Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAdditional Site Investigations and Alternatives Analysis 12.21.22 MEMORANDUM BETA GROUP, INC. www.BETA-Inc.com BACKGROUND In response to comments received from the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, additional site investigations were performed on December 13, 2022 to provide more information on the existing site conditions and areas meeting the definition of degraded within the Riverfront Area of the proposed Riverwalk Park Site at 669 Route 28 in Yarmouth, MA to support the NOI filing. MassDEP also requested that a site design with a supplemental alternative parking layout scheme providing some limited parking near the kayak launch with the remaining parking proposed outside the Riverfront Area be discussed. A review of this alternative approach to the parking layout is also provided in this memorandum. SITE INVESTIGATIONS The open area of the Site, including the Riverfront Area, was previously developed, and is degraded due to the lack of topsoil and presence of pavement. The Site was previously cleared, filled, paved, and operated as the (former) Yarmouth Drive-in Theater from 1956 until the Town acquired the land in 1985. Historic aerial photos of the site and prior documentation of site conditions was provided in the NOI filing and can be found in Appendix E. BETA conducted over twenty test pit excavations, which were geolocated on an aerial photo using a GPS unit (Refer to Attachment A for Test Pit Location Plan). Test pits were excavated to observe soil conditions within the Riverfront Area, specifically between the existing snow fence, which parallels the river, and the outer Riverfront Area. Based on the conditions within the excavated test pits, BETA identified and classified the soils encountered as existing sand fill and confirmed a ‘typical’ soil profile within the proposed development area (Refer to Attachment B for photographs and Attachment C for the Test Pit Logs). Excavation was performed by Town of Yarmouth DPW utilizing a John Deere 35D mini excavator. Test pits were excavated to a depth adequate to contact groundwater weeping, where feasible. This depth ranged from 36” to 72” below the surface grade in various locations across the entire site. FINDINGS Twenty-one test pits/observations were excavated within the limits of the Riverfront Area. There are intact areas of asphalt as well as smaller pieces of asphalt visible on the ground surface, adjacent to and across the Riverfront Area. It is estimated that between 40-50% of the surface within the Riverfront Area of investigation is exposed sand without vegetation. In all cases, test pit investigations found the natural A Horizon soils were either removed or covered with sand fill, depending upon the depth of fill needed to accommodate cars at the Drive-In Theater. The C Horizon fill layer was determined to be a compact Fine- Date: 12/21/2022 Job No.:10056 To: Brittany DiRienzo, Conservation Agent, Town of Yarmouth Cc: Kathy Williams, Yarmouth Town Planner Andrew R Poyant, PWS, MassDEP Wetlands & Waterways From: Laura Krause Lead Scientist, BETA Gary James, PE, SE, SI, Civil Engineer, BETA Arek Galle, BETA Group Inc., BETA Subject: 669 Route 28, Yarmouth, MA Riverwalk Park, Additional Site Investigations and Alternatives Analysis Yarmouth Riverwalk Park 12/21/2022 Page 2 of 4 Medium Sand with a color 10 YR 5/6 and was consistently found across the entire area immediately beneath the upper layer. BETA is aware of historic precedent for soils to be mixed with sand with the purpose of creating a ‘hardener’ for stiffening the base course beneath bituminous pavement, thus limiting rutting by vehicle tires. In six (6) observation test pits, a solid bituminous pavement layer was encountered upon excavation and remained intact. In other areas the pavement was broken by the excavator, or possibly by former Drive-In-Theater Site closure operations that were reported to have employed large bulldozers to level the shallowly terraced Drive-In parking area that faced the projection screen. Typically, BETA found e 2”- 6” of fine-medium sand fill over the top of the bituminous asphalt layer; this layer matches the color of the upper layer of soils (2.5 Y 4/2) found across the entire Site. Upon examination of the paving material encountered, it was determined there was no gradation of aggregate in the pavement. The thickness varied from 1” to 4”. The pieces indicate that the surface was an oil-sand mixture which notably matched the color of the upper-most soil layer throughout Site. The investigations show the bituminous pavement remains mixed in with the top 2”-12” of soil on Site. As noted in the test pit logs, the top layer of material above the pavement is a Fine -Medium Sand with no discernable organic content and with limited root structure related to the grass and weed growth on the surface. Remnants of bituminous asphalt pavement and cable/wiring were encountered in 80+% the excavations, documenting that the area of investigation meets the definition of degraded under the Wetlands Protection Act. SUMMARY OF SITE INVESTIGATIONS The recent Site investigation data continues to support the past characterizations of the site, notably that the entirety of the Riverfront Area between the existing snow fence and the outer limit of the Riverfront Area is degraded per 310 CMR 10.58 (5), with specific reference to 1) the presence of existing pavement and 2) the absence of topsoil. Our observation notes include the following: 1. The Site is previously developed. The entirety of the open site was filled, paved, and operated as a Drive-in Theater site from 1956-1986. The surface was shallowly terraced to enhance visibility of the screen and was paved. In some areas the pavement extended to the edge of the Parkers River as evidenced in archival aerial photographs, and the visible presence of bituminous asphalt along areas of the riverbank. 2. The top layer of soil on the Site is a Class I Sand with less than 10% fines. The soil composition is individual grain particles with no cohesive capability. Simple field tests conducted on the soil in the layer show no signs of any fines or organics. In the dictionary, topsoil is defined as: Topsoil is composed of mineral particles and organic matter and usually extends to a depth of 5-10 inches. Together these make a substrate capable of holding water and air which encourages biological activity. Since all soils from 5-10” could be considered topsoil, BETA evaluated these soils to determine whether the organic content is sufficient to encourage biological activity and promote vegetative growth. Based on observations, the soil conditions onsite do not meet 2his definition. The soil is a Class I soil, with few fines or organics, which is not capable of holding water and air. Further, based upon the vegetative growth on the Site, the soil does not promote plant activity. 3. The bituminous asphalt pavement is exposed in some areas, however for much of the Riverfront Area it is covered by 2”-6” of sand. In addition, there are fragments of pavement visible in nearly Yarmouth Riverwalk Park 12/21/2022 Page 3 of 4 80% of the observations. Although the pavement is not solid across the entirety of the area, it still has imposed an impact on the vegetative recovery in the area. 4. The subsoil layer across the Site is likely a hardening agent that was brought in as a base course for the pavement. Regardless of its use, it remains a well-defined B horizon layer in both color and texture, which should have helped the recovery of the A horizon soils. Yet after 40 years, the A Horizon soils have not recovered. The vegetation within the Riverfront Area primarily weed growth, and there are no signs of secondary or upper story growth emerging. Based on visual observations of the site conditions, the presence of exposed soils, the lack of vegetative growth, the presence of bituminous pavement near or at the surface, the lack of development of the A horizon over the past 40+ years, BETA’s findings support that the conclusion that the Riverfront Area inland of the snow fence is degraded and will remain in this condition until the pavement is removed, and the upper soil horizons replaced with a suitable topsoil layer and the related site and waterfront access and site improvements are constructed. Additional reference is made to the attached supporting documentation: Attachments: 1. Attachment A: Test Pit Location Plan 2. Attachment B: Photographs 3. Attachment C: Soil Logs SUPPLEMENTAL ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS An alternative access drive and parking layout, which locates parking near the amenities close to the river with additional parking is located outside of the Riverfront Area, was previously considered. This alternative included maintaining approximately 10 spaces for water dependent uses near the cul-de-sac, and relocation of approximately 78 spaces to outside the Riverfront Area. While this alternative would decrease the pervious pavement parking spaces within Riverfront Areas, this alternative was not pursued for a number of reasons. 1. The Town conducted an extensive Sound Study in 2021 to determine the best location in which to place the performance stage for periodic special events. The optimal location of the stage and audience area was evaluated, with the study assessing the preferred layout for the stage and sound equipment as well as determining the best location for the audience which also provides the best buffering and protection from sound transmission for the abutting properties. This stage and audience layout is presented in the current plan set. The corresponding utility layout and configuration of the open grass event space was developed utilizing information from the Reuter’s Sound Study and preferred stage and audience space layout. 2. The organization of the proposed site plan is structured to provide bicycle, pedestrian and vehicular access to the park and key destinations within as well as create spaces for the desired uses based on the Town’ program for the site which includes waterfront access/paddleboard and kayak launch, a boardwalk loop, walking paths, nature-based play areas, and artist shanties, as well as interpretive and artistic displays. In the development of the design, park functionality was considered for both daily operations as well as for a diverse array of periodic special events. If the parking and park drive access were to be configured to be away from the degraded Riverfront Yarmouth Riverwalk Park 12/21/2022 Page 4 of 4 Areas, leaving the preferred Event Space layout intact, the proposed parking not associated with the River amenities would need to be located along the perimeter of the Site near the Cortland Way neighborhood and/or along the west side of the site near the Niagara Lane neighborhood. Emergency access/egress to and from the Site via Courtland Way would still need to be maintained. Placement of the parking area along the western and/or northwestern perimeter of the Site would increase the vehicular activity with any associated noise and visual impacts near the abutting properties, which include Environmental Justice neighborhoods. Utilizing this approach to the site design, with a western park drive and parking layout would increase the length of the park access drive substantially and potentially necessitate a separate waterfront parking access drive; increasing the overall impervious areas within the park. MARSHMARSH43+004+005+006+007 + 0 0 8 + 0 09+0010+0011+0012+0013+0014+00PARKER'S RIVER LEGENDTEST PITS - 12/13/2022BORINGS/TEST PITS - OCT 2021TP2-1TP2-2TP2-3TP2-4TP2-5TP2-6ATP2-6BTP2-7TP2-8TP2-9TP2-10ATP2-10BTP2-11TP2-12TP2-13TP2-14TP2-15TP2-16TP2-17TP2-18TP2-19TP3-1TP3-2TP3-3TP3-4TP3-5TP3-2UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED OR CHANGED BY REPRODUCTIONSHEET NO.SCALEDATEDESIGNED BY:CHECKED BY:BETA JOB NO.:ISSUE DATE:DRAWN BY:REVISIONSNO.TITLEPROJECTPREPARED BY80SCALE IN FEET: 1"=40'40040REGISTERED PROFESSIONALREGISTERED PROFESSIONALYARMOUTHRIVERWALKPARKTEST PITLOCATIONS -12.13.2022 MEMORANDUM BETA GROUP, INC. www.BETA-Inc.com The following images show the test pit findings. Refer to Attachment A for Test Pit Locations. Test Pit 2-2 Test Pit 2-5 Date:12/20/2022 Job No.:10056 To:Brittany DiRienzo, Conservation Agent Cc:Kathy Williams, Yarmouth Town Planner Andrew Poyant, MassDEP From:Laura Krause Lead Scientist, BETA Gary James, PE, Civil Engineer, BETA Arek Galle,BETA Group Inc., BETA Subject:Attachment B Photographs Riverwalk Park, Additional Site Investigations Yarmouth Riverwalk Park 12/20/2022 Page 2 of 3 Test Pit 2-6B Test Pit 2-8 Test Pit 2-9 Test Pit 2-11 Yarmouth Riverwalk Park 12/20/2022 Page 3 of 3 Test Pit 2-16 Test Pit 2-19 MEMORANDUM BETA GROUP, INC. www.BETA-Inc.com Test Pit 2-1 Depth Soil Horizon Soil Description Color Mottles Other 0-1-1/2”A Sand –L. sand 10 YR 4/4 Varies in depth Pieces of asphalt visible 1-1/2”- 6” B Sand 10 YR 5/6 Loose, grain 10-15% gravel 6-30”C1 Med Sand 2.5 Y 5/4 Loose, grain 5-10% Gravel 36-42”A Fine Loamy Sand 10 YR 3/2 Friable, crumb 42-49”B Loamy Sand 10 YR 4/4 Depth to groundwater weeping:48” Test Pit 2-2 Depth Soil Horizon Soil Description Color Mottles Other 0-11”C-fill Sand 10 YR 5/6 Loose, grain Pieces of asphalt visible at surface 11-36”C-fill Med Sand 2.5 Y 5/4 Loose, grain 5-10% Gravel 36-42”A Fine Loamy Sand 10 YR 3/2 Friable, crumb 42-50”B Loamy Sand 10 YR 4/4 Depth to groundwater weeping:49” Date:12/20/2022 Job No.:10056 To:Brittany DiRienzo, Conservation Agent Cc:Kathy Williams, Yarmouth Town Planner Andrew Poyant, MassDEP From:Laura Krause Lead Scientist, BETA Gary James, PE-Civil Engineer, SE 13765,BETA Arek Galle,BETA Group Inc., BETA Subject:Attachment C -Test Pit Logs Yarmouth Riverwalk Park, Additional Site Investigations Yarmouth Riverwalk Park 12/20/2022 Page 2 of 7 Test Pit 2-3 Depth Soil Horizon Soil Description Color Mottles Other 0-3”C-fill Sand 2.5 Y 4/2 Varies in depth None in places 3-13”C-fill Med. Sand 10 YR 5/6 Loose, grain 5-10% gravel 13-30”C-fill Med Sand 2.5 Y 6/4 Loose, grain 5-10% Gravel 30-35”A Fine Loamy Sand 10 YR 3/2 Friable, crumb 35-50”B Loamy Sand 10 YR 4/4 Depth to groundwater weeping:47” Test Pit 2-4 Depth Soil Horizon Soil Description Color Mottles Other 0-3”A-fill Sand 2.5 Y 4/2 Pieces of asphalt visible 3-16”B-fill Sand 10 YR 5/6 Loose, grain,5-10% gravel 16-23”A Fine Loamy Sand 10 YR 3/2 Friable, crumb 23-50”B/C Loamy Sand 7.5 YR 5/8 Depth to groundwater weeping:43” Test Pit 2-5 Depth Soil Horizon Soil Description Color Mottles Other 0-6”A-fill Sand 2.5 Y 4/2 6-9”Asphalt 9-16”B-fill Sand 10 YR 5/6 Loose, grain 5-10% gravel 16-21”A Fine Loamy Sand 10 YR 3/2 21-48”B/C Loamy Sand 7.5 YR 5/8 Depth to groundwater weeping:42” Yarmouth Riverwalk Park 12/20/2022 Page 3 of 7 Test Pit 2-6A Depth Soil Horizon Soil Description Color Mottles Other 0-12”A-fill Mixed layers 2.5 Y 4/2 10 YR 5/6 Pieces of asphalt & wiring visible 12-16”B-fill Sand 10 YR 5/6 Loose, grain 5-10% gravel 16-36”B/C Loamy Sand 7.5 YR 5/8 Depth to groundwater weeping:36” Test Pit 2-6B Depth Soil Horizon Soil Description Color Mottles Other 0-6”A-fill Fine-med Sand 2.5 Y 4/2 6-8”Asphalt 8-12”C-fill Med. Sand 2.5 Y 4/2 12-21”C-fill Med. Sand 10 YR 5/6 21-34”C1 M-C Sand 7.5 YR 5/8 10-15% gravel Depth to groundwater weeping:34” Test Pit 2-7 Depth Soil Horizon Soil Description Color Mottles Other 0-4”A-fill Sand –L. sand 2.5 Y 4/2 Pieces of asphalt visible 4-12”B-fill Mixed layers of Sand 10 YR 5/6 2.5 Y 4/2 Loose, grain 5-10% gravel 12-40”B/C M-C Sand 7.5 YR 5/8 Loose, grain 0-5% gravel Depth to groundwater weeping:36” Yarmouth Riverwalk Park 12/20/2022 Page 4 of 7 Test Pit 2-8 Depth Soil Horizon Soil Description Color Mottles Other 0-6”A-fill Fine-med Sand 2.5 Y 4/2 6-8”Asphalt 8-36”C-fill Sand fill –mixed layers 2.5 Y 4/2 10 YR 5/6 Layers mixed no clean lines 36-40”C1g Med. Sand 5 Y 7/1 Depth to groundwater weeping:36” Test Pit 2-9 Depth Soil Horizon Soil Description Color Mottles Other 0-6”A-fill Fine-med Sand 2.5 Y 4/2 6-8”Asphalt 8-36”C-fill Sand fill –mixed layers 2.5 Y 4/3 10 YR 5/6 Layers mixed no clean lines 36-40”C1g Med. Sand 5 Y 7/1 7.5YR 5/8 Depth to groundwater weeping:36” Test Pit 2-10A Depth Soil Horizon Soil Description Color Mottles Other 0-2”A-fill Fine-med Sand 2.5 Y 4/2 No vegetation at surface 2-23”C-fill M-C Sand 10 YR 5/6 Loose, grain 5-10% gravel Depth to groundwater weeping:23” Test Pit 2-10B Depth Soil Horizon Soil Description Color Mottles Other 0-6”A-fill Sand fill 2.5 Y 4/2 No vegetation at surface 6-23”C-fill M-C Sand 7.5 YR 5/8 Warning tape-excavation stopped Depth to groundwater weeping:N/A Yarmouth Riverwalk Park 12/20/2022 Page 5 of 7 Test Pit 2-11 Depth Soil Horizon Soil Description Color Mottles Other 0-5”A-fill Fine-med Sand 2.5 Y 4/2 Pieces of asphalt visible 5-16”C-fill Fine-Med. Sand 10 YR 5/6 16-46”C-fill Med. Sand 2.5 Y 5/4 45” 7.5 YR 5/8 Loose, grain 5-10%gravel 46”A Loamy Sand 10 YR 3/2 Depth to groundwater weeping:46” Test Pit 2-12 Depth Soil Horizon Soil Description Color Mottles Other 0-2”A-fill Fine-med Sand 2.5 Y 4/2 2-8”C-fill Med. Sand 10 YR 5/3 Pieces of asphalt visible 8-16”C-fill Fine-Med. Sand 10 YR 5/6 Loose, grain 5-10% gravel 16-37”C1 Med. Sand 2.5 Y 5/4 10-15% gravel 37-43”A Fine loamy sand 10 YR 3/2 Depth to groundwater weeping:43” Test Pit 2-13 Depth Soil Horizon Soil Description Color Mottles Other 0-2”A-fill Fine-med Sand 2.5 Y 4/2 Asphalt at surface around edge of hole 2-43”C-fill Sand Mixed layers & colors for full depth Depth to groundwater weeping:43” Yarmouth Riverwalk Park 12/20/2022 Page 6 of 7 Test Pit 2-14 Depth Soil Horizon Soil Description Color Mottles Other 0-2”A-fill Fine-med Sand 2.5 Y 4/2 Asphalt at surface around edge of hole and wiring visible 2-24”C-fill Fine-Med Sand 10 YR 5/6 Loose, grain 5-10% gravel 24-36”C M-C Sand 5 Y 5/4 Loose, grain 5-10% gravel Depth to groundwater weeping:33” Test Pit 2-15 Depth Soil Horizon Soil Description Color Mottles Other 0-2”A-fill Fine-med Sand 2.5 Y 4/2 Asphalt pieces & wiring visible 2-16”C-fill Fine-Med Sand 10 YR 5/6 Loose, grain 5-10% gravel 16-39”C M-C Sand 5 Y 5/4 24” 7.5 YR 5/8 Loose, grain 5-10% gravel Depth to groundwater weeping:33” Test Pit 2-16 Depth Soil Horizon Soil Description Color Mottles Other 0-6”A-fill Fine-med Sand 2.5 Y 4/2 6-8”Asphalt Solid layer across hole 6-20”C-fill Fine-Med Sand 10 YR 5/6 Loose, grain 5-10% gravel 20-36”C1 M-C Sand 5 Y 5/4 24” 7.5 YR 5/8 Loose, grain 5-10% gravel Depth to groundwater weeping:33” Yarmouth Riverwalk Park 12/20/2022 Page 7 of 7 Test Pit 2-17 Depth Soil Horizon Soil Description Color Mottles Other 0-4”A-fill Fine-med Sand 2.5 Y 4/2 4-16”C-fill Fine-Med. Sand 10 YR 4/4 Loose, grain 5-10% gravel 16-32”C1 Med. Sand 2.5 Y 4/2 10 YR 4/4 27”Mixed layers 32-42”C2 Coarse sand 5 Y 5/4 Depth to groundwater weeping:37” Test Pit 2-18 Depth Soil Horizon Soil Description Color Mottles Other 0-3”A-fill Fine-med Sand 2.5 Y 4/2 3-8”C-fill Fine -Med. Sand 10 YR 5/6 Loose, grain 5-10% gravel 8-34”C1 Med. Sand 5 Y 5/4 27” 5 Y 7/4 Loose, grain 5-10% gravel Depth to groundwater weeping:33” Test Pit 2-19 Depth Soil Horizon Soil Description Color Mottles Other 0-2”A-fill Fine-med Sand 2.5 Y 4/2 2-5”Asphalt 5-14”C-fill F-Med Sand 10 YR 5/6 Loose, grain 5-10% gravel 14-34”C F-M Sand 5 Y 5/4 19” 7.5 YR 5/8 Loose, grain Depth to groundwater weeping:33”