14-005 Chesterfield Rd Roberts Meadow Brook�. � s . _ _� ��ir; � � /cif a✓, r�!/ r
APPLICh.TIO' FOR AUTHORIZATION T'0 CO:dSTIOCT OR /,LTER
- A P SEi IZ1 !",RVO P•r'j.1 -'1 OR MML DAM,
of 1 , 1 je Cenernl Law: a G
-. 's s amended by d
Chapter 595 of the Acts of 1970
GC3vDI7'_IO;S
OF JU;'IISDiC''7Q'_1
Sh-M not apply to swill dams, constructed for irrigation or for
Other ptrxposcs, the breaking of ti,hich would involve no risk to life or
property', nor to standpipes or tanks, nor to a dam t,hcre the area drt':in-
ing into the Pond formed thereby does not exceed one sgiinrc -dle; unle-s
the dam is iaoro than ten feat in heir al the natural bed of the
strm -i at any pcdnt, Ci' unless the of - water which the dam
eXcccds one million gallons.
,
Revised 10 -1 -
t e, `"' _ j ,
Part !,�'
J!J RISDICTIO:JA.L D), 1•i INA.TIO N
~ �chcck the appropriate colurnl)
M
Yes No
1. Is there a risk to Fife and Property
do,matream in the event of failure?
2. Does t?,e area draining into the pond
exceed one se uare mile?
3. Does the height of the dam exceed 10 ft. above
the natural bed of the stream at any point?
4. Does the volume of water impounded at maximum
pool level exceed one million gallons?
If the answer to any one of' the above questions is Yes, then the Commissioner
of P�.,blic Z,orJ.s has jurisdiction. Proceed with Part D of this applicaticn.
If the answers to all four of the above questions are no, please submit
bacMip info - .oration for a review by this Department for our jurisdictional
deter:dnation. The backup inforr,ation should include at least:
a. A copy of a topographic map clearly indicating the location of the
dam and the effective drainage area.
b. A sketch sho,!ing the maximum section of the dam indicating its
height, as measured from the lowest poi?1t of the stream. bed.
c. Calculat.ions for tale volume of water i, at the mgxism)m
design pool level.
d. A brief statement pertaining to dov, :strea)n conditions with respect
to risk to life and property.
e. The signature of applicant and engineer.
--3-
Part "z"
1. Location (Cit'Y -XXyY) Nortjj ton-.— s
2. Detailed description of dam location
U_LD Rese rv�i r RC)hC - tS Meadow Rroo
42 20'_14" - 72 43' 45"
located off Chesterfield Road in Northam
Massachusetts (Mass.DPW Dam No. 2_5- 214_15)
3. Present or PMspective Ov'gler(s)
I! air e(s) c ity
Street 237 Prospect Street
City /Tot• :' Nor thampton State rR Zip L O-fiO
Telephone
5 8 4 - 14
4. Name of U.S. Geological Surrey r;ap (�aadrangle
Easthampton, Mass-
5.
?game of , jesen oir or ,•'aterwav Roberts Meadow_- Lip pe e servo ir
6. Is there scecific legislative authority to M the dam
yes ( ) Ide ,tify No_ t applicable
7. R) - pose for the dam Water SUpp
�i. t;ature of the work
Proposed
Alteration of existing dam (X)
Major rep :i -z of existin- dam ( )
I!AZA_tD I `Ji: ?J- IATION
(Ao Ynstre=�on field investigation)
1. Jhe e;tinated nu.r:;ber of people that could be affected by overtopping
or failure of th( structure, and to Yhat degree the; would be affected.
Failure o f structure could cause damage to roadway below
dam (Kennedy Road) and perhaps failure of lower dam (Roberts
Meadow)
2. The nur,,ber of properties (domes, buildings etc.) ar,d the esti-mpted extent
of dal age by bvertoppi.ng or failure _ It is unlikely that any homes
would affec by the failure of th is structure. However,
should this structure's failure cause the failure of the -
Roberts Meado D am
3. Roads or other structures that could be affected by ove_rtopp_irg
or failure Chester Field and Re servoir Roads in North
Possibly others could be damaged should failure of th is
structure cause failur of Roberts Meadow Dam.
1�.. Additional Into}raation.
a
Proposed Partial removal of dam, (approx 2/3)
Demolition will take place with upper reservoir full and
lower nearly empty. Removal of upper dam to proceed at such
a rate as to.lower the pool level slowly.
homes in the Leeds area could be aff ected.
- 5- w
Part "B" (cc,.nt -ills ed)
HYD,S)IfGIC CO ,,SJ-TEl3AT7(7 +
Pro cedural for hydrologic design as contained in the latest wilt -L of
the U., S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation "Desi of S"Ma1l
Da; ns`'
(Kinnison- Colby)
1. Peak Outflow Major Flood 27 c.
21 Design stoms duration
3. Ra_infail Intensity inches.
Percent -unoff p
4. Contributory Drainage Area 8. 6 sq.nd
(attach a copy of U. S. Topographic Map with
the outline of the drainage div ide).
5. Pi%vious yno flood of record 1955
(month) Aug. 19 __ (year) _____�
6. Design maximuri flood level elevation
7. Additional infoation:
t
1
i
11 tr'u 1,B11 (con'i. n
-6-
DhSIG'I CUTT
1.
Datwu us(-�d:
8.
(a) 14. S. L. of 1929 X
!
9•
(b) A ssurood
�
(c) Other _
,
2.
1'arirrura he "iGht of t'le d rn
30 +.
10.
', a) 10 elevation of clam
455
(b) TOT c- .Nation of spillway 450±
3.
Yolu :e Of waJ.er L at
30,000,000+
r,a:ir rr design pool level.
—
4.
Present. ri,cr bed or charnel
�r,ergency L Yes ( ) No (X)
ij
is
eievatz Qn O d�n
420 ' +
5 •
NO-- ,-r:ul pool elev.
450+
i
surface area
13+
6.
Na, ff. , pool e1ev.
450+
i
surface area
(riur p, vegetated etc.) N. Applicable
13±
7.
T Pe Of st cture " (earth, concrete,
etc)
Stone Masonry Fill
1% .
al-Ions
ac .
ac ,
ft.
8.
Crest ;rdth 68.0±
ft.
!
9•
I'reeboarci, as ,�.E!asulad from the 1"Gxfr,um design
�
pool level Ove Type Structure
,
it
i'
10.
Length of Principal spillway 24±
r
11.
DCSC2'1p tion of principal spillway Granite Blo ck'
Sharp Crested Spillary
12.
�r,ergency L Yes ( ) No (X)
ij
is
Tf yes, describe
13.
—
Gates Yes ( ) Nur.�'�er Siz e
i
NO .
(�
N Of slope plvtectlQn
i
(riur p, vegetated etc.) N. Applicable
15.
Stop log structure(s)
k
Yes
( Mochnnical ( ) Manual ( )
1 f
I
ft.
Part rBII (C(ji1 jn ed)
aIi3SUR: J:CE I?IVF,STIGJLTIU.I
Borin 7 logs, anal-�•sis and recmmend; Lions to accorw, any
this cation.
Not Applicable
CC?;ST H- ICTIO: DHt,1- 1''US
(S 2 copies with. this application) :Tames & addresses of
property o,,:iers Tor all parcels of land ,dth -n the floatage area must
be" clearly indicated on the plan.
Not Applicable
C Pr "T - 'T C S i T ' Cj"0
o � _ I
jSub;vt 2 copies ,; this application)
Not Applicable
CEKiIF -0 OF llJFn\-G CO.*M ilCTIONr
l �sne� tin a e.� t (Must be approved by the d=esign Engineer)
?� m e - — - - - -- --
Street
City /Toi,ro
State
Zi
Telephone .
Inspection_ during con periods ,kill be conducted by the approved
engineer on a flill_ time basis. Bi - ;monthly pr ogri:ss reports are to be sTab :71 tt.Yd
to the 11assaclusetts D•^p artm -ent of Public hork (local District office) with
copies submitted to. the o,;ner and design engi -veer.
Inspector sign�7, -Wre
Applicant si,,nature.
Desiml engineer
. Date
. Date
Date
SIGI11 -76JT� S5EET
APPLICANT
.
N =ne C ity of N Wat Division, D.P.W.
Street 2 37 Prospect Street
City /To-14n Northampton State M Zip 01060
ire gn.hone 413/584 -1401
97
S*1gnatane 1 /� f r-%! /- --- Date 9/2/76
Leon' A. Murray, Supt. of ester
CONSULTAN E iGINEER KPJ4
„ Whitman & Howard, Inc.
IN 2S ?IG
StraA 45 William Street
City /TOwr� Wellesley
Televhone
4
*(P. E. STAI &
Mass.
Zip 0 2181
Date q q-x
Final or "as built" dra_wn�ngs are to be submitted to this offics upon comrletior,
of the project.
No altc_rations shall be grade „rithout the prior review and approt;al of the
Con niSsioner.
FAIiJJRE TO COI LY WITH 7 11iE TE -' Jv CF THIS API_UGAiiGI� ,•JILT,
AUT0.`4TIC':LLY CAUSE REVOCAT ON C THE APP EOVAL.
�, �. \�; :. �� �> `__ - 1 ' � � \ \� \ � ' \ - ' ` a �• .: L - _ _ � � ,'� of — •' l J \ ` i _
7 yr_8.'•T.-- ' \�.,.` \ / 1 1 ` � I f `�; /' - /. • �, [v�,..,w.r.d - -- - " �.t:��' fs. ,J � � ro •� ��� • , ir` ' •\ ' !
-- -- - ,1 ,. • ;'*" -; _ , ',��. '.''• '� ?'3a_ s �) - - - � rw _ s W ,��ti • ' •• rte ,y /
� 1•:'�� \� - � — ���.�� \� \�= _` = ~ - :U` --- - - -�� -. - �' �� '•'1. c�.i',in -��� /. {�j {:(�.' -• I.v �
ZZ
:� � � J-x- � � � 7 j . ' ��'.. i�l;r fir` /' -�' /. /r:` -- '���'�� k4,)�:�"�__'��'r`.:.�• - .�
� � �� 1 1 � 1 / � mil O a \ f,�,cr -`3,v - � - �P- �-.,•
8
.Z � � 3 x � � •, \ � �q7 \' n 1. ` / �'(.�) "�l"�; wit' v 1 n \ \\ \ t ��- -,-��\
�.� 1, '� ",� � / � � � � \
�- - -� \ !��� � �p i l� � , �� f= ti= ��r '' � n � �. ,� �1o�t, ; 1 - 1 .�• ;/ � i ! � I I /( c / �1
`C -����1 \ ii.1 % ` ��� �.'T' c f \` "�= �'-'_'f �'r 0 � �r •' • ` / ��O ��q � ��� � °�-- -^'�.� `I�f � � _� ��`, � ��� /�, -� -0_, �/'�� 1�1'
` ; ^`J � i �� \,�? �_ _'cam -- 3. � { • � I( � �l } / ^�� ;Y �� l \- '�.; ✓�_ -� �_ -�' -' -� _� \ \\) '� \L
�J'-i•''� /,�. /,; %� L \`:- ` _�- - -��(r \-'' \mom- y� / %`:,'__.- �'���'f; t'�'i���_.1- ���„_`'• `L1 \�.
��\ ._ \ � - \ \) � � i "��� . M1 i.- /" Yj - - --�' \ l l; i \i ''�, \� /, / 1. " % •�� ��' It >. � � � �� �� `� . - �!R ^- :, ` t (•
._\ \� t („ 1� O S /., ".'- ,�_,`\,, �(1 �'", �r T -�.� =-J - `J,� [ , ,`jam' ' ,,, ",-- ^"'___•••...:::`�"�" 111 � . L� .cam � �: �f ' � � � -�� ��- „�C
= `'�'\�` •! l~ C hi ^ / ' �F° - ter' - �. -�•. ..r. > � iti h� //, . �� .� ti �>�< -�_ �- ��
i, �� ,( ' \ •(�,, y \ z �� ^� `n., "�� / /, / ^� - - -_\ 1. _ _. �_- �J
%�
3 c c % r� \ )li ' _� -' -� \�� -�•.. ^p '� = 1� \�` r/} / i�� l l . o' - ��J, i,!�� \\ \`= �f=
\I\
ER
mo
01 )
1
CITY OF NORTHAMPTON
N-od
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jeff Spear
FP,O,,f: Da'X Clark: Conservation CoTci-iission
SUBJE CT: Upper Leeds Reservoir: Wetlands Protection Act
DATE: Sept. 22, 19'76
FILE: DN 4246 -28
This is a listing of the major concerns of the Conservation Commission
related to the proposal to remove the Upper Leeds Reservoir Darn.
Dewateriin-- Methods
Alternate- methods of dewatering should_be_ investigated, those to consider
would be: Use of the existing valve if feasible would be my first choice, then
pumping, siphons, and finally physical removal of the dam
- - -'h the iirruoument
at capacity.
Darn removal process if not dewatered: Methods
Main basic process and types of equipment that may be used.
Store Debris Disposal
Esti irate the amount of material present a-x3 whether all of it can be
deposited in the stream charnel Without diverting flows into the existing
banks.
* *Uus trea7- silt deaosits
Estimate the amount of material present and any controls that may be
used to minim its effects downstream.
Sta bilization of ex areas:
Provide elplanations of measures that will be used to prevent erosion
in the Winter a Spring. Program for stabilization in the future.
Alte rnatives : Removal vs. repair
(Further study is in order not to be based solely on economics)
lisPER L.= � R.r SERVOIR: SEPT. 13, 1W6
ORDER OF COMDITIONS: Some preliminary thoughts.
(Corsditions listed in order of process)
Site urepaxa for d am take down
o Vehicle pact: FillAng of approximately wards of gravel borrow graded,
compacted, and stabilized to hold vehicle.
0 of the large IThite Pines located on the embankment will be cut to
provide vehicle maneuvering space, these trees will be marked in the field
and approved by Commission, or labelled specifically in plans.
Dam take down Ur ocess
• Dam will be dismantled slowly to effect a very slow drop in the water
elevation to prevent excessive movement of the upstream silt deposits,
mi-riLmAze doir .str.eam scouring, etc.
• _w ards of stone debris will be placed in the stream channel directly
below the dam to prevent scouring, ards of stone debris may be
placed along the channel for containment, and any excess debris shall be
deposited in the City L
• Tlh� upstream silt deposits shall be monitored during the draw -down process
o Final spillway elevation will be at rt. r.,sl, plus or rin u.s one ft.
o Small impour�:�nt will remain to stop da'�n stream siltation.
o Stone debris drop d below the dare shall be neatly placed a) in the stream
di,- -ctly below the dam to provide aeration, b) along the edge of the
cha .nel to provrid =. some containment.
MaLn tena.nc e and Cis
• Vehicle pa shall be g_°a ed to natural contour of site, loaned, and
seeded within 14 days of the dare take down.
• Newly expcsed banks shall be mulched, and/or seeded within 14 days of
the dam take down.
• Upstream silt deposits shall be graded if steep banks exist, to a suita'mle
grade and mulched and seeded, wh 14 days of the darn take down.
• all wood debris shall be removed to the City L.fx,df ill .
M
� A
Fallow Year Maintenance
o Improve seeded cover by filling_ rills etc. and further seeding, some
tree seedling planting if available.
o Cut down trees that die back from the for -:' .�tcrs ed_be Ord pile debris
in woods
Work Schedule
• The actual dam take down will be completed by 1876
• The Fall stabilization measures will be complete by 1976
• 93sjter protection measures will be followed after this date.
• Following year maintenance will commence by April 30, 1977.
o ctvkN eAr✓L
1 1 1 1 1 J 45 1 i
A <,
an r,40l
�o0
5s'
so
+o
I
C16� ~�L'
1 i5 - a V mud )
—
418 " .Vd) I
J
i
i
60 �
Sv i �� ►2 i
� i
I
i
I
MGne
too
hs
Sv Zs
y C too �jS SU ZS
1
1
i
f
I ; / o
V
J
VJ
J
,
.d
0
(f)
,TE
10PZL u epl,pn�s
( r y jl I'l; 7 ) �t
�i�JQp{n ►t
wlti rely eve
� a skare I;
Cc n 1 ;p UL '4 � i I� •
S
1
I
�
,q �prwY
Sc�!+nc P
too � �js � so zs
too hs 5_0� zs�
( -te` E 11 C��' �{ CAS' ip
I
, 0
0
0
r
J
Zo
m
O
o
l
lb
NF
cx_
c�, � � ti v �s � ; ;,
to
-zl
7_7 7�-T
Ir
I J
zr�
+_ -� 1_► �`�_ L a � : 4 , - :'` , -_: ; =j =�-� ' - -__- -;- '.-�"t ; -- - - �""/., - •` } ,
e
_ •' Y- _ a_ -- _ i
Lt
4
r .. of 1
-J _ 1_7
4, J.
}
T- r�-� t t �_L: 1 ' i T —r I ►� Li d
.. , ,-
�' . + 1 , -t ( — T� i . r , ! -T
A _ f _
Ti _ i_ _J
l k
__J. -� _f � _} _ �_i__ _' - 3 _ ., _�_ _� (____ j _ � : _.i r i �...i f JJ i_ , }'�
_ , -_• ___ ___ mo t• ._ ; _. _' �— __ _ _ __ _�_ . ,�—_. _. — ' ' ._ . _` __� + �__ � __ � ._ _�. '_J
-
_ t
IZV
October 9, 1974
Honorable Scan M. DanPhYs Mayor
City Hall
NortZhmapt0n, Massa mitts 01060
Dear Mayor Dan;sbr
REt Inspection -Da" #2- 8- 214 -14s 15 & 16
Northampton
Roberts Meadow Middle, Upper &
Lower Dams
On Septa =er 23, 1974, an engineer from the Massachusetts Department of Publio
Works made a vi=al inspects of the above dams ouned by the City of NorthwVton.
The inspections were made is accordance with Chapter 253 of the Massachusetts
General taws, as amended by Chapter 595 of the Acts of 1970 (Dams - Safety Ac
The results of the inspections are as followst
Foberts Meadow F.eservohr, Xiddle -Dam ,#2-8- 214 -1-4
The wilts of the inspection indicate that :apai.rs are needed. The following
con(i.-tions were noted that rode attsationt
1. This dart leaks exteizEival,Ys particral.ar2* in the area SOUtheasterly
of the-overflow spillway. At that area water is leaking from
hoz.vantal joints abet one foot below the crest- Theee were a
aeries of pressnare leaks thm- the Joints. In this same area,
the fin ag the lower poxtiou of the wa11 and adjacent to
the spillupay sidewall has been washed away to what appears to be
the original, ground level for a distance of about 60 feet.
2. mare spears to be a slight, ' aeface of f..heall�no
course from the cap stones of
spillway. one stone in the net l,hr -:r coarse protrudes by about 9,
ino'bes. It appaars reasonable to assuma that the original construction
inclilded mortar joints of :- only traces reuz�t. There is
considerable seepage over the face of the wall below this area. In
sours places a broom tick cva.d be ya hid into the open joints by two
feat.
3 Mere is a concrete wall not shown on the original construction
plans along the vester4 side of the brook for about 150 feet
do-,n stream.
U
Ma E�Y ea -Dams
North Eton
-2-
Ct�tob, r 9, 1974
There are some soft areas in the turfed overfill
b ;�!Iizd this uall. About 60 feat dounatream there is a
flow from the hillside about 50 feet back of the wall. MUn
indicates the possibility of underground flog.
U- .Afuch of the mortar in the stone masonry of the ogee overflow
spillway is missing and there is a noticeable leak under the capstone
near the westerly sidewaU. Several of the stones on the eatterly
si.dewall have moved and it was possible to look completely through
several of the joints in the lower portion of the wall.
5. There was a noticeable flow from the 36" waste pipe outlet below
the dam through the westerly concrete srall. This pipe is supposed
to be connected to the waste well on the upstream side of the gate
house.
Floberts Meadow Tyr (Hoxi.e Rqservoir) -gym #2- 8-23-4-15
The coition of the s dam is about +she same as +.she "middle "dam. :pairs are
needed. Little or no maintenance has been o€snducted for a long period of ti.
The following conditions wo a noted:
1. Leakage through the masonry joints is quite general with much of
the mortar miss;. Weeds are grov n , out of same of the joints.
2. On the noetherly and of the spillway wall thera is a conside-rable
amount of seater leaking through the bass of the abut mmt, apparently
along the j oints bet -,wen the ledge foundation and the stone maw ry.
3. At the base of the ledge wall, against the r3a-unstrearr face of the
spillway there is a large beck of etone (10 x 8 mUch has
berme loose. _
4. At the southerly end of the archeod spills y the gate house structure
is badly deteriorated.
5. In the southerly abutment dovmstream wingwall about 14 feet dowa and
to feet from the abutment face, there is a large preseare leak. There
is a sin hole and an areal borrow hole in earth enbankmmt above this
area.
%berts Mes&w Lou -Dam v '2-3-214-16
The raralte of the - ..^specti.on indrea to that this d is safe; hasr-ever,
the following c*nditioas ware noted that require att tions
I .There are son areas of erosion due to wave and ice ac tion and one
ether area of sarfacs erosion on tha do=Gtream sloroe.
2. The waod decking of the service walkway for the 20" drawdown gate has
many missing planks and is quite rotted in places.
°3-
October 9, 1971
Due to the interdependency of these dtructures and the extreme risks to
downstream lives and properties you are hereby directed to draw down the middle
a -ad tpp�r reservoirs to a safa level and nai t do that level until they are c oas?.d? z�ad
safe. It is also strongly recommended that you obtain the services of a Registered
Professional Civil. Faginneer eperienced in the desiga, contraction and main tenance
of dams. An in -depth inspection is reeomended, followed by prompt reaedial action.
If *,-e may be of assistance please do not hesitate to contact us.
1 _- 9
LRAt
cc s Ian Murry, Sapt.
F J Hoey
R Salk
Very truly yours,
MALCO M S. GRAF, P.S.
Associate Commissioner
P
I 6
I i
IT , --
f4
I "L1
I I
I
T � I
I i i I I
---w- -. -- - - -- -- -� -- - T- - {- -�- - -- - -_� 1 I - =-
I
i
I i i J I
I
� I
1 - -- - - { - - -' -
'I
- - --
I
I
,
I �
I '
II
I pp
,
1
� 1 I
I I
a ,
V1
�- ' __ . -_._. Ft _ . -i ---- -------
r I i � I
r -- 7
} A - -- j �( -- - -- }
Lj
rT
I I
i l l l I � � � i i t
- 77 - 7 7
- t_. --
0
T
u
L-2
L
Q -{ Ul
111 ;11— 1 ••—
U z
a
3
° t,
IA O
c,
43
rq
n ° +;
4-4 f-4
a �
. o 0
� o � o �
��
m
.0 H �e
o
o 0
€ 'O 7g 41
f ; — .ri o
A eC 01— O V R
C) �H-A
s r+)�
43 C6 0
rg - �
P m H
H O
® cn n �.�, U x xw
-
n
Q
0
L
Ili �z
Tt
L
Q -{ Ul
111 ;11— 1 ••—
U z
a
3
° t,
IA O
c,
43
rq
n ° +;
4-4 f-4
a �
. o 0
� o � o �
��
m
.0 H �e
o
o 0
€ 'O 7g 41
f ; — .ri o
A eC 01— O V R
C) �H-A
s r+)�
43 C6 0
rg - �
P m H
H O
® cn n �.�, U x xw
-
n
_
�
m
v-t 'Cf
3
"
.O
O
�
•
•3
fti
0
0
3
ba r�-t
m
fi�
� � c•
rt 4:
�Hr-I
ll
4
a r -4
cn
H O
A Q
O
O -H
O
+a w
9a ®,�
�� A
q3
0
4
��
IV
0
83
a�
o
e
O
v
U
ID
43
O
c
«
43
.
!r
pq
�`
m O
p
+�
H
���-.{{
- S
O
O
Er,,`
ri
t4 0 �V4
03
E
r�-i
�
1 0 go
:.
H
F+
'
o
H
10 13.
m
F
d b O
p
r�i
e.
on
go
93 O
c"ll
cr
}G�4
c°
cc � .�
( Q
WETLANDS PROTECTION ACT: Upper Leeds Reservoir Dam take down project.
Public Hearing: 9/13/76
Comments, questions, opinions, etc.
Notice of Intent
P.3-H.1 Solid waste, Destination oft
All 600 yds. into stream?
Possibility of hauling some material away?.....
H.2 Disposal of solid waste:
Random placement, but where and how?
Right below dam, in piles, scattered, row along bank, or just where it lands?
Will it be gently placed or dropped from 50•?
P.4 -J.3 Lasting drainage effects: We must regulate silt flow from dam site downstream.
J.4 Surface water siltation
J.6 Surface water quality: Minimal longterm; Specify a judgement of years?
Immediate damage cot1d last many years.
Enclosure:
Q.J.1 Specify: Which trees will be cut.
We would like exposed area protected: mulch, grass, tree seedlings, etc.
City must speed up natural regeneration process: by doing that suggested above.
Work Site:
Vehicle pad, and fill necessary. Volumes, location, stabilisation, final cleanup,
removal, grading, loam, seeding, mulch.
Tree cutting, which trees will be cut, which pruned, debris disposal.
Dam: Final spillway elevaton- plus or minus.
Placement Of some debris directly below the dam may prevent some scouring.
Are there records of similar projects?
On what do you base your judgement that the water elevation can be dropped slowly
considering the unforseen variables involved with "picking" granite blocks of this
large size out of the dam. Danger of collapse? How will blocks be "picked" out of
the dam? Cable, clam?
Ups tream silt accumula will this be monitored during draw down? After a water
drop of a few feet this mgterial may start to move if elevation drops to quickly.
Upstream silt stabilization after draw downs
Grading to lessen slopes if necessary?
Mulch, seed etc. immediately after draw down. If late in season, Winter protection?
Cle an -up aftew draw downs
Removal of tree stumps and branches
Neaten stone debris from dam. Form channel.
Vehicle pad removed or graded and seeded.
Definitive Work schedule -as can best be determined at this time.
Project start
Project ends
Period of actual dam take down, in hours or days etc.
Grading and clean up phase
Bank stabilization and planting phase.
Winter stabilization measures phase.
Following year, continued stabilization, out back of trees, planting, silt check.
Safetys Draw down of next reservoir.
PLANSs None included....
I would like at least a conceptual plans from Whitman and Howard if possible; that
shows the following, and including the answers to the above ...... If we have no
plans, I feel strongly that we will not have a handle on the final results of this
project.
• Show area concerned at a readible scale
• Work sites, with notations for procedures involved all through process.
• Duration of each of the above- provide good estimates.
• Areas to be graded, mulched, stabilised, seeded etc.
• Trees to be altered, removed etc.
• Plans for all debris.
o Areas which will require later maintenance.
t � .
NOTICE: O I'
P,V 9 13176 609'
& t a 6
.L RT5 OF THIS FORM EHALL PE C01iI.PLETED UNDER TH 1= ,r?.1NS AND P �'2Ni:LTY Cr'
:C3.t�DTi r, THE E`:VIRGN; 1E NTAL DATA FORM i:TOi-.CHED HERETO AND , � F_ aT i? �;<':Or' O?
1•'I.D i; PI -.
. -. Y1 ING fiAY BE CO1:SIDERrD I1`01- 1PLFTE.
DAPE
:Notice is hereby given in accordance with the provisions of G.L. -.131 s.40,
that the proposed activity as submitted herein' falls within the jurisdiction
of said statute, and is located in the
City /X Nor
Reservoir Road
Recorded at the Reoistry of Not Applicable 0 Book
Certificate (if registered) Not Applicable
ADDRESS
The name(s), address and telephone number of owner (s) of the subject
land are:
NAME
City of NOrthampton
MFWE.
, Page_ ,
TELEPHONE NO.
Water Division D.P.W. 237 Prospect St. 584 -1401
I have filed identical Notices and plans by Certified Mail with the
follo-wing:
Conservation Commission ( oriainal) Date:
Lnvi.ronmental Quality AEn�ineering
!Sass. Department of Division
100 C :mbridge St., Boston (3 copies) of Wetlands Date J_
Environmental Quality i,.nPir-eerino
I -;ass. Department of 3xc Division of
100 Nashua St., Boston (1 cony) Waterways Date ;
Have all permits, variances and approvals as required by C.131 s.4O been
obtained? (yes or no). Attach copies to original Notice of Intent.
none required
Enclosed is Statutory Filing Fee of $25.00, payable to City or To-v.
The name, address and telephone number of the owner's representatives
(if any) are as follows:
NAME
ADDRESS
TELEPPOiIE NO.
Attorney City Solicitor _ City Hall, Northampton
45 William Street
Engineer Whitman & Howard, I nc. Wellesley, :CIA 617 - 237 -5000
Leon A. Murray -� Water Div., DPW,
Agent_ Supt. of Water 237 Prosbe St.. orthamnton, Ma. 41 '�_ 584 1401. —_
'he purpose of the project is: (Use additional sheets if neccf;sary)
To remove portion of existing dam at Upper Lee s Reservoir
Owner' (or agent's signature)
24 ,
NOTICE: O I'
P,V 9 13176 609'
& t a 6
.L RT5 OF THIS FORM EHALL PE C01iI.PLETED UNDER TH 1= ,r?.1NS AND P �'2Ni:LTY Cr'
:C3.t�DTi r, THE E`:VIRGN; 1E NTAL DATA FORM i:TOi-.CHED HERETO AND , � F_ aT i? �;<':Or' O?
1•'I.D i; PI -.
. -. Y1 ING fiAY BE CO1:SIDERrD I1`01- 1PLFTE.
DAPE
:Notice is hereby given in accordance with the provisions of G.L. -.131 s.40,
that the proposed activity as submitted herein' falls within the jurisdiction
of said statute, and is located in the
City /X Nor
Reservoir Road
Recorded at the Reoistry of Not Applicable 0 Book
Certificate (if registered) Not Applicable
ADDRESS
The name(s), address and telephone number of owner (s) of the subject
land are:
NAME
City of NOrthampton
MFWE.
, Page_ ,
TELEPHONE NO.
Water Division D.P.W. 237 Prospect St. 584 -1401
I have filed identical Notices and plans by Certified Mail with the
follo-wing:
Conservation Commission ( oriainal) Date:
Lnvi.ronmental Quality AEn�ineering
!Sass. Department of Division
100 C :mbridge St., Boston (3 copies) of Wetlands Date J_
Environmental Quality i,.nPir-eerino
I -;ass. Department of 3xc Division of
100 Nashua St., Boston (1 cony) Waterways Date ;
Have all permits, variances and approvals as required by C.131 s.4O been
obtained? (yes or no). Attach copies to original Notice of Intent.
none required
Enclosed is Statutory Filing Fee of $25.00, payable to City or To-v.
The name, address and telephone number of the owner's representatives
(if any) are as follows:
NAME
ADDRESS
TELEPPOiIE NO.
Attorney City Solicitor _ City Hall, Northampton
45 William Street
Engineer Whitman & Howard, I nc. Wellesley, :CIA 617 - 237 -5000
Leon A. Murray -� Water Div., DPW,
Agent_ Supt. of Water 237 Prosbe St.. orthamnton, Ma. 41 '�_ 584 1401. —_
'he purpose of the project is: (Use additional sheets if neccf;sary)
To remove portion of existing dam at Upper Lee s Reservoir
Owner' (or agent's signature)
24 ,
0
form m - 0 IX2 .. ] l) 1.d 0'It 1;17 i :)i? ��. l
JI�) � C - t �?r
r
U1IJ(21 the provi. ic,ns o C.L. CH.131 S.
2. 1 % 1 1e1 -e section is not relevant t the applic ^tion in quesUion,
the words "l.lot applicable" should be entered on the appropriate
line.
City of Northampton, Water Division
NAM,E OF APPLICANT Department of Public Works
ADDRESS OF APPLICANT 237 Prospect Street, Northampton, MA
MUNICIPALITIES WHERE ACTIVITY IS PROPOSED AND NOTICE IS FILED.
Northampton
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY INVOLVED
IN APPLICATION (including the dimensions
of any existing buildings, decks, marinas,
existing cesspools)
DESCRIPTION OF MODIFICATIONS PROPOSED
ON TrE SITE, including grading, dredging,
removal of vegetation, etc.
A. SOILS
1. United States Department of
Agriculture Soil Types (shdw on map)
Upper Leeds Reservoir
(approx. acres) and granite
block dam (approx. 60' in
length)
Partial removal of granite dam
granite blocks to be randomly
placed in stream -bed for
aer ation
21D- Charlton
9D - Hollis
2. Permeability of soil on the site. (Dates of testing)
3. Rate of percolation of water through
the soil. (Dates of testing) Not Applicable
B. SURFACE WATERS
1. Distance of site from nearest
surface water (Date of measurement)
At Site
2. Sources of runoff rater
Roberts Meadow Brook
- 25 -
..
4 .
5.
2 -
`Kinrris & Colby formula for
cif- :; i J , c::,I �.�,� :.i to Major f loQd
2700 cfs
Dcstin. of runoff .J�3ter
R Mea dow Brook -Mil Ri ver -Co River
Chemica additives to runoff
.::,ter on the site
C. GROUND COVER
I. Extent of existing impervious
ground cover on the site
2. Extent of proposed impervious
ground cover on the site
3. Extent of existing vegetative
cover on the site
4. Extent of proposed vegetative
cover on the site
N4 _r4e __
Some ledge outcrops in area
near dam
none
see attached report
see attached report
D. TOPOGRAPHY
1. Maximum existing elevation on site
2. Minimum existing elevation of site
3. Maximum proposed elevation of site
4. Minimum proposed elevation of site
450+ dam
420+ brook channel
450+ unmoved portion of dam
420+ brook channel
5. Description of proposed change in topography
removal of part of dam and subsequent lowering of water lev
E. GROUND WATER
1. Minimum depth to water table on site (at time of filing)
at surface
. 2. Maximum depth to water table on site (at time of filing)
at surface
3. Seasonal maximum ground
F. WATER SUPPLY
1. The source of the water
2. The expected water requ
3. The uses to which water
water elevation
at surfac _
to be provided to the site
Bnhprra Meadow Br
irements (g.p.d.) for the site
None
will be put
Not applic
:c,.. �J.. I,L
._
�. v�';:'i f "t? O1 s-17Osa .��ys - cm
- location on the sit
2. :,Pe cted cone` of the
effluents (human waste,
detergents, oils, heavy
ocher chemicals)
(d c scr 1pt ion
e, of system)
seWaae
pesticides,
metals,
Not applicable
Not applicable
3. Expected daily volumes of se-,,age Not applicable
H. SOLID WASTE approx. 600 c.y. of stone and
mortar
1. Estimated quantity of solid waste
to be developed on the site
2. Method for disposal of solid waste random placement of granite
blocks in stye -a to p rDyide
aeration
3. Plans for recycling of solid waste
see above
i . BOAT Y= RDS, DOCKS, M: R INAS
1. Capacity of marina (numoer of
boats, running feet)
2. Description of docks and floats
(site, dimensions)
3. Description of sewage pumpout
facilities (type of waste disposal)
4. Description of fuelling facilities
and fuel storage tanks
Not applicable
Not applicable
S.* Description of fuel spill prevention Not applicable
measures and equipment
J. IMPACT OF PROPOSED ACTION APPLIED FOR See attached report
I. Effects on plant species
(upland and marine)
2. Effects on marine species (shellfish, finfish)
No lasting impact
Not Applicable
Not applicable
K. AJTERNATIVES TO PROPOSED ACTION 1) repair existing dam
2) leave dam in present state
I. Describe alternatives to the -
requested action
2. Describe the benefits of the requested
action over the alternatives
The proposed action is less costly than the repair•of existing
dam,-it is als6 less hazardous than leaving the dam as it exists.
In its present state there is the possibility under flood conditions,
of a sudden failure. A sudden failure would endanger the lower dams
and persons and properties in the areas near the brook.
.. F
4
3.
Ef on
and
rul-off.
The long term effect on drainage
and runoff would be minimal i
-ts oil
's-iltal:ion 0 r
urface
Increase in siltation
at: 1: S during project and follow-,
ing spring; long term
effect minimal
S.
Effects on
groundwater quality
None
- E — ncrease in _S_1 - 1_t__ffwring project
6.
N 'Lfeclk on
sur water
water
quality
minimal longterm
K. AJTERNATIVES TO PROPOSED ACTION 1) repair existing dam
2) leave dam in present state
I. Describe alternatives to the -
requested action
2. Describe the benefits of the requested
action over the alternatives
The proposed action is less costly than the repair•of existing
dam,-it is als6 less hazardous than leaving the dam as it exists.
In its present state there is the possibility under flood conditions,
of a sudden failure. A sudden failure would endanger the lower dams
and persons and properties in the areas near the brook.
.. F
M
Question C -4: Extent of the existing vegetative cover on
the site.
In general, the site is heavily wooded. Pines are the
dominant tree, with some hemlock. The trees range in size
from 4 to 12 inches in caliper and from 15 to 40 feet in
height. Trees nearest the water are lower and more heavily
branched than those further back and behind the tree line.
The edge of water, edge of woods line is clearly defined
(water level as of September, 1975) and the tree line is a
fairly constant 5 to 8 feet back from the water.
The open bank between the tree line and the water is
grass with some low ferns and deciduous scrub growth. Back
into the tree line, the grass and low deciduous growth give
way to a mat of pine needles and the ferns become more
predominant.
Question J -1: The effects (impact) of the proposed action
on the existing plant species on the site.
The primary impact that the proposed action will have
on plant species existing on the site will be limited to a
very few trees and branches that may have to be cut or
pruned to allow construction equipment access to the dam
area.
The secondary impacts that the proposed action will
have on the existing plant species on the site will involve
potential die -back of some trees along the existing tree
line, the growth of grasses, ferns and some low deciduous
materials down onto the newly exposed bank surfaces, and the
subsequent regression of these materials as new trees and
woods become established and develop due to self seeding
from the existing species.
The timing and extent of these changes is difficult to
predict. They will depend upon such factors as general rs;
climatic conditions over the coming years, the hardiness of a �-,5t-
individual trees on the site, gradients of the exposed
stream banks, and soil moisture once the elevation of the
surface water is lowered. These changes will not be detri-
mental to either the environmental or visual qualities of �r
the area. They represent a change in the visual character
and asthetic quality of the area from one of a somewhat
open, tree lines, small pond landscape back to a pre- dam ,�L
landscape of a somewhat deep, tree banked, stream.
5,
3
f
-
'_1. r. ,
-� t
r - T
1W
j I
r - j % 4 t
4
4-
Et
4 —
t
;Ooq
c x x
IPI
iP! i '_ _{ I 4
-4ij
ice. ifi 1 i i Y' J
r
-.� �. L�� ..�� _; .. { �1 j . j T om• ' } }• -T � „�" �'
` -� -- - ` �_.•_• _" { - '- �•� -. - - -- ,- � e :� .' £ . � " E st • -- �Q�.- .
t r 1
T 1
1
Ti
1
�"�"^ ) ; � LEE ►� 5 !2 t 5 � R y o ► 1�
i
i3o � t�RoF ALE tlEA50kF- M 1 S
a
i ff
34 o" dow^54y`eaw% TJ
N% ..
i
App," K.
AO h+a r i
I
�---
Xc►q.s`
to o
t 15 'A v ' �`
0
0
r
r�
a
i
A l , ,y► ,o
Ao a�° 6 S'o 2S` ` ►2` S` i
' -i�– —X
�o g o . U,- " ()'' Cw'e j P C6'ie e�
b+uc�� lee
J
I
O
).ud svt vd �-;d
C«'
l P oriN
lC1U ��'
SV
2� r
►
0 3 kO r e I._
Apt
3 ro X ' i
a Mo re
�l�v s iwr�
i
i
i
1
too ►jS ` S0 25
mud H
f ,
o
N.
0
0
�4
6 -6-- >6
ckc,rles Doiucky
.C.MASOti, Maronv\
( I)
pr dd ilQ I)N
1,n2+�Sui er..eh�S
(r u hin i K A il
c��s�r,ces
4w e e&. , 1 ►KV5
Inkip relalivf
�, Sere );hp
CON -F ;�u 1 - 4Y - f o K.
6'
CM
:J
tz
App"x.
Ape" Y
�shire�
too hs So zs
C6' j1 Sy - &� Cr9'Wuc��
hit u d J M v d� ist t3 � J
10O
w S6 � 2S �
CC,! ri yy COX �` C8' -rod )
I
O
0
r
0' 0 �'
*Awl'
../
12 E L'=S ISSUED
BOARD /COI%.ISSIOH: CONSZRVATION COMMSSICN
PAGE 1 OF