Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResponse to commentsOctober 17, 2023 Town of Yarmouth Yarmouth Conservation Commission Attn: Brittany DiRienzo, Conservation Administrator 1146 Route 28 South Yarmouth, MA 02664 Re: NOTICE OF INTENT RESPONSE TO COMMENTS - BASS RIVER GOLF COURSE DEP FILE NO. 083-2404 Dear Ms. DiRienzo and Conservation Commissioners: Below are the comments sent to Coneco Engineers & Scientists on September 7, 2023 by Brittany DiRienzo and comments made on the DEP File Number Sheet by The Southeast Regional Office. The comments are in regard to the Notice of Intent (NOI) submittal for the proposed cart path bridge on the Bass River Golf Course. Ms. DiRienzo’s questions are numbered below as 1 to 15 and the DEP’s comments are numbered 16 and 17. The Coneco responses are listed as bullet points in Bold. 1.62 Highbank Road has 3 outstanding orders of conditions (027, 168, and 329). Please submit requests for certificates of compliance by September 14th to close these out. •RCoC’s were filed on 9/18/23 for all three OOCs and outstanding Orders 027 and 168 were closed (CoCs issued) at the October 5th hearing. •329 was a Superseding OOC issued by the DEP and the RCoC was filed on 9/18/23. NOI form 2.B. This project is within land subject to coastal storm flowage, not bordering land subject to flooding. Please revise section B and C to reflect. •Section B and C have been revised to reflect Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage. 3.Coastal bank should be checked off, and area altered included since it is mentioned in the narrative and the site plan. •We have checked off Coastal Bank as requested. We have listed all work in the area as previously disturbed since this is a direct replacement of the bridge and cart paths previously constructed in Coastal Bank. 4.Is there any BVW present onsite? If not, no changes needed. •There are no BVW located near the project area. 5.C. I am unsure this would qualify as a limited project since it does not fit within the defined “The construction and maintenance of catwalks, footbridges, wharves, docks, piers, E NVIRONMENTAL E COLOGICAL E NERGY S URVEY C IVIL 238 Littleton Road, Suite 105, Westford, MA 01886 (978) 656-8684 Coneco.com boathouses, boat shelters, duck blinds, skeet and trap shooting decks and observation decks; provided, however, that such structures are constructed on pilings or posts so as to permit the reasonably unobstructed flowage of water and adequate light to maintain vegetation.” Although this distinction should not have a significant impact on the project, and the DEP representative can determine this. • The path and bridge should be considered as a limited project under the distinction of footbridges. The path will be used for both carts to drive on and people to walk from the tee to the green on the golf hole. Narrative 6. The stream is perennial and tidal, not intermittent and would therefore have its own riverfront area. Revise impact area calculations if necessary. • The stream is currently represented as a perennial feature on the USGS Topographic Quadrangle map, and we have corrected the Narrative to reflect this. We have revised the calculations to reflect Riverfront Area based on this unnamed tributary to the Bass River. 7. Description of how the project meets the performance standards for all resource areas present is required. • The performance standards for the resource areas have been added to the narrative. 8. The bridge is not currently existing but is described as such in different areas of the narrative. • Although the bridge is not currently standing, there are still components of the structure that have remained such as the approaches. The previous structure was in place until it was damaged and removed sometime between October of 2016 and April of 2017. The path up to the crossing has been maintained. The new bridge would be going in the same disturbed area as the prior structure. We checked the Narrative and clarified all areas where we discuss the old bridge and proposed bridge. 9. New impervious surface is proposed and requires stormwater calculations. • The previous structure was in place until it was damaged and removed sometime between October of 2016 and April of 2017 and the replacement does not constitute new impervious surface. The only part of the project that does not exist on this date that could be considered impervious is the bridge deck itself. The path up to the crossing has been maintained and the material is still in place from the prior structure. We have included a Stormwater Checklist in the filing. 10. Please provide staging information • All staging of materials and equipment will be in the parking area outside the resource areas and buffer zones. Materials will be transported down the existing pathways to the construction area. CONECO ENGINEERS & SCIENTISTS, INCORPORATED Site plan 11. No foreign material may be used during plantings within the salt marsh. Mulch and planting soil mix will not be allowed. • No foreign material will be used in the salt marsh area. All plantings will be native to the area. 12. What is the vertical distance between the existing salt marsh and proposed bridge? • The salt marsh extends up the banks from the stream to the same elevation of the cart path. Grading is proposed to raise the elevation of where the bridge will anchor into the ground. The upper portion of the salt marsh will be at the same elevation as the bridge. We have included a profile of the bridge to show the various height of the bridge in relation to the salt marsh. 13. Are there any gaps between the planks on the bridge, if so, what size are the gaps? • The bridge deck is made of fiberglass and designed to look like a wooden bridge. The deck is actually a solid surface, not planks. 14. What are the previously disturbed areas on the plan proposed for replanting (and in the NOI form for riverfront)? The administrative review in 2017 for the bridge removal specified that these areas were not to be disturbed. • The previously disturbed areas proposed to be planted are for the restoration of the existing gravel/bituminous path. 15. Fill is proposed in the salt marsh resource area, but re-grading contours are not shown on the site plans. Clarification needed in narrative and site plan. • The plan set did show proposed grades, but we have modified the plans to make the difference between the existing and proposed grading contours clearer. 16. DEP Comment re potential Water Quality Certification. • The 805 square feet of salt marsh impact includes the helical piles and the restoration of the cart path approaches. Some of the “salt marsh” included in this calculation is still underlain by bituminous concrete to the southeast and compacted seashells and gravel to the northwest of the proposed bridge location. These are both areas that were previously the cart path approaches to the former bridge. The proposed work will be within the previous footprint of the cart paths and bridge. Salt marsh plantings are proposed adjacent to the bridge and cart path. We are working with the DEP SERO on this comment. 17. DEP Comment re potential Chapter 91 Licensing. • We are working with the DEP SERO and Waterways Program on this comment. CONECO ENGINEERS & SCIENTISTS, INCORPORATED On behalf of the Town of Yarmouth we request that the NOI be heard at your next available public meeting. Please do not hesitate to contact me at 508-944-0479 should you have any questions. Sincerely, Michael J. Toohill, PWS, CE, CERP Sr. Environmental Scientist cc: MassDEP SERO Scott Gilmore – Bass River Golf Course, Town of Yarmouth Timothy Gerrish – Gardner+Gerrish Nicholas Hebel - Coneco CONECO ENGINEERS & SCIENTISTS, INCORPORATED