4 pmts a art 4ti!►t� o�c. sEc v with► zs,.g, so►Na +�►�td►s )WALK EXISTING GRADE FUTURE BOARDWA N.I.C. CONSTRUCTION N.I ORDINARY FILL—COVER Ti i[I II L I II IIC I�Iirll' I — =' — �-111 III. I I � IJ Ii III�F��-fir l' �I�lit-1� 11 ILIA III Fr t �isJlr 111- I I r' II- IIE1�1' djL I lixi1V iI I11 IIt-IiI Iii ��Fi 1 I" IL ElyIII III= f —li �t HTL EL. +11A r� Il ll ]ll II��"_ 11l 'ILII I i! aU�ll—lull' II=r-1J � tit EXISTING SLOPE —IIF=IITI—IILII( iIL 11 °li MHW EL. +8.9 �Il I11 II 11�i1t it � FI +7.5 LIMIT OF EXCAVATION I ORDINARY FILL—NON COVER — �T LIMIT OF EXCAVATION HD GEOTEXTILE FILTER FABRIC AALW EL.-;:O.Q INSTALL STONE FILL FOR LEVELING AS REO'D SEAWALL SECTION — TYPE III @==SCi�LE. HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN (HASP) SOIL MANAGEMENT PLAN(SMP) for Site Improvement Actions MADEP RTN 3-21067 at 10 Blaney Street Salem Wharf Project Salem, Massachusetts 01970 June 2009 Prepared for: Bourne Consulting Engineering 3 Bent Street Franklin, Massachusetts Prepared by: NARM !/li uar k"ai-irnurucutal Grnnp, Inc. One Mifflin Place,Suite qoo,Cambridge, Massachusetts 02t38 Telephone 6t7.49z.6500 HASP&SMP IO Blaney Street,Salem,MA Page n --- _ lune 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS ISITE DESCRIP'TION .......................................................................................I 2 HAZARD EVALUATION................................................................................2 3 PERSONNEL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT...............................................2 4 SITE CONTROL...............................................................................................3 5 DUST CONTROL.............................................................................................3 6 EROSION CONTROL......................................................................................4 7 SOIL MANAGEMENT PRACTICES.............................................................4 8 DECONTAMINATION ACTIVITIES ...........................................................4 9 COMMUNICATION AND EMERGENCY PROCEDURES.........................8 1826 HSP i HASP&SMP 10 Blaney Street,Salem,MA Page I June 2009 t SITE DESCRIPTION Location: Salem Wharf Project 10 Blaney Street Salem,Massachusetts 01970 Site Usage: Public Use as Wharf and Boating Historical Site Usage: Historically the site was used for commercial operations since the mid 1800s,which included a keg factory, beef extract manufacturer, ebony polish company, and leather tannery. Surrounding Area: Mixed residential and industrial/cornmercial Entry Objectives: Earthwork and general construction/renovation On-Site Control: Proper security shall be provided on-Site to ensure that unauthorized persons will not wander or drive onto the Site during construction activities. Site security shall consist of a chain-link security fence that shall be locked at night. City of Salem fire authorities should be notified of the fencigg prior to installation and keys provided in case of an emergency. Additionally, access should be allowed to the garden located along White Street. INTRODUCTION This Site Health and Safety Plan (HASP)and Soil Management Plan(SMP)is designed to establish policies and procedures for protecting the health and safetyof workers engaged in activities at the Site and surrounding receptors rs to preventexposures associated with disturbance of soil contaminated with elevated levels of lead,chromium,and poly-nuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Maximum soil concentrations of Site contaminants located within the top 3' below surface grade (BSG) and beneath 3' BSG have been summarized in the table below. Maximum Soil Concentrations(mg/Kg) 10 Blaney Street Salem MA Within 0-3' BSGFGreaterThan3' BSG MCP RSC-I Total Chromium _ 218LQ 30 30 Total Lead 1,230 _ 716 300 — ---.. Benzo(a rene 3.8 22 9 2 Accordingly, this HASP& SMP addresses only threats associated with contaminated soils, and strict adherence to this plan will reduce threats to an insignificant level, but not eliminate, the 1826 1SP - - l HASP B SMP , 10 Blaney Sucet,Salem,MA Page 2 _. June 2009 potential for harm from this soil. Therefore,Alliance Environmental Group, Inc. (AEG)cannot and does not guarantee the health and safety of on-Site personnel or individuals who may come into contact with Site soils. It is the responsibility of on-Site personnel to report all potential hazards to the Project Superintendent(PS), whose job it is to implement and enforce this HASP. Note that all workers managing soil from depths greater than 3' BSG must have 40-hours of Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response Standard (HAZWOPER)training. Site Health and Safety Associate The PS shall keep the Site Health and Safety Associate (HASA)informed of HASP-related issues and shall assume all routine, on-Site health and safety responsibilities. If emergency conditions arise or operational changes occur or are anticipated, (e.g., work practices are altered, Site conditions change), the PS shall confer with the Site HASA itnmediately. 2 HAZARD EVALUATION The following soil contaminants have been identified on the Site: lead, chromium and PAHs. The threat from these contaminants arises through chronic long-term exposure through dermal contact, ingestion or inhalation of contaminated dust. The proper precautions involve intercepting these exposure routes. 3 PERSONNEL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT Based on an evaluation of the anticipated hazards, at a minimum, Level D protection will be required for any construction worker entering the Site. Level D personal protection equipment (eye protection,dust masks,etc.) will be provided for by the contractor, and Level "D"will be acceptable for all tasks where workers will not be directly engaged with contaminated or potentially contaminated soils. In the event workers are to enter an OSHA compliant excavation as part of potential drainage or utility work, these workers have a greater potential of contacting contaminated soil via inhalation, skin absorption, ingestion, and/or eye contact. Consequently, this worker is required to wear a particulate filtration respirator(Level Q. Level C shall include a particulate filtration respirator that is to be worn when working in and around soil along with the Level D protection measures below. All other workers at the Site not involved with the direct handling and contact of soil shall implement basic Level D,protection. The following personal protective equipment(PPE) will be used, as a minimum for Level D protection. • Covera)lS/uniform • Safety boots • Gloves • Eye protection 1826 lisp • HASP&SMP 10 Blaney Stmet,Salem,MA Page 3 June 2009 Level C includes the following: • Coveiallstuniform • Safety boots • Gloves • Eye protection • Half Face Respirator(Recommended 3M Particulate Respirator 8233 with NI 00 Filter) 4 SITE CONTROL The Site control program is used to control movement of people and equipment in order to minimize exposure to contamination. In order to control access to the Site during redevelopment,only individuals involved in the Site activities shall be allowed onto the Site. In addition, to control access to the Site from unauthorized individuals, a temporary security fence will be placed around the perimeter. People visiting the Site for the first time shall be informed of this HASP & SMP and be held to the requirements described herein. To ensure their understanding, the PS and HASA shall be responsible for briefing individuals visiting the Site and require their signature to document their understanding of the requirements. These records shall be maintained on-Site by the PS and HASA 5 DUST CONTROL Preventative measures shall be made during all on-Site construction and remedial activities to minimize the generation of dust at the Site. During the progress of work,dust control shall be maintained by applying a spray mist of water to on-Site soils to minimize the creation and dispersion of dust. Site soils shall be lightly misted (not saturated)continuously throughout the entire workday or controlled by some other LSP-approved method. The contractor shall provide the labor, water and sprayer for misting purposes. During earthwork activity, a perimeter-monitoring program shall be conducted. At least two air monitors shall be positioned at the perimeter of the Site downwind from the subject activity, and one upwind(together creating roughly an equilateral triangle). These monitors shall be capable of reading PM-10 particulates on real-time and time-weighted-average (TWA) bases to 0.001 mglm3. The meters shall be monitored at a minimum of every hour. In developing an action level, which will mandate activities are being conducted in a manner not to generate unacceptable levels of fugitive dust,background levels must be monitored. The background particulate level shall be determined by monitoring upwind levels. The background (upwind) level shall be determined because background dust concentrations cannot be controlled at the Site of interest, nor should background exposures be included in the assessment of impact from the Site. For these reasons upwind dust concentration can be subtracted from the downwind dust concentration in order to measure the impacts from the monitored site. The action level was established using risk-based calculations for Site contaminants and a resource prepared by Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection(MADEP) 1926 HSP HASP&SNIP Page 4 10 Bianey Street,Salern,MA June 2009 personnel, entitled, "REAL-T7ME AIR MONITORING AT CONSTR UCTION AND REMEDIATION SITES" dated October 1997. From the above resource, the action level has been established as 0.02 Mg/M3 above background. Consequently, any time the difference between downwind and upwind 10 minute TWA readings exceed 0.02 mg/m3, subject activities shall cease until changes in operations can be made so that this limit is not exceeded. 6 EROSION CONTROL As discussed in the section above, proper misting of exposed Site surfaces should be completed to prevent fugitive dust. Additionally, measures shall.be implemented to prevent movement of soils across the Site through other methods such as rain or wind. To prevent off Site movement of soils, proper erosion controls shall be placed along the perimeter of work-site. These measures shall entail the use of silt fencing in conjunction with hay bales or straw wattles. Proper care and maintenance shall be conducted on these controls, and they should be inspected weekly and after rain storms to ensure their effectiveness is maintained. 7 SOIL MANAGEMENT PRACTICES During redevelopment of the Site, movement and regrading of Site soils is likely. Currently,the Site is being managed under an Activity& Use Limitation(AUL), which mandates certain Site use and activities. The AUL does allow construction activities to occur within the top 3' below surface grade (BSG). However, at depths below 3' BSG, soils exhibit concentrations of contaminants that exceed allowable risk levels. For this reason, great care must be implemented when work may extend beyond 3' BSG. In such cases, any materials removed from the top 3' BSG shall be segregated and stockpiled. Materials removed or disturbed beyond 3' BSG shall be segregated and stockpiled on top of and covered with 6-mil polyethylene sheeting regardless of the duration of which the material will be stockpiled. In the event the excavation is to be backfilled, soil from depths deeper than 3 feet BSG shall be placed back to depths deeper than 3 feet BSG. During any excavation activities,soils required to be stockpiled for greater than 24 hours (with the exception of materials located beneath 3' BSG, which shall be placed on top and covered with 6-mil polyethylene sheeting at all times) shall be covered with 6-mil polyethylene sheeting, During cases where soils are to be stockpiled for an extended period of time (i.e. greater than a week)daily inspection of the stockpile shall be made to ensure controls are maintained and, if needed, repaired. In the event soils generated as part of the work need to be disposed, proper application and disposal at a licensed facility is required. This will entail, at a minimum,sampling of stockpiled soils for the permitted facilities requirements and detailed documentation for record keeping purposes. Soil disposal must be completed according to the Bill of Lading (BOL)process, pursuant to the Massachusetts Contingency Plan (3 10 CMR 40.0000) requirements. 8 DECONTAMINATION ACTIVITIES Prior to leaving the Site, any equipment and/or vehicle used for the excavation or transport of impacted soil shall be suitably cleaned of gross soil that could fall off onto public ways or create 1826 HSP HASP&SMP Page 5 10 Blaney Street,Salem,MA lune 2009 dust. Excavation equipment buckets used to remove materials from 3' BSG should be rinsed within the excavation to prevent mixture of soils within the top 3' BSG.. A construction entrance in the form of crushed stone shall be constructed to prevent vehicular dispersal of soils beyond the limits of work. Heavy soils must be brushed from vehicle tires prior to leaving the Site. In the event soils are tracked onto nearby roadways,the roadways will be swept clean and materials deposited on-Site. -2 Equipment and vehicles involved in the handling of soils shall be decontaminated prior to leaving the Site. A decontamination station shall be constructed by removing the existing soil down to a depth of 2' BSG. During the station construction all sharp objects, debris, and large stones shall be removed to avoid unctures to the liner. A geotextile fabric will then P g be placed h over the base of the excavation and edges overlapped a minimum 3'. A 20 mil polyethylene liner shall then be placed over the geotextile base. The finer should be placed in order to cover the area as an entire piece. In the event a seam exists, it should be sealed. The liner will then be '$ topped by another course of geotextile fabric to act as a protection. t Next, the station will be filled with an 18"thick layer of 1-%2"to 2"crushed stone and berms of stone along the station sides. Figures displaying the general construction details have been ,t provided below. ,t The wash station will be equipped with a sump to collect wash water. The sump shall be pumped free of the wash water into a poly tank located in the wash area as needed to prevent overflowing, where it will be stored until proper disposal arrangements can be made. Personnel decontamination will take place in the area of the equipment wash station where potable water will be available to wash boots and other PPE. In this area, drums will be located for disposal of used PPE and fresh PPE will also be made will be available in this area. 1826 HSP I HASP&SMP Page 6 10 Blaney Svect,Salem,MA June 2009 Figure l: Equipment Wash Station Layout r � I f L rr I 1. S26 HSP. 4 HASP&SMP P IO Hlancy Street, age 7 Salem,MA June Page 7 Figure 2: , Equipment Wash Station Cross-Section 1926 NSP HASP&SMP Page 8 10 Blaney Strect,Salem.MA _ lune 2009 9 COMMUNICATION AND EMERGENCY PROCEDURES The following items should be located and discussed with all field personnel prior to the initiation of work at the Site. 1) Personal Protective Equipment 2) Project HASA Contact 3) Location of Nearest telephone In the event of an emergency, development of hazardous Site conditions, or significant changes in the work plan, communication will be established as soon as is practicable. AGENCY TELEPHONE Police Dept. Salem,MA 911 or(978)-744-0171 Fire Dept. Salem,MA 911 or(978)-744-1235 Public Health Officer Salem,MA 978}741-1800 Di Safe 1-888-DIG-SAFE 1-888-344-7233 City Hall(Salem,MA) (97$ 745-9595 Massachusetts State Police 978 538-6161 State Poison Control Center 800 222-1222 MADEP Hotline (888)-304-1133 North Shore Medical Center 81 Highland Avenue (978)741-1215 Salem,MA ENVIRONMENTAL FIRM TELEPHONE ' Site HASA Alliance Environmental Group, Inc. (617)492-6500 Michael F.Geisser,PE,LSP Cell(401)265-7597 1826 HSP i HASP&S.MI' I0 Hlaney Strom,Salem,MA Page 9 .__ June 2009 Direction to North Shore Medical Center 1, (A) Depart Blaney St 2. Turn right onto Derby St 0.2 mi 3. Turn left onto Webb St 0.5 mi 4. Turn left onto SR-1A/ SR-107/ Bridge St 1.2 mi 5. Road name changes to Proctor St 0.4 mi 6. Turn right onto SR-107/ Highland Ave 0.1 mi 7. (B) Arrive at 81 Highland Ave If you reach Colby St, you've gone too far 1a. $' ;*�' !1161 Ir•m Rmmul rF d yi i Whlu P;.n ''r S ileac 1 .r Sal_ni �` J T a PchNl$I Salem sr u s IV . F. A;A J5' � u 0 N u,e.':a Salem n pdF' u i Ti t^ 114, 'Jiai�ra:of iliJ,`.al 1826 lisp HASP&SMP Page 10 10 Blaney Street,Salem,MA Jun,.2009 SAFETY PRECAUTIONS/WORK PRACTICES Safety precautions and good work practices shall be implemented at all times to maintain strong safety awareness. A list of standing orders has been developed to ensure that all persons are cognizant of potential hazards. These standing orders will be reviewed by the Project Superintendent. Any changes in the orders will be announced officially during the scheduled safety meetings. The following orders apply: • Prescribed personal protective equipment shall be worn as directed by the PS and the Site HASA. • Assumptions will not be made concerning the nature of suspect materials found on the Site. Should any unusual situations occur or materials be encountered, operations will cease and the PS or Site HASA shall be contacted for further direction. • Consultation with the PS shall be made to verify any uncertainties. • The PS and Site HASA shall be informed when: o Unusual or suspect odors are detected, o Visual evidence of suspect soil is noted, or o Symptoms of chemical exposure or suspicious health conditions become apparent. • Any unsafe conditions shall be reported immediately. • Workers shall minimize contact with hazardous materials by: o Avoiding areas of obvious or likely contamination; o Using polyethylene sheeting to help contain contaminants, when identified; and o Avoiding direct contact with potentially contaminated materials. • Only essential personnel shall be permitted in the work zones. • Whenever possible, personnel will be located upwind during material handling. MISCELLANEOUS HEALTH AND SAFETY ITEMS This HASP is intended to cover workers who are exposed to greater hazards than the general employee population. Consequently, a clerk in an office on the periphery of the Site who does not enter the operations part of the Site and is exposed only to background levels of hazardous substances is not covered under this HASP. Employees who regularly enter the operations areas of the Site and who are exposed to levels significantly over background are covered by this HASP. 1826 HSP HASP&SMP Page I I 10 Blaney Street,Salem,MA June 2009 This HASP concentrates on those substances that will create the greatest risk to employees. Risk assessment considers the following: substance toxicity,potential for exposure, proximity to toxic substance, and availability of controls. For example, a level of exposure to a general population that is not likely to exceed background levels would not normally require notification. Similarly, a level of exposure above background but below established permissible exposure limits would also not require specific notification. As a precaution however, if levels are unknown, employees, contractors, and subcontractors will be informed of the potential for exposure. SAFETY MEETING Weekly safety meetings will be held to discuss the following: o Contents of the Site HASP, o Hazards of chemicals potentially present; and o Safety precautions/work practices. An attendance sheet shall be completed at the Safety Meeting and a log kept of the discussion, questions,and answers made amongst those in attendance. These sheets will be maintained in the job file. 1826 HSP HASP&SMP Page 12 10 Blaney Street,Salem,MA —. _ June 2009 A x'i'ACHMENT— A PLAN APPROVAL AGREEMENT The following individuals have reviewed the Site-specific health and safety plan (HASP)for the 10 Blaney Street project. They are responsible for implementing and enforcing the procedures and items covered by this HASP. In addition,AEG's Manager, Occupational Health and Safety, Mr. John Cucco, must approve any revisions or alterations to this plan before implementation. Notify Michael F. Geisser, PE, LSP,or Jacob Butterworth of any alterations or deviations from the procedures, requirements, etc., listed in this HASP. Once signed below, return a signed copy of this document to AEG. Project Superintendent Date Michael F. Geisser, PE, LSP Date Alliance Environmental Group,Inc. HASA 1826 FISP HASP&SMP 10 ahPage 13ncy$tree[,Salem,MA lune 2009 ATTACHMENT—B COMPLIANCE AGREEMENTS All appropriate on-Site personnel (i.e., Contractor employees and subcontractors)must complete and sign this section to be allowed continued presence on the 10 Blaney Street project. This copy of the HASP will be maintained by AEG. I have read and understood the contents of this Site-Specific HASP, and have had all relevant questions answered to my satisfaction. In addition, 1 agree to comply with the conditions/provisions outlined therein. NAME (print} SIGNATURE COMPANY DATE 1 i 1826 HSP a June 31,2011 Salem Conservation Commission City Hall Annex 120 Washington Street Salem,MA 01970 ATTN: Tom Devine,Agent RE: Salem Wharf Project-ConCom File DEP#64-482 Contract M-19—Site Development—Phase I Subj: Monthly Progress/Monitoring Report-#4 (BCE#29756-03) Dear Mr.Devine: As required by the Order of Conditions (64-482)please find below our current project progress and monitoring report: 1. The Salem Wharf Project is now substantially complete,with only the new Terminal Building and miscellaneous punch list items remaining. On behalf of the City of Salem,a resident engineer from Bourne Consulting Engineering(BCE)is providing the project oversight and has prepared this letter documenting conditions on the site over the past month of construction. 2. Current Project Status: • Contractor is currently over the project extension which was until June 9,2011. • All excavation/earthworks are now complete, including all required utility installations with the exception of placing stone dust in the area of the existing ferry service trailer, once the trailer has been removed from the site and ferry service has been transferred to the new terminal building. • There are no more"Cover"or"Non-Cover"stockpiles on the site. • The material which was generated from the unforeseen concrete tank mentioned in previous reports has been disposed of at an approved offsite facility. • Pavement has been placed as required on contract drawings. 3. Erosion&sediment control: • Silt boom has been removed as all work out shore of seawall is complete—see photo(1). • Silt fence(s)have been removed along the Dominion fence line, existing seawall edge& from end of new seawall to existing ferry service trailer as all earthworks has been completed in these areas—see photos(2 to 4). • There is no more Daily Dust Monitoring as all earthworks associated with the site AUL is complete and the site now has pavement over it. • The only remaining stockpile left on-site is: o 'Excess Stone Revetment which is intended to be used on a future phase of this project—this material is not under the site AUL. The stockpile is located in the designated stockpile area shown on sheet 10—"Layout and Materials Plan"-see photo 5. 4. All erosion and sediment controls have now been removed as work is substantially complete, site conditions appear stable.No other issues to date. BCE will continue to monitor the site as per the Order of Conditions. Should you have any questions or need additional information,please do not hesitate to contact us. Respectively submitted, BOURNE CONSULTING ENGINEERING Enclosure Patrick Hanley,Resident Engineer { . �.�� s 'k 4(��}a �,7: � T ,.��•-fly { 9 ° �'�`r,k .. �U { Photo 1—Seawall—No Silt Boom. P. v= . — t r w rid � iT, I� z ti Photo 2 Existing Seawall—Silt Fence Removed. i . a h t t .r 44, r, u Photo 3—Dominion Fence linej—Silt Fence Removed. wo b x ti �R; b Gmr" Photo 4—Out shore of New Terminal Building—Silt Fence Removed. t x { F Nod h ! k f �S3i +F �L x m Photo 5—Revetment Stockpile—to be used in future phase. l March 31, 2011 Salem Conservation Commission City Hall Annex 120 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 ATTN: Tom Devine,Agent RE: Salem Wharf Project -ConCom File DEP#64-482 Contract M-19—Site Development—Phase I Subj: Monthly Progress/Monitoring Report-#1 (BCE 429756-06) Dear Mr. Devine: As required by the Order of Conditions (64-482) please find below our current project progress and monitoring report: 1. The City of Salem has commenced construction on the Salem Wharf Project which consists of constructing upland improvements as well as a terminal building. On behalf of the City of Salem, a resident engineer from Bourne Consulting Engineering (BCE) is providing the project oversight and has prepared this letter documenting conditions on the site over the course of this past month of construction. 2. Current Project Status: • Concrete seawall is scheduled to be completed by either the end of this week or early next week. • Contractor is beginning to install drainage structures leading out to Blaney Street. • Contractor intends to begin work on Blaney Street next week—starting 04/04/11. 3. Erosion&sediment control: • Silt boom in place and intact—see photo(2). • Silt fence(s) along Dominion side of property, existing seawall edge & from end of new seawall to existing trailer are in place and intact—see photos(3 to 5). • Contractor has installed a temporary "runoff' pad at the site entrance to avoid tracking material onto the street—see photo(6). • Proper "runoff' pad to be installed once work on Blaney Street is complete. Tentative completion date for work on Blaney Street is April 15, 2011. • All material stockpiles have been covered with poly-ethylene sheeting as required. Non- cover material has been placed on top of poly-ethylene sheeting as well—see photo(7). 4. All erosion and sediment controls are in place and site conditions appear stable. No issues to date. BCE will continue to monitor the site as per the Order of Conditions. We hope the enclosed is satisfactory for your needs. Should you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact us. Respectively submitted, BOURNE CONSULTING ENGINEERING Enclosure Patrick Hanley, Resident Engineer ,p - `✓t � attar, rtf MW i 3 tt, 1� � ✓�PR'" 3 r �'a Y f4 YAC"' 3 t t _ x F Photo 3—Silt Fence—Along Existing Seawall. t 4`x { i r a 1[�W i I ry I 1 a r_yx'� +yi 3 Yi��yl �� filo a a` w� Photo 4—Silt Fence—Along Dominion Fenceline. F Photo 5—Silt Fence—End of seawall wrapping around toward construction trailers. at: a tm i b..•o-;:. ' J5 4SiM„{ v }� y i� ypmii r�� '.{ 6 t . p. CPN i Photo 6—Temporary"runofr'pad. K � » � Photo 7—An-Cr MaterialStockpile—plac a r&covered with«» Pho ax . . . zy :y m!m_r MaterialStockpile—_ad !#» 4 � B M1E:4.7we ey .@. O 31 c kms n 4 = `v tiYn t h k N S t p r Photo 9—Covered Slope of Excavation. 4 � �e�:i sta' 1 4 .,, ;'..8 % x }•0'I w"T��4q `f�4�F�1{ I �.:. Mill 9 F 8 ..g. VtLb e 5ii 4 vY' 4 � 1 4 11 f~ Photo 10—Hay bale Stockpile to the right. SALEM WHARF PROJECT SITE DEVELOPMENT—PHASE I CITY OF SALEM SITE TENANTS Planning & Community Development Salem Ferry: City Hall Annex Harbor Express 120 Washington Street 703 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 Quincy, MA 02169 Pr ' oiect Management William Walker Kathleen Winn Office:(617) 770-0040 ext 103 Office: (978) 619-5684 Cell: (617) 797-1992 Cell: (978) 479-5225 E-Mail: bwalker@harborexpress.com E-Mail: kwinn@salem.com Excelerate Energy City Engineer: Northeast Gateway David Knowlton SPT Offshore LLC Office: (978) 619-5673 27 Congress Street Cell: (978) 815-3962 Salem, MA 01970 E-Mail: dknowiton@salem.com Captain Jeff Havlicek Building Department Office:(978) 219-5900 Thomas St. Pierre, Director Cell: (617) 291-5424 Office:(978) 745-9595 x5641 E-Mail: Jeff.Havlicek@skaugen.com Cell: (978) 740-9846 E-Mail: tstpierre@salem.com Conservation Commission Tom Devine, Agent Office: (978) 619-5685 E-Mail: tdevine@salem.com Port Manager Russ Vickers 131 Loring Avenue Suite 530 Salem, MA 01970 russ@lunipercovegroup.com BCE 29756-3 Page I of 3 February 25, 2011 SALEM WHARF PROJECT SITE DEVELOPMENT -PHASE I CONSULTANT TEAM Bourne Consulting Engineering Project Geotechnical Engineer 3 Bent Street GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES, INC. Franklin, MA 55 North Stark Highway Weare, NH 03281 Project Manager Ronald R. Bourne, Harry Wetherbee Office:508-533-6666 Office:(603) 624-2722 ex 202 Cell: 401-595-7245 Cell: (603) 235-4866 E-Mail: ron@bournece.com E-Mail: hwetherbee@geotechserve.com Project Surveyor Resident Engineer Nitsch Engineering, Inc. Patrick Hanley 186 Lincoln St., Suite 200 Cell:508-728-4557 Boston, MA 02111-2403 E-Mail: PHanlev@bournece.com Paul Lebaron, Jr Project Civil Engineer Office:(617) 338-0063 Raymond Willis Cell: Office:(508) 440-5470 E-Mail: PLeBaron@nitscheng.com Cell: (508) 341-8570 E-Mail: naillis@onsite-eng.com Project Architect Norris & Norris Associates 448 Huron Avenue Project Landscape Architect Cambridge, MA 02138 Shadley Associates, P.C. 1730 Massachusetts Avenue Charles Norris Lexington, MA 02420-5301 Office:(617) 354-5801 Cell: (617) 699-7338 Pamela Shadley E-Mail: cr.norris@verizon.net Office:(781) 652-8809 ext 12 Cell: (339) 223-4869 EMail: Project Enviromental Consultant oshadlev@shadleyassociates.com Alliance Environmental Group, Inc. 124 Mt. Auburn Street Project Electrical Engineer Suite 20ON RDK Engineers, Inc Cambridge, MA 02138 Seaport Center 70 Fargo Street, Suite 800 Jacob Butterworth Boston, MA 02210-1964 Office: (617) 492-6500 Cell: (401) 413-9110 Steve Costa E-Mail: Office: (857) 221-5931 ibutterworth@allianceenvironmentalgrou Cell: (617)-938-0435p com E-Mail: scosta@rdkennineers.com BCE 29756-3 Page 2 of 3 February 25, 2011 SALEM WHARF PROJECT SITE DEVELOPMENT—PHASE I CONTRACTOR: Hugo Key And Son, Inc. PO Box 6 51 Americas Cup Avenue Newport, RI 02840 Hugo Key II (Sandy) Office: 401-847-7350 Cell: 401-316-9077 E-Mail: sbdmrn@aol.com Jonathan Key Cell: 401-855-1051 E-Mail: iohnvk34@aol.com Hugo Key III Cell: 401-835-1133 E-Mail: hkbossl3@aol.com SUBCONTRACTORS SALEM-Master Contact List 021811 BCE 29756-3 Page 3 of 3 February 25, 2011 I �+ Bourne Consulting Engineering _ BCE 3 Bent Street Ronald R.Bourne,P.E.-President Franklin, MA 02038 January 5, 2009 City of Salem Conservation Commission Attn:-Carey R. Duques, ATCP .� 9 120 Washington Street VY b 'Lu Salem, MA 01970 JAN UEPT.of F� F�^ �& Re: Salem Wharf Project, MA DEP#64-482 (BCE#28705) C�w+.k•J + - Subj: Supplemental Information for NOI Application Dear Carey: Please find attached some additional information regarding the application of the City of Salem for the . Salem Wharf Project at 10 Blaney Street, Salem, MA. As we discussed over the phone today,the application and stormwater management report have been changed to reflect some recent information regarding previous investigation of'the site pursuant to the Massachusetts Contingency Plan and potential site soil contamination. We have also modified the building design (see Sheet 6) to reflect concerns submitted to us through the Chapter 91 ,comment period by the MA DCR. We are also awaiting a signature from Dominion Energy which will arrive before the meeting scheduled for January 8, 2009. ._ If you have any questions or need any additional information please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, BOURNE CONSULTING ENGINEERING Alyssa Richard Environmental Specialist Enclosure CC: Kathy Winn, City of Salem Tel. (508) 533-6666 • .Fax(508) 533-0600 • e-mail: bce@boumece.com Bourne Consulting Engineering BC�_1 3 Bent Street Ronald R.Bourne,P.E.-President - Franklin, AM 02038 October 9, 2008 City of Salem Conservation Commission Attn: Carey R. Duques,AICP 120 Washington Street Salem,MA 01970 Re: Salem Wharf Project,MA DEP464-482 (BCE#28705) Subj: Supplemental Information for NOI Application Dear Carey: Please find attached some additional information regarding the application of the City of Salem for the, Salem Wharf Project at 10 Blaney Street; Salem, MA. The eelgrass and shellfish surveys were completed on October 2, 2008 and our findings are included. In response to some questions from the Conservation Commission a summary of the Stormwater Treatment Plan has been included along with some revised plans to help clarify the methods used to achieve the proposed Best Management Practices. Additionally please find a photocopy of the returned cards from the notification to abutters that were - mailed on September 9, 2009. We are still awaiting;the return of four additional return cards and will provide those for you as soon as they are returned to us. We hope that this will help to address some of the concerns that the Conservation Commission had expressed and we look forward to working with you to complete this application. Very truly yours, ` - BOURNE CONSULTING ENGINEERING Alyssa Richard Environmental Specialist Enclosure CC: Jill Provencal, MA DEP Kathy Winn, City of Salem .. Tel. (508) 533-6666 Fax(508) 533-0600 •.a-mail: bce@boumece.com Bourne Consulting Engineering Eel Grass Investigation of Dredge Site For Salem Wharf Project October 2008 Purpose The purpose of this memo is to detail the investigation of eelgrass (Zostera marina) in Salem Harbor for the future dredge of the harbor to maintain navigation around the proposed pier. Massachusetts GIS investigations from 1995 showed some eel grass in the area just outside of the dredge footprint. The 2001 MA GIS survey of the same area showed a significant reduction in the area of eelgrass. The goal of the investigation was to verify the presence of eel grass at the previously documented area and if found, to estimate the percentage of eelgrass coverage. Methodology On Thursday October 2, 2008, BCE performed an investigation for the presence of eelgrass at Salem Harbor in Salem, MA. A two man SCUBA team was led by an engineer diver with a safety diver also in the water and a biologist on board the tender vessel. The area of the dredge footprint was surveyed in a grid pattern to establish the presence or absence of eel grass in the proposed dredge area. The search area is approximately 200 ft wide and the divers swam in transects approximately 20 feet apart. Navigation was achieved with the use of an underwater compass. Visibility underwater was approximately 15 feet ensuring that the entire bottom was visible to the divers. Divers were in the water from approximately 12:33 PM to 1:25 PM. During that time the tide was rising with low tide at 7:40 AM and high tide at 1:42 PM. There was a slight southerly current. At times the water depths were shallow and visibility was clear making direct observation of the ocean bottom from the tender vessel possible. This allowed for multiple methods of direct observation of the dredge area. Investigation Findings No presence of eelgrass in the proposed area was detected. The bottom sediments range from fine sand to clay. Summary The purpose of this investigation was to establish the presence or absence of eelgrass in the proposed dredge area and, if found, to estimate the percentage of eelgrass coverage. Eelgrass was not found in the proposed area of Salem Harbor. Eelgrass can grow in areas of wide ranging water temperature and salinity and in many different bottom substrates. This, coupled with the previous presence of eelgrass in areas adjacent to the project site led to the possibility for the presence of eelgrass in the dredge area, but no eelgrass beds were found. Page 1 of 1 Bourne Consulting Engineering Shellfish Survey of Dredge Site For Salem Wharf Project October 2008 Purpose The purpose of this memo is to detail the shellfish survey conducted in Salem Harbor in the area proposed for the future dredge of the harbor to maintain navigation around the proposed pier. The proposed area lies adjacent to the Massachusetts GIS shellfish suitability polygon and MA DMF survey from June 19, 2008 indicated the presence of soft shell clams (Mya arenaria), razor clams (Ensis directus) and blue mussels (Mytilus edulis). The goal of the investigation was to verify the presence and type of shellfish in the proposed dredge area and if found, to estimate the percentage of the dredge area that may be suitable shellfish habitat. Methodology On Thursday October 2, 2008, BCE performed an investigation for the presence of shellfish at Salem Harbor in Salem, MA. A boat was utilized to access the sampling areas. A one meter by one meter sampling square (quadrat) was randomly placed into the sediment approximately every 250 feet along the dredge profile (see attached plan). A two man SCUBA team was led by an engineer diver with a safety diver also in the water and a biologist on board the tender vessel. The SCUBA team dug to approximately 3 feet within the quadrat to establish the presence or absence of shellfish in each sample location. Investigation Findings Site 1: Approximately 2+50 feet outshore Some broken razor clam and clam shells were found but no live intact animals were located in the quadrat. Site 2: Approximately 5+00 feet outshore Some broken clam shells were found around the sample quadrat but no shells or live intact animals were located within the quadrat. Site 3: Approximately 7+50 feet outshore Some broken razor clam and clam shells were found but no live intact animals were located in the quadrat. Site 4: Approximately 10+00 feet outshore In addition to broken razor clam and clam shells, five live, intact soft shell clams (Mya arenaria) were found within the sample quadrat. Summary The purpose of this investigation was to establish the presence or absence of shellfish in the proposed dredge area and, if found, to estimate the percentage of the dredge area that contains shellfish. Of the 4 lm2 sample quadrats investigated only one contained any shellfish and only five individuals were found total within that sample area. All shellfish found, while within the proposed dredge footprint were located outshore of the pier construction area. This indicates that although there are some shellfish present within the proposed project site the do not occur in significant numbers. Coupled with the areas designation as a Designated Port Area it is unlikely that the proposed area served as significant habitat for shellfish species. Page I of 1 Bourne Consulting Engineering Stormwater Treatment Summary for Salem Wharf Project October 2008 In order to prevent direct run off of stormwater into Salem Harbor the following Best Management Practices (BMP) are being implemented at the proposed Wharf Project site (see attached Exhibit 1). The infiltration galley will act to contain the first inch of rainwater and allow that water to slowly filter into the surrounding soil and gravel. Stormwater will first be directed into the catch basins which will allow oil and other volatiles will remain on the surface giving them the opportunity to naturally evaporate. The Stormwater from the catch basins is first directed into a Stormceptor, followed by an oil/water separator. A Stormceptor, considered to be a proprietary separator, utilizes a vortex/swirling action via gravity to remove floatables and coarse solids from the stormwater runoff. The proprietary separator must be placed at the beginning of the pretreatment train in order to maximize its effectiveness. The oil/water separator consists of a three compartment tank to remove sediments not captured in the catch basins and Stormceptor, as well as removing oil and floating matter (see Exhibit 2). This BMP was selected as it is generally recommended when discharging to a Critical Area (Shellfish Growing Area) and that it does provide some storage capacity in the event of a spill. The first chamber(called sediment trapping chamber) is designed with an orifice opening at approximately 2/3 the water level depth in the chamber and takes up about 1/2 the total tank volume. This chamber volume provides detention time and a quiescent zone to promote suspended solids to settle out in this chamber, while the location of the orifice below the top of the water level allows floating solids and oils to be retained. The second chamber(oil separation chamber) is about '/4 of the tank volume and is provided with an inverted elbow and pipe that extends down into this chamber approximately 12 inches from the tank floor. This allows water to be drawn from the bottom of the tank, which would capture in this chamber any floatables/oil carried over from the first chamber. The last chamber, at approximately '/4 the tank volume, serves as a final step for fine sediment removal. After passing through the catch basins, Stormceptor and oil/water separator the treated stormwater is released through the outfall pipe into Salem Harbor. Page I of 1 15 4%`. PROPOSED DRAIN MANHOLE (TYP.) / 1 1. 14. CB 1 LJ + PROPOSED - - - - STORMWATER OUTFALL I G:. cn cn 1 - ✓` PROPOSED OIL/ _ _ WATER SEPARATOR -- SEE DETAIL n PROPOSED STORMCEPTOR ~ (TYP.) SEE DETAIL Ln T -- 0 G 118'X30' WATER QUALITY � � INFILTRATION GALLEY SEE —8 PERMEABLE PARKING DETAIL 8`26—f AREA (GRAVEL/STONE) 0 03 n - STORMWATER TREATMENT DETAIL x 0 30 y ® —�Bo�ee Con�ltlog ediog 1 — e� EXHIBIT 1 SCALE: 1 ' — 30'-0" MANHOLE FRAMES AND COWWS SCKAS REPO/RED.LEW21NG COURSE 727 GRADE (rw.) FRAME 70 BE SET/N FULL BW OF MORTAR. f-7NISYM GRADE US, ARM Sh LEVARCIN FWNDRY L204 a9OO/a)N 15'RCP LN� 7RASY RACK STANDARD 7WAP 7WASY RACK FLOW XkXXx WA 7ER LEMM WA 7ER LEM2 15NAUP OUT 7ER LEVEL ° fazow C'4 a' GAS T a' GAS 77aV 7H/RD -cMMDVTA 770V CH4MBER ahAM9ER LY/AMBER M, 8m CaVC BLOCK WALL CNE 8w CaVC &OCK WALL CROSS SECTION8• M BE 7UfiNEV ON 17S SVE 70 ALLOW WATER 70 PASS 7HRal&Y. GMT OVAMBER SPECIRZA 77aV& 1.) CONDW7E MINIMUM S7RVVG7H - 5000 P.Sl 0 28 DAYS 2) S7M REINFORCEMENT - AS7M A-615-74 GRADE 60, 1-MIN. CODER 3) CCW57WVC7?aV JOINT - SEALED W7H I-DIA BUTIM RUBBER OR EDU/VALENT ,K) GRIT 0YAMSER CAPACITY= .;500 GALLONS 5) INSW WD7H OF CYAMED? IS 6t-ON OIL/WATER SEPA RA TOR NOT TO SCALE IEXHIBIT 2 Of CITE' OF SALEM CONSERVATION COMMISSION SITE VISIT FORM PROJECT LOCATION: �OA w^"` DATE OF SITE VISIT• le PROJECT PROPONENT: C 11 DEP FILE NUM ER: Ly PROPOSED WORK: " �A ✓y t Li Commission Members/Agent:e'7-3"A d '� 1 Abutters: Applicant/Property Owner/Representative: sI�E vis;;..PuRPaSE_3? IN , �. ter., ❑Request for Determination ❑Abbreviated Notice of Resource Area Delineation ❑Notice of Intent ❑Certificate of Compliance ❑Enforcement/Violation F-]Emergency 'Informal INLAND RESOURCE AREAS COASTAL RESOURCE AREAS ❑Bank ❑ Land Subject to Coastal ❑Land Under the Ocean Storm Flowage ❑Bordering Vegetated Wetland ElPort Area ❑Coastal Beach ❑Land Subject to Flooding ElCoastal Dune El Barrier Beach F-1 Land Under Water Bodies or Waterway Name: ❑ Coastal Bank ❑Rocky Intertidal Shore ❑Riverfront Area ❑ Salt Marsh ❑ Land Under Salt Pond ❑Vernal Pools ❑ Land Containing ❑Anadromous/Cata- Shellfish dromous Fish Run ❑ Bordering Vegetated Wetland in Coastal Area BUFFER ZONE�(wtthin 100wfeetj a . ❑Water Body ❑ Bordering Vegetated Wetland ❑ Bank ❑ Coastal Beach ❑Coastal Dune • INT.ERESTS.,pROTEQEC)•" ,"` ,"� - ' - ❑Protection of Water Supply ❑ Protection of Groundwater Supply ❑Flood Control ❑Storm Damage Prevention ❑Prevention of Pollution ❑Protection of Fisheries ❑ Protection of Wildlife Habitat ❑Protection of Land Containing Shellfish Is this an exempt project: If so,why? Are resource area boundaries delineated correctly? If not,explain. ❑Photos ❑ Site Map ❑Other: OBSER'ilATIQNS , Take into account relevant aspects or featuresW such as: natural or piped drainage or obvious pollution; topography; existing vegetation; possible alternative sites; signs of wildlife, possible vernal pools, rare species habitat; landmarks; recent or historical disturbances; proximity to other water bodies or drainage areas; adjacent land uses. 1 � '\J\ `' lR GAl— /I �\ COMMONVdEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENERGY & ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ONE \','INTER STREET, BOSTON , MA 02105 017-292-5500 li DE\'P1 LPATRICI{ RECEIVED I'LNA.20\VLF . - Governor N II 0000 O 3 Secretary TIMOTHY P.MURRAY _ JUN IV C J LAURIE BURT - Lieutenant Governor 0•`=PT.OF KANI`4 G Pit Commissioner CO"filli lryDf.vcl_ONKINT City of Salem C/o Bourne Consulting Engineering 3 Bent Street Franklin, MA 02038 RE: ISSUANCE OF CHAPTER 91 WATERWAYS LICENSE JUN X 3 2009 Waterways License Application No. W08-2463, License No. 12422 Salem Harbor, Salem, Essex County Dear Licensee, The Department of Environmental Protection hereby issues the above-referenced Waterways license, enclosed, authorizing you to perform certain activities pursuant to M.G.L. c. 91, the Public Waterfront Act and its regulations 310 CMR 9.00. Any change in use or alteration of any structure or fill not authorized by this license shall render this license void. This License is not final until all administrative appeal periods from this License have elapsed, or if such an appeal has been taken, until all proceedings before the Department have been completed. The appeal period is for twenty-one (21) days. No work shall be undertaken until the License has become final and has been recorded in the Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located, within the chain of title of the affected property RECORDING OF THE LICENSE This License must be recorded at the County Registry of Deeds or, if registered land, with the Land Registration Office within sixty (60) days from the date of license issuance. In the case of recorded land, the License shall also be noted in the Registry's Grantor Index under the name of the owner of the land upon which the project is located. In the case of the registered land, the License shall also be noted on the Land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land upon which the project is located: Failure to record this license within sixty (60) days of the date of issuance will render this license void pursuant to 310 CMR 9.18. A Waterways License Recordation Notice Form has been enclosed for your use in notifying the Department of the recording information for this License. Failure to notify the Department of the recording of this license is a violation of 310 CMR 9.00 and is subject to enforcement action by the Department. APPEAL RIGHTS AND TIME LIMITS The following persons shall have the right to an adjudicatory hearing concerning this decision by the Department to grant or deny a license or permit, in accordance with 310 CMR 9.17(1): (a) an applicant who has demonstrated property rights in the lands in question, or which is a public This information is available in alternate format.Call Donald M.Gomes,ADA Coordinator at 617-556-1057.TDD Service-1-800-298-2207. MassDEP on the World Wide Web: http://w .mass.gov/dep - C�'d Printed on Recycled Paper RE: ISSUANCE OF CHAPTER 91 WATERWAYS LICENSE Waterways License Application No. W08-2463, License No. 124.22 Salem Harbor, Salem, Essex County agency; (b) any person aggrieved by the decision of the Department to grant a license or permit who has submitted written comments within the public comment period; (c) ten (10) residents of the Commonwealth who, pursuant to M.G.L. c. 30A, § 10A, have submitted comments within the public comment period with at least 5 of the 10 residents residing in the municipality(s) in which the license or permitted activity is located. The appeal shall clearly and specifically state the facts and grounds for the appeal and the relief sought, and each appealing resident shall file an affidavit stating the intent to be part of the group and to be represented by its authorized representative; (d) the municipal official in the affected municipality who has submitted written comments within the public comment period; and (e) CZM, for any project identified in 310 CMR 9.13(2) (a) for CZM participation or, in an Ocean Sanctuary, if it has filed a notice of participation within the public comment period. A person requesting an adjudicatory hearing must submit a "Notice of Claim" to the Department, with a copy of the MassDEP Transmittal Form and including the detail specified below, within twenty-one (21) days of the date of issuance of this decision. The MassDEP Fee Transmittal Form is available at the following website: http://www.mass.qov/deo/service/adr/adiherfm.doc. The Notice of Claim must be made in writing and sent by certified mail or hand delivery to: Case Administrator MassDEP One Winter Street, 2nd Floor Boston, MA 02108 A copy of the complete Notice of Claim must be sent at the same time by certified mail or hand delivery to: (1) the applicant, (2) the municipal official of the city or town where the project is located, and (3) the issuing office of the MassDEP, which in this case is located at: MassDEP Waterways Regulation Program One Winter Street, 5 1 Floor Boston, MA 02108 The MassDEP Fee Transmittal Form and a valid check payable to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in the amount of one hundred dollars ($100) must be mailed to: Mass. Department of Environmental Protection Commonwealth Master Lockbox P.O. Box 4062 Boston, Massachusetts 02211 CONTENTS OF APPEAL REQUEST Pursuant to 310 CMR 9.17(3), any Notice of Claim requesting an adjudicatory hearing must include the following information: (a) the MassDEP Waterways Application File Number; (b) the complete name, address, fax number and telephone number of the applicant; (c) the address of the project; (d) the complete name, address, fax number, and telephone number of the party filing the request and, if represented by counsel, the name, address, fax number, and phone number of the attorney; (e) if claiming to be a person aggrieved, the specific facts that demonstrate that the party satisfies the definition of"aggrieved person" found in 310 CMR 9.02; (f) a clear statement that a formal adjudicatory hearing is being requested; (g) a clear statement of the facts which are the grounds for the proceedings, the specific objections to the MassDEP's written decision, and the relief sought through the adjudicatory hearing, including specifically the changes desired in the final written decision; and Michael Girvan Waterways Regulation Program Department of Environmental Protection 1 Winter Street, 5th Floor Boston, Massachusetts 02108 RE: ' NOTIFICATION OF RECORDING THE WATERWAYS LICENSE Waterways License No. 12422 Salem Harbor, Salem, Essex County Dear Mr. Girvan: This is to notify you that the above referenced Waterways license was recorded with the appropriate Registry of Deeds/ Land Court for this project location and to provide your office with the following recordation information. Date of Recordation: County Registry of Deeds/ Land Court: Book number , and page number(s) We will apply for a Certificate of Compliance with your office when the authorized work or change in use is completed. Sincerely, Chapter 91 Waterways Licensee License is void if not recorded within sixty (60) days of issuance. RE: ISSUANCE OF CHAPTER 91 WATERWAYS LICENSE Waterways License Application No. W06-2463, License No. 12422 Salem Harbor, Salem, Essex County (h) a statement that a copy of the request has been sent to: the applicant and the municipal official of the city or town where the project is located. DISMISSAL OF REQUEST The request for appeal will be dismissed if the filing fee is not paid, unless the appellant is exempt or is granted a waiver. The filing fee is not required if the appellant is a city or town (or municipal agency), county, or district of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, or a municipal housing authority. The Department may waive the adjudicatory hearing filing fee pursuant to 310 CMR 4.06(2) for a person who shows that paying the fee will create an undue financial hardship. A person seeking a waiver must file an affidavit setting forth the facts believed to support the claim of undue financial hardship together with the hearing request as provided above. Please feel free to contact David B. Slagle of the Waterways Regulation Program, (617) 654-6640, if you have any questions pertaining to the recording of your Waterways license or Certificate of Compliance. Sincerely, Ben Lynch Program Chief Waterways Regulation Program cc: Salem, Mayor and City Council Salem, Conservation Commission Salem, Planning Board Salem, Harbormaster Ecc: DEP/NE Wetlands File # EOEEA, MEPA Unit File # Enclosure(s) Waterways License # 12422 Notification of Waterways License Recordation form r No. 12422 EIPffi6, City of Salem of -- Salem --, in the County of -- Essex -- and Commonwealth aforesaid, has applied to the Department of Environmental Protection for license to -- construct and maintain a multi use water transportation facility. The proposed project consists of the construction and maintenance of a water transportation terminal building, a fixed pile supported pier and a system of floats and gangways to accommodate commercial vessels, stormwater outfalls, Harborwalk and a fishing pier and to dredge approximately 65,530 cubic yards of sediment ---- and has submitted plans of the same; and whereas due notice of said application has been given, as required by law, to the -- Mayor and City Council -- of the -- City of Salem; --------- NOW,'said Department, having heard all parties desiring to be heard, and having fully considered said application, hereby, subject to the approval of the Governor, authorizes and licenses the said -- City of Salem --, subject to the provisions of the ninety-first chapter of the General Laws, and of all laws which are or may be in force applicable thereto, to -- construct and maintain a multi use water transportation facility. The proposed project consists of the construction and maintenance of a water transportation terminal building, a fixed pile supported pier and a system of floats and gangways to accommodate commercial vessels, stormwater outfalls, Harborwalk and a fishing pier and to dredge approximately 65,530 cubic yards of sediment ---- in and over flowed and filled tidelands of -- Salem Harbor -- at 10 Blaney Street --within the Salem Harbor Designated Port Area -- in the -- City of Salem -- and in accordance with the locations shown and details indicated on the accompanying DEP License Plan No. 12422; (9 sheets). PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER License No. 12422 Page 2 The structures hereby authorized shall be limited to the following uses: to provide a municipal berthing facility for commercial vessels, public access to navigable waters, public access to waterfront open space for passive recreational purposes and to maintain and improve navigation. SPECIAL CONDITIONS This license shall have an unlimited term. Dredging/excavation of sediments shall have a five (5) yearterm. All work authorized herein shall be completed within five (5) years of the date of license issuance. Said construction period may be extended by the Department for one or more one year periods without public notice, provided that the Applicant submits to the Department thirty (30) days prior to the end of the construction period, a written request to extend the period and provides adequate justification for said extension. Within 60 days of completion of the licensed project, the Licensee shall request in writing that the Department issue a Certificate of Completion in accordance with 310 CMR 9.19. The request shall be accompanied by a certification by a registered professional engineer licensed in the Commonwealth that the project was completed in accordance with the License. Please see page 3 and 4 for additional conditions to this license. ------------------------------------------ ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Duplicate of said plan, number 12422 on file in the office of said Department, and original of said plan accompanies this License, and is to be referred to as a part hereof. License No. 12422 Page 3 STANDARD WATERWAYS LICENSE CONDITIONS 1. Acceptance of this Waiemays License shall constitute an agreement by the Licensee to conform to all terms and conditions stated herein. 2. This License is granted upon the express condition that any and all other applicable authorizations necessitated due to the provisions hereof shall be secured by the Licensee Roor to the commencement of any activity or use authorized pursuant to this License. 3. Any change in use or any substantial structural alteration of any structure or fill authorized herein shall require the issuance by the Department of a new Waterways License in accordance with the provisions and procedures established in Chapter 91 of the Massachusetts General Laws. Any unauthorized substantial change in use or unauthorized substantial structural alteration of any structure or fill authorized herein shall render this Waterways License void. 4. This Waterways License shall be revocable by the Department for noncompliance with the terms and conditions set forth herein. This license may be revoked after the Department has given written notice of the alleged noncompliance to the Licensee and those persons who have filed a written request for such notice with the Department and afforded them a reasonable opportunity to correct said noncompliance. Failure to correct said noncompliance after the issuance of a written notice by the Department shall render this Waterways License void and the Commonwealth may proceed to remove or cause removal of any structure or fill authorized herein at the expense of the Licensee, its successors and assigns as an unauthorized and unlawful structure and/or fill. 5. The structures and/or fill authorized herein shall be maintained in good repair and in accordance with the terms and conditions stated herein and the details indicated on the accompanying license plans. 6. Nothing in this Waterways License shall be construed as authorizing encroachment in, on or over property not owned or controlled by the Licensee, except with the written consent of the owner or owners thereof. 7. This Waterways License is granted subject to all applicable Federal, State, County, and Municipal laws, ordinances and regulations including but not limited to a valid final Order of Conditions issued pursuant to the Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. Chapter 131, s.40. 8. This Waterways License is granted upon the express condition that the use of the structures and/or fill authorized hereby shall be in strict conformance with all applicable requirements and authorizations of the DEP. 9, This License authorizes structure's) and/or fill on: _Private Tidelands. In accordance with the public easement that exists by law on private tidelands,the licensee shall allow the public to use and to pass freely upon the area of the subject property lying between the high and low water marks,for the purposes of fishing,fowling, navigation, and the natural derivatives thereof. X Commonwealth Tidelands. The Licensee shall not restrict the public's right to use and to pass freely, for any lawful- purpose, upon lands lying seaward of the low water mark. Said lands are held in trust by the Commonwealth for the benefit of the public. _a Great Pond of the Commonwealth. The Licensee shall not restrict the public's right to use and to pass freely upon lands lying seaward of the high water mark for any lawful purpose. Navigable River or Stream. The Licensee shall not restrict the public's right to use and to pass freely, for any lawful purpose,in the waterway. No restriction on the exercise of these public rights shall be imposed unless otherwise expressly provided in this license. 10. Unless otherwise expressly provided by this license, the licensee shall not limit the hours of availability of any areas of the subject property designated for public passage, nor place any gates,fences, or other structures on such areas in a manner that would impede or discourage the free flow of pedestrian movement thereon. License No. 12422 Page 4 STANDARD WATERWAYS DREDGE CONDITIONS . 1 . Acceptance of this Waterways License shall constitute an agreement by the licensee to conform to all terms and conditions stated herein. 2. This license is issued upon the express condition that any and all other applicable authorizations necessitated due to the provisions hereof shall be secured by the licensee prior to the commencement of any activity hereby authorized. 3. This license shall be revocable by the Department for noncompliance with the terms and conditions set forth herein. This license may be revoked after the Department has given written notice of the alleged noncompliance to the licensee, or his agent, and those persons who have filed a written request, with the Department, for such notice and have afforded the licensee a reasonable opportunity to correct said noncompliance. Failure to correct said noncompliance after the issuance of a written notice by the Department shall render this license void. 4. This license is issued subject to all applicable federal, state, county, and municipal laws, ordinances, by-laws, and regulations, including but not limited to, a valid Order of Conditions issued pursuant to the Wetlands Protection Act, M.G.L. Chapter 131, s.40. 5. This Waterways License is issued upon the express condition that dredging and transportation and disposal of dredge material shall be in strict conformance with all applicable requirements and authorizations of the Department. 6. All subsequent maintenance dredging and transportation and disposal of this dredge material, during the term of this license, shall conform to all standards and conditions applied to the original dredging operation performed under this license. 7. The licensee shall assume and pay all claims and demands arising in any manner from the work authorized herein, and shall save harmless and indemnify the audits, damages, costs and expenses incurred by reason thereof. 8. The licensee shall, at least three days before commencing any dredging in the tide water, give written notice to the Department of the time, location and amount of the proposed work. 9. Whosoever violates any provisions of this license shall be subject to a fine of $25,000 per day for each day such violation occurs or continues, or by imprisonment for not more than one year, or both such fine and imprisonment; or shall be subject to civil penalty not to exceed $25,000 per day for each day such violation occurs or continues. License No. 12422 Page 5 The amount of tidewater displaced by the work hereby authorized has been ascertained by said Department, and compensation thereof has been made by the said -- City of Salem -- by paying into the treasury of the Commonwealth -- zero dollars and zero cents ($0.00)-- for each cubic yard so displaced, being the amount hereby assessed by said Department. (0.0 cu. yds. _ $0.00) Nothing in this License shall be so construed as to impair the legal rights of any person. This License shall be void unless the same and the accompanying plan are recorded within 60 days from the date hereof, in the Registry of Deeds for the County of-- Essex ------- IN WITNESS WHEREAS, said Department of Environmental Protection have hereunto set their hands this 3rd day of June in the year two thousand and nine Commissioner Department of Environmental Program Chief Protection THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS This license is approved in consideration of the payment into the treasury of the Commonwealth by the said -- City of Salem -- the further sum of -- zero dollars and zero cents ($0.00) the amount determined by the Governor as a just and equitable charge for rights and privileges hereby granted in the land of the Commonwealth. BOSTO , Approved by the Governor. Governor �7 .Zl C7 p ➢ BOUNDARY OF LAND SUBJECT l 11 I zuncu r�wr�i�i- II Z x 'O W m r z - TO COASTAL STORM FLOWAGE TBM: PK SET IN z Z D O DOD BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT 10X10 PLATFORM MOORING DOLPI r �1 �7- EL. 14.1 MLW / �r Vt PT z Vt p ee°u'mrMY omm O Y X � D O DOMINION ENERGY i DZW � ZZ3 � - SALEM / LLC c - z l � D z O A z _ --� -If k'1 Ol CONCRETE CURBS .:".:Iv 1 o I I l \ Fri z p0 _ =is 'E- 3 C,E�-- ,a.a GRA PARKING O ➢ W = 1 N P N V VEL U �" 50' GANGWAY Z > C 0 / O v.t ,e.o u.a oeo° U m IL� m I. o° a ovawe000v0000vo eo oeo Dove....66 m m z �NpON.,) m O Z 14.1 _—_ O ,I enmwa_X ° // STONE RIP RAP ,• .ML•W •' TOP 0 RIP RAP SLOPE p o STONE PARKING STOPS J HTl TOE OF RIP RAP Z I�gWaao tae I I o // t 7z—ieZ MHW X ° HTI,/8 MHW Z uMh^ w0 \ � AG INST BULKHEAD °GF1't 2------- -- I— GRA ATE BLOCK KWALL: uuuuu RI � t-a N/F. HAWTHORNE MARINA r 1 LIMITED PARTNERSHIP l rri fl II n n > 4 c e � I �A1 EXISTING CONDITIONS O 3. $' p �o1 rn 37 O N aan� .r o n �� a a tOLIU UC/ COD wa pCD b cep _U 0 c ' CADm a Q � r �' 0 120 � uC� O �N�oo SCALE:1"=120'-0" Z � � n i 1 PR POSED 62'X92' `\ ` TE MINAL BUILDING SEE SHEETS F5,HING PIER PARKING LOT 'FLIER S' E SHEET 4 \\\ > 3—cam T SEWER PUMP STATION / rii ♦\ `\\\ \ \ \\ \ \ 6 uoa 00 :;� ._ ♦\ ......... � � .. •• STORMWATER / m /\\♦/ \• H'ARBORWALK % \ OUTFALL ,r `��j�`\ _ \✓, I " STORM WATER OUTFALL ,: ,' MHW & HTL UNDER / r HARBORWALK — r MHW & HTL AGAINST BULKHEAD \vA r v II Il I(� IIr IIY� {I ON�`�h i�i'17 � ll �� ? `\`� ♦\ / � `x \ ._II:L I._I_f��LL� �4dp � / / Hawthorne `\`♦ ,' v `\ /' / Cove Pdanna `\ `\ i >( � 0.0 CD m ® ' v g PROPOSED CONDITIONS N QA 0 120 i 2.W 22- z cn r^Q I,g„R pig X 3 �o� SCALE:1 "=120'-0" PR0�9Et) 62'1(92' FISHING PIER TERMI ALaBUIL NG �\ ..� SES SHEET '' - ' PIER SEE EXISTING HIGH ,;.z�' , SHEI T 4 r POINT ON SITE PROPOSED OIL WATER SEPARATOR „ SN4 T RAGE AREAS = OU F _Q � JII CD PROPOSED STORMCEPTOR (TYP.) I a ^ SEE DETAIL r PROP ffll �� II11 +� I —STORMCEPTOR (TOYP.) - — y / _LjL UU1�.�� SEE DETAIL PAVED PARKING AREA Howthorne L—__ i �,\i1 II Cove Marina r —� CD 2 c Z s' l;pproved by Department of Bvirmimental Prol:ection Mi. ,n T`� m „ Datc: I, UN x 2099 U4 s o a�) PROPOSED CONDITIONS O q cn SCALE:1 "=120'-0" /' <\ \ x,<♦ :> ;' ` \ •REMOVE & RELOCATE EXISTING BARGES l -_'_ //' __—:,�`';may\♦ f ♦♦ . `4 � `♦ `� \\ 5o I. 1 JE IL \ `\ NEW 60' GANGWAY , n ,/ SAjI, ,i ii \ \ ♦ ♦\ \ \ \♦ O \ 5 n 1 NEW 60' GANGWAY FAC ♦ NEW 40'X10' x FLOATS OFFSHORE SUPPLY VESSEL `\i`�,.\`\ \'`\ \ \\ "`\ b). A II Rl \ \ N , •'I , ` \ 70 \ \ Mw. • NATHANIEL 60WD11 NEW 2-60' so'x30' \ \ GANGWAYS ---;— \ \ EXISTING 50'X20' \ ` BARGE RELOCATED EXISTING 50'X20' FERRY \ BARGE RELOCATED NEW F 40'X10' \♦ 'FLOATS .L' ` p -, FLA �1ry � lNO, \IkLi NEW 60' GANGWAY G+1 azry >„/ v 6yDepartment of Edvironmental�?c�tection ` Date: a PROPOSED PIER 0 50 JUNx3200: n SCALE:1 - --c--� ;7-1. _f---- - --- NEW TAINING WALL —_--____--LL TING TOP (TYP) F SLOPE =�==t==�= _ ) 15` (TYP.) r I� 15' (TYP) 15' (TYP) — _�---__�-- 2'-6" Z.y I= - (TYP) -6„ 15' TYP) I —7' 24 SPACES ® 15' O.C. = 360' 6„ A PILE CAP PLAN - 8' (TYP) 8' (TYP NEW RETAINING W scA�E:1'=so'-o 15' (TYP) rl� 2 ➢ mIn c ? ! m3 [wroued by Depubn(ant 4 0, cn Date:Li Q n PILE CAP PLAN L, " " SCALE:1"=50'-0" O SO O SCALE:1 "=50'-0" VARIES CONCRETE CURB (30' TO 70') GREENHEART PILE pd TOP OF PIER 12" CONCRETE7'-6" O.C. (TYP) rn EL. +17.0 DECK CONCRETE CAP m MHW EL. +8.9 C MLW EL. 0.00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12"0 PIPE PILE (TYP.) a � w N PROPOSED PIER SECTION -4r- 0 U ' 32CONCRETE CURB TOP OF 2'0 FLOAT GUIDEPILES (TYP) PIER EL. +17.0 STEEL SUPPORT11 CONCRETE PILE CAP PILES ® 5' O.C. TIMBER WAVE MHW EL. +8.9 r BARRIER I "A, MLW .EL...0 0.......:...:. .......... .. ............ ............. .................... .. . . .. ............. �\ �% EL. -6. II COMMERCIAL VESSEL BERTH 0 6�nar„ O� BARGE RRY BERTH 12"0 PIPE PILE (TYP) 0 16' PROPOSED ACCESS PIER SECTION ,o s SCALE:1/16 —1 '-0" /rwll I 1 11-7 1 I //� ` 1 i 1�.1 " Jill / \ ` / �% / / :/'� � /• I /,`i/ 1I I / , III1 � I \ II r —„/ ?//l ;_ •JI /1 - I 1; ' ” /i.. � ,,%�� i.•4 1/%r i;"i% / i� I I 1 1�1 1 I 1 I„� �:j/:'I�/�/_ '•`I I I'l .. ''I ii Jill 1 \ l,' �- —• S7ll'/(,lgd/ / -- / — � 1 1- I ��o%' ✓� / i i I I ll l I ice- •• �, C °DREDGE 'Iu DEPTH I ✓\{ - (-27.00) 3+00 4+00 5 D I,\ `6+00 7+00 8"f dq +00 10+00 11 +001. 13+00 B DREDGE DREDGE e DEPTH DEPTH :' 1 4 L Ii'`��1 __:4--- -(-11.00) (-16.00) : : /'•J - - - -- ARBOR BULL LLILUMUt �v�lJ`JJj-1�JIJJJJ�IJJJ a �� ' � �' I , A 111, DREDGE VOLUME= 115117 CY. WAY i DREDGE --AREA= 2�857,101ISQ. FT � � 11 I „JJJJJLJIIJI_UU PROPOSED DREDGE PLAN 0 120 r SCALE:1 "=120'-0" 6 p® pproved by Department of Invironnren4alProtection Dato: N c a HTL EL. +11.0 —__.--- – . v�nM�r MLW EL..0.00- . . .. . . . . . . . . � I. � � II I I ' EL. -16.0 == / q STA SIA STA STA +50 +0 0 +100 +137 A TRANSVERSE DREDGE SECTION 0 16' 6 SCALE:1/16"=1 '-0" EXISTING MUDLINE EL. +11.0 EL0.00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . EL. -11.00 - EL. -16.00 EL. -27.00 PROPOSED 3 ON 1 SLOPE 0 60 LONGITUDINAL DREDGE SECTION a .......-...-------- EL +70 0 I � 0 -.I . fe-Ke, 1.4=1 EL. +49.G REMOVABLE 5-0' Ili PANEL EL 17.3 (100 1R EVENT) y 1 HTL EL 11.0 MHs W El +8.9 �V,Gy1 1 11.LG.�1� -• '. . .;. II II II IIII IIII IIII ' -. � ':._...� ...... ._. 'u` 4 y. 4 v MLW EL. 0;00 I ' it >•, .I d d d...:d d d i C s B TERMINAL SECTION --- 9 EI. +70 0 i n TERMINAL PLAN EI. +aq o ,o a REMOVABLE CONCRETE SLAB FLOOR SUPPORT EL. +18.0 EL. +18.5 STRUCTURE EL 17.3 (100 1R EVENT) LIIl- EL +11 0 o c SUPPORT WALLS SUPPORT CAP St MLW )=L, Q.OQ •' a a n' ® COLUMN LINE ® COLUMN LINE LICENSE PLAN NO, i 2.x-9 2.2rc TERMINAL SECTION F,pproved by Department of Enviromiental Protectia- y ate; !JUN X �� THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS �� OFFICE COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT 251 Causeway way Street, Suite 800, Boston, MA 02114-2136 (617)626-1200 FAX: (617)626-1240 MEMORANDUM TO: [an Bowles, Secretary,EEA ATTN: Holly Johnson,MEPA Unitf�7fi S 4//! ci FROM:B Leslie-Ann McGee,Director,CZM /r ��` DATE: June 19,2008 RE: EOEA 14234—Salem Port Expansion;Salem - The Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management (CZM) has completed its review of the r` above-referenced Environmental Notification Form (ENF), noticed in the Environmental Monitor dated 1 June 25, 2007, and does not recommend the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). CZM + supports this project as it is an appropriate use within a Designated Port Area, represents an important piece of the City's overall waterfront redevelopment goals, and is consistent with the recently submitted update of the Salem Harbor Plan. CZM recommends that the issues discussed below be addressed during permitting. Project Description The project proposed in the ENF involves the redevelopment of 10 Blaney Street into a multi-use port facility by the City of Salem. It is anticipated that this multi-use water transportation facility could service a variety of vessels including the existing Salem ferry Natbaniel Bmvditcb, excursion boats, water taxis, an LNG offshore supply boat, commercial fishing boats, and visiting ships including small cruise ships. Landside improvements include traffic changes on Derby Street, landscaping, and pedestrian amenities such as a continuous Harborwalk and a fishing/viewing pier. Waterside improvements include the construction of a fixed pile supported pier and floating dock/barge system. Dredging will also be required to achieve water depths necessary for the proposed uses. Comments The supplemental information submitted for the ENE describes a number of alternative concept plans for both the landside and waterside options for the Salem Port Expansion site.The justification for the preferred alternative for the dredging and vessel berthing locations (alternative V) relies strongly on the need for year-round safe berthing for commercial(lobster)vessels based on a wave energy reflection analysis depicted in Figures 3 and 4 in the ENF Supplemental Information document.From these figures,it appears that the southern corner of the property,which will provide berthing locations for the excursion,cruise and offshore supply vessels as well as the proposed location of the new Salem ferry facility building, will be susceptible to wave action from northeast storms and the resulting wave reflection. As the preferred alternative for the upland site and building plan includes modifications to the existing riprap slope and construction of a new seawall to support the new building in this location, it will be important that these modifications do not exacerbate existing wave energy issues.The proponent should demonstrate, during the permitting process, that the new,design will minimize impacts on the adjacent Land Under Water such that the stability of the newly constructed or existing adjacent coastal banks or structures are not impacted. The proposed project may be subject to CZM federal consistency review, in which case the project must be found to be consistent with CZM's enforceable program policies. For further information on this process, please contact Bob Been, Project Review Coordinator, at (617) 626-1050 or visit the CZM web site at www.state.ma.us/czm/fcr.htm. LAM/kg DEVAL t.PATRICK GOVERNOR TIMOTHY R MURRAY EIEUI'ENANr GOVERNOR IAN A.BOWLES SECRETARY LESLIE-ANN S.MCGEE DIRECTOR www.mass.govlc m cc: Kathryn Glenn CZ.M North Shore Regional Coordinator Rachel Freed,Acting Section Chief Northeast Regional Office,MA DEP David Slagle, MA DEP Wetlands and Watenvays Nancy Baker Northeast Regional Office,MA DEP Carey Duques Salem Conservation Agent Kathleen Winn, Salem Planning Department Susan St. Pierre, Vine Associates,Inc. i This Form Replaces Form 3510-9(8-98) Form Approved OMB Nos. 2040-0188 and 2040-0211 Refer to the Following Pages for Instructions United States Environmental Protection Agency NPDES A Washington, DC 20460 Form `WEE PANotice of Intent(NOI)for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity Under an NPDES General Permit Submission of this Notice of Intent(NOI)constitutes notice that the party identified in Section II of this form requests authorization to discharge pursuant to the NPDES Construction General Permit(CGP) permit number identified in Section I of this form. Submission of this N01 also constitutes notice that the party identified in Section II of this form meets the eligibility requirements of the CGP for the project identified in Section III of this form. Permit coverage is required prior to commencement of construction activity until you are eligible to terminate coverage as detailed in the CGP.To obtain authorization,you must submit a complete and accurate NOI form. Refer to the instructions at the end of this form. r' d ap eUr��:x l',YWYtlA:ndil .,r a` r•xrvfl "+,t nxa �!,! •• •i Lir.': .Mt 6u `• IMAI II IOIDPI 1 'k `' _` ,'.. Name: 1HIUIGbl kby1 I I8bN I 1INC I I I I I I I I I I I I IRS Employer Identification Number(EIN): Mailing Address: Street: SPI _ bl_ I hbkl 161 I I 11 111111 I 11 III I I I I City: INIEIWIPIoLRt 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ll State: Ll l Il Zip Code: 1012 814101 - 1 1 1 1 Phone: 141011 - 18 4 - 171315101 Fax(optional): 1411 11 JJ -I,8 4 � - 171315111 E-mail (optional): 8UG1Q liAN1d8dNI@VIE9111ZUA . = 1 III ProJect/Site InfOrtnatlon" # , 'k d MRJ%1y. P 4 �`: a+„ Project/Site Name: Ish1tM1 tv� kI I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Project Street/Location: Ill 01 �31LMg�I l 1�t _ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I City: IsALP.M1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I State: IN Zip Code: 1011191710 -I I I I County or similar government subdivision: 1 8 SIS ,IXI I I I I I I I I I I I I I Latitude/Longitude(Use one of three possible formats, and specify method) Latitude 1. __0___ N (degrees, minutes, seconds) Longitude 1.___e____"'W(degrees, minutes, seconds) 2. __0__.__' N (degrees, minutes, decimal) 2.___0__.__'W(degrees, minutes, decimaQ 3._42.592a 2 N (decimal) 3. 70_..8 W(decimal) Method: ❑U.S.G.S.topographic map ❑ EPAweb site ❑ GPS ✓❑ Other: ENOI SYSTEM If you used a U.S.G.S.topographic map,what was the scale: Project Located in Indian country? ❑Yes ❑✓ No If so, name of Reservationatl�l or if not part of a Reservation, put"Not Applicable": Estimated Project Start Date: VI G / 2D 121011111 Estimated Project Completion Date: LO[5 / [2L5 / 1 O 1 I Month Date Year Month Date Year Estimated Area to be Disturbed (to the nearest quarter acre): 11 . EPA Form 3510-9 (Rev. 6/03) v # °.', % udYx �. .�3'4k f"' i* i ;rag d't L�s3 3 t s HI r.✓�;'t, IK SWPPP,'lnformatlan f , s ser mk ',! .t ., `@ `_ ss Has the SWPPP been prepared in advance of filing this NOI? ❑✓ Yes ❑ No Location of SWPPP for viewing: ❑ Address in Section II 0 Address in Section III ❑ Other If Other: III SWPPP Street: city: IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIII State: W Zip Code: SWPPP Contact Information (if different than that in Section II): Name: IHIUIGIOI kt�I IItt I I I I I I I WHIM111 Phone: ��7 Fax(optional): u��7 �T I - {7I I I E-mail (optional): IHIUPPP <p�t' NPISIOINI@y" Ep ; `- PPI • I"�7PK L t)Iecharga Informatior al, e dIgv6ar Identify the name(s)of waterbodies to which you discharge. SALEM HARBOR Is this discharge consistent with the assumptions and requirements of applicable EPA approved or established TMDL(s)? ❑✓ Yes ❑No VI'Eridiiiiiiiied Species Irrformation �p� ;: {adisi, d$ .�.tdk{'y . ..,��:. "�."E*.,k'' i:,': L,u.,a Mg Under which criterion of the permit have you satisfied your ESA eligibility obligations? [Z] A F� B ❑ C ❑D ❑E ❑ F If you select criterion F, provide permit tracking number of operator under which you are certifying eligibility: IIIIIIIIII V11'Ceitiflcatlon Information x q R .. t,.a.....,, k I4,aa, .k�a>.b.. ` ' ° I .:!.:,,., 2 EA � � t 2=3 'f ��"`k Mm-xa. ,aF e�.h e,:,.S u€. �rz uG3 dk w,.. I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gathered and evaluated the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information,the information submitted is,to the best of my knowledge and belief,true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations. Print Name: HUGO KEY I I I Print Title: Signature: HUGO KEY III Date: _02/22 /2011 EPA Form 3510-9 (Rev. 6/03) Instructions for Completing EPA Form 3510-9 Notice of Intent(NOI) for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity Under an NPDES General Permit NPDES Form This.Form Replaces Form 3510-9(8/98) Form Approved OMB Nos. 2040-0188 and 2040-0211 Who Must File an NOI Form application. An operator of a project is a legal entity that Under the provisions of the Clean Water Act, as amended (33 controls at least a portion of site operations and is not U.S.C.1251 et.seq.;the Act),federallaw prohibits stormwater necessarily the site manager. Provide the employer discharges from certain construction activities to waters of the identification number(EIN from the Internal Revenue Service; U.S. unless that discharge is covered under a National IRS), also commonly referred to as your taxpayer ID. If the Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit. applicant does not have an EIN enter "NA" in the space Operator(s)of construction sites where one or more acres are provided. Also provide the operator's mailing address, disturbed, smaller sites that are part of a larger common plan telephone number, fax number(optional)and e-mail address of development or sale where there is a cumulative (if you would like to be notified via e-mail of NOI approval disturbance of at least one acre, or any other site specifically when available). Correspondence for the NOI will be sent to designated by the Director, must submit an NOI to obtain this address. coverage under an NPDES general permit. Each person,firm, public organization, or any other entity that meets either of the Section III. Project/Site Information following criteria must file this forth: (1)they have operational Enter the official or legal name and complete street address, control over construction plans and specifications, including including city, state, zip code, and county or similar the ability to make modifications to those plans and government subdivision of the project or site. If the project or specifications;or(2)they have day-to-day operational control site lacks a street address,indicate the general location of the of those activities at the project necessary to ensure site(e.g., Intersection of State Highways 61 and 34).Complete compliance with SW PPP requirements or other permit site information must be provided for permit coverage to be conditions. If you have questions about whether you need an granted. NPDES storm water permit, or if you need information to determine whether EPA or your state agency is the permitting The applicant must also provide the latitude and longitude of authority, refer to www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/cgp or the facility either in degrees, minutes, seconds; degrees, telephone the Storm Water Notice Processing Center at(866) minutes, decimal; or decimal format. The latitude and 352-7755. longitude of yourfacility can be determined in several different ways, including through the use of global positioning system Where to File NOI Form (GPS) receivers, U.S. Geological Survey (U.S.G.S.) See the applicable CGP forinformation on whereto send your topographic or quadrangle maps,and EPA's web-based siting completed NOI form. tools , among others . Refer to www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/cgp for further guidance on Completing the Form the use of these methodologies. For consistency, EPA Obtain and read a copy of the appropriate EPA Storm Water requests that measurements be taken from the approximate Construction General Permit for your area. To complete this center of the construction site. Applicants must specify which form, type or print, using uppercase letters, in the appropriate method they used to determine latitude and longitude. If a areas only. Please place each character between the marks U.S.G.S. topographic map is used, applicants are required to (abbreviate if necessary to stay within the number of specify the scale of the map used. characters allowed for each item). Use one space for breaks between words,but not for punctuation marks unless they are Indicate whether the project is in Indian country, and if so, needed to clarify your response. If you have any questions on provide the name of the Reservation. If the project is in Indian this form, refer to www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwaterlcgp or Country Lands that are not part of a Reservation,indicate"not telephone the Storm Water Notice Processing Center at(866) applicable" in the space provided. 352-7755. Please submit original document with signature in ink - do not send a photocopied signature. Enter the estimated construction start and completion dates using four digits for the year (i.e., 05/27/1998). Enter the Section 1. Permit Number estimated area to be disturbed including but not limited to: Provide the numberofthe permit underwhich you are applying grubbing, excavation, grading, and utilities and infrastructure for coverage(see Appendix B of the general permit for the list installation. Indicate to the nearest quarter acre. Note: 1 acre of eligible permit numbers). = 43,560 sq. ft. Section It. Operator Information Section IV. SWPPP Information Providethe legal name ofthe person,firm,public organization, Indicate whetheror notthe SW PPP was prepared in advance or any other entity that operates the project described in this of filing the NOI form. Check the appropriate box for the location where the SW PPP may be viewed. Provide the name, ti. Instructions for Completing EPA Form 3510-9 Notice of Intent (NOI) for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity Under an NPDES General Permit NPDES Form This Form Replaces Form 3510-9(8198) Form Approved OMB Nos.2040-0188 and 2040-0211 fax number (optional), and e-mail address (optional) of the (i) a president, secretary, treasurer, or vice-president of the contact person if different than that listed in Section II of the corporation in charge of a principal business function, or any NOI form. other person who performs similar policy- or decision-making functions for the corporation, or (ii) the manager of one or Section V. Discharge Information more manufacturing, production, or operating facilities, Enter the name(s) of receiving waterbodies to which the provided, the manager is authorized to make management project's storm water will discharge. These should be the first decisions which govern the operation of the regulated facility bodies of water that the discharge will reach. (Note: If you including having the explicit or implicit duty of making major discharge to more than one waterbody, please indicate all capital investment recommendations, and initiating and such waters in the space provided and attach a separate directing other comprehensive measures to assure long-term sheet if necessary.)For example, if the discharge leaves your environmental compliance with environmental laws and site and travels through a roadside swale or a storm sewer regulations; the manager can ensure that the necessary and then enters a stream that flows to a river, the stream systems are established or actions taken to gather complete would be the receiving waterbody. Waters of the U.S. include and accurate information for permit application requirements; lakes, streams, creeks, rivers, wetlands, impoundments, and where authority to sign documents has been assigned or estuaries, bays, oceans, and other surface bodies of water delegated to the manager in accordance with corporate within the confines of the U.S. and U.S. coastal waters. procedures. Waters of the U.S. do not include man-made structures created solely for the purpose of wastewater treatment. U.S. For a partnership or sole proprietorship: By a general partner Geological Survey topographical maps may be used to make or the proprietor, respectively; or this determination. If the map does not provide a name, use a format such as "unnamed tributary to Cross Creek". If you For a municipality, state, federal, or otherpublic agency: By discharge into a municipal separate storm sewer system either a principal executive officer or ranking elected official. (MS4), you must identifythe waterbody into which that portion For purposes of this Part, a principal executive officer of a of the storm sewer discharges. That information should be federal agency includes (i) the chief executive officer of the readily available from the operator of the MS4. agency, or (ii) a senior executive officer having responsibility for the overall operations of a principal geographic unit of the Indicate whether your storm water discharges from agency (e.g., Regional Administrator of EPA). construction activities will be consistent with the assumptions and requirements of applicable EPA approved or established Include the name and title of the person signing the form and TMDL(s). To answer this question, refer to the date of signing. An unsigned or undated NO1 form will not www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/cgp for state- and regional- be considered eligible for permit coverage. specific TMDL information related to the construction general permit. You may also have to contact your EPA regional office Paperwork Reduction Act Notice or state agency. If there are no applicable TMDLs or no related Public reporting burden for this application is estimated to requirements, please check the "yes" box in the NOI form. average 3.7 hours. This estimate includes time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and Section VI. Endangered Species Information maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing Indicate for which criterion (i.e., A, B, C, D, E, or F) of the the collection of information. An agency may not conduct or permit the applicant is eligible with regard to protection of sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a federally listed endangered and threatened species, and collection of information unless it displays a currently valid designated critical habitat. See Part 1.3.C.6 and Appendix C OMB control number. Send comments regarding the burden of the permit. If you select criterion F, provide the permit estimate, any other aspect of the collection of information, or tracking number of the operator underwhich you are certifying suggestions forimproving this form, including any suggestions eligibility. The permit tracking number is the number assigned which may increase or reduce this burden to: Chief, to the operator by the Storm Water Notice Processing Center Information Policy Branch 2136, U.S. Environmental after EPA acceptance of a complete NO I. Protection, Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C.20460. Include the OMB control number on Section VII. Certification Information any correspondence. Do not send the completed form to this All applications, including NO Is, must be signed as follows: address. For a corporation: By a responsible corporate officer. For the purpose of this Section,a responsible corporate officer means: FM PUBLIC NOTICE US Army Corps of Engineers® Date: December 18,2007 New England District File Number: NAE-2006-3648 696 Virginia Road Refer Questions To: Ruth Ladd Concord, MA 01742-2751 Or by e-mail: ruth.m.ladd@usace.army.mil ADDENDUM TO NEW ENGLAND DISTRICT COMPENSATORY MITIGATION GUIDANCE: COMPENSATION FOR IMPACTED AQUATIC RESOURCE FUNCTIONS The Council on Environmental Quality(CEQ)has defined mitigation in its regulations at 40 CFR 1508.20 to include: avoiding impacts, minimizing impacts,rectifying impacts,reducing impacts over time, and compensating for impacts. The Clean Water Act Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines establish environmental criteria which must be met for activities to be permitted under Section 404. Both the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency have a national goal of no overall net loss of wetland functions,as explained in the agencies' 1990 Memorandum of Understanding(htti)://www.usace.army.miUcw/cecwo/reg/mou/mitigate.htm). This goal is achieved through mitigation of aquatic resource impacts. This addendum uses the terms"mitigation" and"compensation"interchangeably to refer to compensatory mitigation. The New England District,U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, has examined its aquatic resource mitigation requirements for Department of Army permits over the past decade. We have decided to implement compensatory mitigation ratio guidance as part of the ongoing process to improve the overall success of aquatic resource mitigation being required through the Regulatory Program. The New England District already has two documents on compensatory mitigation in place: a Mitigation Plan Checklist and Mitigation Plan Checklist Guidance, both dated January 12, 2007 and posted on the District website (www.nae.usace.anny.mil). The District is joining many other Corps districts in establishing standard guidelines, including ratio"rules of thumb,"for compensatory mitigation. These ratios provide guidance for all compensatory aquatic resource mitigation required by New England District. They are particularly designed for direct permanent impacts, but additional mitigation may be required to address indirect(secondary)impacts (impacts resulting from the fill activities to areas which are not directly filled, but whose functions are impacted from the nearby fill activities, e.g., fragmenting wildlife habitat, alteration of hydrology,removal of vegetation, etc.), as well. The ratios are based on: • Complexity of system impacted, • Likelihood of mitigation success, , • Degree to which functions are replaced, and r • Temporal losses for certain functions (e.g., water quality renovation). p, M While these ratios will be the starting point for developing appropriate compensatory mitigation, there continues to be flexibility on a project-by-project basis in order to achieve the most appropriate mitigation for a specific project. The functions and levels of functions impacted are important in determining adequate and appropriate compensation. Some of the factors to be considered in developing the project-specific compensation include: CENAE-R • The functions provided by the proposed impact site(including the level of those functions). • The functions provided by the proposed compensatory mitigation project(including the estimated level of those functions upon completion of construction and when monitoring is complete). • The method of compensatory mitigation(e.g.,restoration,creation). • The likelihood of success of the compensatory mitigation project. • Temporal losses of aquatic resource functions. • The risk and uncertainty associated with the proposed compensatory mitigation project. • The distance between the impact site and the compensatory mitigation project site. This flexibility may lead to compensatory mitigation deemed adequate and appropriate which is at a lower ratio than included here. It may also lead to project-specific ratios which are higher than depicted here, so that unavoidable impacts to high quality wetlands may be adequately mitigated and/or indirect and secondary impacts may be addressed. A proven mitigation methodology from an applicant and confidence that the proposed plan substantially reduces the risks inherent in wetland construction may also be considered in determining the appropriate ratios for a specific project. The New England District will also work closely with state regulatory agencies to achieve as much consistency as possible, given differing state and federal legislative and program requirements; however,these guidelines are designed to meet the federal compensation requirements and may not meet state requirements. This addendum was originally on public notice from 1 May 2007 to 31 May 2007. Twenty- five comments were received during and after the comment period. Responses to the comments are in a document posted on the New England District website: hU://www.nae.usace.army.mil/reg/index.htm under"Mitigation." Changes from the draft addendum include: • Reduction of the recommended buffer zone around restoration, creation, and enhancement projects from 200' to 100', • Counting of the recommended buffer as upland preservation credit, • Changing of several of the ratio numbers, • Giving a range to account for differing qualities of impacted wetlands, and • Increasing the ratio for submerged aquatic vegetation based on research from the University of Hew Hampshire. Recommended Ratios (see Table) tIt=is=extremely=important to-mitigate-for affected-functions,-generallyyby_replacing the_same type of-, r system impacted. This will vary with watershed and landscape considerations; the mitigation should be functionally and geographically appropriate. These-ratios-were developed.with.the==3 tpresumption ofin=kind compensation"(which will-not-always be-appropriate) ndranges-are-meant do=reflect=the=quality_-of_aquaticresource and the-level-of-functionsiinpactE&.l cases=where=ouf-1 of-kind e'ompensation is-performed;-project-specific=ratios=should-be-developed? Out-of-kind compensation should not be used solely to reduce the required amount of mitigation based on the ratios. The requirement for higher ratios for impacts to higher quality systems or to those systems whose functions take longer to develop will not be reduced if a lower ratio form of mitigation is 2 CENAE-R RECOMMENDED COMPENSATORY MITIGATION RATIOS TABLE itigation Restoration Creation Enhancement Preservation (re- (establishment) (rehabilitation) (protection/ Impacts establishment) management) Emergent Wetlands 2:1 2:1 to 3:1 3:1 to 10:12 15:1 ac Scrub- shrub2:1 2:1 to 3:1 3:1 to 10:12 Wetlands 15:1 ac Forested Wetlands 2:1 to 3:1 3:1 to 4:1 5:1 to 10:12 15:1 ac Open project project specific Water specific ac Submerged Aquatic 3:1 to 5:1 project specific° project project specific Vegetation SpeCifiC5 ac Streams 2:1 N/A 3:1 to 5:1 10:1 to 20:1 1 Mudflat 2:1 2:1 cproject7 project specific (ac) Is ecific), Upland10 >10:111 N/A project 15:112 specific Assumes no irreversible change has occurred to the hydrology. If there has been such a change,then the corresponding creation ratio should be used. 2 Based on types of functions enhanced and/or degree of functional enhancement. 'Might include planting submerged and/or floating aquatics and/or removal of invasive species. °Rare cases,e.g.,removal of uplands,old fill,etc. 'E.g.,remove pollutant source such as an outfall,remove moorings. e Note that this assumes both banks will be restored/enhanced/protected. If only one bank will be restored/ enhanced/protected,use half the linear foot credit. 'E.g.,daylighting stream,elimination of concrete channel. s Enhancement of denuded banks and channelized streams=3:1. Enhancement of denuded banks when there is a natural channel=4:1. Enhancement when there are vegetated banks but the stream has been channelized=5:1. 'Preserving buffer beyond the 25-foot minimum up to 50 feet from channel= 10:1. Preserving additional buffer 50 to 250 feet from channel= 15:1. 0 This refers to upland used for wetland mitigation,NOT mitigation for upland impacts,which are not regulated. Only applies if existing condition is pavement or structure AND should complement aquatic functions. 12 100' upland buffer recommended for restoration,creation,and enhancement sites would be credited here. 3 CENAE-R selected which will not replace the impacted functions. Indeed, even higher ratios may be required to make the mitigation closer to compensating impacted functions. If it is deemed appropriate to compensate for lost forested wetlands with scrub-shrub or emergent wetlands,the higher ratio associated with forested wetlands should still be used. For example, if forested wetlands(compensation for which would generally be restoration of 3:1)were impacted but the only mitigation available was restoration of emergent wetlands (usually restoration of 2:1 for impacted emergent wetlands),the mitigation would still be at 3:1. Several specific types of systems (e.g.,vernal pools, riffle and pool complexes) are not specified here as they will generally require resource-specific and project-specific compensation. Although streams are included in the table for general guidelines for mitigation, we are working on more stream-specific mitigation guidelines which will include more detail related to work in these types of aquatic systems. Greater mitigation requirements and ratios may be needed for projects near impaired waters to protect water quality. Impaired waters are those waters which do not meet state water quality standards(even after point sources of pollution have installed the minimum required levels of pollution control technology). It is the responsibility of the applicant to determine whether a project is in the vicinity of an impaired water by referring to a state's or tribe's Clean Water Act section 303(d) list and/or maps of impaired waters. Compensatory mitigation that involves restoration, creation, and enhancement benefits greatly from the presence of upland buffer to prevent site degradation resulting from nearby activities and enhances long-term sustainability. It is recommended that a minimum buffer of 100' width be established for all wetland restoration, creation,and enhancement, except in exceptional cases. This buffer area would count toward upland preservation mitigation credit. A preserved buffer of a minimum of 25' from each bank is recommended for stream restoration and enhancement projects. Compensatory Mitigation Guidelines In order to more closely replace impacted functions, in-kind mitigation is generally preferred to out-of-kind mitigation for impacted resources that are not heavily degraded, provided this is appropriate in the landscape. It is important that mitigation be functionally and geographically appropriate in the overall watershed context, so in-kind mitigation may not be preferred in some situations. Out-of-kind mitigation may be preferred for heavily degraded systems or where it would be more beneficial to the overall watershed(at the U.S.G.S. Hydrologic Unit Code Level 8). Compensation should generally be located where it is most likely to be successful in replacing lost functions,taking into account aquatic habitat diversity, connectivity, and a natural balance of wetlands and uplands. Compensation should not be located in positions that will be detrimental to the compensation site (e.g., some on-site compensatory mitigation functions may be degraded by proximity to the project). Some functions(e.g.,floodflow alteration)may need to be mitigated on- site,while others(e.g.,wildlife habitat) should be mitigated off-site in most cases. If more than one compensation site is to be used,they do not need to be contiguous with each other. Again, overall watershed concerns may affect location of compensatory mitigation projects. The types of mitigation in order of preference are restoration, creation, enhancement, and preservation. Restoration,provided there have been no irreversible changes to the hydrology, 4 I -y • CENAE-R , generally has the greatest likelihood of success. It is usually appropriately situated within the landscape. Successful wetland restoration and creation efforts replace impacted wetland acreage and function. Enhancement,=restor-ing=naturahfunctions=te=anexisting=wetland-which=is=degraded,. yields-some replacement=of=wetland=function;but=not=wetland=acreage. Since this form=of mitigation=increases=levelsnffimctions=inexisting=functionin'g=systems,a higher=ratio=is=typically required than=is=required=for=mitigation=involving=restoration or=creation. Preservation is an important element of every compensatory mitigation project. The created, restored, and enhanced sites should be preserved in perpetuity, along with an appropriate buffer,to ensure the long term viability of these compensatory mitigation sites. Preservation alone may be considered for compensatory mitigation in exceptional circumstances. It results in neither an increase in wetland acreage,nor an increase in wetland functions. The goal of required compensatory mitigation is to prevent a net loss in wetland functions resulting from the project. In order to meet the goal of no net loss of wetland functions,the Corps expects mitigation comprised solely of preservation to be acceptable in rare circumstances. While preservation does not replace wetland functions, it does reduce future impacts and degradation to existing wetland functions. For this reason, appropriate preservation may be a suitable means of compensatory mitigation in situations where meaningful wetland restoration, creation, and/or enhancement opportunities have been exhaustively explored and do not exist, or are not practicable or ecologically desirable. The geographic area of consideration when looking for mitigation opportunities is expected to be broad. Due to such a lack of additional mitigation opportunities,an applicant may work with the Corps and other agencies to develop a suitable preservation package. In its discussion of preservation,Regulatory Guidance Letter(RGL) 02-2 (hn://www.usace.army.mil/cw/cecwo/reg/rgls/RGL2-02.pdf) states that(emphasis added): "Districts may give compensatory mitigation credit when existing wetlands,or other aquatic resources are preserved in conjunction with establishment, restoration, and enhancement activities. However, Districts should only consider credit when the preserved resources will augment the functions of newly established,restored, or enhanced aquatic resources. Such augmentation may be reflected in the amount of credit attributed to the entire mitigation project. In exceptional circumstances,the preservation of existing wetlands or other aquatic resources may be authorized as the sole basis for generating credits as mitigation projects. Natural wetlands provide numerous ecological benefits that restored wetlands cannot provide immediately and may provide more practicable long-term ecological benefits. If preservation alone is proposed as mitigation, Districts will consider whether the wetlands or other aquatic resources: 1)perform important physical, chemical, or biological functions, the protection and maintenance of which is important to the region where those aquatic resources are located; and 2) are under demonstrable threat of loss or substantial degradation from human activities that might not otherwise be avoided. The existence of a demonstrable threat will be based on clear evidence of destructive land use changes that are consistent with local and regional(i.e.,watershed) land use trends, and that are not the consequence of actions under the permit applicant's control." 5 CENAE-R In regard to preservation of upland, RGL 02-2 states: "Under limited circumstances,Districts may give credit for inclusion of upland areas within a compensatory mitigation project to the degree that the protection and management of such areas is an enhancement of aquatic functions and increases the overall ecological functioning ofthe mitigation site,or of other aquatic resources within the watershed. Following this guidance, suitable preservation as compensatory mitigation should make sense in the watershed context,provide protection of important aquatic resources,be near other protected resources to provide appropriate ecological continuities, and be sustainable in the long-term. Due to wetlands laws in all of the New England states that reduce development pressure on wetlands, New England District encourages upland preservation that protects aquatic functions over straight wetlands preservation. A sample hypothetical calculation of appropriate mitigation using the ratio guidance is posted on the New England District website: httn://www.nae.usace.armv.mil/reglindex.htm under "Mitigation." The guidelines in this addendum are implemented as of the date of this notice;however,these guidelines will not be used for compensatory mitigation proposals which have written approval from the Corps, even if a final permit decision has not been made for such projects. This addendum represents policy guidance for the New England District. As such, it is not intended to represent a binding regulation,and is not intended to be enforceable against the Army Corps of Engineers by third parties. This guidance is intended as a starting point for analyzing compensatory mitigation for permit decisions, but based on the facts of a particular situation permit decisions may result in different results than the ratios set forth in this document. Any questions regarding the District compensatory mitigation guidelines should be directed to Ruth Ladd at ruth.m.ladd@usace.armv.mil, (978) 318-8818, (800) 343-4789, or, if calling from within Massachusetts, (800) 362-4367. FOR THE DISTRICT ENGINEER: ROBERT J. ESISTA Chief, Regulatory Division 6 JET &q- yez. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENERGY & ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ONE WINTER STREET, BOSTON, MA 02108 617-292-5500- C �� V VED Governor Gov. or PATalcr: RECC�VEQ AUG 2S 2009 IAN A. BOWLES . AUG 20 2009 Secretary TIMOTHY P. MURRAY 0"i>T iF PLAP4Wti Lieutenant Governor 01140LLAURIE BURTil ?P -rR Commissioner City of Salem August 18, 2009 c/o Bourne Consulting Engineering 3 Bent Street Franklin, MA 02038 Attn: Ronald Bourne, P.E. Re: PUBLIC NOTICE OF MODIFICATION TO LICENSE No. 12422 Salem Harbor, Salem, Essex County Dear Applicant: The Waterways Regulation Program (WRP) has received your application requesting authorization to perform certain activities in state waterways pursuant to M.G.L. Chapter 91, the Public Waterfront Act and its regulations at 310 CMR 9.00 etc. The WRP has assigned this application filing with the above-referenced Waterways License application number. IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT YOU REFER TO THIS APPLICATION NUMBER WHENEVER YOU SUBMIT OR REQUEST INFORMATION FOR THIS FILE. Upon review of this application, the WRP has made a determination that this project is a Water- dependent Use Project. Attached is the WRP's Public Notice form for this application. The Applicant is required to publish this notice, at his/her expense, in one or more newspapers having circulation in the area affected by the proposed activity. This notice must be published in the local newspaper(s) for at least one day on or before Notification Date. The required public comment period shall begin on this designated Notification Date. The Applicant is required to submit proof of publication to the WRP by sending a copy of the newspaper notice showing the date of publication or a copy of the newspaper notice and a letter from the newspaper indicating the date the public notice was published. Pursuant to 310 CMR 9.13(1)(a), the Applicant is also required to concurrently provide this notification, along with a copy of the project site plans submitted with the Waterways License Application, to the appropriate municipal officials, regulatory agencies and abutters to the project for their review and comment, by Certified mail. (see Notification mailing list attached). This information is available in alternate format.Call Donald M.Gomes,ADA Coordinator at 617-556-1057.TDD Service-1-800-298-2207. MassDEP on the World Wide Web: htlp:gwww.mass.govidep 0 Printed on Recycled Paper T For Chapter 91 purposes, an abutter is defined as the owner of land that shares a common boundary or corner with a project site at the water's edge, as well as the owner of land that lies within 50' across a waterbody from such site, see; 310 CMR 9.02. The WRP will publish the Public Notice in The Environmental Monitor, if required. Lastly, the WRP cannot complete its review of this application until the following information/document(s) checked below have been submitted: ® Proof of publication of the Public Notice ❑ Receipt of the Municipal Zoning Certification ❑ Receipt of the Municipal Planning Board Notification Form ❑ Receipt of a valid Final Wetlands Order of Conditions ❑ Receipt of a valid DEP Water Quality Certification ❑ Completion of the MEPA review process ❑ Plans according to the specifications of Appendix A of the Waterways Application. NOTE: Final Mylar Project Plans will be required upon notice from the Department and prior to issuance of the Chapter 91 License. ❑ Other: Should you have any questions, please contact me at (617) 654-6520. Thank you. Sincerely, David B. §Iagle Environmental Analyst Waterways Regulation Program DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION WATERWAYS REGULATION PROGRAM Notice of License Application pursuant to M. G. L. Chapter 91 Waterways License No. 12422 Modification City of Salem NOTIFICATION DATE: August 25, 2009 Public notice is hereby given by City of Salem to modify their existing License No. 12422 for a water transportation pier at 10 Blaney Street in the municipality of Salem in and over tidelands of Salem Harbor Designated Port Area. The proposed pier will be relocated to the northeasterly side of the wharf. The proposed use of the project is to provide for commercial docking and access to navigable waters and is a water dependent project. The Department will consider all written comments on this Waterways application received by within 30 days subsequent to the "Notification Date" Failure of any aggrieved person or group of ten citizens or more to submit written comments to the Waterways Regulation Program by the Public Comments Deadline will result in the waiver of any right to an adjudicatory hearing in accordance with 310 CMR 9.13(4)(c). Additional information regarding this application may be obtained by contacting the Waterways Regulation Program at (617) 292-5500. Project plans and documents for this application are on file with the Waterways Regulation Program for public viewing, by appointment only, at the address below. Written comments must be addressed to: David. Slagle, Environmental Analyst, MassDEP Waterways Program, One Winter St., 5"' fl., Boston, MA 02108. Pursuant to 310 CMR 9.13(1)(a), the Applicant is also required to concurrently provide this notification, along with a copy of the project site plans submitted with the Waterways License Application, to the appropriate municipal officials, regulatory agencies and abutters to the project for their review and comment(see Notification mailing list attached). The applicant shall send the notice of license or permit application by Certified mail to the attached list, abutters and notify the Department when completed. Mailing List: Notice of License Application pursuant to M. G. L. Chapter 91 Mayor and City Council, City of Salem Salem Planning Board Salem Conservation Commission Salem Zoning Board Salem Harbormaster Coastal Zone Management 251 Causeway Street, Suite 800 Boston, MA 02114 Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) File# 14234 100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900 Boston, MA 02114 Division of Fish &Wildlife and Law Enforcement Field Headquarters 1 Rabbit Hill Road Westborough, MA 01581 Attn: Tom French Division of Marine Fisheries Annisquam River Marine Fisheries Field Station 30 Emerson Avenue Gloucester, MA 01930 Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Blvd., Columbia Point Boston, MA 02125 Army Corps of Engineers New England Division 696 Virginia Road Concord, MA 01742-2751 Abutters— For Chapter 91 purposes, an abutter is defined as the owner of land that shares a common boundary or corner with a project site, as well as the owner of land that lies within 50' across a waterbody from such site, see 310 CMR 9.02. WRP Files' �\v1 1 III \ l NEW 60' GANGWAY NEW 60' GANGWAY .PROPOSED '' / / NEW 40'X100' FLOATS PIER 29 1 100' \ N � SALEU p� j i " FERP.Y b /j -r l\ \x/- I�`'`/ o �i• I I F•2_ � - _ -NEW 60' GANGWAYS --_— EXISTING �i0'X20(F 2 7— I ELQCAMI3 DO00R ' r r BARGE RE�OCAT@D .-NEW 40'X100' FLOATS uLw AREA OF'POTENTIAL • "' ARCHEOLOGICAL — ``—— •' J' SIGNIFICANT FEATURES \.' ` 0 60 SCALE:1 "=60'-0" 100 YR FLOOD +13.8 NGVO +4.2 TITLE: PROPOSED IN: SALEM HTL +11.0M W +8.9 MLW 0.0 PIER PLAN AT:SALEM HARBOR COUNTY: ESSEX STATE: MA u 'Bow= [ PURPOSE: APPLICATION BY: SHEEP 4 OF 8 �F,� ,��M ig= PORT EXPANSION arY OF SALEM DATE:08/17/09 a� ,per �\ COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENERGY & ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ONE WINTER STREET, BOSTON, MA 02108 617-292-5500 RECEIVED DEVAL L.PATRICK 2009 IAN A BOWLES Governor MAR 2 A Secretary TIMOTHY P.MURRAYDEPT.Of PL4Pli�YiWG& LAURIE BURT Lieutenant Governor CO?.!hUu!T(DtV,:L01110!T Commissioner March 18, 2009 Kathleen Winn City of Salem 120 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 Re: 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION Application for BRP WW 07, Major project dredging At: Salem Harbor, SALEM 401 WQC Transmittal No: X224360 Wetlands File N9: 64-482 ACoE Application Ne: NAE 2005-1095 Dear Ms Winn: The Department has reviewed your application for Water Quality Certification (WQC), as referenced above. In accordance with the provisions of Section 401 of the Federal Clean Water Act as amended (33 U.S.C. §1251 et sec.), MGL c.21, §§ 26-53, and 314 CMR 9.00, it has been determined there=is-reasonable assurance-the project=or-activity will be conducted in a• manner-which-will-not vid late applicable water-quality.standards-(314 CMR 4.00) and other4 applicable-requirements-of state-law. The waters of Salem Harbor are designated in the Massachusetts Surface Water Quality Standards as Class SB. Such waters are intended "as habitat for fish, other aquatic life and wildlife and for primary and secondary contact recreation." Anti-degradation provisions of these Standards require that "existing uses and the level of water quality necessary to protect the existing uses shall be maintained and protected." Background: The City of Salem is proposing to construct a multi-use transportation facility in the Salem Harbor. The proposed project will be developed in two phases. Phase one consists of construction of a multi-use water transportation facility which included a new terminal building, a fixed pile expansion pier, 40 ft by10 ft floats, and related dredging. Construction will also include a wave attenuator system, public parking area and a public harbor walk. Phase two consists of creation of a dockage with year-round protection for vessels of local lobstermen and related dredging. The City will submit a separate application for the phase.two work. This iaformatio.is available in alternate format.Call Donald M.Gomes,ADA Coordiaator at 677-556-1057.TDD#1-866-539-7622 or 1-617-574-6868. MassDEP on the World Wide Web: http:ily .mass.gov/dep LRJ Pnnted on Recycled Paper 401 Water Quality Certification,Town of Salem, Salem Wharf Project, Salem Harbor Transmittal Ne: X224360 Page 2 of 7 The Site currently contains an interim floating dock system, gravel parking area, and a trailer used by the Salem Ferry, Nathaniel Bowditch, which has been providing seasonal commuter ferry service to Boston since 2006. Proposed proiect: The Salem Wharf Project is located with in a Designated Port Area (DPA) in Salem Harbor. Approximately 65,530 cubic yards of improvement dredging over an area of 211,950 square feet will be required in order to support the construction of the multi-use transportation facility, fixed pile-supported pier and a floating dock. It is anticipated that the multi-use transportation facility will serve a variety of vessels, including the existing Salem Ferry, excursion boats, water taxis, a Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) offshore supply tanker, commercial fishing boats, visiting ships and small cruise ships. The sediment will be removed via mechanical dredge. The dredged material will be loaded into dump scows to be transported to the Massachusetts Bay Disposal Site (MBDS) for disposal. The Army Corps of Engineers (ACoE) had issued a Suitability Determination for the dredged material for unconfined ocean disposal. Alternatives Evaluation: Four alternatives were identified for further development as a result of a study: Analysis of Existing Port Plans and Development of a Preferred Plan. These alternatives were similar in nature on the landside with variations in size of the terminal building, but with different berth configurations and pier layouts to support the same vessel usage program. To support the anticipated various vessel usages, three dredge depths or basins (-11 MLW, -16 MLW and -27 MLW) have been proposed to minimize the dredge volume. The area of dredging above -16 MLW is 167,788 square feet and below-16 MLW is 123,776 square feet. During=the MEPA review-process,,Division of Marine Fisheries noted that"Salem Harbor— provides spawning and forage habitat fora variety of,finfish and invertebrate species,,including ,winter.flounder,Atlantic_cod_ and American lobster.-In particular, this embayment (i.erthe, project site) supports seasonalspawningcongregations of,winter.flounder:" In June 2008, DMF marine biologists conducted a survey of the project site and identified a seed set of soft-shell clams,-adult razor clams and-blue-mussels- DMF-recommended that no in-water,-silt producing work between'February'ls`and June 30'' forA protection'of winter flounder-spawning and juvenile development. The project site is not located within the Priority Habitats of Rare Species, Estimated Habitats of Rare Wildlife, in accordance with the Massachusetts Natural Heritage Atlas, 12th Edition. In accordance with the Department's 2001 eelgrass mapping, there is no eelgrass within the project site. Sediment dewatering: Sediment dewatering will not be required for unconfined ocean disposal. Condition No. 10 prohibits scow overflow. Sediment sampling data: The applicant submitted sediment sampling data to ACoE for suitability determination. In accordance with 314 CMR 9.07(7), the Department accepts the a y� 401 Water Quality Certification,Town of Salem, Salem Wharf Project, Salem Harbor Transmittal Ne: X224360 Page 3 of 7 sampling protocol and requirements of the ACoE and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) for unconfined ocean disposal. Public Notice: The public notice was published in the Salem News on February 9, 2009 and the Department received no comment during the 21-day public comment period for this application which ended on March 2, 2009. Section 61 Findings: Pursuant to M.G.L. Chapter 30, Sections 61 to 62H including (M.E:P.A.) this project was reviewed as EOEA No. 14234 and the Secretary's Certificate, issued on July 11, 2008 found that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) would not be required. FT-herefore,.-based on=information currently.in the record, the Department grants a 401 Water Quality Certification for this project subject to the following conditions to maintain, water quality;to minimize impact on waters and wetlands;and to ensure compliance with �appropriate,state_law*The Department further certifies in accordance with 314 CMR 9.00 that there`is'reasonable assurance the projector activity will be conducted in a manner which will not violate applicable water quality standards (314 CMR 4.00) and other applicable requirements of state law. Finally, the Department has determined that upon satisfying the conditions and mitigation requirements of this approval, the project provides a level of water quality necessary to protect existing uses and accordingly finds that the project as implemented satisfies the Surface.Water Quality Standards at 314 CMR 4.00. 1 , 1. The Contractor shall take all steps necessary to assure that the proposed activities will be conducted in a manner that will avoid violations of the anti-degradation provisions of Massachusetts Surface Water Quality Standards that protect all waters, including wetlands. 2. Prior to the start of work, the Department shall be notified of any change(s) in the proposed project or plans that may affect waters or wetlands. The Department will determine whether the change(s) require a revision to this Certification. 3, Dredging in accord with this Certification may begin following the 21-day appeal period and once all other permits have been received. 4. Work in waters and wetlands shall conform substantially to plans submitted in application to this Department, eight sheets, prepared by Bourne Consulting Engineering, dated August 21, 2008, revised on March 13, 2009, unsigned and unstamped. The Department shall be notified if there are modifications and or deletions of work as specified in the plans. Depending on the nature of the scope change, approval by the Department may be required. 5. The:Departmentshall"be"notified; attention Ken Chin 617-29275893,.one week prior to the -i start of in-water-work so that Department staff may inspect the work for.compliance with.the , terms and conditions of this Certification. 6. The Certification remains in effect for the same duration of the federal permit that required it. 7. Future maintenance dredging may be conducted as necessary for the duration of this Certification, provided that: 401 Water Quality Certification, Town of Salem, Salem Wharf Project, Salem Harbor Transmittal Ne: X224360 Page 4 of 7 a. the initial project and any subsequent dredging has been conducted satisfactorily with no violations of the terms and conditions of this Certification, b. submit information to the Department regarding final end use/disposal of the dredged material for review and approval. Under no circumstances that future maintenance dredging can be commenced without obtaining approval from the Department, or c. a suitability determination from the Corps (ACoE) for unconfined ocean disposal d. a due-diligent evaluation to determine that no known spills of oil or other toxic substances have occurred which could have contaminated the sediment in the dredge area e. the volume of future maintenance dredging does not exceed 115,117 cubic yards. f. the Department is notified prior to commencement of maintenance dredging. 8. Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be deployed to minimize turbidity. At a minimum, silt curtain shall be used to surround the dredging barge or downstream (seaward) of the dredge area and if applicable,,dredging shall be carried out using a closed, environmental bucket. 9. The applicant shall submit a turbidity, total suspended solids and dissolved oxygen monitoring plan to the Department for acceptance within eight weeks of the effective date of this Certification or four weeks prior to the commencement of the dredging operation whichever comes first. 10. Scow overflow is not permitted. 11. Disposal of any volume of dredged material at any location in tidal waters is subject to approval by this Department and the Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management office. 12. Within 30 days of the completion of the initial dredging, a bathymetric survey of the channel, depicting post-dredge conditions, shall be sent to the Department. 13. In order to protect spawning, larval and juvenile development of winter flounder, no-dredging= ishall occur between February 1st and June 30th. 9 14. The applicant, or their contractor, shall make every feasible effort to complete the project within the permitted timeframe. Should the applicant, or their contractor, fail to complete the project and wish to request an amendment to the Certification for incursion into the no- dredge period, the written request shall be received by the Department by January 15th. The . following information shall be included in the request: a. project location and transmittal number, b. the date on which dredging started, c. the number of days and hours per day the dredge operated, d. expected daily average production rate and the actual daily average production rate, e. an explanation of why the project failed to remain on schedule, f. an account of efforts made to get the project back on schedule, g. a plan depicting the areas that remain to be dredged; h. the number of cubic yards that remain to be dredged, i. an accurate estimate of the number of days required to complete the project, j. an evaluation of the impact of continued dredging on the species of concern, - 4- 401 Water Quality Certification, Town of Salem, Salem Wharf Project, Salem Harbor Transmittal Ns: X224360 Page 5 of 7 k. a description of any efforts that will be made to minimize the impacts of the project on the species of concern, and a realistic assessment of any societal/financial effects of a denial of permission to continue dredging. The Department will share the information with other resource agencies and a decision to grant or deny the amendment shall be made by February 1 s`. Requests for amendment received after January 151h will be considered at the Department's discretion. 15. Four weeks prior to commencement of the dredging activity, the applicant shall submit a notification procedure outlining the reporting process to the Department for incidents relating to the dredging activities impacting the surrounding resource area and habitats such as, but not limited to, observed dead or distressed fish, or other aquatic organisms, observed oily sheen on surface water, sediment spill, observed turbidity plume beyond the deployed BMPs, barging or equipment accident/spill. If any time during implementation of the project a fish kill or significant water quality problem occurs in the vicinity of the project, all site related activities impacting the water shall cease until the source of the problem is identified and adequate mitigating measures employed to the satisfaction of the Department. This certification does not relieve the applicant of the obligation to comply with other applicable state or federal statutes or regulations. Any changes made to the project as described in the previously submitted Notice of Intent, 401 Water Quality Certification application, or supplemental documents will require further notification to the Department. Certain persons shall have a right to request an adjudicatory hearing concerning certifications by the Department when an application is tequired: a. the applicant or property owner; b. any person aggrieved by the decision who has submitted written comments during the public comment period; c. any ten (10) persons of the Commonwealth pursuant to M.G.L. c.30A where a group member has submitted written comments during the public comment period; or d. any governmental body or private organization with a mandate to protect the environment, which has submitted written comments during the public comment period. Any person aggrieved, any ten (10) persons of the Commonwealth, or a governmental body or private organization with a mandate to protect the environment may appeal without having submitted written comments during the public comment period only when the claim is based on new substantive issues arising from material changes to the scope or impact of the activity and not apparent at the time of public notice. To request an adjudicatory hearing pursuant to M.G.L. c.30A, § 10, a Notice of Claim must be made in writing, provided that the request is made by certified mail or hand delivery to the Department, with the appropriate filing fee specified within 310 CMR 4.10 along with a DEP Fee Transmittal Form within twenty-one (21) days from the date of issuance of this Certificate, and addressed to: Case Administrator Department of Environmental Protection One Winter Street, 2nd Floor Boston, MA 02108. 401 Water Quality Certification, Town of Salem, Salem Wharf Project, Salem Harbor Transmittal Ns: X224360 Page 6 of 7 A copy of the request shall at the same time be sent by certified mail or hand delivery to the issuing office of the Wetlands,and Waterways Program at: Department of Environmental Protection One Winter Street, 5`h Floor Boston, MA 02108. A Notice of Claim for Adjudicatory Hearing shall comply with the Department's Rules for Adjudicatory Proceedings, 310 CMR 1.01(6), and shall contain the following information pursuant to 314 CMR 9.10(3): a. the 401 Certification Transmittal Number and DEP Wetlands Protection Act File Number; b. the complete name of the applicant and address of the project; c. the complete name, address, and fax and telephone numbers of the party filing the request, and, if represented by counsel or other representative, the name, fax and telephone numbers, and address of the attorney; d. if claiming to be a party aggrieved, the specific facts that demonstrate that the party satisfies the definition of"aggrieved person" found at 314 CMR 9.02; e. a clear and concise statement that an adjudicatory hearing is being requested; f. a clear and concise statement of (1) the facts which are grounds for the proceedings, (2) the objections to this Certificate, including specifically the manner in which it is alleged to be inconsistent with the Department's Water Quality Regulations, 314 CMR 9.00, and (3) the relief sought through the adjudicatory hearing, including specifically the changes desired in the final written Certification; and g. a statement that a copy of the request has been sent by certified mail or hand delivery to the applicant, the owner(if different from the applicant), the conservation commission of the city or town where the activity will occur, the Department of Environmental Management (when the certificate concerns projects in Areas of Critical Environmental Concern),the public or private water supplier where the project is located (when the certificate concerns projects in Outstanding Resource Waters), and any other entity with responsibility for the resource where the project is located. The hearing request along with a DEP Fee Transmittal Form and a valid check or money order payable to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in the amount of one hundred dollars ($100) must be mailed to: Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Commonwealth Master Lockbox P.O. Box 4062 Boston, MA 02211 The request will be dismissed if the filing fee is not paid, unless the appellant is exempt or granted a waiver. The filing fee is not required if the appellant is a city or town (or municipal agency), county, or district of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, or a municipal housing authority. The Department may waive the adjudicatory-hearing filing fee pursuant to 310 CMR 4.06(2) for a person who shows that paying the fee will create an undue financial hardship. A person seeking a waiver must file an affidavit setting forth the facts believed to support the claim of undue financial hardship together with the hearing request as provided above. 401 Water Quality Certification, Town of Salem, Salem Wharf Project, Salem Harbor Transmittal Ne: X224360 Page 7 of 7 Failure to comply with this certification is grounds for enforcement, including civil and criminal penalties, under MGL c.21 §42, 314 CMR 9.00, MGL c. 21A §16, 310 CMR 5.00, or other possible actions/penalties as authorized by the General Laws of the Commonwealth. If you have questions on this decision, please contact Ken Chin at 617-292-5893. Sincerely, Glenn Haas Acting Assistant Commissioner Bureau of Resource Protection enclosure: Departmental Action Fee Transmittal Form cc: Karen Adams, Regulatory/Enforcement Division, U.S.Army Corps of Engineers, 696 Virginia Road, Concord, MA. 01742-2751 _ Robert Boeri, CZM, 251 Causeway Street, Suite 800, Boston, MA 02114 Tay Evans, DMF, 30 Emerson Ave., Gloucester, MA 01930 Salem Conservation Commission, 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA 01970 Alyssa Richard, Ronald Bourne, Bourne Consulting Engineering 3 Brent Street, Franklin, MA 02038 KC/X224360 DSP �ti-�r$Z „- ' PUBLIC NOTICE FEB 0 5 2009 DEPT. Cr'LA!C0grVG 3 US Army Corps Coh U!U P[VEi 0U".tE?IT of Engineers® r b F Date: 32009 New England District Da Comment Period Ends: March 6,2009 File Number: NAE 2005-1095 696 Virginia Road In Reply Refer To: Mr. Brian E. Valiton Concord, MA 01742-2751 Or by e-mail: brian.e.valiton@usace.army.mil The District Engineer has received a permit application from the City of Salem to dredge, with disposal of the material at the Massachusetts Bay Disposal Site ("MBDS"), and to construct and maintain a new water transportation terminal and pier in waters of the United States (specifically Salem Harbor) as described below. The Corps is soliciting comments on both the project itself and the range of issues to be addressed in the environmental documentation. APPLICANT: City of Salem Massachusetts, City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 ACTIVITY: To redevelop property atilO-Blaney-Street=into d-multi=use port facility. This application is for phase I of the project which will involve upland improvements and water dependent piers, structures and dredging with disposal of the dredged material in ocean waters at the MBDS. Phase I will include a new terminal building, an expanded fixed pile and timber pier, a floating dock system, construction of a wave attenuator system, and associated dredging of approximately 7 acres of harbor bottom to various depths. The harbor bottom material to be dredged consists primarily of fine silt and sand and, after reviewing physical, biological and chemical testing of the material, hasibeen,determined by-.EPA,andAhelCorps,to be suitable-for.. �uncohfined-'open-water disposal'at the'MBDS'.� A detailed description and plans of the activity are attached. WATERWAY AND LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED WORK: This work is proposed in Salem Harbor at 10 Blaney Street, Salem, Massachusetts. The proposed project location is on the USGS Salem, Massachusetts quadrangle sheet at UTM coordinates 4709140.00 N and 0345550.00 E UTM zone 19. The dredged material is to be deposited in ocean waters at the MBDS. MBDS is a 2.0 nmi (3.7 km) diameter circular area centered at 420 25.106'N, 700 34.969' W (NAD 83), is located 12 nmi (22 km) southeast of Gales Point, MA). AUTHORITY Permits are required pursuant to: X Section-10 of the-Rivers and Harbors Act of.1899 Section 404 of the Clean Water Act X Section,103 ofthe`Ma-rine Protection,-Research and Sanctuaries Act). The decision whether to issue a permit will be based on an evaluation of the probable impact of the proposed activity on the public interest. That decision will reflect the national concern for both protection and utilization of important resources. The benefit which may reasonably accrue from the proposal must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. All factors which may be relevant to the proposal will be considered, including the cumulative effects thereof-, among those are: conservation, economics, aesthetics, general CENAE-R-PEA FILE NO. NAE-2005-1095 environmental concerns, wetlands, cultural value, fish and wildlife values, flood hazards, flood plain value, land use, navigation, shoreline erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water quality, energy needs, safety, food production and, in general, the needs and welfare of the people. The Corps of Engineers is soliciting comments from the public; Federal, state, and local agencies and officials; Indian Tribes; and other interested parties in order to consider and evaluate the impacts of this proposed activity. Any comments received will be considered by the Corps of Engineers to determine whether to issue, modify, condition or deny a permit for this proposal. To make this decision, comments are used to assess impacts on endangered species, historic properties, water quality, general environmental effects, and the other public interest factors listed above. Comments are used in the preparation of an Environmental Assessment and/or an Environmental Impact Statement pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act. Comments are also used to determine the need for a public hearing and to determine the overall public interest of the proposed activity. Where the activity involves the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States or the transportation of dredged material for the purpose of disposing it in ocean waters, the evaluation of the impact of the activity in the public interest will also include application of the guidelines promulgated by the Administrator, U.S Environmental Protection Agency, under authority of Section 404(b) of the Clean Water Act, and/or Section 103 of the Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 as amended. ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, as amended by the Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-267), requires all federal agencies to consult with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) on all actions, or proposed actions, permitted, funded, or undertaken by the agency, that may adversely affect Essential Fish Habitat (EFH). The dredging portion of this project will have an adverse effect on approximately 298, 570 SF (approx. 7 acres) of EFH for American plaice (eggs, larvae,juveniles, adults), Atlantic butterfish(eggs, larvae), Atlantic cod (eggs, larvae,juveniles, adults), Atlantic halibut (eggs, larvae,juveniles, adults), Atlantic mackerel (eggs, larvae,juveniles, adults), Atlantic sea herring (larvae,juveniles, adults), bluefish(juveniles, adults), haddock (eggs, larvae), Ocean pout(juveniles, adults), Pollock(eggs, larvae,juveniles), red hake (larvae,juveniles, adults), White Hake (eggs, larvae,juveniles, adults), whiting (eggs, larvae,juveniles, adults), winter flounder (eggs, larvae,juveniles, adults), windowpane flounder (eggs, larvae,juveniles, adults), and yellowtail flounder (eggs, larvae,juveniles, adults). Habitat at this site can be described as sub-tidal silt and sand. Loss of this habitat may adversely affect winter flounder. The District Engineer.has made a-preliminary determination that. site-specific impacts-may,b-e substantial..Accordingly, the-Corps of Engineers will submit an expanded EFH" assessment to NMFS;whointurnwill provide-conservation-ie-commendations to the Corps:—The Corps will coordinate with the applicant regarding implementation of these recommendations-< The EFH consultation will, be concluded prior to the final decision._The applicant is not currently proposing to provide any mitigation for. loss of EFH.resource areas. That decision maybe revisited during the EFH consultation procedures.- The rocedures.The dredged material disposal is proposed for MBDS. This is an open water ocean disposal site for dredged material, with water depths ranging from 269 to 302 feet (82-92 meters), that is utilized now, as well as in the past, for disposal of dredged material under approved disposal site conditions. The site is monitored under our Disposal Area Monitoring System (DAMOS). The disposal site also provides deep water habitat for the 2 n CENAE-R-PEA FILE NO. NAE-2005-1095 species listed above. However;since_this is an approved ocean disposalsite,the District Engineer has made-a preliminary determination that the site-specific adverse effect,will not be substantial.3 SECTION 106 COORDINATION Basedon his initial review, the District Engineer has determined that little likelihood exists for the proposed work-to impinge upon_properties with cultural or Native American_significance, or listed-in,-or eligiblefor listing_in,:the National_Register of His Places.Therefore, no further consideration of the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, is necessary. This determination is based upon one or more of the following: a. The permit area has been extensively modified by previous work. b. The permit area has been recently created. c. The proposed activity is of limited nature and scope. d. Review of the latest published version of the National Register shows that no presence of registered properties listed as being eligible for inclusion therein are in the permit area or general vicinity. e. Coordination with the State Historic Preservation Officer and/or Tribal Historic Preservation Officer(s) The States of Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts,New Hampshire and Rhode Island have approved Coastal Zone Management Programs. Where applicable the applicant states that any proposed activity will comply with and will be conducted in a manner that is consistent with the approved Coastal Zone Management Program. By this Public Notice, we are requesting the State concurrence or objection to the applicant's consistency statement. The following authorizations have been applied for, or have been, or will be obtained: (X) Permit, License or Assent from State. (X) Permit from Local Wetland Agency or Conservation Commission. ( ) Water Quality Certification in accordance with Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. In order to properly evaluate the proposal;we are seeking public comment; Anyone wishing to comment is encouraged to do so. Comments should be submitted in writing by the above date. If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Brian Valiton at(978) 318-8166, (800) 343-4789 or(800) 362-4367, if calling from within Massachusetts. Any person may request, in writing, within the comment period specified in this notice, that a public hearing be held to consider the application. Requests for a public hearing shall specifically state the reasons for holding a public hearing. The Corps holds public hearings for the purpose of obtaining public comments when that is the best means for understanding a wide variety of concerns from a diverse segment of the public. The initial determinations made herein will be reviewed in light of facts submitted in response to this notice. All comments will be considered a matter of public record. Copies of letters of objection will be forwarded to the applicant who will normally be requested to contact objectors directly in an effort to reach an understanding. 3 CENAE-R-PEA FILE NO. NAE-2005-1095 For more information on the New England District Corps of Engineers programs, visit our website at httn://www.nae.usace.army.mil. THIS NOTICE IS NOT AN AUTHORIZATION TO DO ANY WORK. area K. Adams Chief, Permits and Enforcement Branch Regulatory Division If you would prefer not to continue receiving Public Notices, please contact Ms. Tina Chaisson at(978) 318- 8058 or e-mail her at bettina.m.chaissonga usace.army.mil. You may also check here ( ) and return this portion of the Public Notice to: Bettina Chaisson, Regulatory Division, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 696 Virginia Road, Concord, MA 01742-2751. NAME: ADDRESS: 4 CENAE-R-PEA FILE NO. NAE-2005-1095 PROPOSED WORK AND PURPOSE The work includes the redevelopment of the project site as a multi use port facility. Phase I, which is the subject of this action, will include the following: a. construction of a fixed `L' shaped pile-supported pier approximately 380' long by approx. 32' wide; b. construction of a pile-supported terminal building and walkway (harborwalk)that extends out over the waterway seaward of the mean high water line (original proposal called for this building to be built on filled intertidal areas but the previously proposed intertidal filling has now been eliminated so the building is elevated on pilings out over intertidal areas); c. construction of floating docks and associated gangways (2000 sq. ft. of pile anchored floating dock) on the northeast side of the proposed pier; � P P P , d. construction of floating docks and associated gangways (3200 sq. ft. of pile anchored floating docks)plus two permanently moored ferry barges (each 50' by 20') on the southwesterly side of the fixed pier to accommodate ferries to be moored at the pier; e. dredging of approximately 115,117 cu. yds. of silt and sand material, to various depths (-11 ft. m.l.w., -16 ft. m.l.w., and -27 ft. m.l.w.), from a sub-tidal area totalling approx. 7 acres with disposal of the dredged material at the MBDS; f. construction of a vertical wave attenuator through the center of the proposed fixed pier; and, g. conversion and retention of the existing pier as a public fishing pier. The work is described on the enclosed plans entitled "PURPOSE: PORT EXPANSION APPLICATION BY: CITY OF SALEM IN: SALEM AT: SALEM HARBOR COUNTY: ESSEX STATE: MA," on 8 sheets, and dated "8/21/08, 8/27/08, 1/15/09 and some of the sheets with revisions dated 1/15/09." This notice is for Phase I of this project only. Phase 11 of the project, which may or may not proceed at some future indeterminate date, will be reviewed separately and independently and is not in any way dependent on a permit decision on this application for Phase I. Phase 11 will consist of the creation of year round dockage for the local lobstermen including associated dredging with ocean disposal. 5 / 0 1l k 71 EQT; . �. .- - •/ ; f 20X20 PLATFORM SCALE:1"=3000'-O" 1OX10 PLATFORM MOORING DOMINION ENERGY _ CF �i DOLPHIN SALEM / LLC �-- _ ---maw+ R �% LOCUS IPLAN _ (E� x15'A� of CURBS x13.8 20X50 CONCRETE ""° ,/' : STEEL FLOAT I 20N ONE 15.2 GRAVEL PARKING 16.0 0 4 =a°n.1 oeavoveaseevov000�000e>x000- 50' GANG,Wk X 14.z _ STONE RIP RAP _ �NTBANCE I Maar•.•.' TOE OF RIP RAP – � R I STONE PARKING STOPS HTL x1a.e ( I c HTL & MHW MHW AGAINST BUL'KNEAD R —GRANITE BLOCK WALL N/F HAWTHORNE MARINA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 0 120 F-1 n n n n SCALE:1"=120'-0" 100 YR FLOOD +13.8 NGVD +4.2 TITLE: IXING IN: SALEM HTL +11.0 MLW 0,0 - AT:SSEM HARBOR MHW +8.9 CONDmONS COUNTY: ESSEX . STATE: MA �n—fZ��g�, g, A PURPOSE: APPLICATION BY: SHEET 1 of 8 _— 11 ' lall", id �PRR POSED 62'X92i/iiTERMINAL BUILDING \ / SEE SHEET 8 //� FIf ING PIER If illi PARKING LOT - J l ��nfir/ '•' /` 3 7 EiI SEE SHEET SEWER PUMP STATION _ _ n� rh 3 I f.. v i ... . .. STORMWATERa I?� RARBORWALK OUTFALL 1 - lI STORM WATER e �� r OUTFALL MHW & HTL UNDER MHW & HTL AGAINST BULKHEAD -`-- arADR cr � -JUIUUJJJJJJ� v I I ,o„e Mmir.a I r1`�-.� / 1 � 0 0 I SCALEI 120'-0" C cc 700 YR FLOOD +13.8 NOW +4.2 TITLE: PROPOSED IN: SALEM HTL +11.0 MLW 0.0 AT:SALEM HARBOR MHW +8.9 COMMONS COUNTY: ESSEX STATE: MA PURPOSE: APPLICATION BY: SHEET 2 of 8 L/ PORE EXPANSION CITY OF SALEM DATE:08/21/08 REV 1/15/09 8" CONCRETE DECK 2" HIGH BARRIER RAIL 12' HARBORWALK 6' CONCRETE SIDEWALK PARKING AREA (VARIES) TOP OF HARBORWALK CENTER PARKING ISLAND EL. +15.0 HTL EL. +11.0 _ MHW E_. +8.9 FILL FILL CONC. RETAINING WALL PROPERTY LINE EXISTING SLOPE EXISTING GRADE MIK EL.,0.00 EXISTING RIP RAP TIMBER PILE 15' O.C. (TYP.) n PROPOSED HARBORWALK AND PARKING LOT SECTION 0 REMOVABLE CONCRETE SLAB FLOOR SUPPORT STRUCTURE EL. +18.0 EL. +18.5 EL. 17.3 (100 YR EVENT) I� HTL EL. +11.0 1 IHIoIL- IILIIFIILII. II SII MHW EL. +8.9 SUPPORT WALLS SUPPORT CAP ® COLUMN LINE ® COLUMN LINE MLW EL. 0.00 n PROPOSED PIER SECTION 3 SCALE:1/16"=1'-O" 100 YR FLOOD +13.8 NGVD +4.2 TITLE. PROPOSED IN: SALEM HTL 11. MLW 0.0 SECTIONS AT:SALEM HARBOR MHW + COUNTY: ESSEX STATE: MA _ Bowm COAMOW terhl9 PURPOSE: APPLICATION BY: SHEET 3 OF 8 PORT EXPANSION CfIY OF SALEM DATE:01 15 09 i :.- f' ,,• i / .' /r� REMOVE & RELOCATE 1 1 t I \ EXISTING BARGES ---� — � l_ ------ �— 1 j r r r I 1 �r 0 (`7 NJ p) NEW 60' GANG o \ i tNEW 60' GANGWAss :. i A 40X10 I . s rn / —sem' `� / ¢�_ a — • —__,�T ¢� �� /'"".� MLW l` - - _ 70 / EXISTING 50'X20' % FERRY BARGE EW 40'X10' FLOATS ` \ RELOCATED =-- "•� NEW 60' GANGWAYS cc 0 50 SCALED"=50'-0" 100 YR FLOOD +13.8 NGVD +4.2 TITLE: PROPOSED IN: SALEM HTL +11.0 MLW 0.0 AT:SALEM HARBOR MHW +8.9 CONDITIONS COUNTY: ESSEX STATE: MA Nowne cmmmw PURPOSE: APPLICATION BY: SHEET 4 of 8 II"r� PORT EXPANSION CITY OF SALEM DATE:08/21 OB REV 1/15/09 32' CONCRETE CURB TOP OF 2'0 FLOAT GUIDEPILES (TYP) PIER EL. +17.0 STEEL SUPPORT :. - CONCRETE PILE CAP PILES ® 5' O.C. I TIMBER WAVE MHW EL. +8.9 r BARRIER I MLW EL. 0.0 . I. ....... .... ............. ........................ ADA BARGE II COMMERCIAL VESSEL BERTH & FERRY BERTH II I I U 12"0 PIPE PILE (TYP) PROPOSED ACCESS PIER SECTION 5 SCALE:1/16"=l'-O" VARIES CONCRETE CURB (30' TO 70') GREENHEART PILE TOP OF PIER 12" CONCRETE 7'-6" O.C. (TYP) EL. +17.0 DECK CONCRETE CAP MHW EL. +8.9 MLW EL. 0.00 12"2 PIPE PILE (TYP.) le n PROPOSED PIER SECTION 5 SCALE:1/16"=i'-0" -" 100 YR FLOOD +13.8 NGVD +4.2 TITLE: PROPOSED IN: SALEM HTL +11.0 MLW 0.0 AT:SALEM HARBOR MHW +8.9SECTIONS COUNTY: ESSEX STATE: MA PURPOSE: APPLICATION BY: SHEET 5 OF 8 PORT EXPANSION CRY OF SALEM DATE:08/27/08 r _ - 1 - HTL --- �I _- DREDGE -- W - -` DEPTH I (-27.00) 4+00 5 0 6+07h 7+00 8+00 +00 10+00 11+00 +00' i3+00 e _ DREDGE —� DREDGE DEPTH DEPTH ' (-11.00) (-16.00) I � i I I . DREDGE VOLUME= 115117 CY. DREDGE AREA= 298570 SO. FT ZERO 120 SCALE:1"=120'-0" 100 YR FLOOD +13.8 NGVD +4.2 TITLE: PROPOSED IN: SALEM - HTL +11.0 MLW 0.0 AT:SALEM HARBOR MHW +8.9 DREDGE PLAN COUNTY: ESSEX STATE: MA `��-,—ffoa,econmmbg PURPOSE: APPLICATION BY: SHEET 6 OF 8 p"r PORTEXPANSION WY OF SALEM DATE:8/21/08 HTL EL +11.0 MLW EL. 0.00 - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .•..'. . . . . . . .. ' _ 1 I = I STA STA STA STA +50 +010 +100 - +137 f PROPOSED PIER APPROACH SECTION - SCALE:1/16"-l'-O" ; EMSTING MUDUNE HT EL +11.0 • MLW EL 0.00 EL -11.00VSL_ EL -27.00 PROPOSED 3 ON 1 n PROPOSED DREDGE PROFILE - SCALE:1"=100'-0" ' 100 YR FLOOD +13.8 NGVD +4.2 TITLE: . PROPOSED IN: SALEM HTL +11.0 MLW 0.0 AT:SAla KWOR MHW +8.e DREDGE SECTIONS COUNTY:ESSEX STATE: MA �` PURPOSE: APPLICATION BY: Boarae B&eefaeering SHEET 7 OF 8 -�r- PORT EXPANSION CITY OF SAID DATE:08/21 OS m mr k mar I EL. +70 0 EL, +49- REMOVABLE 44 REMOVABLE PANEL EL. 17.3 (100 YR EVENT) MHW F1 . �. .MI-W EL, D.DQ n n u o n PROPOSED SECTION 3 n -c SCALE:1"=30'-0' W A ri 9 / lye r1 W c LL p cn co t, I III pp J (n n PROPOSED GROUND LEVEL PLAN e Ln REV 1/15/09 N PURPOSE: TITLE: APPLICATION BY: PROPOSED PORT EXPANSION TERMINAL CITY OF SALEM N 100 YR FLOOD +13.8 IN: SALEM HTL +11. .,^ BoQae AT: SALEM HARBOR lfiG COUN NGVD +4.2TY: ESSEX STATE:MA MHWy �� ,� --- a LL MLW 0.0 �� SHEET 8 OF 8 DATE: 08/21/08 Dmx,4nion Cimrgy N.Fvghi�d, rc�,. "i Fort NIA 01"'70 Dominion October 24, 2008 Ms. Kathleen M. Winn Deputy Director of Planning and Community Development City of Salem 120 Washington Street, 3 Id Floor Salem, MA 01970 RE: Salem Port Expansion Project Ms. Winn, This letter is in response to the recent request from your office for Dominion Energy Salern Harbor, LLC. (Dominion) to sign the Notice of Intent (NOI) to the Salem Conservation Commission and the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MADEP) Chapter 91 Waterways application forms. The following information was provided to Dominion: • Chapter 91 Waterways Application Form • Wetlands Notice of Intent Form • Stormwater Management Report dated August 2008 • Chapter 91 drawings dated September 9, 2008 • NOI drawings dated August 27, 2008 Dominion has reviewed the above referenced information and offers the following comments • The property subject to development (10 Blaney Street) currently has an Activity and Use Limitation (AUL) due to elevated levels of lead and chromium. The proposed site improvements related to the Port Expansion, as designed, will require a significant amount of excavation within areas of the property regulated under the Massachusetts Contingency Plan (MCP), MCP related issues should be addressed on the construction plans and reports. All construction and remediation activities will be the responsibility of the City of Salem. • In general, the N011 forms, Stormwater Management Report, or supporting documents do not describe Massachusetts Contingency Plan (MCP) issues or site contamination at the 10 Blaney Street property, The environmental deed restrictions are not discussed in the documents and the construction work, as proposed, is not in compliance with MCP regulations. • In the Checklist for Stormwater Report, Standard 3, page 4 of 8, the box for MGL 21E sites should be checked off and a Mounding Analysis should be performed and included. • In the Checklist for Stormwater Report, Standard 9, page 8 of 8, the box should be checked "The responsible party is not the owner of the parcel where � � w The Long Term Pollution Prevention Plan should also include @ discussion V0 AUL requirements, site contamination, and what party will implement the Plan, � This Plan should include notification requirements to DEP and the Owner in the � event 0y@spill tAsoil Vrwater, * The Chapter 91 Waterways License Application' S6CU&n D Project P|aoo. must have the box checked for 21EWaste Site Cleanup. The RTN Number must be added. * The Chapter 91 Waterways License Applicmbmm, Section E needs the signature ofthe owner (Dooli0iVn). ° The Chapter 91 Waterways License Application, Appendix A, should have the box checked for Proposed & Existing Easements, There are numerous proposed utility lines at the property, and it appears they should be described as part of this document. w The Chapter 91Waterways License Application, Appendix C, should have the box for the Applicant Certification checked off because the landowner is not the applicant. Additional dOCurneniu|iQn is required to mhuvv the applicant has the legal authority h0submit the application for the project. w In addition to the Chapter 91 application and the Wetlands NOf, other state and federal permits or approvals are likely required (i.e. US Army Corp of Engineers, KX/\DEP Water Quality Certification, US Environmental Protection Agency ShurrAYvaierGeneral PorrniU. Dominion requests the opportunity tureview all applications, w Onmo|n|un requests that the existing fence a|00Q the northeast Side of the proposed development be removed and relocated to the property line which Would fall along the back edge n( the proposed pavement. |fthe existing fence cannot barelocated then Dominion requests that the fence bereplaced with the same type offence along the property line. • In several places within the Stormwater Management Report and the associated Appand)x, operation and maintenance activities are discussed. Dominion requests that the operator, City n[ Salem, bnidentified 8& the responsible party. In addition, Dominion requests that the operations manual identify Dominion am the Ow/nor of the property and Dominion should be provided a C0p7 of any � inspection and maintenance reports. w The property owner shall beidentified onthe application forms as: Dominion Energy Salem Harbor, LLC 50OODominion Boulevard Glen Allen, VA23OGO • Dominion requests that the existing community garden is preserved or relocated a( aDominion approved location. Thank you for the opportunity to review these documents. Dominion is available for review and signature of revised documents. If there are any questions please do not hesitate to call Nicole Wilkinson of Dominion at (401) 640-0117. Sincerely, Michael A. Fitzgerald Director F&H CITY OF SALEM DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND Z, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Pi T. ��Fa�MlNE 6 'f KiNIBria.EY DRIScoi.C, 120 WASI HNG'fON SIRIi;GT♦ 51L(;M,NIASSACHUSIH-is 01970 bLwoR _ 1,u-:978-619-5685 FAX:978-740-0404 LYNN GOON IN DUNCAN,AICP DIREC"I'OR December 9, 2008 Michael A. Fitzgerald Director F&H Dominion Energy New England, Inc. 24 Fort Avenue Salem,MA 01970 Re: Salem Wharf Expansion Project(BCE#28705) Subj: Response to 10/24/08 letter Dear Michael: We are writing in response to your recent comments in regards to the permitting process for the Salem Wharf Expansion Project that is being proposed at 10 Blaney Street. General Comments 1. Class B-2 RAO achieved September 2005 2. AUL filed September 2005 3. No modifications to the AUL are anticipated if utilities are installed on the site and the site is paved. Following, we have numbered and responded to all of Dominions comments from your letter of 10/24/08: 1) The property subject to development(10 Blaney Street) currently has an Activity and Use Limitation (AUL) due to elevated levels of lead and chromium. The proposed site improvements related to the Port Expansion, as designed, will require a significant amount of excavation within areas of the property regulated under the Massachusetts Contingency Plan (MCP). MCP related issues should be addressed on the construction plans and reports. All construction and remediation activities will be the responsibility of the City of Salem. The NOI plans and construction plan and specifications will include drawings that illustrate the area of the "Hot Spot" of chromium-contaminated soil and areas of known lead contamination. The final contract documents will also provide a Soil & Groundwater Management Plan (SGMP) and a Health & Safety Plan (HASP) to be followed during construction at the site to maintain a condition of No Significant Risk to Health, Safety, Public Welfare, and the Environment. 2) In general NOI forms, Stormwater Management Report, or supporting documents do not describe MCP issues or site contamination at the 10 Blaney Street property. The environmental deed restrictions are not discussed in the documents and the construction work, as proposed, is not in compliance with MCP regulations. The Project Narrative will be modified to contain the language below. This will better allow permitting agencies to review and understand the restrictions on the Blaney Street Site. The site has been investigated pursuant to the Massachusetts Contingency Plan (MCP — 310 CMR 40.0000) and found to have soil contaminated with primarily lead and chromium. The likely source of the chromium contamination is a former tannery on the site. The likely source of the lead contamination is former scraping and sanding of paint on boats stored on the site. Current site conditions do not present significant risk to recreational trespassers or off-site residents. As such, the site has been closed with a Class B-2 Response Action Outcome (RAO — a B-2 RAO means that no remediation was conducted but an Activity and Use Limitation was implemented to manage possible risk to human health). However, some activities associated with future unrestricted use of the site pose significant risk to human health: growing of fruits and vegetables for human consumption, and excavation within contaminated soils. An Activity and Use Limitation (AUL) has been implemented to manage these two risk scenarios, by requiring the following: a. A prohibition on the growing of fruits or vegetables on the site for human consumption b. Any excavation or handling of contaminated soil on the site be managed through a SGMP and a HASP. Note: the groundwater component of the SGMP is only concerned with management of any dewatering conducted as part of utility installation. Groundwater on the site has been determined not to present significant risk to ecological receptors. 3) In the Checklist for Stormwater Report, Standard 3,page 4 of 8, the box for MGL 21E sites should be checked off and a Mounding Analysis should be performed and included. The appropriate modification will be made to the Checklist for Stormwater Report. A Mounding Analysis will not be required as plans have been modified to include paving the entire site. Inground infiltration/recharge of the stormwater is no longer proposed. 4) In the Checklist for Stormwater Report, Standard 9, page 8 of 8 the box should be checked "The responsible party is not the owner of the parcel where the BMP is located and the Stormwater Report Includes the following submission:". One of the two boxes should be checked and appropriate documentation included in the NOI package (a copy of the legal instrument: deed or other legal entity) that establishes the terms of and legal responsibility for the operation and maintenance of the project site stormwater BMPs; or a plan and easement deed that allows site access for the legal entity to operate and maintain BMP functions.. The appropriate modification will be made to the Checklist for Stormwater Report to note that the responsible party is not the owner. Also a copy of the existing agreement between the City of Salem and Dominion Energy New England, Inc. will be included with the revised submission. 5) In the August 2008, Stormwater Management Report, pages 1-2, the description of the site should include the fact that the property is a closed MCP site with an AUL. The primary site contamination should be briefly described along with the environmental restrictions. A site description as provided in#2 above will be added to the Stormwater Management Report. 6) In the August 2008, Stormwater Management Report, Section 2, there is no mention of the chromium hot spot (i.e. elevated chromium levels in the subsurface soil) where oil / water separators and recharge structures are proposed. In addition, there is no mention of the elevated levels of lead in subsurface soils in these watershed sections, and if there would be any chemical impact to surface water runoff or to groundwater recharge. The Stormwater Management Plans will be modified to eliminate the previously proposed recharge structures. Plan revisions also call for the entire area to be paved. All surface water will be captured, treated, and discharged to Salem Harbor. As such, there will be no chance of leaching of soil contaminants by stormwater flows into groundwater or Salem Harbor. 7) The August 2008 Stormwater Management Report, Section 3, references hooded catch basins with deep sumps. The AUL requires special management of soil and groundwater during construction at 10 Blaney Street. A Health & Saftey Plan is needed for work deeper than 3 feet at the site. There is no discussion of any dissolved chemical concentrations in the sumps and potential impacts to stormwater. Recharge structures installed at the property must be evaluated to determine if they will impact groundwater quality, including, but not limited to, potential changes in chromium speciation (to make sure the infiltration does not cause chemical changes from the trivalent chromium to hexavalent chromium). The design and location of recharge structures should be planned to either remove the chromium hot spot soils before installation of the structures, or install the recharge structures outside of the highly contaminated areas. The Stormwater Management Report will be modified to include the AUL, SMGP and HASP plans. Revisions to the plan call for the elimination of the recharge structures, see#6 above. 8) In the August 2008 Stormwater Management Report, Standard 8 requires a plan to control construction related impacts, including erosion, sedimentation and other pollutant sources during construction. There is no discussion of an NPDES Remediation General Permit (which may be required if dewatering is needed at the site), or the Soil and Groundwater Management Plan that is required for construction by the AUL. MCP regulations require preparation of a RAM plan prior to construction at closed MCP sites with AUL restrictions. A plan to manage construction-related impacts by implementing erosion, sedimentation, and controls for other pollutant sources will be provided in the revised Stormwater Management Report. No general permit is required since all requirements under the NPDES program will be met by the MA DEP Stormwater Report which includes the project Stormwater Management Report. Reference: MADEP, Bureau of Resource Protection, Watershed Permitting Program, Form BRP WM 10 — Request for General Permit Coverage, Construction Site Dewatering. Pursuant to the MCP(3 10 CMR 46.044 1), a Remedial Action Measure (RAM) plan will be submitted to the MADEP by a Licensed Site Professional prior to commencement of construction of the utilities and pavement on the site. There is no dewatering proposed on this site. Contractor will be required to work around tidal elevations as required. 9) The Operation and Maintenance Plan should include a discussion of the RAM plan and/ or other issues pertaining to the MCP site and AUL issues. The Operation and Maintenance Plan will include a discussion of the required RAM Plan (see #8, above) and the MCP and AUL issues (see#2, above). 10) The Operation and Maintenance Plan discusses Site Construction Requirements, but does not mention the need for OSHA HAZWOPER trained workers, or sampling soil stockpiles for offsite disposal. Soil stockpiles MUST(not should) be covered at the end of each day. A site specific Soil and Groundwater Management Plan must be prepared, prior to construction activities at the site. The requirement that ALL site workers who might reasonably be expected to come into dermal contact, inhale soil particulates, or ingest soil, must be currently certified to OSHA 40-hour HAZWOPER standards will be included in the HASP. The SGMP will have a requirement that soil stockpiles must be covered at the end of each day to prevent mobilization of soil particles by wind or precipitation, and to avoid presenting an attractive nuisance for local children. There is no proposed off site disposal of soil and, as such, soil sampling will not be necessary. 1 1) The Long Term Pollution Prevention Plan should also include a discussion of AUL requirements, site contamination, and what party will implement the Plan. The Plan should include notification requirements to DEP and the Owner in the event of a spill to soil or water. The Long Term Pollution Prevention Plan will include a discussion of the AUL requirements similar to that listed in #2. The Plan will also be modified to include notification requirements to DEP and Dominion Energy New England, Inc. should a spill occur. 12) The Chapter 91 Waterways License Application, Section D, Project Plans must have the box checked for 21E Waste Site Cleanup. The RTN number must be added. The appropriate changes will be made to the Ch. 91 application including the addition of the RTN Number. 13) The Chapter 91 Waterways License Application, Section E needs the signature of the Owner (Dominion). With the modifications to the plan and applications, we seek Dominion's concurrence to the project and their signature on the License applications. 14) The Chapter 91 Waterways License Application, Appendix A, should have the box checked for Proposed & Existing Easements. There are numerous proposed utility lines at the property, and it appears they should be described as part of this document. There are no known proposed or existing easements on this property. The proposed utility lines are described and illustrated within the plans submitted to Chapter 91. At this time there is no intention to have these services within an easement. 15) The Chapter 91 Waterways License Application, Appendix C, should have the box for the Applicant Certification checked off because the landowner is not the applicant. Additional documentation is required to show the applicant has the legal authority to submit the application for the project. The appropriate modifications to the Chapter 91 License Application, Appendix C will be made and a copy of the existing lease will be submitted to the MA DEP Waterways division along with revisions to the Chapter 91 license application. 16) In addition to the Chapter 91 application and the Wetlands NOI, other state and federal permits or approvals are likely required(i.e. US Army Corps of Engineers, MADEP Water Quality Certification, US Environmental Protection Agency Stormwater General Permit). Dominion requests the opportunity to review all applications. A full set of permits including the USACE Individual permit and MA DEP Water Quality Certification were submitted for review to Dominion Energy New England, Inc. in September of 2008. Upon review of this letter, permits with revisions will be completed and supplied to Dominion for review and signature. 17) Dominion requests that the existing fence along the northeast side of the proposed development be removed and relocated to the property line which would fall along the back edge of the proposed pavement. If the existing fence cannot be relocated then Dominion requests that the fence be replaced with the same type offence along the property line. The City of Salem seeks to leave the existing fence in place as a safety fence and to act as a security control for the property. The City is proposing to add a second fence to the site along the full length at the property line. The new fence would be designed to be more in keeping with the public park appearance of the site and limit access beyond but would not serve as a security fence. The design of this fence would be established during the project's final design and would be submitted to Dominion for review and approval. Final design will need to be approved by the City of Salem Conservation Commission before construction on the site can begin. 18)In several places within the Stormwater Management Report and the associated Appendix, operation and maintenance activities are discussed. Dominion requests that the operator, City of Salem, be identified as the responsible parry. In addition, Dominion requests that the operations manual identify Dominion as the owner of the property and Dominion should be provided a copy of any inspection and maintenance reports. The Stormwater Management Report will be updated to include the identification of the operator, City of Salem, as the party responsible for all operations and maintenance activities on the Blaney Street site. Additionally Dominion will be provided with a copy of all yearly inspection and maintenance reports. 19) The property owner shall be identified on the application forms as: Dominion Energy Salem Harbor, GLC 5000 Dominion Blvd. Glen Allen, VA 23060 The NOI and Chapter 91 applications have been revised to reflect the updated address. 20) Dominion requests that the existing community garden is preserved or relocated at a Dominion approved location. Following recent discussions with neighborhood groups, the City will revise plans as part of the final design to permit the garden to remain in its current location, with possible minor modification or reconfiguration. We hope the above provides satisfactory responses to your concerns of the proposed Salem Wharf Project. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact us at your earliest convenience. If satisfactory, we will submit the revised regulatory applications to Dominion and we would request your signature of the filings for the Salem Conservation Commission and the DEP Chapter 91 License. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Very truly yours, l Kathleen Winn, Deputy Director Enclosure CC: Ron Bourne, Bourne Consulting Engineering Nicole Wilkinson, Dominion Energy Carey Duques, Salem Conservation Commission r q�+� 1y Btry fI.;y�� .f y' u 5 �`t 'tf�+ Wri 1. _ nd r�:+ti+t'• ROOM �t .+ �'.`_i54T1`r {a" �i'r °f5' tiF+s Ya {' i '+, }� ZI YM IMI s + � env ;• �"' III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII :; 0� 2005090200869 Bk:24794 Pg:104 ! Form ions 09!0212005 15:29 00 OTHER Pg 1129 NOTICE OF ACTIVITY AND USE LIMITATION M.G.L. c. 21E, § 6 and 310 CNIR 40.0000 Disposal Site Name: 10 Blaney Street 1 „ DEP Release Tracking No (s): � 21067 This Nbtica ref Activity .2d. Use Limitation ("Noticc�)..is. madeas of this gnu_ clay or Septemher, 2006, by Dominion Enervy Salem Harbor. [J-C. 24 Fort Avenue. Satcm. Massachusetts 01970, together with Its successors and assigns � l (collectively "Owner"). " a WITNESSI- T'A: i WHEREAS, Dominion Energy Salem LiarborLLC, is the owner in fee simple of those certain parcet(s) of vacant land located in Salem, Essex County, Massachusetts gmsuant to a deed recorded with the Essex County Registry of Deeds in _ Bock L382i Page 116 issued by the Land Rcgisi Kion Office Cl- the Essex County Rcgr.stry Drstrial, WHEREAS, said parcel(s) of land, which is more particularly bounded and described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof('Property") is subject to t[, this Notice of Activity and Use Limitation. The. Property is shown on a plan recorded in he Essex County.Registry of Deeds in Plan Book�2'7 , Plan WHEREAS, a portion of the Property ('Portion of the Property") is subject to this Notice of Activity and Use Limitation. The Portion of the Property is more particularly bounded and described in Exhibit A-1, attached hereto and made a part r y hereof. The :Portion of the Property is shown on a plan recorded with the 'Essex County Registry of Deeds in Plan BookZy79 , Plan WHEREAS, the Portion of the Property comprises all of a disposal site as fs"? the,result of a release of oil and/or hazardous material. Exhibit B is a sketch planKl showing the relationship of the Portion of the Property subject to this Notice of Activity i 1r and Use Limitation to the boundaries of said disposal site existing within the limits of the Property and to the extent such boundaries have been established. Exhibit B is attached hereto and made a part hereof, and WHEREAS, one or more response actions have been selected for the 7 Disposal Site in accordance with M.G.L. c. 21E ('Chapter 21E") and the Massachusetts F Contingency Plan, 310 CMR 40.0000 ('MCP"). Said response actions are based upon (a) the restriction of human access to and contact with oil and/or hazardous material in soil and/or (b) the restriction of certain activities occurring in, on. through, over or under the t 1 Portion of the Property. The basis for such restrictions is set forth in an Activity and Use 9 �v:•i,a M.AF, °L 'EFtSiE^.'rte P:F "4T : � �it-_ "�USS ,mi .titin 7F3�[iJ 3 17U, _ _ �- Donun �r tllinn5i,cc( �5K a�� DIC- aptcinucr -OG> Limitation Opinion ("AUL Opinion"), dated September 2, 2005, (which is attached hereto as Exhibit C and made a part hereof); NOW, THEREFORE, notice is hereby given that the activity and use limitations set forth in said AUL Opinion are as follows: 1. Activities and Uses Consistent with the AUL Opinion. The AUL Opinion provides that a condition of No Significant Risk to health, safety, public welfare or the environment exists for any foreseeable period of time (pursuant to 310 CMR 40.0000) so long as any of the following activities and uses occur on the Portion of the Property: (i) Activities and uses including, but not limited to, normal commercial and industrial operations, pedestrian and/or vehicle traffic, vehicle parking, landscaping, and routine maintenance of landscaped areas which do not result in direct contact with, or disturbance of, soil located deeper than three (3) feet below surface grade; (ii) Excavation associated with underground utility installation, repair, or maintenance and/or construction activities which do not cause and/or result in the disturbance and/or relocation of soil located deeper than three (3) feet below surface grade, provided it is conducted in accordance with Obligation (i) in Section 3 of this AUL Opinion prior to commencement of such activity; (iii) Excavation associated with underground utility installation, repair, or maintenance and/or construction activities which will disturb soil located deeper than three (3) feet below surface grade, provided that it is conducted in accordance with a Soil Management Plan and Health and Safety Plan prepared and implemented in accordance with Obligations (ii) and (iii) in Section 3 of this AUL Opinion prior to commencement of such activity; (iv) Such other activities or uses which, in the Opinion of an LSP, shall present no greater risk of hams to health, safety, public welfare or the environment than the activities and uses set forth in this Paragraph; and (v) Such other activities and uses not identified in this AUL Opinion as being inconsistent with maintaining a condition of No Significant Risk. Activity&Use Limitation RTN 3-21067 46385 -Dominion Blaney Street September 2005 1. 2. Activities and Uses Inconsistent with the AUL Opinion. Activities and uses which are inconsistent with the objectives of this Notice of Activity and Use Limitation, and which, if implemented at the Portion of the Property, may result in a significant risk of harm to health, safety,public welfare or the environment or in a substantial hazard, are as follows: (i) Use of the Portion of the Property as a residence, school, nursery, or daycare facility; (ii) Planting, cultivating, and/or harvesting of vegetables, fruits, and other edible produce; (iii) Excavation that is not conducted in accordance with Obligation (i) in Section 3 of this AUL Opinion; (iv) Excavation that will disturb soil located deeper than three (3) feet below surface grade not conducted in accordance with a Soil Management Plan and Health and Safety Plan prepared and implemented in accordance with the Obligations (ii) and (iii) in Section 3 of the AUI, Opinion. 3. Obligations and Conditions Set Forth in the AUL Opinion. If applicable, obligations and/or conditions to be undertaken and/or maintained at the Portion of the Property to maintain a condition of No Significant Risk as set forth in the AUL Opinion shall include the following: (i) Soil located within the AUL area may not be relocated to an area outside of the AUL area, unless such activity is first appropriately evaluated by an LSP who renders an Opinion which states that such relocation is conducted in accordance with the provisions of the MCP cited at 310 CMR 40.0030 et seq.; (ii) A Soil Management Plan must be prepared by an LSP and implemented prior to the commencement of any activity which will disturb soil located deeper than three (3) feet below surface grade within the AUL area. The Soil Management Plan shall describe appropriate soil excavation, handling, storage, transport, and disposal procedures and include a description of the engineering controls and air monitoring procedures necessary to ensure that workers and potential receptors in the vicinity are not affected by fugitive dust or particulates. On-site workers must be informed of the requirements of the Soil Management Plan, and the Plan must be available on site throughout the course of the project; and (iii) A Health and Safety Plan must be prepared by a certified Industrial Activity K Use Limitation RTN 3-21067 46385 -Dominion Blancy Street September 2005 Hygienist or other qualified individual sufficiently trained in worker health and safety requirements and implemented prior to the commencement of any excavation activity which will disturb soil located deeper than three (3) feet below surface grade within the AUL area. The Health and Safety Plan should specify the type of personal protection (i.e., clothing, respirators, etc.), engineering controls, and environmental monitoring necessary to prevent worker exposures to contaminated soil through dermal contact, ingestion, and/or inhalation. Workers must be informed of the requirements of the Health and Safety Plan, and the Plan must be available on site throughout the course of the project. 4. Proposed Changes in Activities and Uses. Any proposed changes in activities and uses at the Portion of the Property which may result in higher levels of exposure to oil and/or hazardous material than currently exist shall be evaluated by an LSP who shall render an Opinion, in accordance with 310 CMR 40.1080 et seg., as to whether the proposed changes will present a significant risk of harm to health, safety, public welfare or the environment. Any and all requirements set forth in the Opinion to meet the objective of this Notice shall be satisfied before any such activity or use is commenced. 5. Violation of a Response Action Outcome. The activities, uses and/or exposures upon which this Notice is based shall not change at any time to cause a significant risk of harm to health, safety, public welfare, or the environment or to create substantial hazards due to exposure to oil and/or hazardous material without the prior evaluation by an LSP in accordance with 310 CMR 40.1080 et seg., and without additional response actions, if necessary, to achieve or maintain a condition of No Significant Risk or to eliminate substantial hazards. If the activities, uses, and/or exposures upon which this Notice is based change without the prior evaluation and additional response actions determined to be necessary by an LSP in accordance with 310 CMR 40.1080 et seq., the owner or operator of the Portion of the Property subject to this Notice at the time that the activities, uses and/or exposures change, shall comply with the requirements set forth in 310 CMR 40.0020. 6. Incorporation Into Deeds Mortgages Leases and Instruments of Transfer. This Notice shall be incorporated either in full or by reference into all future deeds, easements, mortgages, leases, licenses, occupancy agreements or any other instrument of transfer, whereby an interest in and/or a right to use the Property or a portion thereof is conveyed. Owner hereby authorizes and consents to the filing and recordation and/or registration of this Notice, said Notice to become effective when executed Activity&Use Limitation RTN 3-21067 46385 -Dominion Blaney Street September 2005 under seal by the undersigned LSP, and recorded and/or registered with the appropriate Registry(ies) of Deeds and/or Land Registration Office(s). Activity&Use Limitation RTN 3-21067 46385 -Dominion Blaney Street September 2005 WITNESS the execution hereof under seal this lst day of September, 2005. LG. Scott Fletzer Senior Vice Presiden - id Treasurer Dominion Energy Salem Harbor, LL.0 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA CITY OF RICHMOND The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this Ist day of September, 2005, by G. Scott Hetzer, on behalf of Dominion Energy Salem Harbor, LLC. Notary Public — MY Commission Fxpires: -- The undersigned LSP hereby certifies that she executed the aforesaid Activity and Use Limitation Opinion attached hereto as Exhibit C :m I made a par] hereof and that in her Opinion this Notice of Activily and Use Limitation i< JVFJ the terms set forth in said Activity and Use Limitation Opinion. jay DOROTHYDate: — 3 McG6NGY— �i No.Saab _ Dorothy YMCGIincy, ��FofClSTER��S��F LSP SEAL S F4 /fE 4fi0 CON 'EALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS tel) _, ;''•..a U` , ss J ; C; J zOp z — — - Then personally appeared the above named Dorothy A. McGlincy and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be her free act and deed before me, otary Public My Commission Expires: Upon recording, return to: Michael Fitzgerald Dominion Energy Salem Harbor,LLC i11ET&Pwbk 24 Fort Avenue ced Salem, Massachusetts 01970 10 Blaney Street AUL RTN 3-21067 DOMINION ENERGY SALEM HARBOR, LLC Secretary's Certificate I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am Assistant Secretary of Dominion Energy Salem Harbor, LLC, a Virginia limited liability company (the "Company"). I further certify that the resolutions approved via Unanimous Written Consent (Attachment 1) have not been amended or revoked and that the same is now in full force and effect until revoked. I further certify that the below named person has been duly appointed and is the incumbent of the respective office and that the signature is genuine: G. Scott Hetzer Senior Vice President and Tre ,surer IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand ar(drhave affixed the corporate seal of said Company this ": day of , 2005. E. J.'M irks, III CORPORATE SEAL 1 ATTACHMENT TRANSCRIPT FROM UNANIMOUS WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE SOLE MEMBER OF DOMINION ENERGY SALEM HARBOR, LLC Effective September 9, 2004 RESOLVED, that the President and the other officers shall have such powers and duties as generally pertain to their respective offices as well as such powers and duties as may be delegated to them from time to time by the Manager. The President and each Vice President shall have authority to sign certificates for bonds, deeds and all manner of contracts necessary, expedient in or incident to the conduct of the Company's business and to delegate such authority in accordance with the Company's policies and procedures, in such manner as may be approved by the President. CITY OF SALEM CONSERVATION COMMISSION SITE VISIT FORM PROJECT LOCATION: D II �0. DATE OF SITE VISIT' PROJECT PROPONENT: Ch1 p DEP FILE NUMBER: 4 ygZ- PROPOSED WORK:. :j�kU5 AK" a�,A rASA Commission b rs/A t: Abutters: Applicant/Property Owner/Representative: SITE VISIT PURPOSE. t - , `_,.s4r.. iaIMP , � ��(:zr., a .. ❑Request for Determination ❑Abbreviated Notice of Resource Area Delineation p(I Notice of Intent ❑Certificate of Compliance El Enforcement/Violation ❑Emergency F-1 Informal AREAS OF JURISDICTION - NwHl a.M ,;ft. INLAND RESOURCE AREAS 11 COASTAL RESOURCE AREAS r, 1, ❑Bank Land Subject to Coastal Land Under the Ocean Storm Flowage ❑Bordering Vegetated Wetland [ IaLDesignated Port Area Coastal Beach ❑Land Subject to Flooding ❑ Coastal Dune ❑Barrier Beach ❑Land Under Water Bodies or Waterway Name: € XCoastal Bank ❑Rocky Intertidal Shore s, i; ❑Riverfront Area ❑ Salt Marsh ❑ Land Under Salt Pond ❑Vernal Pools ❑ Land Containing Anadromous/Cata- Shellfish dromous Fish Run ❑ Bordering Vegetated Wetland in Coastal Area `E BUFFER ZUNE;(witltin 100 feefj, � t x v _ ,.jY r ry am3 ❑Water Body ❑ Bordering Vegetated Wetland Bank ❑ Coastal Beach ❑Coastal Dune ,a_�� IINTERESTS P.ROTECTEd. g' �a��=��w;,�� 1`~ z -=: IIII.,,,�-"yyyy�.,,,, M �� Protection of Water Supply Protection of Groundwater Supply Plood Contro0l Storm Damage Prevention Prevention of Pollution protection of Fisheries Protection of Wildlife Habitat Protection of Land Containing Shellfish Is this an exempt project: If so,why? Are resource area boundaries delineated correctly? If not,explain. S17E VISITzDOCUMENTATION01 111"K MEMO,R. In ❑Photos ❑ Site Map ❑Other: �. .T .. ., ',. au3�a�r_ - -:- +,.+,uStP,,.+u'` i�•c tom„.. s.u� �.7, :3�. �1.a.� ::s+:.+�..da+ Take into account relevant aspects or features such as: natural or piped drainage or obvious pollution; topography; existing vegetation; possible alternative sites; signs of wildlife, possible vernal pools, rare species habitat; landmarks; recent or historical disturbances; proximity to other water bodies or drainage areas; adjacent land uses. RECOMMENDATIONS. ,. -1i '' rte Site Information Page 1 of 2 Site Information Site Number: 3-0021067 Category: 120 DY Site Name: NO LOCATION AID Release Type: RAO Address: 10 BLANEY ST Current date: 9/7/2005 Town: SALEM Phase: PHASE IV Zipcode: 01970-0000 RAO class: B2 Official notification date: 9/7/2001 Location type: Initial status date: 9/7/2002 Source: Response Action Information Chemicals Response Action Type: AUL-Activity and Use Limitation Chemical Amount Units Status: LEGNOT-Legal Notice Published BENZ[A]ANTHRACENE .968 MG/KG Submittal Date: 9/16/2005 BENZO[A]PYRENE 1.65 MG/KG RAO class: BENZ[E]ACEPHENANTHRYLENE .775 MG/KG Activity&Use Limitation: INDENO(1,2,3-CD)PYRENE .905 MG/KG UNKNOWN CHEMICAL OF .685 MG/KG Response Action Information UNKNOWN TYPE Response Action Type: RAO-Response Action Outcome-RAO I LEAD 716 MG/KG Status: RAORCD-RAO Statement Received Submittal Date: 9/7/2005 LSPS RAO class: B2 Activity&Use Limitation: NOTICE LSP# Name 17336 MCGLINCY,DOROTHY A Response Action Information Response Action Type: TCLASS-Tier Classification RAO Detail Status: T2TRAN-Tier 2 Transfer Class Method GW Category Soil Category Submittal Date: 12/7/2004 B2 3 2 1 RAO class: Activity&Use Limitation: Tier Classification Detail Response Action Information NRS Totals II DI IV V VI Zone 2 Imminent Hazard Response Action Type: PHSIII-Phase 3 306 190 71 25 20 0 N N Status: CSRCVD-Completion Statement Received Submittal Date: 9/13/2004 RAO class: http://db.state.ma.us/dep/cleanup/sites/Site_hifo.asp?textfield_RTN=3-0021067 11/5/2008 Site Information Page 2 of 2 Activity&Use Limitation: Response Action Information Location r Response Action Type: PHASII-Phase 2 Status: CSRCVD-Completion Statement Received Submittal Date: 9/13/2004 RAO class: f Activity&Use Limitation: Response Action Information Response Action Type: PHASEI-Phase 1 Status: CSRCVD-Completion Statement y ' Received lex , Submittal Date: 9/11/2002 RAO class: Activity&Use Limitation: Response Action Information Response Action Type: RNF-Release Notification Form _ Received 'ke {�' Status: REPORT-Reportable Release or Threat of Release t .Open Sites ("loud Sitox,e= Submittal Date: 9/7/2001 ;.Cl« urt 5ftea with Ust. i. l�itaci 3l RAO class: Activity&Use Limitation: Response Action Information Response Action Type: REL-Potential Release or Threat of Release Status: REPORT-Reportable Release or Threat of Release Submittal Date: 9/7/2001 RAO class: Activity&Use Limitation: http://db.state.ma.us/dep/cleanup/sites/Site_Info.asp?textfield_RTN=3-0021067 11/5/2008 1 $ 1t8 t r ss r t { Ilk Y' c ' Vine Associate a,Inc. " 372 Merrimac St. ' Newburyport,MA 01950 978-465-1428 } 978-465-2640 '10mm— alai P 1 777= . '.. �' ¢'T' '15' Submitted to: MEPA Office ) !/ ' 100 Cambridge Street Boston, MA Y 4•y}� 1 r I 1 Submitted by: ' Vine Associates, Inc. ' Submitted for., - City of Salem - 120 Washington Street Salem, MA - - _ April-15;2008— I ' t I. 1 V�. Vine April 15, 2008 372 Alminmc Street Newb")pae'i Secretary Ian A. Bowles A w ,r, Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs Attn: MEPAtOffice D19'0 100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900 (97.3)465-7418 ' Boston, MA 02114 Fa, (9 78)465-7640 ' Re: Environmental Notification Form O Aa12S 2 Salem Port Expansion Salem; MA Dear Secretary Bowles: ' On behalf of the City of Salem, (the "Project Proponent'), Vine Associates, Inc. is pleased to submit the enclosed Environmental Notification Form (ENF) for the Salem Port Expansion. ' The Project proposes to construct a multi use water transportation facility on a site owned by Dominion and located in the Salem Harbor Designated Port Area in the City of Salem. ' The development of this facility has been planned and evaluated by the City of Salem over the past several years. The proposed development plan includes land and waterside improvements including pedestrian and vehicular access; parking; a water transportation ' terminal with passenger facilities, office and storage space; and a fixed pile supported pier and a system of gangways and floating docks/barges to accommodate a variety of vessels such as commercial fishing boats, small coastal cruise ships, visiting ships, water taxis, texcursion vessels and a supply boat. The facility will require dredging of 8.3 acres of Salem Harbor to create navigable areas with sufficient depths to accommodate the vessels programmed for the site. The U.S. Army Corps has recently determined that the sediments proposed for dredging are suitable for offshore P open water disposal in the Massachusetts Bay Disposal Site. ' The project is required to file an ENF as it will alter a coastal bank(note that the bank was ' previously altered); alter more than '/z acre of wetland resources from the proposed dredging activities; dredge more than 10,000 cubic yards of material; and expand pile supported structures occupying flowed tidelands more than 2,000 sf in base area (301 CMR ' 11.03(3)(b)(1)(b) and (f) and (3), (4), and (6)). I ' 1 ' The project is an important economic initiative for the City that is included in the City's 2008 Municipal Harbor Plan. This City Project has received funding from and is supported by the state Seaport Council as well as other organizations in the City. The City expects to ' complete the project design in the winter of 2008 and begin construction in the spring of 2009. ' Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions at (978)465-1428. ' Sincerely, VINE ASSOCIATES, INC,. Susan St. Pierre Principal ' cc: K. Driscoll, Mayor City of Salem D. Babb-Brott, MEPA Director ' Enclosures 1 original signed ENF I ' 1 copy of signed ENF 1 copy of first three pages of ENF including project description 1 i„1 1 Commonwealth of Massachusetts For Office UseOnly Executive Officece ojEnvironmenmentalAjjairs ' Executive Office of Environmental Affairs ■ MEPA Office EOEA No.: ENF MEPA Analyst: Environmental Phone: 617-626- Notification Form ' The information requested on this form must be completed to begin MEPA Review in accordance with the provisions of the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act, 301 CMR 11.00. ' Project Name: Salem Port Expansion Street: 10 Blaney Street Municipality: Salem Watershed: South River/Salem Harbor Universal Tranverse Mercator Coordinates: Latitude: 42.522398 Longitude: 70.882804 W Estimated commencement date: Spring 2009 Estimated completion date: Spring 2011 Approximate cost: $14.73million Status of project design: 25%complete Proponent: City of Salem Street: 120 Washington Street ' Municipality: Salem State: MA Zip Code: 01970 Name of Contact Person From Whom Copies of this ENF May Be Obtained: Susan St. Pierre Firm/Agency: Vine Associates, Inc. Street: 372 Merrimac Street Municipality: Newburyport State: MAZi Code: 01950 Phone: 978-465-1428 Fax: E-mail: sst. Terre vineassociates.net Does this project meet or exceed a mandatory EIR threshold (see 301 CMR 11.03)? [-]Yes ®No Has this project been filed with MEPA before? ❑Yes (EDEA No. ) ®No Has any project on this site been filed with MEPA before? ' ®Yes (EDEA No. 13558 ❑No Is this an Expanded ENF (see 301 cMR 11.05(7)) requesting: a Single EIR? (see 301 CMR 11.06(8)) ❑Yes ®No ' a Special Review Procedure? (see 301CMR 11.09) []Yes ®No a Waiver of mandatory EIR? (see 301 CMR 11.11) ❑Yes ®No a Phase I Waiver? (see 301 CMR 11.11) ❑Yes ®No ' Identify any financial assistance or land transfer from an agency of the Commonwealth, including the agency name and the amount of funding or land area (in acres): Seaport Bond Bill Funding has been provided for design and permitting and is expected for construction Are you requesting coordinated review with any other federal, state, regional, or local agency? ❑Yes(Specify__ ) ®No 1 ' List Local or Federal Permits and Approvals: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 10/Section 404 ' Permit, Salem Conservation Commission Notice of Intent Which ENF or EIR review threshold(s) does the project meet or exceed (see 301 CMR 11.03): ❑ Land ❑ Rare Species ® Wetlands, Waterways, & Tidelands ❑ Water ❑ Wastewater ❑ Transportation ❑ Energy ❑ Air ❑ Solid & Hazardous Waste ❑ACEC ❑ Regulations ❑ Historical &Archaeological Resources Summary of Project Size Existing Change Total State Permits & & Environmental Impacts Approvals ' E Order of Total site acreage 2.oa Conditions ❑ Superseding ' New acres of land altered o Order of Acres of impervious area 15 1.89 z.oa Conditions ' Square feet of new bordering 0 E Chapter 91 vegetated wetlands alteration License E401 Water Quality Square feet of new other Certification wetland alteration (Watersheet) 362,000 ❑ MHD or MDC ' Acres of new non-water Access dependent use of tidelands or 0 Permit ' waterways ❑ Water Management Act Permit Gross square footage 467 10,024 10,491 ❑ New Source ' Number of housing units 0 0 o Approval ❑ DEP or MWRA Maximum height(in feet) 0 32 (to peak) 32(to peak) Sewer ' TRANSPORTATION Connection/ Extension Permit Vehicle trips per day 848 weekday 272 weekday 1120weekday ❑ Other Permits 694 weekend 752 weekend 1446 weekend (including Legislative ' Parking spaces 1 196 -50 146 Approvals)— Specify: ' Gallons/day (GPD) of water use 78 3772 3850 GPD water withdrawal 0 0 0 GPD wastewater generation/ 71 3122 3300 ' treatment Length of water/sewer mains (in 0 0 0 miles) CONSERVATION LAND: Will the project involve the conversion-of public parkland or other Article 97 public natural resources to any purpose not in accordance with Article 97? ' ❑Yes (Specify ) ENo Will it involve the release of any conservation restriction, preservation restriction, agricultural preservation restriction, or watershedpreservation restriction? ❑Yes (Specify ) ENo ' 2 1 i , RARE SPECIES: Does the project site include Estimated Habitat of Rare Species,Vernal Pools, Priority ' Sites of Rare Species, or Exemplary Natural Communities? ❑Yes(Specify ) ENo HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Does the project site include any structure, site or ' district listed in the State Register of Historic Place or the inventory of Historic and Archaeological Assets of the Commonwealth? ❑Yes (Specify ) ENo ' If yes, does the project involve any demolition or destruction of any listed or inventoried historic or archaeological resources? ❑Yes (Specify ) ENo ' AREAS OF CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN: Is the project in or adjacent to an Area of Critical Environmental Concern? ❑Yes (Specify ) ENo ' PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project description should include (a) a description of the project site, (b) a description of both on-site and off-site alternatives and the impacts associated with each alternative, and (c) potential on-site and off-site mitigation measures for each alternative (You may attach one additional page, if necessary.) ' Project Site and Purpose The City of Salem proposes to redevelop 10 Blaney Street into a multi use port facility. The 2.04 acre site is located off of Derby Street in the Salem Harbor Designated Port Area and is owned by Dominion. The site currently contains an interim floating dock system, a gravel parking area that can accommodate about 196 vehicles, and an office trailer used by the Salem Ferry,Nathaniel Bowditch, which has been providing seasonal commuter ferry service from the site to Boston since 2006. The City is currently under agreement with an offshore supply vessel and a coastal cruise company both of which expect to be users of the facility beginning this year. ' The Project offers a unique and exciting opportunity for the City of Salem to redevelop an underutilized site located on Salem Harbor into an economic engine and a tourist gateway for the community. tProject Background ' The Salem Port Expansion Project has been the subject of planning, economic, and engineering studies over the past several years that recommend the development of a multi use water transportation facility that could service a variety of vessels including the existing Salem Ferry ' Nathaniel Bowditch, excursion boats, water taxis, an LNG Offshore supply boat, commercial fishing boats, visiting ships and small cruise ships. The existing floating dock system was installed in 2006, a bathymetric survey, dredge sampling and testing were performed in ' 2006/2007 and an updated site layout and program was developed in the fall/winter of 2007. Project Description ' The proposed redevelopment plan for the site includes land and waterside improvements. The site is located adjacent to the Dominion Power plant and residential neighborhoods. The site design has been developed in response to this neighborhood context and includes traffic changes j ' on Derby Street, landscaping, and pedestrian amenities including a continuous harborwalk and a 3 ' fishing/viewing pier. ' The facility has been designed for several vessel types (see Table 1 below) and includes a water transportation terminal building with support space for the vessels. To accommodate the envisioned vessel usage, a fixed pile supported pier and floating dock/barge systems are proposed. Dredging is also required to achieve water depths necessary for the desired uses. To the extent possible, the existing interim ferry facility components will be reused as part of the floating dock/barge system and the existing pile support pier portion of the facility will be left in place as a fishing/viewing pier. The proposed land and waterside facilities and improvements are summarized in Table 2 below and shown on Figure 1. 1 Pedestrian and cyclist amenities such as bicycle racks, benches and lighting will be provided along the harborwalk. Efforts will be made to design the proposed terminal building to achieve LEED ' certification and lighting for the parking lot and harborwalk and trash receptacles will utilize solar powered designs. The feasibility of incorporating wind generated energy into the facility will be explored. The proposed terminal building will include a waiting area on the ground floor which ' can also be used for public gathering during off season and off peak.periods. ' Project Impacts The Project site is a level, underdeveloped site currently used for parking and support space for the Salem Ferry,Nathaniel Bowditch. The site currently contains an open gravel parking area with a ' rough rip rap bulkhead edge placed along the shoreline with a narrow walking path on top of the bank. There is also a trailer that houses the Nathaniel Bowditch ferry offices. Table 1 ' Vessel Usage Vessel Type Berthing Requirement Usage ' LNG Offshore Supply Vessel 130 ft berth at floating barge Home Port Salem Ferry 120 ft berth at ADA barge Home Port ' Coastal Cruise Vessels 250 ft berth at ADA Barge Day Use Small to Medium Cruise Vessels up to 400 ft at pier face Day Use Medium Cruise Ships up to 800 ft Anchorage Day Use Tenders to ADA barge Day Use Visiting Vessels/Tall Ships up to 400 ft at pier face Day/Ovemight ' Excursion Vessels 120 ft berth at ADA Barge Live Berth Water Taxi 50 ft berth Float at ADA Barge t 1 4 1 ' Table 2 Land and Waterside Improvements Landside ' Vehicular access from Derby Street via Blaney Street with passenger drop off area suitable for truck,bus and trolley access. Parking for 146 vehicles. Pedestrian access to/from Derby Street via White Street and internal pedestrian circulation along a 12 foot wide pile supported Harborwalk. Electrical;water,sewage pump-out,trash dumpsters and lighting. ' A two story, 10,500 square foot Terminal Building that includes passenger waiting/ticketing;office and support space;and maintenance storage areas (see Terminal Building Program on Table 3). ' Waterside A fixed"L"shaped pier designed to accommodate trucks with adequate maneuvering,refueling and provisioning space and space along the pier end to accommodate small coastal cruise ships (300 feet in length) and visiting ships. The main pier leg is 32 feet wide and 250+/-feet long and the pier end varies in width from 20 to 50 feet and is 130 feet long. 10 ton crane capacity. ' Re-use of the existing 130 foot long float on the west side of the fixed pier to accommodate the Nathaniel Bowditch ferry and small coastal cruise ships (185 feet in length). ' A series of steel floating docks on the east side of the fixed pier to accommodate the LNG offshore supply boat,water taxis and excursion vessels. Floats along the westerly side of the backland to accommodate the local fishing fleet and other vessels. ' Dredging approximately 209,000 cubic yards in an 8.3 acre(362,000 square feet)area to create three basins with depths ranging from elevations—10 to-26 feet Mean Low Water. The dredging of the most landward basin includes approximately 45,000 square feet of intertidal area. This dredging is needed to create berthing the ' local commercial fishing fleet and other smaller draft vessels and to allow floats to be placed closer to the shoreline. ' Waterways and Wetlands The proposed redevelopment of the site involves water-dependent industrial uses, facilities of ' public accommodation, and public access to and along the water's edge on proposed on filled and flowed tidelands in the Salem Harbor Designated Port Area (see Figure 2 below). The ' Project as designed meets the performance standards of the state Chapter 91 regulations including those governing Designated Port Areas (DPAs). As noted, the various components of the existing docking facility will be re-used as part of the proposed facility to the extent practical. ' As a public amenity, the pile supported portion of the existing docking facility will remain in place as a viewing/fishing pier as shown on Figure 1. 1 ' 5 1 Table 3 ' Terminal Building Program Tenant/User Function Net Area Need Cross Area Notes/Needs/FAuipment. Needed 1.Salem Ferry (subtotal) 3,370sf Seasonal space needs at present, ' April through October War. icker o Public 1200sf Office Private 850sr ' Workshop/Storage Private 1000sf Public Restroom'§ Public(2 320sf 160§ Outdoor covered Public 400sf waiting porch 3.Cruise Vessels -0- Seasonal use;can share waiting t and public space with ferry Waiting/Info Shared with -0- E 4.Visiting Vessels -0- Can share waiting and public space ' Waiting/Info Shared with -0- with fmay Ferry ' S.Offshore Supply 4,700sf Yearround use;.heavier activity Vessel durina tall and winter months Office Private 2500sf ' Workshop Private 1000sf Storage .Private 1 000s Priv ate Restroorns Private;2 100 200sf ' 6.Other Shared Areas 250sf General building needs Utilities Common 150sf Mamtenance/Stora a Common 1005f Total Net.Suuare Feet 8,070sf .Area without circulation„wall s.etc.. Total Gross Square Feet One Storey, 8X7sf Site limits may preclude(a l.storey Buildi . @ Us building Total Gross Square Feet Tao Storey 10491sf 2 Stomybuilding would require Building.@ 1.3 a more circulation space;.footprint of a roximatel .5,250 sf ' • Ezlerior space;Not included in net square.footage 1 7 ' Designated Port Area: ' SALEM HARBOR OESIONATEO PORT AREA CONSISTS OF: /;\` a $NCCII•Is Mle,lnm ihosewalms Ileaa Is Walenmys Goatee ra", Uon Iceaward d mean IuBh walm many. Scale in Yana O 30a Priority area for stale sad!W ml luring ltxndwad of mean aiptl woly marMl' II , a o J L. ev-5;9 . Cal Com T Winter Island x� v - Power Planl ].T I x ' l I j rt; "^y aIs, j/ I tontarr 4� •' 16 it alesh Z. 211 ba 21 37 as m n _ 23 1 ,6 :•.. ii: n....... w r 5i•:�\ a ] ��7,• ,/a �'lo`�� foinoxm•vY 20 2, >) al h t a'�• r' 7io ]o ' SALEM ISHARB0R/ Figure 2 ' Salem Harbor DPA ' The site contains state wetland resource areas including Land Under Ocean, Coastal Beach, Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage and Designated Port Area (DPAs) as shown of Figure 3. The harbor bottom generally consists of a granular top layer of silty sand underlain by a cohesive ' silt/clay bottom layer' and according to the MassGIS mapping, the area does not contain vegetated shallows, salt marsh or shellfish beds. The site contains state wetland resource areas including Land Under Ocean, Coastal Beach, Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage and Designated Port Area (DPAs) as shown of Figure 3. The t ' Based on sediment sampling and testing undertaken in 2005 in accordance with a sampling protocol approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 8 harbor bottom generally consists of a granular top layer of silty sand underlain by a cohesive silt/clay bottom layer' and according to the MassGIS mapping, the area does not contain ' vegetated shallows, salt marsh or shellfish beds. The state wetlands regulations presume that in DPAs, certain resource areas including coastal ' beaches and tidal flats are not likely to be significant to marine fisheries, storm damage prevention or flood control but that many species of marine fisheries including anadromous:ffshi ;may inhabit such-areas and may-need to pass.through such areas.to inland spawning areas or,to ' the sea,The regulations also presume that Land Under Ocean in DPAs is significant to marine fisheries, storm damage prevention and flood control and therefore, water circulation and water a quality are critical to the protection of marine fisheries7The ability of land to provide support for adjacent coastal or man-made structures is also presumed to be critical to the protection of storm damage prevention or flood control. To accommodate the intended vessel usage,;dredging of approximately 209,000 cubic:yardsyof harbor sediments is required to create three dredge basins totaling 8.3 acres (see Figure 4). The dredging will occur withinlCoastal:Beach (approximately.45,000:square-,feet) and-Land Under I Ocean (approximately 317,000 square feet) resource areas. The proposed dredging will result in _. temporary impacts to the Land Under Ocean resource area. The Coastal Beach Resource area will be dredged to elevation -10 MLW and will become subtidal. Best.Management Practices will be used during construction to minimize impacts. No permanent adverse impacts to the movement fish,water circulation or water quality are anticipated. Furthermore, no alterations are proposed that would adversely affect the ability of the adjacent land to protect buildings or structures from flood damage. The sedtmeuf in'the proposed rdredge-basins has-been sampled- andtested in accordance.with_a sampling plan approved by.the U.S.,Anny Corps of Engineers> which has recently issued a-suitability_determination-.for open ocean,disposal_of the dredger _1._- — m— y sediments.? ' Other impacts to state wetland resource areas include the installation of a concrete retaining waw along the entireshorelineto-stabilize-the shoreline which willoccur on approximately 850 linear. 'feet of previo`usly altered-Coastal.Bank. WThere is also a 3,950 sf square foot area located along the ' harborwalk and in the vicinity of the terminal building that will be filled to allow the building to be constructed at grade rather than on piles in this location. This•activity'will-affecf'existing-- coastal bank and places approxlmaFely 11580 square` feet f fill in this area below the high tide line but-above mean*low•water Other,activities.include.installadon-of-piles-to-support•the, harborwalk and pier but these will be=placed-in areas_already impacted by the proposed dredging.,, Please refer:to:Figure 5'Proposed Site Fill An interagency meeting was held at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers New England Division on ' April 9, 2008 to discuss the proposed development plan. At that meeting, requirements for alternative analysis and the need for providing mitigation measures, as outlined in the Mitigation Plan Guidance to offset the intertidal dredging and filling, were discussed. The investigation of alternatives and final mitigation plans will be developed during the permitting process. 2 Based on sediment sampling and testing undertaken in 2005 in accordance with a sampling protocol approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 9 � 1 � 1 U I ` 1 "Itl La SRI 1 � y 1 Figure 3 Wetland and Waters Resource Areas 1 10 Ll / POWEP. COAIP4NY / �(!( /Il\I I � f..��i / l ° //, i.'�i�•-�- Rmwf.Oun WI'p4Ti /•�� ///fff"'r"`^^ �� / I 7�I� _--- i SW-8 ■BW-7 _I �� SW-7 _ - ,``r ■ rocs am a sopr L.—_Tw or `f 1 r `r rn PROPOSED DREDGING DEPTHS DREDC% DEPTH - -10.0 — — / OV DREDGE DEPPI - _11.0 PROPOSED DREDGE FOOTPRINT _ OF"GE DEPTH = -15.0 AND SEDIMENT SAMPLE LOCATIONS ® DYERDREDGE DEPTH = -I6.0 ® _ DREDGE DEPTH - -25.0 SALEM CITY PIER OMRDREDGE DEPTH = -27.0 SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS _ 90E/TRANSRI0N SLOPES y ® >NO IV(TYPICAL) JUNE-20-05- FIGURL I } bv[«LVL iFT,nt MxFM14.Wi.Tw5FRu2rr5 a r i U F17111 I II/ � FAC W�DA"S"P: NG �y..�. a 9 p r OIDING Q �_ �_ ` � PIIE SUPPDRIEO PER � Dpo'DROP r -9 _ s, RLE WNVRIED PER ME I E Fl Sao W MCN PLAN kz a s N H � G E_, S -So o PROPOSED SITE FILL eNXv °noI�"MvaO'HP°D'e4a SALEM PORT EXPANSION CITY OF SALEM SALEM, MA MARCH 2008 EXHIBR A Figure 5 Proposed Site Fill rTraffic and Parkinv The proposed expansion of DPA marine industrial uses on the site is expected to increase vehicular traffic above existing levels. Traffic on nearby streets will increase incrementally as the seasonal ferry services continues to attract more visitors and as the year round Offshore LNG Supply Vessel operations expand and contract from winter to summer and as additional vessel usage of the site occurs. To offset potential increases in traffic on Derby Street in the near term, the City is proposing to provide two-way traffic on Derby Street between White Street and Webb Street. This change will not require any major street reconstruction however, on street parking along this portion of Derby Street will be removed and replaced as angled parking along the south side of Derby Street near Dominion. There will be a total loss of two parking spaces under this scheme. See Figure 6 for the proposed street and parking changes. During the fall and winter seasons, the demand for parking by the site uses will decrease the parking lot will be available for residential neighbors during winter snow storm events. 12 � 1 Utilities The site will be serviced by municipal water and sewer to service the proposed Terminal Building and to provide water service for vessels. A sewer pump station will be installed within the turn around area. A new subsurface storm drainage system will be installed with two new 18 inch stormwater outfalls. The system will be equipped with Stormceptor and oil/water separators. ' No infiltration is proposed due to groundwater being tidal influenced. f� tj ' 1 ❑ g 1?e�gl a�gg6 tl!S(sf Gj F� e Sao io 99tt,b`A �: %Ptpa! � II �� Q•, E t� 9 E® M W1 FailE1 i d i f b i � � �� - -O ❑ PH�(J�J/fes/ .//J� � _7 �• Figure 6 Derby Street Improvements ' ' 13 ' Project History The Salem Port Expansion Project was originally proposed in 1998 as a multi use marine facility capable of berthing large cruise ships (800 feet long) as well as accommodating excursion/charter vessels, transient ' vessels and the local commercial fishing fleet. The landside development included retail and hotel uses as well as support facilities for the commercial fishing and water transportation operations. The proposed development was designed to take advantage of the site's proximity to the federal channel and its location in the Salem Harbor Designated Port Area. A large filled pier, a Ya acre area of fill to accommodate retail uses in two buildings, and dredging of ' approximately 550,000 cubic yards of material was proposed. In 2005, the project was reduced in scope based in put on public input as well as the results of market studies which demonstrated that smaller cruise ships would be more likely to utilize the facility than larger slips. The changes included elimination of the filled pier, a reduction in the size of the fixed pier to ' accommodate smaller class cruse vessels;reduced dredge areas and volumes; and elimination of the hotel and retail uses as well as the Yz acre of fill from the development program. The water transportation terminal and commercial fishing support buildings were retained. Parking was reduced to reflect the ' revised program. Alternatives In 2007,the City retained a waterfront consultant to develop a new schematic design for the project taking into consideration, among other factors, existing facility use by the commuter/visitor ferry Natbanie! Bowditeb, and potential use by an offshore supply vessel to support the Northeast Gateway deep water LNG Port that has been constructed about 12 miles east of the City in Massachusetts Bay. The study evaluated several alternative layouts of the facility, changes to the interior circulation system, and recommendations for a larger terminal building to accommodate offices and storage space for the offshore supply vessel operations and the Salem Ferry. The terminal building public space will have bathroom facilities and waiting area. The waiting area is to have a dual role of meeting/small function space during the off season. The existing level of parking will be reduced to accommodate the budding and turning area requirements of trucks and emergency vehicles. In addition to the preferred development plan shown on Figure 1, five other alternatives were considered as part of the 2007 study. These alternatives (A,B, C,D and E) are similar in nature on the landside with variations in the size of the terminal building and different berthing configurations and pier layouts for the same program of vessel usage (see figures on following pages). The site program was based on previous market and site studies and modified based on the existing site constraints. The City is currently undergoing a project management and operation study which will more clearly define the site program needs in terms of both commercial vessel, upland building, and parking needs to support the water dependent uses. The alternatives were reviewed with the City, current and anticipated site users, and an advisory group, and the comments were incorporated into the preferred development plan shown on Figure 1. 14 1 1 In the development of the site plan several key issues were identified: 1 1. The site is within the Salem Designated Port Area and as such is restricted to commercial water dependent maritime activities. 2. The City of Salem has an approved Harbor Plan which supports the proposed uses and 1development of the site. 3. The commercial vessel use includes the need to be MAAB and ADA compliant for passenger vessel services including the Salem Ferry,cruise vessels and excursion vessels. 4. The City is currently under agreement with the offshore supply vessel and for several ports-of-call for a coastal cruise company in 2007 both of which are anticipated to be users of the proposed facility. 1 5. Both the ferry and the offshore supply vessel need to berth on floats but also require access to the Pier face for heavy load transfers. 6. The support pier needs to be designed for trucks and a truck crane load to provide support for 1 the ferry and supply vessel operations. 7. The site requires a formal turning area to accommodate trolleys, buses, trucks and emergency vehicles. The location of the turning area on the site is limited due to the site's narrowness. The 1 location shown is what is believed to be the furthest inshore it can be to provide this function. 8. The physical layout of the turning area limits the area available for the proposed terminal budding 1 which,as a result,must be located along the waters edge. The project proposes to fill a small area to allow the placement of the budding at grade and not on pilings. Pilings would be especially difficult due to the amount of large stone present in this area. 1 9. The inter-tidal area proposed for dredging is required to accommodate berthing need of the local Lobster fleet which was identified as a specific need. The location is critical for protection during winter storm conditions which is one of the major complaints about alternate locations. The City 1 also sees this as a great benefit to increase site utilization as they would be present during the offseason. 1 The project does provide substantial public benefit with the creation of the harborwalk, the creation of the fishing pier and the use of the terminal building for public space that could be utilized during the offseason. Given the nature of the adjoining Dominion property, this site is seen as a transitional 1 development between the power plant and the residential users. The site is being designed to provide public and visitor amenities and to enhance the site as a public gateway to Salem for ferry and cruise ship 1 passengers. 1 1 1 i 15 1 1 iFri ---- �_ r i t IF �- - -'CYCl )�)Tl ��l aan tan mm� f- { ' 16 0 _ y / �itltttt '''��' fn- rY�uua Im986hbtl�J.I - -- -r 1 1 1 ' LAND SECTION — all proponents must fill out this section I. Thresholds/Permits A. Does the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to land (see 301 CMR 11.03(1) Yes X No; if yes, specify each threshold: ll. Impacts and Permits A. Describe, in acres, the current and proposed character of the project site, as follows: Existing Change Total Footprint of buildings 0.01 0.23 0.24 Roadways, parking, and other paved areas 0.15. 1.27 1.42 Other altered areas: Landscaping n/a 0.34 0.34 Fill n/a 0.04 0.04 Undeveloped areas n/a n/a n/a B. Has any part of the project site been in active agricultural use in the last three years? _Yes X No; if yes, how many acres of land in agricultural use(with agricultural soils)will be ' converted to nonagricultural use? C. Is any part of the project site currently or proposed to be in active forestry use? _Yes X No; if yes, please describe current and proposed forestry activities and indicate ' whether any part of the site is the subject of a DEM-approved.forest management plan: D. Does any part of the project involve conversion of land held for natural resources purposes in accordance with Article 97 of the Amendments to the Constitution of the Commonwealth to any purpose not in accordance with Article 97?_Yes X No; if yes, describe: E. Is any part of the project site currently subject to a conservation restriction, preservation restriction, ' agricultural preservation restriction or watershed preservation restriction?_Yes X No if yes, does the project involve the release or modification of such restriction? Yes No; if yes, describe: ' F. Does the project require approval of a new urban redevelopment project or a.fundamental change in an existing urban redevelopment project under M.G.L.c.121A? Yes X No; if yes, describe: G. Does the project require approval of a new urban renewal plan or a major modification of an ' existing urban renewal plan under M.G.L.c.121B?Yes _No X ; if yes, describe: H. Describe the project's stormwater impacts and, if applicable, measures that the project will take ' to comply with the standards found in DEP's Stormwater Management Policy: The project is a redevelopment project and will not increase stormwater runoff from the site. There are two new storm drain outfalls proposed at the site. To provide water quality treatment to the ' stormwater prior to discharge, stormceptors will be provided. No infiltration is proposed as groundwater is tidal saltwater. I. Is the project site currently being regulated under M.G.L.c.21 E or the Massachusetts ' Contingency Plan? Yes _No X ; if yes, what is the Release Tracking Number(RTN)? J. If the project is site is within the Chicopee or Nashua watershed, is it within the Quabbin, Ware, or — Wachusett subwatershed? Yes X No; if yes, is the project site subject to regulation under the Watershed Protection Act? Yes No K. Describe the project's other impacts on land. None 18 i III. Consistency ' A. Identify the current municipal comprehensive land use plan and the open space plan and describe the consistency of the project and its impacts with that plan(s): ' The proposed use is consistent with City zoning and the Salem Municipal Harbor Plan. B. Identify the current Regional Policy Plan of the applicable Regional Planning Agency and describe the consistency of the project and its impacts with that plan: The Metropolitan Area Planning Council, Metro Plan recommends that development be concentrated and supports infill development in and around existing downtown areas. The Project achieves these ' goals. Furthermore the project advances the state goals of encouraging water-dependent industrial uses in state Designated Port Areas and encouraging water transportation. C. Will the project require any approvals under the local zoning by-law or ordinance(i.e. text or map amendment, special permit, or variance)? Yes X No ; if yes, describe: D. Will the project require local site plan or project impact review? _ Yes X No; if yes, describe: 1 RARE SPECIES SECTION ' I. Thresholds/Permits A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to rare species or habitat(see 301 CMR 11.03(2))? _Yes X No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms: B. Does the project require any state permits related to rare species or habitat? _Yes X No ' C. If you answered"No"to both.questions A and,B, proceed to the Wetlands,Waterways, and Tidelands Section. If you answered "Yes"to either question A or question B, fill out the remainder of the Rare Species section below. ' It. Impacts and Permits A. Does the project site fall within Priority or Estimated Habitat in the current Massachusetts Natural Heritage Atlas(attach relevant page)? _Yes X No. If yes, 1. Which rare species are known to occur within the Priority or Estimated Habitat(contact: ' Environmental Review, Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program, Route 135, Westborough, MA 01581, allowing 30 days for receipt of information): 2. Have you surveyed the site for rare species? _Yes X No; if yes, please include the ' results of your survey. 3. If your project is within Estimated Habitat, have you filed a Notice of Intent or received an Order of Conditions for this project? _Yes_No; if yes, did you send a copy of the Notice of Intent to the Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program, in accordance ' with the Wetlands Protection Act regulations? _Yes_No B. Will the project"take"an endangered, threatened, and/or species of special concern in ' accordance with M.G.L. c.131A(see also 321 CMR 10.04)? _Yes X No; if yes, describe: C. Will the project alter"significant habitat" as designated by the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife in accordance with M.G.L. c.131A(see also 321 CMR 10.30)? _Yes X No; ' if yes, describe: D. Describe the project's other impacts on rare species including indirect impacts (for example, stormwater runoff into a wetland known to contain rare species or lighting impacts on rare moth habitat): N/A 19 WETLANDS. WATERWAYS, AND TIDELANDS SECTION I. Thresholds/Permits A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to wetlands,waterways, and ' tidelands (see 301 CMR 11.03(3))? X Yes _No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms: The facility will require dredging of 8.3 acres/209,000 cubic yards of material; alter approximately 850 linear feet of coastal bank; alter more than Y:acre of wetland resources from the proposed ' dredging activities; and expand pile supported structures from 2,500 sf to 39,385 sf in base area. B. Does the project require any state permits (or a local Order of Conditions) related to wetlands, ' waterways,or tidelands? X Yes _No; if yes, specify which permit: Chapter 91 License, 404 Water Quality Certificate and Order of Conditions under state wetland regulations. ' C. If you answered"No"to both questions A and B, proceed to the Water Supply Section. If you answered "Yes"to either question A or question B, fill out the remainder of the Wetlands, Waterways, and Tidelands Section below. ' ll. Wetlands Impacts and Permits A. Describe any wetland resource areas currently existing on the project site and indicate them on I ' the site plan: Wetlands resource areas include Land Under Ocean, Coastal Beach (including tidal flats), Coastal Bank and Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage. The Site is located in a state Designated Port ' Area(see Figure 3, Wetlands and Waterways resource areas). B. Estimate the extent and type of impact that the project will have on wetland resources, and indicate whether the impacts are temporary or permanent: ' Coastal Wetlands Area (in sauare feet)or Length (in linear feet) Land Under the Ocean 317.000 sf Temporary Designated Port Areas 362.000 sf Temporary Coastal Beaches 45.000 sf Permanent Coastal Dunes 0 Barrier Beaches 0 ' Coastal Banks 850 linear feet Permanent Rocky Intertidal Shores 0 Salt Marshes 0 Land Under Salt Ponds 0 ' Land Containing Shellfish 0 Fish Runs 0 Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage 88.900sf ' Inland Wetlands Bank n/a Bordering Vegetated Wetlands n/a ' Land under Water n/a Isolated Land Subject to Flooding n/a Bordering Land Subject to Flooding n/a Riverfront Area n/a ' C. Is any part of the project, 1. a limited project?-_Yes X No ' 2. the construction or alteration of a dam? —Yes X No; if yes, describe: 3. fill or structure in a velocity zone or regulatory floodway? _Yes X No 20 1 1 4. dredging or disposal of dredged material? _X_Yes _No; if yes, describe the volume of dredged material and the proposed disposal site: Dredging of approximately 209,000 cubic yards of harbor sediments is required. The U.S.Army Corps recently issued a determination that the sediments are suitable for open ocean disposal in ' the Mass Bay Disposal Site. 5. a discharge to Outstanding Resource Waters? _Yes X No 6. subject to a wetlands restriction order? _Yes X No; if yes, identify the area(in square feet): D. Does the project require a new or amended Order of Conditions under the Wetlands Protection ' Act(M.G.L. c.131A)? X Yes _No; if yes, has a Notice of Intent been filed or a local Order of Conditions issued? —Yes X No; if yes, list the date and DEP file number: Was the Order of Conditions appealed? Yes X No. Will the project require a variance from the Wetlands regulations?_Yes X No. ' E. Will the project: 1. be subject to a local wetlands ordinance or bylaw? _Yes X No 2. alter any federally-protected wetlands not regulated under state or local law? Yes X No; if yes, what is the area(in s.f.)? F. Describe the project's other impacts on wetlands(including new shading of wetland areas or t removal of tree canopy from forested wetlands): Project includes pile supported structures within wetland resource areas, however the piles are being placed within the dredged footprint and/or coastal bank, and therefore do not present additional ' impacts over that previously described. III. Waterways and Tidelands Impacts and Permits A. Is any part of the project site waterways or tidelands (including filled former tidelands)that are ' subject to the Waterways Act, M.G.L.c.91'? X Yes =No; if yes, is there a current Chapter 91 license or permit affecting the project site? --7--Yes No; if yes, list the date and number: ' License Numbers 174 and 174A issued 1921; 3849 issued 1956; 4548 issued,1962; 4916 issued. 1996: B. Does the project require anew or modified license under M.G.L.c.91? X Yes _No; if yes, ' how many acres of the project site subject to M.G.L.c.91 will be for non-water dependent use? Current Osf Change Osf Total O,sf ' C. Is any part of the project 1. a roadway, bridge, or utility line to or on a barrier beach? — Yes X No; if yes, describe: 2. dredging or disposal of dredged material? X Yes _No; if yes, volume of dredged material 209.000 cubic yards 3. a solid fill, pile-supported, or bottom-anchored structure in flowed tidelands or other- waterways? X Yes No; if yes,what is the base area?_Proposed =27.485 square ' feet (sf) (pile supported)+14.000 sf floats=41.885 sf Exist=500 sf pile supported +2000 sf floats=2,500 sf Change= +39.385 sf. 4. within a Designated Port Area? X Yes —No ' D. Describe the project's other impacts on waterways and tidelands: See Project Description. IV. Consistency: ' A. Is the project located within the Coastal Zone? X Yes _No; if yes, describe the project's consistency with policies of the Office of Coastal—Zone-Management: 21 1 1 ' The Project is located in the Salem Harbor state Designated Port Area. The Project compliance with the CZM Policies governing ports are noted below. PORTS POLICY#1 - Ensure that dredging and disposal of dredged material minimize adverse effects on water quality, physical processes, marine productivity and public health. The City will work with relevant local, state and federal agencies as part of the dredge ' permitting process to ensure that the proposed dredging activities will minimize impacts on water quality, physical processes, marine productivity and public health. PORTS POLICY42'-Obtain the widest possible public benefit from channel dredging, ' ensuring that designated ports and developed harbors are given highest priority in the allocation of federal and state dredging funds. Ensure that this dredging is consistent with marine environment policies. ' The proposed dredge basins and docking facilities have been designed to provide the widest possible public benefit. The vessel types programmed for the site include commuter ferry, water taxi, commercial fishing, excursion vessels and work boats. The Project Site is located ' in a state Designated Port Area and is in close proximity to the federal channel that was recently dredged by the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers. ' PORTS POLICY#3- Preserve and enhance the capacity of Designated Port Areas(DPAs) to accommodate water-dependent industrial uses, and prevent the exclusion of such uses from tidelands and any other DPA lands over which a state agency exerts control by virtue of ownership, regulatory authority, or other legal jurisdiction. The Project Site is located in the Salem Harbor state Designated Port Area. The Project is a multi use water transportation facility that will accommodate water-dependent industrial uses. ' PORTS MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLE #1 - Encourage, through technical and financial assistance, expansion of water dependent uses in designated ports and developed harbors, re-development of urban waterfronts, and expansion of visual access. The Project will significantly expand water dependent uses in a state Designated Port Area and-developed harbor. The Project will re-develop and existing urban waterfront and provide a critical link to the downtown area. Visual access to Salem Harbor will be provided by re- using a portion of-the existing docking facility as a viewing/fishing pier. ' B. Is the project located within an area subject to a Municipal Harbor Plan? X Yes _No; if yes, identify the Municipal Harbor Plan and describe the project's consistency with that plan: The City of Salem's Municipal Harbor Plan which was updated in 2008, recommends the tredevelopment of the Project Site into a multi use water transportation facility. 22 WATER SUPPLY SECTION ' I. Thresholds/Permits A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to water supply(see 301 CMR ' 11.03(4))? _Yes X No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms: B. Does the project require any state permits related to water supply? _Yes X No; if yes, specify which permit: ' C. If you answered "No"to both questions A and B, proceed to the Wastewater Section. If you answered "Yes"to either question A or question B, fill out the remainder of the Water Supply Section below. WASTEWATER SECTION I. Thresholds/Permits A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to wastewater(see 301 CMR 11.03(5))? _Yes X No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms: B. Does the project require any state permits related to wastewater? _Yes X No; if yes, specify which permit: C. If you answered"No"to both questions A and B, proceed to the Transportation --Traffic Generation Section. If you answered "Yes"to either question A or question B, fill out the remainder of the Wastewater Section below. TRANSPORTATION -- TRAFFIC GENERATION SECTION ' I. Thresholds/Permits A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to traffic generation (see 301 CMR 11.03(6))? _Yes x No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms: B. Does the project require any state permits related to state-controlled roadways? _Yes X No; if yes, specify which permit: C. If you answered"No"to both questions A and B, proceed to the Roadways and Other Transportation Facilities Section. If you answered "Yes"to either question A or question B, fill out the remainder of the Traffic Generation Section below. I 1 ROADWAYS AND OTHER TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES SECTION I. Thresholds A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to roadways or other, i ' transportation facilities (see 301 CMR 11.03(6))? _Yes X No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms: B. Does the project require any state permits related to roadways or other transportation. ' facilities? _Yes X No; if yes, specify which-permit: C. If you answered "No"to both questions A and B, proceed to the Energy Section. If you answered "Yes"to either question A or question B, fill out the remainder of the Roadways Section ' below. 23 ENERGY SECTION I. Thresholds/Permits ' A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to energy (see 301 CMR 11.03(7))? Yes X No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms: B. Does the project require any state permits related to energy? _Yes X No; if yes, specify ' which permit: C. If you answered "No"to both questions A and B, proceed to the Air Quality Section. If you answered "Yes"to either question A or question B, fill out the remainder of the Energy Section ' below. AIR QUALITY SECTION I. Thresholds A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to air quality (see 301 CMR 11.03(8))? _Yes X No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms: B. Does the project require any state permits related to air quality? _Yes X No; if yes, ' specify which permit: C. If you answered "No"to both questions A and B, proceed to the Solid and Hazardous Waste Section. If you answered "Yes"to either question A or question B, fill out the remainder of the Air ' Quality Section below. ' SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE SECTION I. Thresholds/Permits ' A. Will the project meet or exceed any review thresholds related to solid or hazardous waste(see; 301 CMR 11.03(9))? _Yes X No; if yes, specify, in quantitative terms: B. Does the project require any state permits related to solid and hazardous waste?_Yes X No; if yes, specify which permit: C. If you answered"No"to both questions A and B, proceed to the Historical and Archaeological ' Resources Section. If you answered"Yes"to either question A or question B, fill out the remainder of the Solid and Hazardous Waste Section below. HISTORICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES SECTION I. Thresholds/ Impacts A. Is any part of the project site a historic structure, or a structure within a historic district, in either case listed in the State Register of Historic Places or the Inventory of Historic and Archaeological Assets of the Commonwealth? _Yes X No; if yes, does the project involve the demolition of all or any exterior part of such historic structure? _Yes X No; if yes, please describe: B. Is any part of the project site an archaeological site listed in the State Register of Historic Places or the Inventory of Historic and Archaeological Assets of the Commonwealth? _Yes. _X_No; if yes, does the project involve the%destruction of all or any part of such archaeological site? _Yes ' 2L No; if yes, please describe: 24 1 ' yes,does the project involve the destruction of all or any part of such archaeological site? _Yes X ; No;if yes, please describe: C. If you answered"No"to all parts of both questions A and B, proceed to the Attachments and Certifications Sections. If you answered "Yes"to any part of either question A or question B, fill out the remainder of the Historical and Archaeological Resources Section below. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Plan,at an appropriate scale,of existing conditions of the project site and its immediate context, showing all known structures, roadways and parking lots,rail rights-of-way,wetlands and water bodies,wooded areas,farmland,steep slopes, public open spaces,and major utilities. ' 2. Plan of proposed conditions upon completion of project(if construction of the project is proposed to be phased, there should be a site plan showing conditions upon the completion of each phase). 3. Original U.S.G.S. map or good quality color copy(8--%z x 11 inches or larger)indicating the project location and boundaries 4 List of all agencies and persons to whom the proponent circulated the ENF, in accordance with 301 CMR 11.16(2). 5. Other: ' CERTIFICATIONS: 1. The Public Notice of Environmental Review has been/will be published in the following newspapers in accordance with 301 CMR 11.15(1): ' Salem Evening News Wed April 23.20D% (Name) (Date) ' 2. This form has been circulated to Agencies and Persons in accordance with 301 CMnR 11.16(2), Date Signatur of Responsible Officer Date Signature of person preparing or Prop ent ENF(if different from above) ' Kimberlev Driscoll Susan St. Pierre Name(print or type) Name(print or type) Mayor. City of Salem. Vine Associates, Inc Finn/Agency Firm/Agency Salem City Hall 93 Washington Street 372 Merrimac Street Street Street Salem, MA 01970 Newburvoort, MA 01970 ' Municipality/StatefZip Municipality/State/Zip (_978)978-745-9595 ext. 5600 978-465-1428 ' Phone Phone 22 1 1 1 1 ' ATTACHMENT LOCUS MAP 1 1 Salem Port Expansion ENF e ��i ., ,l• mr fyt �. ,p ' �..„ l•1 � '.7' •.�. 4,,�h Sub o 1 r1 �• O'w; tT ' iN l • D + /^ t 9 C ,ori •! ".�. "�. :Sal mTermirI61, v # 1 ,L {ife tiP''; rr ratQn�T6kres� "_ gb[a�� Pro`ecf Site W1 lop e :• , , �, Lon�Po/nt S*,E M liner go R' t � r a 1 Pickerpoig poin 6 •:oma Palmer " meq 1 s ont/ ?`v� � ' :.• d rig. o :, r� 1 Locus Map 1 1 1 i ' ATTACHMENT DISTRIBUTION LIST ' Salem Port Expansion ENF DISTRIBUTION LIST I ' Office of Coastal Zone Management PUBLIC OFFICIALS Attn: Project Review Coordinator 251 Causeway Street, Suite 800 Senator Frederick Berry Boston, MA 02114 State House Room 333 Division of Marine Fisheries(North Shore) Boston, MA 02133 Attn: Environmental Reviewer 30 Emerson Avenue Gloucester, MA 01930. ' State Representative John Keenan State House Office Executive Office of Transportation Room 136 Attn: Environmental Reviewer ' Massachusetts State House 10 Park Plaza, Room 3510 Boston, MA 02133 Boston, MA 02116-3969 ' Mayor Kimberley Driscoll Massachusetts Highway Department. Salem City Hall District 4 Office 93 Washington Street Public/Private Development Unit Salem, MA 01970 10 Park Plaza Boston, MA 02116 STATE AGENCIES Massachusetts Highway Department ' EOEEA Attn MEPA Coordinator Policy Director. 519 Appleton Street Undersecretary for Policy Arlington, MA 02476 ' 100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900 Boston, MA 02114- Massachusetts Aeronautics Commission Attn: MEPA Coordinator Department of Environmental Protection 10 Park Plaza, Suite 3510Boston, MA 02116 Commissioner's Office One Winter Street' Boston, MA 02108 Massachusetts Historical Commission The MA Archives Building Department of Environmental Protection. 220 Morrissey Boulevard' Boston, MA 02125 Northeast Regional office Attn: MEPA Coordinator Metropolitan Area Planning Council- Wilmington, MA 01887 Lowell Street 60 Temple Place/6th floor Wilm Boston, MA 02111 ' Department of Environmental Protection. Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority Waterways Regulatory Program Attn: MEPA Coordinator One Winter Street' Boston, MA 02108 10 Park Plaza, 6th FI. Boston, MA 02216-3966 1 Salem Port Expansion ENF ' CITY OF SALEM t City Council 93 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 ' Planning Board 120 Washington Street, 3rd Floor ' Salem, MA 01970 Conservation Commission 120 Washington Street, 3`tl Floor Salem, MA ' Board of Health 120 Washington Street, 4' Floor Salem, MA 01'970 Salem Public Library ' Essex Street Salem, MA 01970 1 2 1 1 1 1 t ATTACHMENT 3 PUBLIC NOTICE Commonwealth of Massachusetts ' Executive Office of Environmental Affairs ' MEPA Office 100 Cambridge St., Suite 900 Boston, MA 02114 Telephone 617-626-1020 ' The following should be completed and submitted to a local newspaper: ' PUBLIC NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROJECT: Salem Port Expansion LOCATION: Blaney Street, Salem, MA ' PROPONENT: City of Salem The undersigned is submitting an Environmental Notification Form ("ENF")to the tSecretary of Environmental Affairs on or before 04/15/2008 This will initiate review of the above project pursuant to the Massachusetts ' Environmental Policy Act("MEPA",M.G.L. c.30, s.s. 61,62 62H). Copies.of the ENF may be obtained from: Vine Associates, Inc. 372 Merrimac Street Newburyport, MA 01950 Copies of the ENF are also being sent to the Conservation Commission and Planning Board of Salem, MA where they may be inspected. The Secretary of Environmental Affairs will publish notice of the ENF. in the ' Environmental Monitor, will receive public comments on the project for 20 days, and will then decide, within ten days, if an environmental Impact Report is needed. A site visit and consultation session on the project may also be scheduled. All persons wishing ' to comment on the project, or to be notified of a site visit or consultation session, should write to the Secretary of Environmental Affairs, 100 Cambridge St., Suite 900, Boston, Massachusetts 02114, Attention: MEPA Office, referencing the above project. By: Vine Associates, Inc. 9 3 MEMORANDUM Str Mer mac freel Newburyport Massachusetts TO: Distribution List 01950 FROM: Susan St. Pierre i� DATE: June 10, 2008 (978)465-/428 RE: Salem Port Expansion Fax Environmental Notification Form Supplemental Information (978)465-2640 Attached please find a copy of Supplemental Information on the Environmental Notification Form (ENF) that was filed on behalf of the City of Salem with the state MEPA Office (EEA 14234) today for the proposed Salem Port Expansion Project at Blaney Street in Salem, MA. Any comments on the ENF and supplemental information should be submitted in writing and directed to Ian A. Bowles, Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs, 100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900, Boston, MA 02114, attn: MEPA office by July 11, 2008. If you have any questions or concerns, or need further assistance please contact my office at 978/465-1428. Thank you. �k ' Vine Associates.Inc. 372 Merrimac St. 1111 Nmburyport,MA 01950 978-465-1428 _ ' 978-465-2640 - 1 h vo �. - Submitted to: a � .. MEPA Office ' 100 Cambridge Street Boston, MA ' 1 Submitted by: ' Vine Associates, Inc. with Bourne Consulting Engineering 1 Submitted for. -- ' City of Salem 120 Washington Street Salem, MA June 10, 2008 1 i ' Salem Port Expansion Project Supplemental Information t I, Table of Contents 1. Additional Alternatives Analysis and Potential Mitigation 1. Introduction 2. Rationale for Proposed Site Programming 3. Site Description ' 4. Purpose and Need for Intertidal Dredging 5. Alternatives Analysis 6. Conceptual Mitigation 2. Summary of Previous Studies ' 3. Description of Impacts and associated calculations ' 4. Exhibits A. Portscape Memorandum of April 11, 2008—Commercial Fishing/Lobster Vessels B. Site Development and Building Footprint and Location ' C. US. Army Corps of Engineers Memo Dredge Sediment Suitability, February 2008 D. Plans 1. Existing Conditions Plan ' 2. Revised dredge footprint and volume calculations based on the updated hydrographic survey t 1 1 1 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK ' 1 1 ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS AND POSSIBLE MITIGATION ' 1 INTRODUCTION The following analysis was undertaken to determine if there is a more practical and feasible alternative to the Salem Port Expansion project described in the April 2008 ENF that would avoid, and if avoidance is not possible, minimize and mitigate the amount of intertidal dredging and still provide the required ' berthing for the intended users of the facility. 2 RATIONALE FOR PROPOSED SITE PROGRAMMING Maritime commerce has always been an important industry in the City of Salem beginning shortly after its founding in 1626. The Salem Port Expansion project would enhance this tradition by creating a much needed multi use water transportation and commercial berthing facility in the City of Salem. ' As noted in Section 2 of this Supplemental Information Package, the City of Salem has been planning the Salem Port Expansion project at this site for the past ten years and there have been numerous public meetings held on the plan to solicit public input. The original 1998 plan was included in the City's 2000 ' Harbor Plan and the current plan was included in the 2008 update to the Harbor Plan. As described in more detail below, the property on which the Salem Port Expansion is proposed provides a unique ' opportunity for the City to develop and realize the economic benefits of this long planned multi use transportation facility. ' 2.1 Location in State Designated Port Area The Project site is located in the Salem Harbor Designated Port Area (DPA), one of only 12 such areas ' located in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts(see Figure 1). This strategic location allows the City to develop the site in a manner that capitalizes on the site's ' proximity to the recently dredged federal channel and to achieve the development of marine industrial uses at the site that cannot be accomplished elsewhere in the community. The uses programmed for the site comply with state policy and regulations governing DPAs. ' DPAs are special areas that were designated in the late 1970's by the state Office of Coastal Zone ' Management (CZM) to recognize their importance for maritime commerce and to reserve these areas as the "...primary host areas to meet both the foreseeable and the unanticipated space needs of industrial uses that depend on proximity to a waterway, either for the transportation of goods/passengers or the ' withdrawal/discharge of large volumes of process water."' ' Preamble to the 1994 DPA regulations(301 CMR 25.00) Section 1 Page 1 Salem Port Expansion Project Supplemental Information , Designated Port Area: ' SALEM HARBOR DESIGNATED PORT AREA CONSISTS OF: Selected area within those waters ' ❑ sub)ett to Waterways iterme jlaWckon Stale In yards (seaward of mean high water mark). , 0 300 Pdodty area for able aM IaderW IuraPolg .. (landward of mean high water mark) .0 gs"a m's Go i • IIG ;• �n 191. Cal Cove ? 6 ' Winter Island r7. ' •sPower Plant ) 2 1 y /" �. �r•: 7: 6 ;DIT Tanksit Whad . to 2 /zs .c 7 \33 f i oaf•Il � �/. /� r 32 wY 3 =�':er7 17 / 75 35 34 33 W. A 31 76 77 32 ' �^2 N,] 21 32 37 38 `` 2 3!. .,.,.....28.E 0. �3", ]L..:?L}70 33` /.2/...• u zo zgo 7.'n n 19 •:')` SALEM sHA' RB0R/ ' t Source: MDEP Salem Harbor Designated Port Area ' Figurel Salem Port Expansion Supplemental ENF Filing 1 DPAs are special areas that were designated in the late 1970's by the state Office of Coastal Zone ' Management (CZM) to recognize their importance for maritime commerce and to reserve these areas as the "...primary host areas to meet both the foreseeable and the unanticipated space needs of industrial uses that depend on proximity to a waterway, either for the transportation of goods/passengers or the ' withdrawal/discharge of large volumes of process water."' State regulations characterize DPAs as "...geographic areas of particular state, regional, and national significance with respect to the promotion of commercial fishing, shipping and other vessel-related activities associated with water-borne commerce, and of manufacturing, processing, and production activities reliant upon marine transportation or the withdrawal or discharge of large volumes of water." The regulations further suggest that such areas should be preserved to the maximum extent practical in order to "...meet the long term, cumulative space needs of the water-dependent industries which these ' areas are so well-suited to accommodate" 3 To support the state policy of reserving DPAs for marine related industrial uses, the performance ' standards found in the state wetland and waterways regulations (310 CMR 10.00 and 310 CMR 9.00 respectively) are relaxed for activities proposed in such areas. The wetlands regulations at 310 CMR 10.26, state that coastal beaches, tidal flats and land containing shellfish located in DPAs are"not likely to ' be significant to marine fisheries, storm damage prevention or flood control." The regulations recognize that DPAs are developed harbors that typically contain "high concentrations of contaminants, from vessel 1 discharges and point and non-point source discharges." They also reduce the impact standard for activities proposed in land under ocean resource areas from avoid to minimize. 2.2 Ownership The Project site is the only property under the control of the City of Salem where a multi-use water ' transportation and commercial berthing facility can be developed. The proposed use has been planned for this property since 1998 and considerable city and state efforts have been expended on the project. ' 2.3 Lack of Sites with Deep Water The City of Salem is a densely developed, relatively small (8.10 square miles) urban area located along ' the Massachusetts coast. The City has approximately 14 miles of shoreline containing very limited areas of deep water and extensive areas of shallow tidal flats. ' The deep water locations are already developed with marinas and berthing areas. These areas are shown on Figure 2 and include Palmers Cove Yacht Club ("1"), Pickering Wharf Marina ("2"), north west side of Derby Wharf ("3"), Hawthorne Cove Marina ("4"), the berth along Dominion's property("5"), Winter Island Pier and Ramp("6"), Salem Willows Pier("7")and Salem Willows Yacht Club ('8"). ' Preamble to the 1994 DPA regulations(301 CMR 25.00) 301 CMR 25.00 Section 1 Page 3 Salem Port Expansion Project Supplemental Information ' 1.. •y�V'� 1 N ,s __ anxa anlw� a a �R 1 ��^• ODSDn MCI.P g f1' rn z P Oxx!M!cu •`l+ R/1Q`L5, 31 \ 0 NV Y r ��i• gni ,urx cc av Pr s 2 f a 12, \w. , • , . 'w k,�5 p''C15'`11•*21 W7 B ..�js f►I}7��•�w.,•j7 yj�,33 4q3 R' :.•S� ,zs n ,pN 13276) ' 'T �y27 29 18 a 4�p �f '._ `•' ••frry.• 2 YxS10 I 7 21\C9 : 16 Mp� 4�r n cr ...,B•:. 13 a3i 27.`�� ovv.cL avR 21g lI ,.•' r teAP wr« ' O • .-• v ) + .:- '`. yA. .??^ \ e a*.p..N �•. IBi.'Y3.• 29 2 E. o P•L Cx! � - 3 r i �• I�i wvx TONu Ik w r 2 x 33 ' fAi r• a 6 u Ff B X21'10 20 2 ♦"a�'k L soca S•✓ ,n v .' 5.. a; .St apo/ -"2 f1Ktl R y a( rlem \•'• p,cx . 2 2 f ¢ �+§/V 222...ni`�" 2 •I • O® r'w 6 ryry a J: ® 8 tYP- ® CH.TOWER • . IIR •! '3 5 28 —23 1_ eC V 2 (C r� 0�1an•27' 1 :':^S • 97 •t4 '!T � 1 i:'2 (ALnxeRa c.cc.a.n TA I `iylfi ¢t lIs 21 sI 6 r2: zt�./ OR, na C9'; sr 1W ST ^\f a a , 3 20 i :n "I,n, ' ` H.Torn \ �rf R a•• t 10 R 21'r(� +N Gn f•.. ►� G \T1Rxl.}��RBOR119 *'R!B s vv ^ aoq r. r• Ty B 17+ S �y 1 0 BTNCN '1/ 3• A f�+T B'I NI 4 B I a ` OR 0 111 ] 2 • 2isas MARBLE 1 I + E Q � rs'2?,5'tt c - P s. o O traNpnr[n ONIULlOR Q x'.101. p. Source:NOAA Salem Harbor Coast Chart ' Figure 2 Salem Port Expansion Supplemental ENF Filing As noted and illustrated on Figure 2, the extent of tidal mud flats along the coastline is extensive. To ' demonstrate this fact, a quick calculation of intertidal' areas within the City of Salem was performed based on the U.S. Coast Chart of Salem and Lynn Harbors. The results of the calculation show that the City of Salem contains approximately 346 acres (15,100,000 square feet) of intertidal areas located along ' about 74%of its shoreline. 2.4 Economic As noted in the April 2008 ENF filing, the Salem Port Expansion project is a vital economic development ' initiative being undertaken by the City of Salem. The Project will provide several benefits that will significantly contribute to the local economy including but not limited to the following: ' redevelop a brownfields site into a state of the art multi use water transportation and commercial berthing facility • provide berthing and backland support for a variety of water transportation uses including a ' commuter ferry boat (Nathaniel Bowditch), a LNG supply boat, excursion vessels and cruise ships • provide sorely needed year round protected berthing for the local lobster/commercial fishing fleet • reduce operating expenses for local lobster fleet II ' • create employment opportunities for local and regional residents • stimulate the local economy including the City's tourism related industries I ' 3 SITE DESCRIPTION ' 3.1 Physical Characteristics The Project site, which is currently used to support the Salem commuter ferry service Nathaniel Bowditch, ' is bordered by the Dominion Power Plant to the east, Hawthorne Cove Marina to the west, the Derby Street neighborhood to the north and Salem Harbor to the south. ' The 2.2 acre site is comprised of urban fill and is long, narrow, fairly level and unpaved. The site is narrowest in the center (approximately +/- 40 feet in width, which constrains the ability to accommodate necessary, parking and pedestrian and vehicular circulation. The entire shoreline has been altered over time and is bordered by intertidal areas which vary in lateral extent. Water depths along the shoreline range from elevation 5 MLW to elevation -20 at the outer edge ' of the existing ferry facility. The northern portion of the site includes an embayment which is almost fully exposed at low tide. Depicted as extending from Mean Low.Low Water to Mean High Water on Coast Charts. Section 1 Page 5 Salem Port Expansion Supplemental ENF Filing ' 3.2 Wave Climate Winter coastal storms can generate strong wave action and surges throughout Salem Harbor. These , winter storms are primarily associated with northeast and easterly winds. The predominate winter wind storm direction is from the northeast, most often originating from an east to southeast direction and then t returning to the northeast, as the storm passes up the coast. Unlike nearby Marblehead Harbor,which is more open to the northeast, the mouth of Salem Harbor has ' greater eastern exposure. This exposure mitigates to some extent the affect of northeast storm surges due in part to the natural shape of the harbor, especially along the northern edge. ' There is, however, a strong secondary or reflective wave generated from waves reflecting off the existing wharf structures located in Salem's inner harbor (primarily Derby Wharf). The reflected wave pattern is ' primarily felt in the northern edge of Salem Harbor in the area extending from Derby wharf to the Dominion property, located just east of the Project site (see Figure 3). The reflective wave approaches the Project site from the west/southwest direction and has almost the same period and height at the t primary northeasterly generated winter wave(see Figure 4). As a result of this reflected wave surge, most of the berthing areas proposed for the Project site will be ' subject to significant winter wave action that would preclude safe use of the docks during winter months. While not of concern to the uses that will berth at the site during non-winter months such as cruise ships, , the Nathaniel Bowditch, and excursion vessels, this condition is unsuitable for vessels that require year round berthing such as the local lobster fleet. The only area on the Project site that would be protected year round from both primary and reflected waves is the existing "cove" located east of the Hawthorne ' Cove marina behind the wharf(see Section 5.3 below). 4 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR INTERTIDAL DREDGING ' As noted, the entire shoreline of the Project site contains intertidal areas. The "cove' area which is the ' most protected portion of the site, is comprised entirely of intertidal areas that are exposed at low tide. As a result, dredging is required to create a basin with adequate depths to accommodate the lobster vessels which average 40 feet in length with a draft of four feet. As noted in Section 3 above, this is the only ' area on the site that is protected from all directions of wind and wave surge including the reflective waves and which also can provide protection from storms with gale force winds or higher. This area is the only berthing proposed on the Project site that the local lobstermen consider suitable for permanent, year ' round berthing. At present, the local lobster fleet changes locations from the summer to the winter which adds to the , operating costs. The need to provide safe, year round berthing protected from winter storms for the local lobster fleet cannot be understated and was identified as far back as 1998 when the first plan for the site , was created. 1 Section 1 Page 6 t . .. F su ti ♦_ +♦ w rc Y • $'" 1. �� .1 �� Ji 1 t • � �• b• #Vp , � 2 jRa 1 AIE Y • �� F' Jy i� 1� � r J• � :C S, ATF f s y: :� �� q- •f s 4 _ fir. - '(x) .v, p.hV`SLI ��•' u�.s • ..! yNl DERBY WHARF : y J q ti i REF � VE g CT 0 I�N 0 C _N Q LL W Ln N�RT EAST ST OR M N WAVE REFLECTION LAYOUT oD SALEM PORT EXPANSION 00 SALEM, MA MAY 2008 0 500 ® P Figure 4 SCALE: 1" = 500'-0" 'r Salem Port Expansion Supplemental ENF Filing As indicated in the memorandum prepared by Portscape dated April 11, 2008 (see Exhibit A), commercial ' lobster fishing is the "most economically significant fishery" in Massachusetts with landings valued at $52.4 million dollars in 2006. Essex County is first in the state in the number of pounds of lobster landed and in the number of active fishermen. Yet, despite the importance of this industry, there is a shortage of ' year round commercial fishing dockage in the area. Currently the only year round berthing available for the local lobster fleet is located in the City of Beverly. The City of Salem does not have any year round berthing dedicated to lobster boats. During the summer, most of the Salem fleet stays on moorings in Marblehead. Other lobster boats berth either in the cities of Beverly or Gloucester. During the winter, berthing is available at the Pickering Wharf marina but the vessels can not load or unload from that location. There are two lobster boats that moor off of Winter Island but this area is exposed to winter storms. Based on interviews with local fishermen, Portscape estimated a potential demand for 15 to 20 year round commercial fishing vessels ranging from 25 to 45 feet in length. More recent discussions with local lobstermen indicate that if a year round facility is provided, demand for the berths would exceed 20 vessels. For the purpose of this analysis, a demand for 20 berths is assumed. Provision of year round berthing is expected to improve economic health of lobster fleet resulting from increased revenues. The lil , memo also reiterates the fact that the issue of weather exposure is significant for the lobster fleet in the area. II ' 5 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS ' As requested by MEPA, the following sections describe and analyze alternatives to the intertidal dredging proposed in the Salem Port Expansion ENF that meet the identified berthing needs of the uses ' programmed for the Project site. 5.1 Alternative Sites ' There are no alternative sites under the City's control where a multi-use water transportation facility can be developed. The City has already expended over $700,000 on berthing facilities and site ' improvements at the Project site and will re-use as many of the components of the existing berthing facility as possible for the new facility. There are no alternative sites within the City of Salem where a year round protected berthing facility can be developed for the local lobster/commercial fishing fleet(see Section 1 above). ' 5.2 Proposed Building Footprint and Location The program of landside support uses for the site was determined through a process of interviews with existing and prospective users, as described in the document, Analysis of Existing Port Plans, prepared by Bourne Consulting Engineering, November 2007. As noted, the 2.2 acre site is long and narrow and Section 1 Page 9 l_ Salem Port Expansion Supplemental ENF Filing must accommodate internal roadways, sidewalks, loading areas, passenger pickup/drop off and a water transportation terminal building. The physical layout of the vehicular turning area limits the area available t for the proposed terminal building which, as a result, must be located along the waters edge. The project proposes to fill a small area (1580 sf) of the intertidal revetment slope to allow the placement of the ' building at grade and not on pilings. Pilings would be especially difficult due to the amount of large stone present in this area. A summary of the alternatives analyzed for the design and programming of the upland is provided in ' Exhibit B. 5.3 Vessel Berthing Locations and Dredging ' Pier Fixed and Floating Docks ' The fixed pier and associated floating docks are located at the most seaward end of the existing upland portion of the site. Such location allows closer access to the recently dredged federal channel; reduces the amount of required dredging due to the presence of deeper water in this location; and minimizes , interference with the adjacent Dominion berth and Hawthorne Cove Marina. An initial alternative analysis was performed in association with the development of site layout alternatives and the proposed water transportation terminal building as described in the April 2008 ENF (see also Exhibit B). The alternatives presented illustrate the layouts for the pier as well as commercial ' floating barges which are utilized by the passenger ferry and the offshore supply vessel and were based on the program elements identified from a review and investigation of previous project studies and direct discussion with current and future users of the facility. Some of the specific design requirements included: ' - Meeting of ADA and MAAB accessibility requirements for passenger vessel facilities - Floating barges for commercial vessel berthing (Offshore supply vessel) ' o Sufficient berthing for two vessels on each face. o Suitable for small cruise ships, visiting vessels, excursion vessels - Fixed pier with direct berthing face to provide: ' o Truck access for • Material/supply transfer • Refueling , • Crane access for vessel maintenance and material transfer • Trash removal ' o Larger Cruise Ship Berthing (greater than 200 feet) o Commercial marine support o Visiting vessel berthing space ' The ADA Barge docks are existing and are required at the site to meet MAAB regulations for scheduled passenger vessel services at Salem. The alternatives integrate the existing facility within each layout. , 1 Section 1 Page 10 Salem Port Expansion Supplemental ENF Filing Lobster/Commercial Fishing Berthing Bourne Consulting Engineering investigated alternatives for the development of year round berthing for the commercial fishing/lobster vessels. In performing the alternative analysis, a number of key design/performance issues were identified by existing and potential site users and local lobstermen and ' include the following: Year round well protected safe berth • Demand for 20+slips for berthing of lobster vessels Vessel lengths from 35 to 42 feet(40 foot average assumed) ' • Support services including close truck access and dockside utilities Year Round Berth—Storm Protection I ' The existing wave climate at the site was discussed with current site users and local lobstermen to determine the optimal berthing configuration for the site. Through these conversations it was learned that an unusual wave climate exists at the site caused by the length and location of Derby Wharf, a historic structure which is part of the National Park Service Salem Maritime National Historic Site, located west of the site(see discussion of wave climate in Section 3.2 above). ' While the most significant exposure to storms of the Project site is from the northeast (and east), the storm related waves from the northeast reflect off Derby Wharf and travel back toward the northeast and into the Project site (passing under the floats at Hawthorne Cove Marina). While not a concern during summer months, this wave pattern creates a significant wave climate during winter storm conditions and would create an unsafe year round berthing facility in that portion of the site where the waves occur. The ' affect of this wave condition is shown on Figures 3 and 4 in Section 3 which illustrate the overall harbor and the specific area of concern with the initial storm wave train and the reflection off Derby Wharf. ' To help combat these storm conditions and wave effects, a wave attenuation structure is now proposed under the fixed pier proposed at the southerly portion of the site. This wave attenuator will lessen wave impacts for the offshore supply vessel and other similar vessels that are proposed to berth on the leeward side of the pier. The attenuator will also provide some protection from the northeast to smaller vessels including lobster boats but not from the winter storm reflected wave conditions. The typical section of the wave attenuator, which would run the length of the approach pier, is shown on Figure 5. ' The possibility of a second water attenuator on the southwest side of the Project site was also investigated in an effort to develop protection from the reflected wave conditions. A review of the ability to install this second wave barrier revealed that it would need to be placed at least 60 feet away from the edge of Hawthorne Cove Marina to allow adequate room for boat access to/from the marina slips. This results in insufficient room to construction berthing for the lobster/commercial fishing vessels and still provide for normal vessel movements associated with commercial passenger vessel operations on the ' southwest side of the proposed pier. Section 1 Page 11 APPROACH PIER TOP OF BOARDWALK EL: +17.0 e A'. d WAVE SUPPORT PILES MHW EL: +8.9 BARRIER ® 8' 0.C. OFFSHORE SUPPLY ADA BARGE VESSEL BERTH & FERRY BERTH I rl MLW EL: 0.0 U I o EL. -6.0 0 a 0 0 0 a n WAVE ATTENUATOR SECTION rl \-i SCALE =r-o- N WAVE ATTENUATION SALEM PORT EXPANSION Ln CITY OF SALEM SALEM, MA V JUNE 2008 X Ll- FIGURE 5 —=ir1 11uy.m Salem Port Expansion Supplemental ENF Filing The location of the reflected winter storm wave train within the Project site was determined and is shown I ' on the alternative lobster/commercial fishing berthing layout plans. Two wave boundary conditions are illustrated that represent the 0.25 and 0.50 fraction of the open water wave height for that portion of the I ' wave which is transmitted into the "Cove". Bourne Consulting Engineering believes that once the wave has reached the '% height boundary that vessel berthing inshore of this boundary will be adequately protected from winter storm conditions. Berthing of vessels outshore of these boundary conditions would not be protected. As illustrated on Figure 4, the "cove" area at the Project site is protected from the southwest wave ' conditions (reflected Derby Wharf waves) due to the presence of the existing solid bulkhead structure that projects out into the harbor at Hawthorne Cove Marina. Hence the year round slips, in order to be protected and meet the needs of the lobster fleet, must be located within this "cove". Alternative Lobster/Commercial Fishing Berthing Configurations Four alternative berthing configurations (in addition to the layout proposed in the ENF filing shown on ' Exhibit 1) were identified and evaluated to determine if intertidal dredging could be avoided or minimized (see Exhibits 2 through 5). Based on the results of the analysis and review by local lobstermen, the City of Salem, the Salem Port Advisory Committee, and the Salem Partnership, Alternative V shown on exhibit 5 was selected as the preferred alternative to replace the layout included in the ENF (see Exhibit 1). A discussion of each alternative is provided below which identifies the number of berths provided, including ' year round berths, and the associated intertidal dredging required to accommodate the berths. Alternative I: This alternative, shown on Exhibit 1, was developed from earlier facility layouts and was t included in the original ENF filing. Twenty slips are provided for the lobster/commercial fishing vessels 40 feet in length. The area of intertidal dredging required for this alternative is 44,190 square feet (sf). This alternative provides safe year round berthing for 7 vessels(slips to the left of the 0.25 line). It should be noted that had the reflected winter wave condition been identified at the time of the ENF filing, the configuration included in the ENF would have been modified to increase the number of slips with year round protection. This alternative does not accommodate the known year round berthing demand for lobster/commercial fishing vessels (20 slips) and results in more intertidal dredging than the ' other alternatives (see Section 4 above). Alternative It: This alternative, shown on Exhibit 2, attempts to minimize the impact to the intertidal ' area and still provide some safe berthing. Twenty slips are provided for the lobster/commercial fishing vessels. The area of intertidal dredging required for this alternative is reduced to 26,800 sf. However, this alternative only provides safe year round berthing for up to 7 vessels which is 13 vessels below ' the existing need. Furthermore, although this alternative indicates up to seven protected slips, there is concern that the commercial vessels operators may find these slips to be too exposed and therefore may not be interested in utilizing them. Section 1 Page 13 0 0 O n o 0 C79901ODD p p000 p poo ll / DREDGE AREA N / 1OX40 FLOAT (TYP.) DREDGE DEPTH / ( -10 PROPOSED MLW AGAINST (-11) BULKHEAD & SEAWALL COMMERCIAL FISHING a �\ / BERTHING AREA (20 SLIPS) v, --- PROTECTED ZONE — --� �1^ L UNPROTECTED ZONE z w Ln orl r co LOBSTER VESSEL BERTHING INTERTIDAL ZONE: ALTERNATIVE I 0 FILLED AREA (BUILDING): 1580 SF. r" SALEM PORT EXPANSION ro INTERTIDAL IMPACT AREA: 47557 SF. SALEM MA N TOTAL AREA: 49137 SF. MAY 2008 x 0 60 EXHIBIT 1 SCALE: 1" = 60'-0" m = = = = = = = AREA CHAIN LNK FENCE GRAVEL PARKING SAI EM 1 0, FERRY 1 /� PATH -� \ FAC LITY oV --�HOLDING u tiO/E J� CONCRETE CURBS o �G 'SON HOLDING G EL PA ING d O p � CT 9 o 000 00C)OO DROP`�9 p�Q0 I R�Ilnr t_ D HARBORWALK 12 i- ( ' MOTH VISIB OF R W AREA O ACCE N I COMMERCIAL FISHING - / 60' GANGWAY N / k BERTHING AREA (TYP) CD (7 PROTECTED SLIPS) DREDGE ODEPTH O / I = 1OX40 FLOAT a U W_ 0 DREDGE AREA, � h N \ _ Ll W /A O IP STEEL SHEET PILE co co LOBSTER VESSEL BERTHING N INTERTIDAL ZONE: ALTERNATIVE II FILLED AREA (BUILDING): 1580 SF. CD INTERTIDAL IMPACT AREA: 26800 SF. SALEM PORT EXPANSION ro TOTAL AREA: 28380 SF. SALEM, MA MAY 2008 X0 60 Exhibit 2 LT SCALE: 1 " = 60'-0" 9`�,� ��„� Salem Port Expansion Supplemental ENF Filing t Alternative III: In this alternative, shown on Exhibit 3, 17 slips are provided and the impact to the intertidal area is further reduced to 8,817 sf. However, this alternative provides no year round ' protected berthing and was deemed unacceptable by the commercial vessel operators who reviewed the alternative. Alternative IV: This alternative, shown on Exhibit 4, presents an option that eliminates intertidal dredging ' in this location and provides for seasonal berthing for 14 commercial vessels. However, this alternative ' provides no year round protected berthing. This was deemed unacceptable by the commercial vessel operators who reviewed the alternative. Alternative V1: This alternative, shown on Exhibit V, attempts to maximize the amount of safe, year , round berths for lobster/commercial fishing vessels and to minimize the intertidal impacts proposed in Alternative 1. The area of intertidal dredging required for this alternative (shown as the shaded area) is ' reduced to 41,600 sf which is illustrated as the shaded area. This alternative shows berthing for up to 30 lobster/commercial fishing vessels,with safe,year round berthing for up to 17 vessels. Summary and Preferred Alternative: , As shown on see Figure 1, there are very few areas along the shoreline that contain deep water and therefore, opportunities to create new berthing areas are extremely limited. The Project Site occupies ' about 2.5% of the City's entire shoreline and contains just over one acre of intertidal area (44,867 square feet)which represents about 0.29%of the total intertidal area in the City. ' Dredging of the intertidal area is required in order to create a protected embayment that will provide a year round berthing area for the local commercial fishing fleet. The project identified a definitive need for ' year round lobster/commercial fishing vessel berthing for 20 plus vessels. No alternate sites are available within Salem. Currently the local lobster fleet uses seasonal moorings in Marblehead Harbor and winter berthing at Pickering Wharf or other recreational boating facilities. Alternative berthing configurations t were analyzed to determine if the year round berthing need for the lobster/commercial fishing fleet could be accommodate and at the same time reduce the required amount of intertidal dredging. Based on this analysis, Alternative I was eliminated as it does not provide the required number of berths ' and results in the most intertidal dredging. Alternatives III and IV were eliminated as they do not provide any year round berthing. Alternative II was eliminated as the proposed berthing configuration was not supported by local lobster mean and only 7 year round berths are provided. The preferred alternative is Alternative V which provides 17 protected year round berths for the lobster/commercial fishing fleet and , reduces the amount of intertidal dredging by 2,590 sf. The alternatives were reviewed with commercial vessel operators, the City of Salem, the Salem Partnership and the Salem Port Advisory Committee and all parties endorsed Alternative V as the preferred alternative as it provides the maximum year round ' berthing. 1 Section 1 Page 16 0 0 0 � B no 0 0 n.' o00 00 0000 0 000 96 / PROPOSED MLW 1OX40 FLOAT (TYP.) 31 N DREDGE AREA 'I 17 DREDGE DEPTH / COMMERCIAL FISHING -10 BERTHING AREA (17 SLIPS) (-11) - � (15 PROTECTED SLIPS) C a UNPROTECTED ZONE w PROTECTED ZONE z Li Ln LW CD co LOBSTER VESSEL BERTHING N INTERTIDAL ZONE: ALTERNATIVE III FILLED AREA (BUILDING): 1580 SF. SALEM PORT EXPANSION INTERTIDAL IMPACT AREA: 8837 SF.00 SALEM, MA v TOTAL AREA: 10417 SF. MAY 2008 x 0 60 ® - EXHIBIT 3 1 SCALE: 1' = 60'-0" —�,7^ :�� HOLDING O O p � o0 00 ED 1:70 OP app lq ill HARSORWALK -10 ( 1Y WIDTH ` -- 50' GAN 1OX40 FLOAT (TYP.) y = �TYP. 0I DREDGE 3 DEPTH / COMMERCIAL FISHING % BERTHING AREA (14 SLIPS) (NO PROTECTED SLIPS) p -1 Q �a U Q d Q 3 Q) p STEEL SHEET PILE W c BULKHEAD Q Z wawthorne O ^ A A -:�., .. �� PILE ANCHORED FLOATS)) r 00 LOBSTER VESSEL BERTHING INTERTIDAL ZONE: ALTERNATIVE IV FILLED AREA (BUILDING): 1580 SF 0 SALEM PORT EXPANSION INTERTIDAL IMPACT AREA: 0 SF SALEM MA N TOTAL AREA: 1580 SF MAY 2008 x 0 60 ® arae Qpmygoyoarbrt EXHIBIT 4 SCALE: 1" = 60'-0° % P 0 0 NE pA/ / HOLDING a ZON HOLDING rH / / 12 _ \ pOopp ID c7 PROP i--)0 �0 w I y _ P q ACCESS PIER I COMMERCIAL FISHING 10X40 FLOAT �2 BERTHING AREA (TYP.) DREDGE DEPTH 60 GANGWAY (TYP.) CD n (17 PROTECTED SLIPS) x -10 DREDGE AREA t EDGE AREA PROPOSEDLl a Ln co LOBSTER VESSEL BERTHING N INTERTIDAL ZONE: ALTERNATIVE o FILLED AREA (BUILDING): 1580 SF. SALEM PORT EXPANSION INTERTIDAL IMPACT AREA: 41600 SF.00 SALEM, MA v TOTAL AREA: 43180 SF. MAY 2008 X0 60 CO2mawaft EXHIBIT 5 SCALE: 1 " = 60'-0" ",�� 7 te®,., Salem Port Expansion Supplemental ENF Filing 6.0 CONCEPTUAL MITIGATION Bourne Consulting Engineering, in conjunction with the City of Salem Mayor's Office and the Department of Planning and Development with input from the Salem Conservation Commission, Salem Sound Coast Watch, the MA Office of Coastal Zone Management and other State and Federal agencies developed a ' conceptual plan that identifies potential mitigation sites in the City of Salem to offset the proposed intertidal impacts at the Project site. ' The conceptual mitigation plan will be used as framework for developing a more refined mitigation program as part of the Project permitting phase. This mitigation plan has been developed based on the ' results of the alternatives analysis which demonstrate that dredging impacts to the intertidal area cannot be avoided without severely comprising the need to provide safe, year round berthing for the local lobster fleet. The preferred alternative does minimize environmental impacts to the greatest extent possible ' given the unique configuration of the property and the identified berthing needs. Additionally, the dredging is not proposed in a natural, unaltered site. Rather, the property is located in a state Designated Port Area that has historically been used for marine industrial purposes. ' The City will work closely with local, state and federal agencies specifically the Salem Conservation Commission, the state Division of Marine Fisheries, and the National Marine Fisheries Service to reach ' agreement on the functions and values of the existing intertidal area, to identify the Project impact on those functions and values, and to create a mitigation program that affectively offsets the impacts to the functions and values. The intertidal area that will be affected by the project is a 41,600 sf mud flat. The ' area has not been officially designated as a Shellfish resource area by the state DMF however at the MEPA Scoping session a DMF staff member stated that the area should be mapped as such. The ' mudflat is also located in the Salem Harbor Designated Port Area and as a result of the site's existing and long history of commercial and maritime industrial usage, is not thought to be an area of high environmental value. Nevertheless the area is a protected state and federal wetland resource area and ' because impacts cannot be avoided, mitigation must be provided. The following sites are listed in order of their perceived suitability and value in relation to the area to be impacted. Pioneer Village Pioneer Village is a City-owned historical site ' (recreation of a 1630's Salem Village) located along Salem Harbor. The site historically contained a salt marsh system which was altered -- - as part of the original work associated with Pioneer Village to create a freshwater pond. This mitigation effort would restore tidal flushing to theti4_. ' pond by removing a portion of the existing y?s ' concrete retaining wall along the beach and open ' Photo 1: Retaining Wall at Pioneer Village Section 1 Page 20 1 Salem Port Expansion Supplemental ENF Filing a channel to Salem Harbor. The restoration effort would return approximately 20,000 sf of lost salt ' marsh habitat to an intertidal system with the anticipation of the reestablishment of its previous environment. Furlong Park Furlong Park is an urban riverfront park situated along Franklin Street in the City of Salem. It is a multi use facility with picnic tables, benches, a playground, sports fields, a basketball court, and a tennis court. This area has been subject to bank erosion and filling of the intertidal area due to continuing degradation of the upland edge and material falling into the mudflat. In order to restore this bank and to protect it from further erosion and to restore the previous area of mud flats, this project would limit the edge of the existing park lawn, formalizing that edge with rip rap and excavating the filled area to below MHW (see Figure 6). w x:. 4. Photo 2: Edge Degradation at Furlong Park ' This would establish an approximately 12' -15' wide area of intertidal mud flat that would restore approximately 20,000 sf of habitat that is of the same ' type as the area being impacted. There is also the f of possibility to extend the park both to the north and south of the existing park limits and to create a kayak / canoe ' beach landing area to further enhance the recreational value of this area. y 9 r J Photo 3:Aerial of Furlong Park Shoreline Section 1 Page 21 PROPOSED STONE DUST WALKWAY AND CURB AREA OF SHORELINE FILL FROM EROSION --A-j a :..� .. ,Lfl.P.E• P•ROT DfV.; :.. ... w ERODING SLOPE,.' w.. .. . . . .; .:; : :.�;:.`:•.:.:.': :: AREA OF RESTORATION ':, '.: , w L TYPICAL SECTION cc PROPOSED MITIGATION o SALEM PORT EXPANSION ro SALEM, MA MAY 2008 X ClumuNhy Figure 6 Salem Port Expansion Supplemental ENF Filing 1 Kernwood Golf Club On the Kernwood Golf Club property there is an approximately 5,000 sf salt pond that has been cut ' of from the tidal flow of the sound. The proposed restoration would involve restoring a link to the estuary to allow for tidal flushing of the pond. " y ' ,d= Similar to the pond at Pioneer Village It is �{ r ' anticipated that this salt pond would return to its native inter tidal cycle and reestablish the historic environment for this system. The potential ' concern with this project is that it is on land that is privately owned. ' Photo 5:Aerial of Kernwood GC Salt Pond Kernwood Park If 4 ' The proposed project at Kernwood Park is similar to that at Furlong Park. The edge of the park is being t eroded and causing the intertidal area adjacent to it to fill. This project area is smaller, at approximately 50 linear feet, but is also a direct In—kind project. ' It is proposed that the edge of the area would be ? ` formalized again potentially with rip rap and y ' excavation to below mean high water would be completed. ' Photo 3:Edge Degradation at Kernwood Park Other Potential Mitigation Sites ' Additional sites that are still being investigated for potential mitigation are also included in this proposal. These include: ' Forest River The Forest River and the adjacent Forest River Park are important recreational and environmental resources for the City of Salem. While our initial investigation of this area has not yielded any immediate sites for mitigation, we are continuing to work with local agencies to identify potential opportunities for preservation and conservation. There may be opportunity to undertake soft shell clam seeding in this Section 1 Page 23 Salem Port Expansion Supplemental ENF Filing area which, based on the report prepared by the Division of Marine Fisheries published in 2002,5 contains suitable habitat that does not have presently contain soft shell clams. Additionally, this area would be a , strong candidate should any direct in-kind mitigation opportunities arise. Smith Pool, Winter Island, Salem State College ' This is a potentially large area of salt pond restoration that is located at the Salem State College Cat t Cove Marine Lab. This area could potentially be reconnected to the sound and restored through tidal flushing. The potential concern with this project is that this is an area that is actively used by the College and there may be concerns with changing its current use. ' Other sites There is potential for other wetland restoration projects in the Salem Sound area including the support of fish runs in the Danvers River and the potential for working in conjunction with a flood control project that is expected to have impacts in the North River area at the Peabody line. ' Additionally, Salem Sound has been previously investigated as a potential site for the establishment of an ' artificial reef habitat. A site in Boston Harbor was chosen over the Salem Sound site, and has been successful in the establishment of a healthy reef system. It is thought that a similar project could be equally successful if completed in Salem Sound although costs must be considered. , Summary The above proposed areas for potential mitigation would restore approximately 42,000 sf of inter tidal / , mudflat habitat to the Salem area. This mitigation would be in-kind with the potential impacts that are anticipated with this project. Out of kind mitigation such as seeding the Forest River with soft shell clams , is another mitigation opportunity that will be explored with local, state and federal agencies. Bourne Consulting Engineering and the City of Salem are anticipating continuing the collaborative efforts with state and federal agencies that have already been established as we move forward with the permitting ' process for the Port Expansion for the City of Salem. 5 The Marine Resources of Salem Sound, 1997. Prepared by Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries,Department of Fisheries,Wildlife and Environmental Law Enforcement,Executive Office of Environmental Affairs in 2002. Section 1 Page 24 ' 2 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS STUDIES ' As noted in the Salem Port Expansion ENF filed with MEPA on April 15, 2008, several planning and economic studies have been prepared for the Project over the past ten years. Dredge sediment sampling ' and testing has occurred and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has determined that the sediments are suitable for open ocean disposal. There are no mapped shellfish beds in the area however a representative from the state Division of Marine Fisheries indicated at the MEPA Scoping session held on May 1, 2008 that the area should be mapped as containing shellfish resources. The City agreed at the MEPA Scoping Session to undertake a shellfish survey prior to the submittal of permit applications for the Project. A brief description of the pertinent previous studies is provided below. ' 1998 New Salem Wharf Study,Salem Harbor Plan (The Cecil Group,et al) As noted in the Salem Port Expansion ENF, the re-development of the Project Site into a multi use facility ' including significant water transportation use was originally proposed in 1998 in preparation and support of the subsequent Salem Harbor Plan which was subsequently published in 2000. The Project at that time was conceived as a multi use marine facility capable of berthing large cruise ships (800 feet long) as well as accommodating excursion/charter vessels, transient vessels and the local I ' commercial fishing fleet. The landside development included retail and hotel uses as well as support facilities for the commercial fishing and water transportation operations. The proposed development was designed to take advantage of the site's proximity to the federal channel and its location in the Salem Harbor Designated Port Area. A large solid filled pier was proposed along with a '/2 acre area of fill to accommodate retail uses in two buildings and a hotel was proposed on the existing upland. Dredging of approximately 550,000 cubic yards of material was proposed including intertidal and subtidal areas. ' This study was the foundation for the City of Salem Harbor Plan which was developed in 2000 for this specific area of the City. The study was scaled down in subsequent development plans to address site ' constraints and provided the original market analysis that was utilized in this as well as subsequent study updates. ' 2001 The Salem Ferry and New Salem Wharf Project, A Phased Approach to Completion and Findings Report-New Salem Wharf Project, Salem, Massachusetts(Vine Associates, Inc.) These studies analyzed the potential to phase development of the 1998 development plan for the site. 2005 Final Site Development Plan, Salem City Pier(Vine Associates at all ' In 2005, the development program was reduced in scope based in part on public input as well as the results of market studies which demonstrated that smaller cruise ships would be more likely to utilize the facility than larger ships. The changes included elimination of a large filled pier; elimination of the %acre of fill formerly proposed for the construction of retail uses; a reduction in the size of the fixed pier to accommodate smaller class cruise vessels; and reduction of the dredge footprint and volumes. Section 2 Page 1 I Salem Port Expansion Supplemental ENF Filing The changes also removed the hotel and retail uses from the project altogether. The water transportation terminal and commercial fishing support buildings were retained. Parking was reduced to reflect the ' revised program. 2005 Ferry Facility Design and Program (Vine Associates, Inc.) ' In 2005, design plans including alternative configuration were developed for the existing ferry facility located on the site. ' 2006/2007 Dredge Sediment Sampling and Testing (Vine Associates, Inc.) ' In May 2005 a dredge sediment and sampling plan for the proposed dredging was approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the sampling and testing were conducted in 2005 through 2007. The U.S. ' Army Crops of Engineers determined in February 2008 that the sediments are suitable for open ocean disposal in the Mass Bay Disposal Site (see Exhibit C). 2007 Hydrographic Survey(Vine Associates, Inc.) , In 2007, a bathymetric survey of the Project Site was undertaken. Sheet 2 of tin Exhibit D includes the , results of the survey. The current dredge footprint and dredge volumes were calculated based on that survey. 2007 Present Review and Analysis of Existing Salem Port Plans(Bourne Consulting Engineering) , The City of Salem retained a waterfront consultant to analysis the existing port plans developed to date as ' well as review the current market analysis and to develop a preferred alternative for both upland and marine development. The task was based on the current City controlled land of Blaney Street. The Project is currently underway and is incorporating additional market analysis to reflect current economic , conditions and site constraints. Alternatives were developed and utilized as basis for the proposed development included in the April 2008 ENF filing with MEPA. 2008- Present Market Analysis, Management and Operations Plan and Regulatory Approvals, (Bourne Consulting Engineering) As noted in the Salem Port Expansion ENF, the City retained a waterfront consultant to develop perform , a current market analysis for the project taking into consideration, among other factors, existing facility use by the commuter/visitor passenger ferry Nathaniel Bowditch, potential use by an offshore supply ' vessel to support the Northeast Gateway deep water LNG Port and current interest expressed by commercial fisherman (lobster boats), commercial marine and coastal cruise companies. The market analysis results have indicated that in addition to the existing usage for passenger vessel service and for ' offshore supply vessel operations that there was a strong demand for year round berthing for lobster boats.A memorandum of the findings is found in Exhibit A. The full study, which is currently underway, is anticipated to be completed in early July. ' Section 2 Page 2 3 DESCRIPTION OF IMPACTS AND ASSOCIATED CALCULATIONS The calculations provided in the Environmental Notification Form filed for the Salem Port Expansion Project(EEA 14234) have been revised based on a refinement of the proposed dredge area using up to ' date bathymetry and adjustments to the portion of the site located above the 100 year flood level. The revised calculations result in an overall wetland impact of 9.8 acres which is below the 10 acre threshold for a categorical EIR requirement pursuant to 301 CMR 11.03(3)(a)(1)(b). ' 1. SITE AREA CALCULATIONS Upland (landward of top of bank) = 2.19 acres ' Waterside(seaward of top of bank) = 7.95 acres Total Site Area= 10.14 2. TOTAL DREDGE Coastal Beach = 1.01 acres Land Under Ocean =6.69 acres ' Total Dredge=7.70 3. OVERALL WETLANDS IMPACT(WITH INTERTIDAL DREDGING REDUCED) ' Upland (Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage) = 1.85 acres Waterside (Coastal Bank, Coastal Beach and Land Under Ocean) =7.95 acres ' Total Wetland Impact=9.80 acres 4. IMPACT BY RESOURCE AREA ' LSCSF= 1.85 acres Coastal Bank= 850 If(0.25 acres) Coastal Beach = 1.01 acres ' Land Under Ocean =6.69 acres Detailed Description of Calculations ' The impact calculations were performed using AutoCAD drawings and an updated hydrographic survey/dredge footprint to refine the estimated wetland impacts identified in the ENF. Based on this information, the proposed impacts to wetland resource areas is 9.80 acres which is below the 10 acre ' thresholds for categorical EIR. Please note that this calculation assumes that the Designated Port Area calculation is not included as such areas are not defined as wetland resource areas per 310 CMR 10.02 (1). ' Resource Area Calculations The upland portion of the site measured from the top of bank to the property line is 2.19+/-acres. The waterside portion of the site measured from the top of bank to the top of the dredge slope in the proposed dredged basins is 7.95 acres. A description of the calculation of wetland impacts is provided below. ' Section 3 Page 1 Salem Port Expansion Supplemental ENF Filing 1 1. Land Under Ocean Impacts to Land Under Ocean (measured from mean low water seaward) were defined by the limit of dredging. (Note that the proposed piers and floating dock/barge systems are located within the dredge footprint). The dredge footprint was further analyzed and the boundary of the outer basin was refined as shown on the attached plan. This refinement results in a dredge footprint in Land Under Ocean of ' 291,564 square feet(6.69 acres). 2. Coastal Beach ' Impacts to Coastal Beach (measured from mean low water to bottom of coastal bank) were defined by the limits of dredging and total 44,190 square feet(1.01 acres). ' 3. Coastal Bank Approximately 850 linear feet of coastal bank is being altered as a result of bank stabilization, installation ' of a concrete retaining wall, installation of sheetpile wall, installation of piles to support a harborwalk, and placement of fill in front of the proposed water transportation terminal building. The total area of coastal bank covered by the Harborwalk and proposed to be filled is 10,890 square feet(0.25 acres). ' 4. Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage(LSCSF) The existing site elevations were reviewed in relation to the FEMA flood maps. Approximately 80,586 ' square feet (1.85 acres)of the landside are within the Zone A4 or Zone V3 flood elevations and therefore considered Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage. These areas were measured from the top of coastal bank inland to the property line. , Updated ENF Calculations ' The calculations included in the ENF are shown below in red and the revised calculations are shown in blue. Calculations in Original Filing Revised Calculations ' Land Under Ocean 317,000 sf 291,564 sf Coastal Beach 45,000 sf 44,190 sf ' Coastal Bank 850 If 850 If (10,890 sf) LSCSF 88,900 sf 80,586 sf Total Wetland Impact 450,900 sf 427,323 sf ' Designated Port Area 362,000 sf 346,738 sfa 6 , A portion of the landside of the site is located outside of the DPA. Furthermore,Designated Port Area is not defined as a wetland resource under the state wetland regulations at 310 CMR 10.00 and therefore was not included in the calculation of wetland impacts. Section 3 Page 2 Exhibit A Portscape Memorandum dated April 11, 2008 o, MEMORANDUM y - DATE: APRIL 11,2008 ' TO: RON BOURNE FROM: LAUREL RAFFERTY, PORTSCAPE ' RE: SALEM PORT EXPANSION PROJECT—MARINE MARKETS—COMMERCIAL FISHING/LOBSTER; OTHER COMMERCIAL VESSELS;TRANSIENT VESSELS MARINE MARKETS—COMMERCIAL FISHING/LOBSTER; OTHER COMMERCIAL VESSELS; TRANSIENT VESSELS , Commercial Fishing/Lobster Commercial lobster fishing is Massachusetts' most economically significant fishery conducted within state waters.' Massachusetts' landings of lobster from all waters, territorial and non-territorial, at 10.9 million ' pounds,was valued at$52.4 million dollars in 2006, 11% higher than 2005, making the state the second leading producer in the country, after Maine. Maine and Massachusetts combined produced 90% of US landings 2 The two charts below3 show the relative standingin commercial lobster landings in pounds and value 9 among New England States from 2001-2006. While Maine has had a commanding lead consistently, Massachusetts has been second consistently. ' NE Lobster Landings (Ibs) by State 100.0 ' 90.0 ------------------------ --- ---- 80.0 ------------------ --- MRI ' e 70.0 ---- --- ---- -- --- 60.0 - --- ---- --- ---- ❑NH 50.0 - `b ---- --- ---- --- ---- ®MA ' 40.0 - ---- --- ---- --- --- OME 30.0 - ---- --- ---- --- ---- p CT 20.0 - ---- --- ---- ' 10.0 0.0 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 , '2005 Massachusetts Lobster Fishery Statistics,Dean,M.J.,S.R.Reed,and T.B.Hoopes(TR31-2005),p. 1. htlo:l/www.mass.aov/clfwele/dmf/i)ublications/tr3I 2005 lobster report otlf Source:htto://www.st.nmfs.noaa.00v/st1/fus/fus06/01 mtro2006 pdf.Statistics compiled by Massachusetts differ,as indicated below. 'Source:www.nmfs.aov.See Appendix A for data depicted in the graphs. i ' ' NE Lobster Landings ($ in millions) by State 450.0 ' 400.0 --------------------------------- - _350.0 -------------------------- --- --R ■RI c 300.0 ------------------------- 250.0 ❑NH 200.0 ®MA c 150.0 ---- --- ---- ®ME ' 100.0 - QCT 50.0 --- --- ---- 0.0 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 ' Within Massachusetts, Essex county, in which Salem is located, retained its position in 2005 as first in the state in number of pounds of lobster landed and in number of active fisherman. The statewide ex-vessel price for Essex County was$4.85 in 2005, less than the statewide average of$5.02.4 The following chart shows the number of active commercial lobstermen, lobster landings, and traps-fished by homeport for 2005 for Salem, other communities along Salem Sound and on the North Shore, and for important fishing ports of the state. Rankings in each of these measures are also shown.5(See Appendix B for this data on all communities of the state engaged in lobster fishing.)As the chart indicates, Gloucester is first in all performance measures. Beverly has top ranking in all categories among the communities along Salem Sound, followed by Marblehead. Salem ranks low in all categories, between 35`"and 371h of the total of 46 communities covered. ' Community Fishermen Catch(Ibs) Effort # Rank Territorial Non-Territorial Total % Rank Traps % Rank .Gloucester 194_1- ._815,170 751,975 1,587,145 14.01 61,988 _14.58. 1 R�ckpor� 64 4 484,158 122,177 606,335 5.42 524,,154 5.68 4 Beverly 39 _ ,8. 418,817 148,307 Y665,1 44 _,5.05 7 21,143 _4,97- 6 Marblehadr31 12 274,153 24,805 298,958 2.67 33 14,619 3.44 9 ' Manchester 26 15 186,879 6,987 193,865 1.73 19 8,841 2.08 18 Danvers ,8_30__51,375. .__O _51.375 ,.46_31 3,130 `.74 30 Salem 637 26,389 0, 26,389 0.24 38x,110 0.50 35 .,Boston. _51._6. 292,038 519,024 _61.1,082 ._7.25. 2 18, 986 4.47_7,1 New Bedford 120 2 51,670 423,997 475,666 4.25 9 5,782 1.36 23 Westport-Fall '®1r.'® w"9 -- River 26 15 . _24,963 744,203 _769,166 ._6.88._ 4 13,143 _3.09. .11 ' State Total 1,222 46 6,462,788 4,721,940 11,184,728 100.00 46 425,020 100.00 46 SII , 4 2005 Massachusetts Lobster Fishery Statistics,Dean,M.J.,S.R.Reed,and T.B.Hoopes(TR31-2005),p.5. http7l/www.mass.ciov/dfwele/dmflpublications[tr3l 2005 lobster report rx! The ex-vessels price referred to is the landings- weighted average ex-vessel price as taken from the SAFIS dealer reporting database. Ibid.,p.7. Data does not include seasonal permits 2 Opportunity Factors affecting the level of opportunity there is in developing lobster fishing dockage fall into two ' categories: • Those concerning the dockage itself--its supply, and characteristics of its supply, its price, safety in terms of weather exposure, and service level provided ' • Those concerning the lobster resource, its supply—the status of the stock--and its sustainability Dockage In Salem Sound and the North Shore area, there is a shortage of year-round commercial fishing dockage space that is of a good price and safe in terms of protection from winter storms. ' In Salem, itself, there are two facilities that have permanent berthing space for commercial fishing vessels, Winter Island, which is public, and Pickering Wharf Marina, which is private.At Winter Island, there is a pier, but it is unused for permanent berthing because of exposure to winter storms.At Pickering ' Wharf Marina, there is space buffered from winter storms; the space includes a 500-F wharf, 10 slips at 39 F each (accommodatinq boats on two sides), and 3 docks with a total length of 130 F. Slots are ' allocated on a 1 e,s`-com1 s -serve basis. Fees for the summer are$150/F/6-months (May—October) and $51/F for the winter 6-months November through April. With this rate structure, pleasure craft generally fill the facility in the summer season,though one lobster vessel used the facility this past summer. Generally six+/-lobster vessels use it in the winter seasons; currently there are 11 lobster vessels at the , facility'. The Dock Master believes that demand for commercial lobster dockage is stronger than the supply, but could not say whether any requests for dockage at his facility in the winter season had not been met. He said the facility is generally full year-round though in the winter, there are fewer vessels, as larger pleasure craft tend to use the facility at this time of year; commercial sight-seeing vessels also use ' the facility. Other than Hawthorne Cove,which does not accommodate commercial vessels, Winter Island is the only facility in Salem with available mooring space with good access and depths; however,weather exposure is an issue in this location; moorings here are a flat$500/yr and services are good. There are ' currently two lobster boats moored at Winter Island. With regard to potential new commercial lobster fishing space, a dredging project is proposed at an existing pier elsewhere in Salem in the vicinity of the new Beverly-Salem Bridge. The project is fora private facility that would accommodate 4-6 lobster vessels and would provide protection for these vessels from winter storms. The status of the project is ' unknown, but there are significant obstacles to it going forward, including conflict with existing plans for a park for the neighborhood. The existing park plans represent mitigation for the bridge construction project and would require City Council approval to change; there is also neighborhood objection to the change. Nearby Marblehead has no slips; moorings have weather exposure and the wait at 12-15 years is long; ' however, commercial vessels of residents may be given preference, and dockage fees are quite low at $3.50/F/yr, less than those for recreational boats; services include a conveyor for loading and off-loading lobster catch at the State St. Landing.According to Harbor Master's office records, dated 12/2007, there , were mooring permits for 29 lobster boats in Marblehead. In the winter, some vessels are taken out of the water, some relocate to Gloucester, Beverly, and Pickering Wharf in Salem. Beverly, the leading producer in lobster landings in Salem Sound and among the top ten statewide in all ' of the criteria ranked by the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF; see Tables on p. 2 and in Appendix B), has what is considered by some the premium public commercial berthing space for the area at the public Beverly Harbor Center(BHC). Its fees and services reflect those of the Jodrey State Pier in ' Gloucester, which the Facilities Manager for the Harbor Center considered the model in the area for commercial dockage. Gloucester, as previously noted, is the top lobster producer in the state. Dockage fees for commercial vessels at BHC are$76/F/yr. Dockage is protected from winter storms. Services include a hoist for loading/unloading, electricity, fuel and bait delivery, but no haul-out or launch. The ' facility has 17 commercial slip spaces; while one is currently available; there is a waiting list of 6-10, demand is said to have been less in the past. 8 6 Source:Tom Moran,Dock Master,Pickering Wharf Marina. ' 'Site survey,4/9/08. 8 Source:Beverly Harbor Center Facilities Manager.The Facilities Manager reported that waiting list application fees might have an ' impact on the numbers applying for placement on the list. 3 ' Manchester also has mooring space only; however, no commercial vessels are allowed; while the ' topography offers winter storm-weather protection, there is icing over. Rockport offers protected mooring space for commercial lobster vessels at$7/F/yr; there are slips, for which fees are$14/F/yr; however, as the maximum length vessel they will accommodate is 22 F, most ' lobster vessels are too large for them. Moorings are ample in number but nonetheless there is a long waiting list; a very small number of the total 408 currently on the waiting list are for fishing or lobster vessels. Lobster vessels on moorings are 150-180 in number. ' Jodrey State Pier in Gloucester has space for 50 commercial vessels, 45 of which are filled by fishing boats used for lobstering 60% of the time and fishing of other species 40% of the time. There is a wait list of 50. Dockage fees are$79.20/F/yr. The key findings of reports on Gloucester's Commercial Fishing industry prepared in 2003 and 2005 are that there is a shortage of berthing space, and further that the shortage is understated in these reports as they focus on groundfish needs, not those of other species, including especially lobster. According to a member of a panel involved in the industry review, lobster boats '...probably take up more docking space ' than the larger boats because there are so many of them . . .'a The report goes on to cite a number of conditions which put more and more pressure on commercial fishing dockage space: • Gloucester's commercial permanent berthing serves not only Gloucester, but communities in driving proximity, including Beverly ■ Smaller nearby harbors have been losing their commercial dockage, and their commercial fishing ' vessels have looked to Gloucester for space • Limits on days-at-sea for fishing for many species mean vessels are tied up at docks longer • The downturn in fishery landings, has led to deferred dock maintenance, and sometimes, as a result, ' docks that can no longer be used.10 Within the past year,the press has reported the migration of Maine fishermen to Gloucester because of regulations in the Maine which prohibit landing lobster by-catch, which is allowed in Massachusetts (see article in Appendix C). Space Available for Commercial Lobster Fishing Boats Location Current# Lobster Vessels Availabili of S ace ' Salem Public: Winter Island 2 Ample mooring space,pier unused for permanent berthing space because of exposure to winter storms Private: Pickering Wharf 11 (winter) Berthing space at a 500-F wharf, 10 39-F slips(2 sides),and 13O-F dock, ' allocated on a1°-come 1"-serve; used mostly by pleasure craft in summer, 1 lobster vessel was said to use docks a this past summer Marblehead 29 12-15 year wait for mooring Preference may be given to commercial fishing vessels of residents Beveri 16 17 spaces,6 10 on Waltmg List - Gloucester. 45 50 spaces, none available, wait list of 50 Rockport 150-180 Moorings--long wall list for moorings S_Iios�LenAth will not accommodate most lobstervessels • Jodrey Slate Pier only. "Vessels fish lobster 60%of time,other species 40%of time. e Commercial Fishing Industry Needs on Gloucester Harbor,Now and In the Future, 2005,Supplement to a Study of Gloucester's Commercial Fishing Infrastructure:Interim Report October 15,2003,p.4. 10 Ibid.,pp.14-18. 4 Dockage Fees for Commercial Fishing Boats" Location Fees ' Salem Public Winter Island $500/yr Private Pickering Wharf $15006-months(May-0d);$5106-months Nov- r ' ' Marblehead $3.50/F/-Irfor moorings evedy B $76/Ftyr for slis Gloucester Public , Jodrey State Pier $79.20/F/yrfor slips St. Peter's Marina $3.75/F/month for dockage Harbor Cove $4/F/month for dockage Private ' � Marine Railways' $4/F/month+$100/month(covering dumpster and electric Rddkporf $7/F/yr for moorings;$1o/F//yr for slips(see above 'Must buy fuel and repairs from facility ' Storm Protection for Commercial Fishing Boats Location Storm Protection Salem ' Public:Winter Island Moorings and pier are exposed to winter storm weather Private: Pickerin Wharf Dockage protected fromwinter storms ' Marblehead Moorings exposed to winter storm weather Revert Dockage_proteded from winter stonna. Gloucester Dockage protected from winter storms ockport Pigeon.Cove Moorings proteded from winter storms , Services Provided for Commercial Fishing Boats Location Services Salem ' Public:Winter Island Hoist at pier,launch/haul service,seasonal dinghy rack storage,water,boat ramps,parking Private Pickering Wharf-30+50.amp elekdrical servioe ' Marblehead Loading/unloading conveyor(at State St. Landing), launch ramps,floats, commercial fishing vessel float rings Beverly Hoist r loading/unloading,6166MClly,fuel and bait delivery,.-no-haul-out orlaunch ' Status of Lobster Stock There are short-and long-term threats to the Massachusetts lobster industry. Short-term threats are being appropriately attended to; long-term threats require more attention. ' There has been an expansion of effort in the lobster fishery that has been significant and rapid. From the late 1940s through the early 1950s, landings were approximately 25 million pounds. More recently, from ' 1993-2005, lobster landings increased from 57 million to 88 million pounds, 80%of which were caught in the state's waters.12 In Massachusetts, concern that expanding lobster fishing was threatening the stock's sustainability led to a prohibition as of 1988 on the issuance of any new coastal commercial lobster fishing permits.13 The number of coastal permits, now at 1,428, has fallen for the past eighteen ' consecutive years. Authorizations for permit transfers in 2005, at 46, were few. The MA DMF report "Which may cover additional services "Species Profile:American Lobster Managers Face the Challenge of Rebuilding Depleted Southern New England Stock,Excerpted ' from ASMFC Fisheries Focus,Vol. 16,Issue 5,July 2007,p.2. 13 Permits that allow lobster harvesting anywhere,including,most importantly,the state's coastal waters. 5 it shows that in 2005, 316 offshore permits were issued, continuing a decline over the past three years of the five years shown. 14 Level of effort is thought to be a function of not only the number of fisherman, but the number of traps.As a result, in addition to a moratorium on new licenses, trap limits have been set in some areas.15 There are additional controls as well. In the management of most fish species, a total allowable catch (TAC) is set, that is, a cap is established on the number or weight of animals that can be landed. In contrast, the lobster fishery is managed through controls to sustain lobster egg production.16 Management controls to meet this egg production objective, control fish mortality, and reduce latent fishing effort17, set minimum (and in some areas maximum) legal sizes and prohibit the catching of egg bearing females. Nonetheless assessments of the stock status indicate that there are problems: in the Southern Gulf of Maine, in Massachusetts Bay and Stellwagen Bank--the area which borders the coast of Massachusetts from its North Shore to Provincetown and the Outer Cape18--there is a low abundance of lobster, high lobster mortality, and low recruitment, and in Southern New England, there is overfishing and stock ' depletion. In Georges Bank (GBK) and most of the Gulf of Maine(GOM), while there is no overfishing and stocks are not depleted, in the case of the GOM, the high stock abundance is matched by high effort levels, making these levels probably unsupportable if abundance returns to historic median levels, and in the GBK, the high effort levels mean increases in effort are unadvisable,is If lobster landings fall to the long-term average, they will be reduced by more than 50% of current landings 20 This return to historical landings will have significant impact on the lobster fishing industry.21 I ' Average catch rates, that is, catch per trap-haul, for coastal lobstermen in 2005 was approximately 10% lower than in 2004 and 25% lower for offshore lobstermen 22. Catch rates increase with amount of trap soak time up to a week; when this factor is taken into account the term 'pounds per trap-haul'set-over- day' is used. The average catch per trap-haul'set-over-day for offshore lobstermen for 2005 was the lowest reported catch rate for Offshore Lobstermen on record,19% lower than 2004. While there has been variability year-to-year between 1994 and 2005, the trend line is one of decreasing catch rates for both Coastal and Offshore lobstermen. A comparison of catch rates for state territorial waters of Salem Sound,which fall in Area 3, and those of other coastal areas of the state are shown below. 14 2005 Massachusetts Lobster Fishery Statistics,Dean,M.J.,S.R.Reed,and T.B.Hoopes(TR31-2005),pp 1-4. htto'//wnvw mass povldlwele/dmf/oublicalions/tr31 2005 lobster reportodf Ts According to a New England Aquarium report on the lobster fishing industry,"...regulating the number of traps places no limit on the number of lobsters that can be harvested commercially." 16 The Sustainability of the Massachusetts Lobster Fishing Industry Dr.Michael Tlusty Research Scientist New England Aquarium Boston MA 02110-3399 January 2003,p.7."The ASMFC is attempting to rebuild lobster populations to a point where egg Qroduction values are 10%that of an unfished population..."(p.19) 'This refers to"latent traps",that is,"... traps that are not currently being fished either because the fisherman is not using their full allotment(a fisherman with 420 traps in the water can still put in an additional 380 for their quota of 800),or because the license is unfished(The Sustainability of the Massachusetts Lobster Fishing Industry Dr.Michael Tlusty Research Scientist New England Aquarium Boston MA 02110-3399 January 2003,p. 10)." 18 Area 514,of the North Western Atlantic Ocean National Marine Fisheries Service Statistical Reporting Areas;see Map in Appendix D. 19 Species Profile:American Lobster Managers Face the Challenge of Rebuilding Depleted Southern New England Stock,Excerpted from ASMFC Fisheries Focus,Vol.16,Issue 5,July 2007,Fact Sources:Lobster Institute&RI Sea Grant,NMFS;and ASMFC Lobster Flyer,web,2006. 30 COASTAL FISHERY RESEARCH PRIORITIES AMERICAN LOBSTER(Homarus americanus)Prepared by the Gulf of Maine Aquarium January 10,2001. 2'Recent record landings led lobstermen to incur great debt.According to a report on the MA lobster industry:"Economics of the lobster industry are difficult,particularly for fishermen given the recent record landings.This has caused them to incur great debt that makes the appropriate investment unsustainable if landings return to their historical average.Given that the lobster fishery is not statically efficient(meaning that the industry could put in less effort to achieve the same yield,Herriges 2001)the appropriate investment will always be maximized,and any downturn in landings will significantly impact the lobstermen."The Sustainability,of the Massachusetts Lobster Fishing Industry Dr.Michael Tlusty Research Scientist New England Aquarium Boston MA 02110-3399 January 2003. Source:2005 Massachusetts Lobster Fishery Statistics,Dean,M.J.,S.R.Reed,and T.B.Hoopes,pp. 11-12. hftD7//www.mass.gov/dfwele/dmf/i)ublications/tr31 2005 lobster report.0f. 6 2005 median catch per unit of effort(CPUE- pounds per trap-haul• set-over-day)for all license types by area fished (A-territorial areas)Z' m i <vue A Q 60l 5 W 6 i mn� � v u Catch per unit effort(CPUE) is an index of fishing pressure. The numbers suggest lobsters are becoming ' more difficult to catch. Since current catch levels are significantly above the long-term average, there is reason for concern that lobsters are being overfished, threatening the sustainability of the lobster industry.14 ' According to a lobsterman who also does research for the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, fishery management is currently being done on a species-by-species basis, creating an eco-imbalance in which there are expanding predator fish populations that are diminishing the lobster stock.15 Other ' researchers have reported that a long-time lobster disease that softens their shells, diminishing their quality, has been on the rise.Another threat to the lobster supply is a regulatory closure of the fishery because of the threat that lobster heavy trap gear and buoy lines pose to right whales, an endangered ' species 2a The above indicates the status of the Massachusetts lobster industry and some of the multiple factors affecting the status. These factors and others reportedly constitute short-and long-term threats to its ' sustainability. The industry is said to be taking appropriate measures to assure its sustainability in the short-term; long-term sustainability is at issue. Accurate predictions are difficult because of what is not known. What is said to be important to its long-term sustainability is the dedication of greater effort to improved scientific programs to fill the knowledge gap, as well as improved conservation, monitoring, and , enforcement programs 21 Commercial Dockage Facility Needs Commercial dockage facilities needs are summarized below. They are largely based on interviews of two ' lobstermen, who reported on three vessels, in their or their families' use. Marblehead is homeport for these vessels. Currently, in the summer season (May—Oct)the three vessels are tied up at moorings in Marblehead and in the winter season (Nov—Apr)are moved to Pickering Wharf Marina in Salem. ' Safety—Weather Protection -- The shift in location for the three vessels for the six-month winter season is made for safety reasons. Pickering Wharf offers protected winter dockage,while moorings in Marblehead are exposed to northheasterly storms in winter. A secure location with protection from , "Source:2005 Massachusetts Lobster Fishery Statistics,Dean,M.J.,S.R.Reed,and T.B.Hoopes,p. 13. htto//www mass pov/dfwele/dmf/publications/tr31 2005 lobster report odf ` The Sustainability of the Massachusetts Lobster Fishing Industry,Dr.Michael Tlusty,Research Scientist,New England ' Aquarium,Boston MA,02110-3399,January 2003,p.2. 35 Interview with Jay Michaud,Lobster Fisherman,3/6/08. x The Sustainability of the Massachusetts Lobster Fishing Industry,Dr.Michael Tlusty,Research Scientist,New England Aquarium, Boston MA,02110-3399,January 2003,p.10-12. 2'The Sustainability of the Massachusetts Lobster Fishing Industry,Dr.Michael Tlusty Research Scientist New England Aquarium , Boston MA 02110-3399,January 2003,p.22. 7 weather exposure year-round, but particularly in the winter season, is viewed as a key need by the ' lobstermen interviewed. The issue of weather exposure is a critical one, as can be seen from information posted on the web sites of Harbor Masters of Salem Sound and North Shore communities, as well as those of the communities themselves. These web sites often indicate whether the communities' harbors or areas of their harbors, are protected or exposed to winter storms. The issue is well-recognized in Salem Sound by those involved in harbor management. The Salem Harbor Master reports the following in red on his Web site": All of Salem Waters,with the exception of Area S29, are exposed to a"Northeaster"to some degree.They ' occur rarely in summer but are common in early spring and late fall. The two long-time lobster fishermen, who were interviewed, stressed the problem of the winter weather exposure of moorings in Marblehead, their homeport, explaining, as noted above, that they move their vessels to in winter to a different location that provides storm buffering. The Beverly Harbor Center Facilities Manager emphasized the issue of ' weather exposure in Salem Sound in an interview and identified some of the areas of particular concern. The owner of Hawthorne Cove Marina confirmed the problem of strong wave action from winter storms affecting his marina, a facility which is located in close proximity to the Salem Port Expansion project site. Importantly, he noted, that just next to his facility within the project site, there is an area protected from ' NE and E storms (winter storms), which he identified on a project map (see map in Appendix E). Berthing Dimensions —While lobstermen tend to fish in boats less than 35 F in length 30, boats range in ' size, on average, from 25-45 F. Two lobstermen who were interviewed indicated the dimensions of three vessels in their or their families' use: two vessels were 42F in length, and a third was 31 F.Average size lobster vessels were said to be perhaps a bit smaller in their homeport of Marblehead. Width of their vessels ranged from 11.5-13.5F and water depth requirements ranged from 3-5 F. For vessels of 42 F, ideal berth length along a wharf is 50 F, but 46 F would suffice, it was reported; slip lengths could be shorter--40 F. Fishing Season--The lobstermen interviewed fished lobster only, year-round, in daily trips, as often as the weather allowed, one reported; the average number of days they were at sea was between 150 and 200. Average number of crew is two for the 42 F vessels; and this was said to be the average crew size for commercial lobster fishing vessels moored in Marblehead. Both lobstermen had state and federal permits allowing fishing in state and non-territorial waters; for the 31 F boat, one permit, a state permit, was held; one lobsterman fished in Massachusetts Bay, mostly in federal waters (see Map in appendix); the other fished in Salem Sound and the area of the surrounding islands, within 5 miles of Salem 70%of the time for him and 100%of the time for his family member with the 31-F boat. All used traps, one reporting his number of traps to be the limit, 800.All sold their catch to a Salem retailer/wholesaler, Patriots Seafood, which they would generally have send a truck for pick-up at the dock. Price at the time of the interview was$8/Ib, but the average price during season is$4+/-/Ib. Much of the product was said to be shipped overseas to Europe and it was speculated that the value of the Euro may cause the price to ' increase. Seasonal Harvest, Coastal &Non-Territorial --The annual pattern in territorial and non-territorial landings for 2005 is shown below and reflects that of past years.31 1 t°(http://www.harbormasters.oraisalem/moorings.shtmi) t9 Area"S"is from the Kemwood Bridge to the Beverly Bridge in the Danvers River is designated Area 'S".There is a long waiting list and very little turnover. 30 The Sustainability of the Massachusetts Lobster Fishing Industry,Dr.Michael Tlusty,Research Scientist,New England Aquarium, Boston MA 02110-3399 January 2003,p.4. "2005 Massachusetts Lobster Fishery Statistics,Dean,M.J.,S.R.Reed,and T.B.Hoopes,p.8. htlp://www.mass.pov/dfwele/ dmf/oublications/tr31 2005 lobster report.odf. 8 Figure$. 2005 commercial lobster landings by month for territorial Table 5. 2005 commercial lobster land- and 110114eRilorial areas Ings(pounds)by month for territorial ' and non-lerritorial areas I.p Teml0ri0 4l nnth Territorial Nan-Territorul 0's January 57,563 290.240 ' e os Febnlaq' 23,958 156.850 c OA M ard, 27,800 174,690 01 - ' April 120,617 206.977 011111111 , ' May 244,412 165,598 P.0 ,m em nm Art m.y nm IN A,Q sep ON w� lune 413,558 309.556 6m July 1,018363 520.066 ' Noo-Ternto hl tm August 1,143,747 600,684 3$ Seplemlzr 1,017,177 527.171 C SO am October 1,001,754 553,667 tw November 959,872 833.959 , amronal er 439,853 591,589 IMEME1111111 Total Int 6.466,652 4.931.141 o ' bn alb pry Ann XU, !m IN At Sep M Nm' Ik Area Table:2005 Commercial Lobster Landings(lbs)by Season for Territorial and Non-Territorial Areas Season Territorial Non-Territorial ' May–Oct 4,839,001 2,676,934 No_v--Apr 1,629,653 2,254,305 Total 6,468,654 4,931,239 ' Among Statistical Reporting Areas(SRA) of state waters, the one including Salem Sound (SRA 3) had the third highest lobster harvest in territorial waters. The Cape Ann area(SRA 2) had the highest harvest of lobster(18%) in state waters. (See Figure below.)32 ' 2005 total commercial lobster landings from all permit types by statistical reporting area—(A-territorial areas) r s NN ' pauMs A ' [�3m.pm.mn0w ©m.pm.p0nrm Opn.aO,.,xnPro •g -r1SAPPIP , A hW 1 r 8 i P. w .W to I to 43� 1p ' 12T 0 Via] n Ibid.,p.8. ' 9 ISI L_ 1 ' The charts below summarize the berthing and additional commercial dockage facility needs, waterside and landside, (beyond that of protection from weather exposure), and the incentives for their relocation, reported by the interviewed lobstermen: Waterside Berthing Length 30-40 F slip length;40-50 F, if along wharf Duration Year-Round Navigational Access Clear channel with 3-5 F water depths Utilities —Electricity 110-120v, 30 am Water W Standard hose nice, but not necessary according to one interviewee Landside Access Access for trucks that may come to site to pick up lobster,deliver fuel Parking 1 space/vessel, ear-round 1 Storage Views: 1)2000 SF/vessel for traps, buoys, lines on-site next to vessel, year-round, ideal but could live without 2)Temporary storage space only, no need for storage on waterfront, but do need storage I space somewhere, ideally on other city-owned property, as yard storage of traps is prohibited in Salem Fuel Views: 1) Fuel delivery by truck to site is easiest 2) Not needed, as can obtain off-site, but allowing access to fuel source used by ferry would be beneficial Loading/Unloadina Conveyor used to load and unload catch in Marblehead is a convenience Bait storage Small building, as in Saugus,would be ideal, space permitting, unless would increase cost to that of private marinas Ice, food, vessel Not necessary maintenance, repair service. ' Incentives to Relocation Year-round dockage available at slip,wharf, or Float that provides protection from winter storms, as exposure to winter storms"puts whole business on line", and moorings are harder to access and less economical, requiring a second boat to get to the mooring Dockage fees more competitive than those of a private marina Electricity, for vessel safety in providing power for pump-out if leaks develop; also for maintenance with power tools ' Proximity to home Market ' When the following question was posed to the lobster fishermen who were interviewed, 'Assuming the facility were built per your comments on what would be needed, as well as those on price, if you were asked "If built,would they come?" how would you answer on a scale of 1-10, 10 being the strongest"yes, they will come?", they answered, "10, they would come." One elaborated: "A weather protected and affordable facility in Salem would most likely attract at least fifteen year round commercial fishing boats. The vessel size would be in the 25 to 45 foot range."13 In a follow-up interview, the second lobsterman echoed the first on the size of the market; he believed 15-20 vessels would be attracted to the facility. ' Revenue Stream If dockage fees were those of existing public and private facilities in Salem Sound, the revenues generated by a 35-F vessel for 12 months would range between $2660 and$7037. For a 42-F vessel they would range between $3192 and$8442. ' 33 Emails of 3/29/08. 10 Revenues Generated from Commercial Fishing Vessel Dockage Fees for a 35-F Vessel(average size) Location Fee 6-months 6 months 12 months , summer winter Salem-Pickering Wharf Marina $1501FIsummer $5250 $1785 $7037 $ 51IFIwinte, ' Beverly Harbor Center 1 $ 761F1yr $2660 Revenues Generated from Commercial Fishing Vessel Dockage Fees for a 42-F Vessel Location Fee 6-months 6 months 12 months , summer winter Salem-Pickering Wharf Marina $1501FIsummer $6300 $2142 $8442 $ 511FIwinter Beverly Harbor Center $ 761FIyr 1 1 $3192 ' The two lobster fishermen who were interviewed and moor their 42-F vessels in Marblehead for the 6- month summer period, and Pickering Wharf Marina in Salem for the 6-month winter period, pay approximately$2336/yr34 or$56/F/yr. This amount is less than the fee for Beverly Harbor Center; this , facility, while offering year-round dockage at a slip at a facility with winter storm protection, meeting the desired criteria, as well as good services, is considered expensive. While Beverly Harbor Center has a waiting list,this suggests that it may take a fee less than $76/F/yr to attract these and other lobster fishermen, especially those who use Marblehead,to a new Salem facility for year-round use. The ' Pickering Wharf Marina fee of$51/F/six-month winter, is the current benchmark for the winter November to April season; however, generally it is only 6-8 commercial lobster vessels which use this facility in this season. ' Impact on Lobster Fishermen Economics Discussions with experienced, full-time commercial lobstermen indicate that establishing dedicated ' shoreline slips in Salem,will improve their bottom-line economics significantly. A conservative estimate of pre-tax earnings improvement for a single boat exceeds$20,000 per annum. In isolated cases, pre-tax earnings improvement may approach double this figure. As with any owner-operator enterprise, individual results vary by each individual boat's current operating circumstances. ' The majority of the earnings improvement results from increases in gross revenue. These increases in gross revenue are not accompanied by proportionate increases in either variable costs or in fixed ' overheads. In simplest terms, proper and dedicated Salem shoreside slips allow more time to actively fish, and require less time to burn time and fuel while traveling. Assuming that each boat saves enough time to fish for lobster at least one half hour per day, for five days a week, only four weeks per month, only six months a year, less than $170 per day incremental gross revenue, will generate$20,000 in , annual revenue. Inasmuch as the fixed costs of mooring, ownership of the vessel and equipment and insurance, and variable costs, such as fuel and crew labor to travel to and from the fishing ground, are already expended, additional time spent fishing generates revenue that largely flows to the pre-tax bottom-line. ' Furthermore, proper and dedicated shoreside mooring may result in reduced expenses, particularly for boats currently unable to find economic and efficient moorings. Areas of expense reduction include ' disposing of dinghies, fuel, reduction of insurance if shoreside moorings permit better risk-management practices; and reduction of weather-related casualty losses. No estimate is made of benefits accruing to the larger community of Salem, although these may be , significant. Benefits include increased tax revenues from lobster boat gross receipts taxes; increased employment at tourist-related enterprises—especially lodging and restaurant employment that rely on "authentic New England"themes to attract customers-, and diversification of Salem's economy. Similarly, no estimate is made of benefits to the Commonwealth. Benefits to the Commonwealth may ' include increased income tax revenue from increased employment, increased income tax revenue from '0 This number includes mooring fees as well as some small additional fees for the summer period. ' 11 lobster boatmen's increased earnings, and increased sales tax revenue from retail sales at tourist and travel enterprises. Summary In Salem Sound and the North Shore area, there is a shortage of year-round commercial fishing dockage space that is of a good price and safe in terms of protection from winter storms. At the same time, overfishing of the lobster resource is a significant concern. It is important to keep this latter issue in perspective--the industry is said to be taking appropriate measures to meet the short-term threat—and to understand the threat. Recent harvests of lobster have been at record levels and have led to expansion of fishing effort and an accompanying expansion in investment that this takes. Catch rates, the index of fishing pressure, are in decline, indicating fishing is harder and overfishing is likely. ' Measures to ensure sustainability of the lobster stock include, among others, a moratorium on issuing new coastal commercial lobster fishing permits and the number of such permits has been declining. The decline indicates that circumstances have had an impact on the lobster fishing industry; other potential significant factors could lead to more impact. A return from record to long-term harvest levels will mean a ' 50% drop in harvests, and economic consequences for the industry, given its level of investment. In 2005,there were a total of 76 lobster fishermen in Salem, Marblehead, and Beverly. Currently, there are at least about 49 commercial lobster vessels using facilities in these communities; approximately 17 ' vessels are using a wharf, slip, or dock on a year-round basis, and 11 vessels are using such dockage for six months in the winter; I for 6-months in the summer; the remainder are using moorings in the summer season. Among the factors that would influence a decision to relocate to a new facility, year-round, ' protected dockage is considered important. A dockage fee of as much as $60/F/yr, but less than $76/F/yr would appear to be competitive. Establishing dedicated shoreline slips in Salem for commercial lobstermen could improve their bottom-line economics significantly. A conservative estimate of pre-tax earnings improvement for a single boat exceeds$20,000 per annum. As noted, individual results vary by each individual boat's current operating circumstances. Such savings, if demonstrated and accepted by commercial lobstermen, could serve as a highly compelling argument increasing their willingness to pay higher fees. ' The two interviewed lobstermen felt very strongly that there is a market for a weather-protected, affordable commercial lobster fishing facility in Salem --that if built, the lobstermen would come. They ' estimated the market size to be at least 15-20 vessels. Evidence of the interest may be suggested by the feedback elicited in the course of interviewing a number of sources in Salem, including individuals associated with public and private marina facilities; it ' was reported that there was excitement about the possibility of a commercial fishing facility. Lobster fishing would be synergistic with other possible uses of the site. Cruise passengers and other tourists are said to find fishing vessels and the activities associated with them an attraction and promotions such as"Days of Wine and Lobster" can be built around this use, such as is done with the crab industry in Mendocino on the coast of Northern California. ' Other Fishing,Yachts,Transient Vessels There is a shortage of mooring/dockage space, permanent and transient, for the full range of types of ' vessels, commercial fishing, as well as pleasure craft such as yachts. With regard to commercial fishing space,the same pressures that apply to lobster fishing facilities, noted above, apply to all types of commercial fishing facilities. There are differences in facilities requirements of different types of fishing vessels, however; berth-size, seasonality of use, storage, service and other needs can vary according to the species the vessel is used to fish. Given the changes that occur in the status of stocks and management controls for sustainability of the various fisheries,the flexibility to accommodate multiple types of fishing vessels can have value.As lobster vessels can be used to fish other species—as they do in Gloucester currently 40% of the time, providing for these vessels has built-in a certain amount of flexibility. 12 Providing berthing for permanent or transient use of pleasure craft, especially yachts,while commanding higher dockage fees--the figures below indicate these fees—, has the potential to create conflict when space is shared with ' commercial fishing vessels. Pleasure craft also have different space and service needs than commercial fishing vessels. Written common sense rules can mitigate some potential conflicts of shared recreational/fishing vessel space—rules to ensure proper management of bait to reduce smells is an example--; nonetheless,segregation of these uses may be best. Some sources of conflict are inherent:commercial lobster fishermen often go out to sea at , very early hours in the morning,producing noise from vessels engines and other activity at a time yacht users may be asleep onboard. Recreational Vessel Mooring/Dockage Fees ' Location Fees Salem Public Winter Island ' Moorings $500/yr Private Hawthorne Cove Length Fee Moorings up to 25' $1,335.00 26'to30' $1,450.00 ' Dockage 31'to 35' $1,575.00 36'to 45' $1,650.00 $142/F/season 5/1-10/31 Private Pickering Wharf Dockage $150/1`/6 months summer ' $ 50/F/6 months winter Marblehead Public Moorings ' Main Harbor $6.50/F/yr West Shore $4.50/F/ r Beveriy Public ' Beverly Harbor Center Slips $141/1`/6 months(Summer,May-0c) $41/F/6 months(Winter, Nov-Apr) Moorings harbor-wide_$5.50/F/yr(for penntt Transient Vessels , Location Fees Salem ' Private Pickering Wharf $150/F/month—summer $50/F/season—winter Hawthorne Cove (recreational) , Moorings $25/day Dotikage $2/F/da/day+electric Marblehead , Tucker's Wharf $3.50/F/day with electric up to 10 days/stay Moorings N/A—Harbor Master's office refers requests to yacht clubs Beverly- , Public Beverly Harbor Center $2/F/night 13 ' Appendix A New England Lobster Landings by State 2001-2005 2006 2005 2004 ' NE State Pounds $ Pounds $ Pounds $ CT 792,894 4,030,636 713,901 3,821,396 646,994 3,166,060 ME 72,666,935 297,164,762 68,729,813 317,948,122 71,574,344 289,078,847 ' MA 10,967,296 52,557,255 9,884,340 49,587,035 11,295,474 51,580,647 NH 2,666,344 13,915,298 2,556,187 14,375,191 2,097,396 10,199,038 RI 3,749,541 18,391,519 4,343,900 23,010,314 3,064,128 14,620,742 ' Total NE 90,843,010 386,059,470 86,228,141 408,742,058 88,678,336 368,645,334 Total All States 92,614,704 395,175,319 87,813,069 415,437,923 90,073,234 374,303,151 ' 2003 2002 2001 NE State Pounds $ Pounds $ Pounds $ CT 671,119 3,170,088 1,067,121 4,225,522 1,329,707 5,450,283 ME 54,970,948 205,715,329 63,625,745 210,950,030 48,617,693 153,982,266 MA 11,385,049 52,329,426 12,853,380 56,568,700 12,132,807 53,430,128 NH 391 1,511 2,027,725 8,071,915 RI 3,474,508 16,731,441 3,835,050 15,875,101 4,452,358 18,746,772 Total NE 70,501,624 277,946,284 81,381,687 287,620,864 68,560,290 239,681,364 Total All Slates 71,682,906 283,515,593 83,087,146 293,893,651 71,192,803 249,509,514 !I I ' 14 1 1 Appendix B Number of active commercial lobstermen, lobster landings and traps-fished by homeport for 2006(does not i include seasonal permits). 'fable 4. Number M'aclive commercial lobstermen,lobster landings and traps-fished by honraport for 2005(does not i include seasonal pennies). Honiepon data is taken from vessel information on the pertain applications. In cases where no vessel or hotaepon was specified,poll of landing w'os used. Catch data includes all repotted landings,regardless of gear type,while effort data represents only trap eflor(. Shaded rows denote towns which rank in the tap 10 I-or either nurntm of fisher men,linal catch,or Iola l effort. Some cities and towns are combined to protect the confidentially of i the dua. nshermen Cntrh(Pounds) BTfert• Cil,/raw. Nuenher Rank Territorial Non-Territorial Total Percent Rank Traps Percent Ronk omsmhlnYannoLLh 7 7i. 55 295,892 2.67% 14 ,870 0.9 % -t Fkeerlyi9 8 7717' 148,.07 x65124 S,OSY, 721 Lei 497% 6 i Boston `51_6 29 .038 519.0_24_811062 T152�2 _18988 44 % 7 Barone 1 46 5.047 0 5,047 0.05% 48 560 0.13'% 47 NoIh,,n 39_S 1.589803 f 7,16 506,146_4.5-T. 88985 211Y 16 Lltiimark 12 25 21,167 13,920 35,087 0.31%. 36 3,122 0.73% 31 i Coh..t 28 13 259,566 47,454 107.D20 2.74`:: 12 13.430 3.16'x, 10 Dan.ers 8 30 51,375 0 51,375 0.46:: 31 3,130 0.74'R 30 Dartmouth 8 30 20,724 0 20,724 OAN'. 40 1,385 0.13%, 40 Dennis 15 23 40.879 0 40,879 0.37% 33 4,723 1.11'% 25 DusMiry.Kingston 8 30 30.431 15 30.446 0.277. 37 1,725 OAI% 38 i E.nham 3 46 7,963 0 7,963 0.07'% 44 369 0.09% 48 Edprrown-Ook Bluffs .. 46 1,032 0 1.032 0.01% 50 155 0.049.. 50 E.., 3 46 7,290 0 7,290 0.07%4 45 790 0.19% 44 Faid...on 29 13 109,621 107.461 217,083 1.94% IS 9.980 2.35% 14 Fnlmomh 7 34 5,925 31.335 31260 0.335: 35 650 015%, 46 i b,resle, i 1.4 I 815,17 751.UY5 -15T7-1-45. , 14. I1 -6l B 1' "14 SS Gosnold 11 46 4,514 0 4,514 0.Uri, 49 340 0.061x, 49 Harxich 5 39 8,031 31,748 11179 0.36% 34 1,150 0.27% 41 Hingham 15 23 165,475 21,684 187,159 1.67% 21 7,929 1.87% 19 i Hall 17 21 191,239 40,564 231.803 2.07% 17 8.845 2.08% 17 1,,wh-Rowley 12 25 12444 0 12,444 0.11% 41 2,250 0.5319 33 Lynn 4 44 4,075 3,177 7,252 0,06",: 46 865 0.20% 43 ManrM.ner 26 15 186,879 6,987 193,865 1.73% 19 8,841 2.08'% 18 Marblehead 31 12 274.153 24,805 298,958 2.67'%. 13 14.619 3AWY. 9 ' Marion 4 44 5,536 42,872 48,408 0.43% 32 2,200 0.52% 34 Af rsh,eid. 2 5 J64;125 1,13 455553 4: 7"'. 1027 4.2 .45 3 Mmtapoisen 9 28 81,50' 22.893 104,196 0.9394 24 4,950 1.16'4 24 Natural 17 21 248.027 12,811 260,838 2.33% 15 10,735 2.5394, 13 Nan,.ko 5 39 21,06D 32,018 53.078 0.47% 30 1,793 042% 37 ' ewlAdford` I�`2�25=7 423,99 _47-576r_-4 7 9 5 782 1 36%T1,__2 3 Nexburyport-Amesday 25 17 52.635 51,295 103,930 0.91.. 25 5,952 140% 22 Odeaus 20 19 188,357 4,028 192,385 1.72% 20 7,082 1.67'x, 21 Ply._gth 77 3 54?.- 28._ l_77-0-74-9-7-15""""T y _: 32 8 4 77 2 i P ovnceto"a 36 11 230,078 8,988 239,066 2.14% 16 9,903 2338 15 Quincy 7 14 21,097 D 25,097 0.22'/. 39 1,499 0.35% 39 Rockport 0!44 484.154 1_2.177 _ 60 335 _542- _ 3 __24_15M_' _9_6_97,__4 . Silo 6 37 26,189 0 26.389 0.24'% 38 2.110 0.50% 35 Salisbury 8 30 10,342 1,020 11.362 0.10'7 42 2.070 0.49'% 36 ' Siad}irA_ _371024 .SI 542,744 ]9L254 laR'. 1 23.403 5,51, 5 Si ugus 20 19 153.557 11,511 165,068 1A9:: 22 10,826 2.55% 12 &ntni�e _ _a9 I .I. 16IS 365,309 i,2 ,. II Srainpscou 21 IS 117,126 17AI1 134,537 1.20:: 23 7,595 1.79% 20 ' Tilbury 5 39 4,128 1,924 6.052 OAS;: 47 940 052% 42 Torso 9 28 64,651 2,899 67,550 0.60Y. 27 1,515 0.83% 29 Wareham 5 39 10,287 0 10,287 0.09:: 43 790 0.16% 45 wellncei 5 39 66.563 0 66,563 0.601M. 28 2,690 0.63% 32 31 9potls FBl R_ner _ _ 26_ 1' 249 ' 7441 1 76 1 ( 88.._ 9 11143 3. .}�II iielinomh 6 37 36,712 53,208 89.920 0.8014 26 4,104 0.97% 26 i Winthrop 10 27 58.817 902 59,719 0.5 29 3.535 0.83% 28 Smexide Total 1222I 6A62,7S8 4.721,940 11,184,728 425.020 11LL Of Sate 47 1 0 209.249 209.249 ,600 "The nma Mr of'Traps'for each city/torn represents the sum.f each in3vidml's max imLLn traps fished for t he year. ' 7 Source:2005 Massachusetts Lobster Fishery Statistics,Dean,M.J.,S.R.Reed,and T.B.Hoopes(TR31-2005),pp 1. htli)71/www.mass.gov/dfwele/dmf/l)ublications/tr31 2005 lobster reportpdf i 15 i Appendix C 2/2008 More Maine fishing boats moving south ' By the Associated Press and the Times staff hftp://www.newburyportnews.com/punews/local story 043064534 html Gloucester's fishing port is emerging as a prime beneficiary from a tide of changes that's being felt hard in the state of Maine. Groundfishing boats are abandoning Portland and heading south, cutting the fish supply for seafood processors and the Portland Fish Exchange and costing businesses that serve the Maine fleet. More and more of the harbor's medium and large boats are now bringing their catches to Gloucester— ', primarily because they can earn extra money by selling lobsters they catch in their nets, a practice outlawed in Maine. Maine's city-owned Portland Fish Exchange seafood auction is now staffed by a skeleton crew and has cut the number of auctions from five a week to just two. It has been selling about 60,000 pounds of fish a week,just 12 percent of its volume in the early 1990s, and is trying to lease out a portion of its largely empty refrigerated warehouse. Fewer boats mean fewer customers for Gowen Marine, which repairs boats and gear and sells supplies, and Vessel Services, the harbor's Ione remaining company selling ice and fuel to commercial boats. Cozy Harbor Seafood, one of Portland's four larger seafood processors, now imports 95 percent of its groundfish from Canada or Massachusetts, said President John Norton. It's hard for Maine processors to compete with companies that have access to local fish, said Angelo Ciocca of Nova Seafood. He expects his company and other shore businesses to close after their owners ' retire. "We are living the end of the groundfish-harvesting side of the industry in the state of Maine,"Ciocca said. "It's done. It's finished." That's hardly the sentiment in Gloucester, where the arrival of the Maine boats is good news in what has otherwise been a difficult era, said Peter Prybot, the longtime Gloucester lobsterman who writes a commercial fishing column for the Times. Prybot's column this past Saturday, in fact, noted the growth in such jobs as graders and buyers at the Gloucester Seafood Auction. "The port of Gloucester, for God's sake, loves to see the Maine boats," Prybot said. "They are top fishermen and top producers. Gloucester not only benefits from the fish landings,they benefit from what is spent on those boats, such as fuel and food." ' Statistics show that the New England fishing industry as a whole continues to shrink in the middle of a long-range plan to rebuild stocks of haddock, cod and yellowtail flounder through regulatory measures that include reducing the amount of time fishermen can spend at sea. In the past year, 20 percent of the active boats in New England have quit groundfishing,said Stephen Ouellette, a Maine maritime lawyer who specializes in fisheries issues. Portland has been particularly hard hit,with fish volumes going down nearly 50 percent from 2004 to ' 2007—but fish catches brought to Gloucester have been stable, helped in part by Maine fishermen. Allyson Jordan, of Scarborough, Maine, said she mailed her Maine fishing license back to the state after the Marine Patrol—at the urging of the lobster industry—began enforcing a long-standing but rarely enforced law that bans Maine-licensed boats from possessing lobsters in state or federal waters. Jordan, 16 1 i whose family has been fishing in Maine for three generations, moved her family's two draggers and shore operations to Gloucester and found an apartment in nearby Rockport. "It was our family's way of life, and it kind of stinks we had to leave,"she said. Sam Viola, a Portland-based fisherman who has been working out of Gloucester this winter, said he and i other boat owners believe they have exhausted all options and are now justified in moving to the Bay State. "Portland is done,"Viola said. "Portland is out of business right now." i 1/19/07 htttp://www.gioucestertimes.com/punews/local story 019120552 ' Maine fishermen landing catch in Massachusetts at Maine's expense By Douglas A. Moser, Staff writer i Gloucester Daily Times Maine fishermen are landing more of their fish in Massachusetts to take advantage of more lenient lobster , rules here at the expense of Maine's seafood auction. Massachusetts law allows fishermen to sell lobsters accidentally caught in their nets; Maine law does not. In the recent past, many Maine fishermen would just bring their lobsters to Gloucester and Boston and i take the fish back to the Portland Fish Exchange. Now, after the prodding of local fishing advocates, they sell their fish here as well. "I always thought it was too restrictive for them," said Vito Calomo, executive director of the i Massachusetts Fishery Recovery Commission. "I used to tell them to come to Gloucester." Calomo said Maine fishermen would stop to sell their lobsters, then steam back to Maine to sell their fish. i Within the last year, they have been landing their entire catch here. "We pay a higher price in Gloucester for quality fish," he said. "When they're fishing off our area or in the i Georges Bank, it's quicker for them to come to Gloucester to drop the lobsters and get a higher price for the fish. They buy fuel here, they buy groceries,they get some repairs done. It's better for our economy." Maine fishing regulations prohibit fishermen from selling the accidental lobsters, called bycatch, when they are not the fishermen's permitted catch. Massachusetts allows fishermen from any state to sell a bycatch of 100 lobsters per day and up to 500 lobsters per trip. At about$4 per pound,which is currently the average price, fishermen can reap an extra$8,000 from 500 i lobsters averaging about four pounds apiece. Calomo said the price rises to between$6 and $8 a pound during the summer. Maine Iobstermen also insist that operators of boats that catch fish in nets come to Massachusetts not i only because they can sell their lobsters here. They say fishermen also get higher prices for their catches here, while paying out less in fuel costs. From 2004 to 2005, the number of trips by Maine-based trawlers to Massachusetts to sell fish and lobsters grew from 76 to 160, and the amount of seafood sold grew from $1.6 million to$3.8 million, according to a new analysis. In 2005, Maine fishermen sold 20,000 pounds of lobster in Massachusetts, a tiny fraction of Maine's total i harvest of 67.3 million pounds. 17 i "For the sake of these few lobsters,we're losing whole boatloads of fish,"said Tom Valleau, president of the Portland Fish Exchange. Maine's lobster industry opposes changing the rules, fearing too much effort is already being put on the lobster population. Fishermen know the odds are long that Maine, the nation's leading lobster state,will change its landing 1 law for lobsters.After all,there are more than 6,000 licensed lobstermen in Maine, the industry has a politically powerful voice, and lobstering by far is the state's No. 1 fishery,worth more than $300 million in 2005. The new numbers came from fishermen's log books and seafood dealer records that are collected by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the federal agency that regulates commercial fishing. The numbers were crunched by an economist at NOAA's Northeast Fisheries Science Center at Woods 1 Hole. According to the analysis, Maine lost$9.6 million in seafood revenues to Massachusetts from 2000 to 2005 because of the law outlawing lobster landings. The Portland Fish Exchange last year handled 9.5 million pounds of product, down from 17.1 million pounds in 2005. In the early 1990s, the auction handled more than 30 million pounds a year. 1 One of those Maine boats going to Massachusetts, the 70-foot Olympia, is owned by Maggie Raymond, who's the executive director of the Associated Fisheries of Maine. ' Last year, her boat stopped going to Portland. Instead, it brought about 400,000 pounds of fish to Gloucester and to Boston, she said. By going to Massachusetts, her boat also brought in about$50,000 from lobster that were caught in her fishing nets, Raymond said. She also saved nearly$9,000 in sales taxes that Maine charges on diesel fuel which Massachusetts does not. Raymond said she would bring her catch to Portland if Maine law allowed her to bring the lobsters there. "These lobsters are being landed anyway. They're just being landed in other states," Raymond said. "if there is any hope of preserving what's left of the groundfishing infrastructure in Maine,which is the i ' Portland Fish Exchange, something has to be done." The Associated Press contributed to this report I w 18 Appendix D Boundary of 1:125,000 scale map of Massachusetts Bay. 71 00'W 70 46'W 70 30'VW 7015W 70 001W 4245'N GULF nni i OF Glwcesler � �� (G� MAINE 42 30'N b d OSTO 614Q,y � 70 4215'N Z 1 D QA., �J tdt Ct9ANNE E4l SSNM O.l_._ i_•-�__-5.-0 . - G •�_ t Ai } by s NathWestemMenficOcean �_,,:•''� Nationat Marine ' Fisheries Service Hr SlaMstlrs!Reporting Areas e CAPE COV HAS' w Area 514 ' " t r CAPE COD m �N - 19M1M 8lrellMlb N ' .T Do�aNe.mw pmo.mdmnan n Nece..�apn s 19 ' Appendix E i p re rotecte7from'storms -- -•— �_ 111y1yfro e R& (wader `et rms) PRMWD RRC PLAN .M110.. awmrart i�ax ' •� �r m '� aa.i ac,� 20 Appendix F List of Individuals Interviewed ' Michael Sosnowski, Lobster Fisherman, 3/5/08 Jay Michaud, Lobster Fisherman, 3/8/08 ' Peter Gifford, Salem Harbor Master, 3/12/08 Elaine Cook, Salem Harbor Master's Office Louis Bochynski, Beverly Harbor Center, Facilities Manager, 3/12-13/08 Ray Shaw, Jodrey State Pier, Gloucester, Facilities Manager, 3/20/08 ' Shirley Edmunds, Gloucester Harbor Master's Office, 4/2/08 Joe Pelczerski, Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management, 3/6/08 Rockport Harbor Masters, Rosemary Lesch and Scott Story, 3/18/08 ' Russ Vickers and Ben Copp, Hawthorne Cove Marina, 3/19/08 Tom Moran, Dock master, Pickering Wharf Marina, 3/19&23/08 Michael Costello, Executive Director, Cape Ann Chamber of Commerce Scott Cavanaugh, U.S. Navy Commander NE Fleet Support, 4/2/08 ' Malls Griffen, Public Relations, Dominion Energy, Salem 3/28/08 Kevin Cornacchio, Dominion Energy, Salem, 3/28/08 Marine Railways, Gloucester Captain Jeffery Monroe, Director, Ports and Transportation Department, Portland, ME ' t 21 ' 1 Exhibit B ' Site Development and Building Footprint and Location ' Site Context Description The proposed Port of Salem project is to be located on a 2.2 acre parcel of property known as the Blaney Street site and is entirely located with in a Designated Port Area. The City of Salem currently leases the site from the adjacent Dominion power plant with the intention to purchase the site. The existing site has an irregular footprint which presents challenges for an efficient layout of upland support needs and the multi-purpose terminal building proposed for the south end of the site next to the pier and floating landings. The current site conditions are shown on Sheet 1 of 2 in Exhibit D. The following describes the two phases of alternative layouts considered and the proposed plan for the upland components of the site ' and building as they relate to the existing bulkhead and high water line. ' Maritime Use Landside Site Requirements The program of landside support uses for the site was determined through a process of interviews with ' existing and prospective users, as described in the document, Analysis of Existing Port Plans, prepared by Bourne Consulting Engineering, November 2007. The upland use requirements can be divided into two categories: upland site layout needs and building program and footprint needs. ' Upland Site Needs: Site users include the Salem Ferry, LNG crewboat operations, whale watch and excursion ferry, fishing fleet, cruise vessel visits, visiting vessels and general commercial vessels. The ' user needs identified included clear and easy circulation for vehicles through the site, parking for employees and patrons, site utilities, pedestrian harborwalk separated from vehicular traffic, and direct pier access for service vehicles.A summary of the combined needs for these uses includes the following: ' 100 foot turning radius at terminal area for bus/trolley queuing, service vehicles, auto and taxi drop-off, and emergency vehicles ' Blaney Street as the two way vehicular access road • 12 foot public access harborwalk from terminal and pier along cove shoreline to White Street at the north western corner connecting to Derby Street ' Provide curbside for bus/trolley queuing • Provide for clear truck access from the Blaney Street to the new fixed pier On site parking for 150 cars. I ' Utility services for water, electrical and sewer form Blaney Street to terminal and new pier. ' Landscaping, benches, lighting, and shade trees to create a park-like setting ' Exhibit B Page 1 J Salem Port Expansion Supplemental ENF Filing Building Program and Footprint Needs: The multi-purpose terminal building will provide space in ' immediate proximity to the pier for some site users including the Salem Ferry, the LNG crewboat, port of call cruise vessels, and other visiting vessels. The building footprint for a two storey structure was determined to be approximately 5,000 square feet, and located as close as possible to the landing ' locations and gangways for the passengers of the ferries and small cruise vessels. • Ferry Terminal including shared passenger waiting, operators' office and ticketing and a ' workshop and supply storage area • Public visitor information and restroom facilities • LNG supply vessel office, crew waiting, workshop and storage facilities ' • Allow for flexibility and expansion of the initial structure. • Outdoor waiting area • Separation of perimeter pedestrian circulation and vehicular circulation ' Optional Site Layout and Building Footprint Plans Based on the upland site and terminal building needs a series of optional site plans were developed in ' conjunction with pier layout options to determine the preferred site plan. The plans responded to several ' important site characteristics which limited the options. • The long tapering site made it difficult to provide an efficient parking and traffic plan, t particularly from the head of Hawthorne Cove to the south end of the site. • The narrow width of the site makes a 100 foot traffic turning radius very difficult even at the wider southern or outshore end without widening the site with a pile-supported harborwalk. ' • The narrow width of the site watersheet requires that a double loaded pier be located at or near the southwest corner of the land area. • The rough rubble rip rap bulkhead from the head of the cove around to the Dominion property ' on the south east corner should not be disturbed or altered any more than necessary, suggesting use of pile supported piers where pedestrian access or widening is needed. • The terminal building needs to be sited to allow a single type foundation which would either ' be footings and slab entirely over upland or entirely over pile supported pier to provide a stable cost-effective foundation. The existing site is stone filled making upland pile driving ' extremely difficult. The site and building analysis options were studied in two sequential steps; 1) a broad set of options ' considering different building locations and pier layouts, and 2) a refined set of options around the preferred building and pier option from the first set. Concept Options (A through F) t Initially six options concept plans were considered with concept plan layouts of different building locations, vehicular turnaround plans and different pier and float layouts. The intention was to determine ' Exhibit B Page 2 ' 1 Salem Port Expansion Supplemental ENF Filing the preferred general site layout and then prepare more detailed variations. The six plans labeled Alternative A through F are shown on the following pages. Alternative A: The plan includes the building sited parallel to the south face of the Blaney Street site with II ' a fixed "L" shaped pier and floats extending south from the western face of the site. A pile supported harborwalk extends 12 feet over the rip rap bulkhead around the perimeter of the site. The building siting provides the optimum orientation to the pier for ferry passengers, cruise visitors and crew boat users of ' the terminal building. The 100 foot wide traffic circle is located immediately north of the building site leaving a maximum amount of the site open for parking and circulation ' Alternative B: The plan includes the building sited parallel to the east property line of the Blaney Street site with a fixed "L" shaped pier and floats extending south from the western face of the site. as in Alternative A, a pile supported harborwalk extends 12 feet over the rip rap bulkhead around the perimeter of the site. The building siting provides a more remote relationship to the pier for ferry passengers, cruise visitors and crew boat users of the terminal building. The 100 foot wide traffic circle is located immediately ' south of the building site at the south edge of the site, requiring all terminal users to walk around the circle. The building location and pedestrian/vehicular circulation conflicts are problems in this plan. The site layout reduces the amount of site available for parking and circulation Alternative C: The plan includes the building sited parallel to the east property line of the Blaney Street site with a fixed "L" shaped pier and floats extending the middle of the south face of the site. However, in ' this case the building is located on the water side of the traffic circle, leaving a large open area on the southwest corner of the site. As in Alternative A, a pile supported harborwalk extends 12 feet over the rip rap bulkhead around the perimeter of the site. The building siting provides a more remote relationship to I ' the pier for ferry passengers, cruise visitors and crew boat users of the terminal building. In Alternative C, the 100 foot wide traffic circle location works for terminal passengers, but cuts down substantially on available parking. The traffic circle location and subsequent reduced upland parking and circulation are problems in this plan. The site layout further reduces the amount of site available for parking and circulation. ' Alternative D: As in Alternative A, the plan includes the building sited parallel to the south face of the Blaney Street site with a fixed "L" shaped pier and floats extending south from the western face of the site. A pile supported harborwalk extends 12 feet over the rip rap bulkhead around the perimeter of the site stopping at the terminal building. While the building siting provides the optimum orientation to the pier, as in Alternative A, the siting requires that building footprint is half on pile supported pier and half on ' exiting upland, making for a poor foundation condition. As in Alternative A, the 100 foot wide traffic circle is located immediately north of the building site leaving an even greater amount of the site open for parking and circulation than in A. While the greater parking is and advantage, the primary problem with this plan is the terminal building straddling the upland and pile supported pier. Alternative E: Similar in layout to Alternative C, the plan includes the building sited parallel to the east property line of the Blaney Street site with a fixed "L" shaped pier and floats extending out from the west edge of the site. As in Alternative A, a pile supported harborwalk extends 12 feet over the rip rap Exhibit B Page 3 I'I Salem Port Expansion Supplemental ENF Filing bulkhead around the perimeter of the site. In this case, the traffic circle is located west of the building, requiring a 120 x 25 foot pile supported pier extension into Hawthorne Cove beyond the harborwalk to , accommodate the circle width. The building siting provides a more remote relationship to the pier for ferry passengers, cruise visitors and crew boat users of the terminal building. In Alternative C, the 100 foot wide "cantilevered" traffic circle location works for terminal passengers, and gains back some of the ' upland parking capacity. The pier extension for the traffic circle and the awkward construction of combined upland and pile supported traffic circle are problems in this plan, as well as the somewhat less functional relationship of the terminal building to the pier and floats. ' Alternative F: In this plan the terminal building is sited on a pile supported pier extension of , approximately 120 x 50 feet at the southwest corner of the site with the traffic circle immediately to the east at the south face of the site. The 12 foot harborwalk extends around the perimeter of the site including around the terminal building. The pier projects form the center of the south face of the site. The ' large pile supported area required for the terminal allows for more parking on site, but covers more watersheet area to allow for the terminal building and substantially impacts navigation and pier layout options in Hawthorne Cove. In addition the terminal site is more removed from the pier and passenger ' circulation than in Alternatives A and D. Preferred Concept Plan — Alternative A: Plan A appears to provide the best balance between the ' functional relationships of the terminal building to the piers and traffic circle, while also allowing enough upland parking. The linear fixed pier extending south from the west edge of Hawthorne Cove was found to allow for better navigation, as well as providing more flexibility for berthing northward into Hawthorne ' Cove In addition the terminal layout remains on upland and does not require building on an additional area of pile supported pier. In terms of balancing upland passenger and vehicular circulation needs and , the primary terminal functions and construction,Alternative A was selected for study of more detailed plan layouts. 1 t Exhibit B Page 4 , ]51411( �� Q — -- _.. _ :o poly VEHICLE �— IDRNING \ _ RADIUS T4WLjW110 � oeoee .?.�cr •• ALE. HARRDI II ' • '•'-- - �� A,�, -tr,r�r�r-,rti r�nnnnnnnn n n 1 v.Ncr-w � x J 5,41N t � wR r pIOUNG 4yao IN 1IIRNG h k RADIUS go 3 Y/6INKJA�_B q t vAwmJo � / 1 I dl.m 2 f l t �r � U. HARBOR ______ ,.__ r,n(`"vnnnr�nnnnnnnnnnn ' Ir, ALTERNATIVE H 1 CONCEPTUAL LAYOUTS SALEM PORT EXPANSION CRY OF SALEM ' nM, MA ts�DA etMmt som ' mNe 1• w4 ff(.b F -wM�� IXHIBR 1 1 1�. ICA ^"^" FARIDXG «/VERICLE N.1pW VK ' NRWNG �= RADIUS 41 6} mJ� 7 /}Ir R�l� � / � WNt2 lllflln•T �- 1 �) IT o ALEM HARBOR C� 1 BWCr-M C , b£HICLE. �O wz.M.r.� � f— RTRN9lG RADIUS DIUS F �fif ...... A --mss'-' oma. 1 ,��.�., A � _ • � � I u.e�Hareeoa ' I , nnnnnn nnnnnnnnnnn ' o ��rxTr.ev CONCEPTUAL LAYOUTS , SALEM PORT EXPANSION CITY OF SM" M, W 'arsloPOMeot aom > oMIeR 2 ' r ...N 21-1 1 1 Tw— TERMING RADIUS O I '-,r WYMY C� ❑ 1 o a 2P�°P<� ~� IUS ��I 4 �nLLM HARBOR n.nlnnnn nnnnl II II� i 1 l PMgNC TURN ING1 'yH[ ..ea (TU3)— — RFDI115�I b r, 4. a} ..,� oov000 e a oa000neoonoo Q P I —�/ _ _ � �� t I �. _ 1 � w w3) ALE. VWreaoF W - ' CONCEPTUAL LAYOUTS SALEM PORT EXPANSION OW OF SALEM ' SALEM. MA sMnoeot aW Salem Port Expansion Supplemental ENF Filing Detailed Options-Phase 2 Evaluations: Five Plans The five detailed site plans, presented in the April 2008 initial ENF filing (under Project Description), assumed a preferred location of the fixed pier extending in a line from the current western edge of the site along Hawthorne Cove. The site layouts and terminal footprint then explored different combinations of ' building location with traffic, parking and pedestrian circulation. Each plan impacts the site bulkhead edge in a different way, with greater or lesser bulkhead alteration. It should be noted that, while all uses ' on the site are DPA commercial marine operations and support, all concept plans sought to minimize watersheet coverage with pile supported deck and the limiting of fill to behind bulkheads inshore of the High Tide Line. ' There are four optional plans presented here labeled A, B, C, and E and shown at the end of this Exhibit. These more detailed plans tested different combinations of vehicular infrastructure, parking, perimeter ' harborwalk, pier and floats, and terminal building siting. (Option D is not shown since the site and building layouts are duplicates to those shown). The plan characteristics with respect to site and terminal layouts, as well as advantages and disadvantages of each option, are described as follows. ' Site Plan A: The 12 foot pile supported harborwalk extends fully around Hawthorne cove and the south end of the site, covering most of the rip rap bulkhead between high and low water around the perimeter. , The building is sited on an angle to follow the existing south edge of the site and remain fully in shore of the top of mean high water line and the existing bulkhead. However, the building shape creates an odd geometry at the ends in order to achieve the desired footprint square footage of 5,000 square feet (for ' cost, construction purposes and interior layout, the building works far better if the ends were square). The traffic circle can fit within the harborwalk widened end of the site. The parking of 146 vehicles comes ' close to meeting the proposed site minimum of 150 spaces. The accessible ferry floats and ADA ramps are placed on the eastern face of the fixed pier (these floats can be located on either side of each alternative and are therefore not a significant variable). ' Advantages: • Terminal footprint stays within the existing bulkhead and high water line. ' • No filling required and minimal bulkhead alteration • Parking for 146 cars • Separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic ' • Comfortable location for the traffic circle. • Direct access from ferry landings to terminal waiting area. Disadvantages: ' • Terminal Building shape is more costly and awkward for interior layout and construction ' • Ferry terminal landings are exposed to easterly storms and winds. Site Plan B: As in A, the 12 foot pile supported harborwalk extends fully around Hawthorne cove and the ' south end of the site, covering most of the rip rap bulkhead between high and low water around the perimeter. The end of the site is squared off with a pile supported pier and altered south west corner of Exhibit B Page 8 ' 1 Salem Port Expansion Supplemental ENF Filing bulkhead. The terminal building is sited square to the deck and fixed pier, but requires some filling to allow for the whole footprint to be on upland. However, the building shape is optimum for the desired footprint square footage of 5,000 square feet, for construction purposes and interior layout. As in Option A, the traffic circle can fit within the harborwalk widened end of the site. Plan B also provides parking of ' 146 vehicles and comes close to meeting the proposed site minimum of 150 spaces. The accessible ferry floats and ADA ramps are placed on the eastern face of the fixed pier. ' Advantages: • The building footprint is optimum for interior layout, construction and proximity to the ferry landings. • Parking for 146 cars • Separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic. • Comfortable location for the traffic circle • The squared end deck works better with the new pier layout and access ramps. • Direct access from ferry landings to terminal waiting area. ' Disadvantages: • Terminal footprint is slightly outside the existing bulkhead and high water line. And requires bulkhead modification and some filling. • Ferry terminal landings are exposed to easterly storms and winds. ' Site Plan C: The 12 foot wide pile supported harborwalk is all located inside the mean low water line and extends from the head of Hawthorne Cove around the south end of the site, leaving the existing vertical bulkhead at the end of the Cove. The building is sited perpendicular to the south edge of the site and is ' rectilinear in shape. The perpendicular siting allows for expansion of the Terminal at a later date to the east. However in order to allow for the turning radius and preserve parking capacity, the building projects ' out beyond the low water line. The Building footprint is half on the upland and half over tidelands requiring a new rectangular extension of the bulkhead with filling behind to allow the foundation to be on upland. The perpendicular alignment also requires a greater amount of pile supported deck beyond the south face ' of the site by eliminating the harborwalk extension at the north end of the Cove, the parking is reduced to 136 spaces and does not meet the proposed site minimum of 150 spaces. The accessible ferry floats and ADA ramps are placed on the more protected western face of the fixed pier. ' Advantages: • Separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic • Terminal building site allows for future addition to the east. ' Comfortable location for the traffic circle. • Ferry landing is more protected from easterly storms and wind. ' Disadvantages: • Terminal footprint projects beyond the existing bulkhead and low water line and requires greater ' alteration and fill below high water line than option B. • South pile supported deck is larger because of perpendicular building. • 10 fewer parking spaces than options-A or B. ' Exhibit B Page 9 Salem Port Expansion Supplemental ENF Filing 1 • Ferry access is separated from terminal waiting by width of the pier. (Plan D omitted due to duplication—See initial ENF filing for copy) Site Plan E: The narrower 6 foot wide pile supported harborwalk is all located inside the mean high water ' line and extends from the head of Hawthorne Cove around the south end of the site, leaving the existing vertical bulkhead at the end of the Cove. As in option A, the building is sited on an angle to follow the existing south edge of the site and remain fully in shore of the top of mean high water line and the existing ' bulkhead. Like A, the building shape needs to be an odd geometry at the ends in order to achieve the desired footprint square footage of 5,000 square feet. The traffic circle barely fits within the existing end , of the site. The parking is reduced to 115 vehicles and is far from meeting the proposed site minimum of 150 spaces. The spaces are lost by not building the pile supported harborwalk at the head of the cove, and by forcing parallel parking along the narrower west edge of the Cove. The accessible ferry floats and ' ADA ramps are placed on the eastern face of the fixed pier. A small harborwalk extension is need to the west of the building to provide ramp access to the western floats. Advantages: , • Terminal footprint and harborwalk stays within the existing bulkhead and high water line and reduces impact on intertidal area (except for small extensions west and south of the building ' footprint). • No filling required and minimal bulkhead alteration • Separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic ' • Comfortable location for the traffic circle. • Direct access from ferry landings to terminal waiting area. ' Disadvantages: • Terminal Building shape is awkward for interior layout and construction ' • Parking is reduced to 115 spaces because of narrower site width along the Cove. • Ferry terminal landings are exposed to easterly storms and winds. Preferred Upland Site and Building Plan ' The final proposed plan is a synthesis of preferred features of the 4 detailed options described above, ' incorporating the best features to achieve a workable site program for commercial maritime uses, and moderating the impacts of harborwalk construction and fill on intertidal areas. Proposed Site Plan: The proposed site plan is similar in layout and building footprint to Option B. The ' 12 foot pile supported harborwalk extends fully around Hawthorne Cove and the south end of the site, ' covering most of the rip rap bulkhead between high and low water around the perimeter. The south end of the site is squared off with a pile supported pier. A small portion of the inner end of an existing pile supported access pier is retained as a fish pier and overlook feature of the public harbor walk. The ' terminal building is sited square to the deck and fixed pier, but requires some filling and alteration of the south west corner of bulkhead to allow for the whole building footprint to be on upland. Approximately Exhibit B Page 10 ' 1 I I, Salem Port Expansion Supplemental ENF Filing 1,580 square feet of the building footprint is in the intertidal zone currently occupied by sloping rip rap bulkhead. The rectangular building shape parallel to the south face and perpendicular to the fixed pier and access road is optimum for the desired footprint square footage of 5,000 square feet, for construction on solid ground and for efficient interior layouts. The traffic circle can fit within the harborwalk-widened end of the site. Plan B also provides parking of 146 vehicles and comes close to meeting the proposed site minimum of 150 spaces. This amount of parking is considered to be essential to a workable plan, in order to minimally accommodate the peak use demands for combined Salem ferry, excursion/whale watch, and commercial fishing and LNG crewboat operations. Even with this maximum amount of parking, offsite parking is likely to be needed at peak use periods. The accessible ferry floats and ADA ramps are placed on the more protected western face of the fixed pier. An open waiting shelter is added to provide protection for ferry and cruise vessel passengers on the western side of the pier at the gangway locations. ' Building Foundation Considerations: The site is an historic fill with rip rap stone edges. This creates a significant problem both in terms of cost and actual ability to drive piles for the building foundation. The ' foundation proposed is with footings and slab which results in the building foundation extending slightly beyond the existing Mean High Water line in the southwest corner. The project proposes to extend the foundation wall to provide the full building support resulting in the filling of 1,580 sf of intertidal area within ' the existing rip rap slope. Advantages: ' The building footprint is optimum for interior layout, construction. • Proximity to the new pier which is critical for passenger vessel terminal facilities. • Parking spaces for 146 vehicles ' Separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic. • Comfortable location and adequate size for the traffic circle • The squared end deck works better with the new pier layout and access ramps. • Ferry landing is located on the western side of the new pier,with a shelter at the top of the gangway. ' Disadvantages: • Terminal footprint is slightly outside the existing bulkhead and high water line. And requires ' bulkhead modification and some filling of the intertidal zone • Ferry landing shelter and ramp access requires an additional 10 foot wide section of pile supported Harborwalk opposite the west end of the terminal. Project Team Findings: We believe that for the terminal building to function properly and effectively in support of the site DPA and water dependant uses, it needs to be close to the activities it supports at the ' outer end of the site. Given the restrictions of the site and the need for siting the vehicular turnaround for fire and safety as well as for operations, we also found that these conditions force the building to the outshore end. We have presented the range of alternatives investigated for various building locations and ' configurations to minimize the buildings impact beyond the MHW limit. ' Exhibit B Page 11 Salem Port Expansion Supplemental ENF Filing 1 In addition, the proposed plan is intended to improve and stabilize the existing rip rap bulkhead slope and eliminate the erosion of edge conditions into the adjacent resource areas, while at the same time ' providing a harborwalk with major improvements to public access and use. Such improvements are deemed not only necessary but beneficial for a successful project. 1 t 1 1 Exhibit B Page 12 ' 1 1 Exhibit C ' U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Dredge Sediment Disposal Suitability Determination Memorandum dated 29 February 2008ing and Testing 1 1 1 L CENAE-R-PT-MAS 29 February 2008 , ( MEMORANDUM THRU: v Ruth M. Ladd, Chief, Policy Analysis and Technical Support Branch ' FOR: Brian Valiton, Project Manager, CENAE-R-PEA SUBJECT: Suitability Determination for Salem Wharf, Salem Harbor, Salem, MA, Application Number NAE-2005-1095. 1. References Cited a. US EPA Region I/USACE-NAE. 2007. Reference Memorandum for ' Evaluating Testing and Non-Testing Requirements of 40 C.F.R 227.6 and 227.27 Federal Navigation Dredging or Non-federal Dredging Projects, for Open t Ocean Disposal at the Massachusetts Bay Disposal Site (MBDS). b. USEPA Region I/USACE-NAE. 2004. Regional Implementation Manual ' for the Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed for Disposal in New England Waters. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1, Boston, MA/US Army Corps of Engineers, New England District, Concord, MA. 54 pp. ' c. USACE-NAE. 2007. Environmental Assessment/ Finding of No Significant Impact Salem Wharf, Salem Harbor, Salem, MA, Application ' Number NAE-2005-1095. US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), New England District, Concord, MA. 2. Summary This memorandum addresses compliance with the regulatory evaluation ' and testing requirements of the Marine Protection,..Research and Sanctuary Act (MPRSA, or Ocean Dumping Act) regulations at 40 CFR 227 as well as the issues outlined in the MBDS Reference memo (USEPA Region 1/USACE-NAE ' 2007) for unconfined open water disposal at an ocean disposal site. Based upon this review, the proposed dredged material from Salem Harbor is suitable for unrestricted ocean disposal at MBDS. Detailedinforiirdtion pertaining to , the regulatory issues associated with theevaluation of this project as well as the technical background of the analytical tests summarized herein is found in the MBDS Reference Memo (EPA 2007). A copy of this memo can be obtained ' upon request from the EPA or USACE. RECEIVED MAR 17 2038 kE. I 1 ,J.• GJLA1Gr,T �.,� .. ' CENAE-R-PT SUBJECT: Suitability Determination for Salem Wharf, Salem Harbor, Salem, MA, ' Application Number NAE-2005-1095. ' 3. Project Description The applicant is proposing to dredge three areas in Salem Harbor in Salem, MA. The inner section has an area of approximately 145,000 sq. ft and ' would be dredged to a depth of-10' MLW with an overdredge to -11' MLW. The outer section would have an area of 189,000 sq. ft. and be dredged to -26' MLW with an overdredge to -28' MLW. The transition section between the two ' would have an area of.42,000 sq, ft. and be dredged to a depth of-15' MLW with an overdredge to-16' MLW. In total, a volume of approximately 210,000 cu. yds. would be produced. The applicant proposes to mechanically dredge ' this material and dispose of it at the Massachusetts Bay Disposal Site (MBDS). This proposed project represents improvement dredging. 4. Sampling Plan: ' A sampling plan was developed on 27 June 2005 for the analysis of physical, biological and chemical characteristics of the sediment proposed to be ' dredged. The federal agencies concurred with this plan. a. Compositing plan Following sample collection, the samples were analyzed for physical characteristics (grain size and water content). After a review of the resulting data, a compositing plan was developed on 18 October 2005. The plan called for four composited samples for use in a bioassay with amphipods and mysids; a suspended particulate bioassay with fish, mysid shrimp, and pelagic larvae; ' and a bioaccumulation assay using bivalves and polychaetes. Composite 1 was composed of core samples SW-1, SW-2, SW-4 and SW-5. Composite 2 consisted of core SW-3 and SW-6. Composite 3 consisted of the upper strata of ' cores SW-7, SW-8 and SW-9. Composite 4 consisted of the lower strata of cores SW-7, SW-8 and SW-9. The federal agencies concurred with this plan. I ' b. Toxicity test A 10-day bioassay test was conducted on the composite samples. As the ' results indicated no toxic response, the suspended particulate and the bioaccumulation tests were conducted to completion. ' c. Determining contaminants of concern The composites were then analyzed for bulk sediment chemistry ' according to the contaminants outlined in the sampling plan of 27 June 2005 for this project. This sampling plan was written in accordance with the USEPA Region 1/USACE-NAE Regional Implementation Manual guidelines (USEPA ' Region 1/USACE-NAE. 2004). As a result of the bulk chemistry, we t2 CENAE-R-PT SUBJECT: Suitability Determination for Salem Wharf, Salem Harbor, Salem, MA, Application Number NAE-2005-1095. determined on 24 April 2006 which contaminants would be tested for in the ' bioaccumulation test. The contaminants of concern were determined to be all metals; all the PCBs; all PAHs except for acenaphthylene, acenaphthene and fluorene; and of the pesticides only heptachlor, aldrin and lindane, ' 4. Testing Results a. 10-day bioassay and elutriate results ' In the amphipod bioassay test, the mean survivorship for the amphipods ' exposed to sediment from the control site was 90% with a mortality of 10%. As the mortality in the control was less than 20%, this test was valid. The mean survivorship for the amphipods exposed to sediment from the reference site ' was 92% with a mortality of 8%. The mean survivorship for the amphipods exposed to sediment from Composite 1 was 88% with a mortality of 12%. The mean survivorship for the amphipods exposed to sediment from Composite 2 ' was 88% with a mortality of 12%. The mean survivorship for the amphipods exposed to sediment from Composite 3 was 95% with a mortality of 5%. Statistical analysis indicates that there is no significant difference between the ' survivorships of the amphipods exposed to the reference sediment and the amphipods exposed to the sediments represented by Composites 1 - 3. The mean survivorship for the amphipods exposed to sediment from Composite 4 ' was 83% with a mortality of 17%. For Composite 4, a second control and MBDS reference site sample were run. The lab control had a survivorship of 91% with a mortality of 9%. The reference site had a survivorship of 81% with ' a mortality of 19%. There was a statistically significant difference between the survivorships of the amphipods exposed to the reference sediment and the amphipods exposed to the Composite 4 sediments. However, the difference ' between the mean survivorship of the amphipods exposed to the reference and the Composite 4 sediments is 2%, no higher than the 20% threshold allowed in the testing protocol. Therefore, the materials proposed to be dredged are not ' considered acutely toxic to the amphipods used in the testing. In the mysid bioassay test, the mean survivorship for the mysids exposed ' to sediment from the control site was 91% with a mortality of 9%. As the mortality in the control was less than 10%, this test was valid. The mean survivorship for the mysids exposed to sediment from the reference site was ' 89% with a mortality of 11%. The mean survivorship for the mysids exposed to sediment from Composite 1 was 95% with a mortality of 5%. The mean survivorship for the mysids exposed to sediment from Composite 2 was 87% ' with a mortality of 13%. The mean survivorship for the mysids exposed to sediment from Composite 3 was 86%with a mortality of 14%. Statistical analysis indicates that there is no significant difference between the ' 3 ' 1 CENAE-R-PT SUBJECT: Suitability Determination for Salem Wharf, Salem Harbor, Salem, MA, ' Application Number NAE-2005-1095. II ' survivorships of the amphipods exposed to the reference sediment and the mycids exposed to the sediments represented by Composites 1 - 3. For Composite 4, a second control and MBDS reference site sample were run as lilt had been done for the amphipods. The lab control had a survivorship of 91% with a mortality of 9%. The reference site had a survivorship of 91% with a mortality of 9%. Statistical analysis indicates that there is no significant I ' difference between the survivorships of the mysids exposed to the reference sediment and the mysids exposed to the Composite 4 sediments. The mean survivorship of the mysids exposed to sediment from Composite 4 sediments i ' was 87%. Statistical analysis indicates that there is no significant difference between the survivorships of the mysids exposed to the reference sediment and the mysids exposed to the Composite 4 sediments. Therefore, based on the results of tests on these two species, the materials proposed to be dredged are not likely to be acutely toxic to benthic organisms. I ' In the Suspended Phase Acute Toxicity Tests, the mysid shrimp (Americamysis bahia) showed a LCso of>100% when exposed to elutriate from each of the composite samples. The inland silverside minnow (Menidia ' beryllina) showed a LCso of>I 00% when exposed to elutriate from each of the project samples. The sea urchin larvae (Arbacia punctulatc4 showed a LCso of >100% when exposed to elutriate from each of the project samples. b. STFATE Water Quality Evaluation l ' As no LC50 was less than 100%, the ADDAMS model was not run. c. Bioaccumulation results In the bioaccumulation tests, both the bent-nosed clam (Macoma nasutco and the clam worm (Nereis virens) significantly accumulated contaminants. ' The clam worm showed significant accumulation of arsenic and cadmium in Composite 3 and arsenic in Composite 4. The bent-nosed clam showed significant accumulation of pyrene and each of the PCBs in Composite 2, ' pyrene in Composite 3 and fluoranthene and each of the PCBs in Composite 4. In total, there were 6 contaminants of concern which were ' bioaccumulated at a level greater than reference. Because of the presence of significant bioaccumulation, the EPA ran a risk-assessment model of the bioaccumulation results. For these compounds, the toxicological significance ' of bioaccumulation from the sediment into benthic organisms was evaluated. It was determined that the disposal of the material as proposed will not cause any significant undesirable effects (see Tables 1 and 2). 1 ' 4 CENAE-R-PT ` SUBJECT: Suitability Determination for Salem Wharf, Salem Harbor, Salem, MA, , Application Number NAE-2005-1095. 5. Disposal Alternatives Analysis ' According to Subsection C, 40 CFR 227.14, 227.15 and 227.16, the need for ocean disposal of the dredged material from this project has to be ' demonstrated and alternatives to the disposal have to be evaluated. Factors considered in determining need will include: evaluation of the degree of treatment that is useful and feasible; whether the material could be reduced or ' eliminated by using other processes; the relative environmental risks, impact and cost for other alternatives; and any irreversible consequences of the use of alternatives. In addition, the CENAE and/or EPA Region 1 must determine ' that there are no practical improvements in processing or treatment to reduce the impacts of the sediment, and that there are no practical alternatives with less adverse environmental impact. ' Six disposal alternatives, outlined by the applicants' agent, were ' considered for the dredged sediments which included: • Upland disposal at an approved landfill ' ■ Beneficial reuse as o Beach nourishment o Brownfield capping ' o Construction • Confined Aquatic Disposal (CAD) • Unconfined Offshore Disposal at the MBDS ' The applicant eliminated from consideration two options: upland disposal at an approved landfill and beneficial re-use alternatives. The detailed description by which the applicant selected unconfined offshore disposal as the preferred alternative is found in the Environmental Assessment and is based on the factors described below. All information for this alternatives analysis ' has been supplied by the applicant's agent. . a. Upland Disposal ' Upland Disposal at an approved landfill was found to be prohibitively expensive and would require additional logistics as compared to offshore unconfined disposal. The costs for such disposal are estimated at$100/cubic yard as compared to $16/cubic yard for offshore disposal which equates to a cost differential of$168.8 million which would render the project economically infeasible. Additionally, the dredged material would need to be stockpiled and dewatered prior to transfer to an upland disposal site. The time required for dewatering is dependent upon such variables as the physical composition of ' sediments, weather conditions, and contractor operations; however, it is 5 ' CENAE-R-PT ' SUBJECT: Suitability Determination for Salem Wharf, Salem Harbor, Salem, MA, Application Number NAE-2005-1095. ' anticipated that sediments would be suitable for removal and off-site disposal over periods of no less than 1 to 2 years. Such stockpiling would consume a large portion of the project site upland which is currently used for parking for the Salem Ferry from April through November. b. Beneficial Re-use ' The applicant's agent believes that none of the three beneficial re-use options were feasible. Based on the sediment test results, the material is too silty for beach nourishment. Similarly, the organics and salt content in the dredged material, in the opinion of the applicant, renders it inappropriate for construction use. Local or regional site investigations did not result in locating ' active Brownfield sites that would accept this material. c. Confined Aquatic Disposal (CAD) The City is investigating the ability to create a CAD cell for material unsuitable for unconfined offshore disposal as a part of its Harbor Development Plan. Placement of this material in a CAD cell would require I ' additional dredging for,creating volume for Project material, which would still require unconfined offshore disposal. I ' d. Unconfined Offshore Disposal at MBDS The proposed dredged material has been tested and has been determined ' to be suitable for unconfined offshore disposal. The total construction cost for this alternative is estimated to be approximately $3,200,000. This is currently the most viable, as well as cost-effective, alternative for the project and is the preferred alternative by City of Salem. There are no practical alternatives, as . determined in the Environmental Assessment for this project (USACE-NAE 2007). 1 1 t6 CENAE-R-PT SUBJECT: Suitability Determination for Salem Wharf, Salem Harbor, Salem, MA, ' Application Number NAE-2005-1095. 6. If you have any questions or want further details on the procedure of ' project evaluation, please contact the MAS Project Manager at (978) 318-8336 or charles.n.farris@usace.armv.mil. CHARLES N. FARRIS ' 4 414IM6 1 Project Manager, Marine Analysis Section ' AE Regulatory _ Melville P. Cot6, Jr., Manager Robert J. DeSista, Chief ' Water Quality Unit Regulatory Division EPA Region 1 - New England New England District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ' Concur one o not conc o not concur ' Date Date 7 ' NEW ENCVND_. POWER co~ ✓( I j I 1f' yry r 9 :.y ixdi�r si Le 2 nnm¢sw l / � ✓ / � � OD TD 5 'Qy,,.;��F•�� y�jR, '�T+"t � ��~r'�'� n. fb�l� � �.i . s q " ^,ten"' PROFUSED DREDGING EL. —86.0 (wIOYERDREO E TO —28.0) ...\ PROPOSED. ORED,CE FOOTPRINT Af4D. SEDIMENT SAMPLE LOCATIONS SALEM CITY PIER SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 1 � JUNE YU llCtixt se �e2 Abnmla5.+� ;vFY9w/sdat,:wssltls'rsEYu CENAE-R-PT SUBJECT: Suitability Determination for Salem Wharf, Salem Harbor, Salem, MA, Application Number NAE- 2005-1095. TAU1"Riaswnwyaa c�poa� UmmA CakpmB C h.0 C b.D Cdo®E C b.F CARC7NOCLIMR68 NON-CARCLNVGE4UCRl6& Ta9Ed� Ta8&®med Ta9Esdmbd TadEM.Md Taal. TailE�nad1 Sa 6Fom1 LARuk Fi*Ri�k k1dWsw6Ld1& R64 robes$®* rhhM* MdI..ShdIkbF%k ,J 890.1,2,4,5 I_a0W5' 232M 4.07E-06 299B01 5.80E-0@ 1.01EM 89-3,6 0.00E-00 0.00E40 OOOE-M aoaE w 0.00E+00 0.02-.00 s8'-7,8,970 . O.00E+W O.00E400 QOOE-OO 000E*00 AOOE-W 0.00E+00 89F7,8,9Upps 279.05 123.06 914E46 SSIE01 1,07E-01 1.86.01 Re�mre0kIDD8R ) 118FA19 22W.46 497E-06 256E-0I 497E-02 &61.-02 Table 1 9 CENAE-R-PT SUBJECT: Suitability Determination for Salem Wharf, Salem Harbor, Salem, MA, Application Number NAE- 2005-1095. 7�647G6 RbkSmm�q dvO Ce�mito Ortavlm_Yw�m' a0r�® C.h=A ComuH ai c Cd.D Ceh®E C.dmP CAREVOCP.Y[CHM NNFCARCM)CEPWRM Tail EtimM Tail Eti ed ThlEd,m d TardP. Tadl&&m d TabiEst®Id Smylma Peat Lob Bnk HIM* sbdlUhRfik LARi* A}hRA bink.Ske➢Sil,Rink SW-N"0,5 0.008+f0 O.00frOD 0.00&00 O.00E�w 000ErW 0.00E-00 SW-O O.WE•OD O.00L400 0.00E+0D 0.00E+00 0.00E4W UOR+00 SW.7"L. O.W&00 O.OmE% O.OWWO 0.WE+W OAD&W 0.008+00 RW.9R0B OAW+w OME.M O.ODF,WO O.OMW O.00E.00 O.WE•W R�smea 0NHD3ReAmca OAOE4w 000E1W 0.0CE40D O.00R+W 0.00E+00 "OE-00 Table 2 P—a - N 10 1 1 1 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK ' t 1 i 1 1 Exhibit D 1 Existing Conditions and Proposed Site Plans 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i i 1 1 I Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands }� MassDEP File Number \ WPA Form 3 — Notice of Intent Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 Document Transaction Number Salem City(rown When filling out Important: A. General Information forms on the computer,use only the tab key 1. Project Location (Note: electronic filers will click on button to locate project site): to move your 10 Blaney Street cursor-do not Salem 01970 use the return a.Street Address b.City/Town c.Zip Code key. Latitude and Longitude: 42.522398 70.882804 moo:r� d.Latitude e. Longitude 41-0278-0 I.Assessors Map/Plat Number g. Parcel/Lot Number 2. Applicant: Kathleen Winn a. First Name b.Last Name Note: City of Salem Before c Organization completing this g 120 Washington form consult on Street your local d.Street Address Conservation Salem CommissionMA 01970 e.Gly/Town regarding any f.State g.Zip Code municipal bylaw 978-619-5685 kwinn(a)salem.com or ordinance. h.Phone Number i. Fax Number 1.Email Address 3. Property owner(required if different from applicant): ❑ Check if more than one owner a.First Name b.Last Name Dominion Energy Salem Harbor LLC c.Organization 5000 Dominion Blvd d.Street Address Glen Alien VA 23060 e.City/Town I.State g.Zip Code h. Phone Number i. Fax Number I. Email address 4. Representative (if any): _Alyssa Richard a.First Name b. Last Name Bourne Consulting Engineering c Company 3 Bent Street d.Street Address - Franklin MA 02038 e.City/Town I. Stale g.Zip Code 508-533-6666 508-533-0600 arichard@bournece.com h.Phone Number i. Fax Number t. Email address 5. Total WPA Fee Paid (from NOI Wetland Fee Transmittal Form): _Municipal Exemption Municipal Exemption Municipal Exemption a.Total Fee Paid b.Stale Fee Paid C.City/Town Fee Paid wpaform3.doc•rev.02/21/08 R Page i of 8 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: i� Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands �\ WPA Form 3 - Notice of Intent MassDEP File Number Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 Document Transaction Number Salem City/Town A. General Information (continued) 6. General Project Description: The City of Salem is proposing to construct a multi use water transportation facility on a leased property in the Salem Harbor Designated Port Area. The proposed plan will be developed in two Phases. Phase One includes the construction and associated dredging of a water transportation terminal and a pier to be used for various passenger vessels 7a. Project Type Checklist: 1. ❑ Single Family Home 2. ❑ Residential Subdivision 3. ❑ Limited Project Driveway Crossing 4. ® Commercial/Industrial 5. ® Dock/Pier 6. ® Utilities 7. ® Coastal Engineering Structure 8. ❑ Agriculture (e.g., cranberries,forestry) 9. ® Transportation 10. ❑ Other 7b. Is any portion of the proposed activity eligible to be treated as a limited project subject to 310 CMR 10.24 (coastal)or 310 CMR 10.53 (inland)? 1. ❑ Yes ® No If yes, describe which limited project applies to this project: 2.Limited Project 8. Property recorded at the Registry of Deeds for: Essex a.County b.Certificate#(if registered land) 23825 116 c.Book d.Page Number B. Buffer Zone & Resource Area Impacts (temporary & permanent) 1. ❑ Buffer Zone Only—Check if the project is located only in the Buffer Zone of a Bordering Vegetated Wetland, Inland Bank, or Coastal Resource Area. 2. ❑ Inland Resource Areas (see 310 CMR 10.54-10.58; if not applicable, go to Section B.3, Coastal 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. For all projects affecting other Resource Area Size of Proposed Alteration Proposed Replacement (if any Resource Areas, please attach a - narrative a. ❑ Bank 1.linear feet 2.linear feet explaining how b ❑ Borderin Ve etated the resource 9 9 area was Wetland 1,square feet 2.square feet delineated. c. ❑ Land Under 1.linear feet 2. linear feet Waterbodies and Waterways 3.cubic yards dredged wpaform3.doc•rev.02/21/08 Page 2 of 8 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands � WPA Form 3 - Notice of Intent MassDEP File Number Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 Document Transaction Number Salem City/Town B. Buffer Zone & Resource Area Impacts (temporary & permanent) (cont'd) Resource Area Size of Proposed Alteration Proposed Replacement(if any) d. ❑ Bordering Land Subject to Flooding 1,square feet 2.square feet 3.cubic feet of flood storage lost 4,cubic feet replaced e. El Isolated Land Subject to Flooding 1.square feet 2.cubic feet of flood storage lost 3cubic feet replaced I. ❑ Riverfront Area 1.Name of Waterway(if available) 2. Width of Riverfront Area (check one): ❑ 25 ft. - Designated Densely Developed Areas only ❑ 100 ft. - New agricultural projects only ❑ 200 ft. -All other projects 3. Total area of Riverfront Area on the site of the proposed project: square feet 4. Proposed alteration of the Riverfront Area: a.total square feet b.square feet within 100 fl. c.square feet between 100 ft.and 200 ft. 5. Has an alternatives analysis been done and is it attached to this NOI? ❑ Yes❑ No 6. Was the lot where the activity is proposed created prior to August 1, 1996? ❑ Yes❑ No 3. ® Coastal Resource Areas: (See 310 CMR 10.25-10.35) 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 Proposed Replacement (if any document transaction number a. ® Designated Port Areas Indicate size under Land Under the Ocean, below (provided on 291,564 your receipt b. ® Land Under the Ocean page)with all 1.square feet supplementary 115,117 information you submit to the 2.cubic yards dredged Department. c. ❑ Barrier Beach Indicate size under Coastal Beaches and/or Coastal Dunes below d. ® Coastal Beaches 0 1.square feet 2.cubic yards beach nourishment e. ❑ Coastal Dunes i,square feet 2.cubic yards dune nourishment wpaform3.doc• rev.02/21/08 Page 3 of 8 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands MassDEP File Number El WPA Form 3 - Notice of Intent Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 Document Transaction Number Salem City/Town B. Buffer Zone & Resource Area Impacts (temporary & permanent) (cont'd) Size of Proposed Alteration Proposed Replacement(if any) f. ® Coastal Banks 850 1.linear feet g. ❑ Rocky Intertidal Shores 1.square feet h. ❑ Salt Marshes 1.square feet q 2.sq ft restoration,rehab.,creation i. ❑ Land Under Salt Ponds 1.square feet 2.cubic yards dredged j. ❑ Land Containing Shellfish 1.square feet k. ® Fish Runs Indicate size under Coastal Banks, inland Bank, Land Under the Ocean and/or inland Land Under Waterbodies and Waterways, above 115,117 1.cubic yards dredged 1. EJ Land Subject to 1.85 acres Coastal Storm Flowage 1.square feet 4. ❑ Restoration/Enhancement If the project is for the purpose of restoring or enhancing a wetland resource area in addition to the square footage that has been entered in Section B.2.b or B.3.h above, please enter the additional amount here. a.square feet of BVW b.square feel of Salt Marsh C. 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 NO[to: Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program Division of Fisheries and Wildlife Route 135, North Drive b.Date of map Westborough, MA 01581 If yes, the project is also subject to Massachusetts Endangered Species Act(MESA) review (321 CMR 10.18). To qualify for a streamlined, 30-day, MESA/Wetlands Protection Act review, please complete Section C.1.C, and include requested materials with this Notice of Intent(NO!); OR complete Section C.1.d, if applicable. If MESA supplemental information is not included with the NOI, by completing Section 1 of this form, the NHESP will require a separate MESA filing which may take up to 90 days to review(unless noted exceptions in Section 2 apply, see below). wpaform3.doc•rev.02/21/08 Page 4 of 8 -'wl U111111111111 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands MassDEP File Number WPA Form 3 - Notice of Intent Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131 , §40 Document Transaction Number Salem City/Town C. Other Applicable Standards and Requirements (cont'd) 1. c. Submit Supplemental Information for Endangered Species Review " 1. ❑ Percentage/acreage of property to be altered: (a)within wetland Resource Area percentage/acreage (b)outside Resource Area percentage/acreage 2. ❑ Assessor's Map or right-of-way plan of site 3. ❑ 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 clearing line, and clearly demarcated limits of work" (a)❑ Project description (including description of impacts outside of wetland resource area & bufferzone) (b) ❑ Photographs representative of the site (c)❑ MESA filing fee (fee information available at: http://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. (d)❑ Vegetation cover type map of site (e)❑ Project plans showing Priority& Estimated Habitat boundaries d. OR Check One of the Following 1. ❑ Project is exempt from MESA review. Attach applicant letter indicating which MESA exemption applies. (See 321 CMR 10.14, http://www.mass.gov/dfwele/dfw/nhesp/nhenvexeml)tions.htm; the NOI must still be sent to NHESP If the project is within estimated habitat pursuant to 310 CMR 10.37 and 10.59.) 2. ❑ Separate MESA review ongoing. a.NHESP Tracking Number b.Date submitted to NHESP 3. ❑ 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.nhesp.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. wpaform3.doc•rev. 02/21/08 Page 5 of 8 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands MassDEP File Number WPA Form 3 - Notice of Intent Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 Document Transaction Number Salem City/Town C. Other Applicable Standards and Requirements (cont'd) 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. ❑ Not applicable— project is in inland resource area only b. N 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 Also if yes, the project may require a Chapter 91 license. For coastal towns in the Northeast Region, please contact MassDEP's Boston Office. For coastal towns in the Southeast Region, please contact MassDEP's Southeast Regional Office. 3. Is any portion of the proposed project within an Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC)? Online Users: a. ❑ Yes N No If yes, provide name of ACEC (see instructions to WPA Form 3 or MassDEP Include your Website for ACEC locations). Note: electronic filers click on Website. document transaction b.ACEC number (provided on 4. Is any portion of the proposed project within an area designated as an Outstanding Resource Water your receipt (ORW)as designated in the Massachusetts Surface Water Quality Standards, 314 CMR 4.00? page)with all supplementary a. N Yes ❑ No information you submit to the 5. Is any portion of the site subject to a Wetlands Restriction Order under the Inland Wetlands Department. Restriction Act (M.G.L. c. 131, §40A) or the Coastal Wetlands Restriction Act (M.G.L. c. 130, § 105)? a. ❑ Yes N No 6. Is this project subject to provisions of the MassDEP Stormwater Management Standards? a. N Yes. Attach a copy of the Stormwater Report as required by the Stormwater Management Standards per 310 CMR 10.05(6)(k)-(q)and check if: 1. ❑ Applying for Low Impact Development(LID)site design credits (as described in Stormwater Management Handbook Vol. 2, Chapter 3) 2.N A portion of the site constitutes redevelopment 3. N Proprietary BMPs are included in the Stormwater Management System. b. ❑ No. Check why the project is exempt: 1. ❑ Single-family house 2. ❑ Emergency road repair 3. ❑ Small Residential Subdivision (less than or equal to 4 single-family houses or less than or equal to 4 units in multi-family housing project)with n6discharge to Critical Areas. wpaform3.doc•rev.02/21/08 Page 6 of 8 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands MassDEP File Number LAI WPA Form 3 - Notice of Intent Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 Document Transaction Number Salem City/Town D. 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. ® 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. ❑ Plans identifying the location of proposed activities (including activities proposed to serve as a Bordering Vegetated Wetland [BVW] replication area or other mitigating measure) relative to the boundaries of each affected resource area. 3. ❑ Identify the method for BVW and other resource area boundary delineations (MassDEP BVW Field Data Form(s), Determination of Applicability, Order of Resource Area Delineation, etc.), and attach documentation of the methodology. 4. ® List the titles and dates for all plans and other materials submitted with this NOI. Salem Port Expansion a.Plan Title Bourne Consulting Engineering Ronald R. Bourne b. Prepared By c.Signed and Stamped by 8/27/08 1.1 = 50' 111 =40', V = 60', 3/32" = 11, 1" = 10' d.Final Revision Date e.Scale Existing Conditions, Proposed Conditions, Proposed Drainage Plan, 9/9/08 Proposed Pier Proposed Dredge Plan Proposed Terminal Bldg g.Date s. ❑ 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. 2 Attach proof of mailing for Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, if needed. 8. ® . Attach NOI Wetland Fee Transmittal Form 9. 0 Attach Stormwater Report, if needed. E. Fees 1. ® Fee Exempt: 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 (in addition to pages 1 and 2 of the NOI Wetland Fee Transmittal Form)to confirm fee payment: Municipal Exemption Municipal Exemption 2. Municipal Check Number 3.Check date Municipal Exemption Municipal Exemption 4.State Check Number 5.Check date Municipal Exemption Municipal Exemption 6. Payor name on check:First Name 7. Payor name on check: Last Name wpaform3.doc•rev.02/21/08 Page 7 of 8 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: �— Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands MassDEP File Number WPA Form 3 - Notice of Intent Document Transaction Number Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 Salem City/Town F. 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 by Certificate of Mailing or 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. ;AA 1.Si nature of Applicant , 2.Date A q 3.Signature of Property i e t) 4.D to 17sloy 5.Signa re of Representative(if any) 6.Date For Conservation Commission: Two copies of the completed Notice of Intent(Form 3), including supporting plans and documents, two copies of the NOI Wetland Fee Transmittal Form,and the city/town fee payment, to the Conservation Commission by certified mail or hand delivery. For MassDEP: One copy of the completed Notice of Intent(Form 3), including supporting plans and documents,one copy of the NOI Wetland Fee Transmittal Form,and a copy of the state fee payment to the MassDEP Regional Office (see Instructions)by certified mail or hand delivery. Other: If the applicant has checked the"yes"box in any part of Section C, Item 3,above, refer to that section and the Instructions for additional submittal requirements. The original and copies must be sent simultaneously. Failure by the applicant to send copies in a timely manner may result in dismissal of the Notice of Intent. wparorm3.doc•rev.02121108 Page 8 of 8 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection "- Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands Program Checklist for Stormwater Report A. Introduction Important: A Stormwater Report must be submitted with the Notice of Intent permit application to document When filling out 9 forms on the compliance with the Stormwater Management Standards. The following checklist is NOT a substitute for computer,use the Stormwater Report (which should provide more substantive and detailed information) but is offered only the tab key here as a tool to help the applicant organize their Stormwater Management documentation for their to move your Report and for the reviewer to assess this information in a consistent format. As noted in the Checklist, cursor ret not the Stormwater Report must contain the engineering computations and supporting information set forth in use the return p 9� 9 P pp g key. Volume 3 of the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook. The Stormwater Report must be prepared and certified by a Registered Professional Engineer(RPE) licensed in the Commonwealth. Vfl —11 The Stormwater Report must include: • The Stormwater Checklist completed and stamped by a Registered Professional Engineer(see X1 page 2)that certifies that the Stormwater Report contains all required submittals.' This Checklist is to be used as the cover for the completed Stormwater Report. • Applicant/Project Name • Project Address • Name of Firm and Registered Professional Engineer that prepared the Report • Long-Term Pollution Prevention Plan required by Standards 4-6 • Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan required by Standard 82 • Operation and Maintenance Plan required by Standard 9 In addition to all plans and supporting information, the Stormwater Report must include a brief narrative describing stormwater management practices, including environmentally sensitive site design and LID techniques, along with a diagram depicting runoff through the proposed BMP treatment train. Plans are required to show existing and proposed conditions, identify all wetland resource areas, NRCS soil types, critical areas, Land Uses with Higher Potential Pollutant Loads (LUHPPL), and any areas on the site where infiltration rate is greater than 2.4 inches per hour. The Plans shall identify the drainage areas for both existing and proposed conditions at a scale that enables verification of supporting calculations. As noted in the Checklist, the Stormwater Management Report shall document compliance with each of the Stormwater Management Standards as provided in the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook. The soils evaluation and calculations shall be done using the methodologies set forth in Volume 3 of the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook. To ensure that the Stormwater Report is complete, applicants are required to fill in the Stormwater Report Checklistby checking the box to indicate that the specified information has been included in the Stormwater Report. If any of the information specified in the checklist has not been submitted, the applicant must provide an explanation. The completed Stormwater Report Checklist and Certification must be submitted with the Stormwater Report. . .... __ ....... .......... _._......_._ The Stormwater Report may also include the Illicit Discharge Compliance Statement required by Standard 10. If not included in the Stormwater Report,the Illicit Discharge Compliance Statement must be submitted prior to the discharge of Stormwater runoff to the post-construction best management practices. 'For some complex projects,it may not be possible to include the Construction Period Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan in the Stormwater Report. In that event,the issuing authority has the discretion to issue an Order of Conditions that approves the project and includes a condition requiring the proponent to submit the Construction Period Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan before commencing any land disturbance activity on the site. swcheck rev 121108.doc•04/01/08 Stormwater Report Checklist•Page 1 of 8 ElMassachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands Program Checklist for Stormwater Report B. Stormwater Checklist and Certification The following checklist is intended to serve as a guide fora applicants as to the elements is thatr ' o dlnarily need to be addressed in a complete Stormwater Report. The checklist is also intended to provide conservation commissions and other reviewing authorities with a summary of the components necessary for a comprehensive Stormwater Report that addresses the ten Stormwater Standards. Note: Because stormwater requirements vary from project to project, it is possible that a complete Stormwater Report may not include information on some of the subjects specified in the Checklist. If it is determined that a specific item does not apply to the project under review, please note that the item is not applicable (N.A.) and provide the reasons for that determination. A complete checklist must include the Certification set forth below signed by the Registered Professional Engineer who prepared the Stormwater Report. Registered Professional Engineer's Certification I have reviewed the Stormwater Report, including the soil evaluation, computations, Long-term Pollution Prevention Plan, the Construction Period Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (if included), the Long- term Post-Construction Operation and Maintenance Plan, the Illicit Discharge Compliance Statement (if included) and the plans showing the stormwater management system, and have determined that they have been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Stormwater Management Standards as further elaborated by the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook. I have also determined that the information presented in the Stormwater Checklist is accurate and that the information presented in the Stormwater Report accurately reflects conditions at the site as of the date of this permit application. Registered Professional Engineer Block and Signature DOUAW ROWWR AVe. gta9�010 O,' r S O S�YdDate Checklist Project Type: Is the application for new development, redevelopment, or a mix of new and redevelopment? ❑ New development ❑ Redevelopment ® Mix of New Development and Redevelopment Minor redevelopment of the site. swcheck rev 121108.doc•04/01/08 Stormwater Report Checklist•Page 2 of 8 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands Program El Checklist for Stormwater Report Checklist (continued) LID Measures: Stormwater Standards require LID measures to be considered. Document what environmentally sensitive design and LID Techniques were considered during the planning and design of the project: ❑ No disturbance to any Wetland Resource Areas ® Site Design Practices (e.g. clustered development, reduced frontage setbacks) ❑ Reduced Impervious Area (Redevelopment Only) ❑ Minimizing disturbance to existing trees and shrubs ❑ LID Site Design Credit Requested: ❑ Credit 1 ❑ Credit 2 ❑ Credit 3 ❑ Use of"country drainage"versus curb and gutter conveyance and pipe ❑ Bioretention Cells (includes Rain Gardens) ❑ Constructed Stormwater Wetlands (includes Gravel Wetlands designs) ❑ Treebox Filter ❑ Water Quality Swale ❑ Grass Channel ❑ Green Roof ❑ Other(describe): Standard 1: No New Untreated Discharges ® No new untreated discharges ® Outlets have been designed so there is no erosion or scour to wetlands and waters of the Commonwealth ❑ Supporting calculations specified in Volume 3 of the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook included. To meet Standards to the greatest extent practicable. swcheck rev 121108.doc•04/01/08 Stormwater Report Checklist•Page 3 of 8 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands Program Checklist for Stormwater Report Checklist (continued) Standard 2: Peak Rate Attenuation ® Standard 2 waiver requested because the project is located in land subject to coastal storm flowage and stormwater discharge is to a wetland subject to coastal flooding. ❑ Evaluation provided to determine whether off-site flooding increases during the 100-year 24-hour storm. ❑ Calculations provided to show that post-development peak discharge rates do not exceed pre- development rates for the 2-year and 10-year 24-hour storms. If evaluation shows that off-site flooding increases during the 100-year 24-hour storm, calculations are also provided to show that post-development peak discharge rates do not exceed pre-development rates for the 100-year 24- hour storm. Standard 3: Recharge -Seeking Waiver from Standard 3 due to Marina meeting standards to the best extent practicable and AUL site classification. ❑ Soil Analysis provided. ❑ Required Recharge Volume calculation provided. ❑ Required Recharge volume reduced through use of the LID site Design Credits. ❑ Sizing the infiltration, BMPs is based on the following method: Check the method used. ❑ Static ❑ Simple Dynamic ❑ Dynamic Field' ❑ Runoff from all impervious areas at the site discharging to the infiltration BMP. ❑ Runoff from all impervious areas at the site is not discharging to the infiltration BMP and calculations are provided showing that the drainage area contributing runoff to the infiltration BMPs is sufficient to generate the required recharge volume. ❑ Recharge BMPs have been sized to infiltrate the Required Recharge Volume. ® Recharge BMPs have been sized to infiltrate the Required Recharge Volume only to the maximum extent practicable for the following reason: ❑ Site is comprised solely of C and D soils and/or bedrock at the land surface ® M.G.L. c. 21E sites pursuant to 310 CMR 40.0000 ❑ Solid Waste Landfill pursuant to 310 CMR 19.000 ® Project is otherwise subject to Stormwater Management Standards only to the maximum extent practicable. ❑ Calculations showing that the infiltration BMPs will drain in 72 hours are provided. ❑ Property includes a M.G.L. c. 21 E site or a solid waste landfill and a mounding analysis is included. Mounding analysis excluded since an infiltration 8MP has not been included with the system. '80%TSS removal is required prior to discharge to infiltration BMP if Dynamic Field method is used. swcheck rev 121108.doc•04/01/08 Stormwater Report Checklist•Page 4 of 8 ElMassachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection -Wetlands Program Checklist for Stormwater Report Checklist (continued) Standard 3: Recharge (continued) ❑ The infiltration BMP is used to attenuate peak flows during storms greater than or equal to the 10- year 24-hour storm and separation to seasonal high groundwater is less than 4 feet and a mounding analysis is provided. ❑ Documentation is provided showing that infiltration BMPs do not adversely impact nearby wetland resource areas. Standard 4: Water Quality The Long-Term Pollution Prevention Plan typically includes the following: • Good housekeeping practices; • Provisions for storing materials and waste products inside or under cover; • Vehicle washing controls; • Requirements for routine inspections and maintenance of stormwater BMPs; • Spill prevention and response plans; • Provisions for maintenance of lawns, gardens, and other landscaped areas; • Requirements for storage and use of fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides; • Pet waste management provisions; • Provisions for operation and management of septic systems; • Provisions for solid waste management; • Snow disposal and plowing plans relative to Wetland Resource Areas; • Winter Road Salt and/or Sand Use and Storage restrictions; • Street sweeping schedules; • Provisions for prevention of illicit discharges to the stormwater management system; • Documentation that Stormwater BMPs are designed to provide for shutdown and containment in the event of a spill or discharges to or near critical areas or from LUHPPL; • Training for staff or personnel involved with implementing Long-Term Pollution Prevention Plan; • List of Emergency contacts for implementing Long-Term Pollution Prevention Plan. ® A Long-Term Pollution Prevention Plan is attached to Stormwater Report and is included as an attachment to the Wetlands Notice of Intent. ® Treatment BMPs subject to the 44% TSS removal pretreatment requirement and the one inch rule for calculating the water quality volume are included, and discharge: Seeking waiver for WQV standard ❑ is within the Zone II or Interim Wellhead Protection Area ® is near or to other critical areas ❑ is within soils with a rapid infiltration rate (greater than 2.4 inches per hour) ® involves runoff from land uses with higher potential pollutant loads. ❑ The Required Water Quality Volume is reduced through use of the LID site Design Credits. ® Calculations documenting that the treatment train meets the 80% TSS removal requirement and, if applicable, the 44% TSS removal pretreatment requirement, are provided. swcheck rev 121108.doc•04/01/08 Stormwater Report Checklist•Page 5 of 8 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands Program Checklist for Stormwater Report Checklist (continued) Standard 4: Water Quality (continued) ® The BMP is sized (and calculations provided) based on: Seeking Waiver from Standard 4 due to Marina meeting standards to the best extent practicable and AUL site classification. ❑ The %" or 1" Water Quality Volume or ❑ The equivalent flow rate associated with the Water Quality Volume and documentation is provided showing that the BMP treats the required water quality volume. ® The applicant proposes to use proprietary BMPs, and documentation supporting use of proprietary BMP and proposed TSS removal rate is provided. This documentation may be in the form of the propriety BMP checklist found in Volume 2, Chapter 4 of the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook and submitting copies of the TARP Report, STEP Report, and/or other third party studies verifying performance of the proprietary BMPs. ❑ A TMDL exists that indicates a need to reduce pollutants other than TSS and documentation showing that the BMPs selected are consistent with the TMDL is provided. Standard 5: Land Uses With Higher Potential Pollutant Loads (LUHPPLs) ® The NPDES Multi-Sector General Permit covers the land use and the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) has been included with the Stormwater Report. ❑ The NPDES Multi-Sector General Permit covers the land use and the SWPPP will be submitted prior to the discharge of stormwater to the post-construction stormwater BMPs. ❑ The NPDES Multi-Sector General Permit does not cover the land use. ® LUHPPLs are located at the site and industry specific source control and pollution prevention measures have been proposed to reduce or eliminate the exposure of LUHPPLs to rain, snow, snow melt and runoff, and been included in the long term Pollution Prevention Plan. ❑ All exposure has been eliminated. ® All exposure has not been eliminated and all BMPs selected are on MassDEP LUHPPL list. ❑ The LUHPPL has the potential to generate runoff with moderate to higher concentrations of oil and grease (e.g. all parking lots with >1000 vehicle trips per day)and the treatment train includes an oil grit separator, a filtering bioretention area, a sand filter or equivalent. Standard 6: Critical Areas ® The discharge is near or to a critical area and the treatment train includes only BMPs that MassDEP has approved for stormwater discharges to or near that particular class of critical area. ® Critical areas and BMPs are identified in the Stormwater Report. swcheck rev 121108.doc•04/01/08 Stormwater Report Checklist•Page 6 of 8 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands Program Checklist for Stormwater Report Checklist (continued) Standard 7: Redevelopments and Other Projects Subject to the Standards only to the maximum extent practicable ® The project is subject to the Stormwater Management Standards only to the maximum Extent Practicable as a: ❑ Limited Project ❑ Small Residential Projects: 5-9 single family houses or 5-9 units in a multi-family development provided there is no discharge that may potentially affect a critical area. ❑ Small Residential Projects: 2-4 single family houses or 2-4 units in a multi-family development with a discharge to a critical area ® Marina and/or boatyard provided the hull painting, service and maintenance areas are protected from exposure to rain, snow, snow melt and runoff ❑ Bike Path and/or Foot Path ❑ Redevelopment Project ® Redevelopment portion of mix of new and redevelopment. ® Certain standards are not fully met(Standard No. 1, 8, 9, and 10 must always be fully met) and an explanation of why these standards are not met is contained in the Stormwater Report. ® The project involves redevelopment and a description of all measures that have been taken to improve existing conditions is provided in the Stormwater Report. The redevelopment checklist found in Volume 2 Chapter 3 of the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook may be used to document that the proposed stormwater management system (a)complies with Standards 2, 3 and the pretreatment and structural BMP requirements of Standards 4-6 to the maximum extent practicable and (b) improves existing conditions. Standard 8: Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control A Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan must include the following information: • Narrative; • Construction Period Operation and Maintenance Plan; • Names of Persons or Entity Responsible for Plan Compliance; • Construction Period Pollution Prevention Measures; • Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan Drawings; • Detail drawings and specifications for erosion control BMPs, including sizing calculations; • Vegetation Planning; • Site Development Plan; • Construction Sequencing Plan; • Sequencing of Erosion and Sedimentation Controls; • Operation and Maintenance of Erosion and Sedimentation Controls; • Inspection Schedule; • Maintenance Schedule; • Inspection and Maintenance Log Form. ® A Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan containing the information set forth above has been included in the Stormwater Report. swcheck rev 121108.doc•04/01/08 Stormwater Report Checklist• Page 7 of 8 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection ?` Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands Program t ° Checklist for Stormwater Report Checklist (continued) Standard 8: Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control (continued) ❑ The project is highly complex and information is included in the Stormwater Report that explains why it is not possible to submit the Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan with the application. A Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control has not been included in the Stormwater Report but will be submitted before land disturbance begins. ❑ The project is not covered by a NPDES Construction General Permit. ® The project is covered by a NPDES Construction General Permit and a copy of the SWPPP is in the Stormwater Report. ❑ The project is covered by a NPDES Construction General Permit but no SWPPP been submitted. The SWPPP will be submitted BEFORE land disturbance begins. Standard 9: Operation and Maintenance Plan ® The Post Construction Operation and Maintenance Plan is included in the Stormwater Report and includes the following information: ® Name of the stormwater management system owners; ® Party responsible for operation and maintenance; ® Schedule for implementation of routine and non-routine maintenance tasks; ® Plan showing the location of all stormwater BMPs maintenance access areas; ❑ Description and delineation of public safety features; ❑ Estimated operation and maintenance budget; and ❑ Operation and Maintenance Log Form. ® The responsible party is not the owner of the parcel where the BMP is located and the Stormwater Report includes the following submissions: ® A copy of the legal instrument (deed, homeowner's association, utility trust or other legal entity) that establishes the terms of and legal responsibility for the operation and maintenance of the project site stormwater BMPs; ❑ A plan and easement deed that allows site access for the legal entity to operate and maintain BMP functions. Standard 10: Prohibition of Illicit Discharges ❑ The Long-Term Pollution Prevention Plan includes measures to prevent illicit discharges; ❑ An Illicit Discharge Compliance Statement is attached; ® NO Illicit Discharge Compliance Statement is attached but will be submitted prior to the discharge of any stormwater to post-construction BMPs. swcheck rev 121108.doc•04/01/08 Stormwater Report Checklist•Page 8 of 8 Stormwater Management Report SALEM PORT EXPANSION SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS Prepared for: City of Salem 120 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 Prepared by: Bourne Consulting Engineering 3 Bent Street Franklin, MA 02038 August 2008 Revised December 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1 Hydrologic Overview Description Section 2 Pre-Development and Post Developed Watershed Descriptions Pre-Development Watersheds Post-Developed Watersheds Section 3 Stormwater Management and Mitigation Overview Structural Best Management Practices Non-Structural Best Management Practices Section 4 Stormwater Management Standards Compliance Section 5 Alternatives Analysis Appendix A Supplemental Information Appendix B Operation and Maintenance Plan Appendix C Long Term Pollution Prevention Plan Section 1 Introduction Description The City of Salem, through the Department of Planning and Community Development, is proposing to redevelop the existing Salem Port, which is located at 10 Blaney Street. The project consists of the redevelopment of the site into a multi-use port/marina facility in an effort to reclaim Salem's seaport for a variety of commercial and recreational activities. The redevelopment of this site is intended to provide a multi-use water transportation facility to serve a variety of vessels, including the existing Salem Ferry Nathaniel Bowditch, excursion boats, water taxis, a Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) offshore supply boat, commercial fishing boats, visiting ships, and small cruise ships. The redevelopment of the site, as proposed, has undergone MEPA review and the City has been issued a MEPA certificate (#14234). The parcel, as mentioned above, is located at 10 Blaney Street and directly abuts Salem Harbor and the Dominion Power facility. The site, as it currently exists, is previously disturbed and primarily consists of gravel areas with a small portion of pavement. The site is approximately 2.21 acres and bounded by Salem Harbor to the south and the west. The site has been investigated pursuant to the Massachusetts Contingency Plan (MCP — 310 CMR 40.0000) and found to have soil contaminated with primarily lead and chromium. The likely source of the chromium contamination is a former tannery on the site. The likely source of the lead contamination is former scraping and sanding of paint on boats stored on the site. Current site conditions do not present significant risk to recreational trespassers or off-site residents. As such, the site has been closed with a Class B-2 Response Action Outcome (RAO — a B-2 RAO indicates that no remediation was conducted but an Activity and Use Limitation was implemented to manage possible risk to human health). However, some activities associated with future unrestricted use of the site pose significant risk to human health, which include growing of fruits and vegetables for human consumption, and excavation within contaminated soils. An Activity and Use Limitation (AUL) has been implemented. The below activities are presented in the Notice of Activity and Use Limitation (See attached AUL): The activities and uses which are inconsistent with the objectives of this Notice of Activity Use Limitation, and which, if implemented at the Portion of the Property, may result in a significant risk of harm to health, safety, public welfare or the environment or in a substantial hazard, are as follows: (i) Use of the Portion of the Property as a residence, school, nursery, or daycare facility; (ii) Planting, cultivating, and/or harvesting of vegetables, fruits, and other edible produce; (iii)Excavation that is not conducted in accordance with Obligation (i) in Section 3 of this AUL Opinion; (iv) Excavation that will disturb soil located deeper than three (3) feet below surface grade not conducted in accordance with a Soil Management Plan and Health and Safety Plan prepared and implemented with the Obligations (ii) and (iii) in Section 3 of the AUL Opinion. Salem Harbor, as detailed in the Surface Water Quality Standards - 310 CMR 4.00, has been identified as a shellfish growing area and therefore classifies the site as discharging to a Critical Area as defined in Standard 6 of the Stormwater Management Standards. A USGS locus plan showing the location of the proposed development has been included as Figure 1. Additionally, a drawing showing the existing conditions at the site has been included with the Notice of Intent application submittal. The proposed development of the site would consist of a new terminal building, piers, a harbor walk pier, paved parking areas, floating gangways, landscaped features, as well as improvements to Derby and Blaney Street. Access to the site will be from the Blaney Street with the secondary access to the site from White Street being discontinued. Other improvements to the site would include providing new utility infrastructure for potable water supply and sanitary sewage disposal via the municipal distribution/collection systems and a new stormwater management system, which presently does not exist on this site. A drawing portraying the proposed condition of the site has been included with the Notice of Intent application submittal. The Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) mapping for this area indicates the entire site to be within an Urban Land Complex. This soil is classified as an area that has been excavated, filled, or is man-made land. In the case of the Salem Port, it is evident that the site was created using offsite material based on the configuration of the coastal land in this area. Stormwater management for the Salem Port project will jro Expansion p p be addressed within the site boundaries. The stormwater runoff generated from the project will be routed through a series of structural Best Management Practices (BMPs) to address water quality and total suspended solids removal. Since the site directly abuts Salem Harbor and is subject to storm flowage in accordance with 310 CMR 4.00, the City of Salem is seeking a waiver from Standard 2 as allowed by the Stormwater Management Standards. In addition, the proposed development meets the definition of a marina per Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) 7999, therefore, the Stormwater Management Standards apply to maximum extent practicable in accordance with 310 CMR 10.04. Section 2 Pre-Development and Post Developed Watershed Descriptions Pre-Development Watersheds In the present condition, the site is comprised of two (2) major watershed areas as shown on the existing conditions plan included with the Notice of Intent application. The watershed designations and corresponding discharge point for the pre-development watersheds are as follows: Watershed E1 Watershed E1 generally encompasses the northwestern portion of the parcel and consists of approximately 1.16 acres. Runoff from this portion of the site drains in a southwest to southeasterly direction and ultimately discharges to the Salem Harbor along the westernmost edge of the Harbor that abuts the site. Watershed E2 Watershed E2 generally encompasses the southeastern portion of the parcel and consists of approximately 1.07 acres. Runoff from this portion of the site drains in a southeasterly direction and ultimately discharges to the Salem Harbor along the easternmost edge of the site that abuts the Harbor. Post-Developed Watersheds In the developed condition, the site is comprised of seven major watershed areas as shown on the proposed conditions plan included with the Notice of Intent application. The watershed designations and stormwater management system for the post- development watersheds are as follows: Watershed P1 Watershed P1 represents the northwestern most portion of pre-development watershed E1 and consists of approximately 0.57 acres. Watershed P1 includes the portion of the site that has been identified to contain a chromium hot spot. Watershed P1, currently existing as a gravel parking area, will be paved and provided with a stormwater management system utilizing deep sump catch basins, a proprietary separator and oil/water separator. After the stormwater runoff has been directed through these series of BMPs, the treated runoff would be discharged to Salem Harbor. Stormwater structures will be placed so as to avoid the identified hot spot to best extent practicable. The paving of this area should eliminate the infiltration of precipitation to the chromium hot spot, therefore minimizing migration/leaching affects of the chromium into the adjacent environmental receptors as a result of infiltration/recharge. Watershed P2 Watershed P2 represents the area associated with the entrance of the site and consists of approximately 0.30 acres. Watershed P2 includes the new paved access drive and parking areas as well as landscaped areas. Runoff from this portion of the site drains to a catch basin, which directs the runoff to a proprietary separator, and an oil/water separator. After the stormwater runoff has been directed through these series of BMPs, the treated runoff would be discharged to Salem Harbor. Watershed P3 Watershed P3 represents the central portion of the site and consists of approximately 0.55 acres. Watershed P3 includes the new paved access drives and parking areas as well as landscaped areas. Runoff from this portion of the site drains to a catch basin, which directs the runoff to a proprietary separator, and an oil/water separator. After the stormwater runoff has been directed through these series of BMPs, the treated runoff would be discharged to Salem Harbor. Watershed P4 Watershed P4 represents the northeastern most section of the roundabout travel way and consists of approximately 0.50 acres. Watershed P4 includes the new paved access drive and parking areas as well as landscaped areas. Runoff from this portion of the development drains to a catch basin, which directs the runoff to a proprietary separator, and an oil/water separator. After the stormwater runoff has been directed through these series of BMPs, the treated runoff would be discharged to Salem Harbor. Watershed P5 Watershed P5 represents the southwestern most section of the roundabout travel way and consists of approximately 0.22 acres. Watershed P5 includes the new paved access drive and parking areas as well as landscaped areas. Runoff from this portion of the development drains to a catch basin which directs the runoff to aro rietar P P Y separator, and an oil/water separator. After the stormwater runoff has been directed through these series of BMPs, the treated runoff would be discharged to Salem Harbor. Watershed P6 Watershed P6 represents the southwestern most section of the site and consists of approximately 0.12 acres. Watershed #6 includes the new paved surface and parking areas within this watershed and landscaped areas. Runoff from this portion of the development drains to a catch basin, which directs the runoff to a proprietary separator, and an oil/water separator. After the stormwater runoff has been directed through these series of BMPs, the treated runoff would be discharged to Salem Harbor. Watershed P7 Watershed P7 represents the area of the new concrete pier and consists of approximately 0.51 acres. Runoff from this portion of the development drains to trench drains, which direct the runoff to a proprietary separator, and an oil/water separator. After the stormwater runoff has been directed through these series of BMPs, the treated runoff would be discharged to Salem Harbor. It should be noted that the roof runoff from the new terminal building will be directly discharged to Salem Harbor, since rainfall to this portion of the site under existing condition would be directed directly to the ocean and is considered clean by the Stormwater Handbook. Section 3 Stormwater Management and Mitigation Overview The proposed stormwater management system incorporates a number of Best Management Practices (BMPs), as prescribed in the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Stormwater Management Handbook. These practices include structural and non-structural measures for providing stormwater quality management. These BMPs function to minimize potential adverse water quality impacts to the surrounding ecosystem. The following sections describe the stormwater BMPs proposed for the site development. As presented in the Notice of Activity and Use Limitation (please see attached): The activities and uses which are inconsistent with the objectives of this Notice of Activity Use Limitation, and which, if implemented at the Portion of the Property, may result in a significant risk of harm to health, safety, public welfare or the environment or in a substantial hazard, are as follows: (v) Use of the Portion of the Property as a residence, school, nursery, or daycare facility; (vi)Planting, cultivating, and/or harvesting of vegetables, fruits, and other edible produce; (vii) Excavation that is not conducted in accordance with Obligation (i) in Section 3 of this AUL Opinion; (viii) Excavation that will disturb soil located deeper than three (3) feet below surface grade not conducted in accordance with a Soil Management Plan and Health and Safety Plan prepared and implemented with the Obligations (ii) and (iii) in Section 3 of the AUL Opinion. To remain in compliance with the existing AUL, a HASP will be included in the final design of the project and no dewatering or removal of materials from the site will occur. As proposed, the site, currently consisting of gravel areas that allow infiltration of precipitation to the ground, will be completely covered with impervious pavement so that all stormwater runoff will be captured, treated, and discharged to Salem Harbor.- The installation of impervious pavement will essentially "cap" the site, thereby eliminating/reducing the ability of chromium and lead transport into the adjacent environmental receptors via groundwater movement as a result of infiltration. Lastly, the project specifications will include provisions that require the contractor to plan their work around tidal conditions in order to avoid dewatering. The proposed stormwater management plan has been developed based on the projected site conditions and the present condition of the water resource areas that receive stormwater runoff from the site. The proposed BMPs have been designed to comply with the Stormwater Management Handbook to the greatest extent practicable. The proposed paved areas are the primary target area for water quality control measures for the project. Runoff from the paved areas is first captured in deep sump catch basins and directed to proprietary separators. The stormwater is then conveyed to an oil/water separator and ultimately discharged to Salem Harbor. The predicted Total Suspended Solids (TSS) Removal for these areas are located in Appendix A. As the calculations show in Appendix A, the stormwater management system provides adequate suspended solids removal to mitigate runoff from the paved areas of the project site. As noted previously, due to presence of chromium and lead on the site, the inclusion of an infiltration BMP to address water quality volume requirements is not practicable and would most likely result in adverse impacts to environmental receptors. Subsequently as a result of not being capable of providing an infiltration BMP on the site, the ability to meet the water quality volume requirements of Standards #4, #5, and #6 cannot be achieved. However, through proper maintenance of the BMPs along with the implementation of the Long Term Pollution Prevention Plan, the objectives of the water quality volume requirement should be met. Structural Best Management Practices Hooded Catch Basins with Deer) Sumps Stormwater from theaved areas will be collected in N a closed conduit plying system fitted with 4-foot deep sump catch basins with hooded outlets. Catch basin sump systems are effective devices for removal of large matter and pollutants that adsorb to sediments and other particulates. Catch basins with sumps and hooded outlets are designed to trap sediment particles and floating contaminants (e.g., oil and greases), that are typically the most significant constituents of the urban runoff pollutant .load. Deep sump catch basins are suitable for use as a pretreatment BMP with stormwater management systems that discharge to a critical area. Regular maintenance and cleaning of catch basins is required to assure adequate performance of these structures. Proprietary Separators Proprietary separators will be used as part of the stormwater management system following the deep sump catch basin BMP. Proprietary separators utilize a vortex/swirling action via gravity to remove floatables and coarse solids from the stormwater runoff. Proprietary separators are suitable for use as a pretreatment BMP with stormwater management systems that discharge to a critical area and also act as a spill control device. The proprietary separators proposed for this site are Stormceptors as manufactured by Rinker Materials, which has been evaluated under the Massachusetts Strategic Envirotechnology Partnership (STEP) program. The Stormceptors for the site were designed based on Rinker Materials PCSMWW program for fine particle removal, which indicate TSS removal efficiencies between 81% and 84%. For the purpose of calculating the TSS removal objective of Standard 4, a removal efficiency of 65% was used based on Table 1 of the STEP report. Oil/Water Separators Oil/Water separators will be implemented with the stormwater management system for after the proprietary separators for new impervious surfaces. The oil/water separator provides velocity dissipation and a settling zone to capture water borne sediment and floating oils not retained in the deep sump catch basins and proprietary separators. Oil/water separators are suitable for use as a pretreatment BMP with stormwater management systems that discharge to a critical area and also act as a spill control device. Non-Structural Best Management Practices Stormwater Management System Maintenance Program All structural components of the stormwater management system will be inspected and maintained on a regular basis in accordance with the minimum requirements of the Stormwater Management Regulation. A detailed Stormwater Management System maintenance plan is appended to this report. Street Sweeping Street sweeping is an effective way reducing sediment and pollutants from entering the stormwater management system. The frequency of street sweeping is detailed in the operation and maintenance plan. Section 4 Stormwater Management Standards Compliance The Massachusetts Stormwater Management Handbooks, Volumes 1, 2 and 3 (February 2008), have been used as the primary guidance for the selection and design of permanent non-structural and structural BMPs for the long-term protection of existing water resources. The Stormwater Management Plan developed for this project incorporates water quality controls that will protect surface and groundwater resources, coastal area and adjacent properties from potential impacts due to increased impervious areas on the site. The stormwater performance standards developed by the MassDEP and a brief discussion on how the proposed project will achieve the standards are provided as follows: Standard 1. No new stormwater conveyances may discharge untreated stormwater directly to, or cause erosion in wetlands or waters of the Commonwealth. No proposed site stormwater conveyance system will discharge untreated stormwater runoff directly to coastal areas. Stormwater runoff from paved surfaces will be collected and treated by a combination of closed conduit pipe system consisting of a series of structural BMPs including deep sump/hooded catch basins, proprietary separators, and oil/water separators. The point of discharge from the stormwater management system will be directly to Salem Harbor, therefore eliminating erosion. Standard 2. Stormwater management systems shall be designed so that post- development peak discharge rates do not exceed pre-development peak discharge rates. This Standard may be waived for discharges to land subject to coastal storm flowage as defined in 310 CMR 10.04. The City of Salem is seeking a waiver from Standard 2 in accordance with 310 CMR 10.04 and as allowed under the Stormwater Management Standards since the site is subject to coastal storm flowage. Standard 3. Loss of annual recharge to groundwater shall be eliminated or minimized through the use of infiltration measures including environmentally sensitive site design, low impact development techniques, stormwater best management practices, and good operation and maintenance. At a minimum, the annual recharge from the post-development site shall approximate the annual recharge from pre-development conditions based on soil type. This Standard is met when the stormwater management system is designed to infiltrate the required recharge volume as determined in accordance with the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook. As detailed in the Stormwater Management Standards, sites within an existing AUL are subject to Standard #3 to the greatest extent practicable, while marinas and boatyards are subject to the Stormwater Management Standards to the greatest extent practicable. Due to site constraints associated with 1) the existing chromium and lead contamination prohibiting infiltration to the ground on the site 2) fluctuations in groundwater of the site due to the influence of the ocean would require significant filling of the site and impacts to adjacent coastal areas to provide an infiltration BMP and 3) the site being characterized as an Urban Land Complex (filled land), providing a recharge / infiltration system on the site is not practical and would most likely result in adverse affects to the environment. An alternatives analysis regarding the inability to meet this Standard has been included as Section 5. As part of the overall proposed site design, environmentally sensitive site design and low impact development techniques were used to the greatest extent practicable. However due to the configuration of the site boundaries, its proximity to Salem Harbor, site access locations and the need to maintain their existing elevations, and the parking requirements associated site's intended use, the implementation of these design techniques were limited. The majority of the site will be covered with new paved surfaces in order to limit the infiltration of stormwater to the contaminated soils underneath the site, thereby reducing the likelihood of contaminant transport via groundwater recharge. In addition, due to the site discharging to a Critical Area, the use of porous pavement and rain gardens would not be considered as a suitable BMP according to the Stormwater Handbook. The proposed improvements to the site include multiple landscaped areas which do not exist in the present site condition and multi- level treatment for stormwater runoff on site. Standard 4. Stormwater management systems shall be designed to remove 80% of the average annual post-construction load of Total Suspended Solids (TSS). This Standard is met when: a. Suitable practices for source control and pollution prevention are identified in a long-term pollution prevention plan, and thereafter are implemented and maintained; b. Structural stormwater best management practices are sized to capture the required water quality volume determined in accordance with the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook; and c. Pretreatment is provided in accordance with the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook. The 80 percent TSS removal rate would be achieved with the implementation structural BMPs, which include deep sump/hooded catch basins, proprietary separators, and oil/water separators. As detailed in this report, providing an infiltration BMP to address recharge requirements of Standard #3 is not practicable due to chromium and lead contamination on the site as well as seasonal high groundwater and soil suitability considerations. Subsequently as a result of not being capable of providing an infiltration BMP on the site, the ability to meet the water quality volume requirement of Standard #4 is impractical. An alternatives analysis regarding the inability to meet the water quality volume requirement of Standard #4 has been included as Section 5. It should be noted that the TSS removal calculation for the new concrete pier could not meet 80% removal requirements since it would not be possible to install deep sump structures on the pier. Detailed TSS removal calculations are located in Appendix A. The Long Term Pollution Prevention Plan to be implemented by the City of Salem has been included in Appendix C. Standard 5. For land uses with higher potential pollutant loads, source control and pollution prevention shall be implemented in accordance with the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook to eliminate or reduce the discharge of stormwater runoff from such land uses to the maximum extent practicable. If through source control and/or pollution prevention all land uses with higher potential pollutant loads cannot be completely protected from exposure to rain, snow, snow melt, and stormwater runoff, the proponent shall use the specific structural stormwater BMPs determined by the Department to be suitable for such uses as provided in the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook. Stormwater discharges from land uses with higher potential pollutant loads shall also comply with the requirements of the Massachusetts Clean Waters Act, M.G.L. c. 21, §§ 26-53 and the regulations promulgated thereunder at 314 CMR 3.00, 314 CMR 4.00 and 314 CMR 5.00. The proposed project would be considered a high intensity use with higher potential pollutant loads. In order to address Standard 5, BMPs have been selected based on Volume 2 of the Stormwater Handbook, which include deep sump catch basins, proprietary separators, and oil/water separators. As detailed in this report, providing an infiltration BMP to address recharge requirements of Standard #3 is not practicable due to chromium and lead contamination on the site as well as seasonal high groundwater and soil suitability considerations. Subsequently as a result of not being capable of providing an infiltration BMP on the site, the ability to meet the water quality volume requirement of Standard #5 is impractical. An alternatives analysis regarding the inability to meet the water quality volume requirement of Standard #5 has been included as Section 5. Additionally, a Long Term Pollution Prevention Plan addressing measures to be taken to limit pollutant loads has been prepared and is included in Appendix C. Standard 6. Stormwater discharges within the Zone II or Interim Wellhead Protection Area of a public water supply, and stormwater discharges near or to any other critical area, require the use of the specific source control and pollution prevention measures and the specific structural stormwater best management practices determined by the Department to be suitable for managing discharges to such areas, as provided in the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook. A discharge is near a critical area if there is a strong likelihood of a significant impact occurring to said area, taking into account site-specific factors. Stormwater discharges to Outstanding Resource Waters and Special Resource Waters shall be removed and set back from the receiving water or wetland and receive the highest and best practical method of treatment. A "storm water discharge" as defined in 314 CMR 3.04(2)(a)1" or (b) to an Outstanding Resource Water or Special Resource Water shall comply with 314 CMR 3.00 and 314 CMR 4.00. Stormwater discharges to a Zone I or Zone A are prohibited unless essential to the operation of a public water supply. The project would discharge stormwater to a Critical Area (shellfish growing). The stormwater management system has been designed to provide 80% TSS removal for paved surfaces. The BMPs have been selected based on Volume 2 of the Stormwater Handbook, which include deep sump catch basins, proprietary separators, and oil/water separators. As detailed in this report, providing an infiltration BMP to address recharge requirements of Standard #3 is not practicable due to chromium and lead contamination on the site as well as seasonal high groundwater and soil suitability considerations. Subsequently as a result of not being capable of providing an infiltration BMP on the site, the ability to meet the water quality volume requirements of Standard #6 is impractical. An alternatives analysis regarding the inability to meet the water quality volume requirement of Standard #6 has been included as Section 5. Standard 7. A redevelopment project is required to meet the following Stormwater Management Standards only to the maximum extent practicable: Standard 2, Standard 3, and the pretreatment and structural best management practice requirements of Standards 4, 5, and 6. Existing stormwater discharges shall comply with Standard 1 only to the maximum extent practicable. A redevelopment project shall also comply with all other requirements of the Stormwater Management Standards and improve existing conditions. The project, while considered in the context to be a redevelopment, only a small portion of the site would be considered a redevelopment project in accordance with the definition in the Stormwater Management Standards due to the increase in impervious area. Standard 8. A plan to control construction-related impacts including erosion, sedimentation and other pollutant sources during construction and land disturbance activities (construction period erosion, sedimentation, and pollution prevention plan) shall be developed and implemented. The proposed project will incorporate erosion and sedimentation controls to minimize the potential for sedimentation in down gradient resources. These controls will include hay bales/silt fence barriers. A detailed erosion control plan is submitted in the operation and maintenance plan attached to the report. Additionally, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan has been prepared for this project to comply with the EPA NPDES Construction General Permit program. Inaddition, the proponent will not be seeking a Form BRP WM 10 — Request for General Permit Coverage, Construction Site Dewatering from MassDEP as there is no proposed dewatering of soils on site and no removal of soil from the site. However, pursuant to the MCP (310 CMR 40.0441) a Remedial Action Measure (RAM) plan will be submitted to the MADEP by a Licensed Site Professional prior to commencement of construction of the utilities and pavement on the site. A Soil and Groundwater Management Plan will also be submitted during the final design of the project before construction activities begin. Standard 9. A long-term operation and maintenance plan shall be developed and implemented to ensure that stormwater management systems function as designed. The Stormwater Management Plan for this project has been developed in compliance with the MassDEP Stormwater Management Standards. The Plan is based on a multi- dimensional approach to stormwater management that recognizes the need for proper site planning, source control of potential contaminants, and implementation of structural and non-structural treatment methods to ensure the protection of water resources in the vicinity of the site and adjacent properties. The Stormwater Operation and Maintenance Plan is attached to this report as Appendix B. Standard 10. All illicit discharges to the stormwater management system are prohibited. An illicit discharge certification statement will be submitted at a later date prior to obtaining a certificate of compliance. L Section 5 Alternatives Analysis — Standard 3 In accordance with the Stormwater Management Standards-Standard 3, a stormwater management system for a site/project must provide recharge equal to the pre-existing condition so that no loss of annual recharge does occur. Specifically, the required amount of recharge for a site shall approximate the annual recharge from the pre- development conditions based on soil type. This Standard is typically met by providing sufficient volume in an infiltration BMP, which is sized using a specific rainfall depth based on the site's soil type(s), over the entire impervious area. Similarly, the inclusion of an infiltration BMP, while typically designated to address Standard #3, also addresses the water quality volume requirement associated with Standards #4, #5 and #6. In accordance with the Stormwater Handbook, there are minimum design standards that must be met in order to properly use an infiltration BMP for its intended purpose. These design standards include maintaining at least 2 feet of separation from seasonal high groundwater and having a minimum soil infiltration rate of 0.17 inches/hour. As mentioned in previous Sections, the site directly abuts Salem Harbor, Dominion Power facility, White Street and Derby Street. The site, due to its location, is subject to daily groundwater fluctuations associated with tidal action of the ocean that range from 0 feet Mean Sea Level (MSL) to 13 feet MSL for spring high tide level. Additionally, the site has been investigated pursuant to the Massachusetts Contingency Plan (MCP — 310 CMR 40.0000) and found to have soil contaminated with primarily lead and chromium. As such, the site has been closed with a Class B-2 Response Action Outcome (RAO — a B-2 RAO means that no remediation was conducted but an Activity and Use Limitation was implemented to manage possible risk to human health), which limits infiltration activities within the site. Lastly, the site, classified by NRCS as an Urban Land Complex, was created by filling the site with imported rock and soil material. As such, an Urban Land Complex does not fall within a Hydrologic Group. Based on the site having a seasonal high groundwater elevation of 13 feet MSL (based on spring high tide), the corresponding minimum finish grade for the site would be approximately 18.5 feet MSL in order to provide the necessary BMPs and a gravity based stormwater management system. Due to site constraints associated with the configuration of the site boundaries, the limited ability to raise grades along the boundaries of the site, and the relation of a raised site to the deck and pier maximum allowable elevation to service the boats based on fluctuating water levels, the implementation of an infiltration BMP for this site is not practical. More importantly, due to the site having been found with significant areas of chromium and lead contamination, providing an infiltration BMP would most likely result in the transport of contaminants via groundwater to sensitive environmental receptors as a result of direct infiltration of stormwater runoff within the site boundaries. Therefore, as permitted by the Stormwater Management Standards for sites classified as AULs as well as for provisions under the Standards that apply to marinas and boatyards, it is not practical to meet Standard #3 since the inclusion of an infiltration BMP would result in a significant alteration to the site and the potential transport of contaminants off site and to sensitive environmental receptors. Subsequently as a result of not being capable of providing an infiltration BMP on the site, the ability to meet the water quality volume requirements of Standards #4, #5, and #6 is impractical. In support of not providing a dedicated infiltration BMP with the Stormwater Management System or any additional recharge structures to address Standard #3 and the water quality volume requirement of Standards #4, #5, and #6 based on the site constraints, we offer the following: • The site is under an AUL restriction which limits the practicability of groundwater recharge. As a result, it is not practicable to provide an infiltration BMP due to risk of off site contamination. All stormwater runoff will be captured, treated, and discharged to Salem Harbor. As such, the infiltration of stormwater to the contaminated soils underneath the site will be limited, thereby reducing the likelihood of contaminant transport via groundwater recharge. • As a result of not being capable of providing an infiltration BMP on the site, the ability to meet the water quality volume requirements of Standards #4, #5, and #6 is impractical. • An infiltration BMP would most likely provide no benefit for groundwater recharge for this site as the groundwater is influenced by the daily fluctuations associated with the tidal variations of the ocean. Additionally, due to the magnitude of the water body that influences groundwater on this site, the direct discharge of any runoff to the ocean should provide in no loss in annual recharge. • Stormwater from the site would be directly discharged to the ocean, which due to the proximity of the site to the ocean and the ocean's groundwater replenishment affects, would in essence provide the same recharge benefit. • The groundwater at the site has a high salinity content and would not be suitable as potable water with out significant treatment, therefore, replenishment of the aquifer to the ground would not be critical from a water supply aspect. • The Stormwater Management Handbook generally prohibits the use of low impact development infiltration BMPs (porous pavement, rain gardens, etc.) due to a discharge to a Critical Area, thereby eliminating the use of at finished grade BMPs to provide the required separation from seasonal high groundwater to the infiltration BMP. • The impacts associated with site grading and the associated filling of the coastal bank to accomplish Standard 3 may outweigh the benefits from recharge when considering the location and groundwater conditions of the site. • The site is the result of imported fill materials (Urban Land Complex), which typically is not conducive to infiltration. • Through proper maintenance and implementation of the Long Term Pollution Prevention Plan, the objectives of the water quality volume requirement of Standards #4, #5, and #6 should be met. APPENDIX A SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION m TSS Removal Calculation Salem Port Expansion Salem, Massachusetts Watershed P2-P3 BMP Removal Rate (%) TSS Load Remaining TSS Load Removed(%) Catch Basin 25 0.75 25 Proprietary Unit 65 0.26 74 Oil/Water Separator 25 0.20 80 Total Removal 80 Watershed P4-P6 BMP Removal Rate`(%) TSS Load Remaining TSS Load Removed (%) Catch Basin 25 0.75 25 Proprietary Unit 65 0.26 74 Oil/Water Separator 25 0.20 80 Total Removal 80 Watershed P7 BMP Removal Rate (%) TSS Load Remaining TSS Load Removed (%) Proprietary Unit 65 0.35 65 Oil/Water Separator 25 0.26 74 Total Removal 74 APPENDIX B OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PLAN OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PLAN SALEM PORT EXPANSION SALEM, MA INTRODUCTION The City of Salem, through the Department of Planning and Community Development, is proposing to redevelop the existing Salem Port, which is located at 10 Blaney Street. The property is owned by Dominion Energy Salem Harbor, LLC and is currently under a lease agreement with the City. The City of Salem will be responsible for all operation and maintenance at the site. The project consists of the redevelopment of the site into a multi- use port/marina facility in an effort to reclaim Salem's seaport for a variety of commercial and recreational activities. The redevelopment of this site is intended to provide a multi- use water transportation facility to serve a variety of vessels, including the existing Salem Ferry Nathaniel Bowditch, excursion boats, water taxis, a Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) offshore supply boat, commercial fishing boats, visiting ships, and small cruise ships. The redevelopment of the site, as proposed, has undergone MEPA review and the City has been issued a MEPA certificate (#14234). The parcel, as mentioned above, is located at 10 Blaney Street and directly abuts Salem Harbor and the Dominion Power facility. The site, as it currently exists, has been previously disturbed and primarily consists of gravel parking areas with a small portion of pavement. The site has been investigated pursuant to the Massachusetts Contingency Plan (MCP — 310 CMR 40.0000)and found to have soil contaminated with primarily lead and chromium. The likely source of the chromium contamination is a former tannery on the site. The likely source of the lead contamination is former scraping and sanding of paint on boats stored on the site. Current site conditions do not present significant risk to recreational trespassers or off-site residents. As such, the site has been closed with a Class B-2 Response Action Outcome (RAO —a B-2 RAO means that no remediation was conducted but an Activity and Use Limitation (AUL) was implemented to manage possible risk to human health). The site is approximately 2.21 acres and bounded by Salem Harbor to the south and the west. Salem Harbor, as detailed in the Surface Water Quality Standards - 310 CMR 4.00, has been identified as an shellfish growing area and therefore classifies the site as discharging to a Critical Area as defined by Standard 6 of the Stormwater Management Standards. The proposed development of the site would consist of a new terminal building, piers, harborwalk pier, paved parking areas, floating gangways, landscaped features, as well as improvements to Derby and Blaney Street. Access to the site will be from the Blaney Operation and Maintenance Plan August 2008 Salem Port Expansion, Salem, MA Revised December 2008 Street with access to the site from White Street being discontinued. Other improvements to the site would include providing new utility infrastructure for potable water supply and sanitary sewage disposal via the municipal distribution/collection systems and will also include a stormwater management system, which presently does not exist on this site. INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE A Remedial Action Measure (RAM) plan will be submitted to the MassDEP by a Licensed Site Professional prior to commencement of construction of the utilities and pavement on the site. The Contractor shall prepare a schedule for inspection and maintenance of the erosion control measures. This schedule shall establish, at a minimum, the weekly inspections of the sedimentation controls, stockpiles, catch basins, unstabilized areas within the site and a report of any required maintenance. The schedule will also appoint an individual who will be responsible for performing the weekly inspections. During the weekly inspection, and at any time during the course of construction, the Engineer, the Conservation Commission Agent, the City or the individual responsible for the erosion control measures may direct the Contractor to take immediate action to correct a deficiency or to increase the erosion control measures. SILTATION CONTROLS The first phase of construction will consist of the placement of siltation controls in accordance with the details and at the locations indicated on the drawings. No further construction activity will take place until the siltation controls are inspected and approved. No encroachment or alteration shall occur beyond the erosion control barriers. Erosion control barriers shall be maintained and replaced, if necessary, throughout the course of construction. SITE CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS Prior to construction, the proposed location of material stockpiles shall be shown on a plan and shall be approved by the Engineer. Stockpiles that are to remain for more than twenty one (21) days shall be shaped and secured by siltation controls around the downstream perimeter and shall be stabilized by temporary seeding or netting. The site grading operation shall then commence. The access drive and parking areas shall be graded to subgrade with the excess soil stockpiled in the designated areas and the utilities installed. The requirement that ALL site workers who might reasonably be expected to come into dermal contact, inhale soil particulates, or ingest soil, must be currently certified to OSHA 40-hour HAZWOPER standards included in the Health and Safety Plan (HASP). The HASP will be submitted by a Licensed Site Professional prior to the beginning of any construction activities. During the construction of the stormwater management system, care must be taken to prevent siltation from entering the stormwater management system. The Soil and Operation and Maintenance Plan August 2008 Salem Port Expansion, Salem, MA Revised December 2008 Groundwater Management Plan (SGMP) will have a requirement that soil stockpiles must be covered at the end of each day to prevent mobilization of soil particles by wind or precipitation. This will also avoid presenting an attractive nuisance for local children, although the site will be closed to the public during construction. Drainage pipes in open excavations must be covered nightly. Hay bales shall be staked around the catch basins and/or a woven geotexile material inserts shall be placed in the catch basins until the binder course has been installed. The silt and sand, which may accumulate around the catch basins, shall be removed after every rainstorm. Catch basins shall be set to binder grade until immediately prior to placement of the top course, at which time they shall be set at final grade. The stormwater management system shall be cleaned after construction has been completed. All areas shall be stabilized within sixty (60)days of disturbance. When weather conditions do not permit stabilization by seeding, hay mulch, straw mats, jute netting or other approved means shall be used for temporary stabilization. Operation and Maintenance Plan August 2008 Salem Port Expansion, Salem, MA Revised December 2008 ACCESS DRIVE AND PARKING LOT CONSTRUCTION The access drive and parking lot construction shall commence after the erosion controls have been inspected and accepted by the Engineer and the Conservation Commission. Soil within the limits of work shall be excavated and stockpiled in designated areas to be approved by the Engineer. These stockpiles are to be stabilized with temporary screening. The access drive and parking areas shall then be graded to subgrade and the utilities installed. The surplus excavated material shall be stockpiled on the site and stabilized. The gravel for paved areas' base shall be brought to the site, spread and compacted to a minimum depth of 12 inches within the finished grade; the bituminous base/binder course shall then be placed. Note that the catch basin grates shall be flush with the base/binder course. The catch basins shall be adjusted to finish grade and the bituminous top course placed after the work associated with the project is complete. The erosion controls shall remain in place and be maintained until the site is stabilized and/or the Conservation Commission permits the removal of the erosion controls. TERMINAL BUILDING AND PIER CONSTRUCTION Prior to the commencement of the site work, erosion controls shall be installed along the downhill perimeter of the work and approved by the Engineer and the Conservation Commission. The soil in this area shall then be excavated within the area of work, stockpiled and stabilized. The erosion controls shall remain in place and be maintained until the site is stabilized and the Conservation Commission permits the removal of the erosion controls. ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS The Contractor shall employ measures to control dust during construction. All debris shall be properly contained and legally disposed of. Derby Street/Blaney Street at the project site entrance shall be swept clean of any soils tracked onto the pavement from vehicles exiting the site. A supply of hay bales and siltation fence shall be kept on the site to provide for additional siltation control, as may be required. Any construction equipment observed leaking or dripping oil shall be removed from the site. No construction equipment shall be re-fueled within 100 feet of the coastal bank. These requirements are intended to be a minimum set of guidelines. The Contractor shall be responsible for their implementation. Should additional controls be required, the Contractor shall take whatever steps are necessary at no additional expense to the Owner. CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE 1. Secure perimeter erosion control/sedimentation barriers. 2. Provide spill prevention kit onsite (See SPPP). 3. All Construction activities will be conducted in conformance with the HASP and RAM plans submitted prior to construction beginning on site. Operation and Maintenance Plan August 2008 Salem Port Expansion, Salem, MA Revised December 2008 3. The construction area will then be cleared with the topsoil stockpiled on i p site. Site excavation and grading work shall then commence. p 4. The site utility work is to commence after the access drive and parking areas have been rough graded to sub-grade. 5. Construct stormwater BMPs. BMPs shall be completed prior to paving. 6. Additional siltation fence or hay bales shall be added as construction proceeds where required to control erosion. Sedimentation controls shall be installed along the downhill side of all soil stockpiles. 7. Catch basins shall have either staked haybales placed around the grate or have a geotextile insert installed until the access drive and parking areas are paved. 8. The pavement subgrade shall then be graded, and the gravel and the bituminous base/binder course placed. This shall be completed as soon as practical after the site clearing. 9. All disturbed areas to be vegetated, not already stabilized, shall then be spread with the required a minimum of 6 inches of topsoil and seeded. 10.Proceed with construction of Terminal Building and Piers. 11.Any sediment that has accumulated in the stormwater management system BMPs shall be removed and the disturbed areas reseeded. All drainage structures shall be cleaned. 12.The siltation controls shall be removed after the site has stabilized and the Conservation Commission grants permission. 13.Prior to the Terminal Building construction, erosion controls shall be installed along the downhill perimeter of work. The erosion controls shall remain in place and be maintained until the site has been stabilized and permission has been given to remove the erosion controls. MAINTENANCE SCHEDULE FOR BMPs As the lessee of this property, the City of Salem shall be responsible for following all established maintenance practices listed below: 1. Catch basins, proprietary separators, and oil/water separators are to be inspected on a quarterly basis. Catch basins, proprietary separators, and oil/water separators shalt be cleaned out when more than one-quarter full of sediment. Inspect and clean as necessary after intense rainfall and as soon as practical upon completion of winter SOperation and Maintenance Plan August 2008 alem Port Expansion, Salem, MA Revised December 2008 sanding activities. All sediments and hydrocarbons should be properly handled and disposed of in accordance with local, state and federal guidelines and regulations. 2. Sweep the bituminous access drive and parking areas four times annually. The first time shall be upon completion of the winter sanding season, the second time shall be during the early spring, the third time during the summer and the fourth time upon completion of the fall foliage season. 3. An annual report outlining the maintenance activities that were completed the previous year will be prepared for the Conservation Commission and submitted by December 31 of every year. A copy of this report will also be submitted to the property owner, Dominion Energy Salem Harbor, LLC. APPENDIX C LONG TERM POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN LONG TERM POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN SALEM PORT EXPANSION SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS INTRODUCTION Salem Port is located adjacent to a shellfish growing area, which is considered a Critical Area in accordance with the Stormwater Management Standards. As such, the control of pollutants discharged from the site is critical to ensure protection of the surrounding ecosystem. In an effort to address these concerns, the implementation and development of suitable practices for source control and pollution prevention is required. The following sections provide mitigation measures and identify target areas for the implementation of a Long Term Pollution Prevention Plan (LTPPP). The owner of the site is Dominion Energy Salem Harbor, LLC. All mitigation measures are to be implemented by the City of Salem, lessee for this site. This LTPPP should be used in conjunction with the Operation and Maintenance Plan prepared for this site. The site has been investigated pursuant to the Massachusetts Contingency Plan (MCP — 310 CMR 40.0000) and found to have soil contaminated with primarily lead and chromium. The likely source of the chromium contamination is a former tannery on the site. The likely source of the lead contamination is former scraping and sanding of paint on boats stored on the site. Current site conditions do not present significant risk to recreational trespassers or off-site residents. As such, the site has been closed with a Class B-2 Response Action Outcome (RAO — a B-2 RAO means that no remediation was conducted but an Activity and Use Limitation (AUL) was implemented to manage possible risk to human health). As presented in the Notice of Activity and Use Limitation (please see attached): The activities and uses which are inconsistent with the objectives of this Notice of Activity Use Limitation, and which, if implemented at the Portion of the Property, may result in a significant risk of harm to health, safety,public welfare or the environment or in a substantial hazard, are as follows: (i) Use of the Portion of the Property as a residence, school, nursery, or daycare facility,: (ii) Planting, cultivating, and/or harvesting of vegetables,fruits, and other edible produce; (iii)Excavation that is not conducted in accordance with Obligation (i) in Section 3 of this AUL Opinion; l Long Term Pollution Prevention Plan August 2008 Salem Port Expansion, Salem, MA Page 2 Revised December 2008 (iv) Excavation that will disturb soil located deeper than three (3)feet below surface grade not conducted in accordance with a Soil Management Plan and Health and Safety Plan prepared and implemented with the Obligations (ii) and(iii) in Section 3 of the AUL Opinion. The following sections of this plan include excerpts from the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook Volumes 1, 2 and 3. DESCRIPTION Marinas provide moorage for recreational boats. Marinas may also provide fueling and maintenance services. Other activities include cleaning and painting of boat surfaces, minor boat repair, and pumping of bilges and sanitary holding tanks. At these sites, both solid and liquid wastes are produced as well as stormwater runoff from high-use customer parking lots. Waste materials include sewage and bilge water. Maintenance by the tenants will produce used oils, oil filters, solvents, waste paints and varnishes, used batteries, and empty contaminated containers and soiled rags. Potential stormwater contaminants include oil and grease, suspended solids, heavy metals, and low/high pH. Additional sources of pollutants at marinas include pressure washing, surface preparation, paint removal, sanding, painting, engine maintenance and repairs, and material handling and storage, if conducted outdoors. If feasible, these activities should be done inside under cover. If done outside, use an impervious surface with adequate containment. Potential pollutants include spent abrasive grits, solvents, oils, ethylene glycol, wash water, paint over-spray, cleaners/ detergents, anti-corrosive compounds, paint chips, scrap metal, welding rods, resins, glass fibers, dust, and miscellaneous trash. Pollutant constituents include TSS, oil and grease, organics, copper, lead, tin, and zinc. Long Term Pollution Prevention Plan August 2008 Salem Port Expansion, Salem, MA Page 3 Revised December 2008 POLLUTANT CONTROLS The following sections detail pollutant control measures related to the marina, snow disposal, hazardous materials, and landscaped areas. Marina Source Control Measures The implementation of proper housekeeping measures and oversight of the marina are critical to limit pollutant introduction into the surrounding ecosystem. The following identify some mitigation measures that should be implemented in an effort to control pollutant loading at the site. A copy of these measures should be provided to all users of the site and incorporated into user's agreements. • Regularly clean all accessible work, service and storage areas to remove debris, spent material, and any other potential stormwater pollutants. • Sweep rather than hose debris on the dock. If hosing is unavoidable, collect and convey the hose water to a wastewater treatment system or facility. • Collect spent abrasives regularly and store under cover to await proper disposal. • Dispose of greasy rags, oil filters, air filters, batteries, spent coolant, and degreasers properly. • Drain oil filters before disposal or recycling. • Immediately repair or replace leaking connections, valves, pipes, hoses and equipment that causes the contamination of stormwater. • Use drip pans, drop cloths, tarpaulins or other protective devices in all paint mixing and solvent operations unless carried out in impervious contained and covered areas. • Convey sanitary sewage to pump-out stations, portable on-site pump-outs, or commercial mobile pump-out facilities or other appropriate onshore facilities. • Maintain automatic bilge pumps in a manner that will prevent waste material from being pumped automatically into surface water. • Prohibit uncontained spray painting, blasting or sanding activities over open water or in any area where these activities may be exposed to rain, snow, snow melt or runoff. • Do not dump or pour waste materials down floor drains, sinks, or outdoor storm drain inlets that discharge to surface water or groundwater. Plug floor drains that are connected to storm drains or to surface water. If necessary, install a sump that is pumped regularly. • Prohibit outside spray painting, blasting or sanding activities during windy conditions that render containment ineffective. • Do not paint and/or use spray guns on topsides or above decks. • Immediately clean up any spillage on dock, boat or ship deck areas and dispose of the wastes properly. Long Term Pollution Prevention Plan August 2008 Salem Port Expansion, Salem, MA Page 4 Revised December 2008 • Use fixed platforms with appropriate plastic or tarpaulin barriers as work surfaces and for containment when performing work on a vessel in the water to prevent blast material or paint overspray from contacting stormwater or the receiving water. Use of such platforms will be kept to a minimum and at no time be used for extensive repair or construction (anything in excess of 25 percent of the surface area of the vessel above the waterline). • Use plastic or tarpaulin barriers beneath the hull and between the hull and dry dock walls to contain and collect waste and spent materials. Clean and sweep regularly to remove debris. • Enclose, cover, or contain blasting and sanding activities to the maximum extent practicable to prevent abrasives, dust, and paint chips from reaching storm sewers or receiving waters. Use plywood and/or plastic sheeting to cover open areas between decks when sandblasting (scuppers, railings, freeing ports, ladders, and doorways). • Direct deck drainage to a collection system sump for settling and/or additional treatment. • Store cracked batteries in a covered secondary container. • Apply source control BMPs provided in this chapter for other activities conducted at the marina, boat yard, shipyard, or port facility (BMPs for Fueling at Dedicated Stations, BMPs for Washing and Steam Cleaning Vehicle/Equipment/Building Structures, and BMPs for Spills of Oil and Hazardous Substances). • Consider recycling paint, paint thinner, solvents, used oils, oil filters, pressure wash wastewater and any other recyclable materials. • Perform activities like paint mixing, solvent mixing, fuel mixing on shore inside or under cover or on an impervious area with adequate containment. l > Long Term Pollution Prevention Plan August 2008 Salem Port Expansion, Salem, MA Page 5 Revised December 2008 Snow Disposal (MassDEP Guidance Document) Finding a place to dispose of collected snow poses a challenge to municipalities and businesses as they clear roads, parking lots, bridges, and sidewalks. While we are all aware of the threats to public safety caused by snow, collected snow that is contaminated with road salt, sand, litter, and automotive pollutants such as oil also threatens public health and the environment. As snow melts, road salt, sand, litter, and other pollutants are transported into surface water or through the soil where they may eventually reach the groundwater. Road salt and other pollutants can contaminate water supplies and are toxic to aquatic life at certain levels. Sand washed into waterbodies can create sand bars or fill in wetlands and ponds, impacting aquatic life, causing flooding, and affecting our use of these resources. There are several steps that communities can take to minimize the impacts of snow disposal on public health and the environment. These steps will help communities avoid the costs of a contaminated water supply, degraded waterbodies, and flooding. Everything we do on the land has the potential to impact our water resources. Given the authority of local government over the use of the land, municipal officials and staff have a critically important role to play in protecting our water resources. The purpose of these guidelines is to help municipalities and businesses select, prepare, and maintain appropriate snow disposal sites before the snow begins to accumulate through the winter. RECOMMENDED GUIDELINES These snow disposal guidelines address: (1) site selection; (2) site preparation and maintenance; and (3) emergency snow disposal. 1. SITE SELECTION The key to selecting effective snow disposal sites is to locate them adjacent to or on pervious surfaces in upland areas away from water resources and wells. At these locations, the snow meltwater can filter in to the soil, leaving behind sand and debris which can be removed in the springtime. The following areas should be avoided: • Avoid dumping of snow into any waterbody, including rivers, the ocean, reservoirs, ponds, or wetlands. In addition to water quality impacts and flooding, snow disposed of in open water can cause navigational hazards when it freezes into ice blocks. Long Term Pollution Prevention Plan August 2008 Salem Port Expansion, Salem, MA Page 6 Revised December 2008 • Do not dump snow within a Zone II or Interim Wellhead Protection Area (IWPA) of a public water supply well or within 75 feet of a private well, where road salt may contaminate water supplies. • Avoid dumping snow on MassDEP-designated high and medium- yield aquifers where it may contaminate groundwater (see the next page for information on ordering maps from MassGIS showing the locations of aquifers, Zone Il's, and IWPAs in your community). • Avoid dumping snow in sanitary' landfills and gravel pits. Snow meltwater will create more contaminated leachate in landfills posing a greater risk to groundwater, and in gravel pits, there is little opportunity for pollutants to be filtered out of the meltwater because groundwater is close to the land surface. • Avoid disposing of snow on top of storm drain catch basins or in stormwater drainage swales or ditches. Snow combined with sand and debris may block a storm drainage system, causing localized flooding. A high volume of sand, sediment, and litter released from melting snow also may be quickly transported through the system into surface water. Site Selection Procedures I. It is important that the municipal Department of Public Works or Highway Department, Conservation Commission, and Board of Health work together to select appropriate snow disposal sites. The following steps should be taken: 2. Estimate how much snow disposal capacity is needed for the season so that an adequate number of disposal sites can be selected and prepared. 3. Identify sites that could potentially be used for snow disposal such as municipal open space (e.g., parking lots or parks). 4. Sites located in upland locations that are not likely to impact sensitive environmental resources should be selected first. 5. If more storage space is still needed, prioritize the sites with the least environmental impact (using the site selection criteria, and local or MassGIS maps as a guide). MassGIS Maps of Open Space and Water Resources If local maps do not show the information you need to select appropriate snow disposal sites, you may order maps from MassGIS (Massachusetts Geographic Information System) which show publicly owned open spaces and approximate locations of sensitive environmental resources (locations should be field- verified where possible). Different coverages or map themes depicting sensitive environmental resources are available from MassGIS on the map you order. At a minimum, you should order the Priority Resources Map. The Priority ii Long Term Pollution Prevention Plan August 2008 Salem Port Expansion, Salem, MA Page 7 Revised December 2008 Resources Map includes aquifers, public water supplies, MassDEP-approved Zone II's, Interim Wellhead Protection Areas, Wetlands, Open Space, Areas of Critical Environmental Concern, NHESP Wetlands Habitats, MassDEP Permitted Solid Waste facilities, Surface Water Protection areas (Zone A's) and base map features. The cost of this map is $25.00. Other coverages or map themes you may consider, depending on the location of your city or town, include Outstanding Resource Waters and MassDEP Eelgrass Resources. These are available at $25.00 each, with each map theme being depicted on a separate map. Maps should be ordered from MassGIS via the Internet at http://www.mass.gov/mgis. Maps may also be ordered by fax at (617) 626- 1249 (order form available from the MassGIS web site) or mail. For further information, contact MassGIS at (617) 626-1189. 2. SITE PREPARATION AND MAINTENANCE In addition to carefully selecting disposal sites before the winter begins, it is important to prepare and maintain these sites to maximize their effectiveness. The following maintenance measures should be undertaken for all snow disposal sites: • A silt fence or equivalent barrier should be placed securely on the downgradient side of the snow disposal site. • To filter pollutants out of the meltwater, a 50-foot vegetative buffer strip should be maintained during the growth season between the disposal site and adjacent waterbodies. • Debris should be cleared from the site prior to using the site for snow disposal. • Debris should be cleared from the site and properly disposed of at the end of the snow season and no later than May 15. 3. EMERGENCY SNOW DISPOSAL As mentioned earlier, it is important to estimate the amount of snow disposal capacity you will need so that an adequate number of upland disposal sites can be selected and prepared. If despite your planning, upland disposal sites have been exhausted, snow may be disposed of near waterbodies. A vegetated buffer of at least 50 feet should still be maintained between the site and the waterbody in these situations. Furthermore, it is essential that the other guidelines for preparing and maintaining snow disposal sites be followed to minimize the threat to adjacent waterbodies. Under extraordinary conditions, when all land-based snow disposal options are exhausted, disposal of snow that is not obviously contaminated with road salt, Long Term Pollution Prevention Plan August 2008 Salem Port Expansion, Salem, MA Page 8 Revised December 2008 sand, and other pollutants may be allowed in certain waterbodies under certain conditions. In these dire situations, notify your Conservation Commission and the appropriate MassDEP Regional Service Center before disposing of snow in a waterbody. Use the following guidelines in these emergency situations: • Dispose of snow in open water with adequate flow and mixing to prevent ice dams from forming. • Do not dispose of snow in salt marshes, vegetated wetlands, certified vernal pools, shellfish beds, mudflats, drinking water reservoirs and their tributaries, Zone IIs or IWPAs of public water supply wells, Outstanding Resource Waters, or Areas of Critical Environmental Concern. • Do not dispose of snow where trucks may cause shoreline damage or erosion. • Consult with the municipal Conservation Commission to ensure that snow disposal in open water complies with local ordinances and bylaws. FOR MORE INFORMATION If you need more information, contact one of MassDEP's Regional Service Centers: Northeast Regional Office, Wilmington, 978-694-3200 Southeast Regional Office, Lakeville, 508-946-2714 Central Regional Office, Worcester, 508-792-7683 Western Regional Office, Springfield, 413-755-2214 l Long Term Pollution Prevention Plan August 2008 Salem Port Expansion, Salem, MA Page 9 Revised December 2008 Hazardous Materials (MassDEP Guidance Document) Boat repair and maintenance activities create wastes that are considered hazardous and require proper handling. Managers of boatyards and marinas are liable for all hazardous waste on their premises. Typical wastes which are classified as "hazardous" include oil, grease, diesel fuel (waste oil), oily bilge water; contaminated soil; gasoline and water (ignitable if flash point is less than 140? F); solvents, such as acetone, kerosene, mineral spirits; strong acids and alkalines (corrosive if below 2 or above 12.5 pH); and paint chips or leftover paint (often toxic, if marine paint). If you operate a boatyard, you can protect your property by: • Specifying good waste management practices as requirements in contracts with your customers, • Posting signs, and setting up a special waste disposal area for these wastes. Each type of waste must be stored in a closed container, labeled as Hazardous Waste with the name of the waste, and dated when the waste was first put in the container. • Checking containers for leaks at least weekly. If the waste is stored outdoors, it must be in containers on a surface which has no cracks or gaps and there must be secondary containment to catch any leaks or spills. It is a significantly greater cost to you if your property becomes contaminated and you have to pay for a clean-up contractor. There is paperwork involved. Anyone who produces, transports, treats, or disposes of hazardous waste must notify the Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP). To notify MassDEP, determine your "generator status" (see below), then download, complete and submit a registration form. Your hazardous waste status will determine which regulations apply. The volume of hazardous waste which a boatyard or marina can accumulate before shipping - and the length of time it can be held - depends on the volume generated in any peak month. Hazardous waste must be shipped with a Massachusetts licensed hazardous waste transporter to a licensed facility unless the boatyard or marina qualifies as a Very Small Quantity Generator (VSQG). Facilities classified as VSQGs can self-transport their waste to a household hazardous waste collection (if the sponsor will allow VSQGs to participate) or to another generator. If you are taking your waste to such a collection, you should obtain a receipt. Keep records of waste shipments (typically a hazardous waste manifest) on file for a minimum of three years. Long Term Pollution Prevention Plan August 2008 Salem Port Expansion, Salem, MA Page 10 Revised December 2008 For more information about hazardous waste, its storage and disposal, or regulatory requirements, call the MassDEP Hazardous Waste Line at 617-292- 5898. You also may want to review A Summary of Hazardous Waste Requirements for Small Quantity Generators. Long Term Pollution Prevention Plan August 2008 Salem Port Expansion, Salem, MA Page 11 Revised December 2008 Landscape Areas (MassDEP Guidance) Most people do not realize that if they choose suitable grasses and other plants, watering in the Northeast is usually unnecessary. It is natural for your grass to turn yellowish during hot, dry spells. This is a normal state called dormancy, which a healthy lawn can withstand. Your grass will regain its vibrancy with the next rainfall. If you choose to water your lawn: • Observe local outdoor water bans. • Place sprinklers in areas where you won't be wastefully watering your sidewalk or driveway. • Water in the early morning to prevent the growth of fungi and minimize evaporation. • Water deeply and infrequently. Deeper watering encourages the roots of grass to grow long and healthy, allowing your lawn to survive drier periods and saving money on your water bill. • Most lawns need less than one inch of water to saturate grass roots 4-6 inches in length. Place an empty coffee can in the watering area and measure the amount of water in the can to determine when you have watered enough. Mowing Your Lawn • Proper mowing is one of the most important ways to maintain a healthy lawn. • Mow only when the grass is dry to get a clean cut and minimize the spread of disease. • Mow grass to a height of 2-3 inches. The longer the grass, the more water is retained and the longer the roots of your lawn will be, making it stronger and more tolerant. Keeping your grass longer also may allow it to outcompete weeds, reducing the need for herbicides. • Mow frequently, cutting no more than a third of the height of the grass at a time. Cutting more grass than this at one time and mowing infrequently can damage your grass. • Sharpen your mower blade to avoid damaging grass blades. Mower blades should be sharpened once a year and touched up after every 10 hours of mowing. • Do not dispose of grass clippings in nearby waters. The clippings will break down and encourage the growth of algae which depletes the oxygen in water and impacts fish and other aquatic species. If you choose not to leave your clippings on your lawn, compost them. Long Term Pollution Prevention Plan August 2008 Salem Port Expansion, Salem, MA Page 12 Revised December 2008 Fertilizing Your Landscape Grass clippings contain high amounts of nitrogen, a key ingredient in fertilizer. Use your grass clippings by leaving them on your lawn. It may be all the fertilizer you need, and it will save you time and money. Clippings are approximately 85 percent water, so they usually decompose within a week and will not smother your lawn. The easiest and most common way to spread clippings is called mulching; mulching mowers cut the grass into smaller pieces and then blow them back onto your lawn. If your soil test and the plants you have chosen demand that you apply fertilizer in addition to your clippings: • Use organic or slow-release fertilizers; these types are less likely to wash off your lawn than inorganic or fast-release fertilizers. • Fertilize in the fall, but beware of weather patterns. Although some rainfall is helpful in distributing fertilizer, a heavy downpour will wash the fertilizer off your lawn and into nearby waters. • Be careful not to apply more than the recommended amount of fertilizer. Too much fertilizer can burn the grass, damage the soil, and attract pests. Pest Control Although pesticides appear to be a good solution for lawn and garden pests, there are drawbacks to pesticide use for you, your landscape, and the environment. Pesticides, by definition, are toxic substances which may pose risks to people, pets, and wildlife. Some chemicals in pesticides remain potent and rain may transport them from your lawn to areas where they may have harmful effects. The best defense against pests is maintaining a healthy lawn naturally, using Integrated Pest Management (IPM). IPM promotes a variety of non-chemical (biological and mechanical) techniques for pest control and uses chemical controls selectively, only when necessary. There are many alternatives to pesticide use, such as beneficial insects like ladybugs and spiders, beneficial parasites like nematodes, and certain beneficial bacteria. Grubs are the most common and difficult pest in Massachusetts. These beetle larvae feed on grass roots, killing large areas of turf in short periods of time and attracting animals such as skunks and moles that feed on grubs. One option in dealing with grubs is to plant a ground cover other than grass that will not perpetuate a grub problem. The most effective biological alternatives to pesticide use for grubs are two beneficial nematodes - Heterorhabditis bacteriophora and Steinernema glaseri. The use of these microscopic worm- like organisms is becoming more widespread and they can be found in many lawncare stores. Long Term Pollution Prevention Plan August 2008 Salem Port Expansion, Salem, MA Page 13 Revised December 2008 To specifically control Japanese beetle grubs (white grubs), introduce a disease that kills these pests, called milky spore disease. Milky spore disease (commercially named Doom, Grub Attack, or Grub Killer) spreads slowly through the soil, possibly taking a season to bring the grub level down to one that the turf can handle, but the disease will continue o tinue to kill grubs for years. To find out more about alternatives to pesticides, call the Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources at 617/626-1700, refer to the Department's booklet, A Homeowner's Guide to Environmentally Sound Lawncare: Maintaining a Healthy Lawn the IPM Way (1997), or contact the agencies and organizations listed below. If you decide to use a pesticide, choose one that is selective for a specific pest. Many pesticides are non-selective and may kill desirable insects and plants. Whether you choose chemical pesticides or biological alternatives, carefully follow the product instructions. STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN FOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES SALEM PORT EXPANSION SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS August 2008 Revised December 2008 • PREPARED BY: Bourne Consulting Engineering 3 Bent Street Franklin, MA 02038 l STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN SALEM PORT EXPANSION SALEM, MA 1. EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS----------------------------------------------------------------1 2. POST-DEVELOPMENT SITE CONDITIONS----------------------------------------------1 3. SWPPP COORDINATOR AND DUTIES----------------------------------------------------3 4. EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL-------------------------------------------3 4.1 Stabilization Measures-------------------------------------------------------------------3 4.2 Structural Measures---------------------------------------------------------------------- 4 4.3 Additional Measures---------------------------------------------------------------------- 4 5. SPILL CONTINGENCY PLAN----------------------------------------------------------------- 5 6. STORMWATER CONTROLS OPERATION & MAINTENANCE PLAN (POST— CONSTRUCTION) SITE------------------------------------------------------------------------ 7 7. COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE REGULATIONS----------------------------------- 8 8. NON-STORMWATER DISCHARGES--------------------------------------------------------9 9. CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE PLAN-------------------------------------------------------9 10. CERTIFICATIONS-------------------------------------------------------------------------------11 LIST OF FIGURES 1. LOCUS MAP-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 LIST OF APPENDICES 1. COMPLIANCE CONDITIONS AND PERMITS 2. INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE LOGS LIST OF PLANS 1. PRE-DEVELOPMENT WATERSHED PLAN 2. POST-DEVELOPED WATERSHED PLAN I I STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN SALEM PORT EXPANSION SALEM, MA 1. EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS The City of Salem, through the Department of Planning and Community Development, is proposing to redevelop the existing Salem Port, which is located at 10 Blaney Street. The property is owned by Dominion Energy Salem Harbor, LLC and is currently under a lease agreement with the City. The City of Salem will be responsible for all operation and maintenance at the site. The project consists of the redevelopment of the site into a multi-use port/marina facility in an effort to reclaim Salem's seaport for a variety of commercial and recreational activities. The redevelopment of this site is intended to provide a multi-use water transportation facility to serve a variety of vessels, including the existing Salem Ferry Nathaniel Bowditch, excursion boats, water taxis, a Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) offshore supply boat, commercial fishing boats, visiting ships, and small cruise ships. The redevelopment of the site, as proposed, has undergone MEPA review and the City has been issued a MEPA certificate (#14234). The parcel, as mentioned above, is located at 10 Blaney Street and directly abuts Salem Harbor and the Dominion Power facility. The site, as it currently exists, is previously disturbed and primarily consists of gravel areas with a small portion of pavement. The site is approximately 2.21 acres and bounded by Salem Harbor to the south and the west. Salem Harbor, as detailed in the Surface Water Quality Standards - 310 CMR 4.00, has been identified as an shellfish growing area and therefore classifies the site as discharging to a Critical Area as defined in Standard 6 of the Stormwater Management Standards. A USGS locus plan showing the location of the proposed development has been included as Figure 1. 2. POST-DEVELOPMENT SITE CONDITIONS The proposed development of the site would consist of a new terminal building, piers, a harbor walk pier, paved parking areas, floating gangways, landscaping features, as well as improvements to Derby and Blaney Street. Access to the site will be from the Blaney Street with the secondary access to the site from White Street being discontinued. Other improvements to the site would include providing new utility infrastructure for potable water supply and sanitary sewage disposal via the municipal distribution/collection systems and a new stormwater management system, which presently does not exist on this site. 1 STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN SALEM PORT EXPANSION SALEM, MA 3. SWPPP COORDINATOR AND DUTIES The Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Coordinator for this project is: Name Company Phone # The duties of the SWPPP Coordinator include the following: 1. Implement the SWPPP with the aid of the SWPPP Team. Oversee maintenance practices identified as Best Management Practices (BMP's) in the SWPPP. Refer to the Operation and Maintenance Plan. Implement and oversee employee training. 2. Conduct or provide for site inspection or monitoring activities. Identify other potential pollutant sources and ensure that they are added to the SWPPP. 3. Identify and deficiencies in the SWPPP and correct them and ensure that any changes in construction plans are addressed in the SWPPP. t 4. EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL 4.1 Stabilization Measures The following stabilization measures shall be utilized to minimize onsite erosion and prevent sedimentation of adjacent resource areas during construction. 1. The smallest area of land practicable shall be exposed at any one time. 2. To the maximum extent feasible, existing onsite vegetation shall be retained and protected. 3. All disturbed areas to be re-vegetated or temporarily stabilized immediately upon completion of grading. In no case shall stabilization occur later than thirty (30) days after the area has been disturbed, except for pavement areas, in order to minimize the potential for onsite erosion. 4. All finish grades will slopes of 3 to 1 (horizontal to vertical) and steeper shall be compacted, loamed and seeded immediately after disturbance. Hydro-seeding is the preferred method of seeding. 2 STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN SALEM PORT EXPANSION SALEM, MA 5. An adequate supply of hay bales shall be stockpiled onsite for emergency use. 4.2 Structural Measures The following structural measures will be utilized to minimize onsite erosion and prevent sedimentation of adjacent resource areas and down gradient properties during construction: 1. An erosion control/sedimentation barrier shall be installed as needed around the perimeter of the site and around any earth stockpiles located along the site boundaries to control overland flow of site- generated stormwater runoff. This barrier will be installed prior to the start of any other project-related earthwork. 2. Hay bales shall be bound with twine and shall be set in place by two wooden stakes. Silt fence shall be staked in place with the bottom 6" buried in the ground. 3. Stormwater runoff shall be diverted from flowing over disturbed areas. 4. Sediment shall be retained onsite within the limit of work as defined by the erosion control/sedimentation barrier. 5. No construction activities shall occur past the limit of work delineated by the down gradient erosion control/sedimentation barrier. 4.3 Additional Measures In addition to the previously described controls, construction shall conform to all specifications as designated on the site plan and any other document or permits issued in association with this project. The following additional measures will be utilized to minimize onsite erosion and prevent � sedimentation of adjacent resource areas during construction: 1. The section of Derby Street/Blaney Street at the project roadway shall be swept, at a minimum, at the end of every work week. The public roadway shall be swept more frequently as needed or upon the request of the City of Salem. 2. Sanitary wastes generated onsite shall be treated and/or disposed of in accordance with applicable state and local requirements. 3 STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN SALEM PORT EXPANSION SALEM, MA 3. Construction site waste materials shall be properly contained onsite and disposed of at an offsite location in accordance with local and state regulations. 4. Weekly inspections shall include all of the erosion/sediment control measures as well as a review of spill containment and prevention measures. 5. All onsite and adjacent roadway drainage facilities shall be maintained in proper working condition during and after construction. 6. The Contractor shall provide a list of proposed materials, including manufacturers' product data and test reports that verify conformance with practices established herein. 7. The Contractor shall attend a preconstruction meeting to coordinate the erosion and sedimentation control plan with the proposed construction schedule. 8. The erosion control/sedimentation barriers shall be inspected before and after all storm events and prior to weekends. Damaged sections of the erosion control/sedimentation barriers shall be repaired within four (4) hours of observation. 9. Sediment shall be removed from erosion control/sedimentation barrier when the depth of sediment accumulates to one third (1/3) of the barrier's height. Erosion control/sedimentation barrier shall be repaired or replaced as needed. 10. No fuels, lubricants or hydraulic fluids shall be stored onsite. No equipment maintenance is to be completed onsite, except for routine service carried out by a qualified fleet mechanic with a suitable fleet maintenance vehicle. Refuel or such routine maintenance shall be restricted to designated areas. Existing paved areas (if applicable) shall be used where possible. Temporary spill protection shall be provided during routine maintenance consisting of at least 6 mil plastic barrier under the vehicle and a sheet of absorbent material. 11. Construction access drives shall feature crushed stone entrances to minimize mud from being tracked onto the adjacent roadways. 5. SPILL CONTINGENCY PLAN A Spill Contingency Plan shall be implemented during construction and will include the following provisions: 4 STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN SALEM PORT EXPANSION SALEM, MA 1. Equipment necessary to address accidental spills or leaks will be stored onsite in a secure but accessible location. Such equipment shall include the following: a. Safety goggles. b. Chemically resistant gloves and overshoe boots. c. Water and chemical fire extinguishers d. Sand and shovels. e. Suitable absorbent materials storage containers. f. First aid equipment. 2. Spills or leaks shall be properly treated according to type of spill, volume of spill and location of spill. Mitigation shall include future spill prevention, containment of the spill in an environmentally sound manner, and remediation of any environmental damage resulting from the spill. 3. For spills of less than 5 gallons of materials: a. Proceed with source control and containment. b. Clean up with absorbent materials other applicable means, unless an imminent hazard or other circumstances dictate that the spill should be treated by a professional emergency response contractor. c. Notify the property owner, Dominion Energy Salem, LLC at (978) 740-8402 4. For spills of greater than 5 gallons of materials: a. Immediately contact the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MASS DEP) Hazardous Waste Incident Response Group at (617) 932-7600, and an approved emergency response contractor. b. Provide information on the type of spill, the location of the spill, the quantity of the spill and the time of the spill to the emergency response contractor or coordinator. c. Proceed with prevention, containment and/or clean up if so directed. d. Contact the City of Salem for any spills of 5 gallons or greater. e. Notify the property owner, Dominion Energy Salem, LLC at (978) 740-8402 and the MA DEP. 5. If there is Reportable Quantity (RQ) release during the construction period, then the National Response Center shall be notified immediately at (800) 424-8800. A report shall be submitted to EPA regional office within 14 days describing the release, the date and circumstances of the release, and the steps taken to prevent another 5 STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN SALEM PORT EXPANSION SALEM, MA 6. After the perimeter site erosion control measures are installed, but prior to any further site work, the Contractor shall provide a 55-gallon spill containment kit and maintain it onsite throughout the construction period. 7. The Contractor is to stop site excavation work if the contractor suspects (due to soil color or odor) the presence of hazardous material, and shall contact a Licensed Professional (LSP), the Engineer, and the Owner. An LSP shall determine if hazardous materials are present, and shall take appropriate action in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations. 8. If requested by the City of Salem, (and if recommended by an LSP), an environmental Field Technician (EFT) shall be present during site grading activities and the installation of the underground utilities to monitor for contamination. The EFT is to be equipped with a photo or flame ionization unit capable of detecting any contaminants that may historically be found at the site. The Contractor is to stop work if the EFT identifies contaminated soil, and the EFT is to contact the LSP, the Engineer, and the Owner. The LSP will take appropriate action in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations. 6. STORMWATER CONTROLS OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PLAN (POST-CONTSTRUCTION) The following measures shall be taken to minimize the impact of post- construction site-generated stormwater runoff on downstream resources: 1. Sweep bituminous parking areas/access drives four times annually. The first time shall be upon completion of the winter sanding season, the second time shall be during the early spring, the third time during the summer and the fourth time during upon completion of the fall foliage season. 2. Catch basins, proprietary separators, and oil/water separators are to be inspected on a quarterly basis. Catch basins and oil/water separators shall be cleaned out when more than one-quarter full of sediment. Inspect and clean as necessary after intense rainfall and as soon as practical upon completion of winter sanding activities. All sediments and hydrocarbons shall all be properly handled and disposed osed of in accordance with local, state and federal guidelines and regulations. 4. All drainage structures in the affected areas shall be inspected and cleaned after a chemical spill of five gallons or more. 6 STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN SALEM PORT EXPANSION SALEM, MA 7. COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE REGULATIONS The proposed project shall comply with all applicable Federal, State and Local regulations. These regulations may include, but are not limited to, any Orders of Conditions issued under the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act in addition to Sections 401 and 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act. Compliance provisions specified in any issued permits are contained in Appendix 1. The NPDES permit conditions require routine inspection of the site and careful documentation of events and conditions. The following is a list of inspection activities that will be completed by the qualified designated site monitor: 1. Erosion control/sedimentation prevention measures and stormwater management measures shall be inspected once per week at a minimum during the entire construction period. 2. All drainage and erosion/sedimentation controls, discharge outfalls and potential problem areas shall also be inspected within twenty four (24) hours of any storm that exceeds one half(0.50) inches of rainfall. 3. A log of all site inspection results shall be accessible and maintained onsite. 4. The Contractor shall be informed of all necessary repairs or modifications to allow for the timely implementation of the required actions. All necessary repairs or modifications shall be completed within seven (7) calendar days of inspection. 5. This SWPPP shall be modified within seven (7) calendar days to reflect any modifications to the pollution prevention measures required as a result of inspection. 6. Weekly reports of all maintenance and inspection activities shall be accessible and maintained onsite in conformance with the NPDES permit conditions. Inspection and Maintenance forms are located in Appendix 2. 7 STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN SALEM PORT EXPANSION SALEM, MA 8. NON-STORMWATER DISCHARGES There shall be no non-permitted non-stormwater discharges associated with this project. Specifically prohibited are the discharges of process waters, non-contact cooling water, vehicle wash water and sanitary wastewater via stormwater drainage system. That system may also carry water from fire fighting activities, irrigation, water flushings, uncontaminated groundwater, air conditioning condensate and routine building and paving wash down waters contained no detergent or hazardous materials, provided these uses are incorporated into this plan. Water Source Planned Discharge Volume Per Day* Streams/Springs NO Fire Fighting EMERGENCY ONLY Irrigation NO Waterlines NO Groundwater NO Air Conditioning Condensate NO Building/pavement wash NO down 9. CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE PLAN 1. Secure perimeter erosion control/sedimentation barriers. 2. Provide spill prevention kit onsite (SPPP). 3. The construction area will then be cleared with the topsoil stockpiled on site. Site excavation and grading work shall then commence. 4. The site utility work is to commence after the access drive and parking areas have been rough graded to sub-grade. 5. Construct stormwater BMPs. BMPs shall be completed prior to paving. 6. Additional siltation fence or hay bales shall be added as construction proceeds where required to control erosion. Sedimentation controls shall be installed along the downhill side of all soil stockpiles. 7. Catch basins shall have either staked haybales placed around the 8 STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN SALEM PORT EXPANSION SALEM, MA grate or have a geotextile insert installed until the access drive and parking areas are paved. 8. The pavement subgrade shall then be graded, and the gravel and the bituminous base/binder course placed. This shall be completed as soon as practical after the site clearing. 9. All disturbed areas to be vegetated, not already stabilized, shall then be spread with the required a minimum of 6 inches of topsoil and seeded. 10.Proceed with construction of Terminal Building and Piers. 11.Any sediment that has accumulated in the stormwater management system BMPs shall be removed and the disturbed areas reseeded. All drainage structures shall be cleaned. 12.The siltation controls shall be removed after the site has stabilized and the Conservation Commission grants permission. 13.Prior to the Terminal Building construction, erosion controls shall be installed along the downhill perimeter of work. The erosion controls shall remain in place and be maintained until the site has been stabilized and permission has been given to remove the erosion controls. 9 STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN SALEM PORT EXPANSION SALEM, MA 10. CERTIFICATIONS Refer to following pages. Responsible Party Responsibility Name: The Owner / Responsible Party is responsible for the Conduct of all construction activities, and ultimate Address: compliance with all provisions of The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Telephone: RESPONSIBLE PARTY CERTIFICATION Responsible Part I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gathered and evaluated the information submitted. Based upon my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the systems, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitted false information, including the possibility of fine or imprisonment for knowing violations. Signature: Date: Printed Name: Representing: (Note: Additional copies of this form may be attached in cases where more than one owner has responsibility for compliance.) 10 I STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN SALEM PORT EXPANSION SALEM, MA r• _ Name: ryThe Contractor is responsible for The Completion of all planned Address: construction activities, including the installation and maintenance of control measures as outlined in the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Telephone: Contractor I certify under penalty of law that I understand the terms and conditions of the general National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit that authorizes the stormwater discharges associated with industrial activity from the construction site identified as part of this certification. Signature: Date: Printed Name: Representing: (Note: Additional copies of this form may be attached in cases where more than one contractor has responsibility for compliance.) 11 STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN SALEM PORT EXPANSION SALEM, MA APPENDIX 1 COMPLIANCE CONDITIONS AND PERMITS STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN SALEM PORT EXPANSION SALEM, MA APPENDIX 2 INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE LOGS STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN SALEM PORT EXPANSION SALEM, MA Inspection and Maintenance Report Form Condition of Date Inspector Erosion Controls Comments l STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN SALEM PORT EXPANSION SALEM, MA Inspection and Maintenance Report Form To be completed every 7 days and within 24 hours of a rainfall event of one half (0.50) inches or more. Inspector: Date: Inspector's Qualifications: Days since last rainfall: Amount of last rainfall: inches Stabilization Measures Drainage Date of Last Date of Stabilized Stabilized Area Disturbance Next (Yes/No) With Condition Disturbance Stabilization Required: To be performed by: On or before: STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN SALEM PORT EXPANSION SALEM, MA Inspection and Maintenance Report Form Other Controls Stabilized Construction Entrance: Amount of Sediment Clean Gravel or Filled Does all Traffic use the Tracked on Road? with Sediment? Stabilized Entrance to Exit the Site? Maintenance required for construction entrance: To be performed by: On or before: STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN SALEM PORT EXPANSION SALEM, MA Inspection and Maintenance Report Form Perimeter Structural Controls: Date: Silt Fences and Straw Bales Drainage Area Has Silt Reached Is Fence Property Is There Evidence of Perimeter 1/3 of Fence Secured? Washout or Overtopping? Height? Maintenance required for sedimentation basin: To be performed by: On or before: STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN SALEM PORT EXPANSION SALEM, MA Inspection and Maintenance Report Form Changes required to the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: Reasons for changes: I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gathered and evaluated the information submitted. Based upon my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the systems, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine or imprisonment for knowing violations. Signature: Date: City of Salem Salem Wharf Project Project Description The City of Salem, MA is seeking the necessary permits to redevelop the property at 10 Blaney Street into a multi use port facility. The site is located off of Derby Street in the Salem Designated Port Area, and consists of approximately 2 acres that currently contain an interim floating dock system, gravel parking area and an office trailer. The facility as it exists is utilized by the Salem Ferry Nathaniel Bowditch, excursion boats, an LNG offshore supply boat, water taxis commercial fishing vessels and some small cruise ships. The entire project was subject to MEPA review in April of 2008 and a final determination was made in July 2008. The City is planning on completing the entire project as presented in the MEPA filing, however to facilitate the permitting process and expedite the start up of the construction phase the proposed redevelopment for this site will be accomplished in two Phases. Phase I will include both upland improvements and water dependent piers and structures. This will include a new terminal building, a fixed pile expanded pier and floating dock system, along with associated dredging, as well as the construction of a wave attenuator system. Also included in Phase I will be a public parking area and a public harborwalk. Phase II, which will be permitted and built separately, will include the creation of protected year round dockage for the local lobstermen, including the associated dredging. The redevelopment of this site will offer an opportunity for the city of Salem to better utilize an underdeveloped site on Salem Harbor that will provide for greater economic and tourism opportunities for the City. The Project site is located in the Salem Harbor Designated Port Area (DPA), one of only 12 such areas located in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. This strategic location allows the City to develop the site in a manner that capitalizes on the site's proximity to the recently dredged federal channel and to achieve the development of marine industrial uses at the site that cannot be accomplished elsewhere in the community. The uses programmed for the site comply with state policy and regulations governing DPAs. The 2008 revisions to the Salem Harbor Plan include the proposed multi use facility as a key component of the regeneration of the Salem Harbor area. s5 � ONE /14 t' FF" F ZONE Bi 9 I 'I' APPROXIMATE SCALE - "" 500 0 500 FEET 4 S 4v G r FeZONE A4 \ $ EL 101 NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PR06RAM SrgE �� (EL 7311 FIRM C ¢� a �= « . .r3ti, ,, L ,Et , P ,py,!v �t FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP A"4 r ONE BRIZ ZONE C 1 v�xe "f �xvt• ,L s FT ZQNEvla4 � ° fd ` v '' ` � °Fen(£ 11 � � �, � �`�"'�" CITYOF SALEM, NEV MASSACHUSETTS F '� s ESSEX COUNTY � PANEL 1 OF 5 SEE MAP INDEX FOR PANELS NOT POINTED) sA , � ZQNT 1f3 `mss' ,d. 3 'bey NE vv�v �� t cnMMUNITYrPANEL NUMBER SALE14 HARBOR ?50102 0001 B a1 \l�W5 MAP REVISED. a \\ Og AUGUST 5,1985 -i COASTAL BASE FLOOD ELEVATIONS APPLY ONLY LANDWARD OF THE SHORELINE SHOWN ON THIS MAP. Federal Emergency Management Agency b1\"aWNariaiz Q A $�fq �j.. i Q This is an tedofficial i copy of a portion of the above referenced flea map. If ZONE A4 k a t was amendments extracted using F MIT hoes,to ThIs map does not reflect changes (EL 11) '.\ yan or amendments which may have been made subsequent to the date on the "ir lnle block. For the latest product information about National Flood Insurance --- — Program flood maps check the FEMA Flood Map Store at wwwrnsafema.gov DEP Eelgrass Mapping Project Map 8 SALEM SOUNC Eelgrass Mapped SALEM HARBOR Map Statistics 2001 ONLY 1995 AND 2001 Eelgrass Area in Acres: Sa vmQ•b.. .d ® ® Limits ONLY Map Location 2001 124.7 ' 2001 24.7 •- - Limits of Project Change - 88.9 --- Municipal Boundary 78.2% -- — ® Limited Access Highway ® Multilane Highway 120,000 LS w — Other Numbered Highway raa � w: o i,wo zwn aaoo e,wa e,wo I Rl , Y j 1 CENAE-R-PT-MAS 29 February 2008 MEMORANDUM THRU: Ruth M. Ladd, Chief, Policy Analysis and Technical Support Branch FOR: Brian Valiton, Project Manager, CENAE-R-PEA SUBJECT: Suitability Determination for Salem Wharf, Salem Harbor, Salem, MA, Application Number NAE-2005-1095. 1. References Cited a. US EPA Region I/USACE-NAE. 2007. Reference Memorandum for Evaluating Testing and Non-Testing Requirements of 40 C.F.R 227.6 and 227.27 Federal Navigation Dredging or Non-federal Dredging Projects, for Open Ocean Disposal at the Massachusetts Bay Disposal Site (MBDS). b. USEPA Region I/USACE-NAE. 2004. Regional Implementation Manual for the Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed for Disposal in New England Waters. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1, Boston, MA/US Army Corps of Engineers, New England District, Concord, MA. 54 pp. C. USACE-NAE. 2007. Environmental Assessment/ Finding of No Significant Impact Salem Wharf, Salem Harbor, Salem, MA, Application Number NAE-2005-1095. US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), New England District, Concord, MA. 2. Summary This memorandum addresses compliance with the regulatory evaluation and testing requirements of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuary Act (MPRSA, or Ocean Dumping Act) regulations at 40 CFR 227 as well as the issues outlined in the MBDS Reference memo (USEPA Region 1/USACE-NAE 2007) for unconfined open water disposal at an ocean disposal site. Based upon this review, the proposed dredged material from Salem Harbor is suitable for unrestricted ocean disposal at MBDS. Detailed inforxnidtion pertaining to the regulatory issues associated with the evaluation of this project as well as the technical background of the analytical tests summarized herein is found in the MBDS Reference Memo (EPA 2007). A copy of this memo can be obtained upon request from the EPA or USACE. RECEI`JED hA'R 17 2uun RF:GUi.A10;'t'1 CENAE-R-PT SUBJECT: Suitability Determination for Salem Wharf, Salem Harbor, Salem, MA, Application Number NAE-2005-1095. 3. Project Description The applicant is proposing to dredge three areas in Salem Harbor in Salem, MA. The inner section has an area of approximately 145,000 sq. ft and would be dredged to a depth of-10' MLW with an overdredge to -11' MLW. The outer section would have an area of 189,000 sq. ft. and be dredged to -26' MLW with an overdredge to -28' MLW. The transition section between the two would have an area of 42,000 sq. ft. and be dredged to a depth of-15' MLW with anoverdredge to -16'MLW. In total, a volume of approximately 210,000 cu. yds. would be produced. The applicant proposes to mechanically dredge this material and dispose of it at the Massachusetts Bay Disposal Site (MBDS). This proposed project represents improvement dredging. 4. Sampling Plan: A sampling plan was developed on 27 June 2005 for the analysis of physical, biological and chemical characteristics of the sediment proposed to be dredged. The federal agencies concurred with this plan. a. Compositing plan Following sample collection, the samples were analyzed for physical characteristics (grain size and water content). After a review of the resulting data, a compositing plan was developed on 18 October 2005. The plan called for four composited samples for use in a bioassay with amphipods and mysids; a suspended particulate bioassay with fish, mysid shrimp, and pelagic larvae; and a bioaccumulation assay using bivalves and polychaetes. Composite 1 was composed of core samples SW-1, SW-2, SW-4 and SW-5. Composite 2 consisted of core SW-3 and SW-6. Composite 3 consisted of the upper strata of cores SW-7, SW-8 and SW-9. Composite 4 consisted of the lower strata of cores SW-7, SW-8 and SW-9. The federal agencies concurred with this plan. b. Toxicity test A 10-day bioassay test was conducted on the composite samples. As the results indicated no toxic response, the suspended particulate and the bioaccumulation tests were conducted to completion. c. Determining contaminants of concern The composites were then analyzed for bulk sediment chemistry according to the contaminants outlined in the sampling plan of 27 June 2005 for this project. This sampling plan was written in accordance with the USEPA Region 1/USACE-NAE Regional Implementation Manual guidelines (USEPA Region 1/USACE-NAE. 2004). As a result of the bulk chemistry, we 2 CENAE-R-PT SUBJECT: Suitability Determination for Salem Wharf, Salem Harbor, Salem, MA, Application Number NAE-2005-1095. determined on 24 April 2006 which contaminants would be tested for in the bioaccumulation test. The contaminants of concern were determined to be all metals; all the PCBs; all PAHs except for acenaphthylene, acenaphthene and fluorene; and of the pesticides only heptachlor, aldrin and lindane, 4. Testing Results a. 10-day bioassay and elutriate results In the amphipod bioassay test, the mean survivorship for the amphipods exposed to sediment from the control site was 90% with a mortality of 10%. As the mortality in the control was less than 20%, this test was valid. The mean survivorship for the amphipods exposed to sediment from the reference site was 92% with a mortality of 8%. The mean survivorship for the amphipods exposed to sediment from Composite 1 was 88% with a mortality of 12%. The mean survivorship for the amphipods exposed to sediment from Composite 2 was 88% with a mortality of 12%. The mean survivorship for the amphipods exposed to sediment from Composite 3 was 95% with a mortality of 5%. Statistical analysis indicates that there is no significant difference between the survivorships of the amphipods exposed to the reference sediment and the amphipods exposed to the sediments represented by Composites 1 - 3. The mean survivorship for the amphipods exposed to sediment from Composite 4 was 83% with a mortality of 17%. For Composite 4, a second control and MBDS reference site sample were run. The lab control had a survivorship of 91% with a mortality of 9%. The reference site had a survivorship of 81% with a mortality of 19%. There was a statistically significant difference between the survivorships of the amphipods exposed to the reference sediment and the amphipods exposed to the Composite 4 sediments. However, the difference between the mean survivorship of the amphipods exposed to the reference and the Composite 4 sediments is 2%, no higher than the 20% threshold allowed in the testing protocol. Therefore, the materials proposed to be dredged are not considered acutely toxic to the amphipods used in the testing. In the mysid bioassay test, the mean survivorship for the mysids exposed to sediment from the control site was 91% with a mortality of 9%. As the mortality in the control was less than 10%, this test was valid. The mean survivorship for the mysids exposed to sediment from the reference site was 89% with a mortality of 11%. The mean survivorship for the mysids exposed to sediment from Composite 1 was 95% with a mortality of 5%. The mean survivorship for the mysids exposed to sediment from Composite 2 was 87% with a mortality of 13%. The mean survivorship for the mysids exposed to sediment from Composite 3 was 86%with a mortality of 14%. Statistical analysis indicates that there is no significant difference between the 3 CENAE-R-PT SUBJECT: Suitability Determination for Salem Wharf, Salem Harbor, Salem, MA, Application Number NAE-2005-1095. survivorships of the amphipods exposed to the reference sediment and the mysids exposed to the sediments represented by Composites 1 - 3. For Composite 4, a second control and MBDS reference site sample were run as had been done for the amphipods. The lab control had a survivorship of 91% with a mortality of 9%. The reference site had a survivorship of 91% with a mortality of 9%. Statistical analysis indicates that there is no significant difference between the survivorships of the mysids exposed to the reference sediment and the mysids exposed to the Composite 4 sediments. The mean survivorship of the mysids exposed to sediment from Composite 4 sediments was 87%. Statistical analysis indicates that there is no significant difference between the survivorships of the mysids exposed to the reference sediment and the mysids exposed to the Composite 4 sediments. Therefore, based on the results of tests on these two species, the materials proposed to be dredged are not likely to be acutely toxic to benthic organisms. In the Suspended Phase Acute Toxicity Tests, the mysid shrimp (Americamysis bahia) showed a LC5o of>100% when exposed to elutriate from each of the composite samples. The inland silverside minnow (Menidia beryllina) showed a LC5o of>100% when exposed to elutriate from each of the project samples. The sea urchin larvae (Arbacia punctulata) showed a LC5o of >100% when exposed to elutriate from each of the project samples. b. STFATE Water Quality Evaluation As no LC50 was less than 100%, the ADDAMS model was not run. c. Bioaccumulation results In the bioaccumulation tests, both the bent-nosed clam (Macoma nasutc4 and the clam worm (Nereis virens) significantly accumulated contaminants. The clam worm showed significant accumulation of arsenic and cadmium in Composite 3 and arsenic in Composite 4. The bent-nosed clam showed significant accumulation of pyrene and each of the PCBs in Composite 2, pyrene in Composite 3 and fluoranthene and each of the PCBs in Composite 4. In total, there were 6 contaminants of concern which were bioaccumulated at a level greater than reference. Because of the presence of significant bioaccumulation, the EPA ran a risk-assessment model of the bioaccumulation results. For these compounds, the toxicological significance of bioaccumulation from the sediment into benthic organisms was evaluated. It was determined that the disposal of the material as proposed will not cause any significant undesirable effects (see Tables 1 and 2). 4 CENAE-R-PT SUBJECT: Suitability Determination for Salem Wharf, Salem Harbor, Salem, MA, Application Number NAE-2005-1095. 5. Disposal Alternatives Analysis According to Subsection C, 40 CFR 227.14, 227.15 and 227.16, the need for ocean disposal of the dredged material from this project has to be demonstrated and'alternatives to the disposal have to be evaluated. Factors considered in determining need will include: evaluation of the degree of treatment that is useful and feasible; whether the material could be reduced or eliminated by using other processes; the relative environmental risks, impact and cost for other alternatives; and any irreversible consequences of the use of alternatives. In addition, the CENAE and/or EPA Region 1 must determine that there are no practical improvements in processing or treatment to reduce the impacts of the sediment, and that there are no practical alternatives with less adverse environmental impact. Six disposal alternatives, outlined by the applicants' agent, were considered for the dredged sediments which included: • Upland disposal at an approved landfill ■ Beneficial reuse as o Beach nourishment o Brownfield capping o Construction Confined Aquatic Disposal (CAD) ■ Unconfined Offshore Disposal at the MBDS The applicant eliminated from consideration two options: upland disposal at an approved landfill and beneficial re-use alternatives. The detailed description by which the applicant selected unconfined offshore disposal as the preferred alternative is found in the Environmental Assessment and is based on the factors described below. All information for this alternatives analysis has been supplied by the applicant's agent. . a. Upland Disposal Upland Disposal at an approved landfill was found to be prohibitively expensive and would require additional logistics as compared to offshore unconfined disposal. The costs for such disposal are estimated at $100/cubic yard as compared to $16/cubic yard for offshore disposal which equates to a cost differential of$168.8 million which would render the project economically infeasible. Additionally, the dredged material would need to be stockpiled and dewatered prior to transfer to an upland disposal site. The time required for dewatering is dependent upon such variables as the physical composition of sediments, weather conditions, and contractor operations; however, it is 5 CENAE-R-PT SUBJECT: Suitability Determination for Salem Wharf, Salem Harbor, Salem, MA, Application Number NAE-2005-1095. anticipated that sediments would be suitable for removal and off-site disposal over periods of no less than 1 to 2 years. Such stockpiling would consume a large portion of the project site upland which is currently used for parking for the Salem Ferry from April through November. b. Beneficial Re-use The applicant's agent believes that none of the three beneficial re-use options were feasible. Based on the sediment test results, the material is too silty for beach nourishment. Similarly, the organics and salt content in the dredged material, in the opinion of the applicant, renders it inappropriate for construction use. Local or regional site investigations did not result in locating active Brownfield sites that would accept this material. c. Confined Aquatic Disposal (CAD) The City is investigating the ability to create a CAD cell for material unsuitable for unconfined offshore disposal as a part of its Harbor Development Plan. Placement of this material in a CAD cell would require additional dredging fo_rcreating volume for Project material, which would still require unconfined o3'4shore disposal. d. Unconfined Offshore Disposal at MBDS The proposed dredged material has been tested and has been determined to be suitable for unconfined offshore disposal. The total construction cost for this alternative is estimated to be approximately $3,200,000. This is currently the most viable, as well as cost-effective, alternative for the project and is the preferred alternative by City of Salem. There are no practical alternatives, as . determined in the Environmental Assessment for this project (USACE-NAE 2007). 6 CENAE-R-PT SUBJECT: Suitability Determination for Salem Wharf, Salem Harbor, Salem, MA, Application Number NAE-2005-1095. 6. If you have any questions or want further details on the procedure of project evaluation, please contact the MAS Project Manager at (978) 318-8336 or charles.n.farrisOusace.armv.mil. CHARLES N. FARRIS Project Manager, Marine Analysis Section AE Regulatory 6 Melville P. Cote, Jr., Manager Robert J. DeSista, Chief Water Quality Unit Regulatory Division EPA Region 1 - New England New England District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers C_oricur . _ _ one 13-5—not cont r o not concur Date /y pg Date 7 POWER OONPNM f -. L � y'`l ! I 5 yyJ/'q"NpD •l i. / r byAj_� :.^ r ., � � iif� 72.' �S.W-g' s// III ^0su ' "r%�� 5 �:_._ ti ✓S `� k -.:� �_- �� _ ddl� QLf PROPOSED DREDGING I EL. —P8.0 1 l(w/OVERDRED E TO —28.0). PROPOSED DREDGE FOOTPRINT AND. SEDIMENT SAMPLE LOCATIONS SALEM CITY PIER SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS' JUNE 26fIGURt 2G wz,"amirts ac. 'NEii4MHNxr,wsuomserrs CENAE-R-PT SUBJECT: Suitability Determination for Salem Wharf, Salem Harbor, Salem, MA, Application Number NAE- 2005-1095. P.uje.f ie.:5.lemHnbor 0=1.5 a3.rom.� Cd.A CA.MB Coh=C CO=D Cok.E C b=F CARC'C10GLIM R25K NONC.4RCL�'OGE?\\TCRLSK T.mIEyhmRd TdAE9=,W T.W Elwn d ToblENd.i d T.WE.6m d ToW Eimmmd �..: Smvhl-POW L&A.Risk FiihRhk wU.'=swFFARisk lobm xhk Fch Rig[ M.1h.sbeR&b Risk S9O-1,2,4,5 1_NIE05 232E-06 4.03E-06 2.93E-01 3.80E-02 1.01E-0l SN-3,6 0.00£cW 0.00E+00 OOO&M 0.00E-00 000E+00 002-W M'7,k9Lowm O.WE+OO 0.00A00 O.00E+OO 090E-00 O.00E.00 O.WE•W 5A°-i,8,9 Tippy 2.70M 5.23E-06 9.14E-06 5-SIE-01 1D7E-0I I.SW.01 BeCvmce F+IR1OSRoffnmce) MOMS 28£-06 397E-06 256E-0I 497E-02 8.61E.01 Table 1 9 CENAE-R-PT SUBJECT: Suitability Determination for Salem Wharf, Salem Harbor, Salem, MA, Application Number NAE- 2005-1095. Tahte Kb Rdvk Summv,•d v8 Cempodln d�smiP`3Ve°rm Cd A Cel..B C k.=C CA—D Cah®E C.I..F C..ARCINMMCKMK MCr�Ci VGEMCFJM Tool Eg.nd Teblrtim Twzlh. d TadEv;®ud T.WE,6.m d TaalZ t=m d I S�plhg Rem Leb Fr Fill Bid MA.S.MkRik Lb Rid FKLMMdhsnoSbd Flu raJ SW.L'_9,5 0.00E+00 0.00E+0D 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 SW-16 0.00E+0D O.00E-W 000E+00 0AOE+00 0.00E+00 400E-0O SW.7"Lew. QODE+W O.OzQ m 0.00E+0D QOOE+00 0.00E+00 OME+00 5W.7,$9tW. 0LDEr00 O.00E. 0.00E+00 0.0WM10 0.00E+0U D.OE O �(MBmBef e) 400E+00 umO 000E+00 O.00EMO OADE+00 Q➢OE+00 1 Table 2 »z-. 10 `— The Commonwealth of-Wassachusetts `'�1�m mgitq(( Executive Office of Energy andEnvironmentafAffairs —/ 100 Cam6ridge Street, Suite 900 Ooston, W,9 02114 Deval L.Patrick GOVERNOR Timothy P.Murray - Tel:(617)626-1000 LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR Fax:(617)626-1181 http://w .mms.gov/envir Ian A.Bowles SECRETARY July 11, 2008 CERTIFICATE OF THE SECRETARY OF ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL NOTIFICATION FORM PROJECT NAME : Salem Port Expansion PROJECT MUNICIPALITY : Salem PROJECT WATERSHED : South River EEA NUMBER : 14234 PROJECT PROPONENT : City of Salem DATE NOTICED IN MONITOR : April 23, 2008 Pursuant to the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act(G. L. c. 30, ss. 61-62H)and Section 11.03 of the MEPA regulations(301 CMR 11.00), I hereby determine that this project does not require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report(EIR). As described in the Environmental Notification Form(ENF)and supplemental information dated June 10, 2008, the project consists of the redevelopment of 10 Blaney Street into a multi-use port facility by the City of Salem. It is anticipated that this multi-use water transportation facility will serve a variety of vessels, including the existing Salem Ferry Nathaniel Bowditch, excursion boats, water taxis, a Liquified Natural Gas (LNG)offshore supply boat, commercial fishing boats,visiting ships,and small cruise ships. Upland improvements to the site include traffic changes on Derby Street-(a local roadway), parking, a terminal building, landscaping and pedestrian amenities including a continuous harborwalk,and a fishing/viewing pier. Waterside improvements include the construction of a fixed pile- supported pier and a floating dockibarge system. EEA# 14234 ENF Certificate July 11,2008 Portions of the 10.14-acre project site are located within a Designated Port Area(DPA). Dredging will be required to achieve water depths necessary for the proposed uses along with impacts to wetland resource areas associated with the construction of the harborwalk, piers, floats, and terminal building. The Department of Conservation and Recreation(DCR)has indicated that proposed activities that will take place seaward of the Mean Low Water line are located within the boundaries of the South Essex Ocean Sanctuary and are therefore regulated in accordance with the Ocean Sanctuaries Act(MGL c.132A §§12B-16E and 302 CMR 5.00). MEPA Jurisdiction and Required Permits The project is undergoing MEPA review pursuant to Section 11.03 (3)(b)(3)because it requires a State Agency action and will result in the dredging of 10,000 or more cubic yards of material. The project will also alter coastal bank (Section 11.03(3)(b)(1)(a))and 1/2 or more acres of wetland resource areas (Section 11.03(3)(b)(1)(f)),and expand pile supported structures by more than 2,000 square feet(sf)in base area(Section 11.03(3)(b)(6)). The project will require a Chapter 91 License and a Section 401 Water Quality Certificate (WQC) from the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection(MassDEP). The project may be subject to federal consistency review by the Office of Coastal Zone Management(CZM). A Section 10/Section 404 Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers(ACOS)will he required. The project must obtain an Order of Conditions from the Salem Conservation Commission,or in the case of an appeal, a Superseding Order of Conditions from MassDEP. Finally, approval under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permit will be needed from the United States Environmental Protection Agency. The project will be receiving funding from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts through the Seaport Bond Bill. Therefore,MEPA jurisdiction for this project is broad and extends to all aspects of the project that are likely,directly or indirectly,to cause Damage to the Environment. Review of the ENF Project Alternatives The ENF and supplemental materials contained an analysis of several project alternatives, including different configurations of the floating dock/barge system and ship berths. The various alternative layouts were guided by the need to provide safe, year-round berthing for commercial lobster vessels based on wave energy reflection patterns in the harbor. Berthing locations for the excursion,cruise and offshore supply vessels, as well as the proposed location of the ferry terminal building, will remain susceptible to wave action from northeast storms and wave reflection. The preferred alternative can accommodate the stated goals of the project related to large-vessel berthing locations,as well as provide 17 protected year-round commercial lobster slips(out of a possible total of 30 commercial fishing berths),while reducing the original amount of proposed intertidal dredging by 2,590 sf to 41,600 sf in total. EEA# 14234 ENF Certificate July 11,2008 Wetlands and Waterways Proposed dredging will alter approximately 1.01 acres of Coastal Beach and 6.69 acres of Land Under Ocean. Dredging associated with the preferred alternative will impact approximately 41,600sf of the intertidal zone. Additional project impacts include alteration of 1.85 acres of Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage (LSCF)and alteration of 850 linear feet of Coastal Bank. Dredging of the intertidal area is proposed as a means to create a protected embayment to provide year-round berthing for lobster/commercial vessels. The Office of Coastal Zone Management(CZM) has noted that the preferred alternative includes modifications to the existing riprap slope and construction of a new seawall to support the terminal building. To ensure that these modifications do not exacerbate existing wave energy issues,the proponent should demonstrate during the permitting process that the new design will minimize impacts on the adjacent Land Under Water such that the stability of the newly constructed or existing adjacent coastal banks or structures are not adversely affected. As part of the preferred alternative,the project includes approximately 1,580 sf of intertidal fill to allow the construction of the ferry terminal building on upland instead of as a pile-supported structure. MassDEP has requested that the proponent demonstrate that this area of intertidal fill is a reasonable alternative to supporting the southern corner of the terminal building on piles. Portions of the proposed dredging areas will be located within the South Essex Ocean Sanctuary. DCR has determined that the project,as proposed, is consistent with DCR's Environmental Policies outlined in the Ocean Sanctuaries regulations, in that the policy at 302 CMR 5.05(1)(g)encourages maritime commerce and development in DPAs that are not otherwise prohibited by the Ocean Sanctuary Act and regulations. I encourage the proponent to provide information during the state permitting processes on how port and vessel activities will be handled so as to maintain water quality and minimize dredging impacts on intertidal areas during construction. The Flood Hazard Management Program(FHMP), under agreement with the Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA), is the state coordinating agency for the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The FHMP has provided comments that include an overview of requirements and documentation for construction within regulated flood zones. It appears that some portions of the project, as described in the ENF, may not be compliant with State Building Code (780 CMR)standards for structures in a velocity flood zone(V zone). The proponent should review the proposed building design and make the changes necessary to comply with State Building Code requirements. Fisheries Habitat According to the Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF),Salem Harbor provides spawning and forage habitat for a variety of finfish and invertebrate species, including (Pseudopleuronecies americanus), Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua)and American lobster (Homarus americanus). In particular, this embayment supports seasonal spawning congregations of winter flounder. Additionally, DMF conducted a survey of the project site on June 19, 2008 which identified a seed set of soft shell clams(Mya arenaria), adult razor clams FF;Aj 14__34 ENF Certificate July 11,2008 (Ennis directus), and blue mussels(Mytilus edulis). The project site, including the outer two proposed dredge basins, is within an area that was mapped as eelgrass in the 1995 MassDEP eelgrass map and is listed on the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration(NOAA) Nautical Chart as an area that was historically vegetated and may still support eelgrass. DMF has recommended several mitigation measures to avoid or minimize impacts to marine resources. These measures include no in-water, silt-producing work between February 1 and June 30 for the protection of winter flounder spawning and juvenile development; a survey of eelgrass in the area; consideration of additional reductions in on-site impervious area; and exploration of additional mitigation alternatives in collaboration with resource agencies during the permitting process. Archaeological Resources The Massachusetts Board of Underwater Archaeological Resources (BUAR)conducted a preliminary review of its files and secondary literature sources to identify any known and potential submerged cultural resources in the proposed project area. While no record of any underwater archaeological resources was found within the proposed project boundaries, research indicates at least 13 shipwrecks in the Salem area for which locations are vague. Therefore,the BUAR cannot conclude that there are no underwater archaeological resources located in the proposed project area. As recommended by the BUAR, the proponent should consider conducting a marine archaeological reconnaissance survey for the areas in which improvement dredging is proposed. This survey should be developed and undertaken by a qualified marine archaeologist in consultation with both the BUAR and the Massachusetts Historical Commission, and completed prior to any dredging. Stormwater The project must comply with the new MassDEP stormwater management regulations (SMR) that went into effect in January 2008. The project includes the construction of two new storwmater outfalls that will discharge to a critical area. MassDEP has identified several deficiencies with the stormwater management design presented in the ENF, which should be modified prior to submission of the Notice of Intent and application for the 401 WQC. These issues include compliance with Standard 4 of the SMR for total suspended solids(TSS)removal and appropriate selection and sizing of Stormceptor"m units. I encourage the proponent to continue to investigate ways to incorporate low-impact design(LID) Best Management Practices (BMPs) into the site design. Additionally, given the constricted nature of the site and proximity to wetland resource areas,the proponent should prepare a source control and pollution prevention plan to address snow removal and street sweeping practices and to prevent illicit discharges to the storm drains on-site. Construction Impacts The proponent should take measures to reduce potential demolition and construction period impacts (including but not limited to noise, vibration,dust,and traffic flow disruptions). The proponent must comply with MassDEP's Solid Waste and Air Quality Control regulations during construction. I encourage the proponent to incorporate construction waste recycling activities as a sustainable measure for the project. The proponent should consult with MassDEP for appropriate standards and guidelines for managing construction waste. 4 EEA# 14234 ENF Certificate July 11,2008 1 encourage the proponent to mitigate the construction period impacts of diesel emissions to the maximum extent feasible. This mitigation may be achieved through participation in the MassDEP Diesel Retrofit Program. The proponent should work with MassDEP to implement construction-period diesel emission mitigation, which could include the installation of after- engine emission controls such as oxidation catalysts or diesel particulate filters. I remind the proponent that off-road equipment engines must use low sulfur diesel (LSD) fuel as of July 2007, as required by a 2004 regulation issued by the U.S. EPA. I encourage the proponent to further mitigate construction period air quality impacts through the use of ultra low sulfur diesel(ULSD) fuel in off-road engines, which contains even lower sulfur content than LSD. Conclusion Following a review of the ENF and the comments entered into the record, I find that the impacts of the project within MEPA jurisdiction do not warrant the preparation of an EIR. I conclude that no further MEPA review is required. The proponent may resolve any remaining issues during the state and local permitting processes. f "July 11, 2008 �� Date Ian A. Bowles Comments received: 05102/2008 John D. Keenan, State Representative, 71h Essex District 05/07/2008 Hawthorne Cove Marina 05/12/2008 Burnham Associates, Inc. 06/19/2008 Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management 06/30/2005 Salem Sounds Coastwatch 07/01/2005 Department of Conservation and Recreation 071101/')008 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection—NERO 07/0 1/2003 Board of Underwater Archaeological Resources 07/01/2008 Division of Marine Fisheries IAt3/1IS.1/hsi DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY NEW ENGLAND DISTRICT,CORPS OF ENGINEERS • 696 VIRGINIA ROAD CONCORD,MASSACHUSETTS 01742.2751 REPLY TO June 2, 2000 (D ATTENTION OF Regulatory Branch CENAE-CO-R-199801388 Honorable Stanley J. Usovicz Mayor, City of Salem Salem City Hall 93 Washington Street Salem, Massachusetts 01970-3592 Mr. Robert Blair& Mr. Robert Salem Goldeneye Corporation 4 Blaney Street Salem Massachusetts 01970 Dear Mayor Usovicz, Mr. Blair and Mr. Salem: This is to reissue the general permit authorization we originally issued on June 12, 1998 to both the City of Salem and Goldeneye Corporation to construct and maintain slope stabilization, a ramp and spud or pile-held floats and to retain approximately 15,666 square feet of previously unauthorized fill at the harbor end of Blaney Street in Salem, Massachusetts and to authorize you to proceed immediately with the mitigation work agreed to under this approval. This reissuance is necessary because the original mitigation plan that was approved as part of that au thorization could not be accomplished and has now been replaced with mitigation work at two different sites (Site# 4.44EA-Pickman-P_ark and Site #,4_45-A_Forest River.T_rail). The mitigation that is now agreed to will be carried out by the Northeast Massachusetts Mosquito Control and Wetlands Management District. As indicated in the June 12,1998 letter (which authorized the structures that were placed for the summer 1998 boating season as well as the existing unauthorized fill), we determined that the work shown on plans entitled "Application by: Goldeneye Corp. and City of Salem," on 5 sheets and dated "May 1998" would have only minimal individual or cumulative environmental impacts and was authorized under the Massachusetts Programmatic General Permit only after the compensation is factored . into the analysis. The revised mitigation plans for the two sites that were recently submitted (PURPOSE: RESTORATION OF SALT MARSH HABITAT, APPLICATION BY: GOLDENEYE CORP. IN: SALEM AT: FOREST RIVER, COUNTY: ESSEX, STATE: MA" in 5 sheets and dated 5/2/2000 with sheets 2, 3, 4, and 5 revised on 5/17/2000 by Bourne Consulting Engineering,Franklin, Massachusetts), is an acceptable substitute for the previous mitigation and therefore, if satisfactorily accomplished, would resolve the current non-compliance with the conditions of the general permit authorization. You may proceed immediately with the restoration once all other required local and/or State approvals have been received. All other conditions of the previous permit authorization letter remain in full force and effect. Also, as Mr. Valiton has previously informed representatives of Goldeneye Corporation, the additional work that has now been proposed for the site, which includes replacing the temporary structures with more permanent and expanded facilities for ferries and other commercial vessels, will have to be the subject of a ; separate public interest review process. We will issue a public notice for that project once work on the mitigation sites has actually commenced. If you have any questions regarding this letter, contact Mr. Brian Valiton at(978) 318-8166 or (800) 362-4367 if calling from within Massachusetts. Sincerely /Karen Kirk Adams Chief, Permits & Enforcement Section Regulatory Branch Copies Furnished: Salem City Planner Salem City Hall 93 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970-3592 Mr. Eric Hutchins NMFS One Blackburn Avenue Gloucester, MA,01930 Mr. Russell Vickers Hawthorne Cove Marina 10 White Street Salem, Massachusetts 01970 Ms. Susan St. Pierre Fort Point Associates, Inc. 286 Congress Street Boston, Massachusetts 02210 Ms. Jane Mead Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management 100 Cambridge Street Boston, Massachusetts 02210 Ms. Andrea Cooper Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management North Shore Office 2 State Pier Gloucester, Massachusetts 01930 L_ -3- Mr. Ed Reiner EPA, Region 1 JFK Federal Building Boston, MA 02203 Mr. Phil Morrison U.S. Fish &Wildlife Service Ralph Pill Marketplace 22 Bridge Street, Unit #1 Concord, NH 03301-4901 Mr. Ron Bourne Bourne Consulting Engineering 184 West Central Street Franklin, MA 02038 Mr. Walter Montgomery Northeast Massachusetts Mosquito Control &Wetlands Management District P.O. Box 5068 Andover, MA 01810 Ms. Jill Provencal Massachusetts DEP, Northeast Regional Office. 205 A Lowell Street Wilmington, MA 01887 NOTE: COORDINATES ARE IN MASSACHUSETTS STS, PLANE COORDINATES (MAINLAND, 'NAO 83Y WOODLAND AREA W DISPOSAL AREA 'PHRAGMITES AREA , 1• J. J J, i. •1. Y V. J. y. ., wPROJECT BENCHMARK DIRT FOOTPATH VOLUNTEERS BRIDGE .; PK SET IN PILE CAP OF VOLUNTEERS BRIDGE, EL. +14.5 MLW Y APRCIXIMATE 3005067.1, E817519.9, .Y Y WETLAND LIMITS " J J W J W .Y Y -Y Y Y I Y Y Y •Y . '39.9` LOWEST POINT OF SALT PAN L. +7.5 MLW FOREST RIVER W # '¢r I PROPOSED SILL DITCH RIVER IS TO BE EXCAVATED / 3 2' WIDE x 2' DEEP II ;.;.fjq:�;•;. '. �� "� �` BOTTOM OF DITCH, EL. +8.5Y 100' DOWN STREAM OF BRIDGE I TO REPLICATE THE RIVER'S II I A y ORIGINAL COURSE II Ij IIlj1I3 I�III�IIIIIII 1 LEGEND J .I rII III I V•.' •�'••' J L J• Y ,. , Y 1. Y Y Y IIIiIIIir QPOSf �ALTyPAN 3' QEEP. DISPOSAL AREA �/II�14J ?T TH.E CFNTE,(2, 2.3 PERIMETEI 1 1 rIlli J 1 1 J 1 AREA = 3700 SF 1 I I I/IIII J 1 , , i Y 'I PHRAGMITES AREA, III�I Y I Y Y MARSH/WETLAND 1 �� rIII WETLAND AREA IIhI y IIr J. J. 0 40 80 12 DREDGE AREA . W 1 1 REVISED 5/17/00 SCALE: 1" = 40'-0" 100 YR FLOOD +17.2 NGVD +4.15 TITLE: IN: SALEM HTL +11.3 MLW 0.0 FOREST RIVER SITE AT:FOREST RIVER MHW +9.32 COUNTY: ESSEX STATE: MA —M� 9oumeCoosvlyogEn��,�R PURPOSE: APPLICATION BY: SHEET 2 OF5 .�� t__ _ _ ___ _,��aiw RESTORATION OF. GOLDENEYE CORP. �r s i i v La &I'mm+zm DATE:5/2/00 AVG. EL.=+10.5 MLW EXISTING GRADE VERTICAL SIDE SLOPES --{ r- 2.0' A SILL DITCH CROSS SECTION 3 HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1" = 20'-0" VERTICAL SCALE: 1" = 2'-0" EXISTING GRADE AVG. EL.=+10.5 MLW /1 6 B SALT PAN - CROSS SECTION 3 HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1" = 20'-0" VERTICAL SCALE: 1" = 2'-0" REVISED 5/17/00 PURPOSE: TITLE: APPLICATION BY: RESTORATION OF GOLDENEYE CORP. SALT MARSH HABITAT CROSS SECTIONS 100 YR FLOOD +17.2 IN: SALEM HTL + 1.13 MHW +19.32 WJL Bourne CoAaddng Eng/oeer/ag AT: FOREST RIVER NGVD +4.15 ~�� ,.pslm.anieran COUNTY: ESSEX STATE: MA .. �.. .. „ curry z nr a nnrr. ❑ /n /nn NOTE: COORDINATES ARE IN MASSACHUSETTS STATE PLANE COORDINATES (MAINLAND, NAD 83) 4' BOX CULVERT SILL DITCH 2' WIDE x 2' DEEP A 5 APPROXIMATE WETLAND LIMITS DEEPEST POINT OF SALT PAN 3' BELOW EXISTING GRADE ±28 PROJECT BENCHMARK B PK SET IN BLACKTOP N3005067.1, E817519.9 5 '•' '• SALT PAN ASSUMED EL. +100.00 880 SF AREA 9.0' 115 FT PERIMETER PHRAGMITES AREA APPROXIMATE CONCRETE WALL WETLAND LIMITS LEGEND PHRAGMITES AREA BREACH EXISTING CONCRETE WALL 0 40 80 AT CONSTRUCTION JOINT SCALE: 1" = 40'-0" REVISED 5/17/00 100 YR FLOOD +17.2 NGVD +4.15 TITLE: IN: SALEM HTL +11.3 MLw 0.0AT:PICKMAN PARK MHw +9.32 PICK AN PARK SITE COUNTY: ESSEX STATE: MA PURPOSE: APPLICATION BY: SHEET 4 OF 5 Boome Consa/Hng Engiueering GOLDENEYE CORP. WE RESTORATION OF �' _._.�a_peq aw+ia_i!`_�Z^�L —�OLT_Mf� DATE:S 2 00 EXISTING GRADE VERTICAL SIDE SLOPES —1 F— 2.0' A SILL DITCH I— CROSS SECTION 5 HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1" = 20'-0" VERTICAL SCALE: 1" = 2'-0" EXISTING GRADE 7:::LLEVATION e SALT PAN — CROSS SECTION 5 " HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1" = 20'-0" VERTICAL SCALE: 1" = 2'-0" REVISED 5/17/00 PURPOSE: TITLE: APPLICATION BY: RESTORATION OF GOLDENEYE CORP. SALT MARSH HABITAT CROSS SECTIONS 100 YR FLOOD +17:2 IN: SALEM HTL +11 139.32 � Bouroe MHW Consuldog Eng/neering AT: FOREST RIVER D +4.15 -- s y„s.,n „� ,,, COUNTY: ESSEX STATE: MA NGVn h4Tc. S /7 /nl1 F ipp myhcbk HP dadk,, r Division of Marine Fisheries ' 251 Causeway Street, Suite 400 �k Boston, Massachusetts 02114 Paul J.Diodati (617)626-1520 kv- Director lax (617)626-1509 Deval Patrick Governor Ian A.Bowles Secretary Mary B.Griffin Commissioner November 14,2008 David Slagle,Environmental Analyst Mass DEP Waterways Program One Winter Street., 5"'fl. Boston,MA 02108 Re: Salem Port Expansion W08-2463 Dear Mr. Slagle: The Division of Marine Fisheries (MarineFisheries)has reviewed the Chapter 91 notice, submitted by The City of Salem for Phase I of the Salem Wharf Project,to include upland improvements and a water transportation terminal with piers and structures,a wave attenuator and associated dredging of approximately 115,117 cy of sediment in Salem Harbor. The proposed shoreline design includes the installation of riprap, timber piles and concrete bulkheads to form a retaining wall and a harbor walk. The proposed upland development includes an increase of 1.89 acres of impervious surfaces. Phase II will be reviewed and permitted separately and includes intertidal dredging for the creation of protected year round dockage for local lobster fishermen. Below we provide comments on the project's potential impacts to marine fisheries resources and habitats. Marine Fisheries resources and project impacts Salem Harbor provides spawning and forage habitat for a variety of finfish and invertebrate species, including winter flounder(Pseudopleuronectes americanus),Atlantic cod(Gadus morhua)and American lobster(Homarus americanus)'. In particular,this embayment supports seasonal spawning aggregations of winter flounder. The area is adjacent to a shellfish suitability polygon,the State's formal shellfish habitat designation. Since the shellfish suitability polygons have a coarse resolution,delineated areas should be used only as a guide to the approximate location of shellfish habitat.' Therefore,MarineFisheries shellfish biologists conducted a survey of the project site on June 19,2008. This survey identified a seed set of soft shell clams(Mya arenaria),adult razor clams(Ensis directus)and blue mussels (Mytilus edulis) in the intertidal portions of the project site. The sediment was characterized as fine sand with areas of clay. The survey did not extend into the subtidal areas proposed to be dredged in Phase I. The phase I project site is within an area that was mapped as eelgrass in the 1995 Mass DEP eelgrass map and is listed on the NOAA Nautical Chart as "Grs",indicating that it was historically vegetated and may still support eelgrass. However,the applicant conducted an eelgrass survey in October 2008 and did not find any eelgrass in the dredge footprint. Work proposed for the creation of this port facility would include dredging and filling of subtidal and intertidal areas including land under the ocean and intertidal land containing shellfish. The Phase I proposal ' Jerome,WC.,A.P.Chesmore and O. Anderson. 1967. A study of the Marine Resources of Beverly-Salem Harbor. Division of Marine Fisheries Monograph Series Number 4. See description of Shellfish Suitability Areas, MassGIS 2004,http://www.mass.gov/mgis/shlfshsuit.htm. includes subtidal and a small portion of intertidal dredging and fill,for a total volume of 115,117 cy and 298,570 sf of dredging and 1,580 sf of intertidal fill. MarineFisheries' Recommendations: The site is a Designated Port Area that has historically supported marine industrial uses and as such should remain a viable site for the City of Salem's marine port needs. However,any development that will impact marine fisheries resources should be approached with avoidance and minimization clearly demonstrated in the project design and alternatives analysis. We recommend the following minimization measures. • In a Designated Port Area,Land Under the Ocean is assumed to be significant to Marine Fisheries (310CMR 10.26). In this case the project is proposed in an area where winter flounder congregations have been documented.' The severity of impacts from dredging will vary depending on the duration of activity and the season during which it takes place. Long periods of dredging-related siltation could greatly hinder the spawning and development of finfish eggs and larvae. Therefore,we recommend that no in-water, silt-producing work take place between February 1 to June 30 for the protection of winter flounder spawning and juvenile development. • We recommend the use of bottom-weighted silt curtains to minimize siltation of adjacent resource areas during dredging. • Stormwater runoff and discharges are one of the largest contributors to water quality degradation in Massachusetts. This project currently proposes a large increase in impervious surfaces. We recommend that the applicant minimize the currently proposed impervious surfaces where possible and design the sites's stormwater management with BMPs to minimize run-off and treat stormwater using LID techniques where possible,in addition to the manufactured device proposed. Thank you for considering our comments. MarineFisheries is available for technical assistance throughout the project permitting process. Please contact Tay Evans,the project review coordinator,in our Gloucester office with any questions at 978-282-0308 x. 168 or tay.evans@state.ma.us Sincerely, Paul J. Diodati Director cc. D. Winkler(DMF) K.Glen, B. Been (CZM) C. Dugues(Salem Conservation Commission) R. Bourne (Bourne Consulting) Jerome et al 1967. 2 I CONTRACTOR IAYDOWWSTOCKPILFAREA BENCH MARK p.' CONTRACTOR SHALL ROLL GRADES FROM EDGE OF �P`�CH MARK #1: REMOVEBERMINCORNER AND SPIKE IN UTILITY POLE PAVEMENT TO MEET UPPING GRAVEL WALKWAY. J IKE IN UTILITY POLE �---.- - MEET❑NEAND GARDE c � GRADE TO RKENE WNTERVIS SLOPE TOWARDS R.WALKWAY AT 2:I MARC is?Pi_•N-iS 84 MLW OF EX6TINGPAVFME �ryF - ELEVATION=I6.8.(MLW) j - 1SpOpIN JNK FFNC° _40 115.00) I1 S00) (150015.00)(15'O�GATc _ � � _ _ - ° (1-ft3 S_� B- IAC 1 8 116.00) (16 01 LINLINastfla - J /mo- -' t6i} 16.1, /B / 6tY'/1/% Zte. 9 N 8 �2 tHP 16.81 /iS9 1%. 3 NYZ+ '..• ^ rt u 20 ./ i It e. 2OHw `9f fi � E 4J tY] 1HP 3 5d5ip] 14 Pp�( )IJf ANDD EOF F%ISTING 111 H133 1 5.35 )I� I E Ai%ERAGCE5514.ISH- / y t METAL 1gy 15A- I S0 MUM 2%SLOPE IN ANY\'. RIt LIN -11 15. 9 6 1/4'1 � NON PAVEMENT AT \ -- a a`H6.00. w �s B�o TYi / 2 al o -1 DEE TO o Ho tD canoE Dc eD ALTs PERMINAL -d.] UILDING I -02 03 SEEBPECIFKAT)N5.ENCH MARK # E�: �\ -� ONCRETE SPIKE IN = 16 0 ! / 0.3 BITUMINOUS CONCRETE PAVEMENT TILITY POLE g36-16U._ _ -1 / ) © ° ! �T5 06 / ! SEAWALL-SEE SHEET B CONTINUOUS BENEATH ADD If LEVATION=20.09(MLW) n.] n.5 ]a9 Ix ' © � .L I I / U2 ALi,rI T[RMINAL BUILDING� Igg I ) I -8,2 MEETNEWRIPRAP ASI FD j I ON MARINE VAA es ��5 -�a- � _ MEE]'E%ISTING GRADE ON ! f� I e.e "KT558 \✓�x� ®� 1 (LAND SIDE OF B�UUIDERS .-342`4 1\ -0.2 SEEDTDGES-SEE UYCUT O 14 fi 15. 3 / Y ND TERLS PIRA 1 -6 w t I�w/t t5 A VIAA PAVEMENT,GRADING&UTILITY RIM NOTES: ADDENDUM #2 NOTES: i6 B 36'Wa $-6'S A NW 6 114 ` 400DS (13.8) \ 1. ALL ELEVATIONS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN,INCLUDING FOR THIS DRAWING L-2,SHEET I IA,ISSUED BY ADDENDUM 6 CONTOUR LINES,UTILITY RIM ELEVATIONS,AND SPOT 42, NO REVISION CLOUDS ARE PROVIDED AS ALL B i63 0 60" Ips 1➢M \�\ \� \ / ELEVATIONS,ARE TO FINAL PHASE FINISHED GRADE,WHICH ELEVATIONS AND GRADES ARE REVISED FROM SHEET 11. ENS '2 3' 01fpN ° AWE n e INCLUDES A BITUMINOUS CONCRETE TOP COURSE. THE E $ TOP COURSF IS NOT INCLUDED IN THIS PHASE 1 BASE BID AS SHOWN ON THIS GRADING PLAN-SHEET 11A, DATED a GP ,�Y 1 �\I i \v J �, \ / PACKAGE.CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE RIM ELEVATIONS 01-03-2011,THE FINISHED GRADES FOR THE 5ITE HAVE BENCH MARK S: 6c//. E` AND TOP OF BINDER COURSE ELEVATIONS I-$'LOWER GENERALLY BEEN RAISED 6-OVER THE ELEVATIONS CONCRETE SPIKE IN THAN INDICATED ELEVATIONS TO ALLOW FUTURE TOP INDICATED ON L-2 SHEET 111N THE ORIGINAL BID COURSE INSTALLATION. DOCUMENT PACKAGE.THE SPOT ELEVATIONS AND UTILITY POLE #36/1-1959 CONTOUR LINES CONTINUE TO DEPICT FINAL PHASE ELF•VATION=17,34(MLW) 2. FOR THIS PROJECT,THE TC ELEVATIONS ARE TO TOP OF FINISHED GRADE PER NOTE AT LEFT.THE PAVEMENT TOP SEAWALL,SEE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS.THE BC ELEVATIONS COURSE,WHICH IS INCLUDED IN THE GRADES SHOWN ON ARE THE PROPOSED FINAL PAVEMENT ELEVATIONS WHERE THIS PLAN,IS NOT INCLUDED IN THIS PHASE 1 CONTRACT. AREPAVEMENT ENTMEETS THE SEAWALL. GRADING NOTES 1. CONTRACTOR SHALL EMPLOY A LICENSED SURVEYOR OR 6. PITCH EVENLY BETWEEN SPOT GRADES.ALL PAVED AREAS 10. ALL GRADING SHALL COMPLY WITH THE RULES AND GRADING LEGEND REGISTERED ENGINEER TO VERIFY AND LAYOUT ALL GRADES MUST PITCH TO DRAIN AT A MINIMUM SLOPE OF REGULATIONS OF THE LOCAL AND FEDERAL LAWS AND AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS. ONE-EIGHTH INCH(1/81 PER FOOT.ANY SIT£CONDITIONS GUIDELINES FOR UNIVERSAL ACCESSIBILITY,INCLUDING SYMBOL DESCRIPTION SYMBOL DESCRIPTION OR ISSUES NOT ALLOWING THIS TO OCCUR SHALL BE ADA.IN CASE OF CONFLICT BETWEEN REGULATIONS,THE 2. PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY EXCAVATION WORK THE REPORTED TO THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO GUIDELINE PROVIDING GREATER ACCESS SHALL APPLY. I� --E%LSnNG CONTOUR RUS OAO DRAINAGE STRUCTURE( CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN CONTINUING THE WORK.NEW PAVEMENT AREAS MUST RIM ELEVATION ACCORDANCE WITH THE'DIG SAFE'NOTIFICATION HAVE POSITIVE DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE STREET CU RB OR 11. RIM ELEVATIONS OF ALL DRAINAGE STRUCTURES AND - 4 PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR VIE VERIFY IN FIELD PROCEDURES PROMOTED BY RESPECTIVE UTILITY TOWARDS DRAINAGE STRUCTURES. OTHER UTILITY STRUCTURES SHALL BE SET FLUSH WITH COMPANIES,THE'DIG SAFE'TELEPHONE NUMBER FOR FINAL SURROUNDING GRADES 50 AS NOT TO CAUSE A TRIP 1-PROPOSED MAJORCONTOUR MEG MEET EXISTING GRADE MASSACHUSETTS 151.988-OIG-SAFE. P. FINAL SHAPING OF ALL EARTHWORK SHALL BE AS DIRECTED EDGE. �} AND APPROVED IN THE FILED BY THE OWNER'S ADDENDUM #2 0 3. VERIFY ALL EXISTING GRADES IN THE FIELD AND REPORT REPRESENTATIVE. 12. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN OR ADJUST TO NEW +10.001 EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION -------- MEAN HIGH WATER ANY DISCREPANCIES IMMEDIATELY TO THE OWNER'S FINISHED GRADES AS NECESSARY ALL UTILITY AND SITE o - REPRESENTATNEPRIORTOSTARTINGWORK.THE STARTING B. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE DUST CONTROL FOR STRUCTU RES SUCH AS LIGHT POLES,SIGN POLES, GRADING +000 PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION 0 TRANSFORMER(FUTURE) OF WORK INDICATES THE CONTRACTOR HAS REVIEWED EARTHWORK OPERATIONS AS APPROVED BY THE OWNER'S MANHOLES,DRAINAGE STRUCTURES,HAND HOLES,WATER IX, PROPOSED SEAWALL ELEVATION AND ACCEPTED E%ISTING CONDITIONS. REPRESENTATIVE. AND GAS GATES,SYSTEMS U LESSETI OTHERWISEROM LANDSCAPING PLAN HOSE BILL UTILITY AND SITE SYSTEMS UNLE550THERWISE NOTED ON 4. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE OF 9, SEE SPECIFICATIONS SECTION 02300 FOR ADDITIONAL THE UTILITY DRAWINGS OR AS DIRECTED BY THE OWNER'S - +TC/BC TOPOFQIRBI BOTTOMOFCURB * HYDRANT ANY LOCATIONS WITH CONFLICTS BETWEEN UTILITY PLANS EXCAVATION AND FILLING REQUIREMENTS. REPRESENTATIVE. i AND GRADING PLANS. 13. CONTRACTOR SHALL HYDROSEED ALL AREAS DISTURBED BY SITE DEVELOPMENT - PHASE I +iWIBW TOPOTWALL/BOTIOMOFWALL 5, CONTRACTOR SHALL BLEND NEW EARTHWORK SMOOTHLY TH15 CONTRACT FOR WHICH NO OTHER SURFACE SALEM WHARF PROJECT ? ' TR 1311 TOP OF PAMP/BOROM OF RAMP INTO EXISTING CONDITIONS,PROVIDING VERTICAL CURVES RESTORATION 15 INDICATED BY THE CONTRACT OR ROUNDINGS AT THE TOP AND BOTTOM OF SLOPES. DOCUMENTS. CITY OF SALEM SALEM, MA gw DECEMBER 2010 021 Shadley Associates BCfi• �Boerse CoaselNug I�aglnearleg +4' MM,.�.mow,m.,m, ✓ ,.nwA�. "�. ENGINEERS - u so-m� �^^�•^^�°_° : `°' � m °BAwN: SK is SCALf.I' I/0l/11 ADDS GRD CME ..m...u.-...-1-.w-e.na.un. ..s.•u+.=... CNECKED� DRAWING N0. L-2 D 1S 3E' ALL APPROVED,DATEDECEMBER 2D. 2010 _ =10' 0' REVs1oNs : SHEET 11A OF 24 SVH Rud 1 6,79j: S" DP-21 PVC INV. (IN)-IJ.'_ %'� �- 6" SDL-35 PIC NV (QIJI)- MATERIAL 11 6'HYDRANT 2_'.DATE VI B- B'%6'TEE °-2 °'%6' RESIGMED iE Il. GTE VALVE S. DI GP 2'CORPORATION WITH SADDLE 2'CURB STOP WITH VALVE BOX 2'COPPER we µ y, Af F 1 MM 14901 Y�1'J SUN J \ / B SDR- -12.36 V V1 J(1 RIM-16,7D1 V ( 8 s Y5 I dvl l f 8'SDF 21 PVC TIN. (INl-lOsa '\ i y B sDR z1 FVL IW. (IN)-11,10I 1 r \ / (OUT) 11.60 12'RICE INV. DUT) 11 80 SPIRES f .R y„r� 1 `S i 6•SDR-35 Pm INC (0Ui)-10.40 1 aaRP w1m eB s Ds#7 lIIIII DS/{ �) % RW 1600 RIM 15 t0 Ty VAnON 15 1 LyA ////T .( RI -15.55 {r t2 MCP Ixv 1:'RCP INV. (om)-1z3s ' ORIi � ^6J d ' it rcoflr w/ E.. Sc18¢6 p.1CU �� 2 rw >s �w T. cP Lnt7iklN_ - ' � 1 sMH Iz vAV.E Sox �PJ7l (`tl !_�_ Rlu-155)1 E - -' W \ -1 ° SDR-21 TWT SERVICE SIN°WITH e'SOR 5 INC IM/ (N)-970 _i•` n- W_ INV 12.70 IXt ]5 I 6•SP6 IMI (DTII) 960 - -fi + +y1-� f F - 9� '� RIM-NJO IIII II VIII °•1{BEND 1 I , r.. '� TI II'�.,+<� y6 5 `R N✓. (OUT)-1201 } D5„RCP INY. IH=10)0 DMX I8 OUi IIT///Illll nE- P PGCE O 1 v� _ 1.1: _ ( ) 11111 p5/8 A p MP Y1 161111 DMH 15 1\kL ) q y S -""5 , ARIu.t97D: RINd50o2 ( On - p t 1- --.-5- -. I FWAC MG utlO J \,•i1 ill>w�:v \�\� �? S(N)-1192 ICE )) 1R'RCP IMI lIN-11.J6 lLB/]) I 1z RCP IMI. IN}11 s0 F . 12'FCP IM/ (IN)-11 BR CB i0 1 12 RLP IMI (OUI w - � A A�� AA w w -_ \II CONTRACTOR To INSTAL BASE s ,.V 9_ /W _ +2•RCv INV ON) 10.57(cB PO) i i 9/II( 0 PMEMENi AT UDL111'TRENCH EXCAVATIONS �! z-. e{a �+ 10•RCP IM/. (OUT)-10.80 j/%rlT,� 1. RUSN TO EUSEN6 PAVEMFM IN PUBOC WAYS 11 / - 15 os µ(OONBE ORATE) DIM/16.ER 16.W TOR ilO10[ 17...muR'S.00 FIM=1l BO RIM-16.00-I6 AOY 15'ROP TIN.(IXID=11]D • �=. B RCP INV. (IN) BAO PAI - OIL/WATEfl - i. •• / e RCP INV. (OUT) 6 OD A(0 1 RIu 16 m1 1 _ RCP_ O 1 -- ® _ 0 RCP IMI (Ix) 9B0 INSTALL NEW WATER ° IIRCP ITN (001) °q DMH IB MNN ADVLWT .) 8'MSgt gpD - _ W _ 'RIN=16003 SMH 15 EXISTING MAW(M.. JS RL IINI. (IN)-9.1 F ,� 1 CU wAifR SERVICE _- 5-ROP INV TIN) -10. RIMSM-21 C ]- SRI/1 WNX CURB STOP _ 5•RCP IMI t,1 A5 / RI SDR-21 PVC IAN. (OIIT)=1].05 B'S k V - 15.601 - 1 n F- 1B•OUTFALL WIN TIDE ONH/B _ 'T--- a _ _ 12'RCP IRA)((IIN=10A5 8 e' ) i FIa VALVE _ RIM-15 W1 1 __ _ _ .-n N111 _ Y - - I 6 SMR B5 Wti pN (OIIt)=90° L _. 6 - i I NN.-]75 _ 12'RLP IAN IN=11.32 CB 5 _ - SIORMLEPTOR SIC SOD RIM-18003 �-./ I ED -=_. ! .1Y -� ,.f / % I' 12 P TIN. p IRM, (CB�) - - C. - _ _ R9'RCP IW. (IN 10.40 12'RCP IRM. (IXrtJ-+0.9) " N�515 M / �' RW I8J01 / DRNNACE OUTFALL 11CA P IMI. 0 G1 JO OMM 11D iB'RCP INV. (0 -10.15 1'CU WATER SERVICE M- CAT CM k SFIL WATER B 'SERVICE M BE ABANDONED f p T I R RCP IAV. (IXIt)-110.5 �'.u 1 RM-R MVV AIN 7Po WITH NRB S10P y. FI RIA-IN 003 RCP 'F g .B-ST-TG R\. B'RCP INJ(( B10 RW 115.W1 / 1 •u W IIOU" 1B'RCP IMI,(OUT)-].90 r I 16'RCP IM'. _ 7 u 1 ( )- $EE DEIN 18 RCP (mRFLOW)-1086 g RPoPINV. (OIUI OB9.1 -� F L- I - 2 i 1 16'RCP INV.(OVERFLO'M)-9.V5 L 1 RV 1°-RCP INN, (OIERFLOW)-1095 CONTRACT PERFORM MET COMMON PENENUEON INTO E%ISTNO II _ - _ 1 OWN 14 IB'GTE VK / vl CONNECT WITH RE%IBLE BOOT PER SPELIFIGTIONS Sl -T- L 1 IB OUIFNL WRX EDE w-„- BRICK THRONE ACCEPT INEW SEWER UNE: LOG ' k' DA-16.00 35 r _ B- RCP INV. (INHfl50 \ FLEX VALVE T-- 0 RCP INN. (OIIt)-B.SD \ T INV-925 TO IKE IN UNE iD ENGINEER 1 1B RLP INV. (OlEFROW�9"8D \ 1 20 D9(M PR PRIOR TICNCOF ryryFIIMEINTO IENGIN ER L __ pOLE X l 10 RCP STC 2400 / BERLH MPR _ _ SYSIEM REPOM ELEVATON AND SfORMCf Y RIM 1580E 1 am)Tr LYO IMI. (OUT)-85 19 RCP IMI. (OUT)-8.70 --- _ Fm=102 s.ODx / DMX S Rep Im,. (IN) 840 (MME)Ip l ndo (OUBLE II 15•acP IM (1.)-11.20(CE)N) ,� • Yr/ RIMM ;L 12RCP MI (IN) 1135 DHAH/J) 1KID 8•RCP IN. (OLTD 940 DMN IT G GZ. IL� / WOWi 15-RCP IW, \ B 12'RC IMI. (IN)-n6as - -"- 15'RCP WV. (OUI w �`Ll/'� ( � UTILITY SITE PLAN EXPANSION III IB'0 PPE 1CA SCALE INN.EL .71 : I'=JO'-0' TYPE II CONCRETE FORCING 2'-0' MIN lA➢ LENGTH ADDENDUM #22 EL+75 ._D.� SITE UTILITY LAYOUT PLAN • • SITE DEVELOPMENT - PHASE I 3 J 1 1.NOTE: SITE ELEVATIONS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN, INCLUDING CONTOUR LINES AND SALEM WHARF PROJECT + RIM AND SPOT ELEVATIONS, ARE TO FINISHED GRADE, INCLUDING A BITUMINOUS CONCRETE TOP COURSE. CITY OF SALEM 2. FOR THIS PROJECT, THE TC ELEVATIONS ARE TO TOP OF SEAWALL, SEE SALEM, MA STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS. THE BC ELEVATIONS ARE THE PROPOSED FINISH DECEMBER 2010 o PAVEMENT ELEVATIONS WHERE IT MEETS THE SEAWALL. 1� DRAINAGE OUTFALL DETAIL 3. FRAMES, GRATES, AND COVERS TO BE SET TO BINDER COURSE ELEVATION. y7 scALE: 1/r-I•-D• ®©© » 1-Bourne Consulting Eogineei'iog T M Shadley Associates Re AR NA,.�)se o }o BD E N G I N E E R S �� „�, my'0°�„a SRAwN: USF ®_ CHECRED: RSR [DRAWING N0.29]56-10A-13 $GL£: 1' - 30'-0 LeP ADDI GRD CI CAPPROVED DRAWNREVISIONS GTE: +vzW/tD EET13A OF 24 SALEM WHARF PROJECT SALEM, MA M-19 CONTRACT NO. 1 SITE DEVELOPMENT = PHASE I Project Owner: DECEMBER 2010 CITY OF SALEM CITY HALL ANNEX 120 WASHINGTON STREET31 SALEM, SALEM, MA 01970 sa , dy U } � !o Swprn Temvxl Y Design Team: Bourne Consulting Engineering - WaterfrontEngineerg Franklin,MA Shadley Assoc.-Landscape Architecture Lexington,MA +- PROJECT iI , m�� LOGIA j Richard E. Kimball Co., inc.-Electrical Engineering Andover,MA -- Geotechnical Services, Inc. - Geotechnical Haverhill,MA �® LOCUS PLAN scH : 1, 1W, Nitsch Engineering-survey Boston,MA Bourne Consulting Engineerin BC �-+ L Waterfront Engineers :77ra LEGEND LIST OF DRAWINGS WE_EIMRONY N IME SITE HES AN -ACTMIY USE UWATIDN" (AUL). ]MAI 2. ME CONTACTOR 5HAL BE AWARE AND COMPLY WITH 'ME HEALTH ANO SAFTIr PUN-(HASP) AND SOIL MNIAGEMENI PINE' (SMP)AND HAVE A COPY ® ,I M.EInI: 1 Title Sheet ON SITE AT ALL TIMES. M COMPLUNCE WITH ME HASP AND UP. THE CONTRACTOR SHML POST EMERGENCY CONTACTS AND DIRECTIONS TO ME NEAREST ,EGGAI FACIL W SIR IN ME EVENT OF AN EMERGENCY. TV 2 Drawing List,Legend,Abbreviation, &General Notes 3. ME CONTRACTOR SHA,HAA AL ELIPLOYEES ]RAINED AN MI RECOGNIZE THE HASP MTD SMP PRIOR TO EXCAVATION OR CONTACT ARM SOWS ON m �„��,,,,� 3 Site Survey 4. ME CONTRACTOR SHAL ATTEND WEEKLY MEETINGS HEID TO DISCUSS CONIFNrS OF THE SITE HASP. NAZADS Of CHEMICALS PDIENNLLY PRESENT AND ..A SAFETY PRECAUTIONS/ ACTICES.WORK PRA LOG OF MESE MEETINGS INCLUDING WES71ONS AND ANSWERS.WD THOSE IN ATTENDNICHA E SHALL BE # YAIT WL 4 Boring Information MAINTAINED IN ME JOB RLE 5. P MATERIAL HANDUNG SHML BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH WASP AND SNP. wW, Staging mA NT PAT 5 Contractor /Erosion Control OSHA RFa,RFUFNTS WL•0, .1.WTl lair OIG MWIWM 4R 6 Site Preparation 8 Demolition -PURSLLNR i0 Mc.L c.30. 139%ANY PERSON sNiHYIC A CONTRACT To WORN ON A PUBLIC BURDNNG ofl WBIK WORKS PROJECT ESTIMATED TO GEST e� tlp�j yRR.1 7 Site Preparation&Demolition MORE THAN $10.0001 MUST CERTIFY UNDER ME PANS AND PEWlTI Of PERJURE THAT N EMPLOrRS EMPLOYED ON ME WORKSITE OR IN WORK pmR rl[W1MMW mWEcml m smwu SUBJECT TO ME BIO. HAVE SOCESSNLLY COMPLETED A LEAST TEM HAIRS OF OSHA APPROVED TRAINING. PROF OF OSHA CERII IWTKKN Of ALL .1M DIK NAw uM e,DI 8 Existing Conditions-Sections WORKERS ONSITE WILL BE REWIRED BY ME CITY PRION TO ME STMT OF WOK. •A' uE HOT ATN. 9 Seawall Layout Plan CODES, •6 RF� y 10 Layout and Material Plan oa G6.GASP I. AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE (An). NAP nA RMtm TAW 2. CONCRETE REINFORCING STEEL INSTITUTE (CNS) 3WSSACHUSETIS STATE FORCING CAGE . lY ¢muss m¢WM mXK ouulnR 11 Grading and Landscaping Plan . W 4 ME COMYONWEALM OF AASWHUSEU21 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORMS 'STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR HIGHWAYS AND BRIDGES- (UIESr EDITpN) WM. 12 Site Details (YHD). 1RM'lY O'IWWS511.,,M TMIM WNf1FI SGR.EY DONMDL AND BA<EI INED' `- IN LIfrA.PAIN, 13 Site Utility Layout Plan W.wr APYAW N PwN: M° N0 FGr `�E 14 Site Drainage Details I. TOPOGRAPHIC DATA AND SIZE iT_ATUPES SHOWN HEREON WERE COLLECTED W MARCH 17, 209, MARCH 19. ]009 MO MAY Z& 2009 BY NRSCH qp. RR W AT OEYABAI[WRs g ENGINEERING AND HYDROCRANIC DATA SKEAN TAKEN FROM MINE ASWCATES. OHC. PUN ENTERED 4XISIMG SITE PLA'.DATED AUGUST. =7 CAN ft.. vW PITA DEYAW`PAINS DINKYRKY Cr CONOITIOAS AS THEY MSIFD WRING NE TIME OF ME SUIWHRA P'OAWFrt OtYAIAN PwNs 15 Water&Sewer Details 2. COORONARs ME BASED ON MASSACHUSETTS (MNLNND)STATE PUNS COOR I ATE SYSTEM (IAD 113) AND ARE EIPRESSEO 0 FEET. WIF M Aff m ATA 16 Seawall Sections 3. ELEVATKINS ARE SHOWN IN FEET AD TENTHS BASED ON MEAN EDW WATER(MLX) GARY. SEE TM DATUM GRAPHIC FOR_GTUM CONVERSION.RECORDS D LOWIwnI A OFEOSEWABIE OFEXISTING <NUTSCH MAKESDNO WW�RRRAMYPL OR GUA+OWNRANTEE IN AN LARANTEE TO TTHE ACCURACY OFXIMATE WAY MELED ON OATW OF UNDERGROUND IINEB. GTW 0 P 17 Seawall Concrete Details W G]WTH 5, SEE SHEET 4 FOR BORING INFORMAMIN. 'AOM KP IF... 18 Revetment Sections 6. EI6RING SURVEY CONTROL POINTS ARE PROVIDED AND SHOWN W ALSTAD IONAL SHEET 3. ME CONTRACTOR $HINSTAL ADSURVEY CONTROL AS 'K W R WINK OEYAWW MJN NECESSARY i0 PERFORM THE WORN. PEAMAMENI RINE)'G.ONIROL(Ai LEAST 3 rotors) SRWL BE ESTABUSMED FOR ME PROIEO AND PROTECTEDPROTECTEDALA ..oA.uW 19 Electrical Legend,Notes&Abbreviations ,I ON AS-BU4LT DRAWINGS, 7. THE C TDRRDAMMAGIE I°�<IA•11C STASH H NAND MAINT�ANN PROJECT BESEUNES AND CONTROL AS REOUIREO TO ENSURE ACCURATE LOGTIDN OF ALELEYENIS _ . mow P"W 20 Electrical Lighting&Power Plan OF THE PRI - UNNARRIAN,KENDIMW 21 Electrical Riser Diagram&Schedules SITE MCESS AND STAGING A FA_G. pgP p IOdW[vE I. CONTRACTOR STAGING AREA SHALL BE LOCATED WITHIN THE PROJECT JURTS AS SHOWN ON PIAN. 22 Electrical Details Sheet No. 1 x. CONTRACTOR TO M A MWUMUMD APPROVED IN,THEM22-NWWAG BUN AY TRW9 t DNEY STREET, AREA SWLL BE KEPT CLAL EAR At TIMES UNLESS OTHERWISE 'X8_1(97) $ WAITER WRINGS (CONTECH) 23 Electrical Details Sheet No. 2 3, ND NAYERuMS OR EWIPMENT SHALL SE STORED WITHIN ME UMRS OF &.SPEY STREET UNLESS APFROAM BY ENGINEER. UB-1(97) A IAND BORINGS CONTECH) 24 Electrical Details Sheet No. 3 4. THE CONTRACTOR SHAU BE SWELY RESMNSNIE FOR SITE SECURITY. CONTRACTOR SHALL PRONIDE CIWN UNK FENCING ARRUND PEMMETER OF WORN WB9°-1 AREA AND STAGING AREA TO PREVENT PI.IEW ACCESS AND PROVIDE PUBLIC WENT ME FENCE SMALL BE A MINIMUM OF 6-HIGH AND CONSTRUCTED OF $ SPRIER BORINGS (NEW IUMPSHIRE WRING) GCVANIZED STEEL GAIN UNK WITH RUSTS AT 6' OM CENTER, FENCE SIAL BE SUPPORTED BY CONCRETE BLOCKS TO RECEIVE POS15. TP-101(01) TEST PIT (MC) 5. COMPACTOR SXNL BE RESPONSIRE FOR JOB SAFETY. ALL CWSTPUCTION ACRVRY SHw1 BE E ACCORDANCE WITH OWSTANDARDS AND LOCAL AND MW-10x(01) MOARTMARD WELL URC) STAR REGU IONS. N/A • SURFACE SAIL SMIPLE (MARCH 2DOIHTRC) SITE PREPARATION! MW-107(04) ■ MONITORING WEI I (TRC) 1. CONT 100 SHAU INSTAL ALL SIGNAGE PRIM TO INTRADON OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES INCLUDE GARNER PRO.IECT SIGNAGE, MR FYE NUMBER AND 8-106(04) A LAND WRING (TRC) FEDERAL AND STAR MANDATED WORT( PLACE SMEAGE. 2. CONTRACTOR SHAL HAVE IN-PEACE TRASH AMID SANITARY FACILITIES FSPR ME WORK PUCE. BORING 1(07) 19 AND BORINGS (HAWTHORNE COVE MARINA) 3. EIISTMC STRUCTURES AND AMENIFES WITHIN ME PROIMRY Of ME WORK SHAL BE PROTECTED TO PREVENT ACCICENTA DAMAGE BY CONSTRUCTOR WB-1(09) $ WATER WRINGS (GS) A4IM11E5. W-1(09) WATER BgKMS (M) .. COMMEERE Of RCON515TFSA srtE WfORWYXIN OR coNIXLKINs ARE ro BE IMYEp"mr CONKYED ro ME DINNER RIND ENGINEER PPNM ro $ COE CNT 01R COMINIIM CO DG-SCTION. HW-1(W) ]r LNW°GANGS (C5) 5. ME TIOHIRACIOR SHALL MI DG-SAFE PRIOR TO LOMLE APP AM WORK E SITE. 1P-1(09) . TEST PITS (x009) (GS) 6. REWIRED OF EXISTING UNDERGROUND ull�FUUY SHOWNESPON ME FOR AN. U. AMAGESOCONTRACTOR SWLL VEMFAS EXACT ROGATIONS NT ACTOR'S As wr BE REWIRED. THE PR TELT UNDERGROUND ROUN BE NLLY RES REPAIRS E FOR ANT'AND E DAMAGES CONTRACTOR'S OCCURRING EX A RESULT M ME CONTRM:TOR'S ENCORE TO LOCATE ANU PRORCi LINO N AMID O UTCTED. ALL REPNflI SHALL BE MADE AT AT THE CONTRACTOR 7. CONTRRETTO SHA�ME P LWNTNN NNO PROTECT AL $%COST TO HE O AND DRAINAGE AT NL TYES, THE COMPACTOR SWLL REPAIR ANY DAMAGE NND WIL FLOOD L.r 117 LLW RESTORE CON TO ME PRE- MAKE CONDITION AT NO OST TO ME GAINER. lO YR ROO +11.0 °. AHE GUDDN'GidR SAIL MAKE AL ARRANGEMENTS NND 6E PESPONSBIE fW PAYING Ntt TEES OR 00515 FOR AM PolE OR U11lRY A1FIU1gN W KAN +8.9 REIDGTION. WISP ♦R9 9. COMRN,TOTHER MA SHM-F ALIO INSTAL TCH BoMD R1ER FABRRL Ix GTCM GSIN$Alp COVEiI AS REWIPEn LO PREVENT CGNDIRUCTION REU1E0 NGW ♦AI FlLL ON RSCijEA PALO IMO CATCH BASIN. NLW 0.0 I IXOMTRACTOR SHAT.CLAN OUT AIL CATCH BASES AND OTHER DRAINAGE NGTTUCTTON C COMPLETION OF WORK. 11.CONIRACTWR SHAL READ Al NECESSARY Y MIIPOPARI CHANCES FOR S ASIRUCOON WCWWNC WATER, PoWER RIGHTING. DATA H A TEIERgNE, 12AEOWREMOH SHAL READ TC UNDERSTAND NO AL REWUtORY CONDITIONS ASSOCNYEU MttM ME PROIEGr NNO SHML COMPLY WITH NL ENWRONNENTA PEWOCTOP S WINO PERMIT COHO OTHER i1 CONTORMAN E WITH CONFINE NL OlNFA IEYPORARE SrOCNpUS OF IXCAVATEn WTERAL OR WiWON Flu USING MAY fl4E5 ARID iKRR FABRIC IN CONFORMANCE W'IM HASP NNO SMP. 14.COLTRAINCL SHML $CTI OF A CONFINED .A PERYE TER W 1 AND A AREA AT A LOCATW i0 BE AFPR'T OEt)N BY THE ENGINEER, OTHER AREA SHALL IMM B PROP 17TED, TO PAVEMENT.A HMM1 LEA WNL AND A REMOVED FABRIC LINER. NO COM CONTAINING CEMENT OR OUTER APPROVED SOCIAS WILL BE CERMIRED All AURRIAIS SHALL BE COMPLETELY REMO'rFU ON COMPIITON OF CWSrRUCTON AND DISPOSED OF AT AN APPROVED OSPOSA LOGTW- U EARMWFORK 1. FMMWOflK MATERIALS TO MEET ME FMLOWING STANOVpS. GRANUWN BORROW/HLL MND X101.0 - GAVEL BORROW TYPE B MHO 1110 - DENSE GRADED CRUSHED STONE FOR SUBBASE MHO M2.01 7 - CRUSHED STONE MHD M201.0 - UNDERI.AYEB STONE MMD M2.024 .� 2. ORDOLAIO'FBL BORRW: - COVER AlAER4•C SLAV BE DUTRNG SUITABLE MATERAL FOR REUSE WITH AMMONIUM 4-STONE, NON-COVER KAMP&SHALL BE EXISTING•SUITAME MInKAL FOR USE WHERE EIPL Y HDEMFIW OR THE DRAWINGS WITH A MAWAUM 4'STONE, o ALL STONE GREATER TAN A SHAU,BE SEGREGATED, CIEMED w DORS AND STOGRPIIEO WITH STONE FILL. < 1REINFORCEMENT SHAL BE NEW DEFORMED STETL OARS. GRAM 60 CONFORMING TO ASTM MI5. EPDXY-COATING CONFONWMG TO ASTM A775/APSAC, 2. REINFORCEMENT ACCESSORIES SHAU. BE DIELECTRIC COATED STEEL OR APPROVED P1AST<. DRAWING LIST, LEGEND, " 3. CONCRETE SHAU HAW ME FOLLOWING SPECIMAllWS: - MINIMUMENT `OMEN11' `5BE"G'": 'Opp PS AT 28 GT5 ABBREVIATIONS & - - NR ENTRANME O SHALL BEE SHAJ1 B A7 5Y. - 7% MAXIMUM SIZE N AGGREGATE SHILL .4 '+. INCH. - WATER TO CEMENT RATIO SHAW BE PE 11 - <EYFM SHALL MEET MIM 0150.NYRE II GENERAL NOTES - 4. GROUT VALRRUWT L BE A HIGH SX. MON-SHRINK K GRWITH SILT WATER RESIST.WCE, SUCH A5 i,YE STM SPECIALGRDUI 120 OR EOUNM£M. ARD g2 ^ °A SITE DEVELOPMENT - PHASE I y UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. AHL TIBER TO BE USED SHALLRAD BE NO. 1 AND BETTER SOUTHERN PINE As GED BY SPIE AND WITH DESMON VAUES n'AW'W� SALEM WHARF PROJECT PER NEPA NATIONAL DESIGN SPECIFICMION OR THE EQU IENT FOR DOUGLAS FR AS LADED BY WCUB AND WXPA. 2. AL TIMBER SHAH BE NEW AND SUPPUED WITH NGMMIR AL DENSIONOMERINE S UNLESS NOTED. \'t,A CIN OF SALEM 3. AL NEW SOUTHERN!YELEOW NNE AND DOKG(kS FIR TIMBER MEMBERS TO WHICH THE PUBLIC MAY BE EXPOSED(DECKING, IANDFLM S. BENCHES. \'S' V SIMILAR) SCALD. BE TREATED WITH ALDLWNE COPPER Q ATENNNTY (ACO) IN ACCORDANCE WITH AWA k AWPB W/ MINIMUM RETENTKKI OF 0 A LBS. PER Y- -�A �, SALEM, MA CUBIC FIAT. ' 4. MSC. HARDWARE GALVANIZED STEEL PUTTS AND ALL BW.T5 AND RI HARDWARE SHAL BE FASHIONED FROM STEEL AND SMAC B S.S. GALVANIZED C� 4 DECEMBER 2010 IN ACCORDANCE WITH REDWREMENTS OF ASM A123.AND/OR A153. BOLTS AND NIRS SHALL CONFORM TO ASM AW7, 1,RBAR EMOVAL AND REPA IDEM OF RIP BAR SHALL BE AS REWIRED FOR WAL CONSTRUCTION OR GRADING Of RIP BAR SLOPE. � S6W�q�6�A��App]]( ,} sr.l*s. Shadley Associates a/Wr_� Pte-- 2. WHERE REQUIRED CEORITIU MU 'JNDERUYER ST'JNE SHALL BE PRIMCED BEFORE RESETTING MINOR STONE. <%o�is.�y�1.,.� u Ww HY.H r,WI �� - nWY NA w 3. ME COMPACTOR SHAU-REUSE EXISTING MINOR STONE MD STONES EIGVATEO WRING SITE OPERATIONS FOR GRADING RIP RAP SLOPE. EXCAVATED F� AR°W +wx •R -- AW/W 4v-FKW IfWI/aawH STONES SHAL BE CLEANED AND BE APPROVED BY ME ENGINEER PRIOR TO USE = N 6 I N C :- .'I S s iAe-WA,N. l>sA�.�- 1BIyBY MN,..Ew.I tYJMw DRAWN, JSF 4. THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT FOR NEW ARMOR STONE ON THE RIP BAR SLOPE. R+.N...w.w�e..•, -,..-R,�- �....A�K..� CHECKEp. x/ DRAWING No. 29756-10-02 r --. APPROVED DAR: ' REVISIONS SHEET 2 OF 24 E, E n pp wwl/I: I%A TEASED TO /C USfLM NFW ENQIND.INC. T4 N YMY sME 1��. DNIa d MAOEY SUFI M VIaNY M[ t �: BEVAw•rlMlw/I TIL �) f ww z 1a 1. „;>D Da. R[WnOA•wWWHaMI �. �fa� raw llN mWe m_ Wwes e ILIm _ ___ _ .; naso 11a Bn � rt v.TA'Tr +NZ`__ a_ MP ~ BE.4NEYTAW ifi .r A nl KM,...TIE IK w YW STREET LEGEND rON $d -MIA) /� v.x •am ala ww BECK-7 STREET //� o � fd s Iry )os(�m-to)(ot)t� C' -_ r• �...w. / r an-u vL O mrnwwwaE ft ! �'"> �. 1P-2(0) �1dt(fifb �-' wTN .y = -., NW x1u91.' '.'r h'+IW lM(ol) ! Wvm NHWwL n sNu w ,. _ m mWIWW MANIWF ,.. " m W ANK META, J -' �R Io6(otJ. . P�.a"�RwW wM°wmi°aio - r " I� tr ,x u ^ R s ,. ''- ff.JWs¢ L V' / m ) . ) M-3(m) a:5 m 5(N /.��%�_ H �> MRL unm POT t4_i MAw I., s,. ° fin; c tv�1.. : V W V'O. uwn wlL WM lwn 41 r.r - A Msvor) E)I 5 f� cW j'MY^ '[Q-c^ — 7 = V wy -1D)(M) OMpL MUM9Y mvrN �� ,\ el•ISWIr) ... .AW MM...A`,f �" �,o cMruE'a NwlJlir SWEET ( 1 ,�Wsr .ami n^EF mwanT mWecv w wwaa mp wIN COINGIEwN "' m-101 TP-r ) '^°a .p ,p♦ 9 N.F - _ =i y/ o .W aKK1 y R0O[2WA-Nw a`IDe xr r :. C4 Yn /'.. ,. NFA? / J �'.F a .in?OS •`L ?- ° 90- -5/ /y / 0. •9 9Y PE) XPY �(/fAlr M'AIINVAwIw -. TWE yyy�� 1�R �. OS wl Ga 14LL V a1) j/a 9 /4mENM lMI r ) 1 I _ '. fi ONw AT RulmvrW 1m IF.I s' " ' v )L�l°(°t - �TPa°a°i xO I ' y �! / 'ice Ir Mm1AWs Y¢WM 1WI.1W,a.NWIu ,.u1n e t I r ._ uJ� ,1 ) L ( uw ox(4°3 I I4 r I_h e r Ir mWmnn¢wM wNN RrA[R uhls 'a r- ' loR(M) by ' > ,� r,tl A. OTW1Iw muxs )"7 q /A.�..w - ,a r 1nw Dawlo meas MIaM�� 1 -.,, ern B-t°MO4A"')f I JJ ' I Mr .. HARBOR; µml .c'. A V ' ,. 11A.v. w was vaE MP v •N t>7 - I �I 'M ° h l+ S A wa�(op) A. )m• RWWn 1LLwlAM mws RLLEm! E' b oO <• T( 1 >tf 7 fin" J 9 10.x• 11.6 wq llLrA101 MINS }Op.16° B` MY IAKD R=M.WFL EpA1M LouIF �•: s4� •,1 Illf' I oY� ,°n°? . ) ��• ,, ,9 ••`aw 0G m AIG Cti�l]lflMn k YaF .EYu ` \ .'�Sd Y4.JMf- 0 eolw MMA vaanas I.4m ) eN• '+ 9r,�M'W�F- - c. INN,a Ww DFWaw FOR KEN .�,.WoB 1 •° �, Bpq `i , I a o ea h d ra La1w wN UX m nws �"ra6b a 9 wDH°)) AM Nwwwi OECwL IR IA WI)/m[P/1-19w wr♦'IwI y ISI X.Y-� A 14{ �q\ :�'\ o�A. i' d VNOwWINp LY UE U[wMFI)JXwaf IG a "°yl L16>1n WIY) X/Y T ` ti45i:v.T O Y -.. IwIOYw.O Z{II V[ a ("VH HAMMAA.INC ••\ LRWOgIlAi ILWwR UE n.12TZ),•H 1 Ia'w v /TEST a uwOIOWAo wIw MIF a ,.,. REET 4ARMM.INC .1 rvr Al. 'A.�'-"Nw +.v V . owEEAs WWA •..«r.� .xa '. ....- 1, sY _ GRAPHIC SCALE 410 20 0 AO BO 1;0 BORING 3(07) 4 SCALE: -,O' X w90RwC 1(07) ... UTILITY INFORMATION STATEMENT g801UNG x(0)) L FINE 99-SIIRFOND UMITYMMIN NION AS R1 SHORIET)1 y THE ifAwfl!BASED ol FIm SURE:, IWaRMATCH KIM MFa ME QU As IF ANY. HE M E IME CA NO ulUtt colME THE S, XN CY O NOTES WFDRCOMM SII"-" BY CE LLEMT IF ANY. MY CECHE NE CANNOT STATED EE THE ACCLNACY O SAID CALL Y LO SNB-SUEACC INFC UMT FE I SFW DEOREE ON STATED DAVMMIJEAMMC ONLY I.)1X15 DOMIFNT IS AX WSiRUENI ON SEANCE O w15b1 EMCMEEAXG.It S S9JW i0 BDI.NNE COMSUITNG A°YSE'VLY LOGIED SHB-SUIEACE UlYltt FEITAES[Ni wnw XMYN STNIDARD 6 CNE ENGEEWND EDN FURPOSES RELATED DRECMY AND SOELY TO RISEN ENGNEITM!S SCOPE R SEANCES ACCURACES TAI CONTRACT KIM KENNE CDISRTa1G EMONE£P110 FM ME MEAD COOTAXS MAY AT SAIEL PMT. x. THE LOCATMS OF UNDFRM UND PIPES COP IM15,AND sMUCTMES HAW BEER CEMMONED FAM INT 115E M REUSE O THIS DOAAENL EOR INT TEASM BY AMY PARTY FM PURPOiFS IIINMTFD ORECRY SAID KW1A11ON.AND AK AFPNOwAE ONLY COMI LOCATIONS M ANY UNOETGMWND MD SOLAY TO SAA CCNMACI AND PAOXCT SHALL K AT THE USETYS SOE AND E%lYU9YE HSN AHD STRUCTURES,NOT VISIBLY 095ERlfD AND LOCATED.CAN VARY FAW THEN ACTUAL(OCAMNS. SITE SURVEY UAIMTTY,N l.)DNMOA POM UNWTY FM NOTM OF CCPN "NS,NS.UNLESS MNITTEN AUMO OHZAFON IS WN = il[gFM BY NISCH,fNO1WFAMG. 1. AD(InMAL BORED UIINXES/SMUCTMES MAY BE EXONWITEIED. 2)ME PURPOSE M MIS RAN IS M SHIA iMOMANY AS 111E RMT OF AN ON-TE-fAWNO NSTRUMENT a. 111E STANS O UEUTES.AIEMER ACME.ABAHDMFD,M MMOWD 5 AN UNKNOWN CDNNTM M MWM. Naas Lnw Water WEI .moo• MAY OCCIWNED ON MARCH 17.2WY.MARCH 1%200H AVD MAY 2&2009.PROKRtt IME MAY WAS FAR AS DUCE CON'ILATM OF THIS WEORMATDI. IOD YR FLOOD ♦IZ.O - 4 SITE DEVELOPMENT — PHASE H D ` SALEM WHARF PROJECT MEMT To WFE Y PROPERTY IME AS SIIONI M IOTA/ACSM LNO TIME 9MNY.PAPNED BY OSIMAN \ ADOWSAINc. DATED JANUARY 4.2001 dSCREPNIOES MFAE EACOIXIFPFD,f10NEWR HAW NOI 9FEY IN IT IS MCMSNO INCH T 00 IS JEC TO CHANCE BASE ID UNDERSTANDVAIFG AN HNFO IA G UNN1Y MHW YB.9 o�.N--'�� 1 ADME$D MFAEM. wEMNAnM D NOT E.LOC AxD 15 a&E<T TO CnAxGE eAsm LPDA VNtmmG RAN NFMYAIIM NMLw 'o.a " -A`RF` CITY OF SALEM _ KCEIWD.AND ACTION.LOCATIONS .. 9T.Ac,y +x A)HONZMTK COOTDNAIES ROFR TO MAIL)BJ DATA. 6. THE ACCMACY OF MEASOED UM Y IMNDITS AND PINE SIMS IS S Cf M FEW CObMMS ME ;r(a .•� SALEM, MA A.)ELEVATION NETEK TO MAN LM WATER(NAM)WATCAL°AMM. AEHJ Y TO MUTE VISUAL.08SER0MONS.DIRECT ACCESS TO ME VMIOJS EIFNENTS AND OMER � ! �'�0 DECEMBER 2010 WAFERS S)ME RIFMMATIM CONTAINED ON ME DSK M EIECTROPC MAIMING FILE ACCLAIPANYND MS RAH)USI& ), ME MOKR UlIUtt ExOXEEAING GOMFARN TO THE SEALED AND SIGNED HARD COPY M ME PLAN T°ENSJRE ME ACWRACY OF ALL /COMPANY SIOAD M CONSULTED ANO THE ACTUAL LOCARONS M W� ttEtlAAMN AMD TO EMWRE NO CHANCES.ALIERATMS,ON MODIFICATIONS HAZE BEEN MADE.NEU.CE SMALL S1J9 MFACE STRUCMRES SHOXI)A WAITED IN ME FIELD(VIE.)KFOK PLANNING WMK C�I�g HOT N MADE M A COCMNT MANSAITIED BY COIPIUTEIt M OMEN EEECTRDEC MEMS UAESS FAST CONNECMNS CONTACT TIE M SNE CAL LINEN AI T-BBB-3aa-)2JJ.SE'.ENTY-TA HOW.S PWM Shadley Associates isi � COMMANDED TO ME MDXAL SEATED DDDMENf ISSUED AT THE TIME ON ME MAY.DLE TO THE CNIM4 M E}CAVATICH,gASTNG.MADMD,NN0/M PAWNG xAnNE a sMWnnc.DATA AccumnM,AND wracno Pun oEWLaLENT,IF Mncu DMEx9Mu I+�NNw�Al.nwrtA r. ° --.— N.r r e NAMINNARM IS NEEDED AND 15 NOT SPFDFICALLY SHOWN M ME EIECTRMC MANK MU,PLEASE CONTACT B AS OF ME DAIS OF THIS RAtL ROOM WFMMAMN FCR ME EgLOANG UINJAS HAS HOT BEEN f, E )sA�w r.P IMJaWp w ryq®�� I[pwJ vaFl .A cuo x� ... M15LW ENOth G PRONGED TO MTSCH EwMCERNG MIfPNME.CI&F. '- !Y U I IA'f S ' yF MA ww f 7e.� WINW JSF �'-�--- . ,.,..T,.,,. �ww�� CHECKED: DRAWING N0. 29756-10-03 APPRovEo: REVT9oN5 DAMTvxDYm _ SHEET 3 OF 24 II li �.� CARVER CORP. - 10 Gwr S TEST BORING LOG xW8 'S TEST BORING LOG NWn w.u. _recn.mur"•eIWSMt_,wur._ ..�. r:.v �e ur '•' - r M ' ■ .Nr • S TEST BORING LOG xWa w..r YylLitrry.W°SWl •-._-_ !W■.•If I.[ """N" Io5 - - w w. Ac�i PAe `.`'..` f r N . m�o4.....w. .......F r >4 .....• yorw. wrsw.. ' �..•� Iota Ito- HV- •! I I-�wown.. nM�F�.�`C n buy%1 � _ ,.... .... .......... r.c—. ( w 1 wtilu"�.w Y•ltw. a.... L ♦� `w�.n! Y"6'fl:DBl"•"..ITr'�Y4Ydl{n•' m .. ry ry ..am rn r HN:•aJ�r� PIOq YL:, � Y rrYEy fa.ca `mals fwrw r .wP.n+.ru.. -_ MI «rw..•� ...r..r. 1---V dam_ ljjjjjjr<.wry .f wl. .. IS' G _ r.r ••• - r o ,5 TEBT BORNG LOG v-L r.••.•" -�"•• �Y�- P'w rrs �wrr .r.... • -•5 TEST BORNG LOG NN "w,:Y'. 1 T�� Y 9Y St. w _ e ar.wrwr• = E '+ ,... �. ••r'-.... IT] n al • rr..1 . m• le _%.S TEST BORING LOG INVa rr G ..............« NV_I P`� :..w.rw..r.rr.w to C�T •r ..... OJ•M.I NhN,�w drn / y • n PI m '/ r .r.u. P... r...r.wm.. .,..r.--.... ru.. ....r. _ •�_ �E`w" ,�,• ,�� • .•M S TEBT BORING LOG Illie v.�..rrrra.n..r......a... v —_ v � � _r r n ` u n I ■ r r . � 1i.�3.r...r.r......n_..n em..�...r..m.n �� pin $Y. r• /f a u Nn�.a]ai �..s.nr.rmwr.s.nr FOR QW100 WLU O WF IAAMNW14EOtECHNIGL WFONWipN 1 ,..,r Ir.F-4 _:.S■ TEST BORNNi LOG w . al I $ORING INFORMATION _ SITE DEVELOPMENT — PHASE I w w SALEM WHARF PROJECT CITY OF SALEM -- ._-' SALEM. MA DECEMBER 2010 rn - Shadley Associates __wu ®O�` r..rr..r..YY/ir�.ar.w %gym W..Y�Yq rrJ.WM1.r. I[�M/i0. n[lLN@r M1I �.'. '. �i I.; i: :` - u.F.w Ys.F IYJo.31 DRAWN JSF - - „•,,,,�, cNECNED. DRAWING No. 29756-100-04 ..._..., APPRGJCD. _ DA" SHEET 4 OF 24 R vlsloNs ills �� yI COMRN.TOR KAY DOM t STOCKPILE AREA ISLEA NEW CN6AW '+IC G w Iv L Mw aaA C` r � .. yY4A' �7 Am s'.. . -1.•flY- - [1 d a a �Ilf *i•�'i a-s .-{-, ._�j s d u.3'Jn r IRI T .. Mer MC`4W I r Sh -n �IIND OF Woµµ RENT Mc CURTAIN BOON/ l r T] 1-l.Llr N. ~ u. ER05KN BeRX1ER - � � �� ; I l ry. ,Iryy 1. 1 s '" NOTE ARCWOUCGICAL sroEmr.MCE ._J" cnr r YO.flNO } AA SITE R FILTER FABRIC SCALE. I'�XO-0• ! Hpµ PoSf 6'O.C. LRNT Of wOIM -----_AREA ___-� X"i0 6"/ROUND FLOAT NO ES: — - WATER 1£011(VARIES) -- - EROSNHI WRIER ---------_-----__------_------_____ NNn LEAKED NriM I. EROSIONBARBARRIERS 5Nµ1 BE INSTNIFD MWND A11 wiNE OR POI FLOAT 2-2T2•STAKES NON W AREA wDRN AREAS AHD SEOCIO'RES. CONTAINER DE STRAP \\\\ YPROPILENE IB•TO 24•IN GROUND OU E EMS BOOM CURTAIN BE 3. EXCAVATED WIEMLLS MO STOCK%LES SHALL BE COMNNED/ DE / CRWYETB COMNIED AS PER ME HASP. SILT CURTAIN - - - - -- - - - - NOTE: SRT CUITARYNYIT BARRI „Xy BALE ERCT CONTI SY$ERN C J. R 1AVERVI AO1 POLYPROPYLENE k .O VON TO BE APPROVED (AfiO.f-J') Sµ41 BE NEPE SEPARATE Oft EQUAL BY SALEM CONSERVATNE FROM CONTIM,MTED WT S EXCAVATED BELOW 3'-0 )L'CHAN BA ST AND EXTEND BARRIER COMMISSION A. A.1-EROSION CONfRO1 MEASURES SHN1 BE E TMLISHED AND WEIGHTED AS WCESSARY TO WOUND "WAINED AS PER ME ORDER OF CONDIDONS AND HASP. SEM FABRIC _ CUT TO FIT WOUNE _ -- STAGIN EY,RDN MuouNE (YAMEB)�"SECBON CONTRACTOR ERO ION ONTROLG/ DEBRIS BOOM MIN. Ir IN GROUND SILT CURTAIN EROSION CONTROL SYSTEM qSITE DEVELOPMENT - PHASE I nSALEM WHARF PROJECT scAiE: Nrs. CITY OF SALEM SALEM, MA DECEMBER 2010 r,.MM. M.•. . Wo[,r_YLw Sh`ad�lYey.�A:s:so�ci1tvesymo �APd _ - - `ii ENGINEERS •w . DRAW JsF MLw 0.0 cW Or I rza DRAWING N0. 19756-10-05 SCALE Y . w' REVISIONS DATE SHEET 5 OF 24 POWER PIXEs TO REWM ♦ {t - .�- _ t .- . -Exsnxc vArH TO -- PNLROID TIE RIMERS a NEtAL FOlFS- _ �• �' RENWE a DISVWE-r W. N. :. j RENO E ALL TIM ANO mEGE A Hm I WIMIR WOIIX UNII$ I > ' J, 8' vEarxE,ilw elsrwiE e'ECEiAnoN EPIACED W/NEW LINE mw( .. II'' EOOE $TONES - (2`w RENO+E a DISPOSE O -- i l IINR Of 11101111( . E%ISTN6 6"WATER i0 BE R PLa51WE0 IMTSfOfA�lm a ---� YW aA / euww sue _ - VIP - 3450 _ _ - -_. 1 � ` — t _ nN6EP/STEEL/ LONGaIE DEBRIS •�•�•�•�•�• T _ wRRm WOIM LYYR-REkP2 a DISPOSE z 41 w F q Fi AP„E ? •'_ . ._ . . EYSINC aware sus/ a TRU.', `9ouL➢ERS TO 6E "',' • f 1 5 a sroc.mLEO , , - �N CCfJDOMINIUM �, q �ewmrs _ _ EscE sraNE TO nsvwL qu LL I i . 1 I IEx15nNG cONCREIE 9 /FOOnNC - I -RENoc a oLuosE TO Lie' L f I C.Lr •� I i ' I li �1 rt1L SI I.L r ,. o �1 ., �I L nf.PiE Q`Jr y `I - SITE PREPARATION & DEMOLITION SITE DEVELOPMENT — PHASE I SALEM WHARF PROJECT CITY OF SALEM SALEM, MA DECEMBER 2010 OATm N•nn .W.L..NSW ;;;," Shadley Associates an_r_ Gemoddu LOO W ROOD�'LJO L•rnAr�,rr�.sr. ��•• .�•• 1A La NNW ♦6.9 i'J •tt L E• R S L �F ��..IMte.'ao NGIM i4.2 0 20 40 _ _ _ pUWN. JS .LW 00 ® _ .......f+•.... CNECREO: SUI.E: 1' = 20'-0' DRAWING N0. 29756-10-06 REvisioms MTE12ZZQIID SHEET 6 OF 24 s>ssW� , EXGT1 G PAIN OF PAVEYflR NSA TO HENMI EKro IN'GPOWEA PO!£ EKSiPC POVIEP POLE CONSIROCTON TiN1Eli W/ PECK _ LNIR OF WORN - '- - t0 REIUM-M. REYOlE R 05POSE f _ tun N*FR m 0 S - - - - - - - - -� E51MW 111 LUR NO r- RENOrE AJJ ;FOR NIURE RFIN5I-ANUTG BRDWNODS PAVENEM� RFM & DISPOSE _4Aa WGEfARO EWITHIN WORK MFA t \� �! BRlNWN0p9 AS REM F� �' A M:' PAP�R � uc As RCD'D W I+I FDR NEIY PAY£Sl1r NEInK k DSPOSF-TM. - I METAL POST REMWE R DISPOSE - '\ � .. 1 BERM MEA AL GAMIC BLOLI(S WONIN WORK MFAC '` _IO REMNN ...\ M110.F!SIOCNPWE �� D \� k F - / 1 I \ I I, 6+00 �.� I PoP RM W/T16G. SSII. 6 CONCRffE CEBI15 .•—•.•—.I• i \•.•- \ ....-_ _ ..� r CONCRETE. MEDAL,TMBER, k MSC. MUIVI5 ..,_.-- WRNM WONK ILXfS-ROIOh!DSPoSE , i AV WOW MEA DUE TONN: HAEOL I j � OGICX SIGHNICMCE \ I � i I SITE PREPARATION & DEMOLITION SITE DEVELOPMENT — PHASE 1 SALEM WHARF PROJECT CITY OF SALEM SALEM, MA DECEMBER 2010 pALDM M.en L. " Water MIw Lu Shadley Associates IW VR aooD x'.170 ASR�...�...� w.A+RrASlr.rwi lJ�el//t r.wZ.s NR ♦I t.p aw..mna�w. na r.r wnrp n MI ao-rF r¢fw/mwr G i N E E }? g ....z a za Aa ,,..,...,.-...-. DO" WLw DD � _ DRAWING N0. 29756-10-07 SCALE: I' 20'-0" __._-.-_..-..__..._.,-. •PPROA?D:REVISIONS /m DATE- SHEET 7 OF 24 Am — 6"3 CCNLPEIE 5lAB CRAV0. PAINING LOT -GMVEI POKING L��LDERS 13' LR TE WNL TOP Of WALL .14. 12"3 GRANITE WNL Nr� TOP OF Ml .uo NON CMR MUDUNE MHW EL .8.9 Nil LY ♦11 O _73'3 ASSUMED LINT 0I` NON._ MUOLWE BURIED CONCRETE SU8 - DOVER MNW EL 39.9 36'3 ASS ED MLw EL,9.O —IUWT Of BURIED _ CONCRETE SUB — ww.EL.90 a) EXISTING INSHORE SEAWALL STA 0+48 a1 EXISTING INSHORE SEAWALL STA 1+22 e 6 uui:r.1D'-a" scALE:r.ta-v $PONE DUST/GRAVEL WNNWAr KEES Of GRAJRE PRICES OF IXUiNIiF STDIE DUST/GIWVEL EDCE SCONE TOLE STONE W=Ar GME P� AARKING LOT GMVEL PMNING LOi WOEWIM STWF 3 C0.1TREVflW]NT w/DEBRIS HON CMRNREW STONE 3' LOVER REVETMEW W/ DEWS — i._ EL s89 NON COVER _ _ g,+110 a169 LWTER%L SUBJECT - _ WTERVL..ECi REDRRWENiS 4000NE TO SIP i0 INSP k SW' YUDLINE REOUIREMEMS .... . . . . .. .. ..MLW.EL,O.P. . I O n EXISTING SOUTH FACE REVETMENT STA 3+25 EXISTING SOUTH FACE REVETMENT STA 5+50 ` B sCNEI".tIY-D" i B WNM WVEM ^,N MERRY RBERIN ACCESS s VESSEL ENELIXG STATION IRPECUINt W/o RFhTMENf w/ caws C� NR EI. Nt,O NON COVFA - -- Z Mbg�tO.B MATERIA SUBJECT W E REW E^ _MLW.EL_P+P. . EXISTING CONDITIONS -SECTIONS SITE DEVELOPMENT - PHASE I SALEM WHARF PROJECT E EXISTING OUTSHORE REVETMENT ;_ CITY OF SALEM n SALEM, MA _ 9CNE 1.10-0" DECEMBER 2010 ROML J s t y AssoiateShadlsawr—' � F `J G I P7 E c R SDRAwN: LSF 0 10 20 �� ..__..,___..__._ ...• •_•,,. APPRovED_ DRAWING N0. 29756-10-08 SG E: 1' . 10' DATE. "' /O SHEET 8 OF 24 -- REVISIONS — -- PREFAB _ • FERMIN& _ " • BUILDING .l •. • • y J EJ EJ N EJ SEAWALL TYPE M SEAWALL TYPE SEA7'NPE II �r - �� INSHORE FACE Of CURB IE `�p4. II to 16 r ti u u M Y 2+00 -- x+m y - ]+00 3#m 4+00 wso 6H09 8+00 ti y� _ NFONRE SEAWALL E E Ww1 TRN15Dp1N B OF WI t) SEE DETAIL D SER AL C FOR MPEV WALL rA L EtEAnoxs -A STA I L L 015'- HAVE ro HAVE PILL NL /17 F S ENISIING STONE WALL a 1S'-o'O.L. SEE DETNL X/I)Fm WININN YM 2 OUISHORE WAGE IOGTpx CLEOBOE Of WNL ONSHORE WARE "WHO STONE Of CURB A WNL-RON AW3IONICE MEA: WE ro VEMWY AN SIGNIFMINCE SF 'r _ eW Z ti ND1e I. TOP OF sEAW/ ELNAMIxS SH&L BE AS SHOWN pl N e1 SHEET 11,GRADING w Lw105GPE RAN. H 2. DII NI5gN JT L TONS BASED ON F K B0.NOWNM LL air PILE CAP SPACING. CONTRACTOR ro VERIFY FINAL "I w iI AYCHff COC,RniWTWl: LDCARONS. (oul6NOn Fac• el caro) A:N 3,016,0;.3 STA 1+50.59 E 022.76). Z T 9:E 3.0MONCIA STA 1+6.5.92 2 C:N 3,019,05B.8 STA 1+86.46 E 823,160.1 D:N 3,015.)81.2 STA 5+94.54 E 823,084,9 E:N 3,015,758.1 STA 6+47.96 E 823,127.5 SEAWALL LAYOUT PLAN {pINP. SITE DEVELOPMENT — PHASE 1 SALEM WHARF PROJECT CITY OF SALEM (D SALEM, MA DECEMBER 2010 �BOWM C B/d/�l Shadley Associates BCE _ M....WW.../.F NF.r e.•.. i�� ,.PFq mr tiiE p�nN� D zD .D ENGINEERS ; "-NH,.M ''�;"�„N; R1eR DFuwx: asf ® _ .. •,...�.,,.•r•.NAS :;,�,r.,�,�, CHECNEo: Wt+e DRAWING N0. 29756-10-09 SCALE: 1' - 20'-0' APPROVED: DA's 12"°^° SHEET 9 OF 24 REVISIONS — ONEDl15T5URFACING 6 - RESET fU41NGTIMBERSVHER STOPSTO. %IOMAM%j# QP AT TACH SPACE MFETEAMNGWALKWAY L-3 .41. �� L 'j�Sff MEETi1NFAND GRAN OF BUNG -.16tl L, R W-V BITUMINOUS CONCRETE PAVEMENT - UYOUTTHISFDGEOFPAVFAIENT ON - _ _ 19 d CONRIX POINTJAND PBOPFltt UNE — - _ —._ __ _ �.��`. WLgvrjA.Sf FINE I5SOUTH PROADE[TOVIELSU0NCEASA ACHIMGMV8l GRFACEASREWNFD.TO - tIB'-iP _--- "—'1—� _ __ _ ___ _ i � MARKBUILDINGBY TO REMAIN ATCONTRACTF pD LMDONNARFA TO REMAIN AT CONTRACT CQNPLETIOIR. � T �U§ 7 / u T RT SIRE T - ' a _ APPROVAL _ 8• I R F. 1 r3'� R 19 (PUBLIC- V IASL m - -x'- - A SINGLE VMDE CENTERLLEE;� FR _ Tay EDd J6 - _ sTwrmG a� I IaF sod ° R::Iry uPP �uaa GIRT 5 cR PAWUENr i.O.D.-IB3 m -tjla` ,f bF. c L--z9.r TA K12' '•sx 6 A - 93• "4pA R=less t >aaN .. R "• a" _ BOO QO ��B sou 5 cor p I 00 00 ca+oxTE PAVEMENT Ld a 0 00 00 00 0 vNGLE YWIREME UNE s'a y3 BITUMINOS ,LL � I c - - _ _� --- _ — _ AND CAME LINES,M. ,.p CAAVFL SURFACE 1 h 6 G. 00I4. Pea � 00 00 V .x r — 1T I , , �nEzm h A • 66 P�R/GBTALLIl6 nnpp pT ®� I B I-IiYL12 2 k T, - - W L W.S. / S1FIERLNMRt1NKTT. 06 �� C 1-15.0(Q) A 1�6.p CORNERB �/LL ^°F _. ,.;ffeed ) - ! )L•9% l / MANHOLE IS B =ea(B') ] DT91NA L E I 1 k 1 fi �ry / / // ry REAasPAEENCH MARK /4: -( 1 / LJ az � 1 D ONCRETE SPIKE IN DP DLE D4 D _`75 y; TILITY POLE #36-16 �� I 'n ,µN I, / /� I 1 I �` La HANDICM PAIBNL STMIIF uu11DRy9B�- 4 4 _ m. la �$ LEVATION=20.09(MLW ns II --- 8z L _ + SALEM HARBOR e"p-rvNc s°'rr2 MOOD 93 c nKEDwuTrr. r u L] �I -oz l9: rglE �,� IS 4 5( A) o T' PROVIDE CNAVEL SURFACE FOR Ew A1B 1 I `•:.: -`L�_4 a ',i l DISTURBEGAREAS ALONG SFAWALIS COD s 1IG} JON ' WHOM ^ p }.4 \ � 0.O5Fsyy ED_G6•1E1f rPAVFMENTO� - �Ipg MATERIALS LEGEND IRT BpJ` EMD "DD SYNBIX DESCRIPTION RPESYMBOL DEMWIRON BD. SYMBOL DESORPTION REF. FENC C 2w, r„ A V BfNMINWSCWM]1ElE TOMGL�IAR HOSE SEE R- 30 LML/,16 I- P t)y -/a 1 �2 R O r O PAVEMENT 5 I j CML BENCH MAR l' 59 =B.A(B') WIN,q,19BO S!r �, IEa \'. \ t \ \ , La La DWGS. CONCRETE SPIKE IN ER NO STAq AIN7 7+O=8 R•13,5a \ 1 \ �� \ GRAVEL SURFACE: DRAINAGE STRUCTURE 4E HYDRANT SEE 9W Ze.YS' N4j'IS'29.W p105(B') =ID.5(B') N/F J \ p4` L. 2.OF GRAVEL BORROW CML ♦ CML UTILITY POLE //36/1-1954. wH27, HAWTHORNE COVE Bal M✓J 14q Aa SURIAGNG GANGS. DhCi ELEVATION=I7.34(MLW) 5' •W Na4'S6'2T•Ly EPUs"E STl,'E MARINA, INC. IZ•AIDE C. 14p SMEEYi OPu.EEwi4 SIONFOUSf SURfAONG 6 ❑ FIJTUPERANSFOPAER SEE REGLATM SIGN 4 a",", WON PALE ENi BLOCK WAWALL LLLRAMrE IJ T LOCATION � e L-J 0 PAVEMENT STRIPING J PLACED BOLADER 2 74i —�_ LAYOUT LEGEND SYMBOL DESCRIPTION SYMBOL DESCRIPTION CONRIX POINT _$ _CENTERLINE/BASELINE MTH STATION POINT BNB PONTa&CWNING �90. 90'ANLIE BPC POINT OF 0M14ATUN ED ALIGN BPT POINT OF TANGENCY Typ TYPICAL ` on PORK Of INRASECTMIN Eq EQUALLY SPACED s< � ®EP END IOINTa C[NRUINE 05E G101RASIN fEI1MYE0. �� BCP [ENTERPLRNT Vs VERIFY IN flaD LAYOUT AND LAYOUT AND MATERIALS NOTES: _— EA ERLNE _____ LAYOUT BASE LINE MATERIALS PLAN i ' I. ALL UNE AND GRADE WORK PER ORAMNGSAND SPECIFICATIONS 6. MAN90N0017FILLER AND SEALANT SHALOFRAM WHDRE R RAA PROPERTYUNE SITE DEVELOPMENT — PHASE I U SHALL RE WD OUT BY A REGISTERED CML ENGINEER OR PAVD.EHT MEETS MRB WALLSOROMER VERTIGI ELEMENTS, ANGLL SURVEYOR ENGAGED BY THE CONTRACTOR. NCLUUING LILA BASES,HYDRANTS,BUILDINGS AND BUILDING L SALEM WHARF PROJECT 2. CONTRACTOR SHALL STAKE ME CENTERLINE AND EDGES OF ALL COLUMNS,WALLS,STAIRS AND AT OTHER VERTICAL CONODIONS a_ ELEMENTS IN THE HELD FOR APPROVAL BY THE OWNER'S AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS. L LENGTH CITY OF SALEM w REPRESENTATNE PRIM TOBEGINNING WORK. I. CONTRACTOR SHALL STAKE CENRRPOIMOFTRAN$FORMER SALEM MA T ALL LINES AND DINENSN]NS ARE PARALLEL OR PERPENDICULAR TO CONCRETE PADS IN IT"FOR APPROVAL OF OWNER'S ME LINES ROM WHICH THEY ARE MEASURED UNLESS OTHERWISE REPRESENTATIVE NOR TO INSTALLATION. �. DECEMBER 2010 - INDICATED. B. RESTORE DUSTING CONDITIONS,INCLUDING NPAMGG RESETTING Y' «w;a ` A. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE ROM FACE OF BUILDING,WALL OR CURB SITE IMNOVFMFNIS AND _-�Mt-- UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. SEEDING,AS NECESSARY IN AREAS OF PROPOSED UTILITY v; ammNfgf R+Wf S. ME DIMENSIONS SHOWN ON ME DRAMNGS SHOW DESIGN IMRmmNTS. 'fJ ©�® r+�. Shadley Associates _ Boyx C w; INTENT AND MUST BE FIELD VERIFIED NOR 9. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR DOCUMFNPNG THE w0 ^�V A�F� 6 TOREPAMTONOF5HOPOMWINGB.5HOP0 WINLBFORML LOGTONS OF ANY DUSTING SITE ELEMENTS TO BE RESET IN THEIR ' r'°'°' F law. �,• �� PAVEMENT AND CTIRBING LAYOUT SMALL BE BASED UPON ACTUAL SAME HORRONTAL LOCATION. E N G I N E E R S ' - DRAWN — R AND FIELD MFASUREIVENT BY THE CONTRl 10. ROM SURNIES UNDER NEW PAVEMENT WHERE REWIRED PER Q�� ....•..Y.�.m.• '•"""`m"°"• .eo, CHECKED: DRAWING N0. L-1 STK I LLJJ CC�� APPRDYED: 0 15 w' 1' DME:nNTMAN mTnln SHEET 10 OF 24 67 SCALE I':]O•-p• REVISIONS — i I -- _ CONTRAGfAEANl1)OBW`R►+WNFII�DB�L ERDYPGE1�Of _ PAVEMENP MkFk.BBq¢�5111Nt10fi WNgI�I1Tc CONTRACTOR UYOOWWSFOWRE ARA U5GEN NEW ENGLAND, , SLOPE T ARDS WNKWAYA t' 'z,PAF cyl - LINE AND GIM FORci REMOVES BEAM AN CORNER ANq AREA LEASED TO CRADEmRCCOVEMAffiw5: I up,*TA DAME o- MACKEY ' _(�. N __- _ LINK FENCE _ (N.DO�-R _ _ +1FNAn , .(15.000 (15.00105. t' ��F rte- EBI�IPICYERR�- p949 , z53 2'511 / `'� ______- __ _ - � 5'v1 oaANc 1) � �r 5 By __ __��_ - a z X51 _ _/ -1--� _ - (18901 (16001 De. UP 1 P s e - NE p Deal , .. _ HP DIRT Oo� 'n R=19. PUBUC - VRI BTRE T °j ` Od L + �+- .. - 9- 1- 1 ~ �PENTS15. w 3.S% uFULL OF T. 6Ai OC � � 1 eIEH,�IB� 14yNO.D- _ o 'PAVHAEMATAERACCFS514.15N- 'C a'� NMrNODS \ KTAE �.0 15.4. 7Nlff 9Locr SOEWgLNI J � 1Y1 GAR] N -- _ `\ LIN as oo A 14 1 All r bJ HOI 1f-V OO OO O '^'lA4"h5f 0• -\\=�_ _ ) o � 0� ��0 00 E 14.153 A 1,15L UPE365-1195) ' - n .. 1 _ � 6 L(Y PIPE / .ALT11 MANHOLE I6) RB 1.169(5") 4 ANY 5T T /� - '� 530 Fi � 2 �I �� _ �f\� 2 -__ - - - _ / �+ BUILDINGTERMINAL - B 1=m.zbz) R 1e e1 Bu1mINc / -� - _ _ -_- _ _ C 1�150D2") / _ _ - _- BL [ RIE �j +I l} ��// _ \ GOND M If�^ o -154 -�. �; 1''a. / / / / /.' -0.2 0 siF was -= - SEE SPECIFICATIONS. i ENCH MARK #4: 47.E �,� Di /� °6 _UUU�"' ,�,{aEA ICF sEEPAa •�'.I j J�0.3 -0.6 - - / T �wrs g ,3` 5(12') ♦(�_--__ D I, /NOP E ELF / I - �A D -' �_ PAVEMENT IS CONTINUOUS BITUMINOUS CONCRETE ONCRE E SPIKE W s�- sem= AI)LLLLl.6l 1 69 - B:3 TILITY POLE #36-16 �a8 s PARI r ® / l /% / / BENEATH ADD.ALTRI SEAWALL-SEESH TERMINAL BUILDING z I FVATIM=20.09(MLW /, IyB ! MEETNEWRIPRAPASI TED y �4 STONE \ 1 0.2 Ng ON MARINE DMWINGG 4- SALEM HARBORallo Nom - �Yc, cacRER c r 1 �\ a7 loos o RAND NIlfa BOULIIERS 1R} \ ONS SDEEgA. NArT a = .e 1 -,I AEDEDGFS-YE4w0UN ANDMATERIALSPUNSEW VRI 1 PAVEMENT,GRADING&UTILITY RIM NOTES: B �6'W" 4fi i A W a00D \ Yp0D5 E11.B1 T ,. _ �. 1. ALL ELEVATIONS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN,INCLUDING OIFi ®il6 BS 16 G D1LfBNG 3 - \' \ 3 CONTOUR LINES,UTILITY KIM ELEVATIONS,AND SPOT C4iC _ 60' (, 1 ELEVATIONS,ARE TO FINAL PHASE FINISHED GRADE WHICH ] 90FRAlx xµG WG n^+ >� „� YV \\\ ` �� INCLUDES A BITUMINOUS CONCRETE TOP COURSE. THE RNCE 2 3 153 �v s In �`11� �_ } TOP COURSE IS NOT INCLUDED IN THIS PHASE 1 RASE BID R=15.30 Of, 0 y +��.4�P I' �. Iry 1/Mpb Y PACKAGE.CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE RIM ELEVATIONS BENCH MARK y3: ry AI-8.4(6") MIN ID%1960 D` < `, AND TCN'OF BINDER COURSE ELEVATIONS I-YR•LOWER n B ADNANT I AO.$6/ F� R-13. �� THAN INDICATED ELEVATIONS TO ALLOW FUTURE TOP CONCRETE SPIKE IN z siAcxANT N41-52 R=1165 I_mt \\ _ 1� UTILITY POLE ,#36/1-1959. 12.2.) 1=10.5(A-) i'� / COURSE INSTALLATION. ELEVATION=17.34(MLW) 5' •w N44'56'21"w (PUBUCEST/?E /�+� 2. FOR THIS PROJECT,THE TC ELLVATBONS ARE TO TOP OF B, (P NOTH VgRrE6 SEAWALL,SEE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS.THE BC ELEVATIONS OUS CONCRETE pq VE ENT ;y ARE THE PROPOSED FINAL PAVEMENT ELEVATIONS WHERE PAVEMENT MEETS THE SEAWALL. GRADING NOTES 1. CONTRACTOR SHALL EMPLOY A LICENSED SURVEYOR OR 6. PITCH EVENLY BETWEEN SPOT GRADES.ALL PAVED AREAS 10. ALL GRADING SHALL COMPLY WITH THE RULES AND REGISTERED ENGINEER TO VERIFY AND LAYOUT ALL GRADES MUST PITCH TO DAMN AT A MINIMUM SLOPE OF REGULATIONS OF THE LOCAL AND FEDERAL LAWS AND GRADING LEGEND AS SHOWN ON ME DRAWINGS. ONINCH II/B9 PER FOOT.ANY SITE CONDITIONS GUIDELINES FOR UNNERSALACCESSIBILITY,INCLUDING OR ISSUES NOT ALLOWING THIS TO OCCUR SHALL BE ADA IN CASE OF COWLKT BETWEEN REGULATIONS,THE SYMBOL DFSCRIPIYONI SYMBOL DESCRIPTION2. PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY EXCAVATIO 4 WORK,TME REPORTED TO THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO GUIDELINE PROVIDING GREATER ACCESS SHALL APPLY. -13- ERISTINGCONIWRDRMINALE muCT1Rf/ CONTRACTOR COMPANIES IN NOTIFY ALL UTILITY COMPAIN CONTINUING THE WORK.NEW PAVEMENT AREAS MUST III It_0W ROA MATRk4 ACCORDANCE WITH THE'DIG SAW NOTIFICATION HAVE POSITIVE DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE STREET CURB OR 11. RIM ELEVATIONS U ALL DRAINAGE STRUCTURES AND OTHER UTILITY 14 PROPOYDMINORCOMWR VIF MR IN FIELD PROCEDURES PROMOTED BY RESPECTIVE UTILITY TOWARDS DRAINAGE STRUCTURES. STRUCFIOUS SHALL BE SET RUSH WITH FINAL SURROUNDING GRADES SO COMPANIES.THE'DIG SAFE'TELEPHONE NUMBER FOR AS NOTTOCAUSF A TRIP EDGE. -I; PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR G MHT EKISTING GRADE MASSACHUSETTS IS I-888-DIG-SAFE. 7, FINAL SHAPING OF ALL EARTHWORK SHALL BE AS DIRECTED AND APPROVED IN THE FILED BY THE OWNER'S 12. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN OR ADJUST TO NEW +1D.BD1 MINING SPOT FLLVATJON --_-- AE.1N HIpI1VARR 1 VERIFY ALL EXISTING GRADES IN THE FIELD AND REPORT REPRESENTATIVE. FINISHED GRADES AS NECESSARY ALL UTILITY AND WE ANY DISCREPANCIES IMMEDIATELY TO THE OWNER'S STRUCTURES SUCH AS LIGHT POLES.SIGN POLES, $ REPRESENTATIVE PRIORI TO STARTING WORK.ME STARTING B. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE DUST CONTROL FOR MANHOLES,DRAINAGE STRUCTURES,HAND HOLES,WATER GRADING & S3 +O.00 PROPOSED NT SPOT ELEVATION QT TRANSFORMER OUTURD OF WORK INDICATES THE CONTRACTOR HAS REVIEWED EARTHWORK OPERATIONS AS APPROVED BY THE OWNER'S AND GAS GATES,HYDRANTS,ETC.,FROM MAINTAINED $� PROPOSED SEAWALL ELEVATION AND ACCEPTED EXISTING CONDITIONS. REPRESENTATIVE. UTILITY AND SITE SYSTEMS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON LANDSCAPING PLAN +Q j HOSE RBB THE UTILITY DRAWINGS OR AS DIRECTED BY THE OWNER'S R.. 4. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE Of 9, SEE SPECIFICATIONS SECTION 023W FOR ADDITIONAL REPRESENTATIVE. �- +TC/BC TOPOFNRB/BOTTOMOFCURB ♦ HYDRANT ANY LOCATIONS WITH CONFLICTS BETWEEN UTILITY PUNS EXCAVATION AND FILLING REQUIREMENTS. j AND GRADING PUNS. il. CONTRACTOR SHALL HYDNO D ALL MEAS CISTURSED BY THIS x +1W TBW TOP lK WALLIBOTIOMa WALL CONIRACH TFOR VCH NO OTHER SURFACE RESTORATKM'ISI1 SITE DEVELOPMENT - PHASE 5, CONTRACTOR SHALL BLEND NEW EARTHWORK5MOOTHLY BY THE CONTRACTDDNMENTS. SALEM WHARF PROJECT IMO EXISTING CONDITIONS,PROVIDING VERTICAL CURVES +TRIBR TOP OF RAMP/00TIOMOFRMIP t,•-'s' OR ROUNDINGS AT THE TOP AND BOTTOM OF SLOPES I CITY OF SALEM w SALEM, MA DECEMBER 2010 w' T7 r ©�m '°"•'^-' Shadley Associates F�Nomm C°IJZJI ng BCE ENGINEERS aw.� �.. �'e.,a...m.,�' DNAwN: Cl I� -J �cOVED DRAWING No. L-z 0 15' l0' W' � DATE: Di(TMRFR 202010 suLL:1•_]e' B• REVISIONS SHEET i1 0F B.SQUARE NOTE: BITUMINOUS CONCRETE TYPKAL PEEN THREADS TO PREVENT BOLT TOP COURSE NIC REMOVAL y{• MIUMINOUS CONCRETE In'OWARER AT 45.14I SIDES,TiPKAt 6' BINDER COURSE wCARRIAGE BOLT WfIH -?^ FINISH GRADE CWNTERSUNI NUTAND WI v LL- TYPIUL D)PDL POSTMINIMUM.IRIM NOT. \ SEAWASEE ANO PFFN EDIT ENDS. EDGECDNUTIWVARIES-SEE \ STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS - __ - - -� MAlIRWSPIAN = N'x IP WOW RAIL I6'd MAXRAUMIENGiH - - - PRWpEIP1YLApA 10001 TYPICAL OFNY GRADED(RUSHED _ Wore 559 IAYI AND MATERWSPIAN1— rI1116'WWDKIST PROVIDE118' —III�—III—II—II—III =III _ GAP AT JOINTS,WMAL. COMPACTED OR UNDIMIRBED 511BGMERE 5(ROIUY 11'DIA COMPACTED(RUSHED HONE I COMPACTED OR UNDISTURBED BITUMINOUS CONCRETE PAVEMENT ICN.FOST YCnON $UBLRAOE YPI 16'd,TYPIGI SGLLE:I I/i'�1'd B'do.C,tt 7777I—POST,TYPICAL mL,rfw-m >i= =`Q- _ - c°MwnaED noNEWn 6' NO E: b " \ \ SEDGE EEWMARIONVARIES : Sff MATERIAL$PUN _ 0. FINISHED GRADE wFINSLAADE ° � 0 8 ° °O ° DENY GRADED CRU5Hf) o ° ' °a $TONE,EITEND ON.6' _ 1 iy..¢, iy..a, ° O°Q BEYOND STWEWn,TYP. II~ylb-��ll°v=ylbll�=/111=1�-III=111 UN°ND RBEEDSSUBLRADE _I I—iii=1 1=1—I 1=1 1=1 1— ISI=Nil=�� P yFI r TYPICAL IYPRAL RAYING ELEVATION TIMBER GUARDRAIL 6 STONEDUST SURFACING SGML:3A%I SCALE 119-10 x IF OF SIGN K PARKING REGULATORY SIGN,SEE LAYOUT RSO'SQ.MR POST z� AND MUTERLVS KAN SIGN,YE LAYOLfT AND MNTERIAu 2 — RAN a sPEaFRATnNs STOPDRAWINGSREQUIRED SFIECT®90lADIXFAOMOR 01 SOLIRCE, L SITE WASHER AND SIGN SAVER• HACEII TD BE DETERMINED BY DINNER'S REMESENLIAME. Nb )y I IR'K SPI 6'CALIME BOLT WI BOULDERS SHALL Bf PLACED ON PWN fNURGFMFNi SURFACE GR10E wDTE fNNW1 QADE/ANTEAWSVARY-SEE - O I. STRIPINGDUIBLE P TO S NON-ACCESSIBLE EPARDNG AEW ALUMINUM REIGN NOTE:SIZE VARRS,FINAL j HALLS ARF TO CENTER OFj ALUMINUM RDLECfIVE SIGN Ti'X IB'WIRWND 1Y MEET. CORNERS AND PREPIINCHED MDUNRNG HOIES. �THEFIELDFTlOUTON OF STONESDR Y x i OF SEE LAYOUT MATERIALS PLW AND ARROVN BYOwNEA'S y&�2 Nd O SYMBOL - REPAFYNTATNE N 2W HANDICAFIVIRESERVEDPARMNGSIGN UNDISTURBED OR 3 PAINfm PAVEMENT COMPACIED SUBGRAOE Q MARKINGS SEE SPECS, 4ANA ACCESSIBLE SIGN MOONTFD BELOW RESERVED 1 B'AMAUE� 91d PLACED BOULDER 4 � ttPICAL SIGN POST AND FWnNG � SUIE:i t2'=t'V /Y HANDICAP PARKING STRIPING N�ETi�o�"la°s E W/va ` SCALE:N.T.S. FINISHEDGRADE,SEEFANS A SITE DETAILS A%Pp R'd I'd PAVFMFNi STRYING i---i—i saYEECS 4 SITE DEVELOPMENT — PHASE I N,BBBPI, IrocoNa FWnNc rty. SALEM WHARF PROJECT CITY OF SALEM a COMPACTED SUBGRADE w SALEM, MA g DECEMBER 2010 w 4 r. � . d N< - Shadley Associates Boor�e Cwsw/tl/l l uGTawELEvnrJON � g PEDESTRIAN ZONE STRIPING REGULATORY SIGN ENGINEERS a •o w� m v e1� BA H: —'"+••^m"m" Cr YSAWN DRAWING N0. L-3 3 M MOVED: SCALE BM•a,'d rcrFUBPI m rom uxE:Nxs. 4 DATE. SHEET ,z OF u = REVISIONS i NXTEST R., IST N1,DRAN ------ aI TEE a-XIPI IT LE a 01 CAP 2:CORPORATION WTN; 2-6'GTE VALVES RWI 14 3ft SADDLE SUR-21 PVC PIN. (OLg)-11.05 2 CURB STOP WITH /6"SM-21 MCII 2 COPPER(N)-IIAO COPPER BOX s 03 'w 4-16 SOS I'CORP I 6 RSOI PVI PAC INV, RW-tC.OD VALVE BOX C IW. (CUI)IISSC ARK fl: I. rBENCH -4 IS CS is M 07 VE 1 5 51 11 C PoY SUNNI 140012-POP M RI 11.00 tl POP M (01 It 111 Siv (OUT) IM -SC)l b"I 4 IS I' VALVE RWI I r R .3C 41 l3vq IDP�21 SERVICE Me"I'll CAP ; 15,17P OR-M Pvc NX. (IN)N 2U INV--1220 6-SUR-33 Pc WV. (OUI 3' Os#9 ROW W 5'4 SENA, p 12 (OM-10.70 .1 7 OP,1H #7 BI OU'lRet DAN) 0 51 RIM-15202 RINI 4 5"POP NN M 2 POP I III (IN�IIIIOL20�DWI 16) T POP 10 65 CB 17) 12- POP M (OUt)-Il.W 7 12-kPA: I ":;.I�Wl 1'1� SPACING UIR) iw, W : i CONTRAI To .... 12 NOR N, W) M EXISTING PAVEMENT IN PUBUC WAILS a PAVE Uil TR=LM.T. --� — -- I RUSH NEW AT /';Is PCP w avoAllit SEPARSTOR RUA OS 03(C.U.,G 15 801 DA'0 1 a Il 9 n Fj C 8 16 Off. ILHIG �D 03vo;��*'N-2 RIM-I..30 5m- 1 12' SOP W. (OUI Ir POP IW. (OUT),I&W I. -- - ca./I SEPARAI 1. (OUI 1 -.4,A, I-z.� I RIM 156D1 INSTALL WNX WATER POP INV (W)IIII 6A 'a IRNH #8 WI -" - 1u-15501 - " I Will #'I CU WATER SIRSI a S�� --;r KIP INV. 0W.W."m �= Wil.15,00. WISH CURB STOP TO-OUTPALL WILL!III r Kp lw. (OUT).10.00- 12' NOW RRI (OUT).110M S" IS ------ --- 12-NOR III(IN I- FUCK VALVE CU AMR SERVICE CUT CAP S,SEN.WATER • Nw. (Ourt)-aUSs IHV.-7.50 IL- --- - sicc is WIT, CURB STO' S io BE W G411 IALVE 12' NOR Iiiii.QI 1 RINI POP INN.(IN) 12 -1090 1 �ACE OMNI a-KP I. is :CP W., (IN).9.95 sw#5 RI dWH IT. RXII 15,111 8: CLIP W. (Ida)-.TO RXIII RI IW. (IN) R&I 6 -21 PVC I (OUT)-l2m 8 -7M i 8-s �7C6 Ia'Ncp AW, (GUT).7w I S- ADS INY. QW-89) 0. 0. Be#2Ifl IS NOR W. OYER 9$5 ir Sco,M. (OUT).&N RSI 15.5ift �14M 'a RIOR I(RWH;S." 1 WcP w (w) IS' SCIP M (OXIONFLONI a- Wo, INV (WI 2 -1115 1111 1 Ir NOW INV (IN)-8.4D "'Ell"All 8-KP W. (OUT)-BI MILK=WTT0PZ=Tn OR UNE: 16 MO EXISTING I-SALE VAIVe 'r POP I CONNECT WRIN!FLEXIBLE BOOL PER FICATICINS IS"PER INV (OVERFLONI .1URFAI WITH TOE SPI I r I I'LLEA vXUXE to A TEST STC#IWCEPTOR SC 2401D 1 INV.8 10 MIXT t RNI.i5.IOP PIT PIRO C=lZCl=p I N'I %--", S"STEN REFORM EUE ARO.AN, ix'NOR.1 (1.).0.85 OCKSON OF EXUSTNS 12' Is'POP MIN. (CUT)-9.60 LANE TO L DMH 02 A � 5:KP aw (WI 11) 5 POP W WXI(CO 03) 12'NOR . [WI ROMI 03) CS il R)CLNBLE 1 All MTE) IS-sc�w (OMT)-890 IT Wc:W INA, (OUI D INV ('I RIM-1a 7. ; IIr� 2:RCP INV (11I 71 I 5 POP M, (WT)-9.10I FNOTE ALL ELEVATIONS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN, INCLUDING CONTOUR LINES AND RIM AND SPOT ELEVATIONS, ARE TO FINISHED GRADE, INCLUDING A BITUMINOUS CONCRETE TOP COURSE. 2. FOR THIS PROJECT, THE TO ELEVATIONS ARE TO TOP OF SEAWALL, SEE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS. THE BC ELEVATIONS ARE THE PROPOSED FINISH PAVEMENT ELEVATIONS WHERE IT MEETS THE SEAWALL. 3 FRAMES, GRATES, AND COVERS TO BE SEr TO BINDER COURSE ELEVATION.- SITE UTILITY LAYOUT PLAN SITE DEVELOPMENT — PHASE I SALEM WHARF PROJECT CITY OF SALEM SALEM, MA DECEMBER 2010 I-x L"IBourAe Consuldzig Engineering II&Y S Assoc iaws E 0 3D RD F N G I N E E R S DRAWN: JBF RRB CHECKED, DRAWING NO, 29756-10-13 $CAI 1- -0, APPROVED. REVISIONS SHEET 13 CF — 7 LESARON DOUBLE GRATE CATCH STORMCEPTOR FRAME AND COVER; STANDARD MANHOLE FRAME AND COVER LEBARON BASIN LV 3448-2-000 LEBARON TYPE LB 328 PER CRY OF TWE LB 285 PER COT OF SALEM REQUIREMENTS CATCH BASIN FRAME AND GRAZE SALEM REQUIREMENTS, THE WORD •DRAIN" LEBARON LF 248-2-000 PROVIDE MORTAR SHELF TO BE CAST IN 3" LETTERS 32"P DOUBLE FRAME AND GRATES FINISH GRADE 6'-8" (STANDARD DEPTH) BRICKS MAY BE USED FOR GRADE ADJUSTMENTS. CATCH BASINS WHERE INDICATED RIM VARIES GRADE ADJUSTERS TO �� FRAME TO BE SET 1N NLL BED OF MORTAR ON DRAWINGS SUIT FINISHED GRADE 111 BRICK 'k• ADJUST TO GRADE 15" 12' � 69 OIL PORT MORTAR ALL JOINTS Y •P 18"-2e 24'031' 2' FINISHED GRAPE 09 ONIomv/"�'Lon�qT TLE'! CONICAL \\ CONCRETE COLLAR P SECTION MIN. 0.12 S0. IN REEL PER VEWICAL 4 �NORTAR FILL AROUND PIPE FOOT. PLACED ACCORDING TO AASHTO DESIGNATION M19 2-S" STAINLESS STEEL PIPE CLAMP 41 1• MIN ]2'B T SEHEIGHT OFRJS 2'-6" FLEXIBLE RUBBER CONNECTOR T VM1E5 �,-STORMCEPTOR 1-#3 RISER FROM M0l1" \` ---18'0 BAR AROUND OPENINGS FOR PIPES I—II S' - HOODED OUTLET PIPE INLET IL T 1' TO 4' Y CATCH BASIN X000 - OUTLET 18'0 AND OVER. 1" COVER �" TO MANHOLE DRAIN --LESARON MODEL 1Y MIN. FLOOR OF STRUCTURE TO BE HEADERS L202 OR EQUAL - WEIR�- WD MT 1 STAINLESS STEEL 5'a CATCH BASIN 4'_O•EXPANSION BANG ------- - 309 MAX BRICK CHIPS AND MORTAR OR NOW PSI 6' COMPACTED STONE FILL J-O MIN.OUTSIDE PIPE CONCRETE (IF HMO MIXED SEE LATEST 4'MINSLAW MAJESTIC GASKET MATERIAL LEBAEON L202 X000 (TYPJING PIPE ♦ MOPw SPECS ACES 4'-D ALLMANHOLE LE NTS____ . PRECAST CONCRETE TO 1W MINYP OEIRCE ( N CONFORM TO ASN-478 CONC. _ OF 4000 PSI AT 28 DAYS DROP ME PROVED Y OPENINGS ] * 8' BITUMINOUS COATING INLET PIPE 6 6' COMPACTED STONE FILL - - ON SURFACE(]]P) HD GEOTE.KIILE FABRIC B 249 DROP PlaB VIEW PIPE OPENINGS TO BE PRECAST 6"COMPACTED STONE FILL OURR PIPE IN RISER SECTION INVERTED ARCH WITH BRICKS 6, 5'0 6• l 6'COMPACTED UID ON EDGE 8" STONE FILL 6'0• n DOUBLE GRATE CATCH BASIN , NOTE: 14 1. FRAME FRAME ANO GRATES TO BE SET INITIALLY TO BINDER SCALE: 3/5"- 1'-0' n DRAIN MANHOLE DETAIL COURSE ELEVATION. SeetionThmChamber 2. ALL CATCH BASIN FRAMES SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF W NOTES N DEPTH. SCALE: N.i S. r W SECTIONS p1ALL K CE9GNEO FOR 15-]p LOLLW'. B CATCH BASIN 2 PPRADER(P 'r KNOCKO)n FOA RMS WMH MORTAR 2-AX n PRECAST STORMCEPTOR-STC 1800 MOE TO WHADE OF NOTES: 16 CCMNECTCNS. 1A 1. MANHOLE DESIGN TO CONFORM TO ASTM C478 LATEST REVISION. SCALE. t/2'-1'-0" 2. CONCRETE SHALL BE WET CAST 4000 P.S.I. 0 28 DAYS. SCILE: 3/8' 1'-0' 3. %HNT SEALANT BETWEEN PRECAST SECTIONS SHALL BE BUM 3. USE FLAT TOP SLAB WHEN HEIGHT OF CONE SECTION IS LESS RUBBER. THAN 3'-0" 4 DOUBLE GTEH BABA FRAME AND GRAM M/1L BE SET IN FULL STORMCEPTOR NOTES'. 4. FILL OUTSIDE FACE OF ALL MANHOLE JOINTS WITH NON-SHRINK MIpiM BED.ANKT TO GRADE WITH CUT DI CH ANI MORTAR t. THE USE OF FLEXIBLE CONNECTION IS RECOMMENDED AT THE INLET AND OUTLET WHERE MORTAR. IS W"COURSES MAAMU.) APPLICABLE, 5. SEL'CATCH SAMN'PETAL FON 6PEODCATONB. 2, COVER SHALL BE POSITIONED MR THE OUTLET DROP PIPE AND THE OIL PORT. STORMCEPTOR FRAME AND COVER: 3. THE STORMCEPTOR SYSTEM IS PROTECTED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING U.S. PATENTS: LEBARON TYPE LB 328, CRT OF 04985148, 05725760, 05753115, 05549151, /6068765, /6371590. SALEM REQUIREMENTS, THE WORD 'DRAIN' TO BE CAST IN 3' LETTERS STANDARD MANHOLE FRAME 4. LIVEDCONTRACTORT SHALL CONTACT A CONCRETE PIPE DMSION PEPRESEWATVE FOR DETAILS NOT -32•B-+( AND COVER LEBARON TYPE LASTED ON N5 DRAWING. GRADE ADJUSTERS TO LB 268 PER CITY OF SALEM REQUIREMENTS, THE WORD BUR FINISHED GRADE 5f• 6• 'DRAIN' TO BE CAST IN 3' BRICK LEVELING COURSE LETTERS AS REQUIRED FRAME TO SET IN 15' OUTFALL 4 06 BARS FULL 80OFF MORTAR (\ t♦ /T FKM WAY 8• 3f19 FINISHED GRADE X 5'-0" LC. 6" B B' RCP IN �f3"CORER MIN. FLEX VALVE H B 4 ORFICE WOE LEBARON FOUNDR RASH m FLON SEE DETAIL 14 312'4 ]' TMSN 1 Z. SU04TAN BROOKLYN RACK � �AN In 249 OUTLET PIPE STAN TRAP $TORMCEWOR 6'RCP OUT WATER WATER INSEE -- FLOW WCL LEVEL: 11I LEVEL -INET - OUTLET n _ O PROVIDE MT FLOATATION INVERT VARIES -- } I AS REQUIRED PER WEIR �EPAmBER{ Y SEDIMENTATION SPECIFICATION / 6. S THIRD '� +FCIUMBER j CHAMBER J +CwNBER y PIPE CONN. SHALL BE ( _ - _ 12 PULED WITHIN 1Y TO - EXPANSION GROUT OUTLET 6" COMPACTED INSHORE SIDE OF WALL - s ONE n OUTFALL SECTION n REINFORCING ® OUTFALL 5'0 CRIME PLATE / 6' 3'-6" 6'-10" 8' n 1♦ 24.0 DROP 7'_O• SCALE: ip"�Y-0" SCALE: 1/3'�t'-0" OUTLET RPE 1 CROSS SECTION 5' CONC. BLOCK WALL ONE COURSE TO BE 8' CONC. BLOCK WILL TURNED ON ITS S1UE TO ALLOW WATER TO TOY MIN, DROP TEE PASS THROUGH INLET PIPE ACCESS OPENING 69 OLL IF (SEE NOTE 02) GRR CHAMBER SPECIFICATIONS: 1, CONCRETE MINIMUM STRENGTH-5000 PS 1, 0 28 DAYS 2. STEEL REINFORCEMENT-ASTM A-615-75. GRACE 60, 1- MIN. COVER 2Bx 3. CONSTRUCTION JOINT-SEALED WITH I'$ BUTYL RUBBER OR EQUNALEW 4. dL/WATER CHAMBER CMKRY - 4,000 GALLONS (MINIMUM) Plmyicw 5, INSIDE WIDTH OF CHAMBER IS 6'-0' �B• - n OIL/WATER SEPARATOR Bxq x I COMPACTED STONE 14127 . 0' SCALE: N.T.S. �( - DRAINAGE MOMS SITE DRAINAGE DETAILS Section Thr9 ber ChamI ALL CAST IN PLACE CONCRETE TO HAVE A MINIMUM 25 OAT Il 005 STRENGTH OF 400D Las PER SD. INCH. USING 3/41NAXIMUM pi SITE DEVELOPMENT - PHASE I SIZE AGGREGATE.PRECAST STORMCEPTOR STC 2400 TIDE FLEX CHECK VALVE SALEM WHARF PROJECT 1. REINFORCING STEEL BARS ARE DEFORMED BARS OF BILLET Is STEEL ASTM A615 GRADE 60. 14CITY OF SALEM SCALE. I/2'-1'-0- 3. WELDED WIRE FABRIC CONFORMS TO MTM A185. SALEM, MA 4. DESIGN LIVE LOAD - HS 20 - 44. DECEMBER 2010 5. MINIMUM OWER FOR REINFORCING IN WALLS OR SUBS POURED AGAINST FARM SMALL ER 3 INCHES ALL OTHERS SHALL BE � .,N,^^ wring 2 INCHES UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. ®m m NAL P,!• B09f'O! Cons rO `..""0 6. ALL MANHOLES SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED OF REINFORCED CONCRETET°Tti Shadley Associates 'A'I m'" SHOP DRAWINGS SUBMITTALS SHALL SHOW ALL REINFORCING DETAILS. .."VINVI•MB^"N"` IF /R a.)NOT. AV 4»•WW ENGINEERS - . A'' ''^AMUSION DRAWN: JSF 1 �.......aMW . r>e1..R.Jen CHECKED: PRO DRAWING N0. 29758-10-14 APPROVED: REVISIONS DA E: ,vD,n° SHEET 14 OF 24 LEBARON CITY OF SALEM STANDARD lB 268 L.I. MANHOLE FRAME k COVER HYDRANT DARLING B36B SALEM STANDARD SET IN I-MORTAR BED-COVERS SHALL HAVE A uA%. WL OF Sb LBS Al A CLEAR OPENING OF 24'AND ME WORO FINISH GRADE SEWER'CAST IN 3'I£TTE.RS r ON TOP SURFACE PER CITY OF SALEM fi 0-MIN. A 19 MIN, 1 REWMtE4ENTS WERE POSSIBLE VALVE BD%ANCH —CONCRETE COLLAR- - 21 DIA, I I IIT MIN. ADJUST TO GRADE Al BRICK k IN 1)� E-MAX 1 MORTAR (2 COURSES WN tY MAX) CONCRETE THRUST 0-MIN I MINIMUM)i C V OF yi- EIfvANON O BRICK BLOCK i0 UNDISTURBED SCREENS GRAVEL P6' ABOVE SER BE Yi DIA. O PIPE - n STANDARD iCp FOR MANHOLE EARTH A. D HIM. GRA, AT LEAST fi ABOK L I -� PIPE HYDRANT DRAIN RING f RISfR 8 -[1 STEEL REINFORCED TSPS 12' RM91Ep LRA _ _ _ _ )I F (PI-ASTICPRECAST MNNOW STEPS 1O 0 'F�,I R_ II - Ij jl `�' 'I j-j 1 T iIJ CONCRETE THRUST BLOCK i0 11 (PRECASL INTO WALL ACTON) _ t W �f I j_ t DOES OF SH EARTH Ofl THREE FLE%LRCS DONT SEALANT TO FILL T-•J y MOSS OF SHOE �{-- AT LEAST"/5S O RANT CAVITY 11( MIN. DIA CASL IRON -T ' 5-yN Y�-- F STANDARD REINFORCED PRECAST ICI 4-0'MIN SPECS, PPONOERMCIE X3 LOl£RLAP MINAMR DEPT P ~ fi A1111ON BV IT STONE ONS-50 CONCRETE BLOCK VARIES _P OA yl �� CONCREI[ NMIHQE RI4lt5 j-1 2' DEPTH ( .) 6 MIN. PER WATER DEPT.SPECS AT ON UNDISTURBED(EARN MAX KOR-NSUL BOOT CLA W/ 60' RESTRAIN WITH ill PE RODS.RETAINER GLANDS, STAINLESS STEEL CLAMPS - SEALED GR SURFACE i0 IO FACTORY MIN. fi LWP (YIN') ---- --- SEALED MM WATER PROOFING BDOutNWs 1 6-(YIN) MATERIAL A A f i j 1 �iON VIEW_ JOINTS CONNECTING PIECES MM RESTRAINED FLOOR OF SHELF TO BE HEADERS WD -,rye Ic f 1' 8'D.I WATER MAIN y.J CLAND ON 6'PLAIN --- FLAT AT A SLOPE O f/FT _ _ 'S.1'/Fi CONCRETE FILL INVERTS + i'�— FND BRANCH CONCRETE THRUST WN 12 50. IN — AS POD STEEL VERTICAL FOOT O w / COPPER TUBING� � LOCI(INC IEE �-� 6-M.J. GALE VALVE CER AASHTO M199 - 4pIOlTHIC BAA SECTION VALVE BOM TN STOP PROVIDE \ ON STORE BSEA �- + FIRE HYDRANT BLOCK TO UNDISTURBED s- MANHOLE STEPS PPOPOSFD \ ` < EARTH CWPACTE SPOKE FILL ANGLE vMRS- (ryP_) KAREN MAIN CORPORATION STOP I 67 SCE SEE PLAN FOR I Y'�-- �IIV gi,,.. SHOWN on DRAncs CCONCRETETH MRUST BLOCK rl' 6'DAL PIPE t.I. TO UNDSNRRE N EAR 6' ELnI RESTRAIN HATH Al"PE RODS. TING IE SEWER MANHOLE-(TMP.) INVERT DETAIL WATER SERVICE DETAIL - TYP NPNDS.OR HYDRANT ca+NEcnxc PIECES NOIR. WM RESIRANEO JOINTS A ^ /� HYDRANT EXTENSIONS 41ALL BF I� INSTALLED BY WE wADMONEER PIAN NEW SCALE: NLS. SCP1E NT.S. SCALE: N.T a) HYDRANT DETAIL NOTES IS 1, MANHOLE DESIGN TO CONFORM TO "PRECAST CONCRETE MANHOLE SECTIONS-ASTM C470 LATEST REVISION. SCALE. N.LS 2 HU OUTSIDE FACE OF ALL MANHOLE JOINTS W/NON SHRINK MORTAR. 3. VA FLAT TOP SUB WHEN HEIGHT OF CONE SECTION 15 LESS THAN 3'-0'. 4. PROVIDE PIPE JOINTS NO MORE THAN 3'-0- FROM OUTSIDE FACE OF MANHOLE. 5. PLUG LIR HOES SOLD W/MASTIC. 0. VIDE PROFLEXIBLE SLEEVE k STAINLESS STEEL SWAP AT ALL PIPE TO MANHOLE JOINTS. >. COAT OUTSIDE SURFACE WITH BITUMINOUS WATERPROOFING. 6 FRAME AND COVER TO BE INITIALLY SET BINDER COURSE ELEVATION. ASPHALT PAVING FpTH: COMPACIE ORDINARY FILL FINE GRAVEL CCMPN:TOR TO M4MA'N SEGREGATION OF COVER MATERIAL AND LOWER CONTAMINATED 1 DENSE GRADED CRUSNE STONE MATERIAL (RON COVER) 1_ y FINISHED G y EXISTING GRADE (NOT FINISNE CRUDE) vAIR1Es • - .`DEPTH AND SURFACE . .. 'IL IY TREATMENT VARIES 1 'COVER MM DEPTH VARIES 3' 0-COVER MATERIAL o COMPACTED BE PIPE BEDDING w WARNING TAPE fi (WA1ER/AKR) COMPACTS NON COVERCONTAMINATED TRIAL RE PIPE QUIRED BACKFILL PIPE BEGGING . Y t TO BE RMAL PLACED 3L�-D' BELOW OPMETER CE HMO TAMPS HAUNCHING �1 IEQD 6- YM 13 (MIN) ~ 4 COMPACTED MPF REDOING NOTE: (OR AS OMERMSE RFCOMMEMO EO COMPACTED SUBGRADE SEPARATED AND STOONCESS MATERIAL TO API KEPT BY PIPE NANUfACNRER) p`1GTE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SMP UTILITY MATERIAL n UTILITY TRENCH DETAIL ( Z HANDLING DETAIL II SCALE N.LS 91I1 NT.S. I ~� WATER & SEWER DETAILS SITE DEVELOPMENT — PHASE I SALEM WHARF PROJECT CITY OF SALEM � c<" SALEM, MA ;yIV DECEMBER 2010 7 Boerne ConaWtlap F.cgfioeerro8 9 Shadley Associates _ �� _ �„R.s, I - -- - NYF,.,� Nf MA.i ear 1 nN I I+w�.r o F m.MR.>WI DRAWN-. JSI CHErKED. Ras — DRAWING N0. 29]56-10_15 F PFgpJED. i - -- - _ RDATE' ' ' SHEET 15 OF 24 EVISIONS - —-- -�--, J E%1SLNG GRADE FINISHED PAVEMENT MURE BOARDWALK ORDINARY FILL-CWFR CONSTRUCTION NI.C. EXIST INO GRACE r.ENURE BOARDWALK / CONSMUCTpN n.LC. rEXISTING GW-0E FUNRE BNIC -- ORgFU-COVER' / �ORgNNiY FlLL-COVER �CONSTRUCTIONTION FL H6.0 NIC '� E::1]v-f HARY LIMIT OF EXCAVATOR - 1 LIMIT0�1 R Ii OF EXCAVATION HR EL a 0 I I I Tl I IMIT OF f%CAVATEXISTING SLOPE ON 1 I I v-_I _ NTL EL a 11.0 1 _ - R XTL EL +110 1 II- LIMIT OF EXCAVATION i. ] MNW EL ♦&9 1 EYISTING iILWE OROINM' FlLL-NON COVER I I _ .a 1MHN $S NXW FI. B _ EXISTING SLOPE r _ FL1Z0 ORDINARY nu-NON, COVER IINII OF EXCAVATION IL � 1 ♦1 a ` INSTAll Sfd1 FlLL FOO 13 MINUS STONE - NO GEOTEATLE FILTER Fp9RIC x=v 11 �\ FI 350 HO CEOTE4LIlE FILLER FAR IC J 4 _ HO GFOTE%IILE FILTER FABRIC ORDINARY E1LL-NON COVER LIMIT OF EXCAVATION INSTAL STONE GILL FOR LEVEUNG AS REOD E j LEVELING AS REO'D MLW R..O4 14,W EF, Q.0 INSTALL STONE FILL FOR MLN EL 0.0 LEVEUNC AS RISC D �1�1" a) SEAWALL SECTION - TYPE 1 n SEAWALL SECTION - TYPE 11 �G1 SEAWALL SECTION - TYPE 111 e 6 8 SCALE: 1/a'.I'-O" 1$' Fil SHED PAVEMENT NIC I'CMWFEA 2ABINDER PAVING I e. EL PFR SNf£T 1I - _ I fi GRAVEL J. +� O PILE CW . SUB-MSF LOU.ignS 12' VARIES ORMW/tY FlLL-CGKR 20' 2'%8' SPEAR KEY 2 1W' J �T D n SEAWALL SECTION-TYP. 16 SCALE 1/2--1'-0- NOTE: 1. SEE DETAILS F/11 h G/N FOR OUTFALL SECTION k OUAILS. 2. ALL NE&W SHALL HAVE J'COVER MIN. UNLESS OTHERWSE NOTED. J. ALL EXPOSED EDGES SMALL HAVE I' CHANFER {. E%PANSOI JOM SNALL BE I' THICK CERAMM OR EQUAL AS SPECIFIED. SEAWALL SECTIONS SITE DEVELOPMENT - PHASE I SALEM WHARF PROJECT CITY OF SALEM SALEM, MA DECEMBER 2010 Shadley Associates CHECKED: RM—/30 OE2AWING N0. 2956-10-16 APPROVED HEVI,Ions D"TE' 1 SHEET 16 OF 24 — I' CHAMFER 2-J• -1 ` MIN W AS •,L - REV'RH D Ht SPEC. e' � J'COrER -I 12' II II eUN SECITO (M.) _ VMIES IIIIIIII StlFul KEv NI O 1T O.C. VIAIES 16 O 12' Ob. ro" SHEAR KEY (I w U -T apNNsNEKH K JqM CALEF 2"%B' SHUN KEY b"wN. J._22•_p• 6"MIN.- 6'MIN ANGLE +e• ® ® MIES EL 17.5 MIN, ] EWN-Y SPICED 16 O 12" 0.6. O 2' OC. HORIZOMNLY SEAWALL SECTION (TYP.) n SHEAR KEY LOCATION-(TYP.) n SEAWALL REINFORCING-(TYP.) n WALL BEND DETAIL p sGME: I/Y-Y-O' suLE: I/z"=I'-D' MIll REINEORCEbEM G C 17 EXPANSION DONT - --MP.) SHEAR KEY AS PER DETNLe QI Q 12 Nt➢RE M 2-I6 TOOL EDGES PRF CAP I•E%PNSHIN Jaw PILES L E6 O 12 O.C. Ie• � 1 STONE 2l' i � REO'Db X I I I I I Lys E%PNSKIN �._ 15'-O FOReMURE BWRDNP ACING_ _ JOINT TRUE WALL TRANSITION DETAIL n EXPANSION JOINT DETAIL EXPANSION JOINT PLAN 19 NOTE: I. SEE DETNLS F/11 k G/H FOR OVL SECIIOR O DETNLS- 2. N REBAR 6 HAVE J" COVER MIN. UNIESS Oi1ERWI5E NOTED. J. NL EXPOSED EDGES SiNLL NAVE I' CWYFER, L ETPANSHIN Jaw RULER SW BE I' THICK CER. OR EWAL AS SPECIRM SEAWALL CONCRETE SECTIONS SITE DEVELOPMENT — PHASE I SALEM WHARF PROJECT ,��• + CITY OF SALEM SALEM, MA Y ° DECEMBER 2010 ,yT""'�g �Buarre CoaA/Nag F,oglaerrlag ' ,o Shadley Associates Tsi Fir r.....�I�.wa .. {M� 9tiM � DRAWN: JSF iww.r .r mrzsr CHECKED. RPI - DRAWING N0. 29756-10-17 -- --- APPROVED REVISIONS 0P1Fi SHEET 17 OF 24 3'-C'COVER RANDOM SIZED 3FVETUEVi STONE HAVING NO SOILS CONTRACTOR '0 MAINTAIN MIN J'-D' REVETMENT REPLACEMENT q f- MATERIAL WffH I' SIZE AGGREGATES OR LESS NOT SUBJECT TOPAVEMENT W/ j :EPTA OF COVER MATERIAL SEE DRNI is/ - �-- -- - - -- - - ---- Fx GING C'RAOF SMP CONTAMINATED MATERIAL SEGREGATION F SUBBASE -- - 71}- CONTRACTOR TO RI EXISTING RLYETMFN- As RE0'0 I - AND SEPARATE INTo- 1�'1 ARMOR STONE >6' 90-IMMCOvrR 0 COVER I {+} <6' 0-10% REINSTALL RANDOM PLACED MCN[ FILL >6' 0% --' - ARMOR STONE p, \ 16" 130% _ _ _ _ _ rL EL. ♦1I o - SLOPE REARMOR NIl CL. .11.0 r /J O lOi -CONTRACTOR TO ACD NON COVER MATERt ` I' 4 _ ADDITIONAL ARMOR STONE F 2'-e't <F.,i i.ONTA4IFMTEO MATERIAL NON CWEi - \ � AS REQUIRED-SEE NOTE: 'PIED!To SEGREGATION X16' Ems.+ dj ~ t - i. / CONTRACTOR i0 INSTALL NON- - - OF Plt 0 THE SITE 1 .. `iL f JI .12e.i 'ERIaL aER SMP _ CO\E4 ORDINARY EILL TO TIED `L-u-S I � oDL LAYER J .� � MGM E%EM GLLOWED I EXISTINGREKTAENT STONE TO REMAIN THICKES NESS ESS - NO 3EOTExTM1E FILTER FABRIC-� - NOTE: CONTRACTOR L E.INSTALL ADDITIONAL ARMOR STONE' ALONG -_ - STONE FILL AS REO'G J TO SLOPE ONE REMOVAL OF EXISTING F DU REQUIRED.)STONE TO PROVIDE A . ARMOR UNIFORM ETO SLOPE OF DUMPED STONE (MIN P" STONE). ARMOR STONE TO BE LIMITED LC ONSrtE MATERIAL. MLw_ EL. OS MLW EL_04 ' NO IMPORTING OF STONE REQUIRED ' -� - �- ' REVETMENT MATERIAL �1 HANDLING DETAIL �l SEAWALL BACKFILL-TYP. REVETMENT SLOPE UPGRADE e SCALE: I/Cd-0' B SLAT£: I 19 I p=T'-C' SCALE: I/C.1'p' I STACK GRANI'E STONE O JOIMT B !FFV UNOERIAYER STONE FKISUNG SEAWALL AND NN W&L NO OF SenwFILL-CONN C ZA' ORDINXAY FILL-COV UNSHOD GRADE NEW SEAWALL (BEYOND) i -6s f e l EXISTING WA _ _ _ �- _ / TNG SFA LL RANDOM PLACED - / ARMOR STONE � - __ STALKED � GRANITE - r ` $ �REVETMENT AT SEAWALL STONE / EAST TERMINUSaTll ADD GEOTEX`LE IB STONE PLL (COVER MATERIAL OUALOT) NEW CONCRETE WALL ORDINARY FILL-140i4 CCVHI STONE EILL STONE I I TO LINT OF SE4WALL �— EXCAVATION NO GEOTExTILE \ , FILTER FABRIC / V EXISTING STONE SEAWALL - REVETMENT END DETAIL, SEAWALL BACKFILL-PLAN SEAWALL BACKFILL.-SECTION g SCALE'. 1/��"-0` I I I REVETMENT SECTIONS A' % SITE DEVELOPMENT — PHASE I : E SALEM WHARF PROJECT CITY OF SALEM k` SALEM, MA DECEMBER 2010 t "a - SLadley Associates BCE Booroe Coarnluog Engineering 10 1_j I ""^•"Yi4 r •-•' � n laeeJ m-FMT u:iw.m m i, ENGINEERS -J ,rlti rmsTl,LpFp.yFT DRAWN SF �„ "NECKED DRAWING NG. 29756-10=18 j .,.v.v,ur.-n..u.. ..aa.,y.�� APPROVED REVISIONS = DATE 5'1ELT � ___ � , POWER DIST. &SITE"LEGEND WIRING DEVICE LEGEND LIGHTING FIXTURE&SWITCH LEGEND Wi°\ur vNeteium.wINIx YWNim ] SCAN uowrm xOxOxO nxmN:(S[E WPNG rwrvXF NfiMrx ro SO6YF o!4NIfIHOWS °Fl� :s-NdGr�LS CI�POfrUNM6.'FM Mrm 1M�2W -0 'fSTMNCLr6 I<MIN°r1YNXE ME —c— GFWw C/FE 'Wr-WMUIES MImML GMVw I.T g2vrt IxrtmNnEn 'z -iMXwlEi nmvrt Xu16FA 'K-KIG16 YUIEO WAN ME 'S_-IELM 16 STrfCH LLMIPS ® 'WP-fCNYRl K/.1XLRMW 'NL_NdV.r6 w31f WM IW6w11f1E°)ERNx ELECAIC WMd.F 'r -XN'AlF3 5,N°E MOIILI'M IM 'T-NMAILS iNIPER RffirYR yFFM1 Y2e xWRIX°!q'ILNE Y'NL YpVMm ® RlLWL ININXI[ 'c-NNii6 NUXIFA IE1Wr sN01[PWE SYl[n wRD zw u°/:m. WMF 0.CL£<MCVfN' EPoI,x4x°ME MIEO 30&1z5v d LMR fAY IilifR S INI iTxIS NRx WNIPLL ® IpERAXE WWI4E IG16 °", nvw wlEi wnx O6xF1EO WN"c-ImEo cosP ABBREVIATIONS ® sEpM1Y weorNa �4con�wa+w,n r.wE Gsr rwwuu ru NI4X IN� �ro upLnxo 0T WYer4ra4 Musm o6caBBcr Nm nx 41°srEea Ixror.pe K x mo cunmB a Y4X coeur WGnw —� Gem m WeuNp NItl W4<Wm T� ,useuu.�m-Lwc,w NSEIs uxEvsm vw s sunt�cowrc _ YJ Ixrtninex 5.Y,io/iae u°Lr..ro�E:5 w4E,Gr p,aa.r. .G .YL*"ve wm oww�lEs.cr YEc 5ssm nEcme wrc ® ]/(F t°-0 WIMP LIIO 41OINV eC4 O M .WKIE EMYE /° YN°X/2XEMi011 SEl AMCTNx BJY IlT bY.f i4WLLY RO% wNMF .T MrIX1Nl WIZ 4tD 4LLV LV4S WLY GIXE r°GBIE LWMELIXM nAIWN KRE IxIgNV11XL WN]M1 n 4WMm �iLM wls,E P'MA 1.1i F.E.nd. SF£RCEC�Gx°X rpt AT ,ypEpC Ppp ryL ppyly CLOSE➢CMKr x^I MAINWI MNPINMN, eR WIpN11L MMiFA SMIGI Nm W.1KK4L EISInc(IDE —VE— V[U44JYX0 RFCIPIC '•' ,LyO ,y4NCyl qE GyCE xO M.R^Y4LY WEN LWIpR . LI I➢p11CW1 h�X qi 6MOS AE 4E6FNCN!pi W ID M5 xJr m YME MMVIf / MJr6A —Vf— VXWR4W V0 RERICM G CME CPo V2A CWIILM MORCTM OLNCL YMI�X ME WNx ROESIN 1i RG15. 5FF SPELFIGllp6 iCe IR ��. UN fKIE 16MSLW WS pMAtlL NLfp OMER SFLT]M6 —N/CC/P2— VXOEMFOIN)RVPMCNE,GYpy Yp WY SfIMN 0.1YIW}TM fIKAA NR FP nt FR1NNn g1ArypF CwV! Igpf CN CfXMI PRIXES9W VM P6 RIW WLYM®SREL a cW"Ev N6 NNf YGX sWIIPE IriuE —xE� LWmWNO xrnw BRANCH CIRCUIT&FEEDER LEGEND F cE4rtN4c INY n ,°,N,.i,E xua m zmiwx eNxL o4m sow xnnwi x 4B x-NolGna oE1K IasPP�q+' � srINN CNWIrt°n rune vNw w m4wos M4Nm oc oRm aXNAr /� N444EB 1csEo-PM y NgFlFN MIM VOIE � M Rmm 11MW3 CpM M.LY r11vY OfEa TFII LYG MMNJ SM60 9NfCWYN EC flELT1YM tl1111NGfU m PA1N4 elOLl( M (IECAYL YEr IL 1lgX� R IODIIVIE 0 EXISTING EQUIPMENT LEGEND rf°4r Ru INuo nYIB YErNLN m4XL I A >�NYmNm Lar4.E w4z mm mmIIPNY swnLssEX SE➢LLtlWE4 eXilp.5-Fp{N HEw ME X Ex¢OSI.PE. EWp4pf m REIW1 C6 WNINWI°6ECIIFGE WMIIC'IM M MY/L 1q VNES OII IN MOIm. I W.I6 SWYY SXIU ! d WUI10 lWlr NIFPIFIIIML W IxppWNO '1DyP -IMf 16 SUYp RRS 6140 Ep3VYgf m BF REW.FO W W A N LN65 Orl[IMr3 WW[MR NYYNIL LNNRFRM4IE RMLv - X4 p151N0 mIRNFM m BE RfIIX IEp "R X°�eLM° UIBRIZ°1x6Rp_eM1 Vp2O p'IOJrt xGL MIM WIIFIIN] KK15 MX XEN IOGTTN V WSIMO SITARp FtlXnpY ,IE IRpr( �OK•.INE i-N49iE YUM ��EWiYEM N Y 1611O�eO/M xfM EPRISm lO 9E 1E �°W X0 ILV EIpMF XR nEINO�"/�Ep JB IPRLYY9IF MY GRTXO EOp14M m E RWKKm pLOYur! 4110W1r-MG..MS . � IXOEIOEVE9I�NIL n11M1 lYM MW bJfrW RWCMX l"F ML ImpB�4G.,m em"�RmN°LTO M G" °,Ye N FwcluN,Ne„x GENERAL NOTES I. nrclnrx c4xWI3,aR sx.0 NN4oE rBWIaxYE 46PXmvnocr.Nxcrol WN3 K ROIIrtD rpf 1 OJ. WO OSE WNRYMI Mf4GMN. SWITCH LEGEND Nz EuelNuu EWPwlrt.wo°n+cm 5wu um x ICGim LaeP 1Nw: im.e°.E PIE oELx mwnlN oY rx4m 4vcnsB m nB emlcu W nc ® IFNINC Cg1111IX VHM EWInINr/RN¢. KNN[WW91M KINYS./S 12WMEP ® RtllO4RL EIFLAX%L GNINIIM 9WL iTM[RC SLIF➢VIE W SXFFR NX nl uMULMMO M WxWI15141xWpW A IBM WNE PIOA!E YL RMINm iPA1C]M IXLIFIFD. } 4y EMIS[O LtlSMS 9WL BE M YIFGIIF m. XxE vBcmrra WXnucrW sxNL wr NL rms m.Lrz4 m upm WuvnA 4eNwuRo¢ss REOVNm!w WINurt cmM tela.4o YONa,m 1NNWmEA uN I4I.am�uxsP"m`ix6"Wmxron�" e]ienerx WxrX.nW 4wi acwE eXlwxM rNW rW nils Yos NiN s�4x W No. Y Z LEGEND NOTES 10 YFRC.PW6.YLNIIELIIIML W.TMS..BR,VHIE SOIDu.. I.oR415 nM MAKNY XfCPw11p1 ISXWIFU IIIIN F/OI OENCE 1.ON Mn mXIIK RO W1 ME IFLPID NM CNE m0.l ONLY N NXWE SP.16. j 3 MrMr 45CP➢f l�aG Llm Wn N 1 O IIYLv wv eE M D m. e }Ia4Rwroxs aIG.w'N•wr x IRnm m Yxr mmL .M WINur sme-ws rvn EPnM EW3XI4Irt 4suL E nMm,man W,Irc w4 cvx°urt 4L41¢e Imn4 Ieo¢ sm svErsumxs mX Ioun°wL s' xBWwWx. i ELECTRICAL LEGEND, NOTES & ABBREVIATIONS e MW SITE DEVELOPMENT - PHASE 1 SALEM WHARF PROJECT n CITY OF SALEM SALEM, MA q Iv to DECEMBER, 2010 ©�© ha i ley Associates, :c. �Bo�e Coasa/tlng Eogietering BCE Ivw w.. .v)el Auawa m� M n na/myFv II(�1 xo-Nev ENGINEERS E..mmw.W w 02420-SMI zaI M2,207 ppgyq; 4s _ ...Anv4leryeod+nn.can CHECKED: SC DRAWING NQ E0.00 nE 5e..4 wm141Ser MPRWEn CI REVISIONS r4 pglE:nrrr4RER an nolo SHEET 19 OF 24 i _ER6ML ,OD,xOCi. ,PN ' ! PAx¢mve'1 nxREXPLr sEAuw �1Dui,Dx a asmanloN EwMraMr - _ _ -='- � ,u>,[llwcn M1N IXTIryR/1fW xC91E mMFA _ , -E%157 W@UE 10.VlFR 1 `1'X=IFryRlpvy ,-FLSRX4 I£NLE _ Ir 1 ♦ /,{��(D)1-1/a"G. � I ' � -..-k-�.«��,.�ll-.1-�_�_.�� _ � I„�'��/ � �gl�Fl1 Malo �E,15RN6 IRVIY f. � _ I/°T I, ILA NEYST rr L - - � T z /4 wcNE.rxart Put MRN GWEM Poxes rmra coXwnrwmrs ET MPPRJ WlE IMIiILW NILNC MY A MN , I rC])I EaT C ”• ,IX.xld Cf.PNFl ,p ET STREET �'R f PaE 115 s/Nl II 1 -._ 4, I _ _ .� flz'r _:. s�zZe M00r PJm12e-m.,nc xuivm - 7i, 7� arc, xT zro.rv�2n�DNor„f c;Nes mcPNOXE I 1 ./ pfiMMIF M A w r _ P SALEM HARBOR MM f T.NMNEM I/IT. H AND W 4d WMR/CICfl n -�- P^ A-1/.T.RYI iN,x2 fiJEM P1FFli �� 1-1/a'LMAIR ipl iMlllE 1REE lJ4xIMrJ -1/z'Y.iM 1LNRE 1XEE I14X11H4 EEILtl� �: Ol MJf VSm. ®NOL USED. _ _ ©XOL USED. ®WMD 11pF5�RkTNIXC WVIXNES iOR/aNNRE MY�Si 1qX ELIfAHR�m IR[R IO MMMG ED 1OR IEQxO,mN%S A1Q 4D1L0.'t NOBS. O XOI 11E1D. CGNmICN. - z Imo ro 44/un aRMMNs mR Lm Norn L,Dua1M4 rciAu. „inxrs AIo Erxr LCG146 M ML es. 0 oDslw NXO Pons EACx NM nm(z)wo rmm IJa1R r4 REJURL uipo z/M,1pv.,IR4Sc mau IXnrec PVLE eor ro xoBLs nwDR PMEE - , l OICM NIIHI6 ME OMRMxY.IIG EVIL!MIYIT$51WL BE DRF1NCm N O WT IIY➢. IMI u4D r11E R6➢.0 REII£Llm ox.-.,TCOCL,[NLIOYIN m mE EISCRKIL _ 1 =O NINL,OR.ME xLTIXMRD CWCIN MAIB�l6 Lr Mr IME Y m ro rCx OL`M'E Oj Hm IJsm. ®NT VSE D. MIO ma M EWixEM NIPS NICMCNNE SWCH MUm 3 iNIFIRpW[CIW pUMM YIAA slWl S s®EG TO ME HOVE”VNLE55 O EIFCI@' CMi0.Y.'IOR YxIL PRg10E 1/Cc.T f1I11M LCGMNI a PMEL ®xOi 11.4➢ ,.-. aim amoneE LUP. ®NOL VSEO. a. W V1Z DRpP 1Lt5®,(payRNm N ME OEDiN CE Au 4'MX. Oj pi Vgp - CIMIIRA,Vq CFSA E$S MSEp LxrN MC ELUSiMRO Egi1fM NvpRS ®NOL,RD CE RESPgRBIF LORiNKArIMN�IM MILL NLMFASE n11M/XKENLAY ®1qi VSEO. ®Nb!VSFD _ RWIW IFM4Lx5.BXMCN CM..UM MW I K 12M i .1 1 xT USEO. ° VSL 4NIEi 9xLL¢INCNUSFL I.1IMIY cf ENC WE NA[11Ni.'MP ®NOLHE VSEO. x nCUl6 E ER wm l�tJi.PRMAS S,xll IQILM S1,NM lY XOL V4U. ®IIOL VSFD. Es. EI2L'lIM'.LL p>RRILIPI SIWl FRMIX I-,IfC iXCY UCx iLNXF INi11ML ®��D. ®DSDxDLL Cp11RM:IM SXIIL PNO.LC J-YC. 10 YOp1F RIl➢I 2N R/WiA L1xr,NE LDrALaN ro ME xuxm Llr mNc NwonaE �Nm vsco Mr sAnoxs.Mo sErwn srvs moors scar owes. A ®rrn VSm. ®ELE11MG1 CfMPKTM sx41 ax m1a1115..E rVME®IILCINL CWRRINL. ®IyPppPl,yiE LCG1pN a fl11VxE 511E WNLNG PoLE BlSE PRT10E NG0 .5 ®Nm,am. m'-'Aos�ial Plmaw,iNa.�4�u4x1A"PDic wrtv�s¢,�yNir r�weu�c.�waoE � ®�usm mrauR N.NLEA Iea.E nAOE Ar EI�I Loa.LwN.L,Pria,uo.N. - �. ®HEi I5E0. ®I➢PNOYWIE LaulNNl OC EV11NE:91E LFN0N4 PaE Bao RNOE NIWO bIVAVIfp SIE0.mNWR$xFFPS AND CM T PfIAY CAME rdl NNPE y ®NPROIaNtE LOGIIOX OC MARE PWP aR SaMM(OESCAI BISm ON I.yW. EYILHSNM MLO P .fai L5MIN0 M ,rIYER.L POxEA.MO rMEW NYP YpLDR,. LC A�LWV OpIN1M'"M nN WAXER ND.E 4RME AL FAa, ELECTRICAL LIGHTING & POWER PLAN ®vartR Avo 1E,2mwewunoxz xMID Nan LOR rL1MRE smuas ro B.aoNe. SITE DEVELOPMENT — PHASE 1 v ®EIFML'MIUL cONIWtNR SNML L. PMSED ISLMO BFJIM r11E PROPERry uP ®RM0.Y RCO WANNA D SL4 ➢MR03 N,xa SALEM WHARF PROJECT 0Y nxo4n mR Eviosrox a<Lxlsr«c rELEPNONE soma - CITY OF SALEM SALEM, MA P �W Ip DECEMBER, 2010 ©�© ad ey Associates, �,C {( ��,e Coaea/Nag &ogf&eerlag IUM.[Pxr AMi,M./S1.Pkn^M Lm.VIWnY Bw .'.� 11]0 W..&,.N Ares •P 711,152. W II n/CM mil �lMf{FNN s GRAPHIC SCALE ENGINEERS b,PM W 02.20-5MI-F lsl As22M7 DRA4X: us > CHECKED aD 20 a 40 W :20 MD: S DRAWING N0. E3.00 SCALE. 1'.aa' nI o,°.W.w. xti E11m.rurruNon DID SHEET 20 OF 24 REVISIONS IIYI I;I i r r/`i ��aaK,m rmFr.a.Jraw j a3AMd fq/YpT 6 ILGIIS d / �UI'YT Poll KN e1MlV �L:M 1Ip/l M'. AM4.J Y IUQDIVCI pIJ.Cm F Ofi@5. Y IWQ FB[n WTAm F rX6 6FL(IIMM cU1111VCrOR. �I Y/f FlIIIME PM6 ICP N MATI[P➢IICf/� I rlla-SrMGYS M1GPR ��ry - IMG M gWCE MYI SFI MT 14,p I EMMaN PotE � d M.�pwE�Fam•T I r Wal[rw[n r /1Fs//sr -sa Wrz n �[e I �nmm I � caNmu:rJaarz Rmws Nws w Wwlm _ J' °+pe'M)� .mm mvvemu 1 —__ 5 KP / wn ITwslaau l ❑ ❑ T w LWInW mol i 11 w rv,i ,r7 K K K w 1p1E BYES WMPNIE FJILI-/ �ro 91P II/11 iM W WI6wlln nmJIMMR FIN SF[WR Ip .Imfn 5@3.flC. � VMV M mM ) 4SIIpL lepp♦lEJ Sa Wl6 1p. IIwK ) 1. mra ro WFW mm urn uasn sans wp mKbl WTJ nv wr Pvaux m rxrs pPJlarvc. 2 M4 AM4 6 FR,i6 r0 nWJiMT NFPOFUq aPY wRYV ICFrIO[MS MF Y4tl1 E0.npr pCV nFIFA m IN[9R PAV M OUCr I�aICM WU IK YSCu4lw6 Rn MalYnl.FfC4rM nkVYmFiR. 1 WL IlID Wr IFm 10� IIIIIIW MF IG701nF e. Im uw. 1p. Funs mFapcmn aws PW.sx swm ron sw uwxo mwurs urn wan uIp nar wFna 11. rPoKc F coram smK apti<eJrcax owns. Ip. PnoKc PF swa,lc w mroun ouas a moTT u Nm l,+m 1e. aeaxrn mawerpx sxw Donal Tda owx smau w Ila o arxm ro me aswc None rwu cosnw.n rlFpc am,carsr mNmFaan. n. Fsenern mxnaeron sw rF]Ws me-a aoF aFWan a eJmFc anile Tru Pun ro wTN ocslw ro so]K uasw oea uonua le. aJslr..mvT.nm alas wlw<sura mKrF.asm.r va Wunw PARTIAL POWER RISER DIAGRAM N.}.5. 1 C A i d a i ELECTRICAL RISER DIAGRAM & SCHEDULES SITE DEVELOPMENT — PHASE 1 3 SALEM WHARF PROJECT j CITY OF SALEM $ SALEM, MA R �21b I° DECEMBER, 2010 9 ' a eS�dC y Assocles,©� P.0 �LE �e ��R �B�eer/aS© lm<Fi.Ml�ibcb/SN.PpnMM<emullmb = ENGINEERS ] °RAwN: us CHECKED. SC FRAET 21 OF 24 NG N0E].f10 M:01fFYRFR ] 01 11 '1 ( _ ii�l ISI iIELNFD LR.IX� R~Tw [NmE lncM a wn Row r-GLvuam srtR i msx.0 �/B/os�aRxof�o eRY.e cavFFR mxounaa / rplsp vIPE b_ � (AS INpG1ED N 1NE Wl1 BWz SCCIpM fp1HERIX1 b M OEruL Sxfii MJ.]1 pplyq CWIP� 4F xJrE S-. jl( TH \ UIeIISp ' / xvRO DrnEBMSE iNIFRYEWIE E IH tKK SCNFG;E PA S R— S R6 mMVr. 'RRE mPMR BONG &$E mE h rwzYL wx vhHaN HpmW ECaaM A ' ftA51S SD/CFA OUCr SP.Y,NS i. 4 10'-O YM 3 �mICRRE FNYSppI 3 Ip1F RR$IW �' _ swEwm ro PaL t1mcY aE 11—.1 ' Tvwa� OL✓'T R�cnoN eEERR RETE 1 (N)1e rEP -« Ir oc.M.0 — P (i)/e pen NCE r GEAR eoxe.C.R _. + - (.)ie eorrcu -amyl —Rlm cravxl¢m wNc LV r-r Rr sxci (auYRaY s10iPA56 � ]/!.tVd Rwus(M)SREFP COxW, cEwNr oro) jV� 0O lJ v� Q 'CL �.a6rn N!£S sl«u a ulEw,m Ox.sTFEr wM1En OP xc. oRs: aERAa DErul wEx PDssInB w nc aIRITp ARxr rpcM IwPaDRnaNE,wnc. :.pgWO YEfK IBER ro MRfsru ORgIXD IfIO wERf �.1Ms oETNI Is prtfxpfp ro IuusrPAlE ttNSIRUC,pI G mKX E.eAVN app RRT ro P692VCm e/NAEIE NpAC Ax0 Y6r411Ie ERRE mPPp ppMD naE sELlw Rw auwrin 41D SIEE a CpMNIR REgwED.E I tlM6rRORYJI S K.r0 4q Y pRIUNG ro MP ar s RIPE K<WICGIE REQ.RR s ILLYSIMrm N TIE/LTYL sECrzlx.Vn2m0 rK LNIERN EBlMyL9�m M mR oErK Np M..M U sl4te'rIO6. 1 OpINp GYE mNECII}6.RE EMIEFYK MF1D. i WHw.RE 15FD fOR.VL M•r Bw3 Ir6rMlID ulfR laxSlID RRM ROIDIIMK..wO 1„w9lKM t.GW Sn.NE R fWK P uC mR f11TME OSE Ixm Yw.KK6/WNIAua Mo raaargxs.resp ro svfmGrnxs m„rDwmWl OEDaz ].wNMIHG rIPE s1W1 BE MIECpB4E rrFF 10E fl.Lxm a RA PJl\ETatf11E Rflx ERRE RF9yTWr•e119m Eunwc urP Wm A wwuuM of iz we Es TRPS sou SE WW ro r.B POLE RISER DETAIL ESOE, w-D o TYPICAL ELECTRICAL DUCT DETAIL E5 2 DUCT BANK CONDUIT SCHEDULE 1/G OEYRIPIl'N R mNOOC/OR$ P, sERNnE YOP sm e I s'-iP � :� svDrc YEP r YL xuR e w SEL e M J 1]e $FF Nurt e T1rl CDY ! sEL IqR e sEP.cE RE R]enRID ! sm xDR e E sPRaE nnWR eulmwe ! SEL MOR e �� _ sEf NVR e m xp e GYERR EE 1-11, sL xvR e b bl V] 9,,ER R e SF[zm[e PERm PmEsrK nG ! ac NDR e ! SEE x e �� wr rtDmi Ga j-'/y sm NRc e 1�� ` mNw,vr DDR ewx R _ sEE nD e T uEr rAVN PLaI[It �— sEE xo,E e PLAN VIEW w Sa rgrt e w' E nE Psc wr srR,nl cwaxumNs -, ! sL Imf e nwsx wrDE � R o m: ZealClt cxwNp wm EDu � fAryJ! i REFER TO rxE nFIG1 WC!BPw$FCIEN iDR CErAE3 MOp¢D M 4MSrM.CIKN E avE M� Eauc / a vc wcr BwN Ex nsE k Em eoru.1eurs0. - ].aap m Tc sPfaluma ma Pmrow rasrur«n,wllc eur Nvr uwim 10 JILT BWI RMlPmplr gm441Fp NY[p MKD MQ.IS Mrpefm fq1 YLIpLLq b b� mYitG uo Ar wYNYRLJ9lLIIC Ix,E16A'p. .4L EQVEVCIORS II6rM ERR SWIL 9Irt0 . mGIIOXS. E .•P t-V P 5.Au SEIM2 ENIWICNIO cpWipa WryIR gxOWNRS INer4l£D M DOCI$IULI b BE T9E 4Y. e. rNrnL Au pan/SPUR corxife Rrm xnan wu srRMc. >~ eEu Axis � `-cau+r wn ew 1 �I_.__ g°:'go=-spy•.°°3P.oB�ra�Ba:a°:1 i0�:€�2i6 j SECTION BEG NE B e nE EWxp DR EEG w pb G G EEM, m R ELECTRICAL RE wm '/r xlEx,L„fBe DpM11ND rnE Bp.PL( .SEECMVt!°"'"`" DETAILS SHEET No.l D9« NDBRY MDYYmRAMM91roM0 « p.BE I T ESITE DEVELOPMENT — PHASE 1 1 mNCaEIE FHCASm DVCx Tm MO WNOME WNl r0 YI.ARl ER".$ETREufNI MM a RpER r0 SPECIi1GrpN EM.1mIDDW1 NEpIWTCN. Pew SALEM WHARF PROJECT TYPICAL PRECAST HANDHOLE DETAIL ESW6 CITY OF SALEM t 1411 T DECEMBER, 010 ©�© hn ey-Associates, P.C. =•' EONcw.RRrnn«Y A/v..su•PNnTe.rvi eysEc.eoellwxwm. Eo�rYE eu %!r' S 3B.M. ENGINEERS o12o-1]1-E u Ee Teeazeez Ex,RwN: ua cnccNEo: �c .mom.W.sw._w_4..xu APPRpJEp. t DRAWING N0. E8.00 )ATE:nrrruarR M 7010 RE ISIONS SHEET 22 OF 24 �dlb i M6 RrY 6 NR IRSERIICE dLv P r ]R C,N0 ON<SMEC ¢[L1RN'H(WIR'Crg1 SMVl'.FANV IEG�,Nw iCR NMVR FIVE-!P MO �KfEP N�INMNG `,VN.E f-{ la-a _ B I ACY KNf CE FMR.WCE PLMT£WEONG J 1414 N11TG MR LOGTOH K J/L.cY,f�W.= fiM}INNNL MC111MTON ME Stl1E.EOR CIERRIGLL J6 OR-NNG M 54B NYSL`II CLSLMI[11E MGRVL PCIE 6+4 M9 LIGM KlE REWIRENENI$ µ wLL NT H flM1FED NCFIt %// T far£i Nq R/aK r' -S M6 LOMM=r. � ��IlYf55 Mrz GRgM DJNONf' -^ / i PUL b.Y C0.91 iRW / �� I \ WCf011 9RT PEII RYPER CON=p4111 % MIXT ears No e'-vJd G E IFIFCIRIC - x[c Isna _ sfc sflmcc IXOTEAYp NE1O 90Li UqL M Sf SIZET M PoIF MnWG. / LLVR6KN1fR. IXOMFRNIf _ / ELWxrsI[T Nr111 PaL MPxwLY IXWFA[D FD:rE/ Il'.10'?fL ER CMaR wl=!PM1N GR.ff � 'AKO PA 3/0 WE COPPLA _ � � Ie MY CwwECnG SEE IqT:] �FN91 CwW[ S AGa.E RMAL _ _1qE'-lE �=f9 T eNVRG / ITAEx rDR 2)_ 1 1� I$/o WE coM[n srzu !> AV NwCEoS FIFNLr /� S W I. �Krnw ip1 � r1 '-IR ] -IT- 2, IV " I' f. SIJ➢ES IY O.c(M.) WTW1 CdWa REpRLCV[NR) r, �0Y PLMI VIEW �<la-P NEi.NL (IvN i VRE wIX5 1}I ($ � FAYITFIONf MFID fAdRO RJO �LNIKIRWwMW19�aq[n ` C ! ��. MMI IIIA HrortCTM I S T 1 V1ErLE Balx AVMIaIf� luw) \ RN -{- �4 v PSE g41Mar ILII f T 13i1O 10 SITE PVH EOR '��PVWNG IRONS •I wPo1K MIO NGEWI.T - f -r I • RPIAEKAs �8 �'Bo q°�o��j'.';'e°�:la . •t,o N• a4 mP OE 4Tw.w Rro sNN1 R IYMH) ��J 9ELw RxRSRIX axof IeEL). -va sWEBP R��\ tlNpKO p� � OM.) SF.1a-a coaPw anD KM an _ slm nano two lmrra M I) (nP.K J) rd etc liwlW wx) 1,FIN N .e. wH �: PLAN VIEW I.iNMBC Nq=afR I II H r i MG1 6<NN 1 RRMEM M E.BY LFBNOX CR NEQM11.4ALV 9wLL BE GST AIM 11/l xlGx lEiRxS IXXINYWr Mf SE T(ERIHMI,SECa4FI RC=IRK d � MIS LMMIG 6 NIENa`o i0 W/SIMR rIF SEIM=C GMTCNG R=UIREMENIS rGifR 1D XfC 16FPIM{l. MKIE$So Eal 4MMrwW1 OETMS. xOIES: $.fE9Gx L01D 9W1 YSWIRIonrz W A M9110 M90-M. I ILL fapC=IYJI6 SNYL K F[OTONK RIM VIII M IXEF➢rKN OE uEC11NlfK WGS N ME yVfLLLF Cw4A M M4 CIIIL MOadD A IMKAtE GEIFR4 NI[Nf 6 TE E[ECIWYL NSI.WATaI. IIMIY WE C SONfE EN,,I Z[NNRMt. owner ro RLWwuoaNrz LIOnM1G iKKE rm saL cxxW.a9mn¢ cRa MlxcmisxlN¢��" x coxcRlc Rrwsm a9r sNNLL K rm Rlro nE xM9w[w1RL Am Raw ro wMWa wEP[RwML 2.C R..NNM[N BXi 0.CEMENi AM odfRY=cNIM1.RQ.POIE WE EN.roeuI.FEWSEi,LEYP'r.pEfp(1p SPEMrwTw fdf ILOIIIdYt MiMWiKM. J WL x01MlET cNPFR 141WGRaM NS slWl K EwYI ro FIMV EGB-n1HI+® /Y ll/,(MI 11LpMY Y (ryPKn1 SK Not s) /:�IJ./LL•�MCSIa"NUd Mo=alw1E1C w o.c. +.PRpAK}eI N nNo aNld:CCIPCR N VEV M 90WMxc ro xERM1 AIEM A'O!9wf KMR 6 f E1wCEiiL IN CapyYl ) ..REPFA ro SPEbNAIwN fER RA]Wo wONS MO E/dE W4N REa1WEMEHrs. 1101 WNlED. }EIFVnnwl nea4 IMSX GMK SINN PE S EVR NSTNulla6 w RIMOS/PpElLlptE NIO JV w PNL4D 5 9010 NL NRM CWKIENIS ATM YYNwIL WCLLINHc caEA I4NE ro I/o AqM LOM wM Ie - _ / Nw� Nb'A uNESs o11FAwY xJ1(o. bMS a7RH[MM.'Ic0. -. TYPICAL SITE LIGHTING POLE BASE DETAIL E$014 � TYPICAL PRECAST ELECTRIC MANHOLE DETAIL E 07 ®®m ELECTRIC SERVICE GROUNDING EW01 .z _W -r �) � l�l ELECTRODE DETAIL(FOR MOBILE TRAILER) 1z mPr - N1nfE rP¢sN91Nc rELPNe9IIr NEN R1N[X r wfL sLM fNYl0A9S Mo CIXdF:ILP SMD PER 51(9 RF.X,NIf EN EN.1/l E 1m cEtNL 4 EOR KSFRKE wlY EWIPYpT NEC 250.99 91E.NLY 1 KK-SEID M RE4J.IXE AS WµYINo INIE ENURE } (ALL iMR20 Eat COxwA ST19-VP A40 fAWNLWC miMINNTwI TK ouKFO 91 MEN IXfAVOFD /�I[RM M iRENCX i /LTwL PAD Ri Mi K MSiIllEO fPWNo M5 Nx110[:I. 9aM vc rE Pw7 �8 5 R / /-«�« LIGHTING] 1Vl SECTION "A-A7 I ` MKMv AM 9DRS: + I L.�ASIN%M1fD WxDWro1rs RfEvt I.PE$9t ro 9acr vnnr W1WAA KaLMNDENrs Ew uodrNWxs Mnr wr of RwNMn ro fNC1DA8� InP9H)N/o 1_IW $t Iw) ' -+ + ' ro oPAwws wn --1e I/z jT + ]K srMNE55 SRFL +IRs Na umlr. answf wuJ + / PIAN VIEW M .,,,k 2, a.M) s z.Nl a9u9 GNo mRl[croxs s1Mu NE ETOn9iec Rlo. N/O LUC!DVN sM]Ro iroaP EE igxV Rolf _ ;N � BVTM1L J.w i Nlal PRYVR MD 41Cxow.ca911a ro R"M"AM MER N Ow ansYlE Slwx) + alMl[ 19 I/l Mf PNT LOCNR sEKMWR'CwwIRS M M Tl ME RGM M POSSI&E w rYE 0.N wExMG. CME ERON JP PfIDM + EIM6x 1'Nf I I f . NLL R SENDS(MIWA MD 4cpw11l��51 K GLLVMMO 51EF1 SCM[DaE W MIIM PwcE RRNfWG \ ' / M DIN)eJ9NMS.W Ml cwW1 fwl9 ro N.xwAVl1C Mo K9N5 i9d1 EM9WW Cw[cw [i .y��,� awl.+ls EAw ro mNerwlol wsrNMrvf ^1 -__I.N I,vP) c(Ad msrnm VnL3r' `� s P1Nw<Duct wNo swu K TD Pw walo cWo. na mw s Pw PEPE]m9E aEr .. Ew W1oar s1De-M MD wKf TRANSFORMER PAD DETAIL GIRYRIO mroRwtlwl rIIE KM'"wE" ; ! THREE PHASE 112.5 THRU 750 KVA EsOoe /CRNL Pv Mo w0'JND Kls AND a R11MZ fWIRIIII MlL NO!K n iJ PRdtm URA rl6 LCMaNR. { IPL IV DEI➢ f�±A6L'e�Os'.0 foo �a2'.P. ;:48.ea ^S .INEMN A1L fa1N ro E1FEO T41.OVP.)- - IY.lad COPPd aM SiFII 3) WO v�w - -MRS 51aIEAO w°- I.MS OEIK 5 1MENCFD m LLIVSTUrz IIEgM9VdR NMlcx E%®MOpE RFaImED 9Y Y xEC iNAE]f0-]. SECTION „ ro 1RMypRYER PID = wgMw RNG I W.iME S,ELE K IXflECaOLL RPE rolt KILNED.1tl1 PaTE1N. IIN AM E.K ELECTRICAL RESTMr'9SE flFR19T WF KICY n MNMN T le K'MES IBWC ME bJRfD sfR.1=E 1przT6 6 A TKK ffrNL REEd m wURo Iw/LTWI w[Hsb15 K WNagF'MKx 9 IE: iN[LWL K faW 10 T.WIIE oEWR h11CW MLSS alEE8:.6.NLEd ra rNE 51a ANI Ew IXIVIIIM1 w=pIWRS N9 T1E T ,_ I,R wNAW:NN6,N,99ED 10„,M,ROE T,E SERpCf Ma,149 REOIRRE1011S. ISf[A 1p •SERNCE REGl.W1f1D w Mf EDVEA. DETAILS SHEET No.2 NE,, MTCIf z5V .`➢arIONM ofrMS. J NL RMLM1 f.RO55B9 INQ.NI NJ.S 'I All m M z MIEl'M CONCRIF(iW _ - R 9011x1 NNO SRS)FSr[1FC A wNIWw OE 2 EFfT 9[YOxp VLX SIEE M wNIDNG. 2 T6 INNwglf E IMdCEO iDR xa,_pflgryrE yL,1KVW TUfiIC wtr,N151 TEP$I I. ML a1MEL,Ro dN.9E f.IX1111E«N1f WEIDS wM TIE EIfPTw M NEGLNCnL..N S"" SITE DEVELOPMENT PHASE 1 ME S.ANCE EHntNCE Ea1MIEM. a.N1 coxoN!RISdS LWL MAZE LONG RIDIV$MLVMIxED Wco sRFL SNfF➢5. (z2.lW PaxD EEtld IdD) '(f J. FHCLo91RC M]IM1ED W NiIp tlNIPM e,2a& C 140 M SIWl K Eg TE MW EGl- E N C SII I PKEN9FIGIEIX PaTYw EaKRE1E MGREGIE EG4L 10 WU11E w SALEM WHARF PROJECT AINz.K. EgYL OH fASI CONCKIF=MSIWICIMM CITY OF SALEM ELECTRIC SERVICE GROUNDING TYPICAL PREFABRICATED HANDHOLE DETAIL N SALEM, MA EcOIX, a BURIED CONDUIT DETAIL EsOu EsoOs a ELECTRODE DETAIL (FOR SITE LIGHTING 6SECURITY WHERE LOCATED ON RAISED ISlANOS) b Iblu DECEMBER, 2010 (FOR FREESTANDING ENCLOSURE AND EQUIPMENT I ©�© 0 ey ssoco es, P.C. � �'' CoAmidilB �B�K�B wm.==P^M<MN<N/vN va,N;IN ca.xw°w K/"i a, n]D xHn •P 1e1 eu.eeM ��' ��/H"W Rff�M°RAw ENGINEERS 191.2,2.1 or+awH: NF ...Nrl.1°®<.a...� CHECKED: sc DRAWING N0. E8.01 RPPR(M9. V 1.I.n51.+r.�NNmuNN O,NrE..KrrNRPR IXn 2D1IX SHEET 23 Or 24 REVISIONS Rfn.rw,1 - ISI IJ a wal �,� mwr�rY—. aro r aaim (rrrs'x) D,NC4) Iq Po a Sl J °5 A Y (RArIU y 'IIIA fit/+ SL tt �PoRiE� SL R p5 SL 1 SXt I I CMRM) CP R Y Xt Cp[YlC fxUid SQ mY a NCRR F"w40 S6 mNL a W16R,E FMAifO>Q mY a mY @M a ttSVK Fd.DJ bIMXL a.W 1 mY FFID>1 a SECTION "A—A" SECTION "GG-GG" SECTION "G-Gr SECTION "K-K" xr.J w�., xr.i IY1R: xr.: MTR: tLr3. w� t.IQ=OI m lYM" FIFCAr/l Ixx',LfTY ax mY5 Ml W.1 rOn CpWI ,.14 P m rt°IC/t!l=[,IY .mY a mY5 51EE,x.., FOR;14RIL RiEn m TIPx/l ELLCIA' oVCt mY a mA,S 9tQl Ne.t rM 4pIER4 ,.x691 m,Tf EVtll¢' 0.C'f mY a mw'u slQr n.t M L4LVY CP6,nlrtrfM Nr,zlPUnla Yvuwlprrs. mrlslAlcnax xaw¢Xo1R fAVYCrNn RsauldMs. 2, m sxm x xfRP ro OIE WCf WM LONMIrt SaFdM1C nA SMEl1 ip1 CawR IM L4x0.'CIOR z MR11 ro M oUCr BV W.CaWf samLSE OI6 sKR RW Wxwrt«p cdldlLroR =...ro 1,1C wR GKK wxWlf sM0.YE ma 91m Mn LV WRr I«0 ttNO,K,g1 z xflN m M pK'1 BWIt NM xxFpAE ONs ra COXOun AVO GPxvx'ICR nFpAIIFYENiS wwnaoxrs Asxcx,m Nrm caxourt rY xmuYa9ns YxcWRv wa wloLn rY Yaalewlrs usmx,m xn«calmwr AvacWRn"m mnvrt rY —_ _. _ r ELECTRICAL DUCT SECTION ELECTRICAL DUCT SECTION NJ S. ELECTRICAL DUCT SECTION «.*s. � ELECTRICAL DUCT SECTION N.rs. (UNDER ADD ALTERNATE #E1) N?s. LCNPM,LSO �m M m wrt n — �,res— a�� IVa ewle Lwow r^°ifk) 1 Y se wort n \ mxourt m ° 1+wr 1 y�� n rt n cc m wa n xv W l.1 I mmxxw IV7ITCVI CMLQIF EN'ASm f!E mY ON mY m M MYMO L100 WxA,F EICKm a¢mY ax a m,aas ou®u mY a cacme wow s¢mY a mY mm a wwc uao x,Y exm w mam cxm SECTION "B—B" SECTION "At-A1" SECTION "F-F" SECTION "J-J" ¢ rods: NIL wlFs xrs xorrs x.r.s. xo"x xaY m rWxr 9anaen wv mY a mns sXm w.l Fan eeamE I.wa ro mma 9zenzPx au mY a mYs sxar w.t ma aawL ivrelnx.',al YaN¢wIrs I.wY ro,rPUL acamcY Quer mY a mYs sYz,x..r ra Laew I.Y=91 m,rvui Euemrx esu LaxL a mYa ala,m.l rax Lvaw wrmamna mxsmLcrvl YwNswls. mr¢nex ai xEaamxxia Yo,wm¢xrs m M P1Cf WR fVdnf 9]rmIRE Ob SrEEr NI M41a«Y QYGiLrpl z Rae,l m M Nm aoxl nrour mmlu,Iw sYEr mn cor¢sn"o mroeoll IRxwIVIrs NYxcxrrn.m mwn r z rvw m M on¢Irrl mw,somxe no swn nn LewYr•xo mowaa :,nera m M oYL xxrRl Calan zomns m srm Ha cLlour xw caFx as Yaurmoxrs YRLNmn,s assmwm.nN mon rY Yoamoln Amwnn wm al9ur rc. Yaamp wnr mon rY ELECTRICAL DUCT SECTION N.T.s. ELECTRICAL DUCT SECTION n.r.s. ELECTRICAL DUCT SECTION ELECTRICAL DUCT SECTION NTS. mpnr rK- man m sa�xort R� g IYE n —HN NN¢awrxo u xvrtn� V— oxNwr r LR Na 02 0mrxt w a w A J r►:J+ Y A cv n � vi x, se, x n v ,v Lr rve Y IY/11'\YI carom=eeNsm m mY a � mune eww�s¢YLIx a mY esaL=w waw Yw wwmc cNassm YE oaY a mY Ewes a wow aav a. minnE 9rcnm sa mY a SECTION "C—C" SECTION "L—L"xrs ma anvv«a aw xmY. SECTION "I—I" 9LCTr4 au mY a or.;.irzs YIm N>I FY aNYn aNmwnYl xoro wRI SECTI ON "E-E" N* r.no9r ro n"ax aecr¢Ir an mY a mrs am Yt rvR Lewes t rmY m rmr xxee,ixn wn mY ari*rs vm N.I rY aoauL mistie:ci,ox r.im91 m,rna¢mr "cr mY a mess sne[r r", raa asww z rmvl m M wcr¢wl mon xraua Lrrs aa,ran mon Yo mocmR i¢wloYirs mIrLIRtICIY1 lYAVOR. RYRYMS CMA1SrYl IEPaE1C1i1_ ASSKMIY VIII NrYxf,Y. z ROY m M au¢sa mon xxmuu rX¢am sY wrlan Ivo moue x 16FR m M La,wvr E'aaR xlmRs a¢sN¢r Nn ml¢Nlr xw cowuclLn YCURdfxIS x laY m M alcr¢wlt roan xl[ax[Ms�Fes wN"In um wxamrax --_ Ymwwx,s Assacwm wm coxourt rY .ssx"xm xmm cwan rn wwmlls AsmcN,m wm mon m -_. _ � ELECTRICAL DUCT SECTION xr.s. ELECTRICAL DUCT SECTION «rs. ELECTRICAL DUCT SECTION N...S. ELECTRICAL DUCT SECTION x?s. _ sa warl 1 M/a w=ardor a wrzn IVo x«¢owu s¢"a"""xasTi m "xo,E T. 5 r •tea L//��/��//��\\��/�J�}�J\��I �'""' ) Po xo Y sL w �� n s° s x� 5: rV Y A rn p W CP IL 5° l w11�1E��Sa mY a mY 6wx a OIIMw Y W wxcY,E ear sm sa oaNL ox mY cam a wow aw marER plasm ai mY a SECTION "CC-CC L co-lta,e exrrsm sY xY a _..__.-_ mY eswt a YAlS_®4�� wlp: xes. SECTION "A2—A2" �Y Ymx a axauc esm s SECTION "FF—FF" SECTION "H—H" w"'�`"m' 9a w�om mY a mYs alar«. rWl Lara.Y mmnclw _ xm¢ nn IVNs x.rs. xmo xr.s .xsme�x"n nm m"uimr°YA`ncmon soma rIw zro,Fox man aIo mlounaR Yo-rLYaevrs s ��Kas, Quer muL a ccrYs srm rot mn Lamv t ,��IYs�RZL oLcr mY a m"I.s slrcr w.l ra mav" I�Iu(u m� ,s Qua mY w mYs sIm wt res mlYu --- % z Yra,o M axLT¢na mon soma=,w sm mn mom Na wransan =_ora ro M vx+eva mon xNimuls ms sear Fan moo,wo cclasmn =.Iloa m"'=amr"'^wroLn saaaa'Iw am`°"cawrt""mroxla ELECTRICAL DUCT SECTION "r.s. Yaaoons axanm n,nl man res RmuRma¢ .ml.,m w,N mY.nr rrc. _ ____ aalmoRs AsweN,m wm morn,n 5 ELECTRICAL DUCT SECTION "rs. ELECTRICAL DUCT SECTION N rs. ELECTRICAL DUCT SECTION N.rs. ELECTRICAL 12 mart uL� ) DETAILS SHEET No.3 m Naro I= RG WS,.ITE DEVELOPMENT - PHASE 1 ALEM WHARF PROJECT CITY OF SALEM SALEM, MA DECEMBER, 2010SECTION "K1-K1" SECTION "D-D" rnrts xoNs: xrs. o mm m rrx sacmr pun mY a arts sxar n.I rY a"vr ,.Ya"'a„°"^L 9ECNxw ouc'mNL a mYs aIm wl mR LUYr mm"cmN 0.C1lPy ASP5. P,C. �� l SOCI0. ' m51R,1Lr,a RW¢YYR. iwY m M w .es a a rt a ma Y x a aw w w w a m,m; � � a�Y"¢am Y aan ora wW ron Ywu w ©�© BCE wmnYs«a AssxW,m N""mxw¢m. ENGINEERS,. _. _ _ Lnipbn,w piQO-SJOLf)eL0E3.3S1 DRAWN'. u5 1 .e.rl"a —;Tamm CHECKED: Rr DRAWING N0. E8.02 ELECTRICAL DUCT SECTION N.rs. ELECTRICAL DUCT SECTION N'% " "P°w ;NyrvaRsx =D 3DrD REVISIONS .1. SHEET 24 OF 24 - iYN PSI 34-RCP IMI (d?)-)4 -- _ DR. /5 e RLP IW, IIN)-790 19•RCP IIN. (WERFLOW)-9.15 24-RCP IW (IN).73 I(O _ IN�RCP IW (00).7 Yf—} 1 �. )0 SIDE Of OIL/WATER AS REO'° - 6 y I. A, :.p d I� . , s I - /IAA_ X \I LL UlCpJ LA ''LLL lel LJII a L II l l I _ $ REWDW A REPLACE SEWER i 71 Ex - - Ly t - NAµ1 L i�1 �iM) j I.._ ,t , • ) - - �� f--..C__rL_ ;Y \4 o;f A n, lA r1(( v 1`_t y�N II \T I N )c - 9YNL£SSTEEL REWORDED NEOPRENE IN (ACTION HIRT OR muu[Nf) SOLVED RENINCWLSIZED FOR WfFALL PIPE (BOTH LMIATIONs) 7,6 N/ DRAINAGE; LL B .. _7 EE DETAIL W.M "^•. I v cS d t J M A f2l -- Dun /zI I / NOTE:DEA7IS 35Iv RCP SIR. T) 2R RCP IN (DUT),5 ALL W ORK IDENTIFIED ON THIS D AWING SHALL BE INCLUDED UNDER . BIO REM 11 STORMWATER SYSTE AND BID REM 13 SEWER LINE. I `�v, AS APPROPRIATE, FOR PAYMENT. CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT A SCHEDULE OF VALUES FOR BID ITEMS 11 AND 13 TO THE OWNER. �M I -T 1. (� Y I ' I I EXPANSION AINITRY PIPE UTILITY SITE PLAN ADDENDUM d4 IM/ EL. J.] I3R NNE II CONCRETE FWTML LENGTH STORM DRAIN MODIFICATION .R• SITE DEVELOPMENT — PHASE I NOTE: 1. ALL ELEVATIONS SHOWN ON THIS PUN, INCLUDING CONTOUR LINES AND SALEM WHARF PROJECT RIM AND SPOT ELEVATIONS, ARE TO FINISHED GRADE, INCLUDING A CITY OF SALEM _ BITUMINOUS CONCRETE TOP COURSE. i 2. FOR THIS PROJECT, THE TO ELEVATIONS ARE TO TOP OF SEAWALL, SEE SALEM, MA + I'0 Lt',J I STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS. THE BC ELEVATIONS ARE THE PROPOSED FINISH JANUARY 2011 PAVEMENT ELEVATIONS WHERE IT MEETS THE SEAWALL. �`R�'� �' 3. FRAMES, GRATES. AND COVERS TO BE SET TO BINDER COURSE ELEVATION. ©�© a f•~• �BOO'DO C06PYIlIOf F.Osu.cv uy ..� Shadley Associates B �_ _1 WR DRAINAGE OUTFALL DETAIL _ �...�.-� .A,» / n0 30 60 ENGINEERS DRAWN: JSF v ® - - .....-.-.�. '�'� w F TAM1b CHECKED'. RRR sceEe: I/Y-�o" srxc. W' - 30'-0' it woo/x LRD c DRAWING N0. 29756-ADD A APPRweO ,m REVISIDNs DATE "/I`/'° SHEET M I 3 _ - - i tts r: ti� i ;5c x1l �� r / i r BMMINWS PAVEMENT .._..-.-.f3' f[ \ F 0 \ J V•Fh 104)60 WADER QUALITY -1- - i.9 r i •._" _ 'ly-\ �/L - \\•'./ SNOW STORAGE AREAS 1xG1 WLTRADNN GALLEY 1 — M1 — iCS PROPOSED G10H BASN t PARKING = 146 SPA F.S`Y,- -, - ' i �/ E l4. u., -�'8J'ew I r ///��L LLLL/ /// ✓/// /. 7%7L� �7/L///�r�L/C /C/r��// ,l�ii i /.. — ' wmmm E i J ..z / I ni J PROPOSED STORYCEPTgt /'\ \ 1 (m.) SEE DETAIL L. �. r,UCr. o,C1. .. < `._H 4d:dNA.R ,z' h...._,,„ al$ r' :' ` E50 PROPOSED OIL/WATER SEPARATOR A FIi0P5fIJ pHFi6:;E PREPOSEO STORAIWATER OUTFALL SEE DETAIL _ 1 Ji) i t- ,Lvn 'L %IDPdsEn aLMA1ER smN+AroN i SEE DETAIL _ SAL.e.b. . AKBJr . z 1 (l S10RMCEP rnJ iLI I I PFR1EA0LE PARBND AREA 115)(W WATER WALJW (WAWLfSitlENP ) E DUAION GALLEY l SEE DETAIL \ PROPOSED DRAINAGE PLAN mlxl��' tCp1W'WW�"FWAwA Gov \ A nsuk9 c'.AB �„�, I��-°Ii�l FOR PERMITS ONLY v SCALE 1"-40'-C* 32'. f"1 w 11.0 M.) �,Wp�vYW WP 0.61 100T1Y1t ROOD +17A�W W CULTEC CNAYBER CULTEC ISO WH z \ mm +9.4 REC�o ]/v DOUBLE- F OR EQUAL Vena. prop+ vorNe +6.9 WASHED STONE BORDER 95% COMPACTED IM • 0 40 60 NHW NM +4.2 4 4• ,.ENT (m.) CULTEC #41 GRAVEL BORROW ® MLW OLD a OFILTER R EWNALENT it SCALE: 1• - b' YLLW -0.0 a ¢. ... ...0 ('Ili a y PROPOSED DRAINAGE PLAN g 1!1'-11 ~ C•�V 2MIN - NT %PE (TW.) Y RN Yn• N J/4'-1K•DOUBLE WASHED I FL 14.0 STONE SALEM PORT EXPANSION NROW - r•* ,r•p NFLOW EL u.0 CITY OF SALEM p. 5 SALEM.SmiW.Dm1e . :. ... •. n INV 11.0 EL 12. MA _, _ 00 p NOTE. 1•o• 1rt N+� AUGUST 2008 VENT PIPESSHALL BE PERFOpNIED 10 BRAIN CONDENSADON 1-E S-� I� MHYI 5.9 I.hlpgptlkfmrat®p1.h Wd0+Iv Wee AlWolk. wplN P ORATNNS DOWN WHEN PNTE IS N PACESEE NOTE Jlhysmnp peuaif,PNaWh111o.IANtePI6yf.6WPteIH1bh0ipn �N, Vaaucviu6 �6WdG lV6 T WBIJ/4WASD STONE 4CmeeeCmeee p'ry Vi,Nm,mv�eppmsawLukWmdVrpeE �_ _- ar.e a4.d WATER QUALITY INFILTRATION GALLEY sccTDEAIL INFILTRATION GALLEYS %k YrSTORMCEPTOR DETAIL 'p c c,IED; JA OP 6 SCALE:1/6'.t'-D' 6 •nro APPROVED: DRAWING N0. 26705-01-06 SG1E:N.T.S. 5 DATESHEET 3 OF 6 - srxE:N T.S. REVISIONS — ITMEM l: PRP,NA 56'X!W' / \` ffRMIML BNIGING I FSNINO IN i, \B > pUMINOUS PAVEMENT - :' MLW `.., PARKING LOT ----- 1 _ ./ - . / 1 41 PHASE i w A Hn a `1 �HARdORWALe(NO ER I till- 13-2 PHASE A-2 -MLw -� R --- - v " PHA'SE A-1 HARBGRWAL PHASE A-3 PHASE A-4 PHASE B-1 � PHASE E " I i ! -- DREDGING f MHW k HTL AGAINST BULKHEAD _ --" - _ t pl ---------------- L I __ PERWEABUEL/S PARKING ARCA (GRAVELIS TCNE) - PROPOSED CONDITIONS PLAN —WORK AREA MAY BNF/ SILT FEMCE WORK ATEA TOP OF MAI®ORNNN'{ BIER FABRIC POST MAY BALE/SILT LENGE EL+tT.D I 4' TO 6'e ROUND BOAT ARRIER A � TOP OF TDP OF SUPPORT SUPPORT PILE B!]BB�B e'as �pw,� IpI_� HARBORWALK O..+14.0 /` -'- 'WATER LEVEL IVARIES) 3-YLT STAKES c EL+MO 'VINYL COATED NYLOOlIYY 11/i TO 7 N GROUND OUTSHO E OR POLYESTER FLOAT OLYPROPELENE c 13- KO - MISS EL yB CONTAINER TE STRAP CURTAIN TIE MAY BALE —_ n o - ' COMM ISTAINNO WALL GROMMETS \ 0 IRIM EL+6e PILEJ,' SILT CONTAINMENT BARRIER, " -- REC061RIM:f WOVEN POLYPROPOLENE wxa RETAwNc WALL • �" REVFTMEAR SLOPE OR EQUAL I" 11RL,r w RMAA,D m `• 1Lw nm....::. . I `\\, EASTMG RP RAP 'WEIGHTED AS BALLAST ANDD rZXTEND UDLI BARRIER v. RECONSTRUCT REVELMENT SLOPE i h TO M N MLw FL 0.00 '>' ✓ L� iNBER PlF le'Qa(rnJ CUT TO FABRIC ,r= SILTATION FENCE ........................ . i✓ E1a51Nc ao RAP U WT TO FlT(VARIES) ^ WITH HAYBALES - MUDUNE (VAPoES) r ELEVATION SECTION oSCALE t/i-f'p n PHASE A "TYPICAL SECTION" n PHASE B "TYPICAL SECTION" n BARRIER CURTAIN DETAIL SCALE: v, - 1•-D- PHASE A AND B EROSION CONTROL PLAN SALEM PORT EXPANSION CITY OF SALEM SALEM, MA PROJECT PHASES AUGUST Y008 A SEA ALL/RIEVETMENf RED014fRUGTIDN c B. IMI®ORYIALK AND PER a UPLAND SITE WOftK BIOf!'N COYM&bw ,vyr,ws.,E D. MUMCONSIRUCIKNI /Y/.h a E DREDGE — iAR�M QAM DMRN: x FOR PnTS ONLY �: DRAWING N0. I8705-01-03 REVISIONS DAM. 08/27/m SHEET 1 OF 2 'ITJMI\OUS PAVEMENT PARKING LOT ...... _7 4 SA EM FE W FAC ITY `-�p"A -S c-UPLAND SITE WORKIi ....... - - - - - - - - - - - - - TV I I ILl i-I 1 1 \I-4 IT SILTATION FENCE L HARBORWALK MHW & HTL UNDER 0 WALL ARSORWALK PHASE D-BUILDING L M.IW & H TIL AGAINST BULKHEAD -74 PERMEABLE PARKING AREA (GRAVEL/STONE) PROPOSED CONDITIONS PLAN HAY MT MTDt FA H, XAREL +17.0 9 'r L= it, W IE411 POSE D +1&0 2-rr VANES mw FL +0.9 11/i M r IN =UND OOT IN= RETAINING WALL KAY INQX K' Rcc� MW EL 0,W MIN if IN mum ......................... VaSTING NIP RIM 15 ac(YMI PHASE Q AND D SILTATION FENCE PHASE C "TYPICAL SECTION" ll WITH HAYBALES EROSION CONTROL PLAN SALEM PORT EXPANSION CITY OF SALEM SALEM, MA PROJECT PHASES AU00S7 2005 o c JNORWE � 0. WWII W-14 lycff A..A m wpm. DRAWING NO. 28705-01-02 -` POR PRRY119 ONLY fin/ w S REVISIONSSHEEP2 OF 2 lag, li 1111111, t � -rG , _i r' F' S4 � I Ill I I 1 �6 x .MlW'. ... - - _ ORFIIDE M) ... ... .. .... •_- - (-2).00) ORFDCE DO" omom — �OEPIN 3+00 4+00 L- 5 6+00 7+00 8+bq" +00 10+00 11 +00 fi 13+ 00 SITE 1TE 2 __........ SITE 3 - SITE 4 _ C I, -r- - DFEOGE W60YE� 11511) CY. n OMDGE ABFA� 2965)0 50. Ff I II I n PROPOSED DREDGE PLAN oostlNo MMDIwE 5 SCNE:1'NO•-0' 0 MLW �� LL-tt.00ffg _r ri-n o0 o j I vRDaos[o ]aN t Fav n LONGITUDINAL DREDGE SECTION oMLW EL. 0.00 I. ` ...... .......... PROPOSED N / PROPOSED DREDGE PLAN SALEM PORT EXPANSION pF/F CITY OF SALEM n -1s.DSALEM, MA m , STA STA A STA STA AUGUST IOOB +90 +50 +0;0 +100 +137 n TRANSVERSE DREDGE SECTION ACE s auwN: 9E 90M£:]/]Y=Y-7 CNECMED: DRAWING N0. 28705-01-04 x PoR PRRl1IT3 ONLY ManO•hD: 4 1Z. O°'2J 0° SHEET 5 OF 6 REVISIONS -�� - t{ (If TTJJ ' 1 I I , p TERMINAL BWG. 50' % 100' PARKING ==SPACES r PHASE 2 PIER 1 11 "vim&pdpl tf047R ITT II� - _ P f / -- - �- - -- - - - -- _- - - - _ - - -- _ - bRo tum urs 1 PPHASE 2 PIER / Pal 'HARBORWALK 12' W701H BLANEY ST._ to SALEM HARBOR _ 1 � I )i��-� �f 1� ll X11 l ll r , UPLAND/PIER LAYOUT A SALEM PORT EXPANSION CrrY OF SALEM MIEN 2007 3 �r ci..lagt ��r cnmrmi DRAMxaa Ro. nm-0t-al SHEET l OF 1 a,e�oyr`u• rwc r. w RLvuwNS TERMINAL BLDG. , ' - 56' x 100' � PARKING = 146 SPACES � . �— — � — — — svfty — WWOLMm LC �. HARBORWALK 12' WIDTH — Z- -, �— IIII -- _______ . - r s 7,7— � I UPLAND-/PIER LAYOUT B SALEM PORT EXPANSION ' CITY OF SALEM i SALEM' MA MOV MBM 2007 �ar GL��ley�>Mt �w u S-jI�M OIWIf. a [�S No. 27477-01-01 HEET l OF 1 0 1 �.lI I 1 �, llllil 1. I III i EXPANSION AREA -' 30' x 80' TERMINAL BLDG. 1 PARKING = 135 SPACES ss' x 8y _ .` Ov x - DROP _-- Alf; �- 1 — cam — r] odx3tr� 1 Y - I "MARBORWALK 12' WDTH ;ALCM HkREIi'r. I 1 11 UPLAND/PIER LAYOUT C SALEM PORT EXPANSION 'S CITY OF SALEM SALEM. MA NOVEMMM 1007 sir... CTsrIE��irrMr 11AM��M C DRAWING N0. 27677-01-01 SHEET 1 OF 1 TERMINAL BLI`-i 50' X 100' PARKING = 115 SPACES PHASE 2 PIER DROP L -- — — - - - - - - - -- - - - - - --- - it lmlw �'� wrt \ 1\ j �_ - - - - -- 30c BLANEY ST •� - ,-, -- —it 10 I PA H^I WHITE Sr. rl UPLAND/PIER LAYOUT E SALEM PORT EXPANSION' Y Cr Y OF SALEM q SALEM. MA - NOVEMBER 2007 L • L7—Awmw C1mmm&& .41W1111 BE tlWMe s [�S�HEe .nv N0. 27!77-01-01 O b b � 1 OF 1 Ji 1 -1 TERMINAL G. 56' X PARKING = 146 SPACES LIMIT146OF L NEW PUBLIC FISHING J PIER PROPOSED PARKING AREA - csm. \ I OfP9I0wE RIPPLY YEffi -- DROP BMwUITCN SYPLL +00/ST CPUSE rn HARBORWALK 12' WIDTH 10X40 FLOAT 60' GANGWAY �l (TIP.) (TYP,) ACCESS PIER I I DREDGE DEPTH Bl � 5T —26 I0 DREDGE DEPTH 1 DREDGE 1DEPTH I I (_48) DREDGE AREA I\ I 1 \ \ le V V LI l V l ,70 PROPOSED SITE PLAN SALEM PORT EXPANSION +. MTuw: uLw . oo. uNw - ae.o. N+L - .n.o CITY OF SALEM 2. mc+wrP1DNic:Nis IXDi aunLfn rwou vweoue PVNe SALEM, MA w TOPaoPArwc wmcY DATA TMIN NroII aAN PNnnm JANUARY 2008 b051e10 SIIF PIAN SNEw iM TEroAW1 7. Di SLLFu" PMPWED er WE ASSOC. MtEO AVOUSY 200]. MT+L NLYD +W2P e.PRCPEHIY BxNMW!MTA TNf E11 fWOY PVN EMIILfD YNMW 4P.Sl Yw�l�W 'ALTA/ACSY WD TITLE 9UMtt, PMPMm 1pR I2tel YM5 I Q D .0. � - — IM CpFNIY ILC.'B'!CLUIWN U IICIMf: AS P UIIIYR! 1. 2W I NO IMYE II.T BQII NAFlfD MLw 0.0 lw W4�M I[AV M AS PIRf OP M6 MDIfR. MLW -0.]3 .wM P x ]. cooRuw,ATPs E efD NAsw55/p1usET5 (KNuu+o) u w b ECK@�PRoim: DRAWING N0. 27877-01-05 STALE PUIf IY.YlMl11MTE SSId (MON). MTE rtsRH 2e_�'((I)� sruE® REV19ONS SHEET 1 OF 1 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK TANK DOMINION ENE 1, I I V-, 1 1\I ' \II♦^\ /•\ 1 \`'1 I / JJr// i/��/j�i IIIA \ ♦ 1 \( ,`Jr \� I/ I /�- i// ��/j�/�i^, p I III 1 11 111 TANK b I I I I I I 1 11 I /) a � III III \ \^ / 1 � .... „I\, 'I/sem��a`'�a�dK✓'1i�6� \\ . Iii iilj�l\\I .^y\ 1 I 1` 1l1\\ \\1 r / It 1^ l II\ 1 I \ \I I 1 1 ' ` I� TANK / /I I 1 I \�\\kill 1 /. 1 +-''\/ I IjI�J % I 1 i I j / j�II SII I I\/\ \ \-\/�1 I �lil/ % //11111\ \I A\ Ivl YJ ^/J 'T. I I I I/ ,/ 1 j 1 F\I I\ I I ^/./// / /1 11 I ��4` 1 \ I I ii�1 I / /11 /— I I i / / jllll \\ y1 -=%i iir_' M' PK sEr IN �_�� i i l( I i I_jJ Jl/i�/, is J y�l} 1 \ 1•' 4 I/-- /, BOUMINOUS PAVDAENT / / // /// / I I I \ \ \ /\1 ; i,/�/, // �/\ / / 1 1 \ IN ET_ 14.1 MLw , �.Mw.ii/I� ♦ ;J I 111 J\,\ ,_ //�.'.\�/.'��I�I\ i rJ \I ,I r� I D.w owFWFE — -�_-- NGWl �,o IdI1I ` / ! �\ i I 1 . \ /i// // / \I ` i /i i i d- d FNUW» i LIT NA1rwN/ wTF�4/l1l/ I I \ \ 1 1 11t Ji �.ii/%','rli 1 I II 11 I it ,, O/ o a!logabecG ee$ee vee' ao doeo 6o_�o 4P/ �rVE n11 \`\ Ill` _ �'``\`%i�'/'' /i'J�/ I \ i I I `♦- \\\ STONE RIPRIP I _ _ I � ^ i i • .I erl o \\ -.,- ---- - _ _\ _ l ' ° SALEM HARBOR any , ' , -\ / \ j I =Ta 9KLT RIF `-\ I 1 MANWID l u u 1 � � Hawthorne FIL NK,O®NDIOK M d \\ i\\^` I _> / \IP,I Cove Marina ❑ i/ V 111 \\/-\\ / I L \ I \ �\ w/\ Nacos: EXISTING SITE PLAN 1. DATUM: MLw-O.O; mm-a.9; HTL-12.2. SITE PLAN 2. SURVEY PDiFORMFD BY NNE ASSOCIAM. INC. ON ANUMY 24, 2007 AND JULY 13. x•'r; 1'=W 2007, AND REPRESENT CONDITIONS AT THE TME OF SUT . SALEM FERRY TERMINAL — CITY OF SALEM 3. COORDINATES ME B ED ON MASSACHUS (MAINVND) STATE PVNE C DINATE BLANEY STREET M1FTI (H`0113) SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 4. SOUNDINGS AND E11/ATgN11 ME SHOWN IN FEET AND TENTHS WED ON MLW DATUM. NoAATNE VALUES ROMESENT DEPTH BELOW THAT SANE PLANE xu u sna aesr esu. ROPERTY IINM ANO ADJACENT SITE FEATURES ME MRROXIMATE AND TAKEN FROM Vine 3. P MAss Ga AND ASSESSOR PU Cm OF sAIEN. m!lOGKTE,W. 5.;:3»- M. CHK. DR. VAI n mDIN RSM RLE N0.11u\\mm-\O sr�aHOMN MPO ON DAMUn 2,, SHEET 1 of 2 i \ i /. \\1 \ \I It j1 l I II J 1 \ \\ It It I It TANK Ilk 11\\ itel/ 1 ,\ll \ I , / I 1 , 1r✓/,% 1 1 1 1 1 \` I Ir,i / IERMWAL eIDG// /wx1Dar / ;�/r/,��I i eal6,mi NEW - VAI TtN: W SET IN \ 1 I 1n•� /� /�i /// /••_�- / J DINMINOUS PAVEMENT /s- euc-�sNINc l/ //�/'/ i I 1 I` \ \ \ r\ — SEE NOTE] �/ / Iii �--� / / /i: l J t I I 1 1` !;,•..'f�i//5:!i,i:/ it \ l PROPOSED PARKIN / PAVWG / I / I I .j TA a `�/♦ /i_ V',6/ l 1;0�0�'C�\ip�;O;oiJ \.•l AREA CHNN INCE GRAVEL PMKAG \ ° ,o/AD PATH �- FAC .5 gA1FORA1 1 I I l \ / l I // ..MNG OR1101t Y \ \ `\C<LIR�t\AR \ / of,f EIE CURBS I + \\ ___^ HOLDING P TNG \ 400000 I//^- �f// � ,/ i''n 1 •_/ - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - --- - -- - --- -- - - - - - - --- - ------ D --- — — -� -+D -- — — — -- \Aye-{- / l 1/ , /.17� RIPRAP \!u] e01v1v1 \✓-,aw1 A144s N 24Y GUIDE RLE AL CGYIERCK FISHIN 1D[,0 FLOAT •? (,W.) 1 / \• / ` 1•• `' / 1II j BERT NG MEA (m) DREDGE DE e0 OMOVMY(TYR) l 1 / (17 PROTECTED S1P5) = Z -10 �\ (\`\` --- - '� i — — =16 _-26 SALEM HARBOR - / - \ ----------------- Hawthorne �- Cove Marina - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ _ SITE PLAN ALTERNATIVE V SOLE: 1•-40' SALEM PORT EXPANSION 1. DATUM: MLW-0.0; MM-8.2: HR-122. CITY OF SALEM 2. SURVEY PERFORMED BY NNE ASSOCWTES. INC. ON JANUMY 24. 2007 AN JULY 1O, INTFRTIDAI_ ZONE SALEM, MA 2007. MD REVRES CONDMONS AT THE TIME OF SU .. FILLED AREA: 1580 SF. MAY 2008 DREDGED AREA 44190 SF. O. COORDINATES ME BASED ON MASSACHUSETTS (MWNU D) STATE MANE COORDINATE SYSTEM (NAOBO). 'Bourne Consulting Engineering 4. SOUNDINGS ElEVATMMIS ME SHOWN W FEET AND lEMHS B0.5ED 011 MLW MUM. lYA1-1 NEGATIVE VALVESS NEPRESENL DEPTH BELOW THAT SAME PIANS 5. PROPERTY LINES AND A CENT SH FEATURES ME APRRO%IMATE MD TMEH FROM MISS GIS AND ASSEMDR PU S CITY OF SALEM. r2,EMM A1O DRAWING No. 67677-01-06 D 40 w MPTtRDIA.M6u W. ® GATE m/oe/oe SHEET OF BGIE: ,• -40• REVISIONS 210VWRW.0 WMY arc or n(tMEll FIM1Y NM rIor boeTxc vrt ouM.SVLroll 1FPNxM SLLOI' _� \ wxwMrn m xwF MSOC (w)al ] VIIlHR1Y eWxam a1.MIN((MY 1.FMIRID / •Ku/t,®1 wn rlru aumn,rxerrico rax rws 2".s vo m1rMr uc•a cYunM trcFcmFc w.nc. II aRv.wluun..icor xo x+rc rnr x(vl vascn / a rem Of rxs warn. oZYaxMl6 M(BlVll M IIN J ), •.Sf1R RNL CCOFgxAR SYSId(xm]I. � IObMK elnc eai wm �t xxlm rlleoels w4aeR auwxu c vuwlc rt9xwo / - 1101E�" fEll y CYAT pF MFA ��r rE _ � t PARKING = 140 SPACES a wru a�rK mae ..r,.. .. I- - xMxg10N1{tr eIDM I iww nn.r(rnJ ... a exlory if ,.oma a oxnre a. 1 ■ar�aw $ e 10T• I SF'Y aua u oiwar arm -I (-m7 0 t0 (- 1 11111LWYYVAPK i19(ML 0PF1Plm , I o-x(AsaEEt we muxaxFowwl M.oCxw"(PoFMx malIoIC) R \ \ �. oma uuls —_ \ UL�� r-,Fl,nnnnnnr-inrnnIn SITE PLAN Wh mol aa.oalr all. wmerMr na aur we xn l l.o Yoaexc FxL uxmrx[ IwyJ ww .e"ar r aar ala VxfS YF(K xMa1K Vw "xV rf F xMBm'YxA rw 'leYr. Fd carne'2 Ir >1riN'mIOC�L r1r 111 NLM -0. W- r ,IWxla HAILm. `+R eaYAOwlx r IrIX o w eo 6 a17A to wrc nAFr -. . Ia• (u Ker el w - ftm allots--I wr a w r-r w•o tae• l.�e. a _ I tt'� SITE PLAN/ SECTIONS wle a.ee alm 10MeF �' SALEM PORT EXPANSION CITY OF SALEM ¢.ao vrswcsa SALEM. MA 12"10 APE PIIS W 1/2" MARCH 2008 I(�I Fmnxc wr xM tSY 1R a10[r 1/� ( ) F j w p�tom / `� wY1 0 On(fMJ WALL 16OG M. rwltx me is ac F �lr Chr�l01A/ exm nF r HARBORWALK CROSS SECTION PIER APPROACH-SECTION COMMERCIAL PIER-SECTION u �e1 e c 27677-01-06 t 1 maex xnn lYrxaho. scYc tA'-1'-0' Q'•^tA._t.-A• rax m alae ti scv:Vs--r-o' xtvlslows a,E SHEET _L OF 1 Figure I Proposed Development Plan 6 •s BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT 104'X60' WATER QUALITY - - - 16.0 SNOW STORAGE AREAS INFILTRATION GALLEY + lso EXISTING HIGH 1 OINT ON SITE _ + I • 14.0 CB 4 + 1s.3 .1 CB 5 PROPOSED CATCH BASIN (TYP) I 4.7 + 15.1 IHP 5 D +I� -- - •• - i 17.3 _. 15.1 15.9 15.0 0 + 16.5 B 2 I 04 0 0 0 - p 1 X60 C 5 _ _ E 1 14.1 E 2 HPI r .._ _ -- - + 15.65 - - + 16.0 _ • • • • • • • .s 1 HPC +.. 16.3 . + 16.0 + 16.2 _. + 1.4:5.- -- _.__ -_- + 16.5 _ PROPOSED RAIN MANHOLE TYP) + .8 \ 'k 115.4 , + 14_ a 1 4 CB 1 � 1 I + -14. 0 o a a D O" Q r PROPOSED STORMWATER OUTFALL t 118'X30' PROPOSED OIL/WATER SEPORATOR ` SEE DETAIL P POSED STORMCEPTO (TYP.) ` SEE TAIL V'a RONALD R BOURNE cava PERMEABLE PARKING AREA 118'X30' WATER QUALITY (GRAVEL/STONE) INFILTRATION GALLEY SEE DETAIL PROPOSED D RAI NA G E P LAN STC 1200 Precast Concrete Stormceptor' STC 1800 Precast Concrete Stormceptor A Stotmceptor (1200 U.S.Gallon Capacity) (1800 U.S.Gallon Capacity) FOR PERMITS ONLY 600' Stormceptor 6 Frame and Cover SCALE:1"=40'-0" 32"0 110 F[raadmepand sCover � 31� 2 �1 Spud FimsHetlt�ra0e Sun inisHlg rade 6"0 Orifice 24"0 Outlet To Oil DATUM: Mean Low Water MLW INV 11 .0 (TYP.) L- . g00i1 8„ P•" 100 YR FLOOD +17.0 8" Pon Plate Pipe CULTEC CHAMBER CULTEC 180 • 72.0 �r0 HTL +11 .0 RECHARGE CHAMBER MHHW +9.4 3/4- DOUBLE- F Varies Sto / OR EQUAL Varies Stormce tor' 41 0 40 gp MHW +8.9 WASHED STONE BORDER 95% COMPACTED InserP �n NGVD +4.2 4 4" VENT (TYP.) CULTEC #410 GRAVEL BORROW MLW 0.0 FILTER FABRIC I^IH Weir Outlet " °" �t Weir owet OR EQUIVALENT TO SCALE. 1 = 40 MLLW -0.3 II I II I I il. I( IL - o (VARIES)EL 16 0 14 PfatPlate PW e I I Access opening 6"00i1 131'-11 Il II 11 II I EI L) LI VENT PIPE TYP. 71" (See nate#2) Port POPdpe p4.0pr �► :�� I �� LI ►►: �� II, 2'MIN ( > Min. p4"ee �°i�� OutletPq� PROPOSED DRAINAGE PLAN I OtNet Pie Plan View EL. 14.0 � 3/4"-1Yz" DOUBLE WSTONDE INFLOW c INFLOW EL. 13.0 � ' . •.y. � . . SALEM PORT EXPANSION CIN OF SALEM INV 11.0 EL. 12.5 Section Thru Chamber a •� SALEM , MA 12"f Section ThmChamber AUGUST 2008 NOTE: Notes: VENT PIPES SHALL BE PERFORATED TO DRAIN CONDENSATION 1'-0" 3'-0" MHW 8.9 1.The Use Of Flexible Connection is Recommended at The Wetand Outlet Where Applicable. WITH PERFORATIONS DOWN WHEN PIPE IS IN PLACE. 4" SCHEDULE 80 \_6" THICK 2.The Cover Should he Positioned Over The Outlet Drop Pipe and The Oil Port. SEE NOTE 3.The Stormeepfor Syystem is protected byy one or more of the folllow ng U.S.Patents:#4985148, �a^ 3/4" DOUBLE WASHED #5498331,#57257b0,#5753115,#5849181,#6068765,#6371'690. Boarve C*wiEihh En eerie STONE 4. Contact a Concrete Pipe Division representative for further dettails not listed on this drawing. S Bent Street VENT D FnnkbW, ZA MR B WATER QUALITY INFILTRATION GALLEY SEE DETAIL 4 INFILTRATION GALLEYS DRAWN: UC PB (5W) 533 ease FAX (M) 533-MOO B c D CHECKED: ADP DRAWING N0. 2$705-01 -06 WATER QUALITY INFILTRATION GALLEY 08 SNOW STORAGE/ SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" 6 6 �'BiQ9OrouTs APPROVED: SCALE: N.T.S. SCALE: N.T.S. DATE: 08/19/08 SHEET 3 OF 6 REVISIONS dllllt II jalit'oil cp / ' Y N '\ \ 1 1 , lam)• \ _ 36 TANK `Ji / X / 20X20 PLATFORM / i i --' / it ; I i _.34 10X10 PLATFORM T IN DESIGNATED PORT TBM: PK SE / /BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT OFFICE AREA BOUNDARY BOUNDARY OF LAND SUBJECT I , MOORING D EL. 14.1 MLW \ TRAILER // � � ' '% / ' DOLPHIN TO COASTAL STORM FLOWAGE / if // DOMINION ENERGY SALEM / LLC OFF TRAILER 30 / / N r-/ _ - -/------ _- I -• ; ; I I I I ' I \\\ II II II ', \� _\, � i3� V�WZ\ V'Q�a,/ 'Dc,' V-'�'// � \\, ; i 1\\ � '� -- - �55 I I l I I 1 I N N 00 N \\ J~ / i'I/' /'' m —� r� -- X 13.6 y iVrl w I _ _--= i SALEM n• I WI I I O -------- Ol i FERRY FACILITY CURBS CONCRETE 5x R . k 15.2 \\ \ 20X50 STEEL FLOAT 53532 831 GRAVEL PARKING • , o NE / Q 1 -------- 17.1 ---- \ -,' co 50' 50' i i i \14.90 o0 o 16.0 GANGWAY / _— --------- — — ___ _ ---—/— Q V O \ I 1 1 \ / ) , / , / / , 1 000 Y`1-BOO oo00o0000000000 0000 000 �00 v 1\ I I \\ - � -• _ �� '/ ' /''/ f' it 1 • D • UN r OCF1\N ------ - - J 14.2 ' -- _ --- ' 76 ® - — 52I 0 ; TOP OF RIP RAP SLOPE ` \ ------ ENTRANCE --_- ; I< y ENTRANCE STONE RIP RAP .•.......................... .. .. TOE OF RIP RAP - — -- _ STONE PARKING STOPS 1 --- I I - _ ----- �/ I 1 i COASTAL HTL 4 "\ , ECI1 � ' ¢ a } R I 13.6 I I HTL & MIHW B MHW � ._ }- x I I O AGAINST BULKHEAD -7 �N0 UNN ER ti d FLOOD it AGFA I I I , 1 ----.------------- I I - - 4 E I GRANITE`\BLOCK WALL - - EBe , II 4167 s31 s3'a 37.1 _. --- ------ I I __- _._ ' I _ i / 'I 52f,� N F ^__"- I `- ,L L HAWTHORNE MARINA - - -- — I " LIMi7E�hARTNHI� - - - - - - - - - 11 / ni I ' 1 s 11 1 I f I ' I I 1 11 1 ' I\ If cv —� U - —FYI cj 00 O Z Z O U Z f— (n W NOTES: EXISTING CONDITIONS 1 . DATUM: MLW = 0.0, MHW = +8.9, HTL = +12.2 j 2. THIS PLAN HAS BEEN COMPILED FROM VARIOUS PLANS INCLUDING: SALEM PORT EXPANSION ~ A. TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY DATA TAKEN FROM PLAN ENTITLED DATUM: Mean Low Water MLW + j,. C�� OF SALEM a- PR"EX SALEM ,ED VI EITE NASSOCMDATEDYAUGUST 200TERMINAL I7..Y OF SALEM" H00 YR FLOOD +1.1,0 ` SALEM , MA I- MHW +8.9 f �0 AUGUST 2008 B. PROPERTY BOUNDARY DATA TAKEN FROM PLAN ENTITLED NGVD +4.2 v y Il' "ALTA/ACSM LAND TITLE SURVEY, PREPARED FOR FIRST MASS MLW 0.0 C ANUARY 4 OMPANY C2001 ANDLIHA E NOTENGINEERING BEEN VERIFIEDINC. LAND DATED o AS PART OF THIS PROJECT. R B(1//I'll!e Consultin Ea Bella N Street 3. COORDINATES ARE BASED ON MASSACHUSETTS (MAINLAND) �+ JU i '— — I STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM (NAD83). Tn (sore) 533-&W TAX (sae) 5M-aeon o DRAWN: JSF } 00 CHECKED: DRAWING NO. 28705-01 -01 l x 0 50 100 APPROVED: FOR PERMITS ONLY DATE: 08/27/08 SHEET I OF 6 SCALE: 1 " = 50' REVISIONS li I l I i 1 I i i 1 1 1 i ' i 1 ,. .I - - :__11 i i •/:',rte,' / /' � '� � _,l co _- / DAA AvJ I f \I / �/ 'lig //, / / J PROPOSED 56'X100' TERMINAL BUILDING SEE SHEET 6 // MAIN10' HORIZONTAL FISHING PI _34 C / / i i ' i%/ i i i / l i i l l l SEPERAIION BETWEEN WATER �i/,' AND SEWER (TYP) 4" SDR-21 PVC FORCE MAIN ,. (TYP) i' MLW - r TYP BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT — r\ PARKING LOT _ — — — _ PIER SEE SHEET X - _ ,' /' { / , , ' 1 ',- , , \ � --/I ` II •v..' v r•` j �'�,/i PROPOSED CATCH BASIN 2 I / j Y % �•�'� r � ._1 —i—/�! � i i i — � I�-- a� � v I / _`_ _ / — — CONNECT TO EXISTING CB 4 SEWER MANHOLE ON BLANEY STREET — CB -4_ A 1 � �wAl cRED ® 6WATER –f ® 3' FORCE �. �� – Ai R—►ANr'F=r• y QO D ; .............................. ............... MLW \1 ,'\ ---- 1 / , _ --- A HARBORWALK MHW & HTL UNDER HARBORWALK PROPOSED STORMWATER OUTFALL - d i -"n o� ti MHW & HTL AGAINST BULKHEAD "` ---- a� __ 53P53'N 37 8 / ✓ -------------- G_RR -.-i--- _ ----------------------------------- - -- SALEM� H ARBOR i PERMEABLE PARKING AREA (GRAVEL/STONE) \ I Inn I , 1 , PROPOSED CONDITIONS PLAN A 2 SCALE: 1"=50'-O" 8" CONCRETE DECK 42 HIGH BARRIER RAIL ' 15 8" CONCRETE DECK 12 HARBOR 6' CONCRETE SIDEWALK HARBORWALK PARKING AREA 42" HIGH BARRIER RAIL (VARIES) TOP OF HARBORWALK a- TOP OF 1% SLOPE EL. +17. HARBORWALK CENTER PARKING ISLAND :, -• o - _ 12"0 N EL. +17.0 TIMBER PILE Lo HTL EL +11.0 MHW EL. +8.9 LL EXISTING RIP RAP N MHW EL. +8.9 FILL 2 REINSTALL EXISTING EXISTING MUDLINE FILL FILL i :. �1 4 CONC. RETAINING WARIP RAP LL I PROPERTY LINE ' MLW E EXISTING GRADE \ ' "' _ • , / L 0.00 CD EXISTING SLOPE CONCRETE LIMIT OF DREDGE/ MLW o . EL. . 0.00 EXISTING RIP RAP BULKHEAD / // z 0 TIMBER PILE 15' O.C. (TYP.) o /EL. -11.0 z 0 Li B PROPOSED HARBORWALK AND PARKING LOT SECTION PROPOSED SECTION 0 2 a 2 SCALE:3/32" -=1' " SCALE: 3/32"=1'-O" N PROPOSED CONDITIONS cn > t SALEM PORT EXPANSION In ;: t :• :. t>L W CITY OF SALEM af SALEM, MA co AUGUST 2008 Ofw Lo ` ll Bourne Consultin Ea " eerier BL'fi 3 �t Stmvt fin, MA MW a N DRAWN: JSF 00 CHECKED: DRAWING NO. 28705-01 -02 X FOR PERMITS ONLY APPROVED: DATE: 08/27/08 6 REVISIONS SHEET 2 OF 6 I N �C13' o��o -A / J I / ' TERMINAL BLDG. / Il I / � I I BOLLARD LIMIT OF NEW VAI TBM: PK SET IN SEAWALL BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT EL. 14.1 (MLW) Sot PUBLIC FISHING ! I (� �� •� \� I FI i /v / BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SEE NOTE 2 I PIER - CLEAT \ 104'X60' WATER QUALITY INFILTRATION GALLEY EXISTING HIGH �— ts. OINT ON SITED � P / 0) PROPOSED PARKING �� // AREA t 14.0 I 1 A V �I CB 5 _ /// PROPOSED CATCH BASIN (TYP) - / IHP HOLDING o 7 PARKING = 146 SPACES 5362536. 5., HOLDING - r- -4-11049X60' p 534 32 a6" 1 .0 Q B 2 I P rl 1631 0o E 1 14.1 E 2 HPI _ 16. - - - — _ rl L / / / PROPOSED' RAIN MANHO ) \ / 15.4 � - MLW � - -- + 14. a I / / — I / \ / I DREDGE DEPTH CB 1 // �I v v F�� —26 �2 ( ) ® / 24'0 GUIDE PILE \ I DREDGE DEPTH oLM / I ® QG�O a u a a HARBORWALK 12 WIDTH (TYP.a \\ (-18) EBB boo 0 0 o DREDGE DEPTH \\ PROPSED DREDGE w _ PROPOSED STORMWATER OUTFALL _10 /_ — — — — — — — — — — ` — , ` / AREA ' 1 PROPOSED OIL/WATER SEPORATOR / — SEE DETAIL � - - - - -\ \ t._ � \\ S SEM HAR OR — — 531'53 a4E PROPOSED STORMCEPTOR (TYP.) \1s \ SEE DETAIL "E � I - _ -- - 7S \ \ I _ '07"E 52T 670 z AIHIT- ST. PERMEABLE PARKING AREA 118X30' WATER QUALITY � �6 (GRAVEL/STONE) INFILTRATION GALLEY S SEE DETAIL y �/0 STC 1200 Precast Concrete SBormceptor STC 1800 Precast Concrete Storrnceptor PROPOSED DRAINAGE P LAN (1800 U.S.Gallon Capacity) '� �� e anrtce ver (1200 U.S.Gallon Capatcity) a an Cover �� FOR PERMITS ONLY 600' g Frame and Cover 32"qy Frame and Cover 31 �'1 G` ^p 0 SCALE:1"=40'-0" Smt FimsHetltGrade � Suit FmAsHe�tC;r�ade a DATUM• Mean Low Water MLW 6'00rfice 24"0 Outlet ceoa �P°/BTE � a INV 11 .0 (TYP.) 8., Pa H00 YR FLOOD +11 .0 ' Oil Plate Pi 6' +944 a CULTEC CHAMBER CULTEC 180 • 72'0 rre f,. � ' �� MHWW +8.9 Of RECHARGE CHAMBER Varies Sto ce 3/4" DOUBLE— F OR EQUAL P • 0 95% COMPACTED Varies Starlmce�ta' �n 0 40 I O �/ MLWD +0.0 Ww WASHED STONE BORDER11 111M O 4 4" VENT (TYP.) CULTEC #410 GRAVEL BORROW mLet Q1f o w�. ° tlet SCALE: 1 " = 40' MLLW —0.3 FILTER FABRIC se oOR EQUIVALENT EL. 16.0-14.0 (VARIES) fate PP a Access opening o I (See note#2) 6'0 Oil P�Pee p �0 z � NT PIPE (TYP.) Min. Port 105" ° 04-etP1 PROPOSED DRAINAGE PLAN cn 131'-11 " 12'MIN PfPipe�ro Plan View 3/4"-tlz" DOUBLE WASHED EL. 14.0 OutletPJA Min. cn SALE EXPANSION STONE M PORT �\ /(L_-_JI INFLOW CITY OF SALEM INFLOW ��i J ire v u EL. 13.0 � INV 11 .0 - EL. 12.5 SectionThruChambcr e' SALEM , MA - Section Thm Chamber F AUGUST 2008 NOTE: Notes: Ck� 1,_O" 3'-0" MHW 8.9 1.The Use Of Flexible Connection is Recommended at-ne Inlet and Outlet Where Applicable. a_ VENT PIPES SHALL BE PERFORATED TO DRAIN CONDENSATION 2.The Cover Should be Positioned Over The Oudet Dro)p Pipe and The Oil Port. i WITH PERFORATIONS DOWN WHEN PIPE IS IN PLACE. 4' SCHEDULE 80 6" THICK 3.TheStormce tors stem rotectedb one or moreiofthefollowngU.S.Patents:#4985148, �Qjd]'jje conaddR Ea t�l'lll O SEE NOTE 3/4" DOUBLE WASHED pp yy p #5498331,#57257bQ#5753115,#5 pr 181 ative 876.5,her deta0.ils �/7 r 00 4. Contact a Concrete Pipe Division representative for further details not listed on this drawing. `L — 3 Bent Sffm treet N STONE -- PB: (5M) =-MM P 5M-050r7 i VENT D WATER QUALITY INFILTRATION GALLEY SEE DETAIL 4 INFILTRATION GALLEYS DRAWN: JC B p WATER QUALITY INFILTRATION GALLEY CHECKED: ADP DRAWING NO. 28705(14 —01 -06 X 66 p APPROVED: DATEE: 08/19/08 SHEET 3 OF 6 REVISIONS T SCALE: N.T.S. SCALE: N.T.S. H TL —._• MHW - � REMOVE & RELOCATEL; I C EXISTING BARGES v4 NEW 60' GANGWAY NEW 60' GANGWAY \ \\ NEW 40'X10' FLOATS / 287' \ \ V A \ : l a �^ EXISTING MIHW l+ + l+r� \ +j / _ • s • s- a a s s e s s a s a e • a�s a " • s_.. s s s s e - • a • � - - - - - - s a r+l 7— T 4- +1 l+J l+ if - + + + 1580 SF. AREA OF - - 7rAtirWAY FILL BELOW HTL A I ��c...............M-LYV ... NEW 40'X10' FLO70NEW WAYS EXISTING 50'X20' �••............... GANGWAYSBARGE RELOCATED NEW EXISTING 50'X20' FERRY BARGE RELOCATED PROPOSED PIER PLAN A 32, CONCRETE CURB 4 APPROACH PIER 2'0 FLOAT GUIDEPILES (TYP) SCALE:1"=20'-0" VARIES 30'-70' CONCRETE CURB TOP OF CONCRETE PILE CAP PIER EL. +17.0 GREEN .0 PILE " O.0 STEEL SUPPORT 7'-6 . (TYP) PILES ® 5' O.C. 12" CONCRETE TIMBER WAVE EL.1 +17.0 CONCRETE DECK CONCRETE CAP BARRIER MHW EL. +8.9 F ADA BARGE COMMERCIAL •: & FERRY (BERTH VESSEL BERTH MHW EL. +8.9 MLW E.L. . . MLW EL. 0.00 co . . . . . . 0 II � I I 12"0 PIPE PILE (TYP.) i 12"0 PIPE PILE (TYP) ci z <t LLA i PROIt POSED PIER SECTION c PROPOSED PIER SECTIONR PROPOSED PIER B CALE: 3 32"=1'-0" 4 SCALE: 3/32"=1'-O" Sa`o SALEM PORT EXPANSION / CITY OF SALEM SALEM, MA ltil°6 AUGUST 2008 fZ1 u, Bourne ConsultingEn " eerin tooc-E 9 Bent Street i/ i/ N � (508) 5x3—MM F )�—OM d DRAWN: JSF CHECKED: DRAWING NO. 28705-01 -03 00 cl� v— APPROVED: X- FOR PERMITS ONLY DATE: 08/27/08 SHEET 4 OF 6 REVISIONS � 1 1 � � N / \ u \ \\ \ � \ / \_, I // / � 1, ,_ , _ / ,• \` I / / 1 I 1 I ' v V v 1 1 I ✓--- v / / III vvA / /' / /� , / / / / c vv 1 v '-- ,i� I co cp — i i// I '1 1V i/, \I / /��_.�•�.—•—•— _,v 1 � � I /� fi 1 — ' � — — — — --c �I � \\\\ ® II 1 \\, 1 / _ _/ ./�^/'{O/ �Fl� �O^ CJ / /'✓``\/ ,' /(]/.,i� ' '\\ % 1 / • _ •--'��• - 1 I_ 1 / 1 I IIIIII _ _ -0�n � NJ- CIV FLF FAC I / `---------- I!\ I II rl / - _ // ; DREDGE DEPTH - ' • . . . . . . MLW• . . . . . (-27.00) .. DREDGE DEPTH - DREDGE DEPTH (-16.00) _ (-11 .00) _ ---- C 3 + 00 4 + 00 5 6 + 0 0 -- 7 + 00 �/ a - -_ -x- 0 0 1 0 -+- 0 0 1 1 X 0 0 � � `• - 3 + 00 - - - ARBCR '----- - - - _ - DREDGE VOLUME= 115117 CY. I DREDGE AREA= 298570 SQ. FT I � I I I i-innnnnnnnnn PROPOSED DREDGE PLAN A EXISTING MUDLINE 0 5 SCALE: 1"=40'-0" o MLW EL. 0.00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N EL. -11.00 EL. - 66.00 00 - - EL. -27.00 o II z PROPOSED 3 ON 1 SLOP G LONGITUDINAL DREDGE SECTION w 5 MLW EL. 0.00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 0 I PROPOSED DREDGE PLA U) CNIL II �a SALEM PORT EXPANSION I I man" � CITY OF SALEM W SALEM , MA NEL. -16.0 V AUGUST 2008 w STA STA S A STA STA +90 +50 +0 0 +100 +137 Bourne ConsultingEn ' eerie R�F 9 Bent Street " p (5M) 5M-MM TRANSVERSE DREDGE SECTION - (5M) =-sees Z M (5 B DRAWN: JSF 0 5 00 SCALE: 3/32"=l'-O" CHECKED: DRAWING NO. 28705-01 -04 X FOR PERMITS ONLY APPROVED: DATE: 08/2708 SHEET 5 OF 6 4i REVISIONS -- t4 ell !UU � J I EL. + 28 . 0 ---- -- I EL. + 17 . 0 HTL MHW EE. + 1 1� . 0 ' L. �"9 Jew a , MLW EL ' A PROPOSED TERMINAL SECTION SCALE: 1"=10'-0„ y .�_T- PROPOSED TERMINAL SECTION A 6 SCALE: i"=10'-0" 0 cv 0 0 0 N N N 00 0 D U' Z D J_ m m 0 W N PROPOSED BUILDING a- 0 Of a 000 TERMINAL " 0~ SALEM PORT EXPANSION cm A. w a�° CITY OF SALEM _ SALEM , MA AUGUST 2008 OfLi0 rl Bourne Consulting00 En " eerin j BCL 9 Bent Street -._ PrantBn, Yd 02098 TBG (508) 5999-8888 M (508) 599-0800 DRAWN: JSF co CHECKED: DRAWING NO. 28705-01 -05 X FOR PERMITS ONLY 0 20 40 APPROVED: DATE: 08/27/08 SHEET 6 OF 6 LZ SCALE: 1 " = 20' REVISIONS