Dunphy Drive/ Maple Ridge Drainage Report/Complaint 1986 A REPORT FROM
THOMAS E. RICE
1CONSULTING GEOLOGIST
Prepared for: Date: July 13, 1986
Charles & Kathleen Pysz, Jr.
95 Dunphy Drive
Northampton, MA. 01060
and
Linda & Robert Wheeler
75 Dunphy Drive
and
Gary & Kathleen Houle
103 Dunphy Drive
In response to your concern about the possible impact of a proposed
subdivision on drainage conditions at your homes and in your yards, as
well as those of your neighbors on Dunphy Drive, I have prepared the
following 3—part report.
Past and Present Drainage Problems and Cause:
In the past each of your homes on the north side of Dunphy Drive has
experienced problems caused by excessive runoff and groundwater flow from
the north. Presumeably other homes along Dunphy Drive have had some
degree of problem with runoff and groundwater flow, depending upon their
location. Excessive groundwater flow and surface runoff nave led to
inoperable and flooded leach systems and basements, and has caused each of
you to expend thousands of dollars to partially correct the problem with
subsurface drains.
My observations on Thursday evening indicated to me that the water
table near your homes is, and has been, close to the surface. The depth
at which the house foundations are set is less than standard depth,
indicating that the original builder encountered a shallow water table.
The lack of footing drains around each foundation aggravated the flooding
problems following every period of heavy precipitation or snow melt. The
installation of footing drains when the houses were built would have
2
prevented most of the oellar flooding, but might not have stopped the
flooding of leach fields �(nd septic tanks. The placement of the septic
systems on the uphill sidd of the foundations is contrary to good practice,
especially when the sub—surface stratification sloped toward the foundation.
The excavation for a swimming pool beside the Wheeler's home shows
the sloping beds of sediment, and also encountered the water table at a
depth of about 7.5 ft. on July 10, 1986. The workmen had been pumping water
from the excavation during the afternoon while they were working, so the
water table may actually be closer to the surface that it was when I
observed it. 1986 precipitation through June was 21.5 inches, which is
almost exactly one half of our average annual precipitation. however, 13.1
inches of that total fell before April, and the total for the past 3 months
was only 8.4 inches. The drier 2nd quarter has depressed all water tables,
especially since it coincides with the beginning of the growing season when
vegetation draws water from the water table. In a wetter 2nd quarter the
water table would be even closer to the surface. Iron staining in the beds
of sediment suggest that it normally is only about 4.5 feet below the
surface.
Uphill from your homes there is abundant evidence of surface runoff
coming from farther uphill as well as from the uphill portions of your
backyards. It was difficult to determine the uphill limit of that surface
runoff, but it seemed to coincide with the downhill edge of the coarser
sand and pebble gravel that occurs a short way uphill from your property
lines. It is probable the runoff from the large hill north of your homes
enters the coarse sand and pebble gravel at the base of the hill and then
emerges from it just uphill from your property to flow downhill across your
yards.
Map 1 which accompanies this report shows the location of Profile Line
AA' . The southern end of the line at A' is approximately tue location of
Dunphy Drive, and the line passes through the area of your homes to the top
of the large hill: Figure 1, which also accompanies this report, is the
topographic profile along the line AA' across Dunphy Drive and down to the
260 ft. contour line. Vertical dimensions are exagerated by a factor of
10:1: Horizontal dimensions are at map scale. The vertical exageration
makes the hill look like a mountain, but it makes it possible to put into
3
perspective a smaller landform upon which your homes and Dunphy Drive are
located. Beginning just I elow the 300 ft. elevation there is a elope break
in the profile: from the ill slope to a nearly horizontal surface. This is
followed by a second slope break at the south edge of the horizontal surface
to a gentler, concave upward, elope that leads down to elevation 260 ft. I
have projected the continuity of the hill slope below the topographic profile
to complete a cross—section of the smaller landform. I have shaded that
cross—section in red to emphasize it. This smaller landform is a small
glacial outwash delta that was built into Glacial Lake Hitchcock and against
the base of the large hill.
Figure 2 is also a topographic profile along the line AA' . I have
redrawn it to expand the horizontal dimension and to remove the vertical
exageration. It shows the slopes as they are, though reduced in scale. I
have included it to illustrate that the presence of the small glacial delta
would be un—noticed, except by someone trained to recognize its surviving
features. Again I have shaded the deltaic feature to emphasize it.
Figure 3 is a generalized blow—up of the portion of Profile AA' that
contains the small glacial delta. I have indicated three parts of the delta
with the letters A, B, & C. The delta was built (deposited) from A toward C.
The sediments in the vicinity of A are the coarsest sediments in the delta.
They were deposited there because they were too heavy to be transported
farther into the lake by currents from the stream that built the delta. The
sediment sizes here are mostly coarse sand (1/16 in. ), grannules (1/8 in. ),
and pebbles (1/4 — 3/4 in. ). The buried beds slope toward Dunphy Drive, but
the upper beds which were spread over tne lower beds are very near horizontal.
These upper near—horizontal beds are called tne topset beds of the delta.
Along the base of the large hill there is a sharp slope break that shows
where tnese beds were washed in against the base of the hill. These topset
beds were above the level of the lake, and the meltwater streams that built
tae delta added to them as they shifted course over the top of the delta.
These beds are veiy permeable, and at present, runoff from the large hill
enters these beds at the base of the hill. The water that enters the topset
beds is then distributed to the buried beds that slope downhill toward Dunphy
Drive. There is no evidence of any surface runoff crossing the area under-
lain by these beds of coarse sediment.
In Figure 3 the letter B indicates a broad area from the left of the .
development boundary to Dfpby Drive. The land surface in this area is
the eroded former face of the delta. This surface was originally beneath
the surface of Glacial Lake Hitchcock. The beds of sediment beneath the
soil cover slope downward toward Dunphy Drive at an angle parallel to the
original slope of the face of the delta. I have indicated these
beds with diagnal
sloping beds that
lines
in the cross—section of Figure 3. These
are revealed in the
sloping
are the
excavation for the 'Wheeler' s swimming
pool. They are called the foreset beds of the delta. The slope angle
these beds is steepest near area A and diminishes under area C. Near
Dunphy Drive the beds are sloping at about 30^ below the horizontal.
Within the foreset beds of the delta the sediments are coarser toward
This fining of sediments toward C
foreset bed in areas A & B cannot
of
area A and become finer toward area C.
means that water that easily flows into a
flow easily at C. The result is that water is stored within these beds and
there is a high water table near Dunphy Drive. Another aspect of these
foreset beds is the alternating sediment sizes found in them. The excavation
for the swimming pool at Wheeler' s home reveals that thick beds of fine sand
The coarse
and silt alternate with thinner beds ofcoarse
sand and grannules.
grained beds act as confined aquifer beds. They are capable of transfering
water rapidly from the vicinity of A toward Dunphy Drive, but without an
outlet they only hold water and release it slowly through area C. When
excavations intercept those coarse beds the water in them can flow out
rapidly. This was undoubtedly the reason for basement flooding before
corrective drains were installed.
South of Dunphy Drive in the area marked C the foreset beds have lower
slope angles and contain much finer sediments: mostly silt with increased
amounts of clay sized sediment. These are the conditions that impede
drainage from these beds and contribute to the high water table uphill from
Dunphy Drive.
Map 2 gives the approximate location of Dunphy Drive.
I have drawn in(blue lines)
The outline of
the various
the proposed subdivision is
shown.
drainageways indicated by the contouring
and know
from
our walkover that they are
intermittent streams,
and
small perennial
of tae U.S.G.S. topographic map,
These include rills,
I have outlined the
there.
streams.
5
part of the delta that I have observed, and have used red shading to
indicate the upper part were the sediments are coarse and red lines for
the finer grained foresetlbed area. The drainageways that lead to the
brook that drains under Route 66 have eroded deeply into the original delta,
altering its original shape until the deposit no longer resembles the ,
initial delta.
Effect of Proposed Development:
Runoff from the south and southeast sides of the large hill that is
proposed for development has supplied the groundwater that has caused
flooded basements, leach fields, septic tanks, and yard erosion along the
northern side of Dunphy Drive toward the western end. About 37-42 % of the
precipitation that falls on that hill at present flows downhill as surface
runoff, 55-57% is consumed by evapotranspiration in the mixed hardwood/
evergreen forest and by groundcover and understory plants beneath the forest
canopy, and about 1p' enters the water table on the hill. The hill is
composed of compact glacial till over bedrock, and is a glacial landform
known as a drumlin. Water infiltrates the compact till at very low rates,
which facilitates increased surface runoff. Groundwater flow within the
till is correspondingly very slow: published flow rates of 87-94 ft./yr. are
usual. Baker Hill in the Bay State section of the city is a similar
drumlin, and Bay State residents could tell you about their problems with
runoff on that partially developed hill.
Runoff from a forested drumlin is at a minimum. Development of drumlins
increases the surface runoff because development reduces the water retaining
characteristics of the ground cover within the forest. A substantial part
of the hill involved in this development will be converted from areas covered
with forest duff to areas of roofs, lawns, driveways and walks, and sub-
division roads and sidewalks. Runoff from those new surface covers will be
very high: 85-1004. In addition, new residents will further increase the
surface runoff as they remove brush, leaves, and undesireable plant growth
from the remaining forested area. The outlook can only be for faster and
more runoff.
Some of the increased runoff will be intercepted by the storm sewers
and curbs of the subdivision roads. But Nap 2 shows that in the area _
6
imediately north of Dunphy Drive the increased runoff will encounter the
coarse—grained topset beds of the glacial delta. That water will infiltrate
rapidly and increase the amount of groundwater in the sediments of the
delta. .The foreset beds of the delta will conduct that graundwater under
the subdivision road that will be constructed there, and lead it downhill
toward the homes on Dunphy Drive.
As a consequence of the changes in runoff and groundwater conditions,
it can be expected that the water table will become shallower in the delta
sediments. Some of the intermittent streams will flow for longer periods
of the year. Some of the present rills will become intermittent streams.
The flow in the present perennial stream will become less regular and subject
to peaking. How this evevation of the water table will effect the existing
homes along Dunphy Drive is hard to predict because some subsurface drainage
has been installed by the homeowners. I think it is safe to predict that
existing subsurface drains will carry larger volumes of water for longer
periods of time. I don' t think it is possible to predict whether those -
drains will have sufficient capacity to prevent a recurrence of the original
problems. I would recommend that you devise aplan for monitoring flow from
those drains so' that you will be able to document any increased flow after
construction of the subdivision begins.
Possible Solutions:
You presently have a high water table, high groundwater flow rates, and
surface flooding and runoff problems. The proposed subdivision threatens
to increase all of those problems. The options available to you seem to be:
1. do nothing now and
problem worsens, or
2. make city officials aware of past and present problems and of the
threat of future problems, and to try to enlist their support for taking
corrective steps at the time that this subdivision is constructed.
prevent the worsening of
install your own private
drainage if the
There are some tnings that can be done to
your drainage problems, and possibly to reduce them. However, those steps
which are beyond the requirements of the subdivision law would mean increased
costs for the developer and are unlikely to happen unless the city picks up
part of the cost.
The first and most important corrective measure would be to out off
groundwater flowing south from the north and northeast parts of the glacial
delta. This could be done by installing a deep curtain drain beneath the
subdivision road where it) crosses the delta. The small delta is not very
thick where the roads will be built and it should be possible to trench
through the delta into the glacial till. The curtain drain should be back
filled with material that will allow the curtain of fill to intercept
groundwater flowing in the aquifer beds and conduct it down to the perfor-
ated drain pipe. The grades along the subdivision roads are favorable for
draining the curtain drain to the small perennial stream. Such a curtain
drain, bottomed-out in the glacial till would out off nearly all runoff
from the hill. That would prevent worsening of your drainage problems, and
probably would reduce them. It won' t entirely eliminate them because water
south of
would still infiltrate
to the foreset beds of the delta in
the area
the subdivision road. However, that area is only a small part of the
drainage area north of Dunphy Drive that now dumps water into the delta. I
would encourage you to try to convince city officials of the benefits of
such a drain.
There are other steps for reducing surface runoff that could be used,
but they probably would not be necessary if
These additional steps would include tying all footing drains to the storm
drain in the street, guttering all roofs and draining the gutters underground
to the storm drain in the street, and installing curbs on driveways that are
graded to drain into the storm sewers in the street. Lawns and yard areas
are the remaining sources of increased runoff, and tney are the most diffi-
cult to deal with, although numerous landscaping and drainage techniques
exist for collecting that runoff and putting it into the storm drains.
Whatever is done to deal with the increased runoff, everyone involved,
including city officials, should be aware that after development is completed
the rate of runoff is going to be much faster that it is at present. That
increased rate of runoff will make the small perennial stream that picks up
all of that drainage susceptible to flash flooding. The use of a curtain
on the delta would dry out much of the
a curtain drain
is installed.
dra
n beneath the subdivision roads
top part of the delta. That would allow some of
trate the upper part of the delta, and introduce
the water reached the curtain drain. This would
the rapid runoff to infil-
a runoff delay time before
be beneficial in that it
8
would reduce the peaks of runoff and spread them out over a period of days.
That would reduce
stream.
the possibility of flash flooding in the small perennial
Submitted July 14, 1986
Thomas E. Rice
Consulting Geologist
1 f��,�-,�. r n x y �,\o �C41 // -`\ l�� ��\ �� ��i$, o\•® \, -1�. `
n , n o —sq �� o Og r
II
t � �'
� � , ., i � k o 4, 1\=. ���� VI 8 �� } { 4'�I �rr t �3®po /��
r t ! 'P A o °'� 2�� _ L ..lurt.-L 11 a
, - , t r /\Ci\. mo d i ao , A f, ' }
V - �/
�.\ v)l'� __ \\\�� O O / ® \ `II it / 00:0' t (jam Z i.L,
, .
........---5 , 1
U. r 1� [' \\� a�� } 117 ?do �� +,� IMF .•.. °x n _ ,.i/ a i? r3.'4
- m d Y o» 1 �V t tt 4 .y i ' \ ;1 --� •% P l e'� a ( A c 1-
1w � �.bb o �\\ _`�\ ` f� rS i\ Iii �� � db' g r `;.� c /// = R ;� �6E �� t J
r
, o / � \\
c :)'-'1>H4 -)11/ cji-tati,T-H--NC_____-__ _, / V444,s\ ...._jay\V� ttlit �j l)
0 �y
/ -mow %n . fY%! i, `-t. -�' t/A z .�� . . * .; %A 1; d.
FIGURE 1 - Profile AA' at 10:1 Exag.
Delta Top is between 290-
300 ft. elev.
■O■ - ■■ O ■R■■■ WWI ■■■■OOOO
nnor
MOM niiii■a
■.f■.h jnV■a■■■■■■R■■O■O
■u4, 1Xlco.6 o■■■■mi.N.N- -- ■■N '=w■N■!■■■■3 nn i` •.ak a■■
■■ioO■ -0a mi■Mrm■.roa=-
■R■■■n ■■ Rii' '■i■o
- —too- �■ ■■■■•O■■O■R Oo ■R�Y■.�mi j 4 •_9- •s^_ , rte: ■ =■■■■■■o
SUMO
mor WWII
FIGURE 2 - Profile AA' at 1 ;1 Exag
Dashed Line Approx. Contact
Between Delta Deposits and
Glacial Till & Bedrock
FIGURE 3 - Blow-Up Of Right Side Of
Figure 2.
'7t rim � ' OAS '� f \ Cc�q J N,t ,;. (r T.0 \ kfri ac\tt ‘,,;,,t ricArg3t;
i ° . �\; ? a 0 Cam. 4e �l1 ;r
�/ \ p t,`9a
v
J=. �t �. 1`rt�d e rth VA. �•i' OO Oo 1/ ���/ r� � �fiN Li,
�.•
I T R' ± III t „ , ,a.,....•
'mod1 �� t�- �� 8 tl\f \' `_- '/.c///' /// i�° 1i•a _SS VV����� Y c��
1
� a � 1 41'. � A �
\ n m i I
td t q L
o o �4�, a``��V ` 11 t7` ., ,4 ii i___,,,, 1 \ P . C.I A? �P^1\
ice// /J 9q
. , ASW
v 1 P
G'T O •
L.
— ”- •
cw C- C7'e '1�/
<;.j: � . .� `) / ! If? ...--47' �'%= '-� ... t•�\! ..._ .,• "/ ! �'/.v. -..4 .sue-''�1 �. .1-1��xi3v.� `lr.:(:
„VInJi2 wfl V177 G' 1/40,115170 C 1
S3 �
V
a
no) 7v./cl sral
g9 � )
a;
o a o e „ ! 1
•
lF Vl /vct
PERCOLATION TESTS MAPLE RIDGE . '
DEPTH FIELD NOTES
TEST P MIC RATE TO GW DATE RESULTS LOCATION
)T g PIT v MIN/IN SOIL LOG
0-15" TOPSOIL
1 15-39" SILTY SAND W/STREAKS
OF FINE SAND
29 27
2 39-46" FINE SAND 103" 4-8-86 535-B/24 532/17
46-76" MED/COARSE SAND
„ 76-107" VERY FINE SAND
0-18" SANDY LOAM
18-36" SILTY SAND 70„ 4_8_86 535-B/24 532/17
30 28 2 36-54" FINE SAND
54-86" LAYERS FINE/COARSE
SAND
0-2" MULCH
2-20" SANDY LOAM
31 29 2 20-36" LAYERS OF FINE/MED. NONE 4-8-86 535-B/23 532/17
SAND
36-108" MED/COARSE SAN//DDD
any r
ti .1' %I
R- / r,
AI ,i t
w
6• r rti ' 40 <L it •-d
5
jf; ?dam tt= it..' ` as
'r"'^I" fif" ' " < 'i '2' -7U VW 1 r l ' 1 -�''"•• : -
-
' a f:l l' ,� v Jr ;tit
Sa121 LLayvu)syo 3 8 icy 1. 1`
1�,; h
- .h
r{v ire)
y' <� r. •
a
c ./-� YXI 1 `�
/ AA �r ri
. it,
169 )!:).f F. - ,-. Y j« " 4a';i . 1 ' 1'4. V
°#s .) Shy -
r`'„ IEt cQ`k
��( � �/ 1
a2 z 1
Y
Vi 4/ _ *v i jy ✓ r.z`� d �
x Po r •:J. , -� � lw.; ✓ j.-1.
July 11, 1986
Toi Mayor David Musante
Planning Board, City of Northampton
As a 10-yeas resident of Dunphy Drive and abutter to the proposed
Maple Ridge project, we have some serious concerns that need to be addressed
prior to any development.
Mainly, the impact of thirty-one septic tanks and homes on our already
overburned area. We suffer greatly with flooded basements, malfunctioning
septic systems, high water tables and poorly draining surface water. After
walking the area with Professor Tom Rice, hydrogeologist, we now know the
cause -- glacial till that encourages horizontal flow of water on a down-
grade slope (see enclosed letter). Since Dunphy Drive is approximately
260-280 £t. above sea level and Maple Ridge ranges from 280-410 ft. , gravity
will prevail.
The enclosed bill reflects only partial cost of flooding repairs. Dave
Hawthorne, Pres. Misterka, Inc. , stopped billing us and routinely pumped our
septic system, daily, during April and May of 1983. In the spring of 1984,
an additional curtain drain was installed (free of charge) because the
Oct. 1983 drain was insufficient (see enclosed photo).
Landscaping and regrading fees sent another $1600.00 to Twin Cedars
Nursery in Williamsburg. The regrading was not completed until summer 1985.
At that same time, Crolle and Balise Plumbing installed a basement sump pump
for approximately $400.00 because of ankle-deep water, AGAIN. There must be
protection and guarantees for existing homes before further construction can
be considered.
As for traffic concerns, the addition of 30 new homes, 30 new children
(minimum), at least 30 more cars traveling over Dunphy Drive to reach the
proposed access road (Spruce Hill) will further endanger our area.
Presently, we lack sidewalks and a stop sign at the junction of Dunphy
Drive and Route 66. We have a blind corner mid-way up Dunphy Drive, an
extremely hazardous intersection at Florence Road and Route 66, not to men-
tion the nightmare of Jeremy Connors' accident. As a personal note,
I (Kathleen) sat with him and my neighbor in the middle of Rt. 66 waiting
for the ambulance. I never want to go through that again. Safety pro-
visions for our children have to be made, especially, concerning school
buses. The pick-up and drop-off spots, now, are Dunphy Drive and Rt. 66
(Jr. High and Smith), corner of Dunphy Drive and Spruce Hill for grade
school (K-6). See enclosed editorial as to the traffic conditions on Rt. 66.
The aforementioned were just some of our concerns. We hope that you
folks on the Planning Board will take these into consideration while review-
ing any requests for variances or special permits that would lower the
minimum standards. Common sense and common decency should protect the homes
and properties already in existence before consi»ring new housing.
9Cy ,
Kathleen and Charles Pysz
OC n,...ru... nr,..e unr+h„mn+rn
, 0 :e.,...,)0:-"`„;,'s •;:,44,1v.rit,Il‘f-0; r. 0+44 ' a „,t,rss'a
• /II .V.41, f la its- ,
-
' , "r Aft& i s -,, „ r.:1,* tr.,s• arri:I5L; I, i . irili
r ' sf‘ f Ff‘I' .v•r- „tin-- ' , ••"41 - •":„rr:, , . "!"-
'S L- 4 Ei■: lt, -1 t, II r14
1 ill
. 117 1 1 1 14. i il
' I V ;4/.1 t it *filriti I ,4 k; 14:14
th 4
t .
Gravel & Loam • Blacktop Driveways& Parking Lots • Cellar Digging
Tel. 584-8869
JOSEPH MISTERKA, Inc.
Excavating Contractor
Westhampton Road, Route 66
Northampton, Massachusetts 01060
June 19, 9 86
Mr . Charles Pysz
95 Cunphy Drive
Northampton , ia.
This is a copy of
done at 95 Dunphy
Pass .
We pumped the
days of May, 1983
23 and 31st .
01060
our records for work
Drive, Northampton,
tank on the following
May 2-4-6-9-11-16-
In April of 1983 we pimped it 10 times
i^
these 10 days .
In October of 1983 they had us irstall
a curtain drain for 1175 .00.
In November of 1985 we nu red the
septic tan's on the 15th.
Sincerely yours ,
Pauline -ienkiewicz ,
Asst . Treas .
JOSEPH 4:ISTE KA, INC .
Net 30 days, 11/2%service charge per month alter 30 days, (18%per annum)
PAGE 6.
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 4, 1986
DAILY HAMPSHIRE GAZETTE
Founded Sept. 6, 1786
Published Every Day Except Sunday.and Holidays By
H. S. Gere&Sons. Inc.. 115 Cons St., Northampton,Massachusetts
Co.pubhshers:Charles W.De-Rose and Peter L. DeRose
Editor:Edward K. Shanahan
Circulation Manager:Jeffrey Cohen
Advertising Director:Michael Slaff
Classified advertising manager:David Sikop
Route 66
There is a certain fear
In our that lurks deep in the
minds of most motor-
opinion ists; it is the realiza-
tion that within a split
second a catastrophe can occur.
Even careful drivers know that an
unseen pedestrian or a passing bi-
cyclist can be killed or have the rest
of their life changed by a disabling
injury, all within a few moments of
inattention or carelessness by either
party.
We tend to keep that fear sup-
pressed. but when we read of yet
another accident, yet another vic-
tim, the concern returns. Who has
not been shaken by the realization
that had we not braked fast enough
or turned the wheel soon enough we,
too, would be finding our names in
the newspaper and then spending
the rest of our own lives living with
the reality that we have permanent-
ly injured or killed someone?
Sometimes, however, we as a
society do not do enough to prevent
the possibility of such tragedies, a
fact reaffirmed by the report of yet
another serious accident on the
Westhampton Road stretch of Route
66 on Friday'evening. An II-year-old
bicyclist is under intensive hospital
care as a result, and as he suffers,
his family and the motorist and her
family suffer, too.
One cannot be omniscient and say
that more signs or traffic signals or
police patrols or road redesign work
would have prevented this latest
tragedy. But surely anyone who
knows anything about either the
Westhampton or Rocky Hill road
segments of Route 66 knows there
are too many places along that road
that are not engineered or marked
to fully protect drivers,bicyclists or
pedestrians.
The accident logs have document-
ed the tale There are several inter-
sections there where those who
know the road well travel it with
extreme caution. Surely, many of
those who are unfamiliar with the
road are lulled into believing that it
remains a country lane when, in
fact, it has become the main road
for the hundreds who have now built
or bought homes along its many
twists and turns and its occasional
straightaways.
The mayor and the City Council's
police committee ought to give
Route 66 some special attention; the
people who live along it and those
who only travel it to get somewhere
else deserve some additional safety
measures.
Chief Daniel Labato
Police Department
Center Street
Northampton, Mass. 01060
Dear Chief:
Headquarters, State Police, Troop B
555 North King Street
Northampton, Mass. 01060
July 15, 1986
Please find enclosed a copy of a letter received from a
resident of your city, Kathleen Pysz, 95 Dunphy Drive,
Northampton, Mass. 01060, expressing concern about traffic
conditions on Route 66 in Northampton.
In my opinion it would be appropriate for your agency to
evaluate the situation. In the event that we may be of
assistance, don't_ hesitate to notify me.
Be assured of our continuing cooperation in matters of
mutual interest and concern.
Sincerely,
I
3OtN w. CILP4AN
Captain, Mass State Police
Commanding Officer, Troop B
JPG:j1s
CC: Kathleen Pysz
trirdw.?y' 56
•cflt <mdop lrwv rwrTvu{/ .,07,2
„rev
ras n rr zy
r�r erp2?7r0 1
rszz/ '!S?"vy w a.7vif-, f- o"�""`✓' ??-4111??-4??-41114",fa 7wr 1-17-q--A17/
Trg. 03712 )yonta
.o-,r ?7 pouwau<rd Ant 1.719 ("/ S-r p nugnS'
1- .2Sor ' rry •2_t a' ori/lrp7 )-01 'o-L-7-nd ro 'ova-gad'
City of Northampton
Office of the Mayor
MEMORANDUM
TO: ' Mr. Paul Hadsel, Mr. Peter MrFrlain, Mr. C nne Bunnell, Mr. Larry Smith
FROM: David B. Musante, Jr. , Mayer
SUBJECT: Dunphy Drive
DATE: July 23,1986
FILE:
I am in receipt of the enclosed material from residents of
Dunphy Drive which seem to indicate that the Dunphy Drive Subdivision
Plan may have been lacking relative to the treatment of groundwater
drainage and septic systems.
I would like to know more about the criteria used in approving
such subdivisions and have scheduled a meeting in my office for
Wednesday, August 6, 1986 at 10 A.M. to discuss same.
Hope to see you then.
David B. Musante, Jr.
Mayor
DBM/d
Enclosure