The URL can be used to link to this page

64-119 - REAR 325 LORING AVENUE - CONSERVATION COMMISSION 7 ��i ' l l I '!!! �I �' �, �' > f _ � _ . _ - - BION COj' CoriS tim CoMrMSSIM , Salem. Massachusetts 01970 F.1 �yW x'17:1 SSAC� July 31, 1991 William A. Krol, P.E. Department of Environmental Protection Metropolitan Boston - Northeast Region 5 Commonwealth Avenue Woburn, MA 01801 RE: File #64-119 Dear Mr . Krol: The Salem Conservation Commission has recently gotten. several reports that additional fill was being added to the' Mackey property on Leggs Hill Road. The mounds of fill have g, ,.)- ; so that they now protrude above the tree line. ,> The Commission has been involved with this site since September 1984 . Your department issued an Enforcement Order in April 1987 . Unfortunately the last item we have in our file is a letter stating an adjudicatory hearing (Docket No. 87-148) would occur and that a DEQE lawyer would be assigned in four to five months . Please inform us of the status of the Appeal so that we can address the concerns of the neighboring property owners. . Thank you for your attention to this matter . Any information should be addressed to Juli Riemenschneider, Conservation Administrator , One Salem, Green, Salem, MA 01970, ( 508)745-9595 ext. 311. Sincerely, JJohn G. Vallis Chairman cc:Randall and Loretta Weiting 14 Buchanan Road Salem, MA 01970 ESD\JULI\DEP64119 I a j/ x 30 / 0VE.4FF10W 69 iS - 27 32. .69 36' 9 .�ot, 2:1 Tz6.30 P � MAX QO \ 24"TREE / 0VE,4FL OW f T ELEV. = 27. 30 i MA o L E � ('229 s L PON, — i WATER ? NO TE / /. A.FTE�S' C�NS TR:/f T/ON D� c�✓EPFLOW �� / sT�vc ruRE �PEMoY£ E,1'�STNG EARTf/ � i )lleE AND ,C-INI,511 GRROE Nl':-W S/-OPE / 77 rr,4k. SLOPE DF 2.•/, i 2. coiNP�c T ALL AAIr-sq .4 / BAckF/L L //✓ t3 '' A1A k L/F' S, / 3 QATvM / S M. S_ L . EX/s 771,v(,' ELE VI4T/ONS \, \ / / l 14 Selo A sc,R VEY A6y Nl ENG/NEEJf'/N '1 9 / .,4 S41 / TES /NC. \ _ 27.6-9 f y ;Tk B� TBM PlQWT MARkSNCAW--"4L- WA-ELL E L C�yE,r f 1 � .YR co✓EQ � S'1"EEL 4S = bVER WELL ab` 1 1 I i t I i j i C/TY OF SALEM , MA. LE �vS y/LL o✓T'L E r `C V 7-R OL S TRIC TUR4 S / TE PL A /V - OA rE : 5'- 9 - 86 OH/G. NO'. 5/33 i i I i� i i ikil ' \ J' Al \Xtop , r ` ( , � � � " .. ---•-rte' .�".... l,�lj•O i � , 4 �, � � ,A-�7YsT r _- � r clo lot - , 10 \ yell l tic 00, be G"q c I ori ��1 ow �>9 �I`O�DU St'G� �k Gc�✓�7�/Gu'1 �G ��vYr�� - �s �,411-- In s y 8�/ON Gj�j� v✓if�,P'� OF FREDERICK cyG\\ -I FCRSES - v No. 27878 >J 1 92 Form 4 DEOE Re No. --� (To be Provided by OEOE) SALEM = Commonwealth City/Tow - • f of Massachusetts Appiiont CITY OF SALEM Abbreviated.Notice of Intent Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L c. 131, §40 To be used only for projects of minimum impact,as described in the General Instructions for Completing the Notice of Intent 1. Lo=tton•StreetAddresiLeggs Hill Pond 325 Loring Ave. Lot Number M30 L50 2 Project Type Reconstruction of outlet structure Description 3.Registry:County Essex Current Book &Page Certificate(If Registered Land) 744-0241 4. Applicant' City of Salem Tel Address: One Salem Green, Salem, MA. 01970 5. PropertyOwner Town of Marblehead Tel. 631-2694 Address Tower Way, Marblehead MA. 01945 8. Representative City of Salem - Engineering Department rel. 744-0241 Address One Salem Green Salem MA. 01970 7. Have the Conservation Commission and DEOE Regional Office each been sent, by certified mail or hand delivery, 2 copies of completed Notice of Intent,with supporting plans and documents? Yes IN No ❑ 8. Have all obtainable permits,variances and approvals required by local by-law been obtained or applied for?Yes ® No ❑ Obtained: Applied For. Not Applied For. Notice of Intent No other nermits or variances required 9. Is any portion of the site subject to a Wetlands Restriction Order pursuant to G.L.c. 131, §40A or G.L. c. 130, §1057 Yes ❑ No 13 10. List all plans and supporting documents submitted with this Notice of Intent Identifying Number/Letter Title/Date . 1 Leggs Hill Pond - OUtlet control structure 2 USGS Locus Plan 3 Details and computations 4-1 93 1 1. For work proposed within the Buffer Zone(as defined in Part I, Sections 10.02(2)and 10.04 of the reg• ulations) describe, with reference to supporting plans and calculations where necessary: (a) The size, shape, type and!ovation of the proposed work. A 4-Ft. diameter by 5-Ft. deep catch basin outlet structure constructed over existing 16-inch outlet pipe behind existing earth dike. (b) Mitigating measures and designs to insure that the proposed work will not alter the resource area which said Buffer Zone borders;or if it will alte?said resource area, the mitigating measures and designs proposed to meet the performance standard established for that resource area in Part II or Part III of these regulations. Existing dike will not be removed until proposed structure is complete. New Embankment will- be graded, topsoil spread, and bank seeded for erosion control 12.For work proposed within Land Subject to Flooding(as defined in Part III, Section 10.57(2) of the reg- ulations)describe,with reference to supporting plans and calculations where necessary: (a) The size, shape, type and location of the proposed work. (b) Mitigating measures and designs proposed to meet the performance standards set forth in Part]if, Section 10.57(4) of the regulations. I hereby certify under the pains and 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. 7 n _j /-x r ., 2s � eP6 Signature of Applicant Da e Signature of Applicant's Representative 4.2 Date UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE OFFICIAL BUSINESS SENDER INSTRUCTIONS PENALTY FOR PRIVATE TO USE TO AVOID PAYMENT Print your name,address,and ZIP Code in the space below. OF POSTAGE, j300 • Complete items 1, 2, and 3 an the reverse., Moisten everse.• Moisten gummed ends and attach( front of article LLAEYIAR if spate permits. Otherwise aHia too back article. � I • Endorse article "Return Receipt Reeuesteded" adja I cent to number. i RETURN TO i LNa (TSender Off : � ��RI (t t'r'eet or P.O. h_4iw. ' q A I rPIAy -� Al IIJI � I if 0iIi S, dW*Ji ode I r I 0 SENDER: Corrl*i,Items 1.2,and i. Add your address in the "RETURN TO space on 3 reversece . t. The owing service is requested (check one). LvT Show to whom and date delivered. .. .... ... ¢ Show to whom,date,and address of delivery. . ¢ RESTRICTED DELIVERY Show to whom and date delivered..... . . ... ¢ RESTRICTED DELIVERY. Show to whom,date,and address of delivery.$ (CONSULT POSTMASTER. FOR FEES) aa 2.El ICLE ADDRESSED TO: ar ��h S a a m 4\fM "-)0, Ci )q l m_ 3. ARTICLE.DESCRIPTION: �. REGISTERED NO. CERTIFIED NO/I INSURED NO. m I �yrMg 5 N (Always obtain signature of addressee or agent) ' zI have received the article described above. so SIGNATURE" ❑ Addressee E] Authorized agent Z y A 4(_ m 4F� L ERU DSTIVARK 0 S. ADDRESk(Complete,only if requested) 1 in a H 6. UNABLE TO DELIVER BECAUSE: CLERK'S O INITIALS L D I {p GM:1MA 234-337 IL —_------------—._____ ♦h— � _ �_.� �� a —� �•,�. N �►, r, r e�eJ /I lyt� ; .,\, ftp C r 1� ,A f • �� (� T4 J_! �!.}ski� �`� Y`, d' i f f � �� 'S 1YyfFr1'�,'yam. � ei\`I. I-��'..+i(r '➢`T >�r •r(h}` •➢'( - y *�L�'N0.\ fl 4h k '`5 � V w ➢1.;FK 3F1 y.ee9�.�.4 v C �� '4� ? r:�-�•. 4 H/11 ked - J72KLe L , t� t �4 .3 Aft■ Cj l\t t t1 - til,, . � : � . f��yz �A�w � !\ • »�/ 2�.�2 ' � . _ ! ^ � \\ ! � \ � ?�� . : �r � � � \/\ (\��\\ . . � � a � � \ ��. ^ � ^ � ` ��\ ^ . � :�® (� ^ \ � ƒ I� � � � :/^ � {��«\\ \\\� : a -� \\ ) , . . . ? �� . ��@ , . 9�7:6/ \�\ « ry � �« . < . �\ « � /�. � � f � z ' iw. �� \� z � . . ��A » ��% t � ©� , � � �� r. Cel y s Gli// /c�Gt! //YlocfGL� j 130 50 Y al 11Nk X+� Akk , CN � �C> i t {' �� m °tom L Salem. Massachusetts 01970 TO : CONSERVATION COMMISSION MEMBERS FROM: DEBBIE HURLBURT, CONSERVATION COMMISSION AIDE RE : MACKEY FILE SUMMARY OF MACKEY PROPERTY EVENTS LEGG ' S HILL DATE EVENTS Sept . ' 84 Gravel. excavation Sept . 27, ' 84 Enforcement Order issued to stop Oct . 27, 184 Agreement reached where Mackey could remove gravel within specified area outside the buffer zone June ' 85 Excavation taking place outside agreed area June 27 , ' 85 Enforcement Order issued July 11, ' 85 Mackey ' s attorney contacted Commission to allow Mackey to remove more gravel . But was informed none can be removed until formal filing July 25 , ' 85 Notice of Intent filed .q0 Sept . 12 . ' 85 Public Hearing - Mackey pI�ro`posed excavation to elevation 30 within buffer zone of Pond and hay bale barriers to prevent sedimentation Oct . 29, ' 85 Hearing continued . Mackey did not appear - meeting nullified Dec . 12 , ' 85 Hearing continued . Order of Conditions was drafted on this date Nov . 6, ' 86 Attorney responded to concerns of the Con Com of lack of cooperation in complying with Order . Letter states alternatives by Mackey . 1 . Dust Control - Calcium chloride being utilized not water 2 . Security - 3 foot diameter rocks being utilized not gate 1% 3 . Siltation control - Management control (maintaining elevation generally higher than 40 ' as to act as a natural barrier ) being utilized not rows of staked hay bales or silt fences Dec . 8 , ' 86 Informal survey by Planning Dept . found elevation to be 30 . 69 not elevation 40 Dec . 11, ' 86 Reg Con Com meeting . Mackey disputed survey results ; Con Com required. Mackey to submit survey Dec . 29 , ' 86 Letter to Mackey from Con Com stating excavation taking place below elevation 40 . Request survey in 14 days of this date Jan 12 , ' 87 Mackey not responding to request April 1, ' 87 Enforcement Order - Removal and filling resulted in alteration of wetlands contrary to Order . Applicant has 21 days to submit plan on details of how and when he proposed to comply . April 21, ' 87 Letter from Attorney stating Mackey agreed to restore altered area to elevation 40 . In addition , will apply to modify condition #3 to use less expensive method to secure property May 18, ' 87 Letter from Attorney with Plan June 11, ' 87 Letter from Mackey ' s Attorney stating that complete restoration of buffer zone in accordance with Plan has been completed . Site visit requested Aug . 10, ' 87 Notice of Intent to Access a Civil Administrative Penalty by DEQE for non-compliance . Fine $18, 950 Aug. 31, ' 87 Letter from Attorney to file a Notice of Claim for an Adjudicatory Hearing April 25, ' 88 Adjudicatory Hearing - Docket No. 87-148 . DEQE lawyer expected to be assigned to case in 4-5 months END OF INFORMATION AVAILABLE IN FILE D1022 "J r SUMMARY OF MACKEY PROPERTY EVENTS LEGG' S HILL DATE EVENTS Sept . ' 84 Gravel excavation Sept . 27, 184 Enforcement Order issued to stop Oct . 27 , ' 84 Agreement reached where Mackey could remove gravel within specified area outside the buffer zone June ' 85 Excavation taking place outside agreed area June 27, 185 Enforcement Order issued July 11, 185 Mackey ' s attorney contacted Commission to allow Mackey to remove more gravel . But was informed none can be removed until formal filing July 25, 185 Notice of Intent filed Sept . 12 . 185 Public Hearing - Mackey proposed excavation to elevation 30 within buffer zone of Pond and hay bale barriers to prevent sedimentation Oct . 29 , ' 85 Hearing continued. Mackey did not appear - meeting nullified Dec . 12, ' 85 Hearing continued. Order of Conditions was drafted on this date Nov . 6, ' 86 Attorney responded to concerns of the Con Com of lack of cooperation in complying with Order. Letter states alternatives by Mackey. 1 . Dust Control - Calcium chloride being utilized not water 2 . Security - 3 foot diameter rocks being utilized not gate 3 . Siltation control - Management control (maintaining elevation generally higher than 40 ' as to act as a natural barrier) being utilized not rows of staked hay bales or silt fences Dec . 8, ' 86 Informal survey by Planning Dept . found elevation to be 30 . 69 not elevation 40 r Dec. 11, 86 Reg Con Com meeting. Mackeydisputed survey results ; Con Com required Mackey to submit survey Dec . 29, ' 86 Letter to Mackey from Con Com stating excavation taking place below elevation 40 . Request survey in 14 days of this date Jan 12 , ' 87 Mackey not responding to request April 1, ' 87 Enforcement Order - Removal and filling resulted in alteration of wetlands contrary to Order . Applicant has 21 days to submit plan on details of how and when- he proposed to comply. April 21, ' 87 Letter from Attorney stating Mackey agreed to restore altered area to elevation 40 . In addition, will apply to modify condition #3 to use less expensive method of to secure property May 18, ' 87 Letter from Attorney with Plan June 11, ' 87 Letter from Mackey ' s Attorney stating that complete restoration of buffer zone in accordance with Plan has been completed. Site visit requested Aug. 10, ' 87 Notice of Intent to Access a Civil Administrative Penalty by DEQE for non-compliance . Fine $18, 950 Aug. 31, ' 87 Letter from Attorney to file a Notice of Claim for an Adjudicatory Hearing April 25, 188 Adjudicatory Hearing - Docket No. 87-148 . DEQE lawyer expected to be assigned to case in 4-5 months END OF INFORMATION AVAILABLE IN FILE D1022 it Form 9 DEOE Re No. 64-119 (To be provided by DECE) - �\ Commonwealth CttylTown Salpm Daniel J. Mackey of Massachusetts Applicant Enforcement Order Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, §40 From Department of Environmental Quality Engineering Issuing Authority Daniel J. Mackey, Thomas Mackey & Sons, Inc. , 58 Broadway St. , Salem, MA 01970 To Date of Issuance Abri 1 1, 1987 Property Wparcel number,address Rear .199; 1 nri n n a Extent and typeofactivity: Removal and filling have resulted in the unauthorized alteration of a bank, bordering vegetated wetlands and land under a waterbody (310 CMR 10.54, 10.55 and 10.56, respectively), contrary to the Order of Conditions issued by the Salem Conservation Comrlission. The Department has determined that the activity described above is in violation of the Wetlands Protection Act,G.L c. 131, §40,and the Regulations promulgated Pur- suant thereto 310 CMR 10.00, because: ❑ Said activity has been/is being conducted without a valid Order of Conditions. 9X Said activity has beeniis being conducted in violation of an Order of Conditions issued to Daniel J. Mackey P.0 Box 366, Salem.m. MA ma7n dated lantinr�i L6,- 3QR& Flenumber 6-4-111) ,Condifionnumber(s) 1.9 Spe ial Condition #'s 1,2,3,4,5 & 7 ❑ Other(specify) Wmil .,_ sp-Enforcement Order also serves as a notice of non-compliance under the Administrative Penalites Act, M.G.L. Chapter 21A, Section 16. Failure to comply with this Order may result in the assessment of civil administrative penalties under the Act. The Department hereby orders the following: Q The property owner, his agents, permittees and all others shall Immediately cease and desist from further activity affecting the wetland portion of this property. ❑ Wetland alterations resulting from said activity shall be corrected and the site returned to its original con- dition. 9-1 IT- ❑ Completed application forms and plans as required by the Act and Regulations shall be filed with the on or before (date), and no further work shall be performed until a public hearing has been held and an Order of Conditions has been issued to regulate said work. Application forms are available at: In The property owner shall take every reasonable step to prevent further violations of the act. ® Other(specify) The apolicant shall within twenty-one (21) days of the date of this Order, submit a plan to the Deaprtment and the Salem Conservation Commission detailing how and when he Dr000ses to come into compliance with Order of Conditions 64-119. No work subject to General Laws, Chapter 131, Section 40 may take place until after this plan is approved by the Department and the Salem Conservation Commission. Failure to comply with this Order may constitute grounds for legal action. Massachusetts General Laws Chap- ter 131, Section 40 provides: Whoever violates any provision of this section shall be punished by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not more than six months or both. Each day or portion thereof of continuing violation shall constitute a separate offense. Questions regarding this Enforcement Order should be directed to: Sabin M. Lord, Jr. , Dep. Req.Env.Engr. Issued by Sabin M. Lord Jr, eputy Regional Environmental Signature(s) (Signature of delivery person or certified mail number) You are hereby notified of your right to an adjudicatory hearing under the Massachusetts Administrative Procedure Act, G.L. c. 30A, Section 10, regarding this Enforcement Order. In accordance with the Department' s Rules for the Conduct of Adjudicatory Proceedings, 310 CMR 1.00, a Notice of Claim for Adjudicatory Hearinq must be filed in writing within twenty-one (21) days of the date of issuance of this Enforcement Order, must state clearly and concisely the facts which are grounds for the proceeding and the relief sought, and must be addressed to: Docket Clerk, Office of the General Counsel Department of Environmental Ouality Engineering One Winter Street Boston, MA 02108 9.2 <C�oN CRy Conservation COT11missim Salem. Massachusetts 01970 W 5 »d Ss, Daniel J. Mackey & Sons, Inc. Attn: Daniel Mackey 58 Broadway St. Salem, MA 01970 December 30, 1991 Dear Mr . Mackey, As Juli Riemenschneider, Conservation Administrator discussed with you, the Commission made a site visit to your property at Leggs Hill Road in Salem, December 11, 1991 . From this visit the Commission concluded that work was, in fact, being conducted in a buffer zone. Unfortunately, your Order of Conditions has expired; if you wish to continue to work within 100 feet of the pond you will need to get the appropriate permits . Please let us know your intentions, at our next meeting January 9, 1992 , One Salem Green, Second Floor Conference Room. If you need information as to the type of application which will be required, please call Juli at 745-9595 ex 311 . Sincerely, Bets Horne Chairperson ex\ccmale )ON Cp)� J Conservatim Commissim Salem. Massachusetts 01970 y yAssn�N� Daniel Mackey Daniel J. Mackey and Sons, Inc. 58 Broadway Street Salem, MA 01970 January 14, 1992 Dear Mr . Mackey, At our January 9, 1992 meeting the Commission reached the consensus that you file a New Notice of Intent for the work within 100 feet of the pond and bank . The forms are enclosed. You will need a topographic survey, wetland flagging, a detailed explanation of your intentions and all other information called for on the Notice of Intent. If you do not plan to do any additional work within 100 feet of the pond, please have brightly colored stakes placed 10 feet on center , 100 feet from the pond. This will allow the Commission to easily assess whether you are in fact not doing work in this area. If you chose this route please have to stakes in place January 22, so we can inspect them prior to the next meeting . If you wish to start a fish farm you will be required to file a Notice of Intent for this action. The Commission would like you to appear at the next meeting, January 23 , 1992. In order to properly advertise a Notice of Intent we will need to know that you will be submitting the Notice, eight days prior to the hearing. Please let us know how you intend to proceed. Sincerely, Betsy Horne Chairperson ex/jrccml2 I I a -:fit F10 x 0 1 1E `- �7: _ 4 T �� T S aµ �� yaF �')4 .:. t ffn „:: 3 �,rt � ''� y ��'f'•f}F,�n')"`�'. f�� ko 9 err. .' t 's �` - � ,� rs, R >z.• -Fry,ys §,y��,e x AsjU y id f. "�fi� tt� ,�Fi��} '`^3,f✓' ai��, �� Mj r # xG d, `+ °du {; >.F , , ,ri ,.-a ,; � .1 @ ° ♦ t4 ty r k$ s f, 5 l -' }se z fJhy45 � no, i,f' p4 dy'r h - 4 tPlrka �„�� •ti:r � ci .«..+ . 11 I4) s 1 1i � 4 -'x � ra 6 �_� te, E,+i;cwtt -+ �ss� rU11 ' F 43 ♦e, - y t 1� !p^i jtt 14I b 7r ! Baa <u �.* '' a .+ % fy r y Jt{1 ♦, ` t.Y r't t # A C4.+.+R' L7; as y;1-ts i. r , 'at• a ' hi+- '^ t�i�F',: x �Jg�,�+ �, ,,A ly NY v N 'fMM-P� * Y yt, ae rv. F x S 2 4 kk� d w,2+ [ e v h4 # '�e t a W<,t 'w�; �i. i tit h f&NET a '�C Ns.?r'�4a"'! � 4.Y'��"S.{ fxt) �.+ �x+f� wT. v x v .+ Nsd I".JYkiC +�kt X. Ki' i9 1 's�' 3nos: p"`x-W-t"iu>!. G""�,�+ o-. c� 'r�1t,XPi F �" '� 7 ' t✓tt �, Nr M �:' CuWin3r3� +,r r ' } x ear Fj 114 PSI . �"�+ LF- C"�cv✓'-D yet yP ibtrin rj{ '� Fin: al J - a VS n C1 rl - r• ' sllE 'pYC >L C.4J fFJI? l i.dV 7{j!'i + ' ( L :.: /xv r ♦ I ) Y nn ,.� f lA !. I �C ti '�n'a%� ♦ f �Jf 1G+! 4 t.�rtT- )fl over ri Loi ! L t i 110f. „ 11 ;� f)I:U p 1 r tr project, "5 1 JlJ� M rg yF,o qCQr Fa CJt ht W.,r)' to t f f Tu /'zti j f}Y'.�'1 t ell ).S ifs. E :ti4 c7Uxt nu ?;EM - �+ 4"ct+,'t' f s7TO n,S'iC It,«�'A Ma'Mf 'a)C" None r'ic'.v een o r k : W.;r::Yc!!'L'r �)�ill r':2 r .7 t'u?,r,e.d l.it9a.1 Fl sa y"d {�, AM Y`>4-31*�, b,,;r*a� f ,7 `-�F�N' �`•'Ir'=u,- 111x; ��zN r�:. tit ' . G!",�' 4 + a, ,.{y ), r UY I ."Ft v"I,E" ^4!1 ' �S ,x'i'17. z _41 1 S r: S F'l u�i_i '�u 1FI♦A) k S Ja�t o- f 'vsi. x�Y �,qY `& JG �L}ka.CJfiff ise�}}'"� hFya �. <',C i �.fU r.t'i as i1- � aZ1 s'FdW 64: we d _a the %shvithn, l ". C'21 � �:s:rx*f�,::.� l� "i.�; r.J.:~,...!°�'Y'�j St�� -�i.c1�w �'�,• a " + 4 d At 01 .. Mal:, was ,5081l J + Nr ri;a C 4d of 2 f't .i i L 7 i .Y3 -"xa'W f 'S'�— .kst e-,z a' �'.L ;.' ,. � w « Cd�'.9V s'^t'_ `5 31`� �V` ESNµ_, i..s ifa r $ t n .N ua l3yn tt° 1 r4C rx�E;d'�-FS fif n.X a' U .� .,, 3 I r`� } t- 'k_�C L sip; �� 4 t .�'+f32.,,,b.)y�" ii•'a.it A�S4£1,r?: � 1 Y � fNiSt) i•iv? aweRn c,,}:4d ra�41j!jY �• - �'Yjes -�'if$ r rl " -.cv�w§�^�?;-( e� . .+"?epi.* >i♦ �1 .a t' �..rG ws" RSNj. y,e3 I`-o `O�w2 t,i"+c"S YOM S. l lit t4S � h'ft .,v-�OF1 �:4aG;�r;3.''ie'E9 Lt'1 tt ;;CR1 4.,'�t?C?cr� jf.Li 3' r to vurine `t'E9t.,f1 F)`fe'] E' �`J"rof``Bie end, wo "'91..(.`tiy.� tt*13t ',IML And a byte � ga x - Jin c 43 { 7^f t5d Wr FC" u,11 Mi the +zRr> 937 xl £)k44t>t Ij V�'teKi« .�� -. � i%.:dap �x~cii l'R n � Y• aY WPM \ A f 1C k Y r j Sd p j fs� s�anrf Yi 9: fT a r t q In q � + � x 7ltG i�'C'*�� d.'ITICI W...r•nrs.,2F[S �!'d�� fi. a .{�:..s,-t�7 ,k�,e y y4,,.;r�. � � ;i •:.q sl.K M .1 ''> Y� 244 �Y��, .�`,py �0. n�f4 ) tAa ....,,,rayl,§:�+ �� .i.`°yi*x'�k,�. '•..4,.%3 ;+'1 #�, R. t:,ll t�..{" ., µ :. - . +'� k. =ti< , w z�:;S.: �cc� c The Salem Conservation Commission has been unsuccessful in enforcing this case (DEQE #64-119) which has.had a-Dat4erfl-of-non-c-ompliance: We-arerequesting support from the DEQE to secure compliance. In September of 1984, gravel excavation was observed within the buffer zone of a .i•etland without notification to the Conservation Commission. After informal requests for compliance were made with no results, an Enforcement Order was issued dated September 27, 1984 (see attached). On October 27, 1984, an agreement was reached whereby the owner could remove gravel within a specified area outside the 100' buffer zone. In June 1985, the Commission observed gravel excavation taking place outside of the agreed area. The Commission felt that the removal must cease until proper plans and a Notice of Intent were fled with the Conservation Commission to better assess the wetland and drainage issues. At this time a second Enforcement Order dated June 27, 1985, was issued (see attached). On July 11, 1985, the owner's attorney contacted the Commission requesting that the owner be allowed to remove more gravel from the site. He was then informed that no further removal could take place until a formal filing with the Conservation Commission was made. A Notice of Intent (DEQE File fi64-119) was filed on July 25, 1985. A public hearing was held on September 12, 1985. At the hearing the owner proposed to excavate to elevation 30 within the buffer zone of the pond and install haybale barriers to prevent sedimentation. The public hearing was continued until Oc:ober 29, 1985. The owner was not present at this time and the meeting was therfore nullified. The hearing was then continued on December 12, 1985. On that date the hearing -•as closed and an Order of Conditions was drafted (see attachment). The owner violated several orders: No sign was posted, Special Condition ;'l4 (Order of Conditions, dated January 6, 1986,) states that 'security of the property (site) shall be The responsibility of the applicant. Prior to any further site work, abarrier shall be erected at the si,e entrance and controiled by a locked gate to insure there is no u.—authorized dumping of unacceptable materials_' This was not done. )Deem condition 5 states that the site work resulting in the removal of material or the aisp,rbrnce of ra strata =:1; be Drohibited below elevation 'JO' This has �dsr, h-�en vioiated. Repeated .:tempts were made by the Cen�ervation Commission to urge he owner d the owner's _ttornev to attend meetings and discuss this matter. The Commission's E.-temp-,s to work cooperatively and keep communication open have been made to no avail. :.,tacked is a letter from the owner's attorney to the Commission dated November 6, 1°S6. Page 2, paragraph 2 of this letter is especially noteworthy, stating that the owner complies with the "spirt" if not the "letter" of the Order of Conditions. On December 8, 1986, an informal survey performed by the Planning Department found that the owner had indeed gone below elevation 40 to elevation 30.69. At a regular meeting of the Conservation Commission on December 11, 1986 it was stated that the property owner disputed the results therefore the Commission voted to -- require the owner to submit a survey signed and stamped by a registered surveyor or refessional engineer within 14 days of a letter sent to the owner dated December 19, 1986. (See enclosed) The time period lapsed on January 12, 1987 and the property owner has not yet responded. It should be noted that the owner was offered the option of returning to the Conservation Commission after he reached elevation 40 and a determination made if any significant impact was made. At that tune an assessment could be made as to whether going to elevation 33 or 39 weiild have asignifleant impact: fhe owner did "not contact :Je Commission cen€e f mg thit, (State(j in the minutes of 3anuary 16; M7 page 4): The reasons for the dedision by the Conservation Commission to limit excavation below elevation 40 are as follows: 1. Any excavation below elevation 40 will stretch the excavation time out to a prolonged period under which it would be difficult to monitored and ensure that all necessary procedures are being followed. (the owner stated it would be 3-5 years) Sedimentation and erosion control procedures would be difficult to maintain over this period as well. 2. What the owner proposed disrupts the soil strata and disturber the filtration medium for run-off which would affect the ground water. V e look forward to your prompt attention to this matter. It has been an c:tgoing problem to the Commission. Our attempts to deal with this in a reasonable fashion have been unsuccessful. Please feel free to contact Rebecca Curran, the Conservation Aide at 744-4580. Sincerely, Philip D. Moran Chairman V.20WP M1 Form 3 oEOE Fde No. i� (To b> provided by OEQE) Ti Salem Commonwealth h Gry�a" of Massachusetts Aaou��t Notice of Intent Under the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. C. 131, §40 and Application for a Department of the Arany Permit Pert 1:General Information _- 1. Locaticn:Street Address Rear 325 Loring Avenue Lot Number 83 Map 30 2. Project:Type Excavation Description Removal of borrow adjacent to — existing pond. i 3. Registry:County Essex South Current gook 5225 &Page-331— Certificate age 331Certificate(If Registered Land) 4. Applicant Leggs Hill Realty Trust Daniel J. Mackey Trustee Tel.-ZZ/L-3849 Address P.O. Box 366 Salem MA. 01970 t S. Property Owner same as applicant Tel. Address - 6. Representative Hancock Survey Associates Inc. Address 69 Holten Street Danvers MA 01923 7. Have the Conservation Commission and the DEOE Regional Office each been sent, by certified mail or hand delivery, 2 copies of completed Notice of Intent,with supporting plans and documents? Yes CR No ❑ I 3t 8. Have all obtainable permits,variances and approvals required by local by-law been obtained? Yes ❑ No Q Obtained: Applied For. Not Applied For. 9. is any portion of the site subject to a Wetlands Restriction Order pursuant to G.L c. 131, §40A or G.L m 130, §105? Yes ❑ No j{] 10.List eG plans and supporting documents submitted with this Notice of Intent Identifying Number/Letter Title.Date 2582 (A) "Plan of Land in Salem Prepared for Thnmas Mackey & Sons Inc." dated July 25 1985 — . 2582 (B) USDA SCS Soils Map dated July 25 1985 — 11.Check those resource areas within which work is proposed: (a)® Butter Zone (b)Inland: ❑ Bank• land Subject to Flcodng, ❑ Bordering Vegetated Welland' ❑ Bordering ❑ Land Under Water Body&Waterway' ❑ Isolated (c)Coastal- ❑ Land Under the Ocean• ❑ 1 Designated Port Area ❑ Coastal Beach' ❑ Coastal Dune ❑ Barrier Beach ❑ Coastal Bank ❑ Rocky Intertidal Shore ❑ Salt Marsh' ❑ Land Under Salt Pond' ❑ Land Containing Shellfish' ❑ Fish Run' 'likely to involve U.S.Army Corps of Engin Pers concurrent jurisdiction.See General Instructions for Completing Notice of Intent. 3-2 J Part It:Site Description _ Indicate which of the following information has been provided (on a plan,in narrative description or calcula- tions)to Geary, completely and accurately describe existing site conditions. Identifying Number/Letter (of plan,narrative or calculations) Natural Features: B Soils Vegetation A Topography A Open water bodies(Including ponds and lakes) Flowing water bodies(including streams and rivers) A Public and prtvafe surface water and ground water supplies on or within 100 feet of site Maxlmumt annual ground water elevations with dates and location of test A Boundaries of resource areas checked under Part I,item 11 above Other Man-made Features: Structures(such as buildings,piers,towers and headwalls) Drainage and flood control facilities at the site and immediately off the site,including culverts and open channels (with inverts),dams and dikes Subsurface sewage disposal systems Underground utilities Roadways and parking areas A Property boundaries,easements and rights-of-way Other Part ill:Work Description Indicate which of the following information has been provided(on a plan,in narrative description or calcula- tions)to dearly,completely and accurately describe work proposed within each of the resource areas checked In Part I,item 11 above. Identifying Number/Letter (of plan,narrative or calculations) Planview and Cross Section of. Structures(such as bwldings,piers,towers and headwalls) Drainage and flood control facilities,including culverts and open channels(with Inverts).- dams nverts).dams and dikes Subsurface sewage disposal systems&underground utiGtles A Filling,dredging and excavatine,indicating volume and composition of material Compensatory storage areas,where required in accordance with Part III,Section 10:57 (4)of the regulations Other Point Source Discharge Description of characteristics of discharge from point source(both closed and open channel),when point of discharge falls within resource area checked under Part 1,item 11 above,as supported by standard engineering calculations,data and plans,including but not limited to the following: 3.3 1. Delineation of the drainage area contributing to the point of discharge; 2. Pre-and post-development peak run-off from the drainage area,at the point of discharge,for at least the 10-year and 100-year frequency storm; 3. Pre-and post-development rate of infiltration contributing to the resource area checked under Part I,item 11 above; 4. Estimated water quality characteristics of pre-and post-development run-off at the point of discharge. Part IV:Mitigating Measures 1, pearly,completely and accurately describe,with reference to supporting plans and calculations where necessary: (a) AO measures and designs proposed to meet the performance standards set forth under each re - Source area specified In Part II or Part III of the regulations;or (b) why the presumptions set forth under each resource area specified in Part 11 or Part III of the regula- bons do not apply. ❑ Coeshl Resaume Arca Type. Wendfyinp number or leer ❑ trend pr Support dooxr ft i ❑ Comtel Resource Area Type: Wentllyn0 nunbarat taaar ❑ hftl of=Port documft i 3.4 ❑ Coastal Resource Area TYPO. Ideneryut9 number W Iettx ❑ Wand of support documents 2. Cleary,completely and accurately describe,with reference to supporting plans and calculations where necessary: (a) aO measures and designs to regulate work within the Buff er Zone so as to insure that said work does not altar an area specified in Part 1,Section 10.02(1)(a)of these regulations;or (b) if work In the Buffer Zone will alter such an area,all measures and designs proposed to meet the performance standards established for the adjacent resource area specified In Part II or Part III of these regulations. a coastal I Resource Am Type Bordered er I00-Foot of eratlawr Zane: IdenWYM MWOW ar lamer w d Bank, land under waterbody & waterway (Pond) of wpport docuanents (a) Placement of Haybale siltation check. A. n I 3.5 � Part V:Additional Information for a Department of the Army Permit Not Applicable 1. COE Application No. 2. (to be provided by COE) (Name of waterway) 3. Names and addresses of property owners adjoining your property: 4. Document other project alternatives(I.e..other locations and/or construction methods,particularly those that would eliminate the discharge of dredged or fdl material into waters or wetlands). 5. 8'h'x 11' drawings in Plainview and cross-section,showing the resource area and the proposed actio- fly within the resource area.Drawings must be to scale and should be clear enough for photocopying. Catiimm is nequied from the Division of Water Pollution Conmd before the Federal permit can be salad Certification may be ebtairledby canctirg the Division of Water Pollution Cmtrol, t Writer Street Boston. fvlacsacnaeetts 021M. V%vxe the amitywiittake place width the area under the Massachusetts apprp ed Coastal Zone Management Program,the applicant terdiies shat his proposed act$ity a�v%d1 and Will conducted in a manner that is con smtt%d1 the appy ed program information provided will be used in erakmu g the application for a perm t and is made a matter of public- record ublicrecord through ssuance of a pk. 6 notice. Disclosure of this information is voluntary. hcvvever if necessary information is not provided. the app5c ton cannot be primed nor can a permit be &sued I hereby certify under the pains and 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. Signatur t Applicant Date Hancock Survey Assoc. Inc. July 25, 1985 Signature of Applicant's Representative Date FORM "Except+•• to ENO Form NM approved by HQUSACE. 6 May 1932• NED 100 (TEST) 1 MAY 62 —mi. do...., nwio • joint Deportment at them Ary and Stay. o! 54chm<u application (or a permit to obtain permiaaion to por(erm activitin in United St.'.. .at,n. The Oro or M........t and 8odpt 10M8) he. approved inti.vont iane r,.,r.dby the US Army Corp e( Ears nn to. 0548 3e(nber 0103.0036 and n>irnien don of 30 Sept ran be, 1960 ooPlieo". Thin etaummt 'ill be vet m 6 point type. 3-6 LYNN QUADRANGLE bg�a�Po \SSACHUSETTS MASSACHUSETTS p0y LIC WORKS 7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC) �P 70052' 30" 55' 7600001FEET 344 kBEVERLY h? fl. 345 42°30' • t ..,� �e _ �.S i♦ ♦ ., o A BOR \ !'.. a ` o �:: _:.R� - ' 28� e� a emn 1ar04 $l a,• rr' S1 4706 ` I i�� 4 � r50 �.� io //moi E ��ll "I �l _/ +� ,f;��{\ ( �g� • 5 `-:`. - rcC p �( (r _ -+rev :• x11 L�¢a'. 1.►Vhf v " �� 'i oo v 150 :/,�� •+-J�o yj, �y� Fill �y ob t J 8 moo` J '.a - Au��'x'•?J. ., 8� 4�� / \ l.. (��:' }' •' u Aar O u +2 .d I � 'iyCi�Y -p ,�i •��eGgLco a +� It :�C'Sc t' _ n Ge(„ru o_ wa emc_ `.. CodntH flu �' 1 .. 05 r� _ •9 \ � . . 9 f M /^ 'f:- iZ )�/ �o t' � 1 C°°'• �, / i � .. 540000 \ W 4 FEET r � ` / • .` r� ' r 1. I l I r'� �i � sow, 1 . R,l•C' '� zs 4104 .. ' o l C' r cp+` ma ♦. . I � h , � / /Poral -�, l 9 � � a Y j✓ h I .. l 3 �� \ i �' ?J_ U._� cH �♦ t s*- .�.`ldf Blaney ock.'Be1 ' _ " p �� tt s PI 03 CONVERSION SCALES ock fel p1h, �• ' \ /kt 5 - 6 �� / 7�J tBO$tl ! P ' lI1 `� 0 1 38 Ism c61" us. ul so o !' Mo xIlori s 29% io J >- t. .• � r a � 4 x4 f R�y.,,lN .�O :U�Jfs0 a.1.• M . .�y aT;,`!'�. . 1� a•�a`I(e+'� wet^-''e` : 'r .4Fti ` • .1 .rt'} "b ,S ill yi ,,�►.a'2' F i w t ? 2�+?,•Sy. f4'r ' jy{{i3�� 'r9 't • �7C•*r�'i x ''a17 ��tA �{•.�'�' 7r _Ly}.t � r 1t .w''1 �L•_;.Y�:.a r r ,i �wt7"„ rh}t • arr a.l�•\ P" !a', .MY . l�\t��;+�� , w: 9i�Q>,�'*' �'{; �1�•�`1tLq�`. y�R'♦�ti«J�, r � `�. °iY'it.t5 r, t+� �.'�,. 11[. � 'P'x•*" .. ,1��.� -t ;< w ��•4.\'"f�'�! A'> ^' � tl}1 'ia '',a z.i?-••n y y'r: iti'' � � \`�,•� {.�r6`h.� 'P�fj�t�� YTr•Q �u Le 'r^f t �' y'� ,� '`i �..,� . :p ,� • e�'sdayv'� '.+�. ..: `• 1'L.�=�"s .7�,:,.r. u j r �nt � f`, •7 � � I'if•+ @t°z ,A. S t�� .r.. _ " ;'. .i�� 1 O` '3. l.. e � t. l�r'i4'(�.ek�•ll.b'.L: � � �'•... � P�l+ �•'v!.-' IRVC R5 , a x, r y7 •; 1 ,JY� � ��, '.�' ,� rti�'F�A4J ; ..i{,,, .,'Y... h�iv ♦ �w'Y,� 8 � � (s'}'� z- •�`S"�K'� �� ' r •i t.i� .e'F�T•R� ,•' !. `L:�FYl4D ,�i �� x1� .Y�J,G�h"� '�xG�� •fl.. u�r• .r 'e,' � 3-y e�sl°� lt� t» .,.>� >,�+,t` +,��4-('�{�r�y '+ •4" '� �iy:.:� ('CD4 .lptr >. .�i^ "}'i•a' V..�' wA' ysaF'^+ rS,A� m. n 5 •� i .• •�,` LJ �ki�f.� //fir., >,, •, y ia, ,�.� .ra' -4•„ .. � r•�J� . yam � r �,F+' '�`� �y.^C�,E�. '1 :yam t,+ .- y1�,•/Y 'IEt>a�"'�Tt a M.• !aJ°'�'l if •�ir�`.'>�♦1.,f� �. Ya^� �s,i iKY hp� y - v s i 11!t C�' , r'tnlM•c?y� 1 r(+n } .r,.. rte- L�' y,J 't•i .� tti�r � '•�..,,q\ _'S a r $��. \� - 1 J ° st�.../[�((i'L'%r 1d y ,n' rCytr ia.�S�f- ""�+1 ),yr.:...li��;� ��/ I. S �y' i @.F�1,.1��'�� •. a , 't•.Fr -n �"�.:i >�P. "'(+^.c '9 ,�c� l. . `r.T•4., @' zjPA ,�.t � `•4': r v K. ya � . 1; �r y ([-J.^�-. A .y ..�. _ > -\. }GY � o 1 '9y1�(�t'b-r��\ "�..>A�tw�.{�•�`y [r :S.1S."; „c. _. � � . t ' `%ON CpIf C {z C Ori COri1lY11SS1m M� Salem. Massachusetts 01970 July 31, 1991 William A. Krol, P.E. Department of Environmental Protection Metropolitan Boston - Northeast Region 5 Commonwealth Avenue Woburn, MA 01801 RE: File #64-119 Dear Mr . Krol: The Salem Conservation Commission has recently gotten several reports that additional fill was being added to the Mackey property on Leggs Hill Road. The mounds of fill have grown, so that they now protrude above the tree line. The Commission has been involved with this site since September 1984. Your department issued an Enforcement Order in April 1987. Unfortunately the last item we have in our file is a letter stating an adjudicatory hearing (Docket No. 87-148) would occur and that a DEQE lawyer would be assigned in four to five months. Please inform us of the status of the Appeal so that we can address the concerns of the neighboring property owners. Thank you for your attention to this matter . Any information should be addressed to Juli Riemenschneider , Conservation Administrator, One Salem, Green, Salem, MA 01970, ( 508)745-9595 ext. 311. Sincerely, JJohn G. Vallis Chairman cc:Randall and Loretta Weiting 14 Buchanan Road Salem, MA 01970 ESD\JULI\DEP64119 A MURPHY, RYAN & O'KEEFE ATTORNEYS AT LAW, INC. TEN CHESTNUT STREET JOHN E. MURPHY TIMOTHY J. O'KEEFE PEABOOY, MASSACHUSETTS 01960 OF COUNSEL JOHN E. MURPHY,JR. JOSEPH CURTIS RYAN JAMES F. RENNICK (617) 531-1421 LYNDA M. MURPHY JOHN R. KEILTY IN REPLY REFER TO NICHOLAS P. VONTZALIDES August 31 , 1987 FILE NO, D. DEV MONGA The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality Engineering 5 Commonwealth Avenue Woburn , MA 01801 ATT : Edward P . Kunce RE : In the matter of Thomas Mackey & Sons , Inc. DEQE File No. AP-NE-87 -610 Notice of Intent to Assess a Civil Administrative Penalty ( " Notice" ) Dear Sirs : This law firm represents Thomas Mackey & Sons , Inc . ( "Petitioner " ) in the matter of DEQE ' s Notice to Assess a Civil Administrative Penalty of $18 ,950 . 00 under the provisions of MGL Ch . 21A §16 and MGL Ch . 131 § 40 ( " Statutes " ) and implementing regula- tions 310 CMR 5 .00 et , seq . respectively . The Petitioner files this Notice of Claim for an Judicatory Hearing ( "Hearing " ) and asserts that the proposed penalty is excessive. Petitioner ' s request for a hearing is based , inter alia , upon the following matters of fact and law : 1 ) Petitioner denies that he failed to comply with the Order of Conditions No. 64-119 ( " Conditions " ) issued by the Salem Conservation Commission ( "Commission " ) on January 16 , 1986 with the exception of i ) a one-time non-compliance with spe- cial conditions No . 5 which prohibits work below this 40 foot elevation and ii ) not posting a file number sign . 2 ) Petitioner denies that he did not appeal the April 1 , 1987 Enforcement Order ( "Order" ) issued by the DEQE . This Order was appealed by this office on behalf of the Petitioner on April 21 , 1987 ( "Appeal " ) . 3 ) The Appeal was followed by telephone conferences with the undersigned and Mr . John Felix and Mr. Ralph Perkins of the DEQE ' s Northeast Regional Office. Based on these conferences , it was the Petitioner ' s understanding that the Order will be considered complied with if the Petitioner was able to restore the Site and resolve these matters with the Page Two Department of Environmental Quaility Engineering August 31 , 1987 Commission . It was Petitioner ' s further understanding that a resolution of the issues raised in the Order on the local level will not be only acceptable to the DEQE but will be encouraged by the Agency . 4 ) Petitioner ' s response to the DEQE ' s cooperation was to arrange a site visit with the Commission . The visit took place on April 30 , 1987 in the presence of two members of the Commission and a full time employee of the City. Phil Moran , Chairman of the Commission , was expected at the site , but failed to show up . In a subsequent telephone conference , Chairman Moran agreed to the Petitioner ' s proposal of restoring the buffer zone to an elevation of 40 feet . This verbal agreement resulted in the Petitioner submitting a plan and restoration schedule to the Commission on May 18 , 1987 . A copy of the plan and schedule for restoration was sent to John Felix of the DEQE . The restoration itself was completed according to the plan. 5) Petitioner further asserts that violations acknowledged in Paragraph 1 were the result of error and were not willful . This position is not only supported by information presented here , but also by the fact that the Petitioner even tried to comply with several provisions of the Commission ' s Conditions which were , on it face , not within the jurisdiction of the authority granted to the Commission under the Statutes . One example of such unauthorized exercise of jurisdiction is Special Condition No. 10 relative to dust control . While we appreciate your cooperation in this matter , we remain , Very truly yours , MURPHY , RYAN & O ' KEEFE D . Dev Monga , Esquire DDM:cfj pc : Salem Conservation Commission Daniel Mackey Robert Welch , Esquire •94 Form 5 DcCEC;�e No. .(To t a 7c+�-trY OEOM Salem Co-mmonwealth - of Massachusetts !'ackev & Scr.s kM Order of Conditions Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act G.L c. 131, §40 fol pm r•O cPT-\�'f 'nr� rnmmi cci n-� Daniel J Xackev `�mP To _ (Name of Appl card (Name of property owner) Address P.O. Box 366 Ad re« Rear 325 Loring Ave. lbLs Order is issued and delivered as follows: lb hand deliveryto aDplicant or representative on (Cate) y cetyied mall, return mceipt requested on (date) 71�s project is locate,, -' Rear 325 Loring Ave. he props,ty is recorde-at the Registry of Essex SDOK 5225 pace 331 Certfic2te (if registered) The Notice of Intent for tnis project was filed on July 25, 1985 (date) The public hearing was dosed on January 16. 6986 (Cate) Findings The Salem Conservation Commission has reviewed the above-referenced Notice of Intent and plans and has held a public hearing on the project Based on the utformetnon available to the Commission at this time, the hQ=Mi5eihm has determined that the area on which the proposed work is to be done is significant to the fotlowing interests in accordance with the Presumptions of Significance set forth in the regulations for each Area Subject to Protection Under the Act (check as appropriate): B-mPublic water supply 0 Storm damage prevention ❑ .Private water supply , �evention of pollution 6;3r""'�Grvund-water supply O Land containing shellfish 95 llerefcn= nP _ Commissionherebyfiindsthat ,hefollowing=nditionsare necessuy.;;n a::ccrdance with th.e Performance Standards set forth. in the regulations. to protect those inter• es's checked above. rhe.._ Cc-miss ion orders tt'.at all work shall be performed in accordance wit`: said con'bcns and with the Notice of In tent referenced above.To the extent that the fol lowing conditions modify or cr e-r from the ptans. speciri,titions or other PmocsaLs submimec with the Notice of Intent, the conditions shall controL General Conditions + 1. Failure to comply with all conditions stated herein,and with all related s atutes and other regulatory meds• ures, shall be deemed cause to revoke or modify this Order. 2. This Order does not grant any property rights or any exdusive privileges;it does not authorize arty injury to prr2le property or invasiOn of private rights. 3. This Order does not relieve the permittee of any other person of the necessity of camping with all- --- other applicable federal,stats or{oval statutes,ordinances, byraws or regulations. % iS Order unless 4. The work authorized hereunder shao be completed within three years from the date of 11 either of the following apply. deal for in the Act;or (a) the work is a maintenance dredging project as prov (b) the fine for completion hzs been extended to a specified date more than three years, but less than five years,from the date of issuance and both that date and the spm circumstances warranting the extended time period are set forth in this Order. S. This Order may be extended by the issuing authority for one or moreperiods of up to thre-e yews each upon aDpiication to the issuing authority at least 30 days prior to the expiration date of the Order. E. ,ny fill used in ccnnec'lon with t`is projec.'shall be leen fin, conning no tzsh, refire, rubbish or de- bris, including but not limited to lumber• bricks. piaster•wire, lath, pacer, czrdboard.v;pe, tires,ashes, • refriger tors, motor venides or pars of any of the foregoing. 7. No work shall be under en until all acministrative FppeaJ periods from this Order have elapsed or, if such an acpeaJ has been filed, until all preceedincs before the Depam+ent have been completed, E. No work shall be undertaken until the Final Order 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 We of the atfected p'-perty. In the case of recorded land, the Final Order shall also be noted in the Registry's Granter Index under the name Of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. In the case Of registered land,the Final Order shall also be noted on the land Cour Cer•fcate of Title of the owner of the land Coen upon w rich the proposed work is to be done.The recording irforrnabon shall be submMed to the . on the torn at the end of this Order prior to conencement of the worlcommencement 9.. A sign shall be displayed at the site not less than two square feet or more than three square feet in size bearing the words, "Massachusetts Department of Environmental Ouafrty Engineering, Fle Number 64-119 10. Where the Department of Environmental Ouality Engineering is requested to make a determination and to issue a Superseding Order, the Conservation Commission shall be a party to an.agency proceedings and hearings before the Department 1 1. Upon completion of the work described herein.the applicant shall forttnvith request in wrtiing that a Certificate of Compliance be issued s'a*V.thatthe work has been satisfacton'y completed. i 96 Plans' dated Signed and Staped by. On Fue wiL1: m " 7/25/85 Frederick M. Forbes Y cII O_ LailQ .r. - Salem :or Thomas Mackey 5 Sons: SI-ec al Conditions (Use additional paper H necessary) see attached .......................... _._._.._.............._....... __....__....__. (Le"O SPWA swnk) . „"MA Issues By Salem _Consenaiion Commission 91, This Order must be signed by a majorriy of the Conser a n Commission. On 1(p +- 1 day of Q n UCLU. 19 + before me pefsonajfy _ ,e to me known to be the person desabed in and who exefrted the foregoing Instrument and acknowledsed that Wshe exeaXed the sam''e//al histher free'act and d Nc Wy ?ub6c U My commission expires Tr v eoraanL It.tuner,am Oeru+acgne.•ed by tit ordar.any o+nx of W d abrs+s 4»land uav whit,e+a wc'•. .wk is ro be do:»5 any jen M&d&-M d the Gty or twn in arhiG9 wch(and a located art hart by notfie4 of rMV nQn 10 requaS 74 Detsimant cl c_-h.a•ts tnn Ousthy ev7r eerng=issue a Supa sedmg Omer.p-a•idi V the reoveM is maOa M orfv,'ed Mai or tang 086y to IJ- Depc Tent within fen days tttsm Ine rite of s=�W ris Omer.A c:»r ct aro rtM W.&!=X It.me same brine be sem by Cef7fied mei ce ru1+d cv”a to the Carn�C–�WVC tro a7'7- r Detach onitched It"and submit toihe Salem Conservation Commission prior toeornmenearnisntofwort. Issuing Ault" To Piet be&&.used t)tet 7ro Order of CdnCttiona for rw prgecl arh0 Fre Numosr hes bx n recao&d at the Pepistry d has been noted in me chain of me of the atleCled property in sccormnce wrm General Con&tkn E o —19— if retarded Isnd.7»instrument number wh,ch identifies this transactor' If registered land,this document number which identifies this l anmcyor 1 . Except as modified by this Order of Conditions, all work shall conform to plans submitted 'with the Notice of intent , dated1//85. Any changes made or intended to be made in the plan: qy re the zppl. icant to i;:qui:-e of tnc ' ,Dmmissicn in writing ; hether the change requires a new filing . ::,.te plan noting changes required by Lhis Order of Conditions shall be submitted to the Conservation Commission cior to the commencement site '4ork . 2. Prior to the commencement of site work, a written erosion control and sedimentation barrier program shall be established, submitted to the a v b Conservation Commission and approved y the Conservation Commission. The erosion control and sedimentation barriers shall be established in accordance with "Erosion and Sedimentation Control Guidelines", Publication #13 ,529-39-1000-2-84 C.R. dated august, 1983. The erosion control and sedimentation barrier program shall address, but not be limited to, the type of barrier (s) , placement, maintenance, frequency of replacement, stabilization and revegetation• 3. No site work shall commence until the approved barriers have been i installed, inspected and approved by the Conservation Commission or its designated representative. 4: Security of the property ( site) shall be the responsibility of the applicant. Prior to any further site work, a barrier shall be erected at the site entrance and controlled by a locked gate to insure there is no unauthorized dumping of unacceptable, materials- 5* Site work resulting in the removal of r,.aterial or the disturbance of underlying strata shall be prchibited below elevation 40. 6 . Prior to the commencement of site work, all unacceptable fill material on the site shall be removed from the site and disposed of in a manner approved by the Conservation Commission• 7, All disturbed banks within the 100' buffer zone with pervious underlying scratts shall be stabilized in a-co"dance with the "Erosion and Sedimentation Control Guidelines", Pub` cation at a slope not to exceed _ 13 ,529-39-1000-2-84—C.R. , dated August , 1 ' " tem ted during each growing 8 1�: 1 , Reve etation of said areas shall be at P season. Any area which does not revegetate over 5'i of its 'surface within two growing seasons shall be replanted with indigenous species. A revegetation plan for such purposes shall be presented to and approved by the Conservation Commission prior to its implementation. 8, The Conservation Commission or its designated agent shall be notified immediately of any unacceptable fill found during the site preparation. If the Conservation Commissic'• or DEQE determines the unacceptable material to be non—hazardous, .t will be removed from the site and disposed of in a manner approved the Conservation Commission. Fill material which is deterr..i' ed to be hazardous by the Conservation Commission or DEQE shall be re,—_•,ved to an approved facility and copies of delivery slips shall be supp- :ed to the Conservation Commission. Until such unacceptable hazar:=*Js material is removed from the site, no additional site work may be performed. i — Page 2 — 9 . Upon written advance notification, 7o7se4nn ion Cen.-is ion members and/or its agent shall have the right to eitei and inspect the site to evaluate compliance with these conditions and to require the applicant to submit any data deemed necessary by Oc Commission for :hat evaluation. 10. Water shall be employed during excavation to control dust . r . Dual,e� o �n�i��/ Daniel S. Greenbaum O-lzi !'!�C/I.�C/`' J6-eet, _00&017, ✓Y zM 0210(9 CommissioneL SLP % 0 1991 NOV -7 1990 -------------------------------- In the Matter of: Docket No. 87-148 MACKEY File No. AP-NE-87-160 -----------= -------------------- Salem FINAL DECISION I have reviewed the attached proposed agreement of settlement, entitled " Consent Agreement" , signed by Samuel Bennett, Deputy General Counsel, for the Department of Environmental Protection on Occtober 26, 1990 and by Attorney John Kielty for Mackey & Sons on October 26, 1990. I have. determined, pursuant to 310 CMR 1. 01(11) (b) , that it is in accordance with the responsibilities of the Department of Environmental Protection to protect the interests entrusted to it by law, specifically G.L. c. 131, §40, and 310 CMR 10. 00. Accordingly, the Department of Environmental Protection hereby issues a Final Decision incorporating the agreement. The petitioner is ordered to comply forthwith with the terms and provisions of the agreement. " In accordance with,.310 CMR 1. 01(11) (b) ,and the. terms of the attached agreement,, the above-captioned proceeding is dismissed, with the parties waiving whatever rights they have to (1) appeal this Decision - _ -_ 100%.Recycled Paper i -2- y , , to any other Agency or to any Court, (2) rehearing, reargument, and reconsideration, (3) notice of their rights of appeal and of rehearing, reargument, and reconsideration.,. _ and (4) a tentative- decision. Daniel S. ree Commissioner i �e�ba�tircerab of�'iwuryi>zeizta.L�i�c'tectioz Daniel S. Greenbaum Commissioner ( aye `JD- T&v& &Vf1, Jffa&Wc/urse &02109 / Willard R. Pope � ��&. /617 292 JJ6(9 General.Counsel - NOV -7 19M -------------------------------- In the Matter of: Docket No. 87-148 MACKEY File No. AP-NE-87-160 ---------------------------------- Salem 'I ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE' S RECOMMENDATION OF SETTLEMENT I have reviewed the attached proposed agreement of settlement, entitled " Consent Agreement" , signed by Samuel Bennett, Deputy General Counsel, for the Department of Environmental Protection on Occtober 26, 1990 and by Attorney John Kielty for Mackey & Sons on October 26, 1990. I have determined, pursuant to 310 CMR 1. 01(11) (b) , that it is in accordance with the responsibilities of the Department of Environmental Protection to protect the interests entrusted to it by law, specifically G.L. c. 131, §40, and 310 CMR 10. 00. Accordingly, it is my recommendation that the Department issue a Final Decision incorporating the agreement. �w Francis X. Nee Administrative Law Judge Original-Pdnted-or?�Rkycled-Paper COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSE,PSg} " EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS 4 DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION September 19, 1990 In the Matter of ) File No. AP-NE-87-610 Docket No. 87-148 Mackey ) Consent Agreement 1. The Department of Environmental Protection is a duly constituted agency of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts maintaining its principal office at One Winter Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02108. The Department is authorized to assess civil administrative penalties by M.G.L. a. 21A, §16. 2- Thomas Mackey and Sons, Inc. ("Mackey") is a Massachusetts Corporation with a principal place of business at 58 V_ Broadway Street, Salem, MA 01970. 3 On August 10, 1987, the Department issued notice of: its intent to assess an Administrative Penalty in the amount of $18 , 950. 00 to Mackey. On September 1, 1987, Mackey appealed that assessment to the Commissioner. 4 . _Because the parties seek to conserve the considerable time and resources that litigation of this matter may reasonably be expected to consume, the Department pursuant to its authority under M.G.L. c. 131, §40 and M.G.L. c. 21A, ,- §16. and, regulations promulgated thereunder, and _ Mackey hereby enter into this. Consent. Agreement. -2- 5. Mackey hereby agrees to pay the Department the sum of $7 ,500. 00 on or before October 15, 1990 6. Mackey hereby agrees that the Department has the authority to enter into this agreement. 7. Mackey hereby waives any right to an administrative hearing, a tentative decision and judicial review of this agreement and to notice of any such rights of review. 8. This- agreement shall. constitute final resolution of this proceeding and shall be effective and deemed consented to as of the date of issuance of a Final Decision signed by the Commissioner. Nothing in this Consent Agreement shall be construed as, or operate as barring, diminishing, adjudicating or in any way affecting any legal. or equitable right of the Department to - -:issue-any future Order or Assessment with respect to any continuing or future violations of its laws or regulations, provided, however, the Department shall not institute further proceedings seeking criminal, civil or administrative penalties for the occurrence of any incident covered by its Notice of Intent to Assess an Administrative Penalties dated August 10, 1987. 9. This Consent Agreement shall apply to and be binding upon the parties, their officers, employees, agents, successors and as signs 10. This Consent Agreement is entered into without any finding of liability. 01540 Counsel f r (or Mack y) '0 z4J40 Attorney for the Department: Address., fo'2GJ9�:_ 154.64 - � iy7 J 87-148 SERVICE LIST John R. Keilty, Esq. Representing 10 Chestnut Street Mackey Peabody, MA 01968 Ralph Perkins Department Staff Department of Environmental Protection Northeast Regional Office 5 Commonwealth Avenue Woburn, MA 01801 Sam Bennett Representing Assistant General Counsel The Department of Environmental Department of Environmental Protection Protection One Winter Street Boston, MA 02108 'i I \ — Page 2. _ Glenn Yale asked what the current elevation of the slope is and Mr. Forbes replied that it is 1 :1 , which he feels is more than adequate and that this is uniform across the entire parcel. Mr. Yale stated that a 1 : 1 slope with the proposed slope is inconsistent with DEQE recommendations. Glenn Yale expressed concern regarding the stability of the slope and stated that any material felt to be inadequate by the Board should be removed. Mr. Mackey stated that the bank, which is made up of natural .grass growth and impervious clay has existed for many years with no evidence of erosion. Mr. Mackey suggested constructing a vertical wall and Mr. Yale stated that a 2:1 slope. would be preferable. Glenn Yale asked what the previous level of the slope was and Mr. Mackey stated that it was at elevation 20. Philip Moran asked Mr. Mackey if he plans to sell his property in the near future and Mr. Mackey replied in the affirmative. Glenn Yale expressed concern regarding what materials are present _ underneath the bank and the future of Rosie' s Pond. He stated that this is an unstable bank and suggested a 21E. Mr. Yale asked if the bank is sealed with clay and Mr. Mackey replied in the affirmative. Mr. Yale stated that he would like to see a plan of how the bank will be stabilized. Upon the motion of Phil Moran and second of Ray Lavender, the public hearing will be continued following a site visit by the Board. It was so voted. LEGG'S HILL, ORDER OF CONDITIONS Attorney Timothy O'Keefe and Mr. Ted Forbes of Hancock Survey were present representing Mr. Mackey who proposes to excavate to elevation 30 within the buffer zone of the pond on his property. Glenn Yale asked how many cubic yards of material would be removed and over what time frame and Mr. Mackey replied that approximately 70,000 cu. yards of material would be removed and stated that it would be done over an indefinite period of time. . Mr. Yale asked how long it would take to excavate to elevation 40 and Mr. Mackey replied that this would depend entirely upon the demand for gravel. Mr. Yale noted that the Board is concerned regarding the water table of the pond and protection of public water supply. 1 C i Page 3 — Stability of the slope and erosion control were other concerns -raised by the Board . and Mr. Forbes noted that silt fences can be used instead of hay bales. Glenn Yale asked if Mr. Mackey proposes to fence the area and Mr. Mackey replied that this is not proposed due to the expense involved. Ward VII City Councillor Jack Nutting addressed the Board stating that -the level of the pond has risen over the 'past .several years and asked the Conservation Commission to do whatever was in •the best interest of Salem. Following some discussion, the public hearing was declared closed. An Order of Conditions will follow. Mr! Mackey agreed to waive the 21-day time limit for drafting the Orders. I PUBLIC HEARING — STANLEY MIKULSKI, ALMEDA ST. Philip Moran read the notice of the public hearing. This proposal involves the construction of two single—family dwellings . within the buffer zone of a bordering vegetated wetland on Almeda _ street. No filling or altering of the wetland is proposed, but some filling will be necessary to level an area for the home construction. Mr. John Dick of Hancock Survey was present to discuss this plan. He stated that the proposed slope would be approximately 3:4:1 in height and that 100-135 cubic yards of material will be brought on the site. Glenn Yale asked if excavation is proposed outside of the hay bales as indicated on the plan and Mr. Dick replied in the negative . Mr.. John Wright and Mr. and Mrs. Divirgilio of Almeda Street and Ward IV City Councillor Lenny O'Leary were present to speak in favor of the proposed construction. . All were very much in support of this pian. Upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of Ray Lavender, the public hearing was declared closed. An Order of Conditions will follow. An amendment to the plan detailing erosion control procedures will be submitted. DETERMINATIONS: Upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of Ray Lavender, a negative Determination will be issued to Mr. Joseph Gallo for his project on Orleans Ave. It was so voted. Upon the motion of Harry Takis and second of Raymond Lavender, a negative determination will be issued for the Salem State College parking lot located off of Harrison Ave. F N1R. GKSPE-e- " i q M N�trgt,& qb wc1� 7/ l v rec--�.J .� h 6, cL4.7 a 074 74, « Ys Forth 3 OEdE Fie No. t (To be provided by_EOE) !I' - Commonwealth " cit g... Salem of Massachusetts nPWkant Notice of Intent Under the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, §40 and Application for a Department of the Army Permit Part I:General Information 1. Location:Street Address Rear 325 Loring Avenue Lot Number 83 Map 30 2. Proiect.Type Excavation Description Removal of borrow adj�c nr rn — existing pond. - i 3. Registry:County Essex South Current Book 5225 &Page 33i Certificate(It Registered Land) 4. Applicant Leggs Hill Realty Trust, Daniel J. Mackey Trustee Tel. 774-4249 Address P.O. Box 366 Salem, MA 01970 I 5. Property Owner same as applicant Tel. Address 6. Representative Hancock Survey Associates, Inc. Tel. ?77-3_50 Address 69 Holten Street Danvers M`A 01923 7. Have the Conservation Commission and the DEOE Regional Office each been sent,by certified mail or hand delivery, 2 copies of completed Notice of Intent,with supporting plans and documents? Yes CR No ❑ 3t 8. Have all obtainable permits,variances and approvals required by local by-law been obtained? Yes ❑ No R1 Obtained: Applied For. Not Applied For. 9. Is any portion of the site subject to a Wetlands Restriction Order pursuant to G.L c. 131, §40A or G.L c. 130, §105? Yes ❑ No k] 10.List all plans and supporting documents submitted with this Notice of Intent Identifying Number/Letter Title, Date 2582 (A) "Plan of Land in Salem Prepared for-Thomas— Mackey orThomasMackey & Sons Inc." dated July 25 1985 . 2582 (B) USDA SCS Soils Map dated July 25 1985 11.Check those resource areas within which work is proposed: (a)® Buffer Zone (b)Inland: ❑ Bank* Land Subject to Flooding, ❑ Bordering Vegetated Wetland* ❑ Bordering ❑ Land Under Water Body&Waterway ❑ Isolated (c)Coastal• ❑ Land Under the Ocean' ❑ I Designated Port Area' ❑ Coastal Beach' ❑ Coastal Dune ❑ Barrier Beach ❑ Coastal Bank ❑ Rocky Intertidal Shore' ❑ Salt Marsh ❑ Land Under Salt Pond' ❑ Land Containing Shellfish' ❑ Fish Run' Likely to involve U.S.Army Corps of Engiraers concurrent jurisdiction.See General instructions for Completing Notice of Intent. 3.2 Part If:Site Description Indicate which of the following information has been provided (on a plan,in narrative description or calcula- tions)to dearly,completely and accurately describe existing site conditions. Identifying - - Number/Letter (of plan,narrative or calculations) Natural Features: 13 Soils Vegetation A Topography A Open water bodies(Including ponds and lakes) A Flowing water bodies(Including streams and rivers) Public and private surface water and ground water suppfles on or within 100 feet of site Maximum annual groundwater elevations with dates and location of test A Boundaries of resource areas checked under Part 1,item 11 above Other Man-made Features: Structures(such as buildings,piers,towers and headwalls) Drainage and flood control facilities at the site and immediately off the site,including culverts and open channels (with inverts),dams and dikes Subsurface sewage disposal systems Underground utlfitles Roadways and parking areas A Property boundaries,easements and rights-of-way Other Part III*Work Description Indicate which of the following information has been provided(on a plan,in narrative description or calcula- tions)to dearly,completely and accurately describe work proposed within each of the resource areas checked In Part I,item 11 above. Identifying Number/Letter (of plan,narrative or calculations) Planview and.Cross Section of: Structures(such as buildings,piers,towers and headwalls) Drainage and flood control facilities,including culverts and open channels(with inverts),- dams and dikes Subsurface sewage disposal systems&underground utilities A Filling,dredging and excavatinc,indicating volume and composition of material Compensatory storage areas,where required in accordance with Part 111,Section 10:57 (4)of the regulations - Other Point Source Discharge Description of characteristics of discharge from point source(both closed and open channel),when point of discharge falls within resource area checked under Part I,item 11 above,as supported by standard engineering calculations,data and plans, including but not limited to the following: 33 1. Delineation of the drainage area contributing to the point of discharge; 2. Pre-and past-development peak run-off from the drainage area,at the point of discharge,for at least the 10-year and 100-year frequency storm; 3. Pre-and post-development rate of infiltration contributing to the resource area checked under Part I,item 11 above; 4. Estimated water quality characteristics of pre-and post-development run-off at the point of discharge. Part IV:Mitigating Measures . 1. Clearly,completely and accurately describe,with reference to supporting plan§and calculations where necessary; (a) All measures and designs proposed to meet the performance standards set forth under each re- source area specified In Part II or Part III of the regulations;or (b) why the presumptions set forth under each resource area speatied'in Part It or Part III of the regula- bons do not apply. ❑ Coastal Resource Ares Type: Idendlymo mozer or boar ❑ word - of support documents i ❑ Cossal Resource Area Type: - - Identifying number or latter ❑ wand of support documents 3.4 ❑ coestal Resource Area Type: Identityutg number Or letter ❑ Iniuvol of support 000wnents 2. Clearly,completely and accurately describe,with reference to supporting plants and calculations where necessary: (a) all measures and designs to regulate work within the Buffer Zone so as to insure that'said work does not alter an area specified in Part I,Section 10.02(1)(a)of these regulations:or (b) if work In the Buffer Zone will alter such an area,all measures and designs proposed to meet Me performance standards established for the adjacent resource area specified in Part II or Part III of these regulations. 0 Cosemt I Resource Arae Type Bordered By 100-Foot Dlsoredomy Zone: Idenoyi q r umber or letter k'nd Bank, land under waterbody & waterway (Pond) of support docwMnts (a) Placement of Haybale siltation check. A. 01, I 3.5 Part V:Additional Information for a Department of the Army Permit Not Applicable 1. COE Application No. 2. (to be provided by COE) (Name of waterway) 3. Names and addresses of property owners adjoining your property: 4. Document other project alternatives(i.e..other locations and/or construction methods,particularly those that would eliminate the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters or wetlands). 5. 8'h'x 110 drawings in planview and cross-section,showing the resource area and the proposed activ- ity within the resource area.Drawings must be to scale and should be clear enough for photocopying. Cenficatiat is required film the Dusion of Water Poikim n C ntrd before the Federal perm¢can be ssued Cerd icaoon may be obtained by ccrttactirg the Oivsion of Water PoLton Control 1 Winter Street Boston. Massacriusetts 02108. Where the actifitywilftake pace vvid)in the area under the Massachusetts approved Coastal Zone Management Program the aq)5oant cenfies that his proposed actvity vv ih and wilbe conducted in a nwyw that is consistent:vviih the appoved program Information p coded wif be used n er&aorg the app5cat cn for a permit and is made a matter of public. record through issuance of a pJJc notice. Disclosure of this information is voluntary. however I necessary information s not prwlded, the application carni be processed nor can a permit be issued. I hereby certify under the pains and 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. Sg `"eof pli Date Hancock Survey Assoc. Inc. July 25, 1985 Signature of �plicant'sRepresentative Date FORM '-Lacoption to enc Form 430 approved by HQUSACe. 6 May 1932•• HED 100 (TEST) 1 MAY 82 "This document corrins a joint Department of the Army and State of Massachusetts aDPlbti aon for a permit to obtain permission to perform activitin in United States water,.The Ofrire of Maagement and Bad6et (OMB)he. approved thon gpnt ion. reae/red by the Us Army Corp, of Seri nor,. OMB Yareber 0702-0036 and aspiration data of 00 Septamber 1993 enplias Thin _ statement will be act in 6 point type. 3-6 LYNN QUADRANGLE LSSACHUSETTS MASSACHUSETTS p�y� LIC WORKS 7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC) `e v;,,: .•,_1.5 ,�, 55' 760000 FEET 344 �eEVEecv°s nu. 45 70°52'430"20 30 7 se ° 'SCJ✓ Gol��s¢� °p° A � `I HA BOR fl o w le `p °" L •11 �: � ` e \p it I 2dt•, nen �4 by r+ - Rrovhs(,Ehdpa '^�.� art°/ .., �`i _ °� €' em toryt St a� er sr a706 �t—`.,, `=��\ �•y�� O/55o / 'fir + + -a :v, a o 9 I _ .a /L i l o ♦ ° �✓ It . r °^' a' Sc ie e Z Spy \ �� n1/uZV �i0 1\(Y� \ s• i _ ' J\ W q' / 540000 o EET 25. . _ 47 041 Temple-$•, /s °,l �' 1; ?D h y e the . ' ... ,i :. ' v0 1 � - ". / •T v Palin - .. . � °I e l p s PtCONI I 'd 4/03 oVERSON e/k SC LE \ 4 �h dl'S.. \ /� \'• .. Li P, r � __ � y i U •o'� feel uemrs .38 ( J1. co(n',, use F =i(- so f` �r4 1 esoo - �riRed R�Ek \/a ^ar,�?m: s . +y o o °�zv% _ ao : '" � � • uaoa -_ ��. fa� �'7yr�a, !� ` P �- rs• J 'A>' J '0Fi<Y��'� a + � •r'�- � � r t � �..� 6 t may.+ ''a ^� '. 2 • v . Sy � � ��FT �]^ d �r 490r / -CrpS � ,.iJ '°� �i.� 4��'-0 RN- . '� f Cr �� `k's � • rr•� ��1°�-r, , ,<1+ „ �wF"a.tt."X' �a.. ( %T�( - UD, ° VP�, � .�0 4I` a 129 y T E.Wl '� SGS 5oi/s hf�l sca & /rs /.Coo, r- rax { ' tg, y-t Cir i �OG� OKri .vat.: r ;. 17f, ' cam . h �� \u(y 2T, /SIBS hi 4 a SA.,l*n,RN�.t�a� 94 Form S DECERe NO. 64-119 fro be pvvioee by DECE) �] GbRovm Salem Commonwealth of of Massachusetts A7 T. Mackey & Sons E order of Conditions Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act G.L c. 131, §40 To Daniel J Mackey mama (Name of Apples) (Name of property owned Address P.O. Box 366 AddressRear 325 Loring Ave. • - This order is issued and delivered as follows: G lb hand delivery to applicant or representative on (date) certified mail, return receipt requested on (date) Ths project is located Rear 325 Lorin Ave. The property is recorded at the Registry of Essex 5o, 5225 Page 331 r . Certificate (if registered) The Notice of Intent for this project was filed on July 25 1985 (date) The public hearing was dosed on January 16 6986 (date) Findings The Salem Conservation Commission has reviewed the above-referenced Notice of Intent and plans and has held a public hewing on the project Based on the information available to the Commission at this time, the Commi ca;on has determined that the area on which the proposed work is to be done is significant to the following interests in accordance with the Presumptions of Sionificance set forth in the regulations for each Area Subject to Protection Under the Act(check as appropriate): 2---Public water supply ❑ Storm damage prevention ❑ Private water supply .- f�evention of pollution L�Ground water supply G Land containing shellfish ❑ Flood control ❑ Fisheries 51 95 Therefore,the Commission hereby finds that the following conditions are necessary;in accordance with the Performance Standards set forth in the regulations,to protect those inter- ests checked above.The Commis s ion orders that all work shall be performed in accordance with said conditions and with the Notice of Intent referenced above.7o the extent that the fol . lowing conditions modify or differ from the plans,specifications or other proposals submitted with the Notice of Intent,the conditions shall controL . m General Conditions 1. Failure to comply with all conditions stated herein,and with all related statutes and other regulatory meas- ures, shall be deemed cause to revoke or modifythis Order. 2. This 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 qr arty other person of the necessity of complying with all other applicable federal, state or local statutes,ordinances, by-laws 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 and both that date and the special circumstances warranting the extended time period are set forth 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 rill used in connection with this project shall be dean fill, containing no trash, refuse, rubbish or de- bns, including but not limited to lumber, bricks, plaster,wire, lath, paper, cardboard, pipe, fires, ashes, refrigerators, motor vehicles or parts of any of the foregoing. 7. No wcrk shall be undertaken until all adninistmtive l periods from this Order have elapsed or, if appeal such an appeal has been filed, until all proceedines befog the Depar rent have been completed. 8. No work shall be undertaken until the Final Order has been recorded in the Registry of Deeds or thLand 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 Granter Index under the name of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. In the case of registered land,the Final Order shall also be noted on the Land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land Comm upon which the proposed work is to be done.The recording information shall be submitted to the on the form at the end of this Order-prior to commencement of the work 9.. A sign shall be displayed at the site not less than two square feet or more than three square feet in size bearing the words,"Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality Engineering, File Number 64-119 10. Where the Department of Environmental Quality Engineering is requested to make a determination and to issue a Superseding Order, the Conservation Commission shall be a party to ail.agency proceedings and hearings before the Department- 11. epartment.11. Upon completion of the work described herein,the applicant shall forthwith request in writing that a Certificate of Compliance be issued stating that the work has been satisfactorily completed. 12.The work shall conform to the following plans and special conditions: 52 96 Pians: Title Dated Signed and Stamped by. On Re with: "Plan of Land in 7/25/85 Frederick M. Forbes Salem for Thomas Mackey & Sons: - 4 Special Conditions(Use additional paper if necessary) see attached r " . ......................................._.............. (Leave Space Blank) " 5-3A - 9: Salem Conservation Commission Issued By Signatures) t s Order must be signed by a maj:LConse�rvabonComrni�s�' ,,- Titis On iey U 19 before me personally _ to me known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing Instrument and acknowledged that he/she execged thesame hisTher t"'act and d ( (/ � — O 0 Notary Public: my commission expires The apOzant..the owner.any pefaon aggrieved by this Order.arty owner of tad ab, t the land upon which the vopmao work is to D6 cine x any ion rasiderrb of the city or town in which such lard is located are hereby notified of their right to request the Deparanent of donEirive tan t!(cushy fits of erinq:o issue a SuPcsedsng Order,ixwiding the request is made by certified mai or htan0 de6wery TO isaance of thin Order.A copy of the request, at the sane time be sem M certified trip DePa3nwl wittun ten days tram the date of Mail,or hard 6&M"to the Conservation Corrrrtlsson and the ePofimrd- . i r Detach on tlottsd Ilne and eubmt to the Salem Conservation Commission prior tocommencernent of work. Issuing Authority To Please be advised that flue Order of Condttioru for the project and Fie Number has been recorded at the Registry of n accordance with General Condition a on —t 9_ has been noted m the chain of title of me affected property's If recorded lard, the instrument number which identifies this transaction is II registered land,the document number which identifies this transaction Applicant signal ' 1 5-4A 1 . Except as modified by this Order of Conditions, all work shall conform to plans submitted with the Notice of Intent, dated 1/85. Any changes made or intended to be made in the plans shall require the gyp ' applicant to inquire of the Commission in writing whether the change requires a new filing. A site plan noting changes required by this Order of Conditions shall be submitted to the Conservation Commission prior to the commencement of site work._ 2. Prior to the. commencement of site work, a written erosion control and sedimentation barrier program shall be established, submitted to the 6 Conservation Commission and approved by the Conservation Commission. The erosion control and sedimentation barriers shall be established in accordance with "Erosion and Sedimentation Control Guidelines", Publication #13,529-39-1000-2-84 C.R. , dated august, 1983. The erosion control and sedimentat-ion barrier program shall address, but not be limited to, the type of barrier (s) , .placement, maintenance, frequency of replacement, stabilization -and revegetation. 3. No site work shall commence until the approved barriers have been installed, inspected and approved by the Conservation Commission or its designated representative. 4: Security of the property (site) shall be the responsibility of the applicant. Prior to any further site work, a barrier shall be erected at the site entrance and controlled by a locked gate to insure there is no unauthorized dumping of unacceptable. materials. 5. Site work resulting in the removal of material or the disturbance of underlying strata shall be prohibited below elevation 40. 6. Prior to the commencement of site work, all unacceptable fill material on the site shall be removed from the site and disposed of in a manner approved by the Conservation Commission. 7 . All disturbed. banks within the 100' buffer zone with pervious lized in accordance with the "Erosion underlying stratus shall be stabi and Sedimentation Control Guidelines" , Publication "13 ,529-39-1000-2-84—C.R. , dated August, 1983 , at a slope not to exceed 1�: 1 . Revegetation of said areas shall be attempted during each growing season. Any area which does not revegetate over 75% of its surface within two growing seasons sha17 be replanted with indigenous species. A revegetation plan for such purposes shall be presented to and approved by the Conservation Commission prior to its implementation. 8. The Conservation Commission or its designated agent shall be notified immediately of any unacceptable fill found during the site preparation. If the Conservation Commission or DEQE determines the unacceptable material to be non—hazardous, it will be removed from the site and disposed of in a manner approved by the Conservation Commission. Fill material which is determined to be hazardous by the Conservation Commission or DEQE shall be removed to an approved facility and copies of delivery slips shall be supplied to the Conservation Commission. Until such unacceptable hazardous material is removed from the site, no additional site work may be performed. — Page 2 — 9. Upon written advance notification, Conservation Commission members and/or its agent shall have the right to enter and inspect the site to evaluate compliance with these conditions and to require the applicant to submit any data deemed necessary. by the Commission for that evaluation. 10. Water shall be employed during excavation to control dust. I MINUTES OF MEETING October 24, 1985 The Salem Conservation Commission met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room on Thursday, October 24, 1985 at 7:30 P.M. Present were Chairman Philip Moran, Vice—Chairman Glenn Yale, Martha Hogan, David Lash, Paul Geoghegan, Harry Takis Raymond Lavender and Staff Advisor Dale Yale. Vice—Chairman Yale called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING — DAN MACKEY, LEGG' S HILL ROAD Glenn Yale read the notice of the public hearing. The purpose of this hearing is to explore the effects of the removal of. gravel from property located on Legg' s Hill Road, within a wetland area. Attorney Timothy O'i:eefe and Mr. Ted Forbes of Hancock Survey were present representing Mr. Mackey. Mr, Forbes stated that it is proposed to excavate -to elevation 30, within the buffer zone of the pond and that a hay bale barrier would be installed to prevent sedimentation into the pond. Mr. Forbes further stated that gravel will be excavated as it is requested by Mr. Mackey' s customers. Therefore, the removal process could take several years. Glenn Yale asked what grade they proposed and Mr. Forbes replied the slope would be 10%. Glenn Yale felt this slope was excessive. Mr. Forbes noted that the City required a maximum of 10% for secondary streets. Mr. Yale expressed concern regarding future development of this area and asked if any hydraulic calculations have been done to determine what effects a 100 year storm would have on the pond and Mr. Forbes answered that there is not sufficient information to determine this at the present time. Mr. O'Keefe further noted that Mr. Mackey still has the ultimate say in what is done there and the risks are his. A siltation and erosion control program was discussed and Staff Advisor Dale Yale suggested that a silt fence might be more effective than hay bales. Mr. Bob Marsilia of Linden Ave. , an abutter to the pond, expressed concern over the stability of the bank. Mr. Roger Boucher added he was concerned about the dumping of inappropriate material on the site and Mr. Mackey replied that there was no inappropriate material in the buffer zone. David Lash stated that he would like to look at Mr. Mackey' s property before making a decision on this proposal and it was then suggested that the board arrange a site visit. f I ' a Page 2 — Following some discussion, a motion was made by David Lash and seconded by Ray Lavender to continue the public hearing. It was so voted. ' t CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE — DON MASELLA, MARLBOROUGH ROAD Staff Advisor Dale Yale stated that she has looked at Mr. Masella' s property and feels that he has filled the requirements of the Order of Conditions. e Upon the motion of Harry Takis and second of Ray Lavender, the Certificate of Compliance was approved. It was so voted. MAYNARD PLASTICS — SWAMPSCOTT ROAD I Mr. George Seeley of The Fafard Companies was present to discuss two !0 issues. One is a proposal which involves the construction of 3 42" diameter pipes 'to run under Swampscott Road just at the entrance to the Maynard Plastics site. Philip Moran and Glenn Yale had visited the site and met with David Westerling, Engineer for Fafard. Presently, a 30" culvert exists which is grossly inadequate. Fafard proposes the cosntruction of 3 42" pipes and possibly leaving the existing 30" in place to act as a french drain. Mr. Seeley would like the Conservation Comission' s guidance as to what design storm to use. It was noted the Ebershoff development used a 100—yr. design storm. Fafard will be re—looking at the hydraulic calculations and will return with a design in the near future. The second issue Mr. seeley wished to discuss is the issue of a drop of one foot elevations for Maynard Plastics. Staff Advisor Dale Yale asked if the culvert would be designed to a 100 year storm and Mr. Seeley replied that he has talked with the City Engineer who feels that a 50 year storm is adequate. Mr. Seeley further stated that if the culvert is designed for less than a 100 year storm, no storage area would be present. Mr. Seeley stated that earlier cut and fill calculations were incorrect due to inacurate topographic calculations. Flood elevations were lowered by one ft. but have the same amount of run—off and will have no greater impact on the neighboring wetlands. ORDERS OF CONDITIONS: Upon the motion of Harry Takis and second of Martha Hogan, the Order of Conditions for McNeil was approved, as drafted. It was so voted. - Page 3 - CONTINUATION OF HEARING - SESD - INSTALLATION OF NEW INTERCEPTOR Mr. Barry .Hampson and Mr. Jim Ryan, Project Manager for Metcalf and Eddy were present to discuss this proposal which involves the construction of a 2600 ft. segment of the Danvers-Beverly sewerage interceptor to provide relief capacity to the existing interceptor. This segment is a 42" diameter flexible joint force main. Mr. Hampson noted that the primary method of excavation will be performed with a clamshell bucket which will dig to a depth of 11 ft. He further noted that silt screens will not be used, as planned, due to the high tital current speed (app. 1' - 2 knots) . Every effort will be made to prevent erosion. Approximately 35,000 yards of dredged material will be excavated and brought to land, then transportated to the Corps of Engineers by truck. Mr. Hamoson stated that sidecasting is the least disruptive method of construction and that the sediment quality would be consistent with the rest of the harbor. Harry Takis asked what additional permits would be required and Mr. Hampson stated that he would need a Water Quality Certificate and approval from Chapter 91 Division of Wetlands and Waterways and also from the Corps of Engineers. Glenn Yale asked if there would be any impact on marine fisheries and Mr. Hampson stated that no construction will be performed during spawning season, between February 15 and April 15. Mr. Yale asked if a pre and post survey would be done and Mr. Hampson reolied in the affirmative and noted that Metcalf and Eddy would hire a subcontractor to do this . Follcwing some discussion, a motion was made by Ray Lavender and seconded by Harry Takis to close the public hearing. An Order of Conditions will follow. It was so voted. I i MACKEY It was noted for the record that Mr. Mackey, his attorney, or engineer were not present to discuss Legg' s Hill or Broadway. Upon the motion of David Lash and second of Harry Takis, the Legg' s Hill issue will be continued until our next meeting. It was so voted. As a coutesy to the applicant , the public hearing notice was not read; therefore the hearing is nullified. The applicant will be given leave I to re-submit his application. 1 ..'�%oN cConservatim Commission oy . Salem. Massachusetts 01970 �41ASSnC� February 18, 1986 Mr. Daniel Mackey T. Mackey & Sons 58 Broadway Salem, MA. 01970 Re: Legg' s Hill Road, DEQE File #64-119 Dear Mr. Mackey: At their meeting of February 13, 1986, the Conservation Commission voted to toll the appeal period on the above—referenced Order of Conditions from the date of this letter. Therefore, the ten—day appeal period will lapse on February 28, 1986. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely urs, Philip D. Moran -' Chairman cc: Atty Timothy O'Keefe DEQE 1 nn . . Ccn S r d� CU+– S .__��y„�.—.J� – yam-}—�.:$.ir.a-n 5G i1_..�✓s�c�e�.-��,-�...GOn��.i+.v/ Gon�ecnk..g i — rEt� - -�,aN P_ o_N TFC_-- N0IC ,-- _sr � IDr o'r. TtiF - PoND a 's—H-►tL7—Wj-f Ere. 6o �L EXG,4,✓ T-coN 1_ 1 --- - - - - - rt-f-c- PaNv A r LsT7(d - -- IC- --- -- v�!_Y'i��_2.—_EO�t—ls---.3_O._6�.._ T-ti�'r✓ 12_E_f_1'�� -�k-teCyE �UGG�------- S'(7�i2 A�t� � P[ L�5 X55 LT-1_� IY t_5 � �12QM TffE �✓r9r'1�IC P (OF. -- — -- - -- - —--- ----- -- --a IZV 2o,1'_ mow, --- ------ - - -- -p�...R eta, - Ill r 1 COnSe m m '4 Salem. Mascachu:etts 01970 'yAlSpCN� $EP 6 59 PM X85 FILE'S CITY OF SALEM CITY Cs:.t 54! EM,NAS$. CONSERVATION COMMISSION Will continue a public hearing under the Wetlands Protection Act, Mass. G.L. , Chap. 131 , Section 40, at the request of Mr. Daniel Mackey, 58 Broadway. The purpose of the hearing is to explore the effects of the removal of gravel from property located on Legg's Hill Rd. , within a wetland area. The hearing will be held on Thursday, October 24, 1985, at 7 :30 p.m. , One Salem Green, second floor conference room. ,qap � A Philip D. Moran Chairman October 3 This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Bo j6d�4?,fs City Hall Ave . , Salem, In ith Chap.. 626. at /-s9 P"f of the Acts of 1956. 15 ;Y 194- 3 Form S DECE Fine NO. 64-119 (i o t,D•a'oe-o try DECE) Salem commonwealth Ctyrtown . . =--MM r of Massachusetts AMI Iaa T. Mackey & Sons Order of Conditions Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act G.L c. 131, §40 To Daniel J. Mackey (Name of Applicarit) (Name of property owner) Address P.O. Box 366 Addres Rear 325 Loring Ave. - 7iis order is issued and delivered as follows: 0. lb hand delivery to applicant or repre-senfattve on (date) by cer:;fi ed mat, return receipt requested on (date) I his project is located at Rear 325 Loring Ave. The property is recorded at the Registry of Essex B,,__5 2 2 5 cage 331 Certificate(if registered) he Nctice of Intent for'his project was filed on Julv 25. 1985 (date) The public hearing was closed on January 16 6986 (date) Findings The Sales Conservation Commission has reviewed the above-referenced Notice of Intent and plans and has held a public hearing on the project Based on the information available to the Commission at this time, the Tommi sa;nn has determined that the area on which the proposed work is to be done is significant to the following interests in accordance with the Presumptions of Significance set forth in the regulations for each Area Subject to Protection Under the Act(check as appropriate): ❑ Storm damage prevention 8- Public water supply evention of pollution ❑ Private water supply @-Ground water supply ❑ Land containing shellfish ❑ Flood control " ' ❑ Fisheries 5-1 4 a j Therefore.the Commission hereby finds that the following conditions are necessary, in accordance with the Performance Standards set forth in the regulations,to protect those inter- Commission orders that all work shall be performed es schecked above.The in accordance with said conditions and with the Notice of Intent referenced above.To the extent that the fol- lowing conditions modify or differ from the plans,specifications or other proposals submitted with the Notice of Intent, the conditions shall control. General Conditions 1. Failure to comply with all conditions stated herein,and with all related statutes and other.regufatory meas- ures,shall be deemed cause to revoke or modify this Order. 2. This 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) theas time for completion hbeen extended to a specified date more than three years, but less than five years,from the date of issuance and both that date and the special circumstances war-anting the extended time period are set forth in this Order. S. 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. e. Any fill used in connection with this project shall be clean fill, corit3j ning no trash, refuse,rubbish or de oster, wire, lath, paper. cardboard, PIPs, tires, ashes, bns, including but not limited to lumber, bricks, p refrigerators, motor vehicles or parts of any of the foregoing. 7. No work shall be undertaken until all administrative appeal periods from this Order have elapsed or, if such an eppeaf has been filed, until all proceedines before the Department have been completed. 8. No work shall be undertaken until the Final Order 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. 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 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 to be done.The recording information shall be submitted to the Commission on the format the end of this Order-prior to commencement of the work. 9. A sign shall be displayed at the site not less than two square feet or more than three square feet in size bearing the words, "Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality Engineering, File Number 64-119 10. Where the Department of Environmental Quality Engineering is requested to make a determination and to issue a Superseding Order, the Conservation Commission shall be a party to all.agency proceedings and hearings before the Department 11. Upon completion of the work described herein, the applicant shall forthwith request in writing that a Certificate of Compliance be issued stating that the work has been satisfactorily completed. 12. The work shall conforn to the following plans and special conditions: 5-2 0. Salem Conservation Commission Issued By sgnature(s) This order must be signed by a majority of a ConservaSon Camm'Ission. Q�� On �� day of Q h U t 9 * before me _ P to me{mown to be the pr3rsortaiiy person descn'bed in and who executed the foregoing Instrument and acknowledged Lhaf he/she exec-Jed the sam�e�ag his/her free act and dd Nc` Pubic U My commission expires Tho app;k;ani,thz owner,any Pe'r�n eggnve ed by Ch's W.any owner of land abuzing V,tend upon wfti h the propmed worst b>7 be dorm C,arty tan rewdsmr d the dry or town in w'.cn sucth isnd c toeated ars hereby notified of thee nett to request the oeParrnent ,f Eft. Yhenr. Ousiity ErgPrteertrt9 to issue a Sut edmg Order,V�idirV the ,ZL st is made by certified ma:a twtd delivery to 11ie pepa�7nent within tern days from Cie data of issuance cl mis Order.A copy of tie radusst&Ad el the same time be sent by certified mai;cc i.nd dam"to the Conservation Commcson and the aPofc Salem Conservation Commission Piot to commencement of wort. Detach on dotted 11"and submit to the Issuing Authonty To Please be advised that the Order of Conditions for the Proieet and Re Number ties been recorded at the Registry of ort - has bean noted in the chain of title of the affected property'm accordance with General Cordtb 8 19— It recorded land, the instrument number which identifies this transaction i II registered land.the document number which ideninfies this transaction - APP�Cant Signature 5-4A 96 Pians: Title Dated Signed and-Stamped by. On Re with: "Plan of Land in 7/25/85 Frederick M. Forbes Salem for Thomas Mackey & Sons: 4 S ectaConditions(Use additional paper if necessary) see attached ...........................................................__...._........................."........"....................................................__....................... • (Leeve Space Bw*) . e 5-3A 1 o 1 . Except as modified by this Order of Conditions, all work shall conform to plans submitted with the Notice of Intent, dated 1/85. Any changes made or intended to be made in the plans shall require the applicant to inquire of the Commission in writing whether the change requires a new filing. A site plan noting changes required by this Order of Conditions shall be submitted to the Conservation Commission prior to the commencement of site work. 2. Prior to the commencement of site work, a written erosion control and sedimentation barrier program shall be established, submitted to the Conservation Commission and approved by the Conservation Commission. The erosion, control and sedimentation barriers shall be established in accordance with "Erosion and Sedimentation Control Guidelines" , Publication 413 ,529-39-1000-2-84 C.R. , dated august, 1983. The erosion control and sedimentation barrier program shall address, but not be limited to, the type of barrier (s) , placement, maintenance, frequency of replacement, stabilization `and revegetation. 3. No site work shall commence until the approved 'barriers have been installed, inspected and approved by the Conservation Commission or its designated representative. 4. Security of the property (site) shall be the responsibility of the applicant. Prior to any further site work, a barrier shall be erected at the site entrance and controlled by a locked gate to insure the.re. is no unauthorized dumping of unacceptable materials. 5. Site work resulting in the removal of material or the disturbance of underlying strata shall be prohibited below elevation 40. 6. Prior to the commencement of site work, all unacceptable fill material on the site shall be removed from the site and disposed of in a manner approved by the Conservation Commission. 7 . All disturbed. banks within the 100' buffer zone with pervious underlying stratzs shall be stabilized in accordance with the "Erosion and Sedimentation Control Guidelines", Publication X13 ,529-39-1000-2-84—C.R. , dated August , 1983 , at a slope not to exceed 1'2:1 . Revegetation of said areas shall be attempted during each growing seascn. Any area which does not revegetate over 75% of its surface within two growing seasons shall. be replanted with indigenous species. A revegetation plan for such purposes shall be presented to and approved by the Conservation Commission prior to its implementation. 8. The Conservation Commission or its designated agent shall be notified immediately of any unacceptable fill found during the site preparation. If the Conservation Commission or DEQE determines the unacceptable material to be non—'hazardous, it will be removed from the site and disposed of in a manner approved by the Conservation Commission. Fill material which is determined to be hazardous by the Conservation Commission or DEQE shall be removed to an approved facility and copies of delivery slips shall be supplied to the Conservation Commission. Until such unacceptable hazardous material is removed from the site, no additional site work may be performed. Page 2 — 9. Upon written advance notification, Conservation Commission members and/or its agent shall have the right to enter and inspect the site to evaluate compliance with these conditions and to require the applicant to submit any data deemed necessary by the Commission for that evaluation. 10. Water _shall be employed during excavation to control dust. 4 6 1 „NON CO3j Salem. Massachusetts 01.970 August 19, 1985 Mr. Ted Forbes Hancock Survey Associates 69 Holten Street Danvers, MA. . 01923 . _.__ . i Dear Ted: Pursuant to the vote at the last Conservation Commission meeting, this letter confirms the Commission' s agreement with Daniel Mackey which allows him to excavate gravel from his property on Legg' s Hill to elevation 40. - - You may recall that the Commission was concerned over the stability of the bank during excavation. They requested a -sedimentation erosion control plan and assurances of bank stabilization to the Commission prior to their next meeting on September 12. I will be on vacation until September 2, but will be happy to discuss this with you further at that time if you wish. Sincerely, Dale E. Yale Staff Advisor to the Conservation Commission L I 1 MINUTES OF MEETING December .12, 1985 ( ' I The Salem Conservation Commission met on December 12, 1985 at One Salem Green, second floor conference room. Present were Chairman Philip Moran, Vice-Chairman Glenn Yale, Ray Lavender and Harry Takis. Martha Hogan, Paul Geoghegan, David Lash and Dale Yale were absent. Vice Chairman Glenn Yale called the meeting to order at 7 :35. DETERMINATION OF APPLICABILITY - POPEYE"S, CANAL ST. Glenn Yale read the notice of the Determination. Mr. Sam. Tassel representing Popeye 's. and Dr. Hugh Mulligan of Gulf of • Maine Research were present to discuss this plan which involves the construction of a 2500 sq. ft. fast food restaurant on an existing paved surface on Canal and Hersey Streets, between Alice' s Ice Cream and The Donut Ring. ,This area is zoned for this use. The property is within Zone B, flood hazard area and is outside any wetland resource area or buffer zone. - Dr. Mulligan stated that landscaping will be provided on the Canal St. side of the 100 X 150 sq. ft . site. He further noted that this area is subject to 100-500 year storm, this not being classified as a wetland resource area. Speaking in opposition to the plan were Mr. Roger Dyer and Mr. Ray Frazier, both of Hersey Street. Also present expressing disapproval of the plan was Ward VII Councillor, Jack Nutting. Major concern was with regard to the proximity of Popeye ' s to Alice' s Ice Cream. Lighting and drainage were among other concerns expressed. Philip *loran stated that while this area is subject to flooding, the area is paved and not classified as a wetland area. Upon the motion of Philip Moran and second of Ray Lavender, a negative determination will be issued. It was so voted. PUBLIC HEARING - DANNY MACKEY, BROADWAY Glenn Yale read the notice of the public hearing. Attorney Timothy O'Keefe and Mr. Ted Forbes of Hancock Survey were present representing Mr. Mackey who proposes to stabilize the existing bank adjacent to Rosie' s Pond at 58 Broadway. The bank has been filled and altered substantially over the past several months. Also, the fill that has been placed there covers salvage materials that Mr. Mackey stores on his property. 1 1 I'. i Gerry: I spoke with Glenn and Paul Geoghegan regarding Mackey. and these are the reasons they gave me for the decision to allow to elevation 40: 1. Any excavation below elevation 40 will stretch the excavation time out to a prolonged period under which it would be difficult to monitor and ensure that all necessary procedures are being followed. (Mr. Mackey stated it would be three to five years) . Sedimentation and erosion control procedures would be difficult to maintain over this period as well. 42. What Mr. Mackey proposes disrupts the soil strata and disturbs the filtration medium for run-off which would affect the groundwater. 3. A minimum cover of strata is necessary to serve as a filtration medium between ground water and disturbed areas. DEQE has no policy which serves as a guideline but takes each case on a case by case basis. DEQE also states that the burden of proof is:jon the petitioner. P">4. This is most important and I neglected to tell you--Mr. Mackey was offered the option of returning to the Commission after he has reached elevation 40 and a determination was made if any significant impact was made. This is part of the minutes of the meeting. That way the time period factor is minimized and an assessment could be made as to whether going to elevation 35 or even 30 would have a significant impact. 'CONDI Tt J of §alem, �IS52zt 1TSP S Department of Public Works s (One �ttlem Green ��aIHINE M. PAUL S.NIMAN DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SERVICES July 11 , 1985 Mr. Daniel Mackey Thomas Mackey & Sons, Inc. 58 Broadway Salem, MA. 01970 Re: Drainage - Alteration Permit Dear Mr. Mackey: It was recently brought to my attention that you are excavating material from your property off of Leggs Hill Road. Under the City of Salem Code of Ordinances, Sections 26-170 to 26-174, a Drainage Alteration Permit is required if the existing grade of the land is being altered by more than two (2) feet. You are hereby notified to discontinue your work until you have applied for, and been issued, a Drainage Alteration Permit. Very truly yours, Paul S. Niman Director of Public Services PSN/cmc cc: Dale Yale, Planning Dept. 1014 Colt C"iservatim nmii Salem. Alassachusetts 01970 �` Al,�ss; October 1, 1984 Attorney G. William Rendle 221 Essex Street Salem, MA. 01970 Dear Mr. Rendle: Pursuant to our conversation today, I have spoken with Mr. Philip Moran, Chairman of the Conservation Commission and he agrees that as long as Mr. Mackey ceases any work. within 100' of the top of the inland bank on Legg's Hill Pond, hemay- waituntil October 25 to discuss the matter of the continuing activity in a wetland area with the Commission. However, if Mr. Mackey continues to work within that area between now and October 25, 1984, I have no option but to pursue further legal action on this matter. I will be happy to discuss this with you further if you wish. Sincerely yours, Charles Frederiksen Conservation Aide CF:dey cc to Mr. Mackey March 13, 1987 Joh Felix Department of Environmental Quality Engineering Woburn, MA Dear Mr. Felix: The Salem Conservation Commission is requesting support from the DEQE to secure compliance from a violator who has a pattern of non-compliance. In a letter dated January 27, 1987, addressed to Mr. Carl Drieker, the Commission outlined the history of a case of non-compliance (DEQE #64-119) (see attached). The following paragraphs will outline another case, (DEQE 7/64-128) which has been an ongoing problem to the Commission. Both of these cases are owned by the same party. The Salem Conservation Commission feels they have taken reasonable measures to secure compliance without success and now are asking assistance from DEQE. On November 8, 1984, a report was sent to the Commission regarding storage of "junk" within the buffer zone of a wetland. The Commission contacted the owner on November 15, 1984, and obtained an informal verbal committment from the owner to "clean up" the area. The owner was given one month to perform the clean up. One month later on December 15, 1984, the Commission made a site inspection and agreed that the matter would have to wait until the snow melted. On April 15, 1985, a second site inspection was made. It was observed that no change in the storage of materials had been made and therefore on April 25, 1985 an Enforcement Order was issued (see attached). On April 30, 1985, the owner requested a Notice of Intent form. The owner took no further action after that request therefore the Conservation Commission recorded the Enforcement Order at the Registry of Deeds on June 27, 1985. On October 25, 1985, a Notice of Intent was filed and a public hearing was scheduled for November 14, 1985. On that date the owner failed to attend the meeting, and it was agreed that the hearing would be nullified and the owner given leave to resubmit application. The public hearing was held on December 12, 1985. The applicant proposed to tabilize the existing bank adjacent to the wetland at 58 Broadway. The bank had Sbeen filled and altered substantially over the past several months and the John Felix March 13, 1987 Page 2 Commission was concerned that the new fill that had been placed there had covered salvage materials. The hearing was continued pending a plan of how the bank would be stabilized. The owner indicated on several occassions that progress had been made in removing unacceptable materials and revegetating the slope. At a site inspection, it was obvious that nothing had been done. The hearing was kept open until February 27, 1986. Until DEQE received the Notice of Intent. The final Order was approved on March 13, 1986 (see attached). The Order addressed two alternatives either resurfacing and revegetating the bank (conditions 113-19) or constructing a vertical wall (condition 420). A site inspection was made February 28, 1987. It was observed that there was no change in the bank indicating that the owner had done nothing since the Order of Conditins was issued. The Boiler Plate Condition 4/6 and Special Conditions 4413, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20 have been violated. We are unable to effectively deal with this problem. Thank you for your attention to this, and we await your response. Please feel free to contact Rebecca Curran, the Conservation Aide (744-4580). Sincerely, Philip D. Moran Chairman M21WP form 3 - DEOE Fie No. i (Tobe provided oy DEOE) _ ��'•` / Commonwealth CityFFeww Salem of Massachusetts appkant Notice of intent Under the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, §40 and Application for a Department of the Army Permit Part 1:General Information 1. Location:Street Address Rear 325 Loring Avenue Lot Number 83 Map 30 2. Proiect:Type Excavation Description Removal of borrow ad.ac nt to existing pond. 3. Registry:County Essex South Current Book 5225 &Page--13J— Certificate age 331Certificate(if Registered Land) - 4. Applicant Leggs Hill Realty Trust, Daniel J. Mackey Trustee Tel. 274-3RA9 Address P.O. Box 366 Salem . MA 01970 5. PropertyOwner same as applicant Tel. Address 6. Representative Hancock Survey Associates, Inc. Tel. Address 69 Holten Street Danvers MA 01923 — 7. Have the Conservation Commission and the DEOE Regional Office each been sent, by certified mail or hand delivery, 2 copies of completed Notice of Intent,with supporting plans and documents? Yes ER No 0 31 8. Have all obtainable permits,variances and approvals required by local by-law been obtained? Yes ❑ No R Obtained: Applied For. Not Applied For. 9. b any portion of the site subject to a Wetlands Restriction Order pursuant to G.L c. 131,§40A or G.L C. 130, §105? Yes ❑ No k] 10.List all plans and supporting documents submitted with this Notice of Intent Identifying Number/letter Title,Date 2582 (A) "Plan of Land in Salem Prepared for Thomas— Mackey homas -Mackey & Sons Inc." dated July 25 1985 . 2582 (B) USDA SCS Soils Map dated July 25 19$5 — 11.Check those resource areas within which work is proposed: (a)® Buffer Zone (b)Inland: ❑ Bank* Land Subject to Flooding, ❑ Bordering Vegetated Wetland• ❑ Bordering ❑ Land Underwater Body 8 Waterway• ❑ Isolated (c)Coastal: ❑ Land Under the Ocean' ❑ I Designated Port Area ❑ Coastal Beach• ❑ Coastal Dune ❑ Barrier Beach ❑ Coastal Bank ❑ Rocky Intertidal Shore• ❑ Salt Marsh ❑ Land Under Salt Pond ❑ Land Containing Shellfish- ❑ Fish Run' Likely to involve U.S.Army Corps of Engi�Pera concurrent jurisdiction.See General Instructions for Completing Notice of Intent. 3-2 Part II:Site Description . Indicate which of the following information has been provided (on a plan,in narrative description or calcula- tions)to clearly,completely and accurately describe existing site conditions. Identifying Number/Letter (of plan,narrative or calculations) Natural Features: B Soils Vegetation A Topography A Open water bodies(Including ponds and lakes) Flowing water bodies(including streams and rivers) A Pubfic and private surface water and ground water suppfles on or within 100 feet of site Maximum annual ground water elevations with dates and location of test A Boundaries of resource areas checked under Part I,item 11 above Other Man-made Features: Structures(such as buildings,piers,towers and headwalls) Drainage and food control facilities at the site and immediately off the site,including culverts and open channels (with inverts),dams and dikes Subsurface sewage disposal systems Underground utilities Roadways and parking areas A Property boundaries,easements and rights-of-way Other Part III:Work Description Indicate which of the following information has been provided(on a pian,in narrative description or calcula- tions)to dearly,completely and accurately describe work proposed within each of the resource areas checked In Part I,item 11 above. Identifying NumbedLetter (of plan,narrative or calculations) Plainview and Cross Section of Structures(such as buildings,piers,towers and headwalls) Drainage and flood control facilities,including culverts and open channels(with inverts).- dams and dikes Subsurface sewage disposal systems a underground utilities A Filling,dredging and excavating,indicating volume and composition of material Compensatory storage areas,where required in accordance with Part III,Section 10:57 (4)of the regulations Other Point Source Discharge Description of characteristics of discharge from point source(both closed and open channel),when point of discharge falls within resource area checked under Part I,item 11 above,as supported by standard engineering calculations,data and plans,including but not limited to the following: 3-3 Phil - To refresh your memory for tonights meeting at Legg's Hill; here is a summary of events. In September 1984, gravel excavation was observed within the buffer zone of a wetland without notification to the ConCom. After informal requests for compliance were made with no results, an Enforcement Order was issued dated September 27, 1984. On October 27, 1984, an agreement was reached whereby the owner could remove gravel within a specified area outside the 100' buffer zone. In June 1985, the Commission observed gravel excavation taking place outside the agreed area. The Commission felt the removal must cease until proper plans and a Notice of Intent were filed with!,the ConCom to better asses the wetland and drainage issues. At this time a second Enforcement Order dated June 27, 1985, was issued. On July 11, 1985, the owner's attorney, Dev Monga, contacted the Commission requesting that the owner be allowed to remove more gravel from the site. He was then informed that no further removal could take place until a formal filing with the Conservation Commission was made. A Notice of Intent was filed on July, 25, 1985. A public hearing was held on September 12, 1985. At the hearing the owner proposed to excavate to elevation 30 within the bufferzone of the pond and install haybale barriers to prevent sedimentation. The public hearing was continued until October 29, 1985. Mackey failed to show up so the hearing was continued until December 12, 1985. The hearing-.was closed on January 16 1986. The Order of Conditions was issued oae:thdt same date. Attached is the Order of Conditions. Mackey has violated special condtions 111,2,3,4,5,6, 7. Repeated attempts were made by the ConCom to urge the owner and the owner's attorney to attend meetings and discuss the matter. Then came the letter from Dev Monga stating that Mr. Mackey complies with the "spirt" if not the "letter" of the Order of Conditions. On December 8, 1986 Bobby Gates and myself surveyed the area and found that Mackey had gone below elevation 40 to elevation 30.69. The ConCom informed Mackey of this and he disputed the results therefore we required him to submit a survey signed by a registered engineer within 14 days. This was never done. Again to refresh your memory on the reasons for the decision to limit excavation below elevation 40 are as follows: Any excavation below elevation 40 will stretch the excavation time out to a prolonged period under which it would be difficult to monitor and ensure that all nesecary procedures are being followed. (Mackey said it would be 3 to 5 years) Sedimentation and erosion control procedures would be difficult to maintain over this period as well. 2. What the owner proposed disrupts the soil strata and disrupts the filtration medium for run off which would effect the ground water. Mckey was given the option of returning to the ConCom after he reached elevation 40 and an assesment could be made as to whether going to elevation 30 or 35 would have a significant impact. I will see you at 6P.M. The DEQE says if Mackey or his lawyer are uncooperative in any way we should stop the meeting and inform them so that they can issue administrative penalties. -Becky MURPHY, RYAN & O'KEEFE ATTORNEYS AT LAW, INC. TEN CHESTNUT STREET JOHN E. MURPHY TIMOTHY J. O'KEEFE PEABODY, MASSACHUSETTS 01960 OF COUNSEL JOSEPH CURTIS RYAN JOHN E. MURPHY,JR. (617) 531-1421 LYNDA M. MURPHY JAME5 F. RENNICK _ JOHN R. KEILTY IN REPLY REFER TO NICHOLAS P. VONTZALIDES FILE NO. D. DEV MONGA May 18 , 1987 Salem Conservation Commission One Salem Green Salem , MA 01970 ATT : Phil Moran , Esquire RE : Rear 325 Loring Avenue Salem , MA File No. 64-119 Dear Mr. Moran : Pursuant to a site visit on April 30 , 1987 , and our sub- sequent telephone discussions , we wish to submit this plan ( "Plan " ) detailing measures proposed by Daniel Mackey ( " Mackey" ) to restore a section of the 100 foot buffer zone to 40 feet as shown on the attached sketch . PLAN 1) Installation of staked haybales by May 25 , 1987 ; 2) Excavation of clean gravel from elevated sections of the buffer zone and/or from upland areas and placement in the areas to be restored to an elevation of 40 feet . The material so placed will be stabilized by placing rock tailings on the slope. This activity will be completed by June 20 , 1987 . The above activities will be followed by an engineering survey in order to document that the buffer zone has been restored to the 40 foot elevation . The haybales , however , will be kept staked in place until after completion of the inspection by the Conservation Commission . PAGE TWO Please call me if you have any questions regarding this matter. Very truly yours , MURPHY , RYAN & O ' KEEFE D - xeJ Anom- /G✓ D . Dev Monga , Esqui e DDM: cfj pc : DEQE , John Felix Bob Welch Danny Mackey f. co ug S. RUSSELL SYLVA �� om(ly Commissioner `�v � Ali gi,.st 107 19�]'.• 935-0320 AP- File # Tri ASSES: s Matter of } NOTICE OF INTENT in the Ma_ ,- y A CI',1I!- Ahi`tlfdr IR 4 Thomas Mackey :-^.nd ? PENALTY Sense Inc . I . THE PARTIE= i lite Engineeriti9 r the e tai [�-a a }h Of ar ,ment Of El ironme.. O f the COmmcnr+e_.l The Dep- t a en -y 1 ` S a duly constitut_d ag c 4 Commonv+ealth artment) i_ located at Dep- is It maintains an office ,_�{fice is at 1 Winter t Massachuset --' 01Sp1 - its prirripal Woburn' MA Avenue, MA Street , i Lltinl Pl rt3c4 e F n iderlt q r and Sons, ln_ ` + Re3 c, > Thomas Mackey r, lotod - - -_ - - , 2 o ns-itle7 4 ;: the "Applicant'! is the -„ Of Ease., Caleme MA recorded in the Regi= p„a g e 331 . I I = STATEMENT OF FACTS AND LAU! set tl 11-1 G.L . c and duties ulg•ated pur` ant j a .1 . The Bepartment has the powers 131 , s. 40 and regulations pro, 310 CMR 10.00, 1ySbe the Salem Cc,raer•:ation Gommiasi-on issued On zanu.ary i e 4-11 tc, the App17C311+ , •,.11Owin c_. lttea =.nd agreed i Ch der of Conditions number tc loris =_. 1Gm_ Or twin worF:: on the site acco,-ding upon by the parties. 4 + 'frrm both r i �2^a 111 t i �. f�a-'.Il . Cin March 25e 1• � t_Omml�S;,nay •� • e Salem Conservati numbe n-P the project site and recO, ded the submitted y.Pc.ldente and the rep, the visiteer o¢ Conditions= Gpecifially. Sion r,cted , ero- ticnls o{ the Ord file no , =ijl saa.s. notp- ,a.ti.cn^• - i viola follot ac,npermit+_e t" - plans were rc't t a roved Or in=_. :ailed, took place t were n0 - RPlacAeremOva.l of gravel m3tei-ial„ t on o{ controls -esta .iliza .l- resource areas took p ; rjelnw. elevation 40, and bark staGiliza+ion and . below. at-eas was not. accompl.ished = disturbed 1 i a ^ ^ 4. The act�vity d � C�apter l3� �� t escrihed in (3) h ) by grder yf 'Coer ion 49 in �hat t�a �ve »*s r/�t in c | � (Plans> , specingiti»»s ��s, �4-ll� e acti»�ties �ere omPlianc� wit� � � l�is rs:_c�nc�, | c�»�itinns 1 2 ` Th�� grder 's cnn�»»i P�rmitte� ! on Public hc l �a»c�� was a �io `�� ' �` ' , ar« 7 w � willful �n� ant>�' s��ety, *el �ar ��I on'' c*:se� si �rsrrot follo:ed �� '' � the result of ' e � ano the enviro «r� ica:t impact 5 Oerrnrn�ent � and wa � n Hpril which 2 instruct �he 1987 s H ' ' DePart � Frotection A "ed that wprk in a �e«t issu�d an Enfo � that a plen c he halted, tha� reas suhject to the rcement [7rUer ' will come inoe submitted wi �hinrurther vinlat� ons �w" ��a,�s | This Enfsrce/o r»mPliance with D��1 ��ys d�tailin� � e�, and ment Order was, /�yt arder n Conditions-ow �he APPlicann � � 6This »pea]ed � 6�-1 �9 ` o ' s Enfcrcemert [} � � � nrnpther relevant dcrur�er was nnh co�plie� ` ' -coMP! iance -as me�t was sub��itt �ha� Public health, safea «i�Iation �ha� cae t» The Depart�en�no plan and not the result ty' welfare and the«se� significa:t i ^ This � of error , � e:vir:nment � impact on � W . [)ISPgSITIOi�jf xas xillfM 1 . or the , DePartment ..es set fnrt� in pa ' , venalty in the a =es upon th� Applic t ragraPh lI (2) ab � 16 anA 310 C�1R 5nsu�� c� an a ci /� l aopini th� � � n det� ^25' the Departmsr�As re1�ir�� b,, S i s rati«e � r'�ining the amo ( 1 ) : ca�d tual urt cf �he penalty/' ` ollow� :g and ��lfare, end thepo�enii�l i"Toot (��) Act:a� environme:t . a'� Pubijc �e�] �h , safe,y, } Potential rosts inc°nd potentic, demag�s parsnnurred' by the Co�monnes�ffereW' and �c�ual h , a� tor � - , or hy any ot�� ! failyres Whether the APplicant t � � ~ `,:/p� y� oo� steps to prevent t/`e cympIi (4) ` ' .WhetMer t�r /C8pp ! i ' = � after the �cr�rrenc�rtft�»k s�ePs to prcmptl | - ` `ne fail Y cn ! (5) Whett »r�s to r� � me into � wh�tover harm occer t�e Applicant tunx (6) ��heth `u�re� as a res«l � nf �ste�sle � ��r'emedYcar�� n� ti�ate ! with asy re�ula�ier the Applicant h �- »molY, by the Dnt�»' orUer ` l �censeas Pre«io:sly ' ailed t | authority or rssp 'nor s:Y 1aw ��h�ch 'tor aPproval issued » c»mPlY ' szbili�y to erforcne ��C�rtme:t has ��r adopted cox�ply (7) Ming compliance ..ss � ' 'e Ming ,st) y �hy� the fai �u/es to y � { / � � ^ � age -3- � AP-M[-87-61 Cj " (8)� Deterring future /noncomp/ zanca by both the opp / �cant and ctters � . � � ! (0 ) Tre Applicant 's finsncial condition , | � ` ( 10) The public interest . � � 2. The Applicant is hereby notified IM00 � | 11 > The Applicant has a rign; to & OoMc010' ' »: this civil administrative penalty assessmentu � M Effective twenty-one (21 ) days after the date af ` � issuance of this Notice, the Applicant shall be deemed to have ' � waived his rights to an adjudicatory heaving on this civil � � administrative penalty assessment unless , within said twenty-one � (21 ) Jays, the Applicant files with the Department ( � .e , the ' Department receives) a written statement subject to and in � compliance with the applicable pro�isiens of the DepartTent ' s R:les i for Adjudicatory Proreeding5, a1C CMR 1 .()0. � � � a> alleging either on huth of the Fol } nwznm: � Q ) a denial of W"et is set f:rih in � ( II ) (3) ` (4 ) and � A > . ` ( ii } anserting that the mnnev amount of thy civil � administrative penalty as set forth i: para - graph II ! ( 1 ) above is excessive . � b } clearly a"d consisoly states every point of fact � � and law the Applicant intents to i -e in the adjudicatory prncpening ; ; � ^ c } is addressed to ; Cncket Clerk , Office nr General � � Counsel , Department of Engi- neering , One Winter Street , 3rd Floo, , 7nston, MA �2l08. � J. If the Applicant waives his rights to an ad�:dicatory hearing , � the Applicant must ;ay the full amoont of the civi \ a�minis�rative wenalty no lator than twenty-any (21 ) days after the �aoe of � issuance of t-ia Notice. Payment must be by certifled check , cashier 's check , or money order , payable to the commnnyealth of � Massachunetts. No other form of Payment shall be accopted .: ^ Paymsnt must be mailed or hand-dnlivered to the �d�inis� trativr Penalty Clerk ` Bureau of 4dministrati;e Fer;ices ` FiIe � #AP-NE-87-61n` 4th Floor , REDE` 1 Ninte/ Street , Bosto//, MA | M2105. All checks shall bear the file numbers of this wocusent ' ' � } ' ^ NE ~ ~^ ` � ° 4 - lf the Applicant waives his rights 01 an and if the Applicant does not pay the +u/l | amow:t o- t!`a ci /il administrative penalty withir twenty7-one (21 > days aftv, the date of issuance of this Notice, the KpOcant shall be liacle to Ihe / Commonwealth for up to three times the amount of the pennity ` together with costs, plus interest from the time the pe:altv became final ` and attorney's fees, includi:g all ccsts ar'/ v— incurred dirsctly in the collecti:n or the penaltr - | 5. If the non-compliance described i: paragrann 11 0 > ahuve continues or is repeated after the date of issuance of this Nctice, i additional civil administrative penalties may be assessed for every � day of such non-compliance from now on. Such additional civil adminsitrativs penalties may he assessed in the course Df the � � adsudizatory 4sarirg an this asseisyent of y ci"il V: ' csttra !�vc | penalty , without issuance of any :ther penalty assessms �t notice Vu the Applicant . If the Applicant wa ' ves his rtghts to a, � ad2udicatcry hearing on this assessmsn� cf a civil adn� �is�rati�z � � penalty, such additional civil administrative penalties uay be � assessed in as many additional penalty assessment ootices as >� necessary. � August 10/ 1987 ; � DATE: --------------------- In Edward -P. Kunce Regional 1Environmental Enqineer 952340l348 Certified Mail No . or Delivery Person --------�----- - ---- ( � ` . � / ; � � / , � � / � L --R E�E i`,,�AUo 1 7 1 84€M PLANNING B€PT.P.__ _ CITY OF SALEM HEALTH DEPARTMENT BOARD OF HEALTH Salem, Massachusetts 01970 ROBERT E. BLENKHORN 9 NORTH STREET HEALTH AGENT August 15, 1984 (617) 741-1800 - Thomas Mackey & Sons, Inc. 58 Broadway Salem, MA 01970 Gentlemen: You are respectfully requested to submit, in writing, with a photocopy to the Depart- ment of Environmental Quality Engineering, a statement of the corrective measures you have taken at Leggs Hill in response to recommendations based on a site observation by me (July 5, 1984) and by a D.E.O.E. inspector (July 19, 1984) . The items to be addressed are the following: I. Letter dated July 9, 1984 from Robert E. Blenkhorn to Thomas Mackey & Sons: 1. If you intend to operate a sanitary landfill in the Leggs Hill area, you must, under the Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 111, Section 150A, obtain site approval from the Board of Health. II. Letter dated July 25, 1984 from Richard J. Chalpin to Mr. Robert Blenkhorn: 1. NEPCO should be informed that anything other than clean fill, in- cluding fill mixed with solid wastes, should be transported to an approved sanitary landfill; and that further disposal of fill me- terial, which includes solid wastes, at the Mackey site is pro- hibited without a Salem Board of Health assignment. 2. Certain Mackey site wastes--namely, asphalt paving, roofing ma- terials, four (4) empty oil tanks, and other refuse--appear to have been dumped in violation of the Massachusetts solid waste laws, specifically M.G.L. Chapter 111, Section 150A. These materials are to be removed in a manner approved by the Board of Health. 3. Immediate attention should be given to the unacceptable slope of the filled material at the Mackey site, as this slope is quite hazardous. 4. Thomas Mackey & Sons, Inc. shall abide by all disposal restric- tions at the ultimate disposal site assigned by the Salem Board of Health or at any other approved site. SalCID Ilealtl_i Department 1 ,,. 9 North St . Salem, Plass. 01.970 The following items, from letter dated July 9, 1984 (above) , have received attention: 1. Goldberg-Zoino Associates, Inc. has tested samples of the site contents and provided a detailed ananlysis of same (see letter of June 21, 1984 from GZA to Mr. John Webster of Fluor Construc- tion, Inc. ) . 2. Fluor Constructors, Inc. has implemented a satisfactory dust- control program (see letter of July 9, 1984 from Fluor Construc- tion to the Board of Health) . Your cooperation is both requested and appreciated. I wish to extend my thanks to the State Department of Public Health, D.E.Q.E. Division, for their anticipated efforts in this matter, and to you for the assistance you will provide. Very truly yours, FOR THE BOARD OF HEALTH ROBERT E. BLEN(HORN, C.H.O. . Health Agent REB/tv cc: Richard J. Chalpin, Engineer, D.E.Q.E. Mr. Charles Frederickson, Salem Conservation Commission New England Power Co. Fluor Construction, Inc. Louis C. Mroz File - 2 Form 9' DE0=_Re No. - - - - (To be provided by DEQE) City1Tcvm - :�T Commonwealth -- of Massachusetts Apples INN a c_' Enforcement Order Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, §40 From SM Ilssuing Authority To Thomas Mackey & Sons September 27, 1984 Date of Issuance Property lot/parcel number,address Legg's Hill Road/Jefferson Avenue Extent and type of.activity: The Conservation Commission's jurisdiction lies within 100' of an inland bank. The Commission has determined that the property in question is an inland bank on . a pond which issubjectto protection under the Wetlands Protection Act. Excavation has taken place within 100' of the top of the bank without notification to the Comm. The Salem Conservation Commission has determined that the activity described above is in violation of the Wetlands Protection Act, G.L c. 131, §40, and the Regulations promulgated pur- suant thereto 3104C'MR 10.00, because: LT Said activity has been/is being conducted without a valid Order of Conditions.. ❑ Said activity has been/is being conducted in violation of an Order of Conditions issued to dated File number , Condition number(s) ❑ Other(specify) Salem Conservation Commission The hereby orders the following: ex£] The property owner, his agents, permittees and all others shall immediately cease and desist from fur her activity affecting the wetland portion of this property. ❑ Wetland alterations resulting from said activity shall be corrected and the site returned to its original clition. t 9-1 Q Completed application forms and pians as required by the Act and Regulations shall be filed with the Conservation Commission (dater, , { onorbefore see below and no further work shall be performed until a public hearing has been held and an Order of Conditions has been issued to regulate said work. Application forms are available,at: One Salem Green The property owner shall take.every reasonable step to prevent further violations of the act. Other(specify) The Commission hereby requests that you attend their next regularly- i scheduled meeting .on Thursday, October 11,1984, at 7:30 p.m. to discuss the activity that has taken place and how you intend to resolve it. Failure to comply with this Order may constitute grounds for legal action_Massachusetts General Laws Chap- ter 131, Section 40 provides: Whoever violates any provision of this section shall be punished by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not more than six months or both. Each day ` y or p ortio n ,hereof of continuingviolation shall +' constitute a separate arae offe nsa. Questions regarding this Enforcement Order should be directed to: Charles Frederiksen, hide 744-4580 Issued by Salem Conservation Commission Sign ature(s) U C (Signature of delivery person or certified mail number) l 9.2 � „xi,2wi+��s r� .M� � ,.k� .'gig'_ �> i ,��;, "' v�',i�. 'i = :•i'rFY�l1, � $£'�fr�' � . r 4x e` a �i • � ' ✓,fit.. �,. u '' p h r ��^� �r '� � '4 _ �yA' t". "R• 1� . r* = 1. / � 1 1 ��!' �� ! . 1l t (� I e rq� `t n "^ A. e`CDWI 1 I L'ir €. � ,v ! �� i�,►oa �.. "'�`<Y°/J . _ �' �� f;s.j €s'x�y#.'` �-`' t''4�� 5''r#Va�� "' �✓ o � � � �_ � ^n: � ��'yE�� a. >` 7 ;,' 4c.�j,p y� �"V� 3 , {st •. ��6' V. :�Z1 �"'7 fz. � ^ d = r ;t. c a San �ia D D fib ��,.. '''j ci 1 r�' T�F.•F` � � �'C� .�~y� r. .. � x hlllp �1 y�w��y'-,j, �g 1.. 11rA{ e /s V y s \ LYNN QUADRANGLE .SSACHUSETTS MASSACHUSETTS 0, LIC WORKS ` 7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC) �P 55' 760000 FEET 344 TBE✓ERLY 42 Al", 345 70052' 30" 420 30' 0 3.` / .��♦ n e. oo � ti�U �,Gol��sei( ° '� �` z ``I �/ HA BOR . ° /• Lei- 1 �� (bQ t 1 J _ q � ._ a�- y r• a_ ° � .5�� .a �� ' ( 28�^ LJ Eade� la onto Sad' er> sr 4106 i roph �p p ea �Y2.(tneate - :'� Ji�i � � _ \ .._• �l _ a e 55 BR 1J ♦ � f - S (f 8 Ea / cR \'�F ICC "' !(.' se ti-. O �_� ..({�%I1 L2 � ,►1✓•h�t 5 r�_ '��.c'. '.•Y A/540 ti f �� 50 y Y o St _ \ fAuarry� I • d I .... a _ pu i��, i^.,�� —�� ed eo'.; °O'� Ltr �•$eele U /� Gel L. 1 i' _ \ F4 wa:nllsc � CoOntfY lClu 1 6105 �C ' c � Foatr ems \- � �� /, tN• a�� w 'e FEET p a ` '30�,� / i 1 � \ v�.�\cam� .. s P- _ _ � - �•� ' / �. :,e 4104 J` O N MP B tfi 4 r rlN . do t : � St .�L"liff�f�ek: Bea �!:...:, - -- `'✓f� ,O � - LIY�E)I s Pt 4103 CONVERSION f k -i °,. SCALES Feel m,t... ID 'r `:' eoln'I9 use 4•I, tyt. so „ 1; r - as33 f �/' Y•/ x I ff .p �If°uPes 11 ed 000 ifck / fo .',wx/-�..R 3,. s✓• p 4 ° 2s% Part V:Additional Information for a Department of the Army Permit Not Applicable 1. COE Application No. 2. (to be provided by COE) (Name of waterway) 3. Names and addresses of property owners adjoining your property: 4. Document other prof eat aftemadves(Le.,other locations and/or construction methods,particularly those Mat would eliminate the discharge of dredged or fib material into waters or wetlands). . 5. 8%'x 11'drawings in planview and cross-section,showing the resource area and the proposed activ- fty within the resource area.Drawings must be to scale and should be clear enough for photocopying. CW&adon is rewied from file Division of Water Pollution Conaof before the Feat per"can be saved Certification may be obtained by oamcCng the D'hrsion of Water Pollution Ccnvol. 1 WrV Street Boston. Massae nzsetts 02108. ftem the ac6*will-take place Wait the area under the Massachusetts approved Coastal Zone Managernent Program.the applicant cerdes that his proposed activity corriolies with and will be cmducted in a rnannff that is toonsistem Wdh the approved program Information provided wilt be used in evaluawtg the app5cabon for a permit and is made a matter of pubiic. record through ssuame of a public notice. Otscbsure of.ths information s voluntary. hDAever if necessary ribmtabon is not provided, the application cannot: be processed nor can a permit be &sued. I hereby certify under the pains and penalties of perjury that the foregoing Notice of Intent and accompanying plants,docume and supporting data are true and complete,to the best of my knowledge. ZS Signatur :b Applican' Date l f Hancock Survey Assoc. Inc. July 25, 1985 Signature of Applicant's Representative Date t FORM "Exception to enc form e3" approved by HQUSACE. 6 May 1932• HED 1100 (TEST) 1 MAY 82 '[hb document contains • Joint Department n(the Army and State of Mssssehusstte 00"'t"'for a permit to obtain permission to perform aetivitito is United States maters.The Office of Management and Budget 10M31 hu approved those questions required by the US Army CorPs of Engineers. OMB Number 0702-0036 and expiration data of 30 September 1963 applies". This statement -ill be as, in 6 point type. 3-6 ❑ Coastal Resource Area Type: Idenfifyin9 number a letter ❑ 1r"nd of support documents 2. Clearty,completely and accurately describe,with reference to supporting plans and calculations where necessary; (a) an measures and designs to regulate work within the Butter Zone so as to insure that said work does not after an area specified in Part I,Section 10.02(1)(a)of these regulations;or (b) 0 work In the Butter Zone will atter such an area,all measures and designs proposed to meet the performance standards established for the adjacent resource area specified In Part II or Part III of these regulations. C CosawI Resource Arae Type 9ardered By Tem-Foot Dlacrsaorfary Zone: idendfyf Vq berartettx � k"nd - of support documents Bank, land under waterbody & waterway (Pond) (a) Placement of Raybale siltation check. A. r i I 3-5 I. Delineation of the drainage area contributing to the point of discharge; 2. Pre-and post-development peak run-off from the drainage area,at the point of discharge,for at least the 10-year and 100-year frequency storm: 3. Pre-and post-development rate of infiltration contributing to the resource area checked under Part I,item 11 above; 4. Estimated water quality characteristics of pre-and post-development run-off at the point of discharge. Part IV:Mitigating Measures 1. Clearly,completely and accurately describe,with reference to supporting plans and calculations where necessary: (a) All measures and designs proposed to meet the performance standards set forth under each re- source area speed in Part II or Part III of the regulations;or (b) why the presumptions set forth under each resource area specified in Part II or Part III of the regula- bons do not apply. ❑ Coasw Resource Anes Type: Identayingntanberorteiter ❑ WIN of support doaumnb ❑ CoasW Resource Area Type: - Identaying muTA r or brier ❑ 4dand of support documents t 3.4 MURPHY, RYAN & O'KEEFE ATTORNEYS AT LAW, INC. TEN CHESTNUT STREET JOHN E. MURPHY TIMOTHY J. O'KEEFE PEABODY, MASSACHUSETTS 01960 OF COUNSEL JOHN E. MURPHY,JR. JOSEPH CURTIS RYAN JAMES F. RENNICK (617) 531-1421 LYNDA M. MURPHY JOHN R. KEILTY IN REPLY REFER TO NICHOLAS P. VONTZALIDES FILE NO. D. DEv MONCA June 11 , 1987 Salem Conservation Commission One Salem Green Salem , MA 01970 ATT : Phil Moran RE : Daniel Mackey Dear Phil : I tried contacting you several times in the last few days in order to inform you that Daniel Mackey has completed restoration of the buffer zone in accordance with the plans submitted with our May 18 letter. In order for Mr. Mackey to proceed with surveying the work completed , we request that a site visit be conducted to review and approve the restoration work . Based on my conversations with Ralph Perkins of the DEQE ' s Northeast Regional Office in Woburn , Commissions ' s approval of the recent activities undertaken by Mr. Mackey will be a prerequisite to DEQE ' s withdrawal of further enforcement action in this matter. We will appreciate your cooperation in this matter. Very truly yours , MURPHY , RYAN & O ' KEEFE cat,, `'`� D . Dev. Monga , Esquire JRK : cfj pc : Ralph Perkins Department of Environmental Quality Engineering Wetlands Division 5 Commonwealth Avenue Woburn , MA 01801 trio\ Cos a -vat-ion MaSsachuzctts 01970 May 19, 1987 `:r. Ralph Perkins _ Department of Environmental Quality Engineering 5 Commonwealth Ave. Woburn, MA Dear Mr. Perkins, The Salem Conservation Commission is hereby requesting support from they DEQE. on case ,1164-119. On April 1 1987, the DEQE issued an Enforcement Order to the owner of the property at Legg's Hill in Salem. The order gave the owner 21 days to submit plans of how he proposed to come into compliance with the Conservation Commission's requests. On April 21, 1987 the Commission recieved a letter stating that the owner and his Attorney were willing to discuss the "alledged violation". On May 1, 1987, the Chairman of the Conservation Commission spoke with the owner's Attorney, Mr. Dev Monga. At this time it was agreed that the requested plans would be submitted no later than the next Conservation Commission's • regular meeting. This meeting was held on May 14, 1987. The Commission has not recieved plans. The Commission feels they have taken reasonable measures to,secure complian'ce', without success. The Commission is requesting that the DEQ£ proceed with administrative penalties since we feel this is the only way to secure compliance. Thank you for your cooperation and prompt attention to this matter. Sincerely, 7� Philip D. Moran ~ Chairman 1 Form DEOE File No. 64-119—� .9� (To be provided by DEQE) Commonwealth Dityrrown Salpm =: of MassachusettsApplicant Daniel J. Mackey Enforcement Order Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, §40 Department of Environmental Ouality Enqineering From Issuing Authority To Daniel J. Mackey, Thomas Mackey & Sons, Inc. , 58 Broadway St. , Salem, MA 01970 Date of Issuance Abri 1 1, 1987 Property lot/parcel number,address Rear 12q I nri ng AVgA W@ Extent and type of activity: Removal and filling have resulted in the unauthorized alteration of a bank, bordering vegetated wetlands and land under a waterbody (310 CMR 10.54, 10.55 and 10.56, respectively) , contrary to the Order of Conditions issued by the Salem Conservation Comriission. The Department has determined that the activity described above is in violation of the Wetlands Protection Act,G.L.c. 131, §40,and the Regulations promulgated pur- suant thereto 310 CMR 10.00, because: ❑ Said activity has been/is being conducted without a valid Order of Conditions. file Said activity has been/is being conducted in violation of an Order of Conditions issued to Daniel J. M11ackey P.O.Box 366, Salem, MA nl47n ,dated January 36, lggy Filenumber 64..119 , Conditionnumber(s) 1.9 Special Condition Vs 1,2,3,4,5 & 7 ❑ Other(specify) WARNING: This Enforcement Order.also serves as a notice of non-compliance under the Administrative Penalites Act, M.G.L. Chanter 21A, Section 16. Failure to comply with this Order may result-in;thefassessment of civil administrative penalties under the Act. The. Department hereby orders the following: 15J The property owner,his agents, permittees and all others shall immediately cease and desist from further activity affecting the wetland portion of this property. ❑ Wetland alterations resulting from said activity shall be corrected and the site returned to its original con- dition.. - 9.1 D Completed application forms and plans as required by the Act and Regulations shall be filed with the on or before (date), and no further work shall be performed until a public hearing has been held and an Order of Conditions has been issued to regulate said work. Application forms are available at: Ll The property owner shall take every reasonable step to prevent further violations of the act. ® Other(specify) The apolicant shall within twenty-one (21) days of the date of this Order, submit a plan to the Deaprtment and the Salem Conservation Commission detailing how and 'when he proposes to come into compliance with Order of Conditions 64-119. No work subject to General Laws , Chapter 131, Section 40 may take place until after this plan is approved by the Department and the Salem Conservation Commission. Failure to comply with this Order may constitute grounds for legal action. Massachusetts General Laws Chap- ter 131, Section 40 provides: Whoever violates any provision of this section shall be punished by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not more than six months or both. Each day or portion thereof of continuing violation shall constitute a separate offense. Questions regarding this Enforcement Order should be directed to: Sabin M. Lord, Jr. , Dep.Reg.Env.Engr. Issued by Sabin M. Lord Jr. eputy Reqional Environmental Engineer i Signature(s) _ - - -- -- (Signature of delivery person Y - or certified mail number) You are hereby-notified of your right to an adjudicatory hearing under the Massachusetts Administrative Procedure Act, G.L. c. 30A, Section 10, regarding this Enforcement Order. In accordance with the Department' s Rules for the -Conduct of Adjudicatory Proceedings, 310-CMR 1.00, a Notice of Claim for Adjudicatory Nearing must be filed in-writinq within twenty-one (21) days of the-date of issuance of _ this Enforcement Order, must state clearly and concisely the facts which are grounds -for the-proceeding and the relief sought, and must be addressed-.to: Docket Clerk, Office of the General Counsel Department of Environmental Ouality Engin'ee`ring One Winter Street Boston, MA 02108 9-2 _ _ erected at the site entrance and controlled by a locked gate to insure there is no unauthorized dumping of unacceptable materials: This was not done. Special condition #5 states that the site work resulting in the removal of material or the disturbance of underlying strata shall be prohibited below elevation 40'. This has also been violated. Repeated attempts were made by the Conservation Commission to urge the owner and the owner's attorney to attend meetings and discuss this matter. The Commission's attempts to work cooperatively and keep communication open have been made to no avail. Attached is a letter from the owner's attorney to the Commission dated November 6, 1986. Page 2, paragraph 2 of this letter is especially noteworthy, stating that the owner . complies with the "spirt" if not the "letter" of the Order of Conditions. On December 8, 1986, an informal survey performed by the Planning Department found that the owner had indeed gone below elevation 40 to elevation 30.69. At a regular meeting of the Conservation Commission on December 11, 1986 it was stated that the property owner disputed the results therefore the Commission voted to require the owner to submit a survey signed and stamped by a registered surveyor or professional engineer within 14 days of a letter sent to the owner dated December 19, 1986. (See enclosed) The time period lapsed on January 12, 1987 and the property owner has not yet responded. It should be noted that the owner was offered the option of returning to the Conservation Commission after he reached elevation 40 and a determination made if any significant impact was made. At that time an assessment could be made as to whether going to elevation 35 or 30 would have a significant impact. The owner did not contact the Commission concerning this. (Stated in the minutes of January 16, 1987 page 4). The reasons for the decision by the Conservation Commission to limit excavation below elevation 40 are as follows: 1. Any excavation below elevation 40 will stretch the excavation time out to a prolonged period under which it would be difficult to monitored and ensure that all necessary procedures are being followed. (The owner stated it would be 3-5 years) Sedimentation and erosiori control procedures would be difficult to maintain over this period as well. 2. What the owner proposed disrupts the soil strata and disturbes the filtration medium for run-off which would affect the ground water. We look forward to your prompt attention to this matter. It has been an ongoing problem to the Commission. Our attempts to deal with this in a reasonable fashion have been unsuccessful. Please feel free to contact Rebecca Curran, the Conservation Aide at 744-4580. Sincerely, Philip D. Moran Chairman M20WP \.�koN CpIf z MCommissim• a .. Salem. Massachusetts 01970 41A SS.. ,1 March 10, 1987 Mr. John Felix Department of Environmental Quality Engineering 5 Commonwealth Avenue ! Woburn, MA Dear Mr. Felix: Pursuant to our phone conversation this morning, here is the letter document the ,t "Mack y" case. The Salem Conservation Commission has been unsuccessful in enforcing this case (DEQE x/64-119) which has had a pattern of non-compliance. We are requesting support from the DEQE to secure compliance. r In September of 1984, gravel excavation was observed within the buffer zone of a r wetland without notification to the Conservation Commission. After informal requests for compliance were made with no results, an Enforcement Order was issued dated September 27, 1984 (see attached). On October 27, 1984, an agreement was reached whereby the owner could remove gravel within a specified area outside the 100' buffer i zone. In June 1985, the Commission observed gravel excavation taking place outside of the agreed area. The Commission felt that the removal must cease until proper plans and a Notice of Intent were filed with the Conservation Commission to better assess the wetland and drainage issues. At this time a second Enforcement Order dated June 27, 1985, was issued (see attached). On July 11, 1985, the owner's attorney contacted the Commission requesting that the owner be allowed to remove more gravel from the site. He was then informed that no further removal could take place until a formal filing with the Conservation Commission was made. A Notice of Intent (DEQE File #64-119) was filed on July 25, 1985. A public hearing was held on September 12, 1985. At,the hearing the owner proposed to excavate to elevation 30 within the buffer zone of the pond and install haybale barriers to prevent sedimentation. The public hearing was continued until 1 October 29, 1985. The owner was not present at this time and the meeting was therf ore nullified. The hearing was then continued on December 12, 1985. On that date the hearing was closed and an Order of Conditions was drafted (see attachment). y The owner violated several orders: No sign was posted, Special Condition 7k4 (Order a of Conditions, dated January 6, 1986) states that 'security of the property (site) shall be Ipthe responsibility of the applicant. Prior to any further site work, abarrier shall be t I � MURPHY. RYAN & O'KEEFE ATTORNEYS AT LAw, INC. TEN CHESTNUT STREET M1:F=nr P EABOOY, MASSACHUSETTS 01960 OF COUNSEL - --' J O'KEEFE JOSEPH CURTIS RYAN ....-. E. M-,PHY, JR 16177 5314421 LYNDA M. MURPHY -,-Eq F, RENNICK J J-,N R. KEILTY IN REPLY REFER TO NICHOUS P. VONTZALIOES FILE NO, D DE`: MONGA April 21 , 1987 The Department of Environmental Quality Engineering ( "DEQE" ) 5 Commonwealth Avenue Woburn , MA 01801 ATT : John Felix - RE : Rear 325 Loring Avenue , Salem, MA File No. 64-119 Dear Sirs : This office represents Daniel J. Mackey of Thomas Mackey 8 Sons , Inc. , 58 Broadway Street , Salem, MA, 01970 ( "Mackey" ) in the matters alleged in your Enforcement Order ( "Order" ) dated April 1 , 1987 . The allegations identify " . . . . . . . . . unauthorized alteration of a bank , bordering vegetated wetlands and land under a waterbody (emphasis supplied) . Mackey categorically denies alteration of any of the resource areas identified in the Order. Mackey , however , acknowledges removal of a small quantity of material in the 100 foot buffer zone . This matter was discussed with Dale Yale of the Salem Conservation Commission , on or around October 24 , 1986 , and arguments were presented by Mackey in an. effort to show that the alteration was not significant . Althouth our argument of insignificance remains unchanged , Mackey agrees to restore the altered area to an elevation of 40 feet as required by the Order of Conditions dated January 1986 . The method and time table for restoration will be discussed with the Conservation Commission in the next few days . Your allegation also addresses violation of Condition No. 3 pertaining to security at the site. This Condition states that a barrier shall be erected at the site entrance and controlled by a locked gate . . . . " We will be formally applying .to the Conservation Commission to modify this Condition and permit Mackey to institute an effective but less expensive method of securing the property. A controlled locked gate is not only an Page Two economic hardship but also materially interferes in the operational activity at the site . Mackey has complied with the intent of this Condition in securing the site by physically blocking access and placing a three foot diameter rock and backhoe equipment at the close of every working day. Thanking you very much for your cooperation in this matter. Very truly yours , MURPHY , RYAN & O ' KEEFE �D r-t CJ D . Dev Monga , Esquire DDM:cfj pc : Salem Conservation Commission/ CERTIFIED MAIL ew d � _ �' �--�,_,•l 5 � r.J-�'i.L-`.�"f- -_p�...r��.=�—cam -.mss r�r_�/L.c �-_ ��..,. l`�--`�-"7-S--r" cR t _ ' _._ _ r ____ _ _.- ___ _ i U , -- - -- -- e --,�a C4 _ujO-c c.f uta - - - — ►ma_ ca ,a n� c ►-4h- -cum m Ss,vh-S- -- -- - - __c cm v ,__( ---- - ----- - lqss - - - l r • - ?-� _ _rte_ �F 9?Cc _ ,i)2 -i�5 - i dl PYd - - - - - _ 476.324 _ t cv`e_-— -- -- - - - C�se�u_c. CQ � __ ,ern .oma �� - - - - - - , - I C. - - 1 cvow - - d - - 4br, - - - Wd - �So_ .CRMv1 _ _ a- 'C3 - -- - wol �`A -dnUW rune t u I� _ I III ., II i 1 I T{y- I� -- - t --� �•- - .rte .�_. --. _-w�. _ __ ___. #2582 B HANCOCK SURVEY ASSOCIATES, INC. 69 HOLTON STREET DANVERS, MA 01923 (6171 777-3050/662.9659 - 30 January 19 6 Daniel J. Mackey P.O. Box 366 Salem, MA 01970 Re: Leggs Hill Realty Trust Dear Dan: This office has prepared the grading plan and Notice of Intent presented to the Salem Conservation Commission, showing the proposed excavation between elevation thirty and elevation sixty on your property off Leggs Hill Road. " 1 r. It is our opinion that the removal of this material will.-not-change .' the water table within your property or create a drainage hazard between Leggs Hill Road and the existing pond. (pond elevation twenty seven and half) . The material to be removed from the site is coarse sand and Rravgl. The excavation procedure u would b.e a one yard backhoe to pull the material .r toward the interior of th borrow pit where a front end loader will load the trucks. A haybale siltation r ill be set at elevation thirty to protect the pond. We have shown a ten percent grade coming into the borrow area from Leggs Hill Road and a one 0 o atter on adjacent land. All work will be performed utilizing Standard Construction pro- cedures and safety measures. I If there are any questions by yourself or others please do not hesitate to call. Very truly yours, HANCOCK SURVEY ASSOCIATES, INC. Ted Forbes FMF/mec cc: H.S.A. file A MURPHY, RYAN & O'KEEFE ATTORNEYS AT LAW, INC. TEN CHESTNUT STREET JOHN E. MURPHY TIMOTHY J. O'KEEFE PEABODY, MASSACHUSETTS 01960 OF COUNSEL JOHN E. MURPHY,JR. JOSEPH CURTIS RYAN JAMES F. RENNICK (617) 531-1421 LYNDA M. MURPHY JOHN R. KEILTY IN REPLY REFER TO NICHOLAS P. VONTZALIDES FILE NO. D. DEV MONGA May 18 , 1987 Salem Conservation Commission One Salem Green Salem , MA 01970 ATT : Phil Moran , Esquire RE : Rear 325 Loring Avenue Salem , MA File No. 64-119 Dear Mr. Moran : Pursuant to a site visit on April 30 , 1987 , and our sub- sequent telephone discussions , we wish to submit this plan ( "Plan " ) detailing measures proposed by Daniel Mackey ( " Mackey" ) to restore a section of the 100 foot buffer zone to 40 feet as shown on the attached sketch . PLAN 1) Installation of staked haybales by May 25 , 1987 ; 2) Excavation of clean gravel from elevated sections of the buffer zone and/or from upland areas and placement in the areas to be restored to an elevation of 40 feet . The material so placed will be stabilized by placing rock tailings on the slope. This activity will be completed by June 20 , 1987 . The above activities will be followed by an engineering survey in order to document that the buffer zone has been restored to the 40 foot elevation . The haybales , however , will be kept staked in place until after completion of the inspection by the Conservation Commission . PAGE TWO Please call me if you have any questions regarding this matter. Very truly yours , MURPHY , RYAN & O ' KEEFE D . Dev Monga , Esquire DDM:cfj pc : DEQE , John Felix Bob Welch Danny Mackey f `e MURPHY, RYAN & O'KEEFE COPY ATTORNEYS AT LAW, INC. TEN CHESTNUT STREET JOHN E. MURPHY TIMOTHY J. O'KEEFE PEABO DY, MASSACHUSETTS 01960 OF COUNSEL JOSEPH CURTIS RYAN JOHN E. MURPHY,JR. (617) 531-1421 LYNDA M. MURPHY JAMES F. RENNICK JOHN R. KEILTY IN REPLY REFER TO NICHOLAS P. VONTLALIDES FILE NO. D. DEV MONGA April 21 , 1987 The Department of Environmental Quality Engineering ( "DEQE" ) 5 Commonwealth Avenue Woburn , MA 01801 ATT : John Felix RE : Rear 325 Loring Avenue , Salem , MA File No. 64-119 Dear Sirs : This office represents Daniel J . Mackey of Thomas Mackey & Sons , Inc. , 58 Broadway Street , Salem , MA , 01970 ( " Mackey" ) in the matters alleged in your Enforcement Order ( "Order" ) dated April 1 , 1987 . The allegations identify unauthorized alteration of a bank , border1 ve etated wetlands and land under a waterbody (emp asis Supp ie Mackey categori—' ca y denies alteration of any of the resource areas identified in the Order. Mackey , however , acknowledges removal of a small quantity of material in the 100 foot buffer zone . This matter was discussed with Dale Yale of the Salem Conservation Commission , on or around October 24 , 1986 , and arguments were presented by Mackey in an effort to show that the alteration was not significant . Althouth our argument of insignificance remains unchanged , Mackey agrees to restore the altered area to an elevation of 40 feet as required by the Order of Conditions dated January 1986 . The method and time table for restoration will be discussed with the Conservation Commission in the next few days . Your allegation also addresses violation of Condition No. 3 pertaining to security at the site . This Condition states that . a barrier shall be erected at the site entrance and controlled by a locked gate . . . . . . " . We will be formally applying to the Conservation Commission to modify this Condition and permit Mackey to institute an effective but less expensive method of securing the property . A controlled locked gate is not only an 1 Page Two economic hardship but also materially interferes in the operational activity at the site. Mackey has complied with the intent of this C7ndition in securing the site by physically blocking access and placing a three foot diameter rock and backhoe equipment at the close of every working day. Thanking you very much for your cooperation in this matter. Very truly yours , MURPHY , RYAN & O ' KEEFE D . Dev Monga , Esquire DJM:cfj p: : Salem Conservation Commission C=RTIFIED MAIL Pc Sob Lid, Dk,+-k Isla- l MURPHY, RYAN & O'KEEFE ATTORNEYS AT LAW, INC. JOHN E. MURPHY TEN CHESTNUT STREET ' TIMOTHY J. O'KEEFE PEABODY. MASSACHUSETTS 01960 OF COUNSEL JOHN E. MURPHY,JR. JOSEPH CURTIS RYAN JAMES F. RENNICK (617) 531-1421 LYNOA M. MURPHY JOHN R. KEILTY NICHOLAS P. VONTULIO ES IN REPLY REFER TO D. DEV MONGA FILE NO. June 11 , 1987 Salem Conservation Commission One Salem Green Salem , MA 01970 ATT : Phil Moran RE : Daniel Mackey Dear Phil : I tried contacting you several times in the last few days in order to inform you that Daniel Mackey has completed restoration of the buffer zone in accordance with the plans submitted with our May 18 letter. In order for Mr. Mackey to proceed with surveying the work completed , we request that a site visit be conducted to review and approve the restoration work . Based on my conversations with Ralph Perkins of the DEQE ' s Northeast Regional Office in Woburn , Commissions ' s approval of the recent activities undertaken by Mr. Mackey will be a prerequisite to DEQE ' s withdrawal of further enforcement action in this matter. We will appreciate your cooperation in this matter. Very truly yours , MURPHY , RYAN & O ' KEEFE Opt. r\z,-) D . Dev . Monga , Esquire JRK : cfj PC: Ralph Perkins Department of Environmental Quality Engineering Wetlands Division 5 Commonwealth Avenue Woburn , MA 01801 Co v.-,d \�` %•�� Sale ui. Nfassachusctts 01970 May 19. 1987 ..r. Ralph Perkins Department of Environmental Quality Engineering 5 Commonwealth Ave. Woburn, Dear Mr. Perkins, The Salem Conservation Commission is hereby requesting support from they DEQE. on case-464-119. On April 1 1987, the DEQE issued an Enforcement Order to the owner of the property at Legg's Hill. in Salem. The order gave the owner 21 days to submit plans of how he proposed to come into compliance with the Conservation Commission's requests. On April 21, 1987 the Commission recieved a letter stating that the owner and his Attorney were willing to discuss the "alledged violation". On Yay 1, 1987, the Chairman of the Conservation Commission spoke with the owner's Attorney, Mr. Dev Monga. At this time it was agreed that the requested Plans would be submitted no later than the next Conservation Commission's regular meeting. This meeting was held on May 14, 1987. The Commission has not recieved plans. The Commission feels they have taken reasonable measuies td ,secure compliance' without success. The Commission is requesting that the DEQE proceed with administrative penalties since we feel this is the only way to secure compliance. Thank you for your cooperation and prompt attention to this matter. Sincerely, 2^ Philip D. Moran Chairman Page Two economic hardship but also materially interferes in the operational activity at the site. Mackey has complied with the intent of this Condition in securing the site by physically blocking access and placing a three foot diameter rock and backhoe equipment at the close of every working day . Thanking you very much for your cooperation in this matter. Very truly yours , MURPHY , RYAN & O ' KEEFE -D D t-� CT D . Dev Monga , Esquire DDM:cfj pc : Salem Conservation Commission/ CERTIFIED MAIL MURPHY, RYAN & O'KEEFE ATTORNEYS AT LAw. INC. TEN CHESTNUT STREET JOHN E. MURPHY TIMOTHY J. O'KEEFE PEABODY, MASSACHUSETTS 01960 OF COUNSEL JOSEPH CURTIS RYAN JOHN E. MURPHY.JR. (617) 531-1421 LYNDA M. MURPHY JAMES F. RENNICK JOHN R. KEILTY IN REPLY REFER TO NICHOLAS P. VONTZALIDES FILE NO. D. DEV MONGA April 21 , 1987 The Department of Environmental Quality Engineering ( "DEQE11 ) 5 Commonwealth Avenue Woburn , MA 01801 ATT : John Felix RE : Rear 325 Loring Avenue , Salem , MA File No. 64-119 Dear Sirs : This office represents Daniel J . Mackey of Thomas Mackey & Sons , Inc. , 58 Broadway Street , Salem , MA , 01970 ( " Mackey" ) in the matters alleged in your Enforcement Order ( "Order" ) dated April 1 , 1987 . The allegations identify unauthorized alteration of a bank , borderin ve etated wetlands and land under a waterbody . . . . . F (emphasis Supp ie Mackey categorically denies alteration of any of the resource areas identified in the Order. Mackey , however , acknowledges removal of a small quantity of material in the 100 foot buffer zone. This matter was discussed with Dale Yale of the Salem Conservation Commission , on or around October 24 , 1986 , and arguments were presented by Mackey in an effort to show that the alteration was not significant . Althouth our argument of insignificance remains unchanged , Mackey agrees to restore the altered area to an elevation of 40 feet as required by the Order of Conditions dated January 1986 . The method and time table for restoration will be discussed with the Conservation Commission in the next few days . Your allegation also addresses violation of Condition No . 3 pertaining to security at the site . This Condition states that 11 . . . . . . a barrier shall be erected at the site entrance and controlled by a locked gate We will be formally applying to the Conservation Commission to modify this Condition and permit Mackey to institute an effective but less expensive method of securing the property. A controlled locked gate is not only an y µON coy, • 2 ? C on Commi&io 1 J Salem. Massachusetts 01970 yASSnta TO: Conservation Commission Members FROM: Dale Yale/Rebecca Curran RE: Legg's Hill — discussion At our last meeting, the Commission discussed the results of a survey performed by the Planning Department on the property abutting Legg' s Hill Pond. You will recall that an Order of Conditions issued for the excavation operation on the property limited excavation to elevation 40. It appears from the City's survey that this condition has been violated. The owner of the property has disputed this survey result. Therefore, the Commission voted to require evidence from the owner which supports his claim that the 40' elevation requirement has not been violated ( see attached letter) . A time limit of fourteen days to respond to our request was set forth. The property owner has not yet responded to our letter and the time limit lapsed on January 12, 1957. C1O19 Page -4- AP-NE-87-610 4 . If the Applicant waives his rights to an adjudicatory hearing , and if the Applicant does not pay the full amount of the civil administrative penalty within twenty-one (21 ) days after the date of issuance of this Notice, the Applicant shall be liable to the Commonwealth for up to three times the amount of the penalty, together with costs, plus interest from the time the penalty became final , and attorney's fees, including all costs and attorneys' fees incurred directly in the collection of the penalty. 5. If the non-compliance described in paragraph II (2) above continues or is repeated after the date of issuance of this Notice, additional civil administrative penalties may be assessed for every day of such non-compliance from now on. Such additional civil adminsitrative penalties may be assessed in the course of the adjudicatory hearing on this assessment of a civil adminsitrative penalty, without issuance of any other penalty assessment notice to the Applicant. If the Applicant waives his rights to an adjudicatory hearing on this assessment of a civil administrative penalty, such additional civil administrative penalties may be assessed in as many additional penalty assessment notices as necessary. August 10, 1987 DATE= --------------------- BY- a----- Edward P. Kunce Regional Environmental Engineer P523401348 Certified Mail No . or Delivery Person -------------------- - Page -3- AP-NE 97-610 (8) Deterring future noncompliance by both the Applicant and others. (9) The Applicant 's financial condition. ( 10) The public interest. 2. The Applicant is hereby notified that : ( 1 ) The Applicant has a right to an adjudicatory hearing on this civil administrative penalty assessment. (2) Effective twenty-one (21 ) days after the date of issuance of this Notice, the Applicant shall be deemed to have waived his rights to an adjudicatory hearing on this civil administrative penalty assessment unless, within said twenty-one (21 ) -days, . the Applicant files with the Department ( i .e. , the Department receives) a written statement subject to and in compliance with the applicable provisions of the Department 's Rules for Adjudicatory Proceedings, 310 CMF: 1 .00. a) alleging either or both of the following: ( i ) a denial of what is set forth in paragraph=_. ( II ) (3) , (4) and (6) . ( ii ) asserting that the money amount of the civil administrative penalty as set forth in para- graph III ( 1 ) above is excessive. b ) clearly and concisely states every point of fact and law the Applicant intends to raise in the- adjudicatory proceeding . c) is addressed to: Docket Clerk, Office of General Counsel , Department of Environmental Quality Engi- neering, One Winter Street, 3rd Floor, Boston, MA 02108. 3. If the Applicant waives his rights to an adjudicatory hearing, the Applicant must pay ,the full amount of the civil administrative penalty no later than twenty-one (21 ) days after the date of issuznce of this Notice. - Payment must be by certified check, cashier's check, or money order, payable to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. No other form of payment shall be accepted. Payment must be mailed or hand-delivered to the Adminisitrative ` ~PenaltyClerk5- Bureau 'bf Administrative Services, 'FYle -" - '= #AP-NE-87-6i0, 4th Floor, DELE, 1 Winter Street, Poston, MR 02108. All checks shall bear the file numbers of this document (AP-NE-87-610) . �ji ti Page -8- AP-NE-87-610 4. The activity described in (3) above was not in compliance with Chapter 131 , Section 40 in that the activities were not permitted by Order of Conditions No. 64-119. The Order's conditions 1 , 9, 12 (plans) , special conditions 1 , 23 3, 4, 5, and 7 were not followed. This non-compliance was a violation that caused significant impact on public health, safety, welfare, and the environment ; and was willful and not the result of error. 5. On April 1 , 1987, the Department issued an Enforcement Order which instructed that work in areas subject to the Wetlands Protection Act be halted, that further violations be prevented , and that a plan be submitted within 21 days detailing how the Applicant will come into compliance with Order of Conditions no , 64-119. This Enforcement Order was not appealed . 6. This Enforcement Order was not complied with, in that no plan or other relevant document was submitted to the Department . This non-compliance was a violation that caused significant impact on public health , safety, welfare and the environment ; and was willful and not the result of error. - — III . DISPOSITION 1 . For the violation set forth in paragraph II (2) above, the Department assesses upon the Applicant a ci=vil administrative penalty in the amount of $1.8 950. As required by G.L. c . 21A, s. 16 and 310 CMF: 5.25, the Department considered the following factors in determining the amount of the penalty: ( 1 ) Actual and potential impact on public health , safety, and welfare, and the environment . (2) Actual and potential damages suffered , and actual or potential costs incurred , by the Commonwealth , or by any other person. (3) . . .Whether the Applicant took steps to prevent the failures to comply. (4) . . .Whether the Applicant took steps to promptly come into compliance after the Occurrence of the failures to comply. (5) Whether the Applicant took steps to remedy and mitigate whatever harm occurred as 4- result of the -failures to comply. (6) Whether the Applicant has previously failed to comply with any regulation, order, license, or approval issued or adopted by the-Department , or -any` law which- the Department' has the. - authority or responsibility to enforce. (7) Making compl-iance less costly than the failures- tc, _-- - -comply. _ t S. RUSSELL SYLVA qUg 1 r Commissioner 938-0320 August 10, 1967�P�ha�,�n®fPl In the Matter of ) File # AP-NE-87-610 ,/WW NOTICE OF INTENT TO ASSESS Thomas Mackey and ) A CIVIL ADMINISTRATIVE Sons, Inc. ) PENALTY I . THE PARTIES 1 . The Department of Environmental Quality Engineering (the Department) is a duly constituted agency of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. It maintains an office located at 5 Commonwealth Avenue, Woburn, MA 01801 ; its principal office is at 1 Winter Street , Poston, MA 02108. 2. Thomas Mackey and Sons, Inc . , Daniel J. Mackey, president ( the "Applicant" ) is the owner of land at Rear 325 Loring Avenue, Salem, MA recorded in the Registry of Esser. County in Rook 5225, page 331 . II . STATEMENT OF FACTS AND LAW 1 . The Department has the powers and duties set forth in G.L. c . 131 , s. 40 and regulations promulgated pursuant to that statute at 310 CMR 10.00. 2. On January 16, 1986, the Salem Conservation Commission issued Order of Conditions number 64-119 to the Applicant, allowing certain work on the site according to plans submitted and agreed upon by the parties. 3. On March 25, 1987, in response to complaints from both residents and the Salem Conservation Commission, a Department representative visited the project site and recorded a number of violations of the Order of Conditions. Specifically, the submitted plans were not followed, a file no . sign was not posted, erosion - controls were not approved or installed, unpermitted alterations of resource areas took place,removal of gravel materials took place below .elevation 40, and bank- stabilization and restabilization of disturbed areas was not accomplished . Z cjol �1'V M cOIIlI12issim Salem. Massachusetts 01970 W �' ASSt�N�� February 18, 1986 Mr. Daniel Mackey T. Mackey & Sons 58 Broadway Salem, MA. 01970 Re: Legg's Hill Road, DEQE File #64-119 Dear Mr. Mackey: '.At their meeting of February 13, 1986, the Conservation Commission voted to toll the appeal period on the above—referenced Order of Conditions from the date of this letter. Therefore, the ten—day appeal period will lapse on February 28, 1986. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely urs, � 2) Philip D. Moran Chairman cc: Atty Timothy O'Keefe DEQE f"Y .,,,.��,♦, • • i2senvati on Commission ; � Salem. `1a«dchu=ctf� 111970 December 29, 1986 Mr. Daniel J. Mackey T. Mackey & Sons 58 Broadway Street Salem. 'riA 01970 , Dear Mr. Mackey: -- ....,.-._.... _ .- . . The Salem Conservation Commission is of the opinion that excavations along Legg's Hill Pond on your property, within the 100' buffer zone, have taken place- below the 40' elevation allowed by your Order of Conditions, D.E.Q.E. X64-119, dated Januaiy 16, 1986. -- This letter hereby requests-that asurvey;''signed and stamped by 'a ` ' neeistered Land Surveyo�Or'ProfessidnaY`Erglnee' `te" submit*ed Co—fie Commission which documents actual elevations of excavations within the b :ffer zone of the pond.- –Chis- s6rvey 0 11 tie'submi"tted to [he `' ---- Cc;.:ervation Cor..r. ission within fourteen i :4) days of the date of this lctter, ,le look forward :o yoLr erempt etter:icn tc tais mater. Since_ely, yours . Phi ! is D. Moran C`:a :...an CC: Dev Monga 0923 TO : Dale Yale RE : Daniel J . Mackey File #64-119 Order of Condition dated January 16 , 1986 Dear Ms . Yale : This summarizes our most recent discussions regarding the Order of Conditions ( "Order" ) referenced above issued to our client , Daniel J . Mackey . It appears that the Commission members have concerns about Dan Mackey ' s lack of cooperation in complying with the Order as follows : 1 ) Dust Control ; 2) Security ; 3) Siltation Control and 4) 40 foot elevation. Based on discussions with our client and site visits , it appears that non compliance is of a de minimis nature and that the issues can be resolved by establishing better communications between our client and the Commission members . We hope that this letter will serve the purpose of improving communications and in addressing immediate con- cerns on specific issues raised by the Commission members . Dust Control problem , although not under the jurisdiction of the Conservation Commission , is addressed in special condition 10 of the Order which directs the applicant to employ water during excavation . Daniel Mackey tried this technique with the undesirable result of r creating mud some of which was transported into the streets by truck tires . Our client ' s good faith efforts to comply with this condition are further evidenced by his application of calcium chloride to control/dust. Our client also respectfully submits the fact that most if not all the dust at the site is created by operations in the upland area and not by any activity in the buffer zone where the soil is more 'gravelly and , therefore , does not easily get airborne. Our client also recognises his obligations to secure the property in order to control incidents of unauthorized dumping of unacceptable materials . Special Condition 4 directs the applicant to erect and secure .a gate at the site entrance at a considerable expense. Instead of a gate , our client resorted to blocking the entrance with a three foot diameter rock and move the rock as needed to gain entrance. This alternative used by Dan Mackey complies with the "spirit" if not the "letter" of your directive and ultimately serves the interests pro- tected by the Wetlands Protection Act and its implementing regula- tions . Protection of the bank as well as the pond from sedimentation is being done by exercising management controls instead of installing rows of staked hay bales or silt fences . Management controls generally comprise maintaining the�berm at existing elevations which are generally higher than 40 feet and ensuring stability of the berm so that it may continue acting as a natural barrier. This seems to be an effective alternative method for preventing siltation particularly in view of the fact that installing staked row of hay bales is not feasible at certain sections due to bank topography and steep slopes . E r Since enforcement of this condition at this stage will create undue hardship , our client will keep at the site , if acceptable to the Commission , 50 bales of hay for any emergency which may result from a breach of the berm. The above summary shows that Dan Mackey has shown good faith in complying with the Order of Conditions and that he will continue to do so, If you have any questions regarding this matter , please call me. We will also be very happy to meet with the Commission members , either formally or infor- mally , to discuss any issues they may have in order to develop a better communication between the various parties . Thanking you for your cooperation in this matter. �r MEMORANDUM FROM: Robert W. Welch, Esq . TO: Timothy J . O 'Keefe , Esq . RE : Order of Conditions — Leggs Hill DATE : January 24 , 1986 Danny and I have discussed the Order of Conditions today and I would like to make the following comments : ( a) The Order of Conditions are issued to Daniel J . Mackey. The name of the property owner indicated Daniel J. Mackey ( same) . The property is actually owned by Leggs Hill Realty Trust — Daniel J . Mackey , Trustee , for the benefit of Herbert Mackey , Edward Mackey and Daniel J . Mackey . The organization that is doing the work at Leggs Hill is T. Mackey 6 Sons , Inc . Daniel Mackey neither owns nor is doing any work at Leggs Hill . (b) A hearing was held on January 16 , 6986 ( ? ) and the decision was filed on the 16th day of January , 1986 . Note : Phil Moran did not sign it , but it was not released by the Conservation Commission or their Clerk until January 23 , 1986 . We have been attempting to get this decision since Monday , January 20 , 1986 and were not able until January 23 , 1986 . ( c) The appeal period from this order has to be made "within ten days from the date of issuance of this order" ( see statement below Dale Yale ' s signature) . You will note that the order says it was issued and delivered by certified mail , return receipt requested , on blank date , when in fact it was issued and delivered in hand on January 23 , 1986 . This means the appeal period expires February 1 , 1986 . (d) The property is recorded at the Essex South District Registry of Deeds , Book 7598 , Page 54 . The valuable gravel located at the site is between elevation 30 and 40 . Gravel above elevation 40 is not as valuable to T. Mackey 6 Sons as the gravel between 30 and 40 . On the other hand , I wonder if we appeal this decision if we would have to stop all work in removing gravel until the appeal is heard . By that time the land may have been sold and winning the appeal would be of little use to Danny. As you know, we have the property under a Purchase and Sale Agreement for a financial arrangement which I think both Danny and I agree is very satisfactory to him. We do not want to do anything that would in any way interfere with the consummation of that agreement . Mr . Kavanaugh has agreed to intercede with the Conservation Commission on our behalf and does not want us to appeal this decision. The question of whether we appeal the decision or not cannot take into consideration Mr . Kavanaugh' s feelings , but I believe our game plan at this time is : ( a) Not appeal this decision for the reason stated above; (b) Meet with Mr . Kavanaugh and see if he will get the decision changed for us; (c) In the event that does not work, request that a new decision be issued naming the proper parties and dates and then take another look at it to see if we can appeal from the decision when it issues in proper form. In the event that we are unable to do that then, of course , we will have to stand by our original decision not to appeal at this time and pursue whatever remedies we may have against the City of Salem for flooding out Mr. Mackey' s land and/or depriving him of his grandfather rights to screw up the environment of the City of Salem. ( Please note Mr . Mackey' s objection to the characterization in the last statement ) . 'I z CODServatim Commissim r; Salem. Massachusetts 01970 ASSn�� AGENDA--June 26, 1986 i 1. Public Hearing--Legg's Hill Pond control structure 2. Public Hearing--Zieff, Pond Improvements 3. Public Hearing--Locust Street, boat ramp 4. Certificate of Compliance--Maynard Plastics 5. Order of Conditions--Salem Suede 6. Approval of Minutes 7. Old/New Business I JWN Co. l� Consen ,,.meg..° �1�4r r Salem. P'ifassachusetts 01970 December 29, 1986 Mr. Daniel J. Mackey _ T. Mackey & Sons - _ - 58 Broadway Street Salem, MA 01970 Dear Mr. Mackey: The Salem Conservation Commission is of the opinion that excavations along Legg' s Hill. Pond onyourproperty, within the 100' buffer zone, have taken place- below the 40' elevation allowed by- your Order of Conditions, D.E.Q.E. -`64-1.190 dated Januar} 16, 1-986 -- aThis letter hereby requests thar a scr'vev, sig"'ted and In mpeo`•by a - - .,. - Registered Land Surveyor or-Professi`ona`l En.gineei `"be 'suomit;ed^ -' _ - Commission which documents actual elevation=_ of excavations within the buffer -zone of -the-pond:- -This- TOYVey sh'a'll"be-su6mi�ced to -fie -`T— Conservation Commission within fourteen (14) days of the date of this - letter. -- - --- -- ..___._--- ----- - --- We look forward to your prompt atten=ion to this matter. Sincerely, yours, viz_rr—, Philip D. Moran J Chairman CC: Dev Monga C923 MUIRPHY, RYAN & ®'KEEEE ATTORNEYS AT LAW, INC. TEN CHESTNUT STREET JOHN E. MURPHY TIMOTHY J. O'KEEFE PEABODY, MASSACHUSETTS 01960 OFCOUNSEL JOSEPH CURTIS RYAN JOHN E. MURPHY,JR. (617) 531-1421 LYN DA M. MURPHY JAMES F. RENNICK JOHN R. KEILTY IN REPLY REFER TO NICHOLAS P. VONTZALIDES FILE NO. D. DEV MONGA November 6, 19 6 !^`, Salem Planning Board (JV1 <, i.986 Essex Green `C4P,9 P Salem, MA 01970 `R�hVi'VG DE'pr I ATT: Dale Yale RE: Daniel J. Mackey File #64-119 Order of Conditions dated January 16, 1966 Dear Ms. Yale: This summarizes our most recent discussions regarding the Order of Conditions ("Order") referenced above issued to our client, Daniel J. Mackey. It appears that the Commission members have concerns about Dan Mackey's lack of cooperation in complying with the Order as follows: 1) Dust Control 2) Security 3) Siltation Control and 4) 40 foot elevation. Based on discussions with our client and site visits, it appears that non compliance is of a de minimis nature and that the issues can be resolved by establishing better communications between our client and the Commission members. We hope that this letter will serve the purpose of improving such communications and in addressing immediate concerns on specific issues raised by the Commission members. Dust Control problem, although not under the jurisdiction of the Con- servation Commission, is addressed in special condition 10 of the Order which directs the applicant to employ water during excavation. Daniel Mackey tried this technique with the undesirable result of creating mud :some of which was transported into the streets by truck tires. Our client's good faith efforts to comply with this condition are further evidenced by his application of calcium chloride to control dust. Our client also respectfully submits the fact that most if not all the dust at the site is created by operations in the upland area and not by any activity in the buffer zone where the soil is more gravelly and, therefore, does not easily get airborne. Our client also recognises his obligations to secure the property in order to control incidents of unauthorized dumping of unacceptable materials. Special Condition 4 directs the applicant to erect and secure a gate at the site entrance at a considerable expense. Instead of a gate, our client resorted to blocking the entrance with a three foot diameter rock and move the rock as needed to gain entrance. This alternative used by Dan Mackey complies with the "spirit" if not the "letter" of your directive and ultimately serves the interests pro- tected by the Wetlands Protection Act and its implementing regulations. Protection of the bank as well as the pond from sedimentation is being done by exercising management controls instead of installing rows of staked hay bales or silt fences. Management controls generally com- prise maintaining the bank at existing elevations which are generally higher than 40 feet and ensuring stability of the bank so that it may continue acting as a natural barrier. This seems to be an effective alternative method for preventing siltation particularly in view of the fact that installing staked row of hay bales is not feasible at certain sections due to bank topography and steep slopes. Since enforcement of this condition at this stage will create undue hardship, our client will keep at the site, if acceptable to the Commission, 50 bales of hay for any emergency which may result from a breach of the bank. The above summary shows that Dan Mackey has shown good faith in com- plying with the Order of Conditions and that he will continue to do so. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call me. We will also be very happy to meet with the Commission members, either formally or informally, to discuss any issues they may have in order to develop a better communication between the various parties. Thanking you for your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, MURPHY, RYAN & O'KEEFE D. Dev Monga, Esquire DDM:cfj -2- t i J I MACKEY — LEGG'S HILL fI DRAFT ORDER OF CONDITIONS Presumptions of Significance Public Water Supply Ground Water Supply Prevention of Pollution 8 1. Except as modified by this Order of Conditions, all work shall conform to plans submitted with the Notice of Intent, dated 1/85. Any changes made or intended to be made in the plans shall require the applicant to inquire of the Commission in writing whether the change requires a new filing. A site plan noting changes required by this Order of Conditions shall be submitted to the Conservation Commission prior to. the commencement of site worts. 2 . Prior to the commencement of site work, a written erosion control and sedimentation barrier program shall be established, submitted to the Conservation Commission and approved by the Conservation Commission. The erosion control and sedimentation barriers shall be established in accordance with "Erosion and Sedimentation Control Guidelines", Publication #13,529-39-1000-2-84 C.R. , dated august , 1983. The erosion control and sedimentation barrier program shall address, but not be limited to, the type of barrier (s) , placement, maintenance, frequency of replacement , stabilization and revegetation. 3. No site work shall commence until the approved barriers have been installed, inspected and approved by the Conservation Commission or its designated representative. 4. ' Security of the property ( site) shall be the responsibility of the applicant. Prior to any further site work, a barrier shall be erected at the site entrance and controlled by a locked gate to insure there is no unauthorized dumping of unacceptable materials. 5. Site work resulting in the removal of material or the disturbance of underlying strata shall be prohibited below elevation 40. 6. Prior to the commencement of site work, all unacceptable fill material on the site shall be removed from the site and disposed of in a manner approved by the Conservation Commission. 7. All disturbed banks within the 100' buffer zone with pervious underlying stratas shall be stabilized in accordance with the "Erosion and Sedimentation Control Guidelines", Publication #13 ,529-39-1000-2-84—C.R. , dated August, 1983, at a slope not to exceed 1'x:1 . Revegetation of said areas shall be attempted during each growing season. Any area which does not revegetate over 75% of its surface within two growing seasons shall be replanted with indigenous species. A revegetation plan for such purposes shall be presented to and approved by the Conservation Commission prior to its implementation. — Page 2 — 8. The Conservation Commission or its designated agent shall be notified immediately of any unacceptable fill found during the site preparation. If the Conservation Commission or DEQE determines the unacceptable material to be non—hazardous, it will be removed from the site and disposed of in a manner approved by the Conservation Commission. Fill material which is determined to be hazardous by the Conservation Commission or DEQE shall be removed to an approved facility and copies of delivery slips shall be supplied to the Conservation Commission. Until such unacceptable hazardous material is removed from the site, no additional site work may be performed. 9. Upon written advance notification, Conservation Commission members and/or its agent shall have the right to enter and inspect the site to evaluate compliance with these conditions and to require the applicant to submit any data deemed necessary by the Commission for that evaluation. LAJ r MURPHY, ]RYAN & ®'KEEFE ATTORNEYS AT LAW, INC. TEN CHESTNUT STREET JOHN E. MURPHY TIMOTHY J. O'KEEFE PEABODY. MASSACHUSETTS 01960 OF COUNSEL JOSEPH CURTIS RYAN JOHN E. MURPHY,JR. (617) 531-1421 LYNDA M. MURPHY JAMES F. RENNICK JOHN R. KEILTY IN REPLY REFER TO NICHOLAS P.VONTZALIDES FILE NO. D. DEV MONGA November 6, 1986 Salem Planning Board Essex Green Salem, MA 01970 ATT: Dale Yale RE: Daniel J. Mackey File #64-119 Order of Conditions dated January 16, 1986 Dear Ms. Yale: This summarizes our most recent discussions regarding the Order of Conditions ("Order" ) referenced above issued to our client, Daniel J. Mackey. It appears that the Commission members have concerns ' about Dan Mackey' s lack of cooperation in complying with the Order i as follows: 1) Dust Control f 2) Security 3) Siltation Control and 4) 40 foot elevation. Based on discussions with our client and site visits, it appears that non compliance is of a de minimis nature and that the issues can be resolved by establishing better communications between our client and the Commission members. We hope that this letter will serve the purpose of improving such communications and in addressing immediate concerns on specific issues raised by the Commission members. Dust Control problem, although not under the jurisdiction of the Con- servation Commission, is addressed in special condition 10 of the Order which directs the applicant to employ water during excavation. Daniel Mackey tried this technique with the undesirable result of _ creating mud some of which was transported into the streets by truck tires. Our client's good faith efforts to comply with this condition are further evidenced by his application of calcium chloride to control dust. Our client also respectfully submits the fact that most if not all the dust at the site is created by operations in the upland area and not by any activity in the buffer zone where the soil is more gravelly and, therefore, does not easily get airborne. Our client also recognises his obligations to secure the property in order to control incidents of unauthorized dumping of unacceptable materials. Special Condition 4 directs the applicant to erect and secure a gate at the site entrance at a considerable expense. Instead of a gate, our client resorted to blocking the entrance with a three foot diameter rock and move the rock as needed to gain entrance. This alternative used by Dan Mackey complies with the "spirit" if not the "letter" of your directive and ultimately serves the interests pro- tected by the wetlands Protection Act and its implementing regulations. Protection of the bank as well as the pond from sedimentation is being done by exercising management controls instead of installing rows of staked hay bales or silt fences. Management controls generally com- prise maintaining the bank at existing elevations which are generally higher than 40 feet and ensuring stability of the bank so that it may continue acting as a natural barrier. This seems to be an effective alternative method for preventing siltation particularly in view of the fact that installing staked row of hay bales is not feasible at certain sections due to bank topography and steep slopes. Since enforcement of this condition at this stage will create undue hardship, our client will keep at the site, if acceptable to the Commission, 50 bales of hay for any emergency which may result from a breach of the bank. The above summary shows that Dan Mackey has shown good faith in com- plying with the order of Conditions and that he will continue to do so. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call me. We will also be very happy to meet with the Commission members, either formally or informally, to discuss any issues they may have in order to develop a better communication between the various parties. Thanking you for your cooperation in this:.matter. Sincerely, MURPHY, RYAN & O'KEEPE D. Dev Monga, Esquire DDM:c£j -2- Date Hour To WHILE YOU WERE OUT M Of Phone Area Code Phone Number Telephoned Returned Call Left Package Please Call I I Was In Please See Me Will Call Againj I Will Return I I Important Message Signed AIGNER FORM NO.55056 PRINTED IN USA �J �'Y',o �C.� CC\ �f ��` i f� � �� ATTORNEYS AT LAW, INC. TEN CHESTNUT STREET JC-N E. MURPHY TIYDTHY J. O'KEEFE PEABODY, MASSACHUSETTS 01960 OF COUNSEL JOSEPH CURTIS RYAN JC-.N E. MURPHY. JR. (617) 531-1421 L_YN DA M. MURPHY Ja,!S F. REN NICK JC-N R. KEILT'Y IN REPLY REFER TO NIS:=OCAS P. VONTZALIDES FILE NO. D. DEV MONGA November 6, 1986 Salem Planning Board Essex Green Salem, MA 01970 �_�� CF")' • / ATP: Dale Yale RE: Daniel J. Macke File 64- Y $ 119 Order of Conditions dated January 16, 1986 Dear Ms. Yale: This summarizes our most recent discussions regarding the Order of Conditions ("Order" ) referenced above issued 'to our client, Daniel J. Mackey. It appears that the Commission members have concerns about Dan Mackey's lack of cooperation in complying with the Order as follows: 1) Dust Control 2) Security 3) Siltation Control and 4) 40 foot elevation. Based on discussions with our client and site visits, it appears that non compliance is of a de minimis nature and that the issues can be resolved by establishing better communications between our client and the Commission members. We hope that this letter will serve the purpose of improving such communications and in addressing immediate concerns on specific issues raised by the—Commission members. Dust Control problem, although not under the jurisdiction-of--the Con- servation Commission, is addressed in special condition 10 of the-- Order which directs the applicant to employ water during excavation. . Daniel Mackey tried this technique with the undesirable result of creating mud :some of which was transported into the streets by truck tires. Our client' s good faith efforts to comply with this condition are further evidenced by his application of calcium chloride to control dust. Our client also respectfully submits the fact that most if not all the dust at the site is created by operations in the upland area and not by any activity in the buffer zone where the soil is more gravelly and, therefore, does not easily get airborne. Our client also recognises his obligations to secure the property in order to control incidents of unauthorized dumping of unacceptable materials. Special Condition 4 directs the applicant to erect and secure a gate at the site entrance at a considerable expense. Instead of a gate, our client resorted to blocking the entrance with a three foot diameter rock and move the rock as needed to gain entrance. This alternative used by Dan Mackey complies with the "spirit" if not the "letter" of your directive and ultimately serves the interests pro- tected by the Wetlands Protection Act and .its implementing regulations. Protection of the bank as well as the pond from sedimentation is being done by exercising management controls instead of installing rows of staked hay bales or silt fences. Management controls generally com- prise maintaining the bank at existing elevations which are generally higher than 40 feet and ensuring stability of the bank so that it may continue acting as a natural barrier. This seems to be an effective alternative method for preventing siltation particularly in view of the fact that installing staked row of hay bales is not feasible at certain sections due to bank topography and steep slopes. since enforcement of this condition at this stage will create undue hardship, our client will keep at the site, if acceptable to the Commission, 50 bales of hay for any emergency which may result from a breach of the bank. The above summary shows that Dan Mackey has shown good faith in com- plying with the order of Conditions and that he will continue to do so. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call me. We will also be very happy to meet with the Commission members, either formally or informally, to discuss any issues they may have in order to develop a better communication between the various parties. Thanking you for your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, MURPHY, RYAN & O'KEEFE D. Dev Monga, Esquire DDM:cfj -2- l • TEL. 711-9649 THOMAS MACKEY & SONS, Inc. SAND : GRAVEL : LOAM : FILLING : BLACKTOP TRUCKING AND EXCAVATING - DEMOLITION WORK 58 BROADWAY, SALEM, MASS, 01970 c' aber 2 ].9R�, Atty. Pohert• P:'eI r , 221 Fssex Street Salem, "a. 01970 Dear Tn ren] y to a reouest from you for a statement as to the nast and future use of the T.eggs Sill Property, owned by Thomas '"ackev y , Sons , Ihc. . T wish to state the follo-wing facts concerning the nrorerty. This rronerty was rurchased by the '"ackey family 45 years ago, it has been used from the turn of the century to the nresent time for the removal of gravel and rock. Also, at various times we have derosited backfill. material on certain areas of this -ronerty rerlacing the gravel . This backfill material consisted mainly of blasted ledge and earth from various construction sites over the last 50 years. TO the best of my knowledge there are no harmful substances huried on this nrorerty. The City, of Salem Tree Department at, one time film-ed some brush and leaves near the westerly nrorerty line; this material :as srread out and covered with layers of earth, therefore , T consider anv backfilled area as strlact.urely sound . Our future intentions until such time if the rro-erty is sold is to continue the o-eration the same as stated' above. T v:il.] gladl•,, meet ::ith any nrosnective rurchaser and mutually agree as to the limits of our oneration during the time a Purchase and Sell agreement is in effect. T will be glad to walk the nronerty with any nrosnective nurchaser or his renresentative to rointout anv filled areas and remaining deposits of gravel. Very truly yours, 0.'AS "ACKEv F- SOIP?S , TRc , DJ?I: hag Daniel. J� °'ackey Genera] anager Y' Dear Mr. Casper, Enclosed Please find the Enforcement Order dated 9/27/84 and the Enforcement Order issued by DEQE on 4/1/87. I am unable to locate a copy of the Order dated 7/25/85 and issued by the Salem Conservation Commission. Following is a breif history of the area: In September of 1984, gravel excavation was observed within the buffer zone of a wetland without notification to the Conservation Commission. After informal requests for. compliance were made with no results, an Enforcement Order was issued dated September 27, 1984. On October 27, 1984, an agreement was reached whereby the owner could remove gravel within a specified area outside the 100' buffer zone. In June 1985, the Commission observed gravel excavation taking place outside the agreed. area. The Commission felt that the removal must cease until proper plans and a Notice of Intent were filed with the Conservation Commission to better asess the wetland and drainage issues, At this time a second Enforcement Order dated June 27, 1985, was issued. On July 11 , 1985, the owner's attorney contacted the Commission requesting that the owner be allowed to remove gravel from the site. He was then informed that no further removal could take place until a formal filing with the Conservation Commission was made A Notice of Intent (DEOE file 1164-119) was filed on July 25, 1985. A public hearing was held on September 12, 1985. At the hearing the owner proposed to excavate to elevation 30 within the buffer zone and install haybale barriers to prevent sedimentation. The hearing was continued and an Order of Conditions was issued dated January 6, 1986. The owner violated several of the Orders. Repeated attempts were made by the Conservation Commission owner and owner's attorney to attend meetings and discuss this matter. On January 27, 1987 the Commission formal}jreauested assistance in securwocompliance in this case. On April 1 1987 the DEOE issued an enforcement order reouest14he owner to come into compliance by submitting plans to both DEQE and the Conservation Commission. The Commission recieved a letter on April 21, 1987 stating that the owner would be willing to meet and discuss concerns, the Commission and DEOE recieved inappropriate plans dated May 18, 1987, DEQE is presently preparing administrative penalties to issue the owner If I can assist you please feel free to call, Sincere Rebecca Curran go,;tb. � 7t` �'�• M` r '+i; �..'.�� r':-�.� �,/._...._ � �r .moi � -- ._ .. �- �� ,� Mir �'. � .•,� ' ►rY�� ' 1R' "'"S l __%�� .'-T�.J ,: 'T�•1 1-3 ,:x.5.4€ .S-F3ta'.."'.'''.-�� . � �.. � `� � _. � � �l� - �6 a�a�-.. ' --S. 19 _,.1t ,�, °moi 4 ..�, • .;.' - t i'r} ' �� ; .fiC t 7l� _ �• .� i I m sim i Z � Salem. Massachusetts 01970 ASsnt�� I TO: CONSERVATION COMMISSION MEMBERS FROM: GERARD KAVANAUGH RE: LEGG'S HILL ORDER OF CONDITIONS ------------------------------------------------------------------ Attorney Timothy O'Keefe and Mr. Ted Forbes of Hancock Survey will be representing the Applicant. You. may ..recall, this matter was contidued pending a site visit by the Commission. Mr. Mackey proposes to excavate to elevation 30 within the buffer zone of the pond on his property. The following concerns were raised at the public hearing: I. Stability of the bank 2. Installation of a silt fence vs staked hay bales 3. Existence of inappropirate materials on the site 4. Excessive grade (10% for access roadway) ' It should be noted that Mr. Mackey has an informal agreement with the commission to excavate to elevation 40 (from elevation 60) . . It was the consensus at the site visit that no further excavation below without a thorough investigation of soil conditions (21—E) . The proximity to Marblehead's well heads should also be considered. Among other conditions, I suggest the following: 1 . Except as otherwise authorized by this Order, all work shall be in accordance with the Notice of Intent, including supporting documentation and plans. 2. Any changes made or intended to be made in the plans shall require the applicant to inquire of the Conservation Commission in writing whether the changes require Salem Conservation Commission approval. 3. Prior to excavation, a silt fence shall be installed according to "Erosion and Sedimentation Control Guidelines", Publication #13, 529-39-1000-2-84—C.R. , dated August, 1983. Such siltation barrier shall be approved by the Conservation Commission or its designated agent. i 4. If, during the course of construction, the Applicant discovers inappropriate fill within the wetland or buffer zone, it shall be promptly removed from the site. If said fill might be construed as hazardous," the following steps shall be taken., The Applicant shall immediately request a determination from the DEQE as to whether the material constitutes a hazardous waste. If DEQE determines the material to be non-Hazardous, the Applicant will remove the material from the site or dispose of the matter on site in a manner approved by the Conservation Commission. Fill material which DEQE determines to be hazardous shall be removed from the site within four weeks from the date of the positive finding. The hazardous material shall be removed to an approved facility and copies of delivery slips shall be supplied to the Conservation commission. Until such material is removed, the material shall be covered and surrounded by hay bales. The• Applicant shall provide the Conservation Commission with copies of all correspondence to and from DEQE within seven calendar days. 5. The Applicant, and his successors and assigns shall be reponsible 0 for ensuring that salt as a de—icing agent shall not be used on - roadways. 6. Sank stability 7. Limits of excavation (no less than 40?) r . DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY NEW ERGLAND DIVISION. CORPS OF ENGINEERS 424 TRAPELO ROAD WAITHA M. MASSACHUSETTS 02254 nF.E. t0 •iIE NnN ). August 26, 1985 Planning Division Plan Formulation Branch Mr. Robert M. Rargman Boston Investment and Development Company 151 Tremont Street Boston, Massachusetts 02111 Dear Mr. Rargman: This is in response to your letter of August 16, 1985, concerning your proposal to widen a bridge and install utilities across the Forest River in Salem, Massachusetts. Although you stated that this stream was under the control of the Corps of Engineers, the Corps does not maintain a navigable channel in this area, and, therefore, the river is not directly under Corps jurisdiction. However, the placement of fill in the river or adjacent wetlands or the installation of subaqueous utility lines would require a permit from this office. The construction of a bridge over this river and utility lines connected to that structure requires authorization from the D.S. Coast Guard at 150 Causeway Street, Boston, Massachusetts. In addition the State also has permit procedures, as basically the waterway comes under their jurisdiction. I have enclosed booklets that describe the Corps of Engineers permit process as administered by our Regulatory Branch. If you have further questions in this matter you should address them directly to Mr. Robert DeSista, Regulatory Branch, at 1-800-362-4367 (toll free). Sincerely, ��Jo4PianngiD phCh ef, i ion Enclosures i L INIURPHY, RYAN & 04KEEFE ATTORNEYS AT LAW. INC. TEN CHESTNUT STREET JC-r: E. M,RPH, -w:)rr,Y J Cl* IO.re: PEABODY, MASSACr IJSETTS 01960 OF COUNSEL JCS_; H C.L'RTIS RYAN (617) 531-1421 i_YNDA M. MURPHY JC-N R. Kc,,-- ,N REPLY.REFER TO NCI-CLAS P `/n,rz� ODES FILE NO. D. DEV MONGA November 6, 1986 ( Salem Planning Board Essex Green Salem, MA 01970 ATT: Dale Yale - ` - --- - - - RE: Daniel J. Mackey Fiie 964-119 Order of Conditions dated January 16, 1986 Dear Ms. Yale: l This summarizes our most recent discussions regarding the Order of Conditions ("Order" ) referenced above issued to our client, Daniel J. Mackey. It appears that the Commission members have concerns about Dan Mackey's lack of cooperation in complying with the Order as follows: 1) Dust Control 2) Security 3) Siltation Control and 4) 40 foot elevation. Based on discussions with our client and site visits, it appears that non compliance is of a de minimis nature and that the issues can be resolved by establishing better communications between our client and the Commission members. We hope that this letter will serve the purpose of improving such communications and in addressing immediate concerns on specific issues raised by the Commission members. Dust Control problem, although not under the jurisdiction of the Con- servation Commission, is addressed in special condition 10 of the Order which directs the applicant to employ water during excavation. Daniel Mackey tried this technique with the undesirable result of creating mud some of which was transported into the streets by truck tires. Our client's good faith efforts to comply with this condition are further evidenced by his application of calcium chloride to control nl- dust. Our client also respectfully submits the fact that mos-,: if not all the dust at %:he site is created by operations in the upland area and not by any ;;c, ,ity in the `r..rter zone ea:.ere the soil. ;.s more gravelly and, therefore; .ioes not easily get airborne. Our client also recognises ;jis obligaci.ons tc secure the property in order to control incidents of unauthorized dumping of unacceptable materials. Special Condition 4 directs the applicant to erect and secure a gate at the site entrance at a considerable expense. Instead of a gate, our client resorted to blocking the entrance with a three foot diameter rock and move the rock as needed to gain entrance. This alternative used by Dan Mackey complies with the "spirit" if not the "letter" of your directive and ultimately serves the interests pro- tected by the wetlands Protection Act and its implementing regulations. Protection of the bank as well as the pond from sedimentation is done by exercising management controls instead of installing rows of staked hay bales or silt fences. Management controls generally com- prise maintaining the bank at existing elevations which are generally higher than 40 feet and ensuring stability of the bank so that it may continue acting as a natural barrier. This seems to be an effective alternative method for preventing siltation particularly in view of the fact that installing staked row of hay bales is not feasible at certain sections due to bank topography and steep slopes. Since enforcement of this condition at this stage will create undue hardship, our client will keep at the site, if acceptable to the Commission, SO bales of hay for any emergency which may result from a breach of the bank. The above summary shows that Dan Mackey has shown good faith in com- plying with the order of Conditions and that he will continue to do so. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call me. We will also be very happy to meet with the Commission members, either formally or informally, to discuss any issues they may have in order to develop a better communication between the various parties. Thanking you for your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, MURPHY, RYAN & O'KEEFE Zn�� KsY, D. Dev Monga, Esquire DDM:cfj -2- yam �Z lr. s fiM Commission „-RS Salem. Massachusetts (11970 TO: Conservation Commission Members FROM: Dale Yale/Rebecca Curran RE: Legg's Hill — discussion At our last meeting, the Commission discussed the results of a survey performed by the Planning Department on the property abutting Legg's Hill Pond. You will recall that an Order of Conditions issued for the excavation operation on the property limited excavation to elevation 40. It appears from the City's survey that this condition has been violated. The owner of the property has disputed this survey result. Therefore, the Commission voted to require evidence from the owner which supports his claim that the 40' elevation requirement has not been violated ( see attached letter). A time limit of fourteen days to respond to our request was set forth. The property owner has not yet responded to our letter and the time limit lapsed on January 12, 1987. C1O19 i %f Form 9' ofCommonwealth assacar husetbAppkwd -- Enforcement Order -=d.. � . - Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L c,X31, §40 _ Y.ii. . From SALEM ^ ��d^^Aultwrriv' To ' Thomas Mackey-6 Sons - September 27, 1984 _ __ �:•. Date of Issuance Property lot/parcel number,address Legg's Hill Road/Jefferson Avenue Extent and type of activity: The Conservation Commission's jurisdiction lies within 100' of an inland bank: The Commission has determined that the property in question is an inland bank on _ a pond which is subject to protection under the Wetlands Protection Act. Excavation has taken place within 100' of the top of the bank without notification to the Com. The Salem Conservation Commission has determined fttat the activity described above is in violation of the Wetlands Protection Act,G.L c. 131,§40,and the Regulations promulgated pur- suant thereto 3101CMR 10.00,because: U Said activity has beentis being conducted without a valid Order of Conditions. ❑ Said activity has beentis being conducted in violation of an Order of Conditions issued to dated File number Condition number(s) ❑ Other(specify) The Salem Conservation Commission hereby orders the following: x19 The property owner, his agents.permittees and all others shall immediately cease and desist from further activity affecting the wetland portion of this property. ❑ Welland alterations resulting from said activity shall be corrected and the site returned to its original con- dition. 9.1 9 $ Completed application forms egd plans as required by the Act and R •= b:Tw Conservation Commission �aYbetledwitdate on or before seebelow h� (date), and no further work shall be performed until a public hearing has been held and an Order of Conditbns has been lssired to regulate said work. Application fomes ere available at '0ne Salem Green The property owner span take every reasonable step to prevent further violations-6f the sot Other(specify) q .' The Commission hereby requests that you attend their next regularly- scheduled meeting on Thursday, October .11, -1984, at 7:30 . .m-. to discuss ? -?;�•v the activity tjiat fias taken place and how you Irntend to resolve it. �_.. Order may constitute grounds for leg Failure to comply witit this al action.Massachuset ter 131.Section 40 piovides ts-----__— — _ _ General Laws Chap. �M Whoever violates any provision of this section shall be punished by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not more than six months or both, ` Each day or portion thereof of continuing violation shall constitute a separate offense. Questions regarding this Enforcement Order should be directed to: Charles Frederiksen, Aide Issued by Salem Conservation Commission 744-4580 - - Signatures;)Z7/ . 4� (Signature of delivery person or certified mail number) 9-2 J ` I R1: AST CF f,gEN "i CONCRETE CATCH BASIN l R/M EL z7. 3 ` �vEENAH R4�o - 2 5 1 oR EQUi3(. � I fl / _ � _ \` - RAKE 70 LE SET IN FULL \ LED OF MORTAR u c U t�41NIGUM N / / N O 71 / / 6 , �Ix� � KINIUU4 H•loo / u (y Y ` O J W A/G 6> - EXiSTin/G I~" > EX/$T� OUTLET PIPE PIPE TO EE SET Ili ly u /NV EL. 2�r.23 —'� FULL LCD OF uORTAR O !l"FI" DIAMETER •�'0; � (1 . C I I DOS. •'�r � � � S� 41 NI4 UM < � ` . � v:0_•p:Cc,e'�.Q':�a;�.��•�r Q� �liP:Q.`Q_.;. +9 D:"#r�...' I f —CLASS •D'CEI:ENT COMCRETE i' �f I �: 10 FOUNDRY coNIPANY 8 Discharge vs "Depth On Grams 7- 6 - - 6 II 100 - 90 - 5 - 0090 I 80 - 70 - 10 60 9 8 d 4 W 50 7 W 6 Q 40 N Z w 5 F 0- 3 30 a 4 " F I U LU ct�AnJ GRRTE - t- 20 Q U W I 2 2 - w W DEP%y pF WATER > I— ov�A GRA7E RSM O C) \ \ 10 0 9\ 8 c� W < \7 o ,cAPAcir% of cX/5T/N6 •9' 0 • W 6 /?E S.3 SFS 8 � w `¢ \ 7 ►- R--g55 uME SO%p GGOGG� ~• Q 4 C� 6 SPATE : ,9= /.235-4 fl; 5 1 3 - .9 - .9 U N_ •8 2 .3 .7 (D _ 6 yII 1 n LggLhle=��h Fn nda f.QmDanv. -4350 Series Light Duty Round Drainage Grates, Flat Bar Type For Walkway Use Onlyr /11 Specify: 1. Catalog number. Angle frame as shown can 2. Anole frame when required. be furnished with any grate on pages 213 and --+-I e� �� 214- Special frame anchors NN .Tm furnished on request. Catalog Dimensions in inches Wt. No. A B G H Lbs. P-4380-AAI33/. Y. s/. s/. 1.. R4380-A 4 92 R:380•Al 4s/, sb 'h sh 1 84380-B1 5 'k '/x 'h 2 R4380-1 5'h '/s 'h '/: 2 R-4380.2 53/. tP 3/ '/e 2 R4380-3 6 1 '/s s/. 6 R43804 8 'h 4 R-4380-0A1 8'/2 3/. 1 1 7 ; R-43d0.4A 10 s/ 'h 'h 9 ;:i ,: R-0380-6 101h 3/. 31k Is 1'/: s/ 10 ,t" R-43E0-7 - 113/ 1 Ph x 4 1 1 20 i RR-43E0-8 12112 1 1 I 25 R4380-9 141/ 3/ 1 1 20 R-4380-10 15 % s/ s/e 19 IN eoxncn OR 843110-I1 15 1 sb 8. 27 eu. nee ur SOIL Ree _. R4380-12 1511, '/e s/ s/ 15 R43R0-13 16 1 11h 1 1 30 P 4380.13A IPI, 1/2 1 x 3'/e 'h 16 R4380-14 18 '/ 7/g s/. 40 R4380-15 18 1 1'/e 1'/. 40 ® <�\ O -^,-43b0.16 19 Y: -/. 1 35 R4220.17 19 1 3/ 1/2 55 >•>: `.7 84320-18 20 1 2 x 2 11/ 55 ., ° i R4380-21. 24 4i 11/ s/ 55 (D ' 84380.22 27 s/ Y. 3/4 85 ' RA380.23 28 1 21h Is 4 2 110 co.cxca "4380-24 30 s/. s/. 130 84380-25 32 3/. Nb 1 145 4— P.-IMG-26 33'% s/. 1% 1 165 n Not recommended for bicycle traffic. For safety standards see pages 82 to 85. �R-4385 Series lightweight Bar Grates Recommended for use in file not subject to heavy loads. For heavy traffic ' �� crates, see R-4030 series, page 208. Since file and other pipe is made urder many specifications, dimensions will vary. Check the grate sizes in "1 the teb!e:to be vire they will fit the pipe you are using. Specify; 1.Catalog number. '' ' ccf.!og F'' Dimension in hes Wt. Catolog Pipe Dimension in inches Wt. � No. Size A 8 G N lbs. No. Size A B 6 N lbs. „•�-� j .n.-43E5-4 4 5%/ 'A 'A % 2 8.4385-F 1518'/' V' Y 60 R-434:68 6 8 'A Vr %e 4 R-4385-G 18 22 1 1 1 55 ® A R-43854 8 10'4 'h 'h r/�. 6 R-438S.H N 29 1�A 1s/e Y 130 ® H� ,e, Gco P!3L5-D 10 1 12Vz VA 'A V, 11 R-4385-J 17 32% I'A 1'A. Y 200 P.-4335.1 12 14W Y Va V. 22 R-4385-K 30 36 IA IVs 1 200 M N H H H ki IT �%I Not recommended for bicycle traffic. For safety standards see pages 82 to 85. T R-4388 Series Cast Iron Lids, 18-inch Approved for use on residential grease traps. Customer's name cast on lid without extra charge in lots of 200 or more. Specify: 1. Catalog number. Catolog Dim. LhWt. m 18•� � s�\�t,� No. Dims. Nates R4 /"38e•A ' 18 Solid R43E8-B ''/i' 25 Soli) c'o. R4388-C 1 /4" 301 Graled ;"o�t9:, o. b;: Illustrating R-4388-A IllustratingR-4388-C 84388-D '6" 40) Censor •ia_b R-43EH-E '/:" 300:6; e' •'s. 'Si. 1 inch holes— 18'/inch diameter. 214 g�NAH SECTiCN 4 FOUNGIR�Y�CCMPANY CATALOG NO. TYPE SQ. FT. OPEN CATALOG N0. TYPE SQ. FT. OPEN R-4370-18 E 1.3 R-4385-G E 1.0 R-4370-21 D 0.9 R-4385-H G 1.6 R-4370-22 D 1.1 R-4385-J G 2.5 R-4370-23 G 0.9 R_-4385-K G 2.7 R-4370-25 G 2.0 R-4370-26 G 1.7 R-4370-27A G 2.4 R-4373-2 K 1.0 sq.in. P. 4373-3 K 1.1 sq.in. R-4373-4 K 3.0 sq.in. R-4373-6 K 3.1 sq.in. R-4373-8 K 4.1 sq.in. R-4373-10 K 5.5 sq.in. R-4373-12 - K 0.1 R-4373-15 K 0.1 R-438C-,zA1 E 2.8 sq.in. R-=4380-A E 3.7 sq.in. R-4380-A1 E 6.0 sq.in. R-4380-B1 E 4.8 sq.in. R74380-1 E 5.4 sq.in. R-4380-2 E 7.5 sq.in. R-4380-3 E 6.0 sq.in. R-4380-4 E 0.1 - R-4380-4A1 E 0.1 R-4380-4A E 0.2 R-4380-6 G 0.2 v g.-4380-7 G 0.3 R-4380-8 E 0.3 P.-4380-9 E 0.4 R-4380-10 E 0.5 R-4380-11 E 0.5 R-4380-12 E 0.6 R-4380-13 G 0.7 R-4380-13A E 0.9 . - 7.-4380-14 E 0.7 -' 4380-15 E 0.6 R-4380-16 E 0.8 R-4380-17 E 0.8 R-4380-18 G 0.7 R-4380-21 G 1.3 R-4380-22 G 1.5 R-4380-23 G 1.1 �NLEr GipgTE sec��n &N R-4380-24 G 1.7 �,�� Z_ S SQ- F7• �.9jpR-4380-25 G 2.5 R-4380-26 G 2.7 R-4385-A E 7.5 sq.in. R-4385-B E 0.1 R-4385-C E 0.3 R-4385-D E 0.3 R-4385-E E 0.5 R-4385-F E 0.5 11 I I . I 1 . f6A�� Pt AL- Picker g St Ao✓S .� q -A 1 4 �� • oV\Co✓rse 0 J,J �$ta�-� � � FJEr'eb� ..:/I'� ��i HAP 15 OLS � ,h- t ter - J z RE `a-- m —� ��r� `sow � �1l ` \ �^,t/t`i'��/'i'✓ii elf art ��i� ' • ��J �clu ` b✓ \ rug ��`-- d _ '��ii ell IS V iJ �.\ at L OG US PLAN GEGGS H11-1- SCALE /LLSCALE Ve57000 vSCS -LYNN f SALEM Fac. z W Cot Conservation Commission r Salem. Massachusetts 01970 AGENDA--October 25, 1984 1. Public Hearing--Pickman Park Sewer--Parallel Street and along B & M R.R. line 2. Mackey 3. Richdale--Review of submitted calculations 4. New England Power--Extension of Order of Conditions #64-85 5. Approval of Minutes 6. Old/New Business s 5Conservatim Commissim E y,1 Salem. Massachusetts 01970 k'HAtisr�� October 1, 1984 Attorney G. William Rendle 221 Essex Street Salem, MA. 01970 Dear Mr. Rendle: Pursuant to our conversation today, I have spoken with Mr. Philip Moran, Chairman of the Conservation Commission and he agrees that as long as Mr. Mackey ceases any work within 100' of the top of the inland bank on Legg's Hill Pond, he may wait until October 25 to discuss the matter of the continuing activity in a wetland area with the Commission. However, if Mr. Mackey continues to work within that area between now and October 25, 1984, I have no option but to pursue further legal action on this matter. I will be happy to discuss this with you further if you wish. Sincerely y s, Charles Frederiksen Conservation Aide CF:dey cc to Mr. Mackey i f .`O"""tiiQ� fdi#� of �ttlem;�ttsstt��use##s d �e�tttr#meat of Public Works s �p (Orte ,�6211rzn (green PAUL S.NIMAN DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SERVICES July 11, 1985 Mr. Daniel Mackey Thomas Mackey & Sons, Inc. 58 Broadway Salem, MA. 01970 Re: Drainage - Alteration Permit Dear Mr. Mackey: It was recently brought to my attention that you .are excavating material from your property off of Legge Hill Road. Under the City of Salem Code of Ordinances, Sections 26-170 to 26-174, a Drainage Alteration Permit is required if the existing grade of the land is being altered by more than two (2) feet. You are hereby notified to discontinue your work until you have applied for, and been issued, a Drainage Alteration Permit. Very truly yours, Paul S. Niman Director of Public Services PSN/cmc cc: Dale Yale, Planning Dept. C , •oii CIJrA 111 i1�Gn I I Salem. Massachusetts 01970 f1� SSW ASS . CITY OF SALEM CONSERVATION COMMISSION Will give a public hearing under the Wetlands Protection Act, Mass. G: L. Chap. 131, Section 40, at the request of Mr. Daniel Mackey. The . purpose of the hearing is to discuss Mr. Mackey' s proposal to stabilize the bank adjacent to Rosie's Pond at 58 Broadway. The hearing will be held on Thursday, December 12, 1985, at 7:30 p.m. , One Salem Green, second floor conference room. Philip D. Moran Chairman Dec. 5 } 1 Salem. _Massachu,;etts ()197() /.Ass>,6 December 29 , 1986 Mr. Daniel J. Mackey T. Mackey & Sons 58 Broadway Street Salem, MA 01970 Dear Mr. Mackey: The Salem Conservation Commission is of the opinion that excavations along Legg ' s Hi11. Pond on your property, within the 100' buffer zone, have taken place below the 40' elevation allowed by your Order of Conditions , D. E.Q.E. #64-119, dated January 16 , 1986 . This letter hereby requests that a survey, signed and stamped by a - Registered Land Surveyor or Professional Engineer, be submitted to the Commission which documents actualelevations of excavations within the buffer zone of the pond. This survey shall be submitted to the Conservation Commission within fourteen (14) days of the date of- this letter. We look forward to your prompt attention to this matter. Sincere.l y. yours , • �1�1, i � � �\ l Philip D. Moran Chairman CC : Dev Ptonl�a - C923 Form 9 DEOE Fd!NO. 64—119 (To be wovldcd by DEOE) r. Commonwealth City/Town of Massachusetts ;vP„cam J . "lackey __^ Enforcement Order Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, §40 Deoartment of Environmental (luality Engineering From Issuing Authority Daniel J. Mackey, Thomas Mackey & Sons, Inc. , 58 Broadway St. , Salem, MA 01970 To Date of issuance April 1, 1987 Property lot/parcel number, address Rear 'i95 Inrin9hvenue Extent and type otactivity, Removal and filling have resulted in the unauthorized alteration of a bank, bordering vegetated wetlands and land under a waterbody (310 CMR 10.54, 10.55 and .10.56, resnectively) , contrary to the -Order of Conditions issued by the Salem Conservation- Commission. The Department has determined that the activity described above is in violation of the Wetlands Protection Act, G.L c. 131, §40, and the Regulations promulgated pur- suant thereto 310 CMR 10.00, because: ❑ Said activity has been/is being conducted without a valid Order of Conditions. Ek Said activity has beentiis being conducted in violation of an Order of Conditions issued to Daniel J. Mackey P.O.Box 366, Salem. MA m 97n dated January 16, 1926 Filenumber 64_119 .Conditionnumber(s) 1 .9 Special Condition H's 1,2,3,4,5 & 7 ❑ Other(specify) WARNING: This Enforcement Order also serves as a notice of non—compliance under the Administrative Penalites Act, M.G.L. Chapter 21A, Section 16. Failure to comply with this Order may result in the assessment of civil administrative penalties under the Act. The Department hereby orders the following: 13 The property owner,his agents, permittees and all others shall Immediately cease and desist from further activity affecting the wetland portion of this property. ❑ Wetland alterations resulting from said activity shall be corrected and the site returned to its original con. dition. - e•i ❑ Completed application forms and plans as required by the Act and Regulations shall be filed with the on or before (date), and no further work shall be performea until a public hearing has been held and an Order of Conditions has been issued to regulate said work. Application forms are available at: in The properly owner shall take every reasonable step to prevent further violations of the act M Other(specify) The apolicant shall within twenty-one (21) days of the date .of this Order, submit a plan to the Deaprtment and the Salem Conservation Commission detailing how and when he Dr000ses to come into Comoliance with Order of Conditions 64-119. No work subject to General Laws, Chapter 131 , Section 40 may take place until after this plan is approved by the Department and the Salem Conservation Commission. Failure to comply with this Order may constitute grounds for legal action. Massachusetts General Laws Chap- ter 131,Section 40 provides: Whoever violates any provision of this section shall be punished by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not more than six months or both. Each day or portion thereof of continuing violation shall constitute a separate offense. - Questions regarding this Enforcement Oider should be directed to: Sabin M. Lord, Jr. . Dep.Reg.Env.Enor. Issued by Sabin M. Lord Jr, eouty ional Environmental Engineer Signatures) :..- (Signature of delivery person or certified mail number) You are hereby notified of your right to an adjudicatory hearing under the Massachusetts Administrative Procedure Act, G.L. c. 30A, Section 10, regarding this Enforcement Order. In accordance with the Department's Rules for the Conduct of Adjudicatory Proceedings, 310 CMR 1.00, a Notice of Claim for Adjudicatory Rearinq must be filed in writinq within twenty-one (21) days of the date of issuance of this Enforcement Order, must state clearly and concisely the facts which are grounds for-the proceeding and the relief sought, and must be addressed to: Docket Clerk, Office of the General Counsel Department of Environmental Duality Engineering One Winter Street Boston, MA 02108 9-2 . tJoN sz Conservatim Comm slim �i Salem. Massachusetts 01970 Ff y5W 'HA SSf�� February 18, 1986 Mr. Daniel Mackey T. Mackey & Sons 58 Broadway Salem, MA. 01970 Re: Legg' s Hill Road, DEQE File #64-119 Dear Mr. Mackey: At their meeting of February 13 , 1986, the Conservation Commission voted to toll the appeal period on the above-referenced Order of Conditions from the date of this letter. Therefore, the ten-day appeal period will lapse on February 28, 1986. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely yquTs, Philip D. Moran Chairman cc: Atty Timothy O'Keefe DEQE i &P o� Al/� a,V�rl ROBERT W.WELCH 617-744-0637 WILLIAM B.WELCH(1929-1975) WILLIAM J. LUNDREGAN CATHERINE L.BEGLEY JANE T. LUNDREGAN OF COUNSEL October 10, 1985 Timothy J. O'Keefe, Esq. 10 Chestnut Street Peabody, Massachusetts 01960 Dear Tim: I met with Daniel Mackey this morning, he informs me that these is a Conservation Commission Meeting on October 24, 1985, to discuss Broad- way and futher that there is a City Council Meeting also on October 24, at 6:30, to discuss the zoning change which would exclude water and com- puting the amount of land necessary to comply with the zoning ordinance. This will severely affect Danny at Leggs Hill, but will also affect his property at White and Blaney Street. He would like you to represent him at both of these meetings. I We further discussed the use of Leggs Hill and he is getting a preliminary plan prepared so that we can file before October 24, 1985. In addition Danny and I discussed the possibility of forgeting our friends in Boston, who had made an offer of 1.5 million dollars for the land but have never come through with it, and simply recording the plan showing approximately fifty lots which Daniiy believes he could sell for $100,000 each, that of course would generate approximately five million dollars. The normal cost for constructing the roads, water, and sewer figured on a lineal foot would be approximately a million dollars, but Danny feels he could do it for one- third of that figure. We could sell the lots on Leggs Hill Road in Marble- head without doing any futher work and that would generate the $300,000 which will be used as seed money to put in the roads for the balance of the project. As you know Danny is very concerned about the water level at Leggs Hill. The city agreed many years ago to maintain it at level 23 and it is now at 28 floating out at least two or three acres of Dannys' land. The drain is plugged up and even though we are in sanewhat of a drought season, the level is continuing to rise. The final matter we discussed was the fact that both you and I had not sent Danny an invoice for the work we have done to date on these appearances be- fore the Conservation Commission etc. I think that you and I should discuss that. I will await to hear fran you. Yours very truly, •000� ROBERT W. W= RWN/cam LAW OFFICE OF ROBERT W. WELCH 18 BROWN STREET,P.O.BOX 8229 SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01971 508-744-0637 Fax No.508-744-3650 October 19, 1989 Timothy O'Keefe, Esq. 10 Chestnut Street Peabody, Massachusetts 01960 Dear Mr. O'Keefe: At your request I have reviewed all of the files of Daniel Mackey, looking for any notes that Mr. Mackey may have taken at any meetings concerning the sale of Leggs Hill. On the back of one letter, a copy is enclosed, I found a drawing of Leggs Hill. On the back of another sheet of paper I found figures, however most of the writing on that page is mine, and not Mr. Mackey's. If you have any further questions concerning this do not hesitate to contact me. s ery truly, , ,l.�W OB^ T. WELCH RWW/ws Enclosure 1IURPHY, RYAN & O'KEEFE ATTORNEYS AT LAW, INC. JOHN E. MURPHY TEN CHESTNUT STREET TIMOTHY J. O'KEEFE PEABODY. MASSACHUSETTS 01960 OFCOUNSEL JOHN E. MURPHY,JR. JOSEPH CURTIS RYAN JAMES F. RENNICK (617) 531-1421 LYNDA M. MURPHY JOHN R. KEILTY NICHOLAS P. VONTULID ES IN REPLY REFER TO D. DEV MONGA FILE NO. April 25 , 1988 Robert W. Welch Attorney at Law -- Welch & Lundregan 18 Brown Street Salem, MA 01970 RE : In the matter of Thomas MacKay & Son , Inc. Dear Bob : Pursuant to your recent correspondence referencing the above captioned matter and our telephone conversation , please note that our request for an adjudicatory hearing has been given Docket No . 87-148. A DEQE lawyer is expected to be assigned to the case in the next four to five months . In the interim , Salem Conservation Commission may file a Motion of Withdrawal ( "Motion" ) which will be reviewed by the DEQE on merits . It is my understandng that a Motion filed by the City has more than an even chance of being accepted by the DEQE. Please call me if you have any questions regarding this matter. Very truly yours , MURPHY, RYAN & O' KEEFE D . DEV M NGA, ESQUIRE DDM :cad P . C. : Timothy J . O' Keefe , Esquire :i r' S. RUSSELL SYLVA 5 7�� k7Loeruce Commissioner 938-0320 G! O(PCIIV? August 10, 1987 In the Matter of ) File # AP-NE-87-610 NOTICE OF INTENT TO ASSESS Thomas Mackey and ) A CIVIL ADMINISTRATIVE Sons, Inc. ) PENALTY I . THE PARTIES 1 . The Department of Environmental Quality Engineering ( the Department) is a duly constituted agency of the Commonwealth of ilt5sachusetts. It maintains an office located at 5 Commonwealth Avenue, Woburn, MA 01801 ; its principal office is at 1 Winter Street , Boston, MA 02108. 2. Thomas Mackey and Sons, Inc. , Daniel J. Mackey, president ( the "Applicant" ) is the owner of land at Rear 325 Loring Avenue, Salem, MA recorded in the Registry of Essex County in Book 5225, page 331 . II . STATEMENT OF FACTS AND LAW :I. . The Department has the powers and duties set forth in G.L. c . 131 , s. 40 and regulations promulgated pursuant to that statute at 310 CMR 10.00. 2. On January 16, 1986, the Salem Conservation Commission issued Order of Conditions number 64-119 to the Applicant , allowing certain work on the site according to plans submitted and agreed upon by the parties. 3. On March 25, 19871 in response to complaints from both residents and the Salem Conservation Commission, a Department representative visited the project site and recorded a number of violations of the Order of Conditions. Specifically, the submitted plans were not followed , a file no. sign was not posted , erosion controls were not approved or installed, unpermitted alterations of resource areas took place,removal of gravel materials took: place below el vation 40, .and bark =tabilization and restabili ation of disturbed areas was not accomplished . 1 P'aoe -= 4, Th.o activity described ..i.,: .3) above was not an compliance with Chantey- -31 :_Pr:tl l u(1 l .. ha the tjvities were Ilnt QP:-mltlPd h ✓ r de- r,t i_r,nd 3+yvin=. P2r, . .tip}— H?� lt; '.plans ) , special nditi ,n=. . l , an were 'not -Followed . This non-compliance was a 'vio Tatioln that caused � =_-ignificant impart o,.n public ;-eaItn , -aTa :, t . :,e1 a '- - re, -tri the �nvi. n,-,me'nt ; and was -not r, tcay.;_fl _ -.-F On Apri 1 1 ! 190'?, the r,enartment issued an Enforcement_- Order which - n,st, a=ted that —n eas subject to the Wetlands -:-otectioln Act be halted , thea further violations be prevented, and that a. plan be submitted within 21 days detailing how the Applicant will come into compliance with Order of Conditions .no , 64-119. This Enfr.rcement Order ,tae. -_ _ apneaie:d , .i . This En-Fn- ,rement Order was not complied with , in that no plan nr other relevant dnciiment -aas submitted to the Department . This non-compliance was a violation that caused significant impact on public raa? th . sa. ets. •telfare =.Ind the envirnnme-n- , and was willful and t' the ps"j JY er r : TII . DI�--PniTION Por rhe violation set fc.r 'h ,.n paragraph TI {2) above_, the Department =._senses upon the Applicant a. civil administrative ena.. tv in I.the As real,.'iy -d h•, r'.: . 31.A, S. 16 and 316 CMR the Department considered the following factors in determining the amount of the penalty: il ) Act"al and potential impact on P;-Iblic health , safety, and welfare, and the environment . f. P'' Act;Ia. , and potentiai damage=_. suT7ered , and a,=tical or noten .ai =Isls _. ,- -ed by tha -nmmonwealth . b., any other ❑eI �nll, 3) Ijnether the Applicant tank: atenc tr, m_ -a..elnt the t.ai 11 ire=• Yr rri,Pp lv . , . .Whether the App1ica.-nt took: steps tc, _ -c,mptl.' --c,mii-Ar.e itr, mmol i .a.nre _= ter the occ!+.rl-ence of the failure= .tri comply: whether the Appii__a_nt toot:: step= .--, .-emedy and mitigate •thate er 'n a_t-m r„_r ed as a re=-�llt r,-F the fail,;-eto =mmPly . , _ .i "hnetn.e7 the Hpplicant has ailed t.n --,mpi �„ith -sr' lati - n. nn-der li �enq or app . �.i Esuied rr adopted Fh epa Tet-�T : i_h l a =,1- ani. .w wh1Cli e Dena:`;Tapr. r.,..s "rhe authority _ ,- -esnr:n>i6llit,_• to enforce, a'. . _ . ing rnmpli .ance les cc,stly than the -Faiiures rn _'COME) i : a.ga -:.I- Hr-IJ,C-.t D'f—.er,-, nn f_itut-e nrinrr;m.pli-a.,?CP _ri r_.i-+. the ;=;ppli,=ant and others, - ? In7 The public interest. The AoDl -;ca.,,t is r:et-ehV nntifie,7 that 17 The Applicant has a ;-fight to an ad ;udica.tclry hearing on this civil ..=dmi ^i=_trati-e penalty assessment . t2) Effective tiven+y-one 1.21 .1 days after- the date of issuance of this t,•otice, the Applicant shall be deemed *.n have ;'waivedhis right=- t =d,,1dicat_;r,, he,--Aring r,n this civil administrative penalty assessment unless, within said twenty-one f2i ) day=., The Applin=ant files with the Department !. 1 .P. , the Department .-ecei=res) _. written statement sunjec't to and irl compliance with the applicable provisions of the Department 's Rules f•,,.- Ad.iudicatr,r„ R,-r.ceedings. 2:1p r=MR ' . JtJ. = i =llening eithp—r- or both of the fnllGwino - ( i ) a. denial of what is se" forth in paragraphs !: II } (g) . (4) and -6) . ( ii ) asserting that the money amount of the civil administrative penalty as set forth in para- graph III ' I ) above is excessive. b ) =lead;- and consi=_.ely states every point of fact all r' l.a.t4 the Apel i_=.nt _nte;?r)'c- tC; 3.1 gB 17l til!-�. a.d.j'tr71'-a t n t-" proreedinrl addres=.ed to . hnc4fet Fled' , Offira ._-,f Seneral i=ounsel , 11PpaY-tmen+ of En`i rinmenta.l Duality Ennl- reerinq , line Winter =trees , =rd Floor , 7�nc.tnn, FIA If the applicant sjaive=_. his rights to an adjudicatory hearing , the Applicant mumt nav the fi_(ll amount- rcr The civil administrative penal+; no _atr-r }ham twenty-one kEl ) lova_ After the date of is=u.ance or -h• = lrrtice. t-'avment must be by -ertifled heck=: , rant-tier- ' = chare;; r,1-dei p..yabta i;r 1_nlmmnt?wa-1 Th f r.)ass.achuE7e+:ts. s.l Mf,e, •_ n'r r.k r -'_ m9PL =ha' _ h� �.r Ceni-ed . P.:{ympnt ntll.c - F1.� 'T,ai _P1 frr wand YP_1='Prete tri ThP int dminls.l ri,alty, CIEIfur #AF'-NE-87-b il. -i7-. ,Floor - DEGIE, - .inter Street - hoston, MA min—,= r+ If the Applicant waives his Tights tri an ad_judirator-•f hearing , ='r,d if the Applicant does not paw, the fr_i11 .smoun+ rl . the civil administrative cenalty within twenty-one 421 ) days .after the date of issuance of this Notice. the APP - rant shall be liable to the Commnnwealt h for u❑ to i-hn--e -ime5 the amnu;nt _,* t!'e toget_.her with costs, plus interest from the time he peneltybecame final , and attorney's fees, including all costs and attorneys' fees barn"red directly in the Coll-r*loin n-* +F;e pana.jt" , If the non-compliance described in paragraph II t2) above continues Or is repeated after the date r1f issuance of this Notice, additional civil administrative penalties may be assessed for every day of such non-compliance from now on. Such additional civil adminsitrative penalties may be assessed in the course of the a.dj_ldicatory hearing on this assessment of a civil admin=_.itrative penalty, without issuance of any other penalty assessment notice to the Applicant . If the Applicant waives his rights to an e.djudirator,s hearing on this assessment of a civil administrative penalty, such additional civil administrative penalties may be assessed in as many additional penalty .=.sses=_.meat nrrtices as rlecesSary. August 10, 1987 J�fj DATE; --------------------- BY. -- Edwarr P. Kunce Regional Environmental Engineer P523401348 Certified Mail No. or Delivery Person -------------------- r o nd 4 ...- n z Conservation Commission J Salem. Massachucctts 01970 11ASS�C TO : CONSERVATION COMMISSION MEMBERS FROM: DEBBIE HURLBURT, CONSERVATION COMMISSION AIDE RE : MACKEY FILE SUMMARY OF MACKEY PROPERTY EVENTS LEGG' S HILL DATE EVENTS Sept . ' 84 Gravel. excavation Sept . 27, ' 84 Enforcement Order issued to stop Oct . 27 , ' 84 Agreement reached where Mackey could remove gravel within specified area outside the buffer zone June ' 85 Excavation taking place outside agreed area June 27, ' 85 Enforcement Order issued July 11, ' 85 Mackey ' s attorney contacted Commission to allow Mackey to remove more gravel . But was informed none can be removed until formal filing July 25, ' 85 Notice of Intent filed Sept . 12 . ' 85 Public Hearing - Mackey proposed excavation to elevation 30 within buffer zone of Pond and hay bale barriers to prevent sedimentation Oct . 29 , ' 85 Hearing continued . Mackey did not appear - meeting nullified Dec . 12, ' 85 Hearing continued. Order of Conditions was drafted on this date Nov . 6, ' 86 Attorney responded to concerns of the Con Com of lack of cooperation in complying with Order . Letter states alternatives by Mackey . 1 . Dust Control - Calcium chloride being utilized not water 2 . Security - 3 foot diameter rocks being utilized not gate I i 3 . Siltation control - Management control. (maintaining elevation generally higher than 40 ' as to act as a natural barrier) being utilized not rows of staked hay bales or silt fences Dec . 8, ' 86 Informal survey by Planning Dept . found elevation to be 30 . 69 not elevation 40 Dec . 11, ' 86 Reg Con Com meeting . Mackey disputed survey results ; Con Com required Mackey to submit survey Dec . 29 , ' 86 Letter to Mackey from Con Com stating excavation taking place below elevation 40 . Request survey in 14 days of this date Jan 12, ' 87 Mackey not responding to request April 1 , ' 87 Enforcement Order - Removal and filling resulted in alteration of wetlands contrary to Order . Applicant has 21 days to submit plan on details of how and when he proposed to comply . April 21, ' 87 Letter from Attorney stating Mackey agreed to restore altered area to elevation 40 . In addition, will apply to modify condition #3 to use less expensive method to secure property May 18, ' 87 Letter from Attorney with Plan June 11, ' 87 Letter from Mackey ' s Attorney stating that complete restoration of buffer zone in accordance with Plan has been completed . Site visit requested Aug . 10, 187 Notice of Intent to Access a Civil Administrative Penalty by DEQE for non-compliance . Fine $18, 950 Aug. 31, ' 87 Letter from Attorney to file a Notice of Claim for an Adjudicatory Hearing April 25, ' 88 Adjudicatory Hearing - Docket No . 87-148 . DEQE lawyer expected to be assigned to case in 4-5 months END OF INFORMATION AVAILABLE IN FILE D1022 Form 9' �- DEOE FdeNo. (To be provided by DEOE) _ _ > Commonwealth City/Town of Massachusetts - Applicant A Enforcement Order Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, §40 From SALEM 9ssuing Authoritv TO Thomas Mackey & Sons Date of Issuance September 27, 1984. Property lot/parcelnumber,address Legg's Hill Road/Jefferson Avenue Extent and type of.activity: .The Conservation Commission's jurisdiction lies within 100' of an inland bank. The Commission has determined that the property in question is an inland bank on . . a pond which is subject to protection under the Wetlands Protection Act. Excavation has taken place within 100' of the top of the bank without notification to the Comm. The Salem Conservation Commission has determined that the activity described above is in violation of the Wetlands Protection Act,G.L c. 131, §40,and the Regulations promulgated pur- suant thereto 31 OICMR 10.00,because: E31 Said activity has been/is being conducted without a valid Order of Conditions. ❑ Said activity has been/is being conducted in violation of an Order of Conditions issued to dated File number , Condition number(s) ❑ Other(specify) Salem Conservation Commission The hereby orders the following: xQ The property owner, his agents, permittees and all others shall immediately cease and desist from further activity affecting the wetland portion of this property. C ❑ Wetland alterations resulting from said activity shall be corrected and thesite returned to its original con- dition. 9-1 1B Completed application forms and pians as required by the Act and Regulations shall be filed with the Conservation Commission onorbefore see below (date), and no further work shall be performed until a public hearing has been held and an Order of Conditions has been issued to regulate said work. Application forms are available at: One Salem Green 3P The property owner shall take,every reasonable step to prevent further violations of the act. Other(specify) The Commission hereby requests that you attend their next regularlj- scheduled meeting.on Thursday, October 11,1984, at 7:30 p.m. to discuss the activity that has taken place and how you intend to resolve it. Failure to comply with this Order may constitute grounds for legal action.Massachusetts General Laws Chap- ter 131,Section 40 provides: Whoever violates any provision of this section shall be punished by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not more than six months or both. Each day or portion'thereof of continuing violation shall constitute a separate offense. Questions regarding this Enforcement Order should be directed to: Charles Frederiksen, Aide Issued by Salem Conservation Commission 744-4580 Signature(s) � (Signature of delivery person or certified mail number) 9-2 Conservation Commission Salem. Massachusetts 01970 7j '16C July 12, 1985 Attorney Robert Welch Welch and Lundregan 221 Essex St. Salem, MA. 01970 Dear Mr. Welch: Enclosed is a copy of an Enforcement Order issued to Mr. Daniel Mackey regarding his property at 58 Broadway, on June 27, 1985. Also enclosed is a copy of the receipt issued by the Essex County Registry of Deeds when the Order was recorded. When a copy of the recorded Order is returned, I will forward one to you. Regarding Mr. Mackey' s Legg' s Hill property, the Commission discussed the matter of further removal of gravel from that area. You may recall that an Enforcement Order is in effect on this property as well. At the time this Order was issued (October 25, 1984) , an agreement was reached whereby Mr. Mackey could remove gravel within a specified area. The Commission felt this was an equitable compromise which would allow Mr. Mackey to fulfill his contractual obligations without infringing on the wetland. The Commission now feels that gravel removal must cease until _ proper plans and Notice of Intent are filed with the Commission. The Commission is in[ereste in continuing to work in a cooperative manner with Mr. Mackey, but feel the site cannot be altered any further without a better assessment of wetland and drainage issues. I would be happy to discuss this with you further if you wish. Sincerely yours , Philip D. Moran Chairman cc : Daniel Mackev Attorney Timothy O'Keefe 104 Form 9' DECE F-Nc. • (�c De Rv�Oec try DEQ7 Sal EIIi cNro.++ - c„^�. ComncnweeJth Daniel ?'tacker of Wassachuset5 r✓ 2 Enforcement Order Massachusetts Wetlands Pratection Act, O.L c. 131 , §40 From Sales Conservation Co ission ssu='oAuno'i"v r' JA,, 1/ ] To Daniel :dBCKev (Date of of Issuance June 27 , 1 c,65 ,,rcpa'ty lot/parcel number, andress SE Sroactaaa. Sate-: Extent and type of activitvt :he Conservation Cor=ission hereby O7ders that srcragE C= inappropriate `ill raterial witnln 100 feet CF a wetland and C.'a-or - glade Of theva7i. CCrCer'_ng RCsie' s Fond be to stE;ped . Plans trust, be filed and approved by the Cc=issicn to address this re-nicyai. . ne Conservation Cc i hasreteminedKzt�eactivitydescribed above sin vio oticn of tie We"ands Protection Ac:, C.L. c. 1�1 . §�, and he nesukl ons promo_ated pur- suz rt tneretc :l nC.mF, 1 C.DC, bec:aLse: :Said actfviy has been/is beinc conduned wi rout a v2irt 0,re, cl, Ccndthens. :zit act vitt' has been/is being cc-Mucted in violation c' an Order o' Ccnditicns issued to dater, rue number Condition n�,,noer(s) . Cther (spectfy) Sa ( nn=F * r ^^ _" hereby orders Lhe following: he The property owner, his agents. pemitlees and ail others shalj immediately cease and desist from further activity atfectino the wetland portion of;his property. U Wetland alterations resulting from said activity shall be torr ected and the site returned to its original can- diticn. 9.1 ESSEX COUNTY REGISTRY UEEUS 07/1_/85 REC : 10.00 107## REC ; 10 .00 108## TOIL 20. 00 CASH 20.00 CHNG 0. 00 1216 001 10:14 SOUTHERN DIST 105 Completed application forms and plans as required by the Act and Regulations shall be filed with the Commission on or before September 1 (date), and no further work shall be performed until a public hearing has been held and an Order of Conditions has been issued to regulate said work. Application forms have been sazt C2 The property owner shall take every reasonable step to Prevent further violations of the act. ❑ Other(specify) Failure to comply with this Order may constitute grounds for legal action. fvlassachusens General Laws C`a_-, ter 131, Section 4.0 provides: Whoever violates any provision of this section shall be punished by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not more than six months or both. Each day pom.on thereof of ccntinuingevolation shall constitute a separate offense. V Questions regarding this }nforcement Order should be directed to: Dale Yale: 744-4550 Issued by Salem Conservation Commission Sicnature(s) (Signature of-delivery person or certified mail numbed a 9.2 I r DEOE File No. _ �III. IIII mol bleheod (To be provided by DEOE) W IIIPhAari d con5et( V\/Qtlon Ciryrtown Marbl commission Applicant Lees Hill Real v_. Trust 0 sd-o l St mOfdehead, mossochisetts 01945 -- - Order.of Conditions Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act G.L. c. 131, §40 Fro.. - + in rnmmi Ggi nn - To fLS^ u; i i 701 t�TruG Same (Name of Applicant) (Name of property owner) Address 58 BraY Salem. MA _— Address S^mP This Order is issued and delivered as follows: '�,! yEby hand delivery to applicant or representative on (date) ❑ by certified mail,return receipt requested art (date) This project Is located at L,-_ggq Hill u^"l The property is recorded at the Registry of Esse-- South Boole 7598 Page 54 Certificate(if registered) The Notice of Intent for this project was filed on 6-16-86 (date) The public hearing was closed on 6-19-86 (date) Findings The r nmm i eg i nn has reviewed the above-referenced Notice of Intent and plans and has held a public hearing on the project. Based on the information available to the C Timm i —inn at this time,the r nmm igg i on has determined that the area on which the proposed work is to be done is significant to the following interests in accordance with the Presumptions of Significance set forth in the regulations for each Area Subject to Protection Under the Act(check as appropriate): ❑ Public water supply ® Storm damage prevention ❑ Private water supply ® Prevention of pollution ❑ Groundwater supply ❑ Land containing shellfish ❑ Flood control ❑ Fisheries 5-1 Plans: Title Dated Signed and Stamped by. On File with: tlr 0 � L.-A YY\,M,`,Ae Special Conditions(Use additional paper it necessary) ..................................................................... ................................................................................................................ (Leave Space Blank) 5-3A Wa3 � � '� ° d � dt �tt3 J � � '�m W� r• 2 yv 1 = V•d 2 LLjd r�� edJ � FaIOWWW N^y � � p �� W Si � �� I_F dI W p) 6 IPwu ��y1J � F• ul qi 201 rc VOfjz }dpi 2 W / ,Y �� .. �• rc Ta r a ? J ] V }3rd w' �d �z V ai'o oip v N J ei GI°910Z 2 N 6 o 0 1 L " 111 WD f U "WbB9�1 ,zQ��` W � � W `d nr 9 D N J r R�r ;WIWi N 4�W� B°WWF WSFd 3> j ONa� Or?I Wdg l NAC �'4 d)0 4�0 ZFQ � � UJ 9 J ko j3� 4 w� z o o y F J Il 3 5 U r — 41 $0 R T __ m 9p .e C Jm 0°qj F u i Be • 'p ' _ jj We�0 Wn Qv IFF �> = WW 1 WW Z = >O 01 Ob A Ona um=3 d Z tl J W J / �L•�f W< rylaV+ 231Ydo .8 �s �J� 1 1 II a GnnoG mwa,unrg7 Xr s Ol ,ZQ.1 a - J. °,�LL J�^ W 7 WVIN WPJ Q al r d La 1r / •�// / � 1111 pp �''dz RQYY pdYyq -,.-i Xit YW d�`W 11 LL xz 44 3 '61 Jr QwiLI I a r Vv i cn unrm aces A/sR�u�� \ °o dO�p� II / ,7 yul O��A 3uNA0�71qF O W 1 r OC a�J}al •/ p!t� I J LLL J �Ouaz �3 . 1ja _ �C 2 1 g U 931 pnS , s /o Q '�� d VN vfW x I ry • f Iu�'' „ mar I h / ylllll, .WYIII' b e ead OEQE File No. III ILII 9I� (To be provided by 0EQE) conservati n . 0 CiryRown Marblehead commission APPlicant Leggs Hill Realty Trust L10 school st marblehead, massachusetts 0_1945 III` Notice of Intent Under the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L c. 131, §40 and Application for a Department of the Army Permit Part I:General Information 1. Location:Street Address Leggs Hill Road A portion of Lot Number 10 of Map 16 2. Project Type Dwelling Description Construction of a single family dwelling anc fill and regrading within 100 feet of a pond 3. Registry:County Essex SouthCurrent8aokgPage_:=_ — Certificate(It Registered Land) 4. Applicant Leggs Hill Realty Trust Telf617)744-3849 Address 58 Broadway, Salem, MA 01970 5. Property Owner Same As Applicant Tel. Address 6. Representative Hancock Survey Associates, Inc. Tel. (617)777-3050 Address 69 Holten Street, Danvers, MA 01923 7. Have the Conservation Commission and the DEQE Regionai Office each been sent, by certified mail or hand delivery, 2 copies of completed Notice of Intent, with supporting plans and documents? Yes M No ❑ 3.1 IPartIf:Site Description -� Indicate which of the following information has been provided (on a plan,in narrative description or calcula- tions)to clearly,completely and accurately describe existing site conditions. Identifying Number/Letter (of plan,narrative or calculations) Natural Features: Soils A Vegetation A Topography A Open water bodiesincludin ( 9 ponds and lakes) Flowing water bodies(including streams and rivers)' Public and private surface water and ground water supplies on or within 100 feet of site Maximum annual ground water elevations with dates and location of test A Boundaries of resource areas checked under Part 1,item 11 above- Other Man-made Features: Structures(such as buildings,piers,towers and headwalls) Drainage and flood control facilities at the site and immediately off the site,including culverts and open channels (with inverts),dams and dikes Subsurface sewage disposal systems A Underground utilities A Roadways and parking areas A,B Property boundaries,easements and rights-of-way Other Part III:Work Description Indicate which of the following information has been provided(on a plan,in narrative description or calcula- tions) to clearly,completely and accurately describe work proposed within each of the resource areas checked in Part I, item 11 above. Identifying Number/Letter (of plan, narrative or calculations) Planview and Cross Section of: A Structures(such as buildings, piers, towers and headwalls) Drainage and flood control facilities,including culverts and open channels(with inverts), dams and dikes Subsurface sewage disposal systems&underground utilities A Filling,dredging and excavating,indicating volume and composition of material Compensatory storage areas,where required in accordance with Part III,Section 10:57 (4)of the regulations Other Point Source Discharge Description of characteristics of discharge from point source(both closed and open channel), when point of discharge falls within resource area checked under Part I, item 11 above, as supported by standard engineering calculations,data and plans, including but not limited to the following: 3-3 90 ❑ Coastal Resource Area Type: - Identifying number or letter ❑ tnland _ of support documents 2. Clearly,completely and accurately describe,with reference to supporting plants and calculations where necessary. (a) all measures and designs to regulate work within the Buffer Zone so as to insure that'said work does not.alter an area specified in Part I,Section 10.02(1)(a)of these regulations;or (b) if work in the Buffer Zone will alter such an area,all measures and designs proposed to meet the performance standards established for the adjacent resource area specified in Part II or Part III of these regulations. ❑ Coastal I Resource Area Type Bordered By 100•Foct Uscetlonary Zone: Identifying number or letter L inland BorderingV W ted Wetland & Pond of support documents Stone riprap shall be emplaced at the rear of the par- cel abutting the resource area (BVW) . H.S.A. 112462 At such time as design grade is reached at the back (A) of the lot, a staked haybale barrier shall be placed along the top of slope, to' enable establishment of finished grade and stabilizing vegetation (lawn) on the remainder of the lot. This barrier shall remain in place and in function until its removal is approved by the Commission or a Cer- tificate of Compliance has been issued. 3-5 j LYNN QUADRANGLE ACHUSETTS MASSACHUSETTS p0y WORKS 7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC) �P 55 45 70°52' 30" ,KBE VERs.v5 Mr. 760000 FEET 744BEVERw c 2 Mr. 7 42 30 Kii,Le A ll :• ,� H, /9 4, sr q7 41 05 \_ 540000 ' FEET a Q E }/ f °'~ 4704 4py 9 ey F f, (I a e ack Bea A _ O Q c l s P 4703 Tet � n: � 'l,^-Cr r -+ ...ars y� B � r�z rr4/•:9�.•a `.'4 �+t tnt. - rF 27 30 4102 L1000 - - 4 �� -04�.+ .•kn'r-• ' d �ay�-.' '�X'i .r� r� :. j >• � r•�5'e v i+' N �� € g 1 kh c s. 90 qw}y� ,t �" �{''S_ �,�hh �,�t<f . r t'P �g p.�F o 6 1{,��q�K rr a• Zr .. L7''7t �f000p�. d"9r t`�t t7` T. rY':,'+ '1}' .?•. t �acsr t. ryh a '`$ i 4101 R# Y•C!:s"� � 4� � � � r{� .ht a ^d3�i_ 2' 1 9"��r `4 �'F 'S�k�tr I �`` � ' 'i��t" ;,PPz'�n'� % - _ �. 9. _ .. ..=W A YM'Yb.7�+'tiv �r .}sc'F.{ . . ",sSrzeE ��Pr'y3$.alzn.#t� 3•` .. �� '.kBNR"' M'_-. 112462 HANCOCK SURVEY ASSOCIATES, INC. 69 HOLTON STREET DANVERS, MA 01023 (617) 777-3050/ 662 9659 - 25 June 1986 Marblehead Conservation Commission Town Hall Marblehead, MA 01945 HAND DELIVER Dear Commission Members: The following is a set of proposed special conditions for File No. 40-147, Leggs Hill Road. All riprap currently lying beyond the limits of Bordering Vegetated Wetlands as flagged shall be drawn back into proposed slope. Due care shall be taken to prevent further encroachment into the resource area. Such fines and common fill shall be placed behind the proposed riprap facing as shall be sufficient to prevent erosion of finish grade and top soil to the resource area. A line of staked haybales shall be placed at the top of finished slope along the rear lot line to control surface erosion of finish grade and top soil to the resource area. This barrier shall remain in place until removal is approved by the Commission or a Certificate of Complicance has been issued. Very truly yours, HANCOCK SURVEY ASSOCIATES, INC. John G. Dic JGD/mec cc: H.S.A. file HALEY AND WARD. INC. CIVIL AND SANITARY ENGINEERS 20 FOE ROAD SSOCIATES WALTHAM. MASS 02154 ISIT� SS0.09e0 F. WILLIAM HALEY. P.E. WALVZA H. MO..ISOM. P.E. L.S. GEORGE H. RIMRALL. P.E. C WAAREM WA"*P.6 . LJ. lie R. YusAus PARWOR.T i Ta.... BRADLEY W. WARD CHARLY H. MILLEII. P.C. LS L E vllP►ROIRR.T rn1 r n• n V li April 28, 1978 Re: Vinnin Square Drainage W 181-29S Attorney Paul. Lausier Town Counsel Abbot Hall Marblehead, Mass. , 01945 Dear Sir: We have- obtained a set of preliminary plans relating to the proposed drain- age work in the vicinity of Vinnin Square. In essence, the plans call for the coll- ection of the storm drainage from the roadways in the area and collectively dis- charging them to a pond at the rear of the Stop and Shop super market , through a 54-inch pipe. This pond (labeled "D") has a present water surface elevation of 26.3 feet (USGS Base Datum) . The drainage will then be discharged from Pond "D" to Pond "C" (adjacent to the Water Department well) through a 60-inch pipe. The elevation of Pond- "C" is shown as elevation 20.6. Not shown on the plans are any of the de- tails related to the discharge from Pond "C" to the Forest River. e Our recommendations related to this proposed construction are as follows: 1. The outlet structure from Pond "D" shall have a minimum elevation of 27. 3 or one foot in elevation above the normal water surface of the present pond. This outlet structure should be provided with stop planks or other device to provide a means to prevent the discharge of water from Pond "D" to Pond "C" in the event of the contamination of Pond "D". 2. The City of Salem shall sample the water in Pond "D" on a semi-an- nual basis and more frequently if requested to do so by the Marblehead Water Depart- ment, and shall have said samples analysed for coliform bacteria, oil and grease, chlorides , or other pollutants requested by the Marblehead Water Department and shall furnish the Water Department with the results of these analyses. 3. In the event that the Marblehead Water Department determines that the discharge of this drainage water is resulting in conditions which jeopardi:e the potential use of the well adiacent to Pond "C" as a public water supply, the City of Salem will construct a drainage system around or through Pond "C" to prevent further contamination from this source. 4. The work proposed at the outlet of Pond "C" shall not result in the 1- lowering of the water level below the invert level of the existing discharge pipe. In addition, provisions shall be made at this proposed outlet structure to repress vandalism, particularly as it relates to the plugging of the outlet pipe. S. All final plans shall be submitted to the Marblehead Water Depart- ment for review and approval as it relates to the protection of a potential water supply. Very truly yours, HALEY AND WARD, INC. ENGINEERS WALTHAM, MASS. - Charles H. Miller CHM rmg cc: Marblehead Water Dept. �. :•�: 1 : Applicant: Uepartment of Public Works, Salem; DEQE Tile • 711e3e C'rdr. of Conditions are 133ue3 :o ?rotoct 1.atm .11ality for the foil .�.; ini- reasons: 1. The entn :iqu.-r a drainaGe irproveasnts ha-ve been detorainxi to be += . s_,^,'n_ .icant tonublic- water sum_; to r�oun3 ,rates sunny a� to gre- vention of pollution since the recaivinZ ,7 n,•^,w $(:�3 Bill �naaed Pfozd+` 3. in the aaplication, J?�3 File :Jo. 64-24) ass in the past boss used' a avatar supply source by the Town of :'arblehead. The su well and the area is still GY FAQ came fros.a�`. ' -_ - zlain'�.inei as an eMerG,onc water source. : = 2. - Th a. have have l,eea deta=ined to be si t_c.._on of land con„aini. - she will enaant to x. :h • a, Rive= ll.iah zinc* the water will Bator Sales-sZar'�e! by wa7 of the Forest 31ver 3altaat3h. The marsh is also Of ce_•vation area establishri uralnr .'�s.ac: s=ett3 ^.eneral .*,amort^y�ap� J , Cora- lection 3C. a VInnIn 3quara daai':a, syster. dtsc!urges'into-the • . atop and 3hd� Cu�a±nar? et (razad Pond "D” , p Del►iad r ...e. '.!:-Z!'� withoit a �t c n the apnllcatian. D^si3 Fits P1 or:,_ . .i to Fold "U" - xil l connect tot±- po.� v a ,! +••e propoaed L�.....y�� _ - i --- -�44 %rlla drain a lariats and wui , ` >: inc a :_c:r ratn_; into the ponds and tt __eh `'�� lan3 area thereby ..e the loading �'sedll-_,:tz and po_lu Cant: i7hiCh R?" cincre of ' ?ore:: ;li:pt t- ! gdve- 2_y affect both ponds and t r :,3_ _+ _1370rt on. 12ter quality 1roparad ^ . r for the �onaexvatiol Coviission by ;aoc ezical �sooci teo, dated Januar 10 19i" and a rc of Sale.. :,_zit 0_vrt:ant dat y pert by the amity �� sd- 'inuary ?. 1�, irdlcste that tha watar yuaL _y 1.." :'O.. o b ali?d t�07 - Mon .iuT1^rC.^.�:• L^ -� � 3.n an'. thz t to:•1 at - .et least _la s ��;'c :all i pro'_atii/ better than Class 3. i'ia propocad .13o. az da:era_e2ad to '00 aignificant to .1100d. cont an tae h.ra d;,_'lt to the �o t CT t a slfni:ic-.n .d n'- a Lr :all. As a result ~, ool l o..1 r7••-.? - :r.•, •i _ -. .l lil �y'_:T2 d::i;c.+;,e i:7roveAentz, the :he `a:!r�qualiay i: - -than p. z ;aali no: v? le;a t�s.i Class B ^ to 11 COti eT1Ct_O 1 Or O^?r_L:.fin c t •_ lr 5" to d11_ r z• - -ior to the start of 1 co^:itrJ^_"an t:1e 1:n t _:r_ c` .:oif ^ cr .halm znl the Corm erration c?.t•=`? h'_' 1^sninr oro -- t' c drat a ,st CIo s- zraa .o_ r o• - - �, , s 8 w.trr Quality. - i:c a anis - - -_ i C1 an'_':,; _a--nna. ic.: ;z��l—int— y rl ,a� a_,�:.. . -:°_ct_venezz of the . .or chlorLdes as well 'Water .-1. R!:;_ur•:r . !'. ..: t. in.-. . ,' S�nn ..( 'w.:CPr .t.�l i .:C 1pn G.•:C rOI CU. y rr-,( raea) th of TE ,nt I (const) as tests for subatanets which ars incl"'ita in^the s 'a (10flnitio . - The n-0-,r= shall have at lcas r or during periods of hiGh tuna " £o?lowin;; oxt?pdad dW peri .,N bealnn:ne zt{fie-iii r t M. he cost o: tho 3acPl1nG Program shall be Hent of Dublic 'Jorss a-'+d th'� Consecration ,v borne equally by Ais�e�— _- _ �° Conaissioa of—:salsa x shall include other pollutants end shall be dons more fzrequsatiT. 4 }. .. sa:mlin8 rrte R%mblehead's later as zvqusoted by the Y.arblehsad )later 7ertss ,-�. .. Departmentshall be famished sdth all test results. Department deterainea that the In the event that the :;arblehead Safer ultin discharge of this drainag* Water is resulting ltt conditions Which 3sop�ia�°='Y the potential use of the Wall adjacent to Pond "C" as a yublia_�t�z City•amity of Sales a cors r,ic nam s�staa asound or ' pxevsnt r c°�ae—iratio:: llroa this sou-ee. _ _ TDs outlet structure from Pond "D" shall have a minimum with atopfa�la_ neaa sol level. This outlet structure shhouU "on 7=v9nt the -�� of ttatK fame - or other device to provide a mans to p Yocsl "IIc 'o ?ond in tho event of the contaainatian of Pond ;r -,ir At' the outlet ofho nd "C" an 18" dlaaetsr e� s s t - JO' Salsa 9soarrment ofui3aeeat to the exists t3_1(1"diassty;_ ,-� a "•.� �. . a_g:�e s_hzll_ �sip3sir�Id oi^o and at the saw-ne _%F- zi lethe ,)s_srtnent of 1" . :1).1 large pi?� inlets or outlets Shall nava ba r racks install o nro- � �•._._ rset childroa entering thom- T t soeci°lcations for the Worts 3ha11 taelu3e a requL"sasnt to miniz ze �. :,: �• a co�tr.:.ction of the dr inage agstem. noilmbntation of the pon3s Burin\, ' ` The :-quiremsat shall be in accox+lancs :cath U'dalinsa for Soil arm 'I.-tar ^,oraorration in L'rtaaizing Areas of :!&asachusettr., united States :. ur IIenarrasnt of Agriculte. Soil Conservation 3ervica, April 1975- -;-yid• ;n v GEOCHEMICAL ASSOCIATES ENVIHONMENTAt ANALYSIS GEOIOGICAI SPEUMENS Jattuar)' l0 , 1978 Salem Conservation Commission One Salem Green Salem , Massachusetts 01970 Dear Brian; The Legg Hill Pond and a small body Of water immediately behind the Vinnen Square Stop 5 Situp ( rofrrrc�d to as the Stu:, 5 Shop Pond hereafter) were sampled on January 1 , 2 , -and 8 , tr, determine water quality . Eater samples were- taken for the follow- ing tests : dissolved oxygen , pil, conductivity , turbidity , color, oil, total solids , chloride ion concentration , alkalinity , and coliform. All samples were collected and evaluated by Geochemical Associates except for the coliform. Three coliform samples were sent to the Salem Board of Health Department , as per their direc- tions, on January 3 . However, due to their lack of communication _these samples were never tested. Another set of two samples were again collected on January 8 on unsafe ice conditions and were left for their analysis on January 9. Although your original desire was to water classify both ponds , the State Engineer claims they do not use this method +-o classify lake waters . As was found in my analysis, ponds and lakes tend to vary during certain periods , especially during ice cover, while rivers do not . So for the most part I have summarized the report with both app,-oachcs .in mind . I have also included several extra copies of the report and copies of the State Lake Classification Procedures . I would appreciate having them (Lake Classifications) returned. Copies can be obtained from Eben Chasebrough (727-6980) , Division of Whter Pollution Control . Sincerely , .4, ntlebo Tom Rich :richrmirnl nsroc'iate: •i Outlook Hill Salem, Massachusetts 01970 i page 2 of 10 Technical Report i.dse: A 01-78 Subject: Water and Lake classification of Stop & Shop Pond and Legg Hill Pond. Sampling Date: January 1, 2 , & 8 , 1978 Sampling Time: 9 : 30 am - 1:00 pm 0 Weather: Overcast, light snow, temperature -3 C Conditions : Both ponds covered with 10 inches of ice. Methods of Analysis: ASTM k 1. Sampling procedure D 510-68 & D 1496-67 ` 2. Dissolved -oxygen D 1589-60 3. pH Ionalyser pH meter 4. Conductivity YSI Conductivity Bridge Turbidity D 1889-67 6. Color Spectronic 20 7. Oil D 1340-60 8. Total Solids D 1888-67 9. Chloride concentration D 512-67 (B) 10.Alkalinity D 1067-70 11.Coliform Salem Board of Health rri to I � ill —��-�---=/ - � _-- _. I! I - -- - -- \ " �/, � � • 1I Iyuod 4s CiOLIS LA.- \ - r p mm VI ri i• 1 :° ,y. .1 6. Ip .4 W 1b '- OT 39 E abed _ , ICA page 4 of 1 W 1 _ 1 < / 4aTO P 4 S Mor 1 V Np 1 � 'PMS►'�N�i �\ LST \, � � �i�--✓ � N tt��t oe 5�t NdP� too s» STOP # SHOP f page 5 of 10 Stop 6 Shop Prind Analysis Morphometric Data: Maximum length 500 feet Maximum width 360 feet Maximum depth (sampled) 10 feet Area 0 . 0055 square miles (3 . 51 acres) Sampling Data: 1 2 3 Pond depth (feet) 3 10 6 Sampling depth 1. 5 5 3 Surface temperature eC 2° 211 2` Chemical Data : Dissolved oxygen (ppm) surface 1. 38 1. 34 1 . 59 @ -sampling depth 0, 0 0 pH 7. 69 7. 52 7 . 43 Conductivity Wmhos) * 46 48 43 Turbidity OTU) <5 45 1�5 Color (ppm) * - <5 - 45 - 1�5 Oil (ppm) 410 410 410 Total Solids (ppm) 50 70 20 Chloride conc. (ppm) 28 37 32 Alkalinity @ LHCO] (ppm) 137 104 146 @ [OH] (ppm) 93 109 98 Coliform Total ----- ----- To be determined Fecal ----- ----- by Salem Board of Health * Tap water 47A(mhos ® 60^ ** ppm platinum pfit �A j 1 2 .o <.9 a loof - � � � 1 � 1 Qkego 9 abed I - - page 7 of 10 ' Legg [till Pond Analysis Morphometric Data: Maximum length 1 , 100 feet Maximum width 600 feet Maximum depth (sampled) 7 feet Area 0 . 0164 square miles (10 . 52 acres) Sampling Data: 4 5 6 Pond depth 7 4 5 Sampling depth 3 . 5 2 2 . 5 Surface temperature'C 2 ` 2" 2' Chemical Data: Dissolved oxygen @ surface 1. 57 1. 66 1. 62 @ sampling depth 0 0 0 pH 6 . 17 7 . 41 6 . 68 conductivity OAmhos) * 78 53 88 turbidity OTU) <5 45 L5 color (ppm) ** < 5 < 5 45 oil (ppm) <10 L10 L 10 total solids (ppm) 160 110 190 chloride cone. (ppm) 46 46 42 alkalinity @ CHCO] (ppm) 207 178 247 @ tbH] (ppm) 46 54 40 Coliform total to be deter- fecal mined by Salem -- Board of Health * tap water 47fl mhos @ 60- ** ppm platinum l Ipage 8 of 10 Discussion of Results : The Stop C Shop pond exists as a result of earlier excavations in what is a very gravelous area. Water in the pit is supplied by rain, seepage, and drainage from two storm drain culverts . One is located several feet above the water behind the Stop & Shop (Approx- imately 20 yards from sampling point 1) and the other beneath the surface (appromimately 20 yards from sampling point 2) . Much of the shore area is strewn with metallic debris (old shopping carts , mat- teesses , etc. ) . The lake is shallow (probably less than 20 to 30 feet) and the bottom is densely populated with aquatic vegetation. The Legg Hill Pond off Linden Avenue is a larger body of water surrounded by gravel, marsh, and a large rock dumping area. Water in -the pond is supplied by. natural drainage and by means of a storm culvert: at the southern end of the lake. Water in the pond drains through a somewhat plugged pipe at the, northern end. This drains into thf Forest River marsh. The lake is relatively shallow and contains dense bottom aquatic vegetation. Fish reportedly taken from the lake are typically warm water fish. Both lakes contain low dissolved oxygen concentrations just below the ice and none ni-dway to the bottom. This can probably be attributed to the use of oxygen by. the bottom sediments and low photosynthetic activity of plants under winter surface ice. The surface waters are essentially neutral in pH, while the alkalinity moderate. " Alkalinity is important for the protection of fish and other aquatic life in fresh water habitats because it buffers pH changes that occur naturally as a result of photosynthetic activity of the chlorophyll- bearin§ vegetation. Components of alkalinity such as carbonate- and bicarbonate will also complex-some toxic heavy metals and reduce their toxicity markedly. " Both ponds are thus fairly we buffered against pll changes. Conductivity, which denotes the electrolyte concentration, is close to that found in typical Salem tap water. Turbidity, oolor, and oil are not above those typically found in natural waters. page 9 of 10 Discussion continued : Although both solids and chloride ion concentrations are quite low, the presence of ice cover between the culverts and pond probably prevents highway salts from entering . however, these values may increase as the ice melts . Except for winter salt runoff, chloride concentration should not fluctuate very much. Coliform data will he supplied by the :;rilem Beard of Health Department. Conclusions : Based on Massachusetts lake classifications , both ponds appear to be unstratified, eutropic bodies of water. However, their severity rating can not be completely determined from the existing data . Except--for the- low dissolved oxygen values , the water quality is quite high, ie. at least Class B for the Stop & Shop Pond and probably better for the Legg Hill Pond. Coliform data will make the determination clearer. Despite the water quality, the full environmental impact of the proposed drainage line should be weighed carefully. Both lakes are within the midst of lake eutrophication (aging) , where the addition of unnatural sediments (salts, sand, etc. associated with storm culvert drainage) will only expedite death. If the Stop & Shop Pond is to become the sump for stmrm drains , then efforts should be made to prevent additional sediments from entering the Legg Hill Pond. _ ,ti r+~ Noe - � of�>,••"- _ _ r w .i Vlcw of New Well 80 Fect Below Sart",of the Ground, March 1, t808. I Itilill fill . l I .. 4 � ��/\_"tea 'T�\ ��.�li � - '•I� fir-n/,Yn✓ Well from M,,d Han A, )larch 1, •95. h r+'v " .•. `; - - _ - moi_ _. ._ - I'' w L f'- { — moi. __ ✓...—.. =e— mss+ � 4-� cr .`_Y-•a'.' I'M �i Y MARBl[NQD WATBR WORKS PUMPING STATION. �_ In answer to many inquiries and articles appearing in the press, tating that a water well located $ the rear of the abandoned taro pumping station an Loring Avenues salsa, will be re-activated, the Mater Commissioners wish to may that present plane aro to preserve this Yell for possible futurt smergsney usee this will be a"amplished by eloeaimg out any floating or sunken material in the wells reinforcing around the well ant providing a ooncrete cover aver the well* lite cover will be provided with an opening so that portable pnaping equipment am be quickly installed to utilise the water, if for any reason the Metropolitan supply should fail. It must be pointed out that when the tom entered the Metropolitan water System an agreement was made that the Netropolitan system would be the sole soures of supply. - Alsos it should be noted that this well could only supply a possible half million gallons of water per days Mile Marblehead uses approximately I&SW#000 galss per day during the winter monthsm end three to four million gallons during the summer months. The dater Commissioners believe thats due to a nation wide water shortage, it is wise to keep the well, and have requested !tads In their 1966 budget to do this worm. If the requesisis approved by the !inane Committee and voted by Town Meetings the work will be done ismadiatelye Onoe again the water Commissioners urge etch resident of Marblehead to initiate water conservation programs in their homes in preparation for an expected water shortage in the ausmer of 1966. 1AACM • `,t ON CdL s. � {z Conservatim Commissim r, 4 Salem. Massachusetts 01970 h TO : CONSERVATION COMMISSION MEMBERS FROM: DEBBIE HURLBURT, CONSERVATION COMMISSION AIDE RE : MACKEY FILE SUMMARY OF MACKEY PROPERTY EVENTS LEGG ' S HILL DATE EVENTS Sept . ' 84 Gravel excavation Sept . 27, ' 84 Enforcement Order issued to stop Oct . 27 , ' 84 Agreement reached where Mackey could remove gravel within specified area outside the buffer zone June ' 85 Excavation taking place outside agreed area June 27, ' 85 Enforcement Order issued July 11, ' 85 Mackey ' s attorney contacted Commission to allow Mackey to remove more gravel . But was informed none can be removed until formal filing July 25, ' 85 Notice of Intent filed Sept . 12 . ' 85 Public Hearing - Mackey proposed excavation to elevation 30 within buffer zone of Pond and hay bal.e barriers to prevent sedimentation Oct . 29, ' 85 Hearing continued. Mackey did not appear - meeting nullified Dec . 12 , ' 85 Hearing continued. Order of Conditions ' was drafted on this date ti Nov . 6, ' 86 Attorney responded to concerns of the Con Com of lack of cooperation in complying with Order . Letter states alternatives by Mackey . 1 . Dust Control - Calcium chloride being utilized not water 2 . Security - 3 foot diameter rocks being utilized not gate 3 . Siltation control - Management control. (maintaining elevation generally higher than 40 ' as to act as a natural barrier ) being utilized not rows of staked hay bales or silt fences Dec . 8, ' 86 Informal survey by Planning Dept . found elevation to be 30 . 69 not elevation 40 Dec . 11, ' 86 Reg Con Com meeting . Mackey disputed survey results ; Con Com required Mackey to submit survey Dec . 29 , ' 86 Letter to Mackey from Con Com stating excavation taking place below elevation 40 . Request survey in 14 days of this date Jan 12 , ' 87 Mackey not responding to request April 1, ' 87 Enforcement Order - Removal and filling resulted in alteration of wetlands contrary to Order . Applicant has 21 days to submit plan on details of how and when he proposed to comply . April 21, ' 87 Letter from Attorney stating Mackey agreed to restore altered area to elevation 40 . In addition , will apply to modify condition #3 to use less expensive method to secure property May 18, ' 87 Letter from Attorney with Plan June 11, ' 87 Letter from Mackey ' s Attorney stating that complete restoration of buffer zone in accordance with Plan has been completed . Site visit requested Aug . 10, ' 87 Notice of Intent to Access a Civil Administrative Penalty by DEQE for non-compliance . Fine $18, 950 Aug. 31, ' 87 Letter from Attorney to file a Notice of Claim for an Adjudicatory Hearing April 25, ' 88 Adjudicatory Hearing - Docket No . 87-148 . DEQE lawyer expected to be assigned to case in 4-5 months END OF INFORMATION AVAILABLE IN FILE D1022 .��XoN Cp�1 J x Salem. Massachusetts 01970 ./- AJASsPC�� Daniel Mackey Daniel J. Mackey and Sons, Inc. 58 Broadway Street Salem, MA 01970 January 14, 1992 Dear Mr . Mackey, At our January 9, 1992 meeting the Commission reached the consensus that you file a New Notice of Intent for the work within 100 feet of the pond and bank. The forms are enclosed. You will need a topographic survey, wetland flagging, a detailed explanation of your intentions and all other information called for on the Notice of Intent . If you do not plan to do any additional work within 100 feet of the pond, please have brightly colored stakes placed 10 feet on center, 100 feet from the pond. This will allow the Commission to easily assess whether you are in fact not doing work in this area. If you chose this route please have to stakes in place January 22, so we can inspect them prior to the next meeting . If you wish to start a fish farm you will be required to file a Notice of Intent for this action. The Commission would like you to appear at the next meeting, January 23, 1992 . In order to properly advertise a Notice of Intent we will need to know that you will be submitting the Notice, eight days prior to the hearing. Please let us know how you intend to proceed. Sincerely, Z/� Bet y Horne Chairperson ex/jrccml2 )orf/ - �� 111sc-H atiCIT � 1iiII?II�� Ti11I 115\(�R.ff �I�� r. t Xinut02 of 1' i_ ---- The __ he Conservation Commission i13,, ..L One Won .-Ce.)a an Pubronry 23, 190 at 0:00 r.i'i. •. . '.•O".^._.:51.0^. .:".i3U G_^.';: attending .._-_... !:h't1- j_... _..._,_ . Trench, :L.:_:.-.CL?.iTi20L•i;.!_ r..? 'j 3110a ul.latiar, David !/3 Don 1 Henry cnol' , -brad '.c'':t:l-.a and caul 111.11s. Associates atter? ing were: Ilex ti_^c isz, :1st'. ..urvani laul DOTO'_es Jordan, .,esto'c, David ?e'lletie_, Alias Theriault ona Pollyanna Mornay. .:Hest attending was ?ic_1ard :Orton. _'hj rai.n Rtes Of the previous meeting were acct Mad with corrections. .. . French announced the folloui^' notice. ._n3 co,:nuni_c^t_ons: Alex Arci.•c,,2, has spoken with the ..d`:3irn?m of he -P ^ho. y Co`.saT a.tion Go:'C1i33ion sad like -e-" e Date `.!l^-.� ;'0111'7. �lr-0 t0 s%Ch2.nFe "�aeti ::" �,:i':laic:d ;:.'.'; -.] them 'u 1 t0 .,:tetl :.:'.'f Wort-'a .,.... nass . . `„• ;l./, of Lor_ ., Hills Developers' ` ust, has code a Dr aosct o the r l .. 1'_ns oe._d to limit the he' -;:t of the -lroposei b'i.Lin;z to ?0 feet, excepti-r_c iaric. ilannar. Nr. French gill contact Oounci.l_or 2ater Soolay to v__lb- '1rald Hartley, of barblohend Co:L:07Q is concerned :;bout that town's is uing the South -...r.. Moorage District so their pipeline will rua across walca Harbil'_. letter .� • _ , management t l at d -- lv^2i••_r '.� ..cue LO t1•lf• ::ay0'- 2 �a1"dance t�.d .'.011".Ga i'._. _ .�.'1J.^.Z Oi �:11 .::RC1 (10::c.�0^ g0 the City by Highland Seal ty 'Trust. A letter :.as Sent t0 the Boston A RaMe rall2o30 about the tre.ah and litter alonj the trac%s. "'in?noia.l .3urine c: The i`19-:locrs voted unanimously that monies to oe t]'-=nsfer-ed ^ay be done by the Financial Jecre"i,a f. .. .1.Vi.d 7e'•ioe ha3 invastigated the ,possibility of settin.3 lip a Conservation ?and, a cumulative fund not a Motion of the re Zular b'udge't. it ::ill be used as a. Ucretion- ary Pccount, will accept contributions. ;rifts, n,.rarts,eV. To est:Lbli5h this account the Nenbar3 w ll d:nn to 1110.00 each, the active Associates 15.00 each an!:. the funds will l be ]resented to the City Tre2 sugar a..-_ formally E..., il'; All donations are tax deauct ible. Alex. '.rc'' ' l o NabodyDanvers if they _;� will contact to _:Ge3,� and Leon. ons to see ha'r'e any in2o'.rmotion On such a fonts, and David JeVoe will cheer Nitn the Con>ezvallon Law Found t'.on for ^articular:.. Tet was dacided ihst the Nontnly Kne-ncial (e_ost i. B a• $ L1'_ be ..:i1 i.79"c'Q O::Ca month, t the last G.:?yi:'..!:- of eve Ly month. M1S now axpences or changnz Since the 1131 retort. .'J:i'lo,1V ^latcher, City Anglaasr, who .,a . Lnv: F.0 -0 3:1^1S dud not W7-nd. e _ TC!"Watna 0 roll-call vote ;J `a into 0%. 0007D 113310 , 'J .Gc11z ,. _c. of a c'G.'.ae tC ion allictlit. 70t; c _ .. s. . _ to 0K _ .ac..l is session. alai Eau! 51110 rw7ortod that he chacked on the Dearborn Otreet property )reonntly beim developad by L•9.rch .fealty _fa.;t. 6t,_ i ley :cDermot haz aned for applicability to the `+io6la.nds Protection Act. 1r. :11111: asked ,:r. De :oe and Hunt for t1v'ir file C( On till-S. K. w i'lits will get :notice of property under the •.•etl•and, Protection Act and 13 working On Checking the chain of t'-tles , :hearin7si, and will _ ._:ort of _roper procedures by the next naeti.nj Assts"Lint Solicitor Peter Merry gave his p"rogrezz report an the .._.ckay prpparties. Mr. Pierry has broung suit against :lackey for the White Street and 3roadway propertle3. 3y a ranment with :.Obert Welch, Hr. ':aciey's attorney, Lehsrd J'erkholt was appointed i a. : 3.3ter 't0 hear the suit. y. hearing was hold, with 3e=kC Olt a3 r:8.c,ta:, ant it :7aS left that the ordinance presently on the city' s books will not aresentl'y corer this situation, but that When the revised ordinance is passed, within O days it will then apply. "urth•er action is advised to be _'7ostpored until the new ordinance is passed. P. ) Nr. :•_er,-y 1s 1oo',in_ into zoning and filling ordinances in regard to Legg's }till load and plans on talking t0 7Ugo Di3iase about construction of a nev fence for the Marlboro load problem. also s^Okc with Ears:;nal cs;an of the Salem Police and Brian French 1s to check with the Marshal of the possibility Of hunting on the coastline. Donald Hunt will act as a liaison with the Police Department. Zr. Willis 1S continuin`, to request and receive information on letlands mapping. Cloti Cervon! mentioned that Ihss. Audubon nay hive additional information, and :.r. I i ll1 s .:Ill report on this further at the rent ^wenn.,. 7han the information is Conon a meeting will be net u? with Ted Sa.do.rs'd, Greg Senko, 3ri.a.n ?reach and Nr. Allis to discuzs funning, etc . Mary .':,lie;? ?elletier reported that she received a copy of the Board of Health's letter to William Tint! regardi_n; the In;gemi. property. Also, she has issued 3 additonal cease and desist notices to: APs J Cossko, Joseph G. dagone, and Welch Con0ructionco. for dumping Off Nampscott ;i Oad into a wetland, with copies t0 Dan 3urke, County COTS- � issi.oner, Whitman 1 Howard Architects, and James Carlin, County Engineer, as they are involved with the new cou=thous3 building where the materials draped tends froaa. Other Busiress 3'rlan French again requested the receipt of our file cabinet, it will be moved this fe week. 3rad :iorthrup has applied for matching _rants from the State self-help funds and for federal funding for the Torest :fiver Conservation Area. Bill Tinti needs a. list of public lands within the city. :0711"071 has talked :.i "ta i;Q:r':'ll ehe£U: a'JO'l.t <'. conservation restriction for TaOapSOn'S .. ,allow. Apornizal work ne,Q ;o a3 doni . o _ _ „ a rS en 1 '�` i1 he . 3..1..�'_' Vote... . nani4i0.17_y to plLchc a. C�^..C'_a for ;�e�.t:,. , c.l'�� a toinphoto lens pica .i II! Wta.l un to r nd �n 135• Authority t0 porchaze` given to Paul J4 s. t Aloe, the fel 11.18 for 2J^) -.n 'v35 for lOC:3, O.UtaOri ty' t0 0. •.r 1111: LO D1LCnaSE, alt. bills being .'Jet to .r_ . Devon . 1 Minutes of Meeting`10r26/76 I -3- Paul suggested four areas to be considered for this study. Starting with the area in and around Mr. Ingemi's property, Paul suggested the testing begin at the pit site. The swamp would be tested next, and then the outfall of the swamp to the pond on Mr. Ragone's property. The fourth area to be considered would be the other side of Mr. Ragone's pond going downstream. Paul Willis state that there would be 25-50 tests done at an estimated cost of $150. Paul Willis is to call Cat Cove Marine Laboratory to adk if they would investigate the source of estueric pollution. 1 Richard Morton and Brad Northrup spoke to the Commission of the filling being done by North Shore Dredging on Mr. Mackey's property at the end of Blaney St. At the request of the Commission the police served Mr. Mackey with a cease and desist. Richard Morton contacted Mr. Censi at the Division of Waterways and found that Mr. Mackey has applied for a permit. Dick also questioned Mr. Cenci regarding a possible outstanding fine of $15,000 owed by Mr. Mackey. Mr. Censi could not readilylocate that information, but he would contact Richard when he had. Mr. McDonough of the Army Corps of Engineers is going to come to view the site to ascertain if there is cause for the intervention of the Army Corps of Engineers. Paul Willis made the motion that the Conservation Commission wishes to en- dorse the serving of a cease and desist because of the action being taken at the end of Blaney St. Mary Ellen Pelletier seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. William Tinti next spoke to the Commission regarding the action necessary in order to obtain a temporary restraining order for the work being done at the end of Blaney St. Bill informed the Commission that a return of service of the cease and desist issued to Mr. Mackey is necessary. He asked if North Shore Dredging had been informed of the illegality of working after a cease and desist had been issued. Brad Northrup said he had informed the workmen with no result. Mr. Tinti suggested that North Shore Dredging be served with a cease and desist and a return of service obtained. Mr. Tinti informed the Commission that, in addition, affadavits would have to be obtained. Affadavits are to be taken from Richard Morton and Brad Northrup. Cleti Cervoni is to be in charge of the ConCom's efforts regarding the Bottle Bill. Cleti state that she felt any effort should be done in con- junction with the work being done by Dolores Jordan. Cleti Cervoni noted that there would be a fall walk on Sunday, October 31, 1976. a The meeting was adjourned at 11:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Susan Madison Minutes of Meeting 177 _. Page 3 r Dick Morton has spoken to Ms . Dawson of the Conservation Law Foundation ` and she thinks that the people doing the work on Central Warf and Derby J Warf are not under any legal obligation to file with the Salem ConCom. Business David DeVoe and Richard Morton are to work on the upcoming Warrant. It was noted that our telephone Credit Card Number is about to expire. David will apply for a new one. The CommissionPas also reminded that the City Tax number should be used when making purchases - Brian French outlined the Order of Conditions for Phase IIofthe sewer improvements (File #64-18) . The Order of Conditions applies to Po rtions of the Scenic Heights, McShay and Messina Interceptors . A motion was made by Donald Hunt to acceptthe Order of Conditionotion and the vote as en by Brian French. Brad Northrup unanimous . Next followed a discussion relevant to the disbursement of the different brochures put together by the Salem ConCom. One of these brochures is an explanation of the WPA. and the other deals with the preservation of open space in Salem. It was the sense of the Commission rder toe determine Wet- lands Maps should be placed over the Assessor's Wetlands in Protection Act. which of Salem's residents are affected by Landowners who live in these areas should be given the brochure con- d Marc Sosnowski are to work on this. cern;ng the WPA. Richard Morten an Regarding the brochure on open space in Salem, it was the sense of the Commission that 100 copies of this brochure be placed in the main branch of the library and r ch of n the possibility of Richard is brochure orton is to deliver these brochures and check o being sent out with the Water Bills. The deadline for Messrs. Macke y and Pelle�taerthe motto i with aththe Salem ConCom was January 15th. Brad Northrup Commission approve- the serving of the Cease & Desist notice to Northshore Dredging, Co. Paul Willis seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. Paul Willis is to contact Bill Tinti. It was noted that the Army Corps of Engineers has referred their information officecerning Messrs. Mackey and Pelletier to the Attorney G Mary Ellen Pelletier informed the Commission that she wasiin ring ceipto t of a letter from the Department of Environmental Quality hemi situation the Salem Board of Health. DEQE recommends that the Ing wthey can. be handled at the local level, but they will assist in anyrepresentatives of Mary Ellen Pelletier is to set up a meeting betweenthe Board of Health, DEQF,, Attorney General's Office and the Army Corps of Engineers. I Minutes of Meeting i5/3/77 I Page 2 It was the consensus of those present that the proposed work does fall under the Wetlands Protection Act and a hearing date was set for Wednesday, June 1, 1977 at 7:30 P•M- Tony next spoke of a plan to place fill from the sewer project at Magrath Park in order to complete a baseball field that various people are Interested in completing. Tony informedthe toluenession that been dumpedeandveral filled potentially dangerous items including over in the past in the area next to the baseball field. Jim Rienhardt expressed interest in viewing this site. It was the consensus of those present that the hearing for this proposed work should also be held the evening of June 1st. Tony added that if these plans are approved,o:rhe does sn not kno tknowthe whenftaccept- hey will be completed since he his no way nt able fill needed will be available. The Commission next discussed the filling being done by Mr. Fantoni on Mr. Mackey's property. Tony informed the Commission that he had requested that Mr. Fantoni not fill areas until it had been cleared by either him or Ann Pelletier, who is an Environmental Engineer. The filling done on the Mackey property has been done without the City Engineer's knowledge. As City Engineer, Mr. Fletcher has no salvage rights and any controlmay have has to be in an advisory capacity. ThItCommissiwasonfis to further Investigate the situation on LeggsHill Roaat the Marblehead Conservation Commission should be informed of this matter. Notices and Conmunications It was noted that the Marblehead ConCom has written to Mr Welch, representing Mr. Mackey, informing him that he must file for a Wetlands Hearing relevant to any work he proposes on Leggs Hill Road. Also noted in these minutes was the fact that the Marblehead ConCom is also writing to the Department of Environmentalf 3 gementenic nomiR creational the Forest River for inclusion in the inventory Rivers in Mass. A copy of the Con's letter nominating the Forest River as a Scenic River will be forwarded to the tMarbleheheir ad ConCom. The ConCom is also Interested in obtaining a copy of tes in the April utilizinghand fill from st he South EssexoSe eruconstruct construction. Paul noted that the Committee on Natural Resoureswand d authorize the Agriculture s urged the passage of House Bill number wh cRiver basin and the Palmer's Department of Public Works foSalem.ge he Cover r Channel in the City I :i-s of Meeting�$�1-7�77� Page 4 ownership of the land in question. Brian French informed the Commission that Councillor Nowak had spoken to him of the possibility of the Commission taking custody of 5.8 acres of City owner land located at Fort Ave. and Memorial Drive. Jim Rienhardt pointed out that management of this area would be difficult. Brad North- rup questioned who would be responsible for the policing of this area. Discussion was also held concerning the possiblity of the Commission assuming the custody of Fort Lee and Fort Pickering. Again doubt was expressed whether the Commission has adequate resources to assume these responsibilities. Paul Willis stated that in Brookline, there was a community clean up twice a year for the conservation land under their custody. In addition the Brookline Conservation Commission utilized CETA personnel for additional work that was needed. The Commission next considered the Wetland/Flood Hazard Special Permit application of New Englana Power. After a brief discussion, a motion was made by David DeVoe, seconded by Cleti Cervoni and unanimously voted that the Conservation Commission concurs with the project outlined in the application. Cleti Cervoni reported on the results of Spring Weekend. She reported on the program attendance as well as the final costs. Brian requested that income from the weekend also be noted. Support for the weekend had been good and the weekend was felt to have been successful. Discussions of various violations was next considered. Paul Willis is to write a letter to Mr. Derflinger of 26 Hardy St. regarding the fill he is putting in the Harbor. Marc Sosnowski reported that he had learned from Ann Pelletier of the Engineering Department that Mr. Mackey has made arrangements to obtain some non-reusable fill. Marc is to investigate where this fill will be placed. Brian French is to check on dumping reported by Councillor Grace by Ugo and Elio DiBiase at 56 Almeda St. The meeting was adjourned at10:25 P.M. Respectfully submitted, l l``-i } *Minutes of. l/30/78 ( Page 3 The public hearing requested by the Salem DPW relevant to the proposed installation of storm drainage pipes in the Vinnin Square area at the end of Linden Ave and Chandler Road was opened at 7:55 P.M.by Vice Chairperson �l Cleti Cervoni. Cleti read relevant sections of the Wetlands Protection Act to those present as well as a letter that has been received by the Commission from a number of sportsmen who utilize the area. Richard Swenson of the engineering Department was present to explain that this was basically a reconstruction project which would replace an existing system that is not working because of a build up of sedimentation in the pipes. He further explained that they also planned to lower the water level of the pond at the rear of Stop and Shop (Pond D on the plan) to V maintain a constant elevation of 29.36 feet. Richard also stated that the elevation of the pond easterly of Linden Ave. (Pond C on the plan) is 20.6 feet. He did say, however, that the measurements of these ponds were taken late last winter and so the levels may differ now. Brian French pointed out that the plans were not stamped or dated and that the datura was not referenced. Walter Lezenski of the State DPW explained that the plans submitted to the commission were preliminary plans and that in all the years he has worked for the State DPW he has never seen a stamped plan. Brian questioned whether there was any one person who was responsible for the Plans. Walter said no. Brian then questioned what frequency of storm was the plan designed for. Richard Swenson replied that it was designed for the 10 year storm level. Brian also questioned why no calculations had been submitted with the Notice of Intent. Walter replied that he had never gone before a local ConCom before and didn't realize it was necessary. He also noted that Salem would be receiving $400,000 out of a total $650,000 that has been allocated for such projects. Relevant to the calculations, Walter stated that the flow would be 85 cubic feet per second from the water shed 'area of 54 acres. He also stated that the runoff coefficient would be 0.4 or 40%. i Brianquestioned whether there would be curb inlets. Richard Swanson said there could be and that they were shown on the plans. Brian then asked I if they would have catch basins . Richard Swenson replied that .they would. Brian noted that current engineering journals were recomendations Were judging catch basins to be useless. Brian then asked if the pipes were "designed to run full." Walter statsd that they weren't. In discussing the various elevations marked on the plan; Richard Swenson stated that the State bases their elevations on mean sea level. l Minutes of 1/30/73 Page 4 .;o Brian also questioned any Pond D had to be lowered. Richard replied that cellar floors in the area experience frequent flooding. Brian stated that the Comnission's concern is the water quality of the ponds after the new drainage system is completed. Brian informed Walter and Richard that the Commission had had tests of the ponds taken and that Pond C is Class A water and that Pond D fulfills the qualifications for Class C. Brian stated that the commission wants Pond C to stay Class A. 1 Brian next questioned the depth of Pond D. Richard Swengnn quoted depths of 13' , 15' and 11 ' in various parts of the pond. " Paul l'lillis questioned whether some 'chemical buffering effect' could be utilized so that the %eater quality of Pond C will be insured. Paul 14illis suggested that booms could be used to control surface oil and gasoline runoff. l� Brian questioned what protective devices were planned to insure that children do not get trapped in the connecting pipe. Walter stated that was up to the Salem City Engineer. Brian suggested that a bar rack be installed. Brian then stated that he was still concerned about the water level of Pond D. He stated that it may turn out that the level of the pond should be increased not decreased. He asked that stakes be placed from elevation 25 for the ConCom to inspect before any final decision is made. Richard Swenson agreed to do this. Attorney Burke, representing Thomas Mackey, was present to question some possible effects of this project on his clients property. He pointed out that the DP';I plan takes the runo-°f to [lackey's pond and then ends. He stated that the level of the pond could be raised with resulting flood- ing of the dirt road beyond. Attorney Burke further stated that the City Engineer had promised hydraulics 1 testing and that it had not been done. He also stated that the elevation the ndis 20 and that the 2 pipes leaving the pond are at elevation 13`and 18 rd that they are both presently blocked. He questioned at' ese tato pines could handle the outflow when there was a 60" pipe connecting the ta;o ponds. Brian French stated that he understood that Nr. tiackey didn't want any more water nut.`yhat Mr. Mackey's land is hinh and could take an additional elevation of several feet. Walter ointed out that -he 'and 4,oe ,Antbo 1 d Viewed the area in Nov. and that tie pipes coning Trom Hacxey s oda ae � not blocked at that time. Richard Swenson stated that the promised tests had not been done yet because of the weather but that they would be. � 1 r� Minutes of 1/30/73 Page 5 i Attorney Burke questioned what would happen to the quality of the water. Brian stated that it was hard to tell but that there may be a temporary drop in the water quality. Richard Swenson stated that he would recheck the slopeand the size of the pipes in Mackey's pond to discover their capacity and follow this to the Forest River. halter stated that the dirt road beyond the pond could be dug and a pipe placed. A brief disgy�sjop, fpllQwO�as,to,.(optinulgg ,th , ,heariig gg,,tJay;Qalculations would be made available as well as estimate of 100year flow rate, and the stakes that are to be placed in Pond D can be observed. A motion was made by Brian French and seconded by Paul Willis that the public hearing for the DPW be continued on February 7, 1978 at 7:30 P.M. at One Salem rreen, The special meeting was adjourned at 9:45 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Conservation Commission Saleni. :1luscachuset ts 01970 I•IIidUTES OF 1•LETIA FEK.UA?Y.21, 1978 The Conservation Commission met at One Salem Green on Tuesday, February 21, 1978 at 7:30 P.M. Commission members attending were: Cleti Cervoni, Jim Rienhardt, Brian French, Brad Northrup, Mary illen Pelletier, and David DeVoe. Commission members not attending: Paul Willis \ Chairman Brad Northrup opened the continuation of • the public hearing \\ for the Department of Public Works at 7:3$ ! •-R- with a quorum present. This public hearing is being held to consider the effects ofthe proposed installation of storm drainage pipes in the Vinnin Square area at the 1 end of Linden Ave. and Chandler Road. Brian French, having viewed the site, stated that the elevations for Pond D were above those indicated on the Plans and he asked Tony Fletcher, the City Engineer, the differential between mean low water and mean sea level. Tony replied that the difference was 4.8 feet. / Brian stated that he still thought that the pond should be kept higher than had been proposed on the Plan. The City Engineer stated that he wanter to lower the Stop & Shop pond (pond D) to its historic elevation. He further explained that since the drainage ditch near Peter St. had been filled there had been more flooding in the area. As an example, he pointed out that Stop & Shop has had flooding in their basement. Brian then stated that the water level at Pond D appears to be suffi- cient. Brian French further pointed out that liackey's Pond looks as if the pipes \ need to be cleaned out. Attorney Burke, representing Mr. Thomas Mackey, explained that the Town of Marblehead had installed an earthen dam years ago. Tony Fletcher added that he has been informed by Mr. Harris of the Marblehead Nater Department that the 10" pipe located in Mackey's pond was installed by Marblehead in 1900. Tony further stated that a 14" cast iron pipe was installed where the road crosses near Mackey's pond . in the fifties. Tony then suggested that the 10" pipe be eliminated and that the drainage bw.�Lllowed to flow in a natural Swale. Tony stated that he would further investigate this possibility before a final decision to remove the pipe was made. Brian then questioned what precautions were being planned to insure that children do not enter the proposed pipe between the two ponds. Tony j noted that the necessary precautions will be taken and some device installed to prevent children from entering. Because of the inclement weather during the past month, the calculations and testing requested by the ConCom were unable to be done. Tony informed the commission that the tests that had been done showed that the PH count i I i Piinutcs of sleeting 2/21/'j3 Page 2 r for both ponds was 6.7 and that the fecal colorform was tested at 4 Darts. Tony also stated that his testing indicated no hydrocarbons present in either pond. Brian French stated that the testing that had been done by the Commission indicated a high chlotid2 count. Brian then reviewed other results of the testing done for the Commission by Thomas Rich. Tony further explained that the pipe connecting the two ponds is going to be concrete. He added that even though stone would be more attractive, he felt the area of maintenance had to be conzidered as a deciding , factor. He did say, however, that the banks are ragged now and that cosmetic work would be done to hide the pipe as much as possible. Richard Swenson stated that calculations will be done before the next public hearing. He also stated that the difference in rates of precipi- tation between the 10 year storm and the 100 year flood do not vary as greatly as one might think. For the ten year storm the rate is 2 incSes per hour and for the 100 year flood the rate is 3 inches per hour. A motion was made by Brian French and seconded by Cleti Celrvoni that the public hearing be continued until Plarch 7, 1c778 at 7:3 Chairman Brad Northrup called the regular meeting of the Conservation Commission to order at $:10 P.M. with a quorum present. Tony Fletcher briefly spoke to the Commission relevant to the clean up that is being done as a result of the recent storm. Tony explained that clean up has started relevant to the debris that was tossed up in the Leech St. area as well as other areas . He also stated that damage to Winter Island and the Plummer Home for Boys was extensive. He added that a complete photographic record of the storm damage in the coastal area is now being compiled. lie stated that he would probably be able to give a presentation of damage done to docks and seawalls around the City by the next meeting. He stressed that much of the repair work should begin as soon as possible and asked that the commission try to expedite matters as much as possible. Brad informed Tony that emergency procedures under the Wetlands Protection Act have been issued by the State and that they will speed up the filing process. Tony also stated that .Minter Island is to be treated separately because there is a question of whose jurisdiction the repair work falls under. He added that riprap as well as a good amount 6f fill will be necessary for Winter Island. Mary Ellen Pelletier questioned the damage to Fort Pickering. Tony replied that there was heavy damage to the ramp and the lighthouse. It was the consensus of the Commission that the minutes for the special meeting of January 30, 1978 be deferred until the next meeting. MINUTES OF MEETING:; -!`ay_8, 1980 1 CLAYTON SMITH (con't) The vote was unanimous and the Secretary (acting Chairman) declared the motion carried. BP GAS STATION A motion was made by Cleti Cervoni and seconded by Ray Lavender to approve the Order of Conditions for BP Gas Station with the following conditions: 1. All work shall be in accordance with the submitted plan "New Oil Tanks Installation for BP Gas Station, Salem, Massachusetts." prepared by Robert M. Rumpf & Associates dated 3/25/80. The vote was unanimous and the Secretary (acting Chairman) declared the motion carried. BUDGET It was noted by Sue Madison that the budget for the fiscal year 1980 was approved by the Mayor with the exception of an increase in salary for the position of Clerk. The city council will take action on the budget on Wednesday, May 14th at 8:00 P.M. The Commission will be represented. VINNIN SQUARE Mackey Pond Tony Fletcher has informed the Commission that the 18 inch pipe, installed by the DPW per Order of Conditions, adjacent to the existing pipe has caused the level of water to drop 6 feet. After a brief discussion, Commission members present agreed that an inspection of the property would be necessary in order to resolve the situation. SALEM HOSPITAL Salem Hospital has submitted various plans fo the Commission for review of proposed sites for improving additional parking space behind the hospital. After some discussion by Commission members, Brian French noted that the Commission would consider a proposal for construction of additional space only if it is out of the wetlands, which form part of the South River Flood Control Project. YCC Sue Madison noted that letters to the 24 selected enrolees have been sent and she has received a good response from the youths. She also noted that several resumes have been received for the positions of director and work crew supervisors. An interviewing committee will be set up to review the resumes and to made appointments for interviewing - the applicants. SPRING WEEKEND Cleti Cervoni noted that the invitation proof for the cocktail party has been received and approved. Minutes of Meeting - Ni ovember- 13 , 1980 JAMES GEMMA (continued) A motion was made by Ray Lavender and seconded by Brian French to close the hearing. The vote was unanimous and the Chairman declared the motion carried. MEETING Since the next regular meeting of the Commission was scheduled for November 27th (Thanksgiving) , members agreed to change the date to December 2nd. VINNIN SQUARE Tony Fletcher was present to discuss water and sewer problems at Vinnin Square. He informed the commission that there has been a history of flooding problems in the Vinnin Square area and last year the Town of Marblehead and Swampscott got together with Salem to request, from the State, funds to replace the drainage system. He noted that the water drains into the Stop & Shop pond and then a pipe connects through Elinor Street and other streets to the Linden Avenue pond which in turn goes into a pipe and ultimately into the Forest River. From there it crosses the well heads into the old Marblehead water supply. Marblehead felt that they may have to utilize that water someday and were concerned that this runoff water would effect the water quality. Mr. Fletcher noted that everything drains into the pipe auto- matically, as it is a natural topographical situation. Mr. Fletcher informed the Commission that the water is being tested twice a month and no fecal coloform has registered. It has proven to be typical of runoff water - Class B - the ph is good and the oxygen is higher than expected. He noted that the water quality was well below the coloform bacteria requirements established by DEQE. Brad Northrup noted that the Order of Conditions required re- placing the outlet pipe . Mr. Fletcher informed the Commission that the 8 inch iron pipe was replaced with a 16 inch pipe which lowered the pond 8 feet. He also noted that the grates, which were also required, will be installed shortly. On another matter, Mr. Fletcher noted that he has been working with DEQE and Sue Madison relevant to the raw sewerage that comes into the drain behind Monroe Street adjacent to Sylvania. He has also found several other problems: 1. On the other side of Monroe Street there is a headwall that is filling with sewerage. This problem is being taken care of. 2 . The city had a street drain with a fecal coloform count. It has been replaced by new lines. 3 . Rainbow Terrace had a drain line that the State College had connected to the sewer line . The city has disconnected it f Minutes of Meeting - November 13 , 1980 VINNIN SQUARE (continued) and re-routed it. 4 . Sylvania had a slight fecal coloform count due to a bathroom being connected to the system. It will be taken care of . YCC Sue Madison asked for constructive ideas relative to the new YCC application which must be sumbitted by December 15th. Brian French noted that the commission has stopped the trail system about 1/3 of the way along the tracks towards Swampscott and next year the YCC group could extend it further along the road and down to the Carpenter and Costin trail . As well as that, he also suggested establishing a self-guided nature trail and to also produce some information that would allow people to use Swampscott, Salem & Marblehead conservation areas by way of plans and literature. A motion was made by Ray Lavender and seconded by Alice Akatyszewski to close the meeting. The vote was unanimous and the Chairman declared the motion carried. Respectfully submitted, Sheila Morin i `.t%0N ('I1.1� fz Conservation Commission (� Salem. Massachusetts 01970 1j.1/.Ass, MINUTES OF MEETING IFebruary_9, 1984 The Salem Conservation Commission met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room, on Thursday, February 9, 1984. Members present were Raymond Lavender, Philip Moran, James McDowell, and Alice Akatyszewski. Christopher Hagger, Glenn Yale, Richard Femino, and Associate Member Paul Willis were absent. Chairman Philip Moran called the meeting to order at 8:04 p.m. MACKEY--RIVERWAY ROAD Mr. Frederick Forbes of Hancock Survey was present to file a Notice of Intent for property at 9 Riverway Road (Map 31, Lot 325) which is a wetland area. He agreed the public hearing would be set for February 23, 1984. They intend to construct a single-family residence and some filling will be required. Mr. Forbes requested a waiver from the 15.36 requirement for location of the basement floor and the consensus of the Board was that this would not be ac- ceptable. A site walk was scheduled for Sunday, February 12, 1984 at 9:00 a.m. to gain a better perspective on the plan. PICKMAN PARK A letter received by the Commission dated February 2, 1984, from Phyllis Ohlbrych was read. She claims that several conditions of the original Order have not been adhered to (see attached letter) . Jim McDowell stated he had visited the site earlier today and felt there were no specific violations beyond the posting of the DEQE sign. Mrs. Ohlbrych felt several boulders from the Dion's Yacht Yard site had been placed in the wetland area. Jim McDowell proposed the Commission inspect the area again after viewing the Mackey site on Sunday. Mrs. Ohlbrych asked if the Commission had ever researched the possibility of making this area available for purchase by the Audubon Society or other similar organization and Mr. Moran replied that the Commission had no say in what Mr. DiBiase did with his land beyond ascertaining that there were no wetland violations. The Commission had not been opposed to this project when it first was proposed. After the Commission has viewed the site again, Mr. Frederiksen, the Conservation Aide will brief Mrs. Ohlbrych on the results. SHETLAND A letter requesting an extension of the Order of Conditions which allowed Shetland to store bricks on the mudflats along the South River was read. The proposed marina has been postponed indefinitely, so no definite date for removal of the �•�`o` ro,it .1 Conservation Commission r. 4 Salem, Massachusetts 01970 f ..7j bd5sn�O�. MINUTES_OF MEETING. 7March 8, 1984 The Salem Conservation Commission met at One Salem Green, second floor con- ference room, on Thursday, March 8, 1984. Present were Philip Moran, Alice Akatyszewski, Christopher Hagger, Glenn Yale, and James MacDowell. Also present was Conservation Aide Charles Frederiksen. Raymond Lavender, Richard Femino, and Associate Member Paul Willis were absent. Vice-chairman Glenn Yale called the meeting to order at 8:10 p.m. Mr. Moran absented himself from the first part of the meeting. MACKEY--ORDER OF CONDITIONS Vice-chairman Glenn Yale gave a brief overview of the project for the benefit of those members of the Commission not present at the last meeting. Chris Hagger noted that according to the Minutes, the applicant agreed that the area was a tidal flat. Paul Willis had further identified the saltmarsh with the presence of spartina marsh grass. The Minutes further state there is an area of saltmarsh of approximately 1800 square feet present on the site. The Notice of Intent did not identify the area as a coastal beach, Mr. Forbes had stated he would leave that determination to the Army Corps; however, Coastal Zone Management, the area has been mapped as a coastal beach. Mr. O'Connor, an abuttor, had identified the area as a shellfish area. In order to further clarify this, a request was made to Cat Cove Marine Labs to survey the site. They did this and found several examples of shellfish (see attached letter) . Therefore, the site is composed of the following: a coastal beach, a coastal bank, a saltmarsh, and a shellfish area. On that basis, upon the motion of Christopher Hagger and second of Alice Akatyszewski, the application is denied. It was so voted (4 - 0) . DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE--ROBERT MARSILIA, LINDEN AVENUE Mr. Moran read the notice of the Determination which was published in the newspaper on March 1, 1984. Mr. Marsilia presented a certified plot plan showing the bulkhead of his proposed single-family dwelling to be 102' from the edge of the pond. Jim MacDowell asked if they have any plans for grading and Mr. Marsilia re- plied there will be no grading changes, they just plan to fill in the ruts. Jim MacDowell asked what type of landscaping they anticipate and Mr. Marsilia replied they will plant a lawn, but anticipate minor landscaping. Glenn Yale asked what the setback from the street is and Mr. Marsilia replied they will be 75' back from the street and 102' from the pond. �f•l I Page 2 Minutes of Meeting--June 4, 1984 i There being no further discussion and no members of the public present wishing to speak in favor or in opposition to the proposal, upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of Alice Akatyszewski, the public hearing was declared closed. It was so voted. Upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of Raymond Lavender, the site will be inspected prior to our next meeting and the Order of Conditions written at that time. It was so voted. ERNEST DELPERO--EXTENSION OF ORDER OF CONDITIONS (#64-91) Attorney John Serafini Jr. was present to discuss the proposed extension of an Order of Conditions issued to Mr. Ernest DelPero for work on Webb Street. The proposal consists of the construction of condominium units on pillars sunk into the mudflat at Collins Cove. Mr. DelPero has done quite a bit of the work, but needs a little more time. He noted that the project has minimal impact on the wetland. James MacDowell asked how long Mr. Serafini felt Mr. DelPero needed and Mr. Serafini replied he felt they would be finished with the project and would be coming back to the Commission for a Certificate of Compliance by the end of the year. They would be amenable to an extension of less than a year. Upon the motion of James MacDowell and second of Alice Akatyszewski, the Order of Conditions was extended for six months. It was so voted. LEGG'S HILL POND Glenn Yale gave a brief update of the situation. It was reported by one of the residents of Linden Avenue that the pond level had dropped dramatically \ and quickly. Upon inspection, it was noted that the outlet pipe which was placed in the pond as part of the Vinnin Square drainage project had been been removed, thus changing the invert elevation of the pipe and the level of the pond. The City of Salem has been mandated to keep the pipe free of debris and Mr. Mackey had been contracted by the City to perform this cleaning work. However, as an emergency measure, until such time as it could be as- certained what the appropriate level of the pond should be, the outlet was temporarily dammed up. The dam was removed by Marblehead subsequent to that / time and was again dammed up upon order of the Commission on onlantemergencyporaryuntil basis. Mr. Yale stressed that the blocking procedure it could be determined what action was appropriate. James MacDowell noted that the commission has plans of homes built on the Linden Avenue side of the pond dated March 1983, which out the elevation of the pond at 27.2. Mr. Dana Snow of the Marblehead Water and Sewer Department stated that Marble- head had been maintaining the outlet pipe there for years in the absense of maintenance by Salem. The pipe is constantly being plugged up for skating purposes, vandalism, etc. He stressed that the pipe must be maintained in order / A • / f 7 Page 3 ` Minutes of Meeting--June 4, 1984 J to maintain the water quality of the pond which directly impacts their well fields. He disputes the 27.2 elevation and expressed concern that if the pond level were too high the water quality would be adversely af- fected in their well fields. He felt the elevation should be four feet \ lower than what now exists. According to the order of Conditions issued \ for the Vinnin Square drainage project, the 18" should be laid along pipe s removed was laid the existing 10" pipe. Therefore, the pipe which wa into the center of the pond and the invert elevation should be relatively clear. He added that in reality there eshould be res andntheond thered was at all. Indthe past the area was the site of many p eat as part of the drainage project. Philip Moran asked if the pond is within the boundaries of Salem and Mr. Snow replied in the affirmative. Glenn Yale asked if Marblehead had coor- dinated their efforts with Salem to maintain this pond propertly and Mr. Snow replied that Salem did not coordinate with Marblehead at all and the clean out of the pipe is practically a daily occurrence. Chris Haqger asked what exactly the water quality issue was and Mr. Snow replied that the well was constructed in the late 18o0's and its use was discontinued in 1952. They have recently been ander some Chris Haggerssuredfromwhathe MDC to reactivate the use of that water supply. the yield would be and Mr. Snow replied .75 mgd. Philip Moran asked w whatuld like specifically Marblehead would like to see and Mr. Snow replied they the elevation of the pond to be four feet lower than now. He is further concerned with the fact that Linden Avenue residents are using the pond that the use of fertilizers, for recreational pursuits--who is liable? He added r etc. could cause eutrification of the pond. Glenn Yale stated that those residents felt their property lines ran out into the water. Mr. Snow stated that pond in its natural state is practically non-existent. If they begin pumping from their well again, the level will drop dramatically. The elevation as it is now could seriously affect their water be qualitmpng because if the water runs into their well too quickly, they rface water rather than ground water and the wleachihat n seffect of ize of thethellwater was andl be affected as well. Chris Haggerit is grav Steve Benjamin of the Marblehead Water Department reppliedoncernea thateifwell Go' deep and 30' in diameter. Mr. Snow stated they arethe elevation of the pond is too high, improper infiltration will take place. concern. Mr. Snow stated that his consulting Chris Hagger felt this was not a engineers had stated this concern. d Mr. Snow it Glenn Yale asked what the Chris of felthe well was Marblehead'snconcerns werepnotdnecess the same as the pond. Chris Haqg needed more discussion. Mr. Benjamin raised sarily valid and felt the matter ation of the well and Mr. Hagger agreed, but the issue of road salt contaimin added that this is always a problem. Glenn Yale asked what Mr. Snow's opinion of where the pipe should be placed would be and Mr. snow felt it should follow the contour of the bottom of the pond. Glenn Yale asked if Mr. Snow felt the invert had been changed and Mr. Snow replied in the negative. Minutes of Meeting--June 4, 1984 Page 4 Attorney William Rendle representing Mr. Mackey stated that the pond should be tested three times a year by the Conservation Commission. To his knowledge \ this had not been done, even though the Order of Conditions specified that it must be done. The pond must be maintained as Class B. Regarding the elevation of the pipe, if the 18" pipe is set adjacent to the existing 10" pipe at the same invert elevation, the elevation of the pond would be con- stant. He stressed that Salem must maintain this pond. Thev have a respon- sibility to Marblehead and to Mr. Mackey as an abuttor as well. r' Philip Moran felt the whole matter needed a great deal more study. There are several areas to look into and he suggested dealing with the matter again at our next meeting. Mr. Peach of the Marblehead Water Commission felt their engineer could provide input into this as well and it was agreed he should be invited. 1 Mr. Albert Tremblay of Linden Avenue stated that aerial photos of the area show the pond to be higher than it is now. The neighbors certainly do not wish to live on a swamp. It was further noted by the Commission that vegetation has established on the pond which make it subject to wetlands protection. Mr. Snow stated that if Marblehead begins to use their well again, there will ; be no pond. GIFFORD RUSSELL-FRANKLIN STREET A Cease and Desist order is still in. effect on the property. Additional information from the Army Corps has just been received which does not shed too much more light on the situation. James MacDowell noted there is still some material being stored on the property which is in violation of the Order of Conditions. It was further noted there is a question of ownership of the property according to the Planning Board minutes of 1971. Mr. Russell replied he had a title search done and his land goes out to the center of the river. He added that the fill was there long before he owned the land. Glenn Yale noted that we still have no information as to what the actual contour should be. The Army Corps has indicated they would like all the fill material removed--not just the unsuitable fill; however, they will abide by the Conservation Commission recommendation. Mr. Yale feels that the Corps wishes the fill to be removed. He also pointed out that the Cease and Desist was not limited to the subsequent Order of Conditions. The Order of Conditions did specify removal of unsuitable fill materials, but was issued for a proposed marine railway which now is not going to be constructed. Mr. Yale feels all the fill should be removed. Alice Akatyszewski agreed. Mr. Russell felt a great deal of the fill material had already been removed. Upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of Alice Akatyszewski, a set of drawings at 20 scale shall be provided to the Commission defining what is currently on the site so that a definition can be made as to how to best handle the situation. It was so voted. i Conservation Commission " 4 Salem. Massachusetts 01970 II ISgn0��. MINUTES OF MEETING rJun-e 14, 1984 'f The Salem Conservation Commission met at One Salem Green, second floor conference ` room, on Thursday, June 14, 1984. Present were Philip Moran, Alice Akatyszewski, Raymond Lavender, James MacDowell, Glenn Yale, and Christopher Hagger (8:15 p.m. ) . Also present were Conservation Aide Charles Frederiksen and City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh. Richard Femino and Associate Member Paul Willis were absent. Chairman Philip Moran called the meeting to order at 8:04 p.m. LEGG'S HILL POND i Chairman Philip Moran gave a brief summary of the discussion which took place at our previous meeting regarding the issue of the pond known as Legg's Hill Pond. As a result of sections of outlet pipe being removed from the end of the pond, the level of the pond had dropped dramatically. As a temporary measure, the Conservation Commission had ordered the placement of an earth dam to maintain the water level in the pond until such time as the proper outlet pipe could be in- stalled. There has been some argument as to what the actual level of the pond should be and the discussion of our last meeting was continued until this evening so that certain legal and engineering aspects could be researched further. Mr. Moran had researched the original deeds to the property and noted that Marble- head purchased the pond some years ago, but it is located entirely within the boundaries of Salem. According to definitions noted in the wetlands regulations, the area is defined as a pond and as such is subject to the protection of the Conservation Commission under the Wetlands Protection Act. The Commission will attempt this evening to define the issues and reach an equitable solution to determine the level of the pond which will protect wetlands vegetation in the area, provide the aesthetics the neighbors of the area had believed were part of their / property, and satisfy the concerns of the Marblehead Water Department as well. 1 Mr. Dana Snow, Superintendent of the Marblehead Water and Sewer Department, noted that the original 10" pipe that was set in the pond in 1923 was placed at a certain invert' elevation. When the Order of Conditions for the Vinnin Square Drainage Project was issued a larger pipe (18" was ordered, 16" was installed) was to be placed at the same invert elevation as the 10" pipe. He introduced Mr. Charles Miller who is a consulting engineer for the Town of Marblehead. Mr. Miller is from the firm of Haley and Ward. He noted the invert elevation i of the 10" pipe was 23.31 and the 16" pipe was 23.13. The pond surface presently is 27.4, so the pond is now 4' above the invert of the drainage pipe. J Philip Moran asked why the original pipe was placed there and Mr. Miller replied that this was done when their 14" water main was installed up Legg's Hill Road. The 10" pipe accomodated a brook which ran through the property. �' Minutes of Meeting--June 14, 1984 Page 2 Philip Moran asked what the Town of Marblehead wished the Conservation Commission to do and Mr. Snow replied that it was the feeling of the Water Commissioners in Marblehead that the pond should be restored to its original level. This would mean a drop in level of approximately four feet. He also raised the issue of liability. Philip Moran felt the liability issue was not within the jurisdiction of the Con- servation Commission, but he also noted that he has never been aware of a municipality being held liable for a drowning in a municipal water area. He added that even if the pond were lowered, the problem of liability still exists. The Conservation Commission must first consider the state law which governs this wetland. Glenn Yale asked when was the last time Marblehead pumped from their well in the area and Mr. Snow replied in 1954-55. He added that Marblehead had to work very hard to maintain the elevation due to the accumulated debris and vandalism. Glenn Yale asked if the level of the pond ever reached the level of the invert of the 10" pipe and Mr. Snow replied he felt the level was maintained, but periodic damming up of the pipe was allowed to happen to accomodate skaters, etc. James MacDowell noted he had found the elevation of the pond to be 28.0 on Wednesday. Mr. Miller had done his elevation calculations on Monday, June 11. Mr. MacDowell noted that the Commission had in its possession a plan which took the elevation of the pond in March of 1983 and placed it at 27.2. He raised the issue of whether the invert had changed and Mr. Snow felt that was a possibility. He added, however, that the drainage pipe at Vinnin Square lays 2' higher. Mr. MacDowell noted that according to the Linden Avenue plan to which he referred earlier, the outlet shows a high water mark stain at 27.5. This is fairly clear / evidence that the level of the pond was at this elevation for a prolonged period i of time. Mr. Snow felt this could be due somewhat to the continued blockage problem. James MacDowell felt it would be difficult to justify lowering the pond level by three to four feet. Chris Hagger raised the issue of water quality, which seemed to be of concern to Marblehead at our last meeting. Mr. Snow stated that the consensus was now that the elevation as it stands now would not affect water quality. Mr. Miller added, 1 however, that any further rise in the level could have a detrimental effect. Chirs then asked if there was no detrimental effect on water quality, what difference would it make? Mr. Snow again raised the issue of liability. The order of Conditions issued in 1978 does set the invert elevation of the pipe at the same level as the existing 10" pipe, therefore the level of the pond should be lower. Chris Hagger felt he was not clear as to the liability issue and Mr. MacDowell added that if any legal action was ever instituted, it would be "messy" as there are so many owners of the property. Mr. Miller felt that whatever reason the pond ele- vation is higher, some type of official sanction should be made. i Glenn Yale clarified the dam situation. It was done as a temporary measure to preserve the level of the water that is presently there until such time as a determination could be made as to the appropriate level. Minutes of Meeting--June 14, 1984 Page 3 Mr. Miller further added that the Town of Marblehead has made a great deal of ef- fort to maintain that outlet pipe in the absence of any maintenance from Salem. If any liability questions should arise, at least Marblehead could show that these efforts had been made. He added that if the pond was lowered to the "proper" level, there would actually be two small ponds. Jim MacDowell noted that if the Town of Marblehead wishes to bring the level of the pond down to four feet less than it is now, it would clearly require a filing of a Notice of Intent. i� i Attorney William Rendle, representing Mr. Mackey, asked what identifiable vegetation existed in the pond area which needs protecting? If that vegetation became established as a result of a recent rise in the level of the pond and occurred due to a lack of maintenance of the outlet pipe by the City he feels it would fall into a different category than vegetation which exists as part of a wetland. The increased elevation of the pond has taken some of Mr. Mackey's land and he feels this loss of land should be addressed. Jim MacDowell noted that we are not dealing with just wetlands vegetation--the j pond is defined in the Act as a resource area which is protected by the Wetlands Protection Act. Vegetation is only one criterion. Also, the regulations make no distinction as to whether the pond came into existence. We must deal with it as it now exists. Mr. Rendle replied that the original Order of Conditions created a balance of interests, which are not all served equally at present. i Mr. Moran felt that negligence in maintenance was not a valid argument. He asked if Mr. Mackey had an explanation as to why sections of pipe were removed and Mr. Mackey replied that the sections that were removed were not part of the original installation. They had been placed there by Marblehead in an effort to cut back on the vandalism and when he went in there to clean out the pipe, his equipment inadvertently dug up those additional lengths. Mr. Rendle added that if the City had maintained the pipe as they were supposed to, this would not be a problem now. Philip Moran noted that there is strong evidence that the level of the pond should be 27. 3. Glenn Yale added that we also have aerial photos of the area taken in 1968 which show the pond at an equivalent level as presently. Dana Snow asked if there were any plans available from the state which set the appriprate level of the pond and Mr. MacDowell replied they had construction draw- ings only--this is why there is such a dilemma. Glenn Yale asked what benchmark Mr. Mackey used and Mr. Rendle replied he used the old 10" pipe as a guide. This was explictly explained in the Order of Conditions. Attorney Gary Sabkkider, representing residents of the neighborhood, asked Mr. Miller if they had any topographical plans which showed the pond level being so j low as to create two small ponds and Mr. Miller replied in the negative. Some discussion ensued as to the benchmarks used in calculating the invert elevations. j Mr. Miller noted that the top of the hydrants in the well fields were 21.41 and 17.44, using "Marblehead base." a r , Minutes of Meeting--June 14, 1984 Page 4 1 Mr. Sackrider asked if Marblehead felt there would be reduced liability if the level of the pond was lower and Mr. Snow stated that by making the pond level higher, the recreational aspects of the pond are enhanced. Glenn Yale asked how Marblehead would feel about a level of approximately 27 or so? l Mr. Snow replied that some permanent type of structure would have to be installed i and he wondered who would bear the cost for this? Mr. MacDowell noted that the City of Salem will design and build this structure and it would then be the responsibility of the City of Salem to maintain. As to the mechanism of how this is achieved regarding a Notice of Intent or a modification of the original order, this has yet to be worked out. Upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of Alice Akatyszewski, the City Engineer � will be requested to design and install an outlet structure which will maintain / the level of the pond at 27. 3. It was so voted. HEWITT--ORDER OF CONDITIONS (#64-103) James MacDowell abstained from any participation in this project. Conservation Aide Charles Frederiksen visited the site this past week and noted that the only issue of any real concern was the presence of debris--stumps, limbs, etc. on the site. The proponent is willing to remove this as a condition of approval. Mr. Frederiksen felt there should also be some erosion control em- ployed on the bank behind lot 345. Upon the motion Alice Akatyszewski and second of Christopher Hagger, the Order of Conditions will be written referencing the presented plan, requiring that all debris be removed, and that erosion control measures be employed behind lot 345. It was so voted. RAGONE A summary of the illegal fill which was found to be stored on Mr. Ragone's property was read to the Board (attached hereto) . It was noted that upon the serving of the Cease and Desist, Mr. Ragone voluntarily locked his gates and cooperated fully with the Commission. The fill material came originally from New England Power and there is positive evidence that it contains petrochemical and expert opinion that it also contains coal ash. Both are unacceptable table materials for a wetland area. Upon the motion of Alice Akatyszewski and second of Raymond Lavender, the fill material must be removed within fourteen days. It was so voted. MOOSE Mr. William McLaughlin of the Moose Lodge was present to seek permission from the Commission to begin work in the area away from where the culvert and manhole are to be constructed. Differing opinions as to whether the pipe under Highland Avenue has been cleaned or not have been received from the state DPW and this will be reserached further. It was noted, however, that a state DPW permit must be obtained for the Commission's perusal before any construction or filling takes place according to our Order of Conditions. The matter will be taken under advisement and will be addressed at our first meeting in July. Minutes of Meeting-!October 1984 Page 2 1. Work shall conform to plan entitled, " dated and reviewed and approved by Director of Public Services Paul S. Niman. 2. The location of any proposed cross culverts in the new sewer easement shall be approved in the field by a designated representative of the Conservation Commission prior to construction. 3. Proper erosion control procedures shall be practiced as specified in the Order of Conditions issued for Pickman Park/Salem Acres, Inc., DEQE File #64-32. 4. Movement of vehicles and excavated areas shall be limited to the 20' easement area shown on the plan. This includes storage of all construction materials. 5. Any excess construction materials from the project shall be removed from the site. 6. Sideslopes abutting existing wetland areas shall be finished with wetland soils excavated from the site. It was so voted. MACKEY Conservation Aide Charles Frederiksen gave the board a brief overview of the 1 situation on Legg's Hill Road. Work was observed in what could be described as a \ sensitive wetland area. Following assurances from Mr. Mackey's attorney that no work would take place in the buffer zone, it was determined by the Commission \\ that the top of the ledge constituted an inland bank. Therefore, all the work Mr. Mackey was performing was within the buffer zone. Subsequently, an Enforcement Order of issued to Mr. Mackey ceasing further work on the site. Mr. Timothy O'Keefe, an attorney representing Mr. Mackey, cited a section of the wetlands regulations, Section 10.54, part 2 c which deals with the definition of a bank, which he felt refuted the Commission's determination of the actual boundary i of the bank. Mr. Mackey has several contractual agreements to fulfill with gravel orders and he would like to reach some kind of compromise with the Commission so that these committments can be fulfilled. Mr. Mackey would like to "split the difference" between the the level of the invert on the pond and the cast iron pipe the City maintains and excavate above that level. Mr. O'Keefe further noted that Mr. Mackey had been requested by the Director of Public Services to provide the manpower for the installlation of a new control structure for Legg's Hill Pond. Mr. i Mackey would be happy to help the City in this matter. In return, he would like some assistance in reaching an equitable compromise so he can fulfill his contractual agreements. 1 Minutes of Meeting--October 25, 1984 Page 3 Jim MacDowell noted that the work that Mr. Mackey is proposing would certainly require a filing of a Notice of Intent. The Commission would require a proposed re-grading plan and erosion control procedures, as well as a long-term plan as to the finishing off of the site. Mr. O'Keefe replied Mr. Mackey has every intention of filing, but would like an interim agreement regarding the removal of gravel from the pit. Jim MacDowell raised the issue of the potential of the possible collapse of the bank and Mr. Mackey replied he uses extreme care in doing the backhoe work on the site. Nothing has gone or will go into the pond. / Following some further discussion, it was agreed that the Commission will inspect the site on Saturday morning, at 9:30 a.m. In the meantime, Mr. Mackey will stake out a 100' line and the Commission can make a decision as to the extend of work Mr. i.lackey can perform. NEW ENGLAND POWER COMPANY--EXTENSION OF ORDER OF CONDITIONS 1l 64-85 Upon the motion of James MacDowell and second of Raymond Lavender, the Order of Conditions for New England Power was extended for one year. It was so voted. Vice-chairman Glenn Yale assumed the Chair at this point in the meeting. RICHDALE Upon review of the submitted calculations, a motion to accept was made by James MacDowell and seconded by Christopher Hagger. It was so voted. MINUTES Upon the motion of Raymond Lavender and second of Christopher Hagger, the minutes of October 11, 1984, were approved. It was so voted. OLD BUSINESS Conservation Aide Charles Frederiksen gave the Commission an update on the situation with Ragone. The hazardous material has been removed and the clean fill has been spread. The gate is locked and a representative of the Commission must inspect stockpiled fill material prior to placement. Upon the motion of James MacDowell and second of Christopher Hagger the Cease and Desist Order was lifted. It was so voted. Charles Frederiksen had visited the Conservation Area for two specific reasons recently. Muskrats in the Area had been observed to be behaving in an unusual manner. It was the general opinion of the board that the blasting taking place in the area could be causing this problem; however, Mr. Frederiksen will contact the MSPCA for their input. Minutes of Meeting—November,8, 1984 Page 2 Upon the motion of Alice Akatyszewski and second of Glenn Yale, the proposal was determined to have no significance on the Wetlands Protection Act. It was so voted. PUBLIC HEARING--SIDNEY GERBER, SOPHIA ROAD Chairman Philip Moran read the notice of the public hearing. Mr. Moran further directed that the record indicate no abutters in favor of or opposed to the project were present. This involves the proposed construction of a single-family dwelling on Sophia Road. The lot slopes steeply toward an abutting street and there is some concern for the stability of the bank and the drainage to the brook behind the property. Both James MacDowell and Glenn Yale expressed some concern for the location of a turnaround. If the Planning Board, Department of Public Works, or Fire Department should require a different configuration for the turnaround, the concerns of the Conservation Commission would be changed. The Commission would also like to see a detail of the proposed drainage swale--some concern was expressed as to the construction. Large stones could be dislodged during a heavy storm event. Glenn Yale asked where the edge of the new fill will be located and Mr. Gerber stated he does not intend to place any fill at all. The Commission requested that his plans be amended to show a profile through the house to ascertain the finished contours. Therefore, the consensus of the Commission was to continue the hearing until the following information is provided: Stability calculations for the bank; detail of proposed drainage swale; profile of the proposed finished grades. Upon the motion of James MacDowell and second of Alice Akatyszewski, the hearing will be continued until our next meeting on December 13, 1984. It was so voted. FIELD INSPECTION REPORT The Commission members ' inspected the Leggs Hill property and Broadway P properties of Mr. Mackey and an agreement was made to allow Mr. Mackey to ih continue with the excavation of gravel on Legg's Hill Road. Further, Mr. Mackey will clean up the site off Broadway and it will be inspected again prior to our next meeting. MINUTES Upon the motion of James MacDowell and second of Alice Akatyszewski, the minutes of October 25, 1984, were approved. It was so voted. I , MINUTES-OF'MEETING` April 11, -1985 The Salem Conservation Commission met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room, on Thursday, April 11, 1985. Present were Philip Moran, Glenn Yale, Paul Geoghegan and David Lash. Raymond Lavender and Christopher Hagger were absent. Chairman Philip Moran opened the meeting by welcoming David Lash to the Commission. He then called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING--SALEM SUEDE Chairman Moran read the notice of the public hearing. Mr. Bruce Poole of SP, Inc. , representing Salem Suede, was present to discuss Salem Suede' s proposal to construct a pre-treatment facility for wastes generated by their leather business. This pre-treatment is mandated by State and Federal law and must be in place by November of 1985. \ Mr. Poole stated they have submitted plans and specifications to SESD and have been approved to discharge into their system following the treatment process they plan on-site. David Lash asked the nature of the SESD review and Mr. Poole explained the pre-treatment proposal further: 1. Wastewater from the tannery flows by gravity to a pump area. In the pump pit the pH is monitored and the wastewater is agitated to prevent settlement of solids. 2. The wastewater is then pumped to a mixing chamber and combined with alum and polymer to assist in the settling out of solids. 3. Solids are settled out in a settling tank. The sludge is removed from the bottom of the tank and the remaining wastewater is monitored prior to discharge into the sewer system. 4. The sludge is pumped into twin storage tanks and is de-watered on site. Presently, all the tanneries in the area are looking into a central sludge facility. Once the sludge is de-watered, the water removed is put back through the mixing process again. Sludge is disposed of at a central facility off-site. Mr. Poole noted that the tanneries have a July 15 deadline to find a central de-watering facility, but are building in plans so that they can J\ de-water on site if plans for this central facility do not materialize. l � —3— Upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of David Lash, the public hearing was closed. It was so voted. Upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of Paul Geoghegan, the Order of Conditions will be drafted and signed at our next meeting pending the submission of uplift calculations for the tanks and a copy of the SESD permit. It was so voted. DETERMINATION OF APPLICABILITY--WITCH CITY CAB Chairman Philip Moran read the notice of the Determination. Ms. Karen Burke, owner of Witch City Cab, and Mr. Alex Willis, General Manager, were present to discuss their proposal for the operation of a taxicab repair service to the rear of the Richdale property at 3 Bridge Street. Their lot is located directly on an embankment on Beverly Harbor. Mr. Willis presented a sketch of the area. He noted that no major repair work was done on the site--just fan belts, lightbulbs, etc. Glenn Yale asked if any engine removal had taken place and Mr. Willis stted they take engines out of cars slated for the junkyard. Glenn Yale asked if any motors were being repaired on the site and Mr. Willis replied there are three presently under repair. Glenn Yale asked if any oil changes were done on the property and Mr. Willis replied in the negative. Glenn Yale raised the issue of accumulated tires and stockpiled engines and batteries on the embankment. This was in violation of the Wetlands Protection Act. Photographs of the area were submitted which had been taken by the Fire Inspector. These confirmed the stockpiling of engines and batteries. Upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of Paul Geoghegan, the Determination was found to be positive and a Notice of Intent must be filed. Ms. Burke and Mr. Willis will attempt to clean up the area and will return to the Commission in two weeks. WETLANDS VIOLATIONS Photographs of three areas which have caused some concern to the Commission were discussed: 1. Linsky: It has been observed that Mr. Linsky has not removed the fill stored on his property as promised. He will be asked to attend our next meeting to address this issue. 2. Mackey: David Lash noted the concern for Mr. Mackey's Broadway property is the stability of the bank. Rather than clearing the debris /- away from the wetland area as requested by the Commission, Mr. Mackey `Jl covered it. /14 -4- Upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of David Lash, a Cease and Desist order will be sent to Mr. Mackey and a plan of clean-up will be drafted for Mr. Mackey to follow. 3. Story Street: The owners of the abutting lots to the area where dumping hat been taking place at the end of Story Street will be notified and a clean-up plan will be discussed. OLD/NEW BUSINESS Regarding some trail work in the Conservation Area to discourage trailbikers, the Phoenix School will be contacted to see if they will help with manpower. David Lash will contact Signworks for a quote on a new sign for the Conservation Area. The Conservation Spring Cocktail Party will be held on Friday, May 10, at Philip Moran' s residence. Upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of Paul Geoghegan, Order of Conditions #64-11 issued to Joseph Ragone in 1981, was rescinded. This Order was supersceded by Order #64-73, which was recently modified to allow the construction of a warehouse storage project by David Ebershoff. MINUTES Upon the motion of Paul Geoghegan and second of Glenn Yale, the Minutes of March 28, 1985, were approved. It was so voted. There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn. Having passed unanimously, the meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dale E. Yale I II /1 I JUH MINU_TIES_OF_MEETIG m_y 11 , 19_85 Tnp Salem Conservation Commission met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room on Thursday, May 23 , 1985- Present were Philip Moran, Glenn, Yale . Raymond Lavender, Harry Taki<_ , David Lash, Paul Geoghegan and Staff Advisor Dale Yale. Chairman Philip Moran called the meeting to order at 7 : 40 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING — MA.YNARD PLASTICS — SWAMPSCOTT ROAD Chairman Moran read the notice of the public hearing. The purpose of this hearing is to explore the effects of the construction of a 100,000 so. ft . building with attendant parking to rouse Mavnard Plastics Corp. This building is proposed for a parcel of land on Swampscott Road, which is within a wetlands area . 'ohn Serafini , attorney representing The Fafard Companies, was present to discuss plans for the project . A contract has been signed between Howard Fafard and Mavnard Plastics to construct a new facility for Maynard on 15 acres of a 43 acre parcel . Mr. Fafard has agreed to have a building ready for occupancy by May of 1986 - He stated that some vegetation and a small stream exists on the site but that by repositioning the building , it would be angeled so as not to touch any wetlands areas. Howard Fafard referred to a large topcgraphical map of the area and :aced the building has been angeled on the site cc preclude any filling of a wetland. it will be necessary ce cross c?ie stream ac the fcent of ZFecprooerty fcr access , neces_isatin€ -nstallation of cul% erts. The ,,._lding is sired so the office portion of the 'business is facing up Swampscott Road toward Highland .Avenue. To the rear of the property chemical storage tanks will be positioned and they propose to submerge the tanks to conseal their visibility from Swampscott Road. Loading decks will be located to the rear of the building and natural vegetation Will remain in the front. A. small pond at the front of the property Will remain untouched and part of an upland area at the front of the property is proposed for a retention pond. Mr. Jim Merloni, . an engineer, presented a drainage plan to the Board and noted that his calculations indicate the need for a retention basin to compensate for the two small culverts presently existing on Swampscott Road. His calculations indicate the use of this retention basin will decrease runoff by 50% during peak storm periods . Philip Moran asked what the dimensions of the building would be and Howard Fafard replied that it would be 163,000 sq. ft. , (500' x 1601 ) . Mr. Moran asked about the impact of increased runoff on neighboring properties and Mr. Merloni replied they will retain the majority of the increased runoff. Page Glenn Yale asked if the water level and retention design of the Ebershoff project was considered Jrcalculating t-.is design and Mr. Merloni replied in the affirmative . Glenn Yale asked what preconstruction runoff coefficients were and M:. Merloni replied 57 cubic feet per second. Mr. Yale asked what would be done about the existing reinforced culverts and Staff Advisor Dale Yale replied that the City would have to address this. Mr. Merloni added that the proposed retention area would somewhat improve that s,tuarion. Dale Yale asked what type of control structure would be installed and Mr. Merloni answered they probably would use an open pipe which would be the easiest type of structure to maintain. Glenn Yale asked what elevation the top of the retention Pond would be and Mr. Merloni calculated that elevation to be approximately 90. Glenn Yale noted the slope of the berm on the retention pond could encroach or. neighboring property. Glenn Yale further questioned how the slop e would be stabilized and Mr. Fafard stated thewould likely rip—rap the slope . Further, the slope is proposed to be at 1 : 1'x• Philip Moran inquired as to how many employees Maynard plastics has in their employ , how many parking spaces were available co them and where . parking was available on the site . Mr. Fafard answered that there are approximately 250 employees , 125 parking spaces . and that parking will be available on both sides of the entrance to the building. It was the consenus of the commission that this was too few parking spaces . Mr . Moran asked if parking would also be a"aila'c:e along Swampscott Road and Mr . Fafard stated that the Planning =,epartment would have to address this . Glenn :'ale asked what type of chem' cais .could be stored in the tanks and Mr . Fafard stated he would provide that information. Because of the need to facilitate this proiect as quickly as possible , Chairman Moran asked David Lash and Glenn. Yale to serve on a sub—committee to work with the developer in obtaining all necessary information to draft an Order of Conditions . I Following some discussion, a motion was made by Glenn Yale and seconded by Raymond Lavender to continue this public hearing until the next i meeting. It was so voted. WETLANDS VIOLATIONS UPDATE 1 Hill , Staff Advisor Dale Yale Regarding-Mr.Mr. Mackey ' s property on Legg' s g had received a request from Mr. Mackey' s attorney to remove more gravel ` I from the site. It was agreed the Commission had acted in good faith by allowing Mr. Mackey to remove in the agreed upon area. Therefore, he will be notified that no; further removal can take place until a formal filing with the Commission is made. I f I — Page 3 — The Enforcement Orders for Mr. Ferris and !'r. Mackev ' s land on Broadway have been recorded at the Registry of Leeds. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Upon the motion of Raymond Lavender and second of David Lash , a motion was made to approve the minutes of June 27 . It was so voted. OLD/NEW BUSINESS Philip Moran noted that the annual Conservation Commission report will be due in September. The MBTA will be notified that the Coranission feels the storage of branches cut from the trees along the railroad line within a wetland area is a violation of their Order of Conditions. Following our next meeting, the Commission has been invited to Philip Moran' s house for a social gathering. There being no further business , a motion was made to adjourn. Having passed unanimously, the meeting was declared adjourned at 9 : 20 P.M. Respectfully submitted. Nancy Svatt MINUTES OF MEETING-.-_- ? i ^June 27, 1_985 Y , The Salem Conservation Commission met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room on Thursday, June 27, 1985. Present were Raymond Lavender, David Lash, Paul. Geoghegan, Harry Takis Martha Hogan and Vice Chairman Glenn Yale. Also present was Staff Advisor Dale Yale. Philip Moran was absent . Vice Chairman Glenn Yale called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING - CITY OF SALEM - IMPROVEMENTS TO FRANKLIN PARK Vice Chairman Yale read the notice of the public hearing. Andrea Fish, Assistant Director for Development of the Salem Planning Department , was present to discuss specific improvements planned for Franklin Park. First , approximately 425 feet of loose rip-rap will be placed along the shoreline of the park at a 2: 1 slope for stabilization purposes and erosion control . The rip-rap will be located approximately three feet from the shoreline. Andrea Fish noted that no specific permit for this work will be needed from the Army Corp, but they will have general review over the proposal . She noted that this is known as a "Nationwide Army Corp Permit". Second, a four foot wide jogging path, made of sand and bark mulch, will be constructed around the park. Six exercise stations will be installed along the path and willrequire small footings which will be done with an auger and will be filled with crushed stone and concrete. Andrea also asked for a specific recommendation from the Commission regarding the location of the path in relation to the shoreline. Glenn Yale asked why the rip-rap was only 425 feet in length and Andrea replied they plan to place the rip-rap only in the areas where it is needed. The remainder of the shoreline is gently sloping. Upon the motion of Raymond Lavender and second of Harry Takis, the public hearing was declared closed. It was so voted. Upon the motion of David Lash and second of Harry Takis, an order of conditions will be drafted referencing the plan presented this evening and including the following additional conditions: I . A maximum of one foot of fill (six inches of sand and six inches of bark mulch) will be used in the construction of the jogging path. l -2 I� attraction for children and there could be a serious accident. Councillor Nowak concurred with this concern. Glenn Yale asked if the level of the beach had dropped dramatically placed on the beach and the general consensus was since sand was last that remained that ithere as a seriousrshift in the sand achisand mogravel . was The est Glenn Yale asked the grain size of the sand to be placed and Danny Mackey , contractor for the project , felt is was finer than what is presently there. Glenn Yale felt the wetlands regulations addressed the issue of beach maintenance very clearly and that this type beach nourishment" was clearly allowed. An informal poll of those present (approximately 25) showed no one was ft opposed to the spreading of the sand. Eileen Phipps noted for the record that the beach rights included in her deed were not included in the Phipps ' plot plan and they were not taxed on them. felt the problem was twofold: One, is sand appropriate David Lash ownership, and two, who actually owns the beach, and if regardless felt Conservation Land Trust deed is correct , Conservation Commission the the Cone the deed restrictions and allow placement of sand. sup Phil'_p Moran suggested the sand be spread on the 52 ' which is in front of the Phipps' home and no further sand should be placed until the cns ownership is determined. Glenn Yale felt the wetlands regulacect s soecifically addressed the sand issue and the maintenance project should be allowed to proceed. David Lash felt there was the issue of whether erce°eo er rictins to the wetlands Protection Act Sup wasoftimportance. consider . Harry Takis felt the safety issue Mrs. Jane Doyle stated she believed that the wetlands Protection Act had jurisdiction over any wetland issue regardless of ownershuPisdictionlenn Yale overualldwetlandgareasthe wregardelssetlands oofctheno nershipAct has final j vid Lash, it was agreed Upon the motion of Harry Takis and second of Da to allow the stockpiled sand to be placed over the portion of the beach to the Phipps. No further sand is to be placed until which may belong the ownership issue is resolved. It was so voted, with Glenn Yale abstaining. LEGG'S HILL Mr. Danny Mackey, Attorney Timothy O'Keefe, and Mr. Ted Forbes of would Hancock Survey were present to file a Notice of Intent which would allow Mr. Mackey to fulfill some contractual obligations to excavate some gravel from his site on Legg' s Hill. i Page 3 - Mr. O'Keefe noted that thus far Mr. Mackev has lived up to his \'•` agreements with the Commission. What the Notice of Intent proposes is to excavate to elevation 30 away from the pond. Glenn Yale asked how much gravel they intend to excavate and Mr. Mackey replied they intend to excavate approximately 100,000 cubic yeards. David Lash asked what the elevation of the berm was presently and Mr . Mackey replied it was at elevation 60. Glenn Yale asked 20% Pe the slope Forbes noted it was a of the berm was presently and Mr. ual excavation would take after Glenn Yale asked how long the act approval and Mr. Mackey replied it would be on-going. Philip Moran asked how many yards of gravel would be necessary to excavate between now and our next meeting in September and Mr. Mackey ed that replied he would need to excavate 10,000 yards. Mr. Moran not Mr . Mackey has lived up to the agreements he has had with the Commission in the past . Glenn Yale asked if Mr. Mackey could excavate down to elevation 38 approximately prior to the public hearing and Mr . Mackey replied he could stay within that elevation boundary easily and still live up to his contractual agreements for gravel . Glenn Yale stated the Commission would need some assurances as to slope stability. Mr. Forbes felt some erosion and sedimentation controls could be employed. Upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of Harry Takis , gravel can be removed down to elevation 40, provided an erosion control plan is submitted to the Conservation Commission prior to our next meeting. It was so voted. MAYNARD PLASTICS This is a continuation of a public hearing which was opened on July 11 , 1985 . Mr. George seeley, Ms . Sylvie Micheluit, and Mr. David Westeriing of co discuss revisions to Fafard, and Attorney John Serafini were present the Maynard plan resulting from sub-committee meetings held with both Planning Board and Conservation Commission members. Mr . Seeley gave an overview of the entire 43 acre parcel. It was generally agreed that the Commission would write an Order of Conditions for the entire parcel with site by site specifics for each individual site as it is developed. Mr. Seeley showed the delineated wetlands which have now been flagged and noted Fafard plans to address the 30" and 24" culverts on Swampscott Road which are already inadequate and whose inadequacy will be exacerbated by the construction of the proposed Maynard building. Mr. Seeley pointed out the drainage patterns of the >> entire site for the Commission' s information. It was noted that the proposed retention pond would be dry except for the 100-year storm periods; therefore as an alternative, they now MINUTES_OF .MEETING._ 01985 The Salem Conservation Commission met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room on Thursday, October 24, 1985 at 7 :30 P.M. Present were Chairman Philip Moran, Vice-Chairman Glenn Yale, Martha Hogan, David Lash, Paul Geoghegan, Harry Takis Raymond Lavender and Staff Advisor Dale Yale. Vice-Chairman Yale called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING - DAN MACKEY, LEGG' S HILL ROAD Glenn Yale read the notice of the public hearing. \ The purpose of his hearing is to explore the effects of the removal of gravel from property located on Legg' s Hill Road, within a wetland area. Attorney Timothy O',,eefe and Mr. Ted Forbes of Hancock Survey were present representing Mr. Mackey. Mr. Forbes stated that it is proposed to excavate to elevation 30, within the buffer zone of the pond and that a hay bale barrier would be installed to prevent sedimentation into the pond. Mr. Forbes further stated that gravel will be excavated as it is requested by Mr. Mackey' s customers. Therefore , the removal process j could take several years. i Glenn Yale asked what grade they proposed and Mr. Forbes replied the slope would be 10%. Glenn Yale felt this slope was excessive. Mr. Forbes noted that the City required a maximum of 10% for secondary streets. j Mr. Yale expressed concern regarding future development of this area and asked if any hydraulic calculations have been done to determine what effects a 100 year storm would have on the pond and Mr. Forbes answered that there is not sufficient information to determine this at the present time. Mr. O'Keefe further noted that Mr. Mackey still has the ultimate say in what is done there and the risks are his. A siltation and erosion control program was discussed and Staff Advisor Dale Yale suggested that a silt fence might be more effective than hay bales. Mr. Bob Marsilia of Linden Ave. , an abutter to the pond, expressed concern over the stability of the bank. i Mr. Roger Boucher added he was concerned about the dumping of inappropriate material on the site and Mr. Mackey replied that there was no inappropriate material in the buffer zone. l David Lash stated that he would like to look at Mr. Mackey's property--- before making a decision on this proposal and it was then suggested that the board arrange a site visit. 9 `1 Page 2 — Following some discussion, a motion was made by David Lash and seconded by Ray Lavender to continue the public hearing. It was so voted. CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE — DON MASELLA, MARLBOROUGH ROAD Staff Advisor Dale Yale stated that she has looked at Mr. Masella' s property and feels that he has filled the requirements of the Order of Conditions. Upon the motion of Harry Takis and second of Ray Lavender, the Certificate of Compliance was approved. It was so voted. MAYNARD PLASTICS — SWAMPSCOTT ROAD Mr. George Seeley of The Fafard Companies was present to discuss two issues. One is a proposal which involves the construction of 3 42" diameter pipes to run under Swampscott Road just at the entrance to the Maynard Plastics site. Philip Moran and Glenn Yale had visited the site and met with David Westerling, Engineer for Fafard. Presently, a 30" culvert exists which is grossly inadequate. Fafard proposes the cosntruction of 3 42" pipes and possibly leaving the existing 30" in place to act as a french drain. Mr. Seeley would like the Conservation Comission s guidance as to what design storm to use. It was noted the Ebershoff development used a 100-yr. design storm. Fafard will be re-looking at the hydraulic calculations and will return with a design in the near future. The second issue Mr. seeley wished to discuss is the issue of a drop of one foot elevations for Maynard Plastics. Staff Advisor Dale Yale asked if the culvert would be designed to a 100 year storm and Mr. Seeley replied that he has talked with the City Engineer who feels that a 50 year storm is adequate. Mr. Seeley further stated that if the culvert is designed for less than a 100 year storm, no storage area would be present. Mr. Seeley stated that earlier cut and fill calculations were incorrect due to inacurate topographic calculations. Flood elevations were lowered by one ft . but have the same amount of run-off and will have no greater impact on the neighboring wetlands. ORDERS OF CONDITIONS: Upon the motion of Harry Takis and second of Martha Hogan, the Order of l Conditions for McNeil was approved, as drafted. It was so voted. i 1 MINUTES-AF-MEETING_ _„� D cembe_r_-12, 1985 The Salem Conservation Commission met on December 12 , 1985 at One Salem Green, second floor conference room. Present were Chairman Philip Moran, Vice-Chairman Glenn Yale, Ray Lavender and Harry Takis. Martha Hogan, Paul Geoghegan, David Lash and Dale Yale were absent. 1 Vice Chairman Glenn Yale called the meeting to order at 7:35. DETERMINATION OF APPLICABILITY - POPEYE"S, CANAL ST. Glenn Yale read the notice of the Determination. Mr. Sam Tassel representing Popeye ' s• and Dr. Hugh Mulligan of Gulf of Maine Research were present to discuss this plan which involves the construction of a 2500 sq. ft. fast food restaurant on an existing paved surface on Canal and Hersey Streets, between Alice ' s Ice Cream and The Donut Ring. This area is zoned for this use . The property is within Zone B, flood hazard area and is outside any wetland resource area or buffer zone. Dr. Mulligan stated that landscaping will be provided on the Canal St. side of the 100 X 150 sq. ft. site. He further noted that this area is subject to 100-500 year storm, this not being classified as a wetland resource area. Speaking in opposition to the plan were Mr. Roger Dyer and Mr. Ray Frazier, both of Hersey Street. Also present expressing disapproval of the plan was Ward VII Councillor, Jack Nutting. Major concern was with regard to the proximity of Popeye ' s to Alice ' s Ice Cream. Lighting and drainage were among other concerns expressed. Philip Moran stated that while this area is subject to flooding, the area is paved and not classified as a wetland area. Upon the motion of Philip Moran and second of Ray Lavender, a negative determination will be issued. It was so voted. PUBLIC HEARING - DANNY MACKEY, BROADWAY Glenn Yale read the notice of the public hearing. Attorney Timothy O'Keefe and Mr. Ted Forbes of Hancock Survey were present representing Mr. Mackey who proposes to stabilize the existing bank adjacent to Rosie' s Pond at 58 Broadway. The bank has been filled % and altered substantially over the past several months. Also, the fill that has been placed there covers salvage materials that Mr. Mackey �' stores on his property. J t , Page 2 - � I� Glenn Yale asked what the current elevation of the slope is and Mr. \ Forbes replied that it is 1 : 1 , which he feels is more than adequate and that this is uniform across the entire parcel. Mr. Yale stated that a 1 : 1 slope with the proposed slope is inconsistent with DEQE 1 recommendations. Glenn Yale expressed concern regarding the stability of the slope and stated that any material felt to be inadequate by the Board should be removed. Mr. Mackey stated that the bank, which is made up of natural / grass growth and impervious clay has existed for many years with no evidence of erosion. Mr. Mackey suggested constructing a vertical wall and Mr. Yale stated that a 2 : 1 slope would be preferable. Glenn Yale asked what the previous level of the slope was and Mr. Mackey stated that it was at elevation 20. Philip Moran asked Mr. Mackey if he plans to sell his property in the near future and Mr. Mackey replied in the affirmative. Glenn Yale expressed concern regarding what materials are present underneath the bank and the future of Rosie' s Pond. He stated that this is an unstable bank and suggested a 21E. Mr. Yale asked if the bank is sealed with clay and Mr. Mackey replied in the affirmative. Mr. Yale stated that he would like to see a plan of how the bank will be stabilized. Upon the motion of Phil Moran and second of Ray Lavender, the public hearing will be continued following a site visit by the Board. It was so voted. r LEGG'S HILL, ORDER OF CONDITIONS Attorney Timothy O'Keefe and Mr. Ted Forbes of Hancock Survey were present representing Mr. Mackey who proposes to excavate to elevation 30 within the buffer zone of the pond on his property. Glenn Yale asked how many cubic yards of material would be removed and \ over what time frame and Mr. Mackey replied that approximately 70,000 cu. yards of material would be removed and stated that it would be done over an indefinite period of time. Mr. Yale asked how long it would take to excavate to elevation 40 and Mr. Mackey replied that this would depend entirely upon the demand for % gravel. Mr. Yale noted chat the Board is concerned regarding the water table of the pond and protection of public water supply. f C � / — Page 3 — Stability of the slope and erosion control were other concerns raised by the Board and Mr. Forbes noted that silt fences can be used instead of hay bales . Glenn Yale asked if Mr. Mackey proposes to fence the area and Mr. Mackey , replied that this is not proposed due to the expense involved. /. Ward VII City Councillor Jack Nutting addressed the Board stating that \ the level of the pond has risen over the 'past several years and asked the Conservation Commission to do whatever was in •the best interest of Salem. Following some discussion, the public hearing was declared closed. An Order of Conditions will follow. Mr! Mackey agreed to waive the 21-day 0 time limit for drafting the Orders. PUBLIC HEARING - STANLEY MIKULSKI, ALMEDA ST. Philip Moran read the notice of the public hearing. This proposal involves the construction of two single-family dwellings within the buffer zone of a bordering vegetated wetland on Almeda street. No filling or altering of the wetland is proposed, but some filling will be necessary to level an area for the home construction. Mr. John Dick of Hancock Survey was present to discuss this plan. He stated that the proposed slope would be approximately 3:4: 1 in height and that 100-135 cubic yards of material will be brought on the site. Glenn Yale asked if excavation is proposed outside of the hay bales as indicated on the plan and Mr. Dick replied in the negative. Mr., John Wright and Mr. and Mrs. Divirgilio of Almeda Street and Ward IV City Councillor Lenny O'Leary were present to speak in favor of the proposed construction. . All were very much in support of this plan. Upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of Ray Lavender, the public hearing was declared closed. An Order of Conditions will follow. An amendment to the plan detailing erosion control procedures will be submitted. DETERMINATIONS: Upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of Ray Lavender, a negative Determination will be issued to Mr. Joseph Gallo for his project on Orleans Ave. It was so voted. Upon the motion of Harry Takis and second of Raymond Lavender, a negative determination will be issued for the Salem State College parking lot located off of Harrison Ave. MINUTES OF MEETING panuary 16, 1986 L_ The Salem Conservation Commission met on Thursday, January 16, 1986 at One Salem Green, second floor conference room at 7 :30 p.m. Present were Chairman Philip Moran, Glenn Yale, Paul Geoghegan, Martha Hogan, Ray , Lavender, Harry Takis, and Staff Advisor Dale Yale. David Lash was absent. Philip Moran called the meeting to order at 7 :30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING — CITY OF SALEM — SWAMPSCOTT ROAD SEWER AND WATER IMPROVEMENTS Philip Moran read the notice of the public hearing. Mr. Bruce Thibodeau, Project Manager for LEA Engineering, presented the Board with a proposal which involves the construction of 2300' linear feet of water main, sewer force main, and gravity sewer, and a waste water pump station on Swampscott Road. The pump station is located within a wetland area roughly opposite the North Shore Tennis Club. Resource areas significant to the Act are: inland bank, bordering land subject to flooding, and land under a water body. Mr. Thibodeau explained that the wetland follows along Swampscott Road, crosses the existing culvert and continues along through the lot. He noted that the culvert will be taken out for the purpose of opening up the wetlands. There will be a general cleaning up of the brook. Some filling is proposed along the bank. The entire area will be paved and drainage will be into the existing brook. A 1�: 1 slope is proposed, with rip—rap to minimize erosion• Glenn Yale asked how the edge of the wetlands was defined and Mr. Thibodeau replied that it was determined by vegetation and water. Regarding de—watering, Mr. Thibodeau noted that the specifications call for hay bales and control sedimentation. A full—time resident inspection by a Clerk of the Works will be hired by the City during construction. Paul Geoghegan asked what the elevation of the bottom of the fuel oil tank would be and Mr. Thibodeau stated that it was approximately 8-9 ft. deep. Philip Moran raised the issue of the removal of fill from the site and Mr. Thibodeau responded that mostly rock will be excavated from the foundation which can in turn be used as rip—rap. Mr. Moran asked if the fill will be scored on the site and Mr. Thibodeau replied in the affirmative stating that it will not be stockpiled in the wetlands and that an appropriate place will be found. Mr. Moran further asked if j there were any provisions relative to stockpiling and Mr. Thibodeau stated that provisions were addressed in the specifications plan. J , - Page 4 - Upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of Paul Geoghegan, a negative determination, will be issued to Salem State College. It was so voted. ORDERS OF CONDITIONS Legg' s Hill : '\ This is a continuation of a discussion on a proposal by Mr. Danny Mackey to excavate to elevation 30 within the buffer zone of the pond on his \ property. Attorney Timothy O'Keefe was present representing Mr. Mackey. Mr. O'Keefe suggested a compromise of excavating to elevation 35 instead of 40, as referenced in the Order of Conditions issued to Mr. Mackey. He staled tha[. there is no evidence of lack of stability in the slope at elevation 40. Upon the motion of Philip Moran and second of Raymond Lavender, it was recommended that elevation 35 be accepted. Glenn Yale felt strongly that the excavation should be limited to elevation 40 and that a lower elevation could pose hazardous conditions to ground water. Further, if Mr. Mackey wishes to return to the Commission in the future after he has excavated to elevation 40, a Determination could be made as to whether there was a significant impact or not. Mr. Yale further expressed concern regarding dust control generated from excavation and suggested that the utilization of a water wagon be addressed in the final Order of Conditions to control this problem. The motion failed, one in favor, five opposed. Upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of Paul Geoghegan, an Order of Conditions will be issued for Legg' s Hill with the limit of excavation being held to elevation 40. it was so voted, five in favor, one opposed. Broadway: This is a continuation of discussions involving a proposal by Mr. Danny Mackey to stabilize the existing bank adjacent to Rosie' s Pond at 58 Broadway. The bank has been filled and altered substantially over the past several months. Also, the fill that has been placed there covers salvage materials that Mr. Mackey stores on his property. Attorney Timothy O'Keefe was present representing Mr. Mackey. Regarding a recent visit by the Conservation commission to the site, I Glenn Yale stated that unacceptable fill was still present within 100' of the wetland area which is in violation of the boilerplate Order of Conditions. Philip Moran noted he was "disappointed" at thelack of progress on cleaning up the site. Mr. Mackey had indicated on several occasions that progress had been made in removing unacceptable materials and re-vegetating the slope. This obviously has not been done. Mr. Yale expressed concern regarding the removal of the fill, restabilization with an imperviuos, acceptable material and revegatio � 1 i' - Page 5 - Philip Moran suggested a vertical wall be put outside of the bank and Mr. Mackey stated that this would be agreeable. This will be addressed in the Order of Conditions. Mr. Yale asked how the wall would tie in with the corner of Mr. Mackey' s property. Mr. Mackey replied that it will tie in at a 90 degree turn and will not encroach upon abutters property. Glenn Yale suggested that engineering plans be submitted to the Conservation commission at the completion of the project. There being no further discussion the public hearing was declared closed. An Order of Conditions will follow. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Upon the motion of Ray Lavender and second of Harry Takis , the minutes of the previous meeting were approved. There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn. Having passed unamiously, the meeting was declared adjourned at 10:00 P.m. �Ree-spnectful llyyAsubmitted, Nancy Syatt MINUTES-OF-MEETING" r-lune-26-, - 1986. v— The Salem Conservation Commission met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room, on Thursday, June 26 , 1986. Present were Philip Moran, Martha Hogan, Paul Geoghegan, Fred Harney, and David Lash. Harry Takis was absent. (- Chairman Philip Moran called the meeting to order at 7 :40 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING--LEGGS HILL POND Chairman Philip Moran read the notice of the public hearing. This proposal involves the installation of a control structure at the \ outlet end of Leggs Hill Pond to maintain the existing elevation of \ Leggs Hill Pond. The installation of this structure is in response to a request from the Commission based upon the fact that previously the outlet pipe placed during the Vinnin Square drainage project had been damaged in order to raise the level of the pond for fishing and ice skating, etc. The level of the pond had been raised and the perimeter became. vegetated. A verbal ruling from DEQE was received stating that the pond must be maintained at this new elevation. This ruling was reconfirmed earlier this week. The Conservation Commission, therefore, made a judgement that t'he / elevation of the pond should be maintained at approximately elevation 27. This was determined by several survey plans which were submitted with Notices of Intent for homes on the opposite side of the pond / (Linden Avenue) . The Commission then requested that a control structure be designed and installed by the City. Assistant Engineer Tom Rouleau presented the proposed plan to the Commission. It involves the installation of a catch basin type of structure. The inlet is designed to handle the existing flow with the pipe 50% clogged. A sump will be included in the design to reduce siltation. The existing d;ke which was placed as an emergency measure to maintain the pond will be removed and the bank will be established at a 2: 1 slope maximum and loamed and seeded to prevent erosion. T Mr. Rouleau noted that wetlands maps which were done from aerials taken in 1964 showed the pond at nearly the same elevation as presently exists. The elevation of the proposed structure is taken from an October 1985 survey done by T & M Engineering of 27.69, which is approximately 1 ' less than today. Philip Moran asked if the new structure will drain down the pond and Mr. - Rouleau replied the level of the pond will to 27.3 with average flows. J . —2— Mr. Moran asked if the 1964 maps showed the pond area to be approximately the same as presently and Mr. Rouleau replied in the affirmative. The aerials were taken in 1964 and the wetlands mapping was done in 1977. The area shown on the maps is similar to the existing conditions. \ Philip Moran asked what exists presently to maintain the pond level and Mr. Rouleau replied that an earth dyke was placed there to mainriain the j pond elevation until a permanent structure could be installed. Mr. Dave Monga of Murphy, Ryan, and O'Keefe, an attorney representing Dan Mackey, was present to aske some questions on behalf of his client. He questioned when the dyke was placed at the outlet end of the pond and Mr. Rouleau replied it was placed there approximately one year ago. Mr. Monga asked if there was an Order of Conditions or a Determination made at that time as to the necessity for the dyke and Mr. Moran replied in the negative. Staff Advisor Dale Yale noted the placement of the dyke was done as a temporary, emergency measure until a control structure could be designed and built. She reviewed the history of the site for Mr. Monga and noted the DEQE input which determined that the level of the pond should be maintained at approximately elevation 27. Mr. Monga felt that the removal of the earth dyke should require some approvals from the Army Corps. He further questioned the maintenance aspect of this project and felt there should be a full Notice of Intent filed with rebuttable presumptions of significance. He conceded the jurisdiction of the Conservation Commission and the actions of the Commission as an emergency in placing the dyke at the outlet , but now questions whether an Army Corps permit would be needed to remove it. Mr. Moran stated that any question Mr. Monga may have as to the appropriateness of the filing should be handled as an appeal. Mr. Moran asked when the installation of the structure would take place and Mr. Rouleau felt they would like to do this in August or early September during the driest part of the year. Mr. Monga stated he felt the information regarding the pond elevation is .inaccurage and Mr. Moran reiterated his statement regarding this being handled through an appeal. Historically, the 27.3 elevation has been established based upon several surveys and an opinion from DEQE. Mr. Rynkowski of Mystic Road in Marblehead stated he felt the pond had always been at this approximate elevation. A lowering of the level as is suggested by Mr. Mackey would create a bog. 1' 1 —3— There being no further discussion, upon the motion of David Lash and second of Paul Geoghegan, the hearing was closed. It was so voted. PUBLIC HEARING--ZIEFF, POND IMPROVEMENTS Ms. Kathy O'Connor, a landscape designer, and Mr. Paul Mulloney of SP Engineering were present to discuss proposed improvements to a Small pond on the property of the Village at Vinnin Square, off Loring Avenue. They propose minimum disturbance to the pond and would like to visually improve the pond itself by removing "waste" vegetation and provide access around the pond by installing a jogging/walking trail . The existing vegetation has been typed and thev propose landscape plantings on the rip-rap for which they have received a negative Determination from the Commission. They propose to selectively remove the waste vegetation, enhance the plantings, and fill two small low stagnant pools with appropriate crushed stone. Mr. Mulloney stated that they area they propose to fill would be under 500 square feet total in area. Philip Moran asked if the removal of "waste" vegetation would result in a negative impact on the pond and Mr. Mulloney replied that an inventory of species indicated several varieties of poor quality wetlands plants such as bamboo, phragmites, alders, etc. They do not improve the quality of the water or underlying soil. They also do not provide necessary intake of nutrients to improve the quality of the pond. They propose to install red cedar and several other wetland plantings to improve the pond, particularly in the lower corner. Paul Geoghegan asked where the outlet pipe was connected and Kathy O'Connor replied the outlet is connected to a catch basin on the property. There is also a headwall with an inflow pipe which collects run-off from Loring Towers. Mr. Mulloney noted that, based upon sampling, the pond is moderately eutrophic. They do not anticipate high levels of nitrogen input into the pond. Paul Geoghegan expressed some concern regarding the phosphates. He asked whether the bottom of the pond was muck and Mr. Mulloney replied in the affirmative. Mr. Geoghegan questioned who would maintain the pond and surrounding jogging trail. Kathy O'Connor noted that the plantings they propose would help maintain the pond quality. Paul Geoghegen expressed some concern over the ability of new plantings to properly absorb nutrients. He urged the applicants to institute a proper habitat management plan which would minimize fertilizer and control introduction of oil by placement• of oil separators in catch basins, etc. r MINUTES-OF- MEETING - tJu 1�,, 1986 The Salem Conservation Commission met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room, on Thursday, July 24, 1986. Present were Paul Geoghegan, Fred Harney, David Lash, and John Doyle. Philip Moran, Harry Takis, and Martha Hogan were absent. Acting Chairman Paul Geoghegan called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. and opened the meeting by welcoming new member John Doyle to the Board. DETERMINATION OF APPLICABILITY--SALEM OIL AND GREASE Paul Geoghegan read the notice of the Determination. Mr. Vance Smith of Salem Oil and Grease was present to discuss his company' s proposal to construct a 15' x 65 ' addition to their facility to house EPA mandated pre-treatment facilities. This proposed facility will require excavation for a footing, but the first floor elevation will be above the 100-year flood elevation and over 100 feet from the North River canal. Paul Geoghegan asked Mr. Smith for a brief description of the treatment process. Mr. Smith noted the process will allows fats to rise to the top of the wastewater tanks and they are skimmed off. The pH is then neutralized and the wastewater is discharged via South Essex Sewerage District treatment plant. Paul Geoghegan asked where the acid used in the treatment process is stored and Mr. Smith replied they use an acid brine solution which is delivered to the site in small tanks. The solution is transferred by pipeline when needed in the actual treatment process. Upon the motion of David Lash and second of Fred Harney, a negative Determination will be issued. It was so voted. PUBLIC HEARING--HARVEST OF THATCH, FOREST RIVER CONSERVATION AREA Paul Geoghegan read the notice of the public hearing. This proposal involves the harvesting of phragmites in the Forest River Conservation Area. A group of individuals are involved in the restoration of Pioneer Village and have researched materials which closely replicate the thatch used as roofing material . Thatchers from Plimouth Plantation will be doing the actual harvesting work and they plan to do the cutting by hand. One acre of phragmites will be required for one roof. l -3- 2. No more than 500 square feet of wetland shall be filled, including the area proosed to be filled for the construction of the jogging path. 3. The use of fertilizers within 100' of the pond shall be prohibited except for a one-time normal use in the initial installation of shrubs, trees, and other landscape vegetation. 4. Disturbance of existing wetlands plants shall be restricted to the activities outlined in submitted plan and report. 5. An erosion and sedimentation control barrier in accordance with "Erosion and Secimentation Control Guidelines," Publication #13, 529-39-1000-2-84-C.R. , dated August , 1983, shall be implemented prior to commencement of work. Such barrier shall be approved by the Conservation Commission or its designated agent. 6. Any changes made or intended to be made in the plans shall require the applicant to inquire of the Conservation Commission in writing whether the changes require Commission comments or approval . It was so voted. HARRIS BOAT RAMP, ORDER OF CONDITIONS Upon the motion of Fred Harney and second of David Lash, the plans for Mr. Frank Harris to construct a boat ramp to the rear of his property on Locust Street were approved. An Order of Conditions referencing the submitted plans shall be issued. It was so voted. LEGGS HILL POND CONTROL STRUCTURE--ORDER OF CONDITIONS Upon the motion of David Lash and second of John Doyle, an Order of Conditions will be issued for . the installation of a control structure at Leggs Hill Pond, subject to the following conditions: 1. The installation and construction of the proposed outlet structure of Leggs Hill Pond has been determined to be significant to public water supply, ground water supply, and to the prevention of pollution, since Leggs Hill Pond has in the past been used as a water supply source (the supply came from a well and the area is still maintained as an emergency % water source) . 2. Work shall conform to plan entitled, "Leggs Hill Pond Outlet Control \� Structure," dated May 9, 1986, prepared by Thomas Rouleau, P. E. , Engineering Assistant , and detail plan entitled, "Precast Cement Concrete Catch Basin." FF -4- _\ 3. Prior to commencement of construction, an erosion and sedimentation _ control barrier in accordance with "Erosion and Sedimentation Control Guidelines," Publication #13, 529-39-1000-2-84-C.R. , dated August, 1983 , shall be installed upstream of the proposed control structure and downstream of the proposed structure. a. Staked haybales shall be placed in a configuration which will adequately contain any sedimentation resulting from the dike removal. b. Such hay bales may be removed after the water has sufficiently cleared to indicate no further sedimentation will take place. 4. The Town of Marblehead Water Department shall be notified seventy-two (72) hou. 3 prior to commencement of construction. 5. Prior to backfilling around the control structure, the Commission or its designated shall be notified to confirm the rim elevation is set at 1 27 .3. 6. The City of Salem shall be responsible for ensuring that the structure is cleaned and maintained at least twice yearly. The Town of Marblehead shall be notified at least seventy-two (72) hours in advance - of such maintenance operations. i 7. Following installation, the proposed slope shall be vegetated to ensure stability. It was so voted. OLD/NEW BUSINESS The next regular meeting of the Conservation Commission shall be on September 11 , 1986. There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn. The motion carried and the meeting was declared adjourned at 9:40 p.m. Respect ly submitted, cc, Dale E. Yale f MINUTES OF MEETING_ _ Dlarch 26, 1987 The Salem Conservation Commission met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room on Thursday, March 26, 1987 . Present were Phil Moran, Harry Takis , John Doyle, Fred Harney, Martha Hogan, Paul Geoghegan, David Lash, and Conservation Advisor Rebecca Curran. DETERMINATION OF APPLICABILITY-MAGEE, 441 LAFAYETTE STREET Attorney Bob LeDeux, representing the applicant Marquis Magee, informed the Commission that in 1978 there was an Order of Conditions issued for a foundation plan at 441 Layfayette St. which was to be built in a wetland buffer zone. The house is now for sale, and two foot encroachment on the side line was recently discovered. The discretion was due to an error in which the deck was never shown on the original plan. Mr LeDeux, informed the Commission that the foundation was built :is submitted. The deck is an important aspect of the house, was built but , did not appear on the original plans. Mr. Moran stated that the foundation does comply to the Order of Conditions. Mr. Moran suggested that the Commission issue a Certificate of Compliance for the foundation and a Negative Determation be issued for the deck. Mr. Geoghegan questioned _t-he_deck in regard to the buffer -and-Mr. Moran- replied that it does not interf.greyith- it.__ . -_-• - -- - Upon the motion of Mr. Moran and the second of Mr. Takis it was decided that a Certificate of Compliance would be issued. The Commission unaminously voted in favor and a Negative Determation would be issued for the deck. OLD/NEW BUSINESS Mr. Moran questioned Ms. Curran on the status of Mr. Beaulieu and she informed him that he was planning to submit a Notice of Intent for the next meeting. Mr. Takis informed the Commission that he had been to Parlee Street and noticed that fill was being dumped over the existing slope. Mr. Moran asked if he was in compliance and Mr. Takis responded that he believed SO. Mr. Moran suggested that he continue to visit the site and keep the Commission informed of the status. Ms. Curran stated that she and Mr. Ralph Perkins of the DEQE inspected Mr. Mackey' s properties . After inspecting and reviewing the Broadway site it was found that there was no time limit on the Broadway Order of Conditions and therefore there was not much the Commission or DEQE could do. She then stated that the DEQE is putting on Enforcement Order on the Leggs Hill case. The owner will have twenty-one (21) days to submit an erosion control plans and plans to restore the bank to elevation 40. If he does not comply the owner could be subject to penalties administered by the DEQE. Ms. Curran informed the Commission that there was a Cease and Desist Order placed on Joseph Morphew's property at Highland Avenue and he had -3- \ consensus that they should do anything within their power to help D.E.Q.E. document their case against Mr. Mackey, so Ms. Curran was directed to send a letter to D.E.Q.E. documenting Mr. `lackey' s noncompliance. J Ms. Curran stated that Mr. Kieren requested a one year extension on his Order of Conditions to build a swimming pool in his back yard at 15 Linden Avenue. The consensus of the Commission was that the extension should be granted. Ms. Curran then told Commission members that Cathie Landing has notified her that dreging operations will begin, as they were required to in their Order of Conditions. The deteriorating pilings at Winter Island were then discussed. Mr. Moran suggested, and it was the Commission' s consensus, that a letter be written to the City Enginner, Planning Department and the Mayor' s Office stating their concern with the condition of the pilings as being in violation of the Wetland Protection Act. He suggested that the Harbormaster also contact the same depatrments stating his concern with the condition of the pilings as being a hazard to navigation. Mr. Moran told Commission members that David Lash has notified him that he will be moving to Essex, MA in April, thus can no longer serve on the Conservation Commission. Mr. Moran asked Commission members to let him know if they know of any qualified people who would like to serve on the Commission. Ms. Curran stated that it would be Ms. Carr's last meeting and that if there was no objection she would like next weeks meeting to be recorded. There were no objections. Mr. Takis made a motion to approve the minutes of February 27 , 1987 as submitted. Mr. Harney seconded the motion and the vote was unanimously in favor. Mr. Doyle made a motion to adjourn at 8:30 p.m. , Mr. Harney seconded the motion and the vote was unanimously in favor. Respectfully submitted, Cynthia Carr C1126 MINUTES OF MEETING .� rMarch 12'1-1987 The Salem Conservation Commission met on Thursday, March 12, 1987 at One Salem Green, second floor conference room at 7:30 p.m. Present were Chairman Philip Moran, Harry Takis, John Doyle , and Fred Harney and Staff Advisor, Rebecca Curran. Absent were Martha Hogan, Paul Geoghegan., and David Lash. Philip Moran called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Station Road Discussion Mr. Raymond Beaulieu, owner of 35 Station Road and the abutting property requested an informal discussion with Conservation Commission members regarding the options he has for building an addition on his existing home at 35 Station Road. He was also interested in the possibilities of building a new house on the abutting lot. The lot his existing house is on is completely in a buffer zone and the lot he wants to build a new structure on is approximately 80%, wetland the remainder is a buffer zone. Mr. Beaulieu stated he has resided at this location for the past 13 or 14 years and had the lots subdivided in 1983 . He stated he did not know until recently that he was in an area subject to the Wetlands Protection Act, thus needing Conservation Commission approval prior to building on the property. Mr. Takis asked how large the proposed addition was to be. Mr. Beaulieu stated that the addition will be approximately 30' to 40' long and will extent to 10' of the side yard lot line. Mr. Moran suggested that Commission members meet at the site on Saturday, March 14, 1987 at 9:00 a.m. with Mr. Beaulieu to look at the site prior to making suggestions to Mr. Beaulieu about the addtion or the new structure. Mr. Beaulieu stated that this was agreeable and the other members were in agreement . Mr. Moran then stated that Mr. Beaulieu may have problems building a new structure on the property he owns adjacent to his home since most of the parcel is in a wetland. Faden Discussion Mr. Faden of 45 Daniels Street requested an informal discussion regarding his property. Mr. Faden distributed pictures of his home on Daniels Street. He stated that the seawall, as existing, needs to be improved to avoid future storm damage to his property and he would like to remove the existing stairs and relocate them as well as explore the possiblity of adding a deck which would protrude approximately 3 ' over the seawall, after it had been improved. Mr. Faden also told the Commission members that the mudflats abutting the seawall were owned by Mr. David Crosby of Beverly Farms, MA. He stated that Mr. Crosby bought -2- the flats in 0.00 and is paying $2z a year in taxes on the flats to the Mr. Moran state rst issue Mr. Faden had to overcome was that of the flats bel a person other than himself, and he would have to get an easemei :ir. Crosby' s permission before the Commission could give him app. jval to build any structure over Mr. Crosby's property. Mr. Moran stated that all three projects described by Mr. Faden would require a Notice of Intent and Conservation Commission approval . Mr. Takis asked whether or not the Army Corps of Engineers would have to be notified about the projects. Mr. Moran asked the applicant and other Commission members if a site visit on Saturday morning, following the Station Road site visit would be possible since the proposals are not clear in his mind, even after viewing pictures of the property. The consensus of the other Commission members was that this was a good idea and Mr. Faden was in agreement. Naumkeag Salvage Mr. Moran stated that after a site visit Ms. Curran has suggested that Mr. Pelliter be informed of the following requirement regarding his property: 1 . Require the applicant to remove two rows of cars and all other debris for the entire length of the property, and suggest that Mr. Pelliter undertake the following: 2. Require the applicant to retain a qualified expert to determine both the environmental impact of the yard on the wetland and a method of alleviating any determined impact. Mr. Moran stated that all vegetation behind the property could be identified as wetland vegetation. He also stated that Mr. Pelliter has two truck trailers stock piled directly above the wetland. Ms. Curran stated that there is a large pile of tires adjacent to wetland. Mr. Moran further stated that Mr. Pelliter has been agreeable with Conservation Commission suggestions to date and stated he belonged to an organization which helps used car lots to function in an environmentally sound manner so he is hopeful of compliance to the two requirements as stated above. New/Old Business Ms. Curran stated while visiting Mr. Mackey's property abutting Mr. Pelletier's property and she discovered that he is in violation of all Order of Conditions issued to him for the property. She contacted D.E.Q.E. and they would like documentation of this noncompliance in order to strengthen their case against Mr. Mackey. This documentation will help to show that Mr. Mackey has a pattern of noncompliance to Wetland Protection Act regulations. The Commission members were of the -3- consensus that they should do anything within their power to help D.E.Q.c. document their case against Mr. Mackey, so Ms. Curran was directed to send a letter to D.E.Q.E. 'documenting Mr. Mackey' s noncompliance. HS. Curran stated that Mr. Kieren requested a one year extension on his Order of Conditions to build a swimming pool in his back yard at 15 Linden Avenue. The consensus of the Commission was that the extension should be granted. Ms. Curran then told Commission members that Darbie landing has notified her that dreging operations will begin, as they were required to in their Order of Conditions. The deteriorating pilings at Winter Island were then discussed. Mr. Moran suggested, and it was the Commission's consensus, that a letter be written to the City Enginner, Planning Department and the Mayor 's Office stating their concern with the condition of the pilings as being in violation of the Wetland Protection Act. He suggested that the Harbormaster also contact the same depatrments stating his concern with the condition of the pilings as being a hazard to navigation. Mr. Moran told Commission members that David Lash has notified him that he will be moving to Essex, MA in April , thus can no longer serve on the Conservation Commission. Mr. Moran asked Commission members to let him know if they know of any qualified people who would like to serve on the Commission. Ms. Curran stated that it would be Ms. Carr' s last meeting and .that if there was no. objection she would like next weeks meeting to be recorded. There were no objections. Mr. Takis made a motion to approve the minutes of February 27, 1987 as submitted. Mr. Harney seconded the motion and the vote was unanimously in favor. Mr. Doyle made a motion to adjourn at 8:30 p.m. , Mr. Harney seconded the motion and the vote was unanimously in favor. Respectfully submitted, Cynthia Carr C1126 i f %oN rpl, `= Conservation Commission r. Salem. Massachusetts 01970 .,� MINUTES OF MEETING May 14, 1987 The Salem Conservation Commission met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room on Thursday, May 14, 1987 . Present were Philip Moran, John Doyle, Martha Hogan, Fred Harney, Harry Takis, and Staff Advisor Rebecca Curran. Chairman Philip Moran callled the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. 474 LAFAYETTE STREET Mr. Moran stated that the proposed plan. was the temporary storage of 64 cubic yards offillwithin a wetland buffer zone. while the construction of an fnground swimming poolis in progress. Mr. Harney, owner of the property, and member of the Conservation Commission was present to discuss his proposal . He stated that 70% of the fill will be used for backfill around the swimming pool and the remaining 30% will be spread as loam on the front lot away from the buffer zone. Mr. Harney concluded that the size of the pool will be 12 x 24 .Mr. Takis made a motion of Negative Determination and Mr. Doyle second the motion. The Commission was unaminously in favor. OLD/NEW BUSINESS Ms. Curran stated that she had heard nothing from Mr. Mackey regarding Leggs Hill . Mr. Moran informed the Commission that he suggested to Mr. J Mackey that he hire an engineer and to submit the proposed plans to the Commission. Mr. Mackey has not responded in any way to this suggestion. Mr. Moran stated that he received a unaminous tip regarding Leggs Hill ; .� he was told that 50 gallon drums had been buried in this area. The Commission will write a letter to D.E.Q.E. informing them of this and suggest that they take a site visit and conduct a boring test. Mr. Takis asked if the state had been contacted regarding the status of Nick Fiore 's property and the Department of Public Works ' plans to update the culvert . Ms. Curran will write a letter to Authur Doyle of Division 5 of the State D.P.W. Ms. Curran informed the Commission that Mr. John Sironi of 69 Valley St. had contacted her this past week. He requested that the Commission take a site visit to his property. Mr. Moran suggested that Ms. Curran inspect Mr. Sironi 's property next week. 1 I FAFARD DEVELOPMENT PHASE II — REVIEW Mr. Ron Killian was present to represent the Fafard Company regarding Phase II of construction. He had previously dicussed the Phase II with the Commission in November of 1986. The two main issues brought up by the previous meeting were the placement of two units that were close to a wetland area and one unit that should be eliminated completely. Mr. Killian stated that both these proposal had been completed. The two units were placed on a foundation of stone and now lie 13 to 14 feet back from the wetland. !, Mr. Killian is requesting a letter of reccomendation from the Commission to D.E.Q.E stating that they have seen the proposed plan and approve an Order of Condition. Mr Takis made a motion to approve and Mr. Harney second the motion. All were in favor. OLD/NEW BUSINESS Ms. Curran stated that so far Mr. Mackey failed to meet the deadline on the Cease and Desist Order and D.E.Q.E will administer penalties on Monday, April 27, 1987 . Ms. Curran stated that she had written a letter to Mr. John Seroni , owner of property on Valley Street. She has had no response to this. Mr. Moran suggested she check with the Building Inspector to see if a Building Permit was issued for the construction. Ms. Curran had recently been on a site visit to Mr. Joseph Ingemi ' s property on 80 Marlboro Road. He has been asked to remove the debris that were dumped on the wetland. He has moved it, but not out of the wetland area. It appears he does not understand where the wetland lies and that the removal has not helped the situation. Mr. Moran suggested a site visit on Tuesday at 6:00 p.m. Ms. Curran informed the Commission that she had been to Seemore Street and that asphalt chunks are being dumped in a area above a wetland. Asphalt is a petroleum product and she is concerned with the effects on the wetland below. Although the area is out of the Commission' s jurisdiction, there will be a site vistit on Tuesday night. Mr. Harney motioned the meeting ajourned at 8:45 Respectfully submitted Susan Cosman Clerk of Commission BN913 II I ' o(1V Cpl } Conservation Comnussion ; Salvin. Mascachusclts 01970 f W f' 0. MINUTES OF, MEETING May 28, 1987 ? The Salem Conservation Commission met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room on Thursday, May 28, 1987. Present were Paul Geoghegan, Harry Takis, John Doyle, Martha Hogan, Rebecca Curran and the Commission' s newest member Robert Crowley. Paul Geoghegan called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. 18 CLARK STREET - DETERMINATION OF APPLICABILITY Mr. Walter Abraham was present to discuss his proposed plans-for his property and has submitted a report by The Gulf of Maine Research to the Commission. The applicant proposes to construct a single family house on the property, within the 100 foot Buffer Zone. No work will be done in the wetland. Mr. Abraham stated that he will be removing debris including metal materials and replacing it with grass for slope stabilization. Mr. Geoghegan concluded that Mr. Abraham would have to submit a Notice of Intent for the next meeting. The Commission requested that Mr. Abraham detail the proposed diagram which should include elevation, surrounding wetland and a scale for the next meeting. 20 CLARK STREET - DETERMINATION OF APPLICABILITY Mr. Abraham also proposes to construct a house on lot 20 within the 100 foot discretionary Buffer Zone. His proposals include the filling in of 500 square feet of Bordering Wetland in order to maximize the use of the property. Ms. Curran quoted from the Wetlands Protection Act (10.55 4C) "the said portion has a surface area less than five hundred .(500) square feet , therefore the issuing authority may issue an Order of Conditions permitting work in bordering vegetated wetland." The Commission requested of Mr. Abraham that when submitting the Notice of Intent that the diagram be well detailed and that lot 18 & 20 be combined as one project. Mr. Geoghegan suggested a site visit so the Commission would be fully prepared when Mr. Abraham returned with the Notice of Intent. Mr. Takis made a motion of Positive Determination for lot 18 & 20 and Ms. Hogan second the motion. It was unaminously in favor. 3 McKINLEY ROAD - DISCUSSION Ms. Curran stated that the abutters of Forest River were not present, but she had been informed by the neighbors that there was a pile of junk in the area. Mr. Geoghegan suggested that Ms. Curran call the Department of Public Works and request assistance in the removal , for it is Conservation owned land. i PICKMAN PARK — EXTENSION PERMIT Ms. Curran informed the Commission that the DiBiase Corporation requested an extension on the construction of condominiums. No changes have been made to the proposed plans. Mr. Doyle made a motion for a six month extension and Mr. Takis second the motion. All were in favor. JEGGLE'S ISLAND — DISCUSSION Ms. Curran stated that the Osgood Park Association, which is a private park on Hemenway Street, was involved in the smashing of Canadian Geese eggs on Jeggle's Island. These people were also pouring oil on the eggs in order to get rid of them. They have complained that the geese continually return to their park, which is due to people feeding them. Ms . Curran stated that these people are probably also pouring oil on the Snowy White and Mallard eggs and that the pouring of oil will not solve this problem. It appears that the Fish and Wildlife issued a permit for this , but it involved the park and not the island. Mr. Doyle noted that this lies within the Commission' s jurisdiction and that the Fish and Wildlife should be contacted for this permit should not have been issued. The Commission agreed that action should be taken immediately. Mr. Doyle made a motion for a Cease and Desist on Osgood Park Association from`pouring .oil on a wetland or within 100 feet of the water. Ms. Hogan -second the motion and all were in favor. OLD/NEW BUSINESS Ms. Curran stated that she had been to Naumkeag Salvage and that they were doing a good job of cleaning the place as the Commission ordered. She will plan a site visit with the Commission when it has been completed. Ms. Curran informed the Commission that she had contacted the Hazardous !/ ' Waste Commission regarding the anonymous tip of waste buried on Leggs A`Y\ Hill. They need more information before they will do a boring test. Mr. Takis questioned the status on Mr. Lovely' s property on Story Street and suggested a site visit. The site visit of the Commission will be on Thursday, June 4, at 6:30 p.m. It will include Clark Street, Parlee Street, and Story Street. Mr. Takis suggested to the Commission that they keep a formal list of old business in order to keep up on open and or closed files. Ms. Curran stated that new business included projects such as land banking, Friends of Forest River and The City Wide Walking Trail. The Commission will research these new ideas. I Mr. Geoghegan noted a change to the May 14 minutes and Mr. Takis made a motion to approve the minutes followed by the second of Ms. Hogan. All were in favor. Conservation Commission r Salem. Massachusetts 01970 f� ! It lssnCP�. MINUTES OF MEETING _ June 11 , 1987 The Salem Conservation Commission met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room on Thursday, June 11 , 1987. Present were Phil Moran, Fred Harney, Martha Hogan, Harry Takis , and Conservation Advisor Rebecca Curran. Mr. Moran called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. 18 CLARK STREET — PUBLIC HEARING Mr. Moran read the notice of the public hearing to the Commission. Mr. Walter Abraham was present to request an Order of Conditions for 18 Clark Street for the construction of a single family house. The foundation will be Located within the 100 foot buffer zone, but there will be no construction in she wetland. Mr. Abraham proposes to remove debris from the wetland and replace it with sod—forming grass. The Commission inspected the lot last week on a site visit and were well aware of the proposed work. Mr. Takis made a motion to close the public hearing and Ms. Hogan second the motion, all were in favor. Abraham requested that the hearing be continued for lot 20 on Clark Street. Mr. Takis made a motion to continue the hearing and Ms. Hogan second the motion. All were in favor. Mr. Takis motioned that an Order of Conditions be granted on 18 Clark Street as proposed on The Gulf of Maine Research work description. Ms. Hogan second the motion. The Commission was unaminously in favor. PARLEE STREET — DISCUSSION Concerned residents of Crowdis Street were present to discuss the construction on Parlee Street and the blasting on Crowdis Street. Mr. Ted Michaud of 39 Crowdis Street presented pictures of the area to the Commission and questioned the status and future plans of Mr. Richard Malone, owner of the property. Ms. Curran responded that the Commission was aware of the situation and that Mr. Malone was issued an Order of Conditions to remove the debris. Mr. Robert Redican of 42 Crowdis Street was present and informed the Commission that he has been observing the construction closely and that no debris has been removed. Mr. Moran then concluded that the Commission will monitor the situation closely. FAFARD PHASE II — REVIEW AND APPROVAL Ms . Curran informed the Commission that there was a minor change in Fafard' s condominium project that did not concern the Conservation Commission, therefore was not within our jurisdiction. Mr. Takis made a motion for the record that they were aware of this change and Mr. Harney second the motion, all were in favor. OLD/NEW BUSINESS Mr. Moran stated that as of yet there has been no other destruction of eggs at Jeggle 's Island. Ms. Curran said that the situation was under investigation by Federal and State agents. Mr. Harney informed the Commission that Mr. Mackey has continued construction at Legg' s Hill. Ms. Curran will inform D.E.Q.E. of this for a Cease and Desist had been placed on his property. Ms . Curran updated the Commission on new business that she is currently working on which includes ; an informational pamphlet to residents residing near a wetland, and the reorganization of the Commission' s files. She will submit the pamphlet this to the members for their review upon completion. Mr. Moran made an amendment to the minutes of the previous meeting. The spelling changes of Hemenway Street and Naumkeag were noted and the motion was made for the approval and all members were in favor. Mr. Takis made a motion to ajourn the meeting at 8:30 p.m. and Ms. Hogan second the motion. Respectfully submitted, Susan Cosman 5107 1 Conservation Commission Salem. Massachusetts 01970 y y:,ss ct`c MINUTES_ OF MEETING June 25,, r987 The Salem Conservation Commission met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room on Thursday, June 25 , 1987. Present were Philip Moran, Barry Takis, Martha Hogan, Bob Crowley, John Doyle, Fred Harney, and Staff Advisor Rebecca Curran. Chairman Philip Moran called the meeting to order at 7 :30 p.m. Hamblet and Hayes, Colonial Road — Public Hearing Chairman Philip Moran read the notice of the public hearing. Mr. Jobb Wallace of Hamblet & Hayes and Mr. John Dick of Hancock Survey were present to propose the connection of the north drainage area to the south drainage area. Two years ago a gate valve was installed in the south drainage area (DEQE #64-105) . Mr. Wallace and Mr. Dick feel it will be beneficialif the north drainage area is connected to the south drainage area in case of a major incident. The gate valve would contain the contamination from entering the South River. The grading will change slightly away from the wetland. Ms. Curran asked where the pitch would be. Mr. Wallace responded by showing Ms. Curran that the pitch would be towards the catch basin on the plans. Mr. Takis asked where the gate valve was. Mr Dick said they wanted to upgrade because of the shallow depth of the system. Mr. Moran asked Mr. Dick if he had over received a Certificate of Compliance on DEQE case #64-105. Mr. Dick was not certain. Ms. Curran informed the Commission that there was no Certificate of Compliance. Mr. Moran asked Mr. Wallace and Mr. Dick whether the 64-105 has been completed. They said they will check on it for next Tuesday. Mr. Moran suggested a site visit. Mr. Moran asked for a motion to be made for a continuance until next meeting to allow for a site inspection. Mr. Takis made a motion for a site inspection and Mr. Doyle seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous. Mr. Harney was asked if it was necessary to have the location staked out. Mr. Harney replied that it was not. The Commisssion decided that the site visit will be at 6:00 p.m. on June 30, 1987. 1 F Discussion — Brentwood Councillor O'Leary was present to ask the Commission if the problem on Brentwood regarding the WetLands was investigated. Councillor O'Leary wanted to know if there was a natural spring located there. Ms. Curran replied although there are some problems with the variances it was not a wetland area, and the Conservation Commission has no jurisdiction. Ms. Curran thought that sand as fillwas odd; however, she continued to say that if it was a natural spring it would be apparent. Discussion — Crowdis Street The second issue raised by Councillor O'Leary was Crowdis Street . Mr. Takis said that he visited the site. Ms. Curran mentioned that the concern was with Parlee Street and that Crowdis Street construction was not effecting the wetland area. Mr. O'Leary inquired about the problem on Parlee Street. Ms. Curran responded by saying that the fill was originally placed too close to a wetland area. Some of the fill was removed; however some remained because the backhoe was unable to reach it . Ms. Curran also mentioned that the toe of the slope was presently 1-1 but a 1;-1 slope was requested by the Order of Conditions. Old/New Business Discussion — Jefferson Avenue Ms. Curran received a letter from a concerned citizen regarding a salt pile on Jefferson Avenue. Mr. Takis suggested that a site visit be made. The Commission decided to look at this site on Tuesday, June 30. Discussion — Legg' s Hill Mr. Monga was invited by the Conservation Commission to discuss the Commission' s involvement in the Legg' s Hill case. Mr. Monga stated that if the Commission would approve the restoration work, DEQE would allow the Conservation Commission to handle the case. The Conservation Commission felt that the matter could be more effectively dealt with by DEQE instead of locally. Mr. Monga requested that a phone call or letter be written to Ralph Perkins of DEQE informing him that the \ Conservation Commission has complete disinvolvement. Mr. Moran said that he would do that. The Conservation Commission was also concerned with the plans submitted on May 18, 1987 because the restoration work was done without the approval of the Conservation Commission nor DEQE. Mr. Moran read a public hearing .notice regading a public meeting/hearing concerning the South Essex Sewerage District on Thursday, July 30, 1987 at 7:00 p.m. at Salem State College. Mr. Abraham of 20 Clark Street was not present. Mr. Moran suggested a motion be made to vote on the continuance of 20 Clark Street. r MINUTES OF MEETING January 15, 1987 The Salem Conservation Commission met on Thursday, January 15, 1987 at One Salem Green, second floor conference room at 7 :30 p.m. Present were Chairman Philip Moran, Harry Takis, Martha Hogan, Fred Harney, John Doyle, Paul Geoghegan, David Lash and Staff Advisors Dale Yale and Rebecca Curran. Vice-Chairman Paul Geoghegan called the meeting to order at 7 :35 p.m. Public Hearing - Winter Island Yacht Yard Mr. Geoghegan read the advertisement for the public hearing from the Salem Evening News and opened the public hearing. Mr. Peter Haywood, owner of Winter Island Yacht Yard at 3A Winter Island Road explained his proposal to the Commission. L"r. Haywood told the Commission that recent storms have caused much damage to his property. He is asking the Commission permission to reconstruct a retaining wall to prevent tu._ure Land erosion. Mr. Haywood proposed to build a straight blockwalL made of concrete blocks, or granite depending on the avalablity and expense of granite. The existing wall which has suffered severe storm damage has been at the site for the past 9 years. The proposed wall would be in approximately the same location, but would be 10' high at low tide . There is no abutter opposition to this plan. Ms. Yale asked if the applicant would need to install footings. Mr. Haywood responded that he would not need to install footings if the glacial ledge could be reached during installation excavations. Mr. Geoghegan asked Mr. Haywood if all the fill will be done from she land side of the proposed wall. Mr. Haywood responded in the positive. Mr. Takis asked Mr. Haywood if any removal would take place. Mr. Haywood responded that there may be some care in of land as construction begins which would have to be removed. Mr. Robert Gauthier, an abutter was present and at this time spoke in favor of the proposed project. He stated that Mr. Haywood has done a good job in maintaining his property and has reinvested substantially in the boat yard since purchasing it. Mr. Lash made a motion to close the public hearing. Mr. Takis seconded the motion and the voce was unanimously in favor . Ms. Yale told Mr. Haywood that the Commission has the option of drafting conditions after the meeting or during the next two weeks and that :he Commission will be in touch with him when the conditions are draftee. Public Hearing continuation - Parlee Street Ms. Yale stated that the site visit was held on January 3 , 1987, but due to the large amount of snow cover on the ground, it was difficult for the Commission members to determine the visual condition of the fill as well as to do a visual wetland deliniation. e.. 1 3 — Mr. Gauthier asked if a survey done by Mr. Hugh Mulligan would better address the needs of the Commission. It was responded in the affirmative and Mr. Gauthier stated that a survey and wetland delineation by Mr. Mulligan will be forthcoming. Ms . Yale stated that a priority of the applicant should be to stake hay bales approximately 10' from the bottom of the slope. Ms. Yale then stated that a silt fence may be a suitable alternative if hay bales were not available at this time of year. Mr. Gauthier also asked if the Commission wanted the edge of the wetland or the 100' buffer deliniated on the map. Mr. Geoghegan responded that both of these delineations would be preferable. Mr. Harney asked where the gate is located at the site. Mr. Gauthier responded that the gate is located near the junction of Parlee and Crowdis Streets. Mr. Malone stated that no one that he or Mr. Gauthier would give authorization to have been at the site since the cease and desist order was placed on the property. Mr. Harney asked if the backhoe parked at the end of Crowdis Street belongs to either Mr. Gauthier or Mr. Malone. They responded in the negative. Mr. Moran stated that he has sited wood, plaster and Isuzu brochures at the site. Mr. Gauthier responded that he had not authorized fill comprised of these materials to be dumped at the site, but the lock has been cut on several occasions and that he will do everything possible to satisfy the Commission regarding the outcome of this project . After examining the plan, Commission members felt that two of the proposed houses are located within the 100' buffer zone and one has a steep slope at the rear corner. Mr. Moran made a motion to continue the public hearing at the next meeting. Mr. Takis seconded the motion and the vote was unanimously in favor. Legg' s Hill — Discussion Ms. Yale told the Commission that after a site survey performed by the City, it was determined that Mr. Mackey was at elevation 30.69. His Order of Conditions stated that he was not to go below elevation 40. The Commission requested that Mr. Mackey respond to the Commission' s survey by having a registered engineer or land surveyor perform a survey within fourteen days to confirm Mr. Mackey' s verbal disagreement with the City' s survey. r This request was sent to Mr. Mackey by registered mail and, to date, the i Commission has not received a response to this request. J f 4 — \ Mr. Takis asked what the Commission should do next . Mr. Moran stated \ that he felt the Commission should turn the case over to D.E.Q. E. and let them take over the case from this point . Mr. Geoghegan agreed with Mr. Moran. Mr. Lash asked how the case is supposed to be documented. Ms . Yale stated that Ms. Curran will look into the necessary documentation. Ms. Yale announced her resignation from her position as Staff .Advisor to the Conservation Commission and introduced Ms. Rebecca Curran as her replacement. Commission members wished Ms. Yale well and thanked her for her service over the years. Commission members then welcomed Ms. Curran to the Commission..! Certificate of Compliance — Fafard — Parcels 1 & 2 Ms. Yale explained to the Commission that two parcels on First Street are completed and that As—built plans have been submitted to and reviewed by the Department of Public Works and the Clerk of the Works . Both of these reviews have been positive and it would be appropriate at this time for the Commission to write a letter of compliance for these two parcels. Mr. Lash made a motion that the Commission write a letter stating that the two parcels previously referenced in the Fafard project are in compliance of the Order of Conditions. Mr. Moran seconded the motion and the vote was unanimously in favor with Mr. Harney voting present. Old Business Ms. Yale summarized the past two weeks events at Legg' s Hill Pond for �\ Commission members. She explained that a dike now retains the pond elevation at an elevation dictated by the D.E.Q.E. There is a small culvert at pond site, but due to clogging it has never worked as a drainage outlet for the pond. During the recent storms, increased 1 neighborhood flooding brought requests to the Deparment of Public Works j to clear out the culvert and allow the pond to drain. Last week the Department of Public Works cleaned out the culvert and some drainage of i the pond occured. The pond is stabilized now at an appropriate elevation. Ms. Yale stated she would like the Commission to get momentum behind the plan to installa control structure, which has received funding as wellas permission from all concerned agencies except the Army Corp of Engineers. A permit must be obtained from them in order to breech the dike and construct the control structure. To have this control structure in place as soon as possible will be a - benefit to all concerned, thus Ms. Yale was requesting Commission members to work expediently on the project. The Winter Island Yacht Yard conditions were then discussed with consensus being reached that the plan should be referenced in the Order of Conditions and that all work will take place from the landward side of the wall . The wall will be 10' at low tide. 1 SALEM CONSERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING M!ARCAV9; 1989 A regular meeting of the Salem Conservation Commission was held on Thursday, March 9, 1989 at 7: 30 P.M. in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green . Present were: Chairman Philip Moran, Bob Crowley, Martha Hogan, Richard Femino, George Ahmed , and John Vallis . Absent was Fred Harney. Also present were Kathy Winn , Conservation Administrator and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 18-20 KOSCIUSKO STREET Mr . Dennis Helmar was present at the meeting to ask the Commission to grant a Certificate of Compliance on his property located at 18-20 Kosciusko Street. He stated that the Certificate of Compliance was part of an order of Conditions issued by the Salem Conservation Commission in July of 1979 and had apparently been overlooked during a title search performed when he purchased the property seven years ago. He stated that he is presently selling the property and became aware of the Order of Conditions when the title search was performed for this sale. Phil Moran stated that he received a call from Mr. Helmar ' s Attorney, Thomas Alexander and was made aware of the situation. He noted that since the work was performed by the previous owners he suggested that the architect or engineer for the project sign an affidavit saying that the work was done in compliance with the Order of Conditions . He said thatJim Ballou did the drawings for the project but did not supervise the work so he could not attest to the work performed , which was to entail filling in an old cellar and putting a concrete slab over it . Mr. Helmar provided an affidavit from the previous owner, J. Chappin, which was read at the meeting by Phil Moran, and a copy of wich is on file in the Planning Department. Motion made by John Vallis to approve the Certificate of Compliance of 18-20 Kosciusko Street, seconded by Bob Crowley and approved unanimously. CLERK OF THE WORKS REPORT - WILL BEAULIEU PIONEER VILLAGE Will Beaulieu reported to the Commission that the Engineering Department has determined the elvation of the pond at Pioneer Village to be 10.9. He also stated that the plans for the project remain the same as previously reported except that the mechanical manhole had been changed to a manual one. 3 . LINDEN AV2NUE Kathy Winn reported that she also received complaints that there is someone dumping into the pond at Linden Avenue and Peter Road. She said that there is no ID on the trucks and that there are signs in the area posting No Trespassing and Private . Phil Moran stated that Bob Bouchard owns a Construction Company and lives there . He suggested that Mr . Bouchard be asked to attend the next meeting to address this issue . MACKEY PROPERTY Kathy Winn reported that the status of the Mackey Property should be decided By DEQE within the next month. / Phil Moran suggested that the members of the Commission make a visual inspection of the area before the next meeting so that the commission can determine how to proceed. j NEW BUSINESS George Ahmed informed the commission that there are pilings in the water behind the Chase House, and asked if the commission was aware of them. Phil Moran stated that permission was granted for the project by the commission last July and that the work should be completed by the end of April . APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion made by John Vallis to approve the minutes as submitted to the meeting of February 23 , 1989, seconded by George Ahmed , and approved unanimously. There being no further business to come before the Commission, a motion was made by John Vallis to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Richard Femino, and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 8 : 30 P.M. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY: EILEEN M. SACCO, CLERK MURPHY, RYAN & O'KEEFE ATTORNEYS AT LAW. INC. TEN CHESTNUT STREET JOHN E. MURPHY P EABO DY, MASSACHUSETTS 01960 OF COUNSEL TIMOTHY J. O•KEEFE J05EPH CURTIS RYAN JOHN E. MURPHY.JR. (617) 531-1421 - LYNDA M. MURPHY JAMES F. RENNICK JOHN R. KEILTY IN REPLY REFER TO NICHOLAS P. VONTZALIDES August 31 , 1967 FILE NO. D. DEV MONGA The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality Engineering 5 Commonwealth Avenue REC` H , 1 r --•- ,-q Woburn , MA 01801 ' ' J ATT : Edward P. Kunce SEP Q 1987 RE : In the matter of a� , ;. Jet } Thomas Mackey & Sons , Inc. ��"" � � ••�• 1•�� L:t�j� DEQE File No. AP-NE-87 -610 Notice of Intent to Assess a Civil Administrative Penalty ( "Notice" ) Dear Sirs : This law firm represents Thomas Mackey & Sons , Inc. ( "Petitioner" ) in the matter of DEQE ' s Notice to Assess a Civil Administrative Penalty of $18 ,950 . 00 under the provisions of MGL Ch . 21A §16 and MGL Ch . 131 § 40 ( " Statutes " ) and implementing regula- tions 310 CMR 5 . 00 et . seq . respectively . The Petitioner files this Notice of Claim for an Judicatory Hearing ( "Hearing " ) and asserts that theproposed penalty is excessive. Petitioner ' s request for a hearing is based , inter alia , upon the following matters of fact and law : 1 ) Petitioner denies that he failed to comply with the Order of Conditions No. 64-1119 ( " Conditions " ) issued by the Salem Conservation Commission ( "Commission " ) on January 16 , 1986 with the exception of i ) a one-time non-compliance with spe- cial conditions No . 5 which prohibits work below this 40 foot elevation and ii ) not posting a file number sign . 2 ) Petitioner denies that hedidnot -appeal the April 1 , 1987 Enforcement Order ( "Order" ) issued by the DEQE . This Order was appealed by this office on behalf of the Petitioner on April 21 , 1987 ( "Appeal " ) . 3 ) The Appeal was followed by telephone conferences with the undersigned and Mr . John Felix and Mr . Ralph Perkins of the DEQE ' s Northeast Regional Office. Based on these conferences , it was the Petitioner ' s understanding that the Order will be considered complied with if the Petitioner was able to , restore the Site and resolve these matters with the Q Page Two ` Department of Environmental Quaility Engineering August 31 , 1987 Commission. It was Petitioner ' s further understanding that a resolution of the issues raised in the Order on the local level will not be only acceptable to the DEQE but will be encouraged by the Agency . 4) Petitioner ' s response to the DEQE ' s cooperation was to arrange a site visit with the Commission . The visit took place on April 30 , 1987 in the presence of two members of the Commission and a full time employee of the City . Phil Moran , Chairman of the Commission , was expected at the site , but failed to show up. In a subsequent telephone conference , Chairman Moran agreed to the Petitioner ' s proposal of restoring the buffer zone to an elevation of 40 feet . This verbal agreement resulted in the Petitioner submitting a plan and restoration schedule to the Commission on May 18 , 1987 . A copy of the plan and schedule for restoration was sent to John Felix of the DEQE . The restoration itself was completed according to the plan. 5 ) Petitioner further asserts that violations acknowledged in Paragraph 1 were the result of error and were not willful . This position is not only supported by information presented here , but also by the fact that the Petitioner even tried to comply with several provisions of the Commission ' s Conditions which were , on it face , not within the jurisdiction of the authority granted to the Commission under the Statutes . One example of such unauthorized exercise of jurisdiction is Special Condition No. 10 relative to dust control . While we appreciate your cooperation in this matter , we remain , Very truly yours , MURPHY , RYAN & O ' KEEFE D . Dev Monga , Esquire ; DDM:cfj pc : Salem Conservation Commission Daniel Mackey Robert Welch , Esquire MURPHY. RYAN & O'KEEFE • ATTORNEYS AT LAw, INC. TEN CHESTNUT STREET JOHN E. MURPHY TIMOTHY J. O'KEEFE PEABODY. MASSACHUSETTS 01960 CFCOUNSEL JOHN E. MURPHY.JR. JOSEPH CURTIs RYAN JAMES F. RENNICK (517) 531-1421 LYNCH M. MURPHY JOHN R. KEILTY August 31 , 1967 IN RE.-LY REFER TO NICHOLAS P. VONTZALIDES FILE NO. D. DEV MONGA d ry C_ Il \{' N" 'jy, The Commonwealth of Massachusetts c,T 1 1987 Department of Environmental Quality Engineering - 5 Commonwealth Avenue A ly; r Woburn , MA 01801 � 9_II U � .tis •am P� ATT : Edward P . Kunce RE : In the matter of Thomas Mackey & Sons , Inc . DEQE File No. AP-NE-87 -610 Notice of Intent to Assess a Civil Administrative Penalty ( " Notice " ) Dear Sirs : This law firm represents Thomas Mackey & Sons , Inc . ( "Petitioner" ) in the matter of DEQE ' s Notice to Assess a Civil Administrative Penalty of $18 ,950 . 00 under the provisions of MGL Ch . 21A §16 and MGL Ch . 131 § 40 ( " Statutes " ) and implementing regula- tions 310 CMR 5 .00 et . seq . respectively . The Petitioner files this Notice of Claim for an Adjudicatory Hearing ( "Hearing " ) and asserts that the proposed penalty is excessive. Petitioner ' s request for a hearing is based , inter alia , upon the following matters of fact and law : 1 ) Petitioner denies that he failed to comply with the Order of Conditions No. 64-119 ( "Conditions " ) issued by the Sale:a Conservation Commission ( "Commission " ) on January 16 , 1986 with the exception of i ) a one-time non-compliance with spe- cial conditions No . 5 which prohibits work below this 4.3 foot elevation and ii ) not posting a file number sign . I 2 ) Petitioner denies that he did not -appeal the April 1 , 1987 Enforcement Order ( "Order" ) issued by the DEQE . This O:. der was appealed by this office on behalf -of the Petitioner on April 21 , 1987 ( "Appeal " ) . 3 ) The Appeal was followed by telephone conferences with the undersigned and Mr . John Felix and Mr . Ralph Perkins of the DEQE ' s Northeast Regional Office . Based on these conferences , it was the Petitioner ' s understanding that the Order will be considered complied with if the Petitioner was able to restore the Site and resolve these matters with the Page Two Department of Environmental Quaility Engineering August 31 , 1987 Commission . It was Petitioner ' s further understanding that a resolution of the issues raised in the Order on the local level will not be only acceptable to the DEQE but will be encouraged by the Agency . 4) Petitioner ' s response to the DEQE ' s cooperation was to arrange a site visit with the Commission . The visit took place on April 30 , 1987 in the presence of two members of the Commission and a full time employee of the City . Phil Moran , Chairman of the Commission , was expected at the site , but failed to show up . In a subsequent telephone conference , Chairman Moran agreed to the Petitioner ' s proposal of restoring the buffer zone to an elevation of 40 feet . This verbal agreement resulted in the Petitioner submitting a plan and restoration schedule to the Commission on May 18 , 1987 . A copy of the plan and schedule for restoration was sent to John Felix of the DEQE . The restoration itself was completed according to the plan. 5 ) Petitioner further asserts that violations acknowledged in Paragraph 1 were the result of error and were not willful . This position is not only supported by information presented here , but also by the fact that the Petitioner even tried to comply with several provisions of the Commission ' s Conditions which were , on it face , not within the jurisdiction of the authority granted to the Commission under the Statutes . One example of such unauthorized exercise of jurisdiction is Special Condition No . 10 relative to dust control . While we appreciate your cooperation in this matter , we remain , Very truly yours , MURPHY , RYAN & O ' KEEFE D . Dev Monga , Esquire DDM:cfj / pc : Salem Conservation Commission, Daniel Mackey Robert Welch , Esquire ., FI BOOK 75�7 PAGE 162 104 ' Forth 9' - DEOE File No. `sa (To be provided by DECE) City/rown Salem Commonwealth Daniel Mackey of Massachusetts ApplicaM Enforcement Order Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, §40 From Salem Conservation Commission issuingAuthority To Daniel Mackey _ Date of Issuance June 27 1985 Property lot/parcel number,address 58 Broadway Salem Extent and type of activity. The Conservation Commission hereby orders that storage of inappropriate fill material within 100 feet of a wetland and change in grage of the bank bordering Rosie's Pond to be stopped. Plans must be filed and approved by the Commission to address this removal. The ' Conservation Commission has determined that the activity described ry above is in violation of the Wetlands Protection Act,G.L C. 131, §40,and the Regulations promulgated pur- D suant thereto 3101CMR 10.00,because: 0 9�aid activity has been/is being conducted without a valid Order of Conditions. — w r7 Said activity has been/is being conducted in violation of an Order of Conditions issued to JcaB."- File number Condition number(s) ❑ Other(specify) 0 J The Salem Conservation Commission hereby orders the following: gr' he property owner, his agents• permittees and all others shall immediately cease and desist from further activity affecting the wetland portion of this property. C3 . Wetland alterations resulting from said activity shall be corrected and the site returned to its original con- dition. 9-1 BOOK'282? PACE 163 ` 1(35 M" .Completed application forms and plans as required by the Act and Regulations shall be filed with the Commission onorbefore Setpember 1 (date), and no further work shall be performed until a public hearing has been held and an Order of Conditions has been issued to regulate said work. Application forts hays% been 'Un r The property owner shall take every reasonable step to prevent further violations of the act. ❑ Other(specify) Failure to comply with this Order may constitute grounds for legal action.Massachusetts General Laws Chap- ter 131,Section 40 provides: Whoever violates any provision of this section shall be punished by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not more than six months or both. Each day or porton thereof of continuing violation shall constitute a separate offense. Questions regarding this Enforcement Order should be directed to: Dale Yale: 744-4580 Issued by Salem Conservation Commission Signature(s) — (Signature of-delivery person or certified mail number) 9-2 1 104 Form 9' DEOE Fe No. `q (To oe provided by DEOE) \ City/Tow Salem Commonwealth of Massachusetts ApjAcat[ Daniel Mackey Enforcement Order Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L c. 131 , §40 t From Salem Conservation Commission 'IssuingAuthonty To Daniel Macke Date of Issuance June 27 , 1985 Property lot/parcel number, address 58 Broadwav Salem Extent and type of activity. The Conservation Commission hereby orders that storage of inappropriate fill material within 100 feet of a wetland and change in grade of the bank bordering Rosie's Pond be to stopped. Plans must be filed and approved by the Commission to address this removal. . The Conservation Commission has determined that the activity described above is in violation of the Wetlands Protection Act,G.L C. 131, §40, and the Regulations promulgated pur- suant thereto 3101CMR 10.00,because: said activity has been/is being conducted without a valid Order of Conditions. M Said activity has been/is being conducted in violation of an Order of Conditions issued to dated File number. Condition number(s) ❑ Other(specify) The Salm hereby orders the following: The property owner, his agents, permittees and all others shall immediately cease and desist from further activity affecting the wetland portion of this property. ❑ Wetland alterations resulting from said activity shall be corrected and the site returned to its original con- dition. g-1 105 E7 .Completed application forms and plans as required by the Act and Regulations shall be filed with the Commission onorbefore September 1 (date), and no further work shall be performed until a public hearing has been held and an Order of Conditions has been issued to regulate said work. Application forms have been s-- "e property owner shall take every reasonable step to prevent further violations of the act. ❑ Other(specify) Failure to comply with this Order may constitute grounds for legal action. Massachusetts General Laws Chap- ter 131, Section 40 provides: Whoever violates any provision of this section shall be punished by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not more than six months or both. Each day ppdion thereof of continuing violation shall constitute a separate offense. Questions regarding this forcement Order should be directed to: Dale Yale: 744-4550 Issued by Salem Conservation Commission • Signature(s) - — IV (Signature of-delivery person or certified mail number) 9-2 1' rr AUGR EZ 1 n. Ido SALEM PLANNING DEPT. t Sa��M �� • d t5"l d u D AUG 1 6 'iy85 N, / 1 lit Yll Ll. til IA A .� �/.///,/r n,///ry v/�/� .'Y'+/v/,i,• 935-2160 DATE: ust 12 1985 TOWN: Salem i ASSIGNED FILE NO: 64-119 I i The Division of Wetlands is in receipt of an application filed under M.G.L. Chapter 131 , Section 40, the application is in the name of: f APPLICANT: Legge Hill Real h , TY iqh OWNER OF LAND: Same , Daniel S. Mackey Trustee P.O. Box 166 j i Salem. MA 01970 1 PROJECT LOCATION: Rear 39S rnr;ng o , LOT: 83 Man .30 . I PROJECT REVIEW ( ) The application is incomplete. No File Number will be assigned until material checked below is submitted to this Office: { ( ) Notice of Intent and Environmental ( ) Plans Data Form , ( ) Project requires the filing of• a { ) Locus 3 Form 3 (Notice of Intent) rather than Form 4 (Abbreviated Notice of Intent) WATERWAYS REVIEW ( ) Project may require a Chapter 91 License - Project has been referred to Waterways. ( Project does not require a Chapter 91 License. ISSUANCE A OF FILE NUMBER INDICATES ONLY COMPLETENESS OF FILING SUBMITTED, NOT APPROVAL OF THE APPLICATION. Very truly yours, William A. Krol , D.E. Deputy Regional Environmental Engineer cc : Con•.rrvation Conurii ;:ior) city Hall, Salem, MA 01972 Hancock S6rvey Associates; Inc. , 69 Holten Street, Danvers, MA 01923 a 1 w i `x Form _ DECEFile No. 64-119 (To be provided by DEOE) City/Town Caipm Commonwealth Daniel J. Mackey : of Massachusetts __ - Applicant Enforcement Order Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, §40 Deoartment of Environmental Quality Engineering Issuing Authority From Daniel J. Mackey, Thomas Mackey & Sons , Inc. , 58 Broadway St. , Salem, MA 01970 To Date of Issuance April 1 , 1987 Property loVparcel number,address Rear '195 Inr9nn , ge Extent and typeof activity: Removal and filling have resulted in the unauthorized alteration of a bank., bordering vegetated wetlands and land under a waterbody (310 CMR 10.54, 10.55 and 10.56, resnectively) , contrary to the Order of Conditions issued by the Salem Conservation Commission. The Department has determined that the activity described above is in violation of the Wetlands Protection Act,G.L. c. 131, §40,and the Regulations promulgated pur- suant thereto 310 CMR 10.00,because: ❑ Said activity has beentiis being conducted without a valid Order of Conditions. Daniel J. M11ackev tilt Said activity has beenlis being conducted in violation of an Order of Conditions issued to P 0 Box 366. Salem- MA n197n ,dated Ian-,Ar , 1&, ___ Filenumber 6LI19—,Condition number(s) 1.9 Spesial Condition #'s 1,2,3,4,5 & 7 ❑ Other(specify) WARNINr,: This Enforcement Order also serves as a notice of non-compliance under the Administrative Penalites Act, M.G.L. Chanter 21A, Section 16. Failure to comply with this Order may result in the assessment of civil administrative penalties under the Act. The Department hereby orders the following: Q The property owner,his agents, permittees and all others shall Immediately cease and desist from further activity affecting the wetland portion of this property. ❑ Wetland alterations resulting from said activity shall be corrected and the site returned to its original con- dition. I 9.1 I i ❑ Completed application forms and plans as required by the Act and Regulations shall be filed with the - on or before -- (date), and no further work shall be performed until a public hearing has been held and an Order of Conditions has been issued to regulate said work. Application forms are available at: Ll The property owner shall take every reasonable step to prevent further violations of the act. ® Other(specify) The apolicant shall within twenty-one (21) days of the date of this - Order, submit a plan to the Deaprtment and the Salem Conservation Commission detailing how and when he proposes to come into comoliance with Order of Conditions 64-119. No work subject to General Laws , Chapter 131 , Section 40 may take place until after this plan is approved by the Department and the Salem Conservation Commission. Failure to comply with this Order may constitute grounds for legal action. Massachusetts General Laws Chap- ter 131. Section 40 provides: Whoever violates any provision of this section shall be punished by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not more than six months or both. Each day or portion thereof of continuing violation shall constitute a separate offense. Questions regarding this Enforcement Order should be directed to: Sabin M. Lord, Jr. , Dep. Req.Env.Engr. Issued by Sabin M. Lord Jr. eouty heqional Environmental Signature(s) (Signature of delivery person or certified mail number) You are hereby notified of your right to an adjudicatory hearing under the Massachusetts Administrative Procedure Act, G.L. C. 30A, Section 10, regarding this Enforcement Order. In accordance with the Department' s Rules for the Conduct of Adjudicatory Proceedings, 310 CMR 1.00, a Notice of Claim for Adjudicatory Hearinq must be filed in writinq within twenty-one (21) days of the date of issuance of this Enforcement Order, must state clearly and concisely the facts which are qrounds for the proceeding and the relief sought, and must be addressed to: Docket Clerk, Office of the General Counsel Department -of Environmental Duality Engineering One Winter Street Boston , MA 02108 9.2 r tie 1 = Conservation Commission Salem. Massachusetts 03970 .,qA SS PtWI July 12, 1985 Attorney Robert Welch Welch and Lundregan 221 Essex St. Salem, MA. 01970 Dear Mr. Welch: Enclosed is a copy of an Enforcement Order issued to Mr. Daniel Mackey regarding his property at 58 Broadway, on June 27 , 1985. Also enclosed is a copy of the receipt issued by the Essex County Registry of Deeds when the Order was recorded. When a copy of the recorded Order is returned, I will forward one to you. Regarding Mr. Mackey' s Legg's Hill property, the Commission discussed the matter of further removal of gravel from that area. You may recall that an Enforcement Order is in effect on this property as well . At the time this Order was issued (October 25, 1984) , an agreement was reached whereby Mr. Mackey could remove gravel within a specified area. The Commission felt this was an equitable compromise which would allow Mr. Mackey to fulfill his contractual obligations without infringing on the wetland. The Commission now feels that gravel removal must cease until proper plans and Notice of Intent are filed with the Commission. The Commission is interested in continuing to work in a cooperative manner ' with Mr. Mackey, but feel the site cannot be altered any further without • a better assessment of wetland and drainage issues. I would be happy to discuss this with you further if you wish. Sincerely yours, Philip D. Moran Chairman cc: Daniel Mackey Attorney Timothy O'Keefe 104 Form 9 DECE F.e NO. .?� (to De P-0-0e•0 by M:UL) �– 521es gitvrtw++ figCommonwealth Daniel Mackey — ;�. Nassachusetts Enforcement Order Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L c. 131 , §40 Salem Conservation Co=ission =ssu='g�o� From To Daniel MzcY.ev Date of iss1uance „ung 27 . 1985 fi5 Prcperty IoUparce!number, address SE Broad,021. Salem Exert and type of actvit r The Conservation C-om i-fission hereby orders that storage Of i7la?Pr Opriate fill mcL EIlcl t:-?thin �� feet of a wetlatld anti change in grade of the ba=rk bordering $osiE' s Pond be to stopped • ?lens Must be filed and ap?roved by the Cc=zission to address this removal. The ' Conservation Co=i=_cion has determined wrat tie act vitt'desc bed above is in violation of the Wettancs Protection Act, C.L C. 131 , §4-0, and the necuiaticns pronuigated„ur- suant tneretc 3',XC1AF, 1 0.00, because: ;,Said act vity has been/is being conducted without a v2"d Order of Cendtt ons. 7. Said activity has been/is being ccnducted in viOi2bOn of an Order of Conditions issued to dated we number Condition numbers) rCther (specc.fY) (^ nap , n (.n+++-+•ccin. h ereby orders the following: ire fie The property owner, his agents, permittees and all others shall immediately cease and desist from further activity affecting the wetland portion of this property. p Wetland alterations resulting from sad activity shall be corrected and the site returned to its original con- dition. � 9.1 i ESSEX COUNTY REGISTRY DEEDS 07/12/85 REC ; 10. 00 10700 REC , 10.00 10800 TOTL 20. 00 CASH 20.00 CHNG 0. 00 1218 001 10:14 SOUTHERN DIST z Peparttment of Vnbfir ,�erbiees Mne $alem (green , n pfa/MINF{M 745-9595 I 9 xt. 321 ��/�, e STANTON W.BIGELOW,P.E. ®P�� City Engineer 6" Director of Public Services June 24, 1992 William E. Luster City Planner One Salem Green Salem, MA 01970 Re: "Pond D" DEP file No. 64-24 Dear Bill : As per your request of May 14 , 1992, the Engineering Department has investigated the level of the above referenced pond. After transferring a elevation to pond, we found the existing elevation of the water to be 26 . 81 MLW (22 .45 MSL) on June 24, 1992 . If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. aVver , uullyy your ., W / Richard A. Lis Assistant City Engineer MACKEY OCCORANCES Date Occurance Jan. ' 78 Pond "C" elevation 20 .6 ft . May ' 78 Order of Conditions issued to MDPW. Outlet Structure at pond C will be at elevation 18" , installed by DPW adjacent to 10" pipe. May ' 80 16" pipe installed - pond fell to approximately 6 to 8 feet. June ' 84 Outlet pipe removed changing level of pond thus temporarily dammed up. Pond elevation now, after damming 27 . 2 June ' 84 Pond to be maintained at 27 . 3 at public hearing (with Mackey in attendance) approved as such. June ' 86 DEQE ruled that pond must be maintained at new elevation, approximately elevation 27 . July ' 86 Control Structure Order of Conditions issued. March ' 87 Mackey has 21 days to submit erosion control plans and plans to restore the bank to elevation 40 . May ' 87 Mackey fails to meet deadline on Cease and Desist and DEQE will administer penalties. June ' 87 Mackey continues construction at Legg ' s Hill . Commission informs DEQE of this for a Cease and Desist had been placed on his property. March ' 89 Con Coin Administrator reported the status on Mackey Property should be decided by DEQE within the next month. June ' 92 Letter from DPW that Pond is at elevation 26 . 81 as of June 24, 1992 . EX\EX\MACKEY 2 APt'iPCX;'A}RTE LOCA r/ov �A 37 y ,P/KE C \ v. orE:-PfL OW z 7 6 9 (� 04" ?REE t„ GRopo,SED ovER,FL oW i�,A x ` PEST ZL EV = 2 7 C ? 0 69 i V J � E C-9 S N/4L nowt? WATER LEVEL 27, 69 ocr�85 /. AFTE_R ;o14°S 7"k'UC 7`/JN sr�veT;r,�E RE �tOYE E�'./�Ti�vG EAk'T� � ' AND lc'1N1, # GA'ROE NE w 5 L SPE c744PAC7- AL L Alj$r PENT ARE A 1 '. /N & '' AIA )( I- M M 5 L . 27.69 1i �--/5 'AC'A,0(0.S TBM �-AIWT M.ARk COVER c oNf. WE4 L COVE.t EL 3/.45- r <,nvER WELL W 1 f AFZ L/M/4/14* C o,v r4©J. S rPvC.r41RAC LATE s�°y�86 SCA�.,f RPPR�X,A?ArE LOCAL/ON �� / / IC " AORA/N 30 SRIffC C / f \ ovE.;QFI OW STRUCTURc 46 6 9 24" TRFE / PROPOSED oVEA?, LOW = 27. 30 MAX / V s fi- z7 69 L f G G S N/ L POIV40 WArdER LEVEL vcT�es / / ,✓ 4,1.72r-IP CONS r)f'c/C T/DN Qf OVE.AFFL 4 tV AND F/N16hl GRADE NEW 's L SPE i t - AAic A M r S .7 T K g -rBM OAWT ,MARk — ST'EEL 4_ /5 iPAL�r/WEA COVER k:L COVER \ E L 3/.45 c vF_ wE L af! i LZ �; . ,5 41L L C4' 741 PRE L iM iNRR Y av r�E c o�v rA�OL S7 Pvc TvAoE I ft .GPPR�%X,,►?ATE L OG AT/ON �A ? �_ _— ---� / � /ro 4)RAiN 30 SP/KE C OYE:,PfL OW _TUR *<- ,c\, 0-6.30 ' 0-4" rRjEE 21/69 k AMA X -RES T EL E V. = 2 7. 0 nj g 'a 7� 6y v WATEFT' LF_ rR vc 7-101V rRvc:TE/,E'E" ,pE��IOYf E X'ST'�`G EA�'l"fil NE W U L Jf E AICA � / BAckFiL L /N t3 ' SIA k :./FTS -7 . (�9 i -'BM PA/AIT MACk ✓N WEA coVER t is cs �.4 C-')✓fR EL 3/.45 T, < vEk W--,L L aH . i LZ L P VA f R,"AL iM/41,4RY S 7W , C rv,4p SCAB E i = 1. I - / / \ OvEllel4j. ow 1 S TRUCTU,A4Z- /-Z "�c 9- �(32. ; 2 ?.69 zq" rREE-� 69 2O�- PR4POSE'D OVE.'P,`L OW C ',EST EL EV. MAX WATER LFVEL 7. Lo CONS 77R�lC rIO AI of c�VEtPFL U{t/ 1 / STR;/c,TJsPE rPEMOYE E,I�,�ST/NG EA�PT"�/ r� D!KE A/'/G TD ,A9Ak, SL-12,pE 2. ;=c710Pf3CT 41L f�� sACkf/L Z. AV 8 A14)( L/f7"S, Vl� 27. 9 It r k g 7rBM F-'AUNT � MAkk -- /67IA':, s cO✓FR U STEEL �JNL. WELL cavER EL 3l-45 eoYER WELL •, i LZ C 65 6�fL L. PO4/ Ao PRZ4./MiNA*Y �v T�,E T' c�,v rpvL S r�Pvc r'vcE DATE SCA[.Z.- 2 x � hY 30 30.7v SPIKE C S 7-AWCTUR4c' 7.�9 / Q 24TREE 69 �'� PROPOSED OVERfLow �lPE•ST ZLEi! = 27. 30 ,Maw 'v / l ti L E G G S HILL POND WATER L E. VEL 270-,9 oc r/SS ,gFT1 th �� 'iP vC rIoN of nvE�FL OW .vl R ?b ,414,i'. .SL oPE of 2. ca�tf- r ,At A W A BAck, L AV B 4/FT5, 3. S N' . . � . � � \ \� � 27.6,5► i .r— /5 'RAGYUs r k g ^BM PA�iVT MARk e o�. WE[L cnVER �R co✓i STEEL f'RX IL IM 141,4,f .14/1%E T C CN 7',POL S T,4u�'rv�4� SCA4,f ✓ '= 20 � . 1 { � I W_ Y �' '� �. r ��I��,1r/�� s -1 lam _ YiA1f • 11 h gill 1, a. /rp oRp/N " t 24" TREE =7. CPO ED OVE.4,�LCW 41A X f//LL PONS M I � WA 4A' LF- VEL i -rf,P S,f?NS 7'RLIC7-1J)v of OVERFLOW s� s r v� rc/RE R,�rAlaye EX/STI'NG ZW KE AND /VFW L L Of E c a -r AL L_ "q, V*"E�!rT AA 3 DNT!/iN / S /" L , e,4'157-1N(; -F 41 YAT/ON$ 154 QED cti c.RKEY 4Y 7- .4 .4 s .SD CIA TES /NC. l I r k g -rBM PAINT MARk wE�-L i 01 TY SALE,*l MA. t LE �3 L-,�yS NILS 0417-4E7' COW -ROS S7R61CT41R4C / TAE PZ- AN _ 3G ALE : / 20 OA rz arc ; `.t;,(I11�£r�*c�liQTC LJi?tIiIT1�1it1TI NOW; of Ne r.._ w _ ..•hc- connervati.o':Q .:G2.'.'_s;'i Oil iS3 i, ..� L'fle jams .':e.',•, on -eb _nr.1 1976 at 1:c1 p,m. -O:'"7_u o. o.. ..911'13 . . :. ,ttcadl C%h 1 _.. h, L . .h i i v oman Kawy 311c.1 _. 0..3 r, _via 113163. 76nu.11. Hunt, Henry _. .. _...` ^ A 1_' 3,-':::L G . '_;_ i7 Paul all_ _1.115. Associates attending were: Ilex Arc'...• Oleo .,�-. roni, tau 1''.:-10:�^, Dolores Jordan, nary ,estor, David Pelletier, Miss Theriault _.nu Pollyanna _..__. ay. Ouest attending 'hs minutes of the previous meeting were a.ccootod :iiia carrec ions. .._ . French announced the followina notices an! communications: "W brei., has spoken with the Shzirn7n o_ the _ nsho1y Conservation Co:'_hssio:: sad c,aE ' ._. .._ .a.a:, ., Reap t}�� u3 i6 . . .,.nth any - „ -.a..� -.�o:zl'�. _�.:•.a to erc:le.nre - •,,� .,,- ,,, ., ,.._: ..-... _ •-' ^.� ':,:gorv.:..t ...... ...vss . i.:;l:/, of Lor_ ::; M15 ') Topers 05made 4o7osal to to ila=05 ioa.rd to limit the heijt of the 7ropozei OG'.1d_ to ?0 feet, e'/-ceptln: a_1o. as .,:er. Ar. Wench 'fill contact 'Jouacil_o. Peter _,o1.11e,` to V2_'_iy. "aOinald Hartley, of Narblehe .d Co .Cor:; is concerned about twat town's joining the South _.-..,_._ Sawar0.ge District c._. :'heir pipeline will run across KIM L1 Harbur. A letterJ ..ant to the dayor '-rding the ...00l".o:.l il.2.3 Deme nt of the land donated to the City by . ghla.:d 3ealty Trus`.. Il letter :•a3 sent t0 the i30st611 ,. i'ia ine rai 1:03d about the tr2.M and litter a10n;j the trac%5. ine.na al 3uninalo .l -,1,e _ _ n ,-1 that monies to J_ trans I'er-_ed -^.-ay be done by the Financial °('ie l'Cer� VO':e�l a v.Tli�O; �_;� Secretary. Onvi.a Moe has investigated the )ossibi).i ty of sattil3 lip a Coazarvation 7und, a cumulative fund not a function Of the re-�:J . lar OuC'set. it .:ill be usad as a Mcretion- ':ry :ccoun v, will accept contributions, gifts, r>rants,':!tc. To e6t;obli5h this accoun�. tho Nembers will 1 ^n` .' .v each, the active Associates .CO each an! the funds will be pesented to the City :ire: sugar an! fornally set u7. x.11 donations are tax deductible . Ale: Arc7_Ss will co_Jct the Peabody and Move= Con:oms to sac if they have any info nition on such a fund, ...nd David De•roe will check xita the Cga,ezv tion Law Tound tion for rarticularz. it was decided that tole . ontnly . financial :evor , YM be duli ..._ed Onla a :long, at the last Ifu3ai._ 7 of evecy month. :O now nxpencea or cla o - S'_nte thu W1: report. An hoAy 710tcher, M'% Anglaaer, filo was '.m:. ed to ;pe_3 did not aGi.^r'.a.. r t10 Fain 511112 rn?ortcd that he chucked on the Dearborn 3tree tO1L,z property _rozently developed byrLarch fealty _r=it. 3 v'_ley i:C.. 3_r_..O r t has a nheq fon applicability to the Notl nds Protection Act. Q, Jillic askea Mr. JeVas and ._ . Hunt for their file={ On tr. Vili-s will yet notice Of property under the '.atland irot'ac tica fact and is working, On checkLnj the chain of Lutes , hearials, an! will ?ort of proper procedures by the next neetin AsrlsLant JOliotor Peter merry -.ave his probesz report on the ..ackey proper_ i'i'_•. iierry has bromn; suit a ainst Anckey for `the �Ahtite Strut and 3roadway properties. 3y ag regiment with :Obert Welch, Nr. ''ac%wy'S ttornsy, Lehsid harRholt was appointed a :':aster to hear the suit. A hearing was held, with ierkcol"t as r:a.stew, and it was left that the ordinance presently on the city's books will not presently corer this situation, but that !!hen the revised ordinance is passed, within QO days it will then apply. Further action is advised to be postponed until the new ordinance is passed. Er. :^erry is looi:in._ into zonin; and fillLn7 ordinances in regard to Lag§z Hill 3oad and plans on tal!cin to Ugo DiOase about construction of a new fence for the Marlboro load a robl.em. also srokc with harshal jongan of the Salem Police and Brian French is to check with the Marshal of the possibility of hunting on the coastline. Donald Hunt will act as a liaison with he Police Department. ;`.r. Willis is continuing to request and receive information on wetlands mapping. Clete Cervoni. mentioned that Nass. Audubon may havo additional information, and ,;r. Willis ::i.11 report on this further_ at the next meeting. ':hen the information is conpll - a meeting will be net up with Ted Sa.dows` , 'reg Senko, 3rian Trench and Mr. Aillis to di: c".;zs funding, etc. !a.r; ;lien -Pelletier reported that she reccoed a copy of the Board of Health's letter to 'William Tiath regarding the In emi property. Also, she has issued 3 additonal cease and desist notices to: A A J Coszko, Joseph !l. SaGone, and Welch ConztructionCo. for dumping off Swampscott Road into a wetland, with copies to Dan Zuri:e, County Coza- iss%oner, Whitman A Howard,Architects, and James Carlin, County 3nlineer, as the; ;re involved with the new courthouse building where the materials draped cavae from. Other Buciress 30an ;'reach again requested the receipt of our file cabinet, it will be mored this week. 3rad :iorthrup has applied for matching grants from the State self-help funds and for federal bmdln7� for the _'Ores+ :Aver Conservation Area. Bill_ Tint! needs a list of public lands within the city. 7on,on has tanned with Parblehead about L_ conservation restriction for Thonjison's .:_^.'OiI. i•.p ".i_s2.1 wornz nezC-si to be -.••.?$ - ^.==•'. VO tc�. l!n3'.^.'.SrO'iily t0 ?Ll-C.-oc a camera for 4260, and a tolyhcto lens '.link$ .-7111 �total uo to and :O more than 350. Authority to POrchasee ;__ven to rain ii4 - Aloe, the '? file for 420 and 035 for loWz, autho=iy to 0. .i illin to purchase, wit! bills be'..nj zeat to Hr. Jadon . Minutes of Meeting_ /26/7.6 _ -3- / Paul suggested four areas to be considered for this study. Starting with the area in and around Mr. Ingemi's property, Paul suggested the testing begin at the pit site. The swamp would be tested next, and then the outfall of the swamp to the pond on Mr. Ragone's property. The fourth area to be considered would be the other side of Mr. Ragone's pond going downstream. Paul Willis state that there would be 25-50 tests done at an estimated cost of $150. Paul Willis is to call Cat Cove Marine Laboratory to adk if they would investigate the source of estueric pollution. Richard Morton and Brad Northrup spoke to the Commission of the filling being done by North Shore Dredging on Mr. Mackey's property at the end of Blaney St. At the request of the Commission the police served Mr. Mackey with a cease and desist. Richard Morton contacted Mr. Censi at the Division of Waterways and found that Mr. Mackey has applied for a permit. Dick also questioned Mr. Cenci regarding a possible outstanding fine of $15,000 owed by Mr. Mackey. Mr. Censi could not readilylocate that information, but he would contact Richard when he had. Mr. McDonough of the Army Corps of Engineers is going to come to view the site to ascertain if there is cause for the intervention of the Army Corps of Engineers. Paul Willis made the motion that the Conservation Commission wishes to en- dorse the serving of a cease and desist because of the action being taken at the end of Blaney St. Mary Ellen Pelletier seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. William Tinti next spoke to the Commission regarding the action necessary in order to obtain a temporary restraining order for the work being done at the end of Blaney St. Bill informed the Commission that a return of service of the cease and desist issued to Mr. Mackey is necessary. He asked if North Shore Dredging had been informed of the illegality of working after a cease and desist had been issued. Brad Northrup said he had informed the workmen with no result. Mr. Tinti suggested that North Shore Dredging be served with a cease and desist and a return of service obtained. Mr. Tinti informed the Commission that, in addition, affadavits would have to be obtained. Affadavits are to be taken from Richard Morton and Brad Northrup. Cleti Cervoni is to be in charge of the ConCom's efforts regarding the Bottle Bill. Cleti state that she felt any effort should be done in con- junction with the work being done by Dolores Jordan. Cleti Cervoni noted that there would be a fall walk on Sunday, October 31, 1976. The meeting was adjourned at 11:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Susan Madison -- Minutes of Meeting11/C7 77--1 Page 3 1 Dick Morton has spoken to Ms. Dawson of the Conservation Law Foundation 1 and she thinks that the people doing t to file on Centralith the Salem Derby l J Warf are not under any g gaio Om- Business David DeVoe and Richard Morton are to work on the upcoming Warrant. It was noted that our telephone Credit Card Number is about to expire. David will apply for a new one. The Commission wasaloreminded that the City Tax number should be used when making Y purchases. e sewer Brian French outlined the order oorderConditions ConditionsPhase appliesftohportions improvements (File ,-18) . The of the Scenic Heights, McShay and Messina Interceptors . A motion was made by Donald Hunt to acceptthe er ofmotion Condition the as written by Brian French. Brad Northrup seconded unanimous. Next followed a discussionrelevant to the disbursement one ofbrochures different t brochures put together by onservation is an explanation of the WPA. and the other deals with the pre of open space in Salem. It was the sense of the Commission order to determine Wet- lands Maps should be placed over the Assessor's Wetlands in Protection Act. which of Salem's residents are affected by Landowners who live in these areas should be given the brochure con- Morton and Marc Sosnowski are to work on this. cerning the WPA. Richard Regarding the brochure on open space in Salem, it iwas tn the of the Commission that 100 copies of this brochure be pMorton branch of the library and 50 in and check each of on the possibility branches . Richaofrd this brochure is to deliver these brochures being sent out with the Water Bills . The deadline for Messrs. Mackey and Pelletier to file with the Salem ConCom was January 15th. Brad Northrup made the motion that the esist notice to Northshore Commission approve- the serving of the Cease &.D Dredging, Co. Paul Willis seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous. It was Paul Willis is to contact Bill Tinti. s noted that the Army Cores of Engineers has referred their information officeconcerning Messrs. Mackey and Pelletier to the Attorney G Mary Ellen Pelletier informed the Commission that she wasin Engineering ce ipt of a letter from the Department of Erecommends thatvironmental atheyingemi situation the Salem Board of Health. DEQ way the can. be handled at the local level, but they will assist in any Y Y Mary Ellen Pelletier is to set up a metfficerepresenand t.hetaArmy tives of the Board of Health, DEQ , Attorney General's rps of Engineers. i Minutes of Meeting Page 2 It was the consensus of those present that the proposed work does fall under the Wetlands Protection Act and a hearing date was set for Wednesday, June 1, 1977 at 7:30 P.M. Tony next spoke of a plan to place fill from the sewer project at Magrath Park in order to complete a baseball field that various people are interested in completing. Tony informed the commission that several potentially dangerous items including toluene have been dumped and filled over in the past in the area next to the baseball field. Jim Rienhardt expressed interest in viewing this site. It was the consensus of those present that the hearing for this proposed work should also be held the evening of June 1st. Tony added that if these plans are appo vm, he does owing when not knoountPo£taccept- will be completed since he has no way able fill needed will be available. The Commission next discussed the filling being done by Mr. Fantoni on Mr. Mackey's property. Tony informed the Commission that he had requested s until it had been cleared by either him that Mr. Fantoni not fill area or Ann Pelletier, who is an Environmental Engineer. The filling done on the Mackey propertyhas been done without the City Engineer's knowle hts edge. As City Engineer, Mr. Fletcher has oacit ageThegCommission is to further ca may have has to be in an advisory p Y investigate the situation on Leggs Hill Road. It was also felt that the Marblehead Conservation Commission should be informed of this matter. Notices and Communications It was noted that the Marblehead ConCom has written to Mr Welch, representing Mr. Mackey, informing him that hemust tll Rfile for a Wetlands Hearing relevant to any work he proposes on Legg H Also noted in these minutes was the fact that the Marblehead ConCom is also writing to the Department of EnvironmentalI Management cenic nomiRecreational the Forest River for inclusion in the inventory Rivers in Mass. A copy of the Con's letter nominating the Forest River as a Scenic River will be forwarded to the tM their letter. .oncom. The ConCom is also interested in obtaining a copy of Noedlehead tes oftthein the April areas utilizinghfill from he South EssexoSeweruconstrucdescriptions and 21st construction. Paul noted that the Committee on Natural Resources cwand authorize the Agriculture s urged the passage of House Bill number 553 Department of Public Works to dredge the North River basin and the Palmer's Cover Channel in the City of Salem. 1 _acs of Meetingl5�/17/77 ) Page 4 ownership of the land in question. Brian French informed the Commission that Councillor Nowak had spoken to him of the possibility of the Commission taking custody of 5.8 acres of City owner land located at Fort Ave. and Memorial Drive. Jim Rienhardt pointed out that management of this area would be difficult. Brad North- rup questioned who would be responsible for the policing of this area. Discussion was also held concerning the possiblity of the Commission assuming the custody of Fort Lee and Fort Pickering. Again doubt was expressed whether the Commission has adequate resources to assume these responsibilities. Paul Willis stated that in Brookline, there was a community clean up twice a year for the conservation land under their custody. In addition the Brookline Conservation Commission utilized CETA personnel for additional work that was needed. The Commission next considered the Tletland/Flood Hazard Special Permit application of New Englana Power. After a brief discussion, a motion was made by David DeVoe, seconded by Cleti Cervoni and unanimously voted that the Conservation Commission concurs with the project outlined in the application. Cleti Cervoni reported on the results of Spring Weekend. She reported on the program attendance as well as the final costs. Brian requested that income from the weekend also be noted. Support for the weekend had been good and the weekend was felt to have been successful. Discussions of various violations was next considered. Paul Willis is to write a letter to Mr. Derflinger of 26 Hardy St. regarding the fill he is putting in the Harbor. Marc Sosnowski reported that he had learned from Ann Pelletier of the Engineering Department that Mr. Mackey has made arrangements to obtain some non-reusable fill. Marc is to investigate where this fill will be placed. Brian French is to check on dumping reported by Councillor Grace by Ugo and Elio DiBiase at 56 Almeda St. The meeting was adjourned at10:25 P.M. Respectfully submitted, j L'i a 111inutes of 1/30/78 Page 3 - The public hearing requested by the Salem DPW relevant to the proposed installation of storm drainage pipes in the Vinnin Square area at the end of Linden Ave and Chandler Road was opened at 7:55 P.M.by Vice Chairperson Cleti Cervoni. Cleti read relevant sections of the Wetlands Protection Act to those present as well as a letter that has been received by the Commission from a number of sportsmen who utilize the area. 1 Richard Swenson of the engineering Department was present to explain that this was basically a reconstruction project which would replace an existing system that is not working because of a build up of sedimentation in the pipes. He further explained that they also planned to lower the water level of the pond at the rear of Stop and Shop (Pond D on the plan) to maintain a constant elevation of 29.36 feet. Richard also stated that the elevation of the pond easterly of Linden Ave. (Pond C on the plan) is 20.6 feet. He did say, however, that the measurements of these ponds were taken late last winter and so the levels may differ now. Brian French pointed out that the plans were not stamped or dated and that P the datum was not referenced. Walter Lezenski of the State DPW explained that the plans submitted to the commission were preliminary plans and that in all the years he has worked for the State DPW he has never seen a stamped plan. Brien questioned whether there was any one person who was responsible `\ for the Plans. Walter said no. Brian then questioned what frequency of storm was the plan designed for. Richard Swenson replied that it was designed for the 10 year storm level. Brian also questioned why no calculations had been submitted with the �\ Notice of Intent. Walter replied that he had never gone before a local ConCom before and didn't realize it was necessary. He also noted that Salem would be receiving $400,000 out of a total $650,000 that has been allocated for such projects. Relevant to the calculations, Walter stated that the flow would be 85 cubic feet per second from the water shed 'area of 54 acres. He also stated that the runoff coifficient would be 0.4 or 40%. Brianquestioned whether there would be curb inlets. Richard Swenson said f there would be and that they were shown on the plans. Brian then asked I if they would have catch basins . Richard Swenson replied that they would. Brian noted that current engineering journals were recomendations Jeng catch basins to be useless. Brian then asked if the pipes were "designed to run full." Walterthat they weren't. In discussing the various elevations marked on the plan, Richard S stated that the State bases their elevations on mean sea level. 1 i r Minutes of 1/30/78 Page 4 Brian also questioned why Pond D had to be lowered. Richard replied that cellar floors in the area experience frequent flooding. Brian stated that the Comnission 's concern is the �:ater quality of the ponds after the new drainage system is completed. Brian informed Walter and Richard that the Commission had had tests of the ponds taken and that Pond C is Class A water and that Pond D fulfills the qualifications for Class C. Brian stated that the commission wants Pond C to stay Class I A. Brian next questioned the depth of Pond D. Richard Swencnn quoted depths 1 of 13' , 15' and 11 ' in various parts of the pond. " Paul Millis questioned whether some 'chemical buffering effect' could be utilized so that the water quality of Pond C will be insured. Paul !!illis suggested that bocros could be used to control surface oil and gasoline runoff. Brian questioned what protective devices were planned to insure that children do not get trapped in the connecting pipe. :falter stated that was up to the Salem City Engineer. Brian suggested that a bar rack be installed. Brian then stated that he was still concerned about the water level of Pond D. He stated that it may turn out that the level of the pond should be increased not decreased. He asked that stakes be placed from elevation 25 For the ConCom to inspect before any final decision is made. Richard Sorenson agreed to do this. Attorney Burke, representing Thomas Nackey, was present to question some possible effects of this project on his clients property. He pointed out that the DP';I plan takes the runoff to Ilackey's pond and then ends. He stated that the level of the pond could be raised with resulting flood- ing of the dirt road beyond. ! Attorney Burke further stated that the City Engineer had promised hydraulics testing and that it had not been done. He also stated that the elevation of the pond is 20 and that the 2 pipes leaving the pond are at elevation 13 and 18 and that they are both presently blocked. He questioned whither these two pines could handle the outflow vdien there was a 60" pipe connecting the tyro ponds. Brian French stated that he understood that Mr. tiackey didn't want any more water hn k.yhat Mr. (lackey's land is Mall and could take an additional elevation of several feet. Walter ointed out that he 'and ,Joe ,Anlbo 1 d viewed the area in liov. and that tie pipes coning prom llacxey s odd v er not blocked at that time. Richard Stenson stated that the promised tests had not been done yet because of the weather but that they would be. } ,J Minutes of 1/30/78 Page 5 i Attorney Burke questioned what ;ould happen to the quality of the water. Brian stated that it was hard to tell but that there may be a temporary drop in the water quality. Richard Swenson stated that he 0ould recheck the slopeand the size of the pipes in Nackey's pond to discover their capacity and follow this to the Forest River. Walter stated that the dirt road beyond the pond could be dug and a pipe placed. A brief disg$sAgp, fol 9,z4P��as to,_coptinuing ,th- hearirlg;g9,t�ay ;qalcul ations would be made available as well as estimate of 100year flow rate, and the stakes that are to be placed in Pond D can be observed. A motion was made by Brian French and seconded by Paul Willis that the public hearing for the DPW- be continued on February 7, 1978 at 7:30 P.M. at One Salam green. The special meeting was adjourned at 9:45 P.hJ. Respectfully submitted, x0 N Conservation Commission y. Sabin, llussachusetts 01970 MINUTES OF M-ZTIJG_ FEEKUARY 21, 1978 1 The Conservation Commission met at One Salem Green on Tuesday, February 21, 1978 at 7:30 P.M. Commission members attending were: Cleti Cervoni, Jim Rienhardt, Brian French, Brad Northrup, Mary Ellen Pelletier, and David DeVoe. Commission members not attending: Paul 'Willis Chairman Brad Northrup opened the continuation of • the public hearing for the Department of Public Works at 7:35 P•i'1. with a quorum present. This public hearing is being held to consider the effects ofthe proposed Installation of storm drainage pipes in the Vinnin Square area at the end of Linden Ave. and Chandler Road. Brian French, having viewed the site, stated that the elevations for Pond D were above those indicated on the Plans and he asked Tony Fletcher, the City Engineer, the differential between mean low water and mean sea level. Tony replied that the difference was 4.8 feet. Brian stated that he still thought that the pond should be kept higher than had been proposed on the Plan. The City Engineer stated that he wanter to lower the Stop & Shop pond (pond D) to its historic elevation. He further explained that since the drainage ditch near Peter St. had been filled there had been more flooding in the area. As an example, he pointed out that Stop & Shop has had flooding in their basement. Brian then stated that the water level at Pond D appears to be suffi- cient. Brian French further pointed out that Mackey's Pond looks as if the pipes need to be cleaned out. Attorney Burke, representing Mr. Thomas Mackey, explained that the Town of Marblehead had installed an earthen dam years ago. Tony Fletcher added that he has been informed by Mr. Harris of the Marblehead Water Department that the 10" pipe located in Mackey's pond was installed by Marblehead in 1900. Tony further stated that a 14" cast iron pipe was installed where the road crosses near Mackey's pond in the fifties. Tony then suggested that the 10" pipe be eliminated and that the drainage be.,�Lllowed to flow in a natural Swale. Tony stated that he would further investigate this possibility before a final decision to remove the pipe was made. Brian then questioned what precautions were being planned to insure that children do not enter the proposed pipe between the two ponds. Tony noted that the necessary precautions will be taken and some device installed to prevent children from entering. Because of the inclement weather during the past month, the calculations and testing requested by the ConCom were unable to be done. Tony informed the commission that the tests that had been done showed that the PH count 4iinutcs of Meeting 2/21/78 Page 2 i for both ponds was 6.7 and that the fecal colorform was tested at 4 Darts. 'Tony also stated that his testing indicated no hydrocarbons present `, in either pond. Brian French stated that the testing that had been done by the Commission indicated a high chloride count. Brian then reviewed other results of the testing done for the Commission by Thomas Rich. Tony further explained that the pipe connecting the two ponds is going to be concrete. He added that even though stone would be more attractive, he felt the area of maintenance had to be considered as a deciding , factor. He did say, however, that the banks are ragged now and that cosmetic work would be done to hide the pipe as much as possible. Richard Swenson stated that calculations will be done before the next public hearing. He also stated that the difference in rates of precipi- tation between the 10 year storm and the 100 year flood do not vary as greatly as one might think. For the ten year storm the rate is 2 incies per hour and for the 100 year flood the 'rate is 3 inches per hour. A motion was made by Brian French and seconded by Cleti Cervoni that the public hearing be continued until P•4zrch 7, 1978 at 7:30 P.M. Chairman Brad Northrup called the regular meeting of the Conservation Commission to order at $:10 P.M. with a quorum present. Tony Fletcher briefly spoke to the Commission relevant to the clean up that is being done as a result of the recent storm. Tony explained that clean up has started relevant to the debris that was tossed up in the Leech St. area as well as other areas. He also stated that damage to Winter Island and the Plummer Home for Boys was extensive. He added that a complete photographic record of the storm damage in the coastal area is now being compiled. He stated that he would probably be able to give a presentation of damage done to docks and seawalls around the City by the next meeting. He stressed that much of the repair work should begin as soon as possible and asked that the Commission try to expedite matters as much as possible. Brad informed Tony that emergency procedures under the 3etlands Protection Act have been issued by the State and that they will speed up the filing process. Tony also stated that 'Winter Island is to be treated separately because there Is a question of whose jurisdiction the repair work falls under. He added that riprap as well as a good amount 8f fill will be necessary for Winter Island. Mary Ellen Pelletier questioned the damage to Fort Pickering. Tony replied that there was heavy damage to the ramp and the lighthouse. It was the consensus of the Commission that the minutes for the special meeting of January 30, 1978 be deferred until the next meeting. 4�4 i Minutes of May 2, 1978 Page 3 not funded by CETA. He further stated that a work crew with supervision provided by CETA personnel is now working in Harmony Grove Cemetery doing various maintenance work. Mr. Rogan pointed out that although each participant in the pro- gram spends two weeks in this supervised work crew as part of the screening process, the structure of the supervised work crew remains with the addition of new applicants. Mr. Rogan explained that the work crew is funded by CETA for a 30 hr. work week and that necessary hand tools are provided by CETA. Brad Northrup questioned whether a proposal had to be submitted as a part of this program. John Condon replied that there is a standard contract for sub-grantees and that no proposal is necessary. He also stated that he felt there was more of a chance of varied work through the Commission rather than the strictly maintainence jobs that the work groups are now performing. Brad Northrup explained that although the taking of land for the Forest River area has been approved by the City Council, only 308 of the landowners have formally accepted the value established for their land. The re- maining 708 of the owners are in a state of "legal limbo" at the present time. Brad continued by stating that the Forest River acquisition is still in its 'germ stage' and that it would be a few years before the Commission obtained complete cusdodianship of the area. Suggestions were then made to the CETA representatives of other city agencies that could be approached for possible work. Among the suggestions were the high school nature trail, the Plummer Home for Boys and Winter Island. Orders of Condition - DPW Discussion was held on the proposed Order of Conditions for the DPW Vinnin Square storm drainage project written by Brian French. Brian ex- plained that he had incorporated the conditions suggested by Hayley & Ward and outlined in a letter to Marbehead's Town Counsel, Attorney Lausier)11 into the Commission's Order of Conditions. As part of the proposed Order of Conditions is a condition that water tests be made on Pond C and D three times a year and that the Commission, in conjunction with the City Engineer, select the person, as well as the specific tests to be made. Brad Northrup questioned the costs of these tests. David Devoe estimated that the Commission's share of the costs would be approximately $225.00. Brian French noted that the Commission should remain committed to preserving the water quality of Salem and that by sharing the costs of the testing, the Commission would be assured of input in the future. 1 < Minutes of May 2, 1978 Page 4 A motion was made by David DeVoe and seconded by Brian French to issue , Orders of Conditions to the Salem Department of Public Works for work proposed in the Vinnin Square area which would include the following conditions: These Criers 0: Conlitioas art issued to prot0^.t ;:tet?: j::al-Ity for tale follow- in;: r__.-ons: i 1. i`.^.e Vi.nnin :-,quare drainaZe im'proverients ..'_v? _.P':1 deari7d:?o3 t0 be s'. n4. `'01nt to oablie Water suno,y", t0 ,'�'�_'O'a:ld 'dS'tar; sli'77l'y and to pra- �'c.,_tiJ:^. Of pollution since the _9caivinS 'i011"S atre—'s .rill (Ilar:3w Pond ;:he a.ODlication, D'E).5 Fila i!o. J -_=` 1-^_S in t_^.e 71st teen used as 2. rate_ nupply souro-e by the To;rl of role r3a3. The -nly cama fro:: ..ell an' t:1e area i3 stll'_ 471:1`L .1S �._ a_z: an e--_r� ncy uaier source. im-)rovementn have f:c?'n detsr-ined t0 „_ sij:.__icant to pro- tection of land containing shellfish i.^.__ i'ae 'rat=r :rill enter %'alem :[3roor bY ray of the Forest River Saltmarsh. The narsh is also Bart of a con- a` :)n ars?_ est%.h113!'loi under :?s9ac'niset`s .?"al :a'rs, ^hapten !S0, i. � . '_.. nre q ,+ ,rinalin inuare I_ra!n,;,c nystBn ils0.'.gr..'o into t.la 7o:'id behind to-, i 7nor a-=—l.;et (na-,aa Pond i1 thennl`_o3tlon, 3313 rile 0 . 'r �i_i� iT..,;.^.Oat a '7).i_1n connectl 0l to Tena "T:r lap -ropozed improvements .oaec ' both -)onus by a pipe, :1411 ara.in a lar land area and will i::creaze flo..r rat..^.s into the ponds and thereby in-_reale loadir.- of el-.1_a ani polhrtallts :r:1ic nay a. ershly a iecc Jona -)cads and tI -creat a .ar salt rah. -_-)ort on ,.rater quality 'prerarad for the ,,onserra.tioa :o-:::iission by _ober._^al %ssoc dates Jar;ary 19, 171% .'ll a racor- by the ..ity O"^.'a18[fi :.3alth 'e DB.rtnelit dated �:anuaZ',�T 9, 17i1r '-=-1� "yt�h-� the Plater quality ..n Pond "D" b3hi'.ld�. ]to-) _. w'.Io^. is?eri:<Sr':e is is lyast Class .. .. �.^. a, J. tha y)On!1 at ::e`^yrs :fill s _ro`ably '.7atter`1..::-!: 'Mass �. ".1e pr^^o]ed _-anlage irm-ovemento liave also 038:1d8tar _ tO oe significant to Tool. ^.ontrJl on tale land adjacent to the -Dona at ,�e ,�ru ll. As a rez,lt ' of t::=_ significance of the proposed `i fain Square, drai:il �r:rrovements, the follo_ri:a oonlitions are established: 1. 'rile :rater quality in either pond. shall not be less than Class 3 due to cosyt_action or. operation of the drainage system. Prior to the start of construction the Department of Public '-forks of Saler ant th3 Conservation shall establish a Street and ca.tc!1 basin cle:'_ni ,- 7ro;7 -1 for the drai..na.se area to maintain at least Class B water quality. This ^ro^an shall include `rater SamolinT to monitor the effectiveness of the c12—=i—n;; T?rO,g2aT.. The samplin„ Will include testi: for chlorides as Well Minutes of May 2, 1978 Page 5 as tests for subs�.wnc2s lrhich are _nC_1a4= .'_ t:13 Gass 2 definition. I Shrill ha.'ie at le-.3t 3 -an-)l9 nr +fin» Year i70'.3di_Lel;j Z'011o �n-� OT dur_n- Deriois 07 hi�A n,.no. _ O lO.r r'1 d �...1'y ?er_0"3, ��^ ' �`1 �t L1^_ 'il 1' r t(l n f oa o ^ 5. 1� loro rar. S�'lall JornO .juall," 0y t._c J..1,3 �.-IIt Oi J,.1-.1__ .._... t'1. Consarvati0: COPn135icn Of Salem ,1 1 S 7L711n;? s:'lall i'^cl'udo ot.he_r nollLtan.L:i and sh:n.11 done :oro freque3tly 1\ as re;_le3ted b}r the :arblehead 1--ter Dana ::ent. .=olen2ad's .tater � .)?rt ent shall '.le furaishe9. .,i.th all n tl12 event th?.t the arblonaad :later De-artrc.:t : ?tn_;aines that the C'.13C1 r;g2 of this Iraina,_;e Trate: is resull`_n—, .'•_n :=Iition3 -,;:11th jeo03rdiZe • th2 potential use of the well adjacent to Pond ""' as a public t+ester 3L'771y, the City of Sale.^.. s!lall conitr-:Ct : 'V.rsdr;. sjrste:n around or kL Ough 'on"0 rv.•• to rre Vent furthar contamination from anis source . O':tlet EtrUcturo from Pond "T' 3i1?.11 ..a._ c ,..__. 7.UP. elevation of ?7.3 ..,.,.li o,.._. lCVel . iClis outlot ,;t_UCV1ro 5:.,.111 -._ _ .`_d3d 4rith st07 Olaa_.3 r,OtC!2_ -^eV1CC `i.0 Pr0'lide 3 P..:^ail3 t0 ^_eYent '�h?^ of -,later =roi.1 po^7 " J" to Pond "C , i.1 the, event o f c Oo:::_?.:.n on o �o.r.d •rDrr i • At t'hi. O'.l t�?t of Pond rrnn an lun di3S:3 ec ni?? s.:111 �o i�19 t311e3 by .)e-)artmia!:Y of Publ-,c '.rork3 adjace.:' Io the _.._ . .^s lli" daanete_ 1 o.Jtict nine and Pc the aamo invert elevat-ion. "_lis -_ne ahall be :ai_tained `-y the 3,lom ]e_artrent of "ublic !or:..- . i i lar,,:e nin3 inlets Or Outlets shall ?. a bar r..:_3 i'.^stilled to nr3- . Vont children enterin., then. 5 T'i- s- ci f ications for the work shall i ilcltl'.3 a. __'l'J=r3nent to :linimi�_ se:li-,cnta.tion of the noni3 durin;, co-7, ruction of ara.i-:a 2 sy3te-:. ,he _eju_remont ;'hall be in actor? ulc wli h :'.ddcl_r?s _`.'or 3oi1 and 'Tater '7onservat,on in urbanizing Ar-aaL of united State8 Wenaztne t of '.;_iculture, :foil _:o:lsery t_on Ser:iee, AOril 1975. / The vote was unanimous and the Chairman declared the motion carried. Report on the 'Environment' Sub-Committee Brian informed the Commission that the final subcommittee report on the Environment is currently being revised by Cheri Cooper and will be presented to the Planning Board by James Rienhardt on May 4, 1978. Inspection It was the consensus of the members present that an inspection be held on May 14, 1978 at 10:00 A.M. of Mr. Thomas Hanlon's property at 60 Bayview Avenue. His sea wall was destroyed during the February storm. MINUTES OF MEETIN(.:; - May ,. 1980 - _ CLAYTON SMITH (con't) . The vote was unanimous and the Secretary (acting Chairman) declared the motion carried. BP GAS STATION A motion was made by Cleti Cervoni and seconded by Ray Lavender to approve the Order of Conditions for BP Gas Station with the following conditions: 1. All work shall be in accordance with the submitted plan "New Oil Tanks Installation for BP Gas Station, Salem, Massachusetts." prepared by Robert M. Rumpf & Associates dated 3/25/80. The vote was unanimous and the Secretary (acting Chairman) declared the motion carried. BUDGET It was noted by Sue Madison that the budget for the fiscal year 1980 was approved by the Mayor with the exception of an increase in salary for the position of Clerk. The city council will take action on the budget on Wednesday, May 14th at 8:00 P.M. The Commission will be represented. VINNIN SQUARE Mackey Pond Tony Fletcher has informed the Commission that the 18 inch pipe, installed by the DPW per Order of Conditions, adjacent to the existing pipe has caused the level of water to drop 6 feet. After a brief discussion, Commission members present agreed that an inspection of the property would be necessary in order to resolve the situation. SALEM HOSPITAL Salem Hospital has submitted various plans fo the Commission for review of proposed sites for improving additional parking space behind the hospital. After some discussion by Commission members, Brian French noted that the Commission would consider a proposal for construction of additional space only if it is out of the wetlands, which form part of the South River Flood Control Project. YCC Sue Madison noted that letters to the 24 selected enrolees have been sent and she has received a good response from the youths. She also noted that several resumes have been received for the positions of director and work crew supervisors. An interviewing committee will be set up to review the resumes and to made appointments for interviewing - the applicants. SPRING WEEKEND Cleti Cervoni noted that the invitation proof for the cocktail party has been received and approved. Minutes of Meeting - November '13 , 1980 7 JAMES GEMMA (continued) A motion was made by Ray Lavender and seconded by Brian French to close the hearing. The vote was unanimous and the Chairman declared the motion carried. MEETING Since the next regular meeting of the Commission was scheduled for November 27th (Thanksgiving) , members agreed to change the date to December 2nd. VINNIN SQUARE Tony Fletcher was present to discuss water and sewer problems i at Vinnin Square . He informed the commission that there has been a history of flooding problems in the Vinnin Square area and last year the Town of Marblehead and Swampscott got together with Salem to request, from the State, funds to replace the drainage system. He noted that the water drains into the Stop & Shop pond and then a pipe connects through Elinor Street and other streets to the Linden Avenue pond which in turn goes into a pipe and ultimately into the Forest River. From there it crosses the well heads into the old Marblehead water supply. Marblehead felt that they may have to utilize that water someday and were concerned that this runoff water would effect the water quality. Mr. Fletcher noted that everything drains into the pipe auto- matically, as it is a natural topographical situation. Mr. Fletcher informed the Commission that the water is being tested twice a month and no fecal coloform has registered. It has proven to be typical of runoff water - Class B - the ph is good and the oxygen is higher than expected. He noted that the water quality was well below the coloform bacteria requirements established by DEQE. Brad Northrup noted that the Order of Conditions required re- placing the outlet pipe . Mr. Fletcher informed the Commission that the 8 inch iron pipe was replaced with a 16 inch pipe which lowered the pond 8 feet. He also noted that the grates, which were also required, will be installed shortly. On another matter, Mr . Fletcher noted that he has been working with DEQE and Sue Madison relevant to the raw sewerage that comes into the drain behind Monroe Street adjacent to Sylvania. He has also found several other problems: 1. On the other side of Monroe Street there is a headwall that is filling with sewerage. This problem is being taken care of. 2. The city had a street drain with a fecal coloform count. It has been replaced by new lines. 3. Rainbow Terrace had a drain line that the State College had connected to the sewer line . The city has disconnected it Minutes of Meeting - November 13 , 1980 VINNIN SQUARE (continued) and re-routed it. 4 . Sylvania had a slight fecal coloform count due to a bathroom being connected to the system. It will be taken care of . J YCC Sue Madison asked for constructive ideas relative to the new YCC application which must be sumbitted by December 15th. Brian French noted that the commission has stopped the trail system about 1/3 of the way along the tracks towards Swampscott and next year the YCC group could extend it further along the road and down to the Carpenter and Costin trail . As well as that, he also suggested establishing a self-guided nature trail and to also produce some information that would allow people to use Swampscott, Salem & Marblehead conservation areas by way of plans and literature . A motion was made by Ray Lavender and seconded by Alice Akatyszewski to close the meeting. The vote was unanimous and the Chairman declared the motion carried. Respectfully submitted, Sheila Morin I `\\UN fp) fj Conservation Commission r. Salt-in. 11assachusctts 01970 l�'4d SSnC�\�. MINUTES OF MEETING February 9, 1984 } ' The Salem Conservation Commission met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room, on Thursday, February 9, 1984. Members present were Raymond Lavender, Philip Moran, James McDowell, and Alice Akatyszewski. Christopher Hagger, Glenn Yale, Richard Femino, and Associate Member Paul Willis were absent. Chairman Philip Moran called the meeting to order at 8:04 p.m. MACKEY--RIVERWAY ROAD Mr. Frederick Forbes of Hancock Survey was present to file a Notice of Intent for property at 9 Riverway Road (Map 31, Lot 325) which is a wetland area. He agreed the public hearing would be set for February 23, 1984. They intend to construct a single-family residence and some filling will be required. Mr. Forbes requested a waiver from the 15. 36 requirement for location of the basement floor and the consensus of the Board was that this would not be ac- ceptable. A site walk was scheduled for Sunday, February 12, 1984 at 9:00 a.m. to gain a better perspective on the plan. PICKMAN PARK A letter received by the Commission dated February 2, 1984, from Phyllis Ohlbrych was read. She claims that several conditions of the original Order have not been adhered to (see attached letter) . Jim McDowell stated he had visited the site earlier today and felt there were no specific violations beyond the posting of the DEQE sign. Mrs. Ohlbrych felt several boulders from the Dion's Yacht Yard site had been placed in the wetland area. Jim McDowell proposed the Commission inspect the area again after viewing the Mackey site on Sunday. Mrs. Ohlbrych asked if the Commission had ever researched the possibility of making this area available for purchase by the Audubon Society or other similar organization and Mr. Moran replied that the Commission had no say in what Mr. DiBiase did with his land beyond ascertaining that there were no wetland violations. The Commission had not been opposed to this project when it first was proposed. After the Commission has viewed the site again, Mr. Frederiksen, the Conservation Aide will brief Mrs. Ohlbrych on the results. SHETLAND A letter requesting an extension of the Order of Conditions which allowed Shetland to store bricks on the mudflats along the South River was read. The proposed marina has been postponed indefinitely, so no definite date for removal of the 1 r�i r Conservation Commission Salem. Massachusetts 01970 MINUTES OF. MEETING March 8, 1984 l The Salem Conservation Commission met at One Salem Green, second floor con- ference room, on Thursday, March 8, 1984. Present were Philip Moran, Alice Akatyszewski, Christopher Hagger, Glenn Yale, and James MacDowell. Also present was Conservation Aide Charles Frederiksen. Raymond Lavender, Richard Femino and Associate Member Paul Willis were absent. Vice-chairman Glenn Yale called the meeting to order at 8:10 p.m. Mr. Moran absented himself from the first part of the meeting. MACKEY--ORDER OF CONDITIONS Vice-chairman Glenn Yale gave a brief overview of the project for the benefit of those members of the Commission not present at the last meeting. Chris Hagger noted that according to the Minutes, the applicant agreed that the area was a tidal flat. Paul Willis had further identified the saltmarsh with the presence of spartina marsh grass. The Minutes further state there is an area of saltmarsh of approximately 1800 square feet present on the site. The Notice of Intent did not identify the area as a coastal beach, Mr. Forbes had stated he would leave that determination to the Army Corps; however, Coastal Zone Management, the area has been mapped as a coastal beach. Mr. O'Connor, an abuttor, had identified the area as a shellfish area. In order to further clarify this, a request was made to Cat Cove Marine Labs to survey the site. They did this and found several examples of shellfish (see attached letter) . Therefore, the site is composed of the following: a coastal beach, a coastal bank, a saltmarsh, and a shellfish area. On that basis, upon the motion of Christopher Hagger and second of Alice Akatyszewski, the application is denied. It was so voted (4 - 0) . DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE--ROBERT MARSILIA, LINDEN AVENUE Mr. Moran read the notice of the Determination which was published in the newspaper on March 1, 1984. Mr. Marsilia presented a certified plot plan showing the bulkhead of his proposed single-family dwelling to be 102' from the edge of the pond. Jim MacDowell asked if they have any plans for grading and Mr. Marsilia re- plied there will be no grading changes, they just plan to fill in the ruts. Jim MacDowell asked what type of landscaping they anticipate and Mr. Marsilia replied they will plant a lawn, but anticipate minor landscaping. Glenn Yale asked what the setback from the street is and Mr. Marsilia replied they will be 75' back from the street and 102' from the pond. t Minutes of Meeting--June 4, 1984 Page 2 There being no further discussion and no members of the public present wishing to speak in favor or in opposition to the proposal, upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of Alice Akatyszewski, the public hearing was declared closed. It was so voted. Upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of Raymond Lavender, the site will be inspected prior to our next meeting and the Order of Conditions written at that time. It was so voted. ERNEST DELPERO--EXTENSION OF ORDER OF CONDITIONS (#64-91) Attorney John Serafini Jr. was present to discuss the proposed extension of an Order of Conditions issued to Mr. Ernest DelPero for work on Webb Street. The proposal consists of the construction of condominium units on pillars sunk into the mudflat at Collins Cove. Mr. DelPero has done quite a bit of the work, but needs a little more time. He noted that the project has minimal impact on the wetland. James MacDowell asked how long Mr. Serafini felt Mr. DelPero needed and Mr. Serafini replied he felt they would be finished with the project and would be coming back to the Commission for a Certificate of Compliance by the end of the year. They would be amenable to an extension of less than a year. Upon the motion of James MacDowell and second of Alice Akatyszewski, the Order of Conditions was extended for six months. It was so voted. LEGG'S HILL POND Glenn Yale gave a brief update of the situation. It was reported by one of 1 the residents of Linden Avenue that the pond level had dropped dramatically \ and quickly. Upon inspection, it was noted that the outlet pipe which was placed in the pond as part of the Vinnin Square drainage project had been been removed, thus changing the invert elevation of the pipe and the level \ of the pond. The City of Salem has been mandated to keep the pipe free of \ debris and Mr. Mackey had been contracted by the City to perform this cleaning work. However, as an emergency measure, until such time as it could be as- certained what the appropriate level of the pond should be, the outlet was temporarily dammed up. The dam was removed by Marblehead subsequent to that time and was again dammed up upon order of the Commission on an emergency basis. Mr. Yale stressed that the blocking procedure was only temporary until it could be determined what action was appropriate. James MacDowell noted that the Commission has plans of homes built on the Linden Avenue side of the pond dated March 1983, which put the elevation of the pond at 27.2. Mr. Dana Snow of the Marblehead Water and Sewer Department stated that Marble- head had been maintaining the outlet pipe there for years in the absense of ' skating maintenance by Salem. The pipe is constantly being plugged up for etc. He stressed that the pipe must be maintained in order purposes, vandalism, / e i Page 3 Minutes of Meeting--June 4, 1984 to maintain the water quality of the pond which directly impacts their well fields. He disputes the 27.2 elevation and expressed concern that iwater quality would be adversely af- f the pond level were too high the ft the elevation should be four feet ected in their well fields. He fel \ lower than what now exists. According to the order of Conditions issued for the Vinnin Square drainage project, the 18" pipe should be laid along the existing 10" pipe. Therefore, the pipe which was removed was laid \ into the center of the pond and the invert elevation should be relatively clear. He added that in reality there should be no pond there at all. In the past the area was the site of many peat fires and the pond was only created as part of the drainage project. Philip Moran asked if the pond is within the boundaries of Salem and Mr. Snow replied in the affirmative. Glenn Yale asked if Marblehead had coor- dinated their efforts with Salem to maintain this pond propertly and Mr. Snow replied that Salem did not coordinate with Marblehead at all and the clean out of the pipe is practically a daily occurrence. Chris Hagger asked what exactly the water quality issue was and Mr. Snow replied that the well was constructed in the late 1800's and its use was discontinued in 1952. They have recently been under some pressuredfromwhathe MDC to reactivate the use of that water supply. Chris Hagg er askthe yield would be and Mr. Snow replied .75 mgd. Philip Moran asked what specifically Marblehead would like to see and Mr. Snow replied they would like / the elevation of the pond to be four feet lower than now. He isfurther the pond concerned with the fact that Linden Avenue residents are using for recreational pursuits--who is liable? He added that the use of fertilizers, 1i etc. could cause eutrification of the pond. Glenn Yale stated that those residents felt their property lines ran out into the water. Mr. Snow stated that pond in its natural state is practically non-existent. If they begin pumping from their well again, the level will drop dramatically. The elevation as it is now could seriously affect their water quality because if the water runs into their well too quickly, they will be pumping surfbe ace effect of water rather than ground water and asked whatthesize of thethe wellater was andlMr. affected as well. Chris Hagg ravel well Steve Benjamin of the Marblehead Water Department replied it is a gif 60' deep and 30' in diameter. Mr. Snow stated the infiltration will that take place. the elevation of the pond is too high, improper Chris Hagger felt this was not a concern. Mr. Snow stated that his consulting engineers had stated this concern. it Glenn Yale asked what the is Hation of er felthe well was Marblehead'sn oncernsowerepnotdnecess the same as the pond. Chris Hagg eeded more discussion. Mr. Benjamin raised sarily valid and felt the matter n tion of the well and Mr. Hagger agreed, but the issue of road salt contaimina added that this is always a problem. Glenn Yale asked what Mr. Snow's opinion of where the pipe should be placed would be and Mr. Snow felt it should follow the contour of the bottom of the pond. Glenn Yale asked if Mr. Snow felt the invert had been changed and Mr. Snow replied in the negative. 3� Minutes of Meeting--June 4, 1984 Page 4 Attorney William Rendle representing Mr. Mackey stated that the pond should be tested three times a year by the Conservation Commission. To his knowledge this had not been done, even though the Order of Conditions specified that it must be done. The pond must be maintained as Class B. Regarding the elevation of the pipe, if the 18" pipe is set adjacent to the existing 10" pipe at the same invert elevation, the elevation of the pond would be con- stant. He stressed that Salem must maintain this pond. Thev have a respon- sibility to Marblehead and to Mr. Mackey as an abuttor as well. Philip Moran felt the whole matter needed a great deal more study. There are several areas to look into and he suggested dealing with the matter again at our next meeting. Mr. Peach of the Marblehead Water Commission felt their engineer could provide input into this as well and it was agreed he should be invited. �1 Mr. Albert Tremblay of Linden Avenue stated that aerial photos of the area show the pond to be higher than it is now. The neighbors certainly do not wish to live on a swamp. It was further noted by the Commission that vegetation has established on the pond which make it subject to wetlands protection. Mr. Snow stated that if Marblehead begins to use their well again, there will be no pond. GIFFORD RUSSELL-FRANKLIN STREET A Cease and Desist order is still in effect on the property. Additional information from the Army Corps has just been received which does not shed too much more light on the situation. James MacDowell noted there is still some material being stored on the property which is in violation of the Order of Conditions. It was further noted there is a question of ownership of the property according to the Planning Board minutes of 1971. Mr. Russell replied he had a title search done and his land goes out to the center of the river. He added that the fill was there long before he owned the land. Glenn Yale noted that we still have no information as to what the actual contour should be. The Army Corps has indicated they would like all the fill material removed--not just the unsuitable fill; however, they will abide by the Conservation Commission recommendation. Mr. Yale feels that the Corps wishes the fill to be removed. He also pointed out that the Cease and Desist was not limited to the subsequent Order of Conditions. The Order of Conditions did specify removal of unsuitable fill materials, but was issued for a proposed marine railway which now is not going to be constructed. Mr. Yale feels all the fill should be removed. Alice Akatyszewski agreed. Mr. Russell felt a great deal of the fill material had already been removed. Upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of Alice Akatyszewski, a set of drawings at 20 scale shall be provided to the Commission defining what is currently on the site so that a definition can be made as to how to best handle the situation. It was so voted. \�\U7 1 Conservation Commission r. Salem. Massachusetts 01970 MINUTES OF MEETING June 14,1984— �y The Salem Conservation Commission met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room, on Thursday, June 14, 1984. Present were Philip Moran, Alice Akatyszewski, - Raymond Lavender, James MacDowell, Glenn Yale, and Christopher Hagger (8:15 p.m. ) . Also present were Conservation Aide Charles Frederiksen and City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh. Richard Femino and Associate Member Paul Willis were absent. Chairman Philip Moran called the meeting to order at 8:04 p.m. LEGG'S HILL POND i Chairman Philip Moran gave a brief summary of the discussion which took place at our previous meeting regarding the issue of the pond known as Legg's Hill Pond. As a result of sections of outlet pipe being removed from the end of the pond, \� the level of the pond had dropped dramatically. As a temporary measure, the Conservation Commission had ordered the placement of an earth dam to maintain the water level in the pond until such time as the proper outlet pipe could be in- stalled. There has been some argument as to what the actual level of the pond should be and the discussion of our last meeting was continued until this evening so that certain legal and engineering aspects could be researched further. Mr. Moran had researched the original deeds to the property and noted that Marble- F head purchased the pond some years ago, but it is located entirely within the boundaries of Salem. According to definitions noted in the wetlands regulations, / the area is defined as a pond and as such is subject to the protection of the Conservation Commission under the Wetlands Protection Act. The Commission will attempt this evening to define the issues and reach an equitable solution to determine the level of the pond which will protect wetlands vegetation in the area, provide the aesthetics the neighbors of the area had believed were part of their property, and satisfy the concerns of the Marblehead Water Department as well. Mr. Dana Snow, Superintendent of the Marblehead Water and Sewer Department, noted that the original 10" pipe that was set in the pond in 1923 was placed at a certain invert elevation. When the Order of Conditions for the Vinnin Square Drainage Project was issued a larger pipe (18" was ordered, 16" was installed) was to be placed at the same invert elevation as the 10" pipe. He introduced Mr. Charles I Miller who is a consulting engineer for the Town of Marblehead. i Mr. Miller is from the firm of Haley and Ward. He noted the invert elevation Of the 10" pipe was 23.31 and the 16" pipe was 23.13. The pond surface presently is 27.4, so the pond is now 4' above the invert of the drainage pipe. i Philip Moran asked why the original pipe was placed there and Mr. Miller replied that this was done when their 14" water main was installed up Legg's Hill Road. / The 10" pipe accomodated a brook which ran through the property. Minutes of Meeting--June 14, 1984 Page 2 Philip Moran asked what the Town of Marblehead wished the Conservation Commission to do and Mr. Snow replied that it was the feeling of the Water Commissioners in Marblehead that the pond should be restored to its original level. This would mean a drop in level of approximately four feet. He also raised the issue of liability. Philip Moran felt the liability issue was not within the jurisdiction of the Con- servation Commission, but he also noted that he has never been aware of a municipality being held liable for a drowning in a municipal water area. He added that even if the pond were lowered, the problem of liability still exists. The Conservation Commission must first consider the state law which governs this wetland. Glenn Yale asked when was the last time Marblehead pumped from their well in the area and Mr. Snow replied in 1954-55. He added that Marblehead had to work very hard to maintain the elevation due to the accumulated debris and vandalism. Glenn Yale asked if the level of the pond ever reached the level of the invert of the 10" pipe and Mr. Snow replied he felt the level was maintained, but periodic damming up of the pipe was allowed to happen to accomodate skaters, etc. James MacDowell noted he had found the elevation of the pond to be 28.0 on Wednesday. Mr. Miller had done his elevation calculations on Monday, June 11. Mr. MacDowell noted that the Commission had in its possession a plan which took the elevation of the pond in March of 1983 and placed it at 27.2. He raised the issue of whether the invert had changed and Mr. Snow felt that was a possibility. He added, however, that the drainage pipe at Vinnin Square lays 2' higher. Mr. MacDowell noted that according to the Linden Avenue plan to which he referred earlier, the outlet shows a high water mark stain at 27.5. This is fairly clear f/ evidence that the level of the pond was at this elevation for a prolonged period of time. Mr. Snow felt this could be due somewhat to the continued blockage problem. James MacDowell felt it would be difficult to justify lowering the pond level by three to four feet. Chris Hagger raised the issue of water quality, which seemed to be of concern to Marblehead at our last meeting. Mr. Snow stated that the consensus was now that .the elevation as it stands now would not affect water quality. Mr. Miller added, however, that any further rise in the level could have a detrimental effect. Chirs then asked if there was no detrimental effect on water quality, what difference would it make? Mr. Snow again raised the issue of liability. The Order of Conditions issued in 1978 does set the invert elevation of the pipe at the same level as the existing 10" pipe, therefore the level of the pond should be lower. Chris Hagger felt he was not clear as to the liability issue and Mr. MacDowell added that if any legal action was ever instituted, it would be "messy" as there are so many owners of the property. Mr. Miller felt that whatever reason the pond ele- vation is higher, some type of official sanction should be made. i i Glenn Yale clarified the dam situation. It was done as a temporary measure to preserve the level of the water that is presently there until such time as i a determination could be made as to the appropriate level. j Minutes of Meeting--June 14, 1984 Page 3 Mr. Miller further added that the Town of Marblehead has made a great deal of ef- fort to maintain that outlet pipe in the absence of any maintenance from Salem. If any liability questions should arise, at least Marblehead could show that these efforts had been made. He added that if the pond was lowered to the "proper" level, there would actually be two small ponds. Jim MacDowell noted that if the Town of Marblehead wishes to bring the level of the pond down to four feet less than it is now, it would clearly require a filing of a Notice of Intent. Attorney William Rendle, representing Mr. Mackey, asked what identifiable vegetation existed in the pond area which needs protecting? If that vegetation became established as a result of a recent rise in the level of the pond and occurred due to a lack of maintenance of the outlet pipe by the City he feels it would ; fall into a different category than vegetation which exists as part of a wetland. The increased elevation of the pond has taken some of Mr. Mackey's land and he feels this loss of land should be addressed. / I Jim MacDowell noted that we are not dealing with just wetlands vegetation--the pond is defined in the Act as a resource area which is protected by the Wetlands Protection Act. Vegetation is only one criterion. Also, the regulations make no distinction as to whether the pond came into existence. We must deal with it as it now exists. Mr. Rendle replied that the original Order of Conditions created a balance of interests, which are not all served equally at present. i Mr. Moran felt that negligence in maintenance was not a valid argument. He asked if Mr. Mackey had an explanation as to why sections of pipe were removed and Mr. j Mackey replied that the sections that were removed were not part of the original installation. They had been placed there by Marblehead in an effort to cut back on the vandalism and when he went in there to clean out the pipe, his equipment inadvertently dug up those additional lengths. Mr. Rendle added that if the City had maintained the pipe as they were supposed to, this would not be a problem now. Philip Moran noted that there is strong evidence that the level of the pond should be 27. 3. Glenn Yale added that we also have aerial photos of the area taken in 1968 which show the pond at an equivalent level as presently. Dana Snow asked if there were any plans available from the state which set the appriprate level of the pond and Mr. MacDowell replied they had construction draw- ings only--this is why there is such a dilemma. Glenn Yale asked what benchmark Mr. Mackey used and Mr. Randle replied he used the old 10" pipe as a guide. This was explictly explained in the Order of Conditions. Attorney Gary Sabkiider, representing residents of the neighborhood, asked Mr. Miller if they had any topographical plans which showed the pond level being so low as to create two small ponds and Mr. Miller replied in the negative. Some / discussion ensued as to the benchmarks used in calculating the invert elevations. Mr. Miller noted that the top of the hydrants in the well fields were 21.41 and 17.44, using "Marblehead base." Minutes of Meeting--June 14, 1984 Page 4 ` Mr. Sackrider asked if Marblehead felt there would be reduced liability if the level of the pond was lower and Mr. Snow stated that by making the pond level higher, the recreational aspects of the pond are enhanced. Glenn Yale asked how Marblehead would feel about a level of approximately 27 or so? Mr. Snow replied that some permanent type of structure would have to be installed ! and he wondered who would bear the cost for this? Mr. MacDowell noted that the City of Salem will design and build this structure and it would then be the responsibility of the City of Salem to maintain. As to the mechanism of how this is achieved regarding a Notice of Intent or a modification of the original order, this has yet to be worked out. Upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of Alice Akatyszewski, the City Engineer will be requested to design and install an outlet structure which will maintain 1 the level of the pond at 27, 3. It was so voted. / HEWITT--ORDER OF CONDITIONS (#64-103) James MacDowell abstained from any participation in this project. Conservation Aide Charles Frederiksen visited the site this past week and noted that the only issue of any real concern was the presence of debris--stumps, limbs, etc. on the site. The proponent is willing to remove this as a condition of approval. Mr. Frederiksen felt there should also be some erosion control em- ployed on the bank behind lot 345. Upon the motion Alice Akatyszewski and second of Christopher Hagger, the Order of Conditions will be written referencing the presented plan, requiring that all debris be removed, and that erosion control measures be employed behind lot 345. It was so voted. RAGONE A summary of the illegal fill which was found to be stored on Mr. Ragone's property was read to the Board (attached hereto) . It was noted that upon the serving of the Cease and Desist, Mr. Ragone voluntarily locked his gates and cooperated fully with the Commission. The fill material came originally from New England Power and there is positive evidence that it contains petrochemical and expert opinion that it also contains coal ash. Both are unacceptable materials for a wetland area. Upon the motion of Alice Akatyszewski and second of Raymond Lavender, the fill material must be removed within fourteen days. It was so voted. MOOSE Mr. William McLaughlin of the Moose Lodge was present to seek permission from the Commission to begin work in the area away from where the culvert and manhole are to be constructed. Differing opinions as to whether the pipe under Highland Avenue has been cleaned or not have been received from the state DPW and this will be reserached further. It was noted, however, that a state DPW permit must be obtained for the Commission's perusal before any construction or filling takes place according to our Order of Conditions. The matter will be taken under advisement and will be addressed at our first meeting in July. Minutes of Meeting-October 25,.1984--f Page 2 , - - 1. Work shall conform to plan entitled, " dated and reviewed and approved by Director of Public Services Paul S. Niman. 2. The location of any proposed cross culverts in the new sewer easement shall be approved in the field by a designated representative of the Conservation Commission prior to construction. 3. Proper erosion control procedures shall be practiced as specified in the Order of Conditions issued for Pickman Park/Salem Acres, Inc., DEQE File #64-32. 4. Movement of vehicles and excavated areas shall be limited to the 20' easement area shown on the plan. This includes storage of all construction materials. 5. Any excess construction materials from the project shall be removed from the site. 6. Sideslopes abutting existing wetland areas shall be finished with wetland soils excavated from the site. It was so voted. MACKEY Conservation Aide Charles Frederiksen gave the board a brief overview of the situation on Legg's Hill Road. Work was observed in what could be described as a sensitive wetland area. Following assurances from Mr. Mackey's attorney that no work would take place in the buffer zone, it was determined by the Commission that the top of the ledge constituted an inland bank. Therefore, all the work Mr. \ Mackey was performing was within the buffer zone. Subsequently, an Enforcement Order of issued to Mr. Mackey ceasing further work on the site. ' Mr. Timothy O'Keefe, an attorney representing Mr. Mackey, cited a section of the wetlands regulations, Section 10.54, part 2 c which deals with the definition of a bank, which he felt refuted the Commission's determination of the actual boundary i of the bank. Mr. Mackey has several contractual agreements to fulfill with gravel orders and he would like to reach some kind of compromise with the Commission so that these committments can be fulfilled. Mr. Mackey would like to "split the difference" between the the level of the invert on the pond and the cast iron pipe i the City maintains and excavate above that level. Mr. O'Keefe further noted that Mr. Mackey had been requested by the Director of Public Services to provide the manpower for the installlation of a new control structure for Legg's Hill Pond. Mr. i Mackey would be happy to help the City in this matter. In return, he would like some assistance in reaching an equitable compromise so he can fulfill his J contractual agreements. f Minutes of Meeting--October 25, 1934 Page 3 Jim MacDowell noted that the work that Mr. Mackey is proposing would certainly require a filing of a Notice of Intent. The Commission would require a proposed re-grading plan and erosion control procedures, as well as a long-term plan as to the finishing off of the site. Mr. O'Keefe replied Mr. Mackey has every intention of filing, but would like an interim agreement regarding the removal of gravel from the pit. Jim MacDowell raised the issue of the potential of the possible collapse of the bank and Mr. Mackey replied he uses extreme care in doing the backhoe work on the site. Nothing has gone or will go into the pond. j i Following some further discussion, it was agreed that the Commission will inspect the site on Saturday morning, at 9:30 a.m. In the meantime, Mr. Mackey will stake out a 100' line and the Commission can make a decision as to the extend of work Mr. Mackey can perform. NEW ENGLAND POWER COMPANY--EXTENSION OF ORDER OF CONDITIONS # 64-85 Upon the motion of James MacDowell and second of Raymond Lavender, the Order of Conditions for New England Power was extended for one year. It was so voted. Vice-chairman Glenn Yale assumed the Chair at this point in the meeting. RICHDALE Upon review of the submitted calculations, a motion to accept was made by James MacDowell and seconded by Christopher Hagger. It was so voted. MINUTES Upon the motion of Raymond Lavender and second of Christopher Hagger, the minutes of October 11,1984, were approved. It was so voted. OLD BUSINESS Conservation Aide Charles Frederiksen gave the Commission an update on the situation with Ragone. The hazardous material has been removed and the clean fill has been spread. The gate is locked and a representative of the Commission must inspect stockpiled fill material prior to placement. Upon the motion of James MacDowell and second of Christopher Hagger the Cease and Desist Order was lifted. It was so voted. Charles Frederiksen had visited the Conservation Area for two specific reasons recently. Muskrats in the Area had been observed to be behaving in an unusual manner. It was the general opinion of the board that the blasting taking place in the area could be causing this problem; however, Mr. Frederiksen will contact the MSPCA for their input. Minutes of Meeting-=November 8,_1984 Page 2 Upon the motion of Alice Akatyszewski and second of Glenn Yale, the proposal was determined to have no significance on the Wetlands Protection Act. It was so voted. PUBLIC HEARING--SIDNEY GERBER, SOPHIA ROAD Chairman Philip Moran read the notice of the public hearing. Mr. Moran further directed that the record indicate no abutters in favor of or opposed to the project were present. This involves the proposed construction of a single-family dwelling on Sophia Road. The lot slopes steeply toward an abutting street and there is some concern for the stability of the bank and the drainage to the brook behind the property. Both James MacDowell and Glenn Yale expressed some concern for the location of a turnaround. If the Planning Board, Department of Public Works, or Fire Department should require a different configuration for the turnaround, the concerns of the Conservation Commission would be changed. The Commission would also like to see a detail of the proposed drainage swale--some concern was expressed as to the construction. Large stones could be dislodged during a heavy storm event. Glenn Yale asked where the edge of the new fill will be located and Mr. Gerber stated he does not intend to place any fill at all. The Commission requested that his plans be amended to show a profile through the house to ascertain the finished contours. Therefore, the consensus of the Commission was to continue the hearing until the following information is provided: Stability calculations for the bank; detail of proposed drainage swale; profile of the proposed finished grades. Upon the motion of James MacDowell and second of Alice Akatyszewski, the hearing will be continued until our next meeting on December 13, 1984. It was so voted. FIELD INSPECTION REPORT The Commission members inspected the Legg's Hill property and Broadway properties of Mr. Mackey and an agreement was made to allow Mr. Mackey to continue with the excavation of gravel on Legg's Hill Road. Further, Mr. Mackey will clean up the site off Broadway and it will be inspected again prior to our next meeting. MINUTES Upon the motion of James MacDowell and second of Alice Akatyszewski, the minutes of October 25, 1984, were approved. It was so voted. 1 MINUTES OF MEETING r pril 11, 198_5 The Salem Conservation Commission met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room, on Thursday, April 11, 1985. Present were Philip Moran, Glenn Yale, Paul Geoghegan and David Lash. Raymond Lavender and Christopher Hagger were absent. Chairman Philip Moran opened the meeting by welcoming David Lash to the Commission. He then called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING--SALEM SUEDE Chairman Moran read the notice of the public hearing. Mr. Bruce Poole of SP, Inc. , representing Salem Suede, was present to discuss Salem Suede' s proposal to construct a pre-treatment facility for wastes generated by their leather business. This pre-treatment is mandated by State and Federal law and must be in place by November of 1985. \ Mr. Poole stated they have submitted plans and specifications to SESD and have been approved to discharge into their system following the treatment process they plan on-site. David Lash asked the nature of the SESD review and Mr. Poole explained the pre-treatment proposal further: 1. Wastewater from the tannery flows by gravity to a pump area. In the pump pit the pH is monitored and the wastewater is agitated to prevent settlement of solids. 2. The wastewater is then pumped to a mixing chamber and combined with alum and polymer to assist in the settling out of solids. 3. Solids are settled out in a settling tank. The sludge is removed from the bottom of the tank and the remaining wastewater is monitored prior to discharge into the sewer system. 4. The sludge is pumped into twin storage tanks and is de-watered on site. Presently, all the tanneries in the area are looking into a central sludge facility. Once the sludge is de-watered, the water removed is put back through the mixing process again. Sludge is disposed of at a central facility off-site. Mr. Poole noted that the tanneries have a July 15 deadline to find a central de-watering facility, but are building in plans so that they can J1 de-water on site if plans for this central facility do not materialize. -3- Upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of David Lash, the public hearing was closed. It was so voted. Upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of Paul Geoghegan, the Order of Conditions will be drafted and signed at our next meeting pending the submission of uplift calculations for the tanks and a copy of the SESD permit. It was so voted. DETERMINATION OF APPLICABILITY--WITCH CITY CAB Chairman Philip Moran read the notice of the Determination. Ms. Karen Burke, owner of Witch City Cab, and Mr. Alex Willis, General Manager, were present to discuss their proposal for the operation of a taxicab repair service to the rear of the Richdale property at 3 Bridge Street. Their lot is located directly on an embankment on Beverly Harbor. Mr. Willis presented a sketch of the area. He noted that no major repair work was done on the site--just fan belts, lightbulbs, etc. Glenn Yale asked if any engine removal had taken place and Mr. Willis stted they take engines out of cars slated for the junkyard. Glenn Yale asked if any motors were being repaired on the site and Mr. Willis replied there are three presently under repair. Glenn Yale asked if any oil changes were done on the property and Mr. Willis replied in the negative. Glenn Yale raised the issue of accumulated tires and stockpiled engines and batteries on the embankment. This was in violation of the Wetlands Protection Act. Photographs of the area were submitted which had been taken by the Fire Inspector. These confirmed the stockpiling of engines and batteries. Upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of Paul Geoghegan, the Determination was found to be positive and a Notice of Intent must be filed. Ms. Burke and Mr. Willis will attempt to clean up the area and will return to the Commission in two weeks. WETLANDS VIOLATIONS Photographs of three areas which have caused some concern to the Commission were discussed: 1. Linsky: It has been observed that Mr. Linsky has not removed the fill stored on his property as promised. He will be asked to attend our next meeting to address this issue. 2. Mackey: David Lash noted the concern for Mr. Mackey' s Broadway property is the stability of the bank. Rather than clearing the debris j away from the wetland area as requested by the Commission, Mr. Mackey `Jl covered it. -4- Upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of David Lash, a Cease and Desist order will be sent to Mr. Mackey and a plan of clean-up will be drafted for Mr. Mackey to follow. 3. StoryStreet: The owners of the abutting lots to the area where ere S dumping has been taking place at the end of Story Street will be notified and a clean-up plan will be discussed. OLD/NEW BUSINESS Regarding some trail work in the Conservation Area to discourage trailbikers, the Phoenix School will be contacted to see if they will help with manpower. David Lash will contact Signworks for a quote on a new sign for the Conservation Area. The Conservation Spring Cocktail Party will be held on Friday, May 10, at Philip Moran' s residence. Upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of Paul Geoghegan, Order of Conditions #64-11 issued to Joseph Ragone in 1981, was rescinded. This Order was supersceded by Order #64-73, which was recently modified to allow the construction of a warehouse storage project by David Ebershoff. MINUTES Upon the motion of Paul Geoghegan and second of Glenn Yale, the Minutes of March 28, 1985, were approved. It was so voted. There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn. Having passed unanimously, the meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dale E. Yale I I k MINUTES OF MEETING_ �— r`'uly 11 , 1985 / Saler ConsErvation Commission met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room on Thursday, Max, 23 , 1985. Present were Philip Moran, Glenn. Yale . Raymond Lavender, Harry Takis , David Lash, Paul Geoghegan and Staff Advisor Dale Yale. Chairman Philip Moran called the meeting to order at 7 : 40 F .M. PUBLIC HEARING — MAYNARD PLASTICS — SWAMPSCOTT ROAD Chairman Moran read the notice of the public hearing. The purpose of this hearing is to explore the Effects of tine construction of a 100,000 so. ft . building with attendant parking to }euse Maynard Plastics Corp. This building is proposed for a parcel of land on Swampscott Road, which is within a wetlands area . 'ehn Serafini , attorney representing The Fafard Companies , was present to discuss plans for the project . A contract has been signed between Howard Fafard and Maynard Plastics to construct a new facility for Maynard on 15 acres of a 43 acre parcel . Mr. Fafard has agreed to have a building ready for occupancy by May of 1986. He stated that some vegetation and a small stream exists on the site but that by repositioning the building , it would be angeled so as not to touch any wetlands areas. r . Howard Fafard referred to a large topcgraphical map Of the area and _ rated the building has been angeled on the site to preclude any filling of a wetland. it :. ill be necessary to cross the stream at the front of nrooerty for access, necessitating installation of The , _lding is sited so the office portion of the business is .`zcir.g up .. Swaroscott Road toward Highland Avenue. To the rear of the property chemical storage tanks will be positioned and they propose to submerge the tanks_ to conseal their visibility from Swampscott Road. Loading docks will be located to the rear of the building and natural vegetation will remain in the front . P. small pond at the front of the property will remain untouched and part of an upland area at the front of the property is proposed for a retention pond. Mr. Jim Merloni, an engineer, presented a drainage plan to the Board and noted that his calculations indicate the need for a retention basin to compensate for the two small culverts presently existing on Swampscott Road. His calculations indicate the use of this retention basin will decrease runoff by 50% during peak storm periods . Philip Moran asked what the dimensions of the building would be and j Howard Fafard replied that it would be 163,000 sq. ft. , (500' x 160' ) . Mr. Moran asked about the impact of increased runoff on neighboring properties and Mr. Merloni replied they will retain the majority of the increased runoff. J Page • Glenn Yale asked if the water level and retention de=_;gn of the Ebershoff project was considered ir. calculating t'r.is design and Mr. "Ierlor.i replied in the affirmative . Glenn 'i ale asked »hat preconstruction runoff coefficients were and Mr . Merloni replied 57 cubic feet per second. Mr. Yale asked what would be done about the existing reinforced culverts and Staff advisor Dale Yale replied that the City would have to address this. Mr . Merloni added that the proposed *retention area would somewhat improve that situation. Dale Yale asked what type of control structure would be installed and Mr. Merloni answered they probably would use an open pipe which would be the easiest type of structure to maintain. Glenn Yale asked what elevation the top cf the retention pond would be and Mr. Merloni calculated that elevation to be approximately 90. Glenn Yale noted the slope of the berm on the retention pond could encroach or neighboring property. Glenn Yale further a'ues.t.oned how the slope would be stabilized and Mr. Fafard stated they would likely rip—rap the slope. Further , the slope is proposed to 'oe at 1 : 1*- Philip Moran inquired as to how many employees Maynard Plastics has in their employ how many parking spaces were available to them and where • parking was available on the site . Mr. Fafard answered chat there are approximately 250 employee=_ , 125 parking spaces. and that parking will be available on both sides of the entrance to the building. lc was the consenus of the commission that :his was too few parking spaces . ";r . Moran asked if parking would also be available along Swampscott Road and Mr. Fafard stated that the Planning =epartment would have to address this. Glenn Yale asked what type of che-.'_cais would be stored in the tanks and Mr . Fafard stated he would provide that ':'formation. Because of the need to facilitate this project as quickly as possible , Chairman Moran asked David Lash and Glenn Yale to serve on a sub—committee to work with the developer in obtaining all necessary information to draft an Order of Conditions. Following some discussion, a motion was made by Glenn Yale and seconded by Raymond Lavender to continue this public hearing until the next meeting. It was so voted. WETLANDS VIOLATIONS UPDATE ill , Staff Advisor Dale Yale Regarding-Mr. Mackey' s property on Legg' s H had received a request from Mr. Mackey' s attorney to remove more gravel from the site. It was agreed the commission had acted in good faith by allowing Mr. .Mackey to remove in the agreed upon area. Therefore , he will be notified that no; further removal can take place until a formal filing with the Commission is made. l ISI Page 3 — The Enforcement Orders for Mr . Ferris and Mr. ":ackev ' s land on Broadway have been recorded at the Registry of Deeds . f� APPROVAL OF MINUTES Upon the motion of Raymond Lavender and second of David Lash, a motion was made to approve the minutes of June 27. It was so voted. OLD/NEW BUSINESS Philip Moran noted that the annual Conservation Commission report will be due in September. The MBTA will be notified that the Commission feels the storage of branches cut from the trees along the railroad line within a wetland area is a violation of their Order of Conditions. Following our next meeting , the Commission has been invited to Philip Moran' s house for a social gathering. There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn. Having passeo unanimously, the meeting was declared adjourned at 9 : 20 P.M. Respectfully submitted . Nance Svazt MINUTE__OF-MEETING - j June 27, 1985 The Salem Conservation Commission met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room on Thursday, June 27, 1985. Present were Raymond Lavender, David Lash, Paul Geoghegan, Harry Takis Martha Hogan and Vice Chairman Glenn Yale. Also present was Staff Advisor Dale Yale. Philip Moran was absent. Vice Chairman Glenn Yale called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING - CITY OF SALEM - IMPROVEMENTS TO FRANKLIN PARK Vice Chairman Yale read the notice of the public hearing. Andrea Fish, Assistant Director for Development of the Salem Planning Department , was present to discuss specific improvements planned for Franklin Park. First , approximately 425 feet of loose rip-rap will be placed along the shoreline of the park at a 2: 1 slope for stabilization purposes and erosion control . The rip-rap willbe located approximately three feet from the shoreline. Andrea Fish noted that no specific permit for this work will be needed from the Army Corp, but they will have general review over the proposal . She noted that this is known as a "Nationwide Army Corp Permit". Second, a four foot wide jogging path, made of sand and bark mulch, will be constructed around the park. Six exercise stations will be installed along the path and willrequire small footings which will be done with an auger and will be filled with crushed stone and concrete. Andrea also asked for a specific recommendation from the Commission regarding the location of the path in relation to the shoreline. Glenn Yale asked why the rip-rap was only 425 feet in length and Andrea replied they plan to place the rip-rap only in the areas where it is needed. The remainder of the shoreline is gently sloping. Upon the motion of Raymond Lavender and second of Harry Takis, the public hearing was declared closed. It was so voted. Upon the motion of David Lash and second of Harry Takis, an order of conditions will be drafted referencing the plan presented this evening and including the following additional conditions: 1 . A maximum of one foot of fill (six inches of sand and six inches of bark mulch) will be used in the construction of the jogging path. l -2- attraction for children and there could be a serious accident . . Councillor Nowak concurred with this concern. Glenn Yale asked if the level of the beach had dropped dramatically placed on the beach and the general consensus was since sand was last that there was a serious shift in the sand and mo s=avel that remained was in one corner. The rest of the beach is now g the sand to be placed and Danny Glenn Yale asked the grain size of Mackey , contractor for the project , felt it was finer than what is presently there. Glenn Yale felt the wetlands regulations addressed the issue of beach maintenance very clearly and that this type of "beach nourishment" was clearly allowed. An informal poll of those present (approximately 25) showed no one was % opposed to the spreading of the sand. hts ded in Eileen Phipps noted for the record thatltthepbeancyr.dlghey wereur not taxed deed were not included in the Ph ot ipp P on them. David Lash felt the problem was twofold: One, is sand appropriate regardless of ownership, and two, who actually owns the beach, and if ConsLand Trust deed is correct , conservation Comm the Cos ission the Co s e the deed restrictions and allow placement of sand. sup Philip Moran suggested the sand be spread on the 52 ' which is in front of the Phipps ' home and no further sand should be placed until the ownership is determined . Glenn Yale felt the wetlands regulatiicns soecifically addressed the sand issue and the maintenance project should David Lash felt there was the issue of whether be allowed to proceed• the wetlands Protection Act supercedee ewas oftimporttance . consider . Harry Takis felt the safety issue Mrs. Jane Doyle stated she believed that the wetlands Protection Act had jurisdiction over any wetland issue regardless of ownership. Glenn Yale concurred, noting the wetlands Protection Act has final jurisdiction over all wetland areas regardelss of the ownership. of. Harry Takis and second of David Lash, it was agreed Upon the motion to allow the stockpiled sand to be placed over the portion of the beach which may belong to the Phipps. No further sand is to be placed until the ownership issue is resolved. It was so votedwith Glenn Yale , abstaining. LEGG'S HILL Mr. Danny Mackey, Attorney Timothy O'Keefe, and Mr. Ted Forbes of d allow Hancock Survey were present to file a Notice of Intent which woul Mr. Mackey to fulfill some contractual obligations to excavate some gravel from his site on Legg' s Hill. Page 3 - Mr. O'Keefe noted that thus far Mr. Mackey has lived up to his is agreements with the Commission. What the Notice of Intent propose=_ Glenn Yale asked how to excavate to elevation 30 away from the pond. much gravel they intend to excavate and Mr- Mackey replied they intend to excavate approximately 100,000 cubic yeards. David Lash asked what the elevation of the berm was presently and Mr . Mackev replied it was at elevation 60. Glenn Yale asked what the slope of the berm was presently and Mr. Forbes noted it was a 20% slope. ual excavation would take after Glenn Yale asked how long the act approval and Mr. Mackey replied it would be on-going. Philip Moran asked how many yards of gravel would be necessary to excavate between now and our next meeting in September and Mr. Mackey / replied he would need to excavate L0,000 yards• Mr. Moran noted that Mr . Mackev has lived up to the agreements he has had with the Commission in the past. Glenn Yale asked if Mr . Mackey could excavate down to elevation 38 approximately prior to the public hearing and Mr. Mackey elevation boundary easily and still replied he could stay within that live up to his contractual agreements for gravel . stated the Commission would need some assurances as to slope Glenn Yale sForbes felt some erosion and sedimentation controls stability. tMr.at could be employed. Upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of Harry Takis, gravel can be removed down to elevation 40, provided an erosion control plan is submitted to the Conservation Commission prior co our next meeting. I� was so voted. MAYNARD PLASTICS This is a continuation of a public hearing which was opened on July 11 . 1985. Mr. George seeley, Ms. Sylvie Micheluit , and Mr. David Wescerling of Fafard, and Attorney John Serafini were present to discuss revisions to the Maynard plan resulting from sub-committee meetings held with both Planning Board and Conservation Commission members. Mr. Seeley gave an overview of the entire 43 acre parcel. It was generally agreed that the Commission would write an Order of Conditions for the entire parcel with site by site specifics for each individual site as it is developed. Mr. Seeley showed the delineated wetlands which have now been flagged and noted Fafard plans to address the 30" and 24" culverts on Swampscott Road which are already inadequate and whose inadequacy will be exacerbated by the construction of the proposed Maynard building. Mr. Seeley pointed out the drainage patterns of the entire site for the Commission' s information. It was noted that the proposed retention pond would be dry except for the 100-year storm periods; therefore as an alternative, they now MINUTES OF- MEETING - .. October F_ MEETING . r .. Oc ober 24, 1985 . The Salem Conservation Commission met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room on Thursday, October 24, 1985 at 7:30 P.M. Present were Chairman Philip Moran, Vice-Chairman Glenn Yale, Martha Hogan, David Lash, Paul Geoghegan, Harry Takis Raymond Lavender and Staff Advisor Dale Yale. Vice-Chairman Yale called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING - DAN MACKEY, LEGG'S HILL ROAD Glenn Yale read the notice of the public hearing. \ The purpose of this hearing is to explore the effects of the removal of gravel from property located on Legg' s Hill Road, within a wetland area. i Attorney Timothy O';:eefe and Mr. Ted Forbes of Hancock Survey were present representing Mr. Mackey. Mr. Forbes stated that it is proposed /J to excavate to elevation 30, within the buffer zone of the pond and that a hay bale barrier would be installed to prevent sedimentation into the pond. Mr. Forbes further stated that gravel will be excavated as it is requested by Mr. Mackey' s customers. Therefore, the removal process i could take several years. Glenn Yale asked what grade they proposed and Mr. Forbes replied the slope would be 10%. Glenn Yale felt this slope was excessive. Mr. Forbes noted that the City required a maximum of 10% for secondary streets. / Mr. Yale expressed concern regarding future development of this area and asked if any hydraulic calculations have been done to determine what effects a 100 year storm would have on the pond and Mr. Forbes answered that there is not sufficient information to determine this at the present time. Mr. O'Keefe further noted that Mr. Mackey still has the ultimate say in what is done there and the risks are his. A siltation and erosion control program was discussed and Staff Advisor Dale Yale suggested that a silt fence might be more effective than hay bales. Mr. Bob Marsilia of Linden Ave. , an abutter to the pond, expressed concern over the stability of the bank. Mr. Roger Boucher added he was concerned about the dumping of inappropriate material on the site and Mr. Mackey replied that there was no inappropriate material in the buffer zone. 1 David Lash stated that he would like to look at Mr. Mackey' s property— / before making a decision on this proposal and it was then suggested that the board arrange a site visit. Page 2 — Following some discussion, a motion was made by David Lash and seconded by Ray Lavender to continue the public hearing. It was so voted. CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE — DON MASELLA, MARLBOROUGH ROAD Staff Advisor Dale Yale stated that she has looked at Mr. Masella ' s property and feels that he has filled the requirements of the Order of Conditions. Upon the motion of Harry Takis and second of Ray Lavender, the Certificate of Compliance was approved. It was so voted. MAYNARD PLASTICS — SWAMPSCOTT ROAD Mr. George Seeley of The Fafard Companies was present to discuss two issues. One is a proposal which involves the construction of 3 42" diameter pipes to run under Swampscott Road just at the entrance to the Maynard Plastics site. Philip Moran and Glenn Yale had visited the site and met with David Westerling, Engineer for Fafard. Presently, a 30" culvert exists which is grossly inadequate. Fafard proposes the cosntruction of 3 42" pipes and possibly leaving the existing 30" in place to act as a french drain. Mr. Seeley would like the Conservation Comission' s guidance as to what design storm to use. It was noted the Ebershoff development used a 100-yr. design storm. Fafard will be re-looking at the hydraulic calculations and will return with a design in the near future. The second issue Mr. seeley wished to discuss is the issue of a drop of one foot elevations for Maynard Plastics. Staff Advisor Dale Yale asked if the culvert would be designed to a 100 year storm and Mr. Seeley replied that he has talked with the City Engineer who feels that a 50 year storm is adequate. Mr. Seeley further stated that if the culvert is designed for less than a 100 year storm, no storage area would be present. Mr. Seeley stated that earlier cut and fill calculations were incorrect due to inacurate topographic calculations. Flood elevations were lowered by one ft . but have the same amount of run-off and will have no greater impact on the neighboring wetlands. ORDERS OF CONDITIONS: Upon the motion of Harry Takis and second of Martha Hogan, the Order of Conditions for McNeil was approved, as drafted. It was so voted. MINUTES OF MEETING 'December 12, 1985 The Salem Conservation Commission met on December 12, 1985 at One Salem Green, second floor conference room. Present were Chairman Philip Moran, Vice—Chairman Glenn Yale , Ray Lavender and Harry Takis. Martha Hogan, Paul Geoghegan, David Lash and Dale Yale were absent . 1 Vice Chairman Glenn Yale called the meeting to order at 7:35. DETERMINATION OF APPLICABILITY — POPEYE"S, CANAL ST. Glenn Yale read the notice of the Determination. Mr. Sam Tassel representing Popeye' s• and Dr. Hugh Mulligan of Gulf of Maine Research were present to discuss this plan which involves the construction of a 2500 sq. ft . fast food restaurant on an existing paved surface on Canal and Hersey Streets, between Alice ' s Ice Cream and The Donut Ring. This area is zoned for this use . The property is within Zone B, flood hazard area and is outside any wetland resource area or buffer zone. Dr. Mulligan stated that landscaping will be provided on the Canal St. side of the 100 X 150 sq. ft . site. He further noted that this area is subject to 100-500 year storm, this not being classified as a wetland resource area. Speaking in opposition to the plan were Mr. Roger Dyer and Mr. Rav Frazier, both of Hersey Street. Also present expressing disapproval of the plan was Ward VII Councillor, Jack Nutting. Major concern was with regard to the proximity of Popeye ' s to Alice ' s Ice Cream. Lighting and drainage were among other concerns expressed. Philip Moran stated that while this area is subject to flooding, the area is paved and not classified as a wetland area. Upon the motion of Philip Moran and second of Ray Lavender, a negative determination will be issued. It was so voted. PUBLIC HEARING — DANNY MACKEY, BROADWAY Glenn Yale read the notice of the public hearing. Attorney Timothy O'Keefe and Mr. Ted Forbes of Hancock Survey were present representing Mr. Mackey who proposes to stabilize the existing bank adjacent to Rosie' s Pond at 58 Broadway. The bank has been filled and altered substantially over the past several months. Also, the fill that has been placed there covers salvage materials that Mr. Mackey �' stores on his property. i - Page 2 - Glenn Yale asked what the current elevation of the slope is and Mr. \ Forbes replied that it is 1 :1 , which he feels is more than adequate and that this is uniform across the entire parcel . Mr. Yale stated that a 1 : 1 slope with the proposed slope is inconsistent with DEQE recommendations. Glenn Yale expressed concern regarding the stability of the slope and stated that any material felt to be inadequate by the Board should be removed. Mr. Mackey stated that the bank, which is made up of natural grass growth and impervious clay has existed for many years with no evidence of erosion. i Mr. Mackey suggested constructing a vertical wall and Mr. Yale stated that a 2: 1 slope would be preferable. Glenn Yale asked what the previous level of the slope was and Mr. Mackey stated that it was at elevation 20. Philip Moran asked Mr. Mackey if he plans to sell his property in the near future and Mr. Mackey replied in the affirmative. Glenn Yale expressed concern regarding what materials are present underneath the bank and the future of Rosie' s Pond. He stated that this is an unstable bank and suggested a 21E. Mr. Yale asked if the bank is sealed with clay and Mr. Mackey replied in the affirmative. Mr. Yale stated that he would like to see a plan of how the bank will be stabilized. Upon the motion of Phil Moran and second of Ray Lavender, the public hearing will be continued following a site visit by the Board. It was so voted. r LEGG'S HILL, ORDER OF CONDITIONS Attorney Timothy O'Keefe and Mr. Ted Forbes of Hancock Survey were present representing Mr. Mackey who proposes to excavate to elevation 30 within the buffer zone of the pond on his property. Glenn Yale asked how many cubic yards of material would be removed and \ over what time frame and Mr. Mackey replied that approximately 70,000 \ cu. yards of material would be removed and stated that it would be done over an indefinite period of time. Mr. Yale asked how long it would take to excavate to elevation 40 and Mr. Mackey replied that this would depend entirely upon the demand for is gravel. Mr. Yale noted that the Board is concerned regarding the water table of the pond and protection of public water supply. t - Page 3 - of the slope and erosion control \, Stability l were other concerns "raised b Y the Board and Mr. Forbes noted that silt fences can be used instead of hay bales. J Glenn Yale asked if Mr. Mackey proposes to fence the area and Mr. Mackey replied that this is not proposed due to the expense involved. Ward VII City Councillor Jack Nutting addressed the Board stating that the level of the pond has risen over the 'past several years and asked the Conservation Commission to do whatever was in -the best interest of Salem. Following some discussion, the public hearing was declared closed. An Order of Conditions will follow. Mr. Mackey agreed to waive the 21-day • time limit for drafting the Orders. PUBLIC HEARING - STANLEY MIKULSKI, ALMEDA ST. Philip Moran read the notice of the public hearing. This proposal involves the construction of two single-family dwellings within the buffer zone of a bordering vegetated wetland on Almeda street. No filling or altering of the wetland is proposed, but some filling will be necessary to level an area for the homeconstruction. Mr. John Dick of Hancock Survey was present to discuss this plan. He stated that the proposed slope would be approximately 3 :4: 1 in height and that 100-135 cubic yards of material will be brought on the site . Glenn Yale asked if excavation is proposed outside of the hay bales as indicated on the plan and Mr. Dick replied in the negative . Mr., John Wright and Mr. and Mrs. Divirgilio of Almeda Street and Ward IV City Councillor Lenny O'Leary were present to speak in favor of the proposed construction. . All were very much in support of this plan. Upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of Ray Lavender, the public hearing was declared closed. An Order of Conditions will follow. An amendment to the plan detailing erosion control procedures will be submitted. DETERMINATIONS: Upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of Ray Lavender, a negative Determination will be issued to Mr. Joseph Gallo for his project on Orleans Ave. It was so voted. Upon the motion of Harry Takis and second of Raymond Lavender, a negative determination will be issued for the Salem State College parking lot located off of Harrison Ave. MINUTES-OF-MEETING Canuary__16, 1986 The Salem Conservation Commission met on Thursday, January 16, 1986 at One Salem Green, second floor conference room at 7:30 p.m. Present were Chairman Philip Moran, Glenn Yale, Paul Geoghegan, Martha Hogan, Ray Lavender, Harry Takis, and Staff Advisor Dale Yale. David Lash was absent. Philip Moran called the meeting to order at 7 :30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - CITY OF SALEM - SWAMPSCOTT ROAD SEWER AND WATER IMPROVEMENTS Philip Moran read the notice of the public hearing. M-. Bruce Thibodeau, Project Manager for LEA Engineering, presented the ]ect g Board with a proposal which involves the construction of 2300' linear feet of water main, sewer force main, and gravity sewer, and a waste water pump station on Swampscott Road. The pump station is located within a wetland area roughly opposite the North Shore Tennis Club. Resource areas significant to the Act are: inland bank, bordering land subject to flooding, and land under a water body. Mr. Thibodeau explained that the wetland follows along Swampscott Road, crosses the existing culvert and continues along through the lot. He noted that the culvert will be taken out for the purpose of opening up the wetlands. There will be a general cleaning up of the brook. Some filling is proposed along the bank. The entire area will be paved and drainage will be into the existing brook. A 1�: 1 slope is proposed, with rip-rap to minimize erosion. Glenn Yale asked how the edge of the wetlands was defined and Mr. Thibodeau replied that it was determined by vegetation and water. Regarding de-watering, Mr. Thibodeau noted that the specifications call for hay bales and control sedimentation. A full-time resident inspection by a Clerk of the Works will be hired by the City during construction. Paul Geoghegan asked what the elevation of the bottom of the fuel oil tank would be and Mr. Thibodeau stated that it was approximately 8-9 ft. deep. Philip Moran raised the issue of the removal of fill from the site and Mr. Thibodeau responded that mostly rock will be excavated from the foundation which can in turn be used as rip-rap. Mr. Moran asked if the fill will be stored on the site and Mr. Thibodeau replied in the affirmative stating that it will not be stockpiled in the wetlands and that an appropriate place will be found. Mr. Moran further asked if there were any provisions relative to stockpiling and Mr. Thibodeau J stated that provisions were addressed in the specifications plan. Page 4 — Upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of 'Paul Geoghegan, a negative determination will be issued to Salem State College. It was so voted. ORDERS OF CONDITIONS Legg' s Hill : \\ This is a continuation of a discussion on a proposal by Mr. Danny Mackey \ to excavate to elevation 30 within the buffer zone of the pond on his property. Attorney Timothy O'Keefe was present representing Mr. Mackey. Mr. O'Keefe suggested a compromise of excavating to elevation 35 instead of 40, as referenced in the Order of Conditions issued to Mr. Mackey. He stated thatthere is no evidence of lack of stability in the slope at elevation 40. Upon the motion of Philip Moran and second of Raymond Lavender, it was recommended that elevation 35 be accepted. Glenn Yale felt strongly that the excavation should be limited to elevation 40 and that a lower elevation could pose hazardous conditions to ground water. Further, if Mr. Mackey wishes to return to the Commission in the future after he has / excavated to elevation 40, a Determination could be made as to whether [here was a significant impact or not. Mr. Yale further expressed concern regarding dust control generated from excavation and suggested that the utilization of a water wagon be addressed in the final Order of Conditions to control this problem. The motion failed, one in favor, five opposed. Upon the motion of Glenn Yale and second of Paul Geoghegan, an Order of Conditions will be issued for Legg's Hill with the limit of excavation being held to elevation 40. it was so voted, five in favor, one opposed. Broadway: `•� This is a continuation of discussions involving a proposal by Mr. Danny at 58 Mackey to stabilize the existing bank adjacent to Rosie' s Pond Broadway. The bank has been filled and altered substantially over the past several months. Also, the fill that has been placed there covers 1 salvage materials that Mr. Mackey stores on his property. Attorney Timothy O'Keefe was present representing Mr. Mackey. Regarding a recent visit by the Conservation Commission to the site, Glenn Yale stated that unacceptable fill was still present within 100' iolation of the boilerplate Order of of the wetland area which is in v he was "disappointed" at thelack of Conditions. Philip Moran noted progress on cleaning up the site. Mr. Mackey had indicated on several ; occasions that progress had been made in removing unacceptable materials This obviously has not been done. Mr. and re—vegetating the slope. the removal of the fill Yale expressed concern regarding , restabilization with an imperviuos, acceptable material and revegatio i i' - Page 5 - Philip Moran suggested a vertical wall be put outside of the bank and Mr. Mackey stated that this would be agreeable. This will be addressed in the Order of Conditions. Mr. Yale asked how the wall would tie in with the corner of Mr. Mackey' s property. Mr. Mackey replied that it / will tie in at a 90 degree turn and will not encroach upon abutters property. Glenn Yale suggested that engineering plans be submitted to the Conservation commission at the completion of the project. There being no further discussion the public hearing was declared closed. An Order of Conditions will follow. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Upon the motion of Ray Lavender and second of Harry Takis , the minutes of the previous meeting were approved. There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn. Having passed unamiously, the meeting was declared adjourned at 10:00 P.m-Respectfully submitted, Nancy Nancy Syatt MINUTES_OF—MEETING J ne_26,�1986- The Salem Conservation Commission met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room, on Thursday, June 26, 1986 . Present were Philip Moran, Martha Hogan, Paul Geoghegan, Fred Harney, and David Lash. Harry Takis was absent. Chairman Philip Moran called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING--LEGGS HILL POND Chairman Philip Moran read the notice of the public hearing. This proposal involves the installation of a control structure at the \ outlet end of Leggs Hill Pond to maintain the existing elevation of \ Leggs Hill Pond. The installation of this structure is in response to a request from the Commission based upon the fact that previously the outlet pipe placed during the Vinnin Square drainage project had been damaged in order to raise the level of the pond for fishing and ice skating, etc. The level of the pond had been raised and the perimeter became vegetated. A verbal ruling from DEQE was received stating that the pond must be maintained- at this new elevation. This ruling was reconfirmed earlier this week. The Conservation Commission, therefore, made a judgement that the elevation of the pond should be, maintained at approximately elevation 27 . This was determined by several survey plans which were submitted . ith Notices of Intent for homes on the opposite side of the pond (Linden Avenue) . The Commission then requested that a control structure be designed and installed by the City. Assistant Engineer Tom Rouleau presented the proposed plan to the Commission. It involves the installation of a catch basin type of structure. The inlet is designed to handle the existing flow with the pipe 50% clogged. A sump will be included in the design to reduce siltation. The existing d;ke which was placed as an emergency measure to maintain the pond will be removed and the bank will be established at a 2 : 1 slope maximum and l.oamed and seeded to prevent erosion. Mz• Rouleau noted that wetlands maps which were done from aerials taken in 1964 showed the pond at nearly the same elevation as presently exists. The elevation of the proposed structure is taken from an October 1985 survey done by T & M Engineering of 27.69, which is approximately 1 ' less than today. Philip Moran asked if the new structure will drain down the pond and Mr. Rouleau replied the level of the pond will to 27.3 with average flows. -2- Mr. Moran asked if the 1964 maps showed the pond area to be approximately the same as presently and Mr. Rouleau replied in the affirmative. The aerials were taken in 1964 and the wetlands mapping was done in 1977. The area shown on the maps is similar to the existing conditions. 1 Philip Moran asked what exists presently to maintain the pond level and Mr. Rouleau replied that an earth dyke was placed there to maintlain the pond elevation until a permanent structure could be installed. I Mr. Dave Monga of Murphy, Ryan, and O'Keefe, an attorney representing Dan Mackey, was present to aske some questions on behalf of his client. / He questioned when the dyke was placed at the outlet end of the pond and Mr. Rouleau replied it was placed there approximately one year ago. Mr. Monga asked if there was an Order of Conditions or a Determination made at that time as to the necessity for the dyke and Mr. Moran replied in the negative. i' Staff Advisor Dale Yale noted the placement of the dyke was done as a temporary, emergency measure until a control structure could be designed and built.' She reviewed the history of the site for Mr. Monga and noted the DEQE input which determined that the level of the pond should be maintained at approximately elevation 27 . Mr. Monga felt that the removal of the earth dyke should require some approvals from the Army Corps. He further questioned the maintenance aspect of this project and felt there should be a full Notice of Intent filed with rebuttable presumptions of significance. He conceded the jurisdiction of the Conservation Commission and the actions of the Commission as an emergency in placing the dyke at the outlet , but now questions whether an Army Corps permit would be needed to remove it. Mr. Moran stated that any question Mr. Monga may have as to the appropriateness of the filing should be handled as an appeal . Mr. Moran asked when the installation of the structure would take place and Mr. Rouleau felt they would like to do this in August or early September during the driest part of the year. Mr. Monga stated he felt the information regarding the pond elevation is t .inaccurage and Mr. Moran reiterated his statement regarding this being handled through an appeal. Historically, the 27.3 elevation has been established based upon several surveys and an opinion from DEQE. Mr. Rynkowski of Mystic Road in Marblehead stated he felt the pond had always been at this approximate elevation. A lowering of the level as is suggested by Mr. Mackey would create a bog. 1 C -3- There being no further discussion, upon the motion of David Lash and second of Paul Geoghegan, the hearing was closed. It was so voted. PUBLIC HEARING--ZIEFF, POND IMPROVEMENTS Ms. Kathy O'Connor, a landscape designer, and Mr. Paul Mulloney of SP Engineering were present to discuss proposed improvements to a Snall pond on the property of the Village at Vinnin Square , off Loring Avenue. They propose minimum disturbance to the pond and would like to visually improve the pond itself by removing "waste" vegetation and provide access around the pond by installing a jogging/walking trail. The existing vegetation has been typed and thev propose landscape plantings on the rip-rap for which they have received a negative Determination from the Commission. They propose to selectively remove the waste vegetation, enhance the plantings, and fill two small low stagnant pools with appropriate crushed stone. Mr. Mulloney stated that they area they propose to fill would be under 500 square feet total in area. Philip Moran asked if the removal of "waste" vegetation would- result in a negative impact- on the pond and Mr. Mulloney replied that an inventory of species indicated several varieties of poor quality wetlands plants such as bamboo, phragmites, alders, etc. They do not improve the quality of the water or underlying soil. They also do not provide necessary intake of nutrients to improve the quality of the pond. They propose to install red cedar and several other wetland plantings to improve the pond, particularly in the lower corner. Paul Geoghegan asked where the outlet pipe was connected and Kathy O'Connor replied the outlet is connected to a catch basin on the property. There is also a headwall with an inflow pipe which collects run-off from Loring Towers. Mr. Mulloney noted that , based upon sampling, the pond is moderately eutrophic . They do not anticipate high levels of nitrogen input into the pond. Paul Geoghegan expressed some concern regarding the phosphates. He asked whether the bottom of the pond was muck and Mr. Mulloney replied in the affirmative. Mr. Geoghegan questioned who would maintain the pond and surrounding jogging trail. Kathy O'Connor noted that the plantings they propose would help maintain the pond quality. Paul Geoghegen expressed some concern over the ability of new plantings to properly absorb nutrients. He urged the applicants to institute a proper habitat management plan which would minimize fertilizer and control introduction of oil by placement. of oil separators in catch basins, etc. MINUTES_OF-MEETING� ('July 24, 1986 C? The Salem Conservation Commission met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room, on Thursday, July 24, 1986. Present were Paul Geoghegan, Fred Harney, David Lash, and John Doyle. Philip Moran, Harry Takis, and Martha Hogan were absent. Acting Chairman Paul Geoghegan called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. and opened the meeting by welcoming new member John Doyle to the Board. DETERMINATION OF APPLICABILITY--SALEM OIL AND GREASE Paul Geoghegan read the notice of the Determination. Mr. Vance Smith of Salem Oil and Grease was present to discuss his company' s proposal to construct a 15 ' x 65' addition to their facility to house EPA mandated pre-treatment facilities. This proposed facility will require excavation for a footing, but the first floor elevation will be above the 100-year flood elevation and over 100 feet from the North River canal. Paul Geoghegan asked Mr. Smith for a brief description of the treatment process. Mr. Smith noted the process will allows fats to rise to the top of the wastewater tanks and they are skimmed off. The pH is then neutralized and the wastewater is discharged via South Essex Sewerage District treatment plant. Paul Geoghegan asked where the acid used in the treatment process is stored and Mr. Smith replied they use an acid brine solution which is delivered to the site in small tanks. The solution is transferred by pipeline when needed in the actual treatment process. Upon the motion of David Lash and second of Fred Harney, a negative Determination will be issued. It was so voted. PUBLIC HEARING--HARVEST OF THATCH, FOREST RIVER CONSERVATION AREA Paul Geoghegan read the notice of the public hearing. This proposal involves the harvesting of phragmites in the Forest River Conservation Area. A group of individuals are involved in the restoration of Pioneer Village and have researched materials which closely replicate the thatch used as roofing material. Thatchers from Plimouth Plantation will be doing the actual harvesting work and they plan to do the cutting by hand. One acre of phragmites will be required for one roof. -3- 2. No more than 500 square feet of wetland shall be filled, including the area proosed to be filled for the construction of the jogging path. 3 . The use of fertilizers within 100' of the pond shall be prohibited except for a one-time normal use in the initial installation of shrubs, trees, and other landscape vegetation. 4. Disturbance of existing wetlands plants shall be restricted to the activities outlined in submitted plan and report. 5. An erosion and sedimentation control barrier in accordance with "Erosion and Secimentation Control Guidelines," Publication #13 , 529-39-1000-2-84-C.R. , dated August , 1983 , shall be implemented prior to commencement of work. Such barrier shall be approved by the Conservation Commission or its designated agent. 6. Any changes made or intended to be made in the plans shall require the applicant to inquire of the Conservation Commission in writing whether the changes require Commission comments or approval . It was so voted. HARRIS BOAT RAMP, ORDER OF CONDITIONS Upon the motion of Fred Harney and second of David Lash, the plans for Mr. Frank Harris to construct a boat ramp to the rear of his property on Locust Street were approved. An Order of Conditions referencing the submitted plans shall be issued. It was so voted. LEGCS HILL POND CONTROL STRUCTURE--ORDER OF CONDITIONS ^\ Upon the motion of David Lash and second of John Doyle , an Order of Conditions will be issued for the installation of a control structure at \ Leggs Hill Pond, subject to the following conditions: 1. The installation and construction of the proposed outlet structure of Leggs Hill Pond has been determined to be significant to public water supply, ground water supply, and to the prevention of pollution, since Leggs Hill Pond has in the past been used as a water supply source (the supply came from a well and the area is still maintained as an emergency water source) . 2. Work shall conform to plan entitled, "Leggs Hill Pond Outlet Control Structure," dated May 9, 1986, prepared by Thomas Rouleau, P. E. , Engineering Assistant, and detail plan entitled, "Precast Cement Concrete Catch Basin." -4- 3. Prior to commencement of construction, an erosion and sedimentation _control barrier in accordance with "Erosion and Sedimentation Control Guidelines," Publication #13 , 529-39-1000-2-84-C.R. , dated August, 1983, shall be installed upstream of the proposed control structure and downstream of the proposed structure. a. Staked haybales shall be placed in a configuration which will adequately contain any sedimentation resulting from the dike removal. b. Such hay bales may be removed after the water has sufficiently cleared to indicate no further sedimentation will take place. 4. The Town of Marblehead Water Department shall be notified seventy-two (72) hou..i prior to commencement of construction. 5. Prior to backfilling around the control structure, the Commission or its designated shall be notified to confirm the rim elevation is set at / 27 .3 . 6. The City of Salem shall be responsible for ensuring that the structure is cleaned and maintained at least twice yearly. The Town of Marblehead shall be notified at least seventy-two (72) hours in advance of such maintenance operations. 7 . Following installation, the proposed slope shall be vegetated to ensure stability. It was so voted. OLD/NEW BUSINESS The next regular meeting of the Conservation Commission shall be on September 11 , 1986. There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn. The motion carried and the meeting was declared adjourned at 9:40 p.m. Respect ly submitted, &v, a, Dale E. Yale r n MINUTES.-OF HEETING- March 26 , 1987 The Salem Conserv-,tion Commission met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room on Thursday, March 26, 1987 . Present were Phil Moran, Harry Takis, John Doyle , Fred Harney, Martha Hogan, Paul Geoghegan, David Lash, and Conservation Advisor Rebecca Curran. DETERMINATION OF APPLICABILITY-MAGEE, 441 LAFAYETTE STREET Attorney Bob LeDeux, representing the applicant Marquis Magee, informed the Commission that in 1978 there was an Order of Conditions issued for a foundation plan at 441 Layfayette St. which was to be built in a wetland buffer zone . The house is now for sale, and two foot encroachment on the side line was recently discovered. The discretion was due to an error in which the deck was never shown on the original plan. Mr LeDeux, informed the Commission that the foundation was built os submitted. The deck is an important aspect of the house, was built but , did not appear on the original plans. Mr. Moran stated that the foundation does comply to the Order of Conditions. Mr. Moran suggested that the Commission issue a Certificate of Compliance for the foundation and a Negative Determation be issued for the deck. Mr. Geoghegan questioned -the_de.ck in regard to the buffer and-Mr. Moran-replied that it does not interf-e Le _with-:it._ _ _ -_-• = - - - -_ Upon the motion of Mr. Moran and the second of Mr. Takis it was decided that a Certificate of Compliance would be issued. The Commission unaminously voted in favor and a Negative Determation would be issued for the deck. OLD/NEW BUSINESS Mr. Moran questioned Ms. Curran on the status of Mr. Beaulieu and she informed him that he was planning to submit a Notice of Intent for the next meeting. Mr. Takis informed the Commission that he had been to Parlee Street and noticed that fill was being dumped over the existing slope. Mr. Moran asked if he was in compliance and Mr. Takis responded that he believed SO. 'Mr. Moran suggested that he continue to visit the site and keep the Commission informed of the status. Ms. Curran stated that she and Mr. Ralph Perkins of the DEQE inspected Mr. Mackey's properties . After inspecting and reviewing the Broadway site it was found that there was no time limit on the Broadway Order of Conditions and therefore there was not much the Commission or DEQE could do. She then stated that the DEQE is putting on Enforcement Order on the Leggs Hill case. The owner will have twenty-one (21) days to submit an 'erosion control plans and plans to restore the bank to elevation 40. If he does not comply the owner could be subject to penalties administered by the DEQE. Ms. Curran informed the Commission that there was a Cease and Desist Order placed on Joseph Morphew's property at Highland Avenue and he had l ; -3- \ consensus that they should do anything within their power to help D.E.Q.E. document their case against Mr. Mackey, so Ms. Curran was directed to send a letter to D.E.Q.E. documenting Mr. Mackey' s noncompliance. J Ms. Curran stated that Mr. Kieren requested a one year extension on his Order of Conditions to build a swimming pool in his back yard at 15 Linden Avenue. The consensus of the Commission was that the extension should be granted. Ms. Curran then told Commission members that Darbie Landing has notified her that dreging operations will begin, as they were required to in their Order of Conditions. The deteriorating pilings at Winter Island were then discussed. Mr. Moran suggested, and it was the Commission' s consensus, that a letter be li written to the City Enginner, Planning Department and the Mayor' s Office it as being in s stating their concern with the condition of the pilings g in violation of the Wetland Protection Act. He suggested that the Harbormaster also contact the same depatrments stating his concern with the condition of the pilings as being a hazard to navigation. Mr. Moran told Commission members that David Lash has notified him that he will be moving to Essex, MA in April, thus can no longer serve on the Conservation Commission. Mr. Moran asked Commission members to let him know if they know of any qualified people who would like to serve on the Commission. Ms. Curran stated that it would be Ms. Carr's last meeting and that if there was no objection she would like next weeks meeting to be recorded. There were no objections. Mr. Takis made a motion to approve the minutes of February 27 , 1987 as submitted. Mr. Harney seconded the motion and the vote was unanimously in favor. Mr. Doyle made a motion to adjourn at 8:30 p.m. , Mr. Harney seconded the motion and the vote was unanimously in favor. Respectfully submitted, Cynthia Carr C1126 MINUTES OF _MEETING March 12, 1987 The Salem Conservation Commission met on Thursday, `]arch 12 , 1987 at One Salem Green, second floor conference room at 7:30 p.m. Present were Chairman Philip Moran, Harry Takis , John Doyle, and Fred Harney and Staff Advisor, Rebecca Curran. Absent were Martha Hogan, Paul Geoghegan, and David Lash. Philip Moran called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Station Road Discussion Mr. Raymond Beaulieu, owner of 35 Station Road and the abutting property requested an informal discussion with Conservation Commission members regarding the options he has for building an addition on his existing home at 35 Station Road. He was also interested in the possibilities of building a new house on the abutting lot. The lot his existing house is on is completely in a buffer zone and the lot he wants to build a new structure on is approximately 80%,wetland the remainder is a buffer zone . Mr. Beaulieu stated he has resided at this location for the past 13 or 14 years and had the lots subdivided in 1983 . He stated he did not know until recently that he was in an area subject to the Wetlands Protection Act , thus needing Conservation Commission approval prior to building on the property. Mr. Takis asked how large the proposed addition was to be. Mr. Beaulieu stated that the addition will be approximately 30' to 40' long and will extent to 10' of the side yard lot line. Mr. Moran suggested that Commission members meet at the site on Saturday, March 14, 1987 at 9:00 a.m. with Mr. Beaulieu to look at the site prior to making suggestions to Mr. Beaulieu about the addtion or the new structure. Mr. Beaulieu stated that this was agreeable and the other members were in agreement. Mr. Moran then stated that Mr. Beaulieu may have problems building a new structure on the property he owns adjacent to his home since most of the parcel is in a wetland. Faden Discussion Mr. Faden of 45 Daniels Street requested an informal discussion regarding his property. Mr. Faden distributed pictures of his home on Daniels Street. He stated that the seawall , as existing, needs to be improved to avoid future storm damage to his property and he would like to remove the existing stairs and relocate them as well as explore the possiblity of adding a deck which would protrude approximately 3 ' over the seawall, after it had been improved. Mr. Faden also told the Commission members that the mudflats abutting the seawall were owned by Mr. David Crosby of Beverly Farms, MA. He stated that Mr. Crosby bought -2- the flats in 0.00 and is paying $2z a year in taxes on the flats to the Mr. Moran stat(, rst issue Mr. Faden had to overcome was that of the flats bel a person other than himself, and he would have to get an easemei it. Crosby's permission before the Commission could give him app oval to build any structure over Mr. Crosby' s property. Mr. Moran stated that all three projects described by Mr. Faden would require a Notice of Intent and Conservation Commission approval. Mr. Takis asked whether or not the Army Corps of Engineers would have to be notified about the projects. Mr. Moran asked the applicant and other Commission members if a site visit on Saturday morning, following the Station Road site visit would be possible since the proposals are not clear in his mind, even after viewing pictures of the property. The consensus of the other Commission members was that this was a good idea and Mr. Faden was in agreement. Naumkeag Salvage Mr. Moran stated that after a site visit Ms. Curran has suggested that Mr. Pelliter be informed of the following requirement regarding his property: 1 . Require the applicant to remove two rows of cars and all other debris for the entire length of the property, and suggest that Mr. Pelliter undertake the following: 2. Require the applicant to retain a qualified expert to determine both the environmental impact of the yard on the wetland and a method of alleviating any determined impact. Mr. Moran stated that all vegetation behind the property could be identified as wetland vegetation. He also stated that Mr. Pelliter has two truck trailers stock piled directly above the wetland. Ms. Curran stated that there is a large pile of tires adjacent to wetland. Mr. Moran further stated that Mr. Pelliter has been agreeable with Conservation Commission suggestions to date and stated he belonged to an organization which helps used car lots to function in an environmentally sound manner so he is hopeful of compliance to the two requirements as stated above. New/Old Business Ms. Curran stated while visiting Mr. Mackey' s property abutting Mr. Pelletier's property and she discovered that he is in violation of all Order of Conditions issued to him for the property. She contacted D.E.Q.E. and they would like documentation of this noncompliance in order to strengthen their case against Mr. Mackey. This documentation will help to show that Mr. Mackey has a pattern of noncompliance to Wetland Protection Act regulations. The Commission members were of the v —3— consensus that they should do anything within their power to help D.E.Q.E. document their case against Mr. Mackey, so FIs. Curran was directed to send a letter to D.E.Q.E. documenting Mr. Mackey' s noncompliance. Ms . Curran stated that Mr. Kieren requested a one year extension on his Ordur of Conditions Lo build a iwiinpii.ng pool in bis back yard aL 15 Linden Avenue. The consensus of the Commission was that the cxtens .on should be granted. Ms . Curran then told Commission members that Darbi.e Landing has notified her that dreging operations will begin, as they were required to in their Order of Conditions. The deteriorating pilings at Winter Island were then discussed. Mr. Moran suggested, and it was the Commission' s consensus, that a letter be written to the City Enginner, Planning Department and the Mayor' s Office stating their concern with the condition of the pilings as being in violation of the Wetland Protection Act. He suggested that the Harbormaster also contact the same depatrments stating his concern with the condition of the pilings as being a hazard to navigation. Mr. Moran told Commission members that David Lash has notified him that he will be moving to Essex, MA in April , thus can no longer serve on the Conservation Commission. Mr. Moran asked Commission members to let him know if they know of any qualified people who would like to serve on the Commission. Ms. Curran stated that it would be Ms. Carr' s last meeting and that if there was no objection she would like next weeks meeting to be recorded. There were no objections. Mr. Takis made a motion to approve the minutes of February 27, 1987 as submitted. Mr. Harney seconded the motion and the vote was unanimously in favor. Mr. Doyle made a motion to adjourn at 8:30 p.m. , Mr. Harney seconded the motion and the vote was unanimously in favor. Respectfully submitted, Cynthia Carr 01126 ` y 1� e` ON , '= C on' Commission r Salem. Massachusetts 01970 MINUTES_OF-.MEETING-j May 14, 1987 The Salem Conservation Commission met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room on Thursday, May 14, 1987. Present were Philip Moran, John Doyle, Martha Hogan, Fred Harney, Harry Takis, and Staff Advisor Rebecca Curran. Chairman Philip Moran calll.ed the meeting to order at 7 :30 p.m. 474 LAFAYETTE STREET Mr. Moran stated that the proposed plan was the temporary storage of 64 cubic yards of fill within a wetland buffer zone. while the construction of an inground swimming pool is in progress. Mr. Harney, owner of the property, and member of the Conservation Commission was present to discuss his proposal . He stated that 70% of the fill will be used for backfill around the swimming pool and the remaining 30% will be spread as loam on the front lot away from the buffer zone. Mr. Harney concluded that the size of the pool will be 12 x 24 .Mr. Takis made a motion of Negative Determination and Mr. Doyle second the motion. The Commission was unaminousty in favor. OLD/NEW BUSINESS Ms. Curran stated that she had heard nothing from Mr. Mackey regarding�� Leggs Hill . Mr. Moran informed the Commission that he suggested to Mr. J Mackey that he hire an engineer and to submit the proposed plans to the / Commission. Mr. Mackey has not responded in any way to this suggestion. Mr. Moran stated that he received a unaminous tip regarding Leggs Hill ; he was told that 50 gallon drums had been buried in this area. The Commission will write a letter to D.E.Q.E. informing them of this and suggest that they take a site visit and conduct a boring test. Mr. Takis asked if the state had been contacted regarding the status of Nick Fiore's property and the Department of Public works' plans to update the culvert. Ms. Curran will write a letter to Authur Doyle of Division 5 of the State D.P.W. Ms. Curran informed the Commission that Mr. John Sironi of 69 Valley St. had contacted her this past week. He requested that the Commission take a site visit to his property. Mr. Moran suggested that Ms. Curran inspect Mr. Sironi ' s property next week. FAFARD DEVELOPMENT PHASE II - REVIEW Mr. Ron Killian was present to represent the Fafard Company regarding Phase II of construction. He had previously dicussed the Phase II with the Commission in November of 1986. The two main issues brought up by the previous meeting were the placement of two units that were close to a wetland area and one unit that should be eliminated completely. Mr. Killian stated that both these proposal had been completed. The two units were placed on a foundation of stone and now lie 13 to 14 feet back from the wetland. Mr. Killian is requesting a letter of reccomendation from the Commission to D.E.Q.E stating that they have seen the proposed plan and approve an Order of Condition. Mr Takis made a motion to approve and Mr. Harney second the motion. All were in favor. OLD/NEW BUSINESS Ms. Curran stated that so far Mr. Mackey failed to meet the deadline on the Cease and Desist Order and D.E.Q.E will administer penalties on Monday, April 27, 1987 . Ms. Curran stated that she had written a letter to Mr. John Seroni, owner of property on Valley Street. She has had no response to this. Mr. Moran suggested she check with the Building Inspector to see if a Building Permit was issued for the construction. Ms. Curran had recently been on a site visit to Mr. Joseph Ingemi 's property on 80 Marlboro Road. He has been asked to remove the debris that were dumped on the wetland. He has moved it, but not out of the wetland area. It appears he does not understand where the wetland lies and that the removal has not helped the situation. Mr. Moran suggested a site visit on Tuesday at 6 :00 p.m. Ms. Curran informed the Commission that she had been to Seemore Street and that asphalt chunks are being dumped in a area above a wetland. Asphalt is a petroleum product and she is concerned with the effects on the wetland below. Although the area is out of the Commission' s jurisdiction, there will be a site vistit on Tuesday night. Mr. Harney motioned the meeting ajourned at 8:45 Respectfully submitted Susan Cosman Clerk of Commission BN913 c `Jz Conservation Commission Salein. Massachusetts 01970 MINUTES_OF MEETING `May. 28, 1987 The Salem Conservation Commission met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room on Thursday, May 28, 1987. Present were Paul Geoghegan, Harry Takis , John Doyle, Martha Hogan, Rebecca Curran and the !i Commission' s newest member Robert Crowley. Paul Geoghegan called the meeting to order at 7 :40 p.m. 18 'CLARK STREET - DETERMINATION OF APPLICABILITY Mr. Walter Abraham was present to discuss his proposed plans-for his property and has submitted a report by The Gulf of Maine Research to the Commission. The applicant proposes to construct a single family house on the property, within the 100 foot Buffer Zone. No work will be done in the wetland. Mr. Abraham stated that he will be removing debris including metal materials and replacing it with -ate-"' s grass for slope stabilization. Mr. Geoghegan concluded that Mr. Abraham would have to submit a Notice of Intent for the next meeting. The Commission requested that Mr. Abraham detail the proposed diagram which should include elevation, surrounding wetland and a scale for the next meeting. 20 CLARK STREET - DETERMINATION OF APPLICABILITY Mr. Abraham also proposes to construct a house on lot 20 within the 100 foot discretionary Buffer Zone. His proposals include the filling in of 500 square feet of Bordering Wetland in order to maximize the use of the property. Ms. Curran quoted from the Wetlands Protection Act (10.55 4C) "the said portion has a surface area less than five hundred .(500) square feet, therefore the issuing authority may issue an Order of Conditions permitting work in bordering vegetated wetland." The Commission requested of Mr. Abraham that when submitting the Notice of Intent that the diagram be well detailed and that lot 18 & 20 be combined as one project. Mr. Geoghegan suggested a site visit so the Commission would be fully prepared when Mr. Abraham returned with the Notice of Intent. Mr. Takis made a motion of Positive Determination for lot 18 & 20 and Ms. Hogan second the motion. It was unaminously in favor. 3 McKINLEY ROAD - DISCUSSION Ms. Curran stated that the abutters of Forest River were not present, but she had been informed by the neighbors that there was a pile of junk in the area. Mr. Geoghegan suggested that Ms. Curran call the Department of Public Works and request assistance in the removal, for it is Conservation owned land. PICKMAN PARK — EXTENSION PERMIT Ms. Curran informed the Commission that the DiBiase Corporation requested an extension on the construction of condominiums. No changes have been made to the proposed plans. Mr. Doyle made a motion for a six month extension and Mr. Takis second the motion. All were in favor. JEGGLE'S ISLAND — DISCUSSION Ms . Curran stated that the Osgood Park Association, which is a private park on Hemenway Street, was involved in the smashing of Canadian Geese eggs on Jeggle' s Island. These people were also pouring oil on the eggs in order to get rid of them. They have complained that the geese continually return to their park, which is due to people feeding them. Ms. Curran stated that these people are probably also pouring oil on the Snowy White and Mallard eggs and that the pouring of oil will not solve this problem. It appears that the Fish and Wildlife issued a permit for this, but it involved the park and not the island. Mr. Doyle noted that this lies within the Commission' s jurisdiction and that the Fish and Wildlife should be contacted for this permit should not have been issued. The Commission agreed that action should' be taken immediately. Mr. Doyle made a motion for a Cease and Desist on Osgood Park Association from pouring oil—on a wetland or within 100 feet of the water. Ms. Hogan -second the motion and all were in favor. OLD/NEW BUSINESS Ms. Curran stated that she had been to Naumkeag Salvage and that they were doing a good job of cleaning the place as the Commission ordered. She will plan a site visit with the Commission when it has been completed. Ms. Curran informed the Commission that she had contacted the Hazardous (f Waste Commission regarding the anonymous tip of waste buried on Leggs A`Y\ Hill. They need more information before they will do a boring test. Mr. Takis questioned the status on Mr. Lovely's property on Story Street and suggested a site visit. The site visit of the Commission will be on Thursday, June 4, at 6:30 p.m. It will include Clark Street, Parlee Street, and Story Street. Mr. Takis suggested to the Commission that they keep a formal list of old business in order to keep up on open and or closed files. Ms. Curran stated that new business included projects such as land banking, Friends of Forest River and The City Wide Walking Trail. The Commission will research these new ideas. Mr. Geoghegan noted a change to the May 14 minutes and Mr. Takis made a motion to approve the minutes followed by the second of Ms. Hogan. All were in favor. h `%oN c a" b, { Conservation Commission Salt-in. Ma,sachu.,ctts 01970 MINUTES_.OF MEETING tJune i l , 1987 The Salem Conservation Commission met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room on Thursday, June 11 , 1987 . Present were Phil Moran, Fred Harney, Martha Hogan, Harry Takis , and Conservation Advisor Rebecca Curran. Mr. Moran called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. 18 CLARK STREET - PUBLIC HEARING Mr. Moran read the notice of the public hearing to the Commission. Mr. Walter Abraham was present to request an Order of Conditions for 18 Clark Street for she construction of a single family house. The foundation will be Located within the 100 foot buffer zone, but there will be no construction in the wet Land. Mr. Abraham proposes to remove debris from the wetland and replace it with sod-forming grass. The Commission inspected the lot last week on a site visit and were well aware of the proposed work. Mr. Takis made a motion to close the public hearing and Ms. Hogan second �-he motion, all were in favor. Abraham requested tha- the hearing be continued for lot 20 on Clark Street. Mr. Takis made a motion to continue the hearing and Ms. Hogan second the motion. All were in favor. Mr. Takis motioned that an Order of Conditions be granted on 18 Clark Street as proposed on The Gulf of Maine Research work description. Ms. Hogan second the motion. The Commission was unaminously in favor. PARLEE STREET - DISCUSSION Concerned residents of Crowdis Street were present to discuss the construction on Parlee Street and the blasting on Crowdis Street. Mr. Ted Michaud of 39 Crowdis Street presented pictures of the area to the Commission and questioned the status and future plans of Mr. Richard Malone, owner of the property. Ms. Curran responded that the Commission was aware of the situation and that Mr. Malone was issued an Order of Conditions to remove the debris. Mr. Robert Redican of 42 Crowdis Street was present and informed the Commission that he has been observing the construction closely and that no debris has been removed. Mr. Moran then concluded that the Commission will monitor the situation closely. i� FAFARD PHASE II — REVIEW AND APPROVAL Ms. Curran informed the Commission that there was a minor change in Fafard' s condominium project that did not concern the Conservation Commission, therefore was not within our jurisdiction. Mr. Takis made a motion for the record that they were aware of this change and Mr. Harney second the motion, all were in favor. OLD/NEW BUSINESS Mr. Moran stated that as of yet there has been no other destruction of eggs at Jeggle 's Island. Ms. Curran said that the situation was under investigation by Federal and State agents. Mr. Harney informed the Commission that Mr. Mackey has continued construction at Legg' s Hill. Ms. Curran will inform D.E.Q.E. of this for a Cease and Desist had been placed on his property. Ms . Curran updated the Commission on new business that she is currently working on which includes; an informational pamphlet to residents residing near a wetland, and the reorganization of the Commission' s files. She will submit the pamphlet this to the members for their review upon completion. Mr. Moran made an amendment to the minutes of the previous meeting. The spelling changes of Hemenway Street and Naumkeag were noted and the motion was made for the approval and all members were in favor. Mr. Takis made a motion to ajourn the meeting at 8:30 p.m. and Ms. Hogan second the motion. Respectfully submitted, Susan Cosman S107 f r f `SUS 1 r�i `= Conservation Commission Salem, Massachusetts 01970 � MW f {ss\Ct��. MINUTES-OF—MEETING June 1 June 25, 1987 The Salem Conservation Commission met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room on Thursday, June 25, 1987. Present were Philip Moran, Harry Takis, Martha Mogan, Bob Crowley, John Doyle , Fred Harney, and Staff Advisor Rebecca Curran. Chairman Philip Moran called the meeting to order at 7 :30 p.m. llamblet and Hayes, Colonial Road — Public Hearing Chairman Philip Moran read the notice of the public hearing. Mr. Jobb Wallace of Hambl.et & Mayes and Mr. John Dick of Hancock Survey were present to propose the connection of the north drainage area to the south drainage area. Two years ago a gate valve was installed in the south drainage area (DEQE #64-105) . Mr. Wallace and Mr. Dick feel it will be beneficial. if the north drainage area is connected to the south drainage area in case of a major incident . The gate valve would contain the contamination from entering the South River. The grading will change slightly away from the wetland. Ms. Curran asked where the pitch would be. Mr. Wallace responded by showing Ms. Curran that the pitch would be towards the catch basin on the plans. Mr. Takis asked where the gate valve was. Mr Dick said they wanted to upgrade because of the shallow depth of the system. Mr. Moran asked Mr. Dick if he had ever received a Certificate of Compliance on DEQE case x#64-105. Mr. Dick was not certain. Ms. Curran informed the Commission that there was no Certificate of Compliance. Mr. Moran asked Mr. Wallace and Mr. Dick whether the 64-105 has been completed. They said they will check on it for next Tuesday. Mr. Moran suggested a site visit. Mr. Moran asked for a motion to be made for a continuance until next meeting to allow for a site inspection. Mr. Takis made a motion for a site inspection and Mr. Doyle seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous. Mr. Harney was asked if it was necessary to have the location staked out. Mr. Marney replied that it was not. The Commisssion decided that the site visit will be at 6:00 p.m. on June 30, 1987. Discussion — Brentwood Councillor O'Leary was present to ask the Commission if the problem on Brentwood regarding the Wetlands was investigated. Councillor O'Leary wanted to know if there was a natural spring located there. Ms. Curran replied although there are some problems with the variances it was not a wetland area, and the Conservation Commission has no jurisdiction. Ms. Curran thought that sand as fill was odd; however, she continued to say that if it was a natural spring it would be apparent. Discussion — Crowdis Street The second issue raised by Councillor O'Leary was Crowdis Street. Mr. Takis said that he visited the site. Ms. Curran mentioned that the concern was with Parlee Street and that Crowdis Street construction was not effecting the wetland area. Mr. O'Leary inquired about the problem on Parlee Street . Ms. Curran responded by saying that the fillwas originally placed too close to a wetland area. Some of the fillwas removed; however some remained because the backhoe was unable to reach it . Ms. Curran also mentioned that the toe of the slope was presently 1-1 but a 1i-1 slope was requested by the Order of Conditions. Old/New Business Discussion — Jefferson Avenue Ms. Curran received a letter from a concerned citizen regarding a salt pile on Jefferson Avenue. Mr. Takis suggested that a site visit be made. The Commission decided to look at this site on Tuesday, June 30. Discussion — Legg' s Hill Mr. Monga was invited by the Conservation Commission to discuss the Commission' s involvement in the Legg' s Hill case. Mr. Monga stated that if the Commission would approve the restoration work, DEQE would allow the Conservation Commission to handle the case. The Conservation Commission felt that the matter could be more effectively dealt with by DEQE instead of locally. Mr. Monga requested that a phone call or letter be written to Ralph Perkins of DEQE informing him that the Conservation Commission has complete disinvolvement. Mr. Moran said / that he would do that. The Conservation Commission was also concerned with the plans submitted on May 18, 1987 because the restoration work was done without the approval of the Conservation Commission nor DEQE. ,1 Mr. Moran read a public hearing notice regading a public meeting/hearing concerning the South Essex Sewerage District on Thursday, July 30, 1987 at 7:00 p.m. at Salem State College. Mr. Abraham of 20 Clark Street was not present. Mr. Moran suggested a motion be made to vote on the continuance of 20 Clark Street. MINUTES--OF-MEETING N �J nuary_15,_ 1987 The Salem Conservation Commission net on Thursday, January 15, 1987 at One Salem Green, second floor conference room at 7:30 p.m. Present were Chairman Philip Moran, Harry Takis, Martha Hogan, Fred Harney, John Doyle, Paul Geoghegan, David Lash and Staff Advisors Dale Yale and Rebecca Curran. Vice-Chairman Paul Geoghegan called the meeting to order at 7 :35 p.m. Public Hearing - Winter Island Yacht Yard Mr. Geoghegan read the advertisement for the public hearing from the Salem Evening News and opened the public hearing. Mr. Peter Haywood, owner of Winter Island Yacht Yard at 3A Winter Island Road explained his proposal to the Commission. Mr. Haywood told the Commission that recent storms have caused much damage to his property. He is asking the Commission permission to reconstruct a retaining wall to prevent fu.:ure land erosion. Mr. Haywood proposed to build a straight blockwaLl made of concrete blocks , or granite depending on the availablity and expense of granite . The existing wall which has suffered severe storm damage has been at the site for the past 9 years. The proposed wall would be in approximately the same location, but would be 10' high at low tide. There is no abutter opposition to this plan. PIs. Yale asked if the applicant would need to install footings. Mr. Haywood responded that he would not need to install footings if the glacial ledge could be reached during installation excavations. Mr. Geoghegan asked Mr. Haywood if all the fill will be done from she land side of the proposed wall. Mr. Haywood responded in the positive. Mr. Takis asked Mr. Haywood if any removal would take place . Mr. Haywood responded that there may be some care in of land as construction begins which would have to be removed. Mr. Robert Gauthier, an abutter was present and at this time spoke in favor of the proposed project. He stated that Mr. Haywood has done a good job in maintaining his property and has reinvested substantially in the boat yard since purchasing it. Mr. Lash made a motion to close the public hearing. Mr. Takis seconded the motion and the vote was unanimously in favor . Ms. Yale told Mr. Haywood that the Commission has the option of drafting conditions after the meeting or during the next two weeks and that 'he Commission will be in touch with him when the conditions are drafted. Public Hearing continuation - Parlee Street Ms. Yale stated that the site visit was held on January 3, 1987, but due to the large amount of snow cover on the ground, it was difficult for / the Commission members to determine the visual condition of the fill as well as to do a visual wetland deliniation. I — 3 — Mr. Gauthier asked if a survey done by Mr. Hugh Mulligan would better address the needs of the Commission. It was responded in the affirmative and Mr. Gauthier stated chat a survev and wetland delineation by Mr. Mulligan will be forthcoming. Ms . Yale stated that a priority of the applicant should be to stake hay bales approximately 10' from the bottom of the slope. Ms. Yale then stated that a silt fence may be a suitable alternative if hay bales were not available at this time of year. Mr. Gauthier also asked if the Commission wanted the edge of the wetland or the 100' buffer deliniated on the map. Mr. Geoghegan responded that both of these delineations would be preferable. Mr. Harney asked where the gate is located at the site. Mr. Gauthier responded that the gate is located near the junction of Parlee and Crowdis Streets. Mr. Malone stated that no one that he or Mr. Gauthier would give authorization to have been at the site since the cease and desist order was placed on the property. Mr. Harney asked if the backhoe parked at the end of Crowdis Street belongs to either Mr. Gauthier or Mr. Malone. They responded in the negative. Mr. Moran stated that he has sited wood, plaster and Isuzu brochures at the site. Mr. Gauthier responded that he had not authorized fill comprised of these materials to be dumped at the site, but the lock has been cut on several occasions and that he will do everything possible to satisfy the Commission regarding the outcome of this project . After examining the plan, Commission members felt that two of the proposed houses are located within the 100' buffer zone and one has a steep slope at the rear corner. Mr. Moran made a motion to continue the public hearing at the next meeting. Mr. Takis seconded the motion and the vote was unanimously in favor. Legg' s Hill — Discussion Ms. Yale told the Commission that after a site survey performed by the City, it was determined that Mr. Mackey was at elevation 30.69. His Order of Conditions stated that he was not to go below elevation 40. The Commission requested that Mr. Mackey respond to the Commission' s survey by having a registered engineer or land surveyor perform a survey within fourteen days to confirm Mr. Mackey' s verbal disagreement with the City' s survey. This request was sent to Mr. Mackey by registered mail and, to date, the Commission has not received a response to this request. 4 — Mr. Takis asked what the Commission should do next . Mr. Moran stated that he felt the Commission should turn the case over to D.E.Q. E. and let them take over the case from this point . Mr. Geoghegan agreed with Mr. Moran. Mr. Lash asked how the case is supposed to be documented. Ms. Yale stated that Ms. Curran will look into the necessary documentation. Ms. Yale announced her resignation from her position as Staff Advisor to the Conservation Commission and introduced Ms. Rebecca Curran as her replacement. Commission members wished Ms. Yale well and thanked her for her service over the years. Commission members then welcomed Ms. Curran to the Commission. 1 Certificate of Compliance — Fafard — Parcels i & 2 Ms. Yale explained to the Commission that two parcels on First Street are completed and that As—built plans have been submitted to and reviewed by the Department of Public Works and the Clerk of the Works. Both of these reviews have been positive and it would be appropriate at this time for the Commission to write a letter of compliance for these two parcels. Mr. Lash made a motion that the Commission write a letter stating that the two parcels previously referenced in the Fafard project are in compliance of the Order of Conditions. Mr. Moran seconded the motion and the vote was unanimously in favor with Mr. Harney voting present . Old Business Ms. Yale summarized the past two weeks events at Legg' s Hill Pond for \ Commission members. She explained that a dike now retains the pond elevation at an elevation dictated by the D.E.Q.E. There is a small culvert at pond site, but due to clogging it has never worked as a drainage outlet for the pond. During the recent storms, increased J neighborhood flooding brought requests to the Deparment of Public Works to clear out the culvert and allow the pond to drain. Last week the Department of Public Works cleaned out the culvert and some drainage of the pond occured. The pond is stabilized now at an appropriate elevation. Ms. Yale stated she would like the Commission to get momentum behind the plan to install a control structure, which has received funding as well as permission from all concerned agencies except the Army Corp of Engineers. A permit must be obtained from them in order to breech the dike and construct the control structure. To have this control structure in place as soon as possible will be a benefit to all concerned, thus Ms. Yale was requesting Commission members to work expediently on the project. The Winter Island Yacht Yard conditions were then discussed with consensus being reached that the plan should be referenced in the Order of Conditions and that all work will take place from the landward side of the wall. The wall will be 10' at low tide. r SALEM CONSERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES—OF _M_ EET-ING-1 (MARCH 9, -1989 A regular meeting of the Salem Conservation Commission was held on Thursday, March 9, 1989 at 7: 30 P.M. in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Present were : Chairman Philip Moran, Bob Crowley, Martha Hogan, Richard Femino, George Ahmed , and John Vallis . Absent was Fred Harney. Also present were Kathy Winn , Conservation Administrator and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 18-20 KOSCIUSKO STREET Mr. Dennis Helmar was present at the meeting to ask the Commission to grant a Certificate of Compliance on his property located at 18-20 Kosciusko Street . He stated that the Certificate of Compliance was part of an ^rder of Conditions issued by the Salem Conservation Commission in July of 1979 and had apparently been overlooked during a title search performed when he purchased the property seven years ago. He stated that he is presently selling the property and became aware of the Order of Conditions when the title search was performed for this sale . Phil Moran stated that he received a call from Mr . Helmar ' s Attorney, Thomas Alexander and was made aware of the situation. He noted that since the work was performed by the previous owners he suggested that the architect or engineer for the project sign an affidavit saying that the work was done in compliance with the Order of Conditions . He said thatJim Ballou did the drawings for the project but did not supervise the work so he could not attest to the work performed , which was to entail filling in an old cellar and putting a concrete slab over it. Mr . Helmar provided an affidavit from the previous owner, J. Chappin, which was read at the meeting by Phil Moran, and a copy of wich is on file in the Planning Department. Motion made by John Vallis to approve the Certificate of Compliance of 18-20 Kosciusko Street, seconded by Bob Crowley and approved unanimously. CLERK OF THE WORKS REPORT - WILL BEAULIEU PIONEER VILLAGE Will Beaulieu reported to the Commission that the Engineering Department has determined the elvation of the pond at Pioneer Village to be 10.9 . He also stated that the plans for the project remain the same as previously reported except that the mechanical manhole had been changed to a manual one. 3 . LINDEN AV--NUE Kathy Winn reported that she also received complaints that there is someone dumping into the pond at Linden Avenue and Peter Road. She said that there is no ID on the trucks and that there are signs in the area posting No Trespassing and Private . Phil Moran stated that Bob Bouchard owns a Construction Company and lives there . He suggested that Mr. Bouchard be asked to attend the next meeting to address this issue. MACKEY PROPERTY Kathy Winn reported that the status of the Mackey Property should be decided By DEQE within the next month. Phil Moran suggested that the members of the Commission make a visual inspection of the area before the next meeting so that \ the commission can determine how to proceed . / NEW BUSINESS George Ahmed informed the commission that there are pilings in the water behind the Chase House, and asked if the commission was aware of them. Phil Moran stated that permission was granted for the project by the commission last July and that the work should be completed by the end of April . APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion made by John Vallis to approve the minutes as submitted to the meeting of February 23 , 1989, seconded by George Ahmed , and approved unanimously. There being no further business to come before the Commission, a motion was made by John Vallis to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Richard Femino, and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 8 : 30 P.M. RESPECTFULLY .SUBMITTED BY: EZLEEN M. SACCO, CLERK rT � 2� yi G1./ om WiRlilYkim s Salem. Massachusetts 01970 ^rAssnr�` January 27, 1987 Mr. Paul Dierker General Council Office of General Council s Department of Environmental Quality Engineering 1 Winter Street 9th Floor Boston, MA 02108 Dear Mr. Dierker: The Salem Conservation Commission has been unsuccessful in enforcing this case (DEQE #64-119) which has,had a-{pat er-n-o€-non-c-ompliance� We-are'requesting,support from the DEQE to secure compliance. In September of 1984, gravel excavation was observed within the buffer zone of a wetland without notification to the Conservation Commission. -After informal-requests for compliance were made with no results, an Enforcement Order was issued dated September 27, 1984 (see attached). On October 27, 1984, an agreement was reached whereby the owner could remove gravel within a specified area outside the 100' buffer zone, In June 1985, the Commission observed gravel 'excavation taking place outside of the agreed area. The Commission felt that the removal must cease until proper plans and a Notice of Intent were filed with the Conservation Commission to better assess the wetland and drainage issues. At this time a second Enforcement Order dated June 27, 1985, was issued (see attached). On July 11, 1985, the owner's attorney contacted the Commission requesting that the owner be allowed to remove more gravel from the site. He was then informed that no further removal could take place until a formal filing with the Conservation Commission was made. A Notice of Intent (DEQE File #64-119) was filed on July 25, 1985. A public hearing was held on September 12, 1985. At the hearing the owner proposed to excavate to elevation 30 within the buffer zone of the pond and install haybale barriers to prevent sedimentation. The public hearing was continued until October 29, 1985. The owner was not present at this time and the meeting was therfore nullified. The hearing was then continued on December 12, 1985. On that date the hearing was closed and an Order of Conditions was drafted (see attachment). The owner violated several orders: No sign was posted, Special Condition #4 (Order of Conditions, dated January 6, 1986,) states that 'security of the property (site) shall be the responsibility of the applicant. Prior to any further site work, abarrier shall be I erected at the site entrance and controlled by a locked gate to insure there is no unauthorized dumping of unacceptable materials: This was not done. Special condition #5 states that the site work resulting in the removal of material or the disturbance of underlying strata shall be prohibited below elevation 401. This has also been violated. Repeated attempts were made by the Conservation Commission to urge the owner and the owner's attorney to attend meetings and discuss this matter. The Commission's attempts to work cooperatively and keep communication open have been made to no avail. Attached is a letter from the owner's attorney to the Commission dated November 6, 1986. Page 2, paragraph 2 of this letter is especially noteworthy, stating that the owner complies with the "spirt" if not the "letter" of the Order of Conditions. On December 8, 1986, an informal survey performed by the Planning Department found that the owner had indeed gone below elevation 40 to elevation 30.69. At a regular meeting of the Conservation Commission on December 11, 1986 it was stated that the property owner disputed the results therefore the Commission voted to require the owner to submit a survey signed and stamped by a registered surveyor or professional engineer within 14 days of a letter sent to the owner dated December 19, 1986. (See enclosed) The time period lapsed on January 12, 1987 and the property owner has not yet responded. It should be noted that the owner was offered the option of returning to the Conservation Commission after he reached elevation 40 and a determination made if any significant impact was made. At that time an assessment could be made as to whether going to elevation 35 or 30 would have a significant impact. The owner did not contact the Commission concerning this. (Stated in the minutes of January 16, 1987 page 4). The reasons for the decision by the Conservation Commission to limit excavation below elevation 40 are as follows: 1. Any excavation below elevation 40 will stretch the excavation time out to a prolonged period under which it would be difficult to monitored and ensure that all necessary procedures are being followed. (The owner stated it would be 3-5 years) Sedimentation and erosion control procedures would be difficult to maintain over this period as well. I 2. What the owner proposed disrupts the soil strata and disturbes the I filtration medium for run-off which would affect the ground water. i We look forward to your prompt attention to this matter. It has been an ongoing problem to the Commission. Our attempts to deal with this in a reasonable fashion have been unsuccessful. Please feel free to contact Rebecca Curran, the Conservation Aide at 744-4580. Sincerely, Philip D. Moran Chairman N120W P f