Columbus Ave Seawall Reconstruction Project ENF Application 2 of 2 9-15-2021ENVIRONMENTAL NOTIFICATION FORM APPLICATION
Columbus Avenue Seawall Reconstruction Project
(EEA #258-2020-2-3)
46 Columbus Avenue, Salem, Massachusetts
September 2021
GZA File No. 18.0171674.04
PREPARED FOR:
City of Salem
98 Washington Street, 2nd Floor
Salem, Massachusetts
GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc.
144 Elm Street │ Amesbury, MA 01913
781-278-4800
31 Offices Nationwide
www.gza.com
TRANSMITTAL VIA EMAIL SEPTEMBER 15, 2021
September 15, 2021
GZA File No. 18.0171674.04
Kathleen A. Theoharides
Secretary of the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs
Attn: MEPA Office
100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900
Boston, MA 02114
Re: Environmental Notification Form Application
Columbus Avenue Seawall Reconstruction Project (EEA #258-2020-2-3)
46 Columbus Avenue, Salem, Massachusetts
Dear Secretary Theoharides:
On behalf of our client, the City of Salem (the City), GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc. (GZA) is pleased to submit
this Environmental Notification Form (ENF) application for the proposed Columbus Avenue Seawall
Reconstruction Project located at 46 Columbus Avenue in Salem, Massachusetts. GZA has prepared this
ENF application in accordance with the requirements of the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act. An
electronic copy will be sent via electronic mail. In addition, one copy of the ENF has been submitted tothe
agencies and offices included in the distribution list (see Appendix C).
The proposed project consists of the in-kind reconstruction of the stone seawall along the approximate
existing alignment with an increase in height and installation of new flood barrier gate for greater
protection and resilience to wave surge/flooding conditions. The existing salt marsh will also be enhanced
with coir rolls, new clean sand, and salt marsh plantings to help reduce the degradation of the existing
marsh area.
The Project involves alteration of greater than 1,000 square feet of salt marsh and the reconstruction of
an existing solid fill structure of greater than 1,000 square feet of base area and is therefore subject to
MEPA review in accordance with 301 CMR 11.03 (3)(b)(1)(c) and 301 CMR 11.03 (3)(b)(6), respectively.
Additional information on the proposed project, including resource area impacts, is presented in the
Project Narrative.
Should you have any questions or comments regarding this submittal, or if you require additional
information, please contact our office at (781) 278-4806.
Sincerely,
GZA GEOENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
David A. Smith
Senior Project Manager
CC: David Knowlton, P.E. City Engineer/DPS Director, City of Salem
Distribution List
Enclosure
September 2021
GZA File No. 18.0171674.04
Columbus Avenue Seawall Reconstruction Project
Environmental Notification Form
TOC | i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
COVER LETTER
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ENVIRONMENTAL NOTIFICATION FORM
PROJECT NARRATIVE
1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................1
1.1 BACKGROUND...............................................................................................................................................1
2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS...................................................................................................................................1
3.0 PROPOSED PROJECT.......................................................................................................................................2
3.1 LARGE GRANITE STONE SEAWALL ................................................................................................................3
3.2 WALL OPENING/FLOOD BARRIER AND BEACH ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS....................................................3
3.3 SALT MARSH ENHANCEMENT.......................................................................................................................3
3.4 PUBLIC BENEFITS...........................................................................................................................................4
4.0 REGULATORY COMPLIANCE AND IMPACTS.....................................................................................................4
4.1 LAND SUBJECT TO COASTAL STORM FLOWAGE (310 CMR 10.04)...............................................................5
4.2 COASTAL BEACH (310 CMR 10.27)................................................................................................................5
4.3 COASTAL BANK (310 CMR 10.30)..................................................................................................................7
4.4 SALT MARSH (310 CMR 10.32)......................................................................................................................9
4.5 LAND CONTAINING SHELLFISH (310 CMR 10.34)........................................................................................10
4.6 100-FOOT BUFFER ZONE.............................................................................................................................12
4.7 OTHER REGULATED RESOURCE AREAS.......................................................................................................12
5.0 CONSTRUCTION PROCEDURES......................................................................................................................12
5.1 MEASURES TO MINIMIZE RESOURCE AREA IMPACTS................................................................................13
6.0 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS .............................................................................................................................14
7.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE POPULATIONS.....................................................................................................14
8.0 CONCLUSION...............................................................................................................................................14
September 2021
GZA File No. 18.0171674.04
Columbus Avenue Seawall Reconstruction Project
Environmental Notification Form
TOC | ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FIGURES
Figure 1 – Site Locus Map
Figure 2 – FEMA National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette
APPENDICES
Appendix A – Permit Plans
Appendix B – Photographs
Appendix C – MEPA Distribution List
Appendix D – Alternatives Analysis
Appendix E – List of Required Permits
Appendix F – Environmental Justice Populations Map
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs
Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) Office
Effective Janu ary2011
Environmental Notification Form
For Office Use Only
EEA #:
M EP A A nalyst:
The information requ ested on this form mu stbe c ompleted in ord erto su bmitad oc u ment
elec tronic allyforreview u nd erthe M assac hu setts EnvironmentalP olic yA c t,301C M R 11.00.
P rojec tName:C olu mbu s A venu e S eawallRec onstru c tion P rojec t
S treetA d d ress:46 C olu mbu s A venu e, S alem, M A 0197 0
M u nic ipality:S alem W atershed :A tlantic O c ean –Ju niperC ove
UniversalTransverse M erc atorC oord inates:L atitu d e:42°32’ 00”N
L ongitu d e:7 0°52’ 12”W
Estimated c ommenc ementd ate:Nov. 2022 Estimated c ompletion d ate:M ay2023
P rojec tType:S eawallRec onstru c tion S tatu s ofprojec td esign:7 5%c omplete
P roponent:C ityofS alem, David Knowlton, C ityEngineer
S treetA d d ress:98 W ashington S treet, 2 nd Floor
M u nic ipality:S alem S tate:M A ZipC od e:0197 0
Name ofC ontactP erson:David A . S mith, S eniorP rojec tM anager
Firm/A genc y:GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc .S treetA d d ress:144 Elm S treet
M u nic ipality:A mesbu ry S tate:M A ZipC od e:01913
P hone:(7 8 1)27 8 -48 06 Fax:(97 8 )8 34-6269 E-mail:
d avid . smith@ gza. c om
Does this projec tmeetorexc eed amand atoryEIR threshold (see 301 C M R 11. 03)?
Yes No
Ifthis is an Expand ed EnvironmentalNotific ation Form (ENF)(see 301 C M R 11. 05(7 ))ora
Notic e ofP rojec tC hange (NP C ), are you requ esting:
aS ingle EIR?(see 301 C M R 11. 06(8 ))Yes No
aS pec ialReview P roc ed u re?(see 301C M R 11. 09)Yes No
aW aiverofmand atoryEIR?(see 301 C M R 11. 11 )Yes No
aP hase IW aiver?(see 301 C M R 11. 11 )Yes No
(Note:Greenhou se Gas Emissions analysis mu stbe inc lu d ed in the Expand ed ENF.)
W hic hM EP A review threshold (s)d oes the projec tmeetorexc eed (see 301 C M R 11. 03)?
301 C M R 11. 03(3)(b)(1)(c )–alteration of1, 000 ormore sfofsaltmarshand 301 C M R 11. 03(3)(b)(6)–
rec onstru c tion ofan existingsolid fillstru c tu re of1, 000 ormore sfbase area.
W hic hS tate A genc yP ermits willthe projec trequ ire?
W P A Notic e ofIntent, DEP C hapter91 L ic ense, 401 W aterQ u alityC ertific ation
Id entifyanyfinanc ialassistanc e orland transferfrom an A genc yofthe C ommonwealth, inc lu d ingthe A genc y
name and the amou ntoffu nd ingorland areain ac res:
The C ityofS alem rec eived agrantfrom the Exec u tive O ffic e ofEnergyand EnvironmentalA ffairs Dam and
S eawallRepairorRemovalP rogram (ENV20 DS 01)ford esign and permitting. The C ityhas also su bmitted
forac onstru c tion phase grantthrou ghthe Dam and S eawallRepairorRemovalP rogram (ENV21 DS 02).
-2 -
Summary of Project Size
& Environmental Impacts
Existing Change Total
LAND
Totalsite ac reage 8 . 7 0 ac res
New ac res ofland altered 8 , 900 sf
A c res ofimperviou s area 2, 400 sf(land sid e
walkway)
0 sf 2, 400 sf
S qu are feetofnew bord ering
vegetated wetland s alteration
0 sf
S qu are feetofnew otherwetland
alteration 8 , 900 sf
(L S C S F, C oastal
B eac h, S altM arsh)
A c res ofnew non-waterd epend ent
u se oftid eland s orwaterways 0 sf
STRUCTURES
Gross squ are footage
Nu mberofhou singu nits
M aximu m height(feet)
TRANSPORTATION
Vehic le trips perd ay
P arkingspac es
WASTEWATER
W aterUse (Gallons perd ay)
W aterwithd rawal(GP D)
W astewatergeneration/treatment
(GP D)
L engthofwatermains (miles)
L engthofsewermains (miles)
H as this projec tbeen filed withM EP A before?
Yes (EEA # )No
H as anyprojec ton this site been filed withM EP A before?
Yes (EEA # )No
-3-
GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION – all proponents must fill out this section
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Desc ribe the existingc ond itions and land u ses on the projec tsite:
The C olu mbu s A venu e seawallis an old erfield stone and granite bloc kmasonrystru c tu re approximately47 4
linearfeetlongwithan approximate 20-footwid e opening, loc ated alongthe northwestern portion ofJu niper
C ove in S alem, M assac hu setts between the properties of44 C olu mbu s A venu e and 30 B ayView A venu e. The
seawallprovid es foreshore protec tion to; the pu blic road way(C olu mbu s A venu e), pu blic sid ewalk, u tilities, and
resid entiald wellings. The seawallis fronted bythe pu blic lyac c essible ‘ S teps B eac h’ and an areaofsaltmarsh
vegetation alongthe sou thwestportion ofthe beac harea.
Desc ribe the proposed projectand its programmatic and physic alelements:
The proposed P rojec td esign c onsists ofremovalofthe existingd eteriorated and d amaged stone masonry
seawalland c onstru c tion ofapproximately466 linearfeetofnew, large c u tgranite stone seawallalongthe
approximate existingseawallalignment, installation ofnew 8 -foot-wid e flood barriergate atthe seawallopening,
rec onstru c tion ofthe granite bloc kland ingand ac c ess steps, rec onstru c tion ofthe 5-foot-wid e paved sid ewalk
alongthe land ward sid e ofthe seawall, and saltmarshenhanc ements inc lu d ingnew c oirrolls alongthe seaward
ed ge, new c lean sand fill, and new and su pplementalsaltmarshplantings. A d d itionally, 10 linearfeetofad jac ent
seawallat44 C olu mbu s A venu e and 30 B ayView A venu e is proposed to be rec onstru c ted to tie-in and matc h
the proposed C olu mbu s A venu e S eawall. Referto the attac hed P rojec tNarrative.
NO TE:The projec td esc ription shou ld su mmarize boththe projec t’s d irec tand ind irec timpac ts
(inc lu d ingc onstru c tion period impac ts)in terms oftheirmagnitu d e,geographic extent,d u ration
and frequ enc y,and reversibility,as applic able.Itshou ld also d isc u ss the infrastru c tu re requ irements
ofthe projec tand the c apac ityofthe mu nic ipaland /orregionalinfrastru c tu re to su stain these
requ irements into the fu tu re.
Desc ribe the on-site projec talternatives (and alternative off-site loc ations, ifapplic able), c onsid ered
bythe proponent, inc lu d ingatleastone feasible alternative thatis allowed u nd erc u rrentzoning,
and the reasons(s)thattheywere notselec ted as the preferred alternative:
A n alternatives analysis was d eveloped forthe proposed C olu mbu s A venu e S eawallRec onstru c tion P rojec t
c onsistingofDo Nothing, S tone M asonryIn-Kind Repairs, S loped S tone Revetment, Reinforc ed C onc rete
S eawall, H ybrid C onc rete and S tone VeneerS eawall, and the P roposed Design. The alternatives analysis is
inc lu d ed in A ppend ix D.
NOTE:The pu rpose ofthe alternatives analysis is to c onsid erwhateffec tc hangingthe parameters
and /orsitingofaprojec t,orc omponents thereof,willhave on the environment,keepingin mind that
the objec tive ofthe M EP A review proc ess is to avoid orminimize d amage to the environmentto the
greatestextentfeasible.Examples ofalternative projec ts inc lu d e alternative site loc ations,
alternative site u ses,and alternative site c onfigu rations.
S u mmarize the mitigation measu res proposed to offsetthe impac ts ofthe preferred alternative:
The rec onstru c tion ofthe d amaged and d egrad ed seawallrepresents amitigation againstwave effec ts, flood ing,
and sealevelrise to protec tthe C olu mbu s A venu e road way(one ofthe main vehic u larrou tes to/from Ju niper
P oint), land sid e u tilities, nu merou s resid entiald wellings, and pu blic ac c ess along(land sid e)ofwalland ac c ess to
the beac h(seasid e)ofwall.
Ifthe projectis proposed to be c onstru c ted in phases, please d escribe eachphase:
S ingle phase c onstru c tion antic ipated to oc c u rbetween November2022 to M ay2023.
-4-
AREAS OF CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN:
Is the projec twithin orad jac entto an A reaofC ritic alEnvironmentalC onc ern?
Yes (S pec ify__________________________________)
No
ifyes, d oes the A C EC have an approved Resou rc e M anagementP lan?___Yes ___No;
Ifyes, d esc ribe how the projec tc omplies withthis plan.
_______________________________________________________
W illthere be stormwaterru nofford isc harge to the d esignated A C EC ?___Yes _X_No;
Ifyes, d esc ribe and assess the potentialimpac ts ofsu c hstormwaterru noff/d isc harge to the d esignated A C EC .
_________________________________________________
RARE SPECIES:
Does the projec tsite inc lu d e Estimated and /orP riorityH abitatofS tate-L isted Rare S pec ies? (see
http: //www. mass. gov/d fwele/d fw/nhesp/regu latory_review/priority_habitat/priority_habitat_home. htm)
Yes (S pec ify__________________________________)No
HISTORICAL /ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES:
Does the projec tsite inc lu d e anystru c tu re, site ord istric tlisted in the S tate RegisterofH istoric P lac e
orthe inventoryofH istoric and A rc haeologic alA ssets ofthe C ommonwealth?
Yes (S pec ify__________________________________)No
Ifyes, d oes the projec tinvolve anyd emolition ord estru c tion ofanylisted orinventoried historic
orarc haeologic alresou rc es?Yes (S pec ify__________________________________)No
WATER RESOURCES:
Is there an O u tstand ingResou rc e W ater(O RW )on orwithin ahalf-mile rad iu s ofthe projec tsite? ___Yes
_X_No;
ifyes, id entifythe O RW and its loc ation. ______________________________________________
(NO TE:O u tstand ingResou rc e W aters inc lu d e C lass A pu blic watersu pplies,theirtribu taries,and bord ering
wetland s;ac tive and inac tive reservoirs approved byM assDEP ;c ertain waters within A reas ofC ritic al
EnvironmentalC onc ern,and c ertified vernalpools.O u tstand ingresou rc e waters are listed in the
S u rfac e W aterQ u alityS tand ard s,314 C M R 4.00.)
A re there anyimpaired waterbod ies on orwithin ahalf-mile rad iu s ofthe projec tsite? ___Yes _X_No; ifyes,
id entifythe waterbod yand pollu tant(s)c au singthe impairment: ____________________________________.
Is the projec twithin amed iu m orhighstress basin, as established bythe M assac hu setts
W aterResou rc es C ommission?___Yes _X _No
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT:
Generallyd esc ribe the projec t's stormwaterimpac ts and measu res thatthe projec twilltake to c omply
withthe stand ard s fou nd in M assDEP 's S tormwaterM anagementRegu lations: The proposed projec twillc omply
withthe stand ard s fou nd in the S tormwaterM anagementRegu lations to the maximu m extentpossible. Erosion
and sed imentation c ontrols willbe in plac e d u ringc onstru c tion ac tivities.
MASSACHUSETTS CONTINGENCY PLAN:
H as the projec tsite been, oris itc u rrentlybeing, regu lated u nd erM . G. L . c . 21E orthe M assac hu s etts C ontingenc y
P lan? Yes ___No ___; ifyes, please d esc ribe the c u rrentstatu s ofthe
Yes ___No _X_; ifyes, please d esc ribe the c u rrentstatu s ofthe site (inc lu d ingRelease Trac kingNu mber(RTN),
c leanu pphase, and Response A c tion O u tc ome c lassific ation): _____________________
Is there an A c tivityand Use L imitation (A UL )on anyportion ofthe projec tsite?Yes ___No _X_;
ifyes, d esc ribe whic hportion ofthe site and how the projec twillbe c onsistentwiththe A UL :
_____________________.
A re you aware ofanyReportable C ond itions atthe propertythathave notyetbeen assigned an RTN?
Yes ___No _X__; ifyes, please d esc ribe: ____________________________________
-5-
SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE:
Ifthe projec twillgenerate solid waste d u ringd emolition orc onstru c tion, d esc ribe alternatives c onsid ered
forre-u se, rec yc ling, and d isposalof, e. g. , asphalt, bric k, c onc rete, gypsu m, metal, wood : The existingstone
masonryseawalland paved walkwaywillbe removed and replac ed . O therminormisc ellaneou s c onstru c tion
d ebris maybe generated , inc lu d ingtimber, c onc rete, and metal. Removed materials u nsu itable forreu se willbe
legallyand properlyd isposed oforrec yc led atan approved fac ility.
(NO TE:A sphaltpavement,bric k,c onc rete and metalare banned from d isposalatM assac hu setts
land fills and waste c ombu stion fac ilities and wood is banned from d isposalatM assac hu setts land fills.
S ee 310C M R 19.017 forthe c omplete listofbanned materials.)
W illyou rprojec td istu rb asbestos c ontainingmaterials?Yes ___No __X_;
ifyes, please c onsu ltstate asbestos requ irements athttp: //mass. gov/M assDEP /air/asbhom01. htm
Desc ribe anti-id lingand othermeasu res to limitemissions from c onstru c tion equ ipment: C ontrac tors willad here
to M u nic ipaland S tate anti-id lingregu lations. C ontrac tors willlimitemissions from c onstru c tion equ ipment.
DESIGNATED WILD AND SCENIC RIVER:
Is this projec tsite loc ated whollyorpartiallywithin ad efined riverc orrid orofafed erally
d esignated W ild and S c enic Riverorastate d esignated S c enic River?Yes ___No _X__;
ifyes, spec ifyname ofriverand d esignation:
Ifyes, d oes the projec thave the potentialto impac tanyofthe “ou tstand inglyremarkable”
resou rc es ofafed erallyW ild and S c enic Riverorthe stated pu rpose ofastate d esignated S c enic River?
Yes ___No ___; ifyes, spec ifyname ofriverand d esignation: _____________;
ifyes, willthe projec twillresu ltin anyimpac ts to anyofthe d esignated “ou tstand inglyremarkable”
resou rc es ofthe W ild and S c enic Riverorthe stated pu rposes ofaS c enic River.
Yes ___No ___;
ifyes, d esc ribe the potentialimpac ts to one ormore ofthe “ou tstand inglyremarkable”resou rc es or
stated pu rposes and mitigation measu res proposed .
ATTACHMENTS:
1.L istofallattac hments to this d oc u ment.
2.U. S . G. S . map(good qu alityc olorc opy, 8 -½ x 11 inc hes orlarger, atasc ale of1: 24, 000)
ind ic atingthe projec tloc ation and bou nd aries.
3. .P lan, atan appropriate sc ale, ofexistingc ond itions on the projec tsite and its immed iate
environs, showingallknown stru c tu res, road ways and parkinglots, railroad rights-of-way,
wetland s and waterbod ies, wood ed areas, farmland , steepslopes, pu blic open spac es, and
majoru tilities.
4 P lan, atan appropriate sc ale, d epic tingenvironmentalc onstraints on orad jac entto the
projec tsite su c has P riorityand /orEstimated H abitatofstate-listed rare spec ies, A reas of
C ritic alEnvironmentalC onc ern, C hapter91 ju risd ic tionalareas, A rtic le 97 land s,
wetland resou rc e aread elineations, watersu pplyprotec tion areas, and historic resou rc es
and /ord istric ts.
5.P lan, atan appropriate sc ale, ofproposed c ond itions u pon c ompletion ofprojec t(if
c onstru c tion ofthe projec tis proposed to be phased , there shou ld be asite plan showing
c ond itions u pon the c ompletion ofeac hphase).
6.L istofallagenc ies and persons to whom the proponentc irc u lated the ENF, in ac c ord anc e
with301 C M R 11. 16(2).
7 .L istofmu nic ipaland fed eralpermits and reviews requ ired bythe projec t, as applic able.
-6-
LAND SECTION – all proponents must fill out this section
I. Thresholds / Permits
A . Does the projec tmeetorexc eed anyreview threshold s related to land (see 301 C M R 11. 03(1)
___Yes __X_No; ifyes, spec ifyeac hthreshold :
II. Impacts and Permits
A . Desc ribe, in ac res, the c u rrentand proposed c harac terofthe projec tsite, as follows:
Existing C hange Total
Footprintofbu ild ings ________________________
Internalroad ways ________________________
P arkingand otherpaved areas 2400 sf_____0 sf__2400 sf__
O theraltered areas ________8 900 sf__8 900 sf__
Und eveloped areas ________________________
Total: Project Site Acreage 8 . 7 0 ac . _____0_____8 . 7 0 ac . __
B . H as anypartofthe projec tsite been in ac tive agric u ltu ralu se in the lastfive years?
___Yes _X__No; ifyes, how manyac res ofland in agric u ltu ralu se (withprime state or
loc allyimportantagric u ltu ralsoils)willbe c onverted to nonagric u ltu ralu se?
C . Is anypartofthe projec tsite c u rrentlyorproposed to be in ac tive forestryu se?
___Yes _X__No; ifyes, please d esc ribe c u rrentand proposed forestryac tivities and
ind ic ate whetheranypartofthe site is the su bjec tofaforestmanagementplan approved by
the DepartmentofC onservation and Rec reation:
D. Does anypartofthe projec tinvolve c onversion ofland held fornatu ralresou rc es pu rposes in
ac c ord anc e withA rtic le 97 ofthe A mend ments to the C onstitu tion ofthe C ommonwealthto
anypu rpose notin ac c ord anc e withA rtic le 97 ?___Yes _X__No; ifyes, d esc ribe:
E. Is anypartofthe projec tsite c u rrentlysu bjec tto ac onservation restric tion, preservation
restric tion, agric u ltu ralpreservation restric tion orwatershed preservation restric tion?___
Yes__X_No; ifyes, d oes the projec tinvolve the release ormod ific ation ofsu c hrestric tion?
___Yes ___No; ifyes, d esc ribe:
F. Does the projec trequ ire approvalofanew u rban red evelopmentprojec torafu nd amentalc hange
in an existingu rban red evelopmentprojec tu nd erM . G. L . c . 121A ? ___Yes _X__No; ifyes,
d esc ribe:
G. Does the projec trequ ire approvalofanew u rban renewalplan oramajormod ific ation ofan
existingu rban renewalplan u nd erM . G. L . c . 121B ?Yes ___No _X__; ifyes, d esc ribe:
III.Consistency
A . Id entifythe c u rrentmu nic ipalc omprehensive land u se plan
Title: __________________________ Date___________________
B . Desc ribe the projec t’ s c onsistenc ywiththatplan withregard to:
1) ec onomic d evelopment_______________________
2) ad equ ac yofinfrastru c tu re _____________________
3) open spac e impac ts ___________________________
4)c ompatibilitywithad jac entland u ses_______________
C . Id entifythe c u rrentRegionalP olic yP lan ofthe applic able RegionalP lanningA genc y(RP A )
RP A : M etropolitan A reaP lanningC ou nc il
-7 -
Title: M etroFu tu re: M akingaGreaterB oston Region Date: M ay2008
D. Desc ribe the projec t’ s c onsistenc ywiththatplan withregard to:
1) ec onomic d evelopment: The proposed projec tc ou ld c reate job opportu nities d u ring
the c onstru c tion phase. The rec onstru c ted seawallwillbe more resilientto wave
impac ts and flood ing, thu s red u c ingthe frequ enc yand need formaintenanc e work
and willprotec tthe pu blic road way, walkway, u tilities, and resid entiald wellings from
expensive storm ind u c ed d amage and /oremergenc ywork.
2) ad equ ac yofinfrastru c tu re: The proposed projec twillrec onstru c tthe existingd amaged
and d eteriorated seawall. The rec onstru c ted seawallwillprovid e inc reased protec tion
and c oastalresilienc yto the pu blic road way(C olu mbu s A venu e), pu blic walkway,
u tilities and resid entiald wellings againstwave effec ts, flood ing, and sealevelrise.
3) open spac e impac ts: The proposed projec twillmaintain and improve the pu blic
ac c ess alongthe land sid e ofthe seawallwiththe rec onstru c tion ofthe pu blic walkway
and ac c ess willbe maintained throu ghthe openingin the seawallto the land ingand to
the beac harea. Improvements to the land sid e ofthe seawall(i. e. elimination of
sinkholes and u nd ermining)willprovid e c ontinu ed , safe ac c ess to pu blic benc hes and
walkway. The existingseawallopeningwillbe improved withthe rec onstru c tion ofthe
seawalland land ing, and safe ac c ess maintained to the beac hareaforc ontinu ed loc al
rec reation.
-8 -
RARE SPECIES SECTION
I. Thresholds / Permits
A . W illthe projec tmeetorexc eed anyreview threshold s related to rare species or habitat (see
301 C M R 11. 03(2))? ___Yes _X__No; ifyes, spec ify, in qu antitative terms:
(NO TE:Ifyou are u nc ertain,itis rec ommend ed thatyou c onsu ltwiththe Natu ralH eritage and
End angered S pec ies P rogram (NH ES P )priorto su bmittingthe ENF.)
B . Does the projec trequ ire anystate permits related to rare species or habitat? ___Yes _X_No
C . Does the projec tsite fallwithin mapped rare spec ies habitat(P riorityorEstimated H abitat?)in the
c u rrentM assac hu setts Natu ralH eritage A tlas (attac hrelevantpage)? ___Yes _X__No.
D. Ifyou answered "No" to allqu estions A , B and C , proc eed to the Wetlands, Waterways, and
Tidelands Section. Ifyou answered "Yes" to eitherqu estion A orqu estion B , fillou tthe
remaind erofthe Rare S pec ies sec tion below.
II. Impacts and Permits
A . Does the projec tsite fallwithin P riorityorEstimated H abitatin the c u rrentM assac hu setts Natu ral
H eritage A tlas (attac hrelevantpage)? ___Yes ___No. Ifyes,
1. H ave you c onsu lted withthe Division ofFisheries and W ild life Natu ralH eritage and
End angered S pec ies P rogram (NH ES P )? ___Yes ___No; ifyes, have you rec eived a
d etermination as to whetherthe projec twillresu ltin the “take”ofarare spec ies? ___
Yes ___No; ifyes, attac hthe letterofd etermination to this su bmission.
2. W illthe projec t"take" an end angered , threatened , and /orspec ies ofspec ialc onc ern in
ac c ord anc e withM . G. L . c . 131A (see also 321 C M R 10. 04)? ___Yes ___No; ifyes, provid e
asu mmaryofproposed measu res to minimize and mitigate rare spec ies impac ts
3. W hic hrare spec ies are known to oc c u rwithin the P riorityorEstimated H abitat?
4. H as the site been su rveyed forrare spec ies in ac c ord anc e withthe M assac hu setts
End angered S pec ies A c t? ___Yes ___No
4. Ifyou rprojec tis within Estimated H abitat, have you filed aNotic e ofIntentorrec eived an
O rd erofC ond itions forthis projec t? ___Yes ___No; ifyes, d id you send ac opyofthe
Notic e ofIntentto the Natu ralH eritage and End angered S pec ies P rogram, in ac c ord anc e
withthe W etland s P rotec tion A c tregu lations? ___Yes ___No
B . W illthe projec t"take" an end angered , threatened , and /orspec ies ofspec ialc onc ern in
ac c ord anc e withM . G. L . c . 131A (see also 321 C M R 10. 04)? ___Yes ___No; ifyes,
provid e asu mmaryofproposed measu res to minimize and mitigate impac ts to signific ant
habitat:
-9 -
WETLANDS, WATERWAYS, AND TIDELANDS SECTION
I. Thresholds / Permits
A . W illthe projec tmeetorexc eed anyreview threshold s related to wetlands, waterways, and
tidelands (see 301 C M R 11. 03(3))? _X__Yes ___No; ifyes, spec ify, in qu antitative terms:
301 C M R 11. 03(3)(b)(1)(c )–The projec tproposes to alter2, 8 7 0 sfofsaltmarshareabyfillingvoid s
and erod ed areas withsu itable c lean sand filland installingnew saltmarshplu gs. The proposed
workwillhelpenhanc e the existingsaltmarshprovid ingaholistic improvementwithinc reased
shoreline stabilization.
301 C M R 11. 03(3)(b)(6)–The projec tproposes to rec onstru c tan existingsolid fillstru c tu re (seawall
and beac hac c ess land ing)of1, 000 ormore sfbase area.
B . Does the projec trequ ire anystate permits (oraloc alO rd erofC ond itions)related to wetlands,
waterways, or tidelands? _X__Yes ___No; ifyes, spec ify whic hpermit: The projec twillrequ ire a
c ombined C hapter91 L ic ense and S ec tion 401 W aterQ u alityC ertific ation from the M assDEP
W aterways Regu lation P rogram, loc alO rd erofC ond itions withthe S alem C onservation
C ommission, and US A C E P re-C onstru c tion Notific ation.
C . Ifyou answered "No" to bothqu estions A and B , proc eed to the Water Supply Section. Ifyou
answered "Yes" to eitherqu estion A orqu estion B , fillou tthe remaind erofthe W etland s,
W aterways, and Tid eland s S ec tion below.
II. Wetlands Impacts and Permits
A . Does the projec trequ ire anew oramend ed O rd erofC ond itions u nd erthe W etland s P rotec tion
A c t(M . G. L . c . 131A )? _X__Yes ___No; ifyes, has aNotic e ofIntentbeen filed ?___Yes
_X__No; ifyes, listthe d ate and M assDEP file nu mber: ______; ifyes, has aloc alO rd erof
C ond itions been issu ed ? ___Yes ___No; W as the O rd erofC ond itions appealed ? ___Yes
___No. W illthe projec trequ ire aVarianc e from the W etland s regu lations?___Yes _X__No.
B . Desc ribe anyproposed permanentortemporaryimpac ts to wetland resou rc e areas loc ated on
the projec tsite: The proposed projec twillhave permanentand temporaryimpac ts to L S C S F,
C oastalB eac h, C oastalB ank, and S altM arsh. Referto the attac hed P rojec tNarrative ford etails
regard ingproposed workwithin wetland resou rc e areas.
C . Estimate the extentand type ofimpac tthatthe projec twillhave on wetland resou rc es, and
ind ic ate whetherthe impac ts are temporaryorpermanent:
C oastalW etland s A rea(squ are feet)or Temporaryor
L ength(linearfeet)P ermanentImpac t?
L and Und erthe O c ean _________________ ___________________
Designated P ortA reas _________________ ___________________
C oastalB eac hes 223sf(P ermanent), 267 0 sf(Temporary)
C oastalDu nes _________________ ____________________
B arrierB eac hes _________________ ____________________
C oastalB anks 514 L F(P ermanent), 50 L F(Temporary)
Roc kyIntertid alS hores _________________ ____________________
S altM arshes 28 7 0 sf(P ermanent), 1000 sf(Temporary)
L and Und erS altP ond s _________________ ____________________
L and C ontainingS hellfish _________________ ___________________
FishRu ns _________________ ____________________
L and S u bjec tto C oastalS torm Flowage 58 00 sf(P ermanent), 1017 0 sf(Temporary)
Inland W etland s
B ank(lf)_________________ ____________________
B ord eringVegetated W etland s _________________ ____________________
Isolated Vegetated W etland s _________________ ____________________
-10 -
L and u nd erW ater _________________ ____________________
Isolated L and S u bjec tto Flood ing _________________ ____________________
B ord eringL and S u bjec tto Flood ing _________________ ____________________
RiverfrontA rea _________________ ____________________
D. Is anypartofthe projec t:
1. proposed as a limited project? ___Yes _X__No; ifyes, whatis the area(in sf)?____
2. the c onstru c tion oralteration ofa dam? ___Yes _X__No; ifyes, d esc ribe:
3. fillorstru c tu re in a velocity zone orregulatory floodway? ___Yes _X__No
4. d red gingord isposalofd red ged material? ___Yes _X__No; ifyes, d esc ribe the volu me
ofd red ged materialand the proposed d isposalsite:
5. ad isc harge to an Outstanding Resource Water (ORW)oran Area of Critical
Environmental Concern (ACEC)? ___Yes _X__No
6. su bjec tto awetland s restric tion ord er? ___Yes _X__No; ifyes, id entifythe area(in sf):
7 . loc ated in bu fferzones? __X_Yes ___No; ifyes, how mu c h(in sf)7 , 500 sf(inc lu d ed
within L S C S Fresou rc e area)
E. W illthe projec t:
1. be su bjec tto aloc alwetland s ord inanc e orbylaw? _X__Yes ___No
2. alteranyfed erally-protec ted wetland s notregu lated u nd erstate law? ___Yes _X__No; if
yes, whatis the area(sf)?
III. Waterways and Tidelands Impacts and Permits
A . Does the projec tsite c ontain waterways ortid eland s (inc lu d ingfilled formertid eland s)thatare
su bjec tto the W aterways A c t, M . G. L . c . 91? _X_Yes ___No; ifyes, is there ac u rrentC hapter91
L ic ense orP ermitaffec tingthe projec tsite?___Yes _X_No; ifyes, listthe d ate and lic ense or
permitnu mberand provid e ac opyofthe historic mapu sed to d etermine extentoffilled
tid eland s:
B . Does the projec trequ ire anew ormod ified lic ense orpermitu nd erM . G. L . c . 91?_X_Yes __No;
ifyes, how manyac res ofthe projec tsite su bjec tto M . G. L . c . 91 willbe fornon-water-d epend ent
u se?C u rrent _0__ C hange _0__ Total_0__
Ifyes, how manysqu are feetofsolid fillorpile-su pported stru c tu res (in sf)?
C . Fornon-water-d epend entu se projec ts, ind ic ate the following:
A reaoffilled tid eland s on the site: _____________________
A reaoffilled tid eland s c overed bybu ild ings: ____________
Forportions ofsite on filled tid eland s, listgrou nd flooru ses and areaofeac hu se:
______________
Does the projec tinc lu d e new non-water-d epend entu ses loc ated overflowed tid eland s?
Yes ___No ___
H eightofbu ild ingon filled tid eland s________________
A lso show the followingon asite plan: M ean H ighW ater, M ean L ow W ater, W ater-
d epend entUse Zone, loc ation ofu ses within bu ild ings on tid eland s, and interiorand
exteriorareas and fac ilities d ed ic ated forpu blic u se, and historic highand historic low
watermarks.
D. Is the projec tloc ated on land loc ked tid eland s? ___Yes _X_No; ifyes, d esc ribe the projec t’ s
impac ton the pu blic ’ s rightto ac c ess, u se and enjoyju risd ic tionaltid eland s and d esc ribe
measu res the projec twillimplementto avoid , minimize ormitigate anyad verse impac t:
E. Is the projec tloc ated in an areawhere low grou nd waterlevels have been id entified bya
mu nic ipalityorbyastate orfed eralagenc yas athreatto bu ild ingfou nd ations?___Yes
-11 -
_X_No; ifyes, d esc ribe the projec t’ s impac ton grou nd waterlevels and d esc ribe
measu res the projec twillimplementto avoid , minimize ormitigate anyad verse impac t:
F. Is the projec tnon-water-d epend entand loc ated on land loc ked tid eland s or waterways or
tid eland s su bjec tto the W aterways A c tand su bjec tto amand atoryEIR?_Yes _X No
(NO TE:Ifyes,then the projec twillbe su bjec tto P u blic B enefitReview and
Determination.)
G. Does the projec tinc lu d e d red ging?___Yes _X__No; ifyes, answerthe followingqu estions:
W hattype ofd red ging?Improvement___M aintenanc e ___B oth____
W hatis the proposed d red ge volu me, in c u bic yard s (c ys)_________
W hatis the proposed d red ge footprint____length(ft)___wid th(ft)____d epth(ft);
W illd red gingimpac tthe followingresou rc e areas?
Intertid al Yes__ No__; ifyes, ___sq ft
O u tstand ingResou rc e W aters Yes__ No__; ifyes, ___sq ft
O therresou rc e area(i. e. shellfishbed s, eelgrass bed s) Yes__ No__; ifyes __
sq ft
Ifyes to anyofthe above, have you evalu ated appropriate and prac tic able steps
to: 1)avoid anc e; 2)ifavoid anc e is notpossible, minimization; 3)ifeither
avoid anc e orminimize is notpossible, mitigation?
Ifno to anyofthe above, whatinformation ord oc u mentation was u sed to su pport
this d etermination?
P rovid e ac omprehensive analysis ofprac tic able alternatives forimprovementd red gingin
ac c ord anc e with314 C M R 9. 07 (1)(b). P hysic aland c hemic ald ataofthe
sed imentshallbe inc lu d ed in the c omprehensive analysis.
S ed imentC harac terization
Existinggrad ation analysis resu lts? __Yes ___No: ifyes, provid e resu lts.
Existingc hemic alresu lts forparameters listed in 314 C M R 9. 07 (2)(b)6?___Yes
____No; ifyes, provid e resu lts.
Do you have su ffic ientinformation to evalu ate feasibilityofthe followingmanagement
options ford red ged sed iment? Ifyes, c hec kthe appropriate option.
B eac hNou rishment___
Unc onfined O c ean Disposal___
C onfined Disposal:
C onfined A qu atic Disposal(C A D)___
C onfined DisposalFac ility(C DF)___
L and fillReu se in ac c ord anc e withC O M M -97 -001 ___
S horeline P lac ement___
Upland M aterialReu se____
In-S tate land filld isposal____
O u t-of-state land filld isposal____
(NO TE:This information is requ ired fora401W aterQ u alityC ertific ation.)
IV. Consistency:
A . Does the projec thave effec ts on the c oastalresou rc es oru ses, and /oris the projec tloc ated
within the C oastalZone?_X__Yes ___No; ifyes, d esc ribe these effec ts and the projec ts
c onsistenc ywiththe polic ies ofthe O ffic e ofC oastalZone M anagement: The projec thas been
d esigned to limitimpac ts to regu lated resou rc e areas and willhave an overrid ingpu blic benefitd u e
to the rec onstru c tion ofan improved seawall, resu ltingin the protec tion ofsu rrou nd ingland s,
inc lu d ingthe road way, walkway, u tilities, and resid entiald wellings, and the protec tion ofthe
su rrou nd ingresou rc e areas. S ee attac hed P rojec tNarrative forad d itionalinformation.
B . Is the projec tloc ated within an areasu bjec tto aM u nic ipalH arborP lan? ___Yes _X_No; ifyes,
id entifythe M u nic ipalH arborP lan and d esc ribe the projec t's c onsistenc ywiththatplan:
-12 -
WATER SUPPLY SECTION
I. Thresholds / Permits
A .W illthe projec tmeetorexc eed anyreview threshold s related to water supply (see 301 C M R
11. 03(4))? ___Yes __X_No; ifyes, spec ify, in qu antitative terms:
B . Does the projec trequ ire anystate permits related to water supply? ___Yes _X__No; ifyes,
spec ify whic hpermit:
C . Ifyou answered "No" to bothqu estions A and B , proc eed to the Wastewater Section. Ifyou
answered "Yes" to eitherqu estion A orqu estion B , fillou tthe remaind erofthe W aterS u pplyS ec tion
below.
II. Impacts and Permits
A . Desc ribe, in gallons perd ay(gpd ), the volu me and sou rc e ofwateru se forexistingand proposed
ac tivities atthe projec tsite:
Existing C hange Total
M u nic ipalorregionalwatersu pply ________________________
W ithd rawalfrom grou nd water ________________________
W ithd rawalfrom su rfac e water ________________________
Interbasin transfer ________________________
(NO TE:Interbasin Transferapprovalwillbe requ ired ifthe basin and c ommu nitywhere the proposed
watersu pplysou rc e is loc ated is d ifferentfrom the basin and c ommu nitywhere the wastewater
from the sou rc e willbe d isc harged .)
B . Ifthe sou rc e is amu nic ipalorregionalsu pply, has the mu nic ipalityorregion ind ic ated thatthere
is ad equ ate c apac ityin the system to ac c ommod ate the projec t?___Yes ___No
C . Ifthe projec tinvolves anew orexpand ed withd rawalfrom agrou nd waterorsu rfac e water
sou rc e, has apu mpingtestbeen c ond u c ted ? ___Yes ___No; ifyes, attac hamapofthe d rilling
sites and asu mmaryofthe alternatives c onsid ered and the resu lts. ______________
D. W hatis the c u rrentlypermitted withd rawalatthe proposed watersu pplysou rc e (in gallons per
d ay)? W illthe projec trequ ire an inc rease in thatwithd rawal?___Yes ___No; ifyes, then how
mu c hofan inc rease (gpd )?____________________
E. Does the projec tsite c u rrentlyc ontain awatersu pplywell, ad rinkingwatertreatmentfac ility,
watermain, orotherwatersu pplyfac ility, orwillthe projec tinvolve c onstru c tion ofanew fac ility?
___Yes ___No. Ifyes, d esc ribe existingand proposed watersu pplyfac ilities atthe projec tsite:
P ermitted Existing A vg P rojec tFlow Total
Flow DailyFlow
C apac ityofwatersu pplywell(s)(gpd ) _______________________________
C apac ityofwatertreatmentplant(gpd ) _______________________________
F. Ifthe projec tinvolves anew interbasin transferofwater, whic hbasins are involved , whatis the
d irec tion ofthe transfer, and is the interbasin transferexistingorproposed ?
G. Does the projec tinvolve:
1. new waterservic e bythe M assac hu setts W aterResou rc es A u thorityorotheragenc yof
the C ommonwealthto amu nic ipalityorwaterd istric t? ___Yes ___No
2. aW atershed P rotec tion A c tvarianc e? ___Yes ___No; ifyes, how manyac res of
alteration?
3. anon-brid ged stream c rossing1, 000 orless feetu pstream ofapu blic su rfac e d rinking
-13-
watersu pplyforpu rpose offorestharvestingac tivities? ___Yes ___No
III. Consistency
Desc ribe the projec t's c onsistenc ywithwaterc onservation plans orotherplans to enhanc e water
resou rc es, qu ality, fac ilities and servic es:
-14-
WASTEWATER SECTION
I. Thresholds / Permits
A . W illthe projec tmeetorexc eed anyreview threshold s related to wastewater (see 301 C M R
11. 03(5))? ___Yes _X__No; ifyes, spec ify, in qu antitative terms:
B . Does the projec trequ ire anystate permits related to wastewater? ___Yes __X_No; ifyes,
spec ify whic hpermit:
C . Ifyou answered "No" to bothqu estions A and B , proc eed to the Transportation -- Traffic
Generation Section. Ifyou answered "Yes" to eitherqu estion A orqu estion B , fillou tthe remaind er
ofthe W astewaterS ec tion below.
II. Impacts and Permits
A . Desc ribe the volu me (in gallons perd ay)and type ofd isposalofwastewatergeneration for
existingand proposed ac tivities atthe projec tsite (c alc u late ac c ord ingto 310 C M R 15. 00 forseptic
systems or314 C M R 7 . 00 forsewersystems):
Existing C hange Total
Disc harge ofsanitarywastewater ________________________
Disc harge ofind u strialwastewater ________________________
TO TA L ________________________
Existing C hange Total
Disc harge to grou nd water ________________________
Disc harge to ou tstand ingresou rc e water ________________________
Disc harge to su rfac e water ________________________
Disc harge to mu nic ipalorregionalwastewater
fac ility ________________________
TO TA L ________________________
B .Is the existingc ollec tion system atornearits c apac ity? ___Yes ___No; ifyes, then d esc ribe
the measu res to be u nd ertaken to ac c ommod ate the projec t’ s wastewaterflows:
C . Is the existingwastewaterd isposalfac ilityatornearits permitted c apac ity?___Yes___No; if
yes, then d esc ribe the measu res to be u nd ertaken to ac c ommod ate the projec t’ s wastewaterflows:
D. Does the projec tsite c u rrentlyc ontain awastewatertreatmentfac ility, sewermain, orother
wastewaterd isposalfac ility, orwillthe projec tinvolve c onstru c tion ofanew fac ility? ___Yes
___No; ifyes, d esc ribe as follows:
P ermitted Existing A vg P rojec tFlow Total
DailyFlow
W astewatertreatmentplantc apac ity
(in gallons perd ay)_______________________________
E. Ifthe projec trequ ires an interbasin transferofwastewater, whic hbasins are involved , whatis the
d irec tion ofthe transfer, and is the interbasin transferexistingornew?
-15-
(NO TE:Interbasin Transferapprovalmaybe need ed ifthe basin and c ommu nitywhere wastewater
willbe d isc harged is d ifferentfrom the basin and c ommu nitywhere the sou rc e ofwatersu pplyis
loc ated .)
F. Does the projec tinvolve new sewerservic e bythe M assac hu setts W aterResou rc es A u thority
(M W RA )orotherA genc yofthe C ommonwealthto amu nic ipalityorsewerd istric t? ___Yes ___No
G. Is there an existingfac ility, oris anew fac ilityproposed atthe projec tsite forthe storage,
treatment, proc essing, c ombu stion ord isposalofsewage slu d ge, slu d ge ash, grit, sc reenings,
wastewaterreu se (graywater)orothersewage resid u almaterials? ___Yes ___No; ifyes, whatis
the c apac ity(tons perd ay):
Existing C hange Total
S torage ________________________
Treatment ________________________
P roc essing ________________________
C ombu stion ________________________
Disposal ________________________
H . Desc ribe the waterc onservation measu res to be u nd ertaken bythe projec t, and other
wastewatermitigation, su c has infiltration and inflow removal.
III. Consistency
A . Desc ribe measu res thatthe proponentwilltake to c omplywithapplic able state, regional, and
loc alplans and polic ies related to wastewatermanagement:
B . Ifthe projec trequ ires asewerextension permit, is thatextension inc lu d ed in ac omprehensive
wastewatermanagementplan? ___Yes ___No; ifyes, ind ic ate the EEA nu mberforthe plan
and whetherthe projec tsite is within asewerservic e arearec ommend ed orapproved in that
plan:
-16-
TRANSPORTATION SECTION (TRAFFIC GENERATION)
I. Thresholds / Permit
A . W illthe projec tmeetorexc eed anyreview threshold s related to traffic generation (see 301 C M R
11. 03(6))? ___Yes _X__No; ifyes, spec ify, in qu antitative terms:
B . Does the projec trequ ire anystate permits related to state-controlled roadways?___Yes
_X__ No; ifyes, spec ify whic hpermit:
C . Ifyou answered "No" to bothqu estions A and B , proc eed to the Roadways and Other
Transportation Facilities Section. Ifyou answered "Yes" to eitherqu estion A orqu estion B , fillou t
the remaind erofthe Traffic Generation S ec tion below.
II. Traffic Impacts and Permits
A . Desc ribe existingand proposed vehic u lartraffic generated byac tivities atthe projec tsite:
Existing C hange Total
Nu mberofparkingspac es ______________________
Nu mberofvehic le trips perd ay ________________________
ITE L and Use C od e(s):________________________
B . W hatis the estimated average d ailytraffic on road ways servingthe site?
Road way Existing C hange Total
1. ___________________________________________
2. ____________________________________________
3. ____________________________________________
C . Ifapplic able, d esc ribe proposed mitigation measu res on state-c ontrolled road ways thatthe
projec tproponentwillimplement:
D. H ow willthe projec timplementand /orpromote the u se oftransit, ped estrian and bic yc le fac ilities
and servic es to provid e ac c ess to and from the projec tsite?
C . Is there aTransportation M anagementA ssoc iation (TM A )thatprovid es transportation d emand
management(TDM )servic es in the areaofthe projec tsite? ____Yes ____No; ifyes, d esc ribe
ifand how willthe projec twillpartic ipate in the TM A :
D. W illthe projec tu se (oroc c u rin the immed iate vic inityof)water, rail, orairtransportation
fac ilities?____Yes ____No; ifyes, generallyd esc ribe:
E. Ifthe projec twillpenetrate approac hairspac e ofanearbyairport, has the proponentfiled a
M assac hu setts A eronau tic s C ommission A irspac e Review Form (7 8 0 C M R 111. 7 )and aNotic e
ofP roposed C onstru c tion orA lteration withthe Fed eralA viation A d ministration (FA A )
(C FR Title 14 P art7 7 . 13, forms 7 460-1 and 7 460-2)?
III. Consistency
Desc ribe measu res thatthe proponentwilltake to c omplywithmu nic ipal, regional, state, and fed eral
plans and polic ies related to traffic , transit, ped estrian and bic yc le transportation fac ilities and
servic es:
-17 -
TRANSPORTATION SECTION (ROADWAYS AND OTHER TRANSPORTATION
FACILITIES)
I. Thresholds
A . W illthe projec tmeetorexc eed anyreview threshold s related to roadways or other
transportation facilities (see 301 C M R 11. 03(6))? ___Yes _X__No; ifyes, spec ify, in qu antitative
terms:
B . Does the projec trequ ire anystate permits related to roadways or other transportation
facilities? ___Yes _X__No; ifyes, spec ify whic hpermit:
C . Ifyou answered "No" to bothqu estions A and B , proc eed to the Energy Section. Ifyou
answered "Yes" to eitherqu estion A orqu estion B , fillou tthe remaind erofthe Road ways S ec tion
below.
II. Transportation Facility Impacts
A . Desc ribe existingand proposed transportation fac ilities in the immed iate vic inityofthe projec t
site:
B . W illthe projec tinvolve any
1. A lteration ofbankorterrain (in linearfeet)?____________
2. C u ttingoflivingpu blic shad e trees (nu mber)?____________
3. Elimination ofstone wall(in linearfeet)?____________
III. Consistency --Desc ribe the projec t's c onsistenc ywithotherfed eral, state, regional, and loc alplans
and polic ies related to traffic , transit, ped estrian and bic yc le transportation fac ilities and servic es,
inc lu d ingc onsistenc ywiththe applic able regionaltransportation plan and the Transportation
Improvements P lan (TIP ), the S tate B ic yc le P lan, and the S tate P ed estrian P lan:
-18 -
ENERGY SECTION
I. Thresholds / Permits
A . W illthe projec tmeetorexc eed anyreview threshold s related to energy (see 301 C M R 11. 03(7 ))?
___Yes __X_No; ifyes, spec ify, in qu antitative terms:
B . Does the projec trequ ire anystate permits related to energy? ___Yes _X__No; ifyes, spec ify
whic hpermit:
C . Ifyou answered "No" to bothqu estions A and B , proc eed to the Air Quality Section. Ifyou
answered "Yes" to eitherqu estion A orqu estion B , fillou tthe remaind erofthe EnergyS ec tion
below.
II. Impacts and Permits
A . Desc ribe existingand proposed energygeneration and transmission fac ilities atthe projec tsite:
ExistingC hange Total
C apac ityofelec tric generatingfac ility(megawatts)________________________
L engthoffu elline (in miles)________________________
L engthoftransmission lines (in miles)________________________
C apac ityoftransmission lines (in kilovolts)________________________
B . Ifthe projec tinvolves c onstru c tion orexpansion ofan elec tric generatingfac ility, whatare:
1. the fac ility's c u rrentand proposed fu elsou rc e(s)?
2. the fac ility's c u rrentand proposed c oolingsou rc e(s)?
C . Ifthe projec tinvolves c onstru c tion ofan elec tric altransmission line, willitbe loc ated on anew,
u nu sed , oraband oned rightofway?___Yes ___No; ifyes, please d esc ribe:
D. Desc ribe the projec t's otherimpac ts on energyfac ilities and servic es:
III. Consistency
Desc ribe the projec t's c onsistenc ywithstate, mu nic ipal, regional, and fed eralplans and polic ies for
enhanc ingenergyfac ilities and servic es:
19
AIR QUALITY SECTION
I. Thresholds
A . W illthe projec tmeetorexc eed anyreview threshold s related to air quality (see 301 C M R
11. 03(8 ))? ___Yes _X__No; ifyes, spec ify, in qu antitative terms:
B . Does the projec trequ ire anystate permits related to air quality? ___Yes _X__No; ifyes,
spec ify whic hpermit:
C . Ifyou answered "No" to bothqu estions A and B , proc eed to the Solid and Hazardous Waste
Section. Ifyou answered "Yes" to eitherqu estion A orqu estion B , fillou tthe remaind erofthe A ir
Q u alityS ec tion below.
II. Impacts and Permits
A . Does the projec tinvolve c onstru c tion ormod ific ation ofamajorstationarysou rc e (see 310 C M R
7 . 00, A ppend ix A )?___Yes ___No; ifyes, d esc ribe existingand proposed emissions (in tons
perd ay)of:
Existing C hange Total
P artic u late matter ________________________
C arbon monoxid e ________________________
S u lfu rd ioxid e ________________________
Volatile organic c ompou nd s ________________________
O xid es ofnitrogen ________________________
L ead ________________________
A nyhazard ou s airpollu tant ________________________
C arbon d ioxid e ________________________
B . Desc ribe the projec t's otherimpac ts on airresou rc es and airqu ality, inc lu d ingnoise impac ts:
III. Consistency
A . Desc ribe the projec t's c onsistenc ywiththe S tate Implementation P lan:
B . Desc ribe measu res thatthe proponentwilltake to c omplywithotherfed eral, state, regional, and
loc alplans and polic ies related to airresou rc es and airqu ality:
20
SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE SECTION
I. Thresholds / Permits
A . W illthe projec tmeetorexc eed anyreview threshold s related to solid or hazardous waste (see
301 C M R 11. 03(9))? ___Yes __X_No; ifyes, spec ify, in qu antitative terms:
B . Does the projec trequ ire anystate permits related to solid and hazardous waste? ___Yes
__X_No; ifyes, spec ify whic hpermit:
C . Ifyou answered "No" to bothqu estions A and B , proc eed to the Historical and Archaeological
Resources Section. Ifyou answered "Yes" to eitherqu estion A orqu estion B , fillou tthe
remaind erofthe S olid and H azard ou s W aste S ec tion below.
II. Impacts and Permits
A . Is there anyc u rrentorproposed fac ilityatthe projec tsite forthe storage, treatment, proc essing,
c ombu stion ord isposalofsolid waste?___Yes ___No; ifyes, whatis the volu me (in tons perd ay)
ofthe c apac ity:
Existing C hange Total
S torage ________________________
Treatment, proc essing ________________________
C ombu stion ________________________
Disposal ________________________
B . Is there anyc u rrentorproposed fac ilityatthe projec tsite forthe storage, rec yc ling, treatmentor
d isposalofhazard ou s waste?___Yes ___No; ifyes, whatis the volu me (in tons orgallons perd ay)
ofthe c apac ity:
Existing C hange Total
S torage ________________________
Rec yc ling ________________________
Treatment ________________________
Disposal ________________________
C . Ifthe projec twillgenerate solid waste (forexample, d u ringd emolition orc onstru c tion), d esc ribe
alternatives c onsid ered forre-u se, rec yc ling, and d isposal:
D. Ifthe projec tinvolves d emolition, d o anybu ild ings to be d emolished c ontain asbestos?
___Yes ___No
E. Desc ribe the projec t's othersolid and hazard ou s waste impac ts (inc lu d ingind irec timpac ts):
III. Consistency
Desc ribe measu res thatthe proponentwilltake to c omplywiththe S tate S olid W aste M asterP lan:
21
HISTORICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES SECTION
I. Thresholds / Impacts
A . H ave you c onsu lted withthe M assac hu setts H istoric alC ommission? ___Yes __X_No; ifyes,
attac hc orrespond enc e. Forprojec tsites involvingland s u nd erwater, have you c onsu lted withthe
M assac hu setts B oard ofUnd erwaterA rc haeologic alResou rc es?____Yes __X__No; ifyes, attac h
c orrespond enc e
B . Is anypartofthe projec tsite ahistoric stru c tu re, orastru c tu re within ahistoric d istric t, in either
c ase listed in the S tate RegisterofH istoric P lac es orthe InventoryofH istoric and A rc haeologic al
A ssets ofthe C ommonwealth? ___Yes _X__No; ifyes, d oes the projec tinvolve the d emolition of
alloranyexteriorpartofsu c hhistoric stru c tu re? ___Yes _X__No; ifyes, please d esc ribe:
C . Is anypartofthe projec tsite an arc haeologic alsite listed in the S tate RegisterofH istoric P lac es
orthe InventoryofH istoric and A rc haeologic alA ssets ofthe C ommonwealth? ___Yes _X__No; if
yes, d oes the projec tinvolve the d estru c tion ofalloranypartofsu c harc haeologic alsite? ___Yes
_X__No; ifyes, please d esc ribe:
D. Ifyou answered "No" to allparts ofbothqu estions A , B and C , proc eed to the Attachments and
Certifications S ec tions. Ifyou answered "Yes" to anypartofeitherqu estion A orqu estion B , fillou t
the remaind erofthe H istoric aland A rc haeologic alResou rc es S ec tion below.
II. Impacts
Desc ribe and assess the projec t's impac ts, d irec tand ind irec t, on listed orinventoried historic aland
arc haeologic alresou rc es:
III. Consistency
Desc ribe measu res thatthe proponentwilltake to c omplywithfed eral, state, regional, and loc al
plans and polic ies related to preservinghistoric aland arc haeologic alresou rc es:
September 2021
GZA File No. 18.0171674.04
Columbus Avenue Seawall Reconstruction Project
Environmental Notification Form – Project Narrative
Page | 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
On behalf of the City of Salem (City), GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc. (GZA) has prepared this Environmental Notification Form
(ENF) application to describe the proposed Columbus Avenue Seawall Reconstruction Project that includes the in-kind
reconstructionofthestoneseawallwithanincreaseinheight,installationofnewfloodbarriergateattheseawallopening,
and salt marsh enhancements located at 46 Columbus Avenue in the City of Salem, Massachusetts (Project, Project Site)
(Figures 1 and 2).
The Project is funded by a grant from the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs Dam, Levee, and Coastal
Foreshore Protection Repair and Removal (EEA #258-2020-2-3). This application is submitted in accordance with the
requirements of the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act (WPA; M.G.L. Chapter 131, Section 40) and its associated
Regulations (310 CMR 10.00), as well as the City of Salem Wetlands Protection and Conservation Bylaw (Chapter 50). The
following provides a detailed description of the current conditions and the proposed Project, as well as a description of
the resource areas and potential impacts to those resources that may result from this Project.
1.1 BACKGROUND
GZA was previously retained by the City of Salem to conduct a Site visit in May 2018 to inspect and evaluate the existing
seawall conditions at the Site in response to the coastal flooding and damage that occurred to the seawalls during the
March 2018 Nor’easterstorm events. GZA previouslyprovidedthe City with a preliminary seawall evaluation letterreport
dated October 21, 2019 describing the existing conditions and providing the City with alternate repairs/reconstruction
recommendations.
Based on the March 2018 Nor’Easter Storm Damage Seawall Assessment letter, the City would like to replace the existing
seawall with consideration to raise the height of the seawall for greater protection and resilience to wave surge/flooding
conditions. In addition, the City would like to improve coastal resiliency of the area by implementing an improved living
shoreline adjacent to the wall in areas of existing and deteriorated salt marsh habitat.
TheCity,withtheassistanceofGZA,appliedforandreceivedagrantforthedesignandpermittingservicesoftheproposed
seawall reconstruction and living shoreline.
The Project Site is located at 46 Columbus Avenue along the northwestern portion of Juniper Cove in Salem,
Massachusetts. The Columbus Avenue Seawall (State ID No. 064-044-000-146-100) is an older granite stone masonry
structure. The seawall has never had the benefit of any ongoing, periodic preventative maintenance program but has
receivedspotrepairsfromtimetotimeespeciallyafterthedamagethatoccurredduringthe2018Nor’easters.Theseawall
is vulnerable to the ever-increasing severity of coastal storms and higher water levels than previously experienced. If left
as-is the structure is likely to experience additional degradation and potentially failure compromising the roadway, public
access, utilities, and residential dwellings.
2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
The Columbus Avenue seawall is an older fieldstone and granite block masonry structure approximately 474 linear feet
long with an approximate 20-foot wide opening, located along the north western portion of Juniper Cove in Salem,
Massachusetts between the properties of 44 Columbus Avenue and 30 Bay View Avenue. The seawall provides foreshore
protection to; the public roadway (Columbus Avenue), public sidewalk, utilities, and residential dwellings. The seawall is
fronted by the publicly accessible ‘Steps Beach’ and an area of salt marsh vegetation along the southwest portion of the
beach area.
September 2021
GZA File No. 18.0171674.04
Columbus Avenue Seawall Reconstruction Project
Environmental Notification Form – Project Narrative
Page | 2
In general, the seawall is composed of angular and rounded stones that range approximately 4-inch by 4-inch to 2-feet by
3-feet in size with varied coursing. In general, the stone sizing decreases towards the top of the wall on the seaward face.
The exposed landwardfaceofthewall generallyappears to consistofmore dimensioned stone blocks.Thetop ofthewall
is an uneven surface, consisting of vertically protruding stones (anecdotally to limit visitors to Juniper Cove from
comfortablysittingonthewall).Theseawallvariesinelevationfromapproximately10.1feetNAVD88atthesouthwestern
cornerto8.5feetNAVD88atthenortheasterncorner. Neighboringprivatewallsoneachendareatthesameapproximate
elevation as the adjacent Columbus Ave wall.
GZA has performed investigations to document the existing conditions of the Site and to assist in the development of
proposed reconstruction and restoration designs including an updated topographic survey of the site, inspections of the
seawall structure, and limited ecological survey of the salt marsh habitat area. Inspections included taking field notes,
sketches, photographic and video documentation of the site.
The seawall inspections included documentation of the above-ground accessible portions of the seawall structure to
assessexistingconditionsandidentifystormdamagedareas.Theseawallwasobservedtohaveminortoadvanceddefects
and deterioration. Various areas with loose or missing chinking stones and areas with loose, cracked, missing and
deteriorated mortar between the stones were observed along the entire top and seaward face. Voids and cracks in the
coreof theexisting seawallwereobserved atseveral locations along the top and seaward sideof thewall, and stones and
mortar were missing at the face and around the pipe penetrations. Several sinkholes were observed landward of the wall
along the sidewalk. The seawall is particularly susceptible to failure, due to age, existing deteriorated condition, lack of
consistent maintenance, and lack of proper stone sizing and design.
The ecological survey performed at the site included documentation of existing conditions of the salt marsh habitat to
identifylocalbiotaandhabitatcharacteristicsaswellasdocumentcurrentecologicaltrajectoryandpotentialvulnerability.
Thesaltmarshareawasobservedto bepartlydesiccatedanddegraded.Thesaltmarshareawasobservedto havevarious
‘pockmark’ voids up to 2 feet deep throughout the marsh area, severe erosion along the seaward end with complete loss
of salt marsh vegetation and substrate up to 2 feet deep presumably at locations of preferential flow paths of tidal water
and/or groundwater, and erosion and undermining at the toe of the salt marsh substrate presumably due to erosive tidal
and wave forces. Protection and enhancement of the salt marsh area will stabilize the shoreline and reduce erosion,
attenuate waves, and provide habitat for plant and animal species.
3.0 PROPOSED PROJECT
The proposed Project design consists of removal of the existing deteriorated and damaged stone masonry seawall and
construction of approximately 466 linear feet of new, large cut granite stone seawall along the approximate existing
seawall alignment with height increase to elevation 11.5 feet NAVD88, installation of new 8-foot-wide flood barrier gate
at the seawall opening, reconstruction of the existing approximate 24-foot by 19-foot granite block landing and access
steps, reconstruction of 5-foot-wide paved sidewalk along the landward side of the seawall, and salt marsh enhancement
including new coir rolls along seaward edge, new clean sand fill, and new and supplemental salt marsh plantings.
Additionally, 10 linear feet of adjacent seawall at 44 Columbus Avenue and 30 Bay View Avenue is proposed to be
reconstructed to tie-in and match the proposed Columbus Avenue Seawall.
The shoreline at the Site has been previously disturbed with the construction of stone masonry seawall and granite block
landing with beach access steps. The armoring of the shoreline and coastal bank is not considered a sediment source, but
rathersignificanttostormdamagepreventionorfloodcontrolbecauseitisaverticalbuffertostormwaves.Theproposed
reconstructed seawall will conform to the ‘natural’ (existing) shape of the shoreline and will be reconstructed within the
same footprint as the existing seawall structure and will not extend further seaward. Relocating the wall landward is not
September 2021
GZA File No. 18.0171674.04
Columbus Avenue Seawall Reconstruction Project
Environmental Notification Form – Project Narrative
Page | 3
considered appropriate due to the proximity to the public roadway, public sidewalk, utilities, and residential dwellings.
The proposed seawall will tie-in with the existing adjacent stone seawalls on the adjacent structures.
The Project design also seeks to provide increased protection and coastal resiliency against wave effects, flooding, and
sea level rise. Detailed descriptions of Project design elements are as follows:
3.1 LARGE GRANITE STONE SEAWALL
The proposed new granite stone seawall will have an increased height ranging from approximately 1.5 feet to 3 feet, up
to elevation 11.5 feet NAVD88. Increased wall height will provide greater protection against storm surge, flooding, and
sea level rise. A proposed top of wall elevation of 11.5 feet NAVD88 may provide protection against the FEMA 100-year
flood event plus some protection against wave effects.
The proposed granite stone seawall will act as a mass gravity wall designed considering wall stability against sliding and
overturning conditions, as well as environmental wave loading conditions. The proposed top of wall width shall be
approximately 2 feet (matching the approximate existing top of wall width). A minimum top width of 2 feet shall be
maintained to allow for potential future increase in wall height.
The proposed granite stonewallfacewillgenerallyreplicatethecurrentwallrugosity andwavedeflection conditions, and
therefore will likely not increase the reflective wave energy into the salt marsh and shoreline area and will likely not
increase the erosion and scour at the base of the seawall.
The proposed granite stone seawall will be founded on a cast-in-place reinforced concrete footing that would extend a
minimum of four feet below existing grade on a crushed stone base over compacted subgrade soils unless bedrock is
encountered at a shallower depth. If bedrock is encountered above the proposed footing elevation the concrete footing
will be cast directly on existing sound bedrock with dowels drilled and grouted into the rock. A minimum depth of four
feet will be maintained to help protect against scour and erosion.
At each end the proposed seawall structurewill tie-inwith the existing adjacent privately-owned stonemasonry seawalls.
TofacilitatetheconstructionoftheproposedColumbusAvenueSeawall,10linearfeetofexistingprivately-ownedseawall
will be reconstructed to match the proposed Columbus Avenue wall type and height. Additionally, an approximate
maximum 10-foot portion of existing wall beyond the reconstructed portion may be temporarily removed and reset to
facilitate the full depth reconstruction. To facilitate the construction of the proposed new Columbus Avenue seawall, an
approximate maximum 10-foot portion of the adjacent walls will be removed and rebuilt.
3.2 WALL OPENING/FLOOD BARRIER AND BEACH ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS
The proposed project includes reducing the wall opening to an approximate 8-foot-wide opening and the installation of a
permanent hinged flood barrier gate for increased protection and resiliency against waves and flooding events. The
proposedprojectalso includesthereconstructionoftheexistinggraniteblocktoppedlandingandgraniteblockstepswith
new approximately 18-feet by 20-feet granite block topped landing and concrete core infill with steps on all three sides
for continued public access to the beach.
3.3 SALT MARSH ENHANCEMENT
Proposed salt marsh enhancement includes the installation of 222 linear feet of new biodegradable coir rolls/fabric along
the edge of the existing salt marsh vegetation, placement of clean sand fill within large void/eroded areas up to the
September 2021
GZA File No. 18.0171674.04
Columbus Avenue Seawall Reconstruction Project
Environmental Notification Form – Project Narrative
Page | 4
approximate elevation of adjacent marsh/riprap stones, filling ‘pockmark’ voids throughout existing marsh with cobbles
and clean sand fill, and the installation of 1000 plugs of Spartina patens and 2500 plugs of Spartina alterniflora.
Protection and enhancement of the salt marsh area will stabilize the shoreline and reduce erosion, attenuate waves, and
provide habitat for plant and animal species.
3.4 PUBLIC BENEFITS
The proposed project provides several public benefits.The Columbus Avenue roadway isoneof the mainvehicular routes
to/from Juniper Point. The proposed reconstructed seawall will provide increased protection to the Columbus Avenue
roadway, maintaining access along Columbus Avenue to/from Juniper Point is very important for an emergency and/or
evacuation route. The reconstructed seawall will provide increased protection to the various landside utilities that are
critical to the many residents they serve. The proposed project will also maintain improved safe access to the beach and
maintainandprotectthepublicwalkwayandbenchesimmediatelylandwardoftheseawallforcontinuedlocalrecreation.
4.0 REGULATORY COMPLIANCE AND IMPACTS
The proposed work will be performed using the best available measures to minimize the adverse impacts to the resource
areas defined under the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act (WPA) and local wetlands ordinances. The project has
been designed to limit both temporary and permanent impacts at the site. However, the proposed work will result in
unavoidable impacts.Table 1 summarizes the total impacts proposed within each resource area.
Table No. 1 – Summary of Resource Area Impacts
Resource Area Temporary Impact Description Permanent Impact Description
Land Subject to Coastal
Storm Flowage 10,170 SF
Temporary equipment
staging, temporary
excavation and shoring
5,800 SF
Seawall and landing
reconstructions, new
flood gate barrier,
walkway and grass strip
reconstruction
Coastal Beach 2,670 SF Temporary excavation
and shoring 223 SF
Biodegradable coir rolls
and timber post
outhauls
Coastal Bank 50 LF
Temporary excavation
at northeast corner
sand build-up
514 LF
City seawall (466 LF),
flood gate (8 LF),
adjacent walls (20) x 2
Salt Marsh 1,000 SF
Augment existing salt
marsh area with new
salt marsh plugs
2,870 SF
Fill large voids/erosion
areas and pockmark
voids with clean sand
September 2021
GZA File No. 18.0171674.04
Columbus Avenue Seawall Reconstruction Project
Environmental Notification Form – Project Narrative
Page | 5
Land Containing
Shellfish ----
Buffer Zone Only 7,500 SF Temporary equipment
staging 4,320 SF Walkway and grass
strip reconstruction
4.1 LAND SUBJECT TO COASTAL STORM FLOWAGE (310 CMR 10.04)
MassachusettsWPA Regulations define Land Subjectto CoastalStorm Flowage (LSCSF) as,“land subject toany inundation
causedbycoastalstormsuptoandincludethatcausedbythe100-yearstorm,surgeofrecordorstormofrecord,whichever
is greater.”
Most of the proposed work occurs within the LSCSF resource area, between the Mean High Water (MHW) line and the
FEMA 100-year flood elevation. The proposed work includes reconstruction of previously altered areas including the
seawall, landing and beach access steps, landside public walkway, and grass buffer strip. The proposed work will
permanently alter approximately 5,800 square feet to reconstruct the damaged and deteriorated seawall, landing,
walkway, and grassed strip. The proposed work will temporarily alter approximately 10,170 square feet of LSCSF area for
temporary equipment staging and temporary excavation and shoring. The proposed work will not significantly impact the
land’s ability to buffer storm waves. The site will be restored to pre-construction conditions after the completion of work.
There are no additional performance standards for LSCSF resource area provided under the Massachusetts WPA
Regulations.
4.2 COASTAL BEACH (310 CMR 10.27)
Massachusetts WPA Regulations define Coastal Beach as,“unconsolidated sediment subject to wave, tidal and coastal
storm action which forms the gently sloping shore of a body of saltwater and includes tidal flats. Coastal beaches extend
from the mean low water line landward to the dune line, coastal bank line or the seaward edge of existing man-made
structures, when these structures replace one of the above lives, whichever is closest to the ocean.”
The Coastal Beach resource area extends from the Mean Low Water (MLW) lineto the seaward edge of theexisting man-
made structures (e.g. stonemasonry seawall and stone block landing) or to the coastal bank atthe cornersof the seawall.
The proposed work includes reconstruction ofthe seawall and beach access landing. Minimal work is proposed within the
Coastal Beach resource area, which includes approximately 223 square feet for the proposed biodegradable coir rolls at
the toe of the existing salt marsh vegetation and relocation of existing timber post outhauls from the marsh area to the
sand beach adjacent to the landing structure. Minor temporary impacts including temporary excavation and
shoring/support of excavation is anticipated to facilitate the construction of proposed wall footings. Approximately 2,670
square feet of Coastal Beach will be temporarily impacted due to temporary excavation and support of excavation.
Temporary excavations within the Coastal Beach will be backfilled with suitable existing sand to match pre-construction
conditions. The Site will be restored to pre-construction conditions after the completion of work.
In accordance with 310 CMR 10.27, when a coastal beach is determined to be significant to storm damage prevention,
flood control, or protection of wildlife habitat, 310 CMR 10.27(3) through (7) shall apply. When a tidal flat is determined
to be significant to marine fisheries or the protection of wildlife habitat, 310 CMR 10.27(6) shall apply.Table 2 lists the
performance standards for Coastal Beach and describes how the proposed project will address the performance
standards.
September 2021
GZA File No. 18.0171674.04
Columbus Avenue Seawall Reconstruction Project
Environmental Notification Form – Project Narrative
Page | 6
Table No. 2 – Performance Standards for Work in Coastal Beach
Performance Standard Proposed Project
310 CMR 10.27(3)
Any project on a coastal beach, except any project permitted
under 310 CMR 10.30(3)(a), shall not have anadverse effect by
increasing erosion, decreasing the volume or changing the
form of any such coastal beach or an adjacent or downdrift
coastal beach.
Biodegradable coir rolls are proposed along the toe of existing
salt marsh to stabilize the edge of vegetation and prevent
continued scour and erosion. Timber post outhauls are
proposed to be relocated from the marsh area to the beach to
further protect the degrading marsh vegetation. Temporary
impacts including temporary excavation and shoring/support
of excavation are anticipated. Temporary shoring will be
removed and excavations within the Coastal Beach resource
area will be backfilled with suitable sand to match pre-
construction conditions. The proposed work is not anticipated
to have adverse effects on the Coastal Beach resource area.
310 CMR 10.27(4)
Any groin, jetty, solid pier, or other such solid fill structure
which will interfere with littoral drift, in addition to complying
with 310 CMR 10.27(3), shall be constructed as follows: (a) It
shall be the minimum length and height demonstrated to be
necessary to maintain beach form and volume. In evaluating
necessity, coastal engineering, physical oceanographic and/or
coastal geologic information shall be considered. (b)
Immediately after construction any groin shall be filled to
entrapment capacity in height and length with sediment of
grain size compatible with that of the adjacent beach. (c)
Jetties trapping littoral drift material shall contain a sand by-
pass system to transfer sediments to the downdrift side of the
inlet or shall be periodically redredged to provide beach
nourishment to ensure that downdrift or adjacent beaches are
not starved of sediments.
The proposed work includes the reconstruction of the existing
deteriorated and damaged seawall structure within the
original footprints and will not extend further seaward. The
reconstructed seawall will have an increased wall height to
provide greater protection against storm surge, flooding, and
sea level rise.
310 CMR 10.27(5)
Notwithstanding 310 CMR 10.27(3), beach nourishment with
clean sediment of a grain size compatible with that on the
existing beach may be permitted.
Temporary excavations within the Coastal Beach resource
area will be backfilled with suitableexisting sand tomatch pre-
construction conditions.
310 CMR 10.27(6)
In addition to complying with the requirements of 310 CMR
10.27(3) and (4), a project on a tidal flat shall if water-
dependent be designed and constructed, using best available
measures, so as to minimize adverse effects, and if non-water-
dependent, have no adverse effects, on marine fisheries and
wildlife habitat caused by: (a) alterations in water circulation;
(b) alterations in the distribution of sediment grain size; and(c)
changes in water quality, including, but not limited to, other
The proposed work includes the reconstruction of the existing
deteriorated and damaged seawall structure within the
original footprints and will not extend further seaward. The
proposedworkwillbeperformedwithinthetidalcycletoavoid
inundation of the work area. Sedimentation and erosion
controlmeasureswillbeinplaceduringconstructionactivities.
September 2021
GZA File No. 18.0171674.04
Columbus Avenue Seawall Reconstruction Project
Environmental Notification Form – Project Narrative
Page | 7
Table No. 2 – Performance Standards for Work in Coastal Beach
Performance Standard Proposed Project
than natural fluctuations in the levels of dissolved oxygen,
temperature or turbidity, or the addition of pollutants.
310 CMR 10.27(7)
Notwithstanding the provisions of 310 CMR 10.27(3) through
(6), no project may be permitted which will have any adverse
effect on specified habitat sites or rare vertebrate or
invertebrate species, as identified by procedures established
under 310 CMR 10.37.
No Estimated Habitat for Rare Species or Priority Habitat for
Rare Wildlife are listed in the vicinity of the proposed Project
SiteonthecurrentmapspublishedbytheNaturalHeritageand
Endangered Species Program.
4.3 COASTAL BANK (310 CMR 10.30)
Massachusetts WPA Regulations define Coastal Bank as, “the seaward face or side of any elevated landform, other than
coastal dune, which lies at the landward edge of a coastal beach, land subject to tidal action or other wetland.”
The Coastal Banks at the Project Site includes existing man-made stone masonry seawall and existing built-up sand at the
corners of the seawall. The seawall structure is not considered a sediment source, but rather significant to storm damage
prevention or flood control because it is a vertical buffer to storm waves. The proposed work includes reconstruction of
the existing seawall within the original footprints and will not extend further seaward. The proposed work will alter
approximately 514 linear feet of existing manmade Coastal Bank. Minor temporary impacts to the Coastal Bank sand at
the corners of the seawalls include temporary excavation and shoring/support ofexcavation to facilitate theconstruction
of proposed wall footings. Approximately 50 linear feet of Coastal Bank will be temporarily impacted due to temporary
excavation and support of excavation. Temporary excavations will be backfilled with suitable existing sand to match pre-
construction conditions. The Site will be restored to pre-construction conditions after the completion of work.
In accordance with 310 CMR 10.30, when a Coastal Bank is determined to be significant to storm damage prevention or
floodcontrolbecauseitsuppliessedimenttocoastalbeaches,coastaldunesorbarrierbeaches,310CMR10.30(3)through
(5) shall apply. Additionally, when a Coastal Bank is determined to be significant to storm damage prevention or flood
control because it is a vertical buffer to storm waters, 310 CMR 10.30(6) through (8) shall apply.Table 3 lists the
performancestandardsforCoastalBankanddescribeshowtheproposedprojectwilladdresstheperformancestandards.
Table No. 3 – Performance Standards for Work in Coastal Bank
Performance Standard Proposed Project
310 CMR 10.30(3)
No new bulkhead, revetment, seawall, groin or other coastal
engineering structure shall be permitted on such a coastal
bank except that such a coastal engineering structure shall be
permitted when required to prevent storm damageto building
constructed prior to the effective date of August 10, 1978 or
constructed pursuant to a Notice of Intent filed prior to the
effective date, including reconstructions of such buildings
The proposed work includes the reconstruction of the existing
deteriorated and damaged seawall structure within the
original footprints and will not extend further seaward. The
proposed granite stone wall face will generally replicate the
current wall rugosity and wave deflection conditions, and
therefore will likely not increase the reflective wave energy
onto the shoreline area. The proposed work will not have
adverse effects on adjacent coastal beach.
September 2021
GZA File No. 18.0171674.04
Columbus Avenue Seawall Reconstruction Project
Environmental Notification Form – Project Narrative
Page | 8
Table No. 3 – Performance Standards for Work in Coastal Bank
Performance Standard Proposed Project
subsequent to the effective date, provided that the following
requirements are met: (a) a coastal engineering structure or
modification thereto shall be designed and constructed so as
to minimize, using best available measures, adverse effects on
adjacent or nearby coastal beaches due to changes in wave
action, and (b) the applicant demonstrates that no method of
protecting the building other than the proposed coastal
engineering structure is feasible. (c) protective planting
designed to reduce erosion may be permitted.
310 CMR 10.30(4)
Any project on a coastal bank or within 100 feet landward of
the top of a coastal bank, other than a structure permitted by
310 CMR 10.30(3), shall not have an adverse effect due to
wave action on the movement of sediment from the coastal
bank to coastal beaches or land subject to tidal action.
The proposed granite stone wall face will generally replicate
the current wall rugosity and wave deflection conditions, and
therefore will likely not increase the reflective wave energy
onto theshoreline area. Temporary excavations along the wall
will be backfilled with suitable existing sand to match pre-
construction conditions.
310 CMR 10.30(5)
The Order of Conditions and the Certificate of Compliance for
any new building within 100 feet landward of the top of a
coastal bank permitted by the issuing authority, shall contain
the specific condition: 310 CMR 10.30(3), requires that no
coastal engineering structure, such as a bulkhead, revetment,
or seawall shall be permitted on an eroding bank at any time
in the future to protect the project allowed by the Order of
Conditions.
The proposed work includes the reconstruction of the existing
deteriorated and damaged seawall structure within the
original footprints and will not extend further seaward
310 CMR 10.30(6)
Any project on sucha coastal bank orwithin 100 feet landward
of the top of suchcoastal bank shall have no adverse effects on
the stability of the coastal bank.
The reconstructed seawall will have an increased wall height
to provide greater protection against storm surge, flooding,
and sea level rise.
310 CMR 10.30(7)
Bulkheads, revetment, seawalls, groins or other coastal
engineering structures may be permitted on such a coastal
bank except when such a bank is significant to storm damage
prevention or flood control because it supplies sediment to
coastal beaches, coastal dunes, and barrier beaches.
The seawall structure is not considered a sediment source, but
rather significant to storm damage prevention or flood control
because it is a vertical buffer to storm waves. The proposed
work includes reconstruction of theexisting seawall within the
original footprints and will not extend further seaward.
310 CMR 10.30(8)
Notwithstanding the provisions of 310 CMR 10.30(3) through
(7), no project may be permitted which will have any adverse
effect on specified habitat sites of rare vertebrate or
No Estimated Habitat for Rare Species or Priority Habitat for
Rare Wildlife are listed in the vicinity of the proposed Project
SiteonthecurrentmapspublishedbytheNaturalHeritageand
Endangered Species Program.
September 2021
GZA File No. 18.0171674.04
Columbus Avenue Seawall Reconstruction Project
Environmental Notification Form – Project Narrative
Page | 9
Table No. 3 – Performance Standards for Work in Coastal Bank
Performance Standard Proposed Project
invertebrate species, as identified by procedures established
under 310 CMR 10.37.
4.4 SALT MARSH (310 CMR 10.32)
Massachusetts WPA Regulations define Salt Marsh as, “a coastal wetland that extends landward up to the highest high
tide line, that is, the highest spring tide of the year, and is characterized by plants that are well adapted to or prefer living
in, saline soils. Dominant plants within salt marshes typically include salt meadow cord grass (Spartina patens) and/or salt
marsh cord grass (Spartina alterniflora), but may also include, without limitation, spike grass (Distichlis spicata), high-tide
bush (Iva frutescens), black grass (Juncus gerardii), and common reedgrass (Phragmites). A salt marsh may contain tidal
creeks, ditches, and pools.”
The Site has an existing Salt Marsh at the southwestern end, fronting the existing seawall. The salt marsh area was
observedtohavevarious‘pockmark’voidsupto2feetdeepthroughoutthemarsharea,severeerosionalongtheseaward
end with complete loss of salt marsh vegetation and substrate up to 2 feet deep presumably at locations of preferential
flow paths of tidal water and/or groundwater, and erosion and undermining at the toe of the salt marsh substrate
presumably due to erosive tidal and wave forces. The proposed work includes placement of clean sand fill within large
void/eroded areas up to the approximate elevation of adjacent marsh/riprap stones, filling ‘pockmark’ voids throughout
existing marsh with cobbles and clean sand fill, and the installation of 1000 plugs of Spartina patens and 2500 plugs of
Spartina alterniflora.The proposed work will alter approximately 2,870 square feet of Salt Marsh by filling voids and
eroded areas with new clean fill to restore the eroded grade and provide substrate for new salt marsh plugs.
Approximately 1,000 square feetof Salt Marsh area will be work will be temporarily impacted with the installation of new
salt marsh plugs to augment the existing Salt Marsh vegetation area.
Additionally, the project proposes to remove and relocate the existing timber post outhauls out of the existing salt marsh
area to eliminate adverse effects of pedestrian foot/boat traffic within the salt marsh area. The proposed work will be
performed using hand tools. No construction equipment will be allowed within salt marsh vegetation areas.
Inaccordancewith310 CMR10.32,whenasaltmarshisdeterminedtobesignificanttotheprotectionofmarinefisheries,
the prevention of pollution, storm damage prevention or ground water supply, 310 CMR 10.32(3) through (6) shall apply.
Table 4 lists the performance standards for Salt Marsh and describes how the proposed project will address the
performance standards.
Table No. 4 – Performance Standards for Work in Salt Marsh
Performance Standard Proposed Project
310 CMR 10.32(3)
A proposed project in a salt marsh, or lands within 100 feet of
a salt marsh, or in a body of water adjacent to a salt marsh
shall not destroy any portion of the salt marsh and shall not
have an adverse effect on the productivity of the salt marsh.
Alterations in growth, distribution and composition of salt
Existingsaltmarshvegetationwillbedelineatedandprotected
throughout the duration of the project. The proposed work
includes placement of clean sand fill within voids to match the
elevation of adjacent marsh/riprap stones. A strict maximum
of 4-inches of sand fill will be allowed over existing salt marsh
vegetation provided that the vegetation extends above the
September 2021
GZA File No. 18.0171674.04
Columbus Avenue Seawall Reconstruction Project
Environmental Notification Form – Project Narrative
Page | 10
Table No. 4 – Performance Standards for Work in Salt Marsh
Performance Standard Proposed Project
marsh vegetation shall be considered in evaluating adverse
effects on productivity. 310 CMR 10.32(3) shall not be
construed to prohibit the harvesting of salt hay.
sand fill. The salt marsh area will be augmented with new salt
marsh plugs within voids (bare spots). The proposed work will
be performed using hand tools. No construction equipment
will be allowed within salt marsh vegetation areas.
310 CMR 10.32(4)
Notwithstanding the provisions of 310 CMR 10.32(3), a small
project within a salt marsh, such as an elevated walkway or
other structure which has no adverse effects other than
blocking sunlight from the underlying vegetation for a portion
of each day, may be permitted if such a project complies with
all other applicable requirements of 310 CMR 10.21 through
10.37.
Nostructuresareproposedwithintheexistingsaltmarsharea.
310 CMR 10.32(5)
Notwithstanding the provisions of 310 CMR 10.32(3), a project
which will restore or rehabilitate a salt marsh, or create a salt
marsh, may be permitted in accordance with 310 CMR 10.11
through 10.14, 10.28(8), and/or 10.53(4).
The Project proposes to enhance the existing salt marsh area
by stabilizing the toe with new biodegradable coir rolls, filling
voids with clean sand fill, and augmenting voids (bare spots)
with new salt marsh plugs.
310 CMR 10.32(6)
Notwithstanding the provisions of 310 CMR 10.32(3) through
(5), no project may be permitted which will have any adverse
effect on specified habitat sites or rare vertebrate or
invertebrate species, as identified by procedures established
under 310 CMR 10.37.
No Estimated Habitat for Rare Species or Priority Habitat for
Rare Wildlife are listed in the vicinity of the proposed project
sites on the current maps published by the Natural Heritage
and Endangered Species Program.
4.5 LAND CONTAINING SHELLFISH (310 CMR 10.34)
Massachusetts WPA Regulations define Land Containing Shellfish as, “land under the ocean, tidal flats, rocky intertidal
shores, salt marshes and land under salt ponds when any such land contains shellfish.” Shellfish means the following
species: Bay scallop (Argopecten irradians); Blue mussel (Mytilus edulis); Ocean quahog (Arctica islandica); Oyster
(Crassostrea virginica); Quahog (Mercenaria merceneria); Razor clam (Ensis directus); Sea clam (Spisula solidissima); Sea
scallop (Placopecten magellanicus); Soft shell clam (Mya arenaria).
According to the MassGIS Oliver online mapping tool, there is a mapped shellfish suitability area for Soft-Shelled Clam
within the Project Site. However, the Site is listed as Prohibited for shellfish growing. The proposed work includes
reconstruction of the seawall and stone block landing within the original footprints and will not extend any further
seaward.NoworkisproposedwithinLandContainingShellfishresourcearea.TheSitewillberestoredto pre-construction
conditions upon completion of work.
September 2021
GZA File No. 18.0171674.04
Columbus Avenue Seawall Reconstruction Project
Environmental Notification Form – Project Narrative
Page | 11
In accordance with 310 CMR 10.34, when a resource area, including Land Under the Ocean, tidal flats, rocky intertidal
shores, salt marshes,or land under salt ponds is determined to be significant to the protection of land containing shellfish
andthereforetotheprotectionofmarinefisheries,310CMR10.34(4)through(8)shallapply.Table5 liststheperformance
standards for Land Containing Shellfish and describes how the proposed project will address the performance standards.
Table No. 5 – Performance Standards for Work in Land Containing Shellfish
Performance Standard Proposed Project
310 CMR 10.34(4)
Except as provided in 310 CMR 10.34(5), any project on land
containing shellfish shall not adversely affect such land or
marine fisheries by a chance in the productivity of such land
caused by: (a) alterations of water circulation; (b) alterations
in relief elevation; (c) the compacting of sediment by vehicular
traffic;(d)alterationsinthedistributionofsedimentgrainsize;
(e) alterations in natural drainage from adjacent land; or (f)
changes in water quality, including, but not limited to, other
than natural fluctuations in the levels of salinity, dissolved
oxygen, nutrients, temperature or turbidity, or the addition of
pollutants.
NoworkisproposedwithinLandContainingShellfishresource
area. Temporary excavations along the shoreline will be
backfilled with suitable existing sand to match pre-
construction conditions. The Site will be restored to pre-
construction conditions after the completion of work.
310 CMR 10.34(5)
Notwithstanding the provisions of 310 CMR 10.34(4), projects
which temporarily have an adverse effect on shellfish
productivity but whichdonotpermanently destroy thehabitat
may be permitted if the land containing shellfish can and will
be returned substantially to its former productivity in less than
one year from the commencement of work, unless an
extension of the Order of Conditions is granted, in which case
such restoration shall be completed within on year of such
extension.
NoworkisproposedwithinLandContainingShellfishresource
area.
310 CMR 10.34(6)
In the case of land containing shellfish defined as significant in
310 CMR 10.34(3)(b), exceptin Areas of Critical Environmental
Concern,theissuingauthoritymay,afterconsultationwiththe
ShellfishConstable,permitthe shellfishtobemovedfrom such
area under guidelines of, and to a suitable location approved
by, the Division of Marine Fisheries, in order to permit a
proposed project on such land. Any such project shall not be
commenced until after the moving and replanting of the
shellfish have been commenced.
NoworkisproposedwithinLandContainingShellfishresource
area.
310 CMR 10.34(7)
Notwithstanding the provisions of 310 CMR 10.34(4) through
(6), projects approved by the Division of Marine Fisheries that
310 CMR 10.34(7) is not applicable to the proposed project.
September 2021
GZA File No. 18.0171674.04
Columbus Avenue Seawall Reconstruction Project
Environmental Notification Form – Project Narrative
Page | 12
Table No. 5 – Performance Standards for Work in Land Containing Shellfish
Performance Standard Proposed Project
are specifically intended to increase the productivity of land
containing shellfish may be permitted. Aquaculture projects
approved by the appropriate local and state authority may
also be permitted.
310 CMR 10.34(8)
Notwithstanding the provisions of 310 CMR 10.34(4) through
(7), no project may be permitted which will have any adverse
effect on specified habitat of rare vertebrate or invertebrate
specified, as identified by procedures established under 310
CMR 10.37.
No Estimated Habitat for Rare Species or Priority Habitat for
Rare Wildlife are listed in the vicinity of the proposed Project
Site on the current maps published by the Natural Heritage
and Endangered Species Program.
4.6 100-FOOT BUFFER ZONE
Massachusetts WPA Regulations define Buffer Zone as,“100-ft area horizontally (on a true lateral) landward of approved
delineation of applicable wetland resource areas.”The WPA further states that any activities undertaken within 100 feet
of an area specified in 310 CMR 10.02(1)(a) will be conducted per (310 CMR 10.02(2)(b)), “in a manner so as to reduce the
potential for any adverse impacts to the resource area during construction, and with post-construction measures
implemented to stabilize any disturbed areas.”
The 100-Foot Buffer Zone area extends landward from the seawall (Coastal Bank). Permanent impacts to the 100-foot
Buffer Zone include proposed reconstruction of the 5-foot-wide paved walkway, restoration of the 3 to 4-foot-wide
grassed area with new loam, and reconstruction of the curbing along Columbus Avenue, totaling approximately 4,320
square feet. Temporary impacts to the 100-foot Buffer Zone include Contractor equipment and materials
staging/stockpilingalongaportionoftheColumbusAvenueroadway,totalingapproximately7,500squarefeet.Thebuffer
zone will be restored to preconstruction conditions at the completion of the project.
4.7 OTHER REGULATED RESOURCE AREAS
GZA has also considered whether the Project Site falls within other environmental regulatory boundaries that would
require additional permits. There are no Outstanding Resource Waters, Areas of Critical Environmental Concern, Natural
Heritage and Endangered Species Program (NHESP) Priority or Estimated Habitat, Certified or Potential Vernal Pools, or
IWPA,Zone I,orZone IIwater supplyareasassociatedwith theProject Site. The Salem HarborDesignatedPort Area(DPA)
is located nearby but not on the Project Site. As part of the permit process, the Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone
Management(CZM) is being consulted, asthe project is locatedwithintheCoastalZone, andtheMassachusetts Historical
Commission (MHC) is being consulted through the filing of a USACE Pre-Construction Notification (PCN).
5.0 CONSTRUCTION PROCEDURES
Construction start and completion of this Project is anticipated for November 2022 to May 2023 (pending permitting and
funding). The general construction process consists of site mobilization and preparation, establishment of site survey
controls, installation of temporary perimeter fencing/barrier and erosion and sedimentation measures, temporary
removal of existing site features (benches, signage, trash receptacles, etc.), removal and disposal of existing seawall,
September 2021
GZA File No. 18.0171674.04
Columbus Avenue Seawall Reconstruction Project
Environmental Notification Form – Project Narrative
Page | 13
construction of new seawall structure with concrete footing and mortared granite block wall, partial removal and
reconstructionofadjacentwallstotie-inwithnewCitywall,removalandreconstructionofgraniteblocklandingstructure,
hand placement of coir rolls, new sand fill, and new salt marsh plugs within the existing salt marsh area, backfilling and
site restoration including new concrete walkway landward of the wall, new loam and seed, and curbing as necessary.
The proposed work will be accessed and staged along Columbus Avenue between the properties of 44 Columbus Avenue
and 30 Bay View Avenue. It is anticipated that temporary fencing/barriers and erosion controls will be placed along the
landward limits of the Site and that this section of Columbus Avenue will temporarily be converted to one-way traffic to
facilitate the proposed construction. Additionally, public walkway access will have to be temporarily routed around the
Site. Signage will be in-place throughout the duration of construction.
Land-based equipment will be used to perform the work and that workers will access the intertidal zone as necessary to
perform the work. The Contractor will have to perform work in a manner that considers the tide cycle, as excavations will
extend below Mean High Water. Excavations shall be kept to a minimum as necessary to complete the proposed work.
Temporary supportofexcavationwill beutilizedfor constructionofthe proposedconcretefootings,reconstructionofthe
landing, and as necessary to protect existing salt marsh vegetation and adjacent seawall structures. The Contractor will
proceedwithcautionto avoiddamagetotheseseawalls,however,damageto privatelyownedseawallsfromconstruction
related activities will be repaired, in‐kind, by the Contractor.
Equipment, materials, debris, or other items will be stored such that they will be protected from rising water when not
being utilized. The Contractor will be advised to monitor the weather forecasts and marine forecasts throughout the
duration of the construction project. Areas temporarily disturbed by construction activities will be restored to pre‐
construction conditions at the completion of the project.
5.1 MEASURES TO MINIMIZE RESOURCE AREA IMPACTS
Measures to minimize impacts to the Resource Areas noted above include the following:
Temporary barriers, fencing and signage will be placed at the work site during construction.
Contractor will have a spill kit/absorbent pads on each piece of equipment.
Each vehicle shall be inspected daily for leaks; any leaking equipment shall be removed from the site immediately
and shall not return to service until repaired.
Work will be performed from the landside of the existing wall, no construction vehicles will be allowed on the
shoreline beach and salt marsh areas.
The work area will be left in a condition such that rising water and/or adverse weather will not cause damage to
the work area or adjacent areas.
The contractor will perform the work during favorable tides for the various aspects of the work. The contractor
will work the tides to minimize impacts to resource areas.
Sedimentation and erosion control measures will be in place during construction activities.
Proposed work shall comply with all Federal, State and Local Codes and Regulations.
September 2021
GZA File No. 18.0171674.04
Columbus Avenue Seawall Reconstruction Project
Environmental Notification Form – Project Narrative
Page | 14
Proposed work shall comply with the Local Conservation Commission’s Order of Conditions.
6.0 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
An alternatives analysis was developed for the proposed Columbus Avenue Seawall Reconstruction Project consisting of
Do Nothing, Stone Masonry In-Kind Repairs, Sloped Stone Revetment, Reinforced Concrete Seawall, Hybrid Concrete and
Stone Veneer Seawall, and the Proposed Design. The alternatives analysis is included in Appendix D.
7.0 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE POPULATIONS
In accordance with the document entitled “Transition Rules for Public Involvement Requirements for Environmental
Justice Populations – Effective as of June 24, 2021,” issued by the MEPA Office to address public involvement protocols
for environmental justice (EJ) populations, this section will provide a list of the EJ populations within 1 mile of the Project
Site (or within 5 miles if the project is anticipated to effect air quality) and an evaluation of whether the Project is
reasonably likely to negatively affect such EJ populations.
On August 9, 2021, GZA accessed the EOEAA’s web-based “EJ Mapping Tool” via the hyperlink provided on the above-
referenced“TransitionRules”document.GZAusedthe“EJMappingTool”toidentifyMA2020EnvironmentalJusticeBlock
Groups near the Project Site. The Project is not anticipated to affect air quality, therefore GZA identified the mapped EJ
populations within 1 mile of the Project Site. Additionally, the Project is not considered reasonably likely to negatively
affect such EJ populations, since the Project is intended to reconstruct an existing seawall and beach access landing with
increased protection and coastal resiliency against wave effects, flooding, and sea level rise for the benefit of all
populations in Massachusetts. GZA identified four EJ populations within 1 mile of the Project Site. The identified EJ
populations are located within the Cities of Salem and Beverly, Massachusetts.Table 6 lists published details provided by
the“EJMappingTool” regardingthevariousidentifiedEJpopulations.Referto AppendixF foramapoftheEJpopulations
within 1 mile of the Project Site, generated by the “EJ Mapping Tool.”
Table No. 6 – Mapped Environmental Justice Populations within 1 mile of the Project Site
County City Block Group Census Tract EJ Population Criteria
Essex Beverly 2 2174 Income
Essex Beverly 4 2174 Minority and Income
Essex Salem 1 2045 Minority
Essex Salem 4 2044 Minority and Income
8.0 CONCLUSION
TheproposedProjectisrequiredforthereplacementoftheexistingColumbusAvenueSeawalllocatedalongJuniperPoint
at 46 Columbus Avenue in Salem, Massachusetts. The Project has been designed to limit impacts to regulated resource
areas. The proposed work will not have adverse effects upon the interests protected by MassDEP or the City of Salem
Wetlands Protection and Conservation Bylaw, rather the proposed work will have an overriding public benefit due to the
replacement of the seawall, resulting in the protection of surrounding lands, including roadway, walkway, utilities, and
residential dwellings, and the protection of the surrounding resource areas.