The URL can be used to link to this page

WheelchairCurbCutsTier2PlymouthLocustSignatureTier II: Site-Specific Environmental Assessment Version 1: Tier II Checklist 1 HUD Grant Number: B-19-MC-25-0027 Date of Field Inspection: Date Review Initiated: Inspector Name: Reviewer Name: Name of Program: Wheelchair Curb Cut Ramps Street Address: Property ID: GPS Coordinates (Lat/Long) : Project Description: The City of Northampton will install wheelchair sidewalk curb cuts across the City to bring them into conformance with current Americans with Disabilities (ADA) and American Access Board (AAB) standards. The exact locations were not identified during the Tier 1 Review, but the City will use this Site-Specific Assessments to finish the Tier 2 Review. Site Specific: City of Northampton The proposed project involves installing wheelchair curb cuts to conform with the ADA and AAB standards.The proposed site does not increase the overall footprint of the existing impervious surface. The proposed site does not alter historical properties directly. The proposed site does not alter wetlands or drainage patterns.The proposed site is not within a floodplain. Tier II: Site-Specific Environmental Assessment Version 1: Tier II Checklist 2 Site-Specific Findings STATUES, EXECUTIVE ORDERS, AND REGULATIONS LISTED AT 24 CFR 50.4 AND 58.6 Airport Hazards 24 CFR Part 51 Subpart D Not applicable. Compliance determined in Tier 1. There is a municipal airport in the City, but it is unlikely that a curb cut will be requested within 2,500 feet of the airport. The City has a prioritization matrix from the 2018 "Public Sidewalk Inventory Analysis Report" that it will use to install curb cuts and there are other areas in the City that are higher on the list. The City will reject requests for curb cuts within 2,500 ft. of the airport. The project is compliant with 24 CFR Part 51 Subpart D. Coastal Barrier Resources Coastal Barrier Resources Act, as amended by the Coastal Barrier Improvement Act of 1990 [16 USC 3501] Flood Insurance Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 and National Flood Insurance Reform Act of 1994 [42 USC 4001-4128 and 42 USC 5154a] Not applicable. Compliance determined in Tier 1. This project is not located in a CBRS unit and therefore this project is compliant with 16 USC 3501, the City is not within a Coastal Barrier Resource area. Not applicable. Compliance determined in Tier 1. This project does not provide financial assistance for mobile home, building, or insurable property. Therefore, the project is compliant with 42 USC 4001-4128 and 42 USC 5154a. Clean Air Act Clean Air Act, as amended, particularly section 176(c) & (d); 40 CFR Parts 6, 51, 93 Not applicable. Compliance determined in Tier 1. This project does not include new construction or conversion of land use facilitating the development of public, commercial, or industrial facilities or five or more dwelling units. It is therefore compliant with the Clean Air Act (42 USC 7401 et seq.) as amended particularly Section 176(c) and (d) (42 USC 7506(c) and (d)). Coastal Zone Management Coastal Zone Management Act, sections 307(c) & (d) Not applicable. Compliance determined in Tier 1. This project is not in and does not affect any Coastal Zones. It is not subject to state review. It is therefore compliant with the Coastal Zone Management Act, sections 307(c) & (d)]. Contamination and Toxic Substance 24 CFR Part 50.3(i) & 58.5(i)(2) Evaluate the site for contamination. Do any of the following apply to the subject property? (1) Property is listed on an EPA Superfund National Priorities or Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) List, or equivalent State list; (2) Property is within 3,00 feet of a landfill site, hazardous waste or solid waste cleanup site; (3) Has an underground storage tank (which is not a residential fuel tank); (4) Known or suspected to be contaminated by toxic chemicals or radioactive materials; or (5) During site reconnaissance of subject property and visible adjoining properties, inspector has observed potential environmental concerns. 1. Evaluation Tier II: Site-Specific Environmental Assessment Version 1: Tier II Checklist 3 No → Provide a map or other documentation of absence or presence of contamination and explain evaluation of site contamination in the Worksheet Summary.>> Based on the response, the review is in compliance with this section. Continue to the Worksheet Summary below. Yes → Describe the findings, including any recognized environmental conditions (RECs), in Worksheet Summary below. Continue to Question 2. 2. Mitigation Document the mitigation needed according to the requirements of the appropriate federal, state, tribal, or local oversight agency. If the adverse environmental impacts cannot be mitigated, then HUD assistance may not be used for the project at this site. Can adverse environmental impacts be mitigated? Adverse environmental impacts cannot feasibly be mitigated → Project cannot proceed at this location Yes, adverse environmental impacts can be eliminated through mitigation. → Provide all mitigation requirements and documents. Continue to Question 3. 3. Describe how compliance was achieved. Include any of the following that apply: State Voluntary Clean-up Program, a No Further Action letter, use of engineering controls, or use of institutional controls. If a remediation plan or clean-up program was necessary, which standard does it follow? Complete removal Risk-based correction action (RBCA) Other Worksheet Summary Compliance Determination Provide a clear description of your determination and a synopsis of the information that it was based on, such as: •Map panel numbers and dates •Names of all consulted parties and relevant consultation dates •Names of plans or reports and relevant page numbers •Any additional requirements specific to your region Compliance documentation can be found attached to this Tier II Checklist. Page(s) _____________ Are formal compliance steps or mitigation required? Yes No Endangered Species Endangered Species Act of 1973, particularly section 7; 50 CFR Part 402 Not applicable. Compliance determined in Tier 1. This project does not involve any activities that have the potential to affect species or habitats. There are no endangered species or critical habitats in Northampton. While the exact project areas have yet to be determined, all activities proposed will be entirely limited to modification of previously existing paved streets and sidewalks. Tier II: Site-Specific Environmental Assessment Version 1: Tier II Checklist 4 The project does not include any expansion of developed or degraded areas, and no vegetation removal or soil excavation is proposed. It is therefore compliant with the Endangered Species Act of 1973, particularly section 7; 50 CFR Part 402. Explosive and Flammable Hazards 24 CFR Part 51 Subpart C Not applicable. Compliance determined in Tier 1. The proposed project does not involve development, construction, rehabilitation that will increase residential densities, or conversion of land use. Furthermore, The proposed HUD-assisted project itself is not the development of a hazardous facility (a facility that mainly stores, handles or processes flammable or combustible chemicals such as bulk fuel storage facilities and refineries). Therefore, the review is in compliance with 24 CFR Part 51 Subpart C. Farmland Protection Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1981, particularly sections 1504(b) and 1541; 7 CFR Part 628 Not applicable. Compliance determined in Tier 1. This project does not involve activities that include new construction, acquisition of undeveloped land or conversion that could convert agricultural land to a non-agricultural use. Furthermore, important farmland in the City of Northampton is in a low population density area and curb cuts will not be required there. The proposed project is in compliance with 7 CFR Part 628. Floodplain Management Executive Order 11988, particularly section 2(a); 24 CFR Part 55 Provide a FEMA/FIRM map showing this site. 1.Does your project site occur in a base floodplain, have an impact on the base floodplain [See also 24 CFR 55.12(c)(6)] or indirectly support floodplain development? Yes → Continue to Question 2, attach Site Plans of project. No → Based on the response, the review is in compliance with this section. Continue to the Worksheet Summary below. Select the applicable floodplain using the FEMA map or the best available information: 2. Floodway → Continue to Question 3, Floodways 500-year floodplain (B Zone or shaded X Zone) → Continue to Question 4, 500-year Floodplains 100-year floodplain (A Zone) → The 8-Step Process is required. Continue to Question 5, 8-Step process 3. Floodways Is this a functionally dependent use? Yes The 8-Step Process is required. Work with HUD OEE to determine a way to satisfactorily continue with this project. Provide a completed 8-Step Process, including the early public notice. →Continue to Question 5, 8-Step Process No Federal assistance may not be used at this location unless a 55.12(c) exception applies. You must either choose an alternate site or cancel the project at this location. 4. 500-year Floodplain Is this a critical action?  No → Based on the response, the review is in compliance with this section. Continue to the Worksheet Summary below  Yes → Continue to Question 5, 8-Step Process Continue to Question 7: Evaluate Alternatives Tier II: Site-Specific Environmental Assessment Version 1: Tier II Checklist 5 5. 8-Step Process In any of the Questions, 1-4 did the 8-Step Process apply? Yes, the 8-Step Process applies, Begin Public Review Process and Continue to Question 7, Evaluate Alternatives No, continue to Worksheet Summary 7. Evaluate Alternatives: Identify and evaluate at least three alternatives, including when possible, alternative sites outside the floodplain or wetland, alternative actions, and the “no action” option. 8. Identify Adverse & Beneficial Impacts including direct and indirect support of other floodplain and wetland development that might result from the project. Analyze the following factors: (1) Natural environment (topography, habitat, hazards); (2) Social concerns (aesthetics, historic and cultural values, land use patterns); (3) Economic aspects (costs of construction, transportation and relocation); and (4) Legal considerations (deeds, leases). 9. Mitigation For the project to be brought into compliance with this section, all adverse impacts must be mitigated. Explain in detail the exact measures that must be implemented to mitigate for the impact or effect, including the timeline for implementation. Mitigation and Resilience Measures: Mitigation and resilience measures that will reduce the risk of loss of life and property and increase the ability to shelter in place will be considered eligible activities. These measures can be applied to homes that are structurally sound and meet all requirements. Mitigation activities may include, but are not limited to the following: •Wet Floodproofing •Dry Floodproofing •Construction of a flood barrier •Incorporation of interior modification/retrofit measures Which of the following mitigation/minimization measures have been identified for this project in the 8-Step ? Select all that apply.           Permeable surfaces Natural landscape enhancements that maintain or restore natural hydrology Planting or restoring native plant species Bioswales Evapotranspiration Stormwater capture and reuse Green or vegetative roofs with drainage provisions Natural Resources Conservation Service conservation easements or similar easements Floodproofing of structures Elevating structures including free-boarding above the required base flood elevations 6. Public Review Process Complete? Attach any public notices or other documentation.Yes No Tier II: Site-Specific Environmental Assessment Version 1: Tier II Checklist 6 10. Reevaluate Alternatives in light of the information gained to determine if the proposed action is still practicable. If new construction is to be located in a floodplain or wetland, apply accepted floodproofing and other measures. To achieve flood protection, wherever practicable elevate the structures above the flood level rather than fill in land. 11. Announced and Explained Decision to Public: Attach public notice and decisions. Yes No 12. Implement proposal with appropriate mitigation.Implement proposed action in compliance with minimization plans and flood insurance requirements Worksheet Summary Compliance Determination Provide a clear description of your determination and a synopsis of the information that it was based on, such as: •Map panel numbers and dates •Names of all consulted parties and relevant consultation dates •Names of plans or reports and relevant page numbers •Any additional requirements specific to your region Tier II: Site-Specific Environmental Assessment Version 1: Tier II Checklist 7 Either provide the memo itself or a link to it here. Explain and justify the other determination here: → Continue to the Worksheet Summary Yes, because the project includes activities with potential to cause effects (direct or indirect). Continue to Step 1. Step 1—Initiate Consultation Use the When to Consult with Tribes Checklist within Notice CPD-12-006: Process for Tribal Consultation to determine if you should invite tribes to consult on a particular project. Use the Tribal Directory Assessment Tool (TDAT) to identify tribes that may have an interest in the area where the project is located. Note that consultants may not initiate consultation with Tribes. Select all consulting parties below (check all that apply): State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Indian Tribes, including Tribal Historic Preservation Officers (THPOs) or Native Hawaiian Organizations (NHOs) List all tribes that were consulted here and their status of consultation: Other Consulting Parties List all consulting parties that were consulted here and their status of consultation: The Section 106 Process After determining the need to do a Section 106 review, initiate consultation with regulatory and other interested parties, identify and evaluate historic properties, assess effects of the project on properties listed on or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, and resolve any adverse effects through project design modifications or mitigation. Note that consultation continues through all phases of the review. Step 1: Initiate consultation Step 2: Identify and evaluate historic properties Step 3: Assess effects of the project on historic properties Step 4: Resolve any adverse effects 1.Is Section 106 review required for your project?  No, because the project consists solely of activities listed as exempt in a Programmatic Agreement (PA). Either provide the PA itself or a link to it here. Mark the applicable exemption or include the text here: Historic Preservation National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, particularly sections 106 and 110; 36 CFR Part 800 → Continue to the Worksheet Summary. No, because the project consists solely of activities included in a No Potential to Cause Effects memo or other determination [36 CFR 800.3(a)(1)] Tier II: Site-Specific Environmental Assessment Version 1: Tier II Checklist 8 Describe the process of selecting consulting parties and initiating consultation here: Provide all correspondence, notices, and notes (including comments and objections received) and continue to Step 2. Step 2—Identify and Evaluate Historic Properties Define the Area of Potential Effect (APE), either by entering the address(es) or providing a map depicting the APE. (Attach an additional page if necessary.) Gather information about known historic properties in the APE. Historic buildings, districts and archeological sites may have been identified in local, state, and national surveys and registers, local districts, municipal plans, town and county histories, and local history websites. If not already listed on the National Register of Historic Places, identified properties are then evaluated to see if they are eligible for the National Register. In the space below, list historic properties identified and evaluated in the APE. Every historic property that may be affected by the project should be listed. For each historic property or district, include the National Register status, whether the SHPO has concurred with the finding, and whether information on the site is sensitive. Attach an additional page if necessary. Provide the documentation (survey forms, Register nominations, concurrence(s) and/or objection(s), notes, and photos) that justify your National Register Status determination. Was a survey of historic buildings and/or archeological site done as part of the project? Yes → Provide survey(s) and report(s) and continue to Step 3. Additional notes: No → Continue to Step 3. Tier II: Site-Specific Environmental Assessment Version 1: Tier II Checklist 9 Step 3—Assess Effects of the Project on Historic Properties Only properties that are listed on or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places receive further consideration under Section 106. Assess the effect(s) of the project by applying the Criteria of Adverse Effect (36 CFR 800.5). Consider direct and indirect effects as applicable as per HUD guidance. Choose one of the findings below—No Historic Properties Affected, No Adverse Effect, or Adverse Effect; and seek concurrence from consulting parties. No Historic Properties Affected Document reason for finding:  No historic properties present. → Provide concurrence(s) or objection(s) and continue to the Worksheet  Historic properties present, but project will have no effect upon them. → Provide concurrence(s) or objection(s) and continue to the Worksheet Summary. If consulting parties concur or fail to respond to user’s request for concurrence, project is in compliance with this section. No further review is required. If consulting parties object, refer to (36 CFR 800.4(d)(1) and consult further to try to resolve objection(s).  No Adverse Effect Document reason for finding: Does the No Adverse Effect finding contain conditions?  Yes Check all that apply:  Avoidance  Modification of project  Other Describe conditions here: → Monitor satisfactory implementation of conditions. Provide concurrence(s) or objection(s) and continue to the Worksheet Summary  No → Provide concurrence(s) or objection(s) and continue to the Worksheet Summary. If consulting parties concur or fail to respond to user’s request for concurrence, project is in compliance with this section. No further review is required. If consulting parties object, refer to (36 CFR 800.5(c)(2)) and consult further to try to resolve objection(s).  Adverse Effect Document reason for finding: Tier II: Site-Specific Environmental Assessment Version 1: Tier II Checklist 10 Copy and paste applicable Criteria into text box with summary and justification. Criteria of Adverse Effect: 36 CFR 800.5 Notify the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation of the Adverse Effect and provide the documentation outlined in 36 CFR 800.11(e). The Council has 15 days to decide whether to enter the consultation (Not required for projects covered by a Programmatic Agreement). → Continue to Step 4 Step 4—Resolve Adverse Effects Work with consulting parties to try to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects. Refer to HUD guidance and 36 CFR 800.6 and 800.7. Were the Adverse Effects resolved?  Yes Describe the resolution of Adverse Effects, including consultation efforts and participation by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation: For the project to be brought into compliance with this section, all adverse impacts must be mitigated. Explain in detail the exact measures that must be implemented to mitigate for the impact or effect, including the timeline for implementation. → Provide signed Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) or Standard Mitigation Measures Agreement (SMMA). Continue to the Worksheet Summary.  No The project must be cancelled unless the “Head of Agency” approves it. Either provide approval from the “Head of Agency” or cancel the project at this location. Describe the failure to resolve Adverse Effects, including consultation efforts and participation by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and “Head of the Agency”: Tier II: Site-Specific Environmental Assessment Version 1: Tier II Checklist 11 Explain in detail the exact conditions or measures that must be implemented to mitigate for the impact or effect, including the timeline for implementation. → Provide signed Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) or Standard Mitigation Measures Agreement (SMMA). Continue to the Worksheet Summary Worksheet Summary Compliance Determination Provide a clear description of your determination and a synopsis of the information that it was based on, such as: •Map panel numbers and dates •Names of all consulted parties and relevant consultation dates •Names of plans or reports and relevant page numbers •Any additional requirements specific to your region Compliance documentation can be found attached to this Tier II Checklist. Page(s) _____________ Are formal compliance steps or mitigation required?  Yes No Noise Abatement and Control Noise Control Act of 1972, as amended by the Quiet Communities Act of 1978; 24 CFR Part 51 Subpart B Not applicable. Compliance determined in Tier 1. This project does not involve New construction for residential use, rehabilitation of an existing residential property, or research demonstration project and therefore in compliance with the Noise Control Act of 1972. Sole Source Aquifers Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, as amended, particularly section 1424(e); 40 CFR Part 149 Not applicable. Compliance determined in Tier 1. This project does not consist solely of acquisition, leasing, or rehabilitation of an existing building and it is not within a sole source aquifer. It is therefore compliant with the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 201, 300f et seq., and 21 U.S.C. 349). Wetland Protection Executive Order 11990, particularly sections 2 and 5 1. Does this project involve new construction as defined in Executive Order 11990, expansion of a building’s footprint, or ground disturbance? The term “new construction” shall include draining, dredging, channelizing, filling, diking, impounding, and related activities and any structures or facilities begun or authorized after the effect date of the Order.  No → Based on the response, the review is in compliance with this section. Continue to the Worksheet Summary below. Yes → Continue to Question 2 Tier II: Site-Specific Environmental Assessment Version 1: Tier II Checklist 12 2. Will the new construction or other ground disturbance impact an on– or off-site wetland? The term “wetlands” means those areas that are inundated by surface or ground water with a frequency sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances does or would support, a prevalence of vegetative or aquatic life that requires saturated or seasonally saturated soil conditions for growth and reproduction. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas such as sloughs, potholes, wet meadows, river overflows, mud flats, and natural ponds. Wetlands under E.O. 11990 include isolated and non-jurisdictional wetlands.  No, a wetland will not be impacted in terms of E.O. 11990’s definition of new construction. → Based on the response, the review is in compliance with this section. Continue to the Worksheet Summary below. Provide a map or any other relevant documentation to explain your determination.  Yes, there is a wetland that will be impacted in terms of E.O. 11990’s definition of new construction. → You must determine that there are no practicable alternatives to wetland development by completing the 8-Step Process. Provide a completed 8-Step Process as well as all documents used to make your determination, including a map. Be sure to include the early public notice and the final notice with your documentation. Continue to Question 3. 3. For the project to be brought into compliance with this section, all adverse impacts must be mitigated. Explain in detail the exact measures that must be implemented to mitigate for the impact or effect, including the timeline for implementation. Which of the following mitigation actions have been or will be taken? Select all that apply: Permeable surfaces Natural landscape enhancements that maintain or restore natural hydrology through infiltration Native plant species Bioswales Evapotranspiration Stormwater capture and reuse Green or vegetative roofs with drainage provisions Natural Resources Conversation Service conservation easements Compensatory mitigation Worksheet Summary Compliance Determination Provide a clear description of your determination and a synopsis of the information that it was based on, such as: •Map panel numbers and dates •Names of all consulted parties and relevant consultation dates •Names of plans or reports and relevant page numbers •Any additional requirements specific to your region Compliance documentation can be found attached to this Tier II Checklist. Page(s) _____________ Are formal compliance steps or mitigation required? Yes No Tier II: Site-Specific Environmental Assessment Version 1: Tier II Checklist 13 Wild and Scenic Rivers Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968, particularly section 7(b) and (c) Not applicable. Compliance determined in Tier 1. This project is not within proximity of a NWSRS river as defined by the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 U.S.C. 1271-1287), particularly section 7(b) and (c) (16 U.S.C. 1278(b) and (c)) and therefore in compliance. Environmental Justice Executive Order 12898 Not applicable. Compliance determined in Tier 1. No adverse environmental impacts were identified outright in any of the other compliance review portions of this project's total environmental review. Proposed measures to mitigate any possible adverse effect were included in other review portions, such as site selection and ensuring all HUD, EPA, and Mass DEP requirements are fulfilled during the project. Any impact that is disproportionately impactful towards low-income and/or minority communities will be mitigated through public engagement and other appropriate measures. When completed, the project will impact low-income and/or minority communities in a positive manner. The proposed project complies with environmental requirements for funding. The proposed project does not comply with environmental requirements for funding. Review Completed by: Name: _________________________________________________________ Date: ___________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ Signature: Certifying Officer: Name: ________________________________________________ Date: __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ Signature: Finding of this Tier II Site Specific Review May 3, 2021 Inventory No:NTH.186 Historic Name:Richards, Herbert S. House Common Name: Address:1 Main St City/Town:Northampton Village/Neighborhood:Florence Local No:23A-086-001 Year Constructed:1905 Architect(s): Architectural Style(s):Queen Anne Use(s):Multiple Family Dwelling House; Single Family Dwelling House Significance:Architecture Area(s): Designation(s): Building Materials(s): Roof: Asphalt Shingle; Slate Wall: Copper; Granite; Wood; Wood Clapboard; Wood Shingle; Stone, Cut Foundation: Concrete Unspecified; Granite; Stone, Cut The Massachusetts Historical Commission (MHC) has converted this paper record to digital format as part of ongoing projects to scan records of the Inventory of Historic Assets of the Commonwealth and National Register of Historic Places nominations for Massachusetts. Efforts are ongoing and not all inventory or National Register records related to this resource may be available in digital format at this time. The MACRIS database and scanned files are highly dynamic; new information is added daily and both database records and related scanned files may be updated as new information is incorporated into MHC files. Users should note that there may be a considerable lag time between the receipt of new or updated records by MHC and the appearance of related information in MACRIS. Users should also note that not all source materials for the MACRIS database are made available as scanned images. Users may consult the records, files and maps available in MHC's public research area at its offices at the State Archives Building, 220 Morrissey Boulevard, Boston, open M-F, 9-5. Users of this digital material acknowledge that they have read and understood the MACRIS Information and Disclaimer (http://mhc-macris.net/macrisdisclaimer.htm) Data available via the MACRIS web interface, and associated scanned files are for information purposes only. THE ACT OF CHECKING THIS DATABASE AND ASSOCIATED SCANNED FILES DOES NOT SUBSTITUTE FOR COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LOCAL, STATE OR FEDERAL LAWS AND REGULATIONS. IF YOU ARE REPRESENTING A DEVELOPER AND/OR A PROPOSED PROJECT THAT WILL REQUIRE A PERMIT, LICENSE OR FUNDING FROM ANY STATE OR FEDERAL AGENCY YOU MUST SUBMIT A PROJECT NOTIFICATION FORM TO MHC FOR MHC'S REVIEW AND COMMENT. You can obtain a copy of a PNF through the MHC web site (www.sec.state.ma.us/mhc) under the subject heading "MHC Forms." Commonwealth of Massachusetts Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard, Boston, Massachusetts 02125 www.sec.state.ma.us/mhc This file was accessed on: Monday, May 3, 2021 at 1:35: PM Follow Massachusetts Historical Commission Survey Manual instructions for completing this form. FORM B  BUILDING MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL COMMISSION MASSACHUSETTS ARCHIVES BUILDING 220 MORRISSEY BOULEVARD BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02125 Photograph Topographic or Assessor's Map Recorded by: Bonnie Parsons Organization: Pioneer Valley Planning Commission Date (month / year): March, 2010 Assessor’s Number USGS Quad Area(s) Form Number 23A-86 Easthampton NTH.186 Town: Northampton Place: (neighborhood or village) Florence Address: 1 Main Street Historic Name: Herbert S. Richards House Uses: Present: Two-family residence Original: Single-family residence Date of Construction: 1905 Source: Springfield Daily Republican Style/Form: Queen Anne Architect/Builder: Exterior Material: Foundation: stone, concrete Wall/Trim: clapboards, shingles, granite blocks Roof: slate, asphalt shingles Outbuildings/Secondary Structures: Major Alterations (with dates): Ell added on north, ca. 1960. Condition: good Moved: no | x | yes | | Date Acreage: 0.132 acres Setting: This house occupies a corner lot in a mixed neighborhood of residential and commercial properties. RECEIVED AUG 19 2011 MASS. HIST. COMM. INVENTORY FORM B CONTINUATION SHEET [NORTHAMPTON ] [1 MAIN STREET] MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL COMMISSION Area(s) Form No. 220 MORRISSEY BOULEVARD, BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02125 Continuation sheet 1 NTH.186 ___ Recommended for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. If checked, you must attach a completed National Register Criteria Statement form. Use as much space as necessary to complete the following entries, allowing text to flow onto additional continuation sheets. ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION: Describe architectural features. Evaluate the characteristics of this building in terms of other buildings within the community. The Herbert Richards House is a two-and-a-half story Queen Anne style house under a side-gable roof with a centered cross- gable on its south façade, which heralds the coming Tudor Revival style. The cross-gable on the south façade is steeply pitched and has at its eaves returns a curved siding pattern suggesting the outline of a Tudor Revival style barge board. At the southeast corner of the house is a round, two-story tower with a slate-covered, conical roof topped by a copper finial. A two-story bay window on the east elevation and an added one-and-a-half story ell on the north elevation add to the complexity of the building’s plan. A full-width porch crosses the south façade overlapping slightly the tower and echoing the round tower with a round corner. The porch has a hipped roof that rests on Doric half-columns on quarry-faced granite block piers. The porch has a pediment over its stairs and piers are connected by railings with square balusters. The house is sided in clapboards on the first story and shingles on the second story. HISTORICAL NARRATIVE Discuss the history of the building. Explain its associations with local (or state) history. Include uses of the building, and the role(s) the owners/occupants played within the community. From Form B of 1980: “This house occupies a prominent corner site on Main Street in Florence opposite a small park. The house was built in 1905 for Herbert Richards, and replaces an earlier house. Early owners of the property, including Mr. Richards, operated a meat market in a small frame building next westerly along Main Street.” BIBLIOGRAPHY and/or REFERENCES Beers, F. W. County Atlas of Hampshire Massachusetts, New York, 1873. Hales, John G. Plan of the Town or Northampton in the County of Hampshire, 1831. Miller, D. L. Atlas of the City of Northampton and Town of Easthampton, Hampshire County, Massachusetts, Philadelphia, 1895. Walker, George H. and Company. Atlas of Northampton City, Massachusetts, Boston, 1884. Walling, Henry F. Map of Hampshire County, Massachusetts, New York, 1860. Registry of Deeds: Bk. 593-P. 39, 503-199, 437-339 FORM B - BUILDING MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL COMMISSION Office of the Secretary, State House, Boston *. iviap. uraw sKetcn ot building location in relation to nearest cross streets and other buildings. Indicate north. In Area no. Form no. 23A-86 p Northampton ess I Main St. U.S. Richards House sent use residence tent owner ription: 1905 Spfld. Daily Republican Durce Architect Exterior wall fabric shingle and vinyl siding Outbuildings (describe) Other features Altered floor sided rjate m^ %0th c. Moved — Date 5. Lot size: One acre or less x Over one acre Approximate frontage Approximate distance of building from street 6. Recorded by g- Lonergan Organization Date June 1980 (over) 37M-7-77 Nth. i ^(_5 7. Original owner (if known)_ Original use Herbert Jj. Richards residence Subsequent uses (if any) and dates_ 8. Themes (check as many as applicable) Aboriginal Agricultural Architectural The Arts Commerce Communication Community development x Conservation Education Exploration/ settlement Industry Military Political Recreation Religion Science/ invention Social/ humanitarian Transportation 9. Historical significance (include explanation of themes checked above) This house occupies a prominent corner site on Main St. in Florence opposite a small park. The house was built in 1905 for Herbert Richards, and replaces an earlier house. Early owners of the property, including Mr. Richards operated a meat market in a small frame building next westerly along Main St. The house feature a two story tower with conical roof and finial at the southeastern corner, and has a two-story bay window with domical roof on the eastern side. A one-story porch with gabled entrance, Tuscan columns atop composite stone piers and simple balustrade covers the facade of the house. 10. Bibliography and/or references (such as local histories, deeds, assessor's records, early maps, etc.) 1895 and 1915 Atlases. Northampton Directory: 1895-96, 1897-98, 1900, 1905 and 1915. Spfld. Daily Republican Jan. I, 1906. Registry of Deeds: Bk.593-P.8l, 586-39, 503-199, 437-339. Inventory No:NTH.187 Historic Name:Thompson, George E. House Common Name:Children's House Day Nursery Address:321 Locust St City/Town:Northampton Village/Neighborhood:Florence Local No:23A-090-001 Year Constructed:1902 Architect(s): Architectural Style(s):Colonial Revival Use(s):Other Educational; Single Family Dwelling House Significance:Architecture Area(s): Designation(s): Building Materials(s): Roof: Slate Wall: Wood; Wood Clapboard Foundation: Brick The Massachusetts Historical Commission (MHC) has converted this paper record to digital format as part of ongoing projects to scan records of the Inventory of Historic Assets of the Commonwealth and National Register of Historic Places nominations for Massachusetts. Efforts are ongoing and not all inventory or National Register records related to this resource may be available in digital format at this time. The MACRIS database and scanned files are highly dynamic; new information is added daily and both database records and related scanned files may be updated as new information is incorporated into MHC files. Users should note that there may be a considerable lag time between the receipt of new or updated records by MHC and the appearance of related information in MACRIS. Users should also note that not all source materials for the MACRIS database are made available as scanned images. Users may consult the records, files and maps available in MHC's public research area at its offices at the State Archives Building, 220 Morrissey Boulevard, Boston, open M-F, 9-5. Users of this digital material acknowledge that they have read and understood the MACRIS Information and Disclaimer (http://mhc-macris.net/macrisdisclaimer.htm) Data available via the MACRIS web interface, and associated scanned files are for information purposes only. THE ACT OF CHECKING THIS DATABASE AND ASSOCIATED SCANNED FILES DOES NOT SUBSTITUTE FOR COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LOCAL, STATE OR FEDERAL LAWS AND REGULATIONS. IF YOU ARE REPRESENTING A DEVELOPER AND/OR A PROPOSED PROJECT THAT WILL REQUIRE A PERMIT, LICENSE OR FUNDING FROM ANY STATE OR FEDERAL AGENCY YOU MUST SUBMIT A PROJECT NOTIFICATION FORM TO MHC FOR MHC'S REVIEW AND COMMENT. You can obtain a copy of a PNF through the MHC web site (www.sec.state.ma.us/mhc) under the subject heading "MHC Forms." Commonwealth of Massachusetts Massachusetts Historical Commission 220 Morrissey Boulevard, Boston, Massachusetts 02125 www.sec.state.ma.us/mhc This file was accessed on: Monday, May 3, 2021 at 1:32: PM Follow Massachusetts Historical Commission Survey Manual instructions for completing this form. FORM B  BUILDING MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL COMMISSION MASSACHUSETTS ARCHIVES BUILDING 220 MORRISSEY BOULEVARD BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02125 Photograph Topographic or Assessor's Map Recorded by: Bonnie Parsons Organization: Pioneer Valley Planning Commission Date (month / year): March, 2010 Assessor’s Number USGS Quad Area(s) Form Number 23A-90 Easthampton NTH.187 Town: Northampton Place: (neighborhood or village) Florence Address: 321 Locust Street Historic Name: Howard Hosford-G. Thompson House Uses: Present: Single-family residence Original: Single-family residence Date of Construction: 1902 Source: Springfield Daily Republican Style/Form: Colonial Revival Architect/Builder: Charles H. Markle, Builder Exterior Material: Foundation: brick Wall/Trim: clapboards Roof: slate Outbuildings/Secondary Structures: Major Alterations (with dates): Condition: good Moved: no | x | yes | | Date Acreage: 0.275 acres Setting: This house occupies a corner lot overlooking a small park near Florence center. RECEIVED AUG 19 2011 MASS. HIST. COMM. INVENTORY FORM B CONTINUATION SHEET [NORTHAMPTON ] [321 LOCUST STREET] MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL COMMISSION Area(s) Form No. 220 MORRISSEY BOULEVARD, BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02125 Continuation sheet 1 NTH.187 ___ Recommended for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. If checked, you must attach a completed National Register Criteria Statement form. Use as much space as necessary to complete the following entries, allowing text to flow onto additional continuation sheets. ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION: Describe architectural features. Evaluate the characteristics of this building in terms of other buildings within the community. The Hosford-Thompson House is a good example of the Colonial Revival style, although it is somewhat idiosyncratic in its asymmetry. It is a two-and-a-half story house under a slate-covered, truncated hipped roof, on which is centered a shed roof dormer. The roof eaves are broad. The house is three bays wide and the equivalent of three bays deep. It has a through- cornice exterior wall chimney on its east elevation where there is also a one-story screened porch on columns. The south façade has a center entry reached by a column-supported portico that is slightly off-center. The flat-roofed portico has a shallow arched roof on it and paired columns with respondent, engaged columns at the wall plane. The entry is trabeated and has leaded glass sidelights. At the second story level above the portico is an off-center, angled oriel window. It is flanked by two windows with 6/1 sash. At the first story the flanking windows are a single window with 6/1 sash and a large, fixed, multi- light window. The house is framed with narrow pilasters. This is the Colonial Revival style as it was influenced by other contemporary trends including the Prairie Style. HISTORICAL NARRATIVE Discuss the history of the building. Explain its associations with local (or state) history. Include uses of the building, and the role(s) the owners/occupants played within the community. From Form B of 1980: “This house is listed in Northampton’s business report for 1902 as having been built for real-estate agents Edward Barrett and James O’Brien for $3000. Later that same year, they sold the house to George Thompson, a motor man for the Northampton Street Railway Co. The area north of Main and Locust Streets, and east of Chestnut Street in Florence was developed in the early 20th century. For years, the land had been owned by D.G. Littlefield, one of Florence’s prominent industrialists, but there was very little pressure for development until after 1900. By that time, most of the village south of Main Street had been developed.” Further research indicates that this house was built for Howard Hosford, who was General Manager of Norwood Engineering, which was on North Maple Street. BIBLIOGRAPHY and/or REFERENCES Beers, F. W. County Atlas of Hampshire Massachusetts, New York, 1873. Drake, David. Northampton Historical Commission, interior signatures found in building for Hosford and Markle. Hales, John G. Plan of the Town or Northampton in the County of Hampshire, 1831. Miller, D. L. Atlas of the City of Northampton and Town of Easthampton, Hampshire County, Massachusetts, Philadelphia, 1895. Walker, George H. and Company. Atlas of Northampton City, Massachusetts, Boston, 1884. Walling, Henry F. Map of Hampshire County, Massachusetts, New York, 1860. Registry of Deeds: Bk. 759-P.413, 667-401, 625-401, 625-217, 623-289, 622-447, 614-197, 565-102 FORM B BUILDING MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL COMMISSION Office of the Secretary, State House, Boston 4. Map. Draw sketch of building location in relation to nearest cross streets and other buildings. Indicate north. In Area no. Form no. 2%A^§0 Northampton ess 32I Locust St. G. Thompson House ent use day nusery ent owner Sylvia Kriebel ription: 1902 >urce Spfld. Daily Republican Architect Exterior wall fabric Outbuildings (describe) Other features clapboard Altered Moved Date Date 5. Lot size: One acre or less x Over one acre Approximate frontage Approximate distance of building from street 6. Recorded by E. Lonerqan Organization NHC Date June 1980 (over) 37M_7_77 7. Original owner (if known) Original use George E. Thompson residence" Subsequent uses (if any) and dates 8. Themes (check as many as applicable) Aboriginal Agricultural Architectural The Arts Commerce Communication Community development x Conservation Education Exploration/ settlement Industry Military Political Recreation Religion Science/ invention Social/ humanitarian Transportation 9. Historical significance (include explanation of themes checked above) This house is listed in Northampton's business report for 1902 as having been built for real-estate agents Edward Barrett and James O'Brien for $3000. Later that same year they sold the house to George Thompson, a motor man for the Northampton Street Railway Co. The area north of Main and Locust Sts., and east of Chestnut St. in Florence was developed in the early 20th century. For years the land had been owned by D.G.Littlefield, one of Florence's prominent industrialists, but there was very little pressure for development until after 1900. By that time most of the village south of Main St. had been developed.. The house is two stories in height with a hipped slate roof, three bay facade is dominated by a large, central portico with double Tuscan columns. The eastern side has a full length poreh with Tuscan columns and balustrade. The 10. Bibliography and/or references (such as local histories, deeds, assessor's records, early maps, etc.) 1895 and 1915 Atlases. Registry of Deeds: Bk. 759-P. 413, 667-401, 625-217, 623-289, 622-447, 614-197, 565-102. Northampton Directory: 1905, 1907, 1920. Springfield Daily Republican Deo. 29, 1902. UV9 AE AE 42.335448-72.672125 42.335114-72.670589 42.334855-72.668582 42.334626-72.666329 42.334473-72.664498LOCUST STSTILSON AVENONOTUCKST N M AIN ST CHESTNUT STPLYMOUTH ST S M A IN S TPARK STN MAPLE STM E A D O W S T LANDY AVEBEACON ST HIGH ST MAIN ST MAPLE STGARFIELD AVESUNHILL DRL I L L Y S T TRINITY ROWKEYESSTP IN E S T BRATTON CTNEW STCOR TI C E L LI S T C O S M IA N A V E WILDER PLMEADOW AVEPLYMOUTH AVEFAIRFIELD AVESUMNER AVEDEPOT AVE DEPOTST W CENTER ST BERKSHIRE TERMA N N T ER MIDDLE ST E0500Feet FEMA FloodplainZONE A AE X500 Document Path: J:\mxd\sidewalk_curb_cuts_20210430.mxdCoordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Massachusetts Mainland FIPS 2001Projection: Lambert Conformal ConicDatum: North American 1983False Easting: 200,000.0000False Northing: 750,000.0000Central Meridian: -71.5000Standard Parallel 1: 41.7167Standard Parallel 2: 42.6833Latitude Of Origin: 41.0000Units: Meter Date: 5/5/2021NORTHAMPTON