HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-12-04 Conservation DRAFT Denial SPR Lot 1 - Berry Street 242-47$ �..... r ;.
' _
�. �,�
_.Lot 2 - Salem Turnpike 242-479 / r� °l
, ' /2
r�
After reviewing the above-listed information, the NACC finds that the proposed
projects, either individually or combined, cannot be adequately conditioned to
protect the interests identified under the Wetlands Protection Act and the Town
of North Andover Bylaw.. Accordingly, both projects are denied. (Although two
Notices of Intent were filed, the development was properly presented as one
project due to the close proximity and inter-connected nature of the proposed
buildings. This denial is a denial under both Notices of Intent.)
As the basis for its denial, the NACC finds the following deficiencies:
Concerning Lots I and 2
1. The following; wetland resource areas are affected by the proposed work: bank'',
land under water, land subject to flooding (bordering and isolated) , and
bordering vegetated wetland. These resource areas are significant to the
interests of the Act and Town Bylaw. These resource areas are also significant
to the recreation interests of the Bylaw. The applicant has not attempted to
overcome the presumption of significance of these resource areas to the
identified interests.
2 The wetland resource boundary is still in dispute. The developer has appealed
the NACC's positive determination based on the delineation and extent of
bordering vegetated wetland and bordering land subject to flooding. Although
the NACC's delineation of the bordering vegetated wetland appears to have been
used in the Notices of .Intent, the bordering land subject to flooding boundary
has not been resolved. The NACC contends that a much greater portion of the
site consists of bordering land subject to flooding under the Wetlands
Protection Act. The applicant contends that this land is not "bordering"
land subject to flooding. If so, most of the site is still clearly a resource
area (land subject to "storm flowage, or flooding, or inundation by groundwater
or surface water") under the Town of North Andover Wetlands Bylaw and must be
so delineated.
The NACC finds that use of the wetland resource areas on site for detention of
=' storm runoff to be inconsistent with the performance standards for protecting
these wetlands. The discharge of storm runoff from the developed portions of
the site will directly dump loads of pollutants (e.g. oil, gasoline, salt,
nutrients, and bacteria) and sediments to the wetland resource areas with
only minimal screening at the catchbasins and swales. Furthermore, the increase
in water level caused by increased runoff will affect the hydrologic regime
of the wetlands. This alteration of wetland resource areas would put the project
outside of the performance standards of the regulations. Accordingly, the
projects' drainage systems will be re-designed to control storm runoff through
one of the following two alternatives:
a. the use of detention or retention ponds constructed outside of the wetland
resource areas on the site (both Lots I and 2) , with all the storm drainage
directed to these ponds. This alternative would eliminate the need for
some of the wetland replacement areas proposed by the applicant.
b. the use of sedimentation ponds to receive the storm runoff from all point
discharges from the drainage system to act as filters for this runoff, and
the use of the wetland resource areas only for the purpose of flood storage
Lot 1 - Berry Street 242-478
Lot 2 - Salem Turnpike 242-479
for the extra site runoff. This alternative will require the
control structures at the outlets of the wetland resource areas
to be identical in their rating curve to the existing natural
control structures, and shall result in increased elevations
within the wetland resource areas for only infrequent or rare
storm events.
All runoff from roof drains and parking lots shall be routed through these
detention and retention areas. The NACC will require MDC gas and oil traps
or their equivalent.
r.
\f4,. As proposed, the combined total of bordering vegetated wetland to be altered on
both sites is approximately 5100 sq.—'are feet. The NACC finds that this figure
can be reduced significantly by redesigning the detention ponds as described
above, and by eliminating the wetland crossing on Lot 2.
yr5r1 extensive work is proposed in the buffer zone; this project has been shoe-horned
onto a site extremely limited by the amount of wetland. Accordingly, the NACC
will impose a buffer zone in which no work will be permitted; this will ensure
that the wetlands are not impacted during construction.
`61 As proposed, the wetlands replication plan is unacceptable. The replacement
areas, as sited, have the potential for adversely affecting significant areas
L. of existing wetland. The amount of wetland replication needed should
decrease when the project is redesigned; any replication then necessary should
be discussed with the conservation administrator before final plans are drawn.
}
WILDLIFE HABITAT EVALUATION
RIPARIAN INDUSTRIAL PARK - LOT 1
NORTH ANDOVER, MA
September 27 , 1988
INTRODUCTION
This report is being prepared as accompanying information to a Notice
of Intent application for a proposed development, as a result of
resource area alterations above the permitted thresholds , defined in
the regulations promulgated under the Wetlands Protection Act at 310
CMR 10 . 54 (4) (a) (5) and 10 . 56 (4) (a) (4) . This evaluation is being
prepared in compliance with the directions outlined in the
aforementioned regulations at 310 CMR 10. 67 , and utilizing the
D.E.Q.E. Wetlands Program Policy 88-1.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The area of the work within the resource area is on a portion of the
property which has been mowed regularly, and consists of an open
field with a man--made ponding area, presumably dug to create a farm
pond for the animals which grazed in the field at that time. This
farm pond, although not large enough in area to be classified as a
pond under the regulations, can be described as a large, wide portion
of a stream, and as a result, contains the resource area inland bank .
The bank area is rather steep-, and is vegetated with purple
loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) , sensitive fern (Onoclea sensibiles) ,
and upland grasses. The soil structure of the bank areas was very
similar to that which existed on the rest of the site . There was
approximately 1 to 1.5 feet of a loamy top soil, with a sand layer
appearing at approximately 1.5 to 2 feet down. The ground water , at
this time, was high, and seemed to coincide with the layer of sand.
There was no evidence of any cavities suitable for burrowing,
although the soil was such that burrowing could occur , and the
topography was such that there are no mud flats or exposed areas
within this resource area type. The plant community was very simple,
consisting of the three species previously mentioned. They all had
approximately 40 - 50% cover , were homogeneously mixed, and there was
only one vegetation type ranging from about . 5 to 2 feet in height.
There were no dead branches or debris in the area, and there is no
opportunity for edge or interspersion to occur .
Wildlife Habitat Evaluation
Riparian industrial Park Lot 1, North Andover , MA
September 27 , 1988
PROPOSED CONDITIONS
The project proposes to alter this resource area type in order to
construct a proposed detention pond, which will function within the
stormwater management scheme for the proposed industrial park . In
order to construct the pond, approximately 230 linear feet of bank is
proposed to be altered . As indicated on the sample checklist
included in the Appendix of this report, the regulations allow for a
threshold of 50 linear feet of bank or 10%, whichever is less on the
property, before a significant alteration to wildlife habitat is
deemed to occur . There is calculated to be well over 500 linear feet
on the property, such that the 50--foot threshold is incurred.
The proposal of the new detention pond will create a total of 370
feet of bank on this site. The replication of wildlife habitat
values in this area will be fairly simple and uncomplicated . By
understanding the existing vegetation growing in the area, it is
clear that the propagules of these species exist in the soil and,
once the slope is stabilized, will revegetate with the same plant
community.
CONCLUSION
The restoration and replication of altered habitats are required to
meet specific performance standards outlined at 310 CMR 10. 60 (3) .
These standards, and how the project proposes to meet them, are
summarized below.
"3 (a) : The surface of the replacement area to be created ( "the
replacement area") shall be equal to that of the area
that will be lost ("the lost area") ; "
As shown on the accompanying plan, the lengths of the resource area
above the permitted thresholds is proposed to be replaced.
"3 (b) : The elevation of groundwater relative to the surface of
the replacement area shall be approximately equal to
that of the lost area; "
The grading shown on the plans submitted with this Notice of Intent
proposes such a similar relationship to the groundwater .
I i
Wildlife Habitat Evaluation
Riparian Industrial Park - Lot 1, North Andover , MA
September 27 , 1988
"3 (c) : The replacement area shall be located within the same
general area as the lost area. In the case of banks
and land under water , the replacement area shall be
located on the same water body or waterway, if the
latter has not been rechanneled or otherwise
relocated; "
Refer to the accompanying plan. The grading shows a Location on the
same water body and in the general vicinity as the lost area.
"3 (d) : interspersion and diversity of vegetation, water and
other wildlife habitat characteristics of the
replacement area, as well as its location relative to
neighboring wildlife habitats, shall be similar to that
of the lost areas, insofar as necessary to maintain the
wildlife habitat functions of the lost area; "
The plan proposes such a similar location to resource areas and
upland areas , and a vegetational community that is similar or
identical to that proposed to be lost.
"3 (e) : The project shall not alter 10 or more acres of land
subject to flooding or land under water bound to be
significant to the protection of wildlife habitat, or
2,000 feet or more of bank found to be significant to
the protection of wildlife habitat (in the case of bank
of a stream or river , this shall be measured on each
side of said stream or river) ; "
The project does not propose an alteration of 2, 000 feet or more of
bank.
113 (f) : If the replacement area is located in an area subject
to the Act, there shall be no adverse affect on the
existing important wildlife habitat functions of said
area, as measured by standards of this section; "
The construction of the detention pond proposes to alter a portion of
the bordering vegetated wetland. This area has been addressed in the
Notice of Intent application in the section referring to the
performance standards required for alterations of bordering vegetated
wetlands.
f l
Wildlife Habitat Evaluation
Riparian industrial Park - Lot 1, North Andover, MA
September 27 , 1988
"3 (g) : The "thresholds" established in 310 CMR 10. 54 (4) (a) (5) ,
10. 55 (4) (a) (4) , and 10 . 57 (4) (a) (3) (below which
alterations of resource areas are not deemed to impair
capacity to provide important wildlife habitat
functions) shall not apply to any replacement area ; and
3 (h) : The replacement area shall be provided in a manner
which is consistent with all other general performance
standards for each resource area in Part III of these
regulations . "
The work within this resource area, and the construction of the
replacement area, will be constructed in a manner which limits the
amount of alteration proposed. Erosion and sediment control
guidelines, as outlined in the Erosion and Sedimentation Control
Report, will be implemented prior to any construction, and until the
area is stabilized and revegetated.
k �
I
APPENDIX
RI' 'RIAN INDUSTRIAL PARK -- LOrf
i,.�RTH ANDOVER, MASSACHUSETTS
L
D.E„Q..-E WETLANDS PROGRAM POLICY 88-1
WILDLIFE HABITAT EVALUATION CHECKLIST
FOR PROJECTS ON INLAND BANKS*
1 . Does the project alter more than the permissable threshold of Bank?
X YES NO
If "yes", how much Bank BELOW the permissable threshold will be altered by the
project? _ 50___ feet How much Bank ABOVE the permissable threshold
will be altered? tgu r feet Proceed to-Question 2.
= If "no", the proposed project is not subject to the wildlife habitat
evaluation or performance standards regarding Banks contained in this
Checklist (see, however, Rare Species Checklist, on p. 21 , below) .
A project or projects on a single lot, for which Notice(s) 'of Intent is
filed on or after November 1, 1987, that (cumulatively) alter(s) up to
10% or 50 feet (whichever, is less) of the length of Bank found to be
significant to the protection of wildlife habitat, shall not be deemed to
impair its capacity to provide important wildlife habitat functions (310
CMR 10.54). Therefore, any project or portion of a project below this
threshold is not subject to wildlife habitat performance standards
(except those discussed on the Rare Species Checklist on p. 21 , below) .
Each side of a river or stream (except intermittant streams) constitutes
a Bank ; i.e. , SO feet of stream or river contains 100 feet of Bank.
2. Which of the habitat characteristics listed below are found on the portion
of Bank which would be altered by the proposed ro 'ect?
If any of the habitat characteristics listed below are checked "yes",
proceed 'to Question 3. if all listed characteristics are checked "no",
the proposed project is not subject to the wildlife habitat evaluation or
performance standards regarding Banks contained in this checklist (see
however, Rare Species Checklist, on p. 21, below).
TOPOGRAPHY (SLOPE OF BANK)
A Steep slope (with burrowable —X_YES NO
soil or cavities/crevices)
B Gentle slope YES X NO
SOIL STRUCTURE
A Soft soil YES X NO
B Gravelly/sandy soil X YES NO
C Mud flats & other exposed areas YES X NO
PLANT COMMUNITY COMPOSITION AND STRUCTURE
A Shrubs YES �_NO
B Trees YES X NO
C Herbaceous plants _YES NO
D Aquatic plants YES �- NO
E Leaf litter & low ground cover YES X NO
F Tree cavities YES X NO
G Branches overhanging water YES X NO
H Dead veg. extending into water YES X NO
(suitable for basking & perching)
*Does not apply to "Limited Projects" under 310 CMR 10.53.
3. Has the a licant submitted a wildlife habitat evaluation which ade uatel
measures the type and amount of each of the habitat characteristics Found on
the�ortior� of Bank that would be altered b the ro osed ro 'ect see the
listing of re uired measurements of each such characteristic, directly below)?
YES NO
If "yes", proceed to Question 4; if "no", applicant must resubmit
wildlife habitat evaluation addressing all inadequately measured
characteristics, or proposed project should- be denied.
REQUIRED MEASUREMENTS OF INLAND BANKS
TOPOGRAPHY: Slope & aspect; length, height & area of Bank.
SOIL STRUCTURE: Substrate composition (% sand, silt, gravel, organics &
clay); depth of soil horizons to 3' or impervious material ; abundance of
cavities suitable for burrowing (none, few, many) ; size and number of mud
flats and other exposed area.
PLANT COMMUNITY COMPOSITION AND STRUCTURE: cover trees, shrubs,
herbaceous plants, aquatic plants, leaf litter, & low ground cover;
vegetative interspersion; ID of species making up at least 10 of each of
the following .vegetative types: trees, shrubs, herbaceous vegetation and
aquatic plants; pattern of distribution of such plant species (clumped,
random or uniform); range of shrub height (% 0--3' , 3-6' , & above 6' );
depth of leaf litter; number & size (diameter at breast height) of
standing trees wi.th cavities, as well as diameter of such cavities (less
or more than 3"); % of water along bank overhung by tree and shrub
branches and height of such branches (under 3' , 3-6' , above ,6' ) ; number
and size of dead vegetation extending into water which is suitable for
basking and perching; identification of any migratory area (area used by
wildlife moving from one habitat to another, whether seasonally or
otherwise) to be altered by the proposed project in a mariner that would
have a substantial •adverse effect on wildlife species which may use such
area.
ADDITIONAL FEATURES OF PROJECT SITE WHERE OFFSITE REPLICATION IS
PROPOSED: Wildlife habitat types within 500 feet from the boundaries of
the Bank, with particular emphasis on habitats directly adjacent the
Bank. The description of the habitat characteristics of the area:
directly bordering the Bank should be somewhat detailed (eg, depth and
permanence of water next to the Bank, as well the predominant vegetative
and soil structure of the land under such water and of the immediate area
on the landward side of the Bank). Other, more distant areas can be
described according to their dominant vegetative, hydrologic and/or land
use type (eg, lake, pond, stream, river, deep marsh, shallow marsh, wet
meadow, shrub swamp, wooded swamp, bog, floodplain, agricultural or open
land, forest land, mining or waste disposal area, or commercial/
industrial/residential area with average lot size 1/2 acre or less, 1/2
to 2 acres, or 2 acres or more).
d. Has the applicant provided site specific plans and calculations which are
adequate to ensure that each of the measured- habitat characteristics will
following 2 growing seasons of project completion and thereafter (ar if the
project will eliminate trees, upon the maturity of replanted saplings) be_
substantially maintained restored or replicated (except for 'those portions of
the Bank which fall below the threshold of permissable alterations noted in
Question 1 ?
X YES NO
If "yes"; proceed to Question 5; if "no";•-project should be denied.
Except for those portions of the Bank which fall below the threshold of
permissable alterations noted under Question 1, the Department will
assume that any substantial alteration in the type or amount of any
measured habitat characteristic will substantially reduce its capacity to
provide important wildlife habitat functions in violation of the
regulatory standards, unless the applicant provides clear evidence to the
contrary. If the applicant wishes to provide such evidence, see Question
7, below:
-5. Does proposed on-site restoration or off-site replication meet all the
performance standards specified in 310 CMR 10.60(3)?
X YES NO
If "yes", the project meets the performance standards of 310 CMR 10.60
regarding-non-rare wildlife species habitat of the Bank -- proceed--to
Question 6; if "no", project should be denied.
6. Does the project meet the requirements of 310 CMR 10.59 regarding rare
wildlife species habitat -- see "Rare Wetland Wildlife Spec es Habitat
Checklist" on p. 21 below?
X YES NO
7. Has theppj2licant provided clear evidence that a 12roposed alteration in
the type or amount of any measured habitat characteristic will not due to
site-specific circumstances substanti JIV reduce its capacity to provide
important wildlife habitat functions food shelter mi ratory or
overwintering _areas or breeding areas)? (Such evidence should address
each of the "important" wildlife habitat functions which may be provided by
each habitat characteristic, described in the text on the following two
pages.)
YES (Mote which habitat charaeteristic(s))
HO
If "yes", proposed alterations of the noted habitat characteristic(s)
should be permitted and such characteristic(s) should not be subject to
the requirements contained in Questions a and 5; all other habitat
characteristics are subject to those requirements.
HAYES ENGINEERING, INC.
603 SALEM STREET
WAKEFIkI-D, MA 01880 NOA-0035
(617) 246-2800 DEFER 1-0 FILE
FAX # 246-7596
September 29 , 1988 I
i
Planning Board
Town hall
North Andover , MA 0.1845
RE: Notice of Intent Filing
Riparian Industrial Park - Lot
Wildlife Habitat Evaluation
Dear Board Members:
Please find enclosed a ropy of the Wildlife Habitat Evaluation for
Lot 1 - Riparian Indistrial Park, North Andover , MA, dated September
27 , 1988 . This report is an accompanyment to the Notice of Intent
application filed on September 27 , 1988 , and was inadvertently left
out of the bound book.
Please insert this report at the end of the Notice of Intent
application received.
Yours truly,
4.2
Deborah J. McCartney
Applicant ' s Representative
DJM/dab
CC . Latham & Latham
Ravers Development