|
Conservation Commission
Meeting Minutes |
|
|
Minutes of January 4, 2001[Approved 2/1/01] Present: Robert Boisselle, Bill Dailey, Paul Locke Minutes: The minutes of November 16, 2000 will be approved at the next meeting due to the lack of a quorum. December 2000 meetings were cancelled. Correspondence: Massachusetts Wetland Scientists are having a 2001 workshop. They have a winter Botany Workshop Friday, 1/19 in Boylston, and they also have a Winter Wetland Delineation Workshop January 26 in Ipswich. The cost for conservation committee members is $85 and if any member is interested, we will pay for their attendnce. Riverways Newsletter. There are a number of articles concerning Water Sheds, its initiative and how it is working; the monitoring of volunteers; different river projects that have been going on; green team work; legislation and a list of web sites concerning the projects. Mass Wildlife News Release: talks about the 8, 953 acres protected in the fiscal year 2000; the archery season begins late December,;environmental educational awards; and the eagle survey that is January 13 in the Bobbin Reservoir area and CT River Valley areas. Mt. Hood fill from the Central Artery Project Letter, sent to DEP from Conservation Commission "To Mr. Steve Lipman, Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Dear Mr. Lipman: I am writing on behalf of the Melrose Conservation Commission to ask for your assistance. Recently, I reviewed some chemical analysis reports for the fill at Mt. Hood. These reports were on file at the Melrose Parks Department. The enclosed information from ESS Laboratory (dated 10/16/)) shows that Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) is present in the fill material in one sample at a concentration of 189 mg/Kg. Other samples contained TPH at lower concentrations or below the method reporting limits. At the start of this project, the MCC was told that the fill to be used at Mr. Hood would be clean and its source would be from undisturbed clay located at some of the deepest portions of the Central Artery tunnel project area. This fill has been placed in a previously undisturbed area and will support playing fields, mainly for school children We would like to know more about how the sampling was conducted and analyses validated, how representative this sample is with respect to all the fill placed at Mt. Hood, and how the chemical analysis results should be evaluated with respect to the non-degradation requirements in the MCP. Please let us know how to follow up on this information. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Nancy A. Naslas, Melrose Conservation Commission Cc: Mayor Patrick Guerriero, Mr. Richard Amirault, Melrose Parks Department A letter in reply was received from DEP, Steven G. Lipman, P.E., Special Projects Coordinator: "Dear Ms. Naslas: The Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) acknowledges receipt of your December 1, 2000 correspondence which forwarded to this writer the results of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) analyses from a September 27, 2000 sample of Central Artery/Tunnel (CA/T) till from Contract C171. As you are aware, the City of Melrose, through its Park Department, is utilizing the till to regrade portions of the Mount Hood Golf Course and an adjacent area to be used as city-owned athletic fields. Your correspondence specifically requests that DEP provide the Melrose Conservation Commission with information on the till sampling program and guidance on "how the chemical analysis results should be evaluated". The September 27th sample had a TPH concentration of 189 mg/kg. In addition, my files indicate TPH results from an additional fourteen-(14) samples which ranged from non-detects to 95 mg/kg. Eight (8) samples of the till were below the method detection limit which ranged between 22 and 119. The arithmetic average concentration of all 15 samples is 56 mg/kg (using one-half the method detection limit for all non-detects). On December 7th, subsequent to this writer's receipt of your correspondence, I spoke briefly with you and indicated that I would respond in writing to your request for information and guidance. This correspondence is intended to be that response. During our discussion, I also stated that based on my knowledge of the C17A till being delivered to Melrose and the results of the TPH sampling, I did not believe that there are any health or environmental concerns from the intended use of the till material. I briefly explained that the most stringent reporting concentration (RCS-1) criteria under Section 310CMR 40.1600 of the Massachusetts Contingency Plan (MCP) and the Method I residential risk assessment standard (Method S-1/GW1) under Section 310 CMR 40.0900 of the MCP for TPH are both 200 mg/kg and that all till samples were below this criteria. We also briefly discussed the fact that the analytical method used for the TPH analyses was 418.1 which tends to "pick-up" non-petroleum materials (organics and clays) as TPH. When the CA/T project has run 418.1 and the more exacting DEP EPH/VPH procedures, the 418.1 results have always been higher. As a frame of reference, as part of the CA/T alignment-wide Site Assessment Process and Soil Characterization Procedures, thousands of soil samples have been collected and analyzed. Using this database and a methodology approved by DEP, the CA/T performed an assessment of "urban background conditions" along the alignment. For TPH, using the 75th percentile, the background was determined to be 850 mg/kg. For your information, the TPH 25th percentile was 41 mg/kg. These background figures were not intended to define the native till or clay below the historic fill along he alignment, but I think that this information is useful in understanding the types of soils that the CA/T Project is excavating. The location of the native tills and clays are initially determined by CA/T through extensive geotechnical and environmental borings, is verified by the specific contractor as part of his submittal of work plans, and confirmed as part of on-site resident inspection by the contractor's consultant and CA/T staff. As I mentioned to you on December 7th, it is difficult to completely eliminate "smearing" during excavation of the tills and clays with the overburden historic fill materials; therefore, it is not unusual to periodically find very low concentrations of TPH in till or clay samples. In addition, low levels of TPH may result from either; (1) contaminants from old treated timber pilings which often extend through the historic fill overburden and into the native tills and clays, or (2) routine operational petroleum leakage from the equipment used to excavate and remove the CA/T soils. Therefore, I believe the results of the thirty samples are consistent with the original characterization of the till as uncontaminated native material. You also requested guidance as to whether the placement of this material at the Mount Hood location would violate the non-degradation provisions of the MCP at 310 CMR 40.032(3). This provision basically states that soils may not be disposed or reused at a location without DEP approval when the concentrations of oil and hazardous materials (OHMs) in the soil is either: · In excess of a release notification threshold applicable under 310 CMR 40.0300 and 310 CMR 40.1600 at the receiving site, or · Significantly greater than the levels of OHMs present at the receiving site. Please be aware that this writer, acting for DEP, signed the Material Shipping Record approving the transportation and reuse of the C17A1 till at the Mount Hood location. In addition, as discussed above I believe the analytical data supports the initial characterization of the till by the CA/T project as native uncontaminated soil. Therefore, placement of the till at the Mount Hood location complies with Section 310 CMR 40.032(3) of the MCP. Relative to your question regarding sampling and analytical procedures; the CA/T Project specifically included detailed QA/QC procedures into all soil sampling and analytical activities and DEP has not found any problems with those procedures. Feel free to contact me at (617)292-5698 if you have any further questions regarding this issue." 470 Lynn Fells Parkway, Dunkin Donuts Order of Conditions - 470 Lynn Fells Parkway, Dunkin Donuts, DEP File #217118 - has been noted in Book #28089, Page 549, and it was recorded December 14, 2000. 470 Lynn Fells Parkway - From the Department of Environmental Protection - This is the notification for the Wetlands Protection Act, File #217118 in reference to the File #217118 that follows the Order of Conditions. Bob: Regarding the Mystic River Water Association letter received at our last meeting, I met with Vanessa Rule concerning the open space in Melrose. Their particular jurisdiction is basically following the waterway, Ell Pond and the drainage towards the Saugus River, and they had EPA money to purchase and to prioritize areas for open space. I informed her there is basically no open space along the way that she is referring to, except near the Pine Banks area, and a lot of that is all in the trustee and already owned by the particular city, agencies, etc. I showed her the open space that we have and she is satisfied, probably will be getting back to us concerning the Pine Banks, as I believe she is involved with the project too. She said it is at different stages, she will be informing us and I will inform her when we start hearing anything about the Pine Banks Project. Budget - January 1, 2001: Accounts payable that we have carries over for about $3,189 Contract Role that we have so far is about $13,646 Total supplies and material - $1,105 Other charges, e.g. conventions, meeting, dues & membership - $793 Total Conservation money left in our budget - $18,919 3 Hemenway Ave. Correspondence from George E. Richardson, Attorney at Law, 12-14-00 To James Sprague, Northeast Regional DEP Office in Wilmington. Re: Request for Departmental Action (Superseding Determination of Applicability) 3 Hemenway Ave., Melrose, MA, DEP File No. - None Assigned Dear Mr. Sprague: I am attorney for Mr. William C. Rose of 4 Hemenway Avenue, Melrose, MA. On behalf of Mr. Rose, I am hereby appealing a Negative Determination of Applicability that the Melrose Conservation Commission ("the Commission") issued on November 30, 2000 with regard to work being done in and with respect to Hemenway Avenue in Melrose. Mr. rose, who was the applicant for a Determination of Applicability with regard to such work and is an owner of land within Hemenway Avenue and land that abuts Hemenway Avenue, is a person aggrieved by said negative determination. He seeks to have the Department of Enviornmental Protectoin ("the Department") issue a Superseding Determination Applicability. I shall describe hereinafter the basis for Mr.Rose's objections to the negative determination. On May 15, 1998, the Department issued a Superseding Order of Conditions to Robert Senier allowing him to construct (a) a house on land owned by him and his wife situated at 5 Hemenway Avenue in Melrose, and (2) an extension of Hemenway Avenue in order to furnish frontage fot the Senioers' land. The file number was 217-107. The Department determined that the area on which the proposed work was to be done was significant to the following eight interests subject to protection under the Wetlands Protection Act (G. L. 131, S 40): public water supply, private water supply, ground water supply, food control, storm damage prevention, prevention of pollution, fisheries, and protection of wildlife habitat. Mr. Senier thereafter had his house constructed and caused the proposed extension of Hemenway Avenue to be partially completed. In contravention of said superseding Order, the work that was done on Hemenway Avenue did not conform to the plan reference therein, which was dated November 17, 1997 and last revised on March 7, 1998. Among other things, the elevations of the way were changed, the configuration of the roadway was changed, headwalls at the ends of a culverted stream were not constructed in accordance with the plan, and the roadway was not completed. Commencing in September of 2000, the City of Melrose ("the City") undertook a total reconstruction of Hemenway Avenue. This meant that the City was proposing not only to complete the extension of the way that Mr. Senier had failed to perform, but also to reconstruct the originally-improved portion of the way (which was well beyond the scope of Mr. Senier's plan). All of Hemenway Avenue is in a Buffer Zone of at least one of three Bordering Vegetated Wetlands ("BVW"). The City did not file a Notice of Intent, and, therefore, it did not obtain an Order of Conditions. The City purported that it was undertaking all of its proposed work pursuant to Mr. Senier's plan and the Order of Conditions issued to Mr. Senier in 1998; however, much of the proposed work was not contemplated in said plan and in said Order. At an early stage of the work, the Commission issued an Enforcement Order against the City, ordering that the work be discontinued. Subsequently, the work was allowed to proceed after the City submitted a sketch to the Department of its proposed work and the Department, without having considered all pertinent facts, held that the work could proceed without the City's having to file a Notice of Intent. The Department apparently made its holding based upon merely said sketch and assurances by the City that it was not and would not be doing any work that would be harmful to interests protected by the Wetlands Protection Act. The Department did not require the City: (a) To submit a plan that was in proper form, with elevations and all other pertinent data; (b) To submit information that would support the City's claim that its proposed work in the area of Hemenway Avenue that was not included in Mr. Senier's plan and was not contemplated by his Notice of Intent and Superseding Order of Conditions would not harm any interest protected by the Wetlands and Protection Act; and/or: (c) To submit drainage calculations despite the fact that drainage patterns had been changed substantially since the Senior plan was approved, in that: (i) Mr. and Mrs.James J. Petrella, who reside at 3 Hemenway Avenue, in late 1997 filled the swale on their property where all of the water that had drained into Hemenway Avenue from Ireson Court and Maple Terrace (which intersect with Hemenway Avenue) had flowed to the BVW behind the Petrellas' house; (ii) This water thereafter flowed down Hemenway Avenue toward the catch basins installed by Mr. Senier, and this drainage system was designed without any anticipation of its having to accommodate a much greater flow of water such as was caused by the filling of said swale; and (iii) The City's sketch shows that it intends to cause all water flowing into Hemenway Avenue to flow to said catch basins that were not designed to handle such a volume of flow. There has been no evidence submitted to the Department that would show what effect said modified drainage patterns will have on the BVW behind the Petrellas' house and on the other resource areas as to which all of Hemenway Avenue is in a Buffer Zone of one or the other of them. There has been no evidence to show that such modified patterns will not cause harm to the eight interests subject to protection under the Wetlands Protection Act that were identified in the Superseding Order of Conditions issued to Mr. Senier. Finally, the City is not reconstructing Hemenway Avenue in conformity to the sketch that it submitted to the Department. For the foregoing reasons, as well and for any other reason that may arise in the course of this appeal, Mr. Rose respectfully requests that the Department issue a Superseding Determination of Applicability that would order Mr. Senier and/or the City of Melrose to file a Notice of Intent with sufficient supporting information that would allow a determination to be made as to whether the work that they have done and have proposed to continue doing within Hemenway Avenue is significant to any of the interests identified in G. L. c. 131, S 40, and, if so, whether an Order of Conditions should be issued in order to protect such interests. Very truly yours, George E. Richardson Public Comments: Bob: Addressing Linda Benezra: I received a call from the DEP Strike Force concerning a situation at Pond 2 at Mt. Hood. They said there was some sort of construction going on around Pond 2. I went up and was looking for any type of construction that was going on and I didn't see any. Is there any specific area I should be looking into? Linda Benezra: I wouldn't consider it construction. I am not sure what they meant by that. But certainly in terms of the filt going all the way up to the green on the 11th, and clear evidence that fill is infiltrating Pond 2. Bob: In Pond 2 you saw the filt? Linda: Yes, and I brought pictures that I will share, but I am not leaving them here to keep. Mr. Foss, do you want to come and talk about it too? Kenny Foss, 50 Temple Street. Linda: Not only do we have a concern about the infiltration into the ponds, there is further issue that we noted and Mrs. Waugh has been there and has noted as well. The filt is being held up along the green of the 11th and over to the 12th. The baling has been done at the 12th, but on the 19th when we were up there and that is what these pictures are, there was a pump pumping water off the 12th. It is was our understanding that there had been 2 ft. of water on the 12th and these pictures will show you this gray clay fill that is everywhere. Mr. Foss: It is migrating to the screen, over rough areas, the wetlands where there is cat and nine tails, also 3rd Pond. There is a brook, it must be a stone brook, where they displaced stones across, underneath the road that goes to the tower, it goes off on an angle, and that is the stream that refills 3rd Pond, and where it is collecting this water,as you face the green it would be on your left, and that is where the water is collecting to replenish the water in 3rd Pond. Here are some pictures. I look at this and it really gets me upset. You may say that it is not contaminated fill, but it is contaminated, and there is debris in it. Bob: But this is not 3rd Pond. This is on the 14th Fairway. Mr. Foss: I will show you that. This is now off of Penny Road where the brook is coming down. When the clay is put there, it cannot percolate down. It is like putting concrete or asphalt and you have tremendous runoff. This is what Mr. Magown of Penny Road referred to and he was very upset. He said he had never seen the water come down so much on the fairway. Linda: This is the one that is going into the pond. This is some material that I picked up right at the site where the water comes out and goes into the pond, where it starts to go down (shows material). Visually, I think it speaks for itself. The other concern that we need to raise is that the water that is on the 12th that has all this filt in it, gets moved over towards the water flow which I believe is the Saugus River. Mr. Foss: That is on the 12th fairway where they were pumping the water. There was a drain previously. That is the stream that goes into 3rd Pond. Linda Benezra: We can report the water is very high. Having previously said how low it was, it is very high. Mr. Foss: This here is on the fairway. That is on the 12th fairway, the original drainage that they had there and this here is a culvert that runs under, that they have been pumping into that runs into the 13th fairway that goes down where the white goods are stored, the refrigerators that are thrown out. Bob: I was looking for construction activity going on there. Mr. Foss: There is no construction activity. Linda: Here is a picture on the 14th Fairway, Penny Road, between the road and the fairway opposite Penny Hill Road and you can see how the water flow is coming out of the ground there, where the grass is being bent, where the tremendous flow and the discoloration from this fill, and it is traveling. This stream that it goes into runs along Penny Road and under the parking lot of Smyly Buick and out by the motel, and then it goes around Route 95 and it goes into the Pine River, which eventually goes into the Saugus Watershed. Linda: If you are up there, Bob, then you know how close to that fairway that pile is, after the 11th green. Bob: It doesn't cross the roadway? Linda: It does, it comes in that pipe underneath, that is our point. Mr. Foss: Here is the picture. Now where this drain comes, is right from this area here, where it comes down onto the 11th fairway, that is the edge of the fill area. Linda Benezra: So on the clubhouse side of the road, if you stand and look at the tower it is down to the left. There is a pipe that comes out there where the water flows through and then you can see it bubbles all the way down into the pond. Mr. Foss: The best thing to do is to go up there and take a look. I think what has to be done right now, is filtration, bales of hale on that brook that feeds that pond. Have you seen the drawings for the 12th fairway on the amount of fill and the drainage that they are going to install? Bob: Right. We reviewed it last year. Mr. Foss: Could you tell me the amount of fill they are going to add to that fairway? Bob: If you look at the hill where it is now, it is going to fill that area completely. That hole is going to be filled. There is going to be drainage put under the fill area. The exact amount I cannot tell you because I have to go into the records and pull that out. Mr. Foss: That is very interesting because for the life of me I don't know how they could ever do that without disturbing, say as you are looking down the fairway, the wooded area and the wetlands. No way could they ever do that. Bob: They are not filling the wetland area on the far right. You will have a steep hill like that. Mr. Foss: It will be a steep bank. That is the problem that I see. Bob: There will be a steep grade at that particular area. We actually requested them to pull back that grade and they are very upset about that because it is going to cut down on the golf aspects of it, but it is being pulled back to get a larger buffer zone in that particular area. Linda Benezra: Could you make those drawings and that information available so we could go into the office and take a look at them. Bob: Yes Mr. Foss: I would hope that we would take a trip up there and take a look. It is more important to look at it rather than pictures. Bob: I was there this past weekend. I have looked at the 12th hole. I did see the sort of boulders that have fallen from the hills and the drainage problems. That was expected because of the steepness of the hill and I am surprised the shovel itself wasn't buried under some of the stuff. If you notice that the stuff is almost like concrete. If it goes, the whole side can go. But there are the hay bales along the area, if you notice the wetlands area there was a double hay bale section there also. Where you see the water trickling straight down, that is where your pipe system is going to be under all that fill. Mr. Foss: Where will this exit? Bob: Where it is exiting is at the far end of the 12th, going around the corner. There is always a discussion concerning at the 13th there is a dry area there where the water builds up and rushes out, and there is a question of clearing that area, so it is a clearer path for the water to move onward, and that was being discussed this year to come back and work on that project. Linda Benezra: There appears to be lots of clay moving this water as it moves and heads over into what is the natural flow of the Saugus River I believe. How do you prevent that, and is that not your job to try to prevent that? Bob: Right now, basically the hay bales should be protecting the area at this point, but sometimes if you are getting a downpour or too much comes out, the water overcomes the hay bales and you may have leakage to the hay bales. I was not inspecting the hay bales up close on the particular day I was there on top of hill observing to see what was going on. Linda Benezra: I think it is important that you make a site visit and go down right by the hay bales because you will see that they have been compromised. Even the ones all the way over, where the double ones are, we saw that they had been compromised. The filters on the other side of it, the material is moving into the wetlands. When we were there on the 14th, we saw evidence over there. Mr. Foss: The 14th, that is the one that goes along Penny Road, and that is where the pictures are showing that where the water comes down there at a rapid mount. It has no place to percolate down. I don't know how much loom you are going to put on top of this clay to absorb the water, but right now it is like concrete and it runs off and it is taking all this filt and is spreading it in all the streams, and also into 3rd Pond. Something should be done immediately with the Pond situation, because this silt eventually will settle to the bottom, suffocate any growth in that water and furthermore it is a good possibility that it could continue on down to the 2nd and 1st Pond, and I don't know what it would do to the pumping system, this silt running through the pumps up there. I don't know the strength of the irrigation system. I am really concerned about this. Bob: We will go up to do the inspection of the silt lines and see what is going on. Linda Benezra: Be sure to grab a pebble, because it can look clear, and you drop a pebble and you get the clouds. Mr. Foss: If you would like me to, I would like to go along to show you that stream and where it comes across.. Bob: I am familiar with the area. I have been up there many times, let me tell you. Mr. Foss: I went across that road up on a 45 degree angle, and definitely that is where that underground brook goes. There is one rock that is like an echo chamber, you can hear the stream. Terry Waugh, 357 Porter Street: I was up at the resources areas today. The hay bales are no good at all. The plastic up there is all underneath. The resource area #1 near the compost, it looks like the road has been widened and there is more stuff down on the side that is going down into this. Bob: Are the barriers still there? Terry Waugh: Just coming up, not on the side anymore where they were. That orange pipe, the gasline pipe, it has caps sticking out, it has no cap on it. Who follows up on those things? Bob: We do. We will have to go look at it. Terry Waugh: You have to spend some time up there. There is so much to see. Bob: What is the reason for the pumper being there? Mr. Foss: It was the city pump. Steve Amirault, 6 Frye Rd., Medford: We are just curious what is going on with Hemenway, as far as the problems that are up there now. Bob: Right now Mr. Rose has sent two letters to the Department of Environmental Protection, requesting a Superceding Determination of Applicability, and that is in DEP hands now. That was December 14. I haven't heard from DEP requesting any files at this point. Steve Amirault: It sounds like they are trying to get the street redone. Bob: Technically, the street is being completed at this point. This are no orders of stopping the street at this point. They are waiting for the telephone company to move that pole. The electric company is ready to go, but Verizon is in the process of getting ready to move that pole. Because of frost, it will probaby be like that until at least the end of February, early March. Steve Amirault: So he is not trying to stop the project? Bob: He's appealing the Determination of Applicability. He made a negative determination and whatever DEP does at that point, it could be a stoppage, or it could not be stoppage. Steve Amirault: But as far as you know, everything that has gone up there is done according to the plans as issued. Bob: Everything has been approved by DEP. It sort of moved out of this jurisdiction to DEP jurisdication. DEP has made their determination to go ahead with the project. They have signed off on it and that is where it stands. They are going to have the first layer of roadway down, the catch basins are in, the curbing is in. Steve Amirault: I just heard in reference to the street not being exactly where it should be? Bob: That was part of the lawyer's case to DEP. Steve Amirault: From Mr. Rose? Bob: Yes Steve Amirault: But DEP has said it is fine? Bob: DEP has given its approval to complete the roadway. Steve Amirault: You people have signed off on it and DEP has signed off on it? Bob: DEP has signed off on the original plans. Steve Amirault: Now he is asking for them to reconsider basically? Bob: Yes. The meeting closed at 9:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Nancy Pritchard Commission Secretary |
|
|
