2003_Conservation_Commission
The Northampton Planning Board Minutes of Meeting January 9, 2003 The Northampton Planning Board held a meeting on Thursday, January 9, 2003 at 7:00 P.M. in the basement of the Unitarian
Society of Northampton Church, 220 Main Street, Northampton, MA. Present were members: Chair Ken Jodrie, Keith Wilson, Paul Voss, Julie Hooks Davis, Andy Crystal and Frandy Johnson.
Staff: Director, Wayne Feiden and Board Secretary, Angela Dion. At 7:10 P.M., Jodrie opened the meeting. He announced that the public hearing on the proposed Ice Pond subdivision, previously
scheduled for this meeting, would be continued. At 7:12 P.M., Jodrie opened the Request by Tristram Metcalfe for a Special Permit with Site Plan Approval (major project) under Sections
6.2, 6.3 & 6.12 of the Northampton Zoning Ordinance for a common driveway, reduction of frontage & lot size for a land donation for property located on Turkey Hill Road, Map ID 34-26
& 31. Tristram Metcalfe presented the application. Metcalfe explained the request for a common common driveway and a reduction of frontage for a land donation. He went through the requirements
for land donations and the setback criteria for cluster development. Jodrie expressed concerns with the proposed plans regarding the side yard setback because the requirement is 20’
and the proposed plans do not indicate that existing requirement. He stated that the permit would need to be conditioned in order to meet the zoning requirements. Additionally, Jodrie
explained that the current requirements for common driveways are that the driveway must be a minimum of 15’ wide but that this could also be addressed through a condition incorporated
into the permit. Feiden asked the applicant to explain to the Board and indicate on the plans, the area of land that would be conservation land. Wilson expressed concerns regarding the
proposed roadway and the width of it. Metcalfe explained that the proposed width is the existing width of the road which tapers at approximately 18’ and that he was under the impression
that he would not have to go wider than 18’.
There was a brief discussion regarding the road and the requirements regarding paving. City Councilor, Marianne LaBarge questioned the proposed donation of land and asked the amount
of land that would be donated. Metcalfe responded that the amount of land to be donated was approximately a little over two acres. LaBarge asked if there would be a future trail to access
the conservation land for this site and if so, where would the trail connect. LaBarge also asked if the proposed homes would be affordable homes with accessory apartments. Metcalfe explained
how the proposed trail would be looped. Feiden explained that Doug Kohl has purchased a large portion of land adjacent to the conservation land and should this land be developed, the
possibility of creating a link to the proposed trail would be a benefit. Paul Foster, Turkey Hill Road stated that the potential buyers of this property should be made aware of the proposed
trail. LaBarge expressed concerns regarding the existing quarry and the safety of children if the quarry begins working and removing gravel. She also expressed concerns regarding the
lack of sidewalks. Laurel Foster Moore, Turkey Hill Road asked if there are already clients for the affordable housing. Metcalfe stated that there is a long list of people who would
love to purchase any of these proposed homes. The Board discussed possible conditions. Feiden read the conditions listed in the staff report and changes were made. Johnson moved to close
the public hearing. Crystal seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Crystal moved to grant the Special Permit with the conditions discussed. Wilson seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
Johnson moved to accept the minutes of November 7, November 14 and December 5, 2002. Voss seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
Feiden discussed a request for a reduction in the letter of credit for the Plantation at West Farms Road subdivision. He explained that the amount of the reduction was $434,700.00. Wilson
moved to approve the request for a reduction in the letter of credit by $434,700. Johnson seconded. The motion passed unanimously. There was discussion regarding the appointment of a
Planning Board member to serve on the Transportation Committee. The Board generally agreed that Keith Wilson should be appointed. Crystal moved to recommend Wilson to the Transportation
Committee. Johnson seconded. The motion passed unanimously. There was a discussion regarding a release of cash escrow for Pathways. Feiden explained the history behind the cash escrow
and stated that the amount was $10,000 plus interest. Crystal moved to approve the release of cash escrow. Johnson seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Feiden discussed the history
of the Gables project and explained that the City has been holding a cash escrow account for 16 years. He explained that Baystate Environmental conducted an assessment regarding what
was wrong with the project and also what need to be completed. Feiden stated that since all the work is complete, he is requesting a final closeout of the project and the release of
the money in the escrow account. Crystal moved to approve the closeout of the project and the release of the cash escrow account. Wilson seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 8:01
P.M., Jodrie opened the Request by The Community Builders, Inc. for Definitive Subdivision Plans under the Subdivision Control Law and the Rules and Regulations Governing the Subdivision
of Land in the City of Northampton, Massachusetts and for a Special Permit with Site Plan Approval (major project) under Sections 5.2, 6.3, 6.13, 10.1 & 10.5 of the Northampton Zoning
Ordinance for cluster development including six flag lots and a reduction of lot size for a land donation for property located on Rocky Hill Road, Map ID 37-29. Jodrie announced that
the applicant has requested a continuance. Johnson moved to continue the public hearing to January 23, 2003 at 7:30 P.M. Wilson seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
Feiden announced that because he represents the City for the application on the Westhampton Road project and since he will be explaining the project, he would be stepping down from the
Board during this process. Feiden explained that this project would be before the Zoning Board of Appeals later in the month but that he wanted to Planning Board to review it in the
event that the Board would like to send recommendations to the Zoning Board. Feiden explained the location of the proposed project that would include three single – family homes, each
with an accessory apartment, which would be developed for affordable housing. He showed the Board various alternative assessments for the project that were completed in order to determine
what concept would best serve the City while at the same time provide valuable affordable housing. The Board discussed possible recommendations for the Zoning Board. The Board agreed
to recommend that the permit be approved with the condition that the City shall retain the right to pave the trail that is shown on the plans, in the future, if needed. Wilson moved
to send the discussed recommendation to the Zoning Board. Crystal seconded and stated that this is a great project and will help meet the City’s needs. The motion passed unanimously.
Johnson made a brief announcement regarding the next CAC meeting scheduled for January 18th. Wilson moved to adjourn. Johnson seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
Northampton Conservation Commission Minutes of Meeting January 23, 2003 The Northampton Conservation Commission held a meeting on Thursday, January 23, 2003 at 5:30 p.m., in Hearing
Room 18, City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Frank Fournier, Matt Nowak, Joanne Montgomery, John Body and Susan Carbin. Members absent: Mason
Maronn, Wendy Sweetser. Staff: Conservation and Land Use Planner, Gloria McPherson. At 5:30 p.m., Montgomery opened the Discussion on a Request by The Community Builders, Inc. for Approval
of Definitive Subdivision Plans under the Subdivision Control Laws and the Rules and Regulations Governing the Subdivision of Land in the City of Northampton, MA, for property located
on Rocky Hill Road, Map ID 37-29. Mark Darnold, Berkshire Design Group, Inc. presented the application. He explained that tonight’s discussion is not a hearing but simply a discussion
because a Notice of Intent has not yet been filed for this project. Darnold stated that this discussion gives the Commission an opportunity to review the definitive subdivision plans
and make recommendations to the Planning Board. He explained that all the proposed lots are located outside of the buffer except for lot 13. Darnold showed the Commission, on the plans
displayed, the areas of open space. He discussed the comments and concerns submitted by the Department of Public Works in regards to the detention ponds and explained that DPW would
like the developers to look at the entire 400 acre watershed rather than just the subdivision. Darnold explained the revised run-off calculations and the 2 proposed level-lip spreaders
instead of the detention ponds that had been previously planned. Montgomery questioned the reasons why DPW had requested that the applicant revise the proposed drainage system and revised
calculations. Darnold explained that because of the soil conditions on the site, DPW encouraged the applicant to look at the entire watershed, since it became evident that the detention
ponds would not serve the function well. He showed the Commission the revised plans with the level-lip spreaders located well outside the 100’ buffer. 1
Montgomery questioned the possible impacts to Route 66. She stated that she is not comfortable with the location of lot 13 because it is located within the 100’ buffer. Darnold stated
that the applicant is willing to put a restriction on lot 13. Mike Becker, Earle Street questioned the average amount of water that flows down the brook. Darnold stated that the amount
of flowing water is approximately 117 cubic feet per second during a 10-year storm and 220 cubic feet per second during a 100-year storm. Becker asked if there is always a flow. Darnold
explained that everything that the applicant is proposing is 200’ from the stream in question; therefore, he never determined officially whether it was determined if the stream was intermittent
or perennial. There was discussion regarding the feasibility of the Commission submitting recommendations to the Planning Board on the proposed subdivision tonight. Carbin moved to close
the discussion. Body seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 6:50 P.M., Montgomery Montgomery opened the Continuation on a Request for Determination filed by Kerry O’Brien c/o Land
Solutions to confirm a wetland delineation for property located on Easthampton Road, Map ID 44-40. Body moved to continue the hearing to April 24, 2003 (meeting starts at 5:30). Carbin
seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 6:51 P.M., Montgomery opened the Notice of Intent filed by Creative Developers, Inc. for the construction of a proposed 70 lot single and
two-family housing subdivision with associated site development and a 12’ fire access road for property located on Burts Pit Road, Map ID 36-68, 286 & 288. Work will take place within
the buffer zone of a Bordering Vegetated Wetland. Peter Wells, The Berkshire Design Group, Inc. presented the application for a cluster development with 70 units. He discussed the overall
project and explained the proposed stormwater system. Wells explained that the site includes 3 isolated wetlands and 1 BVW. He discussed the 4 separate watersheds on site and explained
how the proposed design mimics the existing conditions. Well clarified that because of the new design and layout of the lots, all but 2 lots (previously over 10 lots) would be located
out of the 100’ buffer. Further, Wells 2
discussed a proposal for a Conservation Easement on the portion of the lots within the buffer. Wells showed the Commission, on the plans displayed, the various locations where the water
on site drains, how the water makes its way to the detention pond and eventually to a swale ending at the BVW. He discussed the concerns raised by the neighbors in the Maple Ridge Subdivision
regarding drainage. He explained that he is in the process of changing the designs to address these concerns. Some of the changes would include the replacement of the cul-de-sac and
the 9 proposed lots with 3 flag lots in hopes of reducing the amount of stormwater runoff. Nowak asked how close the newly proposed driveways are to the wetlands. Wells explained that
1 of the 3 proposed driveways would have to be in the 100’ but would not be in the 50’ buffer. Montgomery asked about the amount of open space. Wells stated that although the amount
of open space would be reduced, the project still meets the requirements for open space. Montgomery expressed concerns regarding the stormwater calculations and questioned whether or
not the changes would require a new or amended Notice of Intent. Body expressed concerns about encircling the wetland with a road. Wells stated that in designing the project, he tried
to stay as far away as possible from the wetlands. Body expressed further concerns regarding the habitat value now and in the future should the project be developed. Wells stated that
the habitat was evaluated. He did not find any evidence that it was a vernal pool, but would be willing to consult with New England Environmental regarding what species were located
there. Fournier stated that since it’s outside the 100’ buffer, it is out of the Commission’s jurisdiction. Montgomery stated that the Commission also has to look at the open space and
wildlife. She asked the applicant to consult with New England Environmental. She also asked the applicant for more technical information regarding how they calculated the stormwater
with respect to the the amount of forest slated for clearing. 3
Wells stated he believes that the cleared areas are accounted for in the calculations. He showed Montgomery how the calculations were broken down on page 29 and 31 of the Notice of Intent
for the different types of vegetative cover, both existing and proposed. Montgomery suggested that the applicant prepare an Executive Summary so that anyone looking at the application
could understand the calculations. Nowak asked the applicant to clarify why the cul-de-sac was eliminated. Wells stated that the neighbors did not want all the houses or the noise and
also they were concerned with additional runoff. Nowak expressed concerns regarding the location of the driveway on each side of the driveway and also that some of the lot lines encroach
upon the 50’ buffer. Wells stated that he considers this plan (3 lots and 2 driveways) to be less of an impact to the wetland than the plan with 9 lots and 9 driveways. He also disagreed
that the wetland would be enclosed. City Councilor, Marianne LaBarge stated that the neighbors are happy with the new flag lot plan and explained that the developer has been excellent
in responding to the neighbors and their concerns. Janet Gurn, 17 Diamond Court expressed concerns regarding runoff and the impacts of any salt applied to the roads might eventually
kill existing trees. She stated that she is generally unhappy with how close the road is to her property. Wells explained the road drainage system that would intercept some of the drainage
that would normally go on her lot. George Kohout, 37 Evergreen Road asked if the applicant could put part of the drainage within the road right of way rather than in the woods. Wells
explained that they had looked at that as an option but the grades make it impossible. Montgomery asked about plantings along the road to control runoff. Well stated that he just has
grass planned at this point but would be open to other ideas. Nancy Hall, Diamond Court stated that she prefers the concept with the flag lots rather than the street all the way around
the wetland. She added that the wildlife in the area is wonderful and includes snapping turtles, hawks, turkeys and bobcats and stated that she is concerned that the habitat would be
affected by so much development. 4
Melissa Lampron, 584 Burts Pit Road explained that water currently runs by her property all the time. She stated that she has seen salamanders in the area and believes that the proposed
development is too dense and would impact the neighborhood negatively. Wells reiterates that surface water that currently flows towards any yards would be picked up by the road drainage
system thus reducing the amount of water. City Councilor, Marianne LaBarge explained that from the beginning, there were a lot of concerns from residences on Diamond Court and Platinum
Circle. She suggested that the neighbors discuss their concerns with the developer and stated that she would facilitate such a meeting. Montgomery discussed several reasons why the hearing
should be continued. She explained that she would like to see new stormwater calculations with a clear statement regarding impervious vs. cleared areas and how they were factored into
the calculations. She added that the applicant should submit a corrected Notice of Intent showing the location of the flag lots. Montgomery stressed that the Commission would prefer
to see no lots in the buffer. Finally, the Commission requested and the applicant agreed to consult with New England Environmental and supply the Commission a report concerning the wildlife
that lives in or utilizes the site, or could (based upon the site characteristics) potentially do so. Montgomery suggested continuing the hearing to February 27th. Body moved to continue
the hearing to February 27, 2003. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 6:46 P.M., Montgomery opened the Notice of Intent filed by Paradise Realty Partners, LLP for the
construction of a two-story medical office building with associated site improvements for property located 766 North King Street, Map ID 8-21. Work will take place within the buffer
zone of a Bordering Vegetated Wetland. Mark Darnold, The Berkshire Design Group, Inc. presented the application. He explained that the Planning Board has already approved the plans but
there have been some changes since that time. He explained that the building would now be a 2-story building with a smaller footprint. He explained that a wetland was found across the
street where the state stormwater pipe discharges. Darnold showed the Commission the new plans and explained the proposed drainage including stormwater treatment chambers and underground
detention basin. He stated that there would not be an increase in peak runoff rates from the site. He explained that the Planning Board approved a waiver to put fewer parking spaces
than normally required and in turn would create less impervious surface. Montgomery questioned if they had considered permeable pavement. 5
Darnold stated that they had not considered it because it does not work well with snowplows. In addition, dirt and oil from cars seeping into the groundwater would have a negative impact
and it would be more efficient to catch it and clean it, explained Darnold. Hearing no further comments, Nowak moved to close the public hearing. Fournier seconded. The motion passed
unanimously. At 7:30 P.M., Carbin moved to send recommendations for the Ice Pond subdivision to the Planning Board. Nowak seconded. The motion passed with Montgomery opposed because
lot 13 is located within the buffer. At 7:38 P.M., there was a brief discussion regarding Clear Falls. The Commission generally agreed to send a letter to the owner’s attorney indicating
that a new Notice of Intent should be submitted to remove debris from behind the gates. Body updated the Commission on the status of the beavers on Winter Street. At 7:50 P.M., Montgomery
left for School Committee and Fournier resumes the meeting. At 7:52 P.M., McPherson discussed the Certificate of Compliance for the Gables. Body moved to issue the Certificate of Compliance.
Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 7:55 P.M., McPherson discussed the request for an Extension Permit for the Order of Conditions for the College Church. Carbin moved
to allow the extension of the Order of Conditions. Nowak seconded. The motion passed unanimously. McPherson discussed the revised plans for Route 66. Body moved to allow staff to write
a letter indicating that the changes proposed are not significant and do not require an amendment to the Notice of Intent. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Order of Conditions
– 766 North King Street McPherson read the recommendations in the staff report. Nowak moved to issue the conditions as discussed. Fournier seconded. The motion passed unanimously. 6
7 At 8:10 P.M., Body moved to adjourn. Nowak seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
Northampton Conservation Commission Minutes of Meeting February 13, 2003 The Northampton Conservation Commission held a meeting on Thursday, February 13, 2003, at 5:30 p.m., in Hearing
Room 18, City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Frank Fournier, Matt Nowak, Joanne Montgomery, John Body, Wendy Sweetser and Susan Carbin. Members
absent: Mason Maronn. Staff: Conservation and Land Use Planner, Gloria McPherson. At 5:30 p.m., Montgomery opened the discussion with Brandon Abbott regarding vernal pools. Abbott presented
his research to the Commission and members of the public. Brandon Abbott’s recommendations based on his potential vernal pool research: 1. Establish additional vernal pool protections.
Regulations must include more than the 100 foot buffer but rather increase to include extensive upland habitat. Brian Windmiller of Lexington found that spotted salamanders need between
300 and 500 meters of upland forested habitat. If there is not the opportunity to disperse disperse to upland habitat the salamanders will not survive. They did NOT migrate thru a non-forested
habitat (i.e. lawn). 2. Create a procedure to identify vernal pools on upland habitat where development may occur. Findings indicate that although the Natural Heritage PVP overlay is
helpful, it is incomplete. Most of the PVP’s in this study were not identified by Natural Heritage PVP overlay. 3. Identify amphibian migrations routes. It is imperative that we protect
these areas and minimize human related hazards (upland habitat separated from the breeding vernal pool by a road). 4. Identify the areas used by rare species and protect the habitat,
not just a buffer. Direct monitoring of the populations is essential. 5. Identify non-vernal pool wetlands; survey for rare wildlife; protect the habitat; and monitor the populations.
6. Survey for stream salamanders; protect the habitat and monitor the populations. 1
7. Educate the public about vernal pool ecology and rare species identifications. 8. Protect large tracts of land to maintain habitat connectivity. If necessary, focus on corridors connecting
core habitats. At 6:30 P.M., Montgomery opened the Request for Determination filed by New England Deaconess Association to confirm a wetland delineation for property located at the corner
of Coles Meadow Road and North King Street, Map ID 13-73. Dave Thompson, Coler & Colantonio presented the application. He explained future expansion plans for the Rockridge Assisted
Living facility. He discussed the wetland delineation and showed the Commission, on the plans displayed, the area of two Bordering Vegetated Wetlands at the site. He explained that there
is an existing storm drainage system emptying into the wetlands. Montgomery asked Mary Johnson, who delineated the wetland, to explain her methods used in the delineation process. Johnson
explained that she used plants and hydric soils. Hearing no further comments, Fournier moved to close the public hearing. Body seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Montgomery read
the recommendations listed in the Staff Report. Carbin moved to issue a positive determination checking box 2A. Body seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 6:41 P.M., Montgomery
opened the Notice of Intent filed by Richard L. Hudson et al for the construction of a two-car garage and home office space with related site work for property located at 393 Riverside
Drive, Map ID 30A-22. Work will take place within buffer zone and within Riverfront Area associated with the Mill River. Tom Christopher, representing the applicant, presented the application.
He explained that the site is already impervious where the proposed garage would be located. He stated that it is not an area of rare species and showed the Commission pictures of five
trees that would be eliminated. Montgomery asked how the applicant is planning to mitigate erosion during the construction process since the slope is steep. The applicant responded that
they would use both haybales and silt fences. Sweetser asked if there would be a retaining wall on the slope. Christopher explained that the foundation of the garage would act as a retaining
wall. 2
Montgomery stated that the Commission prefers the use of straw bales, since straw bales do not carry invasive plant seeds. Walter Hindmarsh, 42 Lexington Ave asked the applicant to display
the proposed site plan. Peter Shaunessy asked if there would be point source discharge from the roof into french drains. Chistopher explained that it was not planned but that he would
be happy to entertain the idea. Shaunessy asked how much dirt would be removed and how would the foundation be constructed into the hillside. He stated that he did not have a problem
with the proposal but that he was just curious as to how it would be constructed. Nowak moved to close the public hearing. Sweetser seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Carbin read
the recommendations listed in the staff report. Sweetser moved to issue the conditions as discussed. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 7:00 P.M., Montgomery left. At
7:03 P.M., Fournier left. Sweetser moved to accept the minutes of January 23, 2003 with the changes submitted. Body seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Body moved to table the minutes
of November 14, 2002 and December 12, 2002. Sweetser seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Sweetser moved to authorize Gloria McPherson or Mason Marron to sign the Right of Entry
Agreement for Mass Highway. Nowak seconded. The motion passed unanimously. There was a brief discussion of Mass Highway’s dewatering measures for the Mill River bridge repair. There
was discussion regarding whether the shoal would reappear, and the Commission asked staff to write a letter asking if anything is being done to address increasing the water velocity
by the placement of stones to prevent the formation of another shoal. 3
4 McPherson asked members of the Commission if she could write a letter to the Planning Board regarding the spacing of concrete markers. Body discussed an upcoming planned hike and vernal
pool certification. At 7:24 P.M., Nowak moved to adjourn. Sweetser seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
Northampton Conservation Commission Minutes of Meeting February 27, 2003 The Northampton Conservation Commission held a meeting on Thursday, February 27, 2003, at 5:30 p.m., in Hearing
Room 18, City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Mason Maronn, Matt Nowak, Joanne Montgomery, John Body and Susan Carbin. Members absent: Frank
Fournier and Wendy Sweetser. Staff: Conservation and Land Use Planner, Gloria McPherson and Board Secretary, Angela Dion. At 5:35 P.M., Mason opened the Continuation on a Notice of Intent
filed by Creative Developers, Inc. for the construction of a proposed 70 lot single and two-family housing subdivision with associated site development and a 12’ fire access road for
property located on Burts Pit Road, Map ID 36-68, 286 & 288. Work will take place within the buffer zone of a Bordering Vegetated Wetland. Peter Wells, The Berkshire Design Group, Inc.
presented the application. He handed out a wildlife assessment that was conducted by New England Environmental as well as a revised plan showing the proposed flag lot configuration.
He explained the revisions to the plans since the last hearing regarding the drainage and the elimination of the cul de sac. He explained that the drainage report has been updated to
reflect these changes. He discussed the Executive Summary of the drainage report that was written per the Commission’s request. He discussed the proposed common driveways and explained
that he had
looked at just one common drive but it was determined that the impacts to the wetlands would have been greater with just one driveway. He discussed the wildlife impacts and referred
the Commission to the memo from Karro Frost dated February 5, 2003. Montgomery asked about a letter dated February 10, 2003 from abutters regarding drainage issues. She asked the applicant
to address the concerns raised. Wells explained that the proposed stormwater management system would allow the water to leave the site at the same rate that it currently does. He explained
that the system 1
would be good for the abutters and would encourage the water to flow away from the site. Maronn stated that the drainage concerns are out of the jurisdiction of the Conservation Commission.
He stated that the Commission could only make recommendations to the Planning Board but that otherwise it is not in their purview to discuss the issues. There was discussion regarding
the abutter’s concerns. Maronn explained that the Commission is obligated to only address wetland concerns. He stated that the applicant has made several changes to the plans that have
been a benefit. Montgomery stated for the record that abutters from past projects have discussed their concerns with water and potential drainage problems. City Councilor Marianne LaBarge
discussed the letter that was sent from the abutters. She explained that in the past, there have been letters that were made available to the developer. She stated that the changes to
the plans with the cul de sac have been helpful and that the developer is working closely with the abutters in order to respond to their concerns. Lastly, she stated that the abutters
are happy with the revisions to the road and explained that the developer has offered to plant trees as a buffer. Pat Goggins explained that additional drainage was added to the area
behind the flag lots and stated that they are trying to address the concerns as they come up. He explained that the revisions have been in response to the neighborhood’s concerns including
the reduction of units. Montgomery stated that she would have liked to have additional time to read the wildlife report that was submitted at the start of the hearing. Body stated that
he did not think that it is appropriate for the applicant to submit information at the start of the hearing and expect the Commission to read and make a determination the same night.
There was discussion regarding the information and whether the Commission could read the report tonight and comment on the contents of the report. The Commission discussed whether the
hearing should be closed or continued. City Councilor Marianne LaBarge stated that the meeting night should be moved back to Monday night. Nowwak moved to close the public hearing. Carbin
seconded. The motion passed with Body opposed. 2
3 At 6:14 P.M., Maronn opened the Notice of Intent filed by James & Bonnie Graham for the construction of one two-unit house with related site work for property located at 264 Riverside
Drive, Map ID 30B-124. Work will take place within buffer zone and within Riverfront Area associated with the Mill River. Maronn explained to the abutters present that the applicant
has requested a continuance to the next meeting scheduled for March 13, 2003 at 5:30 P.M. McPherson discussed the minutes of November 14, 2002 & December 12, 2002. Nowak moved to accept
the minutes of November 14, 2002 with minor changes. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Carbin moved to accept the minutes of December 12, 2002 as written. Body seconded.
The motion passed unanimously. At 6:16 P.M., Maronn opened the Discussion on a Request by Creative Developers, Inc. for Approval of Definitive Subdivision Plans under the Subdivision
Control Laws and the Rules and Regulations Governing the Subdivision of Land in the City of Northampton, MA, for property located on Burts Pit Road, Map ID 36-68, 286 & 288. There was
discussion regarding the proposed Oaks subdivision and the Commission generally agreed to discuss possible recommendations for the Planning Board. Angela left. There was general discussion
of the Order of Conditions for the Oaks subdivision, but the Commission decided to write the Conditions at the next meeting after they had time to digest the wildlife evaluation of the
large isolated wetland. There was discussion of the possibility of having regular working sessions for the Commission, perhaps on Monday nights, to do special presentations and work
on some guiding policies for the Commission. There was discussion of the possibility having someone do a presentation on alternative paving surfaces for bike paths at one of the Commission’s
working sessions, and inviting the Planning Board. At 7:08 P.M., Body moved to adjourn. Nowak seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
Northampton Conservation Commission Minutes of Meeting March 27, 2003 The Northampton Conservation Commission held a meeting on Thursday, March 27, 2003, at 5:30 p.m., in Hearing Room
18, City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Mike Reed, Matt Nowak, John Body and Susan Carbin, Reuven Goldstein and Wendy Sweetser. Staff: Conservation
and Land Use Planner, Gloria McPherson and Board Secretary, Angela Dion. At 5:30 P.M., Reed opened the Notice of Intent filed by The Community Builders, Inc. for the installation of
an 8” dry water line and hydrant for property located on Rocky Hill Road, Map ID 37-29. Work will take place within buffer zone of a Bordering Vegetated Wetland. Mark Darnold, The Berkshire
Design Group, Inc., explained the project according to the plans and information submitted in the Notice of Intent. He explained that the Notice of Intent was filed because in order
to construct the bikeway, part of the bikeway would encroach into the buffer zone. He also explained that as part of the definitive process, the Department of Public Works requested
that a looped water line be installed. He clarified that this looped water line was not included in the original Request for Determination. He explained to the Commission that the looped
water line would go underneath the proposed bike path. Reed asked when the water line is installed, how deep would the water line go. Darnold stated approximately five feet. Reed asked
about dewatering. Darnold explained that it depends on when the work is done. He explained the procedure should dewatering take place. Darnold stated that most likely the trench would
be open for one day and would not be open overnight. 1
Hearing no further comments from the Commission members, Nowak moved to close the public hearing. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. The Commission discussed the minutes
of February 13, 2003 and February 27, 2003. Minor changes were made to the February 13th minutes. Carbin moved to accept the minutes of February 13, 2003 as amended. Nowak seconded.
The motion passed unanimously. Carbin moved to accept the minutes of February 27, 2003, as written. Nowak seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Body handed out copies to the Commission
members of the Conservation Commission’s current newsletter. Order of Conditions – Alan Vogel & Beth Fischer. The Commission discussed the conditions as listed in the staff report and
changes were made. Body moved to issue the order as described in the staff report and with the changes discussed. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Body updated the Commission
regarding the Winter Street flooding issue. At 5:49 P.M., Notice of Intent filed by Dipwell Company, Inc. for the construction of a 5,072 sq. ft. manufacturing and office facility with
associated site improvements for property located on Industrial Drive, Map ID 24B-88. Work will take place on a bank and within the buffer zone of a Bordering Vegetative Wetland. Frank
DeMarinis, Associated Builders, presented the application. He briefly discussed the history of the site and the existing conditions. He informed the Commission that today he received
the DEP number for the project together with the comments they have submitted. He explained that Huntley had surveyed the site in the past and Mickey Marcus conducted a wetland determination.
He showed the Commission, according to the plans on display, the location of the tree line and drainage lines. Mickey Marcus explained that in the early 1990’s he had conducted a wetland
delineation and the Commission issued a determination on the delineation. He showed the Commission an area consisting of approximately 600 square feet of wetlands and 2
explained that he is uncertain if in fact they are wetlands. He discussed the plans on display and stated that the current plan reflects both what the Commission had previously approved
and a revised line that had been delineated by Huntley but that was never approved because the application was withdrawn. DeMarinis showed the Commission a rendering of the proposed
project and explained the design and proposed location of the parking area. He stated that there are 11 proposed parking spaces, per the criteria of the Zoning Ordinance, and that the
area is large enough to accommodate large trucks when entering/exiting the site. He discussed the utility connections and explained that the water would be connected at the property
line. He explained proposed plans for the electrical supply that would be located in the back of the building. He showed the Commission the area where a new pole would be installed for
the electrical service and that the conduit would be laid within the drainage swale. Reed asked if the hole could be located in a different area. DeMarinis explained that if the pole
were placed on the other side, a compression pole would have to be installed as well. He discussed the proposed stormwater management system and stated that according to the plans, they
are exceeding the requirements per storm event. He discussed the area where they plan to replicate for the proposed parking lot. He explained that the parking area and the building have
been moved in order to increase the buffer between the pavement and the wetlands. He addressed the comments submitted by DEP. Marcus explained the proposed detention basin and responded
to questions by the Commission members. There was discussion regarding the parking area and what plans they might have for future expansion of the parking lot. Reed asked if anyone wished
to comment on the proposed project. No one spoke. Hearing no further comments, Nowak moved to close the public hearing. Sweetser seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 6:32 P.M.,
Reed opened the Notice of Intent filed by New England Deaconess Association for the construction of a 37,427 sq. ft. addition and 12 one-bedroom attached cottages with associated site
improvements for property located at the corner of N. King Street and Coles Meadow Road, Map ID 13-73. Work will take place within the buffer zone of a Bordering Vegetative Wetland.
3
Dave Thompson, Coler & Colantonio presented the application. He showed the Commission a rendering of both the existing conditions and of the proposed project. He discussed the location
of the site and showed the Commission the main entrance area to the site as well as the parking lot for the assisted living facility. He discussed the three areas of upland that are
broken up by wetlands, the proposed parking area and the work that will take place within the buffer zone. He explained that there currently is a community vegetable garden that he would
like to make accessible to the residents by constructing a boardwalk that would go across the existing wetland. He stated that there would be minimal disturbance of approximately four
square feet. Reed asked approximately how much clearance would be under the crossing. Thompson stated approximately three feet. He discussed improvements that have been made to the drainage
system including three new stormwater treatment units. He explained that an advantage for the new system is that the dirty water would be treated and detained. He directed the Commission
to the maintenance plan included with the application. Thompson explained that the parking area would be increased to 90 spaces and that all of the proposed walkways would be handicapped
accessible. Reed asked if the silt fence would be an armored silt fence. Thompson stated that it would be appropriate because the slope is 2 to 1. Body asked what materials would be
used for the construction of the boardwalk. Thompson stated that he is unsure, but that the support posts would be pressure treated lumber. There was discussion about alternatives to
pressure treated lumber, which would leach arsenic into the wetland. Reed suggested using sonotubes to support the boardwalk. Sweetser asked who would have access to the community gardens.
Thompson stated that it would be up to the owners. Joan Ballas, Laurel Park, introduced herself as the President of the Homeowner’s Association for Laurel Park. She expressed concerns
regarding the access to the community gardens. Goldstein asked about the drainage for the parking lot. 4
Thompson explained the existing drainage and the ways that it would be improved through pretreatment structures. Ballas spoke again and expressed concerns regarding what impact the proposed
project would have on Laurel Park and its residents. Reed stated that the impacts to Laurel Park are not within the jurisdiction of the Commission. He suggested that she discuss her
concerns with the Planning Board. Reed stated that the maintenance of the stormwater system should be kept up-to-date to be certain that the numbers indicated in the report remain the
same. Carbin expressed concerns regarding one of the proposed walkways and asked the applicant if the walkway encroaches into the 50-foot buffer. Thompson explained that there is one
walkway that does encroach into the buffer. It was noted that comments from DEP have not been sent and that the Commission is unable to close the public hearing because a DEP number
has not been issued. Hearing no further comments, Carbin moved to continue the hearing to April 10, 2003 at 5:30 P.M., in Hearing Room 18, City Hall, Northampton. Goldstein seconded.
The motion passed unanimously. At 7:11 P.M., Reed opened the Continuation on a Notice of Intent filed by James & Bonnie Graham for the construction of one two-unit house with related
site work for property located at 264 Riverside Drive, Map ID 30B-124. Work will take place within buffer zone and within Riverfront Area associated with the Mill River. Reed explained
that the applicant has requested a continuance for a month in order to submit additional information. Body moved to continue the hearing to April 24, 2003 at 5:30 P.M., in Hearing Room
18, City Hall, Northampton. Sweetser seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Body requested that the Commission allow the Broad Brook Coalition to conduct an owling hike after dusk
from 6-9 P.M. Body moved to allow Broad Brook Coalition to conduct hikes after the allowed time (dusk). Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. 5
At 7:25 P.M., Reed opened the Continuation on a Notice of Intent filed by John Hunter for the construction of a new stormwater management system, installation of a new sewer line and
the removal of an old barn for property located at 245 N. King Street, Map ID 18-5. Work will take place within the buffer zone of an isolated wetland. McPherson explained that the only
reason why the hearing was continued was that the Commission did not have comments from DEP or a DEP number thus the hearing was continued. Hearing no further comments, Nowak moved to
close the public hearing. Sweetser seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Certificate of Compliance – 50 & 54 Water Street McPherson stated that she conducted a site visit and everything
looks great. Hearing no further comments, Carbin moved to issue the Certificate of Compliance. Sweetser seconed. The motion passed unanimously. Body discussed the hikes that are highlighted
in the current Conservation Commission newsletter. He requested that the Commission sponsor the planned hikes. Carbin moved to sponsor the hikes listed in the current newsletter. Nowak
seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Amy Bookbinder stated that she is disappointed that Joanne Montgomery was not reappointed. The Commission discussed the proposed project for
New England Deaconess and discussed possible recommendations that they would submit to the Planning Board. The members generally agreed that they would recommend to the Planning Board
that native plants should be used as much as possible. Order of Conditions – Ice Pond Residential Subdivision The Commission discussed the conditions as listed in the staff report and
changes were made. Nowak moved to issue the order as described in the staff report and with the changes discussed. Carbin seconded. The motion passed with Goldstein and Body opposed.
6
7 Body stated that he is opposed because the project is setting up future projects that would have to cross the wetland and would therefore have significant impacts to the wetlands and
to the resource area in the future. Order of Conditions – Dipwell The Commission discussed the conditions as listed in the staff report and changes were made. Nowak moved to issue the
order as described in the staff report and with the changes discussed. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Order of Conditions – John Hunter The Commission discussed the
conditions as listed in the staff report. Carbin moved to issue the order as described in the staff report. Body seconded. Nowak opposed and stated that he accepts the plan as is and
does not think that further changes are necessary. The motion passed. At 8:28 P.M., Carbin moved to close the public hearing. Sweetser seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
Northampton Conservation Commission Minutes of Working Session April 7, 2003 The Northampton Conservation Commission held a working session on Monday, April 7, 2003, at 7:30 p.m., in
Hearing Room 18, City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Mason Maronn, John Body, Susan Carbin, Mike Reed and Wendy Sweetser. Staff: Conservation
and Land Use Planner, Gloria McPherson and Planning Director Wayne Feiden. At 7:35 P.M., Maronn opened a discussion on Associate Members. Feiden discussed the three current associates,
Richard Carnes, David Gengler and Lou Moore and their areas of expertise. He mentioned that Lou is an environmental attorney who the City uses when involved in hazardous materials releases.
The Commission discussed the potential roles that Associate Members could play. Three potential categories of Associate Members are: Emeritus, former Commission members who want to
stay in the loop Future Commission Members, those who have expressed an interest to the Mayor Mayor about being on the Commission who would be able to become familiar with the wetland
regs and the permit process before actually committing to serve on the Commission for 2 years Consultants, experts in various fields who would advise the Commission Areas identified
where the Commission might have need for a consultant include wildlife biology, waterways/channel markers, conservation area management, forestry BMPs, farming, arborist, fundraiser,
webmaster/newsletter, attorney. At 8:03 P.M. Body moved to go into Executive Session to discuss a potential land use acquisition project. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously
by roll call vote. At 8:45 P.M. Body moved to end Executive Session. Reed seconded. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote. 1
2 Maronn announced to the public that the only purpose of the Executive Session was to discuss land acquisition. At 8:47 P.M. there was a discussion on possibly changing the night of
Public Hearings from Thursday to Monday, the day specified in the bylaw. Maronn was concerned about a reduction in staffing if hearings were held on Monday. Body suggested that Commission
members could take minutes on a rotating basis. Feiden said that the current staffing model of all meetings on Thursday works well and was designed so that if one or two of the four
staff involved in the permit process (Wayne, Gloria, Carolyn and Angela) was unavailable, others could easily fill in. He stated that if the Conservation Commission meeting night were
changed, secretarial staff would not be available and there could be times when professional staff was also not available. He recommended waiting to make any decisions until after July
1, when he would have a better idea what the Planning Department budget would be. There was discussion that permit nights could be freed up if the Commission took care of other business
at the monthly working sessions. There was general agreement to keep meeting nights on Thursday and revisit the issue in July. At 9:00 P.M. McPherson opened a discussion on establishing
Conservation Commission policies since the Local Wetlands Ordinance revisions were being put on hold. There was general discussion of some of the areas where clear policies would be
helpful to both applicants and the Commission. Areas mentioned are: The riverfront Non-encroachment zone, potentially varied according to zoning district and/or type of resource
area Trees in the buffer Maronn suggested creating a cover sheet to applications stating that if the applicant does certain clearly defined things, he will get a permit. He suggested
that staff provide the list of things looked at during Technical Review meetings for the Commission to review at the next working session. Other items to be discussed at future working
sessions include monitoring conservation land with GPS, setting up a monitor report form for “friends of” groups potentially using the Park Hill APR monitor report done by an intern
last fall, more on ConsCom policies, proposed Montview Avenue stream daylighting project, and floodplain regulations. At 9:37 P.M., Body moved to adjourn. Carbin seconded. The motion
passed unanimously.
Northampton Conservation Commission Minutes of Executive Session April 7, 2003 The Northampton Conservation Commission held an Executive Session on Monday, April 7, 2003, at 8:00 p.m.,
in Hearing Room 18, City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Mason Maronn, John Body, Susan Carbin, Mike Reed and Wendy Sweetser. Staff: Conservation
and Land Use Planner, Gloria McPherson and Planning Director Wayne Feiden. At 8:03 P.M. Body moved to go into Executive Session. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously by roll
call vote. Feiden discussed the potential limited development project on Turkey Hill Road and changes in the lot layout since his informal presentation to some Commission members on
Monday, March 24, 2003. Feiden also discussed a conversation he had with John Skibiski, owner of property adjacent to the Turkey Hill quarry/limited development project site, where Skibiski
offered to sell his parcel to the City for $150,000. Feiden explained that if we were able to purchase Skibiski’s land, the City would own both sides of Turkey Hill Road to the Westhampton
border and there might be the possibility of formally discontinuing the road. However, a self-help grant, which could pay for the additional property, would require a 34% local match,
which would not be politically feasible this year. Feiden discussed another property adjacent to the quarry site, on the south side of Turkey Hill Road. While Cowls has claimed that
it is their property, there is a question of title. In order to increase the amount of conservation land, there is the possibility of not disputing the title in return for Cowls placing
a Conservation Restriction on the land, retaining the right to log it in the future. Feiden discussed a portion of the quarry site which lies in Westhampton and explained that the City
of Northampton would hold a Conservation Restriction on land it aquires in Westhampton. 1
2 Feiden explained that he would like the Commission’s approval to spend $10,000. of City money and to access approximately $24,000. in the Valley Land Fund account in order to leverage
other money for the project with the strong hope, but clearly no guarantees, that both funds would be replenished during the project by the project’s cash flow. Reed moved to recommend
that the City accept the open space and a Conservation Restriction on land in Westhampton and to use the requested money from the Conservation fund and the Valley Land Fund. Carbin seconded.
The motion passed unanimously. The Commission asked to be updated monthly at their working sessions about the Turkey Hill Road limited development project. At 8:45 P.M. Body moved to
end Executive Session. Reed seconded. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote. Maronn announced to the public that the only purpose of the Executive Session was to discuss land
acquisition.
Northampton Conservation Commission Minutes of Meeting April 10, 2003 The Northampton Conservation Commission held a meeting on Thursday, April 10, 2003, at 5:30 p.m., in Hearing Room
18, City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Mike Reed, Matt Nowak, John Body and Susan Carbin and Reuven Goldstein. Staff: Conservation and Land
Use Planner, Gloria McPherson and Board Secretary, Angela Dion. At 5:40 P.M., Reed opened the Continuation on a Notice of Intent filed by New England Deaconess Association for the construction
of a 37,427 sq. ft. addition and 12 one-bedroom attached cottages with associated site improvements for property located at the corner of N. King Street and Coles Meadow Road, Map ID
13-73. Work will take place within the buffer zone of a Bordering Vegetative Wetland. Dave Thompson, Coler & Colantonio, Inc., stated that there have been no changes since the last hearing
other than the comments from DEP. The Commission discussed possible conditions for the project. Hearing no further comments, Carbin moved to close the public hearing. Body seconded.
The motion passed unanimously. Order of Conditions – New England Deaconess Association The Commission discussed the conditions as listed in the staff report and added the following condition:
1. The applicant shall promote the education and understanding of the detrimental impacts of herbicides, pesticides on the adjacent wetlands to all potential users of the community gardens
and encourage the use of the natural slow release fertilizers. Body moved to issue the order as described in the staff report and with the changes discussed. Carbin seconded. The motion
passed unanimously. 1
Nowak arrived. At 5:53 P.M., Reed opened the Discussion on a Request by Beaver Brook Nominee Trust (John J. Hanley) for Approval of Preliminary Subdivision Plans under the Subdivision
Control Laws and the Rules and Regulations Governing the Subdivision of Land in the City of Northampton, MA, for property located at Haydenville Road (Rte. 9) and Evergreen Road, Map
5, Parcels 6, 7 & 12 and Map 6, Parcels 18, 19, 20, 21 & 58. McPherson stated that she received a letter informing her that none of the applicant’s representatives would be present for
this discussion. She then updated the Commission on the status of an older plan that the Commission had denied and that is under review by DEP. She explained that if and when the old
plan is denied, the applicant and/or the Conservation Commission can comment on the plan. She stated that she assumes that the Commission will support any decision that DEP makes. She
explained that the applicant is not willing to withdraw the plan because they would like DEP to make a decision regarding any adverse impacts. The Commission discussed possible recommendations
to send to the Planning Board in regards to the current plan. Reed opened the discussion to the public. Dan Keith, Leonard Street expressed concerns regarding the various vernal pools
located on the site. He stated that Natural Heritage is looking at ways to link some of the vernal pools in order to assist the species that need to be able to migrate from one vernal
pool to the next. He suggested that a total MEPA review be conducted on the site. Deb Jacobs, 82 Grove Ave., expressed concerns regarding the negative impact this project may have to
the area. Davis stated that he appreciates the Commission’s willingness to address the site as a whole including the upland habitat around the buffer zones. The Commission generally
agreed to recommend the following: 1. The applicant should consider a Conservation Restriction on all the land outside of the property borders because the area is an important critical
habitat
for the the Jefferson salamander and the wood turtle. Hearing no further comments, Carbin moved to send the recommendations listed in the staff report with the change discussed to the
Planning Board. Nowak seconded. The motion passed unanimously. 2
At 6:15 P.M., Reed opened a Discussion with the Board of Health – Waste Management Coordinator for the City will discuss a DEP grant to set up a permanent household hazardous waste collection
center at the landfill. Karen Bouquillon, Solid Waste Coordinator for the Board of Health gave an informal presentation of the feasibility of locating a permanent collection facility
at the current landfill. Commission members offered suggestions regarding the central drop-off location. Bouquillon agreed to keep the Commission updated as the plans for this expansion
take place. At 6:40 P.M., the Commission discussed the Enforcement Orders for Wright Builders and Alan Sharpe. Carbin moved to ratify the Enforcement Orders for Wright Builders and for
Alan Sharpe. Body seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 6:46 P.M., there was a discussion regarding an emergency certificate to allow repair to a failed septic system at 100 Whittier
Street. Body moved to allow the emergency certificate. Goldstein seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 6:49 P.M., there was a discussion regarding the Winter Street beaver dam.
City Councilor, Bill Dwight discussed flooding into the sanitary sewer and options for reducing the flooding problems as outlined in a letter from Berkshire Design dated March 25, 2003
to the property owner, Joe Curran. There was discussion of water flow and the bike path by Stop & Shop. Dwight showed the Commission pictures taken today of flooding along the bike path
and of the culvert filled with sand. The Commission generally agreed that something should be done soon. Dwight offered to take the lead in setting up a meeting among the Planning office,
Department of Public Works, Board of Health, Conservation Commission, land owner and the neighborhood at the beaver dam next week. 3
4 At 7:20 P.M., Body asked the Commission to approve a letter to Officer Krenshaw, to pay Molly Hale fifty dollars out of the education and outreach fund for leading a hike on Saturday
and to sponsor wildlife education talk at JFK. Carbin moved to approve the letter, pay Molly Hale and to sponsor the wildlife education talk. Nowak seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
At 7:28 P.M., Goldstein moved to adjourn. Nowak seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
Northampton Conservation Commission Minutes of Meeting April 24, 2003 The Northampton Conservation Commission held a meeting on Thursday, April 24, 2003, at 5:30 p.m., in Hearing Room
18, City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Mason Maronn, Matt Nowak, Wendy Sweetser, John Body, Susan Carbin and Reuven Goldstein. Staff: Conservation
and Land Use Planner, Gloria McPherson and Board Secretary, Angela Dion. At 5:35 P.M., Maronn opened the Continuation on a Notice of Intent filed by James & Bonnie Graham for the construction
of one two-unit house with related site work for property located at 264 Riverside Drive, Map ID 30B-124. Work will take place within buffer zone and within Riverfront Area associated
with the Mill River. Alec MacLeod presented the application. He explained that because there have been so many revisions to the plans and a number of correspondence between all the parties
involved, as well as two new commission members, he would re-present the application in order to avoid any confusion. He discussed the reasons why the plans were revised to a single-family
home and explained that the lot is large but the buildable area of the lot is small. He showed the Commission according to the plans on display, the area of the edge of the river, the
wetland boundary, 100-foot buffer zone and the riparian boundary. He discussed the lawn area and explained that there would be no disturbance of vegetation along on the slope. MacLeod
discussed the location of the existing trees on the site. He discussed the alternatives analysis and history of the site including the zoning changes that were adopted by City Council
for this area. He stated that DEP inquired whether the applicant had requested the zoning changes that were adopted and it was later discovered that it was the City’s idea to change
the zoning for this lot. He explained that the owner never asked for this specific piece of land to be rezoned. He showed a mitigation area to the Commission that is almost equal to
the footprint of the proposed structure and discussed the planting plan associated with the project. He explained that the project is now less than 10 percent of the riverfront area
for this site. Sweetser asked if the driveway was calculated into that figure. MacLeod responded that it was.
Carbin questioned the frontage for the site and whether it meets the regulations. MacLeod explained that the frontage issues are zoning issues and are not within the jurisdiction of
the Commission. There was discussion regarding the zoning requirements and a proposed ordinance that would allow the porch to be moved closer to the street. Maronn asked if there was
anyone who would like to speak in favor or in opposition to the project. Jessica Thompson, Riverside Drive spoke in opposition to the project. She expressed concerns regarding the property
and the fact that the zoning was created in order to preserve the property instead to develop it. Joyce Miller, 272 Riverside Drive also asked about the zoning and questioned the shape
of the lot. Maronn explained that the lot was cut out per the City’s request. Miller continued to question the shape of the lot and if by chance it had been extended. She discussed her
issues, which ranged from the size of the lot and the date that the lot was approved. She explained that she is concerned because in the past she was told that the lot was too small
to build on. Thompson spoke again and stated that for a number of years, the parcel was maintained by the abutters and not by the landowner. Miller asked whether there were plans to
have a basement in the home or would the home be constructed on slab. MacLeod stated that he has not heard whether there would be a basement or not. He explained that the Commission
would not get into the details of the architecture of the structure; however, he did not believe that the basement is going to be an issue. There was discussion regarding the existing
trees and the large oak tree that would be eliminated. Thompson discussed concerns regarding the ground water for the site and explained that she often has water in her basement. She
asked if there are ways to explore the ground water issues. There was an extensive discussion regarding the ground water and MacLeod explained what is within the jurisdiction of the
Commission.
Body stated that he would like to see the calculations of the area of the lot that is not land under water. MacLeod explained that the current calculations do not include the area that
is known as land under water. He directed the Commission to page 2, paragraph 3, of the February 5th letter that he submitted to the Commission. McPherson stated that the calculations
should reflect all impacts both temporary and permanent. MacLeod explained the areas that would be returned to lawn. There was general discussion about whether the area is currently
lawn or not, since when it was not being maintained by the abutters, it reverted to tall grasses, weeds and wildflowers more like a meadow than a turf lawn. There was discussion among
the abutters present and the Commission the reasons why the trust was created and if it was created in order to divide the lots. McPherson explained that the applicants did question
the zoning on lot 6 but that they did not ask for the zoning to change on the lot in question. She stated stated that she is unsure if the lot was placed in one name for the sake of
development. MacLeod explained that the only issue is where the replication area would be. He stated that the replication wcould not be provided on the lot that is owned by the trust
because it is a different owner. There was further discussion regarding the replication area and if the edge of the vegetation area is accurate. Carbin expressed concerns regarding the
tree on the bank and stated that she would like a tree evaluation conducted. The Commission generally agreed that it would be beneficial to conduct a site visit. There was general discussion
of a site visit to check the edge of vegetation and Alec said he would measure the distance from the proposed driveway to the edge of vegetation and put it on a revised map. The Commission
discussed the remaining concerns with this project including the footprint of the house, the total square footage of disturbed area, tree evaluation from a certified arborist, mitigation
area, grading and stated that they would like to see a letter from the trust either allowing or officially not allowing the mitigation area on the lot owned by the trust. Hearing no
further comments, Body moved to continue the hearing to May 22, 2003, at 5:30 p.m. in Hearing Room 18, City Hall, Northampton. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
At 6:50 P.M., Maronn opened the Request for Determination filed by Lloyd Ewing & Ann Deres to determine whether the installation of a new septic system will have an impact on any wetland
resources for property located at 423 Haydenville Road, Map ID 6-54. Lloyd Ewing & Ann Deres, the applicants, explained the application. Deres stated that Peter McErlain from the Board
of Health had been out to the site. She explained that the application is for an upgrade and that they had looked into whether they could tie into the City system but were told that
it would not be feasible. Maronn asked if anyone would like to speak in favor or in opposition to the project. No one spoke. Hearing no further comments, Carbin moved to close the public
hearing. Goldstein seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Maronn read the recommendations from staff. Nowak moved to issue a Negative Determination, checking Box 3. Sweetser seconded.
The motion passed unanimously. At 6:57 P.M., Maronn opened the Notice of Intent filed by John Cooper to construct a single-family house with and an on-site septic system for property
located at 526 Westhampton Road, Map ID 36-122. Work will take place within buffer zone of a Bordering Vegetated Wetland and Riverfront Area. McPherson explained that the hearing should
be continued because the abutters for this project were not notified of this meeting. Body stated that he would like the Commission to conduct a site visit. The Commission generally
agreed to conduct a site visit on May 1st at 5:30 P.M. Carbin moved to continue the hearing to May 8th at 6:15 P.M. in Hearing Room 18, City Hall, Northampton. Nowak seconded. The motion
passed unanimously. The Commission discussed the minutes of March 13, 2003. Carbin moved to accept the minutes of March 13, 2003. Nowak seconded. The motion passed unanimously. The Commission
discussed the minutes of March 27, 2003. Carbin moved to accept the minutes of March 27, 2003. Nowak seconded. The motion passed unanimously. The Commission discussed the minutes of
April 7, 2003.
Body moved to accept the minutes of April 7, 2003. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. The Commission discussed the Executive Session minutes of April 7, 2003. Body moved
to accept the Executive Session minutes of April 7, 2003. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. The Commission discussed the minutes of April 10, 2003. Carbin moved to accept
the minutes of April 10, 2003. Sweetser seconded. The motion passed unanimously. The Commission generally agreed to table the Election of the Vice Chair until all members are present
to vote McPherson discussed the Enforcement Order for 12 Lawn Avenue. She explained that the silt fence had been removed. Body moved to ratify the Enforcement Order. Sweetser seconded.
The motion passed unanimously. McPherson updated the Commission on the Winter Street beaver dam. She explained that there was a meeting held last week at the site with the neighbors,
Board of Health, City Councilor Bill Dwight and the DPW. She stated that the Board of Health determined determined that the beavers were creating a health issue and ordered the removal
of the beavers. Body stated that he was unhappy with the findings of the Board of Health and requested that Peter McErlain come to a meeting and discuss why he felt this issue was a
health hazard. McPherson updated the Commission regarding Clear Falls. She explained that she and Maronn had a meeting with the owner to discuss the remaining issues. She submitted a
letter to the Commission and requested that they approve the letter that clarifies the existing Order of Conditions. Sweetser moved to approve the letter. Carbin seconded. The motion
passed unanimously. Body discussed the vernal pool workshop that was conducted on Saturday. He asked that the Commission approve a letter that he would like to send out regarding the
workshop. Body discussed whether the Commission would like to appoint Joanne Montgomery as an associate member of the Commission.
Goldstein moved to appoint Joanne Montgomery as an associate member. Carbin seconded. Maronn and Nowak opposed. The motion passed. Nowak moved to adjourn. Sweetser seconded. The motion
passed unanimously.
Northampton Conservation Commission Minutes of Working Session May 5, 2003 The Northampton Conservation Commission held a working session on Monday, May 5, 2003, at 7:30 P.M., in Hearing
Room 18, City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: John Body, Susan Carbin, Mike Reed and Wendy Sweetser. Staff: Conservation and Land Use Planner,
Gloria McPherson. At 7:40 P.M., Reed opened a discussion with Bob Packard of the Broad Brook Coalition. Packard explained that the BBC would like to put up donation boxes at the Fitzgerald
Lake Conservation Area. He said that, regarding the possibility of vandalism, he has had conversations with people from the Trustees of Reservation and DEM, who also have donation boxes
at their land, and that there has not been a problem with vandalism. The Commission generally wanted to know where the boxes would be placed and where the collected money would go. Packard
explained that they initially planned to put up one donation box at the North Farms Road entrance and then a second at Boggy Meadow Road if the first one works out. There are no plans
for any other boxes at this point. He said that the boxes would be emptied at least once per week and that all the money would go into the land acquisition fund. The Conservation Commission
was unanimously in favor of putting up donation boxes in FLCA. At 8:00 P.M., Peter McErlain, Director of the Northampton Board of Health, discussed the procedures for the emergency removal
of beavers as set out by the Department of Environmental Protection. McErlain explained that he has a list of 9 conditions that constitute a public health hazard and that he looks at
each situation on a case-by-case basis. He stated that since the year 2000, when this responsibility was passed to Massachusetts Boards of Health, there have been 7 requests for emergency
beaver removals in Northampton, 5 of which were approved by the Board of Health. 1
2 The Commission generally discussed the role of the Commission in beaver situations and how, through information and education, the Commission may be able to let people know that there
are incremental steps that can be taken that could potentially solve the “problem” before it became so serious that it would require the destruction of beavers. There was general agreement
that the Commission should look at ways to rewrite the “Suggested Steps for Addressing Your Beaver Problems” so that it doesn’t assume that the beavers must be removed, and to make published
information regarding beaver management readily available at the Board of Health. McErlain said he would be willing to make this information available at the Board of Health office.
At 8:40 P.M., Wayne Feiden, Planning Director, updated the Commission on the Historic Mill River Corridor project. He said that there will be a neighborhood meeting on Monday, May 19,
to discuss the project with abutters. Mike Reed volunteered to be the Conservation Commission representative on the steering committee. John Body moved to accept the option for the Berlin-Chavez
land to be donated to the Commission. Sue Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. The Commission discussed the monitoring of conservation land. Feiden explained that in the past,
the City has been willing to accept a certain level of encroachment on City-owned conservation land. For example, this would include someone spreading out leaves from their yard on conservation
land, but would not include things like dumping their Christmas trees. The Commission generally agreed that this is something that should be a part of the Conservation Commission Policies
it is working on. Wendy Sweetser moved to have Conservation Commission Public Hearings once per month during July and August, on July 24th and August 28th. Carbin seconded. The motion
passed unanimously. At 9:35 P.M., the Commission unanimously agreed to adjourn.
Northampton Conservation Commission Minutes of Meeting May 8, 2003 The Northampton Conservation Commission held a meeting on Thursday, May 8, 2003, at 5:30 p.m., in Hearing Room 18,
City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Mason Maronn, Mike Reed, Wendy Sweetser, Susan Carbin and Reuven Goldstein. Staff: Conservation and Land
Use Planner, Gloria McPherson and Board Secretary, Angela Dion. At 5:30 P.M., Maronn opened the Discussion on a Request by Steven Willner for Approval of Preliminary Subdivision Plans
under the Subdivision Control Laws and the Rules and Regulations Governing the Subdivision of Land in the City of Northampton, MA, for property located at Westhampton Road & Glendale
Road, Map ID 41-32. Peter Wells, The Berkshire Design Group, Inc. presented the application. He discussed the history of the site and explained that in 1989, a preliminary subdivision
was approved for this site. He discussed the design plans that meet the criteria for zoning and open space. He explained that the site consists of 57 acres of land with a perennial stream
dividing the property as well as the various access points to the site. He stated that Chuck Dauchy flagged the wetlands. Carbin arrived at 5:35 P.M. Wells explained the proposed project
for 24 lots in a cluster design that include access points to both Westhampton Road and Glendale Road. He explained the proposed stormwater management system but stated that plans have
not been finalized regarding the design. He stated that the applicant is willing to donate land in order to have a reduction in the yard setback. He discussed the possibilities for open
space within this project and explained that there is over 75 percent of proposed open space in this concept. He explained to the Board that the project would be as far away from the
stream and wetlands as possible yet would still respond to an open space community.
Maronn asked how large the isolated wetland is. Wells responded that it is 175 ft. Goldstein asked if the applicant has check to see if the wetland might be a vernal pool. Wells stated
that if the commission would like another opinion, he would be happy to contact New England Environmental. Sweetser asked if the houses would have their own septic. Wells stated that
they would. Goldstein asked about the open space behind lots 11, 12 and 13. Wells stated that the area is thickly forested and will most likely remain in that condition. Hearing no further
comments, Reed moved to accept the recommendations listed in the staff report and also to submit the listed recommendations to the Planning Board. Carbin seconded. The motion passed
unanimously. At 5:47 P.M., Maronn opened the Notice of Intent filed by Cellco Partnership dba Verizon Wireless for the installation of an equipment shelter associated with a cellular
antenna for property located at 221 Pine Street, Map ID 22B-40. Work will take place within the Riverfront Area associated with the Mill River and the 100-foot Buffer Zone to a Bank
resource. Steven Riberdy, Baystate Environmental Consultants, Inc., discussed the location of the site and explained that currently the whole site is impervious surface. He discussed
the resource areas on the site including bank and riverfront areas. He explained the proposed project to add cell phone antennas on the site as well as an equipment shed. He stated that
the shed would be elevated above the ground and that the site would be cleaned of all the debris currently located on the site. Reed asked about compensatory storage. Riberdy explained
that the shed would be elevated and that the site would be cleaned up. Hearing no further comments, Carbin moved to close the public hearing. Reed seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
The Commission generally agreed that the Order of Conditions should be written. McPherson read the recommendations in the staff report. and a minor change was discussed.
Carbin moved to issue the conditions as discussed. Reed seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 6:00 P.M., Maroon opened the Request for Determination filed by Hampshire Care to
confirm a wetland delineation and to determine whether an addition to an existing facility will have an impact on any wetland resources for property located at 222 River Road, Map ID
5-1. Sara Campbell, engineer for the project, presented the application. She explained that the flagging was conducted early in the season and stated that the new building would be constructed
at least 100 feet away from the flagged area. She requested that the Commission approve the delineation. Maronn asked the applicant to indicate on the plans on display, the area where
the proposed addition would be constructed. Campbell showed the Commission a rendering of the proposed addition. There was a brief discussion regarding possible future work to the existing
parking area. Hearing no further comments, Reed moved to close the public hearing. Sweetser Sweetser seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Maronn read the recommendations listed in
the staff report and a minor change was made. Reed moved to issue a Positive Determination checking box # 2a. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 6:16 P.M., Maronn opened
the Continuation on a Notice of Intent filed by John Cooper to construct a single-family house with and an on-site septic system for property located at 526 Westhampton Road, Map ID
36-122. Work will take place within buffer zone of a Bordering Vegetated Wetland and Riverfront Area. Alec MacLeod presented the application. He explained that because of comments from
DEP, Commission members and staff, revisions have been made to the plans in order to meet the criteria in the Rivers Protection Act. He discussed the resource areas as well as the location
of the proposed house and septic. Reed asked about the limit of work line and expressed concerns that a portion of the site has been mowed. He suggested that the area should be allowed
to grow back. McPherson suggested that the applicant be allowed to mow once eacha few times a year to maintain the meadow.
After discussion, the Commission generally agreed that it would be fine if the applicant mowed the area in question annuallya few times per year. Hearing no further comments, Sweetser
moved to close the public hearing. Reed seconded. The motion passed unanimously. The Commission agreed to write the Order of Conditions at their next scheduled meeting. The Commission
discussed the minutes of April 24, 2003 and a minor change was suggested. Carbin moved to accept the minutes of April 24, 2003 with the minor change. Sweetser seconded. The motion passed
unanimously. The Commission discussed candidates for Vice Chair. Sweetser nominated Mike Reed as Vice Chair. Goldstein seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Reed accepted. Sweetser
moved to adjourn. Reed seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
Northampton Conservation Commission Minutes of Meeting May 22, 2003 The Northampton Conservation Commission held a meeting on Thursday, May 22, 2003, at 5:30 p.m., in Hearing Room 18,
City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Mason Maronn, Mike Reed, Wendy Sweetser, Susan Carbin, Matt Nowak, John Body and Reuven Goldstein. Staff:
Conservation and Land Use Planner, Gloria McPherson and Board Secretary, Angela Dion. At 5:35 P.M., Maronn opened the Continuation on a Notice of Intent filed by James & Bonnie Graham
for the construction of one two-unit house with related site work for property located at 264 Riverside Drive, Map ID 30B-124. Work will take place within buffer zone and within Riverfront
Area associated with the Mill River. Alec MacLeod discussed the changes that have occurred since the last hearing and submitted a letter in response to the issues that were raised. He
discussed the area of concern regarding the location of the edge of the existing vegetation. He explained a recent drawing submitted to the Commission (prepared by the applicant) that
indicates the new vegetation line. Goldstein asked if the site had been surveyed again to make the new plan submitted. James Graham, owner, stated that the location of the house has
not changed. Hearing no further comments, Nowak moved to close the public hearing. Goldstein seconded. The motion passed unanimously. The Commission discussed the minutes of May 5, 2003
and minor changes were made. Reed moved to approve the minutes of May 5, 2003 with the changes discussed. Body seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
McPherson discussed the Certificate of Compliance for 68 Gilrain Terrace. She stated that she had completed a site visit and that everything looked fine. Hearing no further comments,
Goldstein moved to issue the Certificate of Compliance for 68 Gilrain Terrace. Body seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Order of Conditions – John Cooper. The Commission discussed
the conditions as listed in the staff report. Sweetser moved to issue the Order of Conditions as discussed. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 6:03 P.M., Maronn opened
the Request for Determination filed by Richard E. Jaescke to determine whether the construction of a small addition at the rear of an existing garage will have an impact on any wetland
resources for property located at 774 Bridge Road, Map ID 18C-36 & 176. McPherson explained the application to the Commission because the applicant was not present. Reed asked about
a silt fence. Mr. Jaescke arrived. He responded to questions regarding the proposed project. Hearing no no further comments, Reed moved to close the public hearing. Nowak seconded. The
motion passed unanimously. Maronn read the recommendations as listed in the staff report. Reed moved to issue a negative determination checking box 3 and with the conditions listed in
the staff report. Nowak seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 6:10 P.M., Maronn opened the Request for Determination filed by Advanced Environmental Solutions to determine whether
the installation of monitoring wells and exploratory borings will have an impact on any wetland resources for property located on Haydenville Road, Map ID 11-2. Phil Smith presented
the application. He explained that the site had been an old landfill at some point. He discussed the drainage for the site and the need to drill monitoring wells.
Several questions were asked regarding the process of drilling the wells. Maronn asked if the wells would be capped. Smith stated that it is premature at this point to determine whether
the wells would be capped or not. He described the process of drilling the wells. Maronn asked when the work would begin. Smith stated that he is hopeful to begin work within the next
few weeks. Reed asked how the excavation of materials would be managed during the process of drilling the wells. Commission members made suggestions regarding the drilling process and
the materials that would be excavated. Hearing no further comments, Reed moved to close the public hearing. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Maronn read the recommendations
as listed in the staff report and changes were discussed. Nowak moved to issue a positive determination, checking box 2A and a negative determination, checking box 2. Sweetser seconded.
The motion passed unanimously.
At 6:35 P.M., Maronn opened the Notice of Intent filed by Saint-Saint-Gobain for construction of a 12,743 sq. ft. addition, expansion of the existing paved parking area and a detention
basin for property located at 175 Industrial Drive, Map ID 18D-58. Work will take place within the buffer zone of a Bordering Vegetative Wetland. Mark Reed, Heritage Surveys, presented
the application. He explained that the proposed project is an extension to an existing facility. He discussed the location and the existing conditions of the site. Tim Vitorino, Saint-Gobain
explained the functions of the business. Reed discussed the existing parking area and building. He indicated on the plans the area where the building would be expanded. He showed the
Commission members the location of the existing wetland area and explained that the wetland is one that has been developed through the years. He showed the Commission the buffer zone
and stated that the only construction that is within the 50 ft. buffer zone is the detention area. Mike Reed asked if there is an additional buffer proposed.
Mark Reed showed the limit of work line to create an additional buffer. He explained that the amount of pavement has been decreased in order to lessen the impacts of the project. He
discussed the loading dock (shown on the plans) and stated that the docks were placed as far away from the wetland as possible. There was discussion regarding the existing drainage.
Mark Reed explained that the soils at this location are very heavy which impacts the drainage. Mike Reed asked about the construction of the detention basin. Mark Reed explained the
details of the construction. Hearing no further comments, Reed moved to close the public hearing. Nowak seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 6:55 P.M., Maronn opened the Notice
of Intent filed by Stephen Petegorsky for the construction of a single-family house and a paved driveway for property located on Lot 6, North Farms Road, Map ID 12-33. Work will take
place within the buffer zone of a Bordering Vegetative Wetland. Chuck Dauchy presented the application. He explained the proposed project for a single-family home within the 100 ft.
buffer. He stated that the site was delineated during the 1990’s and that a few months ago the area was flagged according to the old survey and that he verified the wetland flags closest
to the project and that they were still accurate. Maronn asked about the location of the wetland. Dauchy explained that it is somewhat across the site from the proposed work. He discussed
the limit of work line as well as the comments submitted by DEP. Maronn asked the applicant if he has permission to grade on the lot adjacent to the project. Stephen Petegorsky, owner,
stated that he does have permission from the landowner. Goldstein questioned the elevation of the property. Petegorsky explained the elevations and the reasons why he chose the location
of the house. There was discussion regarding the drainage for the driveway. Dauchy explained that it would be mostly be sheet flow.
Sweetser asked if the entire lot would be cleared. Dauchy stated that everything below the house would be cleared but behind it would stay. Maronn explained that most of the driveway
is out of the jurisdiction of the Commission. Hearing no further comments, Nowak moved to close the public hearing. Reed seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Order of Conditions
– Stephen Petegorsky. The Commission discussed the conditions as listed in the staff report and changes were made. Nowak moved to issue the Order of Conditions with the changes discussed.
Sweetser seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Order of Conditions – Saint-Gobain. The Commission discussed the project and possible conditions. It was generally agreed that the Order
of conditions would be tabled to the next scheduled hearing. Order of Conditions -James & Bonnie Graham. Goldstein moved to deny the Order of Conditions. Sweetser seconded. The motion
passed unanimously. The Commission discussed the Findings as listed in the Staff Report. . Carbin moved to accept the Findings listed in the Staff Report as a basis for denying the project.
Body seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Body discussed several letters and requested that the Commission approve the letters. Goldstein moved to approve the letters. Carbin seconded.
The motion passed unanimously. Body made several brief announcements regarding upcoming events. Nowak moved to adjourn. Sweetser seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
Northampton Conservation Commission Minutes of Working Session June 2, 2003 The Northampton Conservation Commission held a working session on Monday, June 2, 2003, at 7:30 P.M., in Hearing
Room 18, City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: John Body, Susan Carbin, Mike Reed, Wendy Sweetser and Reuven Goldstein. Staff: Conservation and
Land Use Planner, Gloria McPherson. From 7:30 to 8:30 P.M., Craig Della Penna from Rails to Trails Conservancy presented to the Commission some of the multi-use trails that have been
established in New England and elsewhere. He discussed the use of stone dust as an alternate paving surface, which is less expensive than asphalt. Stone dust is currently not allowed
for the surfacing of multi-use trails in Massachusetts although it has been used successfully in other New England states. There was general discussion of whether stone dust would be
considered a permeable paving material because of the compaction necessary for its proper installation and the fact the that the surface of the trail must be crowned to allow it to shed
water, much like asphalt. Della Penna suggested looking at the Vermont Department of Transportation website for specific details on constructing stone dust trails. At 8:30 P.M., there
was a discussion of staff cuts as of July 1, 2003, and Conservation Commission public hearing minutes. At 8:40 P.M., Sweetser moved that the Commission take detailed minutes on a rotating
basis. Goldstein seconded. Reed opened a discussion on the logistics of the motion. It was generally agreed that Maronn, or whomever was chairing the meeting would not be required to
take minutes. 1
2 There was general agreement that the Commission should establish an official rotation, that the Commissioner taking minutes would give them to staff at the end of each meeting to format,
and that everyone would try to add comments on the draft minutes at the next meeting to improve the consistency of the minutes. There was general agreement that the Commission should
revisit this issue in a couple months to see how it is working. At 8:55 P.M. the motion passed unanimously. At 8:55 P.M. there was a discussion of consultants to the Commission, perhaps
associate members with expertise, and whether the Commission could pay them a stipend from wetland fees to cover some of the expenses incurred. Can consultants be paid up to $50 and
still not be considered a conflict of interest? At 9:05 P.M. Staff discussed the Channel Markers Committee and that the Commission needs to have a representative on the Committee. Goldstein
mentioned that he rows on the Connecticut River. Body nominated Goldstein to be the Conservation Commission representative to the Channel Markers Committee. Sweetser seconded. The motion
passed unanimously. At 9:10 P.M. Body discussed the Sawmill Hills Trail Guide he developed. He requested $40 from the education and outreach fund to print 100 copies of the guide. Sweetser
moves to use $40 for the printing. Goldstein seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 9:14 P.M. there was a discussion of the Submittal Requirements checklist. The Commission recommended
some changes and additions for staff to incorporate. At 9:33 P.M., Sweetser moved to adjourn. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
Northampton Conservation Commission Minutes of Meeting June 12, 2003 The Northampton Conservation Commission held a meeting on Thursday, June 12, 2003, at 5:30 p.m., in Hearing Room
18, City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Mason Maronn, Susan Carbin, Matt Nowak, and Reuven Goldstein. Staff: Conservation and Land Use Planner,
Gloria McPherson. At 5:33 P.M. Maronn opened the Request for Determination filed by Elm Development Services, LLC to determine whether the construction of an assisted living facility
with associated site development will have an impact on any wetland resources for property located at 500 Bridge Road, Map ID 17B-4. Bill Garrity, Garrity and Tripp, explained the location
of wetland flags and the adjustment of 2 wetland flags based on a site visit with the Commission and Chuck Dauchy the week before. Garrity said he is asking the Commission to approve
the location of wetland flags. Goldstein asked about possible wildlife corridors between the 2 wetlands on site. Garrity explained this information should be available when NOI is filed.
Hearing no further comment, Carbin moved to close the public hearing. Goldstein seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Maronn read the recommendations as listed in the staff report.
Carbin moved to issue a positive determination, checking box 2A with the boundary changes discussed, box 4 and box 5. Goldstein seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 5:43 P.M.
Maronn opened the Request for Determination filed by the Office of Planning and Development to determine whether the construction of a memorial will 1
have an impact on any wetland resources on property located on Main Street, Leeds, Map ID 10B-112. Gloria McPherson, Office of Planning and Development, presented the plans drawn up
for the Leeds Civic Association, which consist of a small paved area in front of the existing monument with benches built with granite blocks from the old dam. The Commission generally
discussed the potential removal of several trees, including the 4-stemmed American Elm. Carbin said that an arborist will look at the trees to see if they should be saved. Deb Jacobs,
Leeds, said the Leeds Civic Association would like to preserve the elms since they could represent the 4 towns that were devastated in the flood. Maronn asked about earth removal. Carbin
stated that little earth removal will be done, just what is necessary to set the pavers. Jacobs mentioned that they would like to try to take out invasive plant species in the area of
the monument as mitigation. Hearing no further comment, Carbin moved to close the public hearing. Goldstein seconded. The motion passed unanimously. The Commission discussed issues raised
in the staff report. Nowak moved to issue a negative determination, checking box 2, with the conditions that erosion controls be used, that as many trees as possible are saved, and that
invasive species in the area of the monument are removed. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unamimously. At 5:56 P.M. Maronn opened the Request for Determination filed by the Ox-Bow
Marina, Inc. to determine whether the resurfacing of the existing parking lot will have an impact on any wetland resources for property located on Island Road, Map ID 45-58. Rick Klein,
Berkshire Design Group, described the repaving project and explained that it is work that is badly needed because of the existing condition of the parking lot. Klein said that the applicant
will provide a pre and post survey including elevations of the work area. He explained that removed of asphalt will be moved off site and that there will be no net changes in elevation.
2
McPherson questioned the erosion along the edge of the parking lot. Klein explained that a separate NOI will be filed at a later date for bank stabilization. Maronn asked how long the
project it will take to complete. Mick Duda, the Marina, said the work should be done in ½ day. He explained that in 1975, the finish paving was never completed. They never put on the
second layer of asphalt. Duda explained that because of financial constraints, he will only repave the two small parking lots next to the building, and not the large parking area by
the soccer fields. Hearing no further comments, Goldstein moved to close the public hearing. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. The Commission discussed conditions for the
determination. Carbin moved to issue a negative box 2 with the conditions that the applicant provide pre and post elevations of the area to be repaved and that the determination is for
only the 2 small parking lots adjacent to the Marina building. Goldstein seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 6:08 P.M., Ian Merles of Camp Ramah, New England, presented a letter
to the Commission asking permission to camp on Elwell Island for 2 nights. There was general discussion of Conservation area regulations including no removing plants, no fires, and no
trash disposal. Carbin moved to approve the camping subject to the regulations of Conservation Areas. Goldstein seconded. The motion passed unanimously. The Commission discussed the
Minutes of May 8. Carbin moved to accept the minutes as written. Goldstein seconded. The motion passed unanimously. The Commission discussed the staff recommendation for the Order of
Conditions for Saint-Gobain. Carbin moved to accept staff recommendations as written. Goldstein seconded. The motion passed unanimously. 3
4 McPherson explained a request for a Certificate of Compliance for David Murphy and Daniel Yacuzzo, who would like to add on to their existing lots by purchasing two small parcels of
land from Cooley-Dickinson Hospital. She explained that the outstanding Orders of Conditions for the Hospital do not apply to these parcels. The Commission generally agreed to issue
partial Certificates of Compliance to Murphy and Yacuzzo. McPherson explained a request for Certificate of Compliance for Christopher Aquadro. The Commission generally discussed the
work completed and the resulting comp storage that was created. Goldstein moved to issue the Certificate of Compliance. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. McPherson notified
the Commission that land acquisition voted on previously will be going to city Council next week. McPherson explained a preliminary request by Bruce Bleiman to remove trees in wetland
at the old Calvin Coolidge house to reestablish a view of the Holyoke Range. The Commission set up a site visit for June 19, 2003 at 5:45pm. There was a discussion of a complaint related
to Clear Falls. Carbin volunteered to follow up on these issues. At 6:40 P.M. Nowak moved to adjourn. Goldstein seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
Northampton Conservation Commission Minutes of Meeting June 26, 2003 The Northampton Conservation Commission held a meeting on Thursday, June 26, 2003, at 5:30 p.m., in Hearing Room
18, City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Mason Maronn, Reuven Goldstein, Wendy Sweetser, John Body and Michael Reed. Staff: Conservation and
Land Use Planner, Gloria McPherson. At 5:30 P.M. Maronn opened the Request for Determination filed by Mary Ellen & Brendon Flynn to determine whether the expansion of an existing kitchen
will have an impact on any wetland resources for property located at 65 Sylvester Road, Map ID 35-188. Robert Walker, Construct Builders, presented the application. He stated that no
new impervious surfaces will be added to the site. Sweetser asked if any additional bedrooms would be created. Walker said the addition was just for the kitchen, with no additional bedrooms.
Hearing no further comments, Reed moved to close the hearing. Sweetser seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Maronn read the staff recommendations. Reed moved to issue a negative
determination checking box 3 with the conditions in the staff report. Sweetser seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 5:35 P.M., McPherson requested, on behalf of the Broad Brook
Coalition, permission for an evening walk and talk in the Fitzgerald Lake Conservation Area on July 13th. There was discussion about whether BBC already has blanket permission to conduct
programs in the Conservation Area after dusk. 1
The Commission generally agreed to give the BBC permission for the July 13th evening walk and talk. At 5:40 P.M., Maronn opened the Request for Determination filed by Barbara Winkler
to determine whether the installation of a new septic system will have an impact on any wetland resources for property located at 66 Drury Lane, Map ID 41-10. Chuck Conner, realtor,
presented the application. Lacourse, sanitary engineer, stated that the existing system consists of a hand built cesspool and that with the seasonal rise of the water table, wastewater
flows directly into the river. Reed asked if the silt fence needed to be so far from the work area Lacourse explained that the erosion control was placed in such a way to facilitate
equipment moving around the new system during construction. He added that the area is all existing lawn. Hearing no further comments, Sweetser moved to close the public hearing. Reed
seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Maronn read the staff recommendations. Sweetser moved to issue a positive determination checking box 2 with the conditions recommended in the
staff report. Reed seconded. The motion passed unanimously. The Commission generally accepted the Minutes of May 22 with no changes. The Commission generally agreed to accept the Minutes
of June 12 with the correction of the date. McPherson discussed a complaint against Charlie Mazeski and explained that he had paved his driveway, which is located in the floodplain,
without first obtaining a permit. She stated that the work he did was the same as what Mick Duda had requested through the permit process for the Marina and that the Commission had required
pre-and postelevations. Sweetser moved to ratified an Enforcement Order against Mazeski which requires him to provide finish elevations of work completed. Body seconded. The motion passed
unanimously. 2
3 The Commission generally discussed the latest draft of Conservation Commission Policies with a number of clarifications and additions stated by members. These were to be incorporated
by staff for the next work session on Monday, July 7. Body moved to fund an Office of Planning and Development staff person 1day per week, 52 weeks per year using wetlands permitting
fees. Sweetser seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 6:30 P.M. the Commission generally agreed to adjourn.
Northampton Conservation Commission Minutes of Meeting July 24, 2003 The Northampton Conservation Commission held a meeting on Thursday, July 24, 2003, at 5:30 p.m., in Hearing Room
18, City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Mason Maronn, Reuven Goldstein, John Body, Sue Carbin, Matt Nowak, and Wendy Sweetser. Staff: Conservation
and Land Use Planner, Gloria McPherson. At 5:30 p.m. Maronn opened the Request for Determination filed by Raymond and Arlene Vanasse to determine whether the replacement of a septic
system will have an impact on any wetland resource for property located at 75 Park Hill Road, Map ID 43-100. Rich Jaeske, represented the Vanasses and presented the application. McPherson
said that the leach field is further away from the buffer. Maronn asked where the existing leach field is. Jaeske did not know, but it is closer to the wetlands that the proposed replacement
would be. Hearing no further comments, Carbin moved to close the hearing. Body seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Maronn read the staff recommendations. Body moved to issue a negative
determination box 3, with the conditions in the staff report. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 5:40, Maronn opened the Notice of Intent filed by MicroCal, LLC Mickey
Marcus, New England Environmental, presented the project. He said that only Phase one was built in 1994, but Phase II was also approved previously. A wetland mitigation area was constructed
as well. The approved plans have now expired, and Micro Cal is now reapplying for Phase II and a 1,000 sq. foot addition.
2 Marcus said there are two new additions to the plan submitted with the NOI: an area for snow storage in the top right corner of the parking lot and drainage swale, and five trees around
the parking area. Marcus explained that construction will take place from the inside out, so no vehicles will be needed on the outside of the building footprint close to the wetland
edge. Bob Bartlett, Hampshire Construction, added that the addition will be a pre-engineered metal building that goes up quickly. No staging and masonry is necessary. Maronn asked if
the remaining area between the addition and the wetlands will remain lawn. Marcus replied that it will. He added that the roof drains into the wetland on the northeast corner of the
building. Terry Anderson, Northampton Economic Development Co-ordinator supported the project and said that they are part of a small cluster of medical technology businesses that the
City would like to support and grow. Hearing no further comments, Sweetser moved to close the hearing. Nowak seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 6:00, Maronn opened the Notice
of Intent for James Dimas of 305 Westhampton Rd, Map ID 36-155 for the construction of addition to a single-family home. Alan Weiss of Cold Spring Environmental presented the project.
McPherson stated that a DEP file number has not been supplied because they haven’t received the new plan. Maronn said that the Commission cannot issue an Order of Conditions without
a DEP number. McPherson said that this project could count as a redevelopment project, which, if filed as so, would expedite the permitting process. Weiss said that he thought the small
size of the project wouldn’t necessitate this type of filing. McPherson said that there are some questions regarding the square footage calculations in the application. Weiss said that
the 500 sq. ft. number was put in there because of extra room for driving equipment and such. Maronn told the applicants to address the comments from DEP and deliver the necessary information
to DEP.
Dimas stated that he spoke with Wayne Feiden and was told that this application would be a nobrainer. Carbin moved to continue the hearing until August 28, 2003 at 5:30 pm. Goldstein
seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Discussion of Rocky Hill Cohousing Definitive Subdivision plan. Mark Darnold from Berkshire Design presented the project with one minor change
to the plans, the addition of two frontage lots. Over 115% of the wetlands disturbed will be replicated and sheet flow will be minimized throughout the project. At the bridge over the
wetland, stormwater will be treated in a Stormceptor. Carbin said that in the preliminary plan, the Commission recommended that the house on Lot 5 be moved outside of the 100’ buffer
zone. Doug Kohl said that it was moved, but not entirely out of the buffer zone, and that it would be possible to do so. Goldstein asked about the future covered parking. Kohl said that
it is a provision for future parking. Body asked if the sled run would be mowed. Kohl said that it would be left as a field. Body said that care should be paid to the time that the field
is mowed in the summer so as not to disturb wildlife habitat, particularly ground-nesting birds. McPherson asked about the arrows on sheet L4 that say filter buffer strip but do not
point to anything. Darnold said that these are designated sheet flow discharge areas for stormwater used in their calculations, but there is no rip rap or anything artificial placed
there. Goldstein asked about delineating the garden area so as to prevent encroachment into the wetland. McPherson replied that there is a steep slope there, which could effectively
mark the buffer. She added that the pump station is still within the 100 ft buffer and questioned why. Darnold said that that is an elevation issue, that it is gravity fed and must be
kept lower than the units it is serving. He added that it will be grassed over and inconspicuous. David Entin, a future resident of Rocky Hill CoHousing, said that the future residents
are eager to preserve as much of the existing trees and habitat on the property. Body said that they should look into bear-safe dumpsters. 3
4 Hearing no further comment, the Commission unanimously closed the hearing. The Commission discussed recommendations to the Planning Board for the definitive plans for Rocky Hill CoHousing:
• Try to get as much impervious pavement and parking out of the buffer zone as possible. • All parking on the northwest (wetland) side of the drive shall be pervious, either gravel or
articulated concrete. • Single-family house on Lot 5 shall be located completely outside the 100’ buffer. • As offered by the applicant, all plantings shall be non-invasive, and preferably
native, species. • The edge of the garden area should be clearly marked with permanent markers to prevent future encroachment into the buffer zone. Body moved to pass these recommendations
on to the Planning Board. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. The Commission discussed the Order of Conditions for MicroCal. McPherson added a staff recommendation to ensure
that the lot is swept four times per year. Sweetser moved to issue staff recommendations with proposed changes. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. The Commission unanimously
agreed to table the minutes until the next meeting. Carbin said that Joanne Montgomery is asking the Commission to send a letter of support to the City Council for the creation of a
Tree Committee. The Commission unanimously agreed to do so. Carbin asked for joint meeting with the Planning Board to discuss how lots in subdivisions and flag lots are approved, create
a procedure that would ensure no conflict with the role of the Conservation Commission and potentially create an upland requirement. The Commission decided to discuss this matter in
greater detail at the next working meeting and unanimously agreed to a joint meeting with the Planning Board. At 7:25 p.m. Sweetser moved to closet the meeting. Carbin seconded. The
motion passed unanimously. Respectfully submitted, Wendy Sweetser
Northampton Conservation Commission Minutes of Meeting August 28, 2003 The Northampton Conservation Commission held a meeting on Thursday, August 28, 2003, at 5:30 P.M., in Hearing Room
18, City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: John Body, Sue Carbin, Matt Nowak, Wendy Sweetser and Mike Reed. Staff: Conservation and Land Use Planner,
Gloria McPherson. At 5:45 P.M., Reed opened the Notice of Intent filed by James Dimas for construction of an addition to an existing single-family house located at 305 Westhampton Road,
Map 36-155. Alan Weiss, Cold Spring Environmental Consultants, presented the application. He explained that Mass Highway had determined the 100-year flood elevation at the bridge over
Basset Brook, adjacent to the site, to be 207’. All proposed work is above this elevation. Weiss indicated the appropriate paper work would be sent to DEP. Sweetser asked about the area
of work. Weiss replied that the addition is 336 square feet and that the applicant is proposing to remove an existing concrete pad of approximately the same area as mitigation for work
done in the riverfront. Reed asked about compensatory storage. Weiss indicated that the work is not in a flood zone. He showed the Commission a map produced by Mass Highway with elevations.
Hearing no further comments, Sweetser moved to close the hearing. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 5:55 P.M., Reed opened the Request for Determination filed by the
Northampton Department of Public Works to determine whether the construction of additional parking will have an impact on any wetland resources at Sheldon Field located on Bridge Street,
Map 25C-84. 1
2 Paulette Kuzdeba from the DPW presented the project which is to be an expansion of parking at Sheldon field with addition of two basketball courts. She explained that the area will
be regarded with high point in middle draining to both sides instead of into Old Ferry Road. A curb will be put next to the road. Runoff will be infiltrated. The net area of increase
in impervious surface is less than 200 square feet because they will be removing some existing asphalt. McPherson questioned the net compensatory storage. Kuzdeba indicated there would
be an increase of at least 40 cubic yards. Sweetser asked if there would be a need for an NOI. McPherson didn’t feel there would be any benefit and that the determination could be conditioned
to require post construction elevations. Nowak asked about the location of an existing utility pole and if it will
be located within the paved area. Kuzdeba replied that it will not be moved and that the lot was designed around it. Hearing no further comment, Nowak moved to close the hearing. Body
seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 6:05 P.M., Reed opened the Notice of Intent filed by Jeff and Susan O’Brien for construction of a single-family house located on Burts Pit
Road, Map 29-616. Mark Reed, Heritage Surveys, presented the application. Reed submitted a revised plan showing a 25 ft undisturbed vegetated border between the wetlands and the driveway
as recommended by National Heritage. Mike Reed asked if all other alternative building areas on the site were considered. Mark Reed explained that by Northampton zoning, the house must
be located within a 150’ diameter circle within the lot. Body asked if the house could be sited differently to reduce impacts to the two wetlands. Mark Reed said that it is the desire
of the applicants to build their house in the rear portion of the lot. Body asked about the total area of disturbance for this proposal. He questioned what the total area of disturbance
would be if the house were constructed elsewhere on the lot. Reed said that the house is kept out of the 50’ buffer on the proposed plan
Body pointed out that the parking area and driveway are almost entirely within the 50’ buffer. He questioned whether there was a way to reduce impacts and stated that he would rather
see impacts shifted to the 100’ buffer and out of the 50’ buffer. He suggested that the applicant look at alternate places to site the house and driveway. Mike Gragnolati, one of the
applicants’ consultants, felt the driveway in the 50 ft buffer would not be disruptive. He stated that the driveway would not be an impediment to wildlife because there would be very
little traffic since it is a single family house, maybe only 6 trips per day, and that the speeds would be slow enough so that the applicants could stop and move a turtle out of the
way. Sweetser asked if the driveway was going to be paved. The applicants responded that it would be gravel. Body requested that the applicant quantify the actual disturbance within
each buffer zone, the 50’ and the 100’, for the proposed plan and an alternate plan with the house located closer to the road and the driveway minimized, so the Commission would have
facts on impacts to compare. Hearing no further comment, Body moved to continue the hearing to September 11 at 6:20 P.M. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 6:30 P.M.,
Reed opened the Notice of Intent filed by Tofino Associates, Inc., for Rocky Hill CoHousing cluster subdivision with 35 housing units located on Florence Road, Map 37-65, 66, 67 and
19. Doug Kohl briefly introduced the project. Brian Jereb, Berkshire Design, Project Manager, presented 8 changes required by the DEP. Mark Durso, Berkshire Design, Engineer, reviewed
the storm management system and explained how certain figures for TSS removal were arrived at. Reed asked about stormcepters. Durso said there is one stormcepter for the project, but
that they tended to rely more on overland flow whenever it was possible. Reed asked if the stormwater system is mostly swales. Durso answered that there are water quality swales, level
lip spreaders and a deep sump as as part of stormwater management. McPherson asked if the level lip spreaders would be rip rap. 3
Durso replied that they are, and that the flow would then be directed to existing wooded areas for infiltration. McPherson asked what were all the stormwater management components that
would require regular maintenance. Durso listed them and said there was a maintenance schedule in the NOI. Reed asked about the wetland replication and DEP’s comments. McPherson said
the specifics were spelled out fairly well on one of the maps, but that we were waiting for more information from Chuck Dauchy. Kohl explained that Chuck Dauchy was doing soil borings
in the replication area to meet DEP standards for inland replication. He added that compliance could be conditioned in an Order of Conditions. Carbin asked about the proposed future
common building and whether this would come to the Commission separately. McPherson stated that the Commission could condition it that way. Jereb and Durso walked the commission through
the changes required by DEP point by point. Reed asked if this project was big enough to require a MEPA review. Jereb said no. Hearing no further comment, Sweetser moved to close the
hearing. Nowak seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 7:15 P.M., Reed opened a discussion of Preliminary Plans for the Village at Hospital Hill There was general discussion of the
size and slope of the proposed detention basins and the extent of grading required. The Commission felt that several basins were much too steep and required too much fill. The Commission
discussed recommendations from McPherson and Carolyn Misch. The Commission was generally disappointed that the Planning Board hearing was scheduled for the same night, even though the
Office of Planning and Development had assured them that this would not happen, and that there was no representative from MassDevelopment and the Village at Hospital Hill project available
to present their plans to the Commission. The Commission discussed holding public hearings on a different night than the Planning Board. 4
5 Carbin moved to send staff recommendations with minor changes and additions to the Planning Board. Body seconded. The motion passed unanimously. The Commission discussed other business
and approved a request for an extension of Orders of Conditions for Steven Susco and a Certificate of Compliance for Timothy Seney for work on lot 19 on Cardinal Way. Sweetser moved
to approve minutes June 2, 2003. Carbin seconed. The motion passed unanimously. Sweetser moved to approve minutes of June 26, 2003. Nowak seconed. The motion passed unanimously. Sweetser
moved to accept the minutes of July 24, 2003 with a minor change. Nowak seconded. The motion passed unanimously. The Commission discussed the Policy on Work within the Buffer Zone. There
was discussion on what square footage disturbance should be allowed within the 50-100’ buffer zone on lots within cluster subdivisions. The Commission generally agreed that the proposed
2,000 square feet seemed reasonable. The Commission generally agreed with the Policy as written. McPherson explained a change that was suggested by Wayne Feiden, Director of the Office
of Planning and Development, which involved including all Business, Industrial and Planned Village districts in the exception to the 50’ non-encroachment zone. The Commission asked McPherson
to invite Feiden to present all business and industrial districts with wetlands if he wants them included in ConsCom policies. The Commission agreed to postpone a vote on the Policy
pending more specific information on all business and industrial zoning districts. At 8:40P.M., sweetser moved to close the meeting. novak seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Respectfully
submitted, S. Carbin
Northampton Conservation Commission Minutes of Meeting September 11, 2003 The Northampton Conservation Commission held a meeting on Thursday, September 11, 2003, at 5:30 P.M., in Hearing
Room 18, City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Mason Maronn, John Body, Sue Carbin, and Wendy Sweetser. Staff: Conservation and Land Use Planner,
Gloria McPherson. At 6:00 P.M., Maronn opened the Request for Determination filed by Massachusetts Audubon Society to determine whether the repair of an existing driveway at 127 Combs
Road, Map 52-1, will have an impact on any wetland resources. Mary Shanley-Koeber, director of programs for Mass Audubon, presented Mass Audubon’s plans. She stated that the asphalt
of the entry drive is crumbling, and gets scoured out every time it rains. The biologists feel that the re-paving will improve the condition of the floodplain because less debris will
be running off the road. Body asked if the water will be directed off the road. Shanley-Koeber stated that the repair company will install the standard conditions associated with roads,
including a crown in the road to shed water. John Lyons stated that the average contractor would install the crown as a matter of course. Hearing no further comments, Carbin moved to
close the hearing. Sweetser seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Body moved to issue a negative determination checking box 2, Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously Body
made a motion to move agenda item at 6:05 to the present time. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. 1
At 6:05 P.M., Maronn opened the Request for Determination filed by Susan O’Neill to determine whether site work to fill an old foundation hole at 53 East Center Street, Map 11A-70, will
have an impact on any wetland resources. Susan O’Neill stated that her backyard is very overgrown. She would like to fill in a cellar hole and grade the yard to make it safer and nicer.
McPherson stated that the foundation hole is dangerous. Carbin asked about the amount of fill that will be going in because at the site visit, it didn’t seem as if it needed as much
as is shown on the plan. O’Neill agreed. Maronn noted that the plan shows about 30 feet from the end of the foundation to the end of the fill, and it is 26 feet from the end of the fill
to the silt fence, which seems excessive. O’Neill stated that the consultant got carried away with the plan and that she just wants to gently terrace the yard, not fill the foundation
up. Hearing no further comment, Carbin moved to close the hearing. Sweetser seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Maronn read the staff recommendations. He added that it could be
conditioned to not allow work closer than 35 feet to the drainage swale. Body moved to issue a negative determination checking box 2 with the conditions discussed. Carbin seconded. The
motion passed unanimously. At 6:15 P.M., Maronn opened Notice of Intent filed by Lane Construction Corporation for the decommissioning of a primary settling basin on Damon Road, Map
18-12. Work will take place within the buffer zone of a Bordering Vegetative Wetland, Riverfront Area and Estimated Habitat. Dan Nitzsche, with Baystate Environmental, presented the
project which is to decommission a primary settling pond for an asphalt quarrying operation. They will dewater it, cover it with a geotech cloth, and revegetate it. The sheet flow from
the site that would normally come into the primary settling basin will be redirected around the filled pond to an existing basin. Because this is a redevelopment, some of the performance
standards don’t have to be met, as outlined in the table in the application. There is no expansion of the facility or truck routes, and they are not even going to be working out to the
tree line. Maronn asked where the slurry will go without a pond. Nitzsche replied that dry collection will be used and there is no reason anymore for a settling pond. In fact, they are
already using the dry collection system and the settling basin has already 2
dried out. Body asked what species it is estimated habitat for. Nitzsche said that it is the standard zone adjacent to the Connecticut River. Carbin asked what the improvement to the
Riverfront is going to be. Nichie said that it is limiting the surface for phragmites to spread. Marron opened the hearing up to public comment. John Lyons asked about future stockpiling
of materials. Nitzsche replied that the use and operation of the facility will not be expanding. Ann Russell asked what the name of the small stream that flows through the site. Nitzsche
replied that there is no name on the map and it may be an unnamed stream. Brian Connelly asked if all the work going to be performed will be between the lines on the map (100 and 200
buffer zone lines). He then asked why they have to fill in this pond if it’s just being decommissioned. Nitzsche said that they are doing it to make it a stable area and because DEP
is requiring it. Jennifer Hopp asked how far the work is from the stream. Nitzsche measured the settling basin at 102 feet from the stream. Hopp then asked if it is buildable land for
a shed. McPherson said that the site probably wouldn’t be stable for a building, and that no work beyond decommissioning the basin is included in the NOI. She added that the applicant
would have to come before the commission again in order to build anything. Nitzsche stated that the NOI included the stockpiling of gravel for storage on the footprint of the basin,
and gravel is currently stored nearby. Body stated that it is really important for them to get rid of the phragmites and prevent them from spreading. Having received no response from
Natural Heritage, Sweetser moved to continue the hearing to the next meeting on September 25 at 5:45. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Alec MacLeod discussed the beaver
dam project put before the Commission almost 2 years ago. There was an appeal by the Willards, upstream. 3
McPherson stated that during a site visit, she, Body and Carbin found that there was no line of rocks placed, as was required in the Order of Conditions, and now the beavers are building
a dam in the culvert. She added that there appeared to be a line of rocks existing, but they are very small and completely under water. There is no leveler and no water gauge, which
were also required. Alec agreed that they need to take care of it. Commission decided to issue two Enforcement Orders and tickets for the violated order of conditions regarding managing
beaver activity at the Plantations. McPherson discussed the Enforcement Orders previously issued. The Commission decided to issue 4 additional $100 fines for the first day after McPherson
spoke to David Deitz on-site and actions weren’t taken to correct the violations. The Commission asked McPherson to write a letter to the developer regarding the violations and the possible
ramifications with DEP and the EPA if things are not taken care of at the local level. At At 6:45 P.M., Maronn opened the continuation of the Notice of Intent filed by Jeff and Susan
O’Brien for construction of a single-family house located on Burts Pit Road, Map 29-616. Work will take place within the buffer zone of a Bordering Vegetated Wetland and within Estimated
Habitat. Mark Reed from Heritage Surveys presented a revised Option 1 plan with a further reduction in the total area of proposed work in the 50 ft. buffer zone. The driveway is reduced
to 11 feet and the limits of work and the amount of clearing has been pulled in to 20 feet. Body asked why the house was not moved more to the south in option 2 to minimize impacts to
the wetland buffer. Reed said that it’s because of the setback requirements in the zoning bylaw where the house has to be within a 180’ circle. And the house has to be 40 feet from the
side property lines. McPherson stated that the house could be rotated slightly to get the garage and driveway further from the wetland and the limits of work could be pulled in to get
all all work out of the 50’ buffer. Councillor LaBarge stated that she didn’t have any problem with the plan the O’Briens wanted. Mike Brinn said that the amount of difference between
the plans is negligible. Jeff O’Brien stated that in option 1, the house will be completely outside the 100 foot buffer, whereas in option 2, they will be living within the buffer. McPherson
asked if they could switch the house in option 1 around so that the driveway would be on the other side and have significantly less impact within the 100’ buffer. 4
Jeff O’Brien stated that they couldn’t because the existing house plans allow for the kitchen to be sunny. McPherson noted that the long side of the house would still be facing south
as it is in the current plan. Hearing no further comments, Sweetser moved to close the hearing. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Commission issued approval for acceptance
of a conservation restriction for the Ice Pond. Sweetser moved to accept the Conservation Restriction of the Ice Pond Subdivision. Body seconded. The motion passed with 3 votes, with
Carbin opposing because the original intent was to give the land to the city in fee and lot lines were set according to that plan. At 8:00, Body moved to go into Executive Session. Carbin
seconded. The motion passed unanimously by roll call vote. The Commission discussed land acquisition during Executive Session. Commission discussed the army corps driving on our conservation
land and asking of the Friends of Sawmill Hills to monitor this land. Body made a motion to to ratify the enforcement orders that previously went out regarding the Plantations. The Commission
unanimously ratified the Enforcement Orders. Sweetser moved to issue an extension of the Order of Conditions to the DPW for work on the River Street. Body seconded. The motion passed
unanimously. Commission agreed to table the minutes. The Commission discussed the Order of Conditions for the O’Briens. Body stated that Option 2 seemed to be designed for failure as
a worst-case scenario. He stated that it seems clear that by reducing the size of the yard and the parking turn around, the project could be entirely out of the 50 ft. buffer, and therefore
no driveway would go within 50’ of the wetland. Maronn stated that he preferred Option 1 but questioned why the driveway and garage were located in the 100 ft. buffer. Carbin stated
that she preferred Option 1 because it kept the house and living area out of the 100 ft. buffer but would like to see it reoriented so that the parking is out of the buffer as well.
The Commission asked McPherson to contact the applicant and consultant and request a plan that reduces the impact of the driveway and turnaround in Option 1 and gets them out of the
100’ 5
buffer. The Commission also asked for contour lines on the plan and a square footage calculation of the permanent impact of the driveway. The Commission discussed the Order of Conditions
for James Dimas. Body moved to approve the Order of Conditions as written in the staff report with a minor change. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. The Commission discussed
the Graham’s appeal to DEP. McPherson showed the Commission the revised plans and stated that the Commission could comment on the plans to DEP. The Commission asked McPherson to write
a letter to DEP expressing concerns about the surface hydrology of the site, the lack of details for the proposed water bars, and the fact that the lot was created after the Rivers Protection
Act. Body informed the Commission that there will be a transect hike at Mineral Hills on Oct 1, with follow up hikes in the winter and spring. At 9:15 P.M., Sweetser moved to close the
meeting. Body seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Respectfully submitted, Wendy Sweetser 6
Northampton Conservation Commission Minutes of Executive Session September 11, 2003 The Northampton Conservation Commission held an Executive Session on Thursday, September 11, 2003,
at 8:00 P.M., in Hearing Room 18, City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Mason Maronn, John Body, Susan Carbin and Wendy Sweetser Staff: Conservation
and Land Use Planner, Gloria McPherson and Planning Director, Wayne Feiden. At 8:00, Body moved to go into Executive Session. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously by roll call
vote. Feiden stated that there were previous discussions over the years about acquiring a particular piece of land on Coles Meadow Road. The executor of this land recently approached
the city after years of negotiation. One lot of the 3 is a building lot. There are an additional 8 acres in the back, with a wetland crossing. City is interested in facilitating the
property owner’s efforts to build one house along the street and conserve the back lot. There are two potential ways of accomplishing this: the City takes the risk and gets a lower price,
or we buy all the backland for $17,000 and City does all the conservation and planning permitting for a one-lot cluster. Everything in the construction would be out of the 50-foot buffer.
Feiden explained that the plan is to move the money that was frozen for the acquisition of the two Gleason lots to buy this parcel. Body move to reassign an estimated $11,000 for the
Gleason property to this project. Carbin seconded. The motion was approved unanimously. Feiden presented an additional proposed in-holding acquisition within the Saw Mill Hills Conservation
Area. Sweetser moved to acquire the land in Saw Mill Hills. Carbin seconded. The motion approved unanimously. Sweetser moved to come out of the Executive Session. Carbin seconded. The
motion passed unanimously by roll call vote.
Northampton Conservation Commission Minutes of Meeting September 25, 2003 The Northampton Conservation Commission held a meeting on Thursday, September 25, 2003, at 5:30 P.M., in Hearing
Room 18, City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Mike Reed, Sue Carbin, Matt Nowak and Reuven Goldstein. Staff: Conservation and Land Use Planner,
Gloria McPherson. At 5:30 P.M., Reed opened the Request for Determination filed by David McCutcheon to determine whether the boundaries of a resource area on Lovefield Street, Map 51-11,
are accurately delineated. McCutcheon described the minor changes shown on plans given to the Commission based on yesterday’s site visit. Hearing no further comments, Carbin moved to
close the hearing. Goldstein seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Carbin moved to issue a Positive Determination checking box 2a including changes discussed, Goldstein seconded.
The motion passed unanimously. At 5:46 P.M., Reed opened the continuation of the Notice of Intent filed by Lane Construction Corporation for the decommissioning of a primary settling
basin on Damon Road, Map 18-12. Work will take place within the buffer zone of a Bordering Vegetative Wetland, Riverfront Area and Estimated Habitat. Reed asked for comments from the
Commission. McPherson explained existing site conditions and proposed work. Commission discussed future onsite mowing. Reed asked for public comments. Ann Russell of River Run Apartments
wanted to make sure that the wetland regulations are being complied with. 1
Hearing no further comment, Goldstein moved to close the hearing. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. The Commission discussed the Order of Conditions for Susan and Jeff
O’Brien. There was a discussion of miscommunication between Staff and the O’Briens. The Commission discussed the two options presented. Option #1 showed the house located at the rear
of the lot. The driveway went through the 50’ wetland buffer and the driveway turnaround and parking were located within the 100’ buffer, but the house and yard were outside the 100’
buffer. Option #2 showed the house located at the front of the lot. The entire house and yard could be conditioned to be out of the 50’ buffer, but would still be within the 100’ buffer.
The Commission generally preferred that the house and living area be out of the 100’ buffer, as in Option #1. Commission discussed issues relating to buffer disturbance and equipment
access to build the house. Susan O’Brien stated that her parents would allow construction equipment to pass over their property to avoid impact to the buffer. McPherson stated that the
extent of the wetland was not known on the adjacent property and further wetland delineation would be costly and time-consuming. She did not see a problem with equipment going over the
proposed driveway. The Commission agreed. Reed read staff recommendations. Goldstein moved to accept the O.O.C. recommendations as discussed. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
Carbin moved to accept minutes of August 28, 2003. Nowak seconded. Feiden explained the need for engineering studies on 2 dams owned by the commission. Goldstein moved to use money from
wetlands account. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 7:15 P.M., Carbin moved to close the meeting. Nowak seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Respectfully submitted,
Matthew Nowak 2
Northampton Conservation Commission Minutes of Meeting October 9, 2003 The Northampton Conservation Commission held a meeting on Thursday, October 9, 2003, at 5:30 P.M., in Hearing Room
18, City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Mike Reed, Wendy Sweetser, Matt Nowak, Reuven Goldstein, and John Body. Staff: Conservation and Land
Use Planner, Gloria McPherson. Mike Reed officially opened the Commission’s public hearing. The Commission began with the Order of Conditions for Lane Construction Company. Reed believed
that all questions were answered for him at the previous hearing. Nowak was concerned that placing the wetland markers at the toe of the slope would inhibit the mowing of the slope.
The Commission recommended that the markers shall be place at the edge of the wooded area. Delete “Permanent plantings shall be installed” and add “erosion control seed mix on side of
basin” to staff recommendations. Add annual mowing of the old settling basin area up to the permanent markers and the side slopes of the newly decommissioned settling basin. Sweetser
moved to accept the OOC as discussed and amended. Nowak seconded. There was unanimous approval by the Commission members. The Commission then discussed the Order of Conditions for the
Rocky Hill CoHousing. One issue was having the level lip spreader no closer than 35 feet from the wetlands. This would require a cement headwall while having the spreader closer to the
wetland would not require the headwall, causing less impact. The Commission agreed that less impact makes more sense. The Commission agreed to strike the staff recommendation involving
snowplowing from the parking areas. 1
A report of the success of re-vegetation activities must be submitted by May, 2005 and by May, 2006. Nowak moved to accept the OOC as discussed and amended. Sweetser seconded. The was
unanimous approval by the Commission Members. The Commission discussed Minutes for September 11th minutes. Other than misspellings of names and offset lines, Nowak moved to accept the
minutes as written. Sweeter seconded. All Commission members approved the minutes. The Commission discussed Minutes for September 25th minutes. Reed asked that the minutes should read:
Recommendations of two options were discussed, Option 2 was closer to road while Option 1 placed the home farther back on the property. The Commission selected Option 1.” The Commission
decided to table the minutes until next meeting. McPherson presented a Request for Certificate of Compliance for the Vogel project. She recommended approval of the compliance. Nowak
moved to issue the COC. Sweetser seconded. The Commission vote was unanimous. McPherson spoke about the site visit yesterday at the Plantations Development. The developer would like
to amend the Order of Conditions so that they would not need to place the Clemson Leveler in the beaver pond. They believe that the existing smaller culvert with a cage would work well
enough. Body explained that this would not work. Beaver would build around the culvert cage because of the movement of water. The leveler was to be placed further out and run through
the culvert so that the beaver do not hear the water flowing. The Commission unanimously agreed that amending the Order would not meet the goals of the original Order of Conditions.
The Commission unanimously agreed that the earlier Orders should be followed now. McPherson spoke on the Dunphy Drive extension and some complaints from neighbors. Body provided photos
showing three breaches in the silt fencing from last week, as well as today. Nowak, Sweetser and Goldstein volunteered to be the team to check the project weekly. Body recommended one
Enforcement Order and one ticket for the three silt fence violations, and if the violation continues, the fine should be $100 for each day from the date of receiving the enforcement.
2
The Commission unanimously agreed. McPherson discussed continuing erosion problems on the Rt. 66 project. The Commission decided to fine the construction company for each infraction.
Gagliarducci is the construction company. Site visits were planned for the next two weekends. Jeffrey O’Brien presented the revised plan to keep the turn around outside the 100’ buffer,
and decrease the limit of work line to minimal impact. A clarification of the Order was given: erosion controls should be put up after the tree cutting but before stumps are removed.
The Commission discussed the
Order: “planting list and schedule must be provided.” The Commission needs to know what plants are going in and must be contacted before the planting is initiated. It will be important
for the woody plantings to match the density. A wetland mix should be applied to stabilize the area before this winter. A pre-construction meeting with Reed was set up. O’Brien presented
an updated plan to the Commission. Reed stated that the orientation of the house does not matter if it is outside of the 100’ buffer. Nowak moved to accept the plans and accept the plantings
list at the pre-construction site visit. Goldstein seconded. All members approved, except Body, who abstained. Wayne Feiden, Planning Director, spoke on changing fees for wetland permitting.
The Daily Hampshire Gazette does not like the set up of asking the applicants to make a check out to the Gazette for the public hearing. Feiden recommended to change the wetland fee
to included an advertising fee of $35 for each application, made payable to the City and permission of the Commission to pay the advertising fee from the wetland account to the Gazette.
Goldstein made a motion to change the wetland fee to include an advertising fee of $35 and also to approve a $35 advertising payment from the wetland account. Nowak seconded. The Commission
approved unanimously. Goldstein moved to close, Nowak seconded. Commission approved. Respectfully submitted, Dr. John Body 3
Northampton Conservation Commission Minutes of Meeting October 23, 2003 The Northampton Conservation Commission held a meeting on Thursday, October 23, 2003, at 5:30 P.M., in Hearing
Room 18, City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Mike Reed, Matt Nowak, Reuven Goldstein, Wendy Sweetser and Susan Carbin. Staff: Conservation and
Land Use Planner, Gloria McPherson. At 5:30 pm, Reed open the Request for Determination filed by Stanley Zewski to determine whether the replacement of porch stairs and a concrete walk
will have an impact on any wetland resources at 39 Fair Street, Map 32A-247. Stanley Zewski said that this work has already been completed after being stopped by the building inspector.
He said he replaced the front steps and cement sidewalk because they were in disrepair. He said he replaced the cement walk at the same height because that is the height of the grass
next to it. The Commission felt that there was no apparent change in elevations. Hearing no further comment, Goldstein moved to close the public hearing. Nowak seconded. The motion passed
unanimously. Nowak moved to issue a Negative Determination checking box 2. The motion passed unanimously. At 5:40 pm, Reed opened the Request for Determination filed by Daniel and Alison
Gleason to determine whether widening an existing driveway will have an impact on any wetland resources at 640 Kennedy Road, Map 4-10. The applicants wish to widen an existing gravel
driveway a small portion of which is in the 100 ft buffer of a wetland. Total buffer area affected is 71 sq ft. Sweester stated unequivocally that she supports shared driveways. Other
Commission members shared that support. 1
Hearing no further comment, Nowak moved to close the hearing. Goldstein seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Sweatser moved to issue a Negative Determination checking box 3. Nowak
seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 5:50 pm, Reed opened the Request for Determination filed by New England Deaconess Association to determine whether the addition of a 4’ wide
sidewalk will have an impact on any wetland resources on North King Street by Coles Meadow Road, Map 13-73. Jessie Mariano presented the request for constructing a sidewalk along North
King Street. Reed asked about what type of equipment will be on site and asked where any soils will be stored. Mariano replied that all equipment will be kept on the road and there will
be no storage of materials on site. Sweatser asked about a tree belt. McPherson indicated that it has been eliminated in the areas closest to the wetland to minimize the width of the
right-of-way and any impacts. Hearing no further comment, Goldstein moved to close the hearing. Sweatser seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Novak moved to issue a Negative Determination
checking box 3 with staff recommendations for conditions. Sweetser seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 6:00 pm, Reed opened the Request for Determination filed by City of Northampton
to determine whether proposed work at Veterans Field, located off Clark Avenue, Map 31D-171, is subject to the jurisdiction of the Northampton Wetlands Ordinance. A representative from
Berkshire Design Group presented the application describing improvements to Vets Field, a new drainage line that will replace the existing broken line, and 3 small isolated wetlands
that have been identified by Chuck Dauchy. Reed asked what would happen to the wetlands once the drainage is improved. Dauchy replied that he would expect them to dry up. He stated that
he feels that these wetlands are only there because of the broken drainage line through the field. Reed asked about the function of these wetlands. 2
Dauchy indicated their function was not significant. He said the area of the wetlands is a bit more than 400 sq ft putting them under local jurisdiction. Sweatser ask about any sheet
flow that feeds the wetlands. Dauchy replied that sheet flow will continue as it is now. Dave Corbett presented photos of a wetland in another part of Vets Field. The photos showed a
substantial wetland with apparent wildlife value. Jane Summer, 42 Fort Hill Terrace, reported that the wetland in the photo is used for skating, swimming and boating. Chuck Dauchy indicated
that this wetland would not be affected by the proposed work. Corbett asked if the large wetland would disappear. Dauchy indicated it would not. Summer expressed concern about the stability
of the slope on her property if the isolated wetlands are dried up. Dauchy said the bank probably wouldn’t change but if anything it would create a more stable slope. Dave Stevens, Westhampton
Road, expressed concerns about the proposed site for the community gardens and the soil there, which could be contaminated. Berkshire Design representative said it would be tested and
thanked Stevens for pointing out the potential problem. Hearing no further comment, Goldstein moved to close the hearing. Nowak seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Nowak moved to
follow staff recommendations and issue a Negative Determination checking box 1 (not subject to protection under the Act) with a finding that the wetland is not significant to any interests
identified in the Northampton Wetlands Ordinance. Goldstein seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 6:45 pm, Reed opened the Request for Determination filed by Sovereign Builders
to determine whether the boundaries of a resource area on Westhampton Road, Map 48-15, are accurately delineated. Chuck Dauchy presented the application and submitted a revised map.
3
David Stevens, Westhampton Road, complimented Dauchy on the delineation and indicated that he has had the vernal pools certified on his property, which is adjacent to the applicant’s
property. He stated that the largest vernal pool, which is half on his property and half on the applicant’s is in the process of being certified since obligate vernal pool species have
been found. Hearing no further comment, Sweetser moved to close the hearing. Goldstein seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Sweetser moved to issue a Positive Determination checking
box 2a, referencing changes made during the site visit and including staff recommendations in the findings. Goldstein seconded. The motion passed unanimously. At 7:05 pm, Reed opened
the Request for Determination filed by Sovereign Builders to determine whether the boundaries of a resource area on Chesterfield Road, Map 15-20, are accurately delineated. Chuck Dauchy
presented the application. There were no changes made during the site visit. Hearing no comments, Sweester moved to close. Goldstein seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Sweester
moved to accept staff recommendations and issue a Positive Determination checking box 2a, with notes from staff report in the findings. Nowak seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
At 7:10 pm, Reed opened the Notice of Intent filed by Sovereign Builders for the construction of a single family home with associated site work and septic system on Sovereign Way, Map
36-242. Work will take place within the buffer zone of a Bordering Vegetated Wetland. The project was presented by Chuck Dauchy. Reed asked about whether or not the house could be moved
further from the wetland. McPherson said they could put the garage right on the zoning setback line, but it would only be another 5 feet away from the wetland. She pointed out that the
limit of work line at the corner of the house could be pulled in from 20 feet to 15 feet. Todd Cellura, Sovereign Builders, said that 15 feet would be no problem, and that he would rather
do that than move the house 5 feet closer to the property line. The Commission generally agreed. Nowak asked about the extent of the lawn area. 4
Dauchey said it would be limited to the work area shown on the plan. Sweetser asked if the garage would be the same size as the house, as indicated on plan. Cellura said probably not,
but he needed the Commission to OK a building footprint so that he could begin the design. Reed requested that the sediment barrier be at the limit of work line and that to the extent
possible, the limit of work line should be kept to 35 feet from the wetland. Cellura agreed. Hearing no further comment, Sweetser moved to close the hearing. Nowak seconded. The motion
passed unanimously. The Commission generally agreed to write the Order of Conditions at the next meeting. In other business, Carbin moved to accept the Policy on Work within the Buffer
Zone as presented by staff. Sweetser seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Carbin moved to accept the minutes of September 25, 2003, as written. Sweetser seconded. The motion passed
unanimously. Sweetser moved to accept the minutes of Executive Session on September 11, 2003, as written. Nowak seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Sweetser moved to accept the
minutes of October 9, 2003, as written. Nowak seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Nowak presented a drainage problem on his uncle’s farm, explaining that the Fairgrounds owns the
property adjacent and have been periodically adding fill, causing water to back up on his uncle’s field to the point where he is unable to farm part of it anymore. He also presented
photos of the problem. The Commission requested staff to send a letter to the Fair requesting a representative to come to the next Conservation Commission meeting to explain the adding
of fill. Sweetser moved to close the meeting. Carbin seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Respectfully submitted, Susan Carbin 5
Northampton Conservation Commission Minutes of Meeting November 13, 2003 The Northampton Conservation Commission held a meeting on Thursday, November 13, 2003, at 5:30 P.M., in Hearing
Room 18, City Hall, 210 Main Street, Northampton, Massachusetts. Present were Members: Mason Maronn, Mike Reed, Matt Nowak, Reuven Goldstein, John Body and Wendy Sweetser. Staff: Conservation
and Land Use Planner, Gloria McPherson. At 5:30 P.M. Maronn opened the Request for Determination filed by The Community Builders, Inc., to determine whether the rehabilitation of an
existing pond outlet control structure will have an impact on any wetland resources at the Ice Pond Subdivision, Rocky Hill Road, Map 37-29. Jay Vinskey discussed the plans for rehabilitation
and referred to past discussion about the deterioration of the outlet control structure. Maronn asked about the procedures to be used. McPherson asked about debris removal steps, especially
about any machinery that would be used, since the application stated that there would be regrading of the drainage channel. Vinskey replied that upon closer inspection, regrading will
not be necessary, but that depending on the weight of the new grate, a small bobcat may be used to carry it down to the drain; otherwise hand tools only will be used. Body moved to continue
the hearing until December 11 at 5:30 pm because of a change in the scope of work regarding the use of motorized equipment, necessary grading and vegetation removal, and the mitigating
measures to be taken to accommodate this. At 5:45 P.M. Maronn opened the Request for Determination filed by John Ewing to determine the boundaries of resource area at 280 Wilson Road,
Map 44-12, 55, 116, 128, 129, 130, are accurately delineated. Phillip Rury of Hatch Mott MacDonald presented the application. 1
Maronn described his observations of the wetland line and his agreement with the delineation. He also pointed out that any proposed use of the land on the wetland side of the road would
require that the line be further delineated. Development plans for the ANR lots across the street from the wetland were discussed, including the ramifications of the buffer zone of the
wetland which goes into Lot 1. The Commission generally agreed that another RDA will be needed when work is proposed on Lot 1. Sweetser moved to issue a Positive Determination checking
box 2a, noting that n RDA will be required for work on Lot 1. Body seconded. The motion passed unanimously. In other business, McPherson said that the Conservation Commission must elect
a representative to serve on the Tree Committee and that she had spoken with Sue Carbin who had expressed interest. The Commission unanimously agreed that Carbin should be the Conservation
Commission representative to the Tree Committee. McPherson discussed the Clement Street drainage channel project and the apparent excessiveness of it, especially as regards aesthetic
impacts. She said that while it is built according to the specifications that the Commission approved, it appears to be over-engineered: 160 feet of riprap so thick that the stream flows
under the top of the rocks, which are too deep for vegetation to grow through. She encouraged Commission members to visit it and compare the results with the approved plans and the Order
of Conditions. She suggested that in the future, the Commission should consider the aesthetic impacts of projects, which is specifically allowed in the local wetland ordinance, and should
require the use of more innovative and less intrusive designs. Jim Dostal discussed the large size of the natural rocks in the channel that necessitated their removal and said the ground-cover
spray with seed has been applied to the exposed banks of the channel. At 6:05 P.M. Maronn opened the Notice of Intent filed by Jane Carey for the replacement of a septic system system
of an existing single-family house at 140 Loudville Road, Map 48-6. Work will take place within the buffer zone of a Bank and Bordering Vegetated Wetland, and within Riverfront Area.
Alan Weiss from Cold Spring Environmental presented the application. He explained that environmentally sensitive parts of the property are in Northampton although much of the site is
in Easthampton. He described the leach field design and property constraints, including the location of the well and the floodplain, that keep him from moving the system further away
from 2
both the stream and Manhan River on the property. He explained that the property owner has gotten stream and well setback variances from the Board of Health. Weiss explained the mitigation
measures to be used, including straw bales. The positive aspects of the septic system were described. No additional clearing involved. He stated that the owner is anxious to complete
the work. Maronn stated that the hearing had to be continued because DEP hasn’t yet issued a File #. Goldstein moved to continue the hearing to December 11 at 5:45. Nowak seconded. The
motion passed unanimously. At 6:17 P.M., Attorney Richard Evans and Russ Myette came before the Commission to discuss whether an RDA needed to be filed for Myette’s floating docks on
the Connecticut River. Evans stated he was unable to find an applicable category for the project on the RDA form since there is no new construction involved as Myette has had docks there
since the 1960s. Goldstein asked about any changes in the number or footprint of the docks. Myette stated that the number of spaces hasn’t changed, only the orientation. Evans stated
that his concerns were that floating docks are temporary, don’t involve piers, and cause minimal alterations to the resource area. Some of the particulars of Chapter 91 were discussed.
Reed and Maronn recommended that Staff obtain clearer guidance, in writing, from the DEP, and that, once received, the Commission would reopen the discussion to determine how to apply
the appropriate policy to all docks where Chapter 91 permits apply on a city-wide basis. John Body left at approximately 6:55 P.M. There was a discussion of Village at Hospital Hill
stormwater management issues. Mssrs. Preble and LaPointe from Biels & Thomas presented the revised stormwater system. They explained that they are in Phase I of the project and have
responded to initial comments from the City and the Commission in preparation of the Definitive Subdivision and NOI submittals. They explained how they were able to accommodate the Conservation
Commission’s request to scale down the size of the detention basins and to keep them out of 100-ft buffer. The outfalls of 2 of the basins would be within the 100’ buffer and would feed
the wetlands at the north and south end of the property. Preble said that the southernmost basin discharges to the wetland buffer because drainage improvements may divert water from
this area. He discussed the difficulty of keeping discharge points out of wetland buffers because of the elevations of the gravity systems. 3
McPherson asked about the aesthetic impacts of the two basins and the swale connecting them. LaPointe stated that an arborist has completed a tree survey and has identified “specimen”
trees that should be saved, which influenced the shape and location of the detention ponds and swale. He stated that the swale was shallow and would revegetate, and would not be easily
noticed. There was discussion about the outfalls and how they could be made to look more natural and minimize the use of riprap. Preble said that they would use large natural stone stones
placed vertically in the ground within the channel to slow the flow of water. The Commission liked this idea. At 7:05 P.M., Bruce Shallcross of the Tri County Fair and Mr. Huntley of
Huntley Associates were present to discuss the alleged addition of fill on property adjacent to John Bobola’s property. Shallcross discussed their stormwater management difficulties
in this area. Stockpiles in this area were dredged from the Fair’s detention ponds, which was required by the Commission in 1999. The Commission had previously approved this part of
the Fairgrounds to store the dredged materials as it was being used over time to refill stalls. Maronn discussed the shortcomings of the City’s stormwater drainage system in this area.
Huntley added that this is an ongoing problem that the City has known about for years. Attorney Growhoski, representing Mr. Bobola, discussed their concerns about the damage caused by
increased ponding of stormwater coming from Fairgrounds and the restricted use of Bobola’s property. Masonn asked about the possibility of different engineered solutions to the drainage
problems. Nowak stated his uncertainties about the effectiveness of the Fairground’s initial corrective measure, a small swale near the fill. Various stormwater management solutions
were discussed as well as the fact that this has been an unusually rainy year. Shallcross offered to dig a swale at the property line to help prevent water from reaching Bobola’s property
and said the Fairgrounds will re-grade the riding ring to direct the stormwater away from the Bobola property when they make other improvements to the fence at the property line. 4
McPherson discussed a Request for Certificate of Compliance for 27 Spruce Street. Nowak moved to issue a Certificate of Compliance based on staff recommendations. Glodstein seconded.
The motion passed unanimously. The Commission discussed conditions for the last Sovereign Way lot. The public hearing was closed at the last meeting. Sweetser moved to issue the conditions
recommended in the staff report. Nowak seconded. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 7:50 PM. Respectfully submitted, Michael Reed **Note that this is the most aggravating
computer I have ever typed on. 5