Loading...
2019.09.26 Staff Report Conservation Commission Staff Report 1 September 26, 2019 To: Conservation Commission From: Sarah LaValley RE: Staff Report, September 26 Commission Meeting 5:30 PM - Continuation: Notice of Intent for residential driveway construction within buffer zone to wetland resource areas. Timothy Seney, 1087 Westhampton Rd, Map ID 41-70 The applicant has requested a continuation. Continue the hearing, with no discussion to be held tonight, until October 24 at 6:00 PM 6:00 PM – Continuation: Notice of Intent under the Northampton Wetlands Ordinance for construction of a new 3-story apartment building and related site and utility work within wetland resource areas and buffer zones. Dewey Court Properties LLC, 34 Dewey Court, Map ID 31D-217 The applicant has requested a continuation. Continue the hearing, with no discussion to be held tonight, until October 24 at 6:20 PM 6:15 PM - Continuation - Notice of Intent for proposed Paradise Pond Sediment Management Program for sediment redistribution and mobilization. Work to include alteration to within land under waterbodies – Paradise Pond and Mill River. Smith College, applicant The Commission approved a sediment management plan in 2014 that Smith College developed in conjunction with the Commission, NHESP, DEP, and other regulatory agencies. This allowed release of sediment downstream during high-flow conditions in an effort to maintain pool depth while avoiding dredging. The plan included monitoring of bathymetry, stream conditions, fish, and endangered species, but was not as successful as the applicant hoped in mobilizing sediment. This NOI proposes enlarging the project area from 6.66 acres to 9.8 acres to include the plunge-pool; maintaining the pond depth at a 2-foot rather than 3-foot depth, and redistributing 1500-3000 cubic yards of accumulated sediment between October and May with heavy equipment. The applicant also notes that ‘large storms resulting in rapid sediment accumulation may require interim drawdown/redistribution events.” Dewatering and refilling are anticipated to take between 4 and 6 weeks; dependent upon flow in the Mill river. The Commission has continued the hearing since late 2018 at DEP’s request, since a Water Quality Certificate had not been issued. That has now finally been granted, and an Order can be issued. Standard conditions do not apply due to the nature of the work. 6:20 PM: Notice of Intent for construction of a 5-unit apartment building, parking lot and associated stormwater. Ping Geng & Thomas Gu, 25 Maple Ave, Map ID 32C-171 The application proposes construction of five residential units and ten space parking lot in an area adjacent to the former pre-diversion Mill River. Current conditions are pavement, gravel, areas of fill, and some vegetation, which is primarily not proposed to be disturbed. Stormwater requirements will be met through installation of a subsurface chamber with an outfall at the former channel. There is no stormwater on the site under current conditions. Resource areas include riverfront, bank, and buffer zone. A woodland restoration area, including 12 trees and 18 shrubs, is proposed. Locations of these are not shown and are proposed to be located in the field. Silt fence is proposed at the limit Application Overview: Conservation Commission Staff Report 2 September 26, 2019 of work, which is at its closest point approximately 20 feet from top of bank. Removal of one 40” dbh sycamore within riverfront is proposed. The project will also require planning board review and approval. [1] The commission first needs to review the Riverfront area on site as well as the submitted plans to understand what is the degraded area that existed in 1996 and exists now, per the definition of degraded per 310 CMR 10.58 (5). DEP Comments: The Commission confirmed resource area boundaries onsite in 2017 and noted the presence of fill, lack of topsoil, buried bricks and other debris, that existed prior to 1996 according to aerial photographs, and have been on the site likely since the rerouting of the Mill River in the late 1930s. [2] An improvement over existing conditions is always required for work submitted under 310 CMR 10.58(5). Acceptable improvements include, but are not limited to: 1) Significant net reduction of impervious surfaces; 2) Planting of indigenous plant species; 3) Providing stormwater management demonstrably in excess of what is required per 310 CMR 10.05(6)(k) through (q); 4) Removal and proper disposal of noxious but otherwise legally located materials. A revised plan that includes a 4,900 sf ‘woodland restoration area’ was submitted. The Commission should discuss this plan with the applicant to ensure that the standard for improvement is met. The Order should include a condition that prohibits conversion of the restoration area to impervious surfaces or other uses, and also require that a request for certificate of compliance include documentation of planting success after three growing seasons. [3] Table 1.0 states that all proposed disturbance will be closer than the existing degraded area but on page 5 of 6 it states that no work is closer than the existing degraded area. This should be clarified. If any work is closer than the existing degraded area, then either 1 to 1 restoration and/or 2 to 1 mitigation is required. The table includes a typo, work is NOT proposed closer than the existing degraded area. [4] One cannot use streamstats to overcome the perennial presumption of a stream. Please review 310 CMR 10.58(2)(a)1.d. This is correct, the application presumes that the stream is perennial and includes riverfront area on plans. Resource area boundaries have already been confirmed by the Conservation Commission. [5] Please note that the Stormwater Management Standards only apply to the maximum extent practicable. Noted. The stormwater report demonstrates compliance with the standards. [6] Underground stormwater chambers are subject to UIC program requirements. https://www.mass.gov/underground-injection-control-uic Noted. The underground chamber will also need to be installed in parent material, not fill. A condition should be added to require this specifically. Work is proposed within the Protected Zone to bank resource. In the portion of the site that is zoned Urban Residential C, where buildings are proposed, this zone is 35 feet but can be allowed within the URC under the Wetlands Ordinance as a project ‘where development includes mitigation measures that will improve the existing condition of the wetlands or adjacent upland.’ This is accomplished through stormwater treatment which will for some standards be an improvement over pre- Consistency with the Wetlands Protection Act and Northampton Wetlands Ordinance: Conservation Commission Staff Report 3 September 26, 2019 development conditions, and by site restoration. Other standards of the Ordinance do not apply within the URC area. Within the SC zone, where the stormwater outfall, plantings and restoration area are proposed, the Protected Zone is 50 feet, but the work as proposed can be allowed as a “Project in or affecting protected zones or resource areas containing areas already degraded or developed.” The work proposed does not exceed the amount of degraded area, and is located farther from the resource than existing degraded conditions. Bank is not proposed to be disturbed. Riverfront standards are discussed in the application and the site is proposed to be improved through restoration, in a supplemental plan filed on 9/26. An alternatives analysis is not required as a redevelopment of disturbed/degraded riverfront. Staff Recommendation: The flared end outlet structure, including riprap, is proposed to be installed within 1 foot of bank resource. It appears that there is sufficient room on the site to pull this outlet away from the resource and create an artificial wetland in lieu of riprap, which would improve existing conditions. This could be eligible for TSS removal or other credit as a BMP. The Commission should discuss the feasibility of this with the applicant, although elevation may limit possibilities. The Commission should also discuss plans for invasive species removal and control on the site, and add any conditions necessary. Require final approval of tree and shrub locations prior to installation. Require an O&M for the stormwater system, discuss snow storage and treatment, and add any conditions necessary. The area meets the definition of ‘disturbed and degraded’ riverfront and Protected Zone, and the proposal meets the performance standards of both the WPA and local Ordinance. An Order of Conditions, including standard conditions and suggested conditions discussed, can be issued. Request for Certificate of Compliance. A-Z Storage, Easthampton Road, DEP File 246- 237 This project was never started; the Commission issued another subsequent Order of Conditions on a separate application for construction of the facility. Issue a complete certificate of compliance, checking the ‘invalid’ box for a project not started.