The URL can be used to link to this page

64-290 - 4 BLANEY STREET - CONSERVATION COMMISSION Z90 nAsnee0.tln } 2 o8e ofde s 3r& r�,.5 Z(p) c3h�n V44 1 b ao abw r,5�rr1�7? s 2 O ��ort5 frl6gti SA�\\-r��tC�P��ST � (� `��F=��,A�►�N. catkin M t. )"\g -Woe;) C."%N t vv� ho male alld< (� LOSE oTl{ Z- o g DDMS a 5 y ri a COVER SHEET FAX To: Ron Bourne Fax #: 508 520 6671 Subject: Blaney Street NOI-Goldeneye (I Date: - March 25, 1999 Per your request I have attached copies of the two letters that I read into the record at the March 11'h public hearing. To date, I have still not received the following information which was requested by the Commission on March 11". Requested information is as follows: 1. Topography to be placed on plan (original, existing and proposed) 2. Copies of Chapter 91 and Army Corps applications 3. Clarify# of boats/trips per day 4. Clarify fueling 5. Dust control plan 6. Clarify boat wake damage to bank 7. Drainage Calculations 8. Stormwater Management Plan 9. Clarification of granite curbing on plan 10. Vegitated Swale 11. Best Management Practices (BMP's) 12. Treatment of 8' wide walkway 13. Identify existing pavement to be removed 14. Strength of pier with full loading Please make the requested clarifications to the plan and resubmit 8 copies with the above referenced requested information. I will then distribute to Commissioners. I will see you at tonight's 7:00 meeting of the Conservation Commission. Thank you for your attention to this matter. From the desk o Stephen Dibble Assistant Planner City of Salem,Planning Dept. One Salem Green Salem,MA.,01970 (978)745 9595 ext.311 Fax:(978)740 0404 .'mod no P 8 Lee Street Salem, MA 01970-2422 24 February 1999 Mr. Mark E. George:m, Chairman Conservation Commission City of Salem One Salem Green Salem, MA 01970 Re : Goldeneye Corporation Proposal Dear Mr. George, This letter is submitted in support of the said corporation's proposal to make improvements to its property at 4 Blaney Street in Salem. The better than anticipated response and use of a high speed ferry service last summer and fall between Boston and the firm's terminal on the Salem waterfront stands as the strongest endorse- ment of its continuation and expansion. The firm's proposed expansion as described in the public press earlier this week seems both adequate and flexible toward longer range plans by the city to develop its valuable commercial waterfront. One of the firm's partners was even quoted as desiring "to see that project (i.e. , the City of Salem' s) get done. " His proposal to build an "interim structure" rings true as present day engineering and construction techniques allow vibrational devices to both drive and extract pilings. Much of the proposed in-the-water elements would be afloat and therefore easily removed when necessary. Your consideration of my views and their entry into your records is appreciated. Sincerely, Peter T. Victory cc : Mr. Craig Wheeler, City Planner Mr. David B. Struhs, Commissioner, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Department of Environmental Protection 02/25/1999 15:06 9787410458 SALEMSND PAGE 01 Post-IN Fax Note 7671 Date TO pages► J C. From Layer a co.m'pt co. Phav _^F February 25, 1999 Fax a 7 _ J OC � EcuwPVXO9e t axaFus Mark George, ChairSalem Conservation Commission A oaar Dear Mr, George, Salem Sound 2000 1 am writing to express a concern that Salem Sound 2000 has with the Notice of Intent filed by Goldeneye Corporation for a parking lot on the 201 Washington Stmct Salem Harbor waterfront. The Notice of Intent describes the planned Suite 9 parking lot as a gravel lot which will provide infiltration of all Salem.MA 01970 stormwater runoff and removal of 100°/u TSS in that runoff. Based on(978)741-7900 this claim, no stormwater management plan is included. Salem Sound 20DO is concerned that the gravel surface will not provide sufficient infiltration or treatment of stormwater. We do not consider a gravel parking lot to be a pervious surface and believe that, once used for any period of time, it will approximate the imperviousness of City of lleredy asphalt. According to Standard 5 in the Stomlwater Policy Handbook Town ofDwn m (Volume I)(p. 1-7), commercial parking lots with high intensity use Town of Ma chntet-hy-rne-sea need stormwater treatment. Based on the expected volume of traffic in To�of MeM head this lot, it appears to fall under this category, City ofpekody Salem Sound 2000 believes that a plan for treating stormwater runoff Chy of sakm from this lot should be considered, particularly given its proximity to the water and the high TSS load it will likely carry. There are many low tech, low cost methods for treating stormwater such as vegetated swales that may be appropriate for this site. Table 3.2 (p. 3-9)in the Stormwater Technical Handbook lists a variety of these best management practices (BMPs). Salem Sound 2000 greatly appreciates your consideration of this issue. p""�zope Madterome Please feel free to call us if you have any questions. Fsstmao GrJ�puee Cotpxetion P.ndicote c Sincerely, Hawthorne Cove 41®a - MataathUaew Bays pmg� .;i'FZ•GLyy ��; GC.�L-L�-� Nuional Pads Senwe ;Karen Hopkins rvew rid tlsolaba Poundanw Program Coordinator The Peabody$tuz Mu M South&saes Sewerage Distna f�asac�iu�lel l : ARGEO PAUL CELLUCCI GOVERNOR JANE SWIFT D r � .Se?less'9 : Dept. LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR TeL (617) 727-9800 BOB DURAND f 'J Fax (617) 727-2754 SECRETARY C, V_ http://W w.magnet.state.ma.us/envir G MA -6:5 OFFICE February 22 , 1999 CERTIFICATE OF THE SECRETARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL NOTIFICATION FORM PROJECT NAME : Commercial Boat Terminal PROJECT MUNICIPALITY : Salem PROJECT WATERSHED : North Coastal EOEA NUMBER : 11860 PROJECT PROPONENT : Goldeneye Corporation DATE NOTICED �IN MONITOR January 23 , 1999 Pursuant to the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (G. L. c . 30 , ss . 61-62H) and Section 11 . 06 of the MEPA regulations (301 CMR 11 . 00) , I hereby determine that this project does not require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report . This project involves the installation of a 100 by 60 foot pier with a 155 by 15 foot walkway, a 100 by 40 foot barge with a double gangway and ramping system, a timber dolphin, 1830 square feet of floating docks, 3 gangways, a 60 by 40 foot terminal building, and 203 unpaved parking spaces for commercial boat services . The proposed pier is a pile-supported structure located within flowed tidelands, and the parking area is located on filled Commonwealth and private tidelands . The primary purpose of the project is to provide docking facilities and ancillary parking and support facilities for a terry service and tour boat service with additional secondary usage as a small vessel dock facility. Gu PC Gn He CVG t'C$:JC• :9`'PO S:GC^tiu mr'W25:2 E©$A# 11860 ENF Certificate February 22, 1999 s ,,o The project is subject to review pursuant to Section 11 . 03 (3). (b) 6 since it involves construction of a pile-supported structure exceeding 2 , 000 square feet in base area within flowed tidelands and requires a license under Chapter 91 . The project will also require Consistency review by Coastal Zone Management and an Order of Conditions from the Salem Conservation Commission. The City of Salem is involved in a planning effort to develop a Municipal Harbor Plan that will likely include this site. The developer has recognized that the site is likely to become a significant element in that plan and further recognizes that any project undertaken at this time may be replaced in the future by the City of Salem during implementation of the proposed Harbor Plan. While the currently proposed use of the property seems to be consistent with the overall objectives of the plan, to encourage private investment in developing new and improved facilities for maritime use, the developer should continue to work with the City of Salem to ensure that the Harbor Plan continues on track and that the currently proposed use of this site does not preclude future uses proposed in that Plan. Neighbors to the site have raised concerns about increased use of the property under the current conditions . Specific concerns include traffic; traffic generated dust from the unpaved surface of the site, and all-night lighting that illuminates abutting properties . The developer has committed to working with the neighbors to correct the dust and lighting problem and has committed to using only Blaney Street for access and egress although White Street may be used for emergency access, if required. The proponent has also committed to developing a stormwater management system for the site, consistent with the Department of Environmental Protection' s (DEP) Stormwater Policy, to control runoff from the site . This system should be reviewed with the DEP and with the Salem Conservation Commission. Finally, the proponent had agreed to provide compensatory mitigation for fill in tidelands as a condition of the temporary permit issued by the US Army Corps of Engineers. The proponent should complete these outstanding mitigation requirements as part of the implementation of the proposed project . 2 EOEA# 11860 ENF Certificate February 22 , 1999 Based on the above, I find that the project, with the implementation of the proposed improvements and environmental , mitigation, is not likely to create significant adverse environmental impact, and should not preclude future development of the Salem Municipal Harbor Plan. No further MEPA review is required. February 2 1999 ( Date Bob Durand, Secretary Comments received DEP Northeast Regional Office Coastal Zone Management National -Marine Fisheries Service Mayor Usovicz Salem Conservation Commission Salem Planning Board Hawthorne Cove Marina The Salem Partnership Salem Port Development Corp . David Malloy Stephen Hultgren (2) George Smith BD/rf 3 �+ �r��rvilrr,r �/!rre rf C�ir +,rin/r7/r�irC�al��r-rv� 2 4.+5 ARGEO PAUL CELLUCCI GOVERNOR JANE SWIFT Dept. LIEUTENANT GOVERN Salem '"�' �+t+,"d <'� ` '. Tel. (617) 727-9800 BOB DURAND Fax (617) 727-2754 SECRETARY http://www.magnetslate.ma.us/envir February 22 , 1999 CERTIFICATE OF THE SECRETARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL NOTIFICATION FORM PROJECT NAME Commercial Boat Terminal PROJECT MUNICIPALITY Salem PROJECT WATERSHED North Coastal EOEA NUMBER 11860 PROJECT PROPONENT Goldeneye Corporation DATE NOTICED IN MONITOR _: .January 23 , 1999 Pursuant to the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (G. L. c . 30, ss . 61-62H) and Section 11 . 06 of the MEPA regulations (301 CMR 11 . 00) , I hereby determine that this project does not require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report . This project involves the installation of a 100 by 60 foot pier with a 155 by 15 foot walkway, a 100 by 40 foot barge with a double gangway and ramping system, a timber dolphin, 1880 square feet of floating docks, 3 gangways, a 60 by 40 foot terminal building, and 203 unpaved parking spaces for commercial boat services . The proposed pier is a pile-supported structure located within flowed tidelands, and the parking area is located on filled Commonwealth and private tidelands . The primary purpose of the project is to provide docking P Y P P P 7 P 9 facilities and ancillary parking PP arkin and support facilities for a terry service and tour boat service with additional secondary usage as a small vessel dock facility. 0 Pun!ea on urno'5''x' 20°-Pps!C"',. e'Was!e EOEA# 11860 ENF Certificate February 22 , 1999 The project is subject to review pursuant- ,to Section 11 . 03 (3) (b) 6 since it involves construction of a pile-supported structure exceeding 2, 000 square feet in base area within flowed tidelands and requires a license under Chapter 91 . The project will also require Consistency review by Coastal Zone Management and an order of Conditions from the Salem Conservation Commission. The City of Salem is involved in a planning effort to develop a Municipal Harbor Plan that will likely include this site . The developer has recognized that the site is likely to become a significant element in that plan and further recognizes that any project undertaken at this time may be replaced in the future by the City of Salem during implementation of the proposed Harbor Plan. While the currently proposed use of the property seems to be consistent with the overall objectives of the plan, to encourage private investment in .developing new and improved facilities for maritime use, the developer should continue to .work with the City of Salem to ensure that the Harbor Plan -continues on track and that the currently proposed use of this site does not preclude future uses proposed in that -Plan. Neighbors to the site have raised concerns about increased use of the property under the current conditions . Specific concerns include traffic; traffic generated dust from the unpaved surface of the site, and all-night lighting that illuminates abutting properties . The developer has committed to working with the neighbors to correct the dust and lighting problem and has committed to using only Blaney Street for access and egress although:White Street may be used for emergency access, if required. The proponent has also committed to developing a stormwater management system for the site, consistent with the Department of Environmental Protection' s (DEP) Stormwater Policy, to control runoff from the site. This system should be reviewed with the DEP and with the Salem Conservation Commission. Finally, the proponent had agreed to provide compensatory mitigation for fill in tidelands as a condition of the temporary permit issued by -the US Army Corps of Engineers . The proponent should complete these outstanding mitigation requirements as part of the implementation of the proposed project . 2 EOEA# 11860 ENF Certificate February 22 , 1999 Based on the above, I find that the project , with the implementation of the proposed improvements and environmental mitigation, is not likely to create significant adverse environmental impact, and should not preclude future development of the Salem Municipal Harbor Plan. No further MEPA review is required. �� 1 February�2 �99Q l ^ Date Bob Durand, Secretary Comments received DEP Northeast Regional Office Coastal Zone Management National Marine Fisheries Service Mayor Usovicz Salem Conservation Commission Salem Planning Board Hawthorne Cove Marina The Salem Partnership Salem Port Development Corp. David Malloy Stephen Hultgren (2) George Smith BD/rf 3 v, d 22 "E wept. GOLDENEYE CORPORATION SALEM FERRY TERMINAL ENVIRONMENTAL NOTIFICATION FORM (ENF) JANUARY 15, 1999 ��Bourne Consulting Engineering ENVIRONMENTAL NOTIFICATION FORM O in accordance with the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act EOEA No.: MEPA Analyst: EXECUTIVE OFFICE of Phone: 617-727-5830 ext. ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIR: Project: COMMERCIAL BOAT TERMINAL Street: 4 BLANEY STREET Municipality: SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS Watershed: NORTH Co,gsT.4rr C0ATE:r_SN6L7 Latitude and longitude: APPROX. N 42o 30', W 70o 52' Proponent: GOLDENEYE CORPORATION Street: 4 BLANEY STREET Municipality/State/Zip Code: SALEM, MA 01970 Estimated commencementdate: Estimated completion ate: Approximate cost: $675,000 Status of project design: 20 % complete Copies of this Environmental Notification Form may be obtained from: Name: RONALD R. BOURNE Firm/Agency: BOURNE CONSULTING ENGINEERING Phone: 508-528-8133 Street: 184 WEST CENTRAL STREET Fax: 508-520-6671 Municipality/State/Zip Code FRANKLIN, MA 02038 E-mail: bce@boumece.com escnption of the Project and its alternatives (attached additional pages it necessary): INSTALLATION OF A 100 FT. x 60 FT. PIER WITH 155 FT. x 15 FT. WALKWAY, 100 FT. x 40 FT. BARGE WITH DOUBLE GANGWAY AND RAMPING SYSTEM, TIMBER DOLPHIN, 1880 SF OF FLOATING DOCKS, 3 GANGWAYS, 60 FT. x 40 FT. TERMINAL BUILDING AND 203 PARKING SPACES FOR COMMERCIAL BOAT SERVICES AT THE FOOT OF BLANEY STREET IN SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS. 7/98 This is an important notice. Comment period is limited. For information call 617-727-5830. Schedules attached to this Environmental Notification Form: Related Permit(s) Impact(s)not meeting Review Threshold(s) required from an or exceeding a Review q g Subject Matter of Schedule met or exceeded Agency of the Threshold or requiring (see 301 CMR 11.03) Commonwealth a Permit from an (attach a copy of each Agency of the completed application) Commonwealth (1) Land X (2) Rare Species X (3) Wetlands, Waterways & Tidelands X (4) Water X (5) Wastewater X (6) Transportation X (7) Energy X (8) Ai X (9) Solid & Hazardous Waste X (10) Historical/Archaeological Resources X (11) ACECs X s this an Expanded ENF requesting: a Single EIR? _ Yes X No (see 301 CMR l l.06(8)) a Special Review Procedure? _ Yes X No (see 301 CMR 11.09) a Waiver? _ Yes X No (see 301 CMR 11.11) List ot any manc—m Assistance or Land I ransf er from an Agency of the Commonwealth: NONE Description ot the roject s consistency with state, municipal, county, regional an ederal growth an infrastructure plans and policies and of its ability to facilitate sustainable economic development: The applicant, Goldeneye Corporation, is proposing to put in a commercial boat surface that will be utilized by the public to provide access to ferry and cruise vessels. Aspects of the project include: • Parking for 203 cars • Terminal building to support the facility operations. • ADA accessible ferry dock system • Small vessel (non-ferry)dock facility 7/98 Page 2 At the current time,the project is located within the Designated Port Area, which restricts usage of the site to water dependent commercial activities. The city zoning for the site is industrial and the proposed project is consistent with that zoning. At the present time the City of Salem has established a Salem Harbor Planning Committee which is developing a harbor plan. At this time,no approved harbor plan exists for the city. The applicant has presented the proposed project to the Salem Harbor Planning Committee for their review. Currently,they have it under advisement and we anticipate comment shortly and will be forwarded to MEPA. It is the opinion of the applicant that this project is consistent with the direction of the proposed harbor plan with this site being utilized for commercial vessel operations; specifically for ferry and crew vessel docking and operations. Historically,this site has been utilized for a demonstration ferry service between Salem and Boston, which proved successful during the summer of 1998. The continuation of this service is not clear at this time and it is the intent of the applicant,through successful gaining of all permits,to construct the proposed facility to provide the ferry service for the 1999 season. The City of Salem is in the process of developing Salem Port project,which includes this site. The applicant is the property owner and wants to be sure that development of this site continues,as well as being consistent with the City of Salem's overall Salem Port Project. The development of the port project is presumed will take several years before its full implementation. During the Salem Port Project approval process,the proposed project would allow the ferry and cruise vessel usage to continue and grow, establishing loyal users for the ferry service. When(and if)the full port development plan occurs,the work proposed under this filing would be removed and re-utilized in the final plan. The below statement details the consistency of the proposed project with the current harbor plan drafts. Harbor Plan Consistency Statement The applicant recognizes that its property is the subject of a planning review effort for future construction of a larger state funded marine facility. If built,this public facility will form the core of the Salem Harbor Plan future program and replace any interim project undertaken by the applicant. The plan presented by the applicant is, however, consistent with the overall objectives of Salem's Harbor Plan effort as well as facilitative to several of its key operational goals and mission as articulated throughout Salem's various preliminary draft harbor plan documents. The applicant project is an important step forward in advancing the goals of the City and provides an incremental, logical progression forward while the future of the larger public study project is debated, planned and taken through the permitting process. Specifically, the applicant project advances the following: 7/98 Page 3 "Goal 1: To reestablish the identity of Salem as an active seaport by developing new and improved facilities serving many types of vessels on the waterside and enhancing acces s to and visibility of the harbor on the landside for residents and visitors alike. This should be done by defining a specific program of activities to intensify use of the harbor, as well as funding to implement priority projects." The applicant has already taken an unsafe vacant and cluttered waterfront lot in 1998 and improved it to provide access and use as a port facility for the 1998 Salem Ferry Project. This effort demonstrated the public demand for waterfront access and need for waterborne transportation. This current proposal will establish a waterside facility which will serve many types of vessels simultaneously and thereby enhance access to and from the waterside. The project proposed will intensify the use of the port within its DPA area through a specific program and will be funded entirely from private dollars. Within "Goal I"the following objectives are supported by the applicant project: "Expand services for cruise ships, transient vessels, including yachts, commercial ships and ferries. Increase berthing and mooring capacity..... Enhance facilities for local fisherman. Develop landside and waterside public amenities to enhance the experience of the harbor." "Goal 2: Maximize the economic potential of the harbor in the context of the economic development goals of the City as a whole, while enhancing the quality of life for the residents in adjacent areas." The applicant project proposal will allow private business development to occur in keeping with the overall economic development goals of the City by creating jobs and stimulating economic growth within the targeted seaport district. The improvements to the property by the applicant have already enhanced the quality of life for adjacent neighborhood residents by providing safe and unimpeded physical and visual access to the waterfront. The improvements'with the proposed project will add greater amenities and further access into the water sheet for pedestrians and fisherman. Within "Goal2"the following objectives are supported by the applicant project: "Expand tax base and economic activities in general. Promote private commercial development that will take advantage of increased visitations, as a result ofpublic investments (such as the establishments of the Essex National Heritage Area) in this area. Ensure the integrity of historic resources and quality of life in residential neighborhoods near areas with intensified harbor uses." 7/98 Page 4 "Goal 3: Promote the waterfront as a focal point for Salem's visitor economy, emphasizing cultural tourism, high quality recreational experiences and longer visitor stays." The applicant project will promote visitation through the enhancement of ferry service capacity. By bringing visitors through the waterside gateway to Salem the visitor will become more focused on the role of the waterfront in Salem's early cultural and economic development. The ability of the facility to accommodate large harbor tour vessels will also provide interpretive experiences for the large volume of tour bus visitors arriving into the city, who will now have the opportunity to take a harbor cruise. No facility exists to support large scale historic harbor tours of the waterfront and surrounding port areas. Increasing options for visitor experiences such as harbor tours and ferry connections to other ports will likely create reasons to extend stays. Within "Goal 3"the following objectives are supported by the applicant project: "Promote access to historic resources, without comprising their integrity. Promote improved pedestrian connections, ..... Develop landside and waterside public amenities to enhance the year-round experience of the harbor and the City as a while for both visitors and residents. Develop additional support facilities for transient vessels, ..... Increase dollar expenditures per visitor. Encourage and support economic activities which extend beyond the peak seasons." "Goal 4: Protect and enhance access to waterfront, and on the water,for the Salem community,for passive and active recreation: reconnect the community to its waterfront where the connection does not already exist." The applicant project establishes a permanent connection to the waterfront. Temporary float access was placed for the 1998 Salem Ferry Project and it is now gone. The applicant project will protect and enhance the access for the community and provide a central connection within the historic port district to outside port facilities. Over the past year, passive recreation use by the residents has increased dramatically on the site and will be further enhanced by improved access for fisherman,pedestrians and the addition of a small launching float for seakayakers and other small boat enthusiasts. Within "Goal 4"the following objectives are supported by the applicant project: "Develop water taxi and ferry links among attractions on the harbor and to Boston. 7/98 Page 5 . Promote improved pedestrian connections, ... Develop waterside public amenities to enhance the experience of the harbor. Maximize potential public benefits to residential neighborhoods throughout the waterfront. Maximize amenities and opportunities for recreational boaters." "Goal 7: Ensure that public investment in waterfront infrastructure will support and encourage private investment. ...." The investment by the State of Massachusetts in a Salem-Boston High Speed Ferry trial project represents a public investment. The applicant project is focused on providing maximum return on that public investment by delivering an immediate response of private investment dollars and expansion of ferry services to the community without requiring any further public support. The.objective of the ferry trial in 1998 was to test the viability of a private service and now that service will exist with the installation of the applicant project. The applicant has entered into a long term agreement with a large private ferry operator for the Salem-Boston service and has other operations waiting to provide tours and ferry connections to other ports. Within "Goal 7"the following objective is supported by the applicant project: "Promote water related commercial development by leveraging public investments in the area." The applicant project is additionally consistent within the "Review Draft Plan" in the so-called "North Commercial Waterfront" with the first stated use objective: Support water dependent uses that are appropriate to the site in scale and character, and which do not exceed the limited parking resources. The construction of the applicant project will have further benefits to the community if the larger state funded project moves forward. That is,that economic development issues will become more clearly understood by all sides through the gradual increase in site utilization proposed by the applicant. Sustainable economic business growth will be more likely by continuing to maintain business activity and establish public awareness of the site and therefore the City for water related access. Also, the applicant project will be capable of functioning as a staging and access point for construction and dredging mobilization efforts in the future. 7t98 Page 6 List of any permits, licenses, certificates, variances or approvals required from any municipal, county, regional or Federal governmental entity: CHAPTER 91 BRP WW 01 WATERWAYS LICENSE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS PERMIT COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONSISTENCY NOTICE OF INTENT- SALEM CONSERVATION COMMISSION APPROVAL Attachments: 1. Appropriate schedule(s) as indicated on Page 2 of this form 2. Site plan(s) 3. Original U.S.G.S. map or good quality color copy (8-'/z x i l inches or larger) indicating the Project location and boundaries 4. GIS Coordinates, if available Certifications: 1. The Public Notice of Environmental Review has been/will be published in the following newspapers in accordance with 301 CMR 11.15(1): (Name) (Date) SALEM EVENING NEWS JANUARY 20, 1999 2. This form 'as been circulated to Agencies and Perso accordance with 301 CMR 11.16(2). Date Signa _�uq of Responsible Officer # ignature of pe son preparing or lonent ENF (if different from above) BO SALEM RONALD BOURNE Name (print or type) Name (print or type) Finn/Agency GOLDENEYE CORP. Firm/Agency BOURNE CONSULTING ENGINEERING Street 4 BLANEY STREET Street 184 WEST CENTRAL STREET Municipality/State/Zip SALEM, MA 01970 Munici ali /State/Zi FRANKLIN P tY P , MA 02038 Phone ( 978 ) 744-3800 Phone 508 ) 528-8133 7/98 Page 7 Schedule an PROJECT DOES NOT EXCEED SCHEDULE THRESHOLD. SUBMITTED FOR META INFORMATION ONLY. 1. Description and assessment of the Project's impacts on land, including (as applicable): A. acres of land to be altered directly B. acres of new impervious area to be created C. acres of public natural resources land to be converted to other purposes D. acres of land in agricultural use (with agricultural soils)to be converted to nonagricultural use E. release of a conservation restriction,preservation restriction, agricultural preservation restriction or watershed preservation restriction F. required approval of a new urban redevelopment project or a fundamental change in an existing urban redevelopment project G. required approval of a new urban renewal plan or a major modification of an existing urban renewal plan The existing site supports a temporary ferry terminal run by the City of Salem as a Demonstration Project during the 1998 season. The proposed Project will construct a permanent commercial boat terminal in place of the existing temporary facility. Approximately 203 permanent parking spaces will replace the existing temporary spaces. The site shall accommodate automobiles, truck traffic and bus traffic while providing access to the commercial boat terminal, per the proposed layout illustrated on Sheet 3 of 4. Site access will be from White Street and Blaney Street. 2. Description and assessment of the Project's other impacts on land: No other significant impacts will occur due to the proposed Project's scope of work. The upland impacts will be the same has the existing temporary ferry facility. 3. Description and analysis of alternative plans or designs for the Project or aspects thereof that would avoid or minimize impacts on land: The proposed alternative has been selected because of its consistency to the existing operation. Currently, no alternative plans or designs are proposed by the applicant. The City of Salem is in the process of investigating this site for a larger facility. That investigation and planning process is separate from this project and is not part of this application. 7/98 Page 8 4. Description and assessment of proposed measures that would mitigate impacts on land: The majority of work will include minor grading and site preparation for in support of the building construction. The pier-structures will be installed from a water-based barge and crane. The existing surface drainage shall not be altered. Site work will coordinate the following measures: 1. Silt fences shall be placed adjacent to areas being graded. 2. No material shall be placed or stockpiled in tidal waters. 3. The Contractor shall remove all debris generated from site work to an approved disposal site. 4. Excavated material shall be stockpiled for site backfilling or properly disposed of offsite by the Contractor. Upon finishing work, the Contractor shall fill and regrade the areas of excavation to final grade conditions. Only suitable material shall be used for backfilling as approved by the Engineer. 7/98 Page 9 Schedule 2 —Rare Species PROJECT DOES NOT EXCEED SCHEDULE THRESHOLD. SUBMITTED FOR MEPA INFORMATION ONLY. 1. Description and assessment of the Project's impacts on rare species, including (as applicable): A. alteration of"significant habitat" designated by the Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program in accordance with General Laws Chapter 131A B. taking of an endangered or threatened species or species of special concern C. alteration of a Priority Site of Rare Species Habitat and Exemplary Natural Communities alteration of Estimated Habitat of Rare Wildlife or a Certified Vernal Pool No onion of the la nd an1 affected by the proposed Project is designated as any of the above referenced sites and preservation areas. 2. Description and assessment of the Project's other impacts on rare species: According to the Coastal Zone Management(CZM) Phase I, Dredge Material Management Program (DMMP) Summary Report, soft-shell clams and oysters are located in the immediate v'P Y vicinity of the ty project. No eel grass or other sub-aquatic vegetation are reported to be contained in the proposed Project area. . The proposed structures will be pile supported and will have minimal impact on existing shell fish. No dredging is proposed 3. Description and analysis of alternative plans or designs for the Project or aspects thereof that would avoid or minimize impacts on rare species: Currently, no alternative plans or designs are under consideration for the proposed Project. The proposed project avoided alternatives that required fill and selected pile supported structures to minimize impacts. 4. Description and assessment of proposed measures that would mitigate impacts on rare species: No rare species are impacted within the proposed Project's scope; therefore, no implementation of mitigating measures was required. 7/98 Page 10 Schedule et an s, Waterways and Tidelands PROJECT EXCEEDS SCHEDULE THRESHOLD. 1. Description and assessment of the Project's impacts on wetlands, waterways and tidelands, , including (as applicable): A. alteration of any resource area subject to protection under the Wetlands Protection Act B. alteration of any other wetlands protected under Federal or State law C. alteration of a wetland resource area requiring a variance under the Wetlands Protection Act D. construction or alteration of a dam E. non-water dependent use of or structure in waterways or tidelands F. fill or structure in a velocity zone or regulatory floodway The proposed structure (terminal building)will constructed with its base floor elevation above the FEMA V3 elevation of+17.2 feet (MLW). G. roadway, bridge or utility line to a barrier beach H. dredging or disposal of dredged material I. solid fill, pile-supported or bottom-anchored structure in flowed tidelands or other waterways The proposed Project is located in FEMA Zone V3, at a flood height of 17.2 (MLW), and A4 at elevation 15.5. The tidal range is 9 feet. No wetlands exist within the proposed Project and no dredging shall occur. 2. Description and assessment of the Project's other impacts on wetlands, waterways and tidelands: A minor amount of slope stabilization may occur, if required, during the construction of the proposed Project. Any work required along the shoreline will be completed in a manner to preserve and protect the existing conditions as completely as possible. The disturbance will be only as necessary to install foundation elements including pier support piles and abutments. No additional rip rap or shore protection is proposed. 3. Description and analysis of alternative plans or designs for the Project or aspects thereof that would avoid or minimize impacts on wetlands, waterways and tidelands: The building is proposed over existing fill and the pier structure utilizes piles for support to minimize impacts to the tidal area. The pier structure was extend out only as necessary to reach adequate draft for the vessels without the need to dredge. 7/98 Page 11 4. Description and assessment of proposed measures that would mitigate impacts on wetlands, waterways and tidelands: The pier, walkways, floating docks and other structures, excluding the terminal building, shall be designed to withstand the required potential water elevation change and potential submersion. To meet the FEMA Zone V3 required flood elevation, the terminal building floor level is to be constructed approximately three feet above the existing site grade. The building will be built on post footings to allow storm flows to transition under the building. The perimeter of the building below the FEMA flood elevation will have break-away walls that will give way during these storm events. 7/98 Page 12 Schedule Water PROJECT DOES NOT EXCEED SCHEDULE THRESHOLD. SUBMITTED FOR MEPA INFORMATION ONLY. 1. Description and assessment of the Project's impacts on water resources, quality, facilities and services, including (as applicable): A. new or expanded withdrawal from a groundwater or surface water source B. new interbasin transfer of water C. new water mains D. new water service by an Agency of the Commonwealth to a municipality or water district E. new or expanded drinking water treatment plant F. alteration requiring a variance under the Watershed Protection Act G. non-bridged stream crossing 1,000 or less feet upstream of a public surface drinking water H. supply for purpose of forest harvesting activities The proposed Project impacts or involves none of the above referenced items. Water service currently exists in the vicinity of the ferry terminal building. 2. Description and assessment of the Project's other impacts on water resources, quality, facilities and services: The proposed Project will not significantly impact the water resources, quality, facilities, or services with regard to the considerations of this Schedule. 3. Description and analysis of alternative plans or designs for the Project or aspects thereof that would avoid or minimize impacts on water resources, quality, facilities and services: Currently, no alternative plans or designs are under consideration for the proposed Project. 4. Description and assessment of proposed measures that would mitigate impacts on water resources, quality, facilities and services: Based upon the limited impact of the proposed Project with regard to the water resources, quality, facilities and services referenced in this Schedule, no implementation of mitigation measures is required. 7/98 Page 13 Schedule --Wastewater PROJECT DOES NOT EXCEED SCHEDULE THRESHOLD. SUBMITTED FOR MEPA INFORMATION ONLY. 1. Description and assessment of the Project's wastewater impacts, including (as applicable): A. new or expanded wastewater treatment and/or disposal facility B. new interbasin transfer of wastewater C. new sewer mains D. new sewer service by an Agency of the Commonwealth to a municipality or sewer district E. new or expanded discharge of sewage, industrial waste water, or untreated stonnwater to an outstanding resource water, a sewer system, surface water, or groundwater F. new or expanded capacity for storage, treatment,processing, combustion or disposal of sewage sludge, sludge ash, grit, screenings, or other sewage sludge residual materials No change in storm runoff is proposed. Storm runoff percolates in the stone parking area. Edges of site are elevated to restrict runoff from going into the harbor. 2. Description and assessment of the Project's other wastewater impacts: No significant wastewater impacts shall result from the proposed Project. Wastewater will be generated primarily from public bathrooms and discharged into the city sewer system 3. Description and analysis of alternative plans or designs for the Project or aspects thereof that would avoid or minimize wastewater impacts: Currently, no alternative plans or designs are under consideration for the proposed Project. 4. Description and assessment of proposed measures that would mitigate wastewater impacts: Based upon the limited impact of the proposed Project with regard to wastewater, no implementation of mitigation measures is required. 7/98 Page 14 Schedule Transportation PROJECT DOES NOT EXCEED SCHEDULE THRESHOLD. SUBMITTED FOR MEPA INFORMATION ONLY. 1. Description and assessment of the Project's impacts on traffic, transit, pedestrian and bicycle transportation facilities and services, including (as applicable): A. new or widened roadway B. new interchange on a completed limited access highway C. new airport D. new or expanded runway,terminal,taxiway, or air cargo building at an airport E: new rail or rapid transit line for transportation of passengers or freight F. new generation of vehicle trips (average daily trips) G. new parking spaces H. construction, widening or maintenance of a roadway or its right-of-way that will alter the bank or terrain, cut living public shade trees, or eliminate stone wall I. conversion of a military airport to a non-military airport J. discontinuation of passenger or freight service along a rail or rapid transit line K. abandonment of a substantially intact rail or rapid transit right-of-way The existing site supports a temporary ferry terminal run by the City of Salem as a Demonstration Project during the 1998 season. The proposed Project will construct a permanent commercial boat terminal in place of the existing temporary facility. 203 permanent parking spaces will replace the existing temporary spaces. The site shall accommodate automobiles, truck traffic and bus traffic while providing access to the commercial boat terminal, per the proposed layout illustrated on Sheet 3 of 4. Site access will be from White Street and Blaney Street. Based upon data from the Demonstration Project season and a Transportation Report forthcoming from the City of Salem, the peak number of trips was 141 (with 196 parking spaces). For the proposed project the maximum anticipated average daily trip (adt) count of 406 has been assumed to be generated. Also, during its season, the Demonstration Project received no complaints from residents in the surrounding area from traffic or associated noise. 2. Description and assessment of the Project's other impacts on traffic, transit, pedestrian and bicycle transportation facilities and services: 3. No other significant transportation related impacts are expected from the proposed Project. 7/98 Page 15 3. Description and analysis of alternative plans or designs for the Project or aspects thereof that would avoid or minimize impacts on traffic,transit, pedestrian and bicycle transportation facilities and services: Currently, no alternative plans or designs are under consideration for the proposed Project. 4. Description and assessment of proposed measures that would mitigate impacts on traffic, transit, pedestrian and bicycle transportation facilities and services: Based upon the low adt generated and limited transportation impacts from the proposed project, no implementation of mitigation measures is required. 7/98 Page 16 Schedule --Energy PROJECT DOES NOT EXCEED SCHEDULE THRESHOLD. SUBMITTED FOR META INFORMATION ONLY. 1. Description and assessment of the Project's impacts on energy facilities and services, including (as applicable): A. new or expanded electric generating facility B. new fuel pipeline C. new electric transmission lines The proposed Project does not include any of the above referenced Energy considerations. 2. Description and assessment of the Project's other impacts on energy facilities and services: The proposed Project has no significant impacts on energy facilities and services. 3. Description and analysis of alternative plans or designs for the Project or aspects thereof that would avoid or minimize impacts on energy facilities and services: Currently, no alternative plans or designs are under consideration for the proposed Project. 4. Description and assessment of proposed measures that would mitigate impacts on energy facilities and services: Based upon no impact of the proposed Project with regard to energy facilities referenced above, no implementation of mitigation measures is required. 7/98 Page 17 Schedule 8 - it PROJECT DOES NOT EXCEED SCHEDULE THRESHOLD. SUBMITTED FOR MEPA INFORMATION ONLY. 1. Description and assessment of the Project's impacts on air resources and quality, including (as applicable): A. construction or modification of a major stationary source B. new or increased emissions of particulate matter, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, volatile organic compounds, oxides of nitrogen, lead, any other criteria or hazardous air pollutant, or carbon dioxide The proposed Project does not construct or modify a major stationary source, either new or existing, which would produce or increase air emissions of the above referenced items. 2. Description and assessment of the Project's other impacts on air resources and quality: The proposed Project does not significantly impact air resources or quality in the Project area. 3. Description and analysis of alternative plans or designs for the Project or aspects thereof that would avoid or minimize impacts on air resources and quality: Currently, no alternative plans or designs are under consideration for the proposed Project. 4. Description and assessment of proposed measures that would mitigate impacts on air resources and quality: The implementation of mitigation measures is not required due to the negligible impact of the proposed Project on the air resources and quality. 7/98 Page 18 Schedule -- Solid and azar ous Waste PROJECT DOES NOT EXCEED SCHEDULE THRESHOLD. SUBMITTED FOR MEPA INFORMATION ONLY. 1. Description and assessment of the Project's solid and hazardous waste impacts, including (as applicable): A. new or increased capacity for the storage, treatment, processing, combustion or disposal of solid waste B. new or increased capacity for the storage, recycling, treatment or disposal of hazardous waste The proposed Project does not include any impacts with regards to the above referenced solid and hazardous waste considerations. 2. Description and assessment of the Project's other solid and hazardous waste impacts: The proposed Project does not significantly impact the solid and hazardous waste considerations of this Schedule. 3. Description and analysis of alternative plans or designs for the Project or aspects thereof that would avoid or minimize solid and hazardous waste impacts: Currently, no alternative plans or designs are under consideration for the proposed Project. 4. Description and assessment of proposed measures that would mitigate solid and hazardous waste impacts: The negligible impact upon solid and hazardous waste items referenced above does not require mitigation measures to be implemented. 7/98 Page 19 Schedule —Historical and Archaeological Resources PROJECT DOES NOT EXCEED SCHEDULE THRESHOLD. SUBMITTED FOR MEPA INFORMATION ONLY. 1. Description and assessment of the Project's impacts on historical and archaeological resources, including (as applicable): A. demolition of all or any exterior part of any Historic Structure listed in or located in any Historic District listed in the State Register of Historic Places or the Inventory of Historic and Archaeological Assets of the Commonwealth B. destruction of all or any part of any Archaeological Site listed in State Register of Historic Places or the Inventory of Historic and Archaeological Assets of the Commonwealth No Historical or Archaeological Resources are located within the scope of the proposed Project. 2. Description and assessment of the Project's other impacts on historical and archaeological resources: No Historical or Archaeological Resources are located within the scope of the proposed Project; therefore, no impacts exist. 3. Description and analysis of alternative plans or designs for the Project or aspects thereof that would avoid or minimize impacts on historical and archaeological resources: Currently, no alternative plans or designs are under consideration for the proposed Project. 4. Description and assessment of proposed measures that would mitigate impacts on historical and archaeological resources: Because no Historical or Archaeological Resources exist within the proposed Project site, no implementation of mitigation measures is required. 7/98 Page 20 Schedule --Areas of CriticalEnvironmental Concern PROJECT DOES NOT EXCEED SCHEDULE THRESHOLD. SUBMITTED FOR META INFORMATION ONLY. 1. Description and assessment of the Project's impacts on environmental resources or quality or infrastructure facilities and services within an Area of Critical Environmental Concern that are conceptually or physically related to the subject matter of any Permit required for the Project: The proposed Project does not contain any Areas of Critical Environmental Concern. 2. Description and assessment of the Project's other impacts on environmental resources or quality or infrastructure facilities and services within an Area of Critical Environmental Concern: The proposed Project does not contain any Areas of Critical Environmental Concern; therefore, no impacts exist. 3. Description and analysis of alternative plans or designs for the Project or aspects thereof that would avoid or minimize impacts on environmental resources or quality or infrastructure facilities and services within an Area of Critical Environmental Concern: Currently, no alternative plans or designs are under consideration for the proposed Project. 4. Description and assessment of proposed measures that would mitigate impacts on environmental resources or quality or infrastructure facilities and services within an Area of Critical Environmental Concern: The proposed Project does not contain any Areas of Critical Environmental Concern; therefore, no implementation of mitigation measures is required. 7/98 Page 21 ^+� • UtR3y _ v , SALEM SOUND s, PROJECTO SITE l r SPA � 1 1 r— c\, Iop 42.71' SALJWPLACm 11110ERil .� ly fy, 'N f B �'J FILL UC.INM 174 t 1 4A 4* FEMA 0 .1III ILII ZONE A4 °-,;e9 I I (1BUFFER ZONE EL.+I5.500 FT) @ P rOyFILL PLACEDO" y/h o SHEL k _�"`#AM) UC NO. ]613 IAQt P Z�/ _ry SCALE: 1" = 800' p ' ^ fE 3 LACED R _ uc Nos sew lusts �� ' •' Ig, it � \ � � � o ' �\? � 66 I� .J(= Fu i FILL PLACED utaER I 'I PROPOSED PARKIN ; 1 ue;rras-x4a�sots \� L10T j (_- 11 av ..• 'W l BUFFER ZONE � LI.L PLACED0. 36 U1OER/ ` FEMA '., uc. Na saw J\ ZONE B c� �.` / cnl. NZ POWER CO. I• TERM NUII�DING ;i��/' ` 4' OPOS�VW PROFILE .�TING ,DOCK v _ __` li '\ P°w =nGbna % \ \AIL •'' �/ p \ u \` ONE M 19 /i PROPOSED HANDICAP I'',' ACCESSIBLE FERRY LANDING TERMINAL I;;, - ` _ =,' `EXISTING DOLPHINS, LAND UNDER THE OCEAN AND CATWALK FEMA EXISTING'LOCAL: ZONE V3 �\ � \ CHANNEL EL.+17.s SALEM HARBOR — — --------• 0 200 400 SCALE: 1 " = 200' TITLE: APPLICATION BY: VICINITY MAP GOLDENEYE CORP., SALEM, MA 100 YR FLOOD 17.2 IN: SALEM HTL 10.0 Bourne Coasvltiag Ea MHw g.0 giaeeriag AT: SALEM HARBOR 184 West Central Street, Fr. Wm, MA 0 0038 COUNTY: ESSEX STATE: MA MLW 0.0 SHEET 1 nF 4 nnTF nrT OR 10'x10' PLATFORMS / / N ✓1 EXISTING FLOATS TO BE REMOVED 8'x4 LOW FREEBOARD FLOAT 8'x2O' LOW FREEBOARD FLOAT jc 7-PILEDOLPHIN CLUST R s SEE DE AIL ° k Fence° -'x5' GANGWAY = j Al / �/ � 10'x20' FL99ATS \ III 10, 30' FLOAT Q _ T M L UI DING IL 1 i:. i€ EU E E. ISTING OTIN /ED PIER10 IER P � F X i 4 330' — — _ 150'x15' FIXED PIER Mew 35' GANGWAY /65'x5' GANGWAYS 10'x30' FLOAT EXISTING RIPRAP / 100'x40' BARGE 1 SHORELINE TOP OF SLOPE PIER CONFIGURATION CLOSELY MATCHES 1 HISTORIC FOOTPRINT (SEE ATTACHMENT 8) IN THIS AREA WITH THE ADDITION OF 1 _2 THE ACCESSIBLE FLOAT NECESSARY TO MEI)T CURRENT ADA REGULATIONS. _ _ -- p 60 120 -} '-a 5 ! — \ _-—j-a s SCALE: 1 " = 60'-0" _a _ _ __-e REVISED 10/15/98 100 YR FLOOD 17.2 TITLE: IN: SALEM HTL 10.0 MLW 0.0 PIER LAYOUT PLAN AT:SALEM HARBOR MHW 9.0 COUNTY: ESSEX STATE: MA �BOurae Consulting Engineering APPLICATION BY: SHEET 2 OF 4 IPA W... r....._,., 1._ f ,,. ...1— 1 GOI nFNFYF rnPP SALEM, MA N/F NEW ENGLAND 40'x 0' FERRY POWER COMPANY TANK TERMINAL UILDING PARKING LOT AREA BUS DROP-OFF (203 SPACES) AREA POLE LIGHTING Chain Link Fence (TYP) Existing � b � r \ GRANITE CURB _ - 47 30 S . 11 4 - _ s _ — / MLW_. .. _ �� WALKWAY / , 8' WIDE EXISTING NE IPRAP/I SEAWALL , ,0 ,0 — (6r I RtPAIR �REA _ — I� I EXIISTING GRANITE BLACK WALL JI I a 6 — EXISTING TIMBF_R I�JI 3 ---- BULKHEAD EXISTING FEEL/ SHEETPIL WACl7� r n f WHITE S T -� GATE Hawthorne FENCE Cove Marina u L' --- --_ 0 u L 8)0 (J 160 SCALE: 1 " = 80' 100 YR FLOOD 17.2 TITLE: IN: SALEM HTL 10.0 MLW 0.0 PARKING LOT LAYOUT PLAN AT: SALEM HARBOR MHW 9.0 COUNTY: ESSEX STATE: MA eS Bourne Consulting Engineering APPLICATION BY: SHEET 3 OF 4 18A W..i c..r. i sf...f UA n,n.a I GOLDENEYE CORP., SALEM, MA PROPOSED FIXED PIER PROPOSED GANGWAY PROPOSED RAMP & PLATFORM SYSTEM HTL+10. MHW +9.0 MLW 0.0 100'x4O' BARGE EL. -10.0 EXISTING RIPRAP EXISTING GRADE � i n PIER-ELEVATION 4 — EL. +18.0 TIMBER PIER SCALE: 1" = 40'-0" HANDRAIL 15� WIRE WRAP PILES CAP PILES W/ FIBERGLASS 6 TIMES & STAPLE —EL. GAL EACH PILE EACH WRAP 16.0 TIMBER PILES (TYP) � —� � 1"0 GALVINIZED WIRE ROPE MHW +9.0 2 CABLE o It 12"0 TIMBER CLAM It 11 EXISTING GRADE j Z EACH PEND NOTE ES - TYP MLW 0.0 PILES: 1-VERTICAL 6-BATTERED n TYPICAL APPROACH PIER n 7-PILE CLUSTER CONNECTION 4 4 SCALE: 1 ' = 20'-0" SCALE: 1" = 4'-0" 0 4 8 60 FENDER PILE 18"0 MOORING PILE (TYP) 10' WIDE FLOATS 6'-O'-TY , MHW +9.0 MHW+9.0 SCALE: 1 " = 4'-0" MLW 0.0 MLW 0.0 - 0 20 40 INTERMEDIATE S PORT SCALE: 1 " = 20'-0" '�/ EXISTING GRADE 0 40 80 TYPICAL MAIN PIER BARGE ELEVATION 4 SCALE: 1" = 40'-O 4 SCALE: 1 " = 40'-0" SCALE: 1" = 40'-0" REVISED 1 1/03/98 100 YR FLOOD 17.2 TITLE: IN: SALE HTL 10.0 MLW 0.0 PIER SECTIONS AT: SALEM HARBOR MHW 9.0 COUNTY: ESSEX STATE: MA Bourne Consulting Engineering APPLICATION BY: SHEET 4 OF 4 — , . , . _. . - . .. --- cni ncnicvc ro OD cni n11 MA „•13-1998 11 :054M FROM SOS 7dO OdOd P. 3 'I ® NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM r FIRM FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS ESSEX COUNTY IL PANEL 1 OF 5 (SEE MAP INDEX FOR PANELS NOT PRINTED) COMMUNITY-PANEL NUMBER 250102 0001 B MAP REVISED: a AUGUST 5, 1985 1 Federal Emergency Management Agency i( Areas of too-year Consul flood -ith velocity (w)ve action);base flood cicyltinns and flood hanrd faClors not determined. 30 Areas pf. 1p(1-yen Coastal flood with yclocity (w)ye actien);.IratCY.(leed elevations and flood halard factor: do urnincd. NOTES TO USER in arus not in the fneeial flood ha2ard areas((one5 A and V) �l1 n bd13NOZ I •dVW SIHl NO NMOHS 3t:1138OH':3HI 30 m r OSVMONVI A1NO A1ddV SNOIIPt.313 COOK 3SV81VISV00 ry, ?/OU?IYH ltC�76'S ID3LO'eJd C`11 CA I e Oy`��se! �l Ode S+L L •`• �r ✓ d bZb7 y \�� 1 O 3NOZ 1( 8 NOZ� m a O 3NOZ \ 3NC (ol 131 bV 3NOZ y+ i t 3NO2 (bV 3NO2 / Z d V070 O9L 20S WOad WVSO' II 9661-EI-11 heA PROPOSED DESIGNATED PORT AREA: 'F.... :.[9 PROPOSED DESIGMTE➢ SALEM SALEM HARBOR e, PORT AREA: GLOUCESTER IMNU HM IOB ISO R uop um u..n O M A 1:0•1 1 O QO 0. 0 LL EAS INER '.•`' 1 50.1 T 1 INNE 1 1 1 GLOUCESTER MFRCOR 3 0. 0 i_ \\ \`J OGLOUCESTER � I nlrn Cow O X 1 'O SALElI 1 Y•4. Clunn.l �I 11 i SALEM MARINA J , I II rbu - n.a 1 GLOUCESTER bm MA0.BOR PRo7ECT LOCL4S / Water Sc. BEVERLY / 1 / Channel DANVERS RIVER LDepth 24' --\ \\ . / 'Dzel/ BEVERLY Essex Bridge \\ , Beverly / HARBOR �ChannelJ / Boston d Maine R.R. PROPOSED DESIGNATED PORT AREA: Scale In Feec 0 500 1000 SALEM BEVERLY HARBOR ESTIMATED HABITATS OF RARE WILDLIFE ILDLIFE AND CERTI FIFO YFANAI. FOOLS • _ For use with the MA Wetlands Protection Act regulations (31a CMR 1D). Produced by Natural Heritage 3 Endangered Species Program, YA Division of Fisheries S Wildlife .AJ.✓ ti.J t? _T 6 Y \.�i ��Y \ .� \�� :�1 �t�•F/j Y Vim_ r�`-i ' �...� e Yt�,: x K�rY � _ v \ L. a \ yam ,J \ .• �/I S "•', �\ �__T4N L \ '�--�+ Q} ' { 1•je0��.—�, ..,.� S�`'e�,.\ �� 'r -_' pr ram. �Ty s. _ t /•{ [+Zi.;c l Y�-b �.. •.. _ I 1 'rod. t �/ ,-�"" '� < < :: y-�,t _ Tom•yz \�'�1��4 �� _, t,• - Y 3 e i r\p PR07E LOCUS 9 S t �..'�//� _ 1 ram• � S ti 3. 1 1n:le aet County Index 91a1 tc ----`e? - a _• ' i I ki!ornoter locate Idpetnt teld/InSle, i 1 S A L E M 0 U A D 1 991 pl p / r pYly t t .+.' � 'P �) �A I'� U -H � � '�`+er �t ;P.1 'c+ l" I / l� '' t ' /I � <.o.• -tTe r �� , 1 �. r � '��. PLf/) r�l/ �J'441 \�. �'�7��tQ\`� J- _ 11 tI ..�1.i`� 0 •.; , �, � \`lylyykk�j, t � /' c f �+ (j�+ _ I $ � 4 �-jP yp, V� W �\ t,i, y FI� �f<r �l I t�/y',p , � -.~j \a I:ll��^ :.X•.J yy 4r^( r ///�� 1 � o ^p '' , .�S L, !.. �� 4 $K/�! �� j1\�1�1, \ �JI i!• th � �•�� / r( � P>t �.�Qa/ .1 ,�� 1 ' , ! z'�m irtry` � (i rr � ^� A I1 /�II�I rl'�'�. I ,1 ) J�."` � \I�11!t� �" :•,'.w vl r i �� '��:'�1 r' � �.� /y , .1 1 —Y o'^ s i � '1 ` � /Ir '.Qy f ( ' r /, 1 ! o ' rl•r. �t I{. f , , t< x.--'^ e +�. rl ,, ) �`\< �rl,J7�j�`�1 I�`3/�( ." � �Y + �.Cy�ufi I .{F 5�� q•-u 'i .�; � ��/( li<, 4 /� ,, �� n>�,9 sv ` t• � IY_. � + �r -r sell A: C� ,,y MM {l < r � (' < ,r�/ r � r� a>u. _` + .: fl �„Qe-._ r ,+ 1 -y. #`fNl (1��.•f `t/ + V , 'FII I ✓/ .. ,\ t �e ��( �(� �d _.xm ', %u $ iF 4r � :+ ( $ t �r { 1; �. .�`•n�� r `l ; ^ Gf� r (( 1,+� �11 /fl.- _> i r` f�44 �� ) � _yl.. ' l Il ,,:� 'i'r� �-r• r � l i'e $, y r if ). r�`~"> y�tu V� � 3 k ��./ ,�1 �/( �. a +}L' .� << P 4 ,,(l y+ !'� r`K-?� �`'y �1� 1 , 4,P �'•'r 1 fi �, �Ir <�wu ,COY, S , r4(Ia / S •y ��`` ,• �! �/ y '\ / �.• i �i � 11' f '` 'd.< 'i C`,� I�' �,'• t �:� r /J. , ,`u<�p }f ,a i � f, � �SI. '1 1 �. r� 7� � '^n JI T � :3tY�_r ♦''' ' ! �(T! t �- J _,�. \ .,.IT?f^ I` � � f r a /� 4 1 �, � c-y O , 3 ' •d �.:..a r•/y i:5� p}ti + `;a ,':.! 1�� :.P L , ,. ': ) 1 _ � �'I�I .�1 al' 4 !II t i �F, P _ y ! I i r1 P ! �,I } 1 a` �rsry"_,. �+ � s I•� r'' d � I ) T 1 r ' a'�I t'\• �`i _ � n .rI. • -� - t � rP { t �p$sf�:i kr / 1,' G a1{j � I � } P I 1c�4,rt I� \ f A r�., IP � •f .� , �a ,,� � I ♦ �!- ,..1.flu in 1Yy .. . . .. . .. 1 �� J;I tn. r 'o (u +'!+ j A Y. ,::f -Y^' n.,'✓.: L1 rb 00 C `� \ ,/—J•.,�I i '' 6a I � ._ I %2.G• p'aY9rou ` f.aed, � /L ( _ Q _ i CenzrN - i sr. '•: : e . ;�' � is .- ✓�..� t 4 � t�' ��'�.� / f .z. 'I • `..� 4. _ �. �1 i `Et ` /Y ;�zpP]'Iu ate. `°'.``s'M,n9 .. Ooue -Point ' ~ ha house, Point • 5 -�. �`, ` In � 4� " Beam - i, - P`} i Woodbury --o" Point f•s� #'�KIf Pb 1 _ E� i - a I `Z`P a . Haste Shoal -.- �, c na 'flrL.^ ,_ •.TucR i ;��,[ -` --_ .a r1 '`:1. 3, Y _ __ _ -• :Point _ Great Haste Sale n Neck , !shod ., �"� •_( C - , '%f'yjp°. i.:'� ^Ponnper l l _ i:r" 7.• .?,% C e O 1 _ Abbot c' J1 'Y WcR`.::. _ iRoek.. z % sal :n y °O Q �� la ,5 t .• � +Ya Go � °- 6�� EFort Picken �yt�`' �• �/ l.Powerplant� Rost Fame /'. Kapp Rock : ___-- _ J _ y 107, 6. y" ��/� - HafWde_ / , Rock - 'M Salem - r _"-\ v`D ROB __ ,- ._ Triangle t Salem Tenna,at. Rom ommo_ t -!i t B - wnart /"' SOUTH: Wellman"i _ Endeavors cloutman Ledge ; Cl,, -- Outer ,_..; z—PomL Tuen �y/YF. -. Endeavors ic Nau us. _. . . Point ire r siM[a(rjRe anes —ile. - - -- ' �i�s -�' - Dolliber - J - �• _ IIetbv - // � '� a —1 �+Poinf 'z�Peachs coma Sr :'.�� Whar` / : o _J\• ~-� c(-Point sr E 7� } _ I�t ,lignt : / Folgerm � Point i � POr `ez S AIL "Point '7 -q: Brown .n olmer r �' - 0. � .;�` �'� ` T�I � �- f :.�F . , .z c`Island H s Palmer ecsrc '. I _ r C" \\ /i�" �� ater ur` ounyv, Gerry _Point W ank �r `�.,"````PPPPPPattW Island N•1 / .` _. Jacks Ro, Sewall r I Park ?4 Plcken}7g _ E �. Pmnt - j'� - G... C�3 i ti ,yf.4R5LGH E� ena eaH _il• dwins /1� ✓q �'�� 1. r "9 /_ f st Head Jack Poi, 191, r — M "r Ramp HAP5OR _ rY .� r t z Park allYo\!� :Z'. •• e �'�i :QQ/C SWAMvscorT<.S KM 45 52' 30" 1 147 a'.afi� - _ 4 SCALE 1:25 000 500 o00 1 CENTIMETER ON THE MAP REPRESENTS 250 METERS ON THE GROUND �2 CONTOUR INTERVAL 3 METERS 000 0 2000 4000 SALEM FERRY TERMINAL-GOLDENEYE CORPORATION (BCE PROJECT#98204) ENVIRONMENTAL NOTIFICATION FORM(ENF)CIRCULATION LIST 1. Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act Secretary of Environmental Affairs ATTN: MEPA Unit 100 Cambridge Street-20th floor Boston, MA 02202 2. Executive Office of Environmental Affairs—MEPA Office Attn: Mark Smith 100 Cambridge Street-20th Floor Boston,MA 02202 3. Department of Environmental Protection Attn: David Murphy,Commissioner's Office One Winter Street Boston,MA 02108 4. DEP/Northeast Regional Office Attn: MEPA Coordinator 205-A Lowell Street Wilmington,MA 01887 5. Army Corps of Engineers Attn: Brian Valiton 696 Virginia Road Concord,MA 01742-2751 (978)318-8166 6. Executive Office of Transportation and Construction Attn:Environmental Reviewer 10 Park Plaza, Room 3510 Boston, MA 02116-3969 7. Massachusetts Highway Department Public/Private Development Unit 10 Park Plaza Boston, MA 02116 8. Massachusetts Highway Department—District Office MHD—District#4 Attn: MEPA Coordinator 519 Appleton Street Arlington, MA 02174 9. Regional Planning Commission Merrimack Valley Planning Commission 160 Main Street Haverhill, MA 01830-5000 10. City of Salem—City Council/Board of Selectmen Planning Board 1 Salem Green-2nd Floor Salem, MA 01970 (978)745-9595 11. City of Salem—Office of Planning and Community Development 98204 ENF Circ.doc Page I of 2 6 Central Street Salem,MA 01970 (978)745-9595 12. Salem Conservation Commission 1 Salem Green Salem,MA 01970 13. Salem Harbor Harbormaster 50 Winter Island Road Salem,MA 01970 (978)471 -0098 14. Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management Attn:Project Review Coordinator 100 Cambridge Street,20th Fl. Boston,MA 02202 (617)727-9530 x418 15. Division of Marine Fisheries Attn: Environmental Reviewer 100 Cambridge Street, 19th Fl. Boston, MA 02202 16. Massachusetts Water Resource Authority Ann:MEPA Coordinator 100 First Avenue Charlestown Navy Yard Boston, MA 02129 17. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Attn: MEPA Coordinator 10 Park Plaza,6th Fl. Boston, MA 02216-3966 98204 ENF Circ.doc Page 2 of 2 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs - MEPA Office 100 Cambridge St. - 20th fl., Boston, MA 02202 617-727-5830 FORMS OF NOTICE The following should be completed and submitted to a local newspaper: PUBLIC NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROJECT: COMMERCIAL BOAT TERMINAL LOCATION: FOOT OF BLANEY STREET SALEM MA PROPONENT: GOLDENEYE CORPORATION The undersigned is submitting an Environmental Notification Form ("ENF") to the Secretary of Environmental Affairs on or before JANUARY 15, 1999 This will initiate review of the above project pursuant to the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act("MEPA", M.G.L. c. 30, s.s. 61, 62 62M. Copies of the ENF may be obtained from: BOURNE CONSULTING ENGINEERING 184 WEST CENTRAL STREET FRANKLIN, MA 02038 (508) 528 — 8133 Copies of the ENF are also being sent to the Conservation Commission and Planning Board of THE CITY OF SALEM. MA. where they may be inspected. The Secretary of Environmental Affairs will publish notice of the ENF in the Environmental Monitor,will receive public comments on the project for 20 days, and will then decide,within ten days,if an environmental Impact Report is needed. A site visit and consultation session on the project may also be scheduled. All persons wishing to comment on the project, or to be notified of a site visit or consultation session, should write to the Secretary of Environmental Affairs, 100 Cambridge Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02202, Attention: MEPA Unit, referencing the above project. By GOLDENEYE CORPORATION i, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 'l^ NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE a NORTHEAST REGION One Blaclmum Drive Gloucester,MA 01930.2298 Robert Durand, Secretary FEB 9 1999 Executive Office of Environmental Affairs Attention: Dick Foster, EOEA 411860 100 Cambridge Street—20th Floor Boston, MA 02202 RE: Goldeneye Ferry Terminal Dear Secretary Durand: This letter is in reference to the Environmental Notification Form for the Goldeneye Corporation to construct a 100-foot by 60-foot pier and associated ramps, floats, dolphins and parking spaces at 4 Blaney Street in Salem, Massachusetts. The project purpose is to establish a waterside facility to serve ferries and cruise vessels, and to provide small vessel dockage. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has no objection to the construction of the gangway and float structures; however, we are concerned about the existing unauthorized fill associated with the project, as well as indirect effects to whales due to potential future travel routes of high speed ferries. NMFS has been coordinating with the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) on this project site for a number of years and most recently with the current owner who facilitated the temporary ferry route between Boston and Salem in 1998. As a condition to the temporary Army Corps permit, the Goldeneye Corporation agreed to, and was required to, provide compensatory mitigation for the unauthorized fill. In coordination with the Goldeneye Corporation, NMFS helped identify and develop a few viable mitigation options. However, to our knowledge Goldeneye never completed development and implementation of the mitigation plans. Therefore, we recommend that you require completion of outstanding mitigation requirements prior to issuance of any additional state permits. We also continue to be concerned about the potential for impacts from high speed ferries on endangered and threatened marine mammals. During 1998 there were at least two ship strikes to protected whales from vessels that originated from Massachusetts ports. The enclosed June 4, 1998 letter from NMFS to the ACOE elaborates on the marine mammal and compensatory mitigation issues. Please include the enclosed letter as part of our official comments. If you have any questions pertaining to this letter, please contact Eric Hutchins at (978) 281-9313. Sincerely, / I&1 Peter D. Colosi, Jr. Assistant Regional Administrator for Habitat Conservation "' 0„44 I t+Y�-1 Enclosure cc: Mike Bartlett—USFWS (Concord) Jane Downing—USEPA (Boston) Jim Sprague—MADEP (Wilmington) Margaret Brady—MACZM (Boston) Nancy Haley—NMFS (Milford) Chris Mantzaris—NER3 Greg Silber—PR2 Mark George—Salem ConCom Tom French—MA NHESP (Westborough) Bill Lawless - ACOE File: 1503-01 (MA)Salem 498-1388,Goldeneye Corp. Salem Ferry Terminal x-"wti UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration =J NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE NORTHEAST REGION One Blackburn Drive Gloucester. MA 01930 JUN 4 i Mr. William Lawless Chief, Regulatory Division U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 696 Virginia Road ' Concord, MA 0 1 742-2 75 1 RE: Salem-Boston High Speed Ferry(File 1998-641) Dear Mr. Lawless: This letter is in reference to the application of the City of Salem, Massachusetts and the Goldeneye Corporation to construct a temporary pile-supported floating dock and related structures necessary to undertake a high speed ferry demonstration project between the ports of Salem and Boston. The proposed activities consist of installing a 6' by 50' gangway attached to a series of floats totaling 20' wide by 183' long in Salem Harbor. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has no objection to the construction of the gangway and float structures. However, we are concerned about the disposition of the existing unauthorized fill associated with the project as well as indirect effects to whales due to the proposed and potential future travel routes of the high speed ferry. According to information provided by the applicants, selection of this development site revolved around the opportunity for adequate commuter bus access and vehicle parking on the attached upland parcel. However, 15,660 square feet of this upland site consists of unauthorized fill that had been placed by prior owners. Accordingly, the Army Corps of Engineers has been actively investigating and undergoing enforcement action on this site for a number of years. Our staff has been present at some of the meetings where this enforcement case has been discussed and it was our understanding that the enforcement issue involving the unauthorized fill was to be resolved prior to or during the issuance of any future permit for this site. Moreover, since the use of the filled area is integral to the project,the fill should be authorized (along with appropriate mitigation)as part of any permit issued for the proposed gangway and floats. To compensate for the unauthorized fill, the applicants have begun investigating potential mitigation sites located along a degraded section of the tidally influenced Forest River on the far side of Salem Harbor. This river system possesses adequate and viable mitigation opportunities, including salt marsh restoration and enhancement that can be pursued by the applicants. We understand that the applicants have already begun developing a mitigation plan for this site and, based on our site visit, it should not be difficult to refine these plans to the satisfaction of both the Army Corps of Engineers and the federal resource agencies. The operation of high speed ferries associated with this project raises concerns about the potential for ship strikes on whales during scheduled transit between ports. Although the vessel operations are not being directly permitted by the Army Corps of Engineers, the implementing regulations for Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (50 CFR Part 402.02) require that indirect effects of an action on a listed species or critical habitat must also be assessed. Effects of the action refers to the direct and indirect effects on an action...together with the effects of other activities that are interrelated or interdependent with that action. Indirect effects are defined as"those that are caused by the proposed .a. d NO f action and are later in time, but still are reasonably certain to occur." In this particular project,the ramp and float construction would be interdependent to the high speed ferry operation and would have no independent utility apart from servicing the ferry. Many species of whales are common to Massachusetts Bay including minke (Balaenoptera acutorostrata) and endangered humpback(Megaptera novaeangliae), fin(Balaenoptera physalus) and right whales (Eubalaena glacialis). As described,the ferries will operate at speeds of up to 25-30 knots and the proposed service schedule includes both day and evening operational hours when visibility will be negligible. As a commuter link to Boston,the ferries are expected to operate in adverse weather conditions such as fog and heavy rain events, which would also act to limit visibility and increase the possibility of ship strikes. However,after reviewing the proposed travel route between Salem and Boston, which is to extend no further than ''/.to ''/2 mile from the shore where whales are unlikely to occur, we can conclude that this action is not likely to adversely affect threatened or endangered whales that may be present in the project area. Accordingly, further consultation pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act will not be necessary. However, if the project plans change(such as new ferry routes other than Salem to Boston as described) or new information becomes available that would modify the basis for this determination,then consultation should be reinitiated. In summary,NMFS does not object to the authorization of this project provided that specific conditions are included that require the applicant to pursue finalization and implementation of mitigation to compensate for the unauthorized fill located at the proposed ferry terminal. If you have any questions pertaining to this letter, please contact Eric W. Hutchins at(978)281-9313. Sincere ly, tiAnoew A. Rosenb rg, Ph.D. nal Administ for cc: Jane Downing- USEPA (Boston) Mile Bartlett- USFWS (Concord, NH) Jim Sprague - MADEP (Wilmington) Jane Mead - MACZM Nancy Haley-NMFS (Milford) Chris Mantzaris- PR3 Greg Silber- PR2 File. 1503-01(MA)Salem 1998-1388 Salem-Boston High Speed Ferty t Ti#u of �ttlPm, �Httssttrl2usk�##s n � 3'Ts s 3 Flanritq IIMT� Mm Salem Greett February 12, 1999 Dick Foster Executive Office of Environmental Affairs 100 Cambridge Street Boston, MA 02202 Attn: MEPA Unit RE: EOEA#11860— 10 Blaney Street, Salem—Salem Ferry Terminal Dear Mr. Foster: The Salem Planning Board has been made aware of the Environmental Notification Form (ENF) submitted by the Goldeneye Corporation to construct a ferry terminal, which is proposed to be located at 10 Blaney Street in Salem, Massachusetts. The Board has reviewed the plans submitted to the City of Salem for the proposed ferry terminal and has several concerns pertaining to the ENF. Primarily, the submitted plans do not provide enough information for the Board to provide detailed comments on the traffic effects of the proposed terminal. The following is a description of the concerns the Board has with what is included in the application and what has not been included: 1. The submitted plan does not speak.to the number, type, or capacity of the vessels, which will be landing at the site. Without this information, the Planning Board cannot determine the approximate number of vehicles, which will be traveling to and from the site. At the scoping session, it was stated that the site would only be utilized for a ferry, which would travel from Salem to Boston and a possible small vessel, which would travel from Salem to Cape Cod and the islands. There is no information submitted in the ENF, which supports this statement. The pier and barge shown on the plan has the capability of having many different vessels of many different sizes enter the site, thus there is the possibility for a substantial number of vehicles to be traveling to the site. The access to the site is located on both Blaney Street and White Street. Both of these streets are accessed by Derby Street. In this location, Derby Street is a one way street, which is small in width. Derby Street cannot handle excessive amounts of additional traffic on the roadway. The Planning Board requests that additional information be provided in the application to determine the projects effects on traffic. y 10 Blaney Street February 12, 1999-2 In addition,the application shows access to the site to be located on both Blaney Street and White Street. At the scoping session, the applicant stated that the access from White Street was only for emergency services. This was not stated in the ENF. Access to the site from White Street will have a negative impact on the surrounding neighbors. There are several residential single family homes located on White Street,which is not designed to handle heavy loads of traffic. The Planning Board requests that the applicant be required to either not have access from White Street or if the applicant feels access from White Street is necessary, then the Planning Board requests that a statement be included in the finding which allows the access to only be utilized for emergency services. 2. The ENF shows that the project will contain 203 parking spaces on site. Because the applicant has not stated the number of vessels,the types of vessels, the capacity of the vessels, or the frequency of the vessels to the site, there is no way for the Planning Board to determine whether the number of parking spaces proposed for the site is adequate. It was stated in the application that the parking would be adequate because the parking located on the site was adequate for the 1998 Salem Ferry. During last year's demonstration project, the site was only utilized for one ferry, which arrived at the site six times a day. If the applicant utilizes the site for additional vessels,then the parking will not be adequate. The Planning Board requests that the applicant be required to submit more detailed information pertaining to the number and types of vessels entering the site and the anticipated number of parking spaces required for the site. 3. In the ENF, it is stated that the current 196 temporary parking spaces will be replaced with 203 permanent parking spaces. The ENF does not address the type of material, which will be utilized to make the parking spaces permanent. At the scoping session,the applicant stated that the parking lot would remain gravel. Because the lot is currently gravel and the applicant has stated that the lot will be changed from temporary parking spaces to permanent, a different material must be utilized to make the change. The applicant has submitted a Notice of Intent to Salem's local Conservation Commission. In this application, it is stated that the parking lot will contain a pervious pavement. If the parking lot contains a pervious pavement and not gravel, the applicant should be required to address the issue of storm water management. With the change in the parking lot material, the storm water will run off the site at a greater velocity than a gravel parking lot. 4. The applicant states in the ENF that the project is an interim project. In other locations in the ENF, the applicant states that the project is for a permanent ferry service. The Planning Board requests that the applicant be required to state if the proposed project is a permanent or temporary facility. In addition, if the project is permanent,the location of the proposed facility is not in keeping with the City of Salem Harbor Plan. The Harbor Plan proposes a facility in a different location than the facility shown on the applicant's plans. If the facility is permanent, then the ` 10 Blaney Street February 12, 1999-3 construction would need to be removed if and when the New Salem Wharf is constructed. In closing,the Planning Board feels that the ENF,which was submitted provides different information from the information which was provided verbally by the applicant at the scoping session. In addition, the application submitted does not provide enough information in order for the Board to make a clear determination as to the impact of the proposed ferry terminal pertaining to traffic and parking. The Salem Planning Board would like to thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed plans for the MBTA parking garage. Please contact Denise Sullivan at the Salem Planning Department at (978) 745-9595 extension 311 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Walter B. Power, III Chairman of the Salem Planning Board Cc: Mark Smith, MEPA Office Craig Wheeler, City Planner Mark George, Conservation Commission Chairman Stanley J. Usovicz, Mayor Planning Board Members 2v Conservation Commission Salem. Massachusetts 01970 y, \\ ^�nssnc February 12, 1999 Dick Foster Executive Office of Environmental Affairs 100 Cambridge Street, 201h Floor Boston, MA 02202 Attn: MEPA Unit Re: EOEA# 11860—Blaney Street - Salem Dear Mr. Foster: The Salem Conservation Commission (SCC) would like to thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above-referenced project currently being reviewed under MEPA. The SCC will soon be reviewing this project, a Notice of Intent was presented to us on Feb 12, 1999 and the Notice of Intent public hearing has been scheduled for February 25, 1999. The Notice of Intent for proposed work includes proposed construction of a 100'x 60' pier with a 155'x 15' walkway barge with double gangways and ramping system, timber dolphins, 1880 SF of floating dock with a 60' x 40' terminal building, parking area for 202 cars, 3,375 SF of permeable pavement placed, and 2,550 SF of existing pavement removed. Portions of this and other proposed work are included under previously issued Order of Conditions that remain open. A level of clarity and closure of the earlier orders and an enforcement order to Goldeneye Corporation will need to take place prior to the issuance of an order for this project. The distribution of the ENF was flawed. The Salem Conservation Commission was not served with copy of ENF even though listed on distribution list nor were they notified of any site visit, therefor several members were not allowed to participate. The wrong Regional Planning Office was served. The City of Salem Office of Planning & Community Development copy of the ENF was sent to incorrect address. The City of Salem Planning Board did not receive copy of ENF. The SCC has significant concerns that are both in and outside our immediate jurisdiction as mandated under 310 CMR 10.00 et seq. Therefore, we are taking this opportunity to comment through the MEPA process. Comments may have been more extensive had the SCC been served as required. Some of our concerns stem from a general lack of information and conflicting information and are as follows: a • Increased impervious surfacing • No use of any Best Management Practices (BMP's) for sediment, sheetflow, pollution control, etc • Insufficient stormwater management • Resource area shall unnecessarily receive solid and fine material • Air born dust form roadway and parking lot not controlled • Chronic grounding of freeboard floats, barge, and floats as proposed should be studied • Historic and proposed taking_ of Commonwealth lands with no provision for public access along waterfront • Discussion of fueling operations is insufficient • Determination needs to be completed if proposed repairs to seawall are proposed on a Historic Seawall • Access to site via White Street has received conflicting statements • Portions of proposed work are shown to be on land owned by others (US Generating Plant) • Lack of information of impacts of bus traffic and idling time on resource area • Unauthorized fill and proposed mitigation not yet resolved • Conflicting statements that the same improvements are temporary, interim, AND permanent In closing, we would like to state again that had the Commission been properly served these comments and other issues may have been further explored. Please include or require notification to the Salem Conservation Commission of any Public Hearings, additional site visits, or other opportunity to properly comment in this process. Thank you for you assistance in this matter. Sincerely, '2d Mark George, Chair Salem Conservation Commission cc: The Honorable Stanley J. Usovicz, Mayor Craig Wheeler, City Planner Walter Power, Planning Board Chair r 3 f� COMMONWEALTH OF,WSSACHUSETTS EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ED DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (7O3 Metropolitan Boston - Northeast Regional Office S�ierrl �' 1�r; ;u Dept. ARGEO PAUL CELLUCCI GUVCIDo( BOB DURAND Secretary JANE SWWT - DAVII)B.STRUHS Lieutenant Governor Commissiocer Ntr. Robert Blair APR 16 19% c% Goldeneye Corporation 4 Blaney Street Salem, MA 01970 RE: Waterways Application File No. W99-9152 Dear Mr. Blair: Thank you for your letter of April 12, 1999 pertaining to your request to continue to run a ferry service and proposed harbor tour service from the Blaney Street site in Salem Harbor. As stated in our letter to you on 9 1999 the ferry service is considered b the Department Y April rry Y P� to be a change in use from that authorized under license no. 4916 which stipulated the use of the site as a facility for the maintenance and construction of marine related structures. It is the Departments' determination that the use of the site as a parking lot for the ferry and harbor tour service as well as the use of an unauthorized building to support these services is not in compliance with the existing conditions authorized under license no. 4916. The Department can also not allow this project as a minor project modification as stated in 310 CN R 9.22(3)(b)as we consider your proposal a significant deviation from the original use stated in license 4916 in terms of fimction,character,duration and patronage. Under our regulations the definition of a substantial change in use means a use for a continuous period of at least one year of 10%or more of the surface area of the authorized or licensed premises or structures for a purpose unrelated to the authorized or licensed use or activity. The Departments' position continues to be that the ferry service and proposed harbor tours will not be able to commence at this site until a new Chapter 91 license is obtained. In order to obtain your license the following information needs to be provided to the Department: This information is available in alternate format by calling our ADA Coordinator at(617)574-6872. 205a Lowell St. Wilmington,MA 01887•Phone (978)661-7600•Fax (978)661-7615•TDD#(978)661-7679 Prid9d m ReryUed Papa t W99-9152/Goldeneye Corp. Page 2 -Order of Conditions from the Salem Conservation Commission - Planning Board Notification Form -Zoning Board Certification Form Once the Department has obtained the above information, we will draft and issue a written determination either supporting or denying the project. There will then commence a 21 day period in which time anyone who submitted a petition to intervene or the applicant may review the determination and request an adjudicatory hearing. If the Department supports the project and does not receive any requests for a hearing a license will be issued. The Department is aware of the time constraints that you are facing and is more than willing to work with you,the City of Salem and any other parties to resolve this as expeditiously as possible. Si rely, ` ames A. S e Section Chief Division of Wetlands and Waterways cc: Mayor and City Council Salem Conservation Commission William Whooley, Harbormaster 8pr 12 99 05: 04p Bo Salem/Bob Blair 9787406771 p. l i Goldeneye Corporation 4 Blaney Street Salem, Massachusetts 01970 USA James A Sprague, Section Chief Division of Wetlands & Waterways MA Dept. of Environmental Protection 205 A Lowell Street Wilmington, MA 01887 April 12, 1999 Dear Mr. Sprague: In 1996 the Department of Environmental Protection approved Waterways License Application: W95-3975 and issued License No. 4916 for the Salem property which we purchased from Thomas Mackey and Sons Inc. in 1998. This license allows for maintenance and repair of the fill and seawall portions of the property as well as allowing for certain uses upon it. The license states authorized uses to include: 'to provide a facility for the construction, maintenance and repair of marine related structures and uses accessory thereto." In 1998 we were pleased to provide the use of this property to the City of Salem for the establishment of ferry services to Boston, which was funded through funds provided to the City by Massachusetts E.O.T.C. This project was very successful, carrying over 60,000 passengers in four months of operation. Consequently, we have applied for a new Chapter 91 License in order to construct an enhanced marine facility to accommodate the ferry use as well as other marine related water dependent functions. This application is in process and under your review. The undisputed improvement in the condition of our property and its increased ability to provide public access to the water as well as the public benefits derived from water transportation are Important to the region. We believe that this minor modification to our property is consistent with 310 CMR 9.22(3)(b), and we therefore request to continue to undertake the change of use in order to maintain the enhanced public benefit which was derived in 1998. Further that these minor modifications which are still existing conditions on our property represent an insignificant deviation from the original use statement in terms of character, function and duration. Additionally we believe that the minor modification to the present license is of a temporary impact and becomes moot as the use is inherent within the Chapter 91 application #W99-9152, and that this application process will be resolved in the coming months. i p Bo 5alem/Bob Blair 3787406771 p• Z Per our written agreement with the City of Salem in June of 1998 the City accepted responsibility to: -The City at Its expense will obtain and maintain in effect all federal state and local licenses, permits, and approvals necessary to implement these requirements." To this end the City of Salem contracted Fort Point Associates and Nucci Vine Associates to design, permit and install the appropriate facility. It has come to our recent attention that there was an apparent lack of proper permit follow through with your agency as it pertains to the Chapter 91 law and 310 CMR 9.00 regulations. We are seeking to correct this situation. Our intention is to operate a Boston - Salem ferry service and local harbor tour vessel from our existing facility until the future of our pending application for a new facility is determined later this year. The existing facility is in compliance with all other local and federal permits. Thank you for your kind attention to this matter. Sincerely, Bob Blair Gokieneye Corporation COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Metropolitan Boston - northeast Regional Office ARGEO PAUL CELLUCCI Govemor TRUDY COXE Secretary B.STRUHS JAN 2 61999 D.4\TD mmssio er 7r nr Goldeneye Corp v c/o Bourne Consulting Engineering 184 West Central Street Jd� 9 EQ � Franklin,MA 02038 RE: Waterways License Application No. W99-9152 SalHfl'm Dear Sir(s): The Waterways Regulation Program (WRP)has received your apriication requesting authorization to perform certain activities in state waterways pursuant to M.G.L.Chapter 9 i.Waterways Licensing. The WRP has assigned your filing with the referenced application number. IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT YOU REFER TO THIS APPLICATION NUMBER WHENEVER YOUR SUBMIT OR REQUEST INFORMATION FOR THIS FILE Immediately following this letter is the WRP's public notice for the application. You are required to publish this notice,at your expense, in the,local newspaper(s)having circulation in the area affected by the proposed activity. This notice must be published no later than the designated"Notification Date"for at least one day in the local newspaper(s). There is a prescribed public comment period imposed from the date of publication. You are required to submit,proof.ofpublication to the WRP by sending a copy ofttt newspaper notice showing the date of Publication or a letter.fr om.the iewspaper indicating the date the notice was published. The WRP will concurrently notify the appropriate municipal officials of the proposed activity for their review and comment. The WRP cannot commence licensing review and authorization until at least forty-five(45)days after the municipality has been notified of this application. Also, should this project exceed the MEPA waterways thresholds, thereby requiring completion of the MEPA review process,the WRP will publish the public notice in the Environmental Monitor. Furthermore,pursuant to 310 CMR 9.00,the Licensees are required to provide compensation for private use of structures(or fill)on Commonwealth tidelands which interfere wi_t the rights of the public to use such lands. Said compensation includes,but is not necessarily limited to,the allowance of the public to pass on foot,for any lawful purpose,within the area of the subject property lying seaward of tue high water mark. The WRP may contact the Applicant,if it has not already done so within the text of this letten requesting information and/or possible revisions necessary to comply with this requirement. Lastly,the WRP cannot begin review of this application for licen�,- issuance until the following information has been submitted to the file: x Proof of publication of the public notice x Expiration of the statutory 45 day comment period x Order of Conditions x Planning Board Notification Form and Zoning Board Certificate x Please submit to MEPA for review - u This information is available in alternate format by calling our ADA Coordinator at(617)574-6872. 205a Lowell St. Wilmington,MA 01887 a Phone (978)661-76M•Fax (978)661-7615•TDD#(978)661-7679 0 PnntW m RecydW ser If for any reason you are unable to publish this notice by,or before the Notification Date,please change the date to the date of publication. Should you have any questions with regard to the foregoing,please contact Jill Provencal at(978)661-7778. S' cerely A. pr g O / Jill E.Provencal Section Chief Environmental Analyst Division of Wetlands and Waterways Division of Wetlands and Waterways cc: Salem Mayor and City Council Salem Conservation Commission William Whooley,Harbormaster Salem Planning Board John Simpson,WRP, Boston Andrea Cooper,CZM Division of Fish and Wildlife Massachusetts Historical Commission Office of Coastal Zone Management Division of Marine Fisheries Abutters WRP Application File(1) ABUTTERS TAKE NOTICE: If the structure,to be authorized is within 25 feet of the common property lines,it may impact access to your property from the water. Please contact the Department within the public comment period if this is a problem. Public Notice Attachment DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Wa:erways Regulation Program Notice of License application pursuant to M.G.L. Chapter 91 Waterways License Application Number W99-9152 Goldeneye Corporation Notification Date: F E a 161999 Public notice is hereby given of the application by Goldeneye Corporation to construct and maintain a pier, ramps, barge, dolphins, floats, parkin, lot and building and to repair existing seawall at Blaney Street, in the municipality of Salem in and over the waters of Salem Harbor. The proposed use of the structure is for a commercial ferry terminal and is a water-dependent project. The Department will consider all written comments submitted 30 days subsequent to the "Notification Date". A public hearing may be held upon written request by the municipal official. Furthermore, a municipality,ten citizen group or any aggrieved person that has submitted comments may also "petition of intervene' to become a party before the close of the comment period. Failure to submit such petition will result in the waiver of any rights to an adjudicatory hearing. For information call (978)661-7600. Plans and documents for this application are on file with the Department for public viewing at the address below. Written comments should be addressed to J. Sprague, Section Chief, DWW, 205A Lowell Street, Wilmington. MA 01887. 0 li SALEM SOON! I 'l '"Ry S � PROJECTO SITE s / 4 31' U40 MARK LIG//MM 174 t it _ ..s 1 I 44 FEMA v� Mph 11 c OUF ER ZONE ZONE A4 N �y (100 FT) EL.+155 —l ru KACW uoe1t Ma Ma sa —] C � �I � SCALE: 1" _ 80 2' ., t / n_ LOCUS PLAN 4 i A FEIIA MA O ZOMEME' -•.. h-. �� VS I -•� ` �_ _Lc Op \� PI h I I I l � I �� : I 1LL L7®KA UER PRZj E P IC M03 ]a4 a]a1s I� - i camel fir' F � -- fLL KA® FEMA uO9t � MG w. 390 wL LLL 10� OnTM pOCK' � ZONE B RE�E � .I Now n91 � INA I G�• '` \!``, 1 .SIin9 SneelO. GWer'eac -- r 194' l• PROPOSED HANDICAP ,,,, ACCES481.E FERRY LANDING TFRI/NAL 134'' " Il ul; - --- _ _ - EXISTING DOLPHINS �I LAND UNDER THE OCEAN AND CATWALK ;I FEMA E�LSTING LOCAL ZONE V3 CHANNEL EL.+17.5 `� � -� SALEM HARBOR or �v v -------------------------- PLAN BOuRME A STRucn*AL FEMA 100 YR. = +17.5 1 � 10na, MHW _ 0 200 400 �4412 DATUM MLW = +0.0 SCALE: 1 " = 200' AUGUST 1998 REVISED 11/13/98 SHEET 1 OF 4 ?LANS ACCOMPANYING PETITION OF GOLDENEYE CORPORATION TO CONSTRUCT .AND MAINTAIN FIXED PIERS, GANGWAYS, =LOATS, DOLPHIN, BARGE, TERMINAL 3UILDING AND PARKING IN SALEM HARBOR, SALEM, MA ESSEX COUNTY • I N 10'x10' PLATFORMS n EXISTING FLOATS i TO .BE REMOVED 8'x4 LOW FREEBOARD FLOAT " 8'x?0' LOW FREEBOARD FLOAT �/ . • ° I c 7-PILE DOLPHIN CLUST R Chain Link Fence // ` SEE DEYAIL 1 / / / {�Z�'xS�GANGWAY � � '� •,�� % If-loIX20' FL ATS 99 10 330' FLOAT L RRY UI DING I \ //10 'x60 EU E E ISTING F 0y1, FIXED PIE 330' \ 150'x15' FIXED PIER MLW - �j� 35' GANGWAY 1 �- 65'x5' GANGWAYS 10'x30' FLOAT SHORELINE EXISTING RIPRAP / 100'x40' BARGE 1 � PIER CONFIGURATION CLOSELY MATCHES TOP OF SLOPE HISTORIC FOOTPRINT (SEE ATTACHMENT B) IN THIS AREA WITH THE ADDITION OF -2 THE ACCESSIBLE FLOAT NECESSARY TO ME')T CURRENT ADA REGULATIONS. _i)F4 , PLAN $ �� 0 60 120 SCALE: 1" = 60' N/FNEW ENGLAND POWER COMPANY TANK ' FERRY TERMINAL BUILDING PARKING LOT AREA (203 SPACES) BUS DROP-OFF -- POLE LIGHTING AREA (TYP) Existing chain link Fence GRANITE CURB a71 ao \ b g) MLW i RL ANY_. S _ - - - _ WALKWAY EXISTING RIPRAP,' — -- �� _�) , ' .. .*`:•' 8' WIDE i SEAWALL - SHORELINE �o- --�o —_- « RtPAIR XREA i - — — - -- , I I II I EXI TING GRANITE _ BLPCK WALL I EXISTING TIMBER 3 BULKHEAD EXISTINd - I SHEETPIL;7 WAC � I_ -- Q WHITE l -- GATE `� Fluwlhorne I- - FENCE Cove Morino A PLAN � �� -- - - 3 �ius�Y 0 80 160 SCAI_I_: 1 ' 80 / PROP Y1 D FIXED PIER PROPOSFD GANGWAY I'ROPOSED RAMP r & PLATFORM SYSTEM HTL 1 MHW +9.0 :EL. W 0.0 100'x40' BARGE -10.0 EXISTING RIPRAP EXISTING GRADE rA PIER-ELEVATION SCALE: 1" = 40'-0" b Z 4 i f TIMBER PIER — EL. +18.0 a r HANDRAIL 15' WIRE WRAP PILES CAP PILES W/ FIBERGLASS 3'-6" 6 TIMES & STAPI F - FL. 1 16.0 EACH PILE EACH WRAP TIMBER 'IL E ES (TYP) , 1"0 GALVINIZED WIRE ROPE MHW +9.0 2 CABLE BER EXISTING GRADE CLAMPS D PIL'EST- TYP 72 EACH END NOTE MLW 0.0 PILES: 1-VERTICAL 6-BATTERED n TYPICAL APPROACH PIER n 7-PILE CLUSTER CONNECTION 4 o SCALE: 1" = 20'-0" 4 SCALE: 1" = 4'-0" 0 4 8 60 FENDER PILE 18"0 MOORING PILE (TYP) w10' WIDE FLOATS § 0 Ty� � SCALE: 1 " 4'-0" H +9.0 MHW+9.0 c I MLW 0.0 0 20 40 INTERMEDIATE N SU2RORT m c SCALE: 1 " 20'-0" R m EXISTING GRADE A � o ao ' 80 ) TYPICAL MAIN PIER � BARGE ELEVATION SCALE: 1 " �� 40'-O' a SCALE: 1" = 40'-0" a SCALE: 1" = 40'-0" to A OD r s.xechoset?sDep.71tmen:OffnVironme,7tat Protection BLrcau of Resource Protection- Wet/ands DEP File Number y- WPA Form - Notice of Intent t for OEP use only Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G..4. C. Z3,,7,,, §4p r Please type or print clearly all ® Genera/informatiOn JA information 3. Pro e t Ow er if different from applicant): requested on this 1. Applicant: -lp yrO 2._`(� pp ) form. Same as applicant Goldeneye Corporation SaOerr YsiM,-.'fgD ,name 4 Blaney Street Ma,�ingAddress htuilingadeess Salem -- ciry9rown Ciryd7o:an MA 01970 Stare Zip Code Azre Zip Code 978-744-3800 ,l'urnbor 4. Summary of Project Impacts: Chonc a. Is any work being proposed In the Buffer Zone? Fa.rA�unrbcr/iraop/icablcJ e;"ail/iddmss li/applicaGlel I.l No I X Yes Ifves, how many sq.ft.? Building Mork=10 ,000 .SF 2. Represonla,ive (if any): Parking lot maintenance = 60 ,000 SF Bourne Consulting Engineering squam Feet AUm Ronald R. Bourne b. List the impacts of proposed activities on each wetland r,�„u,7..v,n• - resource area (temporary and permanent impacts, prior to 1 4 FWest Central Street restoration or mitigation): /v,ai"Tra n Kl i n, - Resource Area Size of Impact (e.g., sq,ft.) City/rows MA 02038 Land under ocean 75SF 5121e508-528-8133 zipcme Designated Port area 85000 SF p1me Mnnbcr 508- 5?C-6671 Coastal bank 730LF bce :)bournece .com Land Containing Shellfish 75 SF l=Nln;lAddi'ei.(i/,�ppliu,bleJ _ ' 1-7io;ect6escnption - 1. Project Location: 2 Registry of Deeds: City of Salem Esser. $ 81aney Street fgg/��192 snerr4rylmss 278 lrry AssessorsMap'plaN Parcel/Lcr: !'age C,Y01ce1e(,(RegulffedCarM) Rev. 10/98 Pape 1 of 5 r l Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection- Wetlands WPA Form 3 - Notice of Intent Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 137, §40 Project Description (cont.) 3. Project Description: 4. Plan and/or map references(list title and date): The construction of a 100 ' x 60 ' Vicinity map October 1998. Rev 2/8/99 pier with a 155 ' x 15 ' walkway Pier layout plan July 1998. Rev. 2/8/99 barge with double gangways and Parking .lot layout plan October, 1998. ramping system, timber dolphins, Rev . 2/8/99 1380 SF of floating dock with a Pier sections July, 1998 Rev. 2/8/99 60 ' x 40 ' terminal building, parking area for 202 cars, 3,375 SF of permeable pavement placed, and 2,550 SF of existing pavement removed . Activities Subject to Regulation Land Under Water Bodies: 1. a. If Buffer Zones to resource areas are to be impacted,in -N/A whole or in part,check the applicable resource areas: Square Fret to be altered Inland Resource Areas Coastal Resource Areas N/A Cubic Yards to be dredged ❑ Inland Bank ❑Coastal Beach Land Subject to Flooding: ElBordering Vegetated Wetland �� Barrier Beach -Bordering: 1 Rocky Intertidal Shore N/A ❑Coastal Dune Square Feet to be altered N/A 2 Coastal Bank Cubic Yards filled or displaced ❑Salt Marsh -Isolated: b. Proposed activities located,in whole or in part,in N/A Wetland Resource Area(s) (Complete all-that apply): square Feet to be altered N/A Inland Resource Areas Cubic Yards filled ordisplaced Bank: N/A Coastal Resource Areas Linear Feet to be altered Salt Marsh: N/A Bordering Vegetated Wetlands: Square Feet tobealtered N/A Square Feet to be altered Coastal Dune: N/A N/A Square Feet to be replicated or restored Square Feet to be altered N/A Cubic YardslVolumer to be removed Rev.10/98 Paae 2 of 5 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection- Wetlands WPA Form 3 - Notice of Intent t Massachusetts Wetlands Protection,;ct M.G L. C. 731, §40 Activities Subject to Regulatior (coot) Land Under Ocean: Approx . 7 5 S F i i.Width of Riverfront Area (check one): Square Feet 10&1 Ayed ❑ 25 feet-Designated Densely Developed Areas only N/A _ ❑ 100 feet-New agricultural projects only cubic Yards to be dre'L+ged ❑ 200 feet -all other projects iii.Mean annual high-water line determined by: Beach: _ (check all that apply) N/A square Feet to be olved ❑ Changes soil;vegetation;water marks; scouring - ❑Top of bank (inland rivers) ❑ First observable break in slope Rocky Intertidal Shore: ❑ Mean annual flood level N/A ❑ Mean high tide(for coastal rivers only) square Feet robea7rered iv. Distance of proposed activity closest to the mean annual high-water line: Land Under Sall Pond: N/A N/A Fcrt SouprA Feet ma oUezd v.Total area (squra!a feet)of Riverfront Area on the site of �� Cubic bic Yards7a be dredged the proposed project: N/A Coastal Bank: Squaw Fed 730 L F vi. Proposed alteration of Riverfront Area: (inear Feet tobealmmd N/A _ Nat pare Fret Designated Port Area: Nqarree Feet within 7R7h.from bunk 85 ,000SF Squaw.Fed ro e^aflcrcd- ,SgwAe Fort/^nvt loomd 200ft.fromnk ha Land Containing Shellfish: V 75 S F 2. Bordering Vegetated Wetland Delineation: Explain the determination of Bordering Vegetated Wetland boundaries Squatc Feet ro be.s0crcd identified on plans: , See Attachment "A" ! Final Order of Resource Area Delineation issued by Fish Run: conservation commission or DEP (attached) N/A ❑ DEP BVW Field Data Form (attached) Lihearrmuo Ae aOnrM y Other Method of Determining BVW boundary(Check all Riverfront Area that apply and attach documentation): Ll 50%or more wetland indicator plants i. Name of waterway(if available): i -Saturated/inundated conditions exist —I Groundwater indicators N/A X!Direct observX!on Hydric soil indicators r!Credible evidence of conditions prior to disturbance Rev.10/98 Pane 3 of 5 Massachusetts Department of&V2onmentat Protection Bureau of Resource Protection- Wetlands WPA Form 3 - Notice of Intent f Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 Activities Subject to Regulation (cont) 3. Sites Subject to Special Protection b. Is any portion of the proposed project located within an a. Is any portion of the proposed project located within Area of Critical Environmental Concern(ACEC)? estimated habitat which is indicated on the most recent Estimated Habitat Map of State-Listed Rare Wetland ❑ Yes CX No If yes, provide name of ACEC(see Wildlife published by the Natural Heritage and Endangered Appendix D for ACEC locations): Species Program? -!Yes X No AC£e 1997-8 Edition valid through 12/31/98 ogle o/Map If yes, include proof of mailing or hand delivery of NO1 to: Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program c. Is any portion of the site subject to a Wetlands Division of Fisheries and Wildlife Restriction Order under the Inland Wetlands Restriction Act Route 135, North Drive (M.G.L.c. 131,s.40A) or Coastal Wetlands Restriction Act Westborough, MA 01581 (M.G.L.c. 131, s. I05)? ❑ Yes rFX No If yes, attach a copy of the Restriction Order to the NOL ' Performance Standards b.Was the lot where the activity is proposed created prior to 1. Is any portion of the proposed activity eligible to be treated August 1, 1996? as a limited project subject to 310 CMR 10.24 or 310 CMR 10.53? XI'Yes I i No Yes Kj No If yes,describe which limited project 4. a. Describe how the project will meet all performance applies to this project: standards for each of the resource areas altered, including standards requiring consideration of alternative project design or location. Attach additional sheets, if necessary. See Attachment "A" 2. Is any activity within any Resource Area or Buffer Zone exempt from performance standards of the wetlands regulations, 310 CMR 10.00, Yes V'No If yes,describe which exemption applies_to this project: b. Stormwater Management: The project is exempt from the DEP Stormwater Policy: O Yes M No If yes, explain why the project is exempt: 3. a. Is the project located in the Riverfront Area: See Attachement "B" Yes )j No If yes,indicate the proposed project purpose: Single family home ❑ Residential subdivision Commercial development If no, Stormwater management measures are required. Industrial development Applicants are encouraged to complete Appendix C: Transportation Stormwater Management Form and submit it with the =1 Other-describe: Notice of Intent. Rev.10198 Paae 4 of 5 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection- Wetlands WPA Form 3 - Notice of Intent Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 731, §40 Additional Information Applicant must include all the following with this Notice of Intent: USGS or other map of the area (along with a narrative description, if necessary),containing sufficient information for the conservation commission and the Department to locate the site. Plans identifying the location of proposed activities(including activities proposed to serve as a BVW replication area or other mitigating measure) relative to the boundaries of each affected resource area. Other material identifying and explaining the determination of resource area boundaries shown on plans (e.g.,a DEP BVW Field Data Form). List of the titles and final revision dates of all plans and other material submitted with this NOL Fees The fees for work proposed under each Notice of Intent must Applicants must submit the following information (in be calculated and submitted to the conservation commission addition to pages 1 and 2 of Appendix B)to confirm fee and the Department(see the Instructions and Appendix B: payment: Wetland Fee Transmittal Form). 1 O$y 9 Ff8g4 check umb J No fee shall be assessed for projects of the federal govern- Checkn � easement,the Department of Environmental Protection,or cities Payanmeoncne k and towns of the Commonwealth. Applicant name(if different/ran payv) Signatures and Submittal Requirements I hereby certify under the penalties of perjury that the For conservation commission: foregoing Notice of Intent and accompanying plans,docu- Two copies of the completed Notice of Intent(Form 3), ments,and supporting data are true and complete to the best including supporting plans and documents;two copies of of my knowledge. I understand that the conservation commis- pages 1 and 2 of Appendix B;and the city/town fee payment sion will place notification of this Notice in a local newspaper must be sent to the conservation commission by certified mail at the expense of the applicant in accordance with the wetlands or hand delivery. regulations, 310 CMR 10.05(5)(a). For DEP: I further certify under penalties of perjury that all abutters were Two copies of the completed Notice of Intent(Form 3), notified of this application, pursuant to the requirements of including supporting plans and documents:two copies of M.G.L.c.472 of the Massachusetts Acts of 1993, Notice must pages 1 and 2 of Appendix B;and a copyof the state fee be made in writing by hand delivery or certified mail (return payment must be sent to the DEP regional office by certified receipt requested)to all abutters within 100 feet of the mail or hand delivery(see Appendix A for regional office property line he project location. addresses). n /) Oher: UI C, % f hen applicant has checked the"yes"box in any part of sign ap cant Date Section C, Item 3,above, refer to that section and the Instruc- tions for additional submittal requirements. �2 Z The original and copies must be sent simultaneously. failure by fpr onyowner Date the applicant to send copies in a timely manner may result in � c dismissal of the Notice of Intent, ignvmw amp resentat, ate Q.,, in= Pnna 5 of 5 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection- Wet/ands WPA Appendix B - Wetland Fee Transmittal Form Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 731, §40 Please type or print clearly all /nstructions information 1. To calculate filing fees,refer to the category fee lists and 2. To the conservation commission:Send the Notice of Intent, form.essed on this examples in Section D of this form.Compete pages 1 and Abbreviated Notice of Intent, or Abbreviated Notice of 2 of this form and send these pages and a check or money Resource Area Delineation;a copyof pages 1 and 2 of this order for the state share of the fee,payable to the Com- form;and the city/town fee payment, monwealth of Massachusetts,to: 3. To DEP regional office(see Appendix A for addresses): Dept.of Environmental Protection Send the Notice of Intent,Abbreviated Notice of Intent, or Box 4062 Abbreviated Notice of Resource Area Delineation;a copyof Boston, MA 02211 , pages 1 and 2 of this form; and a copyof the state fee payment. Applicant/Property Owner/nformat1Dn 1. Applicant: 2. Property Owner: Goldeneye Corporation Same as Applicant Nagle Name 4 Blaney Street Mailin Address M,iilingAddmss Salem C.yA wn 01970 Cily//own state Zip Code 5rate Zip Code 978-744-3800 Phone Nurnbfr PboneNumbty 3. Project Location: 4 Blaney Street 5#eMLctNumbn Salem QYlTown Fees Note: See Abbreviated Notice of Resource Area Delineation: examples of how to calculate The fee is calculated as follows (check applicable project type): wetland filing fees in Section D. L_'• single family house project x$1.00= (feet of BVW) Total fee(not to exceed$100) all other proe x$1.on= $0 .00 ZERO ($0 .00) (feet of BVW) Total fee(not to exceed$1,000) State share of filing fee: Zeno ( $0 .00) City/Town share 1`filing fee: Zero (�O 00) (1/2 of total fee minus$12.50) (ill of total fee plus$12.50) Rev.10/98 Pace 1 of 4 S Massachusetts Department of Environmeota/Protection • Bureau of Resource Protection- Wetlands WPA Appendix B - Weiland Fee Transmittal Form Massachusetts Wetlands Protection %1 ct M.G L. c. 731, §40 13 Fees (cost.) Note: See Abbreviated Nolice cf Intent or Nc"::a Gf( :te: examples of how to calculate The fee should be calculated using the following six-step process and worksheet wetland filing fees in Section D. Step 1rType of Activity: Describe each type of activity(s:;o Section D for a list of activities)which will occur in a wetland resource area and buffer zone. Step 2/Number of Activities: Identify the number of aach type of activity. Step 3/Individual Activity Fee: Identify the fee associated with each type of activity using the six categories of projects and fees listed in Section D of this form. Step 4/Subtotal Activity Fee: Multiply the number of activities (identified in Step 2) times the fee per category(identified in Step 3) to reach a subtotal fee amount.Note: If any of these activities are in a riverfront area in addition to another resource area or the buffer zone,the fee per activity shook be multiplied by 1.5 and then added to the subtotal amount. Step 5rrotal Project Fee: Determine the total fee for the project by adding the subtotal amounts identified in Step 4. Step G/Fee Payments:To calculate the stale share of the fee, divide the total fee in half c:nd subtract$12.50. To calculate the city/town share of the fee, divide the total fee in half and zdd$12.50. Step 1rType of Activity Step 2/Number . Step 3/Individua1 Step 4/Subtote} of Activities Activity Fee Activity Fee Parking Lot (202 Spaces) 2 $250 $250 Building Terminal 1 $525 $525 Category 5 $1 ,000 (fixedpier, floating deck, barge total =570 LF @ $2/LF $1 ,140 Fee not. to exceed $1 ,000) $1 ,775 .00 Step 5rTotai Project Fee: Step 6/Fee Payments: Total Project Fee: $1 ,775 .00 (Total fee from Slcp 5) State share of filing fnc: $875 .00 City/Town share of filing fee: $900 .00 (1/2 of total fee minus$1' .30) (112 of total fee plus$12.50) Rev. 10/98 __ Paoe 2 of 4 A Massachusetts Department offnvironmentat Protection Bureau of Resource Protection- Wet/ands WPA Appendix C - Stormwater Mane Bement Form Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 731, §40 Please type or -- print clearly all Iftstructiofts . information requested on this The Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) recom demonstrate how equivalent water quality and water quantity torn. mends that applicants submit this form,as well as supporting protection wi!I be provided. DEP encourages engineers to use documentation and plans,with the Notice of Intent to provide this form to certify that the project meets the stormwater stormwater management information for conservation management standards as well as acceptable engineering commission review consistent with the wetland regulations standards.For more information,consult the Stormwater (310 CMR 10.05(6)(b)) and DEP's Stormwater Management Management Policy. (Note.this September 7998 version of the Policy(March 1997). If a particular stormwater management Stormwater Moneigement Form supersedes ear/ierversions standard cannot be met,information should be provided to including those contained in DEP's Stormwater Handbooks) Project Information 1.The proposed project is: 3. List all plans and documents (e.g., calculations and New development 'XJ Yes 1- No additional narratives) submitted to supplement this form: Redevelopment I Yes i i No Sheet 1- Vicinity Map Combination redevelopment/new development -j Yes C No Sheet 2- Pier Layout Plan (If combination project, distinguish redevelopment components from new development components on theprojectplans.) Sheet 3- Parking Lot Layout Plan 2. Stormwater runoff volumes to be treated for water quality Sheet 4- Pier Sections are based on the following calculations: (check one): _j 1 inch of runoff x total impervious area of post- Attachment A- NOI Additional Narrative development site for discharge to critical arecs (Ouistand Attachment S,.7 Stormwater Management Resource Waters,recharge areas of public water 1. o supplies,shellfish growing areas, swimming beaches,cold water fisheries). Xj 0.5 inches of runoff x total impervious area of post- development site for other resource areas. Stormwater Management Staj;dards DEP's Stormwater Management Policy (March 1997) includes nine standards that are listed below.Check the appropriate boxes for each standard and provide documentation and additional information when applicable. Standard#1: Untreated stormwater Standard#3: Recharge to groundwater X_ The project is designed so that new stormwater point Amount of impervious area(sq. ft.) to be infiltrated: discharges do not discharge untreated stormwater into or 2 600 S 1 (Roof run-off) cause erosion to,wetlands or waters. Standard#2: Post-development peak discharge rates Volume to be recharged is based on: X Not applicable-project site contains waters subject to tidal Li the following U.S. Natural Resources Conservation action. Service(NRCS) hydrologic soil groups(e.g.,A, B,C, D,or Post-development peak discharge rates do not exceed pre- UA)or any combination of groups: development rates on the site at the point of discharge or downgradiem property boundary for the 2-year and 100-year, (%ot;mpero;ous area) (Hydrologicsottgioup) 24-hour storms. without stormwater controls (%otimperviousarea) (H),dro/ogicsoitgroup) L! with stormwater controls designed for the 24-hour, 2-year and 10-year storms (5,o/impervious aiea) (Hydrologicsoilgioup) The project's stormwater design will not increase offsiie of flooding impacts from the 100-year, 24-hour storm. Rev,10/98_ _ Pace 1 of 3 Massachusetts Department offnwronmentat Protection Bureau of Resource Protection- Wetlands WPA Appendix C - Stormwater Management Form Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L, c. 137, §40 Stormwater Management Standards (coot.) IJ Site-specific pre-development recharge rate and volume are and Standard#5: Higher potential pollutant loads were determined as follows: Does the project site contain land uses with higher potential N/A pollutant loads? (See Stormwater Policy Handbook-Volume 1, page 1-23,for land uses of high pollutant loading.) ❑ Yes XX No If yes,describe land uses: N/A List each BMP or non-structural measure proposed to be utilized to infiltrate stormwater to meet Standard #3 (e.g , dry Identify BMPs which have been selected to treat stormwater well, infiltration trench): runoff. If infiltration measures are proposed,describe the pre- treatment. (Note. tftheareaofhighcrpotentialpollutmt Infiltration of site run-off from loading is upgradient of critical area,infiltration is not allowed) terminal building roof in the park- N/A ing area . The annual groundwater recharge for the post-development site approximates thy annual recharge from existing site conditions. 7 Yes ❑ No Standard#6:Protection of critical areas standard#4: 80%TSS Removal Will the project discharge to or affect a critical area? �3f The proposed stormwater management system will remove (See Stormwater 3)licy Handbook-Volume 1,page 1-25, 80%of the post-development site's average annual Total for critical areas.) Suspended Solids(TSS) load. Yes rX No Identify the BMPs proposed for the project and describe how If yes,describe areas: the 80%TSS removal will be achieved: The site 's run-off is infiltrated in the site itself removing 100% TSS Identify BMPs selected for stormwater discharges in these areas and describe how BMPs meet restrictions listed on pages 1-27 and 1-28 of the Stormwater Policy Handbook-Volume 1: N/A If the project is redevelopment,explain how much TSS will be removed and briefly explain why 80%removal cannot be achieved. N/A Rev.10198 Pace 2 of 3 � h Massachusetts Department of Environmental r"ratection Bureau of Resource Protection- Wetlands WPA Appendix C - Stormwater Management Form Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G L. c. 137 40 Stormivater Management Sta udal-ds (cost) disturbance. Standard#7: Redevelopment projects Is the proposed activity a redevelopment project? Standard#9: Operation/maintenance plan Yes XX No ❑ An operation and maintenance plan for the post-develop- ment stormwater controls has been developed.The plan Note:components of redevelopmentprojects which plan to includes ownership of the stormwater BMPs, parties deve%pprevioustv undeveloped areasdo not fall under the responsible for operation and maintenance,schedule for scope ofStandmd7. inspection and maintenance,routine and long-term maintenance respt nsibilities,and provision for appropriate If the activity is a redevelopment project, the following access and maintenance easements extending from a public stormwater management standards have been met: right-of-way to the stormwater controls. N/A plan/ripe Dee N/A p6Nl lle Date Signatures: The following stormwater standards have not been mat fo the Ronald R. Bourne, P.E. following reasons: , nppacammroe.e N/A r President r;,,e z/LG Dire The proposed project will reduce the annual pollutant load on the site with new or improved stormwater controls. Standard#8: Erosion/sedimentcontrol X X Erosion and sediment controls are incorporated into the project design to prevent erosion,control sediments,and stabilize exposed soils during construction or land t Rev. 10198 Pace 3 of 3 PI3YUmu C PI mend 'i • ''I 1 - �� H&\ ( ...v:'l 1:CICry e rT {yl c �� RM h ,� I 1 A line :�/ ��,� .- 1 • � E 1 +'B a' N Il.vn.f)I 1 I ti;c•Curtis ( - Point Ie, Hospital Point Ii.r O Woodbury Point t 5al[eKS PIa <m _ ail ° / . Wl Boater kRanP ; :-_DMf(\I1711 Tuck oint — _,`_—___- Cv \ Great Haste e N Salem Neck stand a r ! ✓�jOc/ t V .Juniper s . 1 opt I ur Y �tvr�9,'Point � ` )\ AbbotCn ge o f \l'k I o ( ya\ .�fsdosal I I rIAPIII hK%LhFy. Rock `< 4 n1'¢ketin9 ). PowerPld rt• H Boat Fame /Knapp as� alPode Rock 11c ra/ /i D 'Rock Triangle ti17 8 Com To Salem Terminal �p�i Rocks A �� rh` Wellman Wharf SUU � (nc�r trus �rMu Cloutman Ledge / purer. _ / . ¢ 1 Fluen •.// ,rem ,rs Naugus \ _` Porn[ a)Stor,e3t S{IC �i(:M e .. -_.. He \5� Ire �.ne+_ _ .... _/ _. Btu eY� Dolliber t, -' Point � ' DeibV / �� ei� sC? .Peachs' t :FIGht Folger Pont •IAl �! -�LLong Point ' .r.I .�:I �� /�. ,5 Low _ � D �, Brown r - ✓ 1 /C` t�P / IrI AI � � Av _ C_ • areal - r ountam rGerry .. Palmer Point 1 4'� / Watm , j em ,' PatY ;^J Island Jacks Rorl Fort Fy� S /v R Park V 'Pickerg dl G� Pmn[ � i:Al I:! n t e , :a L• .i I � // eo v � � P(� r� ))� pt1.-��Goadwins t T C IF J s \ Head Jack Paine "'mP F;i 1 FrocP.e r ail. . ! Island Ili I 4 SCALE 1:25 000 500 0 1000 1 CENTIMETER ON THE MAP REPRESENTS 2.St1 hlEMRS ON FIE GROUND I TS -- -�--arm— t CONTOUR INTERVAL 3 METERS 1000 0 2000 4000 f SALEM SOUND Ij PROJECTO SITE , SPA _ 42'31' � 4 SAIFM WIJ co: QA1r 1I 'IIZIP 1:FILL PLACED UNDER 44 FEMA Po UO.:N06 174 h 174A aZONE A4 .21,Peo o BUFFER ZONE (100 Fr) EL.+15.5 P �J III . _ RU. PLACED UNDER i 1 SALEM LALiINE BASIN - - UC. NO. 3815/ -/ II � SCALE: 1" 800' r i FEl fEMA ZONE�V3 _ FILL PLACED UNDER UO. NOS 3848 oII —/ 1' f it if rn C FILL PLACED UNDER PR OFaSED PARKING- ,;1 ,�� '^ urr�is-SB4�3813 JI=lOT AREf- �B1U0FI�ZONE �pz= COASTAI-BANK � I '..... C c: _ FEMA I C I 5 ua Na�e�j I ( It. us. cENERADNN ZONE B J PROPOSED'FERRY r_ TERMINAL fll11WING —.�PROPOSIWLDW PROFILE ATItNG'�DOCK - _ _ i r IIJI ZONE AA 194 _t - i PROPOSED HANDICAP - / ACCESSIBLE FERRY LANDING TERMINAL 1134, - � I r I, EXISTING DOLPHINS I LAND UNDER THE OCEAN AND CATWALK FEMA EXISTING LOCAL CHANNEL I ZONE V3 - � . (SEE NOTE'1) EL.+17.5 �.',� SALEM HARBOR I --------------------------- NOTE: 0 200 400 1. LOCAL CHANNEL LIMITS FROM NUCCI VINE ASSOCIATES FIGURE 2 "EXISTING SITE PLAN" DATED APRIL 1998. SCALE: 1 " = 200' TITLE: APPLICATION BY: REVISED 02/08/99 VICINITY MAP GOLDENEYE CORP., SALEM, MA 100 YR FLOOD 17.2 IN: SALEM HTL 100 Bourne Consuldng Engineering AT: SALEM HARBOR MHW 9.0 184 West Central Street, Franklin, MA 02038 COUNTY: ESSEX STATE: MA MLW 0.0 SHEET 1 OF 4 DATE: OCT. 98 10'x10' PLATFORMS EXISTING FLOATS TO BE REMOVED 8'x40' LOW FREEBOARD FLOAT o � • r' �� 8'x2O' LOW FREEBOARD FLOAT 50'x5' GANGWAY _ ! oC 7-PILEDOLPHIN CLUST R REUSE EXISTING FOOTING o / ' �� ' SEE DE AIL chain bnk Fence zt `�� 9�� E�'osting Ch �_�� 1 �� , 1 �� `�� 3 �� 10'x20' FL ATS � 10.3 ' FLOAT I 12"0 CONCRETE SUPPORT I I 100'x60' 60' 'E RY �/ /FIXED PIER 5 ., e TERMINAL BUILDING 4� 4 330' 150'x15' FIXED PIER - - — - MLw 35 GANGWAY 10'x30' FLOAT EXISTING RIPRAP _ 65'x5' GANGWAYS 100'x40' BARGE SHORELINE , PIER CONFIGURATION CLOSELY MATCHES 1 TOP OF SLOPE HISTORIC FOOTPRINT (SEE ATTACHMENT B) IN THIS AREA WITH THE ADDITION OF 1 PROPOSED PAVING LIMITS -2 THE ACCESSIBLE FLOAT NECESSARY TO \ MEET CURRENT ADA REGULATIONS. `y- EXISTING PAVEMENT 0 60 120 A_g -e --" - SCALE: 1 " = 60'-0" 100 YR FLOOD 17.2 TITLE: IN: SALEM HTL 10.0 MLW 0.0 PER LAYOUT PLAN AT:SALEM HARBOR MHW 9.0 COUNTY: ESSEX STATE: MA Bourne Consulting Engineering APPLICATION BY: SHEET 2 of 4 184 West Central Street, Franklin, MA. 02038 REVISED 02/08/99 GOLDENEYE CORP., SALEM, MA DATE:JULY 1998 N/F U.S. GENERATING (FORMERLY XISTI�G PAVEMENT NEW ENGLAND POWER COMPANY) TANK \O'x60",FERRY TERMINAL BUILDING ----- PARKING LOT AREA (202 SPACES) BUS DROP-OFF AREA POLE LIGHTING ChQin Link Fence ` UTILITY TRENCH (TYP) Existing % y y ` GRANITE CURB 19� _J4 MHW- •' _ " * WALKWAY PAVING F T I r — / �c� ' 8' WIDE EXISTING RIPRAP LIMITS /_ - (1i= {12) SHORELINE r ( SEAWALL REPAIR AREA I EXISTING GRANITE BLCK WALL i EXISTING TIMBER sl - BULKHEAD _ EXISTING STEEL, : SHEETPIL / WALL' -- l �1 TE FENCE Cove Marina �F GA Hawthorne � 1 �� J II - -- — -------- 0 80 160 SCALE: 1 " = 80' 100 YR FLOOD 17.2 TITLE: IN: SALEM MHW 90 MLW 00 PARKING LOT LAYOUT PLAN COUNTY: ESSSEBOR STATE: MA Bourne Consulting Engineering APPLICATION BY: SHEET 3 of 4 184 West Central Street, Franklin, MA 02038 REVISED 02/08/99 GOLDENEYE CORP., SALEM, MA DATE: OCTOBER 1998 PROPOSED FIXED PIER PROPOSED GANGWAY PROPOSED RAMP �& PLATFORM SYSTEM HTL+10. MHW +9.0 0.0 \ - 100'x40' BARGE EL. -10.0 EXISTING RIPRAP EXISTING GRADE 4* PIER- ELEVATION TIMBER PIER 4 SCALE: 1" = 40'-0" t� NOTE EL. +18.0 HANDRAIL 15' WIRE WRAP PILESCAP PILES W/ FIBERGLASS 3'-6" 6 TIMES & STAPLEEL. +16.0 EACH PILE EACH WRAPTIMBER PILES (TYP) WI ROPEIZED WIRE ROPE2 CABLE12"0 TIMBER MHW +9.0 CLAMPS @10PILES - TYP EXISTING GRADE 1EACH END MLW 0.0 z PILES: 1-VERTICAL 6-BATTERED TYPICAL APPROACH PIER 7- PILE CLUSTER CONNECTION 4 SCALE: 1" = 20'-0" 4 SCALE: 1" = 60' FENDER PILE 18"4 MOORING PILE (TYP) 0 4 8 10' WIDE FLOATS 6'-0�'-TYp1 MHW +9.0 MHW+9.0 SCALE: 1 " = 4'-0" MLW 0.0 MLW 0.0 - 0 20 40 INTERMEDIATE SUEPORT SCALE: 1 " = 20'-0" EXISTING GRADE �i 0 40 80 (�:) TYPICAL MAIN PIER rE-) BARGE ELEVATION 4 SCALE: 1" = 40'-0" 4 SCALE: 1 " = 40'-0" SCALE: 1" = 40'-0" 100 YR FLOOD 17.2 TITLE: IN; SALEM HTL 10.0 MLW 0.0 PIER SECTIONS AT:SALEM HARBOR MHW 9.0 COUNTY: ESSEX STATE: MA Bourne Consulting Engineering APPLICATION BY: SHEET 4 of 4 184 West Central Street, Franklin, MA 02038 REVISED 1 1/03/98 GOLDENEYE CORP., SALEM,MA DATE:JULY 1998 ATTACHMENT A WPA Form 3 - NOTICE OF INTENT Section C 2. The proposed project is not Bordering Vegetated Wetlands. Direct observation of the site shows no wetland vegetation in the area. Section D 4. (a) Describe how the project will meet all performance standards for each of the resource areas altered, including standards requiring consideration of alternative project design or location. Attach additional sheets, if necessary. Land under Ocean and Land Containing Shellfish: Within these resource areas, piles will be driven to support the fixed pier, floating docks and other structures (excluding the terminal building). The driven pile design was chosen over a filled landing or other design in order to minimize the impact upon the resource areas. During construction, a debris boom will be bound the work areas to prevent debris from spreading into other undisturbed areas. The construction will disturb only the areas immediate to the driving of the piles. Coastal Bank: Within the coastal bank resource area, a concrete footing shall be built to support one end of the fixed pier. Hay bales and silt fences will line the perimeter of the construction to prevent disturbance of the surrounding areas and to stop material from flowing directly into the harbor or outside the work areas. Buffer Zone: The 100' Buffer Zone from the Coastal Bank contains a large portion of the proposed parking lot and the terminal building. Hay bales and silt fence will line these areas to protect the coastal bank and harbor from potential run-off and material leaving the work areas during construction. The parking lot shall remain unpaved with minimal changes in the present drainage pattern. Work on the parking lot will be maintenance only, mainly leveling and smoothing of the ground surface to create an even parking area. Crushed stone or similar will be utilized for grading purposes and shall allow the continued existing drainage towards the eastern side of the project and/or percolation into the existing subgrade. To meet potential flooding levels, the terminal building floor level shall be raised to an elevation approximately 3-4 feet above existing to minimize water damage. Designated Port Area: The entire proposed project site lies within a Designated Port Area. The above-described measures for other resource areas shall apply to the protection and performance standards in the Designated Port Area. 98204 wpaldoc ATTACHMENT B STORMWATER MANAGEMENT Standard #1: Untreated stormwater The proposed project includes the construction of a terminal building, a permanent unpaved parking lot, and permanent paved access paths as part of the commercial boat terminal. The proposed paved area is approximately 3,375 SF of permeable pavement located around the ferry terminal building and pier abutment. Approximately 1,450 SF of existing pavement is utilized for the new paved areas and 2,250 SF removed. The proposed areas provided are for ADA parking and access to the site, as well as a drop-off zone for ferry customers. The entire site will receive minor re-grading to level the surface for parking. The grading along the site's shore edges will direct stormwater into the gravel parking area to ensure infiltration and prevent drainage directly into tidal areas. The proposed project grading shall not significantly change the existing drainage patterns of the site and will not include any new outfalls or discharge points. Standard #2: Post-development peak discharge rates The project site contains waters subject to tidal action, and therefore, Standard#2 is not applicable. Standard #3: Recharge to groundwater Run-off from the terminal building and the parking area will be infiltrated in the gravel (crushed stone or similar) parking area. Therefore,the pre-development annual groundwater recharge rates shall be approximately maintained in the post-development site. Standard 44: 80% TSS Removal The pervious gravel parking lot shall eliminate 100% of TSS by infiltration. Standard #5: Higher potential pollutant loads The parking area is not classified by DEP as an "area of higher potential pollutant loads." Standard 46: Protection of critical areas The proposed project does not discharge to a"Critical Area." Shellfish beds do exist in this area, but are not considered significant resources and are not designated by the City as harvest areas. Standard #7: Redevelopment projects The proposed project is considered new development. Standard #8: Erosion/Sediment control Hay bales and silt fence shall line the perimeter of the proposed work area as erosion control measures. Standard #9: Operation/Maintenance plan Periodic repair and maintenance of the gravel parking area and areas surrounding the terminal building will be done to ensure proper infiltration and drainage in the proposed site so that run-off from the site does not occur. 98204 wpaldoc A NOTIFICATION TO ABUTTERS UNDER THE MASSACHUSETTS WETLANDS PROTECTION ACT In acccordance with the second paragraph of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 131, Section 40, you are hereby notified of the following: A. The name of the applicant is GQ]deneye CorpQcation B. The applicant has filed a Notice of Intent with the Conservation Commission for the municipality of The City of Salem seeking permission to construct a commercial boat terminal C. The address of the lot where the activity is proposed is: 10 Blaney Street D. Copies of the Notice of Intent maybe examined at: Goldeneye Corporation, 4 Blaney St. Salem, MA-by appointment (978-744-3800) or Bourne Consulting Engineering 184 W. Central Street, Franklin, between the hours of 9:OOAM and 4:00 PM on the following days of the week: Monday through Friday For more information, call: ( 508) 528-8133 Check one: This is the applicant x ,representative � , or other L (specify): E. Copies of the Notice of Intent may be obtained from either(check one)the applicant❑, representative Ix or other E, (specify): F. Information regarding the date,time and place of the public hearing may be obtained from Bourne Consulting Engineering by calling this telephone number 508-528-8133 between the hours of 9:00 and 4:00 on the following days of the week: Monday through Friday Check one: This is the applicant representative or other ❑ (specify): NOTE: Notice of the public hearing, including its date,time and place,will be published at least five(5)days in advance in the Salem Evening News NOTE: Notice of the public hearing, including its date,time and place, will be posted in the City or Town Hall not less than forty-eight(43)hours in advance. NOTE: You also may contact your local Conservation Commission or the nearest Department of Environmental protection Regional Office for more information about this application or the Wetlands Protection Act. To contact DEP,call: Central Region: 508-792-7650 Northeast Region: 617-935-2160 Southeast Region: 508-946-2800 Western Region: 413-734-1100 Salem Conservation Commission : 978-745-9595